Journal of Urban Health

, Volume 86, Issue 6, pp 839–849 | Cite as

Ambient Air Conditions and Variation in Urban Trail Use

  • Ann M. HolmesEmail author
  • Greg Lindsey
  • Chenchen Qiu


This study examines the effect of air quality and administrative policies on use of urban trails in Indianapolis, IN. Attention is focused on two policy variables: (1) issuance of air pollution advisories and (2) the adoption of Daylight Savings Time. Results suggest that while trail use varies with air quality, current public advisories regarding air pollution may be of limited effectiveness in reducing trail users’ exposures to hazardous pollutants. In contrast, the adoption of Daylight Savings Time was associated with a statistically significant increase in traffic levels.


Air quality Pollution advisories Urban trails 



The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Active Living Research Program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The Greenways Division of the Indianapolis Department of Parks and Recreation provided additional technical support.


  1. 1.
    CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). Behavioral risk factor surveillance system: prevalence data, all States—2007. Accessed on January 16, 2008.
  2. 2.
    EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). The green book: nonattainment areas for criteria pollutants. Accessed on January 16, 2008.
  3. 3.
    Carlisle AJ, Sharp NC. Exercise and outdoor ambient air pollution. Br J Sports Med. 2001; 35: 214-222.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Girardot SP, Ryan PB, Smith SM, et al. Ozone and PM2.5 exposure and acute pulmonary health effects: a study of hikers in the Grand Smoky Mountains National Park. Environ Health Perspect. 2006; 114(7): 1044-1052.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Korrick SA, Neas LM, Dockery DW, et al. Effects of ozone and other pollutants on the pulmonary function of adult hikers. Environ Health Perspect. 1998; 106: 93-99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sallis JF, Cervero RB, Ascher W, Henderson KA, Kraft MK, Kerr J. An ecological approach to creating active living communities. Annu Rev Public Health. 2006; 27: 297-322.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marcus BH, Williams DM, Dubbert PM, et al. Physical activity intervention studies: what we know and what we need to know. Circulation. 2006; 114: 2739-2752.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Briggs DJ, de Hoogh K, Morris C, Gulliver J. Effects of travel mode on exposures to particulate air pollution. Environ Int. 2008; 34(1): 12-22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lindsey G, Wilson J, Yang J, Alexa C. Urban greenways, trail characteristics and trail use: implications and design. J Urban Des. 2008; 13(1): 107-132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lindsey G, Han Y, Wilson J, Yang J. Neighborhood correlates of urban trail traffic. J Phys Act Health. 2006; 1: S134-S152.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). National Climatic Data Center homepage. Accessed on January 23, 2007.
  12. 12.
    Indiana State Climate Office. Indiana State Climate Office homepage. Accessed on January 23, 2007.
  13. 13.
    EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Air Quality System Technology Transfer Network homepage. Accessed on January 23, 2007.
  14. 14.
    Greene WH. Econometric Analysis. New York: Macmillan; 1993.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gardiner JC, Luo Z, Roman LA. Fixed effects, random effects and GEE: what are the differences? Stat Med. 2009; 28: 221-239.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Uysal N, Schapira RM. Effects of ozone on lung function and lung diseases. Curr Opin Pulm Med. 2003; 9(2): 144-50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sarnat JA, Brown KW, Schwartz J, Coull BA, Koutrakis P. Ambient gas concentrations and personal particulate matter exposures: implications for studying the health effects of particles. Epidemiology. 2005; 16(3): 385-395.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bhatnagar A. Environmental cardiology: studying mechanistic links between pollution and heart disease. Circ Res. 2006; 99(7): 692-705.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Steib DM, Paola J, Neuman K. Do smog advisories work? Results of an evaluation of the Canadian Smog Advisory Program. Can J Public Health. 1996; 87: 166-169.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Johnson BB. Communicating air quality information: experimental evaluation of alternative formats. Risk Anal. 2003; 23(1): 91-103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Breznitz S. Cry Wolf: The Psychology of False Alarms. Philadelphia: Erlbaum; 1984.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stewart DW, Martin IM. Intended and unintended consequences of warning messages: a review and synthesis of empirical research. J Public Policy Mark. 1994; 13(1): 1-19.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bickerstaff K, Walker G. Clearing the smog? Public responses to air quality information. Local Environ. 1999; 4(3): 279-294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Evans GW, Colome D, Shearer DF. Psychological reactions to air pollution. Environ Res. 1988; 45: 1-15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Scov T, Cordtz T, Jensen LK, Saugman P, Schmidt K, Theilade P. Modifications of health behavior in response to air pollution notification in Copenhagen. Soc Sci Med. 1991; 33: 621-626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Johnson BB. Gender and race in beliefs about outdoor air pollution. Risk Anal. 2002; 22: 725-738.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gobster PH. Recreation and leisure research from an active living perspective: taking a second look at urban trail use data. Leis Stud. 2005; 27: 367-383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Frank LD. Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Annals Behav Med. 2003; 25(2): 80-91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Academy of Medicine 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Health Policy, School of Public and Environmental AffairsIndiana University–Purdue University IndianapolisIndianapolisUSA
  2. 2.Center for Urban Policy and the Environment, School of Public and Environmental AffairsIndiana University–Purdue University IndianapolisIndianapolisUSA
  3. 3.Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public AffairsUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations