Abstract
Objective
Climatic conditions may enable or deter active school transportation in many North American cities, but the topic remains largely overlooked in the existing literature. This study explores the effect of seasonal climate (i.e., fall versus winter) and weekly weather conditions (i.e., temperature, precipitation) on active travelling to school across different built and policy environments.
Methods
Home-to-school trips by 11–12-year-old children in the City of Toronto were examined using data from the 2006 Transportation Tomorrow Survey. Binomial logistic regressions were estimated to explore the correlates of the choice of active (i.e., walking) versus non-active (i.e., private automobile, transit and school bus) mode for school trips.
Results
Climate and weather-related variables were not associated with choice of school travel mode. Children living within the sidewalk snow-plough zone (i.e., in the inner-suburban neighbourhoods) were less likely to walk to school than children living outside of the zone (i.e., in the inner-city neighbourhoods).
Conclusion
Given that seasonality and short-term weather conditions appear not to limit active school transportation in general, built environment interventions designed to facilitate active travel could have benefits that spill over across the entire year rather than being limited to a particular season. Educational campaigns with strategies for making the trip fun and ensuring that the appropriate clothing choices are made are also warranted in complementing built environment modifications.
Key words: Climate, weather, school travel, walking, built environment
Mots clés: climat, temps, transport scolaire, marche, milieu bâti
Résumé
Objectif
Les conditions climatiques pourraient favoriser ou entraver le transport scolaire actif dans de nombreuses villes d’Amérique du Nord, mais ce sujet est en grande partie inexploré dans la recherche existante. Notre étude porte sur l’effet du climat saisonnier (p. ex., automnal ou hivernal) et des conditions atmosphériques hebdomadaires (température, précipitations) sur le transport scolaire actif dans différents milieux bâtis et environnements politiques.
Méthode
Nous avons examiné les trajets de la maison à l’école d’enfants de 11 et 12 ans vivant à Toronto à l’aide des données du Sondage pour le système de transports de demain de 2006. Des régressions logistiques binomiales ont été estimées pour explorer les corrélats du choix d’un mode de transport actif (comme la marche) ou non actif (voiture privée, transports en commun, autobus scolaire) pour se rendre à l’école.
Résultats
Les variables liées au climat et à la météo n’étaient pas associées au choix du mode de transport scolaire. Les enfants vivant à l’intérieur de la zone de déneigement des trottoirs (c.-à-d. dans les quartiers de la proche banlieue) étaient moins susceptibles de se rendre à l’école en marchant que les enfants vivant hors de cette zone (c.-à-d. dans les quartiers du centre-ville).
Conclusion
Étant donné que les cycles saisonniers et les conditions atmosphériques de courte durée ne semblent pas limiter le transport scolaire actif en général, les interventions sur le milieu bâti conçues pour faciliter les déplacements actifs pourraient avoir des répercussions positives toute l’année plutôt que de se limiter à une saison particulière. On devrait aussi envisager, pour compléter des modifications au milieu bâti, des campagnes de sensibilisation comportant des stratégies pour rendre le trajet amusant et pour aider les enfants à choisir des vêtements appropriés.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements: This research was funded by the Built Environment, Obesity and Health Strategic Initiative of the Heart and Stroke Foundation and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The first author wishes to acknowledge support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, Canada
Conflict of Interest: None to declare
References
- 1.Faulkner GEJ, Buliung RN, Flora PK, Fusco C. Active school transport, physical activity levels and body weight of children and youth: A systematic review. Prev Med. 2009;48(1):3–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.10.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Stewart O. Findings from research on active transportation to school and implications for Safe Routes to School programs. J Planning Literature. 2011;26(2):127–50. doi: 10.1177/0885412210385911. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 3.McDonald NC. Children’s mode choice for the school trip: The role of distance and school location in walking to school. Transportation. 2008;35(1):23–35. doi: 10.1007/s11116-007-9135-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 4.McMillan TE. The relative influence of urban form on a child’s travel mode to school. Transportation Research Part A. 2007;41(1):69–79. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Mitra R, Buliung RN, Roorda MJ. Built environment and school travel mode choice in Toronto, Canada. Transportation Research Record. 2010;2156:150–59. doi: 10.3141/2156-17. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Panter JR, Jones AP, van Sluijs EMF, Griffin SJ. Neighborhood, route, and school environments and children’s active commuting. Am J Prev Med. 2010;38(3):268–78. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.10.040. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Martin S, Carlson S. Barriers to children walking to or from school: United States, 2004. MMWR. 2005;54(38):949–52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Buliung R, Faulkner GEJ, Beesley T, Kennedy J. School travel planning: Mobilizing school and community resources to encourage active school transportation. J School Health. 2011;81:704–12. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2011.00647.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Sirard JR, Ainsworth BE, McIver KL, Pate RR. Prevalence of active commuting at urban and suburban elementary schools in Columbia, SC. Am J Public Health. 2005;95(2):236–37. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2003.034355. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Robertson-Wilson JE, Leatherdale ST, Wong SL. Social-ecological correlates of active commuting to school among high school students. J Adolesc Health. 2008;42(5):486–95. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.10.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Borrestad LAB, Andersen LB, Bere E. Seasonal and socio-demographic determinants of school commuting. Prev Med. 2011;52:133–35. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.12.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Statistics Canada. Population and Dwelling Counts, for Canada, Provinces and Territories, and Census Divisions, 2006 and 2001 Censuses–100% Data. 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 13.McKnight TL, Hess D. Physical Geography: A Landscape Appreciation. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2002. pp. 198–239. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Environment Canada. National Climate Data and Information Archive. 2011. [Google Scholar]
- 15.City of Toronto. Snow–City’s First Snow Plan 2000. 2011. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Data Management Group. Transportation Tomorrow Survey. 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Statistics Canada. Low income cut-offs for 2006 and low income measures for 2005. 2010. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Nelson NM, Foley E, O’Gorman DJ, Moyna NM, Woods CB. Active commuting to school: How far is too far? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008;5:1. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-5-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Mitra R, Buliung RN. Built environment correlates of active school transportation: Neighborhood and the modifiable areal unit problem. J Transport Geography. 2012;20:51–61. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.07.009. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Wong B, Faulkner GEJ, Buliung RN. GIS measured environmental correlates of active school transport: A systematic review of 14 studies. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:39. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Faulkner GEJ, Richichi V, Buliung R, Fusco C, Moola F. What’s “Quickest and Easiest?”: Parental decision making about school trip mode. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010;7:62. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-7-62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Salmon J, Owen N, Crawford D, Bauman A, Sallis JF. Physical activity and sedentary behaviour: A population-based study of barriers, enjoyment, and preference. Health Psychol. 2003;22(2):178–88. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.22.2.178. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Humpel N, Owen N, Iverson D, Leslie E, Bauman A. Perceived environment attributes, residential location, and walking for particular purposes. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26(2):119–25. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2003.10.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.McDonald NC, Aalborg AE. Why parents drive children to school: Implications for safe routes to school programs. J Am Planning Assoc. 2009;75(3):331–42. doi: 10.1080/01944360902988794. [DOI] [Google Scholar]