Snabbt svar: Neuroinclusive design does not mean designing one calmer environment for everyone. It means designing enough variety, legibility and autonomy that different people can find the conditions they need, and that the same person can find different conditions at different moments. Biophilic design contributes to this because nature is not a single sensory condition: it offers openness and enclosure, stimulation and recovery, texture and quiet. Used well, one intervention can deliver acoustic comfort, spatial definition and a connection with nature at the same time.

Innehållsförteckning

There is no “average” sensory experience

The same lighting. The same acoustic conditions. The same open-plan layouts. The same level of visual and sensory stimulation. The assumption behind much of what gets built is that if an environment works reasonably well for most people, it works for everyone.

Human beings, however, are not standardised. We perceive sound, light, texture, movement, colour and space differently. The ability to concentrate, connect, recover or simply feel comfortable in a place can change not only from person to person, but across the course of a single day. The often-cited estimate that people spend around 90% of their time indoors, still used by the US Environmental Protection Agency, is a reminder of how much rests on getting this right.

Neuroinclusive design starts from a simple principle: people do not process their environments in the same way. Neurodiversity describes the natural variation in how human brains perceive, process and organise information. It includes autistic people and people with ADHD, dyslexia or dyspraxia, among others, but the underlying point is broader. Cognitive and sensory experience varies across all of us.

The British Standards Institution's PAS 6463:2022, Design for the Mind, was developed specifically to help the built environment respond to these differences. Its guidance covers acoustics, lighting, thermal comfort, colour, layout and wayfinding.

Crucially, there is no single neurodivergent sensory profile. Some people are highly sensitive to noise, movement, light or visual complexity. Others seek greater stimulation. The same individual may need different conditions depending on the task, the context or the moment. That is what makes a purely low-stimulation approach insufficient. Jean Hewitt, technical author of PAS 6463, describes the importance of choice and control: rather than removing every source of stimulation, designers should consider how an environment can accommodate a spectrum of needs.

From flexibility to real choice

The distinction between flexibility and choice is becoming increasingly important in workplace design.

Gensler's 2026 research into neurodiversity in the workplace describes an “Experience Gap” between the way neurotypical and neurodivergent employees experience sensory demands through the day. Unwanted noise, harsh lighting, visual clutter and interruptions do not necessarily occur in isolation. They accumulate.

The same research argues that inclusive workplaces therefore need more than an isolated quiet room or a few adjustable desks. Lighting, acoustics, colour, materials, furniture, circulation and wayfinding need to be considered as one interconnected sensory system. Most importantly, it distinguishes between flexibility and meaningful sensory choice.

A genuinely varied environment might offer:

The British Council for Offices, in its Designing for Neurodiversity research, reaches a similar conclusion: one of the key principles of an enabling environment is giving people autonomy through choice and a variety of physical amenities. Instead of asking every person to adapt to one dominant environment, the environment begins to adapt to the diversity of its users.

Where biophilic design enters the conversation

Biophilic design is sometimes reduced to a very simple idea: add greenery. Its scope is considerably broader.

Terrapin Bright Green's influential 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design sets out a framework involving direct contact with nature, natural materials and forms, changing light, sensory variation, and spatial experiences such as Prospect and Refuge. In other words, biophilic design is as much about how a space feels and is experienced as it is about what the space contains.

A connection with nature can come through planting and vegetation, but equally through texture, materiality, natural forms, daylight, visual depth and spatial arrangements that echo the conditions we encounter outdoors. That is what makes it relevant to a wider conversation about sensory experience.

Biophilic design does not offer a universal formula for neuroinclusion, and nature-connected design should not be presented as a treatment for neurodivergence. What it can offer is a rich set of tools for creating environments with different sensory qualities, clearer spatial definition, and greater opportunities for restoration, focus and choice.

The Journal of Biophilic Design devoted an entire issue to neurodiversity, examining the connections between access to nature, light, surfaces, sensory feedback and more inclusive spaces. PAS 6463 itself also includes connection with nature and biophilic principles within its wider guidance on sensory-inclusive environments.

Designing with Prospect and Refuge

One of the most useful intersections between biophilic and neuroinclusive thinking is the relationship between Prospect och Refuge.

In Terrapin's framework, Prospect describes the ability to see across or understand the surrounding environment. Refuge describes the complementary condition: a place where someone can step away from the main flow of activity while keeping a sense of connection with the wider space.

We experience versions of this constantly outdoors. A sheltered position overlooking an open landscape. The protection of vegetation at the edge of a clearing. A place beneath a tree with visibility beyond it.

Translated into interiors, the same principle informs high-backed seating, semi-enclosed areas, screens, partitions, quieter corners, and smaller spaces positioned alongside more open environments. The goal is not isolation. A successful refuge offers a sense of protection while still allowing someone to understand what is happening around them.

