Health and equity considerations in policy and practice related to sustainable transportation interventions in four Canadian cities
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Cities around the world are making major investments in sustainable transportation infrastructure in response to diverse societal challenges. These projects have the potential to advance healthy cities, but it is unknown to what extent municipalities incorporate health and equity goals into sustainable transportation policy and practice. We provide an empirical analysis of how health and equity were understood, operationalized, and measured in the planning, design, and implementation of four sustainable transportation projects in four Canadian cities, Victoria, Vancouver, Saskatoon, and Montreal, as part of the INTerventions, Equity, Research, and Action in Cities Team (INTERACT) project. We reviewed nine policy documents that guided the sustainable transportation interventions and conducted content analysis to understand how health and equity were referred to within public-facing policy documents. We also interviewed 23 city staff, councillors, or members of advocacy groups who were involved in the planning, design, and implementation of these interventions and conducted framework analysis on the transcripts. We developed themes from integrated findings of our policy scan and interviews with practitioners. We found that health was broadly used in the policy framing, and that safety and modal shift towards active modes were key health outcomes in both policy and practice. Other health outcomes were described as co-benefits but were minimally operationalized and had limited influence on the prioritization of municipal investments. Equity priorities in policies and practice centered on design and implementation features geared towards equity-deserving groups and accessibility for all ages and abilities. Participants emphasized the importance of policy and political will for advancing equity goals and navigating trade-offs between prioritizing high-use or equity-focused routes. Participants also described challenges with measuring health (due to institutional mandates) and equity (due to lack of disaggregated data). These findings highlight the opportunities for clearer direction in policy and practice in relation to health and equity goals in sustainable transportation interventions. • Health and equity considerations in sustainable transportation planning can have widespread impacts. • In policy and practice, health was primarily considered as safety and modal shift. • Policies considered equity through the needs of equity-deserving groups and establishing a hierarchy of modes. • City staff also considered spatial equity and need for equitable engagement. • Municipalities face challenges in measuring health and equity outcomes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».