Active travel to work in NSW: trends over time and the effect of social advantage

Abstract

Issues addressed: Active travel can increase population levels of physical activity, but should be promoted equitably. Socioeconomic advantage, housing location and/or car ownership influence walking and cycling (active travel) for transport. We examined active commuting over time in

Cycling for transport and recreation: Associations with the socio-economic, natural and built environment

“…This finding supports those from Sydney that show slightly higher cycling rates in inner Sydney (within 10 km of the CBD) than in surrounding areas (Zander et al, 2014). These findings may indicate that government investment in bicycle infrastructure within the inner areas of Brisbane has resulted in more transport cycling, and that cycling in outer suburban areas could be potentially increased with such investment.…”

“…In contrast, in studies from the US (Cervero and Duncan, 2003) and UK (Panter et al, 2013a;Panter et al, 2013b) there was no association found between level of disadvantage and transport cycling. In a recent study from Sydney (Zander et al, 2014); however, there was a dose-response relationship between level of disadvantage and cycling to work, with residents in the most disadvantaged areas being the least likely to cycle to work.…”

“…The strongest associations with transport cycling were network distances to the CBD, river and nearest ferry station. With a recent study from Sydney also showing higher cycling rates for those living nearest the CBD (Zander et al, 2014), it was hypothesised that associations between other environmental attributes and transport cycling may be suppressed when the distance to CBD, as well as distances to other locations attractive to cyclists (river and nearest ferry station), is not adequately addressed. Post hoc, the sample was stratified based on network distance to the CBD and river (highly correlated with distance to ferry station), and associations between the other environmental attributes and transport cycling were revisited.…”

“…Residents were categorised into inner urban residents (living <10 km of the CBD and river) as suggested previously (Zander et al, 2014), suburban residents (living ≥10 from the CBD but <10 km from the river), and outer urban residents (living ≥10 from the CBD and river).…”

Healthy places and spaces: the impact of the built environment and active transport on physical activity and population health

“…The design of aesthetically pleasing and practical pedestrian and cycling paths has been clearly shown to increase both physical activity and active travel, yet proximity to destinations remains an important influence on active travel (see Zander et al). 11 Distance from the city centre is adversely associated with adequate physical activity, yet if active travel patterns were to improve, there would be considerable health benefits (see Beavis et al). 12 New research is now extending the traditional health benefits of cycling to links with quality of life measures (Crane et al).…”