School of Arts and Design, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao, China.
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Hebei University of Environmental Engineering, Qinhuangdao, China.
Front Public Health. 2024 Jul 18;12:1437647. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1437647. eCollection 2024.
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."
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.
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 (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 ( < 0.05).
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.
如何科学评估城市的健康状况，并有效协助制定健康城市发展政策和规划，这在建设全球“健康共同体”方面仍是一个巨大的挑战。
本研究采用 Building Research Establishment 的国际健康城市指数（BRE HCI），涵盖十个环境类别和五十八个指标，以指导和支持健康城市的科学发展。运用熵权-TOPSIS 法和秩和比（RSR）法对全球十五个城市的健康发展水平进行综合排名和分类。此外，通过聚类分析，确定影响健康城市发展的通用和特有指标。
结果表明：（1）在 58 个评价指标中，权重分配的优先顺序为每 10 万人的自行车道和车道公里数（0.068），其次是公共室内娱乐空间 m2（0.047）和每 10 万人的自行车道和车道公里数（0.042）。（2）在十个环境类别中，权重排名前三位的是交通（0.239）、休闲娱乐（0.172）和韧性（0.125）。不同城市和环境类别之间存在显著差异，城市内部健康发展不平衡问题尤为突出。（3）根据综合得分，将健康城市的发展水平分为三个层次：新加坡、上海和阿姆斯特丹为优秀水平；迪拜和约翰内斯堡为较差水平；其余十个城市为中等水平。（4）通过聚类分析的显著性检验（<0.05），从 58 个指标中识别出 53 个国际通用指标和 5 个特征指标。
本研究根据这些发现提出了四项战略建议：建立全面的政策保障体系、完善城市空间规划、拓展多方参与渠道、增加特色健康指标。这些措施旨在缩小城市间的发展差距，促进健康全球城市的平衡和可持续增长。然而，由于样本选择、研究方法应用和潜在混杂因素控制方面存在现有局限性，未来还需要进一步深入研究。
