UTC Report: Shaping Spaces for GenZ

                                                              

 

UTC Report: Shaping Spaces for GenZ

Title of the Campus: Shaping Spaces for GenZ 
Organizer(s) Names: Urban Synergies Group 
Partner Organization(s): ACT Government, University of Canberra Health Research Institute
Date and Location: 8 March 2017 / Ann Harding Conference Centre, University Canberra, Canberra, AUSTRALIA. 
Urban Thinkers Campus in figures: 

Executive summary: 

  
 
Urban living in the early part of the 21st century has not been good for children. The present generation are the least fit and the fattest that they have ever been. Social marginalisation, mental health problems and serious cardio-metabolic disorders have been on the rise in adolescence and early adulthood. On a more positive note, there is good international research evidence that many of these unwelcome facets of modern lifestyles for children could be eradicated through relatively small adjustments of the opportunities available to children, such as those that might be gained through active play and active travel to or from school.These issues were the focus of discussion at the “Shaping Spaces for Gen-Z” Urban Thinkers Campus that was organised by the Urban Synergies Group and the Health Research Institute, University of Canberra on 8th March 2017. Hosted at the University of Canberra, Australia, the Campus focused on environments that foster healthy childhood development in the broadest sense of this term i.e. including mental and physical capacities, social and psychological development and connectedness to community. Child health, physical inactivity, environmental design, child empowerment and the right to play and interact were central themes.The premises going in to the Forum were:  (1) Current societal norms for the general physical condition of children are too low, (2) Current societal norms for body weight status are too high, (3) Many children today have fewer opportunities to develop social skills and psychological resilience than they would have had in the past and (4) To reverse these trends will require a societal shift, with specific objectives to be agreed as the core drivers for change and the available societal resources aligned to achieve those objectives. The societal challenges posed for discussion were:
  1. All children have the right to the best opportunities we can provide for their social, psychological and physical development – how can we do this better?
  2. We need to provide more opportunities for children to achieve and maintain good general levels of physical activities as a lifestyle norm – how can we achieve this?
One hundred and twenty delegates attended. There was good representation from the key stakeholder groups: Parents, General Public, Government, Non-Government Organisations, Health, Academia and Community Services. Education other than tertiary, Commercial organisations and Sports organisations were not well represented.The Forum was introduced by three brief presentations to set the context for later discussions. Then, each of the three specific themes for discussion was introduced by a short presentation, followed by ten parallel round-table discussions, each led by an experienced table coordinator, and leading to a list of proposals to be carried forward to the short-listing stage in the afternoon of the Forum. The three theme issues were: Issue 1: Children and the built environment, Issue 2: Designs around children’s health, Issue 3: Play. Table suggestions were then presented in plenary before moving on to the preliminary voting stage to provide a short-list of proposals from each theme area to be carried forward to the “Reflection and Confirmation” and “Consensus” stages. The latter stages were carried out, after allowing time for reflection and further consideration, through separate sequential online surveys posted to all participants.
 
The most highly supported proposals for action from each of the three theme areas were:
  • Issue 1: Safe access, well-designed routes around schools - daily active transport built in;
  • Issue 2: Play infrastructure for all ages/ co -design best practice learning from overseas;
  • Issue 3: Environmental movement/play in all schools, supported with loose material/ equipment (funding to implement).
 
Whilst these were the top-rated proposals, two further proposals from each theme area also received significant support and may also be worthy of consideration for implementation. These were (in rank order):
  • Issue 1: Design and place "Kids at Play" signage to promote speed reduction on streets; Co-location of shops and play spaces;
  • Issue 2: Co-design/engagement using school curriculum - children's input relevant to their health and physical activity; Safe walking and cycling path (Map + App) QR coded check-points, social school support element;
  • Issue 3: Safer speeds (30 km/h or 15 km/h) near areas where children's play has priority; Promote awareness of importance of play (strategy to target Government, stakeholders, communities and schools).
 
