Walkable new urban LEED_Neighborhood-Development (LEED-ND) community design and children's physical activity: selection, environmental, or catalyst effects?

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Barbara B Brown²  Robert B Stevens¹ 

[1] Masters of Public Policy Program, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA;Family and Consumer Studies Department, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA

关键词: accelerometer;    walk to school;    neighborhood design;    LEED_ND;    new urbanism;    Walkability;   

Others  :  1153384
DOI  :  10.1186/1479-5868-8-139

 received in 2011-08-19, accepted in 2011-12-20,  发布年份 2011

【 摘 要 】

Background

Interest is growing in physical activity-friendly community designs, but few tests exist of communities explicitly designed to be walkable. We test whether students living in a new urbanist community that is also a pilot LEED_ND (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design-Neighborhood Development) community have greater accelerometer-measured moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) across particular time periods compared to students from other communities. We test various time/place periods to see if the data best conform to one of three explanations for MVPA. Environmental effects suggest that MVPA occurs when individuals are exposed to activity-friendly settings; selection effects suggest that walkable community residents prefer MVPA, which leads to both their choice of a walkable community and their high levels of MVPA; catalyst effects occur when walking to school creates more MVPA, beyond the school commute, on schooldays but not weekends.

Methods

Fifth graders (n = 187) were sampled from two schools representing three communities: (1) a walkable community, Daybreak, designed with new urbanist and LEED-ND pilot design standards; (2) a mixed community (where students lived in a less walkable community but attended the walkable school so that part of the route to school was walkable), and (3) a less walkable community. Selection threats were addressed through controlling for parental preferences for their child to walk to school as well as comparing in-school MVPA for the walkable and mixed groups.

Results

Minutes of MVPA were tested with 3 × 2 (Community by Gender) analyses of covariance (ANCOVAs). Community walkability related to more MVPA during the half hour before and after school and, among boys only, more MVPA after school. Boys were more active than girls, except during the half hour after school. Students from the mixed and walkable communities--who attended the same school--had similar in-school MVPA levels, and community groups did not differ in weekend MVPA, providing little evidence of selection effects.

Conclusions

Even after our controls for selection effects, we find evidence of environmental effects on MVPA. These results suggest that walkable community design, according to new urbanist and LEED_ND pilot design standards, is related to higher MVPA among students at certain times.

