Harmonious Spaces with Nature: Bibliometric Assessment of Biophilic Design

Öz

Deep understanding of nature and the inherent relationship between humans and nature form the foundation of biophilic design. This unique approach aims to harmoniously and healthily transform human living spaces in various disciplines such as architecture, landscape architecture, urban and regional planning. This study utilizes bibliometric analysis to answer questions regarding the comprehensive scope of biophilic design applications, the subjects of academic research, their frequency of investigation, research trends, and priorities. The subjects, keywords, usage frequency, interest levels, and relationships of academic research involving biophilic design are analyzed. The academic research trends of biophilic design are examined by analyzing 346 articles published in 184 different journals between 2006 and 2023 in the Web of Science database. Within this context, 699 keywords are identified, with the top 42 keywords being highlighted. This broad array of keywords reflects the richness and depth of the subject matter. Keywords like health, benefits, exposure, stress, recovery, environment, design, impact, city, are particularly prominent, indicating their high relevance. This research employs collaboration networks of keywords and thematic maps to thoroughly demonstrate the academic impact of biophilic design, revealing its growing significance and interest within the academic realm. Emphasizing the potential of biophilic design to transform living spaces and its profound connection with nature remains a central theme.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Biophilic design
• bibliometric analysis
• architecture
• natural environment

Doğayla Uyumlu Mekânlar: Biyofilik Tasarımın Bibliyometrik Değerlendirmesi

Öz

Doğanın derinlemesine anlaşılması ve insanın doğayla iç içe geçmiş köklü ilişkisi, biyofilik tasarımın temelini oluşturur. Bu benzersiz yaklaşım mimarlık, peyzaj mimarlığı, şehir ve bölge planlaması gibi çok çeşitli disiplinlerde, insan yaşam alanlarını doğal dünya ile uyumlu, dengeli ve sağlıklı dönüştürmeyi amaçlar. Bu çalışmada, biyofilik tasarımın kapsamlı uygulama alanları vurgulanarak, akademik araştırmaların hangi konuları ele aldığı, ne sıklıkla incelendiği, araştırma eğilimleri ve öncelikleri nelerdir gibi sorulara bibliyometrik analiz yöntemiyle cevap aranmaktadır. Biyofilik tasarımı içeren akademik araştırmaların konuları, anahtar kelimeleri, kullanım sıklığı, ilgi düzeyi ve birbiriyle olan ilişkileri analiz edilmektedir. Web of Science veri tabanında 2006-2023 yılları arasında 184 farklı dergide yayımlanan 346 makale incelenerek, biyofilik tasarımın akademik araştırma eğilimleri incelenmektedir. Bu bağlamda, 699 adet anahtar kelime belirlenmiş ve en fazla kullanılan ilk 42 anahtar kelime öne çıkarılmıştır. Bu geniş anahtar kelime yelpazesi, konunun zenginliğini ve literatürdeki derinliğini yansıtmaktadır. Özellikle sağlık, avantajlar, maruz kalma, stres, kurtarma, çevre, tasarım, etki, şehir gibi anahtar kelimeler yoğun ilgi görerek öne çıkmaktadır. Bu araştırmada, anahtar kelimelerin işbirliği ağları ve tematik haritaları analiz edilmekte, biyofilik tasarımın akademik dünyadaki etkisi derinlemesine ortaya konulmaktadır. Doğayla iç içe geçen bu kapsamlı yaklaşıma akademik sahada büyüyen ilgi ve önem net bir şekilde görülmektedir. Biyofilik tasarımın yaşam alanlarını dönüştürme potansiyeli ve doğayla kurulan köklü bağı vurgulanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Biyofilik tasarım
• bibliyometrik analiz
• mimarlık
• doğal çevre

Kaynakça

1. Abo Sabaa, S. G., Abdel Azem, M., Al-Shanwany, H., & El-Ibrashy, M. (2022). A Study of Biophilic design and how it relates to the children’s hospitals design. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 992(1), 012003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/992/1/012003
2. Akyıldız, N. A. (2023). Biyofilik tasarım konulu lisansüstü tezlerin bibliyometrik analizi. Kent Akademisi, 16(2), 879–904. https://doi.org/10.35674/Kent.1137707
3. Akyıldız, N. A., & Olğun, T. N. (2021). Darende/Balaban geleneksel yerleşim dokusunda biyofilik tasarım izlerinin incelenmesi. Kent Akademisi, 14(3), 560–577. https://doi.org/10.35674/kent.983117
4. Allison, S. E. (2007). An inquiry into the art of biophilia technology [Master’s thesis, Northern Arizona University].
5. Beatley, T. (2011). Biophilic cities: integrating nature into urban design and planning. Island Press.https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=H9Y4z68WSgUC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=biophilic+city&ots=ZmId5EPUxd&sig=jjik0JKpfAE3Og0ohuuIMWFhO78&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=biophilic%20city&f=false
6. Beatley, T. (2016). Handbook of biophilic city planning & design. Island Press. https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=wnmIDQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=biophilic+city&ots=fXnLRLtrpW&sig=AuAUAuSs2zD-tBnPbprFekoG9GQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=biophilic%20city&f=false
7. Bjørkdahl, K. (2009). Insidious ignorance or burst of biophilia: Cultural uses of educational farms in Norway. Ethical Futures: Bioscience and Food Horizons, 3, 337–342.
8. Browning, W. D., & Ryan, C. O. (2020). Nature inside: a biophilic design guide. Routledge. https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=7QcCEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT6&dq=biophilic+interior&ots=cUeASeK8Dl&sig=IlCwLTqkEEuoQGbWXTnhifb0tPM&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=biophilic%20interior&f=false

9. Chang, C. C., Cheng, G. J. Y., Nghiem, T. P. Le, Song, X. P., Oh, R. R. Y., Richards, D. R., & Carrasco, L. R. (2020). Social media, nature, and life satisfaction: global evidence of the biophilia hypothesis. Scientific Reports, 10(1). Nature Publishing Group. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-60902-w
10. Chen, Y., Xiong, K., Ren, X., & Cheng, C. (2022). An overview of ecological vulnerability: a bibliometric analysis based on the Web of Science database. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(9), 12984–12996. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-17995-1
11. Eckardt, M. H. (1992). Fromm’s concept of biophilia. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 20(2), 233–240. DOI: 10.1521/jaap.1.1992.20.2.233
12. Egerer, M., & Buchholz, S. (2021). Reframing urban “wildlife” to promote inclusive conservation science and practice. Biodiversity and Conservation, 30(7), 2255–2266. DOI: 10.1007/S10531-021-02182-y
13. Ellegaard, O., & Wallin, J. A. (2015). The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? Scientometrics, 105(3), 1809–1831. DOI: 10.1007/S11192-015-1645-Z
14. Garfield, E. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? Scientometrics, 1(4), 359–375. DOI: 10.1007/BF02019306
15. Gunderson, R. (2014). Erich Fromm’s ecological messianism. Humanity & Society, 38(2), 182–204. DOI: 10.1177/0160597614529112
16. Kalvaitis, D., & Monhardt, R. (2015). Children voice biophilia: The phenomenology of being in love with nature. Journal of Sustainability Education, 9(March), 1–15.
17. Kellert, S., & Calabrese, E. (2015). The practice of biophilic design. Terrapin Bright LLC, 3, 21–46.
18. Klint Jensen, K. (2009). Food production and sustainability. Ethical Futures: Bioscience and Food Horizons, 217–221. DOI: 10.3920/978-90-8686-673-1
19. Kopnina, H. (2015). Revisiting the Lorax complex: deep ecology and biophilia in cross-cultural perspective. Environmental Sociology, 1(4), 315–324. DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2015.1048765
20. McGee, B., Park, N. K., Portillo, M., Bosch, S., & Swisher, M. (2019). Diy biophilia: development of the biophilic interior design matrix as a design tool. Journal of Interior Design, 44(4), 201–221. DOI: 10.1111/joıd.12159
21. Mitchell, D. B., & Mueller, M. P. (2011). A philosophical analysis of David Orr’s theory of ecological literacy: Biophilia, ecojustice and moral education in school learning communities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(1), 193–221. DOI: 10.1007/S11422-010-9274-6
22. Morawski, C., & Dunnington, C. L. (2021). Biophilia and visual art education: Two teachers narrate their own connections. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 22(9), 1–26. DOI: 10.26209/ıjea22n9
23. Nitu, M. A., Gocer, O., Wijesooriya, N., Vijapur, D., & Candido, C. (2022). A biophilic design approach for improved energy performance in retrofitting residential projects. Sustainability 2022, Vol. 14, Page 3776, 14(7), 3776. DOI: 10.3390/su14073776
24. Oğuz, G. P., Özyılmaz, H., & Dağtekin, E. (2008). Dicle Üniversitesinde mimarlık eğitimi. Uludağ Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(2), 1–13. DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2015.1048765
25. Olivos-Jara, P., Segura-Fernández, R., Rubio-Pérez, C., & Felipe-García, B. (2020). Biophilia and biophobia as emotional attribution to nature in children of 5 years old. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(511), 1–14. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00511/bıbtex
26. Özdamar, E. G., & Tandoğan, O. (2022). Cyber-gardening and biophilic design in future cities. IGI Global, 286–309. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6725-8.ch013
27. Patra, S. K., Bhattacharya, P., & Verma, N. (2006). Bibliometric study of literature on bibliometrics. Desidoc Bulletin of Information Technology, 26(1), 27–32.
28. Price, D. J. de S. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149(3683), 510–515. DOI: 10.1126/science.149.3683.510
29. Rose, A. L. (2011). Bonding, biophilia, biosynergy, and the future of primates in the wild. American Journal of Primatology, 73(3), 245–252. DOI: 10.1002/AJP.20888
30. Sachs, N. A. (2022). E. O. Wilson: A Legacy of “Biophilia.” HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 15(4), 283–286. DOI: 10.1177/19375867221120409
31. Sinemillioglu, M. O., Akin, C. T., & Karacay, N. (2010). Relationship between green areas and urban conservation in historical areas and its reflections: Case of Diyarbakir City, Turkey. European Planning Studies, 18(5), 775–789. DOI: 10.1080/09654311003612620
32. Small, H. (1980). Co‐citation context analysis and the structure of paradigms. Journal of Documentation, 36(3), 183–196. DOI: 10.1108/eb026695
33. Small, H., & Garfield, E. (1985). The geography of science: disciplinary and national mappings. Journal of Information Science, 11(4), 147–159. DOI: 10.1177/016555158501100402
34. Small, H., & Greenlee, E. (1980). Citation context analysis of a co-citation cluster: Recombinant-DNA. Scientometrics, 2(4), 277–301. DOI: 10.1007/BF02016349
35. Soderlund, J., & Newman, P. (2016). Biophilic architecture: a review of the rationale and outcomes. AIMS Environmental Science, 2(4), 950–969. DOI: 10.3934/envıronscı.2015.4.950
36. Stavrianos, A. (2016). Green inclusion: biophilia as a necessity. British Journal of Special Education, 43(4), 416–429. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8578.12155
37. Tardast, Z., Meshkini, A., & Rajabi, A. (2021). Explain the strategic planning model of biophilic tourism case study: Tehran metropolis. Urban Tourism, 8(2), 65–79. DOI: 10.22059/jut.2021.299414.782
38. Totaforti, S. (2018). Applying the benefits of biophilic theory to hospital design. City, Territory and Architecture, 5(1), 1–9. DOI: 10.1186/S40410-018-0077-5
39. Totaforti, S. (2020). Emerging biophilic urbanism: the value of the human–nature relationship in the urban space. Sustainability 2020, Vol. 12, Page 5487, 12(13), 5487. DOI: 10.3390/SU12135487
40. Varshabi, N., Selçuk, S. A., & Avinç, G. M. (2022). Biomimicry for energy-efficient building design: a bibliometric analysis. Biomimetics 2022, Vol. 7, Page 21, 7(1), 21. DOI: 10.3390/bıomımetıcs7010021
41. White, M. P., Alcock, I., Grellier, J., Wheeler, B. W., Hartig, T., Warber, S. L., Bone, A., Depledge, M. H., & Fleming, L. E. (2019). Spending at least 120 minutes a week in nature is associated with good health and wellbeing. Scientific Reports 2019 9:1, 9(1), 1–11. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-44097-3
42. Wolfs, E. L. M. (2015). Biophilic design and Bio-collaboration: Applications and implications in the field of Industrial Design. Archives of Design Research, 28(1), 71–89.