Healthy Cities and Urban Planning: The QLandQLife Model as Input for Experimentation

  • Elio Trusiani
Part of the The Urban Book Series book series (UBS)


Based on input provided by the QLandQLife research, this contribution reflects on the potential of the content and devices contained in Law no. 10/2013, with particular reference to the national urban green plan. The questions asked by the research and its results highlight the importance of working with the open space of the contemporary city to improve environmental comfort and well-being in urban areas. Broadly speaking, these themes seek a renewed relationship between urban planning and health in which urban open/green space is only one of the structural elements addressed to promote better lifestyles and widespread well-being. In this view, the potential of the national urban green plan is seen not just as an additional tool for the sector but as an opportunity to reconsider urban green and open space as a possible incubator of new principles, functions, and activities. Reinterpreting some content and objectives expressed legislatively as matters of design inherent in ordinary planning tools seems indispensable. First of all, this means reconsidering the role of urban green areas as a necessary performance standard capable of overcoming the quantitative standard that arose at the end of the 1960s. This new interpretational key is capable of anchoring the principles of experimentation in the QLandQLife model with an existing and still-developing disciplinary debate regarding urban health and well-being. It favours the role that urban green areas can play in renewing consolidated approaches and paths in the city’s governance tools according to a perspective that favours a healthy city and a reciprocal interest in health and urban planning.


  1. Bajo N, Guccione M (2004) La qualità ecologica e tutela della biodiversità negli ambienti metropolitani. In. I Rapporto ISPRA “Qualità dell’ambiente urbano”Google Scholar
  2. Boeri S (2011) Biomilano. Corraini edizioni, MilanGoogle Scholar
  3. Chiesura A, Mirabile M (2014) Strumenti di governo del verde. In XI Rapporto ISPRA “Qualità dell’ambiente urbano”Google Scholar
  4. D’Onofrio R, Trusiani E (2015) Health facilities and open spaces: integrated policies at the landscape and territorial level. In: Giofrè F, Dukanovic Z (eds) Health spaces. Hospital outdoor environment. Thesis Inter-University Research Centre Systems and Technologies for Social and healthcare Facilities, University of Florence, FlorenceGoogle Scholar
  5. D’Onofrio R, Trusiani E (2017) Città, salute e benessere. Percorsi innovativi per l’urbanistica. Franco Angeli, MilanGoogle Scholar
  6. Fry G, Tveit MS, Ode A, Velarde M (2009) The ecology of visual landscapes: exploring the conceptual common ground of visual and ecological landscape indicators. Ecol Indic 9:933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Istituto nazionale di Statistica (ISTAT) (2016) Statistiche – Focus verde urbano del 23 May 2016Google Scholar
  8. Law n.°10, 2 October 2013: “Norms for the development of urban green areas” [Legge (2013) 10/02/2013: “Norme per lo sviluppo degli spazi verdi urbani”]Google Scholar
  9. Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare (2016) Comitato per lo sviluppo del verde pubblico, Relazione annuale 2016Google Scholar
  10. Stad M (2014) The city’s spatial impact on health. Background report for the Commission for a Socially Sustainable MalmöGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Architecture and Design, University of CamerinoAscoli PicenoItaly

Personalised recommendations