PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Civil Engineering and Architecture· 2026Q2

Biophilic Design Dimensions and Occupant Wellbeing in Built Environments: A Systematic Review and Triaxial Framework for Evidence-Based Architectural Practice

Akimbek Mukhadiyev

Short summary

A systematic review of 40 publications synthesizes evidence on biophilic design's impact on occupant wellbeing, proposing the Triaxial Interior Biophilic Framework (TIBF) to guide architectural practice.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Biophilic design parameters consistently improve stress reduction, attentional restoration, perceived comfort, and self-reported wellbeing.
  • Findings are categorized into sensory-perceptual (e.g., natural light, visual connection to nature), spatial-configurational (e.g., prospect, refuge), and material-symbolic (e.g., natural materials, water) dimensions.
  • The sensory-perceptual axis was manipulated in 78% of empirical studies, while the spatial-configurational axis was manipulated in only 17%.
  • The Triaxial Interior Biophilic Framework (TIBF) is proposed, mapping ten biophilic parameters against wellbeing outcomes across healthcare, workplace, education, residential, and civic building typologies.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Biophilic design, understood as the deliberate incorporation of natural elements, processes and spatial conditions into the built environment, has attracted growing empirical attention as a strategy for improving occupant health, psychological restoration and cognitive performance. However, the evidence base remains fragmented across building typologies and disciplines, which hinders consistent application in practice. Drawing on 40 publications published between 1975 and 2026 across environmental psychology, neuroscience, evidence-based healthcare design and architectural theory, this article synthesises evidence on the relationships between specific biophilic design parameters and measured occupant wellbeing outcomes. Findings are organised across three analytically distinct dimensions: the sensory-perceptual dimension, encompassing natural light, visual connection to nature, fractal patterning and acoustic quality; the spatial-configurational dimension, encompassing prospect and refuge conditions, spatial hierarchy and biomorphic geometry; and the material-symbolic dimension, encompassing natural materials, water elements and living systems. Across all three dimensions, biophilic design parameters show consistent, measurable improvements in stress reduction, attentional restoration, perceived comfort and self-reported wellbeing, with outcome magnitudes varying by building typology and parameter intensity. Each parameter–typology intersection is appraised against a four-level scale defined a priori. The appraisal shows that the consistency of effect direction is not matched by uniform depth of typology-specific verification: the sensory-perceptual axis was manipulated in 78 per cent of the empirical studies retrieved, and the spatial-configurational axis in 17 per cent. Building on this synthesis, the article proposes the Triaxial Interior Biophilic Framework (TIBF), a structured decision-support instrument that maps ten evidence-based biophilic parameters against wellbeing outcomes across five building typologies: healthcare, workplace, education, residential and civic.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Civil Engineering and Architecture, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Urban Studies

Urban StudiesSocial Sciences