Built and Natural Environment Research papers December The scalar politics of economic planning Lee Pugalis1 and Alan R. Townsend2 ABSTRACT Across England, modes of governing larger-than-local development strategies are undergoing far-reaching change. In CiteSeerX - Document Details (Isaac Councill, Lee Giles, Pradeep Teregowda): The impacts of personal stress upon critical project decision making in construction The public (UK) attitudes toward the implementation of renewable energy technologies in dwellings Measuring material wastage on construction sites: a case study of local authority highway projects Exploring the strategic dimension of We are proud to present this special issue of Built and Natural Environment Research Papers, which includes a selection of papers from Future Intermediate Sustainable Cities: a message to future
CiteSeerX — Built and Natural Environment Research Papers
BMC Public Health volume 18Article number: Cite this article. Metrics details. The built and natural environment and health are inextricably linked, built natural environment research papers. However, there is considerable debate surrounding the strength and quality of the evidence base underpinning principles of good practice for built and natural environment design in promoting health, built natural environment research papers.
This umbrella review aimed to assess relationships between the built and natural environment and health, concentrating on five topic areas: neighbourhood design, housing, food environment, natural and sustainable environment, and transport.
A structured search was conducted for quantitative systematic reviews and stakeholder reviews published between January and April Seven databases and the websites of 15 relevant and respected stakeholder organisations known to publish review-level documentation were searched. Searches were limited to English-language publications and duplicate references were removed. Evidence quality and strength was appraised using validated techniques.
Findings were used to develop a diagram for each topic area, illustrating relationships between built and natural environment planning principles and health-related outcomes.
A total of systematic reviews and review-level documents were eligible for inclusion. The quality of evidence was mixed; much of the evidence examined relied on findings from cross-sectional studies, making it difficult to draw clear causal links between built environment exposures and health-related impacts and outcomes.
Fourteen actionable planning principles associated with positive health-related outcomes were identified across the five topic areas. For example, neighbourhoods that enhanced walkability, were complete and compact in design, and those which enhanced connectivity through safe and efficient infrastructure were associated with better health-related outcomes relating to physical activity, social engagement, mental health, perceptions of crime, built natural environment research papers, and road traffic collisions.
Evidence for the effectiveness of planning principles across different topic areas and on reducing health inequalities was sparse and inconclusive, built natural environment research papers. Findings provide an up-to-date overview of relationships between the built and natural environment and health and present logical, evidence-based messages to aid communication between public health and planning professionals. Peer Review reports. The built and natural environment encompasses objective and subjective features of the physical environment in which people live, work and play, [ built natural environment research papers ] and there is a considerable body of evidence linking the built built natural environment research papers natural environment with health and wellbeing [ 23 ].
As such, public health and planning professionals are increasingly encouraged to consider the built and natural environment as an important determinant of health [ 3 ]. Built natural environment research papers a causal relationship between built and natural environment characteristics and health outcomes is not easy.
Much of the evidence to date relies on findings from observational epidemiological studies which highlight associations between the built and natural environment and health.
However, the broadly cross-sectional nature of the evidence base means it is often difficult to determine cause and effect relationships between built environment exposures and health-related impacts and outcomes, and the potential effectiveness of interventions [ 24 ]. It has also been acknowledged that evidence for built natural environment research papers effectiveness of built environment interventions on tackling health inequalities is limited and unclear [ 2 ].
The translation of research evidence into practice has been hindered by the sheer complexity of relationships between the built environment and health, built natural environment research papers, in that they are both influenced by numerous, and sometimes conflicting factors [ 5 ], and the methods used to assess these relationships are rarely longitudinal [ 6 ]. These factors make it difficult to develop approaches that can be universally applied [ 5 ].
Despite these challenges, the volume of literature published in the last decade on links between the built and natural environment and health cannot be ignored.
There is a need to take stock of the existing evidence base to consolidate our understanding and, where appropriate, to make recommendations to support those working in public health and planning professions.
It was in response to this need that in January Public Health England PHE commissioned this umbrella review. The emergence of umbrella reviews in recent years has provided an attractive strategy for organising and assessing a wide range of review-level evidence [ 78 ], built natural environment research papers. The approach is increasingly used in public health research and practice, bringing together a wide range of evidence to explore what is known about a topic in an attempt to guide the decisions of policy makers [ 2910 ].
Through this umbrella review we aimed to assess the relationships between the built and natural environment and health, concentrating on five topic areas: neighbourhood design; housing; food environment; natural and sustainable environment; and, transport.
The topic areas were defined by the funders, PHE in response to a previous review [ 11 ]. PHE colleagues built natural environment research papers the Canadian publication which seemed to have a resonance with the focus of their work in this area connecting planning and public health in addressing key issues.
