Download to read offline
Uploaded byNew Jersey Future
Njf redevelopment forum 2018 huang
The document discusses the economic value of designing for health. It addresses how economics is concerned with allocating scarce resources for the greatest good. It also looks at the benefits for both the private and public sectors, as well as potential issues around gentrification and displacement that can result from designing for health. The presentation takes questions from the audience.
Njf redevelopment forum 2018 huang
- 1. The Economic Valueof Designing for Health LEE HUANG Econsult Solutions, Inc. March 9, 2018
- 2. What does economicshave to do with designing for health?
- 3. Economics is concernedwith the best allocation of scarce resources for the greatest good.
- 4. What’s in itfor the private sector
- 5. What’s in itfor the public sector
- 6. What about gentrificationand displacement?
- 7. Thank you! Questions? Lee Huang SeniorVice President and Principal Econsult Solutions, Inc. 215.717.2777 huang@econsultsolutions.com
Editor's Notes
- #4 Economics is concerned with the best allocation of scarce resources for the greatest good. Let’s unpack this definition. We are certainly in a world of scarce resources, and so the inherent trade-offs we must make as a result mean that we can’t just say “X is good” or “do you want X,” but rather “are we willing to pay for X” and “what is a fair and efficient way to do that” Another aspect of trade-offs is that “best” and “greatest good” mean different things to different people, which sounds obvious but how much of our rancorous political discourse is based on the notion that I assume that what I want is what everyone else wants, and if they don’t want that then they’re either evil or stupid (rather than just different) One, by no means the only way that “best” and “greatest good” mean different things to different people when it comes to the provision of health resources is that some of the providers are for-profit entities, some are non-profit, and some are government, and while there is some convergence of motivations there are still some fundamental differences in role and perspective I would argue that no matter who you are, you have to think about things like nothing is free, what are people willing to pay for, what are the spillover positive and negative impacts that are borne by others, and what happens when people get left behind – but depending on where you are sitting, your job and motivation may weight different of these things differently
- #5 I need to give you language to make the case to the private sector that it is in their bottom line interest to design for health; there are many reasons For all employers, choosing where to locate is often about access to health resources, because Health care coverage is expensive, and healthier and happier employees are bottom-line issues of expenditures and productivity Healthy amenities impact the bottom line, if you’re doing market rate then you can charge more which increases your margins, and if you’re doing subsidized then part of your social impact case (and we are increasingly requiring developers to prove this) is helping the poor or dealing with environmental issues in a green way Broadly speaking, businesses are looking to create the best, most dense settings for innovation, and designing for health is a big part of this, whether it is health resources that attract knowledge workers or non-auto forms of transportation which enable the density you need to foster innovation
- #6 I need to give you language to make the case to the public sector that it is in their bottom line interest to design for health; there are many reasons First, anything that is good for business is, all else equal, helpful to the public sector because it means jobs and tax base Picking up on an earlier point, active = dense = what allows the kind of urbanness that people seek and that produces innovation and growth Healthier people are also more productive and less costly so in terms of investing in your populace and reducing your public expenditures there’s a very good case Health resources are often highly progressive in nature, in that you are making this really desirable resource freely available to everyone (vs. only rich people can otherwise afford really nice kinds of amenities)
- #7 Gentrification and displacement are economic issues but they also have social/racial/historical/power aspects to them, so let’s explore this further and in a multi-disciplinary manner There are no easy solutions here but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t explore how to do better Better can’t possibly mean you can’t have nice things, and it also can’t possibly mean let’s shut our eyes and imagine that market forces don’t exist, and it also can’t shut the door on more development (because when demand goes up either supply goes up or price goes up)