Volume 14, Issue 51 (7-2025)
Haft Hesar J Environ Stud 2025, 14(51): 39-56 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ahmadi S K, Shabanian M. Measuring the impact of two-shell facades on the energy needs of residential buildings in the region of Kermanshah. Haft Hesar J Environ Stud 2025; 14 (51) :39-56
URL: http://hafthesar.iauh.ac.ir/article-1-2220-en.html
URL: http://hafthesar.iauh.ac.ir/article-1-2220-en.html
1- Department of Architecture, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Islamic Azad University, Hamadan Branch, Iran
Abstract: (192 Views)
Introduction: Today, energy is the source of life and modern human life. However, due to population growth and technological progress, energy consumption in life has increased drastically and has led to the emission of greenhouse gases and climate changes, which have caused many problems for the health of the environment and human societies. For this reason, reducing energy consumption in residential buildings seems essential. The facade of the building, as a connecting factor between the interior and the exterior, plays an important role in reducing energy consumption in residential buildings. Therefore, one of the effective methods to control and improve the quality of building energy consumption and thermal performance and ultimately reduce energy consumption in residential buildings is the use of double-layer facades. The purpose of this research is to measure the amount of energy consumption reduction in residential buildings using two-shell and integrated facades in three modes of natural ventilation, mechanical ventilation and no ventilation in the climate of Kermanshah city.
Method: To achieve the goal of the current research, first the geographical location of the sample was determined. In the next step, the weather data of Kermanshah city was collected. Using Design Builder software, the basic sample, simulation and existing scenarios were analyzed and measured. The accuracy of the simulation results was validated with the values listed in the annual electricity and gas bills of the building under study. The difference between the software output and the actual values was less than 10%.
Findings: consumption because it has a direct effect on reducing energy consumption in these buildings. Investigating and comparing the energy consumption and thermal behavior of the second shell of the building, air conditioning between the two shells in the hot season has determined the most optimal mode of energy consumption for the whole building.
conclusion: The findings show that design ability and creativity are essential and vital skills for the development and progress of any industry and profession. One of the strategies used to strengthen design ability is the use of constructivist educational model in design workshops. This model is known as a very effective approach to develop and improve the design process. which can strengthen design ability and allow designers to respond creatively and innovatively to design issues and challenges and also encourages designers to use creative and innovative approaches in design and look for new solutions and continuous improvement.
Method: To achieve the goal of the current research, first the geographical location of the sample was determined. In the next step, the weather data of Kermanshah city was collected. Using Design Builder software, the basic sample, simulation and existing scenarios were analyzed and measured. The accuracy of the simulation results was validated with the values listed in the annual electricity and gas bills of the building under study. The difference between the software output and the actual values was less than 10%.
Findings: consumption because it has a direct effect on reducing energy consumption in these buildings. Investigating and comparing the energy consumption and thermal behavior of the second shell of the building, air conditioning between the two shells in the hot season has determined the most optimal mode of energy consumption for the whole building.
conclusion: The findings show that design ability and creativity are essential and vital skills for the development and progress of any industry and profession. One of the strategies used to strengthen design ability is the use of constructivist educational model in design workshops. This model is known as a very effective approach to develop and improve the design process. which can strengthen design ability and allow designers to respond creatively and innovatively to design issues and challenges and also encourages designers to use creative and innovative approaches in design and look for new solutions and continuous improvement.
Keywords: Double facade, residential buildings, Kermanshah climate, energy needs, reducing energy consumption
Type of Study: Research |
Received: 2024/06/3 | Revised: 2025/07/16 | Accepted: 2024/07/23 | Published: 2025/06/28 | ePublished: 2025/06/28
Received: 2024/06/3 | Revised: 2025/07/16 | Accepted: 2024/07/23 | Published: 2025/06/28 | ePublished: 2025/06/28
References
1. تقی‌پور، شهرام. (1401). خوانش ژنوتایپ معماری تکامل‌گرای بیوفیلیک براساس اصول اندیشه مدرسه موراتوری. بوطیقای معماری، (5) 2، 15-36.
2. شاهچراغی، آزاده، و بندرآباد، علیرضا. (1396). محاط در محیط (کاربرد روان‌شناسی محیطی در معماری و شهرسازی) (چاپ سوم). تهران: سازمان جهاد دانشگاهی تهران.
3. شمس اسفندآباد، حسن. (1393). روان‌شناسی محیط. تهران: انتشارات سمت.
4. صاحب‌الامری، سنا، و خازنی‌زاده، زهره. (1400). بررسی شاخصه‌های روان‌شناسی محیط در طراحی دهکده آرامش. کنفرانس ملی معماری، عمران، شهرسازی و افق‌های هنر اسلامی در بیانیه گام دوم انقلاب، تبریز.
5. طاهری، نگار، و رنجبران، محیا. (1399). بررسی مؤلفه‌های روان‌شناسی محیط در شکل‌گیری فضاهای شهری (نمونه موردی: میدان شهدای جهرم). اولین کنفرانس مهندسی و فناوری، تبریز.
6. عیسی‌کاکرودی، سپیده. (1401). معماری بیوفیلیک و تأثیر آن بر رفتار انسان. کنفرانس ملی شهرسازی، معماری، عمران و محیط زیست.
7. مهدی، الهه، مهدی، علی، میرزابیگی، محمد، میرمحرابی، اصغر، و میرزابیگی، عارفه. (1401). ارزیابی تأثیر به‌کارگیری راهبردهای طراحی و معماری بیوفیلیک بر ارتقاء شاخص‌های سلامت جسم و روان بیماران بستری در بیمارستان‌های منتخب، از دیدگاه معماران، بیماران و همراهانشان و کادر مراقبت و درمان. مدیریت پرستاری، (4) 11، 114-139.
8. نصیرسلامی، محمدرضا، و سوهانگیر، سارا. (1392). راهکارهایی جهت ارتقاء کیفیت اثر متقابل انسان و محیط بر یکدیگر با رویکرد روان‌شناسی محیطی. تحقیقات روان‌شناختی، (19) 5.
9. نقی‌زاده، محمد، و استادی، مریم. (1393). مقایسه تطبیقی مفهوم ادراک و فرآیند آن در فلسفه و روان‌شناسی محیط و کاربرد آن در طراحی شهری. پژوهش‌های معماری اسلامی، (3)1، 3-14.
10. نوحی‌بزنجانی، محجوبه، و قاسمی، محسن. (1401). اصول طراحانه معماری بیوفیلیک در بیمارستان تخصصی قلب و عروق از منظر کیفیت سلامت بیماران. شباک، 8(1، پیاپی 64)، 73-85.
11. یوسف‌زاده، علی، وفامهر، محسن، و مهدی‌نیا، محمدهادی. (1399). مؤلفه‌های طراحی بیوفیلیک بر حصول زیست‌پذیری با تأکید بر معماری اسلامی. مطالعات هنر اسلامی، (40)17، 406-429.
12. Abdelaal, M. S., & Soebarto, V. (201 .(Biophilia and Salutogenesis as restorative design approaches in healthcare architecture. Architectural Science Review, 62(3), 195-205. [DOI:10.1080/00038628.2019.1604313]
13. Afacan, Y. (2023). Impacts of biophilic design on the development of gerotranscendence and the Profile of Mood States during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ageing and Society, 43(11), 2580-2604. [DOI:10.1017/S0144686X21001860]
14. Alam, M. (2023). Biophilic architecture and designs for mental well-being. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, [DOI:10.1088/1755-1315/1218/1/012020]
15. Almusaed, A. (2011). Biophilic and bioclimatic architecture: Analytical therapy for the next generation of passive sustainable architecture. Springer Science & Business Media. [DOI:10.1007/978-1-84996-534-7] [PMID]
16. Almusaed, A., & Almusaed, A. (2011). Biophilic Architecture Hypothesis. Biophilic and Bioclimatic Architecture: Analytical Therapy for the Next Generation of Passive Sustainable Architecture, 39-46. [DOI:10.1007/978-1-84996-534-7_4]
17. Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior: Privacy. Personal Space, Territory, and Crowding, 45.
18. Andreucci, M. B., Loder, A., McGee, B., Brajković, J., & Brown, M.(2021 .(Exploring Regenerative Co-benefits of Biophilic Design for People and the Environment. Urban Services to Ecosystems: Green Infrastructure Benefits from the Landscape to the Urban Scale, 391-412. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-75929-2_21]
19. Ankur, G. (2017). Biophilic Design in Architecture. International Journal of Engineering Research and, V6(03), 120-124. [DOI:10.17577/IJERTV6IS030153]
20. Asim, F., & Shree, V. (2019). The impact of Biophilic Built Environment on Psychological Restoration within student hostels. Visions for Sustainability, 2019(12), 18-33.
