T h e s i s Copyright
Thesis
By Harold Payet
Supervisor: Dr. Astrid Roetzel
Master of Architecture, Deakin University, 2018
Copyright
Research Title:
Health and wellbeing of humans through biophilia, its architectural design interventions and new research opportunities.
Thesis Question:
What combination of natural biophilic elements and experiences of nature are recommended for human well-being when deployed in working office and health care facility indoor environments?
Abstract:
There has been a significant amount of evidence that confirms the successful application of Biophilia and its elements and attributes (patterns) in various environments. Recent studies in biophilia show how easily work office spaces and health care facilities apply to this. The high stress that can be associated in office environments, and the aspiration for faster recovery times in health care facilities are reasons why biophilia should be applied more to those spaces. Consequently, natural plants such as potted plants and their certain combinations, and visual features and images of nature such as pictures and posters are selected to be used in the proposed experiment in this thesis as they are biophilic elements that can easily be introduced into indoor environments that also offer ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ contact (which are terms that will be defined later) with humans.
Through critical analysis of previous studies, this research attempts to define a knowledge gap that is consequently explored throughout this paper. It critically analyses previous related qualitative and quantitative studies that have been conducted; their aims, objectives, and methods that were used to attain their results. A methodological mapping process; namely Integral Sustainable Design (ISD) is also explored. This research is thereupon used to propose a qualitative proposed experiment that intends to identify what combinations of natural biophilic elements and experiences of nature are recommended in the influence of human well-being when deployed in working offices and health care facility indoor environments. Due to time restrictions (eleven weeks), a proposal will only be outlined that may be used in a proceeding study beyond this thesis that will involve a selected environment setting, participants, and a survey, etc.
Word count:
16,833, excludes Bibliography
71 pages @ A4
To read my full Thesis, please ask me
Figure 7
Savannah-like Environments
Acacias trees offer protection from natural elements, predators, and distant views of the landscape.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 20)
Sections from my Thesis:
Figure 6
Curiosity, Mystery and Enticement
Architectural trail bend from darkened area leads to enlightened setting can trigger explorative behaviour.
Architect: Geoffrey Bawa.
Building: Kandalama Hotel, Sri Lanka: Completed in 1995. Internal view from entrance.
Source: Hes & Plessis (2015, p. 61) &
Payet (2018, p. 32)
Biophilic Design - connecting with Nature
The term ‘Biophilia’ is defined as ‘the inherent human inclination to affiliate with natural systems and processes, especially life and life-like features of the non-human environment’ (Kellert, Heerwagen & Mador 2008, p. 3). This ‘deep-seated need of humans to connect with nature’ (Ryan et al 2014, p. 62) is also known as the ‘Biophilia hypothethis’. This suggests that the affiliation with life and life-like processes, such as ecological functions and structures, has contributed innate advantages throughout the human evolutionary struggle of survival to ‘adapt, persist, and thrive as individuals and as a species’ (Kellert & Wilson 1993, p. 42). The term, ‘Biophilic design’, as defined by Gillis and Gatersleben (2015) is, ‘a design philosophy that encourages the use of natural systems and processes in the design of the built environment’. Payet (2018, p. 4).
Linking nature from landscape to architectural structures through ‘Savannah-like Environments’
Commonly known as the ‘Savannah effect’, Professor Edward Wilson theorised that it was the human evolutionary beginnings in the African savannah that led to positive psychological responses to modern environments (Soderlund & Newman 2015, p. 952). These natural elements such as shade trees (known as acacias), waving grasslands, and far vistas offered ‘prospect and refuge’ opportunities (also discussed in the proceeding chapter). The low trunk characteristics of the trees offered opportunities for individuals to climb and escape predators, and to see across distant landscapes. The broad leaf canopies offered protection from the sun and rain (refer to Figures 7 & 8). Payet (2018, p. 19).
Figure 8
Acacias trees offer protection from natural elements (broad leaf canopies), and predators (low trunk).
