Journal of Public Health Policy

, Volume 30, Supplement 1, pp S177–S202 | Cite as

Correlates of Walking to School and Implications for Public Policies: Survey Results from Parents of Elementary School Children in Austin, Texas

  • Xuemei ZhuEmail author
  • Chanam Lee
Schools and Youth


Walking can be a healthy, sustainable, and equitable mode of transportation, but is not widely used for children’s school travel. This study identifies multi-level correlates of walking to/from school and relevant policy implications. We surveyed parents/guardians of 2,695 students from 19 elementary schools in Austin, Texas, which featured diverse sociodemographic and environmental characteristics. Among the personal and social factors, negative correlates were parents’ education, car ownership, personal barriers, and school bus availability; positive correlates were parents’ and children's positive attitude and regular walking behavior, and supportive peer influences. Of physical environmental factors, the strongest negative correlates were distance and safety concerns, followed by the presence of highways/freeways, convenience stores, office buildings, and bus stops en route. Our findings suggest that society should give high priority to lower socioeconomic status populations and to multi-agency policy interventions that facilitate environmental changes, safety improvements, and educational programs targeting both parents and children.


walking school environment children disparity policy 



The authors acknowledge Chris Moore and other personnel in the city of Austin, Texas and the Austin Independent School District for their help with the survey. Preparation of this study was supported by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Active Living Research Program.


  1. McDonald NC . Active transportation to school – trends among US schoolchildren, 1969–2001. Am J Prev Med. 2007;32 (6):509–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ogden CL, Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Johnson CL . Prevalence and trends in overweight among US children and adolescents, 1999–2000. JAMA. 2002;288 (14):1728–1732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Overweight and obesity. Available at, accessed April 2008.
  4. 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 Prev Med. 2005;29 (3):179–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Mackett RL, Lucas L, Paskins J, Turbin J . The therapeutic value of children's everyday travel. Transport Res A Pol Pract. 2005;39 (2–3):205–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Tudor-Locke C, Neff LJ, Ainsworth BE, Addy CL, Popkin BM . Omission of active commuting to school and the prevalence of children's health-related physical activity levels: the Russian longitudinal monitoring study. Child Care Health Dev. 2002;28 (6):507–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Travel and Environmental Implications of School Siting. Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection Agency; 2003.Google Scholar
  8. Jackson R, Tester J . Environment shapes health, including children's mental health. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2008;47 (2):129–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy People 2010, 2nd edition. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 2000.Google Scholar
  10. McLeroy KR, Bibeau D, Steckler A, Glanz K . An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Educ Behav. 1988;15 (4):351–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ewing R, Schroeer W, Greene W . School location and student travel – analysis of factors affecting mode choice. Transport Res Rec J Transport Res Board. 2004;1895:55–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Braza M, Shoemaker W, Seeley A . Neighborhood design and rates of walking and biking to elementary school in 34 California communities. Am J Health Promot. 2004;19 (2):128–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Evenson KR, Huston SL, McMillen BJ, Bors P, Ward DS . Statewide prevalence and correlates of walking and bicycling to school. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003;157 (9):887–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Green RS, Smorodinsky S, Kim JJ, McLaughlin R, Ostro B . Proximity of California public schools to busy roads. Environ Health Perspect. 2004;112 (1):61–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Zhu X, Lee C . Walkability and safety around elementary schools: economic and ethnic disparities. Am J Prev Med. 2008;34 (4):282–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ewing R, Forinash CV, Schroeer W . Neighborhood schools and sidewalk connections: what are the impacts on travel mode choice and vehicle emissions? Transport Res News. 2005;237:4–10.Google Scholar
  17. McMillan T, Day K, Boarnet M, Alfonzo M, Anderson C . Johnny walks to school – does Jane? Sex differences in children's active travel to school. Children Youth Environ. 2006;16 (1):75–89.Google Scholar
  18. Schlossberg M, Greene J, Phillips PP, Johnson B, Parker B . School trips – effects of urban form and distance on travel mode. J Am Plan Assoc. 2006;72 (3):337–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Merom D, Tudor-Locke C, Bauman A, Rissel C . Active commuting to school among NSW primary school children: implications for public health. Health Place. 2006;12 (4):678–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Timperio A, Ball K, Salmon J, Roberts R, Giles-Corti B, Simmons D, et al. Personal, family, social, and environmental correlates of active commuting to school. Am J Prev Med. 2006;30 (1):45–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Martin S, Carlson S . Barriers to children walking to or from school – United States, 2004. JAMA. 2005;294 (17):2160–2162 (Reprinted from MMWR 2005;54:949–952).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Boarnet MG, Anderson CL, Day K, McMillan T, Alfonzo M . Evaluation of the California Safe Routes to School legislation – urban form changes and children's active transportation to school. Am J Prev Med. 2005;28 (2):134–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Boarnet MG, Day K, Anderson C, McMillan T, Alfonzo M . California's Safe Routes to School program – impacts on walking, bicycling, and pedestrian safety. J Am Plan Assoc. 2005;71 (3):301–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Andrews M, Duncombe W, Yinger J . Revisiting economies of size in American education: are we any closer to a consensus? Econ Educ Rev. 2002;21 (3):245–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Langdon P . Move toward neighborhood-scale schools slowly gains momentum. New Urban News. 2007 (April/May).Google Scholar
  27. Texas Education Agency. 2005–2006 academic excellence indicator system. Available at, accessed April 2007.
  28. Varni JW, Seid M, Kurtin PS . PedsQL™ 4.0: reliability and validity of the pediatric quality of life Inventory™ Version 4.0 generic core scales in healthy and patient populations. Med Care. 2001;39 (8):800–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McMillan TE . Walking and urban form: modeling and testing parental decisions about children's travel. Dissertation, University of California, Irvine; 2003.Google Scholar
  30. Forman H, Kerr J, Norman GJ, Saelens BE, Durant NH, Harris SK, et al. Reliability and validity of destination-specific barriers to walking and cycling for youth. Prev Med. 2008;46 (4):311–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. SPSS Software. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc. Available at, accessed 15 October 2008.
  32. Fulton JE, Shisler JL, Yore MM, Caspersen CJ . Active transportation to school: findings from a national survey. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2005;76 (3):352–357.Google Scholar
  33. Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Frank LD . Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Ann Behav Med. 2003;25 (2):80–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kouri C . Wait for the Bus: How Lowcountry School Site Selection and Design Deter Walking to School and Contribute to Urban Sprawl. Durham, NC: South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, Duke University Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy; 1999.Google Scholar
  35. Federal Highway Administration US Department of Transportation. SAFETEA – LU (Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act): a legacy for users 2005. Available at, accessed December 2007.
  36. Collins DCA, Kearns RA . Geographies of inequality: child pedestrian injury and walking school buses in Auckland, New Zealand. Soc Sci Med. 2005;60 (1):61–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stevenson MR, Jamrozik KD, Spittle J . A case-control study of traffic risk-factors and child pedestrian injury. Int J Epidemiol. 1995;24 (5):957–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pastor M, Sadd JL, Morello-Frosch R . Who's minding the kids? Pollution, public schools, and environmental justice in Los Angeles. Soc Sci Q. 2002;83 (1):263–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Metzger R, Delgado JL, Herrell R . Environmental-health and Hispanic children. Environ Health Perspect. 1995;103:25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ArchitectureTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  2. 2.Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban PlanningTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA

Personalised recommendations