Modern housing units must meet new needs and requirements; housing dimensions and functional characteristics are relevant issues, mainly considering population ageing and disability. The housing standards of nine European countries were compared to analyze their ability to satisfy new population need, in terms of size. The regulations were downloaded from the websites of the official channels of each country. A wide variability in room size was observed (e.g., single room: from 9 m2 in Italy to 7 m2 in France, to the absence of any limit in England and Wales, GermanyHesse, and Denmark). Italian and French legislations define housing dimension considering the room destination and the number of people. The Swedish regulation provides performance requirements and functional indications but does not specify the minimum dimensions of habitable rooms. The rooms' minimum heights vary between 2.70 m in Italy and Portugal and 2.60 m in the Netherlands, but no limits are established in England and Wales. A diverse approach among European countries regulations is observed: from a market-oriented logic one (e.g., England and Wales) in which room minimum dimensions are not defined to a prescriptive one (Italy) and one that is functionality-oriented (the Netherlands). However, considering the health, social, environmental, and economic trends, many of these standards should be revised.
Living environment, and especially dwellings, affect directly and indirectly health in several ways end represent one of the key social determinants of health. The relationship between health and housing has long been recognized and, in the last decades, researchers developed several conceptual models to put in relation the numerous housing factors able to impact on inhabitants' health. For some authors, factors linked to housing and neighborhood conditions that influence health, can be grouped into four broad categories: first considers the health impacts of not having a stable home (residential instability); second, the financial burdens resulting from high-cost housing (affordability); third, the health impacts of conditions inside the home (the housing' safety and quality); lastly, the health impacts of neighborhoods, including both the environmental and social characteristics of where people live (neighborhood). It is evident that the theme of "housing and health" nowadays needs to be assessed with a multidisciplinary approach, because of the complexity and wideness of its components. Moreover it is today clear that to guarantee good health standards it is indispensable to direct political and administrative choices to improve the overall conditions of the neighborhood and of the buildings, and, At the same time, to dispose of a clear and updated regulatory system, since key factor to ensure Public Health protection and social justice.
The 2014-2018 National Prevention Plan (NPP), in order to promote a correct relationship between health and the environment, indicated, among the central objectives, the definition of guidelines to promote the building hygiene codes in an eco-compatible way, but also to develop specific skills on the subject of confined environments and residential construction in the operators of the Regional Health Services. The CCM2015 Project has therefore set itself the goal of taking stock of the best health practices available today in terms of sustainability and eco-compatibility in the buildings' construction and renovation actions. All this in order to define updated health performance targets to be made available to the competent Authorities, to adapt the current legislation at national, regional and local level, and finally to define the contents of a continuing education (training courses) capable to support operators in risk assessment related to the built environment and in the definition of effective preventive measures.
In recent years, growing interest was devoted to housing conditions from both scientific community and public health, so they are now considered among the main environmental and social health determinants of health of the population. Aim of the study is to analyze and compare the current regulations regarding housing sanitary requirements in different Countries of the EU (Sweden, United Kingdom, Denmark, the Netherlands, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain) with the contents of the Italian Health Ministerial Decree 5th July 1975. From the websites of the official channels of the various countries the regulations have been downloaded. For the comparison, only the aspects of BCs concerning the scale of the building were examined; the comparison concerned all the requirements of the Health Ministerial Decree of 5.07.1975 and some other parameters (e.g. indoor chemical pollution, ionizing radiation, non-ionizing radiation) not provided for in the Ministerial Decree, treated in the other standards regulations, and relevant for the indoor well-being of the occupants. The authors observe a wide variability in the contents and in the formulation of the hygienic-sanitary requirements among the different Building Codes, above all as regards the dimensional data and some fundamental themes (e.g. heating systems, mechanical ventilation) whose treatment is often not it is updated with respect to the technological-scientific innovation consolidated over the past few years. A diverse approach among European Countries is also observed: from a market-oriented logic (e.g. UK), to a prescriptive one (Italy), to a functionality-oriented (the Netherlands). The comparative analysis we carried out made it possible to identify convergences and divergences in the standards analysed for the different European countries. As far as the Italian legislation on the usability of residential premises, finally, considering the health, social, environmental and economic trends, many standards contained in the MD 5th July 1975 should be reviewed and updated.