There was wide consensus that urgent action was needed. However, it is crucial to understand the significant barriers that need to be overcome in order to deliver beneficial change. Such barriers were considered as part of the round-table discussions. The key barriers under Issue 1 were: (1) safety – mainly from cars but also ‘stranger danger’ and personal injury whilst using equipment, (2) time – of parents and teachers and also in-curriculum, (3) timeframes, funding priorities and fiscal prudence within Government and (4) a lack of community and shared responsibility. Under Issue 2, key barriers were: (1) not enough natural play space or time to use it, (2) involvement of children and parents/ guardians/ schools in design of activities and spaces and (3) education – do children know what is good/ bad, do their parents, do teachers? Under Issue 3, key barriers were: (1) physical education and play not valued enough or allocated sufficient time and (2) loss of well-maintained play space and lack of play equipment and (3) people resource to facilitate play or sporting activities.It was clear also from discussions at the Forum that all sectors have a role to play, including some stakeholder groups not present at the discussions. That said, the following key actors can be identified because of their particular role in society or the specific expertise that they can bring to bear. Local Governments have a responsibility to promote the social and cultural diversity and economy of the region and ensure that the built environment and services support the needs of residents, including infrastructure, public transport and safe and accessible public spaces. School communities have a primary role to provide education and developmental opportunities for all children. Children have the most inquisitive and resourceful minds that we have available to us and we should engage them in shaping spaces for their future. Universities and research institutions are primary innovators and problem solvers, have the resources and expertise to provide specialist training and the capacity to develop pilot projects or test proof-of-concept proposals before roll-out to the wider community. The Media can be an important vehicle for public education and awareness-raising. Businesses may bring entrepreneurial opportunity to solve particular problems or can support initiatives with more flexible workplace policy. Non-Government and Sporting Organisations have considerable existing capacity that, effectively targeted, could support many aspects of the change agenda with minimal impact on additional resource requirements.
 
In summary, the “Shaping Spaces for Gen-Z” Urban Thinkers Campus, Canberra, Australia on 8th March 2017 contributed to the following 9 of 17 Sustainable Development Goals:
  • Good health and well-being
  • Quality education
  • Gender equality
  • Industry innovation and infrastructure
  • Reduced inequalities
  • Sustainable cities and communities
  • Life on land
  • Peace, justice and strong institutions
  • Partnership on goals
The need for action was strongly endorsed and three priority actions were identified:
  1. Environmental movement/play in all schools, supported with loose material/ equipment (funding to implement)Safe access, well-designed routes around schools - daily active transport built in
  2. Play infrastructure for all ages/ co -design best practice learning from overseas

Powered by flickr embed.

Introduction to the Campus: 

Australia is one of the most urbanised nations in the world. These are the places where most Australians spend their everyday life working, learning, living and playing. The way that these environments are built shapes our lives. They determine the way we move around, the way and what we eat or drink, they contribute to the way we socially connect and create a sense of belonging as a vital part of community life. The National Preventative Health Taskforce report referred to our contemporary urban environments as “obesogenic environments”. Childhood obesity has risen from around 7.5 percent in the 1960s to the current level of about 25 percent. Childhood obesity and physical inactivity is on the rise across many Asian and Pacific island communities.The Urban Thinker Campus can be understood as a renewed call for action as part of a collaborative, united and coordinated effort to reverse this trend not just nationwide in Australia but internationally. Success in overcoming this challenge will need leadership from the top and a strong collective societal commitment to rebalance the opportunities available to children. Childhood obesity remains high and is considered one of the most pressing public health issues facing Australian children. Mental health, social and metabolic problems have also been on the rise. We discussed and came together as a community of concerned stakeholders and parents, to create a realistic pathway forward that should enable better environments for our future generations.We chose Canberra as the ideal case study to contextualise these global issues. Close proximity to the Federal and Territory governments, national key stakeholders and access to leading academic experts in the field provide the foundation for meaningful engagement and opportunities to identify tangible outcomes. 
 
