Solidarity for the Anthropocene.

Social solidarity is essential to large-scale collective action, but the need for solidarity has received little attention from scholars of Earth Systems, sustainability and public health. Now, the need for solidarity requires recognition. We have entered a new planetary epoch - the Anthropocene - in which human-induced global changes are occurring at an unprecedented scale. There are multiple health crises facing humanity - widening inequity, climate change, biodiversity loss, diminishing resources, persistent poverty, armed conflict, large-scale migration, and others. These global challenges are so far-reaching, and call for such extensive, large-scale action, that solidarity is a sine qua non for tackling these challenges. However, the heightened need for solidarity has received little attention in the context of the Anthropocene and, in particular, how it can be created and nurtured has been overlooked. In this commentary, we explore the concept of solidarity from inter-species, intra-generational and inter-generational perspectives. We also propose strategies to enhance solidarity in the Anthropocene.

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

This Series on urban design, transport, and health aimed to facilitate development of a global system of health-related policy and spatial indicators to assess achievements and deficiencies in urban and transport policies and features. This final paper in the Series summarises key findings, considers what to do next, and outlines urgent key actions. Our study of 25 cities in 19 countries found that, despite many well intentioned policies, few cities had measurable standards and policy targets to achieve healthy and sustainable cities. Available standards and targets were often insufficient to promote health and wellbeing, and health-supportive urban design and transport features were often inadequate or inequitably distributed. City planning decisions affect human and planetary health and amplify city vulnerabilities, as the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted. Hence, we offer an expanded framework of pathways through which city planning affects health, incorporating 11 integrated urban system policies and 11 integrated urban and transport interventions addressing current and emerging issues. Our call to action recommends widespread uptake and further development of our methods and open-source tools to create upstream policy and spatial indicators to benchmark and track progress; unmask spatial inequities; inform interventions and investments; and accelerate transitions to net zero, healthy, and sustainable cities.

More green, less lonely? A longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Urban greening may reduce loneliness by offering opportunities for solace, social reconnection and supporting processes such as stress relief. We (i) assessed associations between residential green space and cumulative incidence of, and relief from, loneliness over 4 years; and (ii) explored contingencies by age, sex, disability and cohabitation status. METHODS: Multilevel logistic regressions of change in loneliness status in 8049 city-dwellers between 2013 (baseline) and 2017 (follow-up) in the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia study. Associations with objectively measured discrete green-space buffers (e.g. parks) (<400, <800 and <1600 m) were adjusted for age, sex, disability, cohabitation status, children and socio-economic variables. Results were translated into absolute risk reductions in loneliness per 10% increase in urban greening. RESULTS: The absolute risk of loneliness rose from 15.9% to 16.9% over the 4 years; however, a 10% increase in urban greening within 1.6 km was associated with lower cumulative incident loneliness [odds ratio (OR) = 0.927, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.862 to 0.996; absolute risk reduction = 0.66%]. Stronger association was observed for people living alone (OR = 0.828, 95% CI = 0.725 to 0.944). In comparison to people with <10% green space, the ORs for cumulative incident loneliness were 0.833 (95% CI = 0.695 to 0.997), 0.790 (95% CI = 0.624 to 1.000) and 0.736 (95% CI = 0.549 to 0.986) for 10-20%, 20-30% and >30% green space, respectively. Compared with the <10% green-space reference group with 13.78% incident loneliness over 4 years and conservatively assuming no impact on incident loneliness, associations translated into absolute risk reductions of 1.70%, 2.26% and 2.72% within populations with 10-20%, 20-30% and >30% green space, respectively. These associations were stronger again for people living alone, with 10-20% (OR = 0.608, 95% CI = 0.448 to 0.826), 20-30% (OR = 0.649, 95% CI = 0.436 to 0.966) and >30% (OR = 0.480, 95% CI = 0.278 to 0.829) green space within 1600 m. No age, sex or disability-related contingencies, associations with green space within 400 or 800 m or relief from loneliness reported at baseline were observed. CONCLUSIONS: A lower cumulative incidence of loneliness was observed among people with more green space within 1600 m of home, especially for people living alone. Potential biopsychosocial mechanisms warrant investigation.

Nature versus urban hiking for Veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder: a pilot randomised trial conducted in the Pacific Northwest USA.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate feasibility and acceptability of a group-based nature recreation intervention (nature hiking) and control condition (urban hiking) for military Veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). DESIGN AND SETTING: A pilot randomised controlled trial conducted in the US Pacific Northwest. PARTICIPANTS: Veterans with PTSD due to any cause. INTERVENTIONS: Twenty-six participants were randomised to a 12-week intervention involving either six nature hikes (n=13) or six urban hikes (n=13). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility was assessed based on recruitment, retention and attendance. Questionnaires and postintervention qualitative interviews were conducted to explore intervention acceptability. Questionnaires assessing acceptability and outcomes planned for the future trial (eg, PTSD symptoms) were collected at baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks (immediately after the final hike) and 24 weeks follow-up. RESULTS: Of 415 people assessed for eligibility/interest, 97 were interested and passed preliminary eligibility screening, and 26 were randomised. Mean completion of all questionnaires was 91% among those in the nature hiking group and 68% in those in the urban hiking group. Over the course of the intervention, participants in the nature and urban groups attended an average of 56% and 58%, respectively, of scheduled hikes. Acceptability of both urban and nature hikes was high; over 70% reported a positive rating (ie, good/excellent) for the study communication, as well as hike locations, distance and pace. Median PTSD symptom scores (PTSD Checklist-5) improved more at 12 weeks and 24 weeks among those in the nature versus urban hiking group. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study largely confirmed the feasibility and acceptability of nature hiking as a potential treatment for Veterans with PTSD. Adaptations will be needed to improve recruitment and increase hike attendance for a future randomised controlled trial to effectively test and isolate the ways in which nature contact, physical activity and social support conferred by the group impact outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03997344.

COVID-19, the Built Environment, and Health.

BACKGROUND: Since the dawn of cities, the built environment has both affected infectious disease transmission and evolved in response to infectious diseases. COVID-19 illustrates both dynamics. The pandemic presented an opportunity to implement health promotion and disease prevention strategies in numerous elements of the built environment. OBJECTIVES: This commentary aims to identify features of the built environment that affect the risk of COVID-19 as well as to identify elements of the pandemic response with implications for the built environment (and, therefore, for long-term public health). DISCUSSION: Built environment risk factors for COVID-19 transmission include crowding, poverty, and racism (as they manifest in housing and neighborhood features), poor indoor air circulation, and ambient air pollution. Potential long-term implications of COVID-19 for the built environment include changes in building design, increased teleworking, reconfigured streets, changing modes of travel, provision of parks and greenspace, and population shifts out of urban centers. Although it is too early to predict with confidence which of these responses may persist, identifying and monitoring them can help health professionals, architects, urban planners, and decision makers, as well as members of the public, optimize healthy built environments during and after recovery from the pandemic. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8888.

An ecosystem service perspective on urban nature, physical activity, and health.

Nature underpins human well-being in critical ways, especially in health. Nature provides pollination of nutritious crops, purification of drinking water, protection from floods, and climate security, among other well-studied health benefits. A crucial, yet challenging, research frontier is clarifying how nature promotes physical activity for its many mental and physical health benefits, particularly in densely populated cities with scarce and dwindling access to nature. Here we frame this frontier by conceptually developing a spatial decision-support tool that shows where, how, and for whom urban nature promotes physical activity, to inform urban greening efforts and broader health assessments. We synthesize what is known, present a model framework, and detail the model steps and data needs that can yield generalizable spatial models and an effective tool for assessing the urban nature-physical activity relationship. Current knowledge supports an initial model that can distinguish broad trends and enrich urban planning, spatial policy, and public health decisions. New, iterative research and application will reveal the importance of different types of urban nature, the different subpopulations who will benefit from it, and nature's potential contribution to creating more equitable, green, livable cities with active inhabitants.

The COVID-19 pandemic and global environmental change: Emerging research needs.

The outbreak of COVID-19 raised numerous questions on the interactions between the occurrence of new infections, the environment, climate and health. The European Union requested the H2020 HERA project which aims at setting priorities in research on environment, climate and health, to identify relevant research needs regarding Covid-19. The emergence and spread of SARS-CoV-2 appears to be related to urbanization, habitat destruction, live animal trade, intensive livestock farming and global travel. The contribution of climate and air pollution requires additional studies. Importantly, the severity of COVID-19 depends on the interactions between the viral infection, ageing and chronic diseases such as metabolic, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases and obesity which are themselves influenced by environmental stressors. The mechanisms of these interactions deserve additional scrutiny. Both the pandemic and the social response to the disease have elicited an array of behavioural and societal changes that may remain long after the pandemic and that may have long term health effects including on mental health. Recovery plans are currently being discussed or implemented and the environmental and health impacts of those plans are not clearly foreseen. Clearly, COVID-19 will have a long-lasting impact on the environmental health field and will open new research perspectives and policy needs.

Guidelines for Modeling and Reporting Health Effects of Climate Change Mitigation Actions.

BACKGROUND: Modeling suggests that climate change mitigation actions can have substantial human health benefits that accrue quickly and locally. Documenting the benefits can help drive more ambitious and health-protective climate change mitigation actions; however, documenting the adverse health effects can help to avoid them. Estimating the health effects of mitigation (HEM) actions can help policy makers prioritize investments based not only on mitigation potential but also on expected health benefits. To date, however, the wide range of incompatible approaches taken to developing and reporting HEM estimates has limited their comparability and usefulness to policymakers. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this effort was to generate guidance for modeling studies on scoping, estimating, and reporting population health effects from climate change mitigation actions. METHODS: An expert panel of HEM researchers was recruited to participate in developing guidance for conducting HEM studies. The primary literature and a synthesis of HEM studies were provided to the panel. Panel members then participated in a modified Delphi exercise to identify areas of consensus regarding HEM estimation. Finally, the panel met to review and discuss consensus findings, resolve remaining differences, and generate guidance regarding conducting HEM studies. RESULTS: The panel generated a checklist of recommendations regarding stakeholder engagement: HEM modeling, including model structure, scope and scale, demographics, time horizons, counterfactuals, health response functions, and metrics; parameterization and reporting; approaches to uncertainty and sensitivity analysis; accounting for policy uptake; and discounting. DISCUSSION: This checklist provides guidance for conducting and reporting HEM estimates to make them more comparable and useful for policymakers. Harmonization of HEM estimates has the potential to lead to advances in and improved synthesis of policy-relevant research that can inform evidence-based decision making and practice. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP6745.

Autonomous Vehicles and Public Health.

Autonomous vehicles (AVs) have the potential to shape urban life and significantly modify travel behaviors. "Autonomous technology" means technology that can drive a vehicle without active physical control or monitoring by a human operator. The first AV fleets are already in service in US cities. AVs offer a variety of automation, vehicle ownership, and vehicle use options. AVs could increase some health risks (such as air pollution, noise, and sedentarism); however, if proper regulated, AVs will likely reduce morbidity and mortality from motor vehicle crashes and may help reshape cities to promote healthy urban environments. Healthy models of AV use include fully electric vehicles in a system of ridesharing and ridesplitting. Public health will benefit if proper policies and regulatory frameworks are implemented before the complete introduction of AVs into the market.