Citation

Barros P, Slovic AD, Vecino-Ortiz AI. J. Transp. Health 2020; 16: e100855.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2020, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.jth.2020.100855

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

S ince the mid-twentieth century, the fields of urban planning, design, architecture, landscape and public health have worked together to deepen our understanding of the relationships between urban factors (e.g. built environment and socioeconomic conditions) that may facilitate active transportation as part of a larger strategy to enhance population health. Aspects such as the macro- and microscale physical of urban environments have been found to potentially facilitate active transport, including: well-connected streets (Liao et al., 2018), density of neighborhoods (Liao et al., 2018; Schreuer et al., 2019), destination distance and type (Florindo et al., 2019), land use diversity (Schreuer et al., 2019) and access to convenient public transportation system (Liao et al., 2018). Ewing and Cervero (2010) summarized the urban aspects that influence active transport into five ‘D’ variables: density (e.g. residential density), diversity (e.g. land-use mix), design (e.g. aesthetics), destination accessibility and distance to transit.

Active transportation has been related with reduced risk of chronic conditions, premature death, and depressive symptoms (Galper et al., 2006; Kelly et al., 2018; Robertson et al., 2012; Warburton et al., 2006), while sedentary lifestyles are associated with NCDs, depression and cancer (Lee et al., 2012). Despite active transportation having demonstrated real health impact implications in higher income countries, little research has examined these correlations in lower and middle-income countries. ...

Language: en