Biophilic Design in the Built Environment: Trends, Gaps and Future Directions

Biophilic design has emerged as a multidimensional response to growing concerns about health, well-being, and ecological balance in the built environment. Despite its rising prominence, research on the topic remains fragmented across building typologies, user groups, and geographic contexts. This study presents a comprehensive review of the biophilic design literature, employing a hybrid methodology combining structured content analysis and bibliometric mapping. All peer-reviewed studies indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus were manually screened for architectural relevance and systematically coded. A total of 435 studies were analysed to identify key trends, thematic patterns, and research gaps in the biophilic design discipline. This review categorises the literature by methodological strategies, building typologies, spatial scales, population groups, and specific biophilic design parameters. It also examines geographic and cultural dimensions, including climate responsiveness, heritage buildings, policy frameworks, theory development, pedagogy, and COVID-19-related research. The findings show a strong emphasis on institutional contexts, particularly workplaces, schools, and healthcare, and a reliance on perception-based methods such as surveys and experiments. In contrast, advanced tools like artificial intelligence, simulation, and VR are notably underused. Few studies engage with neuroarchitecture or neuroscience-informed approaches, despite growing recognition of how spatial design can influence cognitive and emotional responses. Experimental and biometric methods remain scarce among the few relevant contributions, revealing a missed opportunity to connect biophilic strategies with empirical evidence. Regarding biophilic parameters, greenery, daylight, and sensory experience are the most studied parameters, while psychological parameters remain underexplored. Cultural and climate-specific considerations appear in relatively few studies, and many fail to define a user group or building typology. This review highlights the need for more inclusive, context-responsive, and methodologically diverse research. By bridging macro-scale bibliometric patterns with fine-grained thematic insights, this study provides a replicable review model and valuable reference for advancing biophilic design as an evidence-based, adaptable, and human-centred approach to sustainable architecture.