Types of identified policy actions: Voluntary standard or certification (i.e., standard or certification schemes that incentivise retention of trees or discourages removal of trees); voluntary financial incentives (e.g., tax rebate or grant) financial incentives for tree retention in new developments or private residences; provision of free tree seedlings for private owners to plant.

What we know: Despite academics support for the use of incentives for green spaces and/or tree protection, there is limited evidence of the development, use or efficacy of these types of policies at the local level (Ordóñez-Barona et al., 2021). Incentive approaches could be appealing to local government considering they are less resource intensive than regulatory processes (Ordóñez-Barona et al., 2021).

Types of identified programmes and initiatives: Active paths development and programmes; modification of parks, construction of outdoor gyms and promotion of use; implementation and improvement of bicycle infrastructure (racks, lanes) and pedestrian paths/bridges.

What we know: Investing in and improving public transportation and active transportation infrastructure is highly cost-effective and has several beneficial win-win effects for health and the environment (Gao et al., 2018; Godrich et al., 2023; McKinnon et al., 2016; Stankov et al., 2020; White et al., 2018). Travel modal shifts to public transport and/or active transport (e.g., walking or cycling) can increase physical activity (Stankov et al., 2020), greater active transport duration and numbers of trips (Stankov et al., 2020), reduce CO2 emissions (Gao et al., 2018) and protect against morbidity (DALYs) and mortality associated with air pollution, traffic-related incidents and sedentary lifestyles (Gao et al., 2018), as well as wider knock-on effects for community wellbeing like improving neighbourhood safety (Stankov et al., 2020). Bicycle lane interventions and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems with adjacent bicycle lanes have been associated with promoted physical activity and active transport (Stankov et al., 2020). Empirical and modelling evidence indicates that multi-pronged actions may be more effective than single-component interventions for influencing health (Stankov et al., 2020).

Examples of implementation: Stankov et al., (2020) presents several empirical and modelling-based studies that have local level examples of active transport interventions and their actual or estimated impacts. Within the UK, included examples came from studies of developed public and active transport infrastructure in Cambridge (England), which included cycle paths, multi-use trails and BRT and studies in Southampton (England), Cardiff and Kenilworth (Wales), which featured new riverside footpaths/boardwalks and traffic-free bridges (Stankov et al., 2020).

Definition: Demand-responsive transport (DRT) provides transportation options that employ dynamic, semi-fixed, or fixed routes with users and can be pre-booked or operated on-demand. They are often mostly used by elderly persons or those with disabilities even if available to the whole community (Butler et al., 2020).

What we know: Publicly funded and socially delivered demand-responsive transport (DRT) services demonstrate beneficial effects, with evidence suggesting they can be aligned with public transport service networks so as to improve first- and last-mile access to public transportation and provide connections to major transportation hubs, which can ultimately increase public transportation ridership (Butler et al., 2020). Shared DRT services can also present an opportunity for increased social interaction and reduced feelings of isolation, particularly among older users (Butler et al., 2020). Effort needs to be made to improve education and awareness of available DRT services as research suggests users who could benefit the most from DRT services are often confused or uncertain about how to use them (Butler et al., 2020).

Examples of implementation: Within Italy, most regions and autonomous provinces offer accompanying and social transport services for older persons to facilitate easier access to health, social, educational, recreational and public services (Barbabella et al., 2022).

Definition: Open streets or play street programmes are initiatives that temporarily close streets to vehicles for pedestrian access, recreational activities or play for children.

What we know: Open streets programmes have been implemented in several cities globally (Danielli et al., 2021) and have showed positive cost-benefit ratios (McKinnon et al., 2016).

Examples of implementation: A review from McKinnon et al., (2016) identified four Ciclovia (Open Streets) programmes in Bogotá (Colombia), Medellín (Colombia), Guadalajara (Mexico) and San Francisco (California, USA). Each of the programmes had a positive cost benefit ratio (Bogotá: 3.23–4.26; Medellín: 1.83; Guadalajara: 1.02–1.23; and San Francisco: 2.32) (McKinnon et al., 2016, Appendix Table 1).

Types of identified shared mobility services: car rentals, public transport, taxis, bike sharing, ride-sharing (e.g., Uber).

What we know: The potential effects of shared mobility services depend on the type and form, with more beneficial effects noted for those related to public transport and active travel (i.e., bike sharing) and neutral and/or inequitable effects for others like private ridesourcing/sharing (Gao et al., 2018; McKane et al., 2023). Bike shares have been estimated to significantly reduce emissions and increases in physical activity, leading to greater avoidance of deaths annual compared to car users (Gao et al., 2018). Private ridesourcing and car-sharing options could potentially contribute to widening transport disadvantage, as these private services are more likely to be operating in centralised, denser areas where more demand is present and thus higher possible profit (Butler et al., 2020). Private ridesourcing also has limited evidence to support claims that it reduce emissions and pollution, with other evidence suggesting that this private option could disrupt existing public transportation networks and taxi users away from more sustainable public and active transport options (McKane et al., 2023).

Examples of implementation: Journeys associated with the bike sharing programme in Barcelona (Spain) - Bicing - have been estimated to have reducing annual CO2 emissions by 9062 MT (Gao et al., 2018). In Australia, the unchecked introduction of the private ridesourcing platform Uber in 2015 led to issues including the overnight loss of value to taxi licenses, concerns around underpayment of workers and later oversaturation of the market (McKane et al., 2023).