Book cover

International Conference on Green Building, Civil Engineering and Smart City

GBCESC 2022: Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Green Building, Civil Engineering and Smart City pp 1234–1246 Cite as

A Systematic Review of Urban Design and Computer Modelling Methods to Support Smart City Development in a Post-COVID Era

  • Liu Yang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3363-8620 10 ,
  • Michiyo Iwami   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3086-5921 11 ,
  • Yishan Chen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3630-9192 12 ,
  • Mingbo Wu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1236-7091 13 , 14 &
  • Koen H. van Dam   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4879-9259 15  
  • Conference paper
  • First Online: 08 September 2022

1104 Accesses

Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE,volume 211)

  • The original version of this chapter has been revised. Funding number in the acknowledgements is now updated. A correction to this chapter can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5217-3_130

The COVID-19 pandemic emphasised the need for decision-support tools to assist urban designers in building resilient and smart cities. Therefore, a multi-disciplinary systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guideline to identify papers relevant for selecting appropriate methodologies that can be applied to build decision-support tools for resilient cities. This paper presents a list of 109 key references, selected from 8,737 records found from the searches, and identified major research themes, fundamental design interventions, and computer modelling techniques. We extracted six groups of interventions categorised by different scales of action: from an individual, crowds (social distancing and travel-related interventions), to a building, a neighbourhood/district, and a city. In addition, there are three sorts of computational modelling approaches, i.e., computer simulation, statistical models, and AI algorithms. Most of the studies developed models for predictive purposes, and 28% of the modelling studies built models for descriptive purposes. This work intends to empower urban designers and planners to overcome and get prepared for unpredictable disasters in pursuit of resilient and smart cities, particularly in the post-pandemic world. This review enables them to quickly find relevant papers as well as suitable methodologies and tools for a particular research purpose.

  • Urban design
  • Computer model
  • Decision-support tool

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
  • Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Change history

22 february 2024.

A correction has been published.

Wang, J.: Vision of China’s future urban construction reform: in the perspective of comprehensive prevention and control for multi disasters. Sustain. Cities Soc. 64 , 102511 (2021)

Article   Google Scholar  

Megahed, N.A., Ghoneim, E.M.: Antivirus-built environment: Lessons learned from Covid-19 pandemic. Sustain. Cities Soc. 61 , 102350 (2020)

Sharifi, A., Khavarian-Garmsir, A.R.: The COVID-19 pandemic: impacts on cities and major lessons for urban planning, design, and management. Sci. Total Environ. 749 , 142391 (2020)

De Las, A., Heras, A.L.-S., Zamora-Polo, F.: Machine learning technologies for sustainability in smart cities in the post-COVID era. Sustainability 12 (22), 9320 (2020)

Kakodkar, P., Kaka, N., Baig, M.: A comprehensive literature review on the clinical presentation, and management of the pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Cureus 12 , e7560 (2020)

Google Scholar  

Page, M.J., et al.: The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021 , 372 (2021)

Yang, L., Iwami, M., Chen, Y., Wu, M., van Dam, K.H.: Computational decision-support tools for urban design to improve resilience against COVID-19 and other infectious diseases: a systematic review. Prog. Plann. 100657 (2022)

Download references

Acknowledgement

Liu Yang is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation China (No. 52108046), the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (No. BK20210260), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (No. 2021M690612). Koen van Dam works on Climate Compatible Growth (CCG) project funded by the FCDO.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Architecture, Southeast University, Nanjing, China

Department of Infectious Disease, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK

Michiyo Iwami

Architecture and Urban Design Research Center, China IPPR International Engineering Co., Ltd, Beijing, China

Yishan Chen

University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

State Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

Centre for Process Systems Engineering, Department of Chemical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK

Koen H. van Dam

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liu Yang .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Central South University, Changsha, China

Guilin University of Technology, Guilin, China

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Yang, L., Iwami, M., Chen, Y., Wu, M., van Dam, K.H. (2023). A Systematic Review of Urban Design and Computer Modelling Methods to Support Smart City Development in a Post-COVID Era. In: Guo, W., Qian, K. (eds) Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Green Building, Civil Engineering and Smart City. GBCESC 2022. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 211. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5217-3_127

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5217-3_127

Published : 08 September 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-19-5216-6

Online ISBN : 978-981-19-5217-3

eBook Packages : Engineering Engineering (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Publish with us

Policies and ethics

  • Find a journal
  • Track your research

urban design research papers

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

  •  We're Hiring!
  •  Help Center

Urban Design

  • Most Cited Papers
  • Most Downloaded Papers
  • Newest Papers
  • Save to Library
  • Last »
  • Urban Planning Follow Following
  • Urban Studies Follow Following
  • Architecture Follow Following
  • Urbanism Follow Following
  • Urban Regeneration Follow Following
  • Public Space Follow Following
  • City and Regional Planning Follow Following
  • Urban And Regional Planning Follow Following
  • Urban Sociology Follow Following
  • Urban Geography Follow Following

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

  • Academia.edu Publishing
  •   We're Hiring!
  •   Help Center
  • Find new research papers in:
  • Health Sciences
  • Earth Sciences
  • Cognitive Science
  • Mathematics
  • Computer Science
  • Academia ©2024

Science and Engineering Publishing Company

Urban planning and design research (updr).

  • Guidelines for Authors
  • Online Submission

Advertisers

Most downloaded papers, journal information, about the journal.

  • Abstracting & Indexing
  • Aims and Scope
  • Editorial Board
  • Review Policy
  • Online Review
  • Order Journal
  • Publication Ethics

Urban Planning and Design Research (UPDR) is an internationally refereed journal dedicated to publishing the latest advancements in urban planning and design research. The goal of this journal is to record the latest findings and promote further research in these areas. Scholars from all relevant academic fields are invited to submit high-quality manuscripts that describe the latest, state-of-the-art research results or innovations.

Abstracting & Indexing

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • View all journals
  • My Account Login
  • Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • Open access
  • Published: 21 February 2024

Making cities mental health friendly for adolescents and young adults

  • Pamela Y. Collins   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3956-448X 1 ,
  • Moitreyee Sinha 2 ,
  • Tessa Concepcion 3 ,
  • George Patton   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5039-8326 4 ,
  • Thaisa Way 5 ,
  • Layla McCay 6 ,
  • Augustina Mensa-Kwao   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8136-6108 1 ,
  • Helen Herrman 7 , 8 ,
  • Evelyne de Leeuw 9 ,
  • Nalini Anand 10 ,
  • Lukoye Atwoli 11 ,
  • Nicole Bardikoff 12 ,
  • Chantelle Booysen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7218-8039 13 ,
  • Inés Bustamante 14 ,
  • Yajun Chen 15 ,
  • Kelly Davis 16 ,
  • Tarun Dua 17 ,
  • Nathaniel Foote 18 ,
  • Matthew Hughsam 2 ,
  • Damian Juma 19 ,
  • Shisir Khanal 20 ,
  • Manasi Kumar   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9773-8014 21 , 22 ,
  • Bina Lefkowitz 23 , 24 ,
  • Peter McDermott 25 ,
  • Modhurima Moitra 3 ,
  • Yvonne Ochieng   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9741-9814 26 ,
  • Olayinka Omigbodun 27 ,
  • Emily Queen 1 ,
  • Jürgen Unützer 3 ,
  • José Miguel Uribe-Restrepo 28 ,
  • Miranda Wolpert 29 &
  • Lian Zeitz 30  

Nature ( 2024 ) Cite this article

2142 Accesses

106 Altmetric

Metrics details

  • Public health
  • Risk factors

Urban life shapes the mental health of city dwellers, and although cities provide access to health, education and economic gain, urban environments are often detrimental to mental health 1 , 2 . Increasing urbanization over the next three decades will be accompanied by a growing population of children and adolescents living in cities 3 . Shaping the aspects of urban life that influence youth mental health could have an enormous impact on adolescent well-being and adult trajectories 4 . We invited a multidisciplinary, global group of researchers, practitioners, advocates and young people to complete sequential surveys to identify and prioritize the characteristics of a mental health-friendly city for young people. Here we show a set of ranked characteristic statements, grouped by personal, interpersonal, community, organizational, policy and environmental domains of intervention. Life skills for personal development, valuing and accepting young people’s ideas and choices, providing safe public space for social connection, employment and job security, centring youth input in urban planning and design, and addressing adverse social determinants were priorities by domain. We report the adversities that COVID-19 generated and link relevant actions to these data. Our findings highlight the need for intersectoral, multilevel intervention and for inclusive, equitable, participatory design of cities that support youth mental health.

More than a decade ago, Galea posed the question “Can we improve mental health if we improve cities?” 4 . In the past two centuries, urbanization has shaped landscapes and lives, making it the “sentinel demographic shift” of our times 4 . The relationships between mental health status and the social, cultural and physical environment have been explored for at least as long; nineteenth-century researchers proposed environmental exposures as possible explanations of ‘insanity’ 5 . Faris and Dunham’s classic 1930s study 6 linked social disorganization and unstable communities to mental disorders. Two decades later, Leonard Duhl sought to create healthy societies through liveable cities, informing the World Health Organization’s Healthy Cities initiative 7 , 8 . The question remains pertinent today even as we recognize the multiple and complex forces that shape mental health 9 . Today we understand that urban environments influence a broad range of health outcomes for their populations, positively and negatively, and this impact is manifested unequally 10 . Opportunities for education and connection exist for some, whereas rising levels of urban inequality, violence, stressful racial or ethnic dynamics in urban neighbourhoods, exposure to environmental toxins, lack of green space, inadequate infrastructure and fear of displacement increase risk for poor mental health and disproportionately affect marginalized groups 11 . Disparate outcomes also pertain to distinct developmental stages, and the mental health of adolescents and young adults is particularly vulnerable to urban exposures.

Adolescents, youth and urban mental health

Young people under the age of 25 are the demographic group most likely to move to cities for educational and employment opportunities, and by 2050 cities will be home to 70% of the world’s children 3 . Cities concentrate innovation 3 and have long been considered the consummate source of skills, resources and talent 12 . They offer greater opportunities for health and economic development, education, employment, entertainment and social freedoms (that is, the ‘urban advantage’), but rapid urbanization also deepens disparities and exposes individuals to considerable adversity, placing their mental health at risk 13 . In fact, most evidence points to urban living as a risk factor for poorer mental health, yielding increased risk for psychosis, anxiety disorders and depression 1 , 2 . Adolescence and young adulthood, specifically, encompass a critical period of risk for the incidence of mental disorders: an estimated half of mental disorders evident before age 65 begin in adolescence and 75% begin by age 24 (ref.  14 ). Mental disorders are the leading causes of disease burden among 10–24-year-olds worldwide 15 , responsible for an estimated 28.2 million disability-adjusted life years globally, with 1 disability-adjusted life year being equivalent to a healthy year of life lost to the disability caused by mental disorders. Public awareness of these issues rose as the incidence of mental disorders and suicide increased in some countries among adolescents and young adults during the coronavirus pandemic 16 , 17 . Urban environments probably have a role in these processes.

Fundamental to adolescents’ growth and development are their interactions with the complex urban environment: physical, political, economic, social and cultural 18 . Adolescents have a heightened sensitivity to context and social evaluation, and a stronger neural response to social exclusion, as well as to threat and reward stimuli 19 , and it is plausible that they may be particularly sensitive to social and environmental cues in the urban context, such as discrimination or violence. Discriminatory policies and norms are entrenched in many of the institutions with which young people interact (for example, schools, housing, justice and policing), and minoritized youth may experience the emotional and mental health consequences 20 . In fact, in settings of structural inequality (for example, high neighbourhood poverty and unemployment), young people are at greater risk for low self-efficacy and feelings of powerlessness and depression 21 . Social cohesion and collective efficacy can reduce the effects of concentrated disadvantage and nurture social and emotional assets among young people, families and their networks 21 .

At present, the world’s largest population of adolescents and young adults so far is growing up amid the sequelae of a tenacious pandemic, rapid population growth in urban centres and increasing urbanization, demanding an urgent response to support youth mental health 22 . Investing in adolescent well-being is said to yield a triple dividend through actions that reduce mortality and disability in adolescence, prolong healthy life in adulthood, and protect the health of the next generation by educating and strengthening the health of young parents 23 . Interventions in urban settings that align with developmental needs of adolescents and young adults could remediate insults from early life and establish healthy behaviours and trajectories for adult life 19 , 24 , potentially averting chronic conditions such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and the associated mental health, social and physical sequelae 25 . In fact, investment in a package of adolescent mental health interventions can yield a 24-fold return in health and economic benefits 26 . At the societal level, shaping the aspects of urban life that influence youth mental health—through services, social policies and intentional design—could have an enormous impact 4 . Proposals for ‘restorative urbanism’ that centre mental health, wellness and quality of life in urban design may move cities in the direction of moulding urban environments for better adolescent health 27 , 28 . Young people, who contribute to the creativity of urban environments and drive movements for social change 29 , have a central part to play in this transformation.