Terrapin also recommends providing different kinds of refuge space where larger populations or multiple activities need to be accommodated. Again, the principle is variety rather than one universal solution.

Acoustics are part of the sensory landscape

Sound is one of the clearest examples of why sensory design matters. An open office can appear visually comfortable while remaining exhausting acoustically. Conversations, movement, phones, equipment and hard reflective surfaces combine into an environment the brain has to process continuously.

PAS 6463 explicitly includes acoustics among the elements to be considered in neuroinclusive environments, and research and industry guidance on neurodiversity repeatedly identify unwanted sound as an important component of sensory load.

This does not mean making every environment silent. A collaborative café, a lobby or a social space naturally has a different acoustic identity from a focus area. What matters is creating appropriate acoustic conditions for different activities, and giving people alternatives when those conditions no longer match what they need.

This is also where acoustic and biophilic design overlap. Natural and preserved materials, textured surfaces and dedicated acoustic elements can be integrated into the architecture of a space rather than treated purely as technical additions.

One caution on how absorption is quoted. The measurement itself is made in a reverberation room to ISO 354. From it, two different families of indicator are derived: ASTM C423 defines the NRC used in North America, while ISO 11654 defines the weighted coefficient and the absorption class, from A to E, used in Europe. They are not interchangeable, and a figure is only meaningful alongside the standard it comes from and the mounting used in the test.

Both figures come from accredited European laboratories: Ball Moss at CARE-CEDIA, University of Liège, and Velvet Leaf at Peutz bv in the Netherlands. Because the material itself is tested, acoustic performance can become part of a wider biophilic material palette instead of remaining visually separate from the interior concept.

Using nature to define space

Biophilic elements can do more than occupy a wall. They can help structure space.

A planted or moss-covered divider creates a perceptible transition between activity zones. A wall of natural texture establishes a quieter visual backdrop. Screening creates partial refuge without fully enclosing an area.

The Greenmood elements most often specified for this kind of work each play a slightly different role.

This illustrates a wider design principle. Instead of thinking separately about planting, acoustics, zoning and sensory experience, a single intervention can sometimes contribute to several of them at once: nature connection, acoustic comfort, spatial definition, texture and refuge. The result is not simply more greenery, but a richer and more legible environment.

Promising evidence, but design still needs nuance

Research into biophilic workplaces is encouraging, and it is worth being precise about what it does and does not establish.

A systematic review of nature-based workplace interventions found positive evidence around restorative effects and wellbeing, while noting that the number of specific studies remains limited and that multisensory dimensions require more investigation. Another systematic review focused on worker stress found evidence supporting nature exposure, particularly access to outdoor environments, while similarly identifying gaps in areas such as multisensory stimulation, refuge and biomorphic forms. A 2024 study published in Scientific Reports found a positive relationship between indoor nature exposure, employee vigour and wellbeing, while noting that individual relationships with nature and other variables may influence outcomes.

The lesson is not that adding plants automatically creates a neuroinclusive workplace. It is that nature can form part of a much wider, evidence-informed design strategy, and that the strategy has to stay centred on the people who actually use the space.

Participatory research with autistic adults reinforces this point. A study examining sensory experiences in public environments identified six interconnected factors influencing whether places felt enabling or disabling: Sensoryscape, Space, Predictability, Understanding, Adjustments and Recovery.

That final word matters.

Designing for difference, not an imagined average

Good inclusive design does not mean finding one environment that suits everybody. Such an environment probably does not exist. It means designing places with enough diversity, legibility and autonomy that people can find the conditions that work for them.

A person might need a protected space to concentrate in the morning and a stimulating collaborative environment later in the day. Someone else might need exactly the opposite. One person may appreciate rich texture and movement. Another may require visual simplicity. One may thrive beside an active communal area. Another may work better with greater acoustic separation.

Designing for those differences means moving beyond a single idea of comfort. It means creating environments where people can focus, connect, retreat, move, recover and regulate their own experience.

Biophilic design can contribute to that ambition precisely because nature itself is not a single sensory condition. It contains openness and enclosure. Stillness and movement. Complexity and order. Texture, variation, light and shadow.

The most interesting question is therefore not how much nature can be added to a space, but how nature can help create more ways of experiencing it.

From biophilic decoration to human-centred design

The conversation around neuroinclusive design challenges architects, designers and organisations to look beyond an imagined average user. The conversation around biophilic design challenges us to look beyond nature as decoration. Together, they point towards a more human approach to interiors.

One where acoustic comfort is considered alongside aesthetics. Where refuge can exist alongside openness. Where stimulation is balanced with opportunities for recovery. Where people are offered meaningful choices instead of being expected to adapt to one fixed environment. And where nature becomes part of the architecture of experience itself.

Because ultimately, designing for human flourishing is not about creating one perfect space. It is about creating better conditions for different people to flourish in different ways.

Vanliga frågor och svar