| Literature DB >> 32481728 |
Silvia A González1,2,3, Olga L Sarmiento1, Pablo D Lemoine4, Richard Larouche2,5, Jose D Meisel6, Mark S Tremblay2,3, Melisa Naranjo1, Stephanie T Broyles7, Mikael Fogelholm8, Gustavo A Holguin1, Estelle V Lambert9, Peter T Katzmarzyk7.
Abstract
Walking and biking to school represent a source of regular daily physical activity (PA). The objectives of this paper are to determine the associations of distance to school, crime safety, and socioeconomic variables with active school transport (AST) among children from five culturally and socioeconomically different country sites and to describe the main policies related to AST in those country sites. The analytical sample included 2845 children aged 9-11 years from the International Study of Childhood Obesity, Lifestyle and the Environment. Multilevel generalized linear mixed models were used to estimate the associations between distance, safety and socioeconomic variables, and the odds of engaging in AST. Greater distance to school and vehicle ownership were associated with a lower likelihood of engaging in AST in sites in upper-middle- and high-income countries. Crime perception was negatively associated to AST only in sites in high-income countries. Our results suggest that distance to school is a consistent correlate of AST in different contexts. Our findings regarding crime perception support a need vs. choice framework, indicating that AST may be the only commuting choice for many children from the study sites in upper-middle-income countries, despite the high perception of crime.Entities:
Keywords: Canada; Colombia; Finland; South Africa; United States; active school transport; distance; safety
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32481728 PMCID: PMC7312928 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17113847
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Sociodemographic characteristics of five country sites in the International Study of Childhood Obesity, Lifestyle and the Environment (ISCOLE).
| Socio-Demographic Characteristics | Ottawa (Canada) | Bogota (Colombia) | Helsinki, Espoo & Vantaa (Finland) | Cape Town (South Africa) | Baton Rouge (US) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| World bank classification a | High income | Upper-middle income | High income | Upper-middle income | High income |
| Gini index (year) a | 34.0 (2013) | 50.8 (2016) | 27.1 (2017) | 63.0 (2014) | 41.5 (2016) |
| Total population at the city level | 812,129 | 7,674,366 | 1,005,275 | 3,433,441 | 228,590 |
| Population density (inhabitants per km2) | 317 | 4310 | 2739 | 1530 | 2960 |
| Motor vehicles per 1000 inhabitants b | 605 | 58 | 534 | 159 | 809 |
| Estimated road traffic death rate per 100,000 population c | 6.8 | 15.6 | 5.1 | 31.9 | 11.4 |
| Crime rate | |||||
| Robbery rate per 100,000 population d | 58.8 | 197.5 | 30.8 | 101.4 | 102 |
a World Bank Data at country level [33]; b World Bank Data at country level: Motor vehicles (per 1000 people) include cars, buses, and freight vehicles but not two-wheelers [35]; c World Health Organization data at country level: Global status report on road safety 2013 [36]; d Robbery at the national level, number of police-recorded offences. Definitions: “Robbery” means the theft of property from a person, overcoming resistance by force or threat of force. Where possible, the category “Robbery” should include muggings (bag-snatching) and theft with violence but should exclude pick pocketing and extortion [37].
Descriptive Characteristics of Participants Stratified by Study Site (n = 2845) in the International Study of Childhood Obesity, Lifestyle and the Environment (ISCOLE).
| Socio-Demographic Variables of the Sample | Ottawa (Canada) | Bogota (Colombia) | Helsinki, Espoo & Vantaa (Finland) | Cape Town (South Africa) | Baton Rouge (US) | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age a | 10.5 (0.4) | 10.5 (0.6) | 10.5 (0.4) | 10.2 (0.7) | 10.0 (0.6) | 10.3 (0.6) |
| Sex | ||||||
| Male (%) | 42.7 | 49.6 | 47.5 | 44.3 | 43.2 | 46.0 |
| Female (%) | 57.4 | 50.4 | 52.5 | 55.7 | 56.8 | 54.0 |
| Highest parent education | ||||||
| <High School (%) | 2.0 | 31.8 | 2.9 | 37.7 | 8.6 | 17.0 |
| Complete high-school or some college (%) | 27.8 | 50.8 | 54.9 | 45.9 | 43.2 | 45.0 |
| ≥Bachelor degree (%) | 70.2 | 17.4 | 42.2 | 16.4 | 48.2 | 38.0 |
| Number of motorized vehicles in the household | ||||||
| None (%) | 3.8 | 75.8 | 9.4 | 37.5 | 8.3 | 32.5 |
| One (%) | 38.3 | 21.5 | 45.2 | 32.4 | 30.5 | 31.8 |
| Two or more (%) | 57.9 | 2.7 | 45.4 | 30.1 | 61.2 | 35.7 |
| Crime perception score a | 2.0 (0.7) | 3.4 (0.7) | 1.6 (0.6) | 3.1 (0.8) | 2.4 (0.8) | 2.6 (1.0) |
|
| ||||||
| Mode of transport to school | ||||||
| Walking (%) | 34.9 | 71.6 | 54.7 | 49.4 | 10.1 | 46.3 |
| Bicycle, roller-blade, skateboard, scooter (%) | 0.6 | 1.8 | 24.4 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 5.1 |
| Bus, train, tram, underground, or boat (%) | 38.1 | 18.7 | 13.3 | 5.4 | 34.5 | 23.3 |
| Car, motorcycle, or moped (%) | 26.5 | 7.3 | 7.6 | 44.3 | 54.3 | 25.0 |
| Other b (%) | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
|
| ||||||
| Average distance to school (km) a | 2.8 (4.2) | 2.4 (3.7) | 1.5 (1.7) | 2.9 (3.9) | 4.6 (5.1) | 2.8 (4.0) |
| Median of the distance to school (km) | 1.5 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 1.5 | 3.3 | 1.3 |
| Distance distribution among active and nonactive travelers | ||||||
| < 1 km (%) | 36.8 | 56.6 | 50.0 | 38.1 | 19.1 | 41.7 |
| 1 km ≤ Distance < 1.5 Km (%) | 13.2 | 10.6 | 20.9 | 12.0 | 11.6 | 13.2 |
| 1.5 Km ≤ Distance < 2 Km (%) | 10.9 | 5.5 | 12.3 | 11.3 | 7.9 | 8.8 |
| ≥2 km (%) | 39.2 | 27.4 | 16.8 | 38.7 | 61.4 | 36.2 |
| Distance distribution among active travelers | ||||||
| < 1 km (%) | 70.0 | 73.0 | 60.6 | 64.4 | 80.0 | 68.7 |
| 1 km ≤ Distance < 1.5 Km (%) | 17.1 | 10.6 | 21.8 | 12.5 | 4.6 | 14.3 |
| 1.5 Km ≤ Distance < 2 Km (%) | 4.2 | 4.9 | 12.2 | 11.3 | 3.1 | 7.3 |
| ≥2 km (%) | 8.8 | 11.5 | 5.4 | 11.9 | 12.3 | 9.6 |
| Average distance to school among active travelers (km) a | 1.3 (2.9) | 1.4 (2.7) | 1.0 (0.8) | 1.7 (3.2) | 1.0 (1.6) | 1.3 (2.4) |
| Active travel among children living at <1 km (%) | 67.2 | 94.6 | 95.9 | 84.9 | 44.8 | 84.5 |
a Mean and Standard Deviation; b Other includes school van, bus feeder, riding on the top tube of the bike’s frame, pedicab, and wheelchair.
Factors associated to active school transport in 2845 9–11-year-old children, by income level of the country.
| Covariates | Sites in Upper-Middle-Income Countries a | Sites in High-Income Countries b | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |||
| Highest parent education | ||||||
| <High School | 4.83 | (2.84–8.21) | < 0.001 | 0.89 | (0.45–1.78) | 0.741 |
| Complete high-school or some college | 4.21 | (2.58–6.85) | < 0.001 | 1.35 | (1.01–1.81) | 0.040 |
| ≥Bachelor degree | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| Age | 0.80 | (0.61–1.06) | 0.126 | 1.96 | (1.49–2.58) | < 0.001 |
| Gender (ref. male) | 1.27 | (0.89–1.79) | 0.176 | 0.97 | (0.74–1.28) | 0.838 |
| Crime perception | 1.33 | (1.06–1.66) | 0.014 | 0.37 | (0.31–0.45) | < 0.001 |
| Number of motorized vehicles (ref. none) | ||||||
| None | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| One | 0.24 | (0.16–0.35) | < 0.001 | 0.42 | (0.24–0.72) | 0.002 |
| Two or more | 0.14 | (0.08–0.26) | < 0.001 | 0.38 | (0.22-0.65) | 0.001 |
| Distance to school | ||||||
| <1 Km | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| 1 km ≤ Distance < 1.5 Km (%) | 0.12 | (0.07–0.20) | < 0.001 | 0.29 | (0.21–0.42) | < 0.001 |
| 1.5 Km ≤ Distance < 2 Km (%) | 0.13 | (0.07–0.23) | < 0.001 | 0.15 | (0.10–0.22) | < 0.001 |
| ≥2 Km | 0.03 | (0.02–0.05) | < 0.001 | 0.02 | (0.02–0.03) | < 0.001 |
a Sites in upper-middle-income countries comprised Bogota and Cape Town according to the World Bank classification [35]; b Sites in high-income countries comprised Ottawa, Helsinki and Baton Rouge according to the World Bank classification [35].
