IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/urbpla/v7y2022i4p61-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-Benefits of Transdisciplinary Planning for Healthy Cities

Author

Listed:
  • Roderick J. Lawrence

    (Geneva School of Social Sciences (G3S), University of Geneva, Switzerland)

Abstract

Synergies between urban planning and public health were synthesized a decade ago by the Lancet Commission’s article “Shaping Cities for Health: Complexity and the Planning of Urban Environments in the 21st Century.” Since then, innovative research projects, urban planning projects, and accumulated experience from the World Health Organization Healthy Cities project confirm that transdisciplinary contributions enable the achievement of core principles of healthy cities. This article clarifies important differences between the content, scope, and outcomes of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary projects about public health and urban planning. It explains why transdisciplinary contributions are more likely to bridge the applicability gap between knowledge and practice in response to persistent urban health challenges; notably, they transgress the boundaries of public health and medical science; they prioritize political action in both the formal and informal construction sectors; and they include citizens, community associations, and private enterprises as partners in consortia for concerted action. This article proposes a radical shift from incremental, reactive, and corrective approaches in planning for urban health to proactive and anticipative contributions using backcasting and alternative scenarios that prioritize health. The article uses the case of public green spaces in planning for urban health. It identifies the shortcomings of many empirical studies that are meant to promote and sustain health before describing and illustrating an alternative way forward.

Suggested Citation

  • Roderick J. Lawrence, 2022. "Co-Benefits of Transdisciplinary Planning for Healthy Cities," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 61-74.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:urbpla:v7:y:2022:i:4:p:61-74
    DOI: 10.17645/up.v7i4.5674
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/5674
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/up.v7i4.5674?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:urbpla:v7:y:2022:i:4:p:61-74. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.