Introduzione/scopo. La pianificazione urbana tende a contenere e regolamentare la crescita urbana consentendo uno sviluppo sostenibile a livello ambientale, sociale e sanitario. Nel presente lavoro gli autori hanno confrontato i quadri normativi della Federazione Russ e dell'Italia ponendo particolare attenzione agli aspetti urbani degli spazi abitativi. Metodo. Considerando la ponderosa produzione normativa nei due paesi, il lavoro ha preso in esame le normative a livello nazionale per l'Italia e federale per la Russia, tenendo principalmente conto dei seguenti aspetti: strumenti di pianificazione urbana e protezione ambientale e sanitaria degli spazi abitativi. Risultati. I problemi relativi alla sicurezza igienico-sanitaria dell'ambiente di vita in Russia sono essenzialmente riconducibili a due sistemi normativi (SNiP e SanPiN), mentre in Italia rientrano nel D.M. 05/07/1975. I principi fondamentali della pianificazione urbana in Russia sono dettati da una norma federale, mentre in Italia sono recepiti nel Piano Regolatore Generale (PRG) comunale e nei diversi regolamenti locali, dove si riasriassume tutta la normativa sovraordinata. Gli aspetti legati alla qualità ambientale, infine, in entrambi i paesi sono disciplinati da varie leggi specifiche (federali e statali); un articolato sistema di norme che tengono conto dei potenziali impatti sulla salute e sull'ambiente Conclusioni. Gli autori ritengono che dovrebbero essere sviluppati, specialmente in Italia che si trova nettamente più indietro da questo punto di vista, strumenti normativi chiari e aggiornati aventi per oggetto l'igiene degli edifici e degli ambienti urbani, basati sulle più recenti acquisizioni di letteratura scientifica internazionale nell'intento di garantire i più alti standard in materia di tutela della Salute Pubblica. ; Aim. Urban planning tries to contain and regulate the uncontrolled growth of cities, encouraging their sustainable development at environmental, social and health levels. In the present work, the authors compare the regulatory frameworks of the Russian Federation and of Italy, with particular attention paid to the urban aspects of living spaces. Method. Considering the extant normative production in the two countries, the authors examine national legislation for Italy and federal legislation for Russia, mainly taking into account the following aspects: urban planning tools and environmental and sanitary protection of living spaces. Results. Hygienic-sanitary requirements regarding living environment in Russia are essentially expressed by two regulatory systems (SNiP and SanPiN), while in Italy they are regulated by the D.M. 07/05/1975. The main principles of urban planning in Russia are expressed by federal standards, while in Italy they are incorporated in the Municipal General Plan (PRG) and in the various local regulations, where all the superordinate regulations are summarized. Finally, aspects related to environmental quality in both countries are governed by various specific laws (federal and state); a complex system of rules that take into account potential impacts on health and the environment. Conclusions. The authors reckon that clear and updated regulatory tools should be developed, especially in Italy that lags behind, regarding the building and urban hygiene, relying on the most recent acquisitions of international scientific literature in order to guarantee the highest standards in Public Health safeguard.
Contesto e scopo del lavoro. La pandemia in corso di COVID-19, che al giorno d'oggi ha superato 2,5 milioni di infezioni notificate nel mondo e circa 200.000 morti, è un forte promemoria che l'urbanizzazione ha cambiato il modo in cui persone e comunità vivono, lavorano e interagiscono, ed è necessario rendere i sistemi e le capacità locali resilienti per prevenire la diffusione di malattie infettive. Come possiamo riprogettare il concetto di sanità pubblica in relazione all'ambiente costruito e alle città contemporanee? Metodi. Secondo le dichiarazioni e lo scenario precedenti, l'obiettivo di questo documento è integrare gli obiettivi strategici di Urban Health, concentrando le possibili risposte, sia immediate che a medio-lungo termine, agli attuali aspetti ambientali, sociali ed economici del "periodo" di distanziamento fisico. Risultati. Le azioni immediate sono 01. programmare la flessibilità degli orari delle città; 02. pianificare una rete di mobilità intelligente e sostenibile; 03. definire un piano di servizi di vicinato; 04. sviluppare una digitalizzazione del contesto urbano, promuovendo le comunità intelligenti; 05. ripensare l'accessibilità ai luoghi della cultura e del turismo. Le azioni a medio lungo termine sono 06. progettare la flessibilità interna degli spazi abitativi domestici; 07. ripensare le tipologie di edifici, favorendo la presenza di spazi semi-privati o collettivi; 08. rinnovare la rete dei servizi di assistenza di base; 09. integrare i piani di emergenza ambientale esistenti, con quelli relativi alle emergenze sanitarie; 10. migliorare la consapevolezza delle parti interessate sui fattori che influenzano la salute pubblica nelle città. Conclusioni. Il decalogo delle opportunità di sanità pubblica può fornire una base utile per progettisti (architetti e urbanisti), responsabili politici, esperti di sanità pubblica e agenzie sanitarie locali, nel promuovere azioni e politiche volte a trasformare le nostre città in ambienti di vita più salutari e salutogenici. ; Background and aim of the work. The ongoing pandemic of COVID-19, which nowadays has exceeded 2.5 million notified infections in the world and about 200,000 deaths, is a strong reminder that urbanization has changed the way that people and communities live, work, and interact, and it's necessary to make the systems and local capacities resilient to prevent the spread of infectious diseases. How we can re-design the concept of Public Health in relation to the built environment and the contemporary cities? Methods. According to the previous statements and scenario, aim of this paper is to integrate the Urban Health strategic objectives, focusing the possible responses, both immediate and medium-long term, to the current environmental, social, and economic aspects of the 'period' of physical distancing. Results.Immediate Actions are 01. program the flexibility of city schedules; 02. plan a smart and sustainable mobility network; 03. define a neighborhood services' plan; 04. develop a digitization of the urban context, promoting the smart communities; 05. re-think the accessibility to the places of culture and tourism. Medium-long term Actions are 06. design the indoor flexibility of domestic living spaces; 07. re-think building typologies, fostering the presence of semi-private or collective spaces; 08. renovate the basic care services' network; 09. integrate the existing environmental emergency plans, with those related to the health emergencies; 10. improve stakeholders' awareness of the factors affecting Public Health in the cities. Conclusions. The Decalogue of Public Health opportunities may provide a useful basis for Designers (Architects and Urban Planners), Policy Makers, Public Health experts and Local Health Agencies, in promoting actions and policies aimed to transform our cities in healthier and Salutogenic living environments.
Background. World Health Organization has highlighted the need to strengthen the relationship between health and built environment factors, such as inappropriate housing conditions. Building Regulations and Local Health Rules provide safety and building hygiene in construction practices. Currently the Italian Government is giving rise to a Building Regulation Type and the paper aims to verify the present contents of recent innovative Local Health Rules and Building Regulations of several Italian municipalities for sup- porting the performance approach of the future Building Regulations including hygienic issues. Methods. The analysis examines both Building Regulations and Local Health Rules of a sample of about 550 cities, analysing some specific fields of interest: urban field, outdoor issues, housing features, housing restrictions, and qualitative aspects. Results. The analysis focuses on some specific aspects defining the general data reported in Building Regula- tions and Local Health Rules, in particular around surfaces, heights, lighting and aeration ratio, basements and semi-basements, gas radon, building greenery, etc. Conclusions. The investigation permitted to have a wide vision on the present State of the Art in order to highlight some innovative aspects and design approaches of Building Regulations and Local Health Rules. New perspectives in the new regulations should have a performance approach, starting also from the recent SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.
BACKGROUND: World Health Organization has highlighted the need to strengthen the relationship between health and built environment factors, such as inappropriate housing conditions. Building Regulations and Local Health Rules provide safety and building hygiene in construction practices. Currently the Italian Government is giving rise to a Building Regulation Type and the paper aims to verify the present contents of recent innovative Local Health Rules and Building Regulations of several Italian municipalities for supporting the performance approach of the future Building Regulations including hygienic issues. METHODS: The analysis examines both Building Regulations and Local Health Rules of a sample of about 550 cities, analysing some specific fields of interest: urban field, outdoor issues, housing features, housing restrictions, and qualitative aspects. RESULTS: The analysis focuses on some specific aspects defining the general data reported in Building Regulations and Local Health Rules, in particular around surfaces, heights, lighting and aeration ratio, basements and semi-basements, gas radon, building greenery, etc. CONCLUSION: The investigation permitted to have a wide vision on the present State of the Art in order to highlight some innovative aspects and design approaches of Building Regulations and Local Health Rules. New perspectives in the new regulations should have a performance approach, starting also from the recent SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.
