Biophilic Urbanism in a post-COVID world

13 November 2020

Biophilic Urbanism in a post-COVID world

By Becks Treharne, Biophilic Urbanism Consultant

Have you ever walked through a forest and suddenly felt at one with nature? Or jumped into the sea? Or climbed to the peak of a hill or mountain? You know that feeling of connection, of an unexplainable sense of belonging? Well, that is biophilia.

You will all have, at least once, felt this emotion while exploring the outdoors, so can begin to understand how difficult it is for urban environments to recreate this in its purest form. How many times do you hear that people feel the need to ‘escape’ the city after long periods inside, or need time to ‘reconnect’ with nature? It is not uncommon that many people feel the need to reconnect when their everyday lives are enclosed in an urban jungle with few and far occurrences of quality nature.

Biophilia is essentially the hypothesis that humans are inexorably connected to nature and natural processes. As biological organisms, we have an emotional affiliation to natural, not artificial or manufactured environments. This relationship is known as biophilia and a substantial and expanding body of evidence exists to support the biophilia hypothesis. Research shows it is crucial to improving our health and well-being while also strengthening our resilience and connection to local areas. Surely then, if the natural world has such a positive influence on our daily lives, nowhere is the need for the human-nature connection to flourish more important than the cities where most of us spend most of our time.

But our cities starve us in so many ways of that much-needed connection with nature. Design too often takes on an overwhelmingly unnatural form that competes against, instead of harmonises with, nature. Homogenisation replaces the complexity of natural environments, removing the abundance of sensory stimulation, intrigue, risk, peril, colour, textures, shapes and so much more that nature offers. The way we experience nature exists on various levels that cannot be replicated in a purely urban setting.

The first problem with this is that limited access to nature can have severe impacts on people’s health and well-being. In fact, there are plenty of studies and evidence to support this. The second problem is the belief that simple green infrastructure can solve this.

Humans are biological organisms that have evolved in biodiverse, quality, natural environments; ecologically comprehensive habitats which mutually reinforce and strengthen within. It is therefore essential these habitats are holistic, rather than disaggregated, in order to achieve these synergies. Not all instances of nature in cities can achieve biophilic outcomes. This means that any nature, designed into a cityscape, that occurs in isolation or that fails to acknowledge the evolving tendency of the human-nature connection, cannot be biophilic. And this is so important because, as crucial as this connection is, it is not dissimilar to our own muscles, which need to be used and strengthened for them to grow and develop. We need continuous and repeated exposure to quality nature to provoke a sense of belonging which penetrates our deep biological core. Isolated experiences with no relevance to our connection to nature will not suffice.

P_KXC_SITE_N939_kxweb.jpg

Nature in cities therefore needs to transcend beyond simple green infrastructure. It needs to encompass all direct and indirect attributes of nature while also considering how we experience these. It needs to consider how light, plants and water can replicate those found in the natural world; how biomimicry and naturalistic shapes and forms evoke memories of nature; how colours and materials remind us of natural spaces; how prospect and refuge make us feel safe or vulnerable, at risk or inquisitive. All these aspects and more mirror the complexities found in nature that a single tree or flower cannot possible replicate by itself.

Since COVID-19 the agenda on homeworking and the quality of indoor working environments has exploded. We are more aware than we have ever been of the importance of access to quality nature. We have bought indoor plants to bring nature to us; we’ve started growing our own food and taking every opportunity to spend time outdoors. But while these indoor environments are essential to offering us this connection to nature, the spaces in between these buildings should not be forgotten.

Let’s assume that COVID hasn’t shifted the trajectory of population growth and the shift to city living. In that case, by 2050 nearly 70% of the population will be living in cities. To accommodate these millions of additional occupants, we will need to design these places with nature at the forefront, not as an afterthought, to ensure that they live happy, healthy and productive lives. Why can’t we design cities people do not instinctively seek to ‘escape’ from?

There is an expanding body of evidence to support the idea biophilic design improves health and well-being; increases productivity; speeds up healing times and reduces pain and need for additional medication; reduces staff turnover and sick days and so much more. While this might be focused on indoor environments, why can’t this learning be adapted to outdoor environments on a city scale?

Of course, it has already been done in many cities across the world, Singapore as a key example, but it is surely time for more cities to invest in this way of living, not least in the wake of COVID-19.

Ends

Ends

Previous
Previous

In conversation with Dodds & Shute

Next
Next

In conversation with Naturalmat