A structured search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EPPI-Centre, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SafetyLit, Transport Research Information Service, and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts was conducted in April to identify quantitative systematic reviews Table 1. Reference lists of eligible reviews were searched, and contact with experts working in the built and natural environment and health fields was initiated to identify documentation not identified through the built natural environment research papers search.
If a review presented findings on more than one of the five built environment categories or on more than one health outcome, these were assessed and reported separately. Reviews reporting on adults and children of all ages were considered for inclusion, as were all health-related outcomes physical and mental. Reviews published between January and April and conducted in high- and middle-income countries Europe, North America, Australasia, and Japan were eligible, built natural environment research papers.
Searches were limited to English-language publications and duplicates were removed. Evidence from qualitative systematic reviews was excluded. In line with previous umbrella reviews, [ 2910 ] systematic reviews were required to meet the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects criteria: 1 inclusion of defined research question and 2 search strategy including at least one named database, in conjunction with either reference checking, hand searching, citation searching or contact with authors in the field.
Potentially eligible papers were screened for inclusion by one reviewer JI according to title and abstract. Full text articles and stakeholder documentation were then obtained and assessed by two reviewers EB, JI against the inclusion criteria.
Descriptive data were extracted using a data extraction tool author, year of publication, population of interest, health outcome s and key findings, built natural environment research papers. The Methodological Quality Checklist MQC[ 9 ] a 7-item appraisal tool, was used to assess the quality of each review. Reviews were rated from 0 to 7, with those scoring four or more deemed moderate-to-high quality, and reviews scoring three or fewer deemed poor quality and subsequently excluded.
At the time of writing there was no recognised measure for assessing the quality of stakeholder documentation. As such, an adapted version of the MQC, the Methodological Quality Checklist for Stakeholder Documents and Position Papers MQC-SPwas applied [ 12 ]. Stakeholder documentation scoring four or more was considered moderate-to-high quality. Documentation scoring three or fewer was excluded. Quality appraisal was conducted by three reviewers EB, built natural environment research papers, JI, JBA.
The quality of empirical evidence informing each of the reviews was categorised according to one of three groups: high, moderate, and low. In most cases, allocation of quality rating was based on the rating provided by the original author s of each review. However, in some cases a quality rating was not provided by the original authors of a review, and as such, the quality of the empirical evidence could not be determined. For example, an improvement in lighting within the home environment modifiable feature was found to be associated with improved social outcomes behavioural impact and reduced fall-related injuries among older adults health outcome.
To avoid possible duplication or over-stating of results, planning principles and modifiable features were generated from the review-level evidence deemed to be of the highest methodological quality.
This process was followed for all documentation included in this review, according to each of the five topics of interest. Figure 1 summarises the search results. A total of systematic reviews and review-level documents met the inclusion criteria.
Many reviews addressed more than one of the five built and natural environment categories suggesting that although there are distinctions between each of the areas, they are also strongly interconnected. A full reference list of included studies, details of study characteristics and quality can be found in the online additional material. Figures 2 to 6 present a visual representation of findings for each of the built and natural environment topics of interest.
Eligible reviews were based on empirical evidence utilising a range of study designs and were targeted at a variety population groups. In considering the evidence presented here, policy makers should be mindful that an absence of high quality evidence does not mean an association between a planning principle and health outcome does not exist.
Further, many planning interventions can be expected to confer co-benefits either to both health and other outcomes, or across a number of health outcomes. Only four reviews eligible for inclusion focused on health inequalities; some positive results were reported, but the overall picture on associations between the built environment and health inequalities was inconclusive. The planning principles, modifiable features, and health-related outcomes identified for each built and natural environment domain, built natural environment research papers, alongside an assessment of evidence quality, are summarised in the text below and in Table 2.
As shown in Fig. Neighbourhoods with features including street connectivity, mixed land use and compact residential design, were found to be associated with higher or increased physical activity among the general population,[S1-S15] and higher or increased social engagement and mobility among older adults [S9, SS16].
Moderate-to-high quality reviews reported a positive or null association [SS19] between infrastructure for walking and cycling and weight status [S20]. Evidence of mixed methodological quality suggested that densely populated neighbourhoods with good access to local facilities and amenities were associated with higher or increased physical activity and mobility,[S9, S14, S21, S23] higher or improved mental health,[SS26] and higher social participation among older adults [S27].
Improvements to safety and efficiency of neighbourhood infrastructure, for example provision of quality street lighting, was associated with higher physical activity,[S9] and lower fear of crime [S28] and road traffic collisions [S29, SS]. One review examining the effectiveness of built environment interventions in managing symptoms of dementia reported lower behavioural symptoms following the redesign of existing physical space [S30].
