Data extraction form Healthy Planning in London Title of paper: Study details Population and Plan details and Outcomes Results Notes setting method of appraisal assessed* Authors Country: Plan: Outcomes measured: Health sector involved in Limitations identified the Plan from the start. Plant, P, Herriot, N., England First draft Further a) Process outcomes: by author(s): Atkinson, S. Alterations to The (i) Health outcomes None An initial HIA was considered: Y Setting (eg London Plan undertaken on the original (ii) Health Year: Urban Limitations identified draft London Plan, which recommendations 2007 by review team: gave an evidence base & incorporated in plan: Authors are health Population: Method of appraisal: stakeholder involvement. Y Citation: (size, characteristics…) Integrated Impact professionals working in HUDU set up & Integrated (iii) Evidence of being Town & Country Assessment to input London & possibly impact assessment implemented: Y Planning, February Capital City into the SA/SEA involved with this case evolved. (iv) Post-adoption 2007, pp 50-51 Six-year difference study. evaluation: NR …. The Further in life expectancy Alterations build on a Aim of between West London b) Specific outcomes: Evidence gaps &/or significant health Article explaining how and East End boroughs, (i) Physical activity: Y recommendations for component. (ii) Mental wellbeing: NR partnership working in plus historic future research: (iii) Air / noise quality etc: London has increased of housing None reported professionals “Planning NR planning’s potential to in London believe that (iv) Unintentional injury: improve the health of Source of funding: are already real NR Londoners and reduce Not reported. fruits from greater (v) Other health: Y engagement with the health inequalities. Specify: health sector, and joint working has improved - climate change the plan-making Study design: - transport demand process, particularly in None specified management actions the light of the new - promotion of policies for emphasis on spatial play areas, childcare & Quality score: planning. access to greenspace + - health legacy from 2012 London’s strong Olympics partnership has been built on the GLA’s
Data extraction form Title of paper: Healthy Planning in London Study details Population and setting Plan details and method of appraisal Outcomes assessed* Results Notes Authors Plant, P, Herriot, N., Atkinson, S. Year: 2007 Citation: Town & Country Planning, February 2007, pp 50-51 Aim of Article explaining how partnership working in London has increased planning’s potential to improve the health of Londoners and reduce health inequalities. Study design: None specified Quality score: + Country: England Setting (eg Urban Population: (size, characteristics…) Capital City …. Six-year difference in life expectancy between West London and East End boroughs, plus historic of housing Plan: First draft Further Alterations to The London Plan Method of appraisal: Integrated Impact Assessment to input into the SA/SEA Outcomes measured: a) Process outcomes: (i) Health outcomes considered: Y (ii) Health recommendations incorporated in plan: Y (iii) Evidence of being implemented: Y (iv) Post-adoption evaluation: NR b) Specific outcomes: (i) Physical activity: Y (ii) Mental wellbeing: NR (iii) Air / noise quality etc: NR (iv) Unintentional injury: NR (v) Other health: Y Specify: - climate change - transport demand management actions - promotion of policies for play areas, childcare & access to greenspace - health legacy from 2012 Olympics Health sector involved in the Plan from the start. An initial HIA was undertaken on the original draft London Plan, which gave an evidence base & stakeholder involvement. HUDU set up & Integrated impact assessment evolved. The Further Alterations build on a significant health component. “Planning professionals in London believe that are already real fruits from greater engagement with the health sector, and joint working has improved the plan-making process, particularly in the light of the new emphasis on spatial planning. London’s strong partnership has been built on the GLA’s Limitations identified by author(s): None Limitations identified by review team: Authors are health professionals working in London & possibly involved with this case study. Evidence gaps &/or recommendations for future research: None reported Source of funding: Not reported.