Advertisement

Journal of Urban Health

, Volume 95, Issue 5, pp 739–749 | Cite as

How Do Racial/Ethnic Groups Differ in Their Use of Neighborhood Parks? Findings from the National Study of Neighborhood Parks

  • Christine A. Vaughan
  • Deborah A. Cohen
  • Bing Han
Article

Abstract

The current study examined racial/ethnic differences in use of parks and park facilities and features and self-reported park use and perceptions. We conducted observations in a nationally representative sample of 193 neighborhood parks in 27 US cities over a 1-week period between April and August of 2016 using the System of Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC). To determine the propensity of different racial/ethnic groups to use parks relative to expectation based on their representation in the surrounding neighborhood, we calculated the percentages of park users of each race/ethnicity and compared these to the percentages of racial/ethnic groups residing in the neighborhood within a 1-mile radius of the park based on 2010 U.S. Census data. In the same parks, we administered an intercept survey to assess park users’ self-reported use and perceptions of the park (N = 1872). We examined racial/ethnic differences in self-reported use and perceptions of parks using GEE models that adjusted for several individual- and park-level covariates. Hispanics comprised a disproportionate percentage of observed park users. Racial/ethnic groups generally did not differ in their self-reported park use and perceptions, except for the social context of park visits. In adjusted models, Hispanics had significantly higher odds of visiting with a child family member (OR = 1.44) and lower odds of visiting alone than non-Hispanic whites (OR = .55). Findings highlight Hispanics’ greater propensity to use parks and indicate that parks may serve a communal purpose for Hispanics that they do not serve for other racial/ethnic groups.

Keywords

Racial/ethnic differences Park use Neighborhood parks Park observations Park visits 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to Deborah Cohen (R01HL114432). The authors express their appreciation of the data collectors who observed park use and participants in surveys.

References

  1. 1.
    Satcher D, Higginbotham EJ. The public health approach to eliminating disparities in health. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(Supplement_1):S8–S11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sallis JF, Floyd MF, Rodríguez DA, Saelens BE. Role of built environments in physical activity, obesity, and cardiovascular disease. Circulation. 2012;125(5):729–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bedimo-Rung AL, Mowen AJ, Cohen DA. The significance of parks to physical activity and public health: a conceptual model. Am J Prev Med. 2005;28(2):159–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Payne LL, Mowen AJ, Orsega-Smith E. An examination of park preferences and behaviors among urban residents: the role of residential location, race, and age. Leis Sci. 2002;24(2):181–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Das KV, Fan Y, French SA. Park-use behavior and perceptions by race, Hispanic origin, and immigrant status in Minneapolis, MN: implications on park strategies for addressing health disparities. J Immigr Minor Health. 2017;19(2):318–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Van Dyck D, Sallis JF, Cardon G, et al. Associations of neighborhood characteristics with active park use: an observational study in two cities in the USA and Belgium. Int J Health Geogr. 2013;12(1):26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lapham SC, Cohen DA, Han B, Williamson S, Evenson KR, McKenzie TL, et al. How important is perception of safety to park use? A four-city survey. Urban Stud. 2016;53(12):2624–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Derose KP, Han B, Williamson S, Cohen DA. Racial-ethnic variation in park use and physical activity in the City of Los Angeles. J Urban Health. 2015;92(6):1011–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carlson SA, Brooks JD, Brown DR, Buchner DM. Peer reviewed: racial/ethnic differences in perceived access, environmental barriers to use, and use of community parks. Prev Chronic Dis 2010;7(3).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gobster PH. Managing urban parks for a racially and ethnically diverse clientele. Leis Sci. 2002;24(2):143–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ching-hua H, Sasidharan V, Elmendorf W, Willits FK. Gender and ethnic variations in urban park preferences, visitation, and perceived benefits. J Leis Res. 2005;37(3):281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Evenson KR, Jones SA, Holliday KM, Cohen DA, McKenzie TL. Park characteristics, use, and physical activity: a review of studies using SOPARC (System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities). Prev Med. 2016;86:153–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cohen DA, Han B, Nagel CJ, Harnik P, McKenzie TL, Evenson KR, et al. The first national study of neighborhood parks: implications for physical activity. Am J Prev Med. 2016;51(4):419–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McKenzie TL, Cohen DA, Sehgal A, Williamson S, Golinelli D. System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC): reliability and feasibility measures. J Phys Act Health. 2006;3(s1):S208–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cohen DA, Setodji C, Evenson KR, Ward P, Lapham S, Hillier A, et al. How much observation is enough? Refining the administration of SOPARC. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8(8):1117–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Academy of Medicine 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.RAND CorporationSan FranciscoUSA
  2. 2.RAND CorporationSanta MonicaUSA

Personalised recommendations