Tall buildings (synonymous with high-rise buildings) generally refer to buildings with an architectural height of ≥ 50 m. The taller the buildings are, the longer their average lifespan; e.g., the lifespan of tall buildings with a height of over 150 m is arguably infinite, as only very few of them have ever been demolished. The primary structural system in tall buildings is constructed earlier and demolished later than other building systems, e.g., Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) and electric lighting, which require periodic renewal during the operational phase. Primary structural elements typically remain untouched, requiring minimal maintenance throughout the entire lifespan of tall buildings. Therefore, the design of the high-rise structural system is a pivotal decision with long-lasting consequences.The entire skeleton of most tall buildings is positioned within the interior space, defined as the endoskeleton. However, in some tall buildings, parts of their skeleton are placed outside the thermal envelope, forming an exoskeleton. It has been claimed that exoskeletons, by casting shadows on the thermal envelope, offer an environmentally friendly solution for tall buildings in warmer climates, by reducing the need for cooling. However, despite their use in renowned tall buildings, the environmental impact of exoskeletons compared to endoskeletons, particularly in terms of life cycle energy consumption and CO2e emissions, remained understudied and lacked sufficient scientific evidence prior to this research. Despite the potential advantage of exoskeletons reducing cooling needs by shading the facade, they may impact the electric lighting system by blocking or reflecting sunlight. They can also create thermal bridges, as they connect to interior structural elements, potentially affecting the conditioned space. Choosing exoskeletons over endoskeletons may alter other parts of the structural system, as structural components interact, and changes to one part may affect the rest. Moreover, contextual variations over time, like neighboring tall buildings affecting sunlight, technological advancements in building systems and energy generation, and climate change impacting HVAC needs, can influence tall buildings' environmental performance during operation. Architectural engineers cannot control contextual factors during the early design stages of tall buildings. However, it is essential to consider how these uncontrollable factors interact with design and material parameters. While controllable factors shape design choices, uncontrollable factors define the contextual conditions.Thus, in addition to the main variable of interest (exoskeletons vs endoskeleton), various factors at different levels were considered for assessment. These factors were studied in the short-term (pre-operational phase) and over the medium- and long-term (up to 30 and 60 years of operation, respectively). In the short term, three additional factors related to structural materials and thermal bridge control were analyzed. Over the medium- and long-term, scenarios addressing contextual changes over time were explored. Each factor's levels represented potential scenarios. Applying scenario planning and a full factorial Design of Experiments (DoE), this study assessed over 1400 scenarios through computer simulation and analysis. The computer experiments involved cylindrical 40-story office building digital prototypes situated in a hot desert climate (Dubai, UAE), featuring a reinforced concrete diagrid frame and a service core as the primary structural system. Through statistical analysis with generalized linear models (GLMs), the researcher addressed the first research question:What is the impact of exoskeletons (vs endoskeletons) on the life cycle primary energy consumption and CO2e emissions of tall buildings? I.e., how effective and desirable is it compared to and in interaction with some other controllable and uncontrollable factors from the perspective of architectural engineers in the early stage of design?The answer to the first research question measured in detail the main effects and the interactions of the aforementioned factors during the life cycle phases. However, as certain uncontrollable factors proved remarkably more effective than the controllable ones (including the main variable of interest), it gave rise to the following concluding research question: What would be the optimal decision or decisions about the controllable factors, made objectively (based on quantitative data), by architectural engineers considering such uncontrollable circumstances?The researcher applied three objective decision analysis methods: maximax, maximin, and minimax regret, which correspond to optimistic, conservative/robust, and cautious perspectives, respectively, to address the second research question. In conclusion, respecting the second question, the study found that in the short term, endoskeletons outperformed exoskeletons in conserving primary energy and reducing carbon footprints for tall buildings. In medium- and long-term periods, endoskeletons remained the optimal choice for optimistic criteria, while exoskeletons proved optimal when prioritizing conservative/robust or cautious perspectives in the hot desert climate. The significant original contribution of this research to the interdisciplinary field of architectural engineering is that it represents the first comprehensive scientific study of its own kind, dedicated to illuminating the impact of utilizing exoskeletons vs endoskeletons on the life-cycle primary energy consumption and CO2e emissions of tall buildings; by employing a replicable quantitative methodology, without oversimplifying critical interacting factors (including multiple controllable factors influencing design choices and uncontrollable factors associated with urban, technological, and climatic contexts that evolve over time).