Back to Annual Meeting Page		American Public Health Association 133rd Annual Meeting & Exposition December 10-14, 2005 Philadelphia, PA

Abstract #115114

Emily Bourcier, MPH, MHA¹, Antoinette Angulo, MPH, CHES¹, Dave Pearson, PhD², and Roger Valdez, MA³. (1) Evaluation Team, Group Health Community Foundation, 1730 Minor Ave., Suite 1500, Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 287-2035, bourcier.e@ghc.org, (2) Center for Community Health and Evaluation, Group Health Community Foundation, 1730 Minor Avenue, Suite 1500, Seattle, WA 98101, (3) Public Health-Seattle and King County, Tobacco Prevention Program, 999 3rd Ave., Suite 500, Seattle, WA 98104

There is increasing recognition that the design of the built environment affects physical and mental health outcomes, yet few market-based approaches to achieving healthy built environments have been piloted and evaluated. A local health department and a community foundation conducted in depth interviews with developers and public planners to explore the potential to offer developers incentives or regulatory relief in exchange for including public health amenities, like smoke-free buildings and walking paths, into their projects. A total of 26 developers, public planners, property managers, and land use attorneys working in the Seattle area were interviewed. The 30-minute instrument was designed by health department and foundation staff, and pre-tested in person. Final interviews were conducted by telephone. The qualitative data was analyzed by coding topic areas, identifying themes, and highlighting key quotes. Developers and planners understood the concept of offering incentives (e.g. allowing structures to be built higher) for public health benefits (e.g. smoke-free buildings). Respondents agreed that incentives most likely to engage developers were 1) allowing increases in density, 2) flexibility in parking requirements, and 3) streamlining the permit process. Common barriers to an incentive exchange program were 1) unpredictable return on investment, 2) a bureaucratic legal process, and 3) neighborhood opposition. Opportunities exist to engage developers in an incentive exchange program. Further research is needed to investigate how to implement and evaluate the success of an incentive exchange program to create healthier built environments – especially for low income and minority populations.

Learning Objectives:

• 1. Identify strategies to achieve built environments that mutually benefit developers and public health agencies
• 2. Understand opportunities and barriers to achieving healthy development projects
• 3. Design methods for conducting a formative evaluation that is productive for developers, public health, and urban planners

Keywords: Policy/Policy Development, Evaluation

Related Web page: www.ghcfoundation.org/fhealth.html

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

I wish to disclose that I have NO financial interests or other relationship with the manufactures of commercial products, suppliers of commercial services or commertial supporters WITH THE EXCEPTION OF I was contracted by Public Health-Seattle and King County, to conduct this formative evaluation..

Recorded presentation