As ESG targets, indoor environmental quality benchmarks, and wellbeing standards become embedded within project briefs, architects are increasingly expected to evidence how buildings support both people and planet.
Biophilic design is often positioned as a solution. Yet, as Dulux’s latest Industry Viewfinder report, Current thinking and approaches to biophilic design, reveals, implementation remains inconsistent across sectors.
Produced in association with ADF, the research explores how architects are currently approaching biophilia, where barriers persist, and what would encourage wider adoption. For specifiers, the findings are clear: belief in the concept exists, but confidence in measurable delivery needs strengthening.
Adoption: positive intent, variable uptake
The report highlights that 50% of architects surveyed are explicitly employing biophilic design within their projects, and 51% describe their experience as positive.
End-user wellness and staff wellbeing were ranked as the strongest drivers, followed closely by passive environmental benefits. In particular, workplace environments are seeing biophilic strategies gain traction, with 60% of respondents applying them in this sector.
However, adoption drops significantly in education, healthcare and industrial settings. Concerns cited include maintenance and installation costs, a lack of client understanding, and difficulty evidencing return on investment.
Notably, 90% of architects surveyed have not yet measured ROI for commercial clients. For many clients, this absence of quantifiable data remains a barrier.
The challenge, therefore, is not persuading the industry of biophilia’s theoretical value — but embedding it within specification decisions that are robust, compliant and cost-aware.
Beyond the “green wall” perception
Biophilic design is sometimes reduced to visible planting or living walls. While these remain popular — with 80% of respondents believing green walls are worth the investment for mainstream applications — the framework is considerably broader.
The report references the established model developed by Stephen Kellert, encompassing:
• Direct experiences of nature (light, air, water, planting)
• Indirect experiences (natural materials, colour, biomorphic forms)
• Contextual connections to place
For specifiers, indirect strategies are often the most practical and scalable. They can be delivered through colour palettes, material selection, surface finishes, and lighting design — without introducing maintenance-intensive systems.
This is where specification plays a decisive role.
Colour is a biophilic too
Colour is one of the most immediate and controllable elements within interior environments. It is also one of the most cost-effective ways to embed biophilic principles.
While greens and blues are commonly associated with nature, the white paper emphasises that all colours exist within natural landscapes. Effective schemes respond to the space's function rather than relying on predictable associations.
In workplaces, calming tones may help mitigate stress and support concentration. In hospitality or leisure settings, warmer accents can introduce energy and vitality. In healthcare environments, balance is essential — promoting reassurance without overstimulation.
However, colour must be considered not only from a psychological perspective but also from an inclusive design standpoint.
Supporting inclusivity through contrast
Critical surface contrast is fundamental to spatial legibility and independence.
Approved Document M (Vol.2) and BS 8300-2:2018 recommend a minimum visual contrast of 30 Light Reflectance Value (LRV) points between adjacent critical surfaces such as floors, walls, doors and ceilings.
In practice, this means that biophilic colour schemes must be carefully evaluated to ensure they do not compromise accessibility.
Low-contrast, desaturated interiors may appear calm, but insufficient differentiation can reduce navigational clarity — particularly for older users or those with visual or cognitive sensitivities.
By integrating LRV data into early-stage specification, architects can ensure that nature-inspired palettes also support compliance and inclusivity.
This alignment between biophilia and accessibility is particularly relevant in healthcare, care and education settings, where the report indicates uptake has been more cautious.
Material specification and indoor air quality
Indoor environmental quality is increasingly scrutinised under sustainability frameworks such as BREEAM and WELL.
The white paper highlights interest in biophilic strategies that address indoor pollutants, with half of respondents open to using biophilia explicitly to tackle air quality.
While advanced systems such as algae photobioreactors or pollutant-absorbing materials are still niche, everyday specification decisions can significantly influence indoor air quality.
Coatings, for example, contribute to the overall VOC load within a building. Selecting low-VOC, water-based paints can:
• Support healthier indoor environments
• Contribute towards environmental assessment credits
• Reduce long-term occupant exposure
• Align with ESG objectives
In high-traffic commercial environments, durability must also be considered alongside environmental credentials. Finishes that combine low VOC formulations with high scrub resistance and scuff protection reduce lifecycle maintenance and repainting frequency, supporting both sustainability and operational efficiency.
Addressing cost and ROI
Cost of installation and maintenance were ranked as the most significant challenges in implementing biophilic design.
However, where ROI has been measured, the results are notable: among the minority who had quantified outcomes, reported returns ranged between 10–40%.
While such figures require further validation, they suggest that wellbeing-led environments may contribute to:
• Improved productivity
• Higher staff retention
• Reduced absenteeism
• Enhanced user satisfaction
For specifiers, framing biophilic strategies within operational performance rather than aesthetic enhancement may strengthen the business case.
Passive measures — such as daylight optimisation, durable, low-emission finishes, and nature-inspired colour schemes — can deliver wellbeing benefits without a disproportionate cost impact.
Sector considerations
The report identifies workplace environments as the most common setting for biophilic implementation, followed by residential projects.
Healthcare, education and industrial environments present more complex constraints. In healthcare settings in particular, concerns around sterility and infection control can limit appetite for planting and organic materials.
In such contexts, biophilia may be more appropriately delivered through:
• Controlled colour strategies
• Textural variation through compliant materials
• Natural light modulation
• Durable, hygienic surface finishes
This nuanced application ensures that biophilic principles enhance rather than compromise performance standards.
From principle to practice
The white paper concludes that while attitudes towards biophilic design are mixed, there is broad recognition of its benefits. The remaining gap lies in education, evidence and practical implementation.
For architects and specifiers, this presents an opportunity.
By embedding biophilic thinking within measurable, specification-led decisions — colour contrast, low-emission coatings, durable finishes, responsible material choices — wellbeing principles become deliverable rather than aspirational.
Biophilic design does not need to rely on high-maintenance installations or symbolic gestures. In many cases, it is realised through considered detailing and informed product selection.
Further reading
To explore the full findings of Current thinking and approaches to biophilic design, download the Industry Viewfinder report.
For technical guidance on inclusive colour contrast, surface durability and low-VOC specification in commercial environments, visit Dulux's website.
By aligning biophilic principles with compliance, durability and measurable performance, architects can deliver environments that genuinely support occupant wellbeing — without compromising practicality or budget.
