Designing Access to Nature for Residential Buildings

Part of the Springer Optimization and Its Applications book series (SOIA, volume 125)


The popular aphorism that ‘nature is good for you’ is explored by reviewing a number of studies measuring the impact of nature, and its deprivation, on subjects. These range from well-being in dementia patients to the development of cognitive and motor skills in preschool children. With sufficient evidence that access to nature is indeed good for you, and providing a pragmatic (if not rigorously scientific) definition of nature, the paper moves on to identify the key design parameters that have impact on our access to nature.

The work proposes a spatial model that consists of zones, links and qualities. Zones can be inside, edge, near or far, these corresponding to the building interior, the building envelope, the immediate surroundings and the distant landscape. Between these zones are links that are either access or sensory. All the above zones and links can be ascribed qualities. Whilst there is too little data at present to propose a quantitative calibration, the model may be useful to a designer for ordering and balancing various conflicting design decisions. Finally, other issues relating to nature are discussed. These include attracting wildlife into the near zone and facilitating gardening and pet-keeping.


Nature View Landscape Gardens Access Wildlife 


  1. Chalfont, G.E.: Design for Nature in Dementia Care. Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London (2008)Google Scholar
  2. English Nature: Wildlife-Friendly Gardening – A General Guide (2005)Google Scholar
  3. Faber Taylor, A., Kuo, F.E., Sullivan, W.C.: Views of nature and self-discipline: evidence from inner city children. J. Environ. Psychol. 22, 49–63 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fjørtoft, I.: Landscape as playscape: the effects of natural environments on children’s play and motor development. Child. Youth Environ. 14(2), 21–44 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. Grahn, P., Martensson, F., Lindblad, B., Nilsson, P., Ekman, A.: Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet, Alnarp. UTE pa DAGIS, Stad & Land nr. 93/1991/1997 (1997)Google Scholar
  6. Greater London Authority: Improving Londoners’ Access to Nature London Plan (2008)Google Scholar
  7. Hellinga, H.I.: Daylight and View; The Influence of Windows on the Visual Quality of Indoor Spaces. PhD Thesis, University of Delft (2013)Google Scholar
  8. Heschong Mahone Group: Windows and Offices: A Study of Office Worker Performance and the Indoor Environment. Technical Report for the California Energy Commission (2003)Google Scholar
  9. Kaplan, R.: The role of nature in the context of the workplace. Landsc. Urban Plan. 26(1–4), 193–201 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kaplan, R.: The nature of the view from home: psychological benefits. Environ. Behav. 33(4), 507–542 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Markus, T.A.: The function of windows – a reappraisal. Build. Sci. 2(2), 97–121 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nicol, F., Humphreys, M.: Thermal comfort as part of a self-regulating system. Build. Res. Pract. 1(3) (1973)Google Scholar
  13. Strife, S., Downey, L.: Childhood development and access to nature. Organ Environ. 22(1), 99–122 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ulrich, R.S.: View through window may influence recovery from surgery. Science 224, 420 (1984, April 27)Google Scholar
  15. Wells, N.: At home with nature, effects of “Greenness” on children’s cognitive functioning. Environ. Behav. 32(6), 775–795 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wells, D.: The value of pets for human health. Psychologist. 24, 172–176 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. Wilson, E.O.: Biophilia. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (1984). ISBN:0-674-07442-4Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Architectural AssociationLondonUK

Personalised recommendations