Are some natural patterns better than others? Is there a way to design, to manage, to interpret natural environments so as to enhance these beneficial influences? Frumkin, H. (2001). Beyond Toxicity: Human Health and the Natural Environment. Am J Prev Med Volume 20(3):34–240 Foster, J. The Sustainability Mirage: Illusion and Reality in the Coming War on Climate Change (Earthscan, London, 2008). Tachimoto, N. in Global Humanics of the Environment (ed. Tachimoto, N.) RIHN Working Paper No. 1; 5–10 (RIHN, Kyoto, 2008). Kellert, S. R. C., Elizabeth F. (2015). The Practice of Biophilic Design. Retrieved from www.biophilicdesign.com

Hosey, L. (2012). The Shape of Green: Aesthetics, Ecology, and Design. Washington, DC: Island Press. pp 216 Kellert, S. (2012). Birthright: People and Nature in the Modern World. New Haven: Yale University PressLater, in 2015, the principles of biophilic design were introduced in the book ‘The Practice of Biophilic Design’ [ 38]. These principles were repeated engagement with nature, focusing on human adaptations to the natural world, encouraging emotional attachment to specific places, promoting positive interactions between people and nature, and encouraging interconnected and incorporated architecture solutions. Also, the experience of nature was grouped into three types: direct experience of nature, indirect experience of nature, and the experience of space and place [ 38]. Categories and patterns of biophilic design The first category Nature in the Space includes all the direct, physical, and ephemeral existence of nature in a place. The influence of the nature in the space experience can be achieved through three main factors which are diversity, movement, and multi-sensory interactions, for instance Some flowerbeds and bird feeders; this category consists of seven biophilic design patterns and they are visual connection with nature, non- visual connection with nature, non-rhythmic sensory stimuli, thermal & airflow variability, presence of water, dynamic & diffuse light, and connection with natural systems [ 10] Duzenli T, Tarakci Eren E, Akyol D (2017) Concept of sustainability and biophilic design in landscape architecture. J Acad Soc Sci 5(June):43–49 Commensal organisms produce serotonin, melatonin, gamma-aminobutyric acid, catelcholamines, histamine, and acetylcholine, all neuroactive molecules [ 308], and so can be expected to affect mood. A soil bacteria, Mycobacterium vaccae, has been show to increase emotional affect and cognitive function in cancer patients [ 334, 335, 336] by inducing Treg production, which downregulates inflammation [ 308]. Renn, J. & Laubichler, M. in Integrated History and Philosophy of Science (ed. Stadler, F.) 109–125 (Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook Vol. 20, Springer, 2017).

Ryan CO, Browning WD (2018) Biophilic design. In: Encyclopedia of sustainability science and technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2493-6_1034-1 According to Jonah Paquette, experiencing awe involves two components, vastness and transcendence. Vastness happens when we see something like a spectacular view or sunset, or are exposed to a concept such as the the infinite size of the universe, that is too incredible to fit into our current worldview, forcing us to expand our understanding of what is possible. Transcendence happens when we take in this new, awe-inspiring experience and try to make sense of it. This paper is intended to be a narrative review of disparate literature designed to provide a reference for wider reading rather than to provide a systematic review of the evidence. As such, no systematic search or synthesis has been attempted and instead, a number of search terms were used and anything considered relevant to senses and nature benefits was included. Multiple study designs were included, as well as research on animals in addition to humans. Some search term examples, for sound, included “sound”, “noise”, “nature benefit”, “wellness”, “health”, “wellbeing”, with similar searches for the other senses. When relevant articles were found, a snowballing method was utilized, searching their references for further relevant articles. In some instances where very few results were found, we included preference studies as well as correlational studies where the effects of possible confounding variables could not be assessed. Brondizio, E. S., Ostrom, E. & Young, O. R. Connectivity and the governance of multilevel social-ecological systems: The role of social capital. Annu. Rev. Env. Res. 34, 253–78 (2009). Most experiments with phytoncides take place in the lab as this is necessary to isolate the compounds, so an avenue of future research would be to conduct experiments in the field but attempting to isolate phytoncides as the active element. Measurements could also be taken of the distribution of phytoncides in the environment, such as through a park or forest, or in comparison to an urban area. Experiments could also look at how far phytoncides extend from natural areas, and whether they are released in measurable quantities from different kinds of urban greenery.In addition to the nutritional value of foods, we ingest a number of microorganisms with our food or directly from the environment, such as from soil. Some of these microorganisms persist as fauna within the gut with a number of beneficial effects. Humans coevolved with microbes for over 500 million years [ 307, 308], and this has led to a symbiotic relationship, wherein bidirectional neuronal, hormonal, and immunological signals are exchanged between the gastrointestinal tract and the brain [ 309]. Saprophytic (soil) bacteria are commonly found in the gut, and while they cannot replicate there, were present in our ancestors due to exposure through mud and water [ 310]. Repeated exposure to these organisms was found to lead to a tolerance response to stress [ 311], and indeed continued exposure to environmental organisms is necessary to maintain the diversity of gut microbiota [ 312]. Taste remains highly neglected in the context of nature experiences, and some interesting research avenues might include clinical studies on the emotional effects of eating processed versus natural foods, ability to distinguish between processed and natural food, and cognitive effects of diet. Growing your own food means understanding seasonality and having the experience of gardening, both of which are strong nature experiences. A study by Church et al. [ 178] showed that those who grow their own food are happier than those who do not, accounting for a large number of possible socio-economic confounding variables, but not demonstrating a causal effect. Food growing has been linked with a variety of benefits, including self-fulfillment, identity affirmation, self-help, and mutual support [ 179], and growing your own food contributes to food safety and tastier, better quality food [ 180, 181, 182]. In fact, wanting better tasting food was the top reason respondents to a study cited for growing their own food [ 178]. It can also be a very satisfying practice [ 183], promotes skill development [ 181, 184], and connects one to nature [ 185]. A final benefit of growing food, and the second most popular reason in the above-mentioned study, was economic savings [ 178]. Community markets with locally grown food have even been used to promote racial equality, as in the case of “Mo’ Better Foods” in the US [ 186], indicating that the benefits derived from food and taste can be far reaching, from the individual to the community scale. The expansion of food-growing from a male-dominated practice to a more equal and female-including practice has been studied [ 187], so it has implications for racial and gender relationships, and the local food movement (growing food locally) has been considered as a social movement [ 188]. Indeed, food ties us together and its use to bring people together socially is well documented [ 189, 190, 191, 192, 193]. Growing food or otherwise interacting in nature can bring us together socially and provide benefits, such as care farms [ 194] and nature-assisted therapy programs [ 195]. All of this suggests that community cohesion is one of the possible benefits of natural food.

A biophilic landscape design in Shanghai, China By Kyle Saylor Hopkins B. S ., The Ohio State University, 2009 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements f or the de. (2014). Soderlund, J., Newman, P. (2015). Biophilic architecture: a review of the rationale and outcomes. AIMS Environ Sci. 2(4):950–969 Whatever you call it, connectedness to nature seems to benefit mood and mental health. In a meta-analysis, Alison Pritchard, PhD, ABPP, at the University of Derby in England, and colleagues found that people who feel more connected to nature have greater eudaimonic well-being—a type of contentment that goes beyond just feeling good and includes having meaningful purpose in life ( Journal of Happiness Studies, online first publication, 2019).The time has come to think of making this material available in a more widely sharable form. The issues are not by any means wrapped up and settled. Nonetheless, there are at least two compelling reasons for taking this step. The first is that these many nature-related and nature-influencing activities - designing, planning, managing, interpreting - are going on right now, often based on little theory and even less data. Compared to the wellintended but often severely limited intuitive bases for decision making currently being employed, the results of these years of research and theory could make a positive contribution. Second, we feel the outlines of what is known and what needs to be known have become clear enough that it is time to invite others to join the fun, to participate in the process themselves. The truth may be a combination of factors. “Stress reduction and attention restoration are related,” Nisbet points out. “And because of the societal problems we’re dealing with in terms of stress, both of these theories have gotten a lot of attention from researchers.” Awe has been shown to reduce stress levels in both the short term and the long term. Importantly though, it was shown that it wasn’t just spending time outdoors that lead to this reduction in stress, but nature’s ability to induce a sense of awe in subjects.

Lau, S.S.Y., Gou, Z., Liu, Y., (2014). Healthy camps by open space design: approach and guideline. Front Archit Res 3:452–467

My Book Notes

Some studies suggest that awe may be able to increase our critical cognitive skills. One study found that when people were induced to feel awe, they were less persuaded by weak arguments than people who did a neutral activity (imagining doing their laundry). Human-animal interactions activate the oxytocinergic system, resulting in decreased social stress and endocrinological, psychophysiological, and psychosocial effects [ 229]. Oxytocin is produced by stroking [ 230, 231], and an increase in plasma oxytocin was found in humans after 5–24 min of petting [ 232, 233]. Oxytocin is found to increase social interaction [ 234], decrease stress [ 235, 236, 237], lower pain thresholds, produce anti-inflammatory effects [ 238, 239], lower anxiety [ 240], and increase the function of the parasympathetic nervous system, resulting in increased digestive function [ 241, 242]. Oxytocin may therefore be an important factor in the nature benefits received from touch. Kellert, S. R., & Finnegan, B. (2011). BIOPHILIC DESIGN The architecture of life viewing guide. http://www.biophilicdesign.net/