that include good health and well-being, including attention to infectious diseases,
noncommunicable diseases, environmental risks, and mental health.
Other initiatives address health at the level of meaning and livability. The
Biophilic Cities network is a global community of partner cities and organizations
committed to planning and designing cities with abundant nature and improving the
connection between residents and a flourishing natural world. The network is a
clearinghouse for ideas about intentional changes in municipal and urban planning
that can produce richer, more vibrant nature-filled cities. One example is Green
Living Spaces Plan from Birmingham, England, which creates access to the city’s
internal network of rivers and canals, the foundation of a citywide grid of trails and
pathways. Another example is San Francisco, USA, the city has multiple programs
that generate small urban spaces for nearby nature experiences, such as Pavement to
Parks, Green Connections Network, SF Better Streets, and an Urban Forest Plan.
The island nation of Singapore is perhaps one of the better known examples of the
evolution from sanitary to sacred and at all scales. The realization of an intrinsic
relationship between city and nature was manifested as the “Garden City” vision in
the 1970s. Adoption of the “City in a Garden” concept in a 1998 masterplan aimed to
integrate greenery into not just the built environment but also into daily lives of
residents. Policies have intensified into the “City in Nature” vision of 2020. The
resulting programs continue to promote earnest efforts to sustain standards of
hygiene (first pronounced in 1967) while continuing the trajectory of sustainable
development that supports livability and resilience.
Despite some progress, many cities (and some countries) must focus on the basics
of sanitary city goals. Yet even within these situations, model projects can initiate
behavioral change to support biophilic goals. The Green Mark scheme, launched in
Singapore in 2005, rates buildings on their environmental performance along tiers of
Gold, GoldPlus, and Platinum. The U.S. Green Building Council also certifies
sustainability performance for buildings, and the associated SITES certifications
recognize landscape sustainability. These systems acknowledge human health but
have not progressed into more holistic performance norms. Moving along that arc,
both the Living Building Challenge and WELL Building Standard promote the next
level of biophilic space. Performance attainment and public recognition provide a
glimpse of the potential for civic sacred in-built environments, although the experience of such spaces is limited to fairly small audiences. Nonetheless, they provide
inspiration and are important test cases.
8.7.2 Research Opportunities
The evolution from sanitary to sustainable to sacred is seen in varied degree of
progress around the planet and within megacities. The evolution of such social–
ecological integrations continues. There are numerous research opportunities:
8 From Sanitary to Sustainable to Sacred: Metro Nature Experiences and. . .
153
noncommunicable diseases, environmental risks, and mental health.
Other initiatives address health at the level of meaning and livability. The
Biophilic Cities network is a global community of partner cities and organizations
committed to planning and designing cities with abundant nature and improving the
connection between residents and a flourishing natural world. The network is a
clearinghouse for ideas about intentional changes in municipal and urban planning
that can produce richer, more vibrant nature-filled cities. One example is Green
Living Spaces Plan from Birmingham, England, which creates access to the city’s
internal network of rivers and canals, the foundation of a citywide grid of trails and
pathways. Another example is San Francisco, USA, the city has multiple programs
that generate small urban spaces for nearby nature experiences, such as Pavement to
Parks, Green Connections Network, SF Better Streets, and an Urban Forest Plan.
The island nation of Singapore is perhaps one of the better known examples of the
evolution from sanitary to sacred and at all scales. The realization of an intrinsic
relationship between city and nature was manifested as the “Garden City” vision in
the 1970s. Adoption of the “City in a Garden” concept in a 1998 masterplan aimed to
integrate greenery into not just the built environment but also into daily lives of
residents. Policies have intensified into the “City in Nature” vision of 2020. The
resulting programs continue to promote earnest efforts to sustain standards of
hygiene (first pronounced in 1967) while continuing the trajectory of sustainable
development that supports livability and resilience.
Despite some progress, many cities (and some countries) must focus on the basics
of sanitary city goals. Yet even within these situations, model projects can initiate
behavioral change to support biophilic goals. The Green Mark scheme, launched in
Singapore in 2005, rates buildings on their environmental performance along tiers of
Gold, GoldPlus, and Platinum. The U.S. Green Building Council also certifies
sustainability performance for buildings, and the associated SITES certifications
recognize landscape sustainability. These systems acknowledge human health but
have not progressed into more holistic performance norms. Moving along that arc,
both the Living Building Challenge and WELL Building Standard promote the next
level of biophilic space. Performance attainment and public recognition provide a
glimpse of the potential for civic sacred in-built environments, although the experience of such spaces is limited to fairly small audiences. Nonetheless, they provide
inspiration and are important test cases.
8.7.2 Research Opportunities
The evolution from sanitary to sustainable to sacred is seen in varied degree of
progress around the planet and within megacities. The evolution of such social–
ecological integrations continues. There are numerous research opportunities:
8 From Sanitary to Sustainable to Sacred: Metro Nature Experiences and. . .
153