Children’s Transport Built Environments: A Mixed Methods Study of Associations between Perceived and Objective Measures and Relationships with Parent Licence for Independent Mobility in Auckland, New Zealand
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Children’s Independent Mobility
1.2. Factors Associated with Children’s Independent Mobility
1.2.1. Child and Household Characteristics
1.2.2. Parental Neighbourhood Perceptions
1.2.3. Objective Measures of the Environment
1.3. Study Aim and Objectives
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Protocol and Study Context
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Socio-Demographic Information
2.2.2. Independent Mobility Licence
2.2.3. Parent-Reported Needs
2.2.4. Objectively-Assessed Neighbourhood Built Environment Features
Ratio of High- to Low-Speed Roads
Number of Signalised Crossings
Ratio of Cycle Path Lengths to Road Lengths
Pedestrian Network Connectivity (PedShed)
2.3. Data Analysis
2.3.1. Objective 1
2.3.2. Objective 2
2.3.3. Objective 3
3. Results
3.1. Objective 1: Parent-Reported Needs
“I feel that this area is very community focused and it feels quite safe and feels quite child friendly.”
Slower and safer drivers, for example: “If people keep to the speed limit it would make me feel safer”Less traffic: “The road traffic is busy and too hard for the kids to use.”more traffic-calming infrastructure: “More speed bumps and more signs near the schools so people can see them and slow down.”Lower speed limits: “Lower speed limits or speed bumps around the area as the people tend to speed down the road and there are a lot of kids in the area that play near the roads.”Signage such as “kids around” to slow traffic and encourage safe driver behaviour: “More caution signs on [X] Road where we live as the traffic whizzes through…More caution signs in the hope that people will pay attention to these signs.”Safer places to cross: “More pedestrian crossings on the roads as cars speed around the area”Safer places to cycle: “I’d like to see a dedicated cycle lanes attached to the footpaths that link up to the school.”Safer places to walk: “Decent footpaths as we have no footpaths on our side of the road and so this is a big deterrent. Also cycle ways would be great as in the bays here we have narrow winding roads.”
“I guess if we all get together as a neighbourhood and get to know each other very well then we could all look out for each other’s kids and we would get to trust each other.”
3.2. Quantitative Modelling
3.2.1. Descriptive Characteristics
3.2.2. Objective 2: Differences in Objectively-Assessed Neighbourhood Features by Parent-Reported Needs
3.2.3. Objective 3: Relationships between Parental Licence for Independent Mobility and Objective Neighbourhood Features and Parent-Reported Needs
4. Discussion
4.1. Objective 1: Parents’ Perceptions on What Would Make Their Neighbourhood Better for Independent Mobility
4.2. Objective 2: Perceived and Objective Aspects of the Neighbourhood Transport Environment
4.3. Objective 3: Factors Associated with Parent Licence for Independent Mobility
5. Strengths and Limitations
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Strong, W.B.; Malina, R.M.; Blimkie, C.J.; Daniels, S.R.; Dishman, R.K.; Gutin, B.; Hergenroeder, A.C.; Must, A.; Nixon, P.A.; Pivarnik, J.M.; et al. Evidence based physical activity for school-age youth. J. Pediatr. 2005, 146, 732–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aubert, S.; Barnes, J.D.; Abdeta, C.; Abi Nader, P.; Adeniyi, A.F.; Aguilar-Farias, N.; Andrade Tenesaca, D.S.; Bhawra, J.; Brazo-Sayavera, J.; Cardon, G.; et al. Global Matrix 3.0 Physical Activity Report Card Grades for Children and Youth: Results and Analysis from 49 Countries. J. Phys. Act. Health 2018, 15, S251–S273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, M.; Ikeda, E.; Hinckson, E.; Duncan, S.; Maddison, R.; Meredith-Jones, K.; Walker, C.; Mandic, S. Results from New Zealand’s 2018 Report card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth. J. Phys. Act. Health 2018, 15, S390–S392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hillman, M.; Adams, J.; Whitelegg, J. One False Move… A Study of Children’s Independent Mobility; Policy Studies Institute: London, UK, 1990; ISBN 0853744947. [Google Scholar]
- Chaudhury, M.; Oliver, M.; Badland, H.M.; Mavoa, S. Public Open Spaces, Children’s Independent Mobility. In Play, Recreation, Health and Well Being, Geographies of Children and Young People; Evans, B., Horton, J., Eds.; Springer Science: Singapore, 2015; Volume 9, pp. 315–335. [Google Scholar]
- Marzi, I.; Reimers, A.K. Children’s Independent Mobility: Current Knowledge, Future Directions, and Public Health Implications. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riazi, N.A.; Faulkner, G. Children’s Independent Mobility. In Children’s Active Transportation, 1st ed.; Larouche, R., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; pp. 77–87. [Google Scholar]
