Advertisement

The Human Habitat: My, Our, and Everyone’s City

  • Bianca Hermansen
  • Bettina Werner
  • Hilde Evensmo
  • Michela Nota
Chapter

Abstract

In many ways, urbanization has changed the way humans have been living for millennia in just over a century. Since UN Habitat I in 1976, the number of people dwelling in cities has almost doubled and is now at 54.5%. Consequently, for the first time ever, cities were the priority of the 2016 UN Global Development Agenda at UN Habitat III in Quito, Ecuador. At their best, cities foster a human habitat in which people thrive socially, environmentally and financially. However, cities are also the main drivers of climate change, unsustainable lifestyles, adverse environmental exposures and deteriorating public health. As such, cities can be understood as both the cause and the solution to these global challenges. To prevent and counteract the negative consequences of urbanization, we need to assess and evaluate which factors are crucial to promote a livable relationship between people and place. To address the complexity of cities, we argue that an interdisciplinary approach to urban design is crucial to promote public health and quality of life in what we have termed the human habitat.

Keywords

Human habitat Livability Urban design Health promoting design Socio-spatial data-collection 

References

  1. Axelsen, L. V., Mygind, L., & Bentsen, P. (2014). Designing with children: A participatory design framework for developing interactive exhibitions. The International Journal of the Inclusive Museum, 7, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azétsop, J., & Joy, T. R. (2013). Access to nutritious food, socioeconomic individualism and public health in the USA: A common good approach. Philosophy, Ethics and Humanities in Medicine, 8, 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker, E. A., Schootman, M., Barnidge, E., & Kelly, C. (2006). The role of race and poverty in access to foods that enable individuals to adhere to dietary guidelines. Preventing Chronic Disease, 3(3), A76. The National Center for Biotechnology Information.Google Scholar
  4. Bedimo-Rung, A. L., Mowen, A. J., & Cohen, D. A. (2005). The significance of parks to physical activity and public health: A conceptual model. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2005), 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bourdieu, P. (2008 [1986]). The forms of capital. In Readings in economic sociology. Biggart, N.. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, pp. 280–291.Google Scholar
  6. CLUSTER. (2017) Cairo downtown passages—Kodak passage. Available from http://clustercairo.org/cluster/design/cairo-downtown-passages-kodak-passage
  7. Copenhagen Municipality. (2011). Byens Bevægelsesrum—Et studie af byrums evner til at fremmer fysisk aktivitet og møde mellem mennesker. Ministeriet for bolig, by og landdistrikter, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  8. Dieleman, F., & Wegener, M. (2004). Compact city and urban sprawl. Built Environment, 30(4), 308–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. EEA: European Environment Agency. (2006). Urban sprawl in Europe: The ignored challenge. EEA Reports, No. 10.Google Scholar
  10. Ewing, R., Schmid, T., Killingsworth, A., Zlot, A., & Raudenbush, S. (2003). Relationship between urban sprawl and physical activity, obesity, and morbidity. American Journal of Health Promotion, 18(1), 47–57. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fantz, A. (2016). Egypt’s long, bloody road from Arab spring hope to chaos. CNN, published 27 Apr 2016. Available from http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/27/middleeast/egypt-how-we-got-here/.
  12. Franck, K., & Stevens, Q. (2007). Loose space: Possibility and diversity in urban life. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Frumkin, H. (2002). Urban sprawl and public health. Public Health Reports, 117, 201–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gargiulo, V., Sateriano, A., Bartolomei, R. D., & Salvati, L. (2012). Urban sprawl and the environment. Retrieved from http://eprints.uni-kiel.de/20777/1/gi412.pdf#page=46.
  15. Gehl, J. (1987). Life between buildings: Using public space. New York: Van Nostrand reinhold.Google Scholar
  16. Gillham, O. (2002). What is sprawl? In M. Larice & E. Macdonald (Eds.), The Urban Design reader (2013). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Grahn, & Stigsdotter. (2003). Landscape planning and stress. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening., 2, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hajer, M., & Reijndorp, A. (2001). In search of new public domain, analysis and strategy. Rotterdam: NAi.Google Scholar
  19. Hansson, K., Cars, G., Ekenberg, L., & Danielsson, M. (2013). The importance of recognition for equal representation in participatory processes: Lessons from Husby. In M. Krivý & T. Kaminer (Eds.), The participatory turn in urbanism (Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 81–98). Footprint.Google Scholar
  20. Heber, A. (2008). En guide till trygghetsundersökningar om brott och trygghet. Elanders, Göteborg: Tryggare och mänskligare Göteborg.Google Scholar
  21. Healthy Spaces and Places. (2009). Design principles safety and surveillance. Healthy Spaces & Places. Available from www.healthyplaces.org.au.
  22. Hilmers, A., Hilmers, D. C., & Dave, J. (2012). Neighborhood disparities in access to healthy foods and their effects on environmental justice. American Journal of Public Health, 102(9), 1644–1654. The National Center for Biotechnology Information.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Holloway, L., & Hubbard, P. (2001). People and place: The extraordinary geographies of everyday life. Harlow, England: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  24. Human Rights Watch. (2013). Egypt: Draft law would effectively ban protests—Amend repressive draft assembly law. Human Rights Watch, Published 30 Oct 2013. Available from https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/10/30/egypt-draft-law-would-effectively-ban-protests.
