What next? Expanding our view of city planning and global health, and implementing and monitoring evidence-informed policy

Determining thresholds for spatial urban design and transport features that support walking to create healthy and sustainable cities: findings from the IPEN Adult study

“…In a post-COVID world where governments are promising to build back better through 15-min cities, 46,47 thresholds for built environment interventions could be very useful. Optimal thresholds for the broad range of urban design and transport features that create healthy and sustainable cities for all (see our conceptual framework in paper four in this Series by Giles-Corti and colleagues) 57 need to be established to avoid counterproductive efforts. For example, walkable, high-density neighbourhoods could attract increased traffic and expose residents to air and noise pollution and traffic-related injuries and mortality.…”

Creating healthy and sustainable cities: what gets measured, gets done

“…(5) If so, are there inequities in access to supportive environments between and within cities? 5 Given the rapidly evolving global challenges that have arisen since our original framework and indicators were published in 2016, the final paper in Series 2 9 considers "where to next?" It updates and expands our 2016 framework of the pathways through which city planning affects ecosystem, human, and planetary health and recommends additional city planning indicators to benchmark and monitor cities.…”

The neighbourhood built environment and health-related fitness: a narrative systematic review

“…Key built environment features that support physical activity include density (i.e., residential or population), connectivity (i.e., many potential routes, short block sizes, many intersections), and land uses (i.e., recreational and utilitarian destinations) [ 16 , 17 ]. Giles-Corti et al developed [ 18 ] and later expanded [ 19 ] a framework positing potential pathways by which the local built environment is associated with physical activity and health. The framework highlights important built characteristics including design (e.g., street layout and connectivity), density (e.g., compactness of residential population), transit (e.g., proximity and access), destination proximity (e.g., distance to local destinations), diversity (e.g., mixed residential, commercial, and recreational destinations), desirability (e.g., safety and aesthetics) and distributed features (e.g., resources equitably distributed across different populations) [ 18 , 19 ].…”

“…Giles-Corti et al developed [ 18 ] and later expanded [ 19 ] a framework positing potential pathways by which the local built environment is associated with physical activity and health. The framework highlights important built characteristics including design (e.g., street layout and connectivity), density (e.g., compactness of residential population), transit (e.g., proximity and access), destination proximity (e.g., distance to local destinations), diversity (e.g., mixed residential, commercial, and recreational destinations), desirability (e.g., safety and aesthetics) and distributed features (e.g., resources equitably distributed across different populations) [ 18 , 19 ]. Given the connections between the built environment and physical activity, and physical activity and health-related fitness, neighbourhood built environments may play a vital role in supporting health-related fitness in adults.…”