- Ikeda, E.; Hinckson, E.; Witten, K.; Smith, M. Assessment of direct and indirect associations between children active school travel and environmental, household and child factors using structural equation modelling. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2019, 16, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitra, R.; Faulkner, G.E.; Buliung, R.N.; Stone, M.R. Do parental perceptions of the neighbourhood environment influence children’s independent mobility? Evidence from Toronto, Canada. Urban Stud. 2014, 51, 3401–3419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliver, M.; Parker, K.; Witten, K.; Mavoa, S.; Badland, H.M.; Donovan, P.; Chaudhury, M.; Kearns, R. Children’s Out-of-School Independently Mobile Trips, Active Travel, and Physical Activity: A Cross-Sectional Examination from the Kids in the City Study. J. Phys. Act. Health 2016, 13, 318–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schoeppe, S.; Duncan, M.J.; Badland, H.; Oliver, M.; Curtis, C. Associations of children’s independent mobility and active travel with physical activity, sedentary behaviour and weight status: A systematic review. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2013, 16, 312–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stone, M.R.; Faulkner, G.E.; Mitra, R.; Buliung, R.N. The freedom to explore: Examining the influence of independent mobility on weekday, weekend and after-school physical activity behaviour in children living in urban and inner-suburban neighbourhoods of varying socioeconomic status. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2014, 11, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bento, G.; Dias, G. The importance of outdoor play for young children’s healthy development. Porto Biomed. J. 2017, 2, 157–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pooley, C.; Whyatt, D.; Walker, M.; Davies, G.; Coulton, P.; Bamford, W. Understanding the school journey: Integrating data on travel and environment. Environ. Plan. A 2010, 42, 948–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prezza, M.; Pilloni, S.; Morabito, C.; Sersante, C.; Alparone, F.R.; Giuliani, M.V. The influence of psychosocial and environmental factors on children’s independent mobility and relationship to peer frequentation. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2001, 11, 435–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prezza, M.; Pacilli, M.G. Current fear of crime, sense of community, and loneliness in italian adolescents: The role of autonomous mobility and play during childhood. J. Community Psychol. 2007, 35, 151–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rissotto, A.; Tonucci, F. Freedom of Movement and Environmental Knowledge in Elementary School Children. J. Environ. Psychol. 2002, 22, 65–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitchell, H.; Kearns, R.; Collins, D.C.A. Nuances of neighbourhood: Children’s perceptions of the space between home and school in Auckland, New Zealand. Geoforum 2007, 38, 614–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mackett, R.; Brown, B.; Gong, Y.; Kitazawa, K.; Paskins, J. Children’s Independent Movement in the Local Environment. Built Environ. 2007, 33, 454–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schoeppe, S.; Tranter, P.; Duncan, M.J.; Curtis, C.; Carver, A.; Malone, K. Australian children’s independent mobility levels: Secondary analyses of cross-sectional data between 1991 and 2012. Child.’s Geogr. 2016, 14, 408–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shaw, B.; Bicket, M.; Elliott, B.; Fagan-Watson, B.; Mocca, E.; Hillman, M. Children’s Independent Mobility: An International Comparison and Recommendations for Action; Policy Studies Institute: London, UK, 2015; ISBN 9780853740148. [Google Scholar]
- Sallis, J.F.; Cervero, R.B.; Ascher, W.; Henderson, K.A.; Kraft, M.K.; Kerr, J. An ecological approach to creating active living communities. Annu. Rev. Public Health 2006, 27, 297–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badland, H.; Kearns, R.; Carroll, P.; Oliver, M.; Mavoa, S.; Donovan, P.; Parker, K.; Chaudhury, M.; Lin, E.Y.; Witten, K. Development of a systems model to visualise the complexity of children’s independent mobility. Child.’s Geogr. 2016, 14, 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cordovil, R.; Lopes, F.; Neto, C. Children’s (in)dependent mobility in Portugal. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2015, 18, 299–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Egli, V.; Ikeda, E.; Stewart, T.; Smith, M. Interpersonal Correlates of Active Transportation. In Children’s Active Transportation, 1st ed.; Larouche, R., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; pp. 115–125. [Google Scholar]
- Crawford, S.B.; Bennetts, S.K.; Hackworth, N.J.; Green, J.; Graesser, H.; Cooklin, A.R.; Matthews, J.; Strazdins, L.; Zubrick, S.R.; D’Esposito, F.; et al. Worries, ‘weirdos’, neighborhoods and knowing people: A qualitative study with children and parents regarding children’s independent mobility. Health Place 2017, 45, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carver, A.; Timperio, A.; Crawford, D. Playing it safe: The influence of neighbourhood safety on children’s physical activity—A review. Health Place 2008, 14, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Meester, F.; Van Dyck, D.; De Bourdeaudhuij, I.; Cardon, G. Parental perceived neighborhood attributes: Associations with active transport and physical activity among 10–12 year old children and the mediating role of independent mobility. BMC Public Health 2014, 14, 631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Timperio, A.; Crawford, D.; Telford, A.; Salmon, J. Perceptions about the local neighborhood and walking and cycling among children. Prev. Med. 2004, 38, 39–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janssen, I.; Ferrao, T.; King, N. Individual, family, and neighborhood correlates of independent mobility among 7 to 11-year-olds. Prev. Med. Rep. 2016, 3, 98–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schoeppe, S.; Duncan, M.J.; Badland, H.M.; Alley, S.; Williams, S.; Rebar, A.L.; Vandelanotte, C. Socio-demographic factors and neighbourhood social cohesion influence adults’ willingness to grant children greater independent mobility: A cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 2015, 15, 690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolfe, M.K.; McDonald, N.C. Association between neighborhood social environment and children’s independent mobility. J. Phys. Act. Health 2016, 13, 970–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carver, A.; Panter, J.R.; Jones, A.P.; van Sluijs, E.M.F. Independent mobility on the journey to school: A joint cross-sectional and prospective exploration of social and physical environmental influences. J. Transp. Health 2014, 1, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Foster, S.; Villanueva, K.; Wood, L.; Christian, H.; Giles-Corti, B. The impact of parents’ fear of strangers and perceptions of informal social control on children’s independent mobility. Health Place 2014, 26, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopes, F.; Cordovil, R.; Neto, C. Children’s independent mobility in Portugal: Effects of urbanization degree and motorized modes of travel. J. Transp. Geogr. 2014, 41, 210–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, E.Y.; Witten, K.; Smith, M.; Carroll, P.; Asiasiga, L.; Badland, H.; Parker, K. Social and built-environment factors related to children’s independent mobility: The importance of neighbourhood cohesion and connectedness. Health Place 2017, 46, 107–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carver, A.; Barr, A.; Singh, A.; Badland, H.; Mavoa, S.; Bentley, B. How are the built environment and household travel characteristics associated with children’s active transport in Melbourne, Australia? J. Transp. Health 2019, 12, 115–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heinen, E.; van Wee, B.; Panter, J.; Mackett, R.; Ogilvie, D. Residential self-selection in quasi-experimental and natural experimental studies: An extended conceptualization of the relationship between the built environment and travel behavior. J. Transp. Land Use 2018, 11, 939–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levine, J.; Inam, A.; Torng, G.-W. A Choice-Based Rationale for Land Use and Transportation Alternatives. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2005, 24, 317–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliver, M.; Badland, H.; Mavoa, S.; Witten, K.; Kearns, R.; Ellaway, A.; Hinckson, E.; Mackay, L.; Schluter, P.J. Environmental and socio-demographic associates of children’s active transport to school: A cross-sectional investigation from the URBAN Study. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2014, 11, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marzi, I.; Demetriou, Y.; Reimers, A.K. Social and physical environmental correlates of independent mobility in children: A systematic review taking sex/gender differences into account. Int. J. Health Geogr. 2018, 17, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nicksic, N.E.; Salahuddin, M.; Butte, N.F.; Hoelscher, D.M. Associations Between Parent-Perceived Neighborhood Safety and Encouragement and Child Outdoor Physical Activity Among Low-Income Children. J. Phys. Act. Health 2018, 15, 317–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, M.P.; Pizarro, A.N.; Mota, J.; Marques, E.A. Parental physical activity, safety perceptions and children’s independent mobility. BMC Public Health 2013, 12, 584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giles-Corti, B.; Kelty, S.F.; Zubrick, S.R.; Villanueva, K.P. Encouraging walking for transport and physical activity in children and adolescents: How important is the built environment? Sports Med. 2009, 39, 995–1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christian, H.E.; Klinker, C.D.; Villanueva, K.; Knuiman, M.W.; Foster, S.A.; Zubrick, S.R.; Divitini, M.; Wood, L.; Giles-Corti, B. The effect of the social and physical environment on children’s independent mobility to neighborhood destinations. J. Phys. Act. Health 2015, 12, S84–S93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Francis, J.; Martin, K.; Wood, L.; Foster, S. ‘I’ll be driving you to school for the rest of your life’: A qualitative study of parents’ fear of stranger danger. J. Environ. Psychol. 