  25. Jacobs, J. (1961a). The uses of sidewalks: Contact. In M. Larice & E. Macdonald (Eds.), The Urban Design reader (2013). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Jacobs, J. (1961b). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  27. Jansson, M. (2014). Green space in compact cities: The benefits and values of urban ecosystem services in planning. The Nordic Journal of Architectural Research, 26(2), 139–160.Google Scholar
  28. Klausen, J. E., Arnesen, S., Christensen, D. A., Folkestad, B., Hansen, G. S., Winsvold, M., & Aars, J. (2013). Medvirkning med virkning: Innbyggermedvirkning i den kommunale beslutningsprosessen. NIBR/Uni Rokkansenteret. Oslo: Nordberg trykk.Google Scholar
  29. Københavns Kommune. (2013). Cykelregnskabet 2012. Copenhagen: Miljø og teknikforvaltningen.Google Scholar
  30. Lee, A. C. K., Jordan, H. C., & Horsley, J. (2015). Value of urban green spaces in promoting healthy living and wellbeing: Prospects for planning. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 8, 131–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2006). Is it safe to walk? 1. Neighborhood safety and security considerations and their effects on walking. Journal of Planning Literature, 20, 219–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Montgomery, C. (2013). Happy city. Canada: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  33. Mulder, I. (2012). Living labbing the Rotterdam way: Co-creation as an enabler for urban innovation. Available from http://timreview.ca/article/607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Payne, L. L., Mowen, A. J., & Orsega-Smith, E. (2002). An examination of park preferences and behaviours among urban residents: The role of residential location, race, and age. Leisure Sciences, 24(2002), 181–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. PPS. (2017). The Power of 10: Applying placemaking at every scale. Project for Public Spaces. Retrieved from http://www.pps.org/reference/the-power-of-10/.
  36. Rasmussen, A. H. (2013). Lovbrudd for det fælles bedste. Information, published 19 Oct 2013. Available from https://www.information.dk/moti/2013/10/lovbrud-faelles-bedste.
  37. Sanders, L., & Stappers, P. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schipperijn, J., Ekholm, O., Stigsdotter, U. K., Toftager, M., Bentsen, P., Kamper-Jørgensen, F., & Randrup, T. B. (2010). Factors influencing the use of green space: Results from a Danish national representative survey. Landscape and Urban Planning, 95(2010), 130–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shenassa, E. D., Liebhaber, A., & Ezeamama, A. (2006). Perceived safety of area of residence and exercise: A pan-European study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 163(11), 1012–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Socialministeriet. (2010). In M. Stender, S. Mertner Vind, K. Hauxner, J. Raun Nielsen, & S. Willems (Eds.), Byen som dagligstue? Byfornyelse med plads til socialt udsatte. Copenhagen: Socialministeriet.Google Scholar
  41. Sotoudehnia, F., & Comber, L. (2011). Measuring perceived accessibility to urban green space: An integration of GIS and participatory map. Available from http://www.agile-online.org/Conference_Paper/CDs/agile_2011/contents/pdf/shortpapers/sp_148.pdf.
  42. Steiner, F. (2016). Human ecology: How nature and culture shape our world. Washington: Island Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sundberg, K. W. (2013). Preventing crime through informed urban design. Security Solutions Magazine. Retrieved December, 2013, from http://www.safedesigncouncil.org/preventing-crime-through-informed-urban-design/.
  44. Troelsen, J., Toftager, M., Nielsen, G., & Kaya Roessler, K. (2008). De bolignære områders betydning for sundhed. Movements. Syddansk Universitet, Institut for Idræt og Biomekanik.Google Scholar
  45. Umeå Municipality. (2009). Curiosity and passion—The art of co-creation. Umeå Municipality.Google Scholar
  46. United Nations. (2017). Universal design. Article 2—Definitions, Division for Social Policy and Development Disability.Google Scholar
  47. United Nations. (1999). Summary of the “International seminar on environmental accessibility; planning and design of accessible urban development in developing countries” held in Beirut 30th of November–3rd of December 1999. Available from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disisea.htm.
  48. Van Herzele, A., & Wiedemann, T. (2003). A monitoring tool for the provision of accessible and attractive urban green spaces. Landscape and Urban Planning, 63, 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wong, S. (2012). What have been the impacts of World Bank Community-driven development programs? Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  50. World Health Organization—WHO. (2013). Fact sheet: 10 facts on noncommunicable diseases. Available from http://www.who.int/features/factfiles/noncommunicable_diseases/en/.
  51. World Health Organization—WHO. (2014a). In M. Marmot (Ed.), Review of social determinants and the health divide in the WHO European Region: Final report. UCL Institute for Health Equity.Google Scholar
  52. World Health Organization—WHO. (2017). Fact sheet: Physical activity. Available from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs385/en/.
  53. WHO Europe. (2006). In M. Braubach & S. Schoeppe (Eds.), The solid facts: Promoting physical activity and active living in urban environments. Copenhagen: WHO Europe.Google Scholar
  54. WHO Europe. (2007). In P. Edwards & A. Tsouros (Eds.), Tackling obesity by creating healthy residential environments. Copenhagen: WHO Europe.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bianca Hermansen
    • 1
  • Bettina Werner
    • 2
  • Hilde Evensmo
    • 2
  • Michela Nota
    • 2
  1. 1.CITITEKCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.COurban Design CollectiveCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations