Air pollution. Asthma. Obesity. These are among the plights of the
modern city. As the world's cities become home to a greater percentage
of the population, better urban planning will be needed to reduce these
negative health impacts, according to a new report from the University College London/Lancet Commission on Healthy Cities.
In some senses, we've done alright so far – sewage treatment
facilities, for example, have greatly reduced water-borne disease in
urban areas, and the concept of locating industrial facilities away from
housing and schools has also cut down on the adverse health impacts
these heavy polluters can cause in people. But as the report notes,
those positive developments are not spread evenly throughout the
increasingly urban world. And as cities continue to grow in both people
and wealth, it's not a guarantee that these best practices will be put
in place in time.
Economic growth and demographic change won't necessarily make an
unhealthy city into a healthy one, argues the report. And even within
cities, some areas – often the poor ones – will have worse health
conditions than others. The disparity within cities can be greater than
that between cities and rural areas. This, the report argues, is
especially true in developing nations.
"The so-called urban advantage – a term that encapsulates the health
benefits of living in urban as opposed to rural areas - has to be
actively created and maintained through policy interventions," the
report notes.
Like many health issues, finding solutions to urban health problems is
almost as complex as the mix of factors that cause them and the
differing urban scales in which they emerge. The health of people in
cities is affected by a variety of urban processes – from urban form to
design to infrastructure. As such, the report argues that urban planning
must be a driver in the development and implementation of
health-focused policies in order to reduce the factors that can create
negative impacts on public health.
Maybe the most basic challenge the report stresses is that it is
impossible to develop overarching plans that account for all the complex
possibilities and interactions that could impact health. Instead, the
authors argue that incremental approaches are necessary. A trial and
error approach of implementing localized and small-scale projects will
help to identify effective measures and offer starting points for
scaling these ideas up. The report also emphasizes the importance of
closely assessing these efforts to understand how and why things work or
don't.
The report looks at case studies in sanitation and waste water
management, urban mobility, building standards and indoor air quality,
the urban heat island effect, and urban agriculture, and suggests that
urban planners and cities should be learning from good examples at a
variety of urban scales. The report points to successful
community-driven sanitation projects in Mumbai slums, programs in Bogota
that encourage physical activity and initiatives to cut urban heat by
increasing plant and tree cover in London.
But for all these successes, there are still areas within Mumbai and
Bogota and London where the populations are disproportionately affected
by the lack of sewage facilities or where housing is disconnected from
the public transit network or in a part of town surrounded by asphalt
and concrete. Understanding how urban policies and practices can create
or counteract these problems will be crucial for the development of
healthy cities in the 21st century.
Written by Nate Ber@The Atlantic: Cities
No comments:
Post a Comment