2017, 53, 112–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ikeda, E.; Hinckson, E.; Witten, K.; Smith, M. Associations of children’s active school travel with perceptions of the physical environment and characteristics of the social environment: A systematic review. Health Place 2018, 54, 118–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carroll, P.; Witten, K.; Kearns, R.; Donovan, P. Kids in the City: Children’s use and experiences of urban neighbourhoods in Auckland, New Zealand. J. Urban Des. 2015, 20, 417–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johansson, M. Environment and parental factors as determinants of mode for children’s leisure travel. J. Environ. Psychol. 2006, 26, 156–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kyttä, M. The extent of children’s independent mobility and the number of actualized affordances as criteria for child-friendly environments. J. Environ. Psychol. 2004, 24, 179–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Villanueva, K.; Giles-Corti, B.; Bulsara, M.; Timperio, A.; McCormack, G.; Beesley, B.; Trapp, G.; Middleton, N. Where Do Children Travel to and What Local Opportunities Are Available? The Relationship Between Neighborhood Destinations and Children’s Independent Mobility. Environ. Behav. 2012, 45, 679–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sharmin, S.; Kamruzzaman, M. Association between the built environment and children’s independent mobility: A meta-analytic review. J. Transp. Geogr. 2017, 61, 104–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moran, M.R.; Plaut, P.; Baron-Epel, O. Do children walk where they bike? Exploring built environment correlates of children’s walking and bicycling. J. Transp. Land Use 2015, 9, 43–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliver, M.; Mavoa, S.; Badland, H.; Parker, K.; Donovan, P.; Kearns, R.A.; Lin, E.Y.; Witten, K. Associations between the neighbourhood built environment and out of school physical activity and active travel: An examination from the Kids in the City study. Health Place 2015, 36, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Villanueva, K.; Giles-Corti, B.; Bulsara, M.; Trapp, G.; Timperio, A.; McCormack, G.; Van Niel, K. Does the walkability of neighbourhoods affect children’s independent mobility, independent of parental, socio-cultural and individual factors? Child.’s Geogr. 2014, 12, 393–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giles-Corti, B.; Wood, G.; Pikora, T.; Learnihan, V.; Bulsara, M.; Van Niel, K.; Timperio, A.; McCormack, G.; Villanueva, K. School site and the potential to walk to school: The impact of street connectivity and traffic exposure in school neighborhoods. Health Place 2011, 17, 545–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badland, H.; Donovan, P.; Mavoa, S.; Oliver, M.; Chaudhury, M.; Witten, K. Assessing neighbourhood destination access for children: Development of the NDAI-C audit tool. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 2015, 42, 1148–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uys, M.; Broyles, S.T.; Draper, C.E.; Hendricks, S.; Rae, D.; Naidoo, N.; Katzmarzyk, P.T.; Lambert, E.V. Perceived and objective neighborhood support for outside of school physical activity in South African children. BMC Public Health 2016, 16, 462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Statistics New Zealand. 2013 Census QuickStats About a Place: Auckland Region. Available online: http://archive.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/profile-and-summary-reports/quickstats-about-a-place.aspx?request_value=13170&tabname= (accessed on 10 April 2019).
- Witten, K.; Kearns, R.; Carroll, P.; Asiasiga, L. Children’s everyday encounters and affective relations with place: Experiences of hyperdiversity in Auckland neighbourhoods. Soc. Cult. Geogr. 2017, 9365, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliver, M.; McPhee, J.; Carroll, P.; Ikeda, E.; Mavoa, S.; Mackay, L.; Kearns, R.A.; Kyttä, M.; Asiasiga, L.; Garrett, N.; et al. Neighbourhoods for Active Kids: Study protocol for a cross-sectional examination of neighbourhood features and children’s physical activity, active travel, independent mobility and body size. BMJ Open 2016, 6, e013377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry of Education. School Deciles. Available online: https://www.education.govt.nz/school/running-a-school/resourcing/operational-funding/school-decile-ratings/ (accessed on 10 April 2019).
