Urban governance and the systems approaches to health-environment co-benefits in cities

Mobilizing knowledge about urban change for equity and sustainability: developing 'Change Stories', a multi-country transdisciplinary study

Background

Health-focused research funders increasingly support multi-country research partnerships that study health, urban development and equity in global settings. To develop new knowledge that benefits society, these grants require researchers to integrate diverse knowledges and data, and to manage research-related aspects of coloniality, such as power imbalances and epistemic injustices. We conducted research to develop a transdisciplinary study proposal with partners in multiple middle and high income countries, aiming to embed equity into the methodology and funding model.

Methods

Parallel to literature review, we used participatory and social research methods to identify case study cities for our primary study and to inform our study design. We conducted semi-structured interviews with informed and consented sustainable urban development experts in the USA (n=23). We co-developed our research approach with our global advisory group (n=14) and conducted a participatory workshop (n=30) to identify case study sites, also informed by conversations with international academic experts in sustainable development (n=27).

Results

Through literature review we found that there is a need to study the contextual pre-conditions of urban transformation, the influence of coloniality on understandings of how cities can change and the failure of standard development practices to meet the needs of all residents and the planet. Through expert input and literature we found that decolonial and storytelling methods may help us show the complexities behind stories of urban transformation, particularly the role of marginalized populations in creating long-term change.

Conclusions

There are multiple benefits of conducting research to develop an equitably designed multi-country research collaboration. We built new partnerships and co-developed our research approach, creating new understanding of diverse collaborators' disciplinary perspectives and institutional requirements. By investigating the informational needs of U.S. sustainable development actors and designing our study to meet these needs, we have increased the likelihood that our research will create impact.

Barriers and Enablers for Integrating Public Health Cobenefits in Urban Climate Policy

Urban climate policy offers a significant opportunity to promote improved public health. The evidence around climate and health cobenefits is growing but has yet to translate into widespread integrated policies. This article presents two systematic reviews: first, looking at quantified cobenefits of urban climate policies, where transportation, land use, and buildings emerge as the most studied sectors; and second, looking at review papers exploring the barriers and enablers for integrating these health cobenefits into urban policies. The latter reveals wide agreement concerning the need to improve the evidence base for cobenefits and consensus about the need for greater political will and leadership on this issue. Systems thinking may offer a way forward to help embrace complexity and integrate health cobenefits into decision making. Knowledge coproduction to bring stakeholders together and advance policy-relevant research for urban health will also be required. Action is needed to bring these two important policy agendas together.

Urban Climate Policy and Action through a Health Lens-An Untapped Opportunity

Motivated by a growing recognition of the climate emergency, reflected in the 26th Conference of the Parties (COP26), we outline untapped opportunities to improve health through ambitious climate actions in cities. Health is a primary reason for climate action yet is rarely integrated in urban climate plans as a policy goal. This is a missed opportunity to create sustainable alliances across sectors and groups, to engage a broad set of stakeholders, and to develop structural health promotion. In this statement, we first briefly review the literature on health co-benefits of urban climate change strategies and make the case for health-promoting climate action; we then describe barriers to integrating health in climate action. We found that the evidence-base is often insufficiently policy-relevant to be impactful. Research rarely integrates the complexity of real-world systems, including multiple and dynamic impacts of strategies, and consideration of how decision-making processes contend with competing interests and short-term electoral cycles. Due to siloed-thinking and restrictive funding opportunities, research often falls short of the type of evidence that would be most useful for decision-making, and research outputs can be cryptic to decision makers. As a way forward, we urge researchers and stakeholders to engage in co-production and systems thinking approaches. Partnering across sectors and disciplines is urgently needed so pathways to climate change mitigation and adaptation fully embrace their health-promoting potential and engage society towards the huge transformations needed. This commentary is endorsed by the International Society for Environmental Epidemiology (ISEE) and the International Society for Urban Health (ISUH) and accompanies a sister statement oriented towards stakeholders (published on the societies' websites).

