For the past two decades, the sustainability movement has reshaped our built environments. We've embraced energy conservation, waste minimization, and optimized efficiency at every turn. Automated lighting systems detect movement, turning off when a space is empty. HVAC systems are fine-tuned to only operate when necessary. Every detail is optimized, streamlined, and regulated—all in the name of environmental responsibility.
At the same time, biophilic design has gained momentum. Research and lived experience confirm that incorporating nature into our spaces enhances productivity, reduces stress, and fosters creativity. We intuitively know this to be true—we feel better when surrounded by nature. We work better. We live better.
But there’s a fundamental flaw in our approach: our sustainability models do not fully account for nature’s needs within our built environments.
Sustainability at What Cost?
Imagine stepping into your office. The lights flick on automatically as you sit at your desk. But what about your plants? Have they been sitting in darkness all night? All weekend?
Many energy-efficient buildings rely on sensor-based lighting, which only activates when someone is present. If no one is around, does that mean the biophilic environment remains in the dark? If we recall our elementary school lessons on photosynthesis, we know that plants need light to survive. Yet in our hyper-efficient buildings, are those vital rays of light only available when investors arrive, when the cleaning crew enters, or when the CEO steps into the conference room?
If that’s the case, are we truly designing for life—or just for optics?
The Imbalance in Our Thinking
For all of our technological advancements, we seem to have overlooked a fundamental truth: for any system to function effectively, balance is essential. Whether in nature or in a spreadsheet, equilibrium is required.
✔ We want thriving, productive, and healthy spaces that support human well-being.
✔ We want to conserve energy, reduce waste, and lower our carbon footprint.
✔ We want biophilic design, but we fail to create the necessary conditions for plants to thrive.
So how does this work? Can we schedule photosynthesis? Can we command nature to “turn on” and “turn off” at our convenience?
We cannot continue using plants as decorative sustainability tokens while designing buildings that actively work against them.
A New Approach: Rethinking Energy & Nature in Design
The conversation around sustainability must evolve. It’s not just about what we conserve—it’s about what we cultivate.
✅ Lighting must be designed for all living things in a space, not just humans. Timed or sensor-based lighting should incorporate plant-focused spectrum adjustments that align with natural rhythms.
✅ Biophilic design must be treated as a living system, not an afterthought. Thriving plant systems contribute to energy efficiency by providing passive cooling, air purification, and psychological benefits that enhance productivity.
✅ Sustainability must account for nature within the built environment. A "green" building that weakens or kills its indoor plant life isn’t truly sustainable—it’s merely checking boxes.
We must ask ourselves: Are we designing for sustainability, or are we designing for statistics? Are we building for life, or merely for LEED points?
True sustainability isn’t just about turning things off—it’s about ensuring that what remains on is in harmony with everything that depends on it.
If we can figure out how to turn off the lights the second we leave a room, surely we can figure out how to keep nature alive while doing it.
Comentários