Resumen
Current literature and guidelines on sustainable design often debate on the advantages of natural ventilation (NV) and mechanical ventilation (MV) on indoor environment and energy consumption. The present systematic review explores the existing literature comparing NV and MV on the indoor comfort and well-being points of view. The findings emphasize that thermo-hygrometric comfort is the main driver of occupants? ventilation behavior, while ventilation design is mainly led by indoor air quality targets. Moreover, more recent papers (especially after COVID-19 outbreak) emphasize the necessity of a health-based approach, contrasting airborne pathogens transmission. In this sense, MV is more frequently recommended in public spaces, while hybrid ventilation (HV) is often suggested as a solution to both ensure proper indoor conditions and energy savings. The concept of well-being is currently under-explored, as the present literature only refers to comfort. The same happens with topics such as visual, acoustic, and multi-domain comfort, as well as passive techniques such as night cooling, or analysis of specific environments such as healthcare facilities. Current knowledge would benefit from an expansion of future research in these directions. The choice of the best ventilation solution cannot ignore the context, type, and condition of energy efficient buildings, in order to properly take into account occupants? well-being.