While diverse health promotion perspectives might merely represent variations in focus, these differences become problematic when relating to building design. To support further dialogs on development of health promotion in, and in relation to, the build environment, there is a need to strengthen the health promotion vocabulary. Further research is needed to compare different design approaches and how these can be combined to minimize contradicting implications for building design.

Purpose This paper aims to explore the literature on office design approaches (ODAs) in relation to employee health. The overall goal is to facilitate the practical use and theoretical development of design approaches to healthy offices. Design/methodology/approach A scoping review of 7,432 papers collected from 4 electronic databases and 5 scientific journals resulted in the selection of 18 papers for content analysis. Findings Various ODAs relating to building design features and health were identified. The findings highlight challenges for this emergent field, including a paucity of literature on ODAs, a lack of definitions of health and healthy offices, ambiguous design strategies and a lack of a holistic ODA. Originality/value ODAs are potentially valuable resources but an under-considered topic for healthy office development. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first scoping review to map and compare different design approaches in the context of office design and its main contribution is in encouraging researchers and practitioners to bring a salutogenic and holistic perspective to their design approaches.

Background: Previous research indicates that the physical environment of healthcare facilities plays an important role in the health, well-being, and recovery outcomes of patients. However, prior works on mental healthcare facilities have incorporated physical environment effects from general healthcare settings and patient groups, which cannot be readily transferred to mental healthcare settings or its patients. There appears to be a specific need for evidence synthesis of physical environmental effects in mental healthcare settings by psychopathology.Purpose: This review evaluates the state (in terms of extent, nature and quality) of the current empirical evidence of physical environmental on mental health, well-being, and recovery outcomes in mental healthcare inpatients by psychopathology.Method: A systematic review (PRISMA guidelines) was performed of studies published in English, German, Dutch, Swedish, and Spanish, of all available years until September 2020, searched in Cochrane, Ovid Index, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science and identified through extensive hand-picking. Inclusion criteria were: Adult patients being treated for mental ill-health (common mental health and mood disorders, Cochrane frame); inpatient mental health care facilities; specifications of the physical and socio-physical environment (e.g., design features, ambient conditions, privacy); all types of empirical study designs. Quality assessment and data synthesis were undertaken.Results: The search retrieved 1,068 titles of which 26 met the inclusion criteria. Findings suggest that there is only indicative evidence of the impact of the physical healthcare environment on patients' mental health, well-being, and recovery outcomes. There is significant lack of pathology-specific evidence. Methodological shortcomings and empirical scarcity account for the poor evidence.Conclusion: This review highlights the need for more research using advanced study designs.

Cities have long been subject to urban containment policies against urban sprawl. Climate change concerns have recently added to the imperative to densify urban space. Urban compaction is often pursued through the creation of 'exemplar' urban developments that superficially implement 'best practice' ideas from elsewhere. In this paper, we abandon the notion of 'best practice' in favour of context-sensitive 'good practices'. Taking London's King's Cross redevelopment as a case study, this paper draws on qualitative methods to examine the contribution of context and path-dependency, as a product of local and non-local forces, to the emergence of King´s Cross as 'good practice'.

This study investigated the current design circumstances of an office as well as employees’ perceptions of the office environment in relation to their perceived health, drawing on sense of coherence theory (comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness). Previous studies have related the physical office environment to employee health. However, most studies have focused on alleviating negative effects, while health-promoting potential, including employee sense of coherence, has been overlooked. This study adopted a mixed method case study approach, combining semi-structured interviews with employees, structured observations, and analysis of architectural drawings. The results indicated that employees’ perceptions did not always align with the ideas behind the architectural design and that employees understood the environment differently. The study also highlighted the interrelations (and contradictions) among the different components of sense of coherence. The findings imply that organizations may need to prioritize which components of coherence should be supported most by the office environment. It also suggests that case-specific design aspects should play a more central role in studying and conceptualizing healthy office design and that design solutions should be continuously modified during the use phase, while ensuring employees’ participation. The study concluded that an ‘ideal’ office environment should not be the goal. Instead, office design should provide an environment in which employees are able to cope with challenges in comprehensible, manageable and meaningful ways.