- Egli, V.; Zinn, C.; Mackay, L.; Donnellan, N.; Villanueva, K.; Mavoa, S.; Exeter, D.J.; Vandevijvere, S.; Smith, M. Viewing obesogenic advertising in children’s neighbourhoods using Google Street View. Geogr. Res. 2018, 57, 84–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ikeda, E.; Mavoa, S.; Hinckson, E.; Witten, K.; Donnellan, N.; Smith, M. Differences in child-drawn and GIS-modelled routes to school: Impact on space and exposure to the built environment in Auckland, New Zealand. J. Transp. Geogr. 2018, 71, 103–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Egli, V. Neighbourhoods for Healthy Kids: A Child-Centred Investigation into the Role of the Built Environment on Child Body Size; Auckland University of Technology: Auckland, New Zealand, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Atkinson, J.; Salmond, C.; Crampton, P. NZDep2013 Index of Deprivation; Department of Public Health, University of Otago: Wellington, New Zealand, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Fyhri, A.; Hjorthol, R.; Mackett, R.; Fotel, T.N.; Kyttä, M. Children’s active travel and independent mobility in four countries: Development, social contributing trends and measures. Transp. Policy 2011, 8, 703–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jago, R.; Thompson, J.L.; Page, A.S.; Brockman, R.; Cartwright, K.; Fox, K.R. Licence to be active: Parental concerns and 10–11-year-old children’s ability to be independently physically active. J. Public Health 2009, 31, 472–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ahlport, K.N.; Linnan, L.; Vaughn, A.; Evenson, K.R.; Ward, D.S.; Carmen Head, B.J. Barriers to and Facilitators of Walking and Bicycling to School: Formative Results From the Non-Motorized Travel Study. Health Educ. Behav. 2008, 35, 221–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evers, C.; Boles, S.; Johnson-Shelton, D.; Schlossberg, M.; Richey, D. Parent Safety Perceptions of Child Walking Routes. J. Transp. Health 2014, 1, 108–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- McGinn, A.P.; Evenson, K.R.; Herring, A.H.; Huston, S.L.; Rodriguez, D.A. Exploring Associations between Physical Activity and Perceived and Objective Measures of the Built Environment. J. Urban Health 2007, 84, 162–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ghekiere, A.; Deforche, B.; Carver, A.; Mertens, L.; de Geus, B.; Clarys, P.; Cardon, G.; De Bourdeaudhuij, I.; Van Cauwenberg, J. Insights into children’s independent mobility for transportation cycling—Which socio-ecological factors matter? J. Sci. Med. Sport 2017, 20, 267–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nevelsteen, K.; Steenberghen, T.; Van Rompaey, A.; Uyttersprot, L. Controlling factors of the parental safety perception on children’s travel mode choice. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2012, 45, 39–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lee, S.M.; Conway, T.L.; Frank, L.D.; Saelens, B.E.; Cain, K.L.; Sallis, J.F. The Relation of Perceived and Objective Environment Attributes to Neighborhood Satisfaction. Environ. Behav. 2017, 49, 136–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schüle, S.; Nanninga, S.; Dreger, S.; Bolte, G.; Schüle, S.A.; Nanninga, S.; Dreger, S.; Bolte, G. Relations between Objective and Perceived Built Environments and the Modifying Role of Individual Socioeconomic Position. A Cross-Sectional Study on Traffic Noise and Urban Green Space in a Large German City. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rothman, L.; Buliung, R.; To, T.; Macarthur, C.; Macpherson, A.; Howard, A. Associations between parents perception of traffic danger, the built environment and walking to school. J. Transp. Health 2015, 2, 327–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eichinger, M.; Schneider, S.; De Bock, F. Subjectively and objectively assessed social and physical environmental correlates of preschoolers’ accelerometer-based physical activity. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2017, 14, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kerr, J.; Rosenberg, D.; Sallis, J.F.; Saelens, B.E.; Frank, L.D.; Conway, T.L.; Rosenberg, D.; Sallis, J.F.; Saelens, B.E.; Frank, L.D.; et al. Active Commuting to School: Associations with Environment and Parental Concerns. Am. Coll. Sports Med. 2006, 38, 787–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koohsari, M.J.; Badland, H.; Sugiyama, T.; Mavoa, S.; Christian, H.; Giles-Corti, B. Mismatch between Perceived and Objectively Measured Land Use Mix and Street Connectivity: Associations with Neighborhood Walking. J. Urban Health 2015, 92, 242–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cerin, E.; Conway, T.L.; Adams, M.A.; Barnett, A.; Cain, K.L.; Owen, N.; Christiansen, L.B.; van Dyck, D.; Mitáš, J.; Sarmiento, O.L.; et al. Objectively-assessed neighbourhood destination accessibility and physical activity in adults from 10 countries: An analysis of moderators and perceptions as mediators. Soc. Sci. Med. 2018, 211, 282–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, E.; Dean, J. Perceptions of walkability and determinants of walking behaviour among urban seniors in Toronto, Canada. J. Transp. Health 2018, 9, 309–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shaw, C.; Russell, M. Benchmarking Cycling and Walking in Six New Zealand Cities; New Zealand Centre for Sustainable Cities, University of Otago: Wellington, New Zealand, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Witten, K.; Pearce, J.; Day, P. Neighbourhood Destination Accessibility Index: A GIS tool for measuring infrastructure support for neighbourhood physical activity. Environ. Plan. A 2011, 43, 205–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Esteban-Cornejo, I.; Carlson, J.A.; Conway, T.L.; Cain, K.L.; Saelens, B.E.; Frank, L.D.; Glanz, K.; Roman, C.G.; Sallis, J.F. Parental and adolescent perceptions of neighbourhood safety related to adolescents’ physical activity in their neighborhood. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 2016, 87, 191–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hume, C.; Timperio, A.; Salmon, J.; Carver, A.; Giles-Corti, B.; Crawford, D. Walking and Cycling to School Predictors of Increases Among Children and Adolescents. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2009, 36, 195–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Timperio, A.; Ball, K.; Salmon, J.; Roberts, R.; Giles-Corti, B.; Simmons, D.; Baur, L.A.; Crawford, D. Personal, Family, Social, and Environmental Correlates of Active Commuting to School. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2006, 30, 45–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Witten, K.; Kearns, R.; Carroll, P.; Asiasiga, L.; Tava’e, N. New Zealand parents’ understandings of the intergenerational decline in children’s independent outdoor play and active travel. Child.’s Geogr. 2013, 11, 215–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Environmental Health Indicators New Zealand. Number of Motor Vehicles in New Zealand. Available online: http://www.ehinz.ac.nz/assets/Factsheets/Released-2017/NumberOfVehiclesInNZ2000-2016-release201710.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2019).
- Mitchell, C.A.; Clark, A.F.; Gilliland, J.A. Built environment influences of children’s physical activity: Examining differences by neighbourhood size and sex. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hasanzadeh, K.; Laatikainen, T.; Kyttä, M. A place-based model of local activity spaces: Individual place exposure and characteristics. J. Geogr. Syst. 2018, 20, 227–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Parent-Reported Needs | Objectively-Assessed Neighbourhood Features | Key Considerations Regarding Making Direct Comparisons |
---|---|---|
Less, slower, and safer traffic | Ratio of high to low speed roads | Objective measure provides an estimate only of traffic safety based on road hierarchy (and does not account for actual driver behavior irrespective of regulatory environment); parent-reported traffic safety needs included a broad range of strategies to reduce speeds and volume of traffic |
More and safer crossings | Number of signalised crossings | Objective measure only takes signalled crossings into account; parent-reported needs included comments about non-signalled crossings |
Safer and designated cycle lanes | Ratio of cycle path lengths to road lengths | Objective measure is limited to data available for the cycle network; parent-reported needs included bike paths and also the quality of places to cycle safely |
More and better walking paths | PedShed | Objective measure provides an indication of the relative prevalence of places to walk only; parent-reported needs noted additional considerations such as wider and better-maintained footpaths |
Topic and Subtopics | na | % a |
---|---|---|
Safety from traffic: Less, slower, and safer traffic | 185 | 19.9 |
Less busy traffic | 65 | 7.0 |
Slower speeds | 56 | 6.0 |
Traffic calming infrastructure (e.g., humps) | 38 | 4.1 |
Lowering speed limits | 37 | 4.0 |
Reducing dangerous driving | 34 | 3.7 |
Improving traffic safety in general | 19 | 2.0 |
Signage to slow traffic (e.g., “kids around”, “slow down”) | 6 | 0.6 |
Safety from traffic: More and safer crossings | 125 | 13.4 |
More and safer pedestrian crossings | 121 | 13.0 |
Lights at pedestrian crossings | 4 | 0.4 |
Supervised crossings | 1 | 0.1 |
Safety from traffic: Safer and designated cycle lanes | 91 | 9.8 |
Cycle lanes—designated, away from road, on footpaths | 66 | 7.1 |
Bike tracks and paths | 26 | 2.8 |
Safety from traffic: More and better walking paths | 67 | 7.2 |
Safety from others | 112 | 12.0 |
Reduced “stranger danger” | 50 | 5.4 |
Community surveillance | 43 | 4.6 |
Reduced crime (drugs and gang activity) | 19 | 2.0 |
Fewer roaming dogs | 12 | 1.3 |
Reduced perceived danger from others especially youth | 9 | 1.0 |
Less bullying | 4 | 0.4 |
More and better destinations | 37 | 4.0 |
More destinations in the neighbourhood | 23 | 2.5 |
More and better facilities at the destinations | 16 | 1.7 |
Better social environment | 33 | 3.5 |
More connected community | 25 | 2.7 |
More children/people out and about | 9 | 1.0 |
Others | 232 | 24.9 |
Better street lighting | 56 | 6.0 |
Child too young | 45 | 4.8 |
Nothing | 38 | 4.1 |
Positive Comments | 31 | 3.3 |
Less hilly | 14 | 1.5 |
Safer neighbourhood | 12 | 1.3 |
Other | 10 | 1.1 |
More public transport and school buses | 9 | 1.0 |
Fewer cars parked on street | 8 | 0.9 |
Better general infrastructure | 8 | 0.9 |
More walking school buses (adult accompanying group of children to school) | 7 | 0.8 |
Better upkeep of public spaces | 6 | 0.6 |
Better visibility of the streets | 4 | 0.4 |
Improved connectivity | 3 | 0.3 |
Uncodeable | 3 | 0.3 |
Socio-Demographic Variables | n | % | Licence for Independent Mobility | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Mean (SD) | p-Value | |||
Sex | <0.001 c | |||
Male | 469 | 50.4 | 5.65 (1.73) | |
Female | 462 | 49.6 | 5.00 (1.67) | |
School level | <0.001 c | |||
Primary (years 5–6) | 486 | 52.2 | 4.58 (1.32) | |
Intermediate (years 7–8) | 445 | 47.8 | 6.04 (1.69) | |
Ethnicity | 0.001 d | |||
New Zealand European/Pākehā/Other European | 394 | 42.3 | 5.41 (1.61) | |
Māori | 112 | 12.0 | 5.49 (1.67) | |
Pacific | 125 | 13.4 | 4.94 (1.73) | |
Asian | 120 | 12.9 | 5.04 (1.62) | |
MELAA a/Other/Not stated | 180 | 19.3 | 5.25 (1.77) | |
Area-level deprivation b | 0.106 d | |||
Low Deprivation (decile 1–3) | 357 | 38.3 | 5.36 (1.67) | |
Medium Deprivation (decile 4–7) | 324 | 34.8 | 5.31 (1.65) | |
High Deprivation (decile 8–10) | 250 | 26.9 | 5.13 (1.71) |
Objectively-Assessed Neighbourhood Features a | Minimum | Maximum | Mean (SD) |
---|---|---|---|
Ratio of high to low speed roads | 0.00 | 1.00 | 0.37 (0.11) |
Number of signalised crossings | 0.00 | 7.00 | 1.01 (1.40) |
Ratio of cycle paths to road lengths | 0.00 | 0.74 | 0.12 (0.13) |
PedShed b | 0.01 | 0.63 | 0.32 (0.11) |
Parent-Reported Need a n (%) of Parents Reporting Need | Less, Slower, and Safer Traffic n = 185 (19.9%) | More and Safer Crossings n = 125 (13.4%) | Safer and Designated Cycle Lanes n = 91 (9.8%) | More and Better Walking Paths n = 67 (7.2%) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Objective Measure | Ratio of High to Low Speed Roads | Number of Signalised Crossings | Ratio of Cycle Path to Road Lengths | PedShed b | ||||
OR (95% CI) c | p-Value | OR (95% CI) c | p-Value | OR (95% CI) c | p-Value | OR (95% CI) c | p-Value | |
Objective measure (higher vs. lower) d | ||||||||
Lower | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
Higher | 0.79 (0.54, 1.14) | 0.208 | 0.90 (0.72, 1.11) | 0.314 | 1.02 (0.56, 1.87) | 0.944 | 0.77 (0.34, 1.73) | 0.527 |
