How the Green New Deal can transform urban landscapes and promote health equity

ABSTRACT

This commentary examines the intersection of urban health disparities and the Green New Deal (GND) in the context of climate change mitigation and equitable urban development. Highlighting the critical challenges of air pollution, limited green space, and urban heat islands, it underscores their disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations. The commentary argues for the GND’s potential to significantly reduce health inequities by targeting air quality improvements and green space expansions in communities most affected by these issues. With evidence from global initiatives and specific case studies, including examples from both major capital cities and smaller urban areas, the paper argues for the GND’s potential to significantly improve urban air quality and public health through renewable energy transitions and green infrastructure expansion. Despite inherent financial, political, and technical hurdles, the commentary advocates for multi-sectoral collaboration and innovative policy-making to navigate these challenges, with an aim to foster a holistic approach to sustainable urban development, prioritizing health equity and environmental resilience.

KEYWORDS:

• Green New Deal
• public health
• urban health
• air pollution
• green spaces

Urban health disparities, defined as differences in health outcomes and their determinants between different segments of the population, and the Green New Deal (GND) are fundamentally intertwined in the quest to mitigate the impacts of climate change and ensure equitable access to health-promoting urban environments. While adverse health outcomes refer to the direct negative health effects experienced by individuals, health disparities highlight the unequal distribution of these outcomes across different population groups, often influenced by social, economic, and environmental factors. Urban health disparities and the Green New Deal (GND), a comprehensive policy framework aimed at addressing climate change and economic inequality through large-scale systemic changes, are fundamentally intertwined in the quest to mitigate the impacts of climate change and ensure equitable access to health-promoting urban environments. Unlike smaller one-off initiatives such as urban greening projects, the GND encompasses a broad spectrum of policies aimed at large-scale renewable energy transitions, extensive green infrastructure development, and systemic economic and social reforms to address environmental and health inequities. Urban areas face unique health challenges, including air pollution, limited access to green spaces, and the urban heat island effect, all of which disproportionately affect low-income and minority populations. By centering equity in its implementation, the GND has the potential to strategically reduce these disparities by focusing on air quality improvements and green space enhancements in the communities that are most disproportionately affected.

The Green New Deal (GND) is a comprehensive policy initiative that seeks to address climate change and economic inequality through large-scale systemic changes. Originating as a political proposal in the United States, the GND aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, create green jobs, and promote social and economic justice (Allam et al. 2021b). The European Union’s Green Deal shares similar goals, targeting climate neutrality by 2050 with substantial investments in renewable energy and sustainable practices. While specific implementations may vary by region, the GND is characterized by its holistic approach, addressing multiple sectors and scales, from national policies to local urban initiatives. The scale of the GND is particularly important for addressing urban health disparities because it integrates environmental, economic, and social dimensions, creating synergistic effects that smaller, isolated projects might not achieve (Haines and Scheelbeek 2020). For example, while urban greening can provide local benefits, the GND’s broad approach can ensure these benefits are distributed equitably across entire urban areas, particularly in disadvantaged communities.

Health disparities refer to the differences in health outcomes and their determinants between different segments of the population. These disparities are often rooted in social, economic, and environmental inequities, leading to certain groups experiencing higher rates of adverse health outcomes such as asthma, cardiovascular diseases, and heat-related illnesses. In urban areas, these disparities are exacerbated by factors like air pollution, limited access to green spaces, and the urban heat island effect, disproportionately affecting low-income and minority populations (Nieuwenhuijsen 2024). Air pollution, primarily from vehicular and industrial emissions, is a leading environmental threat to urban health. The World Health Organization (WHO) reported in 2016 that around 4.2 million premature deaths globally are attributable to ambient air pollution annually (WHO 2022). In the United States, the American Lung Association’s 2020 findings reveal that nearly 36% of Americans, i.e 119.6 million people, live in areas with unhealthy air pollution levels (Association AL 2023), contributing to a higher incidence of asthma, cardiovascular diseases, and lung cancer among these populations.

The disparity in access to green spaces in cities further exacerbates urban health challenges. Research highlights the correlation between green space availability and reduced mortality, underscoring the role of physical activity, stress reduction, and air pollution mitigation these spaces offer (Reyes-Riveros et al. 2021). Notably, research by South, Hohl (South et al. 2018) has demonstrated that increased green space is associated with lower rates of maternal and infant mortality, reductions in gun violence, and improved mental health outcomes. Furthermore, in non-US cities, green space has been shown to significantly impact the health and well-being of immigrant and refugee communities. For instance, studies in European cities have found that urban green spaces provide crucial areas for social integration and physical activity, which are particularly beneficial for these vulnerable populations (Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 2024). However, there are inequities in tree canopy coverage across neighborhoods, with areas predominantly inhabited by people of color or economically disadvantaged groups having 33% less coverage compared to wealthier, predominantly white neighborhoods (Cusick 2021). The study also found that neighborhoods with residents living in poverty have even less tree canopy, with 65% less coverage in communities with 90% or more of the population in poverty compared to communities with 10% or less.

