Authors : Michael Olusegun Adamolekun

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 3 - March

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/bddjzspe

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/mpkeecr6

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26mar507

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : Urban built environments are increasingly associated with physical and psychological health challenges, often linked to limited interaction with natural systems. This study examines the role of biophilic design in enhancing the physical, psychological, and social wellbeing of occupants in urban contexts. Anchored in the Biophilia Hypothesis and Attention Restoration Theory, the research integrates insights from environmental psychology, public health, and architecture to explore how nature-based design strategies foster restorative experiences. A qualitative analysis of selected case studies and established biophilic design frameworks was conducted to identify core design principles that support wellbeing. The findings indicate that incorporating these strategies significantly improves indoor environmental quality, reduces stress, enhances cognitive functioning, and strengthens social interaction among occupants. The study further emphasizes the need to adapt biophilic interventions to local climatic conditions and cultural contexts to ensure effective and sustainable outcomes. By bridging theory and practical design application, this research contributes to the growing discourse on sustainable architecture and provides actionable guidance for architects, planners, and policymakers seeking to develop healthier urban environments.

Keywords : Fenestration, Biomorphic Pattern, Sustainable Architecture, Buffer System, Indigenous Architecture, Neuroscience.

References :

1. Aduwo, E., & Akinwole, O. (2020). Assessing the Implementation of Biophilic Design Strategies in Selected office Buildings in Lagos State, Nigeria. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 9(5), 292–295. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.d8468.069520
2. Awada, M., Becerik-Gerber, B., White, E., Hoque, S., O'Neill, Z., Pedrielli, G., Wen, J., & Wu, T. (2021). Occupant health in buildings: Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the opinions of building professionals and implications on research. Building and Environment, 207, 108440 - 108440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.108440.
3. Colenberg, S., Jylhä, T., & Arkesteijn, M. (2020). The relationship between interior office space and employee health and well-being – a literature review. Building Research & Information, 49, 352 - 366. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2019.1710098.
4. Falk, D. A., Zedler, J. B., & Palmer, M. A. (2016). Foundations of restoration ecology. In Island Press/Center for Resource Economics eBooks. https://doi.org/10.5822/978-1-61091-698-1
5. Gaekwad, J., Moslehian, S., Roös, P., & Walker, A. (2022). A Meta-Analysis of Emotional Evidence for the Biophilia Hypothesis and Implications for Biophilic Design. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.750245
6. Karaçar, P. (2025). Traces of Biophilic Design in Anatolian Seljuk Architecture: Natural Shapes and Forms. Architecture Image Studies. https://doi.org/10.62754/ais.v6i1.133.
7. Lehmann, S. (2021). Growing Biodiverse Urban Futures: Renaturalization and rewilding as Strategies to Strengthen Urban Resilience. Sustainability, 13(5), 2932. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052932
8. Marzban, S., Candido, C., Avazpour, B., Mackey, M., Zhang, F., Engelen, L., & Tjondronegoro, D. (2023). The potential of high-performance workplaces for boosting worker productivity, health, and creativity: A comparison between WELL and non-WELL certified environments. Building and Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110708.
9. Mewomo, M., Toyin, J., Iyiola, C., & Aluko, O. (2023). Synthesis of critical factors influencing indoor environmental quality and their impacts on building occupants’ health and productivity. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1108/jedt-10-2021-0595.
10. Richardson, M., & Butler, C. (2021). Nature connectedness and biophilic design. Building Research & Information, 50, 36 - 42. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2021.2006594.
11. Stack, K., & Shultis, J. (2013). Implications of attention restoration theory for leisure planners and managers. Leisure/Loisir, 37(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14927713.2013.776747.
12. Tidball, K. G. (2012). Urgent Biophilia: Human-Nature Interactions and Biological Attractions in Disaster Resilience. Ecology and Society, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.5751/es-04596-170205
13. Van Den Bosch, M. (2017). Live long in nature and long live nature. The Lancet. Planetary health, 1 7, e265-e266. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2542-5196(17)30122-5

14. Zhong, W., Schröder, T., & Bekkering, J. (2021). Biophilic design in architecture and its contributions to health, well-being, and sustainability: A critical review. Frontiers of Architectural Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2021.07.006