Wednesday, 18 September 2013

£50,000 per day of public money

RoundaboutThe Beeb has this piece about a Belfast roundabout that costs £50,000 per day of public money. Well no, it doesn’t really – nothing to do with the roundabout, the money is for the policing of the immediate neighbourhood, because the junction marks an inflammatory boundary between loyalist and republican areas.

But it’s useful and valid for this huge cost to be publicised. It’s taxpayers’ money used to deter persistent violence in local areas. We’ve known about the massive human cost for a long time: it will be interesting if the novelty of knowing more about the financial cost has some impact in bringing about a lasting solution.

18 Sep 2013 16:58:13 | Space and place

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Envisaging the 'sidewalk-free' neighbourhood We're accustomed to the implication that car-dominated layouts damage local social relations by discouraging walking; but here's an unusual take on neighbourhood characteristics... An interviewee (aged 69) in research carried out into place and social connectedness, mentioned that 'she preferred that there were no sidewalks where she lived, because it deterred people from walking around her neighborhood.' One wonders whether a 'sidewalk-free' local environment might ever be seen pospectively as a desirable feature for someone wanting to relocate. Can you see the estate agents finding the right form of words? But where would people put their cars, if there were no pavements?
PREVIOUS POST
More on the benefits of neighbourliness Via a piece by Sarah Goodyear in Atlantic, here’s some significant research evidence supporting the link between local social cohesion and positive health outcomes. Researchers from the University of Michigan studied a wide range of potential confounding variables using a large and nationally representative sample of older adults. They found that perceived ‘neighbourhood social cohesion’ was strongly associated with both stroke mortality and non-fatal stroke. ‘Each standard deviation increase in perceived neighborhood social cohesion was associated with a 15% reduced risk in stroke incidence after adjusting for age, gender, chronic illnesses, marital status, education, and total wealth. The relationship persisted after adjusting further for behavioral and psychological covariates. Even after adjusting for two individual-level social engagement measures, factors that may have confounded a respondent's perceived neighborhood social cohesion rating, perceived neighborhood social cohesion was associated with a reduced risk of stroke.’ That sounds pretty thorough to me. And towards the end of the article the authors speculate that: ‘residents may experience a lack of perceived neighborhood social cohesion because their neighborhood lacks an infrastructure that allows them to mingle and build community. A lack of these community resources may inhibit healthy behaviors.’ (Emphasis added) In the US, according to this article, stroke is responsible for an estimated $25.2 billion in direct costs. Porportionately, the UK figure would presumably be lower but not luxuriously so. I think I spy a way of reducing it. This probably needs to be spelled out very slowly for A Politician Near You. But it’s commonsense really: investing in the local community sector to generate local social capital and cohesion will bring health benefits of huge economic significance. Let me know if you come across a politician who gets it.

Kevin Harris

Search

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments