Do Relationships Between Environmental Attributes and Recreational Walking Vary According to Area-Level Socioeconomic Status?

Abstract

Residents of areas with lower socioeconomic status (SES) are known to be less physically active during leisure time. Neighborhood walkability has been shown to be related to recreational walking equally in low and high SES areas. This crosssectional study tested whether associations of specific environmental attributes, measured objectively and subjectively, with walking for recreation were moderated by area-level SES. The data of the North West Adelaide Health Study collected in 2007 (n=1500, mean age 57) were used. Self-reported walking frequency was the outcome of the study. Environmental exposure measures included objectively measured walkability components (residential density, intersection density, land use mix, and net retail area ratio) and perceived attributes (access to destinations, neighborhood esthetics, walking infrastructure, traffic/barriers, and crime safety). Participants' suburbs were categorized into low and high SES areas using an indicator of socioeconomic disadvantage. Low SES areas had lower scores in residential density, neighborhood esthetics, walking infrastructure, traffic/barriers, and crime safety. Recreational walking was associated with residential density, access to destinations, esthetics, traffic/barriers, and crime safety. Effect modification was observed for two attributes (out of nine): residential density was associated with walking only in low SES areas, while walking infrastructure was associated with walking only in high SES areas. The associations of neighborhood environmental attributes with recreational walking were largely consistent across SES groups. However, low SES areas were disadvantaged in most perceived environmental attributes related to recreational walking. Improving such attributes in low SES neighborhoods may help close socioeconomic disparities in leisure time physical activity.

Older Adults’ Outdoor Walking: Inequalities in Neighbourhood Safety, Pedestrian Infrastructure and Aesthetics

“…Identifying spatial inequalities in perceived neighbourhood safety was an expected result, since the crime domain has been included in the IMD score used for identifying low- and high-deprivation areas [49]. Findings on spatial inequalities in perceived neighbourhood safety and aesthetics are consistent with findings of previous research examining adults’ physical activity [41,82,83] and older adults’ leisure time physical activity [84] in low- and high-deprivation areas. Qualitative findings of this study supported quantitative findings and showed that lack of safety, good pedestrian infrastructure (e.g., quietness) and aesthetics discourage outdoor walking in high-deprivation areas.…”

“…Some previous research on physical activity has also shown inequalities in perceived neighbourhood safety, pedestrian infrastructure or aesthetics in high- versus low-deprivation areas [41,42]. However, the influences of these spatial inequalities on older residents’ total outdoor walking levels have received less attention.…”

Interrelationships Between Walkability, Air Pollution, Greenness, and Body Mass Index

“…Based on prior studies showing differential relationships between walkability and health by neighborhood SES, 38,39 we also assessed whether age, census tract median household income, median home value, proportion of residents without a high school diploma, or urbanicity modified the walkability—BMI association. Urbanicity was defined by the participant’s residence in an urban (urban area ≥50,000 people) versus non-urban (suburban, i.e., urban cluster of 10,000–49,999; or small town / rural, i.e., urban cluster of <10,000) census tract.…”

Physical and Cognitive Activities as Deterrents of Cognitive Decline in a Biracial Population Sample

“…To capture various social and built environment features of the neighborhood that may influence patterns of physical activity, 48 we constructed a measure of neighborhood-level socio-economic status (SES), using a previously published measure that is composed of four indicators of the census-level block groups: percent on public assistance, percent of households earning $25,000 per year or less, percent with a college degree or higher, and percent of owner-occupied dwellings valued at $200,000 or higher, 49 in analyses. A z-score transformation was computed for each indicator across census block groups and the resulting four z-scores were averaged to create the neighborhood-level measure for each census block, with higher scores indicative of better neighborhood socioeconomic conditions.…”