Advertisement

Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 318–327 | Cite as

Park-Use Behavior and Perceptions by Race, Hispanic Origin, and Immigrant Status in Minneapolis, MN: Implications on Park Strategies for Addressing Health Disparities

Original Paper

Abstract

The study examines the connections between minority status, park use behavior, and park-related perceptions using recent survey data from three low-income neighborhoods in Minneapolis, MN. Blacks and foreign-born residents are found to underutilize parks. Blacks, Asians, and American Indians perceive fewer health benefits of parks than whites, including the benefits of parks for providing exercise/relaxation opportunities and family gathering spaces. Foreign-born residents, blacks, and Hispanics perceive greater and unique barriers to park use in terms of not feeling welcome, cultural and language restrictions, program schedule and pricing concerns, and/or facility maintenance and mismatch concerns. When designing park strategies for addressing health disparities, we recommend to focus the efforts on increasing awareness of park-related health benefits and removing specific park use barriers among minority and foreign-born communities.

Keywords

Parks Behavior Perceptions Minority Race Ethnicity Immigrant Health disparities Health equity 

References

  1. 1.
    Williams DR, Sternthal M. Understanding racial-ethnic disparities in health sociological contributions. J Health Soc Behav. 2010;51(1 suppl):S15–27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frieden TR. CDC Health disparities and inequalities Report-United States, 2013. Foreword. In: Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Surveillance summaries, vol. 62 (Washington, DC: 2002), 2013. p. 1–2.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hamilton TG, Hummer RA. Immigration and the health of US black adults: does country of origin matter? Soc Sci Med. 2011;73(10):1551–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Edberg M, Cleary S, Vyas A. A trajectory model for understanding and assessing health disparities in immigrant/refugee communities. J Immigr Minor Health. 2011;13(3):576–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ho CH, Payne L, Orsega-Smith E, Godbey G. Parks, recreation and public health. Parks Recreat. 2003;38(4):18–20.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maller C, Townsend M, St Leger L, Henderson-Wilson C, Pryor A, Prosser L, Moore M. Healthy parks healthy people: the health benefits of contact with nature in a park context. 2nd ed. Melbourne: Deakin University; 2009.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ulrich RS, Simons RF, Losito BD, Fiorito E, Miles MA, Zelson M. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. J Environ Psychol. 1991;11(3):201–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fan Y, Das KV, Chen Q. Neighborhood green, social support, physical activity, and stress: assessing the cumulative impact. Health Place. 2011;17(6):1202–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Larson LR, Whiting JW, Green GT, Bowker JM. Physical activity locations in Georgia: frequency of use by socio-demographic group. J Outdoor Recreat Tour. 2014;5:68–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sasidharan V, And FW, Godbey G. Cultural differences in urban recreation patterns: an examination of park usage and activity participation across six population subgroups. Manag Leis. 2005;10(1):19–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tinsley HE, Tinsley DJ, Croskeys CE. Park usage, social milieu, and psychosocial benefits of park use reported by older urban park users from four ethnic groups. Leis Sci. 2002;24(2):199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gobster PH. Managing urban parks for a racially and ethnically diverse clientele. Leis Sci. 2002;24(2):143–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Carlson SA, Brooks JD, Brown DR, Buchner DM. Racial/ethnic differences in perceived access, environmental barriers to use, and use of community parks. Prev Chronic Dis. 2010;7(3):A49.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mowen AJ, Payne LL, Scott D. Change and stability in park visitation constraints revisited. Leis Sci. 2005;27(2):191–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Byrne J. When green is white: the cultural politics of race, nature and social exclusion in a Los Angeles urban national park. Geoforum. 2012;43(3):595–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Trust for Public Land, 2014 ParkScore® Index: Rating Park Systems in 60 Largest US Cities. (2014, May 29). Retrieved August 8, 2014, from http://www.tpl.org/media-room/trust-public-land-releases-2014-parkscore®-index-rating-park-systems-60-largest-us-cities.
  18. 18.
    US Census Bureau; Census 2010, Summary File 1, Table DP-1. Accessed 7 Aug 2014.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Owen G, Meyerson J, Otteson C. A new age of immigrants making immigration work for Minnesota (Summary of Key Findings). 2010. Retrieved from The Minneapolis Foundation website: http://www.minneapolisfoundation.org/Uploads/CuteEditor/Publications/Community/Immigrationsummary2010.pdf.
  20. 20.
    Singer A. The rise of new immigrant gateways. Brookings Institution, February 2004. Retrieved from The Brookings Institution website: http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2004/02/demographics-singer.
  21. 21.
    Cerin E. Statistical approaches to testing the relationships of the built environment with resident-level physical activity behavior and health outcomes in cross-sectional studies with cluster sampling. J Plan Lit. 2011;26(2):151–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rogers W. Regression standard errors in clustered samples. Stata Tech Bull. 1993;13:19–23.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Byrne J, Wolch J. Nature, race, and parks: past research and future directions for geographic research. Prog Hum Geogr. 2009;33(6):743–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cohen DA, Sehgal A, Williamson S, Marsh T, Golinelli D, McKenzie TL. New recreational facilities for the young and the old in Los Angeles: policy and programming implications. J Public Health Policy. 2009;30(Suppl 1):S248–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chung-Do JJ, Davis E, Lee S, Jokura Y, Choy L, Maddock JE. An observational study of physical activity in parks in Asian and Pacific Islander communities in urban Honolulu, Hawaii, 2009. Prev Chronic Dis. 2011;8:A107.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cohen DA, Han B, Isacoff J, Shulaker B, Williamson S, Marsh T, Bhatia R. Impact of park renovations on park use and park-based physical activity. J Phys Act Health. 2015;12(2):289–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    King DK, Litt J, Hale J, Burniece KM, Ross C. ‘The park a tree built’: evaluating how a park development project impacted where people play. Urban For Urban Green. 2015;14(2):293–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kirti V. Das
    • 1
  • Yingling Fan
    • 1
  • Simone A. French
    • 2
  1. 1.Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public AffairsUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.School of Public HealthUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations