IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i15p11676-d1205183.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Restorative and Contingent Value of Biophilic Indoor Environments in Healthcare Settings

Author

Listed:
  • Yuxiang Lan

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou 350118, China)

  • Qunyue Liu

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou 350118, China
    Key Laboratory of New Technology for Construction of Cities in Mountain Area, Ministry of Education, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China
    Section for Landscape Architecture and Planning, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg C, 1958 Copenhagen, Denmark)

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals undergoing healthcare-related quarantine often experience heightened anxiety and stress. While biophilic indoor environments have shown potential in reducing stress, their effectiveness within healthcare quarantine settings remains uncertain. Additionally, the economic value associated with implementing biophilic interventions in healthcare environments remains largely unknown. This study aimed to explore the effects of biophilic interventions in indoor quarantine environments on the perceived outcomes of individuals (such as preference, perceived restorativeness, and satisfaction) and their willingness-to-pay (WTP). Participants were asked to imagine themselves in quarantine and were subsequently assigned to one of four indoor rooms, each featuring a different level of biophilic intervention (non-biophilic, low, medium, and high indoor green). Their perceived outcomes and WTP were then evaluated. The findings consistently demonstrated that incorporating biophilic interventions had a significantly positive impact on perceived outcomes and WTP compared with non-biophilic interventions within healthcare quarantine settings. Among the three levels of biophilic intervention, high indoor green spaces had the highest influence, while low indoor green spaces had the lowest. Moreover, perceived restorativeness consistently played a role in influencing WTP across all three biophilic indoor rooms. Further analysis indicated that a medium level of biophilic intervention would be more advantageous and practical in the design of healthcare indoor environments. This study offers valuable insights into both the monetary and nonmonetary values of biophilic interventions in healthcare settings, aiding designers in selecting appropriate biophilic designs to create enhanced restorative indoor environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuxiang Lan & Qunyue Liu, 2023. "The Restorative and Contingent Value of Biophilic Indoor Environments in Healthcare Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:15:p:11676-:d:1205183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/15/11676/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/15/11676/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bateson, John E G & Hui, Michael K, 1992. "The Ecological Validity of Photographic Slides and Videotapes in Simulating the Service Setting," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(2), pages 271-281, September.
    2. Ke-Tsung Han & Li-Wen Ruan, 2019. "Effects of Indoor Plants on Self-Reported Perceptions: A Systemic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-26, August.
    3. Jorgensen, Bradley S. & Wilson, Mathew A. & Heberlein, Thomas A., 2001. "Fairness in the contingent valuation of environmental public goods: attitude toward paying for environmental improvements at two levels of scope," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 133-148, January.
    4. Richard P. Taylor, 2021. "The Potential of Biophilic Fractal Designs to Promote Health and Performance: A Review of Experiments and Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    5. Yang Zhang & Agnes E. Van den Berg & Terry Van Dijk & Gerd Weitkamp, 2017. "Quality over Quantity: Contribution of Urban Green Space to Neighborhood Satisfaction," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-10, May.
    6. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Reiling, Stephen D., 2000. "Environmental attitudes, motivations, and contingent valuation of nonuse values: a case study involving endangered species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 93-107, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Baral, Nabin & Stern, Marc J. & Bhattarai, Ranju, 2008. "Contingent valuation of ecotourism in Annapurna conservation area, Nepal: Implications for sustainable park finance and local development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 218-227, June.
    2. Ulrich J Frey & Frauke Pirscher, 2018. "Willingness to pay and moral stance: The case of farm animal welfare in Germany," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Lo, Alex Y. & Jim, C.Y., 2015. "Protest response and willingness to pay for culturally significant urban trees: Implications for Contingent Valuation Method," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 58-66.
    4. Ressurreição, Adriana & Gibbons, James & Dentinho, Tomaz Ponce & Kaiser, Michel & Santos, Ricardo S. & Edwards-Jones, Gareth, 2011. "Economic valuation of species loss in the open sea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 729-739, February.
    5. Clive L. Spash, 2006. "Non-Economic Motivation for Contingent Values: Rights and Attitudinal Beliefs in the Willingness To Pay for Environmental Improvements," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(4), pages 602-622.
    6. López-Mosquera, Natalia & Sánchez, Mercedes, 2011. "The influence of personal values in the economic-use valuation of peri-urban green spaces: An application of the means-end chain theory," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 875-889.
    7. Halkos, George, 2012. "Assessing the economic value of protecting artificial lakes," MPRA Paper 39557, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Meldrum, James R., 2015. "Comparing different attitude statements in latent class models of stated preferences for managing an invasive forest pathogen," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 13-22.
    9. Meyerhoff, Jurgen & Liebe, Ulf, 2006. "Protest beliefs in contingent valuation: Explaining their motivation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 583-594, June.
    10. Galina Williams, 2023. "Temporal Stability of Attitudes towards Climate Change and Willingness to Pay for the Emissions Reduction Options in Queensland, Australia," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-22, May.
    11. Yanju Luo & Jinyang Deng & Chad Pierskalla & Ju-hyoung Lee & Jiayao Tang, 2022. "New Ecological Paradigm, Leisure Motivation, and Wellbeing Satisfaction: A Comparative Analysis of Recreational Use of Urban Parks before and after the COVID-19 Outbreak," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-28, August.
    12. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    13. Tuan, Tran Huu & Navrud, Stale, 2009. "Applying the dissonance-minimising format to value cultural heritage in developing countries," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 1-17.
    14. Williams, Ryan B. & Mitchell, Donna M. & Neill, Clinton L. & Benson, Aaron, 2015. "Household Willingness to Pay for Playa Restoration," 2015 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2015, Atlanta, Georgia 196917, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    15. Lucia Reisch & Clive L Spash & Sabine Bietz, 2008. "Sustainable Consumption and Mass Communication: A German Experiment," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-12, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    16. Kerstin K Zander & Gillian B Ainsworth & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Stephen T Garnett, 2014. "Threatened Bird Valuation in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
    17. Paul A. Hindsley & O. Ashton Morgan, 2020. "The Role of Cultural Worldviews in Willingness to Pay for Environmental Policy," Working Papers 20-03, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    18. Denise L. Stanley, 2005. "Local Perception of Public Goods: Recent Assessments of Willingness‐to‐pay for Endangered Species," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(2), pages 165-179, April.
    19. Dienes, Christian, 2015. "Actions and intentions to pay for climate change mitigation: Environmental concern and the role of economic factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 122-129.
    20. Yrjola, Tapani & Kola, Jukka, 2002. "Social Benefits of Multifunctional Agriculture in Finland," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24812, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:15:p:11676-:d:1205183. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.