London Borough Of Barking And Dagenham

London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

Introduction

The ‘London Borough of Barking and Dagenham’ is found in East London in England. It

is situated 9 miles or 14.4 km East Central-London. This place is London’s outer borough while

its South is in London’s Riverside area of Thames Gateway. This place has become an urban

regeneration priority for the government. By the end of the year 2011, a population census

showed 187,000 people in the area with a large number of them found in Becontree state (Alex

and Schreurs, 2015). ‘Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council’ is the area’s local

authority. This place is quite underdeveloped with many challenges seen in transportation and

the physical environment which leads to health problems to its residents (Alex and Schreurs,

2015).

These challenges resulted in the formulation of public health initiatives by the council by

the 21st century. These initiatives targeted improving the environment to ensure that its residents

had good health through enhancing Londoner’s wellbeing, health, improve service and business

prosperity and finally enhance resilience in the community. These initiatives concentrated on

environmental issues and their link to health. The issues included active transport and travel,

green space, air quality, healthy food, fuel poverty and many other concerns (Ashton, 2017).

Green Spaces and How it Impacts Health

Green space which is accessible gets considered as a factor which determines or plays a

role in good health. Evidence shows that areas outside houses or working places affect the

mental and physical health of their residents significantly (Ashton, 20172). When looking at

green space both use and access are considered and their availability is both a determinant and

indicator. In Barking and Dagenham, 34% of the land surface is green. Further, at least 50% of

its households can access nature (at least four wards out of the entire 17 wars) (Ashton, 2017).

Data shows that 15% of the population engages in physical activities 5 times a week for about 30

minutes while almost 45% participate in these activities once weekly. Further, the place has

29%, obese adults. This rate is higher than the 21% London rate as well as the 24% national rate

(Ashton, 2017).

Access to these green places has a significant effect on the health of individuals. Safe and

accessible green sites reduce to a significant level depression, mental distress as well as ADHD

or ‘Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder’ signs in young people or children (Gale et al.,

2011). Research shows that access to green places or gardens and having the possibility to cause

environmental improvements are related to the general wellbeing and mental health

improvement as well (Gale et al., 2011). Both NICE and Marmot Review have demonstrated

evidence supporting the relationship between green quality outdoor spaces and motivation for

physical activity (Jones et al., 2007) where these activities are crucial for several health issues

like cardiovascular diseases, diabetes type 2, obesity and physical/mental health. Improving and

increasing green urban areas have other secondary advantages or effects on people’s health

through more extensive health environmental determinants like air quality, risks of surface flood

and heat-island impacts in urban areas (Jones et al., 2007) .

Recommendations

After seeing the critical relationship between green space and health in urban areas, the

council has formulated an ‘all London Green Grid Supplementary Planning Guidance’ which

aims at enhancing function biodiversity as well as green space connectivity (Stewart and Bushell,

2011). Further, they have come up with the ‘Green Flag Award’ mechanism which aims at

improving green space quality as well as promotion (WHO, 2016). It also became recommended

that the residents engage in physical activity and other outdoor events like guided walking and

gyms for them to recover from illnesses such as cardiovascular diseases (WHO, 2016).

Active Travel and Transport

Travel is crucial in connecting individuals to recreation, employment, community

services, health, and education. Many people in this area journey daily which makes it a

component of their daily living and can consequently affect their health significantly (Alex and

Screurs, 2015). Travel also include cycling and walking, employing private vehicles, goods and

public transport vehicles. At least 80% of Londoner’s journey on the road by either, bikes, motor

vehicles or on foot which makes the street environment and transport to affect their well-being

and health significantly (Taylor, 2017).

Evidence shows the presence of inequalities in how health is affected by transport with a

majority of deprived individuals as well as those depended upon roads (which get heavily

trafficked) getting affected health-wise (Goldsteen et al., 2011). Only some London boroughs

incorporate dedicated transport in a ‘Joint Strategic Needs Assessment or JSNA,’ thereby

suggesting that the current measure of how transportation affects health might be an

underestimation. About Barking and Dagenham, around 280,000 trips are made daily by

individuals from this area (Landon, 2016). A few people, however, take part in active travel with

a higher proportion of them cycling to employment places.

About 7% of London’s population use dedicated vehicles to work. Evidence shows that

averagely, five fatalities and 604 casualties occurred in this place in 2005 through 2009 which is

below the entire London’s average (Marmot, 2010). The A13 road is currently heavily used with

about 115,000 automobiles daily (Marmot, 2010). Now, Borough has one dedicated cycle

highway. The health of people is often improved by a public transport network which is

comprehensive with many benefits seen because of increased services access, declined social

isolation and raised social and working opportunities. In London, travel has enabled individuals

to regularly do physical activity through cycling and walking on their daily trips to workplaces.

Only about 20% of Londoner’s meet the 150 minute and weekly recommended physical activity

(Jones et al., 2007). Regular physical exercise is essential for mental and physical health and

helps prevent many diseases like obesity and diabetes type 2 as well as cardiovascular illnesses

and cancer (Townsend and Lake, 2017).

The adverse effects of transport get found in the most trafficked roads with high vehicle

concentrations which result in noise and air pollution as well as raised risks of injury (Marmot

and Wilkinson, 2005). These establish a picture of an environment which is hostile for cycling

and walking which can exacerbate inequalities in health. Automobile contributes to 41-60% air

pollution in the United Kingdom which results in respiratory and cardiovascular diseases.

Residents using roads which get heavily trafficked are the ones who are severely affected

(Marmot and Wilkinson, 2005).

Recommendations and Actions

The government needs to design or come up with street environment models which

encourage cycling and walking, engineered and designed to decrease automobile speed as well as

implement 20mph-areas appropriately. There is need to promote paths and roads which are

convenient and safe for physical exercises such as walking and cycling. These activities can also

become improved through hire schemes for the bike, maps, and information as well as ensuring

safety of roads which are heavily trafficked particularly those linked to most of the health risks

(Public health England, 2014).

Air Quality

The quality of air has long become the principal good health requirement. ‘Quality

Standards Regulations 2000,’ the UK’s quality air legislation which got updated in the year 2010

controls some pollutants which get regarded as dangerous to the environment and human health.

This legislation has EU values and limits or control Sulphur dioxide pollution, nitrogen

dioxide/oxides and particulate matter like PM2.5 and PM10, benzene, lead, Carbon Monoxide,

ozone and benzo (a) pyrene pollution (Friis, 2012). Much attention to the quality of air gets put

on particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide. Particulate matter is a mixture of particles which are

non-gaseous and have unique chemical and physical composition (Friis, 2012). The PM becomes

ranked by the particulate’s size. There are several sources of PM for instance from road traffic,

exhaust emissions, brake wear, and tire as well as dust from the surface of roads. Further, there

are boilers and older furnaces which affect the quality of air too mainly in houses. Poor air

quality can compromise the well-being and health of people (Marmot and Wilkinson, 2005).

Evidence shows that there are high NO2 levels on the roads of Barking and Dagenham

above limits which get recommended. Scientists are still applying their statistical tools in

attempting to understand how different factors affect mortality. They have found that Barking

and Dagenham is number 14 least places in London regarding air quality (Stewart and Bushell,

2011). Prolonged exposure to air that is polluted has been found to result in chronic illnesses and

can raise respiratory diseases risks. It gets estimated that 4,267 deaths occurred in 2008 in

London due to PM2.5 exposure (Friis, 2012). However, these results do not link to real people as

it is a mere statistical construct with amalgamated health effects due to air pollution. Because

everybody inhales the same air, realistic interpretations are that potential risks get distributed

evenly in the entire population with the cumulative mortality outcomes of the concentration

equal to the death number or rate. High levels of NO2 can cause inflammation in an individual’s

breathing tubes, and extended exposure can harm lung function as well as cause respiratory

symptoms or asthma (Friis, 2012). Cardiovascular and respiratory conditions get aggravated by

PM where smaller PM or particles go deeper and become deposited inside respiratory tracts.

Polluted air affects individuals with heart challenges, those working close to the contaminated

area as well as those with respiratory problems (Public health England, 2014).

Recommended Actions

It is necessary to encourage more people to do cycling and walking than use vehicles or

public transport. These measures will reduce air pollution and improve air quality (Stuteley and

Parish, 2010). It is also necessary to promote the efficiency of energy in homes, commercial and

public offices. Individual steps could also be taken such as minimizing engine idling and

decreasing exposure risks where it can potentially harm health especially in individuals with

vulnerabilities (Goldsteen et al., 2011).