Figure 12
Method: ‘Integral Sustainable Design (ISD) from four perspectives or quadrants’
Subject: ‘Savannah-like Environments’
Mapping produced by H. Payet.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 24)
Mapping 1: ’Savannah-like Environments’ (Refer to Figure 12)
Figure 12 displays the mapping of the biophilic attributes (parameters) and their subjective incoming and outgoing influential links (through arrows) of ‘Savannah-like Environments’. More specifically, it shows the upper left (UL) quadrant reflecting the most incomming parameters with ‘Attraction and Beauty‘ (UL) which is experienced through four human senses (shown in the mapping in brackets), and ’Information Richness‘ (UL) which is experienced through all human senses, representing the result or effect of other influential parameters. For example, in this mapping ‘Light and shadow‘ can be appealing when cast onto or through certain forms and structures; whether through tree leaves in an open outdoor environment, between clusters of mushroom-like columns as in Frank Lloyd Wright’s ‘Johnson Wax Headquarters‘, or around the top perimeter of concrete columns and between the junction of a concrete wall and ceiling as in Tadao Ando’s ‘Teatro Armani’ building as seen in Figure 13.
The parameters; ‘Colour, Water, Plants‘ (UL) has four outgoing influences, three within its own quadrant and one in the Upper Right (UR). Payet (2018, p. 24).
Figure 13
Light and shadow in architecture as seen around the perimeter of concrete columns and between the junction of a concrete wall and ceiling.
Architects: Tadao Ando.
Building: Teatro Armani, Milan: 2001. Internal view.
Style: Minimalism.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 25)
Linking nature from landscape to architectural structures through ‘Prospect and Refuge’
In Kellert’s biophilic framework as seen in Figure 1, ‘Prospect and Refuge’ fall in category number six; ‘Evolved human-nature relationships’.
Structural landscape features, when applied to the built environment do not have a clear guideline of how to integrate these landscape features in architectural settings (Joye 2007, p. 306). According to Joye (2007), applying well-defined natural elements such as plants or other natural forms is less difficult due to the former features being more abstract nature. ‘Prospect and refuge’ is a biophilic element that refers to settings that allow individuals to obtain information about the environment while also obtaining shelter. Its strategies are related to ‘Complexity and Coherence (or Order)’ which (both elements or attributes) are in the sixth biophilic design element in Kellert’s (2008) framework (refer to Figure 1). These design elements discuss structure and organisation where originally human ancestors saw prominent landscape features such as trees and rocks as opportunities for ‘prospect and refuge’ (Joye 2007, p. 312). If settings contained too many elements this obscured views of the landscape, thus a balanced presence of both complexity and coherence (or order) was required to contribute to safer environments and aesthetic settings. Joye (2007) analyses the work of Frank Lloyd Wright and his underlying style, organic architecture to define how a complex set of architectural elements can also be ‘ordered’. It is suggested that although organic architecture is generally not restricted by stylistic forms and is expressed through forms of freedom through irregular building shapes, that there are in fact geometric modules that are used in plan as main compositional elements (eg. a triangle). ‘This approach allows different parts of the building to be given similar form, resulting in an overall coherence’ (Joye 2007, p. 312). Payet (2018, p. 24).
Figure 14
Method: ‘Integral Sustainable Design (ISD) from four perspectives or quadrants’
Subject: ‘Prospect and Refuge’
Mapping produced by H. Payet.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 29)
Mapping 2: ’Prospect and Refuge’ (Refer to Figure 14)
Figure 14 displays the mapping of the biophilic parameters and their subjective incoming and outgoing influential links of ‘Prospect and Refuge’. More specifically, it also shows the upper left (UL) quadrant being the most influential with ‘Attraction and Beauty‘ (UL) and ’Information Richness‘ (UL) representing most of the incomming results and effects of other parameters such as ‘Colour, Water, Plants‘ (UL) and ‘Curiosity, Mystery and Enticement‘ (LL).
‘Attraction and Beauty‘ (UL) may seem foreign in this mapping as places of ‘refuge‘ tend to be associated with feelings of ‘fear‘, but it is the outcome of what the term ’refuge‘ may deliver that defines the association it has with ‘attraction and beauty‘. It is suggested that upon finding places that reveil ‘prospect and refuge‘, senses of releif may cause individuals to acknowledge more appreciations of their suroundings which could be experienced and associated with attractive and beautiful feelings. Similar feelings and experiences were seen earlier in this paper where it was shown in a study by Gatersleben and Andrews (2012, p. 92), that individuals who experienced threats in nature also had feelings of awe that promoted reflections on life, and newly found appreciations.
