BIOPHILIC ARCHITECTURE AS A PREVENTIVE STRATEGY FOR YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH IN URBAN CENTERS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69714/hmspjn06Keywords:
Biophilic architecture, Youth mental health, Urban youth centers, Preventive design, Sport facilities, Built environmentAbstract
Urban youth increasingly face mental health challenges due to academic pressure, sedentary lifestyles, limited access to safe public spaces, and the psychological impacts of dense urban environments. Conventional approaches to youth mental health, which are largely clinical or institutional, often fail to address preventive and environmental dimensions of well-being. In response, this paper examines the potential role of biophilic architecture as a non-clinical and preventive strategy to support youth mental health in urban contexts, particularly within sport and youth centers. This study employs a qualitative literature-based approach, synthesizing psychological theories, empirical studies, and architectural research related to biophilic design, adolescent mental health, and the built environment. The findings indicate that biophilic design elements such as natural lighting, ventilation, green and blue elements, spatial openness, and sensory-friendly environments are associated with stress reduction, improved mood, enhanced emotional regulation, and increased place attachment among adolescents. Sport and youth centers, when designed with biophilic principles, can function not only as physical activity hubs but also as restorative social infrastructures that support mental well-being. The paper identifies a research gap in youth-specific, urban-based studies that integrate biophilic design with real architectural typologies. By positioning biophilic architecture as a preventive mental health strategy, this study contributes to architectural discourse and youth studies, emphasizing the importance of everyday environments in fostering psychological resilience among urban youth, particularly in developing city contexts.
References
[1] J. Gehl, Cities for People. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2010.
[2] R. Kaplan and S. Kaplan, The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
[3] S. Kaplan, “The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 169–182, 1995, doi: 10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2.
[4] J.-Y. Kim and S.-J. Park, “Biophilic design application in school common areas: Exploring the potential to alleviate adolescent depression,” Buildings, vol. 15, no. 11, p. 1863, 2025, doi: 10.3390/buildings15111863.
[5] S. Ma, “Trauma-informed design: Shelter homes for runaway children,” in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 1101, no. 1, Art. no. 012038, 2022, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1101/1/012038.
[6] C. O. Ryan, W. D. Browning, J. O. Clancy, S. L. Andrews, and N. B. Kallianpurkar, “Biophilic design patterns: Emerging nature-based parameters for health and well-being in the built environment,” International Journal of Architectural Research (ArchNet-IJAR), vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 62–76, 2014.
[7] R. S. Ulrich, “View through a window may influence recovery from surgery,” Science, vol. 224, no. 4647, pp. 420–421, 1984, doi: 10.1126/science.6143402.
[8] M. Carmona, C. de Magalhães, and L. Hammond, Public Space: The Management Dimension. London: Routledge, 2018.
[9] J. M. Twenge, T. E. Joiner, M. L. Rogers, and G. N. Martin, “Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among U.S. adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time,” Clinical Psychological Science, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 3–17, 2018, doi: 10.1177/2167702617723376.
[10] G. N. Bratman, C. B. Anderson, M. G. Berman, B. Cochran, S. de Vries, J. Flanders, et al., “Nature and mental health: An ecosystem service perspective,” Science Advances, vol. 5, no. 7, eaax0903, 2019, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aax0903.
[11] W. D. Browning, C. O. Ryan, and J. O. Clancy, 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design: Improving Health & Well-Being in the Built Environment. New York: Terrapin Bright Green, 2014.
[12] S. R. Kellert, Nature by Design: The Practice of Biophilic Design. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2018.
[13] M. van den Berg, W. Wendel-Vos, M. van Poppel, H. Kemper, W. van Mechelen, and J. Maas, “Health benefits of green spaces in the living environment: A systematic review of epidemiological studies,” Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 806–816, 2015.
[14] L. Chawla, “Benefits of nature contact for children,” Journal of Planning Literature, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 433–452, 2015.
[15] T. Hartig, R. Mitchell, S. de Vries, and H. Frumkin, “Nature and health,” Annual Review of Public Health, vol. 35, pp. 207–228, 2014, doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182443.
[16] L. Scannell and R. Gifford, “Defining place attachment: A tripartite organizing framework,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.006.
[17] A. F. Taylor and F. E. Kuo, “Children with attention deficits concentrate better after walk in the park,” Journal of Attention Disorders, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 402–409, 2009, doi: 10.1177/1087054708323000
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin Ilmu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
