ABSTRACT
Researchers have increasingly recognized, however, the limitations of defining place in terms of a bounded geographic area equated, metaphorically, to a 'black box'. In public health, nevertheless, the predominant approach to defining place has been in spatial terms. In part, this reflects the influence of epidemiology and the use of multilevel statistical modelling in studying patterns of health and disease. The development of geographical information systems (GIS) technology has made it possible to link geographical patterns of health and disease with spatially referenced physical and social phenomena in a way that can provide aetiological clues about how places shape health and health inequality. Place-based resources, including informal support, are particularly valued by people. Social affiliation is especially important for physical and mental health and well-being. Public health might benefit from a more direct engagement with empirical and theoretical work within health geography where the general starting point is that places form people as much as places are formed from people.