Interestingly, the parameters; ‘Curiosity and Enticement‘, ‘Exploration and Discover‘ and ‘Information and Cognition‘ (LL) are ones that are influential of three others located in the Lower Rignt (LR) quadrant. One example of this is that ‘Habitat and Ecosystems‘ (LR) can consist of local communities that have learned to explore and navigate for thousands of years. This may be due to biophilic elements that are instilled in human curiosity and enticement that have assisted in the human evolutionary struggle to survive (as mentioned earlier) (Kellert & Wilson 1993, p. 42).
The parameters; ‘Colour, Water, Plants‘ (UL) also has four outgoing influences, three within its own quadrant and one in the Upper Right (UR).
‘Growth and efflorescence‘ is a stand-alone parameter in the Upper Right (UR) quadrant that influences ‘Habitats and ecosystems‘ located in the Lower Right (LR) and ‘Attration and Beauty‘ in the Upper Left (UL). Habitats are caused by ‘growth‘ and this term is an experience that is attractive and beautiful; are reasons for these behaviours.
The ‘Context/Systems‘ quadrant (LR) has four parameters that represent ‘context‘ biophilic elements and attributes. These parameters influence the ‘Experiences‘ (UL) and (LL) quadrants which lends support to ‘Refuge‘ being an ‘experienced‘ element. Payet (2018, p. 29).
Modern-day applications of Biophilic Design
The modern-day application of the characteristics of high quality savannahs typically include wide open spaces, variations in architectural topography, clusters of real or symbolic trees such as columns, etc., water features such as fountains, deep overhanging eaves, alcoves and recesses, and cave-like masses of stone, (ie. as seen in Figure 17) (Ramzy 2015, p. 48). Early applications of these expressions are evident in ancient Greek theatres. Compared to Roman theatres which implemented man-made backgrounds instead of natural elements, the Greek theatres such as the Odeon of Herodes Atticus Theatre, located at the Acropolis of Athens, used biophilic characteristics to amplify acoustics by building ‘into the ground’ as opposed to ‘on it’ (refer to Figure 9). This unique accomplishment of maximising sound delivery from stage to every seated audience participant was seldom seen from any other civilization in the same period. Payet (2018, p. 21).
Figure 15
Integrated structure into ground rather than on it amplifies acoustic in theatre.
Builder: Herodes Atticus,
Building: Acropolis of Athens, Greece: Completed in 161 AD. Southwest slope view.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 21)
Even through Gothic architecture, biophilic strategies significantly developed through the implementation of clusters of columns that were replaced by piers with no crowns that saw shafts and supports implemented from floor to ceiling. These shafts connected to the ceiling vaults in a canopy-like structure that spread into branches that resemble tree-like structures (Ramzy 2015, p. 49) (refer to Figure 16). Payet (2018, p. 22).
Figure 16
Spread of palm-like vaults resembles tree-like structures through biophilic strategies.
Architect: William Orchard,
Building: Divinity Hall, Oxford University, England: Completed in 1483. Internal west view.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 22)
Figure 17
Mushroom-like columns with large canopy spread resemble biophilic strategies.
Architect: Frank Lloyd Wright,
Building: Johnson Wax Headquarters, Wisconsin, USA: Completed in 1939. Internal view.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 23)
The main premise behind ‘prospect and refuge’ is to be in a small space that allows great vision of a larger space Ramzy (2015, p. 44). When applied through architectural interventions, ‘refuge’ spaces are small, windowless spaces enclosed by thick walls. ‘Prospect’ refers to opposing characteristics of ‘refuge’ such as raised ceiling heights, larger spaces, wide views of surrounding spaces, and building on elevated sites. This has been applied throughout history in many styles of architecture. Gothic churches implemented raised ceilings in the central area lined with adjoining side low aisles with thick walls pierced with celestial windows which were the ‘refuge-effect’. Examples of this is evident in ancient Egyptian temples, Roman basilicas, Medieval, and Renaissance cathedrals (refer to Figure 18). Payet (2018, p. 27).
Figure 18
Prospect & Refuge
Raised ceilings in the central area, lined with adjoining side low aisles with thick walls pierced with celestial windows.
Architect: Filippo Brunelleschi,
Building: Church of San Lorenzo, Florence: Completed in 1459. Internal view.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 27)
Figure 19
Fractal Geometry
A typical fractal pattern: Fractal image of the Mandelbrot Set.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 34)
Linking nature to architectural structures through ‘Fractals’
In Kellert’s biophilic framework as seen in Figure 1, ‘Fracals’ fall in category number three; ‘Natural pattern and processes’.
