Topophilia and the Biophillic City

Biophilia was an ideology that was popularized within planning circles in the mid to late twentieth century and was kicked off, initially by thinkers like American biologist E.O. Wilson. The term simply means "the love of living things", and that idea implemented in community planning through the lens of landscape architecture actualizes itself through the implementation of green space overhaul, natural water management features, biodiversity within ecology, urban agriculture, green infrastructure strategies, and art and design in the city through communal engagement. The ideology gained popularity due to positive associations of more active people equating to lower health problems as well as studied long-term natural exposure having positive effects in mitigating mental health and mental clarity problems in the Populus.  The same practices in this that are serving people, begin to use these same practices to heal the relationship that humans have with nature, creating one of symbiosis rather than parasitism.

These strategies, if implemented, can transform the way that we conceive of the urban environment. Urbanites are so removed from the natural world to their own detriment, and biophilic cities can reintegrate natural systems and forms into buildings, infrastructure, and, of course, green space. The urbanites may not currently even know that they are being starved for a basic human need in the connection to nature, and the implementation of these strategies could change what it even means at the core of what it is to be a human in the city. Another tenet of the biophilic city that is particularly interesting to me, as my research work is on the feasibility of multimodal transport in the American south to heal our bodies and communities, is the focus on instoration through greenspace. The implementation of an overhaul of nature-based physical activity is shown in the reading to have profoundly positive results on the lowering of obesity, diabetes, and hypertension, [all issues that the south severely struggles with] I now wonder if along with cycling and pedestrian infrastructural planning if I should imagine topophilic tenets place within the rural township. The paper also cites studies confirming that connection to green space is a huge catalyst for communal cohesion, which also cuts down on communal, mental, and physical stressors on the individual and community as a whole.

One of the most important factors to point out is the importance of this sort of design thinking in the face of our post-pandemic world. The pandemic proved to us that spaces to safely gather outside of the built environment should have paramount importance. We need spaces within our cities that can facilitate our need for connection to the natural world. It should not be seen as a luxury trip to drive hours outside of city bounds to be in a pasture or wooded condition. It is a basic human need and right, and we must, as designers, begin to plan for biophilic conditions if we want both the health of our natural world and thus, ourselves. 

I personally lived in a condition in Richmond this summer that was uber-enriching. The city is full of green space, rough native planted areas instead of lawns, connection to the river, and organic city planning.  I have touted to anyone who can hear about how amazing it was to be able to leave the office at 5:30 and be at the dry rocks in the river before 5:45. This connection to nature every day provided me with the most physical and mental clarity and health that I have had in years.

Some awesome examples of biophilic design are included in the links below:

https://www.biophiliccities.org/austin

https://www.biophiliccities.org/richmond