Introduction
This paper explores the relationship between the built environment and community health outcomes. It explores how homeownership, community sidewalks, and clean parks improve health outcomes in different communities. Similarly, using a case-study approach of the Tennessee community, this paper shows that age and income levels are important social factors that could improve the relationship between the built environment and community health.
How the Information presented in the Video relates to Health and Well-being
Adelman (2008) says that “place” influence public health outcomes because “place factors” affect people’s mental health through exposures to harmful, or beneficial, environmental factors. In the same spectrum of analysis, Adelman (2008) says “place” affects community well-being because it determines whether a person gains access to healthy foods, or lives a longer life by avoiding violence.
How Physical features of Tennessee Affect Health Outcomes
As shown above, the built environment affects people’s health outcomes in different ways. In Tennessee, the built environment has a positive effect on community health because its sidewalks and crosswalks encourage people to walk and remain active.
How Affordable, Quality, and Safe Housing Conditions Promote Health
Dunn, Hayes, Hulchanski, Hwang, and Potvin (2006) say housing affects people’s health outcomes. Adelman (2008) supports this assertion by saying the lack of affordable, or safe housing, creates fear and stress, which affect human health. For example, Adelman (2008) interviewed one Asian couple that attempted to leave their low-income neighborhood, for a better one, but had to come back, 11 months later, because they were unable to pay their bills. This fact stressed them, thereby increasing their vulnerability to health complications. Overall, access to quality and safe housing improves health outcomes.
How Home Ownership Affects Health Conditions in Tennessee
Home ownership has a direct effect on health outcomes in Tennessee because it influences community health outcomes through positive health trade-offs. For example, it affects people’s access to healthcare and emergency services. Gaining access to prescription medication also depends on home ownership.
Physical Features That Can Have a Positive and Negative Impact on Health Outcomes
Healthy food outlets and clean parks are examples of physical features that could have a positive, or negative, effect on a community’s health. Adelman (2008) explored this fact when he analyzed two neighborhoods in West Seattle. He said clean parks encouraged people to leave the house and be more active. Access to healthy food outlets also improves community health outcomes in the same manner (Lovasi, Neckerman, Quinn, Weiss, & Rundle, 2009).
For example, if neighborhoods lack such facilities, and, instead, have fast food outlets, people are bound to buy “junk foods,” and increase their vulnerability to health conditions, such as obesity (Berke, Koepsell, Moudon, Hoskins, and Larson, 2007). Overall, healthy food outlets and clean parks affect community health.
Useful Social Factors for designing Effective Health Interventions
Age and income are useful social factors for designing positive health interventions, such as building healthy food outlets and clean parks (as described above). For example, age could determine the kind of activities that would occur in the parks. Concisely, if a community comprises of children, there should be swings, bouncing castles and such facilities for them to play. Conversely, income is an important social factor for establishing food outlets in a community. For example, if a community comprises of a high-income population, the food outlets could stock premium foods. Similarly, if a community comprises of a low-income population, the food outlets should stock affordable products.
Conclusion
This paper shows that the built environment shares a close relationship with health outcomes. Housing and sidewalks are some features of the built environment, explored in this paper, that affect health outcomes. Overall, this study shows that many communities could improve their health outcomes by improving their built environments.
References
Adelman, L. (Executive Producer). (2008). Unnatural causes: Episode 5—Place Matters [DVD]. Arlington, VA: Public Broadcasting Service.
Berke, E. M., Koepsell, T. D., Moudon, A. V., Hoskins, R. E., & Larson, E. B. (2007). Association of the built environment with physical activity and obesity in older persons. American Journal of Public Health, 97(3), 486–492.
Dunn, J., Hayes, M. V., Hulchanski, J. D., Hwang, S. W., & Potvin, L. (2006). Housing as a socio-economic determinant of health: Findings of a national needs, gaps and opportunities assessment. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 97(3), 11–15.
Lovasi, G. S., Neckerman, K. M., Quinn, J. W., Weiss, C. C., & Rundle, A. (2009). Effect of individual or neighborhood disadvantage on the association between neighborhood walkability and body mass index. American Journal of Public Health, 99(2), 279–284.