Spring 2010

The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity

Raymond Chetti
School of Architecture and Planning
University at Buffalo

Abstract

Recent studies have proven that poor urban form fosters sedentary, inactive
lifestyles that discourage routine physical activity, and is associated with higher
rates of overweight and obesity. In this paper, an analysis was performed on the
correlation between characteristics of urban form such as residential density and
land use mix to determine their influence on the percentage of adults whom
achieve the Surgeon General’s recommended levels of moderate intensity physical
activity. A correlation analysis shows that physical activity has a stronger
correlation with land use mix of a Metropolitan Statistical Area (r = .42) compared
to residential density (r = .13). There is a positive correlation between rates of
population in a metro area and the built form of the metro area. These results
support the need for policies that promote increased densities and land use mix as
a means to promote active and healthier lifestyles that include walking, cycling, and
taking public transportation.

Keywords: built environment, urban form, sprawl, public health, physical activity,
obesity epidemic, land use, residential density
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 2

Introduction

The prevalence of the childhood obesity epidemic has grown to an alarming

rate: approximately one out of every three American children are obese (BMI
≥ 95th percentile) (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2010). Obese children
are susceptible to increased risks for heart disease, diabetes, depression,
social isolation, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, high cholesterol,
orthopedic problems and the destruction of weight-bearing joints (ICF
International, 2010). Even though some may think children can grow out of
their “obese” phase, a study by Gunnell et.al (1998) found that obese
children are at higher risk for increased mortality risk during their adult lives;
for this reason, the prevention of childhood obesity is critical in preventing
adult diseases that are associated with obesity. The National Institute of
Diabetes, Digestive, and Kidney Diseases (2007) states, “[individuals] who
are obese have a 10- to 50-percent increased risk of death from all causes,
compared with healthy weight individuals (BMI 18.5-24.9). Obesity is
associated with about 112,000 excess deaths per year in the U.S. population
relative to healthy weight individuals.” Another study funded by the Medical
Research Council, the British Heart Foundation and Cancer Research UK
found that moderately obese individuals’ (BMI 30 to 35) lives are shortened
by three years and by about 10 for the seriously obese (BMI 40 to 50)
(Boseley, 2009).

Aside from the direct negative health effects, childhood obesity also has
significant economic impacts. The Alliance for a Healthier Generation (2010)
estimates that obesity related illnesses constitute about 9% of the total
medical costs of an average American family. About $61 billion dollars per
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 3

year (nationally) is spent directly on medical procedures treating obesity-

related diseases while about $56 billion dollars per year is lost as an indirect
cost of obesity (such as missed work days and future earnings lost). Over 1.6
million children were unable to get the medical care they needed while 3
million children had to wait for medical care because their parents hard to
worry about the rising costs of health care.

In recent years, the impact of poor environmental design has gained the
attention of policy makers, urban planners, and public health officials. Recent
studies have proven that sprawling built form fosters sedentary, inactive
lifestyles that discourage routine physical activity, and is associated with
higher rates of overweight and obesity among adults that live in these
settings (Frumkin, 2002; Smart Growth America 2003). Smart Growth
America (2003) found that adults living in counties marked by sprawling
development are more likely to walk less and weigh more than people who
live in less sprawling counties. Smart Growth America also noted that people
who lived in more sprawling counties are more likely to suffer from chronic
diseases and hypertension.

A similar influence of the build form is also reported on children. Ewing et al.
(2006) found that the likelihood of U.S. adolescents (aged 12-17 years) being
overweight or at risk of being overweight is associated with the degree of
sprawl within their home counties. Counties where the build form is
characterized by low residential densities, single uses, and poor street
accessibility – common features in a sprawling built environment – promote
sedentary, inactive lifestyles while compact built form with higher densities,
mixed land uses, and greater street accessibilities encourage higher levels of
physical activity (through walking) and decrease the likelihood of obesity or
overweight among residents.
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 4

In response to the growing recognition of the role of the built environment on

public health, this paper examines the degree to which urban form
influences physical activity among children in the United States.

About the Childhood Obesity Epidemic

American children of the 21st century are facing an obesity crisis. The
National Health and Nurtitional Examination Survey data suggests that one
out of every three American children are obese (BMI ≥ 95th percentile)
(Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2010). Furthermore, minorities (blacks
and Hispanics) are more susceptible to being overweight or obese since
survey data concluded that overweight or obesity prevalence is 8.9
percentage points higher among Hispanic children ages 2 to 19 and 6.6
percentage points higher for non-Hispanic Black children than among the
non-Hispanic White population.

Even though the percentage of children who were obese or overweight

dropped slightly from 31.9% in 2003-2006 to 31.7% in 2007-2008 (Robert
Wood Johnson Foundation, 2010), the obesity epidemic remains a major
health problem that needs to be addressed.

A growing body of evidence points to the growing epidemic of childhood

obesity (Gunnell et al. 1998, Boseley 2009, ICF International 2010, the
National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive, and Kidney Diseases 2007, the
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation for the United States
Department of Health and Human Services 2010, and the Alliance for a
Healthier Generation 2010. Gunnell et al. (1998) found that being overweight
or obese in childhood is associated with increased mortality risk later in life.
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 5

The authors suggest that strategies aimed at reducing weight in childhood

may positively affect ischemic heart disease – heart failure due to coronary
artery disease, morbidity, and mortality. A report by ICF International (2010)
also notes that that “overweight preschool children are already suffering
from precursors of negative health consequences that are typically seen only
in adults, including: depression and social isolation, type 2 diabetes,
cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and orthopedic
problems and destruction of weight-bearing joints.” These studies suggest
that childhood obesity is a growing health problem that needs to be resolved
before it leads to complicated future, adult related health problems which
are associated with an increased mortality risk.

Obesity can be addressed in a variety of settings. ICF International’s (2010)

points to four areas where obesity prevention and intervention are possible:
child care settings, health care provider offices and settings, neighborhoods
and communities, and homes. The report calls on community planners to
fight poor urban development and sprawl by incorporating designs that
promote walking and other active modes of transportation that are not
associated with single occupancy vehicle (SOV) usage. The report concludes
that by changing the built environment to promote walkable neighborhoods,
it might be possible to promote healthier, more active lifestyles.

The National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive, and Kidney Diseases (2007)

issued a publication which answered a number of questions related to the
statistics of obesity (examples include: economics of obesity ($117 billion
total on U.S. health expenditures), benefits of physical activity, how many
deaths are associated with obesity, and more), risk factors, and problems
with being overweight and obese. This report includes a BMI chart illustrating
body weight and height while stating the appropriate BMI for the
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 6

corresponding weight and height. This is helpful in determining whether or

not an individual may have the appropriate BMI. The statistics of this report
are vital in providing readers a basic foundation about the overweight and
obesity epidemic which the ICFI report does, while expanding upon it.

Similar to both of the preceding reports discussed, The Assistant Secretary

for Planning and Evaluation for the United States Department of Health and
Human Services (2010) also establishes common facts, statistics, and history
about the childhood obesity epidemic. While discussing the prevalence of the
childhood obesity epidemic, this report also mentioned related issues to the
childhood obesity epidemic such as children’s nutrition and eating habits,
physical inactivity and sedentary behaviors, the association between the
built environment and physical inactivity, socio-economic status and
race/ethnicity’s impact on being obese, parental influences, genetics, and
advertising and marketing campaigns.

The Assistant Secretary’s report notes that even though less research has
been done on the relationship between the physical environment and
physical activity for children than adults, the findings for children appear to
be consistent with the adult population. In other words, even though most
studies on the built environment’s influence on physical activity and obesity
are primarily studied on adults, the results of the built environment’s
influence appears to be the same for children as well. For example, if a study
concluded that adults who live in more walkable neighborhoods get more
physical activity and weigh less, that finding would hold true for children too.
The Assistant Secretary’s report also discussed how sprawl and suburban
neighborhoods were areas that discouraged and prevented children and
adults from walking and bicycling; these environments typically forced their
residents to depend on their personal automobiles as their primary mode of
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 7

travel and were associated with higher levels of body mass index (BMI) and
lower levels of physical activity.

To battle the childhood obesity epidemic, several philanthropic efforts have

emerged around the country. the American Heart Association and the
William J. Clinton Foundation established the Alliance for a Healthier
Generation (2010). Aside from an increased risk for mortality and the health
problems associated with childhood obesity, the purpose of this alliance is to
highlight the direct and indirect economic costs associated with obesity and
its related illnesses since the money used for treating obesity related
illnesses could be used for housing and other household expenses.

Built form and its Impact on Physical Activity and Obesity among
Children: A literature review

The negative effects of poor built form have been widely discussed in the
literature. For example, sprawling built form is reported to be negatively
associated with quality of life, result in depletion of natural resources and
energy, the destruction of rural and natural areas, and the depletion of our
ozone layer (European Environment Agency, 2006). Among these negative
impacts, none influence us more directly than the impact of poor built form
on our individual, personal health as well as the health of our children.
According to researchers, particular features of the built form – especially
those characterized by sprawl - encourage dependency on the automobile
and reduce people’s ability to use active modes of transportation such as
walking and bicycling (Lopez 2004, Frumkin 2002; Ewing et al. 2006, Frank
et al 2004). Lopez (2004) performed a multilevel analysis (cross-sectional
study) to assess urban sprawl and obesity by gathering 2000 U.S. Census
data and individual-level data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 8

System and found that after controlling for gender, age, race/ethnicity,
income, and education, for each 1-point increase in his urban sprawl index
(as urban areas tended to be more sprawlful), the risk for being overweight
increased by .2% and the risk for being obese increased by .5%. Lopez
concluded that while the obesity epidemic has many causes, there is an
association between urban sprawl and obesity. Overall, sprawling built form
is associated with greater rates of sedentary lifestyles (i.e. little or no
physical activity) and higher degree of obesity among the population
(Frumkin 2002).

Of course, in addition to promoting sedentary lifestyles, a greater reliance on

the automobile in such communities is also associated with increased air
pollution, automobile crashes, pedestrian fatalities, decreased water quantity
and quality, and increased road rage and social isolation – factors that are
clearly important, but not central to this paper.

Ewing et al. (2006) conducted a cross-sectional analysis of data from the

1997 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth and found that the likelihood of
U.S. adolescents (aged 12-17 years) being overweight (≥85th percentile) was
associated with county sprawl. In another cross-sectional analysis, after
controlling for socio-demographic and behavioral issues, the likelihood of
young adults (aged 18-23 years), being obese was also associated with
county sprawl. The study concluded that sprawl is associated with being
overweight among U.S. youth while also finding that the relationships
discovered were comparable to those previously reported by adults. While
cross-sectional analysis proved that sprawl is associated with being
overweight, the study also concluded that longitudinal analysis did not show
any relationship between sprawl and being overweight. The authors are
unsure why a longitudinal approach gave different results but highlight how
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 9

sample sizes, latent effects, and confounders may be a few contributing

factors.

In addition to Lopez and Ewing et al., both studies done by Frank et al. (2004
and 2005), concluded that living in a less sprawling, more walkable
neighborhood was associated with lower levels of BMI and higher levels of
walking. Frank et al. (2004) measured the relationship between the built
environment with each participant’s self-reported travel patterns (walking
and time in a car), body mass index (BMI), and obesity rates and found that
land-use mix had the strongest association with obesity. The researchers
also found that each additional hour spent in a car per day was associated
with a 6% increase in the likelihood of being obese while each additional
kilometer walked per day was associated with a 4.8% reduction in the
likelihood of being obese. Frank et al. (2004) concluded that measures of the
built environment and travel patterns are important predictors of obesity
across gender and ethnicity while relationships among the built environment,
travel patterns, and weight may differ across gender and ethnicity. The 2004
study also concluded that strategies to increase land-use mix and create
walkable neighborhoods can serve as an effective health intervention for a
healthier lifestyle.

Similarly Frank et al. (2005) found that land-use mix, residential density, and
intersection density were positively related with the number of minutes of
moderate physical activity per day, a person was able to achieve. According
to their study, 37% of individuals in the highest walkability index quartile
(less sprawling) met the ≥30 minutes of recommended physical activity per
day compared to only 18% of individuals who lived in more sprawling
neighborhoods. Individuals in the highest walkability quartile were 2.4 times
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 10

likely than those in more sprawling neighborhoods to achieve the Surgeon

General’s recommended ≥30 minutes of physical activity.

Despite the findings and conclusions associating sprawl to obesity, a study

by Eid et al (2008) questioned whether or not there was a real relationship
between urban sprawl and obesity. The results found no evidence that
sprawl causes obesity and concluded that the interest in the built
environment to combat the rise in obesity is misguided. The focus of Eid et
al. was to determine whether people in sprawling neighborhoods were
heavier because their neighborhood caused them to gain weight or whether
obese people living in sprawling neighborhoods were previously heavy to
begin with. They mention how previous studies failed to properly control for
the fact the individuals who are more likely to be obese choose to live in
more sprawling neighborhoods. The authors used Confidential Geocode Data
of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 of the US Bureau of Labor
Statistics to match about 6,000 individuals to neighborhoods throughout the
U.S; over their study period of 6 years, 79% of these people moved at least
once. Eid et al. took note as they moved to either a sprawling or less
sprawling neighborhood and checked if changes in their neighborhood
environments led to changes in weight. Their study failed to see a change in
people’s BMI as they moved to a different neighborhood. However in
discussing their dimensions of the built environment (their sprawl index and
how they measured sprawl) the researchers only used 30-meter resolution
remote-sensing land cover data from Burchfield, Overman, Puga and Turner
(2006) to measure residential sprawl which included land cover and land use.
Second, the researchers used data from the US Census Bureau Zip Code
Business Patterns to count the number of retail shops and churches in order
to measure a neighborhood’s mix of uses.
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 11

In measuring sprawl and developing an empirical way to measure it, Jaret et

al. (2009) evaluated seven sprawl indexes and assessed the strengths and
weaknesses of each index. These indexes were used to empirically measure
sprawl. The authors assessed that the sprawl index developed by Ewing et
al. (2002) is one of the more accurate indexes with not as many
disadvantages when compared to other sprawl indexes; Ewing’s index
measures density, mixed land use, street accessibility, and centeredness. In
comparing the sprawl indexes of Ewing et al. (2002) and Eid et al. (2008)
Ewing et al.’s has more built environment characteristics which can be used
to accurately measure sprawl as opposed to Eid et al.’s method of measuring
sprawl.

Ewing et al.’s report was published by Smart Growth America in 2005 which
outlined the most comprehensive effort to define, measure, and evaluate
metropolitan sprawl and its impact. The report defined sprawl as a landscape
with four dimensions: a population that is widely dispersed in low-density
development, rigidly separated homes, shops and workplaces, a network of
roads marked by huge blocks and poor access, and a lack of well-defined
thriving activity centers, such as downtowns and town centers. In order to
empirically measure the four previously mentioned dimensions of sprawl, the
authors analyzed residential density, land use, the strength of metropolitan
centers, and the accessibility of the street network. The study’s methodology
discussed in depth how these four dimensions of sprawl were measured
empirically and cited each source of where the data was collected.

Smart Growth America’s (2003) report was the first national study that found
a clear association between the type of place people live and their physical
activity levels, weight, and health. The study found that people living in
counties marked by sprawling development were more likely to walk less
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 12

and weigh more than people who live in less sprawling counties; in addition
people in more sprawling counties were more likely to suffer from
hypertension. The researchers developed a “county sprawl index” that
ranked 448 counties in urban areas across the United States based on four
primary factors: residential density, land use mix, street connectivity, and
centeredness where lower sprawl index scores (such as 63 for Geauga
County outside of Cleveland, Ohio) represent the most sprawling counties
while higher sprawl index scores (such as 352 for Manhattan) suggest
compact neighborhood designs with less sprawl. The average score of all
counties was 100. Smart Growth America’s report suggested research
questions to perpetuate the need for further research to better understand
the relationship between our built environment and our health.