【 授权许可】

   
2011 Stevens, and Brown; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Lobstein T, Baur L, Uauy R: Obesity in children and young people: a crisis in public health. Obesity Reviews 2004, 5(s1):4-85.
• [2]Troiano RP, Berrigan D, Dodd KW, Masse LC, Tilert T, McDowell M: Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007, 40(1):181-188.
• [3]Nader PR, Bradley RH, Houts RM, McRitchie SL, O'Brien M: Moderate-to-vigorous physical activity from ages 9 to 15 years. JAMA 2008, 300(3):295-305.
• [4]Nelson MC, Neumark-Stzainer D, Hannan PJ, Sirard JR, Story M: Longitudinal and secular trends in physical activity and sedentary behavior during adolescence. Pediatrics 2006, 118(6):e1627-1634.
• [5]Salmon J, Timperio A: Prevalence, trends and environmental influences on child and youth physical activity. Medicine and Sport Science 2007, 50:183-199.
• [6]McDonald NC: Active transportation to school: Trends among US schoolchildren, 1969-2001. Am J Prev Med 2007, 32(6):509-516.
• [7]Chillon P, Evenson K, Vaughn A, Ward D: A systematic review of interventions for promoting active transportation to school. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011, 8(1):10. BioMed Central Full Text
• [8]Cervero R, Kockelman K: Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D-Transport and Environment 1997, 2(3):199-219.
• [9]Leccese M, McCormick K: Charter of the new urbanism. New York: McGraw Hill; 2000.
• [10]Calthorpe P: Next American metropolis: Ecology, community, and the American dream. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1993.
• [11]U. S. Green Building Council: Pilot version: LEED for neighborhood development rating system. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Green Building Council; 2007.
• [12]National Center for Environmental Health: Healthy Community Design. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Environmental Health; 2009.
• [13]Garde A: Sustainable by Design?: Insights From U.S. LEED-ND Pilot Projects. J Am Plann Assoc 2009, 75(4):424-440.
• [14]Rodriguez DA, Khattak AJ, Evenson KR: Can new urbanism encourage physical activity? Comparing a new urbanist neighborhood with conventional suburbs. J Am Plann Assoc 2006, 72(1):43-54.
• [15]Brown BB, Cropper VL: New urban and standard suburban subdivisions: Evaluating psychological and social goals. J Am Plann Assoc 2001, 67(4):402-419.
• [16]Kerr J, Frank L, Sallis JF, Chapman J: Urban form correlates of pedestrian travel in youth: Differences by gender, race-ethnicity and household attributes. Transportation Research Part D-Transport and Environment 2007, 12(3):177-182.
• [17]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(4):305-311.
• [18]Giles-Corti B, Wood G, Pikora T, Learnihan V, Bulsara M, Van Niel K, Timperio A, McCormack G, Villanueva K: School site and the potential to walk to school: The impact of street connectivity and traffic exposure in school neighborhoods. Health and Place 2011, 17(2):545-550.
• [19]Rodriguez A, Vogt CA: Demographic, environmental, access, and attitude factors that influence walking to school by elementary school-aged children. J Sch Health 2009, 79(6):255-261.
• [20]Schlossberg M, Greene J, Phillips PP, Johnson B, Parker B: School trips: Effects of urban form and distance on travel mode. J Am Plann Assoc 2006, 72(3):337-346.
• [21]Larsen K, Gilliland J, Hess P, Tucker P, Irwin J, He M: The influence of the physical environment and sociodemographic characteristics on children's mode of travel to and from school. Am J Public Health 2009, 99(3):520-526.
• [22]Babey SH, Hastert TA, Huang W, Brown ER: Sociodemographic, family, and environmental factors associated with active commuting to school among US adolescents. J Public Health Policy 2009., 30(SUPPL. 1)
• [23]Timperio A, Ball K, Salmon J, Roberts R, Giles-Corti B, Simmons D, Baur LA, Crawford D: Personal, family, social, and environmental correlates of active commuting to school. Am J Prev Med 2006, 30(1):45-51.
• [24]Pont K, Ziviani J, Wadley D, Bennett S, Abbott R: Environmental correlates of children's active transportation: A systematic literature review. Health and Place 2009, 15(3):827-840.
• [25]Nelson NM, Foley E, O'Gorman DJ, Moyna NM, Woods CB: Active commuting to school: How far is too far? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2008., 5
• [26]Panter JR, Jones AP, van Sluijs EMF: Environmental determinants of active travel in youth: A review and framework for future research. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2008., 5
• [27]Sirard JR, Slater ME: Walking and bicycling to school: A review. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine 2008, 2(5):372-396.
• [28]Handy S, Cao X, Mokhtarian P: Neighborhood Design and Children's Outdoor Play: Evidence from Northern California. Children, Youth and Environments 2008, 18:2.
• [29]Blanco H, Alberti M, Forsyth A, Krizek KJ, Rodríguez DA, Talen E, Ellis C: Hot, congested, crowded and diverse: Emerging research agendas in planning. Progress in Planning 2009, 71(4):153-205.
• [30]Riggs T: New urbanist pioneer. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute; 2006.
• [31]Sallis JF, Prochaska JJ, Taylor WC: A review of correlates of physical activity of children and adolescents. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000, 32(5):963-975.