Improving Decision-Making for Population Health in Nonhealth Sectors in Urban Environments: the Example of the Transportation Sector in Three Megacities-the 3-D Commission

Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) represent a significant global public health burden. As more countries experience both epidemiologic transition and increasing urbanization, it is clear that we need approaches to mitigate the growing burden of NCDs. Large and growing urban environments play an important role in shaping risk factors that influence NCDs, pointing to the ineluctable need to engage sectors beyond the health sector in these settings if we are to improve health. By way of one example, the transportation sector plays a critical role in building and sustaining health outcomes in urban environments in general and in megacities in particular. We conducted a qualitative comparative case study design. We compared Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) policies in 3 megacities-Lagos (Africa), Bogotá (South America), and Beijing (Asia). We examined the extent to which data on the social determinants of health, equity considerations, and multisectoral approaches were incorporated into local politics and the decision-making processes surrounding BRT. We found that all three megacities paid inadequate attention to health in their agenda-setting, despite having considerable healthy transportation policies in principle. BRT system policies have the opportunity to improve lifestyle choices for NCDs through a focus on safe, affordable, and effective forms of transportation. There are opportunities to improve decision-making for health by involving more available data for health, building on existing infrastructures, building stronger political leadership and commitments, and establishing formal frameworks to improve multisectoral collaborations within megacities. Future research will benefit from addressing the political and bureaucratic processes of using health data when designing public transportation services, the political and social obstacles involved, and the cross-national lessons that can be learned from other megacities.

Developing a programme theory for a transdisciplinary research collaboration: Complex Urban Systems for Sustainability and Health

Background: Environmental improvement is a priority for urban sustainability and health and achieving it requires transformative change in cities. An approach to achieving such change is to bring together researchers, decision-makers, and public groups in the creation of research and use of scientific evidence. Methods: This article describes the development of a programme theory for Complex Urban Systems for Sustainability and Health (CUSSH), a four-year Wellcome-funded research collaboration which aims to improve capacity to guide transformational health and environmental changes in cities. Results: Drawing on ideas about complex systems, programme evaluation, and transdisciplinary learning, we describe how the programme is understood to "work" in terms of its anticipated processes and resulting changes. The programme theory describes a chain of outputs that ultimately leads to improvement in city sustainability and health (described in an 'action model'), and the kinds of changes that we expect CUSSH should lead to in people, processes, policies, practices, and research (described in a 'change model'). Conclusions: Our paper adds to a growing body of research on the process of developing a comprehensive understanding of a transdisciplinary, multiagency, multi-context programme. The programme theory was developed collaboratively over two years. It involved a participatory process to ensure that a broad range of perspectives were included, to contribute to shared understanding across a multidisciplinary team. Examining our approach allowed an appreciation of the benefits and challenges of developing a programme theory for a complex, transdisciplinary research collaboration. Benefits included the development of teamworking and shared understanding and the use of programme theory in guiding evaluation. Challenges included changing membership within a large group, reaching agreement on what the theory would be 'about', and the inherent unpredictability of complex initiatives.

Developing a programme theory for a transdisciplinary research collaboration: Complex Urban Systems for Sustainability and Health

Background: Environmental improvement is a priority for urban sustainability and health and achieving it requires transformative change in cities. An approach to achieving such change is to bring together researchers, decision-makers, and public groups in the creation of research and use of scientific evidence.

Methods: This article describes the development of a programme theory for Complex Urban Systems for Sustainability and Health (CUSSH), a four-year Wellcome-funded research collaboration which aims to improve capacity to guide transformational health and environmental changes in cities.

Results: Drawing on ideas about complex systems, programme evaluation, and transdisciplinary learning, we describe how the programme is understood to “work” in terms of its anticipated processes and resulting changes. The programme theory describes a chain of outputs that ultimately leads to improvement in city sustainability and health (described in an ‘action model’), and the kinds of changes that we expect CUSSH should lead to in people, processes, policies, practices, and research (described in a ‘change model’).

Conclusions: Our paper adds to a growing body of research on the process of developing a comprehensive understanding of a transdisciplinary, multiagency, multi-context programme. The programme theory was developed collaboratively over two years. It involved a participatory process to ensure that a broad range of perspectives were included, to contribute to shared understanding across a multidisciplinary team. Examining our approach allowed an appreciation of the benefits and challenges of developing a programme theory for a complex, transdisciplinary research collaboration. Benefits included the development of teamworking and shared understanding and the use of programme theory in guiding evaluation. Challenges included changing membership within a large group, reaching agreement on what the theory would be ‘about’, and the inherent unpredictability of complex initiatives.

Air Pollution Health Risk Assessment (AP-HRA), Principles and Applications

Air pollution is a major public health problem. A significant number of epidemiological studies have found a correlation between air quality and a wide variety of adverse health impacts emphasizing a considerable role of air pollution in the disease burden in the general population ranging from subclinical effects to premature death. Health risk assessment of air quality can play a key role at individual and global health promotion and disease prevention levels. The Air Pollution Health Risk Assessment (AP-HRA) forecasts the expected health effect of policies impacting air quality under the various policy, environmental and socio-economic circumstances, making it a key tool for guiding public policy decisions. This paper presents the concept of AP-HRA and offers an outline for the proper conducting of AP-HRA for different scenarios, explaining in broad terms how the health hazards of air emissions and their origins are measured and how air pollution-related impacts are quantified. In this paper, seven widely used AP-HRA tools will be deeply explored, taking into account their spatial resolution, technological factors, pollutants addressed, geographical scale, quantified health effects, method of classification, and operational characteristics. Finally, a comparative analysis of the proposed tools will be conducted, using the SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) method.

Systems approaches for localising the SDGs: co-production of place-based case studies

BACKGROUND

Localisation is a pervasive challenge in achieving sustainable development. Contextual particularities may render generalized strategies to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) unfeasible, impractical, or ineffective. Furthermore, many localities are resource- and data-poor, limiting applicability of the global SDG indicator framework. Tools to enable local actors to make sense of complex problems, communicate this understanding, and act accordingly hold promise in their ability to improve results.

AIM

Systems approaches can help characterise local causal systems, identify useful leverage points, and foster participation needed to localise and catalyse development action. Critically, such efforts must be deeply rooted in place, involving local actors in mapping decision-processes and causation within local physical, social and policy environments. Given that each place has a unique geographical or spatial extent and therein lies its unique characters and problems, we term these activities "placially explicit." We describe and reflect on a process used to develop placially explicit, systems-based (PESB) case studies on issues that intersect with and impact urban health and wellbeing, addressing the perspectives of various actors to produce place-based models and insights that are useful for SDG localisation.

METHODS

Seven case studies were co-produced by one or more Partners with place-based knowledge of the case study issue and a Systems Thinker. In each case, joint delineation of an appropriate framing was followed by iterative dialogue cycles to uncover key contextual factors, with attention to institutional and societal structures and paradigms and the motivations and constraints of other actors. Casual loop diagrams (CLDs) were iteratively developed to capture complex narratives in a simple visual way.

RESULTS

Case study development facilitated transfer of local knowledge and development of systems thinking capacity. Partners reported new insights, including a shifting of problem frames and corresponding solution spaces to higher systems levels. Such changes led partners to re-evaluate their roles and goals, and thence to new actions and strategies. CLD-based narratives also proved useful in ongoing communications.

CONCLUSION

Co-production of PESB case studies are a useful component of transdisciplinary toolsets for local SDG implementation, building the capacity of local actors to explore complex problems, identify new solutions and indicators, and understand the systemic linkages inherent in SDG actions across sectors and scales.

