The Effects of Greenspaces On Human Health Part 2: Planning Movements
Historically, people have had many different opinions on how to orient our cities. In the 1800s, American architectural and urban planning theorists started to focus on the inclusion of green spaces into the city. Frederick Olmstead was one of the major proponents of this. He created designs with “sunlight, good air circulation, and an adequate amount of vegetation [...] as the most effective preventive of disease” (The Urbanization of America, p. 35). This can be seen in his many well-known designs including: the city of Riverside, near Chicago, Illinois and the planning of Central Park in New York City.
In the early twentieth century, the City Beautiful Movement was in full swing. Created by Daniel Burnam, in the city of Chicago, this movement sought to create cities as more than just habitations. Instead, he wanted them to be works of art. During this era, people remade “a part of the city: a civic center, a boulevard, a parkway”. (The Urbanization of America; p. 39). One reason why this line of thought became so popular was because of its implementation in the Columbian Exhibition in Chicago. Because of its success, other cities started to increase the implementation of planning in this manner.
Columbian Exhibition in Chicago
One of the last big-wig philosophers on urban planning of this time period was Ebenezer Howard. His main idea was the creation of Garden Cities. These cities would be a combination of both green “rural” space and the built environment. In a circular form, there would be “six magnificent boulevards” (LeGates, Richard T., and Frederic Stout, p. 326) which would be “laid out as a beautiful and well-watered garden” (LeGates, Richard T., and Frederic Stout, p. 326). Through this design, people were meant to avoid “the dangers of stagnation or dead level, and through encouraging individual initiative” (LeGates, Richard T., and Frederic Stout, p. 327). The people who are meant to live here are “among its most energetic and resourceful members” (LeGates, Richard T., and Frederic Stout, p. 329). This city is meant to be an oasis for peoples’ health to be rejuvenated. These spaces are meant to be sustainable and healthy.
Since then, these philosophies on how we can better our designs have crafted our current ideas on urban planning. We now look more at how we could better our cities from both an aesthetic and health stand point.
The APA, or the American Planning Association, is the most predominant policy-maker for Urban Planning in America. They hope to “promote an interdisciplinary, multi-objective approach to policy making and the implementation [...] [of] the Five Strategic Points of Intervention:
1. Visioning and Goal Setting
2. Plans and Planning
3. Implementation Tools
4. Site Design and Development
5. Public Facility Siting and Capital Spending”
Through each of these five points, this organization wants to create accessible spaces which will better our country’s health. This is a process-oriented approach. One is meant to brainstorm solutions to the problem; thus, establishing a starting point to apply a practical fix in real life.
Correspondingly, this approach can be applied to better our environment through the addition of more greenspaces.
The big picture and goal of a project based on the intersection of urban planning and greenspaces may be to increase the city’s health. It is said that “places that engage all the senses contribute to a healthy life” (Coffin, Christie Johnson, and Jenny Young; p.122). This includes everything from sunlight to the fragrance of fresh air to the sounds of the wind or rustling of the trees.
From this acknowledgement that greenspace has a correlation with our health, we then move on to the planning phase. Clare Cooper, a proponent of environmental planning, says in Making Places for People that “mixed-use neighborhood[s] with continuous green spaces [provide] safe pedestrian and bike routes to schools and recreation” (Coffin, Christie Johnson, and Jenny Young ; p.120). This could be one example of a plan we could create in cities. We could retrofit greenspace into the existing infrastructure of a community in order to vary its uses. These are just a couple examples of what could be considered an early step in the evolution of a project.
Next, we have the implementation of tools phase of the process. The APA uses a specific tool, the Health Impact Assessment (HIA), in order to “apply their respective expertise to help inform all manner of public policy decisions, including planning and land-use” (Morris, Marya.; p. 73). Right now, this tool is not as popular in the US as it is in Europe and Australia. Many other countries are applying this before they go through the final developmental phase. HIA also has five phases:
1. Screening: identifying projects of policies for which an HIA would be useful
2. Scoping: Identify which health impacts should be included
3. Risk Assessment: Identify how many and which people may be affected and how they may be affected
4. Report Results to Decision Makers: Create a report suitable in length and depth for audience
5. Evaluate Impact on Actual Decisions
By doing this, they alleviate some of the inconveniences that can occur later in a project’s existence. I think that we, as Urban Planners in the US, should start to incorporate tools such as these into our normal routines. If we were to do this, we could start to create a more livable country like some of those that do use these.
Alternatively, we tend to focus more on our codes and laws. As a society, we want to create more rules and regulations that control what is needed when and where in a design. Right now, some of the codes in our major cities dictate the use of a certain material or a sizing. This is because of how we think spaces should be organized in a traditionally “American” way or we do this to preserve “historicity”. Consequently, America may become more monolithic, boring, boxy, and bland. The urban planning may become more rectilinear than it already is, and our architecture may not be as creative as other spaces. Thus, these two things may not allow us to implement as many greenspaces; ultimately, creating a negative feedback loop with our health. Due to this, I trust that if we were to shape our spaces with more ingenuity, as opposed to crafting more codes, greenspaces may become more common and thus more effective than they have been in the past.
Subsequently, we create a major site design. During this phase, planners move to the drafting board. They start to draw out their ideas in full detail. This starts to create a more elaborate and specifically focused design. Depending on the size of the area one is wanting to redesign, this could take anywhere from a couple months to a couple years to a couple decades. A smaller project, such as, knocking down a couple dilapidated buildings in order to create a park may only take about a year. However, an extravagant renovation and restructuring of space, like the creation of Chicago’s new river walk and Goose Island plan, may be under scrutiny and examination for decades.
Lastly, we head to the most important phase of all. During the “Public Facility Siting and Capital Spending” (Morris, Marya.; p. 10). Phase. This is the most user-conscious phase because it turns our focus to the actual people who will inhabit our space. Would people use our spaces in real life? Are there sidewalks that will draw communities into it? Is it easily accessible? All in all, can it really change the way the space was originally being used for better? If the answers to these questions are “Yes”, then the design can be carried out. It is given over to the public sector who can choose whether or not they agree. In the end, they will be willing or not willing to pay the necessary expenses. Thus, deciding whether or not the project is fully executed or not.
Sometimes, only pieces of projects may be built, and others sent back to the drawing board. In other cases, a brand-new city may be redesigned. Now that we have the foundations of vocabulary needed to talk about greenspaces and health; as well as, the knowledge of the process urban planners can take to implement new designs, let us look at some ways to increase greenspaces and some specific examples already in existence.
There are four pathways that link exposure to greenspace with an increase in health. They are: air quality, stress, physical activity, and social contacts. There are then “three domains encompass[ing] the four general pathways” (Markevych, Iana, and Julia Schoierer, p. 302):
1. Reducing Harm or Mitigation
2. Restoring Capacities (i.e. Restoring Spaces)
3. Building Capacities (i.e. Encouraging of Movement and Communication)
Each of these three domains represent a style of how urban planners can use greenspaces to create a positive effect on our environment.
Mitigation is an effective design tool to prevent future problems. A common way a greenspace can be used is to reduce a population’s exposure to heat. By adding vegetation, it “absorbs direct solar radiation, changes the albedo of background surfaces and has a cooling effect [...] on the surrounding areas” (Markevych, Iana, and Julia Schoierer ; p. 303). This may cancel out some of the effects of the “urban heat island” that is so frequently seen in the immensely populated and largely concrete built environment. Another popular idea is the diminishing of air pollution. Plants “may directly and efficiently remove air pollutants, especially particulate matter of less than 10 (PM_10) and ozone, via deposition” (Markevych, Iana, and Julia Schoierer ; p. 303). This vegetation also produces “biogenic volatile compounds and secondary organic aerosols” (Markevych, Iana, and Julia Schoierer ; p. 303) which have a filtering affect on our air. Thus, by adding more greenspaces, we may be able to lower some of the health problems urban planners are finding in cities that are too hot and that have too much pollution.
Restoring spaces has been used to help a community better its mental health. In the recent decades, this has become very popular. Especially in the U.S., stress reduction has become a critical strategy. According to scientific data, the “viewing [of] vegetation and other natural appearing environmental features can very rapidly evoke positive emotions that block negative thoughts and emotions, thereby ameliorating or shutting down the stress response” (Markevych, Iana, and Julia Schoierer ; p. 304). This response had been originally used to help us, as humans, survive.
Today, we have very different types of stressors. The flight or fight mechanisms are no longer necessary for hunting our food. We would have viewed vegetation as an oasis and a safe- haven from the risks of hunting. Today, many of us are in a constant state of stress because of the increase in technology use, need for constant connections, and inflexible demands from our jobs. Because of this, our health is in jeopardy. For example, it is not uncommon to find “young” people with problems that are historically seen in “old people” such as high blood pressure. Nonetheless, we may be able to rehabilitate them. By walking in the park, scientists have seen that patients often show a “decline in systolic blood pressure” (Markevych, Iana, and Julia Schoierer ; p. 304). This type of pattern has also been seen in labs when subjects were “viewing some simulated natural setting, as with a forested space or a green roof seen from an office window” (Markevych, Iana, and Julia Schoierer ; p. 304). There are also many self-reported benefits such as improved mood and motivation. Even though we seem to be making huge leaps forward with this research, I believe we can continue to do experiments based on the exact relation greenspaces can have on restoring our mental health.
Building capacities is the act of creating areas that will be used in certain ways to improve overall health. Two widely accepted situations are that greenspaces should encourage physical activity and social cohesion. Many studies suggest that “physical activity performed in greenspace [...] produces greater psychological and physiological benefits than physical activity done in other settings” (Markevych, Iana, and Julia Schoierer ; p. 305). For adults, many people love to run or hike on trails. Today, cities are starting to take this into account by creating specifically designated areas for this purpose. To create social cohesion, urban planners must consider the different tastes of different population groups. For example, as children play outside, they create connections that “may positively affect socio-emotional development and help to establish social cohesion, which may also extend to the parents” (Markevych, Iana, and Julia Schoierer ; p. 306) and their networking patterns. This may differ from the elderly who tend to enjoy convening in city parks to play chess or discuss the latest gossip over a pastry and a tea.
In conclusion, we should start designing greenspaces that people would use every day. Throughout our cities, greenspaces should be integrated into the landscape, and, all in all, everyone should have access to these spaces that promote our health.
Works Cited
Boseley, Sarah. “How Do You Build a Healthy City? Copenhagen Reveals Its Secrets.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 11 Feb. 2018, www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/feb/11/how- build-healthy-city-copenhagen-reveals-its-secrets-happiness. 東京都都市整備局 . “Bureau of Urban Development Tokyo Metropolitan Government.” Bureau of Urban Development Tokyo Metropolitan Government | 東京都都市整備局, www.toshiseibi.metro.tokyo.jp/eng/index.html.
Coffin, Christie Johnson, and Jenny Young. Making Places for People: 12 Questions Every Designer Should Ask. Routledge, 2017.
Health Fitness Revolution. “Top 10 Healthiest Cities in the World.” Health Fitness Revolution, 8 Mar. 2016, www.healthfitnessrevolution.com/top-10-healthiest-cities-in-the-world/.
LeGates, Richard T., and Frederic Stout. The City Reader. 2nd ed., Routledge, 2016.
Markevych, Iana, and Julia Schoierer. “Exploring Pathways Linking Greenspace to Health: Theoretical and Methodological Guidance.” Science Direct, Pergamon, 30 June 2017, reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0013935117303067?token=E9503914E418FCB192A06D4C7 8C23FF716CF1B46E7A300E421E6B35E2D6D0DAFE6BA280D0EC8B902C17710E1CB7A92 A7. Morris, Marya. Integrating Planning and Public Health: Tools and Strategies to Create Healthy Places. American Planning Association, 2006.
Senthilingam, Meera. “This Urban Population Is Leading the World in Life Expectancy.” CNN, Cable News Network, 3 Mar. 2018, www.cnn.com/2018/03/02/health/hong-kong-world-longest-life- expectancy-longevity-intl/index.html.
Taylor, Lucy, and Dieter F. Hochuli. “Defining Greenspace: Multiple Uses across Multiple Disciplines.” Science Direct, Academic Press, 8 Oct. 2016, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204616302146.
World Health Organization, World Health Organization, www.who.int/.
“The World's Cities in 2016.” United Nations, United Nations, www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/urbanization/the_worlds_cities_in _2016_data_booklet.pdf.