Why do we build? What do we build? How do we build? Why do we build in a certain way? And, above all, for whom do we build?

These are seemingly simple questions, yet they encapsulate one of the most important issues in contemporary design.

Architecture, urban planning, and interior design are undergoing a profound transformation. We are talking more and more frequently about sustainability, urban regeneration, energy efficiency, technological innovation, high-performance materials, and reducing environmental impact. These are essential issues that are changing the way we think about and build spaces.

But there are questions that still risk being pushed to the background:

Who are we designing for? Who are the users of these spaces? What are their characteristics and needs, and why?

It is precisely from this reflection by Bettina Bolten, a Biophilic Design Consultant, that we wish to begin our exploration of a central theme for MeM: bringing the human experience back into the design process and understanding the role that Biophilic Design can play in this context.

From the design of the space to the design of the experience

When we begin a project, we’re used to dealing with concrete elements: contexts, forms, square meters, functions, flows, laws, regulations, safety, budgets, materials, performance, needs, timelines, etc.

The “what” and the “how” are relatively easy to define, because they can be described, measured, and verified.

The “for who” is more complex.

Behind the generic definition of “user” lie people with different ages, abilities, experiences, backgrounds, habits, expectations, and ways of perceiving the world. People who will use that same environment at different times and for different activities. Human beings who share characteristics specific to our species—shaped by a long evolutionary history—but who also possess individual traits.

Let’s consider an office.

The same spatial layout can be experienced differently by those who need prolonged concentration, those who spend much of their day interacting with others, or those who alternate between individual and collaborative activities. It can also be perceived differently depending on whether users tend to be more introverted or extroverted.

Or let’s consider a school. The same hallway is simultaneously a path, a meeting place, a waiting area, a threshold between different activities, and—potentially—an environment capable of generating stimulation or sensory overload, but also different experiences depending on the characteristics, sensitivities, and perceptual modes of each individual.

Function describes what should happen in a space. Experience tells us how that space is actually lived.

And it is in this transition from design to experience that an intervention can make a big difference.

Image credits: Pexel 

The limits of the “average user”

Designing for people first and foremost requires overcoming a still-widespread oversimplification: imagining an abstract and always predictable user.

Demographic data, dimensional standards, personas, and usage profiles are valuable tools, but they tell only part of the story.

Two people in the same age group with seemingly similar characteristics may experience the same environment in profoundly different ways.

This is why listening plays a crucial role in the design process. Interviews, behavioral observation, path analysis, the study of routines, and direct user involvement reveal insights that are difficult to grasp by simply looking at a floor plan.

The question changes.

From: “What space should we design?” to: “What conditions do we want to create for the people who will experience it so that they feel comfortable?”

Image credits: Pexel 

The “for who” changes design decisions

Studying and understanding people’s collective and individual characteristics and needs risks remaining nothing more than a slogan if what emerges from the evidence and from listening is not subsequently translated into concrete design criteria.

Understanding that an environment must foster concentration, for example, means examining acoustic quality, visual distractions, the ability to choose different levels of exposure, lighting, and the presence of potentially restorative conditions.

Identifying a need for safety means focusing on the clarity of the space, views, thresholds, orientation, and the ability to intuitively understand where we are and where we can go.

Fostering relationships, on the other hand, requires considering distances, spatial configurations, opportunities for interaction, and the balance between social interaction and the ability to retreat.

This is precisely the fundamental step: transforming our understanding of people into well-founded, consistent, and verifiable design criteria.

Nature also means connection

There is also a particularly important passage in Bettina Bolten’s reflection. The reconnection that Biophilic Design seeks certainly concerns Nature, but it also involves our relationships with others (not just humans).

Human beings are part of the natural and social system in which they live. An environment geared toward well-being should therefore create conditions conducive to both individual renewal and to connection, sharing, and a sense of belonging, while at the same time acknowledging our place within a broader natural system.

This means moving beyond a purely aesthetic and anthropocentric interpretation of biophilia.

A green wall can be an interesting element, but on its own it tells us little about the overall biophilic quality of a space.

Rather, we must ask ourselves:

How is that environment experienced?

What kinds of relationships does it foster?

What choices does it offer?

What kinds of stimuli does it generate?

What conditions promote recovery, orientation, safety, and connection?

Designing with people, even before designing for people

Perhaps the most significant shift, however, concerns the process itself. If we truly want to understand the “for whom,” the user can take on a more active role in shaping the project.

Listening means making room for needs that the designer may not have anticipated. Observing means accepting that the actual use of a space may differ from what was imagined. Involving means recognizing that people possess fundamental knowledge: that which stems from their daily experience of places.

The designer retains their expertise and responsibility but engages them in dialogue with other forms of knowledge.

This perspective is particularly important when we design schools, hospitals, workplaces, public spaces, and all those environments frequented by diverse communities.

Image credits: Pexel 

The “why” behind our responses to the environment

There is one final question that is closely tied to the question “for whom.”

Why do certain environmental characteristics influence the way we perceive, behave, and feel well? Why can certain spatial configurations promote safety, exploration, concentration, or social interaction? And, above all, why do some design solutions seem to work better than others?

To answer these questions, it is not enough to simply observe what people do today. We must also understand where our responses to the environment come from.

Evolutionary psychology and evolutionary biology invite us to view human beings as organisms shaped by a long history, during which we have developed specific perceptual, cognitive, behavioral, and physiological capacities in relation to the environment to ensure the survival of our species.

This does not automatically mean that there is a universal formula for designing spaces, nor that every human response can be explained solely through evolution.

It does, however, mean adding a fundamental question to the design process:

Why are we made this way, and what does this tell us about our relationship with the environment?

This is where science can make a fundamental contribution to the project: not only by describing how people respond to their environment, but by seeking to understand why they do so and what biological, psychological, and evolutionary mechanisms may underlie these responses.

And this profoundly changes the way we design.

It is no longer just a matter of knowing what to do, but of understanding why we must do it.

Biophilic Design can therefore be seen as a field in which evolution, biology, psychology, and design can engage in dialogue to gain a deeper understanding of the relationship between people and the environment.

Five questions to consider for your next project

Bettina Bolten’s reflection can thus become an exercise to be used even before we begin to design:

1. Why are we building? What change do we want to bring about through our project?
2. What are we building? What functions must it serve, and what experiences should it make possible?
3. How are we building it? Are our spatial, structural, material, environmental, and technological choices consistent with our stated objectives?
4. For whom are we building? Who will actually inhabit these spaces, what are their needs, and how much do we know about their experience?
5. Why are we building this way? On what scientific evidence can we base our design strategies?

The fourth question inevitably cuts across all the others.

Because we can design a building that is efficient, technologically advanced, and environmentally responsible. But the quality of a space is also measured by its ability to connect with the people who inhabit it and to contribute positively to their daily experience.

Back to the fundamental question

At a time when environmental sustainability and innovation are redefining design, Biophilic Design introduces an additional responsibility: to balance the health of ecosystems with the quality of human life through an approach aligned with the “One Health” concept.

This means returning to a focus on people, recognizing their differences and needs, understanding the relationships they build with their environments, and restoring Nature’s structural and fundamental role in the experience of space.

This article stems from a reflection by Bettina Bolten, a Biophilic Design Consultant and MeM instructor, on the role of people and Nature in the design process.