Towards a Low Emission Transport System: Evaluating the Public Health and Environmental Benefits

Climate change mitigation strategies offer significant societal co-benefits such as improvement in public health, air quality, local economy, and even safety. By considering these co-benefits during the transportation planning process, local governments would be able to link their local appreciate mitigation actions into the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), where diverse objectives should be achieved simultaneously. This study first clarifies the co-benefits approach to climate change mitigation in the transport system, by introducing an integrated multiple-impact framework known as A-S-I (Avoid-Shift-Improve) to evaluate the co-benefits. Thereafter, it applies the quantitative modeling approach to assess public health and environmental co-benefits of the implementation of the Tehran Transportation Master Plan, “the TTMP” in the city of Tehran, Iran, which includes targeted interventions such as shifting from private vehicles to the urban transport system, improving vehicle technologies and introducing alternative fuels. The results from the application of “the TTMP” reveal a significant reduction of CO2 and other local air pollutant emissions by 12.9 and 1.4 million tons, respectively, prevention of about 10,000 mortality cases, and more than USD 35 million savings by 2030.

Integrating Public Health into Climate Change Policy and Planning: State of Practice Update

Policy action in the coming decade will be crucial to achieving globally agreed upon goals to decarbonize the economy and build resilience to a warmer, more extreme climate. Public health has an essential role in climate planning and action: “Co-benefits” to health help underpin greenhouse gas reduction strategies, while safeguarding health—particularly of the most vulnerable—is a frontline local adaptation goal. Using the structure of the core functions and essential services (CFES), we reviewed the literature documenting the evolution of public health’s role in climate change action since the 2009 launch of the US CDC Climate and Health Program. We found that the public health response to climate change has been promising in the area of assessment (monitoring climate hazards, diagnosing health status, assessing vulnerability); mixed in the area of policy development (mobilizing partnerships, mitigation and adaptation activities); and relatively weak in assurance (communication, workforce development and evaluation). We suggest that the CFES model remains important, but is not aligned with three concepts—governance, implementation and adjustment—that have taken on increasing importance. Adding these concepts to the model can help ensure that public health fulfills its potential as a proactive partner fully integrated into climate policy planning and action in the coming decade.

Governance and networks for health co-benefits of climate change mitigation: Lessons from two Indian cities

Health has been the main driver for many urban environmental interventions, particularly in cases of significant health problems linked to poor urban environmental conditions. This paper examines empirically the links between climate change mitigation and health in urban areas, when health is the main driver for improvements. The paper aims to understand how systems of urban governance can enable or prevent the creation of health outcomes via continuous improvements in the environmental conditions in a city. The research draws on cases from two Indian cities where initiatives were undertaken in different sectors: Surat (waste) and Delhi (transportation). Using the literature on network effectiveness as an analytical framework, the paper compares the cases to identify the possible ways to strengthen the governance and policy making process in the urban system so that each intervention can intentionally realize multiple impacts for both local health and climate change mitigation in the long term as well as factors that may pose a threat to long-term progress and revert back to the previous situation after initial achievements.

A role for low-order system dynamics models in urban health policy making

Cities are complex adaptive systems whose responses to policy initiatives emerge from feedback interactions between their parts. Urban policy makers must routinely deal with both detail and dynamic complexity, coupled with high levels of diversity, uncertainty and contingency. In such circumstances, it is difficult to generate reliable predictions of health-policy outcomes. In this paper we explore the potential for low-order system dynamics (LOSD) models to make a contribution towards meeting this challenge. By definition, LOSD models have few state variables (≤5), illustrate the non-linear effects caused by feedback and accumulation, and focus on endogenous dynamics generated within well-defined boundaries. We suggest that experience with LOSD models can help practitioners to develop an understanding of basic principles of system dynamics, giving them the ability to 'see with new eyes'. Because efforts to build a set of LOSD models can help a transdisciplinary group to develop a shared, coherent view of the problems that they seek to tackle, such models can also become the foundations of 'powerful ideas'. Powerful ideas are conceptual metaphors that provide the members of a policy-making group with the a priori shared context required for effective communication, the co-production of knowledge, and the collaborative development of effective public health policies.