مدل یابی نظری ارتباط مولفه های بیوفیلیک با کارایی فضاهای بینابین مجموعه های مسکونی ( در بستر پژوهشهای پیشین)
محورهای موضوعی : معماریفائزه یزدانی رستم 1 , زهراسادات سعیده زرآبادی 2 , فرح حبیب 3
1 - دانشجوی دکتری معماری، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
2 - دانشیار، گروه شهرسازی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
3 - استاد، گروه شهرسازی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
کلید واژه: مدل یابی, فضای بینابین, مجموعه های مسکونی بیوفیلیک, طراحی بیوفیلیک, مدل نظری,
چکیده مقاله :
در سال های اخیر در حوزه معماری توجه خاصی به معماری مسکونی بیوفیلیک شده و سعی بر آن است تا پیوند بین معماری و طبیعت بیشتر مورد توجه قرار گیرد. با رویکرد پژوهش کیفی و طی مروری سیستماتیک و با روش نمونه گیری هدفمند، فهرستی اولیه از پژوهش های انجام شده در این زمینه تهیه گردید. در گام بعد، با روش مرور نظام مند مبتنی بر الگوی چهار مرحله ای و با تدوین استراتژی جستجوی مقالات، مسیر جستجو با واژگان اصول بیوفیلیک، کارایی فضاهای بینابین، مجموعه های مسکونی بیوفیلیک، طراحی بیوفیلیک، منظر بیوفیلیک در پایگاه های استنادی معتبر انجام شد.طی مروری سیستماتیک و با روش نمونه گیری هدفمند، فهرستی اولیه از پژوهش های انجام شده در این زمینه تهیه گردید. یافته های این مقاله نشان میدهد که مفاهیم بیوفیلیک در گام اول منجر به ارتباط با طبیعت، تاثیر بر زندگی انسان و دیگر گونه های زیستی، اثرات مثبت بیولوژیکی و محیط های ساخته شده و افزایش فرصت های طراحی جهت بهبود سلامت و زیست بهتر افراد خواهد شد. در نتایج مشخص شد چه عواملی بر ایجاد محیط های بیوفیلیک تاثیر گذار است و فضاهای بینابین بیوفیلیک در مجموعه های مسکونی چه ویژگی های بهینه ای را به مجموعه های مسکونی اضافه می کند. این تاثیرات در قالب مدل نظری ارائه شده است که می تواند در مطالعات آتی فضای بینابین مجموعه های مسکونی مورد استفاده قرار گیرد.
Construction of residential biophilic complexes is one of the new approaches to increasing the nature of friendliness of residents of residential complexes, the benefits of which will lead to better life of people. In recent years, special attention has been paid to biophilic residential architecture in the field of architecture and tries to pay more attention to the link between architecture and nature. Due to gaps in existing knowledge, abundant evidence of existing shortcomings and approaching the goal, this article reviews the research background in biophilic architecture by highlighting definitions, dimensions, indicators and solutions to identify the characteristics of residential biophilic architecture. Biophilic architecture as well as desirable intermediaries each have indices and characteristics that overlap identification of these two axes can lead to the identification of biophilic interspace characteristics. For this purpose, in the first step, we have tried to identify and categorize the variables affecting biophilic architecture by examining the latest scientific information and in the next step, by systematic review method based on four-step model by editing. This strategy of searching articles and search path was performed with the words "biophilic principles", "efficiency of interstitial spaces", "residential biophilic collections", "biophilic design", "biophilic landscape" in valid citation databases.
Abazari, T., Potvin, A., Demers, C. M., & Gosselin, L. (2022). A biophilic wellbeing framework for positive indoor-outdoor connections in energy-efficient Arctic buildings. Building and environment, 226, 109773.
Abdelaal, M. S., & Soebarto, V. (2019). Biophilia and Salutogenesis as restorative design approaches in healthcare architecture. Architectural science review, 62(3), 195-205.
Amat, R., Ismail, S., Wahab, M., Ahmad, N., & Rani, W. (2020). A Dimension of Biophilia in Urban Design. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science,
Beatley, T. (2011). Biophilic cities: integrating nature into urban design and planning. Island Press.
Beatley, T. (2016). Handbook of biophilic city planning & design. Island Press.
Berto, R. (2005). Exposure to restorative environments helps restore attentional capacity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 249-259.
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.
Browning, W. D., Ryan, C. O., & Clancy, J. O. (2014). Patterns of biophilic design. New York: Terrapin Bright Green, LLC, 3-4.
Buffon, G. L. L., & Daubenton, L. J. M. (1766). Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière, avec la description du Cabinet du Roi (Vol. 1). chez JH Schneider.
Cackowski, J. M., & Nasar, J. L. (2003). The restorative effects of roadside vegetation: Implications for automobile driver anger and frustration. Environment and behavior, 35(6), 736-751.
Čákyová, K., Vertaľ, M., Vargová, A., & Vranayová, Z. (2023). The Concept of Green Industrial Zones. International Scientific Conference EcoComfort and Current Issues of Civil Engineering,
Capaldi, C. A., Dopko, R. L., & Zelenski, J. M. (2014). The relationship between nature connectedness and happiness: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in psychology, 5, 976.
Chiesura, A. (2004). The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landscape and urban planning, 68(1), 129-138.
Cramer, J. S., & Browning, W. D. (2008). Transforming building practices through biophilic design. Biophilic design. Hoboken: Wiley, 335, 346.
Day, C. (2017). Places of the soul: Architecture and environmental design as a healing art. Routledge.
DE, N. C. G. T. (2017). Ecosystem Services in the City—Protecting Health and Enhancing Quality of Life. Summary for Deci-Sion-Makers.
Fromm, E. (1964). Creators and destroyers. The Saturday Review, New York (4.1. 1964), pp. 22-25.
Gehl, J. (1987). Life between buildings (Vol. 23). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Giusti, M. (2019). Human-nature relationships in context. Experiential, psychological, and contextual dimensions that shape children’s desire to protect nature. PloS one, 14(12), e0225951.
Groenewegen, P. P., Van den Berg, A. E., De Vries, S., & Verheij, R. A. (2006). Vitamin G: effects of green space on health, well-being, and social safety. BMC public health, 6(1), 1-9.
Gür, M., & Kaprol, T. (2022). The Participation of Biophilic Design in the Design of the Post-Pandemic Living Space. In Emerging Approaches in Design and New Connections with Nature (pp. 75-106). IGI Global.
Hady, S. I. M. A. (2021). Activating biophilic design patterns as a sustainable landscape approach. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science, 68(1), 1-16.
Harel, K. L. (2022). Darwin's Love of Life: A Singular Case of Biophilia. Columbia University Press.
Hartig, T., Evans, G. W., Jamner, L. D., Davis, D. S., & Gärling, T. (2003). Tracking restoration in natural and urban field settings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(2), 109-123.
Heerwagen, J. (2008). Biophilia and design. Handout for Portland lectures.
Heerwagen, J., & Hase, B. (2001). Building biophilia: Connecting people to nature in building design. Environmental Design and Construction, 3, 30-36.
Hildebrand, G. (2008). Biophilic architectural space. Biophilic design: the theory, science, and practice of bringing buildings to life Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Howard, E. (1946). Garden cities of tomorrow. Faber London.
Kellert, S., & Calabrese, E. (2015a). The practice of biophilic design. London: Terrapin Bright LLC, 3, 21-46.
Kellert, S., & Calabrese, E. (2015b). The practice of biophilic design. London: Terrapin Bright LLC, 3, 21.
Kellert, S. R. (2008). Dimensions, elements, and attributes of biophilic design. Biophilic design: the theory, science, and practice of bringing buildings to life, 3-19.
Kellert, S. R., Heerwagen, J., & Mador, M. (2011). Biophilic design: the theory, science and practice of bringing buildings to life. John Wiley & Sons.
Kellert, S. R., & Wilson, E. O. (1993). The biophilia hypothesis.
Kellert, S. R., & Wilson, E. O. (2008). Biophilia. Human Ecology, 2008, 462-466.
Koohsari, M. J., Mavoa, S., Villanueva, K., Sugiyama, T., Badland, H., Kaczynski, A. T., Owen, N., & Giles-Corti, B. (2015). Public open space, physical activity, urban design and public health: Concepts, methods and research agenda. Health & place, 33, 75-82.
Kweon, B.-S., Ulrich, R. S., Walker, V. D., & Tassinary, L. G. (2008). Anger and stress: The role of landscape posters in an office setting. Environment and behavior, 40(3), 355-381.
Li, Z., Zhang, W., Wang, L., Liu, H., & Liu, H. (2022). Regulating effects of the biophilic environment with strawberry plants on psychophysiological health and cognitive performance in small spaces. Building and Environment, 108801.
Ma, Y., & You, X.-y. (2022). A sustainable conservation strategy of wildlife in urban ecosystems: Case of Gallinula chloropus in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region. Ecological Informatics, 101571.
MAKES, N. I. M., & SENSE, F. (2012). The economics of biophilia. In: New York: Terrapin Bright Green, LLC.
Martin, L., White, M. P., Hunt, A., Richardson, M., Pahl, S., & Burt, J. (2020). Nature contact, nature connectedness and associations with health, wellbeing and pro-environmental behaviours. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 68, 101389.
McCann, E., & Mahieus, L. (2021). Everywhere from Copenhagen: Method, Storytelling, and Comparison in the Globalization of Public Space Design. In Professional Service Firms and Politics in a Global Era (pp. 115-134). Springer.
Newman, P. (2014). Biophilic urbanism: a case study on Singapore. Australian planner, 51(1), 47-65.
Oliver, T. H., Doherty, B., Dornelles, A., Gilbert, N., Greenwell, M. P., Harrison, L. J., Jones, I. M., Lewis, A. C., Moller, S. J., & Pilley, V. J. (2022). A safe and just operating space for human identity: a systems perspective. The Lancet Planetary Health, 6(11), e919-e927.
Parsons, R., Tassinary, L. G., Ulrich, R. S., Hebl, M. R., & Grossman-Alexander, M. (1998). The view from the road: Implications for stress recovery and immunization. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 18(2), 113-140.
Powers, H. (2022). Accessing the Ecosphere: An Indoor Nature-Based Community Expressive Arts Therapy (ExAT) Exploration Project.
Pyle, R. M. (2003). Nature matrix: reconnecting people and nature. Oryx, 37(2), 206-214.
Register, R. (1987). Ecocity Berkeley: building cities for a healthy future. North Atlantic Books.
Richardson, M., & Butler, C. W. (2022). Nature connectedness and biophilic design. Building Research & Information, 50(1-2), 36-42.
Ryan, C. O., & Browning, W. D. (2020). Biophilic design. Sustainable Built Environments, 43-85.
Ryan, C. O., Browning, W. D., Clancy, J. O., Andrews, S. L., & Kallianpurkar, N. B. (2014). Biophilic design patterns: emerging nature-based parameters for health and well-being in the built environment. ArchNet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 8(2), 62.
Ryan, R. M., Weinstein, N., Bernstein, J., Brown, K. W., Mistretta, L., & Gagne, M. (2010). Vitalizing effects of being outdoors and in nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(2), 159-168.
Salingaros, N. A. (2019). The biophilic healing index predicts effects of the built environment on our wellbeing.
Schiebel, T., Gallinat, J., & Kühn, S. (2022). Testing the Biophilia theory: Automatic approach tendencies towards nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 79, 101725.
Scull, J. (2011). The separation from more-than-human nature. In: Retrieved.
Shelton, R. D. (1994). Hitting the green wall: why corporate programs get stalled. Corporate Environmental Strategy, 2(2), 5-11.
Simaika, J. P., & Samways, M. J. (2010). Biophilia as a universal ethic for conserving biodiversity. Conservation Biology, 24(3), 903-906.
Söderlund, J. (2019). The emergence of Biophilic design.
Soderlund, J., & Newman, P. (2015). Biophilic architecture: a review of the rationale and outcomes. AIMS environmental science, 2(4), 950-969.
Tam, K.-P. (2013). Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: Similarities and differences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 64-78.
Tekin, B. H., Corcoran, R., & Gutiérrez, R. U. (2023). A Systematic Review and Conceptual Framework of Biophilic Design Parameters in Clinical Environments. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 16(1), 233-250.
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11(3), 201-230.
van Nes, A., & Yamu, C. (2021a). Introduction to space syntax in urban studies. Springer Nature.
van Nes, A., & Yamu, C. (2021b). Private and Public Space: Analysing Spatial Relationships Between Buildings and Streets. In Introduction to Space Syntax in Urban Studies (pp. 113-131). Springer.
Vidal, D. G., Fernandes, C. O., Teixeira, C. P., Dias, R. C., Seixas, P. C., Barros, N., Vilaça, H., & Maia, R. L. (2022). Behavioural Mapping of Urban Green Spaces Users: Methodological Procedures Applied to Corujeira Garden (Porto, Portugal). In Sustainable Policies and Practices in Energy, Environment and Health Research (pp. 147-166). Springer.
Wijesooriya, N., Brambilla, A., & Markauskaite, L. (2023). Biophilic design frameworks: A review of structure, development techniques and their compatibility with LEED sustainable design criteria. Cleaner Production Letters, 100033.
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.
Zylstra, M. J., Knight, A. T., Esler, K. J., & Le Grange, L. L. (2014). Connectedness as a core conservation concern: An interdisciplinary review of theory and a call for practice. Springer Science Reviews, 2(1), 119-143.
_||_