In addressing these urban health disparities, the GND presents a holistic framework that intertwines environmental sustainability with social equity. Unlike smaller initiatives, the GND’s comprehensive approach can tackle systemic issues, ensuring wide-reaching benefits that smaller projects might not achieve on their own. Specifically, GND policies aim to mitigate health disparities by targeting the underlying determinants of health. For example, by reducing air pollution through renewable energy transitions, the GND can lower the incidence of pollution-related illnesses in marginalized communities. Similarly, enhancing green spaces in underserved neighborhoods can reduce stress, improve mental health, and provide areas for physical activity, thus addressing multiple health determinants simultaneously. By advocating for the transition to renewable energy, the GND targets a reduction in urban air pollution, particularly in communities that are currently disproportionately impacted by high pollution levels. The European Union’s ambitious Green Deal outlines a pathway to achieve climate neutrality by 2050, with initiatives designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions significantly. In comparison, the Green New Deal in the United States focuses on a comprehensive approach to addressing climate change and economic inequality. Key elements of the U.S. GND include substantial investment in training and workforce development to prepare workers for green jobs, a strong emphasis on retrofitting existing buildings to improve energy efficiency rather than new construction, and prioritizing frontline communities – those most affected by climate change and pollution – for these improvements (Galvin and Healy 2020).

Such a transition, embracing renewable energy, improved energy efficiency, and sustainable practices across all sectors, aims to reduce the EU’s greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% from 1990 levels by 2030, setting a course towards an 80% reduction by 2050 (Maya-Drysdale et al. 2020, Eckert and Kovalevska 2021). These targets would not only combat climate change but also significantly improve air quality. This improvement in air quality is expected to have a direct positive impact on public health, potentially preventing thousands of pollution-related health issues and deaths each year. The GND also prioritizes the expansion of urban green spaces as a critical component of sustainable urban development. This strategy involves ensuring that green space enhancements are focused on communities that currently experience disproportionate health impacts due to limited green space access. An exemplar of this initiative is New York City’s Green Infrastructure Plan, aiming to invest $1.5 billion over two decades to enhance green spaces and sustainable drainage systems (Bloomberg and Holloway 2010). These investments are expected to mitigate the effects of urban heat islands and improve stormwater management, while also providing mental and physical health benefits to the urban population, especially in communities that need it the most.

In addition to well-known examples from major capital cities, smaller cities and local initiatives also demonstrate the potential of GND policies to address urban health disparities. For instance, in Malmö, Sweden, the Augustenborg Eco-City project transformed a low-income neighborhood by integrating green roofs, sustainable urban drainage systems, and community gardens, significantly improving local environmental conditions and reducing flood risks (Mottaghi et al. 2020). Similarly, in Medellín, Colombia, the ‘Green Corridors’ project has created extensive networks of green spaces and pedestrian pathways, contributing to reductions in urban heat and improvements in air quality, while promoting social inclusion and accessibility (Anguelovski et al. 2019).

Other global cities, as well as smaller urban areas, have begun embracing similar principles, demonstrating the potential of GND-aligned policies to transform urban health landscapes. Seoul, South Korea’s Cheonggyecheon Restoration Project, which converted an overpass into a 5.8 km-long public park, resulted in a reduction of up to 5.9°C in nearby temperatures and a 35% decrease in particulate pollution (Kang and Cervero 2009). This project not only improved environmental conditions but also contributed to reducing health disparities by providing equitable access to green space and improving air quality in an urban area previously affected by pollution. Similarly, Barcelona’s ‘superblocks’ initiative, aimed at reducing car traffic and promoting pedestrian spaces, has shown potential to significantly lower air pollution and noise levels, with an estimated reduction of nearly 700 annual deaths related to air pollution (Mueller et al. 2020). Additionally, in the city of Freiburg, Germany, the Vauban district has become a model of sustainable urban living, with its emphasis on renewable energy, green spaces, and car-free zones, which collectively enhance environmental quality and public health (Grant and Barton 2015). Those projects highlight how strategic investments in green infrastructure can significantly benefit communities that have been disproportionately affected by urban health challenges.

In Copenhagen, Denmark, a city with a goal of becoming a carbon-neutral capital by 2025, more than 50% of the city’s residents commute by bike daily. This was supported by significant investments in renewable energy sources, leading to a reduction in carbon emissions by 72.6% from 2005 levels, while continuing to grow economically and in population (Kaykal 2020). These examples, ranging from major capital cities to smaller urban areas, underscore the feasibility and health benefits of adopting green urban policies. By highlighting a diverse array of case studies, the GND’s applicability across different urban contexts becomes more evident, providing valuable insights for local policymakers worldwide. However, the path to implementing these GND-inspired urban health initiatives is fraught with challenges, including financial, political, and technical hurdles. The initial financial investment required for such transformative projects is substantial, but the long-term benefits in terms of health and environmental sustainability are equally significant.

Politically, the implementation of GND policies faces significant opposition from various quarters. Multinational fossil-fuel corporations wield considerable influence and often lobby against policies that threaten their interests, hindering progress towards renewable energy transitions. Additionally, the rise of the Far Right in many countries has brought about increased resistance to environmentalism and environmental justice movements (Ewe 2024). This political faction often frames environmental regulations as detrimental to economic growth and national sovereignty, leading to backlash against initiatives aimed at addressing climate change and health inequities. These political dynamics necessitate robust advocacy and strategic coalition-building to overcome entrenched opposition and foster broad-based support for GND policies.

Technically, adapting solutions to specific local contexts demands innovative engineering and urban design strategies. Effective implementation requires multi-sectoral collaboration, community engagement, and innovative policy-making (Allam et al. 2021a). Incorporating health impact assessments into urban planning can ensure projects prioritize health outcomes. Additionally, leveraging technology for data collection and analysis can help identify areas for high-impact interventions, optimizing resource allocation and ensuring equitable distribution of benefits to reduce health disparities (Allam et al. 2019, 2020, Allam 2020).

Overcoming these challenges requires a multi-faceted approach, including multi-sectoral collaboration, community engagement, and innovative policy-making. The GND’s broad framework ensures that efforts are not isolated but integrated, maximizing impact on urban health disparities and environmental sustainability. An example of this approach can be seen in the ‘Green City, Clean Waters’ initiative in Philadelphia, USA (Valderrama et al. 2013). This program combines efforts from various sectors including the local government, community organizations, and private stakeholders to improve urban water quality and manage stormwater through green infrastructure projects. By engaging the community in planning and decision-making processes, the initiative has successfully implemented sustainable practices that reduce flooding, enhance green spaces, and improve public health outcomes.

Incorporating health impact assessments into urban planning can ensure projects prioritize health outcomes. Additionally, leveraging technology for data collection and analysis can help identify areas for high-impact interventions, optimizing resource allocation and ensuring equitable distribution of benefits to reduce health disparities. Specific datasets and tools, such as the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), can be instrumental in this process. The SVI uses U.S. Census data to determine the social vulnerability of communities at a granular level, considering factors like socioeconomic status, household composition, and housing quality. Similarly, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) can map environmental hazards and health outcomes, enabling policymakers to visualize and prioritize areas in need of intervention (Rushton 2003). Combining these datasets with local health and environmental data can ensure that Green New Deal policies are effectively targeted to benefit the most vulnerable populations.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Zaheer Allam

Zaheer Allam holds university degrees from the UK and Australia and is currently Board Member of the Mauritius Renewable Energy Agency (MARENA), African Representative of the International Society of Biourbanism, Advisory member of the International Federation of Landscape Architects, and actively contributes to discussions on sustainability policy and urban regeneration through global organisations. He was the chair of an advisory council under the aegis of the Prime Minister’s Office in Mauritius, where he contributed to sustainability policies. He is the author of over 175 peer reviewed publications and 13 books on the subject of Smart, Sustainable and Future Cities.

Zakia Soomauroo

Zakia Soomauroo is a Ph.D. candidate at the Chair of Sustainable Economics of Human Settlements at the Technical University of Berlin and a researcher in the Research Unit Off-Grid Systems at RLI since August 2022. Her research focuses on just transport transitions, local community engagement, and the sector coupling of mobility and energy systems. Awarded a doctoral stipend from the Reiner Lemoine Foundation, Zakia began her research on decarbonization pathways for small island states in 2018 in cooperation with the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change. She examines how institutional changes, infrastructure investments, and policies can be effectively implemented to achieve global sustainable development goals. At RLI, Zakia supports the planning and modeling of future mobility scenarios and project acquisition. She holds an undergraduate degree in Law and Economics from Touro College, SUNY, and a graduate degree in Industrial and Network Economics from TU Berlin. Before her doctoral studies, she spent four years at VDI/VDE-IT in Berlin, focusing on the technical and legislative governance of electric mobility rollout at a Pan-European level.