Mahdiye Barkhordari Firouzabadi1 
, Sanaz Rahravi Poodeh *2 , Seyedeh Marzieh Tabaeian3 , Seyed Alireza Afshani4
, Sanaz Rahravi Poodeh *2 , Seyedeh Marzieh Tabaeian3 , Seyed Alireza Afshani4
1- 1. Department of Architecture, Institute of Society and Media, ISF.c., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran 2. Architecture and Urban Research Center, ISF.c., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
2- 1. Architecture and Urban Research Center, ISF.c., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran 2. Department of Architecture, Institute of Society and Media, ISF.c., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran ,sanazrahravi@gmail.com
3- 1. Architecture and Urban Research Center, ISF.c., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran 2. Department of Architecture, Institute of Society and Media, ISF.c., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
4- Department of Sociology, Social Sciences Faculty, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
2- 1. Architecture and Urban Research Center, ISF.c., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran 2. Department of Architecture, Institute of Society and Media, ISF.c., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran ,
3- 1. Architecture and Urban Research Center, ISF.c., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran 2. Department of Architecture, Institute of Society and Media, ISF.c., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
4- Department of Sociology, Social Sciences Faculty, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
Abstract: (90 Views)
Background: Social health is a crucial yet underexplored dimension of human well-being, particularly in architecture and environmental design. While the links between design and physical or mental health have been widely studied, the social dimension remains insufficiently addressed. This review examines how architectural and urban design influence social health outcomes globally from 2002 to 2024.
Methods: This systematic review followed the PRISMA protocol. Peer-reviewed articles were retrieved from Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar using Boolean keywords (e.g., “design*” AND “social health”). After screening 16,402 initial records, 44 studies from 14 countries and 31 journals met the inclusion criteria. Eligible studies empirically assessed environmental design factors in relation to social health indicators in real-world settings.
Results: Key design features positively linked to social health include access to green and blue spaces, walkability, aesthetics, public safety, mixed land use, spatial layout, and third places. Common social outcomes were enhanced interaction, cohesion, trust, and sense of belonging. The majority of studies focused on outdoor spaces, with fewer addressing interior environments.
Conclusion: The built environment significantly shapes social well-being. However, notable research gaps persist, especially in non-Western and indoor contexts. Future studies should apply mixed methods, include diverse cultural settings, and develop standardized frameworks to evaluate the social impacts of design.
Methods: This systematic review followed the PRISMA protocol. Peer-reviewed articles were retrieved from Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar using Boolean keywords (e.g., “design*” AND “social health”). After screening 16,402 initial records, 44 studies from 14 countries and 31 journals met the inclusion criteria. Eligible studies empirically assessed environmental design factors in relation to social health indicators in real-world settings.
Results: Key design features positively linked to social health include access to green and blue spaces, walkability, aesthetics, public safety, mixed land use, spatial layout, and third places. Common social outcomes were enhanced interaction, cohesion, trust, and sense of belonging. The majority of studies focused on outdoor spaces, with fewer addressing interior environments.
Conclusion: The built environment significantly shapes social well-being. However, notable research gaps persist, especially in non-Western and indoor contexts. Future studies should apply mixed methods, include diverse cultural settings, and develop standardized frameworks to evaluate the social impacts of design.
Keywords: Environmental design, social health, architecture, urban planning, social well-being, systematic review
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
