Knowledge-based approach for planning healthy cities : the case of Logan-Beaudesert, Australia

Introduction - The planning for healthy cities faces significant challenges due to lack of effective information, systems and a framework to organise that information. Such a framework is critical in order to make accessible and informed decisions for planning healthy cities. The challenges for planning healthy cities have been magnified by the rise of the healthy cities movement, as a result of which, there have been more frequent calls for localised, collaborative and knowledge-based decisions. Some studies have suggested that the use of a ‘knowledge-based’ approach to planning will enhance the accuracy and quality decision-making by improving the availability of data and information for health service planners and may also lead to increased collaboration between stakeholders and the community. A knowledge-based or evidence-based approach to decision-making can provide an ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking through the use of technology during decision-making processes. Minimal research has been conducted in this area to date, especially in terms of evaluating the impact of adopting knowledge-based approach on stakeholders, policy-makers and decision-makers within health planning initiatives. Purpose – The purpose of the paper is to present an integrated method that has been developed to facilitate a knowledge-based decision-making process to assist health planning Methodology – Specifically, the paper describes the participatory process that has been adopted to develop an online Geographic Information System (GIS)-based Decision Support System (DSS) for health planners. Value – Conceptually, it is an application of Healthy Cities and Knowledge Cities approaches which are linked together. Specifically, it is a unique settings-based initiative designed to plan for and improve the health capacity of Logan-Beaudesert area, Australia. This setting-based initiative is named as the Logan-Beaudesert Health Coalition (LBHC). Practical implications - The paper outlines the application of a knowledge-based approach to the development of a healthy city. Also, it focuses on the need for widespread use of this approach as a tool for enhancing community-based health coalition decision making processes.

Urban informatics, ubiquitous computing and social media for healthy cities

The increasing ubiquity of digital technology, internet services and location-aware applications in our everyday lives allows for a seamless transitioning between the visible and the invisible infrastructure of cities: road systems, building complexes, information and communication technology, and people networks create a buzzing environment that is alive and exciting. Driven by curiosity, initiative and interdisciplinary exchange, the Urban Informatics Research Lab at Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Australia, is an emerging cluster of people interested in research and development at the intersection of people, place and technology with a focus on cities, locative media and mobile technology. This paper introduces urban informatics as a transdisciplinary practice across people, place and technology that can aid local governments, urban designers and planners in creating responsive and inclusive urban spaces and nurturing healthy cities. Three challenges are being discussed. First, people, and the challenge of creativity explores the opportunities and challenges of urban informatics that can lead to the design and development of new tools, methods and applications fostering participation, the democratisation of knowledge, and new creative practices. Second, technology, and the challenge of innovation examines how urban informatics can be applied to support user-led innovation with a view to promote entrepreneurial ideas and creative industries. Third, place, and the challenge of engagement discusses the potential to establish places within cities that are dedicated to place-based applications of urban informatics with a view to deliver community and civic engagement strategies.

Utility-driven evidence for healthy cities : problems with evidence generation and application

The question whether the WHO Healthy Cities project ‘works’ has been asked ever since a number of novel ideas and actions related to community health, health promotion and healthy public policy in the mid 1980s came together in the Healthy Cities Movement initiated by the World Health Organization. The question, however, has become more urgent since we have entered an era in which the drive for ‘evidence’ seems all-pervasive.

The article explores the nature of evidence, review available evidence on Healthy Cities accomplishments, and discusses whether enough evidence has been accumulated on different performances within the realm of Healthy Cities. A main point of reference is the European Healthy Cities Project (E-HCP).

Building on the information gathered through documentary research on the topic, it is concluded that there is fair evidence that Healthy Cities works. However, the future holds great challenges for further development and evidence-oriented evaluations of Healthy Cities. There are problems with (1) the communication of evidence, (2) the tension between the original intention of the Healthy Cities Movement and its current operations, and (3) the complex nature of Healthy Cities and the methodological tools currently available.

Evidence for healthy cities : reflections on practice, method and theory

The European Healthy Cities project can be characterized as a social movement that employs an extremely wide range of political, social and behavioural interventions for the development and sustenance of urban population health. At all of these levels, the movement is inspired by ideological, theoretical and evidence-based perspectives. The result of this stance is a dynamic, complex and diverse landscape of initiatives, plans, programmes and actions. In quantitative terms (the number of WHO designated cities and associated cities and communities through national networks), ‘Healthy Cities’ can be regarded as an extraordinary accomplishment and a credit for both WHO and cities in the movement. In qualitative terms, however, critics of the movement have maintained that little evidence on its success and effectiveness has been generated. This critique finds its foundations in the mere perceptions of evidence, the politics of science and urban governance, and perspectives on the preferred or professed utilities of evidence-based health notions. The article reviews the nature of evidence and its interface with politics and governance. Applying a conceptual framework combining insights from knowledge utilization theory, theoretical perspectives on (health) policy development, theory-based evaluations and planned intervention approaches, it demonstrates that, although the evidence is overwhelming, there are barriers to the implementation of such evidence that should be further addressed by ‘Healthy Cities’.

Healthy cities

Healthy Cities is a worldwide movement developed by the European office of the World Health Organization. It has been implemented formally through WHO in many cities, and others have adopted the model. Grounded in 11 qualities that range from housing to economy and social characteristics such as a supportive community, Healthy Cities goes well beyond the definition of health as an absence of disease. This entry looks at its development and implementation around the world.

Do healthy cities work? A logic of method for assessing impact and outcome of healthy cities

In this article, we discuss an appropriate methodology for assessing complex urban programs such as the WHO European Healthy Cities Network. The basic tenets and parameters for this project are reviewed, and situated in the broader urban health tradition. This leads to a delineation of the types of questions researchers can address when looking at a complex urban health program. Such questions reach appropriately beyond traditional public health concepts involving proximal and distal determinants of health (and associated upstream, midstream, and downstream rhetoric). Espousing a multi-level, reciprocal pathways perspective on Healthy Cities research, we also adopt a distinction between impacts and outcomes of Healthy Cities. The former are value driven, the latter intervention-driven. These approaches lead to the acknowledgment of a logic of method that includes situational and contextual appreciation of unique Healthy City experiences in a Realist Evaluation paradigm. The article concludes with a reflection of evaluation and assessment procedures applied to Phase IV (2003-2008) of the WHO European Healthy Cities Network and an interpretation of response rates to the range of methods that have been adopted.

Evaluation of partnership working in cities in phase IV of the WHO healthy cities network

An intersectoral partnership for health improvement is a requirement of the WHO European Healthy Cities Network of municipalities. A review was undertaken in 59 cities based on responses to a structured questionnaire covering phase IV of the network (2003–2008). Cities usually combined formal and informal working partnerships in a pattern seen in previous phases. However, these encompassed more sectors than previously and achieved greater degrees of collaborative planning and implementation. Additional WHO technical support and networking in phase IV significantly enhanced collaboration with the urban planning sector. Critical success factors were high-level political commitment and a well-organized Healthy City office. Partnerships remain a successful component of Healthy City working. The core principles, purpose and intellectual rationale for intersectoral partnerships remain valid and fit for purpose. This applied to long-established phase III cities as well as newcomers to phase IV. The network, and in particular the WHO brand, is well regarded and encourages political and organizational engagement and is a source of support and technical expertise. A key challenge is to apply a more rigorous analytical framework and theory-informed approach to reviewing partnership and collaboration parameters.

Active, healthy cities ? how does population physical activity vary between Australian cities?

Issue addressed: Despite recognition that urban infrastructure influences physical activity, there have been no comparisons between Australian city-level patterns of physical activity. This study ranked Australian cities in terms of adults? participation in leisure-time physical activity and examined city-level variations in activity trends between 2001 and 2009. Methods: Data on participation in leisure-time physical activity in adults (=15 years) between 2001 and 2009 were obtained from the Exercise Recreation and Sport Survey (ERASS), a computer-assisted telephone interview conducted to collect population-level sport participation information by the Australian Sports Commission. Data were analysed for respondents residing in the eight capital cities of Australia. The prevalence of meeting recommended ?health-enhancing physical activity? (HEPA) and levels of walking were calculated by age, gender and survey year. Multiple linear logistic regression analyses were used to compare cities. Results: Pooled data from 174,323 adults across years showed that Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Canberra residents were significantly more active than Sydney, Adelaide and Hobart residents in terms of HEPA. Hobart, Perth and Melbourne residents were significantly more likely to walk =5 sessions a week compared with their counterparts in other cities. HEPA and walking increased across most cities between 2001 and 2009. Conclusion: There are significant differences between Australian cities in physical activity and walking levels, over and above differences attributable to age, gender or educational levels. While this may be due to infrastructure differences, comparative information on indicators of the built environment and transport infrastructure are not available.