Is Your City’s Design Making You Lonely?

Many people see health as the responsibility of clinicians, nutritionists, and other health care professionals. Yet it has become clear that although vitally important, clinical care makes up just 10% to 20% of overall health. The physical environment is an important factor underlying our health ecosystem, influencing how we think, feel, and behave. The United Nations and the World Health Organization have identified better housing and neighborhood conditions as critical to reducing health inequalities.

Physical environments designed to enhance social connections enrich people’s lives on a daily basis but especially pay off in moments of crisis, such as in the aftermath of man-made or natural disasters, when people’s reliance on neighbors and local friends is critical to their survival (5).

This report is not suggesting that the physical environment is the answer to every challenge, but it is an important and often overlooked part of our lives. The scientific community is just beginning to understand the extent to which built environments of all scales affect our social health. Research shows that designers and urban planners can increase people’s social capital in a place by creating spatial designs that facilitate social interaction among residents (6). Early research indicated that built environments in neighborhoods, such as porches and tree-lined streets, can promote neighborly conversations and voter turnout (7). Furthermore, a large-scale systematic review of the scientific literature showed that the design qualities of a place— walkability, sense of place, greenness, street design, architecture—have the potential to increase social interaction, the integration of diverse people, social support, civic pride, social resilience, and social and political involvement (8).

Many American communities have become car- dependent and less walkable through zoning ordinances that deemphasized public transit and essentially banned mixed-use zoning, and thus, pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods (9). However, walkable neighborhoods have been linked to higher social capital, lower rates of depression, less reported alcohol abuse and more physical activity (10). Researchers have tied certain characteristics of the environment such as house and street design (9), population density (11), mixed land use (12), proximity to the city center (13), the amount of greenery (14) and communal space (14) to improvements in a range of social health markers, including social well-being, network size, trust, and perceived safety. Communities are feeling the pressure of urban sprawl, with commuting taking up more time that was once dedicated to leisure or family and friends (15). In contrast, high-rises and rows of cookie-cutter condominiums have popped up throughout cities like Seattle, San Francisco, and Dallas, marketed as modern living, but it appears developers gave little thought to how these facilities connect with the rest of the urban fabric, featuring buildings that crowd out any shared space between neighbors and that fail to offer a sense of welcome or scale in the form of overhangs, trees, and benches at street level. This disregard for the surrounding environment may be partially to blame for an emerging body of research warning against adopting this development model16. In addition, the popularity of door-delivery services and virtual transactions is chipping away at the core of our humanity: the need for physical interactions with other people. We are losing the intervals in our everyday lives that get us to slow down and bond with those around us—the glue between the physical spaces that frame our existence.

REFERENCES: 1. Hood, Gennuso, Swain, & Catlin, 2016; Sir et al., 2012; 2. Cerin, 2019; Hood et al., 2016; Nanda et al., 2017; Peavey Hsieh & Taylor, 2016; Sallis et al., 2006; Wilkie, Townshend, Thompson, & Ling, 2018; 3. United Nations, 2015b, 2015a; 4. World Health Organization, 2018; 5. Klinenberg, 2018; 9. Carmona, 2019; Chriqui, Nicholson, Thrun, Leider, & Slater, 2016; Leyden, 2003; 10. Renalds, Smith, & Hale, 2010; 11.Wen, Hawkley, & Cacioppo, 2006; 12. Mouratidis, 2018; 13. Mouratidis, 2018; 14. Mouratidis, 2018; 15. De Vries, van Dillen, Groenewegen, & Spreeuwenberg, 2013; 16. Fu, 2018; 17. Montgomery, 2018 ; 18. Carmona, 2019; Montgomery, 2018.

PODCAST EPISODE, Click here.

FULL REPORT, Click here.