IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/fe785_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are Cycling and Walking Good for All? Tracking Differences in Associations among Active Travel, Socioeconomics, Gentrification, and Self-reported Health

Author

Listed:
  • Barajas, Jesus
  • Braun, Lindsay M.

Abstract

While the health benefits of cycling and walking have been well established, questions remain about whether these benefits hold in varying socioeconomic contexts, including across demographic groups and in the context of neighborhood change. This study examines this relationship, identifying associations between cycling or walking and self-reported health, whether socioeconomic status moderates these associations, and whether gentrification influences the potential moderating effects. This study uses the 2017 National Household Travel Survey, subset to adults who lived in central cities (n = 88,698). Weighted ordered logistic regression models were fit to estimate self-reported health status separately for cycling and walking. Gentrification was measured using an indicator based on previous research using US Census data. People who had cycled in the past week and each additional walking trip were associated with higher odds of reporting better health. Socioeconomic status moderated the positive associations between active transportation and health in a few key cases. Cycling was not as strongly associated with health for Black cyclists or employed cyclists, while women had smaller benefits from each additional walking trip compared to men. Gentrification was an insignificant moderating factor in most cases. Findings suggest planning efforts that continue to support programs that promote cycling and walking are crucial tools in the public health toolbox. The health gains from active transportation might be experienced in a variety of neighborhood contexts. Nevertheless, infrastructure investments and policy must be attentive to inequities across neighborhoods.

Suggested Citation

  • Barajas, Jesus & Braun, Lindsay M., 2020. "Are Cycling and Walking Good for All? Tracking Differences in Associations among Active Travel, Socioeconomics, Gentrification, and Self-reported Health," SocArXiv fe785_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:fe785_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/fe785_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5f31a9d547928800fb85a188/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/fe785_v1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Welch, Timothy F. & Gehrke, Steven R. & Wang, Fangru, 2016. "Long-term impact of network access to bike facilities and public transit stations on housing sales prices in Portland, Oregon," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 264-272.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lindsey Conrow & Siân Mooney & Elizabeth A Wentz, 2021. "The association between residential housing prices, bicycle infrastructure and ridership volumes," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(4), pages 787-808, March.
    2. Julie Bulteau & Thierry Feuillet & Rémy Le Boennec, 2018. "Spatial Heterogeneity of Sustainable Transportation Offer Values: A Comparative Analysis of Nantes Urban and Periurban/Rural Areas (France)," Post-Print hal-04362203, HAL.
    3. Barajas, Jesus & Braun, Lindsay M., 2020. "Are Cycling and Walking Good for All? Tracking Differences in Associations among Active Travel, Socioeconomics, Gentrification, and Self-reported Health," SocArXiv fe785, Center for Open Science.
    4. Timothy F Welch & Steven R Gehrke & Steven Farber, 2018. "Rail station access and housing market resilience: Case studies of Atlanta, Baltimore and Portland," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(16), pages 3615-3630, December.
    5. Polyzois KANELLEAS & Charalambos KYRIAKIDIS & Filippos ILIADIS & Anastasia TSOLAKI, 2018. "Train station planning and house prices interaction in Athens via hedonic modeling and spatial analysis," Region et Developpement, Region et Developpement, LEAD, Universite du Sud - Toulon Var, vol. 48, pages 41-51.
    6. Ke, Yue & Gkritza, Konstantina, 2019. "Light rail transit and housing markets in Charlotte-Mecklenburg County, North Carolina: Announcement and operations effects using quasi-experimental methods," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 212-220.
    7. Joanna Jaroszewicz & Hubert Horynek, 2024. "Aggregated Housing Price Predictions with No Information About Structural Attributes—Hedonic Models: Linear Regression and a Machine Learning Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-29, November.
    8. Wang, Lisha & Miwa, Tomio & Jiang, Meilan & Morikawa, Takayuki, 2021. "Heterogeneous residential distribution changes and spillover effects by railway projects: The case study of Nagoya, Japan," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 145-163.
    9. Zimny-Schmitt, Daniel & Goetz, Andrew R., 2020. "An investigation of the performance of urban rail transit systems on the corridor level: A comparative analysis in the American west," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    10. Talat Munshi, 2020. "Accessibility, Infrastructure Provision and Residential Land Value: Modelling the Relation Using Geographic Weighted Regression in the City of Rajkot, India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:fe785_v1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.