COVID-19, the Built Environment, and Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Since the dawn of cities, the built environment has both affected infectious disease transmission and evolved in response to infectious diseases. COVID-19 illustrates both dynamics. The pandemic presented an opportunity to implement health promotion and disease prevention strategies in numerous elements of the built environment. OBJECTIVES: This commentary aims to identify features of the built environment that affect the risk of COVID-19 as well as to identify elements of the pandemic response with implications for the built environment (and, therefore, for long-term public health). DISCUSSION: Built environment risk factors for COVID-19 transmission include crowding, poverty, and racism (as they manifest in housing and neighborhood features), poor indoor air circulation, and ambient air pollution. Potential long-term implications of COVID-19 for the built environment include changes in building design, increased teleworking, reconfigured streets, changing modes of travel, provision of parks and greenspace, and population shifts out of urban centers. Although it is too early to predict with confidence which of these responses may persist, identifying and monitoring them can help health professionals, architects, urban planners, and decision makers, as well as members of the public, optimize healthy built environments during and after recovery from the pandemic.

The significance of urban systems on sustainability and public health

“…Urban and national systems around the world have responded differently to the pandemic, highlighting the key role of structural determinants such as government, economy, welfare systems, housing, education and working environments on population health. Characteristics of urban areas that influence the spread of COVID-19 include, for example, household overcrowding, social inequalities, baseline health, ambient air pollution and the quality of housing (Frumkin 2021). These structural determinants have exasperated inequalities, contributing to higher rates of COVID-19 in low socioeconomic status (SES) groups internationally (Baena-Díez et al 2020).…”

“…The complexity of urban systems means COVID-19 has also had knock-on effects on urban environments, and how they are used. Impacts of the pandemic in cities have included: increased remote working; decreased road traffic and increased the use of streets as outdoor spaces; an increased appreciation for greenspace and nature; and in some locations, population movement from urban centres to ex-urban areas (Frumkin 2021). It has also raised questions about how we design and construct our cities.…”

Nature’s contributions in coping with a pandemic in the 21st century: A narrative review of evidence during COVID-19

“…These conflicting results might be attributed to several reasons such as the stage of COVID-19 wave (e.g., early, peak), location (e.g., near to epicenter, country), variations COVID-19 outcome measures (e.g., number of cases vs. mortality), spatial unit of analysis (e.g., zip code vs. county), metrics to measure nature exposure (e.g., NDVI vs. land use), consideration of other built and social environmental factors (e.g., population density, crowding, housing conditions) and lack of consideration on individual confounders (Helbich et al, 2021;Frumkin, 2021;Russette et al, 2021).…”

Counterurbanization: A neglected pathway of forest transition

“…This will be facilitated by the proliferation of teleworking through good internet connection. The spread of Covid 19 during the last two years will probably speed up the counterurbanization process, as many previously reluctant individuals and organizations will be more open to teleworking scheme (Daniels 2021;Frumkin 2021).…”