Okay, here are two sides of the coin, as it were. jhbratton makes a good point in that such claims have, in fact, been made by exploitative interests. This makes it a fraught issue, and although eyekosaeder is correct as far as it goes, such a statement requires a lot of context to avoid defaulting to misuse and abuse.
The now-closed thread So,…What are you wearing? was very confusing to me. A community of nature enthusiasts, and yet the majority took great pains to shield themselves thoroughly from nature, swathing from head to toe in artificial materials, as if to avoid all physical contact with the nonhuman world – even while going out into it. Do we really feel a part of nature, or is it merely a philosophical position?
To an extent, yes. But your plant-filled balcony will not have the degree of complexity of an old-growth forest, with its multiple layers (ground level, understory, main canopy, emergent), each with its assemblage of specialists as well as the generalists who move from layer to layer. Your plant-filled balcony will also have a much shorter food chain and simpler food web. What is the apex predator on your plant-filled balcony? And what would that same taxon’s role be in the undisturbed wilderness that once was where your balcony is now?
Learning about nature in a vacant lot or on a plant-filled balcony is akin to watching a movie based on a literary classic; if it is done well, you will get the same story, but you will not get the depth and nuance.