Built natural environment research papers in housing quality, such as increased energy efficiency, were found to be associated with positive general health, mental health, asthma, and mortality outcomes [S15, S25, SS38] Fig, built natural environment research papers. Improvements in warmth energy efficiency were also found to be associated with reduced health inequalities among older adults and those with chronic conditions from low-income groups [S32].
Moderate quality evidence indicates that lighting improvements were associated with increased or higher social engagement and reduced fall-related injuries,[SS40] however, one review reported that the impact of such an intervention on reducing health inequalities was unclear [S39]. Home safety measures such as smoke alarm installation and pre-set safe temperature hot water heaters were associated with a reduction in, or lower rates of, unintentional injury [SS42].
Built natural environment research papers provision of affordable and diverse housing was found to be associated with higher or increased physical activity, primarily walking [S21] and perceived safety among those from low income groups [S39]. Affordable rental housing, specifically, was associated with higher or improved mental health outcomes among adolescents and adults [S25, S32]. The provision of affordable housing to vulnerable individuals with specific needs, including those living with intellectual disability, substance users, homeless, and those living with a chronic condition was associated higher or improved social, behavioural, physical and mental health-related outcomes [SS51].
Good quality evidence on the associations between the food environment and health outcomes is relatively sparse, and what has been published is contradictory in places Fig. Evidence of moderate or unreported methodological quality indicates that the provision of healthier, affordable food in specific delivery settings e.
However, one review found no evidence for an associations between affordable food and energy, built natural environment research papers, or sugar intake,[S55] and another found no association with weight-related outcomes [S52]. Enhancing community food infrastructure through urban food growing and provision of and access to allotments and garden space was related to positive attitudes towards healthier eating,[S64] higher opportunities for fruit and vegetable consumption, social connectivity, physical activity and engagement with healthcare [S9, S64].
Other reviews reported built natural environment research papers, inconclusive findings for associations between the food environment and health-related outcomes[S22, S65—69]. Overall, it is important to exercise caution when interpreting these findings as review-level evidence draws upon empirical evidence that is cross-sectional in nature, restricting our ability to draw causal links.
Built natural environment research papers review identified a wealth built natural environment research papers mixed-quality review-level evidence linking the natural and sustainable environment with health.
Reduced exposure to environmental hazards, such as poor air quality, was associated with increased physical activity among older adults[S24] Fig. Exposure to air pollution was related to a higher or an increased risk of chronic conditions,[SS94] worsened birth outcomes,[S15, SS99] and problems with cognitive function [S].
Exposure to excessive noise was linked to lower mental health outcomes,[S15, SS25] and higher risk of ischemic heart disease[S]. Available evidence on the health risks of flooding suggest a higher risk of carbon monoxide poisoning [S] and adverse long-term impacts on mental health[SS]. Access to, and engagement with, the natural environment was associated with numerous positive physical and mental health outcomes[S9, S18, S21, SS26, SS, S, S]. Moderate-to-high quality evidence suggests that provision of active travel infrastructure for walking and cycling is associated with higher or increased mobility and physical activity [S1-S15].
Four moderate-to-high quality reviews reported a positive or null association [SS19] between infrastructure for walking and cycling and weight status [S20]. Provision of public transport was found to be associated with higher physical activity [S], better cardiovascular outcomes in the general population,[S19] and a lower fear of social isolation and improved mental health[S15].
Initiatives to prioritise active travel and road safety, such as traffic calming measures, were associated with a range of positive physical activity behaviours,[S6, S9, S14, built natural environment research papers, S] a lower or reduced risk of road traffic collisions and pedestrian injury[S29, SS] and a lower fear of crime [S28].
Moderate neighbourhood tree planting alsoquality evidence revealed that enabling mobility for all ages and activities through increased access to aesthetically pleasing recreational space was associated with positive mental health outcomes [SS26].
It has also been shown to be associated with better pedestrian safety and higher walking among adolescents, although the evidence was less clear among children [S]. This umbrella review provides an up-to-date overview of the evidence for associations between the built and natural environment and health.
Diffrence Between Natural \u0026 Built Environment
, time: 1:3030 Environment Research Paper Topics - ResearchPaperWriter
We are proud to present this special issue of Built and Natural Environment Research Papers, which includes a selection of papers from Future Intermediate Sustainable Cities: a message to future Every PowerPoint slide Built Natural Environment Research Papers includes words of speaker notes. Each project includes visual cues for you to present your PowerPoint with ease/10() Jul 28, · The built and natural environment encompasses objective and subjective features of the physical environment in which people live, work and play, [] and there is a considerable body of evidence linking the built and natural environment with health and wellbeing [2, 3].As such, public health and planning professionals are increasingly encouraged to consider the built and natural Cited by: 29
No comments:
Post a Comment