The Urban Thinker campus focused on environments that foster healthy childhood development in the broadest sense of this term i.e. including mental and physical capacities, social and psychological development and connectedness to community. The event brought a wide range of key stakeholders together. Childhood obesity, physical inactivity, environmental design, child empowerment and the right to play and interact were central themes. At the forum participants were encouraged to critically discuss potential future approaches, discuss opportunities and to empower children in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Another objective was to implement an innovative approach to decision making and action planning. The final objective was to identify and agree on tangible actions that may achieve effective outcomes for childhood obesity prevention and healthier environments for children.The Forum was opened by the Minister for Health & Minister for Transport Canberra and City Services, Meegan Fitzharris, who was then followed by several Urban Thinkers talks setting the scene for the day.As part of the Urban Labs session participants were invited to critically discuss potential future approaches, highlight opportunities and identify ways that empower children in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.Three issues presentations framed each Urban Lab session. The themes were: Children and the built environment, Design’s around the state of children’s health and Play. During the session participants were asked to identify the barriers and brainstorm collaboratively possibilities and ideas that could lead to effective improvements and action. Each table coordinator summarised and presented the table findings back to the audience. All participants received a limited number of votes for their preferred ideas. Once all preferences where given, each table went back to the drawing board and mapped out their top three priority actions. These three priorities where consolidated in a single document. This document was displayed on the projector screens as the collective outcome of the day. However, to identify and agree on tangible actions that may achieve effective outcomes for childhood obesity prevention and healthier environments for children, the organisers designed a reflective feedback loop. This feedback loop was comprised of two brief online surveys and circulated to all participants one week after the forum. The first provided participants with the opportunity to reflect on the discussion at the Forum and confirm their top three items for each Issue area. All short-listed proposals were then scored and ranked to yield the top three items with the greatest collective support for each Issue area. The top three proposals from each Issue area were then carried forward to the final consensus stage, where all participants were asked to rank, on a 1-2-3 basis, the final three short-listed proposals from each Issue area. This provided a set of proposals, three from each Issue area, ranked by their relative collective support from the participant stakeholder groups. A final publication summarised all findings of the day and makes recommendations supported by a road map that enables better outcomes for healthy childhood development.  
 

Summary of all session:

Urban Labs sessions
 
Issue 1: Children and the built environment
The first Urban Lab started with a short issues presentation that contextualised the topic for the audience. The presentation highlighted the relationship between the built environment and human behaviour and the related effects on children. Subsequently the participants were asked to brainstorm the barriers but, overall, to focus on the possibilities for positive change.
 
Barriers highlighted were:
  • Funding and short timeframes within Government
  • Fiscal prudence- reduce costs to minimum
  • Lack of consultation with kids - Government commitment is low because children don’t vote; lack of children’s involvement in planning
  • Safety perception, playgrounds too safe – risk adverse, traffic, speed, volume, media crime focus, too much awareness
  • Time / overscheduling, lack of both maternal and parental leave as well as long working hours
  • Parents and children are not immersed in their local area / community, community council
  • Smaller families, family structure and social connectedness, limited or even lost sense of community, e.g. taller fences
  • Commercialised culture, shopping centre versus bush
  • Parental judgement, parental fear (helicopter, lawn mower parent types)
  • Shared responsibility - social approach, passing the “blame”.
  • Passive learning – curriculum
  • Co-locations of shops and play spaces
  • Better informed government to understand value of making changes to public space
Ideas and possibilities:
  • Co- design (children, parents and designers)
  • Develop principles and embed in territory plan for children/ activity and their activity
  • Private sponsorship of play spaces
  • Urban design interventions, children’s overpass/ underpass/ bypass route, road traffic calming, crossings, lowering speeds in residential areas, walkways highlighted resulting in making cars aware (that they are there), speed reduction on roads, shared streets, speedbumps
  • Urban play bus
  • Behaviours of cyclists near play spaces
  • Pedestrians should have priority over motorised vehicles
  • Educate parents about letting kids out, Parent education forums
  • All of us to have more fun
  • Integrate play into outdoor spaces e.g. Garema place (public space) experiment
  • Block internet/ WIFI in some zones
  • Mapping of linked play spaces
  • Good climbing trees, natural play space (some elements)
  • Compact developments adjacent to green space – allow passive surveillance
  • Ask kids to help design/test play spaces- focus groups
  • Play equipment at libraries
  • Create supportive community at work = decrease working hours / flexibility
  • Create safer walking and cycling paths, Infrastructure and laws to better support bike riding, Lollipop people for school crossings
  • Stronger inter-generational links
  • Reducing urban sprawl
  • Allow risk/ give children opportunities, quantifying the benefits of risk
  • Green infrastructure and plant trees you can climb
  • Technology that assists with play and exercise
  • Rethinking community engagement with schools/ family activities after hours
  • Early years framework - emphasis on play as equal to other academic subjects
  • More options for physical activities, team sports/activities vs individual play
  • Reduce/ stop homework
  • Better waste system/ understanding of nutrition cycle/ where food comes from
  • Kids shed / places for kids and adults to play together
  • Multi-use space, incorporation of nature/ natural environment
  • Children to explore their own area
  • Informal + formal play spaces needed
  • Challenge childism – idea that children’s use of space is less important
  • Street furniture that encourages play not just a seat / streetlight etc., also ramp, spinner, slide.
  • Interventions to get kids active
  • Dedicated structured time for bush play and bush school activities
  • Publicly fund facilities and teachers for sport, physical education, physical literacy
  • There is a lot of spatially good structural DNA in Canberra
  • Grassroots signage (kids are around), increase signage at key active travel pedestrian/cycling routes
 
