Urban public health is an important global issue, and receives extensive attention. It is necessary to compare urban public health status among different cities, so that each city can define its own health patterns an...Urban public health is an important global issue, and receives extensive attention. It is necessary to compare urban public health status among different cities, so that each city can define its own health patterns and limiting factors. The following assessment indicators were established to evaluate urban public health status： living conditions, physical health, education and culture, envir- onmental quality, and social security. A weighted-sum model was used in combination with these indicators to compare the urban public health status in four cities-- Beijing, New York, London, and Tokyo--using data for 2000-2009. Although the urban public health level of Beijing was lower than that of the other cities, it showed the greatest increase in this level over the study period. Different patterns of urban public health were identified： London had the most balanced, steady pattern （almost all factors performed well and developed stably）; New York and Tokyo showed balanced, but unsteady patterns （most factors remained high, though social security and environ- mental quality fluctuated）; Beijing had the most unba- lanced, unsteady pattern （the different factors were at different levels, and education and culture and social security fluctuated）. For enhanced urban public health status, environmental quality and education and culture clearly need to be improved in Beijing. This study demonstrates that a comparison of different cities is helpful in identifying limiting factors for urban public health and providing an orientation for future urban development.展开更多
基金Financial support is provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China （Grant No. 40901269）, the Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University （NCET-09-0226）, the National Science Foundation for Innovative Research Group （No. 51121003）, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. The authors would also thank the help of the editor and the comments of the reviewers, which significantly improved the quality of this paper.
文摘Urban public health is an important global issue, and receives extensive attention. It is necessary to compare urban public health status among different cities, so that each city can define its own health patterns and limiting factors. The following assessment indicators were established to evaluate urban public health status： living conditions, physical health, education and culture, envir- onmental quality, and social security. A weighted-sum model was used in combination with these indicators to compare the urban public health status in four cities-- Beijing, New York, London, and Tokyo--using data for 2000-2009. Although the urban public health level of Beijing was lower than that of the other cities, it showed the greatest increase in this level over the study period. Different patterns of urban public health were identified： London had the most balanced, steady pattern （almost all factors performed well and developed stably）; New York and Tokyo showed balanced, but unsteady patterns （most factors remained high, though social security and environ- mental quality fluctuated）; Beijing had the most unba- lanced, unsteady pattern （the different factors were at different levels, and education and culture and social security fluctuated）. For enhanced urban public health status, environmental quality and education and culture clearly need to be improved in Beijing. This study demonstrates that a comparison of different cities is helpful in identifying limiting factors for urban public health and providing an orientation for future urban development.