Mental Health Friendly Cities, a global multi-stakeholder initiative led by citiesRISE, mobilizes youth-driven action and systems reform to promote and sustain the mental health and well-being of young people in cities around the world 30 , 31 ( Supplementary Information ). To guide transformative actions that will enable cities to promote and sustain adolescent and youth mental health, we studied global priorities for urban adolescent mental health. One aim of this study is to contribute data-driven insights that can be used to unite several sectors in cities to act within and across their domains in favour of mental health promotion and care that is responsive to the needs of young people. To that end, we administered a series of linked surveys that permitted the influence of ideas from young people and multidisciplinary domain experts through an anonymous sequential process, following established methods for research priority setting 32 .

Framework and top-ranked recommendations

To determine the elements of an urban landscape that would support mental health for adolescents and youth and would amplify their voices, we recruited a panel of 518 individuals from 53 countries to participate in a series of three digitally administered surveys that began in April 2020 (Table 1 ). Figure 1 shows the panel participation at each round. In survey 1, panellists responded to the open-ended question: “What are the characteristics of a mental health-friendly city for young people?”. Analysis of survey 1 data produced 134 statements about mental health-friendly cities for young people ( Methods ). In survey 2, participants selected their preferred 40 of the 134 statements. They were also presented with a second question related to the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on their ideas about youth well-being in cities. In survey 3, we categorized survey 2 statements by socioecological domains (Fig. 2 ) and asked panellists to rank-list their preferred statements in each domain. Before ranking, panellists were required to choose one of three framings that informed their selected ranking: immediacy of impact on youth mental health; ability to help youth thrive in cities; and ease or feasibility of implementation.

figure 1

The composition of the project leadership structures, sample recruitment and participation by each survey round are shown below. We invited 801 individuals to participate in the survey panel through recommendations and direct invitations from advisory board members. Participants recruited through snowball sampling received the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) link ( n  = 24). Individuals who gave informed consent in REDCap were deemed to have accepted the survey panel invitation. S1, survey 1; S2, survey 2; S3, survey 3.

figure 2

The socioecological model with six levels (personal, interpersonal, community, organization, policy and environment) that are used to categorize the characteristics of a mental health friendly city.

We present the findings of the third survey within a socioecological model (Figs. 3 – 5 ) because of this model’s relevance to the combination of social and environmental exposures in an urban setting and their interaction with the developing adolescent 33 . Bronfenbrenner’s model begins by recognizing that young people’s personal experiences and development are shaped by their interactions with the people around them 34 ; that is, they react to and act on their immediate environment of familial and peer relationships (microlevel). These interpersonal relationships are also influenced by neighbourhood and community dynamics and exposure to institutions and policies (mesolevel). These, in turn, are nested within the organizational, political, historical, cultural (for example, values, norms and beliefs) and physical environments (macrolevel) whose interplay directly or indirectly affects the adolescent’s mental health and well-being. A high court ruling (policy environment) could have direct or indirect effects on the community, household and personal well-being of a young person seeking asylum. The socioecological framework encompasses the dynamic relationships of an individual with the social environment.

figure 3

Mean ranks and standard deviations (s.d.) values for each mental health-friendly city (MHFC) characteristic are reported grouped by socioecological level and three framings described in the Analysis: immediacy of impact; ability to help youth thrive in cities; and ease or feasibility of implementation. Overall ranks (along with mean and s.d. values) for the total sample are reported. n values in bold represent the number of participants responding for each domain; the percentages in bold represent the percentage of respondents per domain. The number and percentage of the sample that assigned the highest rank for each characteristic are also reported (column 2). The colour continuum from light blue to dark blue shows the highest ranked means in the lightest shades and the lower ranks in darker blue.

figure 4

See the caption of Fig. 3 for details.

figure 5

See the caption of Fig. 3 for details. LGBT+, people from sexual and gender minorities.

The characteristics

We grouped 37 city characteristics across 6 socioecological domains: personal, interpersonal, community, organizational, policy and environmental. Figures 3 – 5 show the mean ranking for each framing and the total mean ranking averaged across frames. We show, for each characteristic statement, the number and percentage of panellists who ranked it highest. The five characteristics in the personal domain centre on factors that enable healthy emotional maturation for young people, future orientation and self-reflexivity. Most panellists (53%) ranked these characteristics according to immediacy of impact on youth mental health in cities, and mean rankings were identical to those linked to ability to help youth thrive in cities. The characteristic that describes prioritizing teaching life skills, providing opportunities for personal development and providing resources that allow young people to flourish rose to the top mean rank for each frame and was also ranked first in this domain by the largest number of panellists ( n  = 93). Notably, the characteristic that describes preparing youth to handle their emotions and overcome challenges was ranked first by 62 panellists, although its mean rank was much lower.

Characteristics in the interpersonal domain refer to young people’s interactions with others in the environment. Prioritized characteristics in this domain centred on relationships marked by acceptance and respect for young people and noted the value of intergenerational relationships. The top-ranked characteristic emphasized age friendliness and interactions that value the feelings and opinions of young people as well as safe and healthy relationships. In this domain, ranked means for characteristics framed according to immediacy of impact on youth mental health and ability to help youth thrive were the same for the top two characteristics. Notably, the two highest-ranked means for ease of implementation focused on opportunities for safe and healthy relationships and strengthening intergenerational relationships.

Young people’s intrapersonal experiences and interpersonal relationships are nested within a system of community and organizational relationships. Study participants prioritized access to safe spaces for youth to gather and connect among the three characteristics in the domain of community, and rankings were identical for each framing. At the organizational domain, two characteristics shared high mean rankings: employment opportunities that allow job security and satisfaction and a responsive and supportive educational system. Health-care services and educational services were the organizations most frequently referenced in relation to youth mental health. Whereas employment opportunities ranked first in terms of feasibility of implementation, provision of youth-friendly health services ranked first for immediacy of impact on youth mental health. With the exception of the community and organizational domains, more panellists chose to frame their responses in terms of immediacy of impact on youth mental health.

Of the four statements in the policy domain, the design and planning of cities with youth input and gender sensitivity ranked highest overall and was most frequently ranked first by panellists (30.68%). Promoting democratic cooperation and equal opportunity and anti-discrimination in all institutions received the highest mean rank for feasibility of implementation.

The sixth socioecological domain lists 13 characteristics related to the social, cultural and physical environments. Addressing adverse social determinants of health for young people had the highest overall ranked mean; however, normalizing youth seeking mental health care and addressing service gaps ranked first when framed by feasibility of implementation and immediacy of impact. Having access to affordable basic amenities was most frequently ranked first in this domain by panellists, but panellist preferences were distributed across the list.

COVID-19 and urban youth well-being

Our data collection began in April 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, and by survey 2 (August 2020), most countries were experiencing the pandemic’s public health, social and economic effects. In light of this, we added an open-ended survey question to which 255 participants responded “How has the COVID-19 pandemic changed your ideas about the wellbeing of young people in cities?” ( Methods ). Most respondents reported changes in perspective or new emphases on inequities as determinants of youth well-being and mental health, whereas nine reported that COVID-19 did not change their ideas. For one such respondent (in the >35 years age category), the pandemic merely confirmed the powerful effect of social vulnerabilities on risk and outcomes during an emergency: “COVID-19 has not changed my ideas about the wellbeing of young people in cities. I found that the young people in cities who did well during the lockdown period and the difficult period of the pandemic were those who were already doing well in terms of a rich social network, good interpersonal relations with family and friends, enjoyable work life, a close religious network, membership [in] a young people’s club so that they were able to stay connected via social media. Those who had access to food and essential commodities and those who knew they would return to school or work after the pandemic. Those who had access to good living conditions and some space for recreation also did well. ... The impact of COVID19 was felt much more by those with existing mental health conditions, living in crowded slums, poverty, unemployment, who were uncertain about the next step”.

Respondents highlighted losses young people experienced as a result of the pandemic. These included loss of the city as a place of opportunity; loss of jobs, familial and individual income, and economic stability; loss of a planned future and loss of certainty; loss of rites of passage of youth; loss of access to friends, social networks and social support; loss of access to quality education and to health care, especially mental health care and sexual and reproductive health services; loss of opportunities for psychological and social development; and loss of loved ones who died from COVID-19. We summarize the qualitative findings according to the socioecological framework. We present sample quotes in Table 2 , along with the age category of the respondents (18–24, 25–35 and >35) and actions for cities to take.

Policy and environment

Governance and equity.

Freedom from discrimination and the value of equity were listed among the mental health-friendly city characteristics; however, respondents pointed out the dearth of equity that COVID-19 unveiled (see the first quote in Table 2 ).

Respondents observed that policy responses to COVID-19, including mandated curfews and quarantines, shifted the social and economic environment of cities. Young people and their families lost economic opportunities, and cities also became less affordable during the pandemic. Participants explained that poverty and job loss worsened young people’s mental health and well-being and exposed youth to more risk factors because they needed to “hustle or work to place food on the table”. The loss of jobs also deprived youth of hope and underlined the economic inequities that some felt marked their generation more than previous ones. One participant (18–24) reported “Before, I used to think youths need someone who can understand them, empathize with them, but looking at the current scenario, I feel youths need security and a hopeful future too”. In some settings, these economic shifts resulted in an exodus from cities. A respondent (18–24) observed “Cities have always attracted young people but since the pandemic started the cost of living has gone from being a barrier to being another factor in encouraging young people to leave”.

Urban built environment

For those who remained in the city, the urban built environment could also offer respite from pandemic-related restrictions in mobility when green spaces and other open spaces were accessible. Participants alluded to cramped urban housing, crowded slums and poor housing infrastructure as stressors that the availability of safe public spaces alleviated. Green space in particular provided solace for young people. A participant (18–24) responded “It’s difficult when you’re confined to the limited space especially when you’re not closer to nature. Negative thoughts get you one way or another even if you try your best. Pandemic has caused more depression I reckon among the youths”. Accessible green space was highlighted as a need and an area for investing effort and policy change (Table 2 ). A desire for clean, youth-friendly green space for safe gathering and recreation was contrasted with unplanned land use and confined spaces, the latter of which some participants linked to greater risks for young people.

Community and organizations

Respondents reported diminished access to education and health care, and a disregard of young people’s needs by decision-makers (Table 2 ). Some responses criticized the lack of forethought before the pandemic to budget for and provide supportive learning environments for youth of all socioeconomic strata. The closure of schools generated stress for young people with the disruption of routines and opportunities to socialize. The pandemic generated greater uncertainty about job opportunities and future trajectories. At the same time, the pandemic brought opportunities to position youth as either contributors and leaders or detractors from community life. Young people reflected on how they experienced inclusion, empathy and exclusion, as well as opportunity for leadership. One respondent (25–35) commented “Our worlds are changing and with it many of our expectations about our education, work, personal interactions and relationships. Instead of being met with understanding, we are collectively positioned as transgressors of social distancing in a way that fails to understand that we are often incredibly vulnerable in this new world and left exposed by lack of infrastructure, service provision and support”.

A respondent (18–24) noticed possibilities for involving young people in responses that could mitigate their numerous losses: “Given the opportunities and resources, young people can be a carrier of change and wellbeing if adults trust them enough to be”.

Interpersonal domain

Getting through difficult times required interpersonal supports: connectedness through in-person encounters in safe spaces, complemented by digital interactions. Multiple respondents emphasized the relationship between social isolation and poor mental health among city youth during the pandemic, noting the difficulty of making meaningful connection during a time of physical isolation. Two young respondents (18–24) said the well-being of young people was linked to being “in a group of people”, which provides “safety and unity”, and to “inclusion, activity, and interpersonal relationships”. Space repeatedly emerged as a theme, as a conduit to facilitate social connection for young people without risk of COVID-19 transmission, violence, sexual abuse or exposure to drug use. Some participants called for greater investment in creating strong, safe virtual communities for young people; however, although participants identified virtual spaces as a resource for mental health support, a young panellist (18–24) remarked of social media and technology that “It isolated people, even though we have … ways of staying connected 24/7, we still feel lonely.”

Consistent with the lead mental health-friendly city characteristic in the personal domain (Figs. 3 – 5 ), the pandemic prompted realization of the need for personal skills development to support youth mental well-being. Some respondents expressed concern about the loss of social skills among young people as a result of confinement and an 18–24-year-old commented “… Youths are in that stage where they need to be equipped with skills to promote positive mental wellbeing”. Another young person (18–24) remarked “Most of us do not really have the capacity and necessary skills to support each other when it comes to mental health”. Participants described the importance of being prepared for unpredictable circumstances and enabling youth to “manage themselves, their emotions, and wellbeing”.

Pandemic-related gains

In some cases, the pandemic brought positive experiences for young people, including more time for self-reflection and discovery, engaging in healing practices, more opportunities to connect with friends, and overall, a greater societal and individual focus on strengthening mental health. A participant (25–35) referred to young people: “They are more conscious about health and their wellbeing by reducing workload and connecting with nature”. Others believed the pandemic revealed young people’s capacity to adapt and to consider the needs of their elders. Some viewed the social justice uprisings that occurred in many countries as a positive vehicle for change and cooperation with others. Changing these conditions would require longer-term solutions: strengthening urban infrastructure and addressing the underlying drivers of inequity. Another participant (>35) lauded the power of youth activism: “… the pandemic has shown us that the resilience of youth is great, as well as the commitment and solidarity with their communities through volunteering, advocacy and youth mobilization”.

