Physical activity-related health and economic benefits of building walkable neighbourhoods: a modelled comparison between brownfield and greenfield developments

Abstract

Background A consensus is emerging in the literature that urban form can impact health by either facilitating or deterring physical activity (PA). However, there is a lack of evidence measuring population health and the economic benefits relating to alternative urban forms. We examined the issue of housing people within two distinct types of urban development forms: a medium-density brownfield development in an established area with existing amenities (e.g. daily living destinations, transit), and a low-density suburban greenfield development. We predicted the health and economic benefits of a brownfield development compared with a greenfield development through their influence on PA. Methods We combined a new Walkability Planning Support System (Walkability PSS) with a quantitative health impact assessment model. We used the Walkability PSS to estimate the probability of residents’ transport walking, based on their exposure to urban form in the brownfield and greenfield developments. We developed the underlying algorithms of the Walkability PSS using multi-level multivariate logistic regression analysis based on self-reported data for transport walking from the Victorian Integrated Survey of Transport and Activity 2009–10 and objectively measured urban form in the developments. We derived the difference in transport walking minutes per week based on the probability of transport walking in each of the developments and the average transport walking time per week among those who reported any transport walking. We then used the well-established method of the proportional multi-cohort multi-state life table model to translate the difference in transport walking minutes per week into health and economic benefits. Results If adult residents living in the greenfield neighbourhood were instead exposed to the urban development form observed in a brownfield neighbourhood, the incidence and mortality of physical inactivity-related chronic diseases would decrease. Over the life course of the exposed population (21,000), we estimated 1600 health-adjusted life years gained and economic benefits of A$94 million. Discussion Our findings indicate that planning policies that create walkable neighbourhoods with access to shops, services and public transport will lead to substantial health and economic benefits associated with reduced incidence of physical inactivity related diseases and premature death. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12966-019-0775-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

How Can the Lived Environment Support Healthy Ageing? A Spatial Indicators Framework for the Assessment of Age-Friendly Communities

“…The priority indicators identified for this domain are walkability for transport [ 38 , 39 ] and access to public open space within 400 m [ 22 ]. These indicators are directly related to walking [ 40 , 41 , 42 ], specifically in older people [ 43 ], and associated with physical health benefits [ 44 ] and mental health benefits [ 45 ].…”

Community gardens as third places

“…The urban form affects population health and this thesis looks at the social and physical health impacts of community gardens which are third places. Particular to this thesis, facilities which attract visitors increase physical activity, encouraging walking or cycling, and have beneficial effects on the health of local people (Zapata-Diomedi, et al, 2019). Thompson and Maggin (2012, p. 398) discuss the lack of support and recognition of the health and social benefits of community gardens by decision makers and suggest that planners have a role in promoting the benefits of community gardens to local councils and providing facilities "to promote health and wellbeing".…”

“…Third places are accessible by walking and open at times which suit the visitors, they are places where neighbourhood faces become familiar . In terms of health and wellbeing, the number of people who walk somewhere is affected by the amenity, density and the variety of destinations, therefore providing places which are worth visiting on a walk has implications for improving the wellbeing of the neighbourhood (Zapata-Diomedi, et al, 2019). Zapata-Diomedi et al (2019) note that in Australia there is increasing attention being paid to designing communities which are walkable, sustainable and encourage physical activity.…”

Could smart research ensure healthy people in disrupted cities?

“…Interest is growing in simulating the health, environmental and economic effects of changes in active travel ( Brown et al, 2016 ; Chapman et al, 2018 ; Mueller et al, 2015 ). Research ranges from assessing hypothetical scenarios of shifts from motorized to active modes (such as a government's active-travel aspirational targets) ( Zapata-Diomedi et al, 2017 ), active transport interventions (bike-sharing scheme, urban developments) ( Mueller et al, 2020 ; Woodcock et al, 2014 ; Zapata-Diomedi et al, 2019 ) and active transport policies ( Macmillan et al, 2014 ). The World Health Organization developed a tool to measure the potential consequences of active-transport interventions on walking and cycling–related mortality and the environment ( https://www.heatwalkingcycling.org/#homepage ).…”