Beyond the documented health impairments, research reveals something more striking: cognitive scores jump 61% with good indoor air quality and double under optimal conditions. Meanwhile, the damage of poor materials ripples outward to distant ecosystems and communities that never benefit from the work performed inside.

Our choice of materials, in other words, has an outsize bearing on our wellbeing. They can either throttle or unleash our potential.

Two Proven Approaches

There are essentially two ways to make our interiors healthier: using better materials and using less of the harmful materials where no alternatives exist.

The first approach is exemplified by Swarthmore College Dining and Community Commons, which employs mass timber construction. Mass timber avoids composite wood products that depend on formaldehyde-laden adhesives, achieving structural integrity through the material itself. No toxic glues means no off-gassing.

The complementary approach – using less – is exemplified by our Orlando studio. While we specified materials like recycled PET acoustic panels, low-VOC paint, and minimal surface treatments wherever possible, our workspace strips away unnecessary layers to eliminate emissions at the source. The minimalism is aesthetic, but it’s also calculated reduction: fewer layers, fewer toxins, less disposal.

Conclusion

Healthy workspace adoption has accelerated, driven by a convergence between economic and environmental factors. Firms are joining together to specify healthy materials simultaneously, and manufacturers adjust production rather than lose contracts. But an even more significant shift stems from changing client expectations. When workers in healthy environments demonstrate measurable cognitive improvement, the business case writes itself. Reduced sick days and sharper decision-making flip the cost-benefit analysis: healthy materials become the smarter financial choice.