Walkability in less advantaged areas

The following is excerpted from our Healthy Active by Design Supporting Module: Walkability in Less Advantaged Areas. Full references are provided in the report. 

 

Neighbourhood design quality can vary with area socioeconomic advantage. More advantaged areas often have better design and residents having better health, while residents of socioeconomically disadvantaged areas may be exposed to lower quality neighbourhood design, be less active, and have poorer health outcomes.  

 

People living in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas tend to encounter less optimal design features compared with residents of more advantaged neighbourhoods, including: 

• smaller amounts of public open space, greater distance from place of residence to public open space, and public open space of lower quality, with fewer amenities and/or features; 
• fewer leisure and recreational facilities within easily accessible distances, and fewer places offering employment and education opportunities locally, requiring further travel distances to access these opportunities; 
• being under-served by urban infrastructure such as community facilities; 
• lower dwelling density and quality housing; 
• poorer walkability, including less street connectivity, residential density, land use mix and presence and/or quality of pedestrian infrastructure; 
• increased exposure to high volumes of traffic, lower traffic safety and higher road traffic injuries, and poorer traffic- and industrial-related air quality; 
• poorer streetscape aesthetics and lower perceived safety, with greater perceived fear and/or risk of being a victim of crime; 
• a locational disadvantage being further from the city centre and related resources, with less advantaged areas typically located from middle suburbia to areas out on the urban fringe, and transport options often being limited and support services more difficult to access; and 
• greater access to, and density of, unhealthy food outlets (particularly around schools), and advertisements for unhealthy food items. 

 

Australian adults living in areas of lowest socioeconomic advantage... have been identified as being at the highest risk of adverse health outcomes, including cardiovascular disease with a 56% higher risk of cardiovascular disease compared to residents in the most advantaged areas: 

• males aged 25 and over living in the lowest socioeconomic areas of Australia had a heart attack rate 1.55 times higher, and cardiovascular disease death rate 1.52 times higher, as males in the highest socioeconomic areas; and 
• females in this age group had a heart attack rate 1.76 times higher, and cardiovascular disease death rate 1.33 times higher, as those females living in areas with high socioeconomic advantage. 

 

Reducing socioeconomic inequities in physical activity has the potential to reap significant health benefits. While such a reduction necessitates action at all levels, the largest and most sustained and equitable impact can occur at the neighbourhood level through the local built and social environment. Healthy neighbourhood design could therefore greatly benefit our most vulnerable people. 

 

The approach to addressing physical activity levels in areas of low socioeconomic advantage will be most effective and meaningful when it is tailored to the specific needs of the community and its residents. 

 

Built environment interventions to address walkability and enhance physical activity in areas of low socioeconomic advantage (which can also impact the social environment of the area) could include: 

• investing in pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, including building and repairing footpaths (and ensuring their continuity), crosswalks, pedestrian bridges, and ramps to make walking and cycling more accessible (most promising in combination) 
• enhancing safety measures, such as improving street lighting, traffic calming measures and crime prevention strategies, including neighbourhood surveillance144 and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design 
• creating (or renovating) green spaces and recreational facilities including parks, trails, playgrounds, sports fields, community gardens, and other green spaces that enhance neighbourhood connectivity and provide residents with safe and accessible space for physical activity. 

 

Mobilising communities in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas 

While there can be no universal approach to assisting communities of low socioeconomic advantage to take ownership and control of neighbourhood development that positively impacts the community’s health, it may often assist to: understand local social issues, build social capital, make everyday engagement easy/easier, be aware that trust in local government and planners may be lacking, and seek out community leaders to facilitate engagement and build trust. 

 

We thank authors Allison Wood, Thomas Vasey and Dr Suzanne Carroll and the Health Research Institute, University of Canberra for this work, as well as community participants in each of the three participating council areas: George Town Tasmania; City of Stirling WA and Fairfield City Council NSW. 

Access our supporting module 'Walkability in areas of less advantage":

www.healthyactivebydesign.com.au/walkability-in-less-advantaged-areas