Our study convened a multinational and multidisciplinary panel of researchers, practitioners, advocates and young people to identify the characteristics of a mental health-friendly city for youths. The characteristics are distributed among six socioecological domains (Figs. 3 – 5 ) that encompass the personal development of young people, supportive educational systems, people-centred health care, a built environment responsive to the needs of young people, and equity-focused policy-making and governance. Within each of these domains, the characteristics we identified are associated with an evolving evidence base linked to youth mental health outcomes and to potential policy intervention.

Intrapersonal characteristics in our list underline the centrality of enabling young people to cultivate skills to manage their interior lives. The targets of such skills-building activities align with proposed ‘active ingredients’ of mental health interventions, such as intervention components related to mechanisms of action or clinical effects on depressive or anxiety symptoms 35 . Examples include affective awareness skills that enable young people to differentiate and describe emotions 36 and emotion regulation skills to increase and maintain positive emotions 37 . Youth-friendly mental health and educational services, a priority theme at the community level of the framework, could support the intrapersonal realm by deploying a variety of interventions for self-control that benefit adolescent and young adult academic, behavioural and social functioning 38 . Such interventions can also be implemented in earlier childhood educational settings through integration into the curriculum or through other community-based medical or social service organizations 39 . Interventions implemented in selected high-income settings include Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies 40 , the Incredible Years 41 and Family Check-up 42 . For young adults, interventions that convey skills to alleviate common psychological problems such as procrastination, perfectionism, low self-esteem, test anxiety and stress could potentially reduce the prevalence of specific mental health conditions while possibly providing acceptable and non-stigmatizing options for care 43 , 44 .

Our data suggest that a defining theme of any mental health-friendly city for youth is the quality of young people’s social fabric and the city’s ability to provide young people with the skills, opportunities and places required to build and maintain healthy social relationships with their peers, across generations, and as members of a community. The relationships of concern in the interpersonal realm have intrinsic value for healthy adolescent and youth development, promoting well-being 45 and prevention of depression 46 , 47 . Panellists also linked opportunities to socialize and build social networks to the availability of safe spaces, the top-ranked priority in the community domain. Achieving safety necessitates equitable and violence-free institutions and cities 48 , a priority that panellists ranked first for ease of implementation in the policy domain. Thus, policies and legislation are required that reduce neglect, bullying, harassment, abuse, censorship, exposure to violence and a wide range of threats towards young people, from homelessness to crime to intimidation by officials 48 , 49 .

Exposure to community violence and household violence consistently worsens mental health outcomes for youth 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 ; successful reduction of urban violence should be prioritized. Equity-focused responses to safety needs should include reducing discriminatory physical and structural violence against young people based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality or mental health status, which place youth at risk of harmful exposures: rape or trafficking of adolescent girls or police killings of North American Black youth. To create urban spaces in which young people can experience safety, freedom and belongingness requires approaches that actively prevent discrimination 54 and that consider young people’s multiple identities in the design of institutional as well as outdoor spaces. Women-only parks create greater security for girls and young women and potentially more positive social interaction in some settings 55 .

The benefits of green space, measured as self-satisfaction for adolescents, are linked to greater social contact (for example, more close friends), underscoring space as a conduit for social connection 55 . The advantages of healthy urban spaces for adolescents have emerged not only in health sciences research but also in allied fields such as urban design and sociology 27 , 56 , 57 . Urban spaces with opportunities for active commute options to and from school are associated with increased physical activity and environmental supportiveness 58 . Similarly, the presence of community spaces, such as town centres, is associated with improved social connectedness and sense of belonging 59 .

The critical importance of social connectedness was reinforced in the COVID-19 responses. Yet, in many cities the pandemic eliminated spaces that foster urban conviviality, often with lasting effects 60 . Restricted movement and COVID-19 transmission risk associated with public transport may have contributed to greater stress for urban dwellers and ongoing reluctance to use these services 61 . Such factors contribute to social isolation, which may persist in the near term. Consistent with our COVID-19 data, responses from a sample of Australian youth identified social isolation, interrupted education and work, and uncertainty about the future among the primary negative effects of COVID-19 pandemic 62 . In several studies, loneliness increased the risk of mental health conditions among young people during prior epidemics; of relevance to the COVID-19 pandemic, the duration of loneliness predicted future mental health problems 63 .

Analysis of our survey 2 data revealed differences in the priorities of young participants (18–24 and 25–35) compared with panellists over age 35. This discrepancy could have implications for urban decision-makers whose plans to implement positive actions on behalf of young people may not align with what is most salient for youth. Thus, youth involvement in policy development is even more crucial. Soliciting youth perspectives about what supports their mental health based on their personal experiences could simplify and improve interventions intended for them 64 . Several actions could facilitate meaningful youth engagement in governance: encourage collaboration between governments and youth organizations to co-create and co-lead national action plans; implement mechanisms within global governance organizations for youth consultation at local, national and international levels; require inclusion of young people on relevant conference agendas; and improve access to funding for youth-led organizations 65 , 66 .

Notably, the themes of equity and elimination of discrimination due to race, gender, sexual orientation and neurodiversity arose frequently in the responses to the survey and the COVID-19 question, as did the adversities to which minoritized groups are vulnerable (for example, community violence, police violence and bullying; Figs. 4 and 5 ). A city that is free of discrimination and racism ranked first among policy responses with immediacy of impact on the mental health of youth—even though no statements proposed dismantling systems of oppression that underlie racism and discrimination, as one respondent noted (Fig. 4 ). Globally, racism, xenophobia and other forms of discrimination increase mortality and harm the mental health of affected groups through stress-related physiological responses, harmful environmental exposures and limited access to opportunities and health services 20 , 67 , 68 , 69 . Embedded racist and xenophobic norms, policies and practices of institutions—including those that govern educational, labour and health care systems—yield racialized outcomes for young people around the world (for example, high incidence of HIV infection among adolescent girls in southern sub-Saharan Africa) 20 . To disrupt these forces requires multiple approaches, including recognition and remedy of historical injustices, the activism of social movements committed to change, and implementation of legal frameworks based in human rights norms 70 .

When participants ranked characteristics for ease of implementation (Figs. 3 – 5 ), they coalesced around a broad set of factors demonstrating the need for collaboration across urban sectors (for example, normalizing seeking mental health care, promoting democratic cooperation and equal opportunity, and creating employment opportunities and progressive educational systems). This need for cooperation is perhaps most apparent for actions that increase equity. Successful cooperation requires a clear, shared vision and mission, allocation of funding in each sector, diversity of funding sources, distributed decision-making and authority across sectors, and policies that facilitate collaboration 71 . However, well-intentioned cross-sectoral responses to urban needs may inadvertently increase inequities by designing programmes influenced by market forces that magnify environmental privilege (that is, unequal exposure to environmental problems according to social privilege) 54 . Examples include gentrification and development that use land to create green spaces but further dislocate and marginalize communities in need of affordable housing 54 . Implementing community- and youth-partnered processes for urban health equity policy co-creation could yield unified agendas and help to circumvent inequitable outcomes 54 , 72 . A mental health-friendly city must be positioned to support, integrate and enable the thriving of marginalized and vulnerable young people of the society, who should be involved in its governance.

Strengths and limitations

Our study has several strengths. First, this priority-setting study yielded a rich dataset of recommended characteristics of a mental health-friendly city for young people from a globally diverse panel of more than 480 individuals from 53 countries. Second, we welcomed expertise from participants with roles relevant to urban sectors: researchers, policymakers and practice-based participants, and we engaged young people in the study advisory board and as study participants, capitalizing on their lived experience. Third, we captured information about how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced participants’ ideas about urban adolescent mental health. Fourth, to our knowledge, this is the first study that brings together a large and multidisciplinary set of stakeholders concerned for cities (for example, urban designers) and for youth mental health (for example, teachers and health professionals) to identify priorities for intersectoral action.

Our study also has several limitations. First, the participants recruited do not reflect the full social and economic diversity of urban populations whom city governments and decision-makers must serve. Our decision to use a web-based format following standard health research priority-setting methods required tradeoffs. We sought disciplinary, age and geographic diversity; however, our sample does not represent the most marginalized groups of adolescents or adults. Rather, the recruitment of academics, educators, leaders and well-networked young people through an online study probably minimizes the number of participants living in adversity. Although we also recruited young people who were not necessarily established experts, many were students or members of advocacy or international leadership networks and were not likely to exemplify the most disadvantaged groups. We risk masking the specific viewpoints or needs of marginalized and at-risk young people. However, we are reassured by the prominence of equity as a theme and the call to address social determinants of health. Second, it is possible that participants recruited through the authors’ professional networks may be more likely to reflect the viewpoints of the advisory committee members who selected them, given collaborative or other professional relationships. This may have shaped the range of responses and their prioritization. Third, the aspirational calls for an end to discrimination and inequalities highlighted in our results require confronting long-standing structural inequities both within and between countries. Structural violence frequently maintains these power imbalances. Although we do not view their aspirational nature as a limitation, we note that our study data do not outline the complexity of responses required to address these determinants of mental health or to dismantle discriminatory structures. Fourth, our data present several aggregated characteristics that may require disaggregation as cities contextualize the findings for their settings. Fifth, our network recruitment strategy led to skewed recruitment from some geographic regions (for example, North America and Nepal), which may have biased responses (Extended Data Figs. 1 – 3 ). Extended Data Table 1 shows the similarities and differences in the rankings for Nepal, USA and the remaining countries in survey 3. Additionally, we recruited few 14–17-year-olds. We experienced attrition over the three rounds of surveying, ending with complete responses from 261 individuals from 48 countries, with the greatest loss in participants between surveys 1 and 2 (Table 1 ), among the 14–17-, 18–24- and 25–35-year-old age groups, and among participants from Nepal (Extended Data Fig. 2 ).

Conclusions

We identified a set of priorities for cities that require intervention at multiple levels and across urban sectors. A clear next step could involve convenings to build national or regional consensus around local priorities and plans to engage stakeholders to co-design implementation of the most salient characteristics of a mental health-friendly city for youth in specific cities (Box 1 ). It is likely that many variables (for example, geography, politics, culture, race, ethnicity and sexual identity) will shape priorities in each city. Therefore, essential to equitable action is ensuring that an inclusive community of actors is at the table formulating and making decisions, and that pathways for generating knowledge of mental health-friendly city characteristics remain open. This includes representation of sectors beyond mental health that operate at the intersection of areas prioritized by young people. Preparing for implementation will require avenues for youth participation and influence through collective action, social entrepreneurship and representation in national, regional and community decision-making. Enlisting the participation of youth networks that bring young people marginalized owing to sex, gender, sexual orientation, race, economic status, ethnicity or caste; young people with disabilities; and youth and adults with lived experience of mental health conditions in the design of mental health-friendly cities will help to level power imbalances and increase the likelihood that cities meet their needs.

Action for adolescent mental health aligns well with actions nations should take to achieve development targets, and collective action to draw attention to these areas of synergy could benefit youth and cities. Specifically, supporting the mental health of young people aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 11 (sustainable cities and communities) and the New Urban Agenda that aims to “ensure sustainable and inclusive urban economies, to end poverty and to ensure equal rights and opportunities … and integration into the urban space” 73 , 74 , 75 .

Additionally, the list of mental health-friendly city characteristics presents a starting point for strengthening the evidence base on intervening at multiple levels (for example, individual, family, community, organizations and environment) to better understand what works for which youth in which settings. Cities function as complex systems, and systems-centred research can best enable us to understand how individuals’ interactions with one another and with their environments influence good or poor mental health 76 . Similarly, interdisciplinary inquiry is needed that investigates urban precarity and sheds light on social interventions for youth mental health 77 . New research that tests implementation strategies and measures mental health outcomes of coordinated cross-sectoral interventions in cities could be integrated with planned actions. Innovative uses of data that measure the ‘racial opportunity gap’ can help cities to understand how race and place interact to reduce economic well-being for minoritized young people on their trajectory to adulthood 78 . Even heavily studied relationships, such as mental health and green space, can benefit from new methodologies for measuring exposures, including application of mixed methods, and refined characterization of outcomes by gender and age with a focus on adolescents and youth 79 . Globally, mental health-supporting actions for young people in urban areas have an incomplete evidence base, with more peer-reviewed publications skewed towards North American research 73 .

Designing mental health-friendly cities for young people is possible. It requires policy approaches that facilitate systemic, sustained intersectoral commitments at the global as well as local levels 80 . It also requires creative collaboration across multiple sectors because the characteristics identified range from transport to housing to employment to health, with a central focus on social and economic equity. Acting on these characteristics demands coordinated investment, joint planning and decision-making among urban sectoral leaders, and strategic deployment of human and financial resources across local government departments that shape city life and resources 75 , 81 . This process will be more successful when cities intentionally and accountably implement plans to dismantle structural racism and other forms of discrimination to provide equitable access to economic and educational opportunities for young people, with the goal of eliminating disparate health and social outcomes. The process is made easier when diverse stakeholders identify converging interests and interventions that allow them each to achieve their goals.

Box 1 Considerations for implementing a mental health-friendly city for youth

Considerations for implementing a mental health-friendly city for youth using a structure adapted from UNICEF’s strategic framework for the second decade of life 82 and integrating selected characteristics identified in the study with examples distilled from scientific literature and from project advisory group members. Objectives for implementation along with corresponding examples and selected initiatives are shown.

Youth are equipped with resources and skills for personal and emotional development, compassion, self-acceptance, and flourishing.

Youth develop and sustain safe, healthy relationships and strong intergenerational bonds in age-friendly settings that respect, value and validate them.

Communities promote youth integration and participation in all areas of community life.

Communities establish and maintain safe, free public spaces for youth socializing, learning and connection.

Institutions facilitate satisfying, secure employment; progressive, inclusive, violence-free education; skills for mental health advocacy and peer support.

Policies support antiracist, gender equitable, non-discriminatory cities that promote democratic cooperation and non-violence.

Urban environments provide safe, reliable infrastructure for basic amenities and transportation; affordable housing; access to green and blues space; and access to recreation and art.

Cities minimize adverse social determinants of health; design for safety and security for vulnerable groups; and orient social and built environments to mental health promotion, belonging and purpose.

Use rights-based approaches

Prioritize equity for racially, ethnically, gender, sexually and neurologically diverse young people

Ensure sustained and authentic participation of youth

Schools and other educational settings

Health and social services

Families and communities

Religious and spiritual institutions

Child protection and justice systems

Peer groups

Civil society

Digital and non-digital media

Implementation objectives

Build consensus and contextualize the mental health-friendly city approach at local, regional, national levels

Engage diverse youth in co-design of mental health-friendly city plans

Expand opportunities for youth governance

Enable collaboration among sectors for policy alignment

Engage communities, schools, health services, media for intervention delivery

Legislate social protection policies

Scale interventions to improve economic and behavioral outcomes

Link implementation to achievement of national or international objectives

Selected implementation strategies

Youth co-design and participation: Growing Up Boulder is an initiative to create more equitable and sustainable communities in which young people participate and influence issues that affect them. It is a partnership between local schools, universities, local government, businesses and local non-profit organizations in the USA that has enabled young people to formally participate in visioning processes such as community assessments, mapping, photo documentation and presentations to city representatives 83 .

Engaging schools for interventions: universal school-based interventions for mental health promotion 84 ; linkage to mental health care for school-based programs 85 ; “Whole-school approaches” that engage students and families, communities, and other agencies to support mental health and improve academic outcomes 84 , 86 .

Digital platforms for youth mental health: Chile’s HealthyMind Initiative digital platform launched during the COVID-19 pandemic and provided a one-stop resource for information and digital mental health services. The platform included targeted evidence-based resources for children and adolescents 87 .

Interventions to test at scale: Stepping Stones and Creating Futures is a community-based intervention for intimate partner violence reduction and strengthening livelihoods in urban informal settlements in South Africa that reduced young men’s perpetration of intimate partner violence and increased women’s earning power 88 .

Shared international objectives: support Sustainable Development Goal 11 and New Urban Agenda targets and Sustainable Development Goals 1–6, 8, 10 and 16.

Project structure and launch

This study aimed to identify priorities for creating cities that promote and sustain adolescent and youth mental health. Central to achieving this aim was our goal of engaging a multidisciplinary, global, age-diverse group of stakeholders. As we began and throughout the study, we were cognizant of the risk of attrition, the importance of maintaining multidisciplinary participation throughout the study and the value of preserving the voices of young people. We used a priority-setting methodology explicitly aimed to be inclusive while simultaneously limiting study attrition. To ensure that we were inclusive of the voices of young people and our large and diverse sample, we limited our study to three surveys, which we determined a priori. Our approach was informed by standard methodologies for health research priority setting 32 .

The project was led by a collaborative team from the University of Washington Consortium for Global Mental Health, Urban@UW, the University of Melbourne and citiesRISE. We assembled three committees representing geographic, national, disciplinary, gender and age diversity to guide the work. First, a core team of P.Y.C., T.W., G.P., M.S. and T.C., generated an initial list of recommended members of the scientific advisory board on the basis of their research and practice activities related to adolescent mental health or the urban setting. We sought a multidisciplinary group representing relevant disciplines. The 18-member scientific advisory board, comprising global leaders in urban design and architecture, social entrepreneurship, education, mental health and adolescent development, provided scientific guidance. We invited members of an executive committee, who represented funding agencies as well as academic and non-governmental organizational leadership, to provide a second level of feedback. A youth advisory board, recruited through citiesRISE youth leaders and other global mental health youth networks, comprised global youth leaders in mental health advocacy. A research team from the University of Washington (Urban@UW, the University of Washington Population Health Initiative and the University of Washington Consortium for Global Mental Health) provided study coordination. The study received institutional review board approval at the University of Washington (STUDY00008502). Invitations to advisory groups were sent in December 2019, along with a concept note describing the aims of the project, and committee memberships were confirmed in January 2020. In February 2020, the committees formulated the question for survey 1: “What are the characteristics of a mental health friendly city for young people?”.

Study recruitment

The members of the scientific advisory board, youth advisory board and executive committee were invited to nominate individuals with expertise across domains relevant to urban life and adolescent well-being. The group recommended 763 individuals to join the priority-setting panel; individuals invited to serve on the scientific advisory board, youth advisory board and executive committee were included in panel invitations ( n  = 38). Our goal was to establish a geographically diverse panel of participants with scientific, policy and practice-based expertise corresponding to major urban sectors and related challenges (for example, health, education, urban planning and design, youth and criminal justice, housing and homelessness, and violence). Many of the nominees were experts with whom the core group and scientific advisory board members had collaborated, as well as individuals recruited on the basis of their participation in professional and scientific associations and committees (for example, Lancet Commissions and Series) or global practice networks (for example, Teach for All). Nominees’ names, the advisory member who nominated them, gender, country and discipline were tracked by T.C. We used snowball sampling to recruit participants from geographic regions that were under-represented: an additional 24 people were recruited through referrals. The scientific advisory board and youth advisory board sought to maximize the number of young people participating in the study, and invitations were extended to adolescents and young adults through educational, professional, advocacy and advisory networks. Nominees received an invitation letter by e-mail, accompanied by a concept note that introduced the study, defined key constructs, described the roles of the study advisory groups and provided an estimated study timeline. Youth participants (14–24) received a more abbreviated introductory letter. A link to a REDCap survey with an informed consent form and round 1 question was embedded in the invitation e-mail, which was offered in English and Spanish. Of the 824 individuals invited, 518 individuals from 53 countries provided informed consent and agreed to participate, resulting in a nomination acceptance rate of 62.8%.

Data collection

We administered a series of three sequential surveys using REDCap version 9.8.2. Panellists were asked to respond to the survey 1 question “What are the characteristics of a mental health friendly city for young people?” by providing up to five characteristics and were invited to use as much space as needed. In survey 2, panellists received 134 characteristic statements derived from survey 1 data and were asked to select their 40 most important statements. From these data, we selected 40 most frequently ranked statements. These were presented in the round 3 survey with three redundant statements removed. The remaining 37 characteristic statements were categorized across 6 socioecological domains and panellists were asked to select 1 of 3 framings by which to rank the statements in each domain: immediacy of impact on youth mental health in cities, ability to help youth thrive in cities, and ease or feasibility of implementation. Of individuals who consented to participate, 93.4% completed round 1, 58.5% completed round 2 and 56.2% completed round 3 (Table 1 ).

We added a new open-ended question to survey 2: “How has the COVID-19 pandemic changed your ideas about the wellbeing of young people in cities?”. Panellists were invited to respond using as many characters (that is, as much space) as needed.

Data analysis

Three-survey series.

We managed the survey 1 data using ATLAS.ti 8 software for qualitative data analysis and conducted a conventional content analysis of survey 1 data 89 . Given the multidisciplinarity of the topic and our multidisciplinary group of respondents, we selected an inductive method of analysis to reflect, as simply as possible, the priorities reported by the study sample without imposing disciplinary frameworks. In brief, responses were read multiple times, and characteristics were highlighted in the text. A list of characteristics (words and phrases) was constructed, and we coded the data according to emerging categories (for example, accessibility, basic amenities, career, built environment, mental health services and so on). The analysis yielded 19 broad categories with 423 characteristics. Within each category, characteristics were grouped into statements that preserved meaning while streamlining the list, which yielded 134 characteristic statements. The University of Washington research team convened a 1-week series of data discussions with youth advisers to review the wording of the characteristics and ensure their comprehensibility among readers from different countries. The survey 1 categorized data were reviewed by members of the scientific advisory board, who recommended that using relevant domains to group characteristics would provide meaningful context to the final list. We used IBM SPSS 28.0 for quantitative analyses of data from surveys 2 and 3. In survey 2, we analysed the frequency of endorsement of the 40 characteristics selected by panellists and generated a ranked list of all responses, with the most frequently endorsed at the top. The decision to select 40 characteristics aligned with methods applied in a previous priority-setting exercise 90 and permitted a list of preferred characteristics that could subsequently be categorized according to a known framework, allowing city stakeholders a broad list from which to select actions. We also analysed frequency of endorsement by age categories (18–24, 25–35 and >35). To amplify the viewpoints of younger participants (under age 35), we combined the top 25 characteristic statements of panellists over 35 with the top 26 characteristic statements of participants under 35 to generate a list of 40 statements, including 11 shared ranked characteristics. As noted, we removed three of these statements because of their redundancy. In survey 3, we analysed data consisting of 37 characteristic statements divided across 6 socioecological domains. Characteristics in each domain were ranked according to one of three framings. We calculated mean ranking and standard deviation for characteristics in each framing category per socioecological domain. Mean rankings (with standard deviation) were calculated across framing categories to arrive at the total mean rank per characteristic and they reflect the proportional contribution of each domain. We also calculated the frequency with which panellists ranked each characteristic statement number 1.

Our study methods align with good practices for health research priority setting as follows 32 .

Context: we defined a clear focus of the study.

Use of a comprehensive approach: we outlined methods, time frame and intentions for the results before beginning the study; however, we modified (that is, simplified) the methods for survey 3 to minimize study attrition.

Inclusiveness: we prioritized recruiting for broad representation and maintaining engagement of an inclusive participant group, and methodological decisions were made in service of this priority.

Information gathering: our reviews of the literature showed that a study bringing together these key stakeholders had not been conducted, despite the need.

Planning for implementation: we recognized from the outset that additional convening at regional levels would be required to implement action, and our network members are able to move the agenda forwards.

Criteria: we determined criteria for the priorities (framing: feasibility of implementation, immediacy of impact and ability to help youth thrive) that study participants used and which we believe will be useful for practical implementation.

Methods for deciding on priorities: we determined that rank order would be used to determine priorities.

Evaluation: not applicable; we have not planned an evaluation of the impact of priority setting in this phase of work.

Transparency: the manuscript preparation, review and revisions enable us to present findings with transparency.

COVID-19 qualitative data

We managed the COVID-19 qualitative data using Microsoft Excel and Microsoft Word. We carried out a rapid qualitative analysis 91 . First, the text responses were read and re-read multiple times. We coded the data for content related to expressions of change, no change or areas of emphasis in participants’ perceptions of youth mental health in cities during the pandemic. We focused our attention on data that highlighted changes. We further segmented the data by participant age categories, domains of change and suggested actions, and we assigned socioecological level of changes. We created a matrix using excerpted or highlighted text categorized according to these categories. Three data analysts (P.Y.C., T.C. and A.M.-K.) reviewed the domains of change and identified emerging themes, which were added to the matrix and linked to quotes. The team discussed the themes and came to consensus on assignment to a socioecological level. We prioritized reporting recurring concepts (for example, themes of loss, inequity, green space, isolation and mental illnesses) and contrasting concepts (for example, gains associated with COVID-19) and associated actions 92 .

Reporting summary

Further information on research design is available in the  Nature Portfolio Reporting Summary linked to this article.

Data availability

Survey data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, P.Y.C., on reasonable request. The sharing of data must comply with institutional policies that require a formal agreement (between the corresponding author and the requester) for sharing and release of data under limits permissible by the institutional review board.

Gruebner, O. et al. Cities and mental health. Deutsch. Arztebl. Int. 114 , 121–127 (2017).

Google Scholar  

van der Wal, J. M. et al. Advancing urban mental health research: from complexity science to actionable targets for intervention. Lancet Psychiatry 8 , 991–1000 (2021).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

UNICEF Innovation & ARM. Innovation for Children in an Urbanizing World: a Use-Case Handbook , https://www.unicef.org/innovation/reports/innovation-children-urbanizing-world (UNICEF, 2017).

Galea, S. The urban brain: new directions in research exploring the relation between cities and mood-anxiety disorders. Depress. Anxiety 28 , 857–862 (2011).

March, D. et al. Psychosis and place. Epidemiol. Rev. 30 , 84–100 (2008).

Faris, R. & Dunham, H. Mental Disorders in Urban Areas (Univ. Chicago Press, 1939).

de Leeuw, E. in Healthy Cities: The Theory, Policy, and Practice of Value-Based Urban Planning (eds de Leeuw, E. & Simos, J.) Ch. 1, 3–30 (Springer, 2017).

Duhl, L. J. The Urban Condition: People and Policy in the Metropolis (Simon and Schuster, 1963).

Vlahov, D., Ettman, C. K. & Galea, S. in Urban Health (eds Galea, S. et al.) Ch. 44 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2019).

Urbanization and Development: Emerging Futures (UN-Habitat, 2016).

Anglin, D. M. et al. From womb to neighborhood: a racial analysis of social determinants of psychosis in the United States. Am. J. Psychiatry 178 , 599–610 (2021).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hancock, T. & Duhl, L. Promoting Health in the Urban Context WHO Healthy Cities Papers No. 1 (FADL, 1986).

Okkels, N., Kristiansen, C. B., Munk-Jørgensen, P. & Sartorius, N. Urban mental health: challenges and perspectives. Curr. Opin. Psychiatry 31 , 258–264 (2018).

Kessler, R., Berglund, P., Demler, O., Jin, R. & Merikangas, K. Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey replication. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 62 , 593–602 (2005).

Global Health Data Exchange, Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2020).

Santomauro, D. F. et al. Global prevalence and burden of depressive and anxiety disorders in 204 countries and territories in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet 398 , 1700–1712 (2021).

Article   Google Scholar  

Jones, S. et al. Mental health, suicidality, and connectedness among high school students during the COVID-19 pandemic - adolescent behaviors and experiences survey, United States, January-June 2021. Morb. Mortal. Wkly Rep. Suppl. 71 , 16–21 (2022).

Call, K. et al. Adolescent health and well-being in the twenty-first century: a global perspective. J. Res. Adolesc. 12 , 69–98 (2002).

Dahl, R. E., Allen, N. B., Wilbrecht, L. & Suleiman, A. B. Importance of investing in adolescence from a developmental science perspective. Nature 554 , 441–450 (2018).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Selvarajah, S. et al. Racism, xenophobia, and discrimination: mapping pathways to health outcomes. Lancet 400 , 2109–2124 (2022).

Hurd, N. M., Stoddard, S. A. & Zimmerman, M. A. Neighborhoods, social support, and African American adolescents’ mental health outcomes: a multilevel path analysis. Child Dev. 84 , 858–874 (2013).

Protecting Youth Mental Health: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory (ed. Health and Human Services) (Office of the Surgeon General, 2021).

Patton, G. C. et al. Our future: a Lancet commission on adolescent health and wellbeing. Lancet 387 , 2423–2478 (2016).

Bundy, D. A. P. et al. Investment in child and adolescent health and development: key messages from Disease Control Priorities, 3rd Edition. Lancet 391 , 687–699 (2018).

Caruthers, A. S., Van Ryzin, M. J. & Dishion, T. J. Preventing high-risk sexual behavior in early adulthood with family interventions in adolescence: outcomes and developmental processes. Prev. Sci. 15 , 59–69 (2014).

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Stelmach, R. et al. The global return on investment from preventing and treating adolescent mental disorders and suicide: a modelling study. BMJ Glob. Health 7 , e007759 (2022).

Roe, J. & McCay L. Restorative Cities: Urban Design for Mental Health and Wellbeing (Bloomsbury Visual Arts, 2020).

Knöll, M. & Roe, J. J. Ten questions concerning a new adolescent health urbanism. Build. Environ. 126 , 496–506 (2017).

Domaradzka, A. Urban social movements and the right to the city: an introduction to the special issue on urban mobilization. Voluntas 29 , 607–620 (2018).

Sinha, M., Collins, P. & Herrman, H. Collective action for young people’s mental health: the citiesRISE experience. World Psychiatry 18 , 114–115 (2019).

Sinha, M. et al. Towards mental health friendly cities during and after COVID-19. Cities Health https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2020.1790251 (2020).

Viergever, R. F., Olifson, S., Ghaffar, A. & Terry, R. F. A checklist for health research priority setting: nine common themes of good practice. Health Res. Policy Syst. 8 , 36 (2010).

Bronfenbrenner, U. Toward an experimental ecology of human development. Am. Psychol. 32 , 513–531 (1977).

Banati, P. & Lansford, J. E. in Handbook of Adolescent Development Research and its Impact on Global Policy (eds Lansford, J. E. & Banati, P.) Ch. 1, 1–26 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2017).

What Science Has Shown Can Help Young People with Anxiety and Depression: Identifying and Reviewing the ‘Active Ingredients’ of Effective Interventions (Wellcome Trust, 2021).

Beames, J. R., Kikas, K. & Werner-Seidler, A. Prevention and early intervention of depression in young people: an integrated narrative review of affective awareness and Ecological Momentary Assessment. BMC Psychol. 9 , 113 (2021).

Daros, A. R. et al. A meta-analysis of emotional regulation outcomes in psychological interventions for youth with depression and anxiety. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5 , 1443–1457 (2021).

Johnson, S. B., Voegtline, K. M., Ialongo, N., Hill, K. G. & Musci, R. J. Self-control in first grade predicts success in the transition to adulthood. Dev. Psychopathol. 35 , 1358–1370 (2023).

Pandey, A. et al. Effectiveness of universal self-regulation-based interventions in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 172 , 566–575 (2018).

Arda, T. & Ocak, S. Social competence and promoting alternative thinking strategies - PATHS preschool curriculum. Educ. Sci. Theory Pract. 12 , 2691–2698 (2012).

Webster-Stratton, C. Randomized trial of two parent-training programs for families with conduct-disordered children. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 52 , 666–678 (1984).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hentges, R. F. et al. The long-term indirect effect of the early Family Check-Up intervention on adolescent internalizing and externalizing symptoms via inhibitory control. Dev. Psychopathol. 32 , 1544–1554 (2020).

Cuijpers, P. et al. The associations of common psychological problems with mental disorders among college students. Front. Psychiatry 12 , 573637 (2021).

Cuijpers, P. Indirect prevention and treatment of depression: an emerging paradigm? Clin. Psychol. Eur. 3 , e6847 (2021).

Blum, R. W., Lai, J., Martinez, M. & Jessee, C. Adolescent connectedness: cornerstone for health and wellbeing. Brit. Med. J. 379 , e069213 (2022).

Filia, K., Eastwood, O., Herniman, S. & Badcock, P. Facilitating improvements in young people’s social relationships to prevent or treat depression: a review of empirically supported interventions. Transl. Psychiatry 11 , 305 (2021).

Herrman, H. et al. Time for united action on depression: a Lancet-World Psychiatric Association Commission. Lancet 399 , 957–1022 (2022).

United Nations Children’s Fund. The State of the World’s Children 2021: on My Mind – Promoting, Protecting and Caring for Children’s Mental Health (UNICEF, 2021).

Massetti, G. M., Hughes, K., Bellis, M. A. & Mercy, J. in Adverse Childhood Experiences (eds Asmundson, G. J. G. & Afifi, T. O.) 209–231 (Academic, 2020).

Bordin, I. Severe physical punishment: risk of mental health problems for poor urban children in Brazil. Bull. World Health Organ. 87 , 336–344 (2009).

Cecil, C. A., Viding, E., Fearon, P., Glaser, D. & McCrory, E. J. Disentangling the mental health impact of childhood abuse and neglect. Child Abuse Negl. 63 , 106–119 (2017).

Giovanelli, A., Reynolds, A. J., Mondi, C. F. & Ou, S. R. Adverse childhood experiences and adult well-being in a low-income, urban cohort. Pediatrics 137 , e20154016 (2016).

Molano, A., Harker, A. & Cristancho, J. C. Effects of indirect exposure to homicide events on children’s mental health: evidence from urban settings in Colombia. J. Youth Adolesc. 47 , 2060–2072 (2018).

Cole, H. et al. Can healthy cities be made really healthy? Lancet Public Health 2 , e394–e395 (2017).

Dadvand, P. et al. Use of green spaces, self-satisfaction and social contacts in adolescents: a population-based CASPIAN-V study. Environ. Res. 168 , 171–177 (2019).

Markevych, I. et al. Access to urban green spaces and behavioural problems in children: results from the GINIplus and LISAplus studies. Environ. Int. 71 , 29–35 (2014).

Thompson, C., Silvereirinha de Oliveira, E., Wheeler, B., Depledge, M. & van den Bosch, M. Urban Green Spaces and Health (WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2016).

Buli, B. G., Tillander, A., Fell, T. & Bälter, K. Active commuting and healthy behavior among adolescents in neighborhoods with varying socioeconomic status: the NESLA study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19 , 3784 (2022).

Laine, J. et al. Cost-effectiveness of population-level physical activity interventions: a systematic review. Am. J. Health Promot. 29 , 71–80 (2014).

Martínez, L. & Short, J. R. The pandemic city: urban issues in the time of COVID-19. Sustainability 13 , 3295 (2021).

Mouratidis, K. How COVID-19 reshaped quality of life in cities: a synthesis and implications for urban planning. Land Use Policy 111 , 105772 (2021).

Bell, I. H. et al. The impact of COVID-19 on youth mental health: a mixed methods survey. Psychiatry Res. 321 , 115082 (2023).

Loades, M. E. et al. Rapid systematic review: the impact of social isolation and loneliness on the mental health of children and adolescents in the context of COVID-19. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 59 , 1218–1239 (2020).

Ng, M. Y., Eckshtain, D. & Weisz, J. R. Assessing fit between evidence-based psychotherapies for youth depression and real-life coping in early adolescence. J. Clin. Child Adolesc. Psychol. 45 , 732–748 (2016).

O’Kane, C., Haj-Ahmad, J. & Friscia, F. Engaged and Heard! Guidelines on Adolescent Participation and Civic Engagement , https://www.unicef.org/media/73296/file/ADAP-Guidelines-for-Participation.pdf (United Nations Children’s Fund, 2020).

Rahmaty, M. & Leiva Roesch, J. Youth Participation in Global Governance for Sustaining Peace and Climate Action International Peace Institute Issue Briefs, https://www.ipinst.org/2021/04/youth-participation-in-global-governance-for-sustaining-peace-and-climate-action (International Peace Institute, 2021).

Erondu, N. A., Mofokeng, T., Kavanagh, M. M., Matache, M. & Bosha, S. L. Towards anti-racist policies and strategies to reduce poor health outcomes in racialised communities: introducing the O’Neill-Lancet Commission on Racism, Structural Discrimination, and Global Health. Lancet 401 , 1834–1836 (2023).

Fani, N., Carter, S. E., Harnett, N. G., Ressler, K. J. & Bradley, B. Association of racial discrimination with neural response to threat in Black women in the US exposed to trauma. JAMA Psychiatry 78 , 1005–1012 (2021).

Fani, N. et al. Racial discrimination associates with lower cingulate cortex thickness in trauma-exposed black women. Neuropsychopharmacology 47 , 2230–2237 (2022).

Abubakar, I. et al. Confronting the consequences of racism, xenophobia, and discrimination on health and health-care systems. Lancet 400 , 2137–2146 (2022).

Towe, V. L. et al. Cross-sector collaborations and partnerships: essential ingredients to help shape health and well-being. Health Aff. 35 , 1964–1969 (2016).

Walker, S. C. et al. Cocreating evidence-informed health equity policy with community. Health Serv. Res. 57 , 137–148 (2022).

Murphy, L. E., Jack, H. E., Concepcion, T. L. & Collins, P. Y. Integrating urban adolescent mental health into urban sustainability collective action: an application of Shiffman & Smith’s framework for global health prioritization. Front. Psychiatry 11 , 44 (2020).

New Urban Agenda (UN Habitat III Secretariat, 2017).

Health as the Pulse of the New Urban Agenda: United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development, Quito (World Health Organization 2016).

Diez Roux, A. V. Health in cities: is a systems approach needed. Cad. Saude Publica 31 , 9–13 (2015).

Pykett, J. et al. Urban precarity and youth mental health: an interpretive scoping review of emerging approaches. Soc. Sci. Med. 320 , 115619 (2023).

O’Brien, R., Neman, T., Seltzer, N., Evans, L. & Venkataramani, A. Structural racism, economic opportunity and racial health disparities: evidence from U.S. counties. SSM Popul. Health 11 , 100564 (2020).

Fleckney, P. & Bentley, R. The urban public realm and adolescent mental health and wellbeing: a systematic review. Soc. Sci. Medicine 284 , 114242 (2021).

de Leeuw, E. & Simos, J. Healthy cities move to Maturity in Healthy Cities (eds de Leeuw, E. & Simos, J.) Ch. 5, 74-86 (Springer, 2017).

Our Cities, Our Health, Our Future: Acting on Social Determinants for Health Equity in Urban Settings - Report to the WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health from the Knowledge Network on Urban Settings (World Health Organization, 2008).

UNICEF Programme Guidance for the Second Decade: Programming with and for Adolescents Programme Division 2018, https://www.unicef.org/media/57336/file (UNICEF, 2018).

Growing Up Boulder: Boulder’s Child- and Youth-Friendly City Initiative (Growing Up Boulder, 2015).

O’Reilly, M., Svirydzenka, N., Adams, S. & Dogra, N. Review of mental health promotion interventions in schools. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 53 , 647–662 (2018).

Kutcher, S. et al. Creating evidence-based youth mental health policy in sub-Saharan Africa: a description of the integrated approach to addressing the issue of youth depression in Malawi and Tanzania. Front. Psychiatry 10 , 542 (2019).

Shinde, S. et al. Promoting school climate and health outcomes with the SEHER multi-component secondary school intervention in Bihar, India: a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet 392 , 2465–2477 (2018).

A New Agenda for Mental Health in the Americas: Report of the Pan American Health Organization High-Level Commission on Mental Health and COVID-1 9, https://doi.org/10.37774/9789275127223 (Pan American Health Organization, 2023).

Gibbs, A. et al. Stepping Stones and Creating Futures intervention to prevent intimate partner violence among young people: cluster randomized controlled trial. J. Adolesc. Health 66 , 323–335 (2020).

Hsieh, H.-F. & Shannon, S. E. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual. Health Res. 15 , 1277–1288 (2005).

Collins, P. Y. et al. Grand challenges in global mental health. Nature 475 , 27–30 (2011).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hamilton, A. B. Qualitative Methods in Rapid Turn-around Health Services Research. VA HSR&D National Cyberseminar Series: Spotlight on Women’s Health, 2013, https://www.hsrd.research.va.gov/for_researchers/cyber_seminars/archives/video_archive.cfm?SessionID=780 (2013).

Ryan, G. W. & Bernard, H. R. Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods 15 , 85–109 (2003).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank M. Antia, S. Talam and J. Vollendroft for contributions to this project; H. Jack for contributions to the manuscript revision; and the survey panellists without whom this work would not have been possible. M.K. was supported in part by funding from the Fogarty International Center (K43 TW010716) and the National Institute of Mental Health (R21 MH124149) of the National Institutes of Health. This study was supported in part by funding to citiesRISE (M.M. and M.H.) from the Rural India Supporting Trust and from Pivotal Ventures. This study was conducted while P.Y.C. was on the faculty at the University of Washington, Seattle. The University of Washington (P.Y.C. and T.C.) received funding from citiesRISE by subcontract. T.D. is a staff member of the World Health Organization (WHO). The content and views expressed in this manuscript are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views, decisions or policies of the institutions with which they are affiliated, including WHO, the US Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

Pamela Y. Collins, Augustina Mensa-Kwao & Emily Queen

citiesRISE, New York, NY, USA

Moitreyee Sinha & Matthew Hughsam

Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

Tessa Concepcion, Modhurima Moitra & Jürgen Unützer

Centre for Adolescent Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

George Patton

Dumbarton Oaks, Harvard University, Washington, DC, USA

Centre for Urban Design and Mental Health, London, UK

Layla McCay

Orygen, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Helen Herrman

University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Ecole de Sante Publique, Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Evelyne de Leeuw

Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA

Nalini Anand

Aga Khan University, Nairobi, Kenya

Lukoye Atwoli

Grand Challenges Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Nicole Bardikoff

Good South Social Impact Enterprise, Durban, South Africa

Chantelle Booysen

Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru

Inés Bustamante

Sun Yat Sen University, Guangzhou, China

Mental Health America, New York, NY, USA

Kelly Davis

World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland

The TruePoint Center, Boston, MA, USA

Nathaniel Foote

Healthy Brains Global Initiative, Nairobi, Kenya

Damian Juma

Teach for Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal

Shisir Khanal

Department of Population Health, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA

Manasi Kumar

University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya

Sacramento County Board of Education, Sacramento, CA, USA

Bina Lefkowitz

Lefkowitz Consulting, Sacramento, CA, USA

Fajara Associates, London, UK

Peter McDermott

Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

Yvonne Ochieng

University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria

Olayinka Omigbodun

Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia

José Miguel Uribe-Restrepo

Wellcome Trust, London, UK

Miranda Wolpert

Climate Mental Health Network, Annapolis, MD, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

This study was led by a core group, P.Y.C., G.P., M.S. and T.W., who were members of the project’s scientific advisory board and executive committee and part of the group of 32 co-authors (P.Y.C., M.S., T.C., G.P., T.W., L.M., A.M.-K., L.A., N.B., I.B., Y.C., T.D., E.d.L., N.F., H.H., S.K., M.K., B.L., O.O., J.M.U.-R., C.B., K.D., M.H., D.J., M.M., E.Q., Y.O., L.Z., N.A., P.M., J.U. and M.W.). P.Y.C. and T.C. regularly updated the core group members by e-mail, and P.Y.C. led online meetings with updates on study progress and data collection and study outcomes with members of the scientific advisory board (N.B., I.B., Y.C., T.D., E.d.L., N.F., H.H., S.K., M.K., B.L., O.O., J.M.U.-R. and K.D.), youth advisory board (K.D., C.B., D.J., Y.O., E.Q. and L.Z.) and executive committee (N.A., J.U. and M.W.). P.Y.C. (the core group lead) and members of the scientific advisory board and executive committee were involved with conceptualization, study design and methodology. Youth advisers assisted with qualitative data analysis. P.Y.C., T.C. and A.M.-K. were also responsible for data curation and formal analysis; P.Y.C. and T.C. wrote the original draft, with contribution from G.P., M.S., T.W., H.H. and L.M. P.Y.C., T.C., A.M.-K., M.M., H.H. and E.d.L. reviewed and organized responses to reviewers. All co-authors reviewed responses to the reviewers. P.Y.C. led the manuscript revision with A.M.-K., M.M. and T.C. All co-authors had the opportunity to discuss the results, review full drafts of the manuscript and provide comments on the manuscript at all stages.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pamela Y. Collins .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature thanks Rhiannon Corcoran, Sean Grant, Diana Romero, Ezra Susser, J. Phillip Thompson and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended data fig. 1 distribution of participants by nationality (n = 518) a,b,c ..

a Countries Participating: Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Canada, China, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, France, Germany, Ghana, Haiti, Hong Kong, India, Iran, Italy, Kenya, Malawi, Mauritius, Mexico, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Rwanda, Samoa, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Tanzania, The Gambia, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, UK, USA, Venezuela, Zambia, Zimbabwe (53 total); b Two responses (“Asian” and “Indigenous and European”) do not list a nation but capture verbatim open-text responses; c Countries with one participant removed from graph and include: Argentina, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Croatia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, France, Haiti, Hong Kong, Indigenous and European, Mauritius, New Zealand, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Switzerland, Taiwan, Tanzania, The Gambia, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Venezuela.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Participant Nationality by Survey Round.

a SEA = South-East Asia, NA = North America*, AF = Africa, LSA = Latin & South America*, EU = Europe, WP = Western Pacific, EM = Eastern Mediterranean.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Distribution of Participants by WHO Region * and Survey Round.

a SEA = South-East Asia, NA = North America*, AF = Africa, LSA = Latin & South America*, EU = Europe, WP = Western Pacific, EM = Eastern Mediterranean; *We separated North America from Latin & South America for more transparent display of participant distribution.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information.

Supplementary Note which describes citiesRISE and lists the project team members of Making cities mental health-friendly for adolescents and young adults.

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Collins, P.Y., Sinha, M., Concepcion, T. et al. Making cities mental health friendly for adolescents and young adults. Nature (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-07005-4

Download citation

Received : 15 June 2022

Accepted : 15 December 2023

Published : 21 February 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-07005-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

urban design research papers

February 20, 2024

Research Seminar February 27 – Zeyu Wang

Our winter quarter seminar series continues February 27, 12:30-1:30pm in Gould 440. This is an in-person seminar.

Utilizing Time Series Street View Imagery to Assess Visual Perceptual Quality in Urban Neighborhoods: A Case Study of New York City and Singapore

Discover an innovative method using time series street view imagery to evaluate urban neighborhoods’ visual quality. This approach, differing from traditional survey methods, employs deep learning on a decade-long dataset, analyzing six perception indicators in diverse geographies. Our case studies in Singapore and New York City public housing demonstrates that temporal imagery can effectively assess spatial equity and monitor the visual environmental qualities of neighborhoods over time, providing a new, comprehensive, and scalable workflow. It can help governments improve policies and make informed decisions on enhancing the design and living standards of urban residential areas. Join us to see how this cutting-edge technique is transforming urban analysis and policy development.

Related Paper:

Wang, Z., Ito, K., & Biljecki, F. (2024). Assessing the equity and evolution of urban visual perceptual quality with time series street view imagery. Cities, 145, 104704.  Available at ResearchGate .

Zeyu Wang is a PhD student in the interdisciplinary UDP program at the University of Washington. Holding a Bachelor of Science in Geography and a Master of Urban Planning (MUP), his academic pursuits are deeply rooted in understanding built environment and human mobility patterns, with a strong focus on urban data science. He is passionate about using advanced technologies and novel data to monitor and evaluate urban built environment, gaining insights into complex urban issues and call for social justice.

Recent Posts

  • Research Seminar February 27 – Zeyu Wang February 20, 2024
  • Research Seminar February 13 – Ekin Ugurel February 7, 2024
  • Spotlight on alumnus Junfeng Jiao December 1, 2023
  • Research Seminar November 14 – Karen Chen October 27, 2023
  • Research Seminar October 24 – Dylan Stevenson October 18, 2023

Recent Comments

  • February 2024
  • December 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • September 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020

Be boundless

Connect with us:.

© 2024 University of Washington | Seattle, WA

Home

Search form

  • Publications

Developing Seamless Connections in the Urban Transit Network: A Look Toward High-Speed Rail Interconnectivity

urban design research papers

Abstract: 

In the past, U.S. studies on high-speed rail (HSR) have focused primarily on the economic implications of high-speed rail development. Recently, however, studies have begun evaluating multimodal connectivity of HSR stations. The ways in which different modes are connected to HSR stations influences the ridership of HSR. As the development of the U.S. HSR system has reached the stage of design and construction, guidelines on multimodal connectivity are necessary to maximize that ridership.

The objective of this study was to quantify multimodal connectivity of HSR stations and its impact on ridership in four countries where HSR has been established, setting the basis for future rail interconnectivity. In this study, multimodal connectivity is measured by the number of different modes of transportation connected to HSR stations, the number of installed arrival and departure facilities for each mode, the transfer time from connecting modes to boarding platforms at HSR stations, and the arrival time intervals of public transportation modes. To achieve this objective, data were collected from HSR systems of France, Spain, Japan and China. Various characteristics of the connecting modes were observed and compared. The relationship between ridership and the characteristics of multimodal connectivity was identified using regression models developed in this study.

It was observed from the analysis that the multimodal connectivity at HSR stations in various countries presents a variety of profiles. For example, HSR stations in China connect with more bus lines than those in other countries. Relatively, there are more bus stops/terminals provided in France. Transfer times in Japan and China are significantly longer than those in France and Spain. The average bus arrival interval in France is longest, at more than double that in China.

All the connectivity variables considered in this study influence ridership in these four countries in various ways. On the whole, bus, subway, and regional railroad service influence ridership significantly. For instance, the more bus services connected to the station, the higher the ridership. This trend is apparent in three of the four countries, France being the exception. Also, subway, light rail, and traditional rail are modes of high-capacity transportation. Their connection to HSR stations always implies high ridership for high-speed rail. The number of facilities also shows significant impacts on HSR ridership. For instance, the more bus and subway stops, and the more bicycle parking and taxi stands, the higher the ridership. Transfer time also has a significant influence.

These findings have important implications for the proposed California and Nevada HSR stations. Accommodations for arrival on foot or by bicycle are recommended. More issues on transfer time at HSR stations in the metropolitan areas in California are elaborated upon. Also discussed are the unique needs of visitors to Las Vegas and their implications for HSR design.

Publications: 

PDF icon

Authors: 

HUALIANG (HARRY) TENG, PH.D.

Dr. Teng, an Associate Professor in Transportation Engineering at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), has approximately 30 years of research and education experience in transportation engineering and management. He graduated from China’s Beijing Jiaotong University with his B.S. and M.S. degrees in railroad engineering and management. He has a second M.S. degree from West Virginia University on railroad operations, and a Ph.D. in civil engineering from Purdue University. He has taught at Beijing Jiaotong University, Polytechnic University of New York, The University of Virginia (UVa), and UNLV. He was the Associate Director for the Center of Transportation Studies at UVa.

Dr. Teng leads the railroad and high-speed rail program at UNLV. Currently, he is operating the Transit UTC at UNLV for which he has been involved in research with federal and local agencies and organized distinguished seminars. He has initiated the railroad, high-speed rail, and transit program at UNLV for which he has developed a curriculum and certificate program on railroad. He is the advisor for the AREMA student chapter at UNLV. In addition, he has been active in railroad professional activities.

Dr. Teng also is interested in Intelligent Transportation Systems, infrastructure maintenance, air quality analysis, freight transportation, safety, and demand forecasting. So far, he has published approximately 40 peer-reviewed technical papers.

TARIK TOUGHRAI

A graduate Student of School of Engineering at the Ecole Nationale des Travaux Publics de l’Etat, Lyon, France, Tarik Toughrai was an intern at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, when he worked on this research project.

TINGTING YU

Tingting Yu is pursuing a M.S degree in Civil Engineering at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. She obtained her B.S. degree of Economics from Wuhan University in China.

RUSSELL OZAWA

Russell Ozawa graduated from the University of California at Davis (UCD) with a B.S. degree in civil engineering and a minor in Japanese. He also graduated from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), with an M.S. degree in civil engineering. Prior to obtaining his M.S. degree, he worked at Miyamoto International, Inc. in Los Angeles, California, for several years as a project engineer. Miyamoto International is a global structural and earthquake engineering private firm.

Mr. Ozawa is currently helping Dr. Teng at UNLV in the research of high-speed rail station multimodal connectivity. He has been researching the high-speed rail systems of Japan. His research interests include high-speed rail systems, transportation systems, structural engineering design, as well as sustainability construction and design.

BINGYI HU, PH.D.

Bingyi Hu is an Associate Professor in the School of Computer Science at Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, China. He obtained his Ph.D. degree from Tsinghua University. Dr. Hu has developed a railway information network for a railway bureau in China. He has been working in the chief engineer office of Xi’an railway bureau for over a year and is familiar with railway information exchange among departments. His research interests include information sharing and network construction.

In addition, Dr. Hu is also interested in device design and development. He has designed more than ten devices and systems and holds more than 30 patents from China. These designs are related to medical instruments and monitoring device of railway systems.

Published: 

Keywords: .

SJSU Research Foundation | 210 N. 4th Street, 4th Floor | San Jose, CA 95112 | Office phone: 408-924-7560 | Office fax: 408-924-7565 | email:  [email protected] ©2018  Mineta Transportation Institute  | CSUTC |  MCTM

San José State University

Subscribe to the PwC Newsletter

Join the community, edit social preview.

urban design research papers

Add a new code entry for this paper

Remove a code repository from this paper, mark the official implementation from paper authors, add a new evaluation result row, remove a task, add a method, remove a method, edit datasets, design and flight demonstration of a quadrotor for urban mapping and target tracking research.

20 Feb 2024  ·  Collin Hague , Nick Kakavitsas , Jincheng Zhang , Chris Beam , Andrew Willis , Artur Wolek · Edit social preview

This paper describes the hardware design and flight demonstration of a small quadrotor with imaging sensors for urban mapping, hazard avoidance, and target tracking research. The vehicle is equipped with five cameras, including two pairs of fisheye stereo cameras that enable a nearly omnidirectional view and a two-axis gimbaled camera. An onboard NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano computer running the Robot Operating System software is used for data collection. An autonomous tracking behavior was implemented to coordinate the motion of the quadrotor and gimbaled camera to track a moving GPS coordinate. The data collection system was demonstrated through a flight test that tracked a moving GPS-tagged vehicle through a series of roads and parking lots. A map of the environment was reconstructed from the collected images using the Direct Sparse Odometry (DSO) algorithm. The performance of the quadrotor was also characterized by acoustic noise, communication range, battery voltage in hover, and maximum speed tests.

Code Edit Add Remove Mark official

Tasks edit add remove, datasets edit, results from the paper edit add remove, methods edit add remove.

California Water Library

Urban Levee Design Criteria

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | May 15th, 2012

The Urban Levee Design Criteria (ULDC) provides engineering criteria and guidance for the design, evaluation, operation, and maintenance of levees and floodwalls that provide an urban level of flood protection (i.e., 200-year level of flood protection) in California, as well as for determining design water surface elevations (DWSE) along leveed and unleveed streams.

Other topics beyond design and evaluation are presented to provide reasonable assurance that once a levee or floodwall is found to provide an urban level of flood protection, it will continue to do so.

RELATED CONTENT: Urban Level of Flood Protection Criteria

flood management , levees , planning and management , Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta

Search the California Water Library

urban design research papers

  • Best Management Practice
  • Biological Opinion
  • Book/Textbook
  • Bulletin 118
  • California Water Plan
  • Conference proceedings
  • Congressional Testimony
  • Environmental Documents
  • Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) review findings
  • Guidance Document
  • Handbook/Guide
  • Issue Paper
  • Journal Article
  • Legal document
  • Legislation
  • NGO Position Paper
  • Policy - state
  • Policy Brief
  • Research Article
  • Research Brief
  • Science Panel Report
  • Technical Report
  • Water Right Decision
  • White Paper
  • Adaptive Management
  • Agriculture
  • Basic Information
  • California Water Fix/BDCP/Delta Conveyance
  • Climate Change
  • Drinking Water
  • Drought & Hydrology
  • Desalination
  • Ecosystem & Species Mgt
  • Ecosystem Restoration
  • Invasive Species
  • Wetland Mitigation
  • Environmental Justice
  • Flood Management
  • Geochemistry
  • Geohydrology
  • Groundwater
  • Human Right to Water
  • Infrastructure
  • Integrated Regional Water Management
  • Landscape Reform
  • People & Water
  • Planning & Management
  • Recycled Water
  • Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
  • Science Management
  • Transfers & Markets
  • Tribal Water Issues
  • Upper Watershed Management
  • Water & Energy
  • Water Project Operations
  • Water Rights, Water Law
  • Water Supply
  • Water Quality
  • Federal Water Quality
  • Non Point Pollution Sources
  • Point Pollution Sources
  • State Water Quality
  • Water Quality Monitoring
  • Water Use & Efficiency
  • Uncategorized
  • adaptive management
  • adjudicated basins
  • agricultural drainage
  • agriculture
  • agriculture water use and efficiency
  • allocations
  • anadromous fish
  • atmospheric rivers
  • basic information
  • basin characterization
  • benthic macroinvertebrates
  • best management practices (BMPs)
  • bioassessment
  • biological opinion (BiOp)
  • brine management
  • Central Valley
  • Central Valley Project (CVP)
  • climate change
  • cloud seeding
  • coastal aquifers
  • Colorado River
  • conjunctive use
  • debris flow
  • Delta conveyance
  • Delta Stewardship Council (DSC)
  • desalination
  • direct potable reuse
  • disadvantaged communities (DACs)
  • drinking water
  • economic analysis
  • ecosystem management
  • ecosystem restoration
  • endangered species
  • environmental justice
  • flood management
  • floodplain restoration
  • forest management
  • fugitive dust
  • Glen Canyon Dam
  • Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE)
  • Great Basin Aquifer
  • groundwater
  • Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program
  • groundwater contamination
  • groundwater dependent ecosystems
  • Groundwater Exchange
  • groundwater pumping impacts
  • groundwater recharge
  • Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP)
  • groundwater-surface water interaction
  • habitat restoration
  • human right to water
  • hydraulic fracturing
  • infrastructure
  • interbasin flow
  • invasive species
  • managed aquifer recharge (MAR) - also see Groundwater Recharge
  • microplastics
  • Monterey amendments
  • native fish
  • ocean acidification
  • oil and gas
  • outreach and engagement
  • planning and management
  • privatization
  • public trust doctrine
  • Quantification Settlement Agreement
  • reasonable use doctrine
  • recycled water
  • Regional Water Quality Control Plan
  • risk assessment
  • Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta
  • science management
  • sea level rise
  • seawater intrusion
  • State Water Project (SWP)
  • Subscription/Donation
  • Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP)
  • Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)
  • Trading - See Water Markets
  • transboundary aquifers
  • Transfers - See Water Markets
  • tribal water issues
  • uncategorized
  • upper watershed management
  • urban water conservation
  • vernal ponds
  • water and energy
  • water budget
  • water management - see planning and management
  • water markets
  • water pricing
  • water project operations
  • water quality
  • water rights
  • water supply
  • water supply forecasting
  • water transfers
  • water use efficiency

Hydrological Region

  • Central Coast
  • Lower Basin States and Mexico - Colorado River
  • North Coast
  • North Lahontan
  • Sacramento River
  • San Francisco Bay
  • San Joaquin River
  • South Coast
  • South Lahontan
  • Tulare Lake
  • Upper Basin States - Colorado River
  • Acton Valley 4-005
  • Adobe Lake Valley 6-010
  • Ames Valley 7-016
  • Amos Valley 7-034
  • Antelope Valley 6-044
  • Arroyo Santa Rosa Valley 4-007
  • Arroyo Seco Valley 7-037
  • Avawatz Valley 6-026
  • Batiquitos Lagoon Valley 9-022
  • Bear Valley 8-009
  • Bessemer Valley 7-015
  • Bicycle Valley 6-025
  • Big Meadows Valley 8-007
  • Big Valley (Lake) 5-015
  • Borrego Valley - Ocotillo Wells 7-024.02
  • Bristol Valley 7-008
  • Broadwell Valley 6-032
  • Buck Ridge Fault Valley 7-054
  • Butte Valley 1-003
  • Cadiz Valley 7-007
  • Cady Fault Area 6-090
  • Cahuilla Valley 9-006
  • Calzona Valley 7-041
  • Campo Valley 9-028
  • Canebrake Valley 7-046
  • Carpinteria 3-018
  • Carrizo Plain 3-019
  • Carson Valley 6-006
  • Castac Lake Valley 5-029
  • Caves Canyon Valley 6-038
  • Chemehuevi Valley 7-043
  • Chocolate Valley 7-032
  • Cholame Valley 3-005
  • Chuckwalla Valley 7-005
  • Coachella Valley - Desert Hot Springs 7-021.04
  • Coachella Valley - Indio 7-021.01
  • Coachella Valley - Mission Creek 7-021.02
  • Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass 7-021.04
  • Coastal Plain of Los Angeles - Central 4-011.04
  • Coastal Plain of Los Angeles - Hollywood 4-011.02
  • Coastal Plain of Los Angeles - Santa Monica 4-011.01
  • Coastal Plain of Los Angeles - West Coast 4-011.03
  • Coastal Plain of Orange County 8-001
  • Coastal Plain of San Diego 9-033
  • Collins Valley 7-055
  • Conejo 4-010
  • Copper Mountain Valley 7-011
  • Corralitos - Pajaro Valley 3-002.01
  • Cottonwood Valley 9-027
  • Coyote Lake Valley 6-037
  • Coyote Wells Valley 7-029
  • Cronise Valley 6-035
  • Cuddeback Valley 6-050
  • Cuyama Valley 3-013
  • Dale Valley 7-009
  • Darwin Valley 6-057
  • Davies Valley 7-061
  • Deadman Valley - Deadman Lake 7-013.01
  • Deadman Valley - Surprise Spring 7-013.02
  • Death Valley 6-018
  • Deep Springs Valley 6-015
  • Denning Spring Valley 6-078
  • Downtown 2-040
  • East Salton Sea 7-033
  • Eel River Valley 1-010
  • El Cajon Valley 9-016
  • El Mirage Valley 6-043
  • Elsinore - Bedfored-Coldwater 8-004.02
  • Elsinore - Elsinore Valley 8-004.01
  • Escondido Valley 9-009
  • Fenner Valley 7-002
  • Fish Lake Valley 6-014
  • Fremont Valley 6-046
  • Gilroy-Hollister Valley - Llagas Area 3-003.01
  • Goldstone Valley 6-048
  • Goleta 3-016
  • Harper Valley 6-047
  • Helendale Fault Valley 7-048
  • Hemet Lake Valley 8-006
  • Hidden Valley 4-016
  • Imperial Valley 7-030
  • Indian Wells Valley - 6-054
  • Iron Ridge Area 7-050
  • Ivanpah Valley 6-030
  • Jacumba Valley 7-047
  • Johnson Valley - Soggy Lake 7-018.01
  • Johnson Valley - Upper Johnson Valley 7-018.02
  • Joshua Tree 7-062
  • Kane Wash Area 6-089
  • Kelso Valley 6-031
  • Lanfair Valley 7-001
  • Langford Valley - Irwin 6036.02
  • Langford Valley - Langford Well Lake 6-036.01
  • Langford Valley 6-036.02
  • Las Posas Valley 4-008
  • Lavic Valley 7-014
  • Leach Valley 6-027
  • Lockwood Valley 4-017
  • Long Valley 6-011
  • Los Osos Valley - Los Osos 3-008.01
  • Los Osos Valley - Warden Creek 3-008.02
  • Lost Horse Valley 7-051
  • Lower Kingston Valley 6-021
  • Lower Mojave River Valley 6-040
  • Lucerne Valley 7-019
  • Malibu Valley 4-022
  • Means Valley 7-017
  • Mesquite Valley 6-029
  • Middle Amargosa Valley - 6-020
  • Middle Mojave River Valley 6-041
  • Mission Valley 9-014
  • Modoc) 5-004
  • Morongo Valley 7-020
  • Morro Valley 3-041
  • Napa-Sonoma Valley - Napa-Sonoma Lowlands 2-002.03
  • Needles Valley 7-044
  • Ocotillo-Clark Valley 7-025
  • Ogilby Valley 7-035
  • Ojai Valley 4-002
  • Orocopia Valley - 7-031
  • Owens Valley - Fish Slough 6-012.02
  • Owens Valley 6-012.01
  • Owl Lake Valley 6-088
  • Pahrump Valley 6-028
  • Palo Verde Mesa 7-039
  • Palo Verde Valley 7-038
  • Pamo Valley 9-024
  • Panamint Valley 6-058
  • Peach Tree Valley 3-032
  • Petaluma Valley 2-001
  • Pilot Knob Valley 6-051
  • Pinto Valley 7-006
  • Pipes Canyon Fault Valley 7-049
  • Pittsburgh Plain 2-004
  • Piute Valley 7-045
  • Pleasant Valley 4-006
  • Potrero Valley 9-029
  • Poway Valley 9-013
  • Raymond 4-023
  • Red Pass Valley 6-024
  • Redding Area - Anderson 5-006.03
  • Redding Area - Bowman 5-006.01
  • Redding Area - Enterprise 5-006.04
  • Redding Area - Millville 5-006.05
  • Redding Area - South Battle Creek 5-006.06
  • Rice Valley 7-004
  • Riggs Valley 6-023
  • Russell Valley 4-020
  • Sacramento Valley - Antelope 5-021.54
  • Sacramento Valley - Bend 5-021.53
  • Sacramento Valley - Butte 5-021.70
  • Sacramento Valley - Colusa 5-021.52
  • Sacramento Valley - Corning 5-021.51
  • Sacramento Valley - Los Molinos 5-021.56
  • Sacramento Valley - North American (5-021.64)
  • Sacramento Valley - North Yuba 5-021.60
  • Sacramento Valley - Red Bluff 5-021.50
  • Sacramento Valley - Solano 5-021.66
  • Sacramento Valley - South American 5-021.65
  • Sacramento Valley - South Yuba 5-021.61
  • Sacramento Valley - Sutter 5-021.62
  • Sacramento Valley - Vina 5-021.57
  • Sacramento Valley - Wyandotte Creek 5-021.69
  • Sacramento Valley - Yolo 5021.67
  • Salinas Valley - 180/400 Foot Aquifer 3-004.01
  • Salinas Valley - Atascadero Area 3-004.11
  • Salinas Valley - East Side Aquifer 3-004.02
  • Salinas Valley - Forebay Aquifer 3-004.04
  • Salinas Valley - Langley Area 3-004.09
  • Salinas Valley - Monterey 3-004.10
  • Salinas Valley - Paso Robles Area 3-004.06
  • Salinas Valley - Upper Valley Aquifer 3-004.05
  • Saline Valley 6-017
  • Salt Wells Valley 6-053
  • San Antonio Creek Valley 3-014
  • San Dieguito Creek 9-012
  • San Elijo Valley 9-023
  • San Felipe Valley 7-027
  • San Fernando Valley 4-012
  • San Gabriel Valley 4-013
  • San Jacinto 8-005
  • San Joaquin Valley - Chowchilla 5-022.05
  • San Joaquin Valley - Cosumnes (5-022.16)
  • San Joaquin Valley - Delta-Mendota 5-022.07
  • San Joaquin Valley - East Contra Costa 5-022.19
  • San Joaquin Valley - Eastern San Joaquin 5-022.01
  • San Joaquin Valley - Kaweah 5-022.11
  • San Joaquin Valley - Kern 5-022.14
  • San Joaquin Valley - Kings 5-022.08
  • San Joaquin Valley - Madera 5-022.06
  • San Joaquin Valley - Merced 5-022.04
  • San Joaquin Valley - Modesto 5-022.02
  • San Joaquin Valley - Pleasant Valley 5-022.10
  • San Joaquin Valley - Tracy 5-022.15
  • San Joaquin Valley - Tulare Lake 5-022.12
  • San Joaquin Valley - Tule 5-022.13
  • San Joaquin Valley - Turlock 5-022.03
  • San Joaquin Valley - Westside 5-022.09
  • San Joaquin Valley - White Wolf 5-022.18
  • San Juan Valley 9-001
  • San Luis Obispo Valley 3-009
  • San Luis Rey Valley - Lower San Luis Rey Valley 9-007.02
  • San Luis Rey Valley - Upper San Luis Rey Valley 9-007.01
  • San Marcos Area 9-032
  • San Mateo Valley 9-002
  • San Onofre Valley 9-003
  • San Pasqual Valley 9-010
  • Santa Barbara 3-017
  • Santa Clara River Valley - Fillmore 4-004.05
  • Santa Clara River Valley - Mound 4-004.03
  • Santa Clara River Valley - Oxnard 4-004.02
  • Santa Clara River Valley - Piru 4-004.06
  • Santa Clara River Valley - Santa Clara River Valley East 4-004.07
  • Santa Clara River Valley - Santa Paula 4-004.04
  • Santa Clara Valley - East Bay Plain 2-009.04
  • Santa Clara Valley - Niles Cone 2-009.01
  • Santa Clara Valley - San Mateo Plain 2-009.03
  • Santa Clara Valley - Santa Clara 2-009.02
  • Santa Cruz Mid-County 3-001
  • Santa Margarita 3-027
  • Santa Maria River Valley - Arroyo Grande 3-012.02
  • Santa Maria River Valley - Santa Maria 3-012.01
  • Santa Maria River Valley 3-012.02
  • Santa Maria Valley 9-011
  • Santa Rosa Valley - Santa Rosa Plain 1-055.01
  • Santa Ynez River Valley 3-015
  • Scott River Valley 1-005
  • Searles Valley 6-052
  • Seven Oaks Valley 8-008
  • Shasta Valley 1-004
  • Sierra Valley 5-012.01
  • Silver Lake Valley 6-034
  • Simi Valley 4-009
  • Soda Lake Valley 6-033
  • South San Diego River Valley 9-015
  • Superior Valley 6-049
  • Temecula Valley 9-005
  • Terwilliger Valley 7-026
  • Thousand Oaks Area 4-019
  • Tule Lake 1-002-01
  • Twentynine Palms Valley 7-010
  • Ukiah Valley 1-052
  • Upper Kingston Valley 6-022
  • Upper Mojave River Valley 6-042
  • Upper Ojai Valley 4-001
  • Upper Santa Ana Valley - Chino 8-002.01
  • Upper Santa Ana Valley - Cucamonga 8-002.02
  • Upper Santa Ana Valley - Rialto-Colton 8-002.04
  • Upper Santa Ana Valley - Riverside-Arlington 8-002.03
  • Upper Santa Ana Valley - San Bernardino 8-002.06
  • Upper Santa Ana Valley - San Timoteo 8-002.08
  • Upper Santa Ana Valley - Temescal 8-002.09
  • Upper Santa Ana Valley - Yucaipa 8-002.07
  • Vallecito-Carrizo Valley 7-028
  • Ventura River Valley - Lower Ventura River 4-003.02
  • Ventura River Valley - Upper Ventura River 4-003.01
  • Vidal Valley 7-042
  • Ward Valley 7-003
  • Warren Valley 7-012
  • West Salton Sea
  • Wingate Valley 6-019
  • Yuma Valley 7-036

web analytics

IMAGES

  1. (PDF) Urban design & urban planning: A critical analysis to the

    urban design research papers

  2. (PDF) Urban design guidelines for places with restorative values

    urban design research papers

  3. (PDF) Architecture, urban design, planning and urban climate

    urban design research papers

  4. 😎 Design research paper. Example of research design in research paper

    urban design research papers

  5. (PDF) The science of urban design?

    urban design research papers

  6. (PDF) Urban Design as a Catalyst for Advancing Architectural Education

    urban design research papers

COMMENTS

  1. Urban design & urban planning: A critical analysis to the theoretical relationship gap

    Introduction Urban design discipline emerged as a reaction to the situation of urban planning and architecture relationship with the city during the modernist era.

  2. Journal of Urban Design

    The Journal of Urban Design is a scholarly international journal which advances theory, research and practice in urban design. There is a growing recognition of the need for urban design in shaping, managing and improving the quality of the urban environment.

  3. Journal of Urban Design: Vol 29, No 1 (Current issue)

    Journal of Urban Design, Volume 29, Issue 1 (2024) See all volumes and issues. Volume 29, 2024 Vol 28, 2023 Vol 27, 2022 Vol 26, 2021 Vol 25, 2020 Vol 24, 2019 Vol 23, 2018 Vol 22, 2017 Vol 21, 2016 Vol 20, 2015 Vol 19, 2014 Vol 18, 2013 Vol 17, 2012 Vol 16, 2011 Vol 15, 2010 Vol 14, 2009 Vol 13, 2008 Vol 12, 2007 Vol 11, 2006 Vol 10, 2005 Vol ...

  4. Sustainable streetscape as an effective tool in sustainable urban design

    HBRC Journal Volume 9, Issue 2 August 2013, Pages 173-186 Full Length Article Sustainable streetscape as an effective tool in sustainable urban design Reeman MohammedRehan Show more Add to Mendeley https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2013.03.001Get rights and content Under a Creative Commons

  5. Urban planning and quality of life: A review of pathways linking the

    1. Introduction Improving quality of life in cities is becoming an increasingly critical issue for urban planning. The rise of urban populations worldwide, caused by rapid population growth and urbanization processes, makes urban quality of life relevant to more and more people.

  6. (PDF) Sustainable urban design with an approach in sustainable urban

    Authors: Nazanin Tangestanizadeh University of Guelph Isa Piri University of Zanjan Abstract The present study uses an interpretive and descriptive method to investigate the concepts of urban...

  7. Buildings

    1. Introduction Research is the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions. (Oxford English Dictionaries, 2020.) What exactly is research in the broad field of performance of urban design, and what methods have proven to be appropriate and useful?

  8. Introduction: the future of public space

    Now the focus must be on implementation, with research into action across the larger networks of urban discourse. Central to the Future of Places aim has been to operationalise a paradigm shift in urban planning, emphasizing benefits on offer for sustainable urban development through a people-centered approach.Many critics have argued that the focus of urban design and development has been too ...

  9. Research through design in urban and landscape design practice

    ABSTRACT. This study takes stock on how research through design (RTD) is interpreted in urban and landscape design practice in relation to the scholarly meaning of RTD. The results indicate that the term 'RTD' in Dutch practice largely refers to the typical procedures and resources of a practical design process.

  10. A Systematic Review of Urban Design and Computer Modelling ...

    The research argued the importance of urban design strategies in addressing the negative impacts and the spread of diseases, e.g., building ventilation and green spaces design . Experts called for an "anti-virus built environment", resulting in designs that are resilient to infectious diseases and can play a role in minimising future ...

  11. (PDF) Urban design & urban planning: A critical analysis to the

    The paper aims to analyze the criticism directed towards the theoretical dreams of the urban design process from a practical perspective. It addresses the theoretical gap in the urban...

  12. Urban Design and Planning

    Urban Design and Planning. Our engineering journal titles report the latest research and current practice for the benefit of the international civil engineering profession and related disciplines. We also cover historical research and lessons learned from past events. Each paper is independently assessed and peer-reviewed. State-of-the-art review.

  13. Urban Design Research Papers

    Urban Design 378,428 Followers Recent papers in Urban Design Top Papers Most Cited Papers Most Downloaded Papers Newest Papers People From Fragment to Eco-Island: An Archipelago à la Carte Download by Socrates Stratis 11 Landscape Ecology , Architecture , Sustainable Development , Urban Studies

  14. (PDF) Innovation in Urban Design: Does Research Help?

    This paper describes how innovation intersects with (1) urban design practice and (2) the work of research universities. When innovation is largely stylistic, design practice...

  15. Urban Studies: Sage Journals

    Urban Studies is an international peer-reviewed journal for urban scholarship. We welcome all original submissions that further our understanding of the urban condition and the rapid changes taking place in cities and regions across the globe. … | View full journal description This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

  16. A review of recent studies on sustainable urban renewal

    Based on 81 journal papers, this paper presents a critical review of recent studies on sustainable urban renewal over the period 1990-2012. The review focuses on the planning sub-system and the social sub-system of urban renewal in terms of the evaluation of sustainability.

  17. Urban Planning and Design Research

    About the Journal. Urban Planning and Design Research (UPDR) is an internationally refereed journal dedicated to publishing the latest advancements in urban planning and design research. The goal of this journal is to record the latest findings and promote further research in these areas. Scholars from all relevant academic fields are invited ...

  18. Making cities mental health friendly for adolescents and young adults

    The advantages of healthy urban spaces for adolescents have emerged not only in health sciences research but also in allied fields such as urban design and sociology 27,56,57.

  19. Research Seminar February 27

    It can help governments improve policies and make informed decisions on enhancing the design and living standards of urban residential areas. Join us to see how this cutting-edge technique is transforming urban analysis and policy development. Related Paper: Wang, Z., Ito, K., & Biljecki, F. (2024).

  20. (PDF) Journal of Urban Design

    Abstract. Developing more sustainable communities is among our foremost challenges, and urban designers have a leading role to play. I view this role very broadly, not just in terms of designing ...

  21. Developing Seamless Connections in the Urban Transit Network: A Look

    HUALIANG (HARRY) TENG, PH.D. Dr. Teng, an Associate Professor in Transportation Engineering at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), has approximately 30 years of research and education experience in transportation engineering and management. He graduated from China's Beijing Jiaotong University with his B.S. and M.S. degrees in railroad engineering and management. He has a second M.S ...

  22. Papers with Code

    This paper describes the hardware design and flight demonstration of a small quadrotor with imaging sensors for urban mapping, hazard avoidance, and target tracking research. The vehicle is equipped with five cameras, including two pairs of fisheye stereo cameras that enable a nearly omnidirectional view and a two-axis gimbaled camera.

  23. 71803 PDFs

    The essence of urban design is the transformation of the environment in a way that maximizes the quality of human life. The tools to achieve this goal must cope with the complexity of natural...

  24. Notice and Takedown in Everyday Practice by Jennifer M. Urban, Joe

    Urban, Jennifer M. and Karaganis, Joe and Schofield, Brianna and Schofield, Brianna, Notice and Takedown in Everyday Practice (March 22, 2017). ... University of California, Berkeley School of Law, Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper Series. Subscribe to this free journal for more curated articles on this topic FOLLOWERS. 4,198. PAPERS. 984.

  25. Urban Levee Design Criteria

    The Urban Levee Design Criteria (ULDC) provides engineering criteria and guidance for the design, evaluation, operation, and maintenance of levees and floodwalls that provide an urban level of flood protection (i.e., 200-year level of flood protection) in California, as well as for determining design water surface elevations (DWSE) along leveed and unleveed streams.

  26. (PDF) 1. Introduction to Urban Design

    Zagazig University Abstract An urban design lecture introduces the main concept of urban design combined with examples. The lecture is from a series of lectures aiming to introduce theories...