Comprehensive evaluation of global health cities development levels
Yu Wen,Yulan Li,Yan Zhang,Bingbing Liu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1437647
IF: 5.2
2024-07-18
Frontiers in Public Health
Abstract:Introduction: How to scientifically assess the health status of cities and effectively assist in formulating policies and planning for health city development remains a profound challenge in building a global "health community." Methods: This study employs the Building Research Establishment's International Healthy Cities Index (BRE HCI), encompassing ten environmental categories and fifty-eight indicators, to guide and support the scientific development of healthy cities. The entropy weight-TOPSIS method and the rank sum ratio (RSR) method were applied to comprehensively rank and categorize the health development levels of fifteen global cities. Furthermore, through cluster analysis, this research identifies universal and unique indicators that influence the development of healthy cities. Results: The results indicate that: (1) Within the scope of 58 evaluation indicators, the precedence in weight allocation is accorded to the kilometres of bicycle paths and lanes per 100,000 population (0.068), succeeded by m2 of public indoor recreation space per capita (0.047), and kilometres of bicycle paths and lanes per 100,000 population (0.042). (2) Among the ten environmental categories, the top three in terms of weight ranking are transport (0.239), leisure and recreation (0.172), and resilience (0.125). Significant disparities exist between different cities and environmental categories, with the issue of uneven health development within cities being particularly prominent. (3) The study categorizes the development levels of healthy cities into three tiers based on composite scores: it classifies Singapore, Shanghai, and Amsterdam at an excellent level; places Dubai and Johannesburg at a comparatively poor level; and situates the remaining ten cities at a moderate level. (4) The analysis identifies 53 international common indicators and 5 characteristic indicators from the 58 indicators based on the significance of the clustering analysis ( p < 0.05). Discussion: The study proposes four strategic recommendations based on these findings: establishing a comprehensive policy assurance system, refining urban spatial planning, expanding avenues for multi-party participation, and augmenting distinctive health indicators. These measures aim to narrow the developmental disparities between cities and contribute to healthy global cities' balanced and sustainable growth. However, due to existing limitations in sample selection, research methodology application, and the control of potential confounding variables, further in-depth studies are required in the future.
public, environmental & occupational health