Masih A Babagoli1, Tanya K Kaufman2, Philip Noyes2, Perry E Sheffield3. 1. Columbia College, Columbia University in the City of New York, 1130 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027, USA. 2. Center for Health Equity, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, 485 Throop Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11221, USA. 3. Environmental Medicine & Public Health, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 17 East 102nd Street, Floor West 2, Box 1057, New York, NY 10029, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This paper examines spatial equity and estimates the health impact of Citi Bike, New York City's (NYC) bike share system. We discuss how further system expansion and utilization by residents in high-poverty communities of color could affect the potential benefit of the largest bicycle share system in the United States. METHODS: First, we compared the Citi Bike station distribution by census tract poverty during the system's 2013 launch and after the 2015 geographic expansion. Second, we applied the World Health Organization's Health Economic Assessment Tool (HEAT) to estimate the benefit of cycling associated with annual Citi Bike members for two 12-month time periods and analyzed change of the benefit over time. RESULTS: The results showed that the greatest proportion of Citi Bike stations were located in low-poverty (wealthier) NYC census tracts (41% per period), and there were no significant changes in station distribution during expansion. HEAT estimated an increase from two to three premature deaths prevented and an increased annual economic benefit from $18,800,000 to $28,300,000 associated with Citi Bike use. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, although Citi Bike stations are not equitably located, the estimated annual health benefits are substantial and have increased over time. Our findings underscore the potential for even greater benefits with increased spatial access in higher-poverty neighborhoods and communities of color. Our findings highlight the importance of the built environment in shaping health and the need for a health equity lens to consider the social and political processes that perpetuate inequities.
INTRODUCTION: This paper examines spatial equity and estimates the health impact of Citi Bike, New York City's (NYC) bike share system. We discuss how further system expansion and utilization by residents in high-poverty communities of color could affect the potential benefit of the largest bicycle share system in the United States. METHODS: First, we compared the Citi Bike station distribution by census tract poverty during the system's 2013 launch and after the 2015 geographic expansion. Second, we applied the World Health Organization's Health Economic Assessment Tool (HEAT) to estimate the benefit of cycling associated with annual Citi Bike members for two 12-month time periods and analyzed change of the benefit over time. RESULTS: The results showed that the greatest proportion of Citi Bike stations were located in low-poverty (wealthier) NYC census tracts (41% per period), and there were no significant changes in station distribution during expansion. HEAT estimated an increase from two to three premature deaths prevented and an increased annual economic benefit from $18,800,000 to $28,300,000 associated with Citi Bike use. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, although Citi Bike stations are not equitably located, the estimated annual health benefits are substantial and have increased over time. Our findings underscore the potential for even greater benefits with increased spatial access in higher-poverty neighborhoods and communities of color. Our findings highlight the importance of the built environment in shaping health and the need for a health equity lens to consider the social and political processes that perpetuate inequities.
Entities:
Keywords:
active transportation; bicycle share; built environment; health benefits; health equity; health impact assessment
Authors: Natalie Mueller; David Rojas-Rueda; Tom Cole-Hunter; Audrey de Nazelle; Evi Dons; Regine Gerike; Thomas Götschi; Luc Int Panis; Sonja Kahlmeier; Mark Nieuwenhuijsen Journal: Prev Med Date: 2015-04-18 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Daniel Fuller; Lise Gauvin; Yan Kestens; Mark Daniel; Michel Fournier; Patrick Morency; Louis Drouin Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-01-17 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Chi Pang Wen; Jackson Pui Man Wai; Min Kuang Tsai; Yi Chen Yang; Ting Yuan David Cheng; Meng-Chih Lee; Hui Ting Chan; Chwen Keng Tsao; Shan Pou Tsai; Xifeng Wu Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-08-16 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Laura Dwyer-Lindgren; Greg Freedman; Rebecca E Engell; Thomas D Fleming; Stephen S Lim; Christopher Jl Murray; Ali H Mokdad Journal: Popul Health Metr Date: 2013-07-10