Issue 2: Designs around state of children’s health 
The second Urban Lab commenced with a short impulse presentation on ways to empower and work with children in co-design processes to achieve and deliver meaningful outcomes for better health and well-being. The participants came together on the tables to brainstorm the issue and outline the barriers preventing better outcomes.
 
Barriers:
  • Education – do kids know what is good/bad
  • Adults preconceived ideas do not consider what kids think/know
  • Australian curriculum too prescriptive, inflexible
  • Kids perceived lack of own ability
  • Sedentary schooling
  • Lack of funding
  • Is there too much public transport?
  • Not enough natural play area
  • Busy lives, time
  • Fewer community connections
 
Ideas and possibilities:
  • Child friendly/ adult facilities (multi-generation facilities)
  • Attractive landscapes for kids and wildlife
  • Need to include kid’s in co-design in school-settings- Life skills. Children’s voice, co design with children/ parents, Engage in design with seniors, families, adults, early childhood, middle years, teens, young adults, Genuine consultation
  • Healthy fruit break in schools: a success
  • Could build on the school canteen “ healthy food” initiative and breakfast clubs in all schools
  • More creative curriculum: Learn about history/maths via cooking
  • Expand communities composting gardens integrated into the local neighbourhoods NOT just dumped as land-fill, Home garden exchange, community gardens
  • Consultation with children who want to be healthy – most children do not want to be overweight/ unhealthy
  • Limit access to lollies/ supermarkets
  • Get kids to design playgrounds/ play spaces
  • Social media website for suburbs.
  • Create “playful” environments
  • School kitchen facilities, affordable cooking classes to improve health literacy, night school, upskilling nutrition education for parents
  • Translating/ improving policy to practice
  • Taking the design process to the end users
  • Budget as a marketing tool
  • Multi-modal engagement opportunities
  • Community councils, involve in early policy developments
  • Commitment across sectors at all levels
  • Sun safe play spaces
  • Play spaces for all ages
  • Free play loose materials in schools, -already in pilot scheme in natural play spaces in parks, consultants did community consultation
  • Schools engaged in development- evaluation, will put pressure on space e.g. Telopea.
  • Play equipment such as– loose parts, tyres, old saucepans
  • Investigate NGO’s/ community organisations that already engage families/ multi generations
  • Increase funding
  • Create place making team to coordinate/ monitor all of the above, social media, QR codes, Linked-in, Facebook, Cloud sourcing, Nature/activity/ data collection, Apps                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
Issue 3: Play
At the beginning two presenters outlined briefly the importance of play and the impacts within schools as well as in neighbourhood environments. Participants had again the opportunity to brainstorm the barriers and discuss ideas supported by possibilities that can deliver better outcomes.
 
Barriers:
  • Speed/ cars/ traffic, safety, speeds, road safety, perception of safety
  • Homework, academic success, time
  • Parents/ Adults, sometimes lack trust in their own kids – restricts discovery play
  • Space, loss of open space, public and private space
  • Teaching attitudes expertise and valuation of PE and physical activity
  • Play is not valued
  • Loitering is not ok, conflicts with uses
  • Acceptance of noise
  • Technology
  • Understanding value of good nutrition/ diet/ exercise
  • Confused idea of play, parents/adults not valuing play/activities
  • Time: time constraints for single parent families may prevent parents spending more time with their kids, time and convenience
  • Canberra is difficult to become socially connected in especially for new families and families from lower socio-economic status
  • Infrastructure provision for playful adults, Integration rather than separation
  • Driver education/road rule assessment move often (all road users need to do more often)
 
Ideas and possibilities:
  • Technology that assists with play and exercise
  • Rethinking community engagement with schools / family activities after hours
  • Early years framework emphasis on play as equal to other academic subject areas
  • More options for physical activities, team sports vs individual play
  • Reduce / stop homework
  • Better waste system / understanding of nutrition cycle / where food comes from
  • Kids shed / places for kids and adults to play together, play spaces for all ages, mixed age playgrounds and play spaces, co – designed, inter-generational, mixed use
  • Multi use space, incorporation of nature / natural environment, play spaces integrated with nature
  • Children to explore their own area
  • Informal + formal play spaces needed
  • Challenge childism – Idea that children’s use of space is less important
  • Street furniture that encourages play not just a seat / streetlight etc., also ramp, spinner, slide
  • Neighbourhood committees that are specifically funded to deal with play in the community, e.g. they get a budget to create three events a month for local neighbourhoods. Kits / APP website are given with resources that give ideas to the committee
  • Prize for the most creative neighbourhoods monthly/ yearly
  • All communities are allocated a “community play shed” with toys/ play aids that the committee is a caretaker of.
  • My active travel pal, create a mobile app that links to an integrated signage system or QR coded check points. Kids can “check in” and the QR code will also link them to a digital map of the bike paths in their location.
  • The app has a community / school space that allows kids to link up with friends that are also walking to school. Allow for walking, school bus system, walked reward system involved that gives points/ rewards for km ridden, walked etc.
  • “Play Pods” in all schools with low risk equipment e.g. tyres, barrels etc., crates (agreement from school is key) -> active education, “loose materials” for free play.
  • Early education – already has the idea so why not primary schools
  • Reduce car speeds to 30km in all neighbourhood zones, positive reinforcements – speed limits, creating network speedbumps, residential street speed signs 30/15 past playful children, change of culture of speed, make entry narrow / bumpy surface naturally slows traffic. Psychological traffic calming => different space.
  • Emphasise the rights of the child, children don’t get to vote
  • Demonstrate youth councils in the communities”:  Neighbourhood watch for local kids
  • Educate parents and children, time to educate children about risks, tackle the fear factor – stranger danger etc.
  • Play spaces in cafes
  • Coffee van in playground/parks spaces
  • Community gardens, community productive gardens next to playgrounds / commonly used community space, schools, shops, commons, creek, playground.
  • Sun safe play spaces, something to play under
  • Including schools and school playgrounds
  • Path networks linking play spaces
  • Flexible design, inclusive management

Key outcomes: 

The following summarises the collaborative brainstorming during the Urban Labs and key outcomes from the three Issue topics discussions, Children and the built environment, Designs around the state of children’s health and Play, for action planning.
 
Issue 1: Children and the built environment
 
Urban Lab summary
When discussing issues and barriers, safety in relation to vehicular traffic concern was the most highly cited aspect. While the issues and barriers stated were diverse, some commonly acknowledged barriers were stated. Funding and timeframe within the government was an agreed upon barrier. The lack of consultation with children was a commonly acknowledged idea in relation to issues and barriers. Time and overscheduling was another commonly agreed upon topic, as well as the idea of a “lost sense of community”.
During the ideas and possibilities phase of the discussion, urban design in regards to traffic calming, shared roads, the lowering of car speeds using speed bumps, etc. was the most popularly agreed upon topic. The creation of safer walking and cycling paths was another popular topic. Grassroots signage warning cars that kids are around was another commonly agreed suggestion, while educating parents in “letting kids out” was a similarly acknowledged idea.
 
