Socioeconomic inequalities in distance to and participation in a community-based running and walking activity: A longitudinal ecological study of parkrun 2010 to 2019

Abstract

Objectives To conduct a longitudinal ecological analysis of the distance to and participation in free weekly outdoor physical activity events ( parkrun ) in England from 2010 to 2019, and related socioeconomic and ethnic inequalities, to inform policies to support participation in physically active community events. Methods We calculate distance to the nearest parkrun event for each English Lower Layer Super Output Area (LSOA) each month from January 2010 to December 2019. We then report the trends in distance to and participation in parkrun by Index of Multiple Deprivation quintile. We also report trends in the Relative Index of Inequality (RII) by deprivation for participation and distance to nearest event. We go on to investigate trends in LSOA level determinants (e.g. deprivation and ethnic density) of parkrun participation between 2010 and 2019, using multivariable Poisson regression models. Results Mean distance to the nearest parkrun event decreased from 34.1 km in 2010, to 4.6 km in 2019. Throughout the period, parkrun events tended to be situated closer to deprived areas compared to less deprived areas. Participation rates increased superlinearly (greater than linear increase) from 2010 to 2013 before slowing to linear growth. Participation over the period exhibits a clear socioeconomic gradient, with people from deprived areas having consistently lower participation rates over the period. parkrun participation rates became more equal between 2010 and 2013 (RII improved from 189 to 39), before stabilising at an RII between 32.9 and 39.6 from 2014 to 2019. The results of the Poisson regression model validate this finding; the coefficients on IMD score initially increased from −0.050 in 2010 to −0.038 in 2013, and then remained relatively stable to 2019 (−0.035). Conclusions Over the past 10 years, geodesic distance to the nearest parkrun decreased from a mean of 34 km to 5 km. In 2010, there was equality between the least and most deprived areas but by 2017 the distance of the most deprived areas was 29% that of the least deprived. Participation was shown to have increased over the past 10 years which can be split into two distinct phases: from 2010 to 2013 participation increased super-linearly and inequality in participation fell dramatically; from 2013 to 2019 participation increased linearly, and inequality in participation remained stable. Despite parkrun 's ambitions of creating inclusive events and engaging with deprived communities, the socioeconomic gradient in participation rates remained high and stable since 2013. Gaining a better understanding of the reasons why parkrun grew so quickly may be useful for other physical activi...

Refining index to measure physical activity inequality: which group of the population is the most vulnerable?

“…Individuals who had no exposure to the various PA awareness campaigns were also among the more vulnerable groups (rank 9). These results are consistent with previous studies, that PA participation is determined by access to PA facilities and health-related information [ 3 , 17 ]. Further, half of sample (52.8%) had never been exposed to any PA awareness campaigns.…”

“…Urban-rural and regional disparities in PA have been documented worldwide. With regard to exposure to health promotion initiatives and access to PA amenities, urban dwellers and those who reside in the more developed regions of the world accumulated more PA minutes than their rural counterparts [1,6,[16][17][18]. However, this study found PA inequality in all regions of Thailand, with the largest gaps in Bangkok.…”

“…Socio-economic inequality in PA also has been frequently reported. Individuals from lower SES (i.e., lower level of education) were more likely to engage in workrelated PA and have less opportunity for recreational PA compared to their higher-SES counterparts [16][17][18]. Regional disparities are reflected by a higher level of inactivity among Latin American, Central Asian, and northern-hemisphere countries [1].…”

Geographies of running cultures and practices

“…This includes recurrent ‘parkruns’ in local parks on Saturday mornings across the globe. Studies in the UK and South Africa show parkrun's inclusive, non‐competitive nature and how running with others creates casual sociability and a local sense of place (de Vries et al., 2022; Hindley, 2020; Smith et al., 2021). This focus on sociability resonates with Larsen and Bærenholdt (2019) and Vink and Varró's (2021) studies of smaller running events in Denmark and the Netherlands.…”

Exploring the benefits of participation in community-based running and walking events: a cross-sectional survey of parkrun participants

“…Participation in parkrun is free: people register online and receive a unique 'barcode' containing their parkrun ID number that they take to any event across the world that is scanned and used to log attendance and completion time. An increasing proportion of events have been established in more socioeconomically disadvantaged areas in the UK, with higher population density resulting in better geographical access to events for those living in these areas [12,13]. Inequalities in registration and participation persist despite parkruns being located closer to more socioeconomically disadvantaged areas [12,14] with 13.1% of those participating at least once live in the most socioeconomically deprived areas of the UK (see Table 1).…”