Architecture as a System: Applying Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory to the Built Environment

Understanding human experience requires looking beyond the individual in isolation. The way we navigate the world relies heavily on the interrelations with the social and physical environment as much as it is influenced by internal processes, such as biological factors. For designers, architects, and researchers focussing on the built environment, this is a process of uncovering the layered contexts in which people live, and how design decisions can either support or hinder development. Quite often we refer to this lens under the banner of “Systems Thinking” but without the context of where the theories originated. 

Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory (1979) provides a framework for considering the multiple, interacting settings that shape behaviour, cognition, and wellbeing across the lifespan; from immediate physical spaces to broader socio-cultural contexts. 

This blog will delve into the theory, its origins, key terms, and relevance to architectural and spatial design. We will also explore how the theory applies to practical design work, offering insights on how the built environment influences human behaviour.

Photo by Axel Heuillard on Unsplash

Mini Overview

Theory: Ecological Systems Theory / Bioecological Model of Human Development

Theorist: Urie Bronfenbrenner

Original Publication Title: The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design

Original Publication Date: 1979

Publisher: Harvard University Press

Field of Origin: Developmental Psychology

School of Thought: Ecological Psychology, Developmental Psychology

Topic/Area: Human Development, Contextual Influences, Lifespan Development

Key Concepts: Microsystem, Mesosystem, Exosystem, Macrosystem, Chronosystem, Contextual Interaction, Development in Environment

Who Was Urie Bronfenbrenner?

Urie Bronfenbrenner (1917–2005) was a Russian-born American psychologist whose work transformed the study of human development. After emigrating to the United States at the age of six, he went on to earn his doctorate in developmental psychology from the University of Michigan before joining the faculty at Cornell University, where he remained for most of his career (Bronfenbrenner Center for Translational Research, 2025). 

Bronfenbrenner’s central concern was that much psychological research focused narrowly on laboratory conditions, neglecting the real-world environments in which people grow and live. His ecological model was, in part, a response to this limitation. By emphasising the interconnected systems shaping development, he argued for a psychology that recognised both context and complexity.

Beyond academia, Bronfenbrenner played a pivotal role in public policy. His research directly influenced the creation of the U.S. Head Start programme (Lee et. al.. 2014) in the 1960s, which continues to provide early childhood education and support for disadvantaged families. His career thus exemplified a rare bridge between theory, empirical research, and social impact. 

Ecological Systems Theory: The Five Systems

Ecological systems in Environmental Psychology, refer to the various physical, social, and cultural environments that shape human behaviour. This concept emphasises that human behaviour is not simply the product of individual characteristics but is deeply influenced by the context in which people live, work, and interact.

In this framework, ecology refers to the interrelationships between individuals and their surroundings, originally referring to social and physical systems in relation to child development. These environments vary in scale, ranging from immediate physical surroundings (like rooms or buildings with few, familiar people) to larger social settings (such as neighborhoods or cities with multiple users) and even global influences (like climate change). 

At the heart of Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory is the idea that human development and behaviour are influenced by all the multiple, interrelated layers of these environments. 

If we use the theory to examine how environmental design affects people psychologically and behaviourally, we have a holistic perspective on how the physical and social aspects of environments interact to influence human experience:

1. Microsystem  In ecological terms, this refers to the immediate environments with which individuals directly interact. Within the built environment, this could be the home, classroom, office, or neighbourhood street. Interior design decisions, such as lighting, materiality, acoustics, and spatial organisation, directly shape how people feel and behave in these spaces. A poorly lit office may contribute to fatigue and stress, while a thoughtfully designed classroom can foster attention, collaboration, and creativity.
   

2. Mesosystem The mesosystem emphasises the connections between different microsystems. In design and planning, this translates to the way different environments relate to each other. For instance, how residential housing connects to public parks, or how workplaces interface with transport hubs. Urban design that integrates walkable streets, green spaces, and accessible community facilities strengthens these links, enabling healthier patterns of daily life.
   

3. Exosystem  This system consists of environments that indirectly influence individuals, even if they are not directly engaged. For example, a city’s zoning policies, a parent’s workplace, or decisions about public transport infrastructure all shape lived experiences. A resident may never attend city council meetings, yet decisions made there determine whether their neighbourhood has affordable housing, access to nature, or heavy traffic pollution, all factors influencing wellbeing.
   

