Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 103, Supplement 3, pp S29–S34 | Cite as

Walkable for Whom? Examining the Role of the Built Environment on the Neighbourhood-based Physical Activity of Children

  • Kristjana Loptson
  • Nazeem MuhajarineEmail author
  • Tracy Ridalls
  • the Smart Cities, Healthy Kids Research Team
  • Nazeem Muhajarine
  • Karen Chad
  • Cory Neudorf
  • Adam Baxter-Jones
  • Bill Holden
  • Scott Bell
  • Charlie Clark
  • Lauren Sherar
  • Dale Esliger
  • Sara Kirk
  • Paul Hanley
  • Lan Vu
Quantitative Research
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

Objectives

To date, only a few studies have attempted to study the processes by which community design and the built and social environments affect individual physical activity, especially in children. Qualitative enquiry is useful for exploring perceptions and decision-making, and to understand the processes involved in how people interact with their environments. This study used qualitative methods to gain insight into the pathways linking the neighbourhood environment with children’s activity patterns.

Methods

Data were collected in semi-structured interviews with 24 child-parent dyads (children aged 10–14 years). Families lived in neighbourhoods ranging from lowest to highest median income and representing the three main design types found in Saskatoon - urban, semi-suburban and suburban.

Results

Parents and children underscored the importance of safe environments for children’s physical activity: streets or paths they can cycle on without feeling threatened, parks and green spaces free of criminal activity, and neighbourhoods where people know each other and children have friends to play with. Although grid-pattern urban neighbourhoods with a high density of destinations may in principle promote active transportation, the higher levels of crime and traffic danger that tend to exist in these areas may hinder physical activity in children.

Conclusion

Understanding what facilitates activity in children is a complex endeavour. It requires understanding the barriers to physical activity present at the neighbourhood level as well as social and perceptual factors that act in interdependent ways to either promote or hinder children’s physical activity.

Key words

Neighbourhood built environment children qualitative method safety physical activity 

Mots clés

milieu bâti du quartier enfants méthode qualitative sécurité activité physique 

Résumé

Objectifs

Jusqu’à maintenant, très peu d’études se sont penchées sur le processus par lequel le design communautaire, le milieu bâti et l’environnement social influent sur l’activité physique des gens, en particulier les enfants. Les enquêtes qualitatives sont utiles pour explorer les perceptions et la prise de décisions, et pour comprendre les processus en jeu dans les interactions des gens avec leur environnement. Notre étude fait appel à des méthodes qualitatives pour approfondir la compréhension des liens entre l’environnement du quartier et le profil d’activité des enfants.

Méthode

Des données ont été recueillies à la faveur d’entretiens semidirigés auprès de 24 dyades parents-enfants (les enfants ayant de 10 à 14 ans). Les familles habitaient des quartiers au revenu médian variable (du plus faible au plus élevé) et qui représentaient les trois grands types de design observés à Saskatoon: urbain, semi-suburbain et suburbain.

Résultats

Parents et enfants ont souligné l’importance que l’environnement soit sûr pour l’activité physique des enfants: des rues ou des sentiers où l’on peut faire de la bicyclette sans se sentir menacé, des parcs et des espaces verts sans activités criminelles, et des quartiers où les gens se connaissent et où les enfants ont des camarades avec qui jouer. Bien que les quartiers urbains aux rues quadrillées, denses en points d’intérêt, favorisent en principe le transport actif, les taux de criminalité plus élevés et les dangers de la circulation qui ont tendance à exister dans ces quartiers peuvent entraver l’activité physique des enfants.

Conclusion

Tenter de comprendre ce qui facilite l’activité chez les enfants est une tâche complexe. Elle exige de connaître les obstacles à l’activité physique présents à l’échelle des quartiers ainsi que les facteurs sociaux et perceptuels qui agissent de façon interdépendante pour favoriser ou entraver l’activité physique des enfants.

References

  1. 1.
    Gauvin L, Richard L, Craig CL, Spivock M, Riva M, Gagnon H, et al. From walkability to active living potential: An “ecometric” validation study. Am J Prev Med 2005;28(2S2):126–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boone-Heinonen J, Gordon-Larsen P, Guilkey DK, Jacobs Jr DR, Popkin BM. Environment and physical activity dynamics: The role of residential self-selection. Psychol Sport Exerc 2011;12:54–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Levine J, Frank LD. Transportation and land-use preferences and residents’ neighbourhood choices: The sufficiency of “smart growth” in the Atlanta regions. Transportation 2006;34(2):255–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berry TR, Spence JC, Blanchard CM, Cutumisu N, Edwards J, Selfridge G. A longitudinal and cross-sectional examination of the relationship between reasons for choosing a neighbourhood, physical activity and body mass index. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2010;7(57). doi:10.1186/1479-5868-7-57.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rodriguez DA, Khattak AJ, Evenson KR. Can new urbanism encourage physical activity? Comparing a new urbanist neighbourhood with conventional suburbs. J Am Planning Assoc 2006;72(1):43–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Geller AL. Smart growth: A prescription for livable cities. Am J Public Health 2003;93(9):1410–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pendola R, Gen S. BMI, auto use, and the urban environment in San Francisco. Health Place 2007;13:551–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frank LD, Andresen M, Schmid TL. Obesity relationships with community design, physical activity and time spent in cars. Am J Prev Med 2004;27(2):87–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berry TR, Spence JC, Blanchard CC, Cutumisu N, Edwards JJ, Nykiforuk CC. Changes in BMI over 6 years: The role of demographic and neighborhood characteristics. Int J Obes 2010;34(8):1275–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sallis JF, Glanz K. The role of built environments in physical activity, eating and obesity in childhood. Future Child 2006;16(1):89–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giles-Corti B, Kelty SF, Zubrick SR, Villanueva KP. Encouraging walking for transport and physical activity in children and adolescents: How important is the built environment? Sports Med 2009;39(12):995–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Frank L, Kerr J, Chapman J, Sallis J. Urban form relationships with walk trip frequency and distance among youth. Am J Health Promot 2007;21(4S):305–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rahman T, Cushing RA, Jackson RJ. Contributions of built environment to childhood obesity. Mount Sinai J Med 2011;78:49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van Dyck D, Cardon G, Deforche B, De Bourdeaudhuij I. Lower neighbourhood walkability and longer distances to school are related to physical activity in Belgian adolescents. Prev Med 2009;48:516–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Norman GJ, Nutter SK, Ryan S, Sallis JF, Calfas KJ, Patrick K. Community design and access to recreational facilities as correlates of adolescent physical activity and body-mass index. J Phys Act Health 2006;3(S1):S118–S128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leung CW, Gregorich SE, Laraia BA, Kushi LH, Yen IH. Measuring the neighbourhood environment: Associations with young girls’ energy intake and expenditure in a cross-sectional study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2010;7:52–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Singh GK, Siahpush M, Kogan MD. Neighborhood socioeconomic conditions, built environments, and childhood obesity. Health Affairs 2010;29(3):503–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Saarloos D, Kim J, Timmermans H. The built environment and health: Introducing individual space-time behaviour. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2009;6:1724–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oakes M. The (mis)estimation of neighbourhood effects: Causal inference for a practicable social epidemiology. Soc Sci Med 2004;59:1929–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zick CD, Smith KR, Fan JX, Brown BB, Yamada I, Kowaleski-Jones L. Running to the store? The relationship between neighbourhood environments and the risk of obesity. Soc Sci Med 2009;69(10):1493–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lopez RP, Hynes HP. Obesity, physical activity, and the urban environment: Public health research needs. Environ Health 2006;5:25. doi:10.1186/1476-069X-5-25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lincoln YS, Guba E. Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Merriam SB. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education, 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1998.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    City of Saskatoon, Neighbourhood profiles. Available at: https://doi.org/www.saskatoon.ca/departments/community%20services/planningdevelopment/future-growth/demographicandhousingdata/pages/neighbourhoodprofiles.aspx (Accessed May 15, 2011).
  25. 25.
    Gauvin L, Riva M, Barnett T, Richard L, Craig CL, Spivock M, et al. Association between neighborhood active living potential and walking. Am J Epidemiol 2008;167(8):944–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gordon-Larsen P, McMurray R, Popkin M. Determinants of adolescent physical activity and inactivity patterns. Pediatrics 2000;105(6):1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Timperio A, Salmon J, Ball K. Evidence-based strategies to promote physical activity among children, adolescents and young adults: Review and update. J Sci Med Sport 2004;7(1):20–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Weir LA, Etelson D, Brand DA. Parents’ perceptions of neighbourhood safety and children’s physical activity. PrevMed 2006;43(3):212–17.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Oliver LN, Hayes MV. Neighbourhood socio-economic status and the prevalence of overweight Canadian children and youth. Can J Public Health 2005;96(6):415–20.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Loukaitou-Sideris A, Sideris A. What brings children to the park? Analysis and measurement of the variables affecting children’s use of parks. J Am Planning Assoc 2010;76(1):89–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristjana Loptson
    • 1
  • Nazeem Muhajarine
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Tracy Ridalls
    • 1
  • the Smart Cities, Healthy Kids Research Team
  • Nazeem Muhajarine
  • Karen Chad
  • Cory Neudorf
  • Adam Baxter-Jones
  • Bill Holden
  • Scott Bell
  • Charlie Clark
  • Lauren Sherar
  • Dale Esliger
  • Sara Kirk
  • Paul Hanley
  • Lan Vu
  1. 1.Saskatchewan Population Health and Evaluation Research UnitCanada
  2. 2.Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, College of MedicineUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations