Next Article in Journal
Study on Early Shrinkage and Mechanical Properties of Concrete with Various Cementitious Materials
Next Article in Special Issue
Analyzing the Bake-Out Effect in Winter for the Enhancement of Indoor Air Quality at New Apartments in UAE
Previous Article in Journal
Hybrid Model for Forecasting Indoor CO2 Concentration
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Classification of Biophilic Buildings as Sustainable Environments

by
Indre Grazuleviciute-Vileniske
*,
Aurelija Daugelaite
and
Gediminas Viliunas
Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Kaunas University of Technology, LT-51367 Kaunas, Lithuania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Buildings 2022, 12(10), 1542; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12101542
Submission received: 7 September 2022 / Revised: 21 September 2022 / Accepted: 23 September 2022 / Published: 27 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Healthy, Digital and Sustainable Buildings and Cities)

Abstract

Biophilic design approach aims at creating favorable conditions for humans in various types of anthropogenic environments, while at the same time restoring broken human–nature connection. The biophilic design guidelines and principles are general and flexible and allow wide array of architectural expressions. In order to better understand the architectural expression possibilities provided by biophilic design approach, the existing classifications of biophilic architecture and biophilic design examples were analyzed with the aim to develop the classification that would reflect the links between a building’s architectural expression and biophilic qualities. Three categories of biophilic architecture were distinguished in the developed classification: mimetic, applied, and organic. The distinguished categories were illustrated with the characteristic building examples and the evaluation of biophilic qualities and human-nature collaboration potential of these example buildings was carried out using comprehensive system of criteria. The analysis has demonstrated that all three distinguished categories—mimetic, applied, organic—allow for the creation of biophilic environments and hold the potential for human–nature collaboration, although organic biophilic design would be currently considered as the least developed, although most promising category.
Keywords: biophilia; biophilic architecture; biophilic building; classifications of biophilic design; human–nature collaboration biophilia; biophilic architecture; biophilic building; classifications of biophilic design; human–nature collaboration

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Grazuleviciute-Vileniske, I.; Daugelaite, A.; Viliunas, G. Classification of Biophilic Buildings as Sustainable Environments. Buildings 2022, 12, 1542. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12101542

AMA Style

Grazuleviciute-Vileniske I, Daugelaite A, Viliunas G. Classification of Biophilic Buildings as Sustainable Environments. Buildings. 2022; 12(10):1542. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12101542

Chicago/Turabian Style

Grazuleviciute-Vileniske, Indre, Aurelija Daugelaite, and Gediminas Viliunas. 2022. "Classification of Biophilic Buildings as Sustainable Environments" Buildings 12, no. 10: 1542. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12101542

APA Style

Grazuleviciute-Vileniske, I., Daugelaite, A., & Viliunas, G. (2022). Classification of Biophilic Buildings as Sustainable Environments. Buildings, 12(10), 1542. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12101542

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop