English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background In a multidisciplinary collaboration it is essential that professionals understand from each other what is meant by a healthy environment and of what aspects it consists. However, the field of health and social welfare and the field of urban planning differ in many aspects, including language. Therefore, this study examined: what is the perception of professionals in the field of health and social welfare and in the field of urban planning about a healthy living environment? And do these perceptions differ? Methods Using the concept mapping method, 94 professionals (government and non government) in the city of Nijmegen(NL) were asked to generate statements on healthy living environment. Next, the professionals sorted these statements and rated them on priority and opportunity within urban planning processes. Results In the brainstorm 45 professionals generated 136 statements. After clearing doubles, 92 statements were sorted by 32 professionals. Which, after analysis, resulted in a map of ten different clusters together indicating what professionals perceive as aspects of a healthy living environment. There was agreement on priority and opportunity between both groups of professionals regards clusters urban quality and invited to move. The two groups professionals have different views about five clusters. Professionals of both fields agree on the three clusters with the least priority and possibilities. Interesting is the relatively limited possibilities that professionals see to stimulate healthy behavior and to improve social connectivity in urban planning. Conclusions There is a consistency between professionals in the field of health and social welfare and in the field of urban planning about the most and least important aspects of healthy environment in urban planning process. It is interesting to see that, although there is a lot of agreement, there are also relevant nuances between both groups on priority and possibilities at 5 out of 10 clusters. Key messages There is a consistency about the most and least important aspects of healthy environment in urban planning process. It depends on the aspect of a healthy living environment if understanding and collaboration between professionals easy is.

Do perspectives on healthy environment differ between health/social professionals and urban planners?