21. Asim, F., Rai, S., & Shree, V. (2021). Biophilic architecture for restoration and therapy within the built environment. Visions for Sustainability, 2021(15), 53-79.
22. Barbiero, G. (2021). Affective Ecology as development of biophilia hypothesis. Visions for Sustainability, 2021(16), 43-78. [DOI:10.13135/2384-8677/5575]
23. Barbiero, G., Berto, R., & Callegari, G. (2016). Biophilic Design to address human's need for Nature in daily artificial environments. In Biodiversity: concepts, new … (pp. 159-159).
24. Berto, R., Barbiero, G., & Pasini, M. (2016). Biophilic Design Triggers Fascination and Enhances Psychological Restoration in the Urban Environment Biophilic design; restorative design View project Nuova Architettura Sensibile Alpina View project. Journal of Biourbanism, 1(June), 25-34.
25. Berto, R., Barbiero, G., & Salingaros, N. A. (2023). Biophilic design of building façades from an Evolutionary Psychology framework: Visual Attention Software compared to Perceived Restorativeness. Visions for Sustainability, 2023(19).
26. Bolten, B., & Barbiero, G. (2023). Biophilic Design: Nine Ways to Enhance Physical and Psychological Health and Wellbeing in Our Built Environments. SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology, 13-19. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-031-09439-2_2]
27. Brielmann, A. A., Buras, N. H., Salingaros, N. A., & Taylor, R. P. (2022). What happens in your brain when you walk down the street? Implications of architectural proportions, biophilia, and fractal geometry for urban science. Urban Science, 6(1), 3. [DOI:10.3390/urbansci6010003]
28. Brondino, M., Pasini, M., Rita, T., & Zeno, F. (2021). Environmental Psychology and Participatory Interior Design: a case study. ICEP 2021 International Conference on Environmental Psychology,
29. Browning, W. D., & Ryan, C. O. (2020). Nature inside: a biophilic design guide. [DOI:10.4324/9781003033011]
30. Browning, W. D., Ryan, C. O., & Clancy, J. O. (2014). Patterns of Biophilic Design: Improving Health and Well-Being in the Built Environment; Terrapin Bright Green LLC: New York, NY, USA, 2014.
31. Brunswik, E. (1955). Representative design and probabilistic theory in a functional psychology. Psychological Review, 62(3), 193. [DOI:10.1037/h0047470] [PMID]
32. Byrka, K., Hartig, T., & Kaiser, F. G. (2010). Environmental attitude as a mediator of the relationship between psychological restoration in nature and self-reported ecological behavior. Psychological Reports, 107(3), 847-859. [DOI:10.2466/07.PR0.107.6.847-859] [PMID]
33. Carter, V., Derudder, B., & Henríquez, C. (2021). Assessing local governments' perception of the potential implementation of biophilic urbanism in Chile: A latent class approach. Land Use Policy, 101, 105103-105103. [DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105103]
34. Edge, S., & Hayles, C. (2017). Examining the economic, psychological and physiological benefits of retrofitting holistic sustainable and biophilic design strategies, for the indoor environment. Amps Proceedings Series 9, 515-525.
35. Elmashharawi, A. (2019). Biophilic Design for Bringing Educational Spaces to Life, Refer: Elmashharawi, A. Journal of Design Studio, 1(1), 16-21. http://www.ecarch.com
36. Emamjomeh, A., Zhu, Y., & Beck, M. (2020). The potential of applying immersive virtual environment to biophilic building design: A pilot study. Journal of Building Engineering, 32, 101481-101481. [DOI:10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101481]
37. Gaekwad, J. S., Sal Moslehian, A., Roös, P. B., & Walker, A. (2022). A Meta-Analysis of Emotional Evidence for the Biophilia Hypothesis and Implications for Biophilic Design. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 2476-2476. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.750245] [PMID] []
38. Gifford, R. (2009). Environmental psychology: Manifold visions, unity of purpose. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 387-389. [DOI:10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.002]
39. Gifford, R. (2012). Environmental Psychology. Encyclopedia of Human Behavior: Second Edition, 54-60. [DOI:10.1016/B978-0-12-375000-6.00150-6]
40. Gifford, R., & McCunn, L. J. (2018). Appraising and designing built environments that promote well-being and healthy behaviour. Environmental Psychology: An Introduction, 104-112. [DOI:10.1002/9781119241072.ch11]
41. Gillis, K., & Gatersleben, B. (2015). A review of psychological literature on the health and wellbeing benefits of biophilic design. Buildings, 5(3), 948-963. [DOI:10.3390/buildings5030948]
42. Güngör, B. Ş. (2020). Do Green Building Standards Meet the Biophilic Design Strategies? Journal of Design Studio, 2(1), 5-23. [DOI:10.46474/jds.739849]
43. Hähn, N., Essah, E., & Blanusa, T. (2021). Biophilic design and office planting: a case study of effects on perceived health, well-being and performance metrics in the workplace. Intelligent Buildings International, 13(4), 241-260. [DOI:10.1080/17508975.2020.1732859]
44. Holahan, C. J. (1982). Environmental psychology. (No Title).
45. Hung, S.-H., & Chang, C.-Y. (2021). Health benefits of evidence-based biophilic-designed environments: A review. Journal of People, Plants, and Environment, 24(1), 1-16. [DOI:10.11628/ksppe.2021.24.1.1]
46. Jaheen, N., & El-Darwish, I. (2021). Biophilic Design Elements in Modern Buildings Influenced By Islamic Architecture Features. JES. Journal of Engineering Sciences, 0(0), 0-0. [DOI:10.21608/jesaun.2021.102832.1085]
47. Joye, Y., & Bolderdijk, J. W. (2014). An exploratory study into the effects of extraordinary nature on emotions, mood, and prosociality. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(OCT), 119285-119285. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01577] [PMID] []
48. Joye, Y., & van den Berg, A. (2011). Is love for green in our genes? A critical analysis of evolutionary assumptions in restorative environments research. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 10(4), 261-268. [DOI:10.1016/j.ufug.2011.07.004]
49. Karaca, E., & Karaca, M. (2021). Environmental Psychology Approaches Within the Relationship of Nature and Health in terms of Landscape Architecture. OPUS Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 18(42), 5781-5802. [DOI:10.26466/opus.910271]
50. Katuk, D., Prof, A., & Köseoğlu, E. (2022). Biophilic architecture and water: Examining water as a spatial sensory element. IDA: International Design and Art Journal, 4(2), 252-270.
51. Kayıhan, K. S. (2018a). Biophilia as the Main Design Question in the Architectural Design Studio Teaching. MEGARON / Yıldız Technical University, Faculty of Architecture E-Journal, 13(1). [DOI:10.5505/megaron.2017.59265]
52. Kayıhan, K. S. (2018b). Examination of biophilia phenomenon in the context of sustainable architecture. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-63709-9_7]
53. Kellert, S. R., Heerwagen, J., & Mador, M. (2011). Biophilic design: the theory, science and practice of bringing buildings to life. John Wiley & Sons.
54. Kellert, S., & Calabrese, E. (2015). The practice of biophilic design. London: Terrapin Bright LLC, 3(21).
55. Kühn, T., & Bobeth, S. (2022). Linking environmental psychology and critical social psychology: Theoretical considerations toward a comprehensive research agenda. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 947243-947243. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.947243] [PMID] []
56. Lei, Q., Yuan, C., & Lau, S. S. Y. (2021). A quantitative study for indoor workplace biophilic design to improve health and productivity performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 324, 129168. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129168]
57. Levin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, Method and reality in social equilibria and social change. [DOI:10.1177/001872674700100103]
58. Lobo, L., Heras-Escribano, M., & Travieso, D. (2018). The history and philosophy of ecological psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(NOV), 403987-403987. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02228] [PMID] []
59. Martínez-Soto, J., de la Fuente Suárez, L. A., & Ruiz-Correa, S. (2021). Exploring the links between biophilic and restorative qualities of exterior and interior spaces in Leon, Guanajuato, Mexico. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 717116. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.717116] [PMID] []
60. McGee, B., & Park, N. K. (2022). Colour, Light, and Materiality: Biophilic Interior Design Presence in Research and Practice. Interiority, 5(1), 27-52. [DOI:10.7454/in.v5i1.189]
61. Mishra, A. S. K. (2018). Biophilic Architecture-Importance and advantages.
62. Moghaddami, H. J. (2019). Re-Thinking Biophilic Design Patterns in Preschool Environments for Children. In The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences of Middle East Technical University (Vol. 11, pp. 1-138).
