Design, development, and public health

T. Rider, Margaret van Bakergem, Jinoh Park, Xi Wang, J. Hipp
{"title":"Design, development, and public health","authors":"T. Rider, Margaret van Bakergem, Jinoh Park, Xi Wang, J. Hipp","doi":"10.17831/ENQ:ARCC.V15I1.571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As awareness of the built environment's impact on individual and community health spreads through design and construction, different stakeholders are engaging in conversations of strategies and metrics. This paper explores the structure, methodology, and findings of research supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation addressing how multifamily developers conceptualize, discuss and implement health strategies in their projects. \nFramed in a Critical Theory perspective, this research first explores the traditional multifamily development decision-making process, specifically targeting how early adopters in multifamily development are discussing health and wellness in their projects. By unpacking the discussions around health and wellbeing in design, real estate development, and public health, aligned concepts are identified to operationalize these concepts for further exploration. \nUsing a comparative case study strategy addressing how and why (Yin 2017), five developers positioned as early adopters were engaged to better understand how they each conceptualize, implement and measure health strategies in their multifamily projects. Two-day in-depth interviews were held in two initial developers' home offices, addressing their standard design and decision-making processes and evolving into specific consideration of various health strategies. Four additional developers were engaged either over the phone or in person. Interview protocol ensured that discussion topics were standardized at the outset, with the following topics addressed with each partner: (1) company mission, (2) organizational structure, (3) differentiation in the market, (4) company evaluation metrics, (5) assessment scales, (6) decision-making processes, (7) market trends, (8) use of evidence-based data, (9) internal health discussions, and (10) investor relationships. Cyclical data collection, transcription, and analysis allowed the interview protocol to be modified for emergent topics. Site visits, website analysis, and clicks through national online real estate databases also contributed to a holistic perspective of this complex problem. \nFindings indicate that multifamily developers are focusing on upfront, marketable strategies that are likely to foster mental and social health, but with little regard of applying any form of evaluative metrics. Rating systems addressing health are of little help. When asked directly about choices to influence the health of residents, participants heavily cited (1) location, emphasizing access to community amenities; (2) place making, for community building and social and mental wellbeing; and (3) physical fitness opportunities through fitness spaces. Even those developers viewed as early adopters are uncomfortable discussing health strategies using a public health lens. This research intends to highlight interdisciplinary conversations surrounding health in multifamily real estate, contributing to more rigorous adoption of health strategies in this challenging building type. These findings can be valuable to stakeholders in design, development, private investment, property management, public health, community design, and policy.   ","PeriodicalId":339072,"journal":{"name":"Enquiry The ARCC Journal for Architectural Research","volume":"117 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Enquiry The ARCC Journal for Architectural Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17831/ENQ:ARCC.V15I1.571","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

As awareness of the built environment's impact on individual and community health spreads through design and construction, different stakeholders are engaging in conversations of strategies and metrics. This paper explores the structure, methodology, and findings of research supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation addressing how multifamily developers conceptualize, discuss and implement health strategies in their projects. Framed in a Critical Theory perspective, this research first explores the traditional multifamily development decision-making process, specifically targeting how early adopters in multifamily development are discussing health and wellness in their projects. By unpacking the discussions around health and wellbeing in design, real estate development, and public health, aligned concepts are identified to operationalize these concepts for further exploration. Using a comparative case study strategy addressing how and why (Yin 2017), five developers positioned as early adopters were engaged to better understand how they each conceptualize, implement and measure health strategies in their multifamily projects. Two-day in-depth interviews were held in two initial developers' home offices, addressing their standard design and decision-making processes and evolving into specific consideration of various health strategies. Four additional developers were engaged either over the phone or in person. Interview protocol ensured that discussion topics were standardized at the outset, with the following topics addressed with each partner: (1) company mission, (2) organizational structure, (3) differentiation in the market, (4) company evaluation metrics, (5) assessment scales, (6) decision-making processes, (7) market trends, (8) use of evidence-based data, (9) internal health discussions, and (10) investor relationships. Cyclical data collection, transcription, and analysis allowed the interview protocol to be modified for emergent topics. Site visits, website analysis, and clicks through national online real estate databases also contributed to a holistic perspective of this complex problem. Findings indicate that multifamily developers are focusing on upfront, marketable strategies that are likely to foster mental and social health, but with little regard of applying any form of evaluative metrics. Rating systems addressing health are of little help. When asked directly about choices to influence the health of residents, participants heavily cited (1) location, emphasizing access to community amenities; (2) place making, for community building and social and mental wellbeing; and (3) physical fitness opportunities through fitness spaces. Even those developers viewed as early adopters are uncomfortable discussing health strategies using a public health lens. This research intends to highlight interdisciplinary conversations surrounding health in multifamily real estate, contributing to more rigorous adoption of health strategies in this challenging building type. These findings can be valuable to stakeholders in design, development, private investment, property management, public health, community design, and policy.   
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
设计、开发和公共卫生
随着建筑环境对个人和社区健康影响的意识通过设计和施工传播,不同的利益相关者正在参与战略和指标的对话。本文探讨了由Robert Wood Johnson基金会支持的研究的结构、方法和结果,探讨了多户型开发商如何在其项目中概念化、讨论和实施健康策略。在批判理论的框架下,本研究首先探讨了传统多户家庭发展的决策过程,特别是针对多户家庭发展的早期采用者如何在他们的项目中讨论健康和健康。通过在设计、房地产开发和公共卫生方面展开关于健康和福祉的讨论,确定了一致的概念,以便将这些概念付诸实践,以进一步探索。使用解决如何以及为什么(Yin 2017)的比较案例研究策略,五位定位为早期采用者的开发人员参与其中,以更好地了解他们如何在其多户项目中概念化,实施和衡量健康策略。在两个最初的开发商的家庭办公室进行了为期两天的深入访谈,讨论了他们的标准设计和决策过程,并演变为对各种保健战略的具体考虑。另外还有4名开发者通过电话或亲自参与。访谈协议确保讨论主题在一开始就标准化,与每个合作伙伴讨论以下主题:(1)公司使命,(2)组织结构,(3)市场差异化,(4)公司评估指标,(5)评估尺度,(6)决策过程,(7)市场趋势,(8)循证数据的使用,(9)内部健康讨论,(10)投资者关系。周期性的数据收集、转录和分析使访谈协议能够针对紧急主题进行修改。网站访问、网站分析以及通过全国在线房地产数据库的点击也有助于对这个复杂问题的整体看法。调查结果表明,多户型开发商关注的是可能促进心理和社会健康的前期市场策略,但很少考虑应用任何形式的评估指标。针对健康问题的评级系统帮助不大。当被直接问及影响居民健康的选择时,参与者大量引用(1)位置,强调获得社区设施;(2)营造场所,促进社区建设,促进社会和心理健康;(3)通过健身空间获得健身机会。即使是那些被视为早期采用者的开发者,也不愿意从公共卫生的角度来讨论健康策略。本研究旨在突出围绕多户住宅健康的跨学科对话,有助于在这种具有挑战性的建筑类型中更严格地采用健康策略。这些发现对设计、开发、私人投资、物业管理、公共卫生、社区设计和政策方面的利益相关者很有价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Embodied Contradictions and Post-Industrial Built Environments Designing Post-Digital Hybrid Workplaces The Design Lodge Evolving Design Pedagogies: Broadening Universal Design for Social Justice Inclusive Design Studios
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1