Feasibility Pattern of Indigenous Indicators of the Biophilic City Case Study: 9th and 10th District of Tehran Metropolitan

Document Type : Article extracted From phd dissertation


1 PhD student in Geography and Urban Planning, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Professor of Geography and Urban Planning, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor of Geography and Urban Planning, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran


Extended abstract
Nowadays, cities are increasingly dominated by buildings, and, they have become as laboratories for the supply of human ambitions among the fortresses of concrete, steel and glass with the least natural space, so that the lack of biodiversity in these cities is quite noticeable. This has led to disrupt natural spaces with urban spaces, evacuate cities from natural environments, divert urban residents from their inherent needs for communication with nature and also it causes change of their perceptions of the natural environment. The existence of these issues and the recognition of humanity's inherent need to communicate with nature has led to biophilic as a new approach. The aim of present study is to analyze the ranking and feasibility of biophilic approach indicators in 9th and 10th districts of Tehran. These districts due to the proximity and uniformity of the environment have same conditions and according to the lack of green spaces, open space, their geographical location in the city, the presence of worn-out textures and so on , a greater portion of different types of pollution and environmental issues have been devoted to them than other ones. Accordingly, these two districts were selected in order to reduce environmental problems and provide a suitable model for overcoming these issues and considering biophilic city's mission in protecting and enhancing natural spaces in the city. Based on the purpose of the study, the research questions are as follows:
- What are the most important factors affecting the realization of the biophilic  city in 9th and 10th  districts of Tehran ?
- What is the current status of  9th and 10th districts of Tehran  from the viewpoint of localized indicators of biophilic urban planning?
The present study is descriptive-analytical and applied in terms of content and methodology. The required data and information were collected through the library and field method. In this study, the main and global indicators of biophilic city have been identified by reviewing articles and theoretical literature. These indicators were localized by 10 faculty members and PhD students in the fields of geography and urban planning and the environment who had essays, books, and studies on the subject and environment of the case study. After saturating the experts' opinion about the indigenous research indicators, they were selected as the final research indicators. The Swara method is used for data analysis.
Results and discussion
According to experts, the index of institutions and organizations with a coefficient of 2.37, biophilic infrastructure with a score of 1/65, biophilic attitudes and awareness with a score of 1/20, and finally biophilic activity with a score of 0/99, have been identified as the most important  indicators, respectively. So The necessity of considering these indicators based on their priority will lead to feasibility of the biophilic city within the case study. The impact of these indicators (either directly or indirectly) has an important role in determining the status of the study area in terms of biophilic urban planning according to the results of experts’ ideas. The status of 9th and 10th districts of Tehran are in a suitable situation in terms of infrastructure and condition indicators, number of gardens, total private and public green space, and also among the indicators of activity index, being curious about the environment .as the results of the waspas method showed, district No.9 is more desirable than No.10 ones.
Swara test results show that according to experts, institutions and organizations index with a final weight of ./3705, biophilic infrastructure with a weight of 1.65769, biophilic attitudes and awareness with a final weight of 1.20999 and finally biophilic activities with Weight of 0.99994 were identified as the most important indicators, respectively. Also, according to the results of waspas test, district No.9 with Qi value equal to 0.081207 is more suitable in terms of feasibility of biophilic indexes than district No.10. Biophilic urban planning is a new approach and as a manifestation of a sustainable city. In Iran's metropolitan areas where sustainable development is rapidly undercut by environmental and ecological problems, the urban biophilic model can play an essential role as a localized sustainable development model. According to the results of the studies were done, the biophilic urban planning approach has the potential to provide a wide range of social and psychological benefits to residents as well as environmental, functional and economic benefits to major cities. Therefore, in order to exploit the benefits of this approach and its feasibility in cities, a systematic and comprehensive study of environmental, social, economic, and other conditions and characteristics is necessary. Therefore, it can be stated that although the studied areas in terms of such biophilic indicators have an appropriate condition, the situation of these two districts is in an unsuitable condition. And the current situation in these two areas has made it difficult to achieve feasibility of biophilic indicators.


1)     Beatley, Timothy. (2011) Biophilic Cities: Integrating Nature into Urban Design and Planning, Washington DC, USA: Island Press.
2)     Beatley, Timothy. & Newman, Peter. (2013) Biophilic Cities Are Sustainable, Resilient Cities, journal sustainability, Vol.5, No.3, pp.3328 - 3345.
3)     Beatley, Timothy. (2017) Handbook of  Biophilic City Planning and Design, Washington-Covelo-London, Island Press.
4)     Benyus, Janine M. (2002) Biomimicry innovation inspired by nature, Harper Perennial, New York.
5)     Chang, Po- ju. & Bae, So young. (2017) Positive emotional effects of leisure in green spaces in alleviating work–family spillover in working mothers, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ,Vol.14, No.7, pp. 1-10
6)    Cabanek, Aga. & Newman, P. (2016) Biophilic urban regeneration: can biophilicsbe a land value capturemechanism?, Sustainable Development and Planning VIII, Vol.210, No.3, pp. 65-74.
7)     Ebrahimpour, Mehdi. & Maedi, H. & Mahdiniya, M, H. (2017) Biophilic Planning new approach in sustainability (Proposing conceptual model of livable city), journal Urban Energy Sustainability, Vol.1, No.2, pp.26 – 41.
8)     Fromm, Erich. (1973) The Heart of Man, New York, USA, Harper and Row.
9)     Frumkin MD, Howard. (2001) Beyond toxicity: human health and the natural environment, Am J Prev Med, Vol. 20, No.3, pp.234 – 240.
10)  Helene, Littke. (2016) Becoming biophilic: Challenges and opportunities for biophilic  urbanism in urban planning policy, jurnal smart and Sustainable Built Environment, Vol.5, No.1, pp.15 -24.
11)  Heerwagen, January. (2001) A Balanced Scorecard Approach to Post – Occupancy Evaluation: Using the Tools Business to Evaluate Facilities, In Federal Construction Council, Learning From Our Buildings: Astate – of – the- Practice Summary of Post – Occupancy Evaluation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
12)  Keller, Stephen. & Heerwagen, Judith. & Mador, Martin. (2008) Biophilic Design: the Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
13)  Kellert, Stephen. & Calabrese, Elizabeth. (2015) The Practice of Biophilic Design, www.biophilicdesign.com.
14)  Kellert, Stephen. (2005) Building for Life: Understanding and Designing the Human-Nature Connection, 2nd None ed. Edition, Washington, DC: Island Press.
15)  Kellert, Stephen. (2012) Birthright: People and Nature in the Modern World, New Haven: Yale University Press.
16)  Kellert, Stephen. (2016) Biophilic urbanism: the potential to transform, Smart And Sustainable Built Environment,  Vol.5, No.1, pp.1-20.
17)  Lehmann, Steffen. (2014) Low carbon cities: Transforming urban systems. Routledge.
18)  Lau, Stephen, Siu, Yu. & Gou, Zhonghua. & Liu, Yajing. (2014) Healthy campus by open space design: Approaches and guidelines, Front Archit. Res, Vol. 3, No.4, pp.452–467.
19)  McCoy, Janetta, Mitchell. & Evans, GaryW. (2002) The potential role of the physical environment in, fostering creativity. Creativity Research Journal, Vol.14, No.3-4, pp.409–426.
20)  Newman, Peter. & Söderlund, Jana. (2017) Improving Mental Health in Prisons Through Biophilic Design, The Prison Journal, Vol.97, No.6, pp.750-772.
21)  Newman, Peter. & Matan, Anne. (2012) Human Health and Human Mobility, Curr Opin Env Sust, Vol.4, pp.420-426.
22)  Ozer, Ebru. (2013) Mutualistic relationships versus hyper-efficiencies in the sustainable building and city, Urban Ecosystems, Vol.17, No.1, pp.195–204.
23)  Reeve, Angela. & Desha, Cheryl, Julia, Kiran. & Hargreaves, Doug. & Hargroves, Karlson, James. (2015) Biophilic Urbanism: Contributions to Holistic Urban Greening for Urban Renewal, Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, Vol.4, No.2, pp.21–33.
24)  Russo, Alessio. & Cirella,Giuseppe T. (2017) Smart Cities Movemen in Brics, Biophilic Cities: Planning for Sustainable and Smart Urban Environments, Observer Research Foundation and Global Policy Journal, Simi Jaison Designs, Vinset Advertising, New Delhi.
25)  Soderlund, Jana. & Newman, Peter. (2015) Biophilic architecture: a review of the rationale and outcomes, journal Environmental Science, Vol.2, No.4, pp.950 – 969.
26)  Scandurra, Enao. (2001) Gli storni e l’urbanista. Progettare nella contemporaneità, Meltemi Editore, Roma, paperback.
27)  Totaforti, S (2018) Applying the benefits of biophilic theory to hospital design, Journal city, Territory and Architecture, Vol.5, No.1, pp.1-10.
28)   Totaforti, Simona. (2017) Città creativa, città biofilica. Integrare la natura nel progetto urbano In: Galdini R, Marata A (eds) La città creativa. Spazi pubblici e luoghi della quotidianità. CNAPPC. Available via DIALOG: http://www. cittacreative.eu/wp-content, La_città_creativa, pp.591- 597
29)  Wilson, Edward O. (1986) Biophilia: the Human Bond with Other Species. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
30)   Wilson , Edward. O. (1984) Biophilia. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
31)  Xue, Fei. & Gou, Zhonghua. & Siu-Yu Lau, Stephen. & KitLau, Siu. & Hung Chung, Kin. & Zhang, Jian. (2019) From biophilic design to biophilic urbanism: Stakeholders’ perspectives, Journal of Cleaner Production,  Vol.211, No.23, pp.1444-1452.
32)   Xue, Fei. & Gou, Zhonghua. & Stephen, Siu Yu Lau. (2016) Human Factors in Green Office Building Design: The Impact of Workplace Green Features on Health Perceptions in High-Rise High-Density Asian Cities, Sustainability, Vol.8, No.10, pp.1-16.
33)  Pedersen Zari, Maibritt. (2018) What makes a city ‘biophilic’? Observations and experiences from the Wellington Nature Map project, M. Aurel (eds.), Back to the future: The next 50 years, 51st International Conference of the Architectural Science Association, pp. 1–10, The Architectural Science Association and Victoria University of Wellington.
34)  Ziari, Keramatollah. & Pourahmad, Ahmad. & Fotouhi Mehrabani, Bagher. & Hosseini, Ali. (2018) Environmental sustainability in cities by biophilic city approach: a case study of Tehran, International Journal of Urban Sciences, Vol.22, No.4, pp.486-516.