Figure 1Associations of active transport to school with distance and crime perception by income level of the country. (A) Association of active transportation to school with distance between home and school among children from sites in upper middle-income countries. (B) Association of active transportation to school with distance between home and school among children from sites in high-income countries. (C) Association of active transportation to school with parental perception of crime in sites in upper middle-income countries. (D) Association of active transportation to school with parental perception of crime in sites in high-income countries.
Figure 2Distance decay curves by study site.
Description of policies that support active school transport in Ottawa, Bogota, Helsinki, Cape Town, and Baton Rouge.
| Location | Description | Target | Sectors Involved | Impact Evaluation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ottawa, Canada | The Ottawa Student Transportation Authority (OSTA) is responsible for all school transport initiatives and policies at the city. Regarding active school transportation (AST), OSTA provides services that support and promote the core principles of the School Active Transportation Charter. Specific actions include: (1) Assisting schools in providing safety conditions for students through management of vehicle, pedestrian, and bike traffic around schools. (2) Assessing potential hazards in all walk zones and assigning transportation services to those children who walk and face a very high risk to their safety. (3) Recommending the best routes for AST, through maps that identify unsafe intersections to avoid. (4) Submitting infrastructure improvement needs or service requirements to the appropriate departments at the city. (5) Coordinating School Travel Planning initiatives, like Active and Safe Routes to School program, that involve school communities engaged in the development of action plans for removing barriers to AST. (6) Coordinating Walking School Bus initiatives, in which children are encouraged to walk to school accompanied by a paid leader of the program. AST programs and policies are also supported by the Ottawa School Active Transportation Network, which involves OSTA, School Boards planning, Ottawa Police Services, City By-Law, Ottawa Public Health, Ottawa Public Works, Green Communities Canada, and Ottawa Safety Council [ | Parents or guardians, students, school communities | OSTA, School Boards planning, Ottawa Police Services, City By-Law, Ottawa Public Health, Ottawa Public Works, Green Communities Canada, and Ottawa Safety Council | School Travel Planning initiatives have been evaluated in Canada. Mammen et al. reported pooled data from several cities across Canada, but no specific data was provided for Ottawa. This evaluation found that after 1 year of implementation, there was no increase in AST. However, given the school-specific nature of the program, this approach may not be appropriate to evaluate its impact [ |
| Bogotá, Colombia | The main AST policy in Bogotá is the School Mobility Plan, which was designed and enforced by the School Board and the District Department of Transport. This plan comprises guidelines for motorized and nonmotorized school transport. Each school must design its own Mobility Plan and propose strategies to promote active and sustainable mobility. The specific actions of this policy regarding AST include: (1) Assigning children to the closest schools to their homes, in order to promote active commuting. (2) Improving infrastructure prioritizing safety conditions for pedestrians and cyclists. (3) Implementing programs to promote safe walks to school among students living at 2 km or closer. (4) Implementing the program " | Parents, community, students | Education, planning, mobility, sport and recreation, urban development, security road and maintenance and security department [ | No impact evaluation |
| Helsinki, Finland | Helsinki Region Transportation (HRT) is the main authority in charge of the transport policy and mobility plans. The main policy document to guide specific actions to promote AST in Helsinki is the School Mobility Plan [ | Parents or guardians, students, school communities | Transport and education | No impact evaluation |
| Cape Town, South Africa | Cape Town’s Transport and Urban Development Authority (TDA) is responsible for the local transport policies. The main policy to promote AST in the city is the Non-Motorized Transport (NMT) Policy and Strategy. This document aims to create safe environments for pedestrian and cyclists in order to increase AST as a desirable and acceptable mode of transport. Specific actions related to schools and learners in this policy include: (1) promoting scholar patrols, (2) implementing bicycle/pedestrian paths and other NMT infrastructure in school priority zones, (3) introducing walking and cycling bus programs and (4) including learner safety programs as part of the school curriculum [ | Community, Students | Transport, education, and urban development | No impact evaluation |
| Baton Rouge, U.S.A | The Louisiana Department of Education regulates the School Transportation for Louisiana. The main guidelines for school transportation are provided on the Louisiana School Transportation Specifications and Procedures Bulletin. However, this document is focused in motorized transportation to school and specifies that children whose home is located further than 1 mile from the school should be provided with free transportation, and children living within 1 mile can also be eligible for bus transportation in case of hazardous walking situations [ | Parents, Students, Schools | Transport, education, and planning | Safe Routes to School impact has been evaluated but not in Louisiana |