Fractal geometry is an element that is often seen in nature that most Biophilia theorists agree is an important feature in biophilic design (Ramzy 2015, p. 47). The term is defined as structures that frequently include repeated but varying patterns of a basic design; quite often found in nature (Kellert, Heerwagen & Mador 2008, p. 10), either at microscopic levels or at larger scales (refer to Figure 20). It was labelled and explored since 1976 but has evidently been implemented through architectural expressions in many successful building structures for centuries; mainly through historical architectural styles such as Baroque, Hindu, Islamic and especially Gothic.
Through Gothic style, the distinctive fractal characteristics display sharp spires as distant dominant features. At closer proximity these seemingly smooth spires are revealed to have spiny outgrowths, and at even closer proximity; more pointed outgrowths and details are revealed on the same spires. This repetition of varying shapes is also seen on gothic arches and windows and combined with the varying scales through distant and close viewing, this display of magnetism is also an exhibition of ‘complexity coherence (or order)’ (Ramzy 2015, p. 47), which are both biophilic design attributes seen in Kellert’s (2008) third biophilic framework in Figure 1 (refer to Figures 20, 21, and 22).
Figure 20 View 1 of 3
Fractal geometry in architecture as seen from a distance
Architects: Early: Van Vorst, Later: Jan Keldermans II, Completed by Matheus de Layens.
Building: Leuven Town Hall; Leuven, Belgium: 1439-1469. External view.
Style: Gothic.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 35)
Figure 21 View 2 of 3
Fractal geometry in architecture as seen at closer proximity
Architects: Early: Van Vorst, Later: Jan Keldermans II, Completed by Matheus de Layens.
Building: Leuven Town Hall; Leuven, Belgium: 1439-1469. External view.
Style: Gothic.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 36)
Figure 22 View 3 of 3
Fractal geometry in architecture as seen at even closer proximity
Architects: Early: Van Vorst, Later: Jan Keldermans II, Completed by Matheus de Layens.
Building: Leuven Town Hall; Leuven, Belgium: 1439-1469. External view.
Style: Gothic.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 37)
The connection between fractal characteristics and biophilic responses, according to Joye (2007, p. 316) is due to three profound links between the shape of natural structures and fractals. The first is through trees, mountains, lightning, clouds and coastlines, which exhibit self-similarities that are also evident in fractals. The second link is through the assertion that these and other natural elements such as plants and trees can be elegantly mimicked with fractal geometry, like the Barnsley Fern (refer to Figure 23). The third link between natural structures and fractals is through psychology in nature. According to Joye (2007), fractal patterns can summon associations of naturalness in human subjects.
Figure 23
Barnsley Fern (young).
A fern displaying its fractal features or patterns; The same shape is repeated in the branches, the fronds, the leaves and even the veins inside each leaf.
Source: Payet (2018, p. 40)
Linking nature to biophilia through ‘Plants’
In Kellert’s biophilic framework as seen in Figure 1, ‘Plants’ fall in category number one; ‘Environmental Features’.
This thesis has already established the importance of plants and their fundamental health connections, comfort and well-being to humans. It also saw their benefits upon insertion within the built environment through critical analysis and methods of previous qualitative and quantitative studies. However, it is essential to momentarily analyse their therapeutic values and to distinguish which plants are more valuable within indoor environments as this forms part of the proposed experiment at the end of this thesis.
Plants are an essential part of human, animal and even to its own and other flora survival. They are a major food source and a key componenet for sustenance and security (Kellert, Heerwagen & Mador 2008, p. 7). In biophilic design, they are more than just green features such as trees, flowers and grass; they are also architectural features that have been implemented on green roofs and façade walls. Not only do they provide aesthetic appeal to the roofs and façade of these buildings, they also provide proven reductions of urban heat and atmospheric pollution (Hes and Plessis 2015, p. 53). In some buildings, natural ecosystems have also been the cause of these implementations (refer to Figures 24 and 25).
Figure 24
Plants
Roof garden (with its own natural ecosystem) over hospital.
Architects: RMJM New York.
Building: Khoo Teck Puat hospital, Singapore.
Source: Newman (2014, p. 60) & Payet (2018, p. 43).
Figure 25
Plants
Internal wall garden.
Architects: Kelvin Kan Associates.
Building: 158 Cecil Street, Singapore.
Source: Newman (2014, p. 61) & Payet (2018, p. 44).
To read my Thesis in full, please ask me for permission.