Ecological approach to creating active living communities

Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California 92103, USA.
Annual Review of Public Health (Impact Factor: 6.63). 02/2006; 27:297-322. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.27.021405.102100
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The thesis of this article is that multilevel interventions based on ecological models and targeting individuals, social environments, physical environments, and policies must be implemented to achieve population change in physical activity. A model is proposed that identifies potential environmental and policy influences on four domains of active living: recreation, transport, occupation, and household. Multilevel research and interventions require multiple disciplines to combine concepts and methods to create new transdisciplinary approaches. The contributions being made by a broad range of disciplines are summarized. Research to date supports a conclusion that there are multiple levels of influence on physical activity, and the active living domains are associated with different environmental variables. Continued research is needed to provide detailed findings that can inform improved designs of communities, transportation systems, and recreation facilities. Collaborations with policy researchers may improve the likelihood of translating research findings into changes in environments, policies, and practices.

Download full-text


Available from: Karla A Henderson, Aug 27, 2015
  • Source
    • "It is well established that the design of outdoor public spaces influences human activity and social behavior (Lestan et al., 2014; Oka, 2011). For example, recognition of the relationship between urban form and frequency of walking and bicycling (Frank and Engelkel, 2001; Saelens et al., 2003) has implications for urban design, transportation systems (Lee and Vernez Moudon, 2004), recreation facilities, and public health policy (Sallis et al., 2006). The health benefits of accessible green spaces is widely acknowledged, however, prospective studies that measure the impact that specific built environment changes have on population physical activity are lacking (Lee and Maheswaran, 2011). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Community parks have achieved recognition as a public health intervention to promote physical activity. This study evaluated changes in population-level physical activity when an undeveloped green space adjacent to transitional housing for refugees was transformed into a recreational park. A prospective, nonrandomized study design used the System of Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC) to document the number and activity levels of park users over time, and to compare trends pre-and post-construction. T-tests or tests of medians (when appropriate) were used to compare pre-and post-construction changes in use of non-park and park zones for physical activity and changes in park use by age and gender. Pre-and post-comparisons of people observed using non-park zones (i.e., adjacent streets, alleys and parking lots) and park zones indicated a 38% decrease in energy expended in non-park zones and a 3-fold increase in energy expended within the park (P = 0.002). The majority of park users pre-and post-construction were children, however the proportion of adolescent males observed in vigorous activity increased from 11% to 38% (P = 0.007). Adolescent females and elderly continued to be under-represented in the park. Our findings support an association between creation of accessible outdoor spaces for recreation and improvements in physical activity. Community involvement in park design assured that features included in the park space matched the needs and desires of the communities served. Some demographic groups were still under-represented within the park, suggesting a need to develop targeted outreach strategies and programming.
    Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 12/2015; 14(2):293-299. DOI:10.1016/j.ufug.2015.02.011 · 2.13 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In addition, children's walking and bicycling were found to be related to various environmental attributes, such as pedestrian and bicyclist infrastructure , street connectivity, and green open spaces (Davison and Lawson 2006; Ferreira et al. 2007; Sallis, Pruchaska, and Taylor 2000). Additional environmental attributes that were found to be important for children's physical activity include measures of road safety (e.g., traffic volume, presences of cross walks) and crime-related safety (e.g., street lights, presence of strangers) (Boarnet et al. 2005; Sallis and Glanz 2006; Timperio et al. 2004; Timperio et al. 2006). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Previous studies examined environmental correlates of children’s physical activity. While most of these studies used aggregated physical activity measures (i.e., overall physical activity, active travel), little is known about the contribution of specific environmental attributes to specific types of physical activity. This study examined associations between GIS-based environmental measures and children’s selfreported walking and bicycling. The study area included “traditional neighborhoods” (N=4), characterized by high-density, land-use mix and grid-street network, and “suburban neighborhoods” (N=3), characterized by low-density, land-use segregation, and cul-de-sac streets. Data on children’s physical activity and psychosocial and socio-demographic factors were obtained through a school survey (of fifth and sixth graders) (N=573). Urban-form measures (intersection density, residential density, and built coverage) were significantly positively associated with walking and negatively associated with bicycling. These associations remained significant after controlling for social, intra- and inter-personal factors. These findings suggest that certain environments may encourage children’s walking and hinder their bicycling at the same time (and vice versa) and therefore raise the need for a more clear distinction between child-related walkability and bikeablilty.
  • Source
    • "Relevant to this paper, among this population even household PA – defined as low-to-moderate-intensity habitual physical activities performed in and around the home, such as housework and preparing meals (Pescatello, Murphy, & Costanzo, 2000; Ratzlaff, 2012), activities often termed 'instrumental activities of daily living' (Lawton & Brody, 1969) – has been associated with health benefits (Buman et al., 2010; Pescatello & Murphy, 1998; Pescatello et al., 2000). Further, although PA studies with older people have usually focused on moderate-to-high-intensity activities such as walking (Barnett, van Sluijs, Ogilvie, & Wareham, 2014; Sallis et al., 2006), these home-based activities can account for much of an older person's total activity, especially among older women (Baltes, Maas, Wilms, Borchelt, & Little, 1999; Benzinger et al., 2014). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Inactive lifestyles have negative health consequences, while time spent sedentary (sitting and lying) is related to morbidity and premature mortality. Older adults often form the most sedentary segment of the population. Much of this behaviour may be practised at home where this group can spend extended periods. Physical activity rates among older adults are particularly low. Even household physical activities can be beneficial for this group, while they can constitute much of an older person's total activity. Despite this context, the home's role in the active and sedentary behaviours of the older population appears critically understudied. Using interview and focus group data collected from 22 older adults (healthy volunteers, stroke survivors and people with dementia), this paper begins to address this issue. Aspects of the home that aid or impede a more active, less sedentary lifestyle are identified with three presenting particular capacity in this respect discussed: steps, space within the home, and the location and form of facilities, fixtures and fittings. The crucial role health status plays in structuring this capacity is identified. Simple design recommendations, devised to support older people to lead more active lives at home, are presented.
    Building Research and Information 06/2015; 43(5):1-15. DOI:10.1080/09613218.2015.1045702 · 1.32 Impact Factor
Show more