Healthy Food

Healthy food or diet is a crucial health determinant in the broader environmental. It is,

therefore, necessary to improve the current food environment by enhancing nutritious food

availability and appreciating the link between dietary patterns and food geography retailing

(Goldsteen et al., 20115). The process of production, food processing, and its delivery must all

become considered. The focus of policy has become placed on measures of local planning and

how it affects supermarkets, planting farms, physical environment, and training on a healthy diet

(Pruss-Ustun et al., 2016). Numerous factors influence food availability. Low income and

unhealthy food predominance may collaboratively work with elements within the location to

limit food access (Pruss-Ustun et al., 2016). Access/availability of food can become determined

using indicators like quality, cost, transportation means, socio-economic factors, physical

proximity, and geography.

Barking and Dagenham has 29% obesity rate in adults which is higher than the 21%

London’s average rate and the 24% national rate (Gale et al., 2011). The school children of the

area (under six years) are 26% obese, higher than 19% national rate and 23% London rate. About

25% to 31% of the entire population uses five vegetable and fruit portions in a day. Further, 15%

of the place’s population physically exercises for 20 minutes while almost 45% practice once per

week. Availability of quality food has many health effects. For instance, cheap and ready

unhealthy diet raises the risk of consumption of high sugars, salt, saturated fats, low fruits and

vegetables (Gale et al., 2011). Consequently, people using these types of food are more likely to

be obese and develop cardiovascular illnesses, some cancers and diabetes type 2 (Jones et al.,

2007). The NOO or ‘National Obesity Observatory’ found that the UK obesity and overweight

economy was at 15.8 billion pounds each year which affects adults and children. Research shows

that increased number of outlets dealing in fast foods is linked directly to higher BMI or ‘body

mass index’ (Landon, 2006)

Recommended Action

The nation should come up with developing schemes which will deal with promoting

easily accessible local healthy food outlets. Besides, there should be planning controls which will

regulate fast food retail shops proliferation particularly near schools and high streets

(Macdonald, 2005).

Fuel Poverty

Evidence shows a relationship between fuel poverty and health of individuals. Indeed,

three factors have become associated with causing or resulting to fuel poverty. These factors are

poor efficiencies in energy particularly in resident’s homes, low income and inflated prices of

fuel (Marmot, 2010). A house can be referred to as fuel poor when its total earnings are under the

line of poverty considering costs of housing energy as well as more expensive energy as

compared to the typical household costs. In Barking and Dagenham, older populations are

predicted to grow from 19,7000 in 2012 to 24,700 in 2025, and by 2040, the number will be

35,900 (Neighborhoods Green, 2014). The risks of fuel poverty have risen, and even though

there are no significant variations between London’s wards, six wards of Barking and Dagenham

are highly exposed to fuel poverty (Neighborhoods Green, 2014). Fuel poverty affects resident’s

health significantly as can be seen by the evidence which shows adverse health effects in this

area particularly in people who have underlying illnesses (Neighborhoods Green, 2014).

The adverse effects of fuel poverty are cold residents or homes, respiratory and

cardiovascular conditions which become exacerbated, influenza and rheumatic arthritis as well as

mental health (Norman and McDonnel, 2007). Fuel poverty effects might become compounded

by adverse emotional wellbeing, social isolation, poor diet and decreased mobility. Homes that

are cold have also become linked to impaired cognitive performance (Norman and McDonnel,

2007). Cost estimates in the UK connected to cold dwellings were at 1.36 billion pounds each

year excluding extra social service costs of care (PHE, 2004).

Conclusion

This essay has illustrated the location of Barking and Dagenham borough as well as its

estimated population acquired through a census. It has demonstrated that ‘London Borough of

Barking and Dagenham’ is found in East London in England. It is situated 9 miles or 14.4 km

eastern Central London. This place is London’s outer borough while its South is in London’s

Riverside area of Thames Gateway. We have seen that the government has given this place urban

regeneration priority. Further, it has been illustrated that by the end of the year 2011, a

population census showed 187,000 people in the area with a large number of them found in

Becontree state. Moreover, the essay has demonstrated the physical factors found in this area and

has shown how such factors affect health of the local residents. Evidence on the relationship

between spaces outside the houses or working places and mental and physical health of residents

has become discussed. Other factors such as active travel and transport, air quality, availability

of food and fuel poverty have become discussed as well especially how these factors affect

resident’s health.

References

Alexrod, R.S. and Schreurs, M.A. (2015) ‘Environmental policy making and Global leadership

in the European Union’ in Axelrod, R.S. and VanDeveer, S.D. (eds) The global environment,

institutions, law and policy. Los Angeles: Sage – CQ press. 4th Edn pp. 157- 186

Ashton, J. (2017) ‘A green perspective: what good does it do?’, Perspectives in Public Health,

137 (1), pp.35 Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1757913916678128

(Accessed: 19.12.17)

Barton, H., Guise, R and Grant, M (2010) Shaping Neighbourhoods: For Local Health and

Global Sustainability. London: Routledge.

Bristol Health Partners (2016) Supporting healthy inclusive neighbourhood environments.

Available at: http://www.bristolhealthpartners.org.uk/health-integration-teams/supporting-

healthy-inclusive-neighbourhood-environments-hit (Accessed: 23/4/2018)

Friis, R.H. (2012) Essentials of environmental Health (2nd Ed). London: Jones and Bartlett pp 3

– 16

Gale, C.R., Dennison, E.M., Cooper, C. and Sayer A.A. (2011) ‘Neighbourhood environment

and positive mental health in older people: The Hertfordshire cohort study.’ Health and Place

17(4), pp. 867 – 874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.(Accessed: 23/4/2018)

Goldsteen, R.L., Goldsteen, K. and Graham, D. (2011) Introduction to public health. New York:

Springer Chapter 8

Jones, A., Bentham, G., Foster, C., Hillsdon, M. and Panter, J. Foresight (2007) Tackling

obesities: Future choices –obesogenic environments – Evidence review. London: Government

Office for Science Available at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/295681/07-735-

obesogenic-environments-review.pdf (Accessed: 23/4/2018)

Landon, M (2006) Environment, health and sustainable development. Maidenhead: Open

university Press.

Macdonald, J.J. (2005) Environments for health. London: Earthscan

Marmot, M. and Wilkinson, R. (2005) Social Determinants of Health. Oxford: Oxford University

Press

Marmot, M. (2010) ‘Fair society healthy lives (The Marmot Review)’ UCL Institute of Health

Equity. Available at: http://www.instituteofhealthequity.org/

Neighbourhoods Green (2014) Edible estates. Available at:

http://www.neighbourhoodsgreen.org.uk/uploads/resources/Edible_Estates.pdf (Accessed:

23/4/2018)

Norman, H. and McDonnell, D. (2017) ‘The NHS healthy new towns programme’, Perspectives

in Public Health, 137 (1), pp. 29 -30 Available at:

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1757913916676043 (Accessed: 23/4/2018)

PHE (2014) From evidence into action: Opportunities to protect and improve the nation’s health.

Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/from-evidence-into-action-

opportunities-to-protect-and-improve-the-nations-health (Accessed: 23/4/2018) pp. 3 – 8

Pruss – Ustun, A., Wolf, J., Corvalan, C., Bos, R. and Neira, M. (2016) Preventing disease

through healthy environments: a global assessment of the burden of disease from environmental

risks. Switzerland: WHO. Available at:

http://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/publications/preventing-disease/en/( Accessed:

23/4/2018)

Public Health England (2014) Local action on health inequalities: Improving access to green

spaces. London: Crown. Available at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/357411/Review8_

Green_spaces_health_ inequalities.pdf (Accessed: 23/4/2018)

Stewart, J. and Bushell, F. (2011) ‘Housing, the built environment, and wellbeing.’ In Knight, A.

and McNaught, A. (eds) Understanding wellbeing: an introduction for students and practitioners

of health and social care. Banbury: Lantern publishing. pp. 201- 213

Stuteley, H. and Parish, R. (2010). ‘Community regeneration: from Apathy and anger to positive

energy’, in Douglas, J. Earle, S., Handsley, S., Jones, L., Lloyd, C.E. and Spurr. S. (eds) A reader

in promoting public health: Challenge and controversy. 2 nd Ed. Milton Keynes: Open

University Press – sage Chapter 34

Townsend, T. and Lake, A. (2017)’Obesogenic environments: current evidence of the built and

food environments’, Perspectives in Public Health, 137 (1), pp 38 -44 Available at:

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1757913916679860 (Accessed: 23/4/2018)

Taylor, M. (2017) ‘Foreward: Health and the built environment’, Perspectives in Public Health,

137 (1), pp. 2 Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1757913916681945

(Accessed: 23/4/2018)

World Health Organisation (2016) Public health, environmental and social determinants of

health (PHE). Available at: http://www.who.int/phe/news/nov-2016/en/ (Accessed: 23/4/2018)

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."