Role setting and action planning framework:
  • Develop an app with a focus on interaction with local environment/ neighbourhood (specific actions, activities and points) à reward by collaboration by industry and business for vouchers
  • Safe Access well designed routes around schools –active transport built in
  • Design and disseminate a range of “Kids at Play” signage options that can be used on local streets to promote speed reduction
  • Weekend pop up road closure – temporary play space
  • Mapping of linked play activities, make connections that are safe and accessible (put on city wide maps).
  • Adventure walks around the suburbs
  • Colocation of shops and play spaces
  • Change in workplace culture (Media knowledge translation campaign, workplace modification, and policy)
The following consensus was reached for priority actions:
  1. Safe access, well-designed routes around schools - daily active transport built in
  2. Design and place "Kids at Play" signage to promote speed reduction on streets
  3. Co-location of shops and play spaces
Issue 2: Designs around the state of children’s health 
Throughout the process it became very clear that sedentary schooling was the most agreed upon issue. Adults often have preconceived ideas in the absence of what children really think or know. Living the busy life is connected to perceived time poorness resulting in less time for community connection. In relation to the ideas and possibilities the “need to include kids in co-design in school-settings” was the most commonly agreed upon theme. Expansion of communities composting gardens as an integrated design solution into the local neighbourhoods not just dumped on landfill was also a commonly agreed upon idea. Child friendly adult facilities were also acknowledged as an idea/possibility.
“Free play with loose materials in schools”, “Multigenerational facilities”, “More co-design and engaging with kids in design of play areas / activities. Most kids want to be healthy” were the three most popular options.
 
Role setting and action planning framework:
  • Co- design and engagement using the school curriculum to develop projects, which children identify as being relevant to their health and physical activity
  • Walking and cycling path safety (my active travel Pal APP) Links signage system to QR coded check-points / QR code links to digital map and social school element
  • Develop an information pack for target local communities to give guidance and consideration relevant to establishing and operating a home garden fruit and vegetable exchange
  • Create a place making team to coordinate and monitor activities in street design
  • Community owned and run play areas (sustainability and design needs to be policy supported) 
  • Enable community to develop play spaces – Fund a government position as play facilitator and grant based
  • Include children in meal planning shopping and preparation of meals
  • Free play and loose material in schools
  • App for play (collaboration with CBR Innovation hub)
 
The following consensus was reached for priority actions:
  1. Play infrastructure for all ages/ co -design best practice learning from overseas
  2. Safe walking and cycling path (Map + App) QR coded check-points, social school support element
  3. Co-design/engagement using school curriculum - children's input relevant to their health and physical activity
 
Issue 3: Play
 
Urban Lab summary:
The most common barrier raised was related to vehicle speed, cars, safety, road safety and the perception of safety. Other barriers included space and the loss of space that of public and private space as well as time constraints for parents not being able to spend time with their children. Perceived convenience and time will need to be addressed and require urgent attention. 
The following ideas and possibilities respond to the time issue and outline options for collaborative intervention. For example, the introduction of a kids shed, containing loose play material as well as places where both children and adults can play together, play spaces for all ages. Another suggestion was made around the reduction of car speeds to 30km/ h in all neighbourhood zones, 15km/ h near children’s play zones, positive re-enforcement obeying speed limits, and bumpy road surfaces. Speed limits, speed bumps, traffic calming spaces, psychological traffic calming and awareness of the different space can be part of the solution. Education of both parents and children, addressing issues of risks and stranger danger was a further suggestion for the way forward.
 
Role setting and action planning framework:
  • Environmental movement and play in all schools with loose material equipment (funding to implement)
  • Communities at play neighbourhood committees that are specifically funded to deal with play in the community (budget to create 3 events per month and prise for most creative neighbourhood both yearly and monthly /communities get an allocated play shed
  • Community gardens next to play spaces
  • Establish a website or app where local play initiatives can upload information about their program including goals and benefits
  • Awareness of the importance of play (strategy that targets Gov., stakeholders, communities and schools)
  • Reclaiming the streets – starting an open debate (web- based) provide data and event engagement à infrastructure solutions, policy, informal community action
  • Play infrastructure for all ages/ co –design best practice learning from overseas
  • Pop- up adult playground
  • Safer speeds (30 km/h or 15 km/h “Past playful children)
The following consensus was reached for priority actions:
  1. Environmental movement/play in all schools supported with loose material equipment (funding to implement)
  2. Safer speeds (30 km/h or 15 km/h) near areas where children's play has priority
  3. Promote awareness of importance of play (strategy to target governments, stakeholders, communities and schools)
 
