Applying GIS in Physical Activity Research: Community ‘Walkability’ and Walking Behaviors

  • Ester Cerin
  • Eva Leslie
  • Neville Owen
  • Adrian Bauman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)

Abstract

Physical activity provides many health benefits, including reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, Type II diabetes and some cancers. Environmental exposure factors (e.g., the built environment) are now receiving ever-increasing attention. Large-scale interdisciplinary studies on the association between attributes of local community environments and residents’ physical activity are being conducted. We will focus on findings from Australia - the Physical Activity in Localities and Community Environments (PLACE) study. PLACE is examining factors that may influence the prevalence and the social and spatial distribution of walking for transport and walking for recreation. A stratified two-stage cluster sampling strategy was used to select 32 urban communities (154 census collection districts), classified as high and low ‘walkable’ using a GIS-based walkability index (dwelling density, intersection density, net retail area and land use mix) and matched for socio-economic status. We report data on a sub-sample of 1,216 residents who provided information on the perceived attributes of their community environments (e.g., dwelling density, access to services, street connectivity) and weekly minutes of walking for transport and for recreation. Moderate to strong associations were found between GIS indicators of walkability and the corresponding self-report measures. The walkability index explained the same amount of neighborhood-level variance in walking for transport as did the complete set of self-report measures. No significant associations were found with walking for recreation. Relevant GIS-based indices of walkability, for purposes other than transport need to be developed.

Keywords

GIS community walkability walking behavior Australia adults 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Bentler PM and Liang J (2003) Two-level mean and covariance structures: maximum likelihood via an EM algorithm. In: Reise SP, Duan N (eds.) Multilevel modeling: Methodological advances, issues, and applications. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah NJ, pp 53–70Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Browne MW and Cudeck R (1993) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bolen KA, Long JS (eds.) Testing structural equation models. Sage Publications, Newbury Park CA, pp 136–162Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Bryant FB and Yarnold PR (1994) Principal-components analysis and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In: Grimm LG, Yarnold PR (eds.) Reading and understanding multivariate statistics. APA, Washington DC pp 99–136Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Cerin E, Leslie E, du Toit L, Owen N, Frank L (in press) Destinations that matter: associations with walking for transport. Place HealthGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Cerin E, Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Frank LD (2006) Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale: validity and development of a short form. Med Sci Sports Exerc 38:1682–1691Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, Bauman A, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, Pratt M, Ekelund U, Yngve A, Sallis J, Oja P (2003) International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ): 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35:1381–1395Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    du Toit L, Cerin E, Leslie E (2005) An account of spatially based survey methods and recruitment outcomes of the Physical Activity in Localities and Community Environments (PLACE) study. Cancer Prevention Research Centre, School of Population Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Frank L and Pivo G (1994) Impacts of mixed use and density on utilization of three modes of travel: single-occupant vehicle, transit, and walking, Transport Res Rec 1466:44–52Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Frank L, Andresen MA, Schmid TL (2004) Obesity relationships with community design, physical activity, and time spent in cars. Am J Prev Med 27:87–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Frank LD, Sallis JF, Conway T, Chapman J, Saelens B, Bachman W (2006) Many pathways from land use to health: walkability associations with active transportation, body mass index, and air quality. J Am Plann Assoc 72:75–87.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Frank LD, Schmid TL, Sallis JF, Chapman J, Saelens BE (2005) Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form: findings from SMARTRAQ. Am J Prev Med 28 (2S2): 117–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Hayashi T, Tsumura K, Suematsu C, Okada K, Fujii S, Endo G (1999) Walking to work and the risk for hypertension in men: The Osaka health survey. Ann Intern Med 131:21–26Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Humpel N, Owen N, Leslie E, Marshall AL, Bauman AE, Sallis JF (2003) Associations of location and perceived environmental attributes with walking in neighborhoods. Am J Health Promot 18:239–242Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Jöreskog KG and Sörbom D (1993) Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. SPSS, Chicago ILGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    King AC, Stokols D, Talen E, Brassington GS (2002) Theoretical approaches to the promotion of physical activity. Am J Prev Med 23 (S):15–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Leslie E, Coffee N, Frank L, Owen N, Bauman A, Hugo G (2007) Walkability of local communities: Using Geographic Information Systems to objectively assess relevant environmental attributes. Health Place 13:111–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Leslie E, Saelens B, Frank L, Owen N, Bauman A, Coffee N, Hugo G (2005) Residents’ perceptions of walkability attributes in objectively different neighborhoods: a pilot study. Health Place 11:227–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Muthén BO (1997) Latent variable modeling of longitudinal and multilevel data. In: Raftery AE (ed.) Sociological methodology (pp. 453–481) ASA, Washington DC, pp 453–481Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Owen N, Humpel N, Leslie E, Bauman A, Sallis JF (2004) Understanding environmental influences on walking: review and research agenda. Am J Prev Med 27:67–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Rafferty AP, Reeves MJ, McGhee HB (2002) Physical activity patterns among walkers and compliance with public health recommendations. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34:1255–1261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Frank LD (2003a) Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: findings from the transportation, urban design and planning literatures. Ann Beh Med 25:80–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Black JB, Chen D (2003b) Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: An environment scale evaluation. Am J Public Health 93:1552–1558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Sallis JF and Frank LD, Saelens BE, Kraft MK (2004) Active transportation and physical activity: opportunities for collaboration on transportation and public health research. Transport Res A 38:249–268Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Sallis JF and Owen N (2002) Ecological models of health behavior. In: Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK (eds.) Health behavior and health education: theory, research and practice. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 462–484Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Snijder TAB, Bosker B (1993) Modeled variance in two-level models. Sociol Method Res 22: 342–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Transportation Research Board and Institute of Medicine(2005) Does the built environment influence physical activity? Examining the evidence. Special Report 282. National Academies Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    United States Department of Health and Human Services(1996) Physical activity and health: a report of the Surgeon General. Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Centre for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Atlanta GAGoogle Scholar
  28. [27]
    Vandelanotte C, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Philippaerts R, Sjostrom M, Sallis J (2005) Reliability and validity of a computerized and Dutch version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). J Phys Act Health 2:63–75Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ester Cerin
    • 1
  • Eva Leslie
    • 2
  • Neville Owen
    • 3
  • Adrian Bauman
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute of Human PerformanceUniversity of Hong KongHong Kong, SARChina
  2. 2.School of Health and Social DevelopmentDeakin UniversityAustralia
  3. 3.Cancer Prevention Research CentreUniversity of QueenslandAustralia
  4. 4.NSW Centre for Physical Activity and HealthUniversity of SydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations