Be careful regarding the scope of your project. It might be that a narrower topic would lead you to a more coherent and early conclusion. For example, you could consider the issue of window placement and orientation as they relate to passive solar heating, cooling (with regards to overhangs and the ability to open), security, ingress and egress and the like. This is just one of many possible examples.

I recommend that you do not label the housing project "sustainable" as it places your object in a rather political perspective; from the point of view of Science it is not possible to decide on what is sustainable and what not. You can perhaps comparatively make choices about "more" sustainable features. Consider that social housing corresponds to a temporary solution, it does not correspond to the people's desire. The whole life cycle of the buildings has to be considered  in order to achieve sustainability. Where do the materials come from? What environmental impact is caused during the extraction of ram materials, industrialization, transportation, construction work? What environmental impact is caused during the operation life according to several scenarios (10 years, 20 years, 50 years)? What environmental impact will be caused when the houses are demolished? Can they be rather disassembled? Can you quantify everything?

Public Housing means substantial requirements of units to be completed in specified time limits calling for  pre-fabrication to the extent possible as undertaken by erstwhile USSR deploying heavy machinery. A study should be undertaken of that housing for its present situation as part of case studies/literature review.  Currently available modern materials will have a greater role in accomplishing quality constructions for public housing, while sustainability is a matter of serious research based on local parameters.

To build upon a number of the points above, there are quite a few industry reports from the UK that may be of interest, such as: NHBC Foundation reports on "Modern methods of construction: views from industry" and "Building sustainable homes at speed: risks and rewards", and "Using modern methods of construction to build homes more quickly and efficiently" by the Naitonal Audit Office. All available here: http://www.nhbc.co.uk/builders/productsandservices/TechZone/MMCHub/Research/ 

Dear Latif Karimi,

pl check it.

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2005/11/mmc.pdf

https://www.irbnet.de/daten/iconda/CIB9059.pdf

I apologize for criticizing you, but the intention is to help. First, you can not start a research with predefined opinions. How do you know that MMC is more sustainable? Second, you can not compare a sub-standard construction practice, which is an attitude, with a method. So, let me make a suggestion and give you some general hints that may guide you, without going into all details.

If you want to use the method of comparison and you believe that MMC can have some positive results, than you should compare an old construction method with a modern, but you have to define which old and and which new method. You can only compare products that are physically under the same conditions. This means that you have to deliver for the old and new method the same quality regarding architecture, structural performance and building physics characteristics (ISO 14040 series). Under these circumstances you can compare two identical buildings one built with the old method and the other with the new method according to your choices. Now you are able to quantify the construction materials needed for each building. By the way, these buildings can be virtual. The next step is to define sustainability. It has many aspects, well-being, economic and environmental.

I suggest to start with the comparison of costs, it's easier. You have to make a LCA for both buildings, which enables you to compare scientifically. After this step you can widen your research regarding other aspects of sustainability and construction methods.

I hope these first ideas may help you in your endeavor.

Dear Prof. Peter F. Colwell, Prof. Aloísio Leoni Schmid, Prof. Peter E.D Love, Prof. Chandrasekhar Morampudi, Eng. Tony Hopkin, Dr. Kundan Meshram,

Thank you very much for your genuine and insightful responses.

Also, Asst. Prof. Soheyl Sazedj, thank you so much for your critical and constructive comment. I really appreciate it Sir.

Prof. Peter E.D Love,

When selecting this research topic "A study on MMC for building sustainable houses (public or private houses)", I had it in my mind to investigate only for the "planning, design and construction phases" and see how MMC can help construct houses that are sustainable [considering social aspects (local or generalized), cost-effectiveness and with least production of wastes]. I did not intend to carry on a complete LCA on houses to be built using MMC and also the traditional methods, because it would be too much of work for a single research paper. 

Furthermore, I emphasize on "sustainability" since it is one of the major challenges in the construction industry in a global scale. This challenge becomes more severe in the case of under-developed or developing countries. As you mentioned in your last comment, yes, I mentioned Kabul because I consider to include it as a case study in my research paper.

I will be glad if I can discuss more details with you on my intention, progress and conclusion so far. 

Apart from technical and professional drawbacks, corruption, security and economy are a few of the many issues that we are concerned with it in Kabul. 

Interesting question & nice contributions. I am following.

Interesting.