Overcoming Systemic Barriers Preventing Healthy Urban Development in the UK: Main Findings from Interviewing Senior Decision-Makers During a 3-Year Planetary Health Pilot

This paper sets out the main findings from two rounds of interviews with senior representatives from the UK’s urban development industry: the third and final phase of a 3-year pilot, Moving Health Upstream in Urban Development’ (UPSTREAM). The project had two primary aims: firstly, to attempt to val...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of urban health 2021-06, Vol.98 (3), p.415-427
Hauptverfasser: Black, Daniel, Pilkington, Paul, Williams, Ben, Ige, Janet, Prestwood, Emily, Hunt, Alistair, Eaton, Eleanor, Scally, Gabriel
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 427
container_issue 3
container_start_page 415
container_title Journal of urban health
container_volume 98
creator Black, Daniel
Pilkington, Paul
Williams, Ben
Ige, Janet
Prestwood, Emily
Hunt, Alistair
Eaton, Eleanor
Scally, Gabriel
description This paper sets out the main findings from two rounds of interviews with senior representatives from the UK’s urban development industry: the third and final phase of a 3-year pilot, Moving Health Upstream in Urban Development’ (UPSTREAM). The project had two primary aims: firstly, to attempt to value economically the health cost-benefits associated with the quality of urban environments and, secondly, to interview those in control of urban development in the UK in order to reveal the potential barriers to, and opportunities for, the creation of healthy urban environments, including their views on the use of economic valuation of (planetary) health outcomes. Much is known about the ‘downstream’ impact of urban environments on human and planetary health and about how to design and plan healthy towns and cities (‘midstream’), but we understand relatively little about how health can be factored in at key governance tipping points further ‘upstream’, particularly within dominant private sector areas of control (e.g. land, finance, delivery) at sub-national level. Our findings suggest that both public and private sector appeared well aware of the major health challenges posed by poor-quality urban environments. Yet they also recognized that health is not factored adequately into the urban planning process, and there was considerable support for greater use of non-market economic valuation to help improve decision-making. There was no silver bullet however: 110 barriers and 76 opportunities were identified across a highly complex range of systems, actors and processes, including many possible points of targeted intervention for economic valuation. Eight main themes were identified as key areas for discussion and future focus. This findings paper is the second of two on this phase of the project: the first sets out the rationale, approach and methodological lessons learned.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11524-021-00537-y
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8190222</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2539397292</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-7302de02ef773810a227f778ea94f727f57261cd2fc78d036c31ac657b8832013</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9Uk1v1DAQjRCIlsIf4IAsceFi8FfimAMStJRWtOpKsAdOlteZdF0Se7GTRflL_Eqc7lI-Dpw89rz3ZsbziuIpJS8pIfJVorRkAhNGMSEll3i6VxxSUdWY1ZW6n2OiFOaiIgfFo5RuCKGVkOxhccC54opU6rD4cbWFaEPv_DX6NKUBemfROxOjg5jQIsIW_DAnz8B0w3pCy7gyHp3k9y5s-pxEzqNhDWj58TW6NPly6nyTGQm1MfTo3A8Qtw6-31YA70LMbOuSCx5fmq9zmZMxzlmDOP4CJqJFZzwMJk77qmjhujA8Lh60pkvwZH8eFcvT95-Pz_DF1Yfz47cX2AopBiw5YQ0QBq2UvKbEMCZzWINRopU5LiWrqG1Ya2XdEF5ZTo2tSrmqa84I5UfFm53uZlz10Ng8YzSd3kTX55Z0ME7_nfFura_DVtdUEcZYFnixF4jh2whp0L1LFrp5qjAmzUpGhRKqkhn6_B_oTRijz-Nl1LwkydQsyHYoG0NKEdq7ZijRsxX0zgo6W0HfWkFPmfTszzHuKL92nwF8B0ib-fsh_q79H9mfs6HByQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2539397292</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Overcoming Systemic Barriers Preventing Healthy Urban Development in the UK: Main Findings from Interviewing Senior Decision-Makers During a 3-Year Planetary Health Pilot</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Black, Daniel ; Pilkington, Paul ; Williams, Ben ; Ige, Janet ; Prestwood, Emily ; Hunt, Alistair ; Eaton, Eleanor ; Scally, Gabriel</creator><creatorcontrib>Black, Daniel ; Pilkington, Paul ; Williams, Ben ; Ige, Janet ; Prestwood, Emily ; Hunt, Alistair ; Eaton, Eleanor ; Scally, Gabriel</creatorcontrib><description>This paper sets out the main findings from two rounds of interviews with senior representatives from the UK’s urban development industry: the third and final phase of a 3-year pilot, Moving Health Upstream in Urban Development’ (UPSTREAM). The project had two primary aims: firstly, to attempt to value economically the health cost-benefits associated with the quality of urban environments and, secondly, to interview those in control of urban development in the UK in order to reveal the potential barriers to, and opportunities for, the creation of healthy urban environments, including their views on the use of economic valuation of (planetary) health outcomes. Much is known about the ‘downstream’ impact of urban environments on human and planetary health and about how to design and plan healthy towns and cities (‘midstream’), but we understand relatively little about how health can be factored in at key governance tipping points further ‘upstream’, particularly within dominant private sector areas of control (e.g. land, finance, delivery) at sub-national level. Our findings suggest that both public and private sector appeared well aware of the major health challenges posed by poor-quality urban environments. Yet they also recognized that health is not factored adequately into the urban planning process, and there was considerable support for greater use of non-market economic valuation to help improve decision-making. There was no silver bullet however: 110 barriers and 76 opportunities were identified across a highly complex range of systems, actors and processes, including many possible points of targeted intervention for economic valuation. Eight main themes were identified as key areas for discussion and future focus. This findings paper is the second of two on this phase of the project: the first sets out the rationale, approach and methodological lessons learned.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1099-3460</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2869</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11524-021-00537-y</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33939069</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Barriers ; Cities ; City Planning ; Decision Making ; Economics ; Epidemiology ; Health care expenditures ; Health Informatics ; Humans ; Industrial development ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Private sector ; Public finance ; Public Health ; Public lands ; Quality ; United Kingdom ; Upstream ; Urban areas ; Urban development ; Urban environments ; Urban planning ; Urban Renewal ; Valuation</subject><ispartof>Journal of urban health, 2021-06, Vol.98 (3), p.415-427</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2021</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-7302de02ef773810a227f778ea94f727f57261cd2fc78d036c31ac657b8832013</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-7302de02ef773810a227f778ea94f727f57261cd2fc78d036c31ac657b8832013</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1474-6992</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11524-021-00537-y$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11524-021-00537-y$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,781,785,886,27868,27926,27927,41490,42559,51321</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33939069$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Black, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pilkington, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Ben</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ige, Janet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prestwood, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hunt, Alistair</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eaton, Eleanor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scally, Gabriel</creatorcontrib><title>Overcoming Systemic Barriers Preventing Healthy Urban Development in the UK: Main Findings from Interviewing Senior Decision-Makers During a 3-Year Planetary Health Pilot</title><title>Journal of urban health</title><addtitle>J Urban Health</addtitle><addtitle>J Urban Health</addtitle><description>This paper sets out the main findings from two rounds of interviews with senior representatives from the UK’s urban development industry: the third and final phase of a 3-year pilot, Moving Health Upstream in Urban Development’ (UPSTREAM). The project had two primary aims: firstly, to attempt to value economically the health cost-benefits associated with the quality of urban environments and, secondly, to interview those in control of urban development in the UK in order to reveal the potential barriers to, and opportunities for, the creation of healthy urban environments, including their views on the use of economic valuation of (planetary) health outcomes. Much is known about the ‘downstream’ impact of urban environments on human and planetary health and about how to design and plan healthy towns and cities (‘midstream’), but we understand relatively little about how health can be factored in at key governance tipping points further ‘upstream’, particularly within dominant private sector areas of control (e.g. land, finance, delivery) at sub-national level. Our findings suggest that both public and private sector appeared well aware of the major health challenges posed by poor-quality urban environments. Yet they also recognized that health is not factored adequately into the urban planning process, and there was considerable support for greater use of non-market economic valuation to help improve decision-making. There was no silver bullet however: 110 barriers and 76 opportunities were identified across a highly complex range of systems, actors and processes, including many possible points of targeted intervention for economic valuation. Eight main themes were identified as key areas for discussion and future focus. This findings paper is the second of two on this phase of the project: the first sets out the rationale, approach and methodological lessons learned.</description><subject>Barriers</subject><subject>Cities</subject><subject>City Planning</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Health care expenditures</subject><subject>Health Informatics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Industrial development</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Private sector</subject><subject>Public finance</subject><subject>Public Health</subject><subject>Public lands</subject><subject>Quality</subject><subject>United Kingdom</subject><subject>Upstream</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><subject>Urban development</subject><subject>Urban environments</subject><subject>Urban planning</subject><subject>Urban Renewal</subject><subject>Valuation</subject><issn>1099-3460</issn><issn>1468-2869</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9Uk1v1DAQjRCIlsIf4IAsceFi8FfimAMStJRWtOpKsAdOlteZdF0Se7GTRflL_Eqc7lI-Dpw89rz3ZsbziuIpJS8pIfJVorRkAhNGMSEll3i6VxxSUdWY1ZW6n2OiFOaiIgfFo5RuCKGVkOxhccC54opU6rD4cbWFaEPv_DX6NKUBemfROxOjg5jQIsIW_DAnz8B0w3pCy7gyHp3k9y5s-pxEzqNhDWj58TW6NPly6nyTGQm1MfTo3A8Qtw6-31YA70LMbOuSCx5fmq9zmZMxzlmDOP4CJqJFZzwMJk77qmjhujA8Lh60pkvwZH8eFcvT95-Pz_DF1Yfz47cX2AopBiw5YQ0QBq2UvKbEMCZzWINRopU5LiWrqG1Ya2XdEF5ZTo2tSrmqa84I5UfFm53uZlz10Ng8YzSd3kTX55Z0ME7_nfFura_DVtdUEcZYFnixF4jh2whp0L1LFrp5qjAmzUpGhRKqkhn6_B_oTRijz-Nl1LwkydQsyHYoG0NKEdq7ZijRsxX0zgo6W0HfWkFPmfTszzHuKL92nwF8B0ib-fsh_q79H9mfs6HByQ</recordid><startdate>20210601</startdate><enddate>20210601</enddate><creator>Black, Daniel</creator><creator>Pilkington, Paul</creator><creator>Williams, Ben</creator><creator>Ige, Janet</creator><creator>Prestwood, Emily</creator><creator>Hunt, Alistair</creator><creator>Eaton, Eleanor</creator><creator>Scally, Gabriel</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1474-6992</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210601</creationdate><title>Overcoming Systemic Barriers Preventing Healthy Urban Development in the UK: Main Findings from Interviewing Senior Decision-Makers During a 3-Year Planetary Health Pilot</title><author>Black, Daniel ; Pilkington, Paul ; Williams, Ben ; Ige, Janet ; Prestwood, Emily ; Hunt, Alistair ; Eaton, Eleanor ; Scally, Gabriel</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-7302de02ef773810a227f778ea94f727f57261cd2fc78d036c31ac657b8832013</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Barriers</topic><topic>Cities</topic><topic>City Planning</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Health care expenditures</topic><topic>Health Informatics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Industrial development</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Private sector</topic><topic>Public finance</topic><topic>Public Health</topic><topic>Public lands</topic><topic>Quality</topic><topic>United Kingdom</topic><topic>Upstream</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><topic>Urban development</topic><topic>Urban environments</topic><topic>Urban planning</topic><topic>Urban Renewal</topic><topic>Valuation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Black, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pilkington, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Ben</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ige, Janet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prestwood, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hunt, Alistair</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eaton, Eleanor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scally, Gabriel</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA/Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of urban health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Black, Daniel</au><au>Pilkington, Paul</au><au>Williams, Ben</au><au>Ige, Janet</au><au>Prestwood, Emily</au><au>Hunt, Alistair</au><au>Eaton, Eleanor</au><au>Scally, Gabriel</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Overcoming Systemic Barriers Preventing Healthy Urban Development in the UK: Main Findings from Interviewing Senior Decision-Makers During a 3-Year Planetary Health Pilot</atitle><jtitle>Journal of urban health</jtitle><stitle>J Urban Health</stitle><addtitle>J Urban Health</addtitle><date>2021-06-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>98</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>415</spage><epage>427</epage><pages>415-427</pages><issn>1099-3460</issn><eissn>1468-2869</eissn><abstract>This paper sets out the main findings from two rounds of interviews with senior representatives from the UK’s urban development industry: the third and final phase of a 3-year pilot, Moving Health Upstream in Urban Development’ (UPSTREAM). The project had two primary aims: firstly, to attempt to value economically the health cost-benefits associated with the quality of urban environments and, secondly, to interview those in control of urban development in the UK in order to reveal the potential barriers to, and opportunities for, the creation of healthy urban environments, including their views on the use of economic valuation of (planetary) health outcomes. Much is known about the ‘downstream’ impact of urban environments on human and planetary health and about how to design and plan healthy towns and cities (‘midstream’), but we understand relatively little about how health can be factored in at key governance tipping points further ‘upstream’, particularly within dominant private sector areas of control (e.g. land, finance, delivery) at sub-national level. Our findings suggest that both public and private sector appeared well aware of the major health challenges posed by poor-quality urban environments. Yet they also recognized that health is not factored adequately into the urban planning process, and there was considerable support for greater use of non-market economic valuation to help improve decision-making. There was no silver bullet however: 110 barriers and 76 opportunities were identified across a highly complex range of systems, actors and processes, including many possible points of targeted intervention for economic valuation. Eight main themes were identified as key areas for discussion and future focus. This findings paper is the second of two on this phase of the project: the first sets out the rationale, approach and methodological lessons learned.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>33939069</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11524-021-00537-y</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1474-6992</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1099-3460
ispartof Journal of urban health, 2021-06, Vol.98 (3), p.415-427
issn 1099-3460
1468-2869
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8190222
source MEDLINE; PAIS Index; SpringerNature Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Barriers
Cities
City Planning
Decision Making
Economics
Epidemiology
Health care expenditures
Health Informatics
Humans
Industrial development
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Private sector
Public finance
Public Health
Public lands
Quality
United Kingdom
Upstream
Urban areas
Urban development
Urban environments
Urban planning
Urban Renewal
Valuation
title Overcoming Systemic Barriers Preventing Healthy Urban Development in the UK: Main Findings from Interviewing Senior Decision-Makers During a 3-Year Planetary Health Pilot
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-18T07%3A02%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Overcoming%20Systemic%20Barriers%20Preventing%20Healthy%20Urban%20Development%20in%20the%20UK:%20Main%20Findings%20from%20Interviewing%20Senior%20Decision-Makers%20During%20a%203-Year%20Planetary%20Health%20Pilot&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20urban%20health&rft.au=Black,%20Daniel&rft.date=2021-06-01&rft.volume=98&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=415&rft.epage=427&rft.pages=415-427&rft.issn=1099-3460&rft.eissn=1468-2869&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11524-021-00537-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2539397292%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2539397292&rft_id=info:pmid/33939069&rfr_iscdi=true