63. Moser, G., & Uzzell, D. (2003). Environmental Psychology. [DOI:10.1002/0471264385.wei0517]
64. Nejade, R. M., Grace, D., & Bowman, L. R. (2022). What is the impact of nature on human health? A scoping review of the literature. Journal of global health, 12. [DOI:10.7189/jogh.12.04099] [PMID] []
65. Pagano, C. C., Day, B., & Hartman, L. S. (2021). An Argument Framework for Ecological Psychology and Architecture Design. Technology Architecture and Design, 5(1), 31-36. [DOI:10.1080/24751448.2021.1863665]
66. Parsaee, M., Demers, C. M. H., Hébert, M., Lalonde, J. F., & Potvin, A. (2019). A photobiological approach to biophilic design in extreme climates. Building and Environment, 154, 211-226. [DOI:10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.03.027]
67. Pasini, M., Brondino, M., Trombin, R., & Filippi, Z. (2021). A participatory interior design approach for a restorative work environment: a research-intervention. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 718446. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.718446] [PMID] []
68. Paul, Jones, D., Zeunert, J., & Roös, P). 2017). Creating Healthy Places: Railway Stations, Biophilic Design and the Metro Tunnel Project. Deakin University.
69. Pedersen Zari, M. (2023). Understanding and designing nature experiences in cities: a framework for biophilic urbanism. Cities and Health, 7(2), 201-212. [DOI:10.1080/23748834.2019.1695511]
70. Peters, T., & D'Penna, K. (2020). Biophilic design for restorative university learning environments: A critical review of literature and design recommendations. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(17), 7064. [DOI:10.3390/su12177064]
71. Proshansky, H. M., Ittelson, W. H., & Rivlin, L. G. (1970). Environmental psychology: Man and his physical setting. Holt, Rinehart and Winston New York.
72. Radha, C. H. (2022). Biophilic Design Approach for Improving Human Health in the. Built Environment. International Transaction Journal of Engineering, 13(9), 1-12.
73. Ramzy, N. S. (2015). Sustainable spaces with psychological connotation: Historical architecture as reference book for biomimetic models with biophilic qualities. Archnet-IJAR, 9(2), 248-267. [DOI:10.26687/archnet-ijar.v9i2.464]
74. Richardson, M., & Butler, C. W. (2022). Nature connectedness and biophilic design. Building Research and Information, 50(1-2), 36-42. [DOI:10.1080/09613218.2021.2006594]
75. Roessler, K. K. (2012). Healthy Architecture! Can environments evoke emotional responses? Global journal of health science, 4(4), 83-89. [DOI:10.5539/gjhs.v4n4p83] [PMID] []
76. Rosenbaum, M. S., Ramirez, G. C., & Camino, J. R. (2018). A dose of nature and shopping: The restorative potential of biophilic lifestyle center designs. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 40, 66-73. [DOI:10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.08.018]
77. Santos, M. (1992). 1992: a redescoberta da Natureza. Estudos Avançados, 6(14), 95-106. [DOI:10.1590/S0103-40141992000100007]
78. Sayuti, N. A. A., Montana-Hoyos, C., & Bonollo, E. (2015). A study of furniture design incorporating living organisms with particular reference to biophilic and emotional design criteria. Academic Journal of Science, 4(1), 75-106.
79. Sharifi, M., & Sabernejad, J. (2016). Investigation of Biophilic architecture patterns and prioritizing them in design performance in order to realize sustainable development goals. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences: Proceedings, 5(3 (s)), pp. 325-337.
80. Soderlund, J., & Newman, P. (2015). Biophilic architecture: a review of the rationale and outcomes. AIMS Environmental Science, 2(4), 950-969. [DOI:10.3934/environsci.2015.4.950]
81. Söderlund, J., & Newman, P. (2017). Improving mental health in prisons through biophilic design. The Prison Journal, 97(6), 750-772. [DOI:10.1177/0032885517734516]
82. Song, W., & Cao, H. (2022). Historical Evolution and Reflections on "Harmony between Man and Nature". Advances in Applied Sociology, 12(10), 605-612. [DOI:10.4236/aasoci.2022.1210042]
83. Sörqvist, P. (2016). Grand challenges in environmental psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 198588. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00583] [PMID] []
84. Steg, L. (2016). Values, Norms, and Intrinsic Motivation to Act Proenvironmentally. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41, 277-292. [DOI:10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085947]