Sex | ||||||||
Male | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
Female | 0.93 (0.67, 1.31) | 0.693 | 0.73 (0.49, 1.09) | 0.125 | 0.78 (0.49, 1.24) | 0.296 | 0.87 (0.47, 1.60) | 0.527 |
School level | ||||||||
Intermediate (years 7–8) | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
Primary (years 5–6) | 1.54 (1.09, 2.19) | 0.014 | 1.01 (0.67, 1.52) | 0.980 | 0.48 (0.29, 0.77) | 0.003 | 1.41 (0.66, 3.00) | 0.372 |
Ethnicity | ||||||||
NZ European/Pākehā/Other European | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
Māori | 0.78 (0.43, 1.44) | 0.432 | 0.60 (0.27, 1.34) | 0.214 | 0.12 (0.03, 0.52) | 0.004 | 0.30 (0.06, 1.53) | 0.147 |
Pacific | 0.36 (0.17, 0.76) | 0.008 | 0.13 (0.03, 0.59) | 0.008 | 0.06 (0.01, 0.50) | 0.009 | 0.29 (0.05, 1.55) | 0.148 |
Asian | 0.61 (0.34, 1.10) | 0.103 | 0.48 (0.22, 1.03) | 0.058 | 0.28 (0.11, 0.75) | 0.012 | 0.37 (0.07, 1.82) | 0.220 |
MELAA a/Other/Not stated | 0.85 (0.51, 1.42) | 0.543 | 0.93 (0.49, 1.75) | 0.816 | 0.51 (0.26, 1.00) | 0.049 | 2.01 (0.73, 5.52) | 0.174 |
Area-level deprivation b | ||||||||
Low | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
Medium | 1.08 (0.72, 1.61) | 0.708 | 0.83 (0.53, 1.28) | 0.396 | 0.84 (0.51, 1.39) | 0.504 | 0.15 (0.07, 0.33) | <0.001 |
High | 1.08 (0.60, 1.96) | 0.796 | 0.50 (0.22, 1.18) | 0.113 | 0.40 (0.15, 1.08) | 0.071 | 0.22 (0.07, 0.67) | 0.008 |
Neighbourhood Variables in Model | Comparison | Estimate (95% CI) a | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Ratio of high to low speed roads b | Higher vs. lower | −0.05 (−0.26, 0.17) | 0.682 |
Less, slower, and safer traffic c | Parent reported vs. didn’t report need | −0.03 (−0.2, 0.21) | 0.811 |
Number of signalised crossings b | Per additional crossing | −0.04 (−0.15, 0.06) | 0.421 |
More and safer crossings c | Parent reported vs. didn’t report need | 0.01 (−0.27, 0.29) | 0.944 |
Ratio of cycle path to road lengths b | Higher vs. lower | −0.46 (−0.71, −0.20) | 0.001 |
Safer and designated cycle lanes c | Parent reported vs. didn’t report need | 0.56 (0.24, 0.88) | 0.001 |
PedShed b,d | Higher vs. lower | 0.20 (−0.01, 0.41) | 0.058 |
More and better walking paths c | Parent reported vs. didn’t report need | −0.14 (−0.55, 0.27) | 0.506 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Smith, M.; Amann, R.; Cavadino, A.; Raphael, D.; Kearns, R.; Mackett, R.; Mackay, L.; Carroll, P.; Forsyth, E.; Mavoa, S.; et al. Children’s Transport Built Environments: A Mixed Methods Study of Associations between Perceived and Objective Measures and Relationships with Parent Licence for Independent Mobility in Auckland, New Zealand. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1361. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16081361
Smith M, Amann R, Cavadino A, Raphael D, Kearns R, Mackett R, Mackay L, Carroll P, Forsyth E, Mavoa S, et al. Children’s Transport Built Environments: A Mixed Methods Study of Associations between Perceived and Objective Measures and Relationships with Parent Licence for Independent Mobility in Auckland, New Zealand. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2019; 16(8):1361. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16081361
Chicago/Turabian StyleSmith, Melody, Rebecca Amann, Alana Cavadino, Deborah Raphael, Robin Kearns, Roger Mackett, Lisa Mackay, Penelope Carroll, Euan Forsyth, Suzanne Mavoa, and et al. 2019. "Children’s Transport Built Environments: A Mixed Methods Study of Associations between Perceived and Objective Measures and Relationships with Parent Licence for Independent Mobility in Auckland, New Zealand" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, no. 8: 1361. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16081361
APA StyleSmith, M., Amann, R., Cavadino, A., Raphael, D., Kearns, R., Mackett, R., Mackay, L., Carroll, P., Forsyth, E., Mavoa, S., Zhao, J., Ikeda, E., & Witten, K. (2019). Children’s Transport Built Environments: A Mixed Methods Study of Associations between Perceived and Objective Measures and Relationships with Parent Licence for Independent Mobility in Auckland, New Zealand. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(8), 1361. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16081361