IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2019i1p231-d302808.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Technological Scenario for a Healthier, More Equitable and Sustainable Europe in 2040: Citizen Perceptions and Policy Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Arlind Xhelili

    (Collaborating Centre on Sustainable Consumption and Production (CSCP), 42107 Wuppertal, Germany)

  • Rosa Strube

    (Collaborating Centre on Sustainable Consumption and Production (CSCP), 42107 Wuppertal, Germany)

  • Francesca Grossi

    (Collaborating Centre on Sustainable Consumption and Production (CSCP), 42107 Wuppertal, Germany)

  • Iva Zvěřinová

    (Charles University, Environment Centre (CUNI), 162 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Timothy Taylor

    (European Centre on Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Truro TR1 3HD, UK)

  • Pablo Martinez-Juarez

    (Health Economics Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK)

  • Sonia Quiroga

    (Department of Economics, Universidad de Alcalá, 28801 Alcalá, Spain)

  • Cristina Suárez

    (Department of Economics, Universidad de Alcalá, 28801 Alcalá, Spain)

  • Dragan Gjorgjev

    (The Institute of Public Health of the Republic of Macedonia (IJZRM), 1000 Skopje, North Macedonia)

Abstract

This article aims at exploring, understanding and comparing European citizens’ insights and perceptions towards “My life between realities”, a positive future scenario which depicts a narrative of reaching healthier, more equitable and sustainable societies by 2040 with the support of technology and technological solutions. It responds to the need for gathering and incorporating more citizen insights into future policy developments and strategic actions to tackle the global challenge of unsustainable development. Citizens of five European countries—the Czech Republic, Germany, North Macedonia, Spain and the United Kingdom—have been consulted through focus groups. The exercise has uncovered citizens’ preferences and attitudes towards four main lifestyle areas; namely, green spaces, energy efficient housing, active mobility and (food) consumption. The technological attributes of the scenario led to citizens expressing diametrically opposed and critical perceptions and attitudes. Given the prospects of technology in driving sustainable development, based on these insights, policy recommendations for the better integration and acceptance of technological advances by the public are discussed herein.

Suggested Citation

  • Arlind Xhelili & Rosa Strube & Francesca Grossi & Iva Zvěřinová & Timothy Taylor & Pablo Martinez-Juarez & Sonia Quiroga & Cristina Suárez & Dragan Gjorgjev, 2019. "A Technological Scenario for a Healthier, More Equitable and Sustainable Europe in 2040: Citizen Perceptions and Policy Implications," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-18, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2019:i:1:p:231-:d:302808
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/1/231/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/1/231/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cornwall, Andrea & Jewkes, Rachel, 1995. "What is participatory research?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 41(12), pages 1667-1676, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caroline Patsias & Anne Latendresse & Laurence Bherer, 2013. "Participatory Democracy, Decentralization and Local Governance: the Montreal Participatory Budget in the light of ‘Empowered Participatory Governance’," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 2214-2230, November.
    2. Lauren Arundell & Kate Parker & Jo Salmon & Jenny Veitch & Anna Timperio, 2019. "Informing Behaviour Change: What Sedentary Behaviours Do Families Perform at Home and How Can They Be Targeted?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-12, November.
    3. Mike Kesby, 2007. "Spatialising Participatory Approaches: The Contribution of Geography to a Mature Debate," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(12), pages 2813-2831, December.
    4. Ines Testoni & Irene Nencioni & Maibrit Arbien & Erika Iacona & Francesca Marrella & Vittoria Gorzegno & Cristina Selmi & Francesca Vianello & Alfonso Nava & Adriano Zamperini & Michael Alexander Wies, 2021. "Mental Health in Prison: Integrating the Perspectives of Prison Staff," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Zemadim, B. & McCartney, Matthew & Langan, Simon & Sharma, Bharat, 2013. "A participatory approach for hydrometeorological monitoring in the Blue Nile River Basin of Ethiopia," IWMI Reports 201009, International Water Management Institute.
    6. Lisa M. Vaughn & MaryAnn Lohmueller, 2014. "Calling All Stakeholders," Evaluation Review, , vol. 38(4), pages 336-355, August.
    7. Ana Luiza Fontenelle & Erik Nilsson & Ieda Geriberto Hidalgo & Cintia B. Uvo & Drielli Peyerl, 2022. "Temporal Understanding of the Water–Energy Nexus: A Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-21, April.
    8. Azad, Md Javed & Pritchard, Bill, 2022. "Financial capital as a shaper of households' adaptive capabilities to flood risk in northern Bangladesh," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    9. Ebitu, Larmbert & Avery, Helen & Mourad, Khaldoon A. & Enyetu, Joshua, 2021. "Citizen science for sustainable agriculture – A systematic literature review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    10. San Sebastián, Miguel & Hurtig, Anna Karin, 2005. "Oil development and health in the Amazon basin of Ecuador: the popular epidemiology process," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 799-807, February.
    11. So Pyay Thar & Thiagarajah Ramilan & Robert J. Farquharson & Deli Chen, 2021. "Identifying Potential for Decision Support Tools through Farm Systems Typology Analysis Coupled with Participatory Research: A Case for Smallholder Farmers in Myanmar," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, June.
    12. Theresia Krieger & Sandra Salm & Antje Dresen & Anna Arning & Kathrin Schwickerath & Andrea Göttel & Stefanie Houwaart & Holger Pfaff & Natalia Cecon, 2022. "Optimizing Patient Information Material for a New Psycho-Oncological Care Program Using a Participatory Health Research Approach in Germany," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-17, January.
    13. Bessell, Sharon, 2019. "Money matters…but so do people: Children's views and experiences of living in a ‘disadvantaged’ community," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 59-66.
    14. Sollis, Kate & Yap, Mandy & Campbell, Paul & Biddle, Nicholas, 2022. "Conceptualisations of wellbeing and quality of life: A systematic review of participatory studies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    15. Hollynd Boyden & Mayela Gillan & Javier Molina & Ashok Gadgil & Winston Tseng, 2023. "Community Perceptions of Arsenic Contaminated Drinking Water and Preferences for Risk Communication in California’s San Joaquin Valley," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-18, January.
    16. Bernard Amadei, 2020. "A Systems Approach to Building Community Capacity and Resilience," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-23, October.
    17. Chung, Kimberly & Lounsbury, David W., 2006. "The role of power, process, and relationships in participatory research for statewide HIV/AIDS programming," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(8), pages 2129-2140, October.
    18. Alexandra Lenis Escobar & Ramón Rueda López & Jorge E. García Guerrero & Enrique Salinas Cuadrado, 2020. "Design of Strategies for the Implementation and Management of a Complementary Monetary System Using the SWOT-AHP Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-23, August.
    19. Nugus, Peter & Greenfield, David & Travaglia, Joanne & Braithwaite, Jeffrey, 2012. "The politics of action research: “If you don't like the way things are going, get off the bus”," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(11), pages 1946-1953.
    20. Victoria Tischler & Karen D'Silva & Anna Cheetham & Mervin Goring & Tim Calton, 2010. "Involving Patients in Research: the Challenge of Patient-Centredness," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 56(6), pages 623-633, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2019:i:1:p:231-:d:302808. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.