Search

Background There is increased interest in the effectiveness and cobenefits of measures to promote walking and cycling, including health gains from increased physical activity and reductions in fossil fuel use and vehicle emissions. This paper analyses the changes in walking and cycling in two New Zealand cities that accompanied public investment in infrastructure married with programmes to encourage active travel. Method Using a quasi-experimental two-group pre-post study design, we estimated changes in travel behaviour from baseline in 2011 to mid-programme in 2012, and postprogramme in 2013. The intervention and control cities were matched in terms of sociodemographic variables and baseline levels of walking and cycling. A face-to-face survey obtained information on walking and cycling. We also drew from the New Zealand Travel Survey, a national ongoing survey of travel behaviour, which was conducted in the study areas. Estimates from the two surveys were combined using meta-analysis techniques. Results The trips and physical activity were evaluated. Relative to the control cities, the odds of trips being by active modes (walking or cycling) increased by 37% (95% CI 8% to 73%) in the intervention cities between baseline and postintervention. The net proportion of trips made by active modes increased by about 30%. In terms of physical activity levels, there was little evidence of an overall change. Discussion Comparing the intervention cities with the matched controls, we found substantial changes in walking and cycling, and conclude that the improvements in infrastructure and associated programmes appear to have successfully arrested the general decline in active mode use evident in recent years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Policy advisers are seeking robust evidence on the effectiveness of measures, such as promoting walking and cycling, that potentially offer multiple benefits, including enhanced health through physical activity, alongside reductions in energy use, traffic congestion and carbon emissions. This paper outlines the ‘ACTIVE’ study, designed to test whether the Model Communities Programme in two New Zealand cities is increasing walking and cycling. The intervention consists of the introduction of cycle and walkway infrastructure, along with measures to encourage active travel. This paper focuses on the rationale for our chosen study design and methods. Method: The study design is multi-level and quasi-experimental, with two intervention and two control cities. Baseline measures were taken in 2011 and follow-up measures in 2012 and 2013. Our face-to-face surveys measured walking and cycling, but also awareness, attitudes and habits. We measured explanatory and confounding factors for mode choice, including socio-demographic and well-being variables. Data collected from the same households on either two or three occasions will be analysed using multi-level models that take account of clustering at the household and individual levels. A cost-benefit analysis will also be undertaken, using our estimates of carbon savings from mode shifts. The matching of the intervention and control cities was quite close in terms of socio-demographic variables, including ethnicity, and baseline levels of walking and cycling. Discussion: This multidisciplinary study provides a strong design for evaluating an intervention to increase walking and cycling in a developed country with relatively low baseline levels of active travel. Its strengths include the use of data from control cities as well as intervention cities, an extended evaluation period with a reasonable response rate from a random community survey and the availability of instrumental variables for sensitivity analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The proportion of trips involving walking or cycling (active travel) in New Zealand is diminishing. In two small provincial cities, funding was provided to install walking and cycling infrastructure and run programs to promote and normalise active travel. We aimed to analyse effects five years after baseline along with changes in active travel for Māori and people on lower incomes. A total of 2,500 people were interviewed in person before the start of the intervention and four times subsequently. Some were part of a cohort that was surveyed more than once. Two matched control cities that did not receive the funding provided a comparison group. The program was associated with sustained increases in active travel rates in the intervention cities compared to the controls. Māori increased active travel rates considerably more than non-Māori, as did members of households with below median income. The program was successful in addressing some inequities within a car-dominated transport system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]