Overall result
The overall outcomes of the consensus voting in relation to the top three number one issues emerged quite clearly and resulted in the following:
  • For issue 1 Children and the built environment: the order stayed the same as for the short-listing stage and there was a clear consensus for 'Safe access, well-designed routes around schools - daily active transport built in'.
  • For issue 2 Designs around the state of children’s health: 'Play infrastructure for all ages/ co -design best practice learning from overseas' remained the most strongly supported proposal and the other two proposals changed positions. However, there was little to choose between these three.
  • For issue 3 Play: 'Environmental movement/play in all schools supported with loose material equipment (funding to implement)' emerged as the most strongly supported proposal.

Conclusion & way forward:

The Urban Thinkers Campus Shaping Spaces for Gen Z was an international forum to discuss realistic pathways that enable environments that foster healthy childhood development in the broadest sense of this term i.e. including mental and physical capacities, social and psychological development as well as connectedness to community. The Forum created a platform for an evidence-based dialog on three issues relating to the state of children’s health today and invited the widest range of stakeholders to be part of this event. Participants from stakeholder groups: parents, the general public, Government, NGOs, academia and community services were well represented.
In terms of the discussion and proposals that came up around the tables during the Urban Labs, social and emotional issues, inequalities and eating behaviours and excess consumption, and a collective response to these issues, were mentioned but not enough to make it into the top ideas for action. This is probably a reflection of our decision to focus the forum mainly around physical activity and play. Combining good quality play opportunities with active transport to school could help address the social and emotional issues but probably not the eating behaviours.
 
Following on from the top three proposals, we recommend an integrated system-wide approach to the issue as this has the potential to directly impact not just the top three priority issues but many other issues that emerged during the discussion as well.
  1. 'Safe access, well-designed routes around schools - daily active transport built in' could be achieved by creating safer speeds (30 km/h or 15 km/h) near areas where children's play has priority. App games that are playful and encourage children to be outside and being active can help raise awareness and function as an individualised tool to get children more active.
  2. 'Play infrastructure for all ages/ co -design best practice learning from overseas' can be accomplished by introduction of weekend pop up road closure e.g. reclaiming the street initiative– introducing temporary play spaces for all. Co- design opportunities in government processes and community based initiatives can empower children. On a grassroots level, creative “Kids at Play” signage, designed by the community can be used on local streets to promote speed reduction fostering unique community characteristics to emerge.
  3. Environmental movement/play in all schools supported with loose material equipment (funding to implement) can be delivered in an integrated way as part of the promotion and awareness raising of importance of play. This coordinated approach could be delivered as part of the ACT Government preventative health coordinator office. A strategy is required to target governments, stakeholders, communities and schools.
 
We suggest also to address societal barriers that prevent community connectedness such as time, perception of safety and accelerated action on speed reduction (30km/h or lower) across the urban neighbourhoods through the introduction of community-led pop up initiative to reclaim the streets, leading to government supported active travel streets.


Monitoring & Reporting:

1. How do you intend to monitor the achievements and progress in the implementation of your action plan approved at your Campus (success indicators and other measures of achievement should be proposed)?
 
The action plan identified three priority proposals: 1 Safe access, well-designed routes around schools - daily active transport built in; 2 Play infrastructure for all ages/ co -design best practice learning from overseas; and 3 Environmental movement/play in all schools supported with loose material equipment (funding to implement).
In order to determine whether the intended results are being achieved and what corrective action may be needed to ensure delivery of the intended results, a monitoring plan is recommended. Therefore, the monitoring strategy will focus on the main actions proposed and will follow the method shown in table 1.
 
Table 1: Monitoring method
 
Action A) Safe access, well-designed routes around schools - Daily active transport built in Method for data collection
  • Applying Heart Foundations Active Living Impact Checklist for development in the ACT
  • Direct observation/measurement and photography
  • Residents feedback session on safety perception
  • Official statistics – active transport infrastructure built after the Urban Thinkers Campus
Indicator
  • Number of schools in the city with well-designed routes.
  • Percent of residents that give positive feedback on the issues.
  • Number of places (schools) with new active travel infrastructure.
  • Proportion of children using active transport to and from school.
Action B) Play infrastructure for all ages/ co-design government and community based initiatives Method for data collection
  • Interview with community based initiatives
  • Official statistics
  • Direct observation/measurement
Indicator
  • Number of activities promoted by the government in conjunction with community based initiatives.
  • Percentage of residents involved in co-design opportunities.
Action C) Environmental movement/play in all schools supported with loose material equipment (promotion and awareness raising of importance of play Method for data collection
  • Survey
  • Interview
  • Official statistics
Indicator
  • Residents can list at least two health and well- being related reasons why play spaces are important.
  • Number/ proportion of schools that approach this subject in their curriculum/daily activities with children.
  • Presence of funding designated to support this action.
  • Number/ proportion of schools that provide loose material equipment for kids to play.
2. Explain how you intend to share the results of your action plan with the WUC community and other partners in order to jointly implement the New Urban Agenda?
Short term 1-2 years
  • The organisers will publish an outcome report of “Shaping Spaces for Gen Z” and shara this resource with the WUC community and other interested partners that are committed to implement the New Urban Agenda.
  • Urban Synergies Group and the University of Canberra, Health Research Institute will monitor and follow up with relevant stakeholder on progress ACT Government Health Directorate - Health report card and bi-annual Chief Health Officer report on the state of children’s health.
  • Attend the upcoming WUC Campaign meeting in May 2017 to share outcomes of the report with WUC partners.
  • Present at the upcoming World Urban Forum’s on the actions that commenced as the result of “Shaping Spaces for Gen Z” in the Canberra case.
Long term up to 2030 for SDGs and up to 2036 for implementation of the NUA
  • Follow up Progress Forum in 5 years and report back to UN- Habitat

UTC key speakers:

  1. Meegan Fitzharris MLA Minister for Health and Minister for Transport Canberra and City Services, Australia
  2. Prof. Tong Liu, Yale University, USA & China
  3. Dr. Paul Kelly, Chief Health Officer, ACT Government, Australia
  4. Prof. Tom Cochrane, University of Canberra, Australia
  5. Mr Gregor H. Mews, Founding Director, Urban Synergies Group, Germany & Australia
  6. Dr. Lisa Sharoun, Co Founder, Cross Culture Design Lab, Australia
  7. Associate Prof. Paul Tranter, UNSW Canberra, Australia

List of participants: 

  • not available

List of organisations represented: 

  1. Members of the public
  2. SAP - Institute for Digital Government
  3. Commissioner for the Environment and Sustainability, Australia
  4. University of Canberra
  5. Australian Capital Territory Government
  6. Kitchengarden Foundation
  7. Belconnen Community Centre
  8. Deakin University
  9. Chung Yuan University
  10. Woden Community Service
  11. Woodlandswetlands
  12. ACT Greens MLA office
  13. Australian National University
  14. Active Learning
  15. Capital Health Network ACT
  16. Health Care Compliance Association
  17. Public Advocate and Commissioner for children and young people
  18. South Australia Government
  19. Community Services
  20. SEE-change Youth Parliament
  21. Heart Foundation ACT
  22. Yale University
  23. Urban Synergies Group
  24. Families ACT
  25. Coordinare
  26. Bluearth Foundation
  27. ISG Projects
  28. Cross Culture Design Lab
  29. National Capital Authority
  30. YMCA
  31. Education ACT
  32. Australian Indigenous Doctors Association
  33. TEDx Canberra
  34. UNSW Canberra
  35. Physical Activity Foundation
  36. Planning Institute of Australia
  37. Living streets Canberra
  38. ACT Council of Parents and Citizens Association
  39. Australian Primary Principals Association

List of partner groups represented: 

  1. Children & Youth
  2. Businesses & Industries 
  3. Foundations & Philanthropies
  4. Research & Academia 
  5. Local & Subnational Authorities
  6. Women
  7. Civil Society Organizations 
  8. Parliamentarians
  9. Grass-roots Organizations

List of countries represented:

  1. Australia
  2. Brasil
  3. China
  4. Germany
  5. India
  6. Ireland
  7. Malta
  8. United States of America