4. Macrosystem  At the largest scale, the macrosystem encompasses cultural values, political priorities, and economic structures. Architecture and urban planning are never neutral: they reflect broader narratives about progress, sustainability, or equity. The emphasis on green buildings, universal design, or participatory planning processes all arise from cultural commitments that filter down into design practice.

   
   

5. Chronosystem  Finally, the chronosystem draws attention to time and change. The meaning of a building or neighbourhood is not fixed; it shifts as individuals age, communities evolve, and societies face new challenges. For example, the rise of remote work has transformed domestic interiors into hybrid living-working spaces, while growing awareness of climate change has reshaped architectural priorities toward resilience, adaptability, and long-term sustainability.

From Developmental Theory to Bioecological Model

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory was originally formulated as a developmental theory. His early work in The Ecology of Human Development (1979) emphasised how children’s growth could only be understood in relation to the multiple, nested environments in which they were embedded. At the time, much developmental psychology relied heavily on controlled laboratory studies, often isolating variables from their real-world contexts. Bronfenbrenner argued that this created a distorted picture of development, neglecting the lived environments that actually shape behaviour and learning.

In the decades that followed, Bronfenbrenner refined his model into what he later called the bioecological model (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2007). This evolution placed greater emphasis on the dynamic interactions between individuals and their contexts, highlighting how personal characteristics, proximal processes (like daily interactions), and time jointly influence development. Relevant publications note that this shift marked a move from a primarily environmental theory of child development to a more integrated systems perspective on human development across the lifespan (Rosa & Tudge, 2013; Tudge et al., 2009).

Why It Matters for Architecture and Design

This historical trajectory is significant for design research. It demonstrates that environments are not simply “backdrops” for human action but are active participants in developmental processes. Whether at the scale of an interior, a building, or a city, design decisions shape, and are shaped by, the ecological systems in which people live.

As designers, we intuitively know that spaces never exist in isolation. A school building, for example, is not only a microsystem where learning occurs; it is also embedded in wider mesosystem linkages with families and communities, shaped by exosystemic policy decisions, and situated within cultural narratives at the macrosystem level. Over time, these relationships evolve, the chronosystem, meaning design must be attentive to adaptability and resilience.

Considering these ecological layers in the context of applied research helps move design research beyond questions of individual preference or immediate function, towards a more systemic awareness of how environments interact with human development at multiple levels resembling what we often refer to as “Systems Thinking”. 

Applications in Research

Bronfenbrenner’s theory has two central implications for design-focused research:

1. Holism over reductionism – Understanding users requires looking at interdependent contexts, not isolated variables.

2. Temporal sensitivity – Buildings and places must be designed with future change in mind, accommodating shifts in demographics, policies, and cultural values.

By situating individuals within overlapping systems, the ecological model provides a powerful conceptual tool for bridging psychology and design. It encourages architects, planners, and researchers to ask: 

“How do our built environments participate in, reinforce, or transform the ecological systems that shape human life?”

Since its original publication, the ecological model has been widely applied in fields ranging from education and health to urban planning and community development.

• Education Research continues to use the ecological framework to examine how school environments interact with family and community settings to influence learning outcomes. For example, recent work has explored how mesosystem connections such as parent-teacher communication affect student achievement (e.g., Hayes et al., 2017).
  

• Public Health The model has informed approaches to child and adolescent wellbeing by linking microsystem factors (family routines, peer groups) with macrosystem influences like health policy and cultural norms (McLeroy et al., 2015).
  

• Urban and Community Studies Ecological systems theory has been adopted in neighbourhood research to understand how built environments and community resources shape developmental trajectories, particularly in disadvantaged contexts (Neal & Neal, 2013).
  

• Design and Architecture Design researchers and practitioners have also used Bronfenbrenner’s theory as a framework for evaluating how built spaces intersect with multiple ecological layers for instance, how housing quality (microsystem) interacts with zoning laws (exosystem) and cultural attitudes toward urban density (macrosystem) (Goldman & Blumenfeld-Lieberthal, 2024).

Across these domains, the ecological systems perspective remains valuable precisely because it resists oversimplification. It allows researchers and practitioners to situate individuals within a dynamic web of influences, making it especially relevant in an era of complex social and environmental challenges.

Photo by Ivan Rohovchenko on Unsplash

Applications in Design

Several architectural projects highlight the influence of ecological systems theory on design, demonstrating how physical spaces connect to human behaviour:

• High Line Park, New York City: Originally an abandoned railway, the High Line has been transformed into a green urban park. The microsystem-level design of the park offers restorative spaces within a dense urban environment, while at the macrosystem level, it reflects broader societal trends toward sustainability and urban renewal.
  

• Maggie’s Centres, UK: These cancer care centers emphasise the relationship between architectural design and well-being. Their designs focus on creating comforting and human-centered environments (microsystem), while also considering the influence of the broader healthcare system (mesosystem and exosystem) in providing supportive spaces for patients and families.
  

• Pruitt-Igoe, St. Louis: This infamous housing project, later demolished, is often used as a case study in the failure to consider how architectural design interacts with social, economic, and cultural systems (macrosystem). The project’s downfall highlighted the importance of addressing community needs and social structures in design ranging from maintenance requirements (microsystem) to the idea of collective ownership and place attachment (mesosystem). 
  

In Summary

Ecological systems theory offers a valuable framework for architects and designers seeking to create spaces that are sensitive to human needs and behaviours. By considering the multilayered influences on behaviour, from immediate physical spaces to larger societal contexts, designers can create environments that promote well-being, foster community, and respond to evolving social and environmental demands.

Understanding ecological systems theory encourages a holistic approach to design that goes beyond aesthetics or functionality. It invites architects to systematically consider the profound impact that spaces have on people's psychological and emotional well-being, ensuring that design is not just about constructing buildings but about shaping environments that resonate with the people who inhabit them.

---

Archontia Manolakelli is an ARB Chartered Architect and Behavioural Design Researcher based in Manchester, UK. Her work embeds behavioural science into the design of everyday spaces as a quiet force for change, helping workplaces, schools, and civic environments better reflect the people who use them. Grounded in evidence-based practice, her approach bridges the gap between theory and application, academia and practice, science and intuition.

---

Hello. Thank you for stopping by, I hope you have enjoyed your reading! If you have any questions or feedback on this article, please don't hesitate to drop me a line on LinkedIn or via email.

---

References

• Bronfenbrenner Center for Translational Research (2025). Urie Bronfenbrenner. Cornell University. https://bctr.cornell.edu/about-us/urie-bronfenbrenner
  

• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Ecology_of_Human_Development.html?id=OCmbzWka6xUC 
  

• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. In P. Moen, G. H. Elder Jr., & K. Lüscher (Eds.), Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development (pp. 619–647). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10176-018 
  

• Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2007). The bioecological model of human development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 793–828). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0114 
  

• Goldman, A., & Blumenfeld-Lieberthal, E. (2024). Designing complexity? The role of self-organization in urban planning and design. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.14175 
  

• Hayes, N., O’Toole, L., & Halpenny, A. M. (2017). Introducing Bronfenbrenner: A guide for practitioners and students in early years education. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315646206 
  

• Lee, R. H., Zhai, F., Brooks-Gunn, J., Han, W.-J., & Waldfogel, J. (2014). Head Start participation and school readiness: Evidence from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Birth Cohort. Developmental Psychology, 50(1), 202–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032280
  

• McLeroy, K. R., Bibeau, D., Steckler, A., & Glanz, K. (1988). An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Education Quarterly, 15(4), 351–377. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019818801500401 
  

• Neal, J. W., & Neal, Z. P. (2013). Nested or networked? Future directions for ecological systems theory. Social Development, 22(4), 722–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12018 
  

• Rosa, E. M., & Tudge, J. (2013). Urie Bronfenbrenner’s theory of human development: Its evolution from ecology to bioecology. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 5(4), 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12022 
  

• Tudge, J. R. H., Mokrova, I., Hatfield, B. E., & Karnik, R. B. (2009). Uses and misuses of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory of human development. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 1(4), 198–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2589.2009.00026.x