Use of health impact assessments in the housing sector to promote health in the United States, 2002-2016

被引:4
|
作者
Bever, Emily [1 ]
Arnold, Kimberly T. [2 ]
Lindberg, Ruth [1 ]
Dannenberg, Andrew L. [3 ,4 ]
Morley, Rebecca [5 ]
Breysse, Jill [6 ]
Pollack Porter, Keshia M. [7 ]
机构
[1] Pew Charitable Trusts, Hlth Impact Project, 901 E St NW,10th Floor, Washington, DC 20004 USA
[2] Univ Penn, Dept Psychiat, Perelman Sch Med, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[3] Univ Washington, Dept Environm & Occupat Hlth Sci, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[4] Univ Washington, Dept Urban Design & Planning, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[5] Rebecca Morley Consulting, Columbia, MD USA
[6] Natl Ctr Hlth Housing, Columbia, MD USA
[7] Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Policy & Management, Baltimore, MD USA
关键词
Community development; Decision-making; Healthy housing; Health impact assessment; Housing policy; Stakeholder engagement;
D O I
10.1007/s10901-020-09795-9
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Housing affects health, yet health is seldom considered in housing decisions. Health impact assessment (HIA) is a tool that can improve housing-related policies, plans, programs, and projects by bringing together scientific data, health expertise, and stakeholder engagement to identify the potential health effects of proposed decisions. We systematically identified and reviewed HIAs of housing decisions in the United States, yielding 54 HIAs between 2002 and 2016. Two examined federal proposals; the others explored decisions in 20 states. A variety of organizations led the HIAs, including non-profits, public health departments, and academic institutions. The primary decision-makers each HIA sought to inform were housing, planning, and/or elected officials. Eighteen HIAs focused on housing policies, codes, design elements, and utilities in residential structures. The remaining 36 HIAs included housing as one element of broader community development and transportation planning decisions. HIA recommendations changed decisions in some cases, and the assessment process helped strengthen connections between public health and housing decision-makers. To illustrate key characteristics of housing HIAs, we purposefully selected three HIAs and described the decisions they informed in detail: off-campus student housing in Flagstaff, Arizona; a rental housing inspections program in Portland, Oregon; and revitalization plans for a major thoroughfare in a suburb of St. Louis, Missouri. With a few exceptions, federal, state, and local agencies in the U.S. are not required to consider the health impacts of housing decisions, such as where housing is sited, how it is designed and constructed, and policies for ensuring that it is affordable and safe. HIA has emerged as a tool for advocates, health and housing practitioners, and policymakers to fill this gap. However, few studies have examined whether HIAs do in fact change housing decisions, shift the way that decision-makers think, or ultimately shift determinants of health (e.g., housing affordability and quality). This review demonstrates that HIAs can facilitate the consideration of health during housing decision-making. Housing HIAs can also help decision-makers address commonly overlooked effects, such as changes to social cohesion, and improve civic participation by engaging communities in the decisionmaking process.
引用
收藏
页码:1277 / 1297
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Use of health impact assessments in the housing sector to promote health in the United States, 2002–2016
    Emily Bever
    Kimberly T. Arnold
    Ruth Lindberg
    Andrew L. Dannenberg
    Rebecca Morley
    Jill Breysse
    Keshia M. Pollack Porter
    [J]. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 2021, 36 : 1277 - 1297
  • [2] Testosterone Prescribing in the United States, 2002-2016
    Baillargeon, Jacques
    Kuo, Yong-Fang
    Westra, Jordan R.
    Urban, Randall J.
    Goodwin, James S.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2018, 320 (02): : 200 - 202
  • [3] Primary Care Spending in the United States, 2002-2016
    Martin, Sara
    Phillips, Robert L., Jr.
    Petterson, Stephen
    Levin, Zachary
    Bazemore, Andrew W.
    [J]. JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2020, 180 (07) : 1019 - 1020
  • [4] Impact of Health Aid Investments on Public Opinion of the United States: Analysis of Global Attitude Surveys From 45 Countries, 2002-2016
    Jakubowski, Aleksandra
    Mai, Don
    Asch, Steven M.
    Bendavid, Eran
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2019, 109 (07) : 1034 - 1041
  • [5] Trends in cannabis use disorder by cigarette smoking status in the United States, 2002-2016
    Weinberger, Andrea H.
    Pacek, Lauren R.
    Wall, Melanie M.
    Zvolensky, Michael J.
    Copeland, Jan
    Galea, Sandro
    Nahvi, Shadi
    Moeller, Scott J.
    Hasin, Deborah S.
    Goodwin, Renee D.
    [J]. DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE, 2018, 191 : 45 - 51
  • [6] Trends in Cigar Use in the United States, 2002-2016: Diverging Trends by Race/Ethnicity
    Weinberger, Andrea H.
    Delnevo, Cristine D.
    Zhu, Jiaqi
    Gbedemah, Misato
    Lee, Joun
    Cruz, Lisa N.
    Kashan, Rachel S.
    Goodwin, Renee D.
    [J]. NICOTINE & TOBACCO RESEARCH, 2020, 22 (04) : 583 - 587
  • [7] Increasing Depression and Substance Use Among Former Smokers in the United States, 2002-2016
    Cheslack-Postava, Keely
    Wall, Melanie M.
    Weinberger, Andrea H.
    Goodwin, Renee D.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2019, 57 (04) : 429 - 437
  • [8] A review of data on the health sector of the United States January 2002
    Hellander, I
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH SERVICES, 2002, 32 (03): : 579 - 599
  • [9] Use and effectiveness of health impact assessment in the energy and natural resources sector in the United States, 2007-2016
    Nkyekyer, Esi W.
    Dannenberg, Andrew L.
    [J]. IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND PROJECT APPRAISAL, 2019, 37 (01) : 17 - 32
  • [10] The Impact of Income Inequality on Health Levels: Empirical Evidence from China:2002-2016
    Zhao, Jinkai
    Yang, Wanping
    Zhao, Kai
    [J]. SOCIAL WORK IN PUBLIC HEALTH, 2024, 39 (04) : 335 - 351