85. Stewart-Pollack, J., & ASID, I. (2006). Biophilic design. Ultimate Home Design, 4, 36-41.
86. Tahoun, Z. N. A. (2019). Awareness assessment of biophilic design principles application. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science,
87. Tam, K. P., & Chan, H. W. (2017). Environmental concern has a weaker association with pro-environmental behavior in some societies than others: A cross-cultural psychology perspective. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 53, 213-223. [DOI:10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.09.001]
88. Tam, K.-P. (2020). Understanding the psychology X politics interaction behind environmental activism: The roles of governmental trust, density of environmental NGOs, and democracy. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 71, 101330. [DOI:10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.101330]
89. Tam, K.-P., & Milfont, T. L. (2020). Towards cross-cultural environmental psychology: A state-of-the-art review and recommendations. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 71, 101474-101474. [DOI:10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101474]
90. Taylor, R. P. (2021). The potential of biophilic fractal designs to promote health and performance: A review of experiments and applications. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(2), 1-22. [DOI:10.3390/su13020823]
91. Tekin, B. H., Corcoran, R., & Gutiérrez, R. U. (2023). The impact of biophilic design in Maggie's Centres: A meta-synthesis analysis. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 12(1), 188-207. [DOI:10.1016/j.foar.2022.06.013]
92. Tokhmehchian, A., & Gharehbaglou, M. (2019). Biophilic perception in urban green spaces (Case study: El Gölü Park, Tabriz). International Journal of Urban Sciences, 23(4), 568-585. [DOI:10.1080/12265934.2019.1568284]
93. Trøstrup, C. H., Christiansen, A. B., Stølen, K., Nielsen, P. K., & Stelter, R. (2019). The effect of nature exposure on the mental health of patients: a systematic review. Quality of Life Research, 28, 1695-1703. [DOI:10.1007/s11136-019-02125-9] [PMID]
94. White, R., & Stoecklin, V. (1998). Children's outdoor play & learning environments: Returning to nature. Early Childhood News, 11(April), 2004-2004.
95. Williams, D. R. (2004). Human responses and relationships to natural landscapes.pdf. Society and natural resources: A summary of knowledge., 227.248-227.248.
96. Xue, F., Gou, Z., Lau, S. S. Y., Lau, S. K., Chung, K. H., & Zhang, J. (2019). From biophilic design to biophilic urbanism: Stakeholders' perspectives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 211, 1444-1452. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.277]
97. Xue, F., Lau, S. S. Y., Gou, Z., Song, Y., & Jiang, B. (2019). Incorporating biophilia into green building rating tools for promoting health and wellbeing. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 76, 98-112. [DOI:10.1016/j.eiar.2019.02.004]
98. Yin, J., Arfaei, N., MacNaughton, P., Catalano, P. J., Allen, J. G., & Spengler, J. D. (2019). Effects of biophilic interventions in office on stress reaction and cognitive function: A randomized crossover study in virtual reality. Indoor air, 29(6), 1028-1039. [DOI:10.1111/ina.12593] [PMID]
99. Yin, J., Yuan, J., Arfaei, N., Catalano, P. J., Allen, J. G., & Spengler, J. D. (2020). Effects of biophilic indoor environment on stress and anxiety recovery: A between-subjects experiment in virtual reality. Environment International, 136, 105427-105427. [DOI:10.1016/j.envint.2019.105427] [PMID]
100. Zare, G., Faizi, M., Baharvand, M., & Masnavi, M. (2021). A Review of Biophilic Design Conception Implementation in Architecture. Journal of Design and Built Environment, 21(3), 16-36. [DOI:10.22452/jdbe.vol21no3.2]
101. Zhao, Y., Zhan, Q., & Xu, T. (2022). Biophilic Design as an Important Bridge for Sustainable Interaction between Humans and the Environment: Based on Practice in Chinese Healthcare Space. Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine, 2022. [DOI:10.1155/2022/8184534] [PMID] []
102. Zhong, W., Schröder, T., & Bekkering, J. (2022). Biophilic design in architecture and its contributions to health, well-being, and sustainability: A critical review. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 11(1), 114-141. 006 [DOI:10.1016/j.foar.2021.07.006]
103. Ziari, K., Pourahmad, A., Fotouhi Mehrabani, B., & Hosseini, A. (2018). Environmental sustainability in cities by biophilic city approach: a case study of Tehran. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 22(4), 486-516. [DOI:10.1080/12265934.2018.1425153]
104. Ziari, K., Pourahmad, A., Fotouhi Mehrabani, B., & Hosseini, A. (2018). Environmental sustainability in cities by biophilic city approach: a case study of Tehran. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 22(4), 486-516. [DOI:10.1080/12265934.2018.1425153]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