• [32]Cao X, Mokhtarian PL, Handy SL: Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behaviour: A focus on empirical findings. Transport Reviews 2009, 29(3):359-395.
• [33]Handy S, Cao X, Mokhtarian PL: Self-selection in the relationship between the built environment and walking: Empirical evidence from Northern California. J Am Plann Assoc 2006, 72(1):55-74.
• [34]Mokhtarian PL, Cao X: Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: A focus on methodologies. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 2008, 42(3):204-228.
• [35]McKenzie TL, Marshall SJ, Sallis JF, Conway TL: Leisure-time physical activity in school environments: an observational study using SOPLAY. Prev Med 2000, 30(1):70-77.
• [36]Alexander LM, Inchley J, Todd J, Currie D, Cooper AR, Currie C: The broader impact of walking to school among adolescents: seven day accelerometry based study. Br Med J 2005, 331(7524):1061-1062.
• [37]Cooper AR, Andersen LB, Wedderkopp N, Page AS, Froberg K: Physical activity levels of children who walk, cycle, or are driven to school. Am J of Prev Med 2005, 29(3):179-184.
• [38]Cooper AR, Page AS, Foster LJ, Qahwaji D: Commuting to school: Are children who walk more physically active? Am J Prev Med 2003, 25(4):273-276.
• [39]Welk GJ, Schaben JA, Morrow JR Jr: Reliability of accelerometry-based activity monitors: a generalizability study. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004, 36(9):1637-1645.
• [40]Freedson P, Pober D, Janz KF: Calibration of accelerometer output for children. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37(11):S523-S530.
• [41]Trost SG, Loprinzi PD, Moore R, Pfeiffer KA: Comparison of Accelerometer Cut-points for Predicting Activity Intensity in Youth. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011, 43(7):1360-1368.
• [42]Ward DS, Evenson KR, Vaughn A, Rodgers AB, Troiano RP: Accelerometer use in physical activity: Best practices and research recommendations. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37(11):S582-S588.
• [43]Daybreak Founders Park Village [http://www.daybreakutah.com/where/villages-map#] webcite
• [44]Boarnet MG, Day K, Alfonzo M, Forsyth A, Oakes M: The Irvine-Minnesota Inventory to measure built environments: Reliability tests. Am J Prev Med 2006, 30(2):153-159.
• [45]Gallimore JM, Brown BB, Werner CM: Walking routes to school in new urban and suburban neighborhoods: An environmental walkability analysis of blocks and routes. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2011, 31(2):184-191.
• [46]Napier MA, Brown BB, Werner CM, Gallimore J: Walking to school: Community design and child and parent barriers. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2011, 31(1):45-51.
• [47]Kerr J, Rosenberg D, Sallis JF, Saelens BE, Frank LD, Conway TL: Active commuting to school: Associations with environment and parental concerns. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2006, 38(4):787-794.
• [48]Ewing R, Cervero R: Travel and the built environment: A meta-analysis. J Am Plann Assoc 2010, 76(3):265-294.
• [49]Patnode CD, Lytle LA, Erickson DJ, Sirard JR, Barr-Anderson D, Story M: The relative influence of demographic, individual, social, and environmental factors on physical activity among boys and girls. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2010., 7
• [50]Troiano RP, Berrigan D, Dodd KW, Mâsse LC, Tilert T, McDowell M: Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008, 40(1):181-188.
• [51]Roemmich JN, Epstein LH, Raja S, Yin L: The neighborhood and home environments: Disparate relationships with physical activity and sedentary behaviors in youth. Ann Behav Med 2007, 33(1):29-38.
• [52]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. Journal of Physical Activity and Health 2006, 3:118.
• [53]van Sluijs EMF, Fearne VA, Mattocks C, Riddoch C, Griffin SJ, Ness A: The contribution of active travel to children's physical activity levels: Cross-sectional results from the ALSPAC study. Prev Med 2009, 48(6):519-524.
• [54]Saksvig BI, Catellier DJ, Pfeiffer K, Schmitz KH, Conway T, Going S, Ward D, Strikmiller P, Treuth MS: Travel by walking before and after school and physical activity among adolescent girls. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2007, 161(2):153-158.
• [55]Sirard JR, Riner WF, McIver KL, Pate RR: Physical activity and active commuting to elementary school. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37(12):2062-2069.
• [56]Heath GW, Brownson RC, Kruger J, Miles R, Powell KE, Ramsey LT, Task Force on Community Preventive Services: The effectiveness of urban design and land use and transport policies and practices to increase physical activity: a systematic review. Journal of Physical Activity and Health 2006, 3(Supplement 1):s55-s76.
• [57]Eubank-Ahrens B: A closer look at at the users of Woonerven. In Public streets for public use. Edited by Moudon AV. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1987:63-79.
• [58]National Trust for Historic Preservation: Why Johnny can't walk to school. Washington, D.C.: NTHP; 2000.
• [59]Nelson AC: Toward a new metropolis: The opportunity to rebuild America. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution; 2004.