Suchergebnisse

The COVID-19 pandemic crisis has compromised the 'healthy cities' vision, as it has unveiled the need to give more prominence to caring tasks while addressing intersectional social inequities and environmental injustices. However, much-needed transdisciplinary approaches to study and address post-COVID-19 healthy cities challenges and agendas have been scarce so far. To address this gap, we propose a 'just ecofeminist healthy cities' research approach, which would be informed by the caring city, environmental justice, just ecofeminist sustainability and the healthy cities paradigms and research fields. Our proposed approach aims to achieve the highest standards of human health possible for the whole population—yet putting the health of socially underprivileged residents in the centre—through preserving and/or improving the existing physical, social and political environment. Importantly, the proposed approach recognises all spheres of daily life (productive, reproductive, personal and political) and their connections with inequities, justice and power dynamics. Last, the just ecofeminist healthy cities approach understands human health as interconnected with the health of non-human animals and the ecosystem. We illustrate the proposed new approach focusing on the implications for women's health and public green spaces research and propose principles and practices for its operationalisation.

While access and exposure to green spaces has been shown to be beneficial for the health of urban residents, interventions focused on augmenting such access may also catalyse gentrification processes, also known as green gentrification. Drawing from the fields of public health, urban planning and environmental justice, we argue that public health and epidemiology researchers should rely on a more dynamic model of community that accounts for the potential unintended social consequences of upstream health interventions. In our example of green gentrification, the health benefits of greening can only be fully understood relative to the social and political environments in which inequities persist. We point to two key questions regarding the health benefits of newly added green space: Who benefits in the short and long term from greening interventions in lower income or minority neighbourhoods undergoing processes of revitalisation? And, can green cities be both healthy and just? We propose the Green Gentrification and Health Equity model which provides a framework for understanding and testing whether gentrification associated with green space may modify the effect of exposure to green space on health. ; This paper was supported by funding from ERC Grant Agreement 678034

Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu MdM-2015-0552 ; Digital object identifier for the 'European Research Council' (http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000781) - Digital object identifier for 'Horizon 2020' (http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007601). ; While access and exposure to green spaces has been shown to be beneficial for the health of urban residents, interventions focused on augmenting such access may also catalyze gentrification processes, also known as green gentrification. Drawing from the fields of public health, urban planning and environmental justice, we argue that public health and epidemiology researchers should rely on a more dynamic model of community that accounts for the potential unintended social consequences of upstream health interventions. In our example of green gentrification, the health benefits of greening can only be fully understood relative to the social and political environments in which inequities persist. We point to two key questions regarding the health benefits of newly added green space: Who benefits in the short and long term from greening interventions in lower-income or minority neighborhoods undergoing processes of revitalization? And, can green cities be both healthy and just? We propose the Green Gentrification and Health Equity model which provides a framework for understanding and testing whether gentrification associated with green space may modify the effect of exposure to green space on health.

Digital object identifier for the 'European Research Council' (http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000781) ; Digital object identifier for 'Horizon 2020' (http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007601) ; Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu MdM-2015-0552 ; Scholars in urban political ecology, urban geography, and planning have suggested that urban greening interventions can create elite enclaves of environmental privilege and green gentrification, and exclude lower-income and minority residents from their benefits. Yet, much remains to be understood in regard to the magnitude, scope, and manifestations of green gentrification and the forms of contestation and resistance articulated against it. In this paper, we propose new questions, theoretical approaches, and research design approaches to examine the socio-spatial dynamics and ramifications of green gentrification and parse out why, how, where, and when green gentrification takes place.

Urban green space is demonstrated to benefit human health. We evaluated whether neighborhood gentrification status matters when considering the health benefits of green space, and whether the benefits are received equitably across racial and socioeconomic groups. Greater exposure to active green space was significantly associated with lower odds of reporting fair or poor health, but only for those living in gentrifying neighborhoods. In gentrifying neighborhoods, only those with high education or high incomes benefited from neighborhood active green space. Structural interventions, such as new green space, should be planned and evaluated within the context of urban social inequity and change. ; The researched presented in this paper received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No.678034 and grant agreement No. 730243). This research contributes tothe Maria de Maetzu Unit of Excellence grant (MDM-2015-0552) at the Institute for Environmental Science and Technology. In addition, JJTC was funded by the Spanish government's Juan de la Cierva incorporation fellowship (IJCI-2016-31100) and MTM was funded by the Juan dela Cierva formation fellowship (FJCI-2017-33842). The dataset used in analyses for this paper, NYC Community Health Survey, 2009–2013 was obtained from the Bureau of Epidemiology Services in the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene

AbstractThis article explores the role that green gentrification plays in exacerbating racial tensions within historically marginalized urban communities benefiting from new environmental amenities such as parks, gardens, waterfront restoration and greenways. Building on extensive qualitative data from three cities in Europe (Amsterdam, Vienna, Lyon) and four cities in the United States (Washington, Austin, Atlanta, Cleveland), we use thematic analysis and grounded theory to examine the complex relationship between historical environmental and racial injustices and current racial green inequities produced by the green city agenda. Our analysis also offers insights into the main differences in how community members articulate concerns and demands over racial issues related to green gentrification in Europe versus North America. Results show that urban greening—and green gentrification specifically—can create 'compounded environmental racisms' by worsening racial environmental injustices and further perpetrating green racialized displacement, re‐segregation and exclusion. The latter is produced by the racial inequities embedded in green infrastructure projects and the related unequal access to environmental benefits, affordable housing, political rights and place‐making. Moreover, we find that settler colonial practices combined with persisting exposure to toxins and re‐segregation in the United States together with neocolonial spatial and social practices in Europe shape how racialized community members perceive and interact with new green amenities.

Altres ajuts: Acord transformatiu CRUE-CSIC ; Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu CEX2019-000940-M ; In the movement towards building greener and more sustainable cities, real estate developers are increasingly embracing not only green building construction but broader strategies and action related to urban greening. To date, their motivations and role in this broader urban greening dynamic remains underexplored, yet essential to dissect how greening is sustained and real estate development legitimized in revitalizing neighborhoods. With an eye to better understand green urban capitalist development processes underway amidst financialized nature and urban growth, and the equity impacts they entail, we explore residential real estate developers urban greening discourses and practices. Through a novel dataset of 42 interviews with private and non-profit residential real estate developers in 15 mid-sized American, Western European and Canadian cities, we uncover three differentiated but interconnected discourses around (i) financial benefits, (ii) consumer- or investor-driven demand and (iii) social dimensions behind developers' interest in urban greening. We argue that developers embark on urban green grabbing through "green" discursive and material value appropriation and rent extraction strategies. Urban green grabbing is conceptually useful in depicting who benefits and how/when developers extract additional rent, surplus value, social capital and/or prestige from locating new residential projects adjacent to new or up-and-coming green amenities. Our work contributes to debates about urban greening's perceived position as a value-producing and rent-extracting good from both a political economy and political ecology perspective

IntroductionProstate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among men in the United States and harms Black men disproportionately. Most US men are uninformed about many key facts important to make an informed decision about prostate cancer. Most experts agree that it is important for men to learn about these problems as early as possible in their lifetime.ObjectivesTo compare the effect of a community health worker (CHW)-led educational session with a physician-led educational session that counsels Black men about the risks and benefits of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening.MethodsOne hundred eighteen Black men recruited in 8 community-based settings attended a prostate cancer screening education session led by either a CHW or a physician. Participants completed surveys before and after the session to assess knowledge, decisional conflict, and perceptions about the intervention. Both arms used a decision aid that explains the benefits, risks, and controversies of PSA screening and decision coaching.ResultsThere was no significant difference in decisional conflict change by group: 24.31 physician led versus 30.64 CHW led (P=.31). The CHW-led group showed significantly greater improvement on knowledge after intervention, change (SD): 2.6 (2.81) versus 5.1 (3.19), P<.001). However, those in the physician-led group were more likely to agree that the speaker knew a lot about PSA testing (P<.001) and were more likely to trust the speaker (P<.001).ConclusionsCHW-led interventions can effectively assist Black men with complex health decision-making in community-based settings. This approach may improve prostate cancer knowledge and equally minimize decisional conflict compared with a physician-led intervention.

Background: The number of urban community gardens, including those on rooftops, is increasing. However, few studies have explored the benefits of these gardens for people with intellectual disabilities or mental health disorders. We evaluated the association between urban rooftop gardening and quality of life of individuals with moderate to very marked disability. Methods: We collected quality of life information with a preliminary version of the INTEGRAL Scale questionnaire from all gardeners (n = 54) and among a comparison group of nongardeners (n = 43). We also conducted semi-structured interviews with participants and technicians, and made field observations. Results: Our results indicated that urban rooftop gardening was associated with better personal development and suggested enhanced physical and emotional well-being, sense of purpose, social inclusion, interpersonal relations (including new perspectives on the urban environment and the changes in social roles), and general quality of life. Conclusion: Our study extends the evidence on the potential benefits of urban rooftop gardening in general, and specifically for those with intellectual disabilities and mental health disorders. ; The research presented in this article received funding from the Town Council of Barcelona and from the European Research Council under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement no. 678034). These sponsors had no role in the design or analysis of this study. No copyrighted material was used in this manuscript.

Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu MdM-2015-0552 ; In global cities, the impacts of gentrification on the lives and well-being of socially vulnerable residents have occupied political agendas. Yet to date, research on how gentrification affects a multiplicity of health outcomes has remained scarce. While much of the nascent quantitative research helps to identify associations between gentrification and determined health outcomes, it tends to draw from static datasets collected for other studies to draw a posteriori and non-longitudinal conclusions. There is little attention in traditional public health research to purposely understand the health impacts of the complex, multi-layered, and rapid change produced by gentrification. Moreover, few studies examine the pathways and socio-spatial dynamics of the association between gentrification and health. In response, we use qualitative data collected in Boston and Barcelona to comprehensively identify how the health and well-being of long-term residents may be affected by gentrification and to call for new multi-methods research. In this initial assessment, we find a range of potential detrimental factors and potential pathways associated with gentrification, including individual-level physical and mental health outcomes such as obesity, asthma, chronic stress, and depression; neighborhood-level health determinants such as safety and new drug-dealing/use; and institutional-level health determinants such as healthcare precarity and worsened school conditions.

Urban outdoor play spaces are reported to improve children's health. However, there is little empirical evidence on the impact of outdoor play spaces on childhood mental and behavioral health. To fill this gap, we investigated the associations between residential proximity to outdoor play spaces and the prevalence of diagnosed mental and behavioral disorders. We explored whether these associations differ by individual and area-level socio-economic status (SES). This cross-sectional study included 151 110 children who were 0-12 years old in 2014 and were visited in public primary health care centers in Barcelona (Spain). Each child's demographic and mental and behavioral disorders information was extracted for 2005-2014, including diagnoses on disorders of psychological development together with other four types of mental and behavioral disorders. The pediatrician diagnosed mental and behavioral disorders we explored in this study were: mood/affective; neurotic, stress-related and somatoform; psychological development; behavioral and emotional; and overall mental and behavioral disorders. We assessed 300 m network buffer residential proximity to overall outdoor play spaces (i.e., the overall sum of play spaces of any type), outdoor green play spaces, and to a diversity of outdoor play spaces. We used robust Poisson regression models to investigate the association between proximity to outdoor play spaces indicators and each health outcome. We tested interaction terms for indicators of proximity to outdoor play spaces and individual and area SES. For measures with significant interaction terms, we conducted stratified models. We found residential proximity to outdoor play spaces to be protective of disorders of psychological development. Proximity to overall outdoor play spaces, proximity to outdoor green play spaces and proximity to a greater diversity of outdoor play spaces were associated with a 4% (95% CI: 1,7), 4% (95% CI: 1,7) and 5% (95% CI: 2,9) lower prevalence rates of disorders of psychological development respectively. Most of the associations were found to be in the same direction-although more pronounced-in low SES areas, but in the opposite direction for children living in high SES areas. No differences in these associations were found by individual SES. Residential proximity to outdoor play spaces is protective of children's mental and behavioral health living in low SES areas. ; This work was supported by the GREENLULU's Project under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation framework [grant number 678034]; the NATURVATION Project under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation framework [grant number 730243]; the ECHOCAT project of La Marató de TV3 Foundation [grant number 201621–30] and the the María de Maeztu Program for Units of Excellence of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [grant number CEX 2019-000940-M]. HC and MTM are funded by Juan de la Cierva fellowships awarded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [grant number FJCI-2018-035322 and FJCI-2017-33842]. The sponsors had no role in the design or analysis of this study.