A number of studies evaluate the degree to which walkable neighborhood

designs may or may not influence physical activity and obesity levels.
Rodriguez et al. (2006) compared various measures of physical activity for
residents of a walkable, new urbanist neighborhood versus those of a
conventional suburban (high sprawling) neighborhood and found no
statistically significant differences in the measures of physical activity.
However, the authors found that residents of new urbanist neighborhoods
were more likely to be physically active in their neighborhood than residents
of the suburbs because new urbanist residents walked more for utilitarian
purposes.

As evident in the literature review, poor urban form influences public health
and perpetuates the childhood obesity epidemic by promoting sedentary
lifestyles that are associated with less physical activity and higher rates of
obesity. Previous studies have empirically measured urban form and used
different variables to measure it; as per Jaret et al. (2009), Ewing et al.’s
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 13

(2002) urban form variables are an effective way to measure a built

environment’s degree of sprawl.

Methodology

The empirical component of this paper investigates the influence of the built
environment on individuals’ level of physical activity. This study uses a
quantitative approach and deductive logic. The research design is a
quantitative case study of metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) within the
United States.i

The dependent variable in this study is the percentage of adults in a MSA

who achieve at least 30+ minutes of moderate physical activity five or more
days per week, or vigorous physical activity for 20+ minutes three or more
days per week.ii

Physical activity data was obtained from the Behavioral Risk Factor
Surveillance System (BRFSS) of the Center for Disease Control. The first year
that physical activity data could be collected was 2005. This was the first
year that the CDC started collecting physical activity data; physical activity
data for years preceding 2005 was not available online. To aid in establishing
the relationship between the independent variables and the dependent
variables, data was collected for independent variables in 2002 and in 2005
for the dependent variable.
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 14

This study measures the independent variables (i.e. the built environment)
using indicators previously used in literature to measure the extent of sprawl
in the built environment. As noted in the preceding literature review, sprawl
can be measured in several ways. This study relies on the measures by
Ewing, Pendall, and Chen (2005). The report offers four broad measures of
sprawl which act as independent variables: residential density, mix of land
uses, street accessibility, and the concentration of development focused on a
city’s center. Each of these four factors is measured using several
quantitative variables.

This study uses two of Ewing et al.’s original four factors –residential density
and mix of land uses. According to Ewing et al.’s literature review, residential
density was concluded to be the only factor of the built environment that
previous research agreed to include. Residential density is measured by the
gross population density in persons per square mile. In addition, land use
mix was selected because of its impact on travel patterns; land use mix is
measured by the percentage of residents within satisfactory neighborhood
shopping within 1 mile of their homes because if residents live within at least
one mile of shopping, it was noted to be a good indicator to as whether or
not people would walk or drive to these destinations. Street accessibility was
not included in this study due to the time and scope limitations of this
project.

The sample for this study included 12 of the 13 metropolitan statistical areas

(MSA) that had an American Housing Survey report for the year 2002. The

excluded MSA from the study, Anaheim-Santa Ana, CA, was considered to
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 15

significantly change the results of the study. Residential density and land use

mix variables were clearly written in the report and easy to gather.

The author conducted a correlation analysis between the dependent variable

(rates of physical activity) and each independent variable (raw data seen in
Appendix 1). The purpose of running correlation analysis on both
independent variables and the dependent variable, physical activity was to
determine how the built environment influences physical activity levels and
to what extent they are associated. This was made possible by calculating
the correlation coefficient of r, or “the degree of association between two
variables” (Kachigan, 1991) in Microsoft Excel. The correlation coefficient of
this study would therefore measure the degree of association between
aspects of the built environment and the percentage of adults who achieve
the recommended levels of physical activity.

The author also generated scatter plots to aid in a pictorial representation of

raw data that was collected to illustrate linear relationships.

Limitations

The original intention of this study was to focus on the primary factors of the

built environment and their influence on children’s physical activity. Due to

the lack of data available from the CDC and the time allotted for this study,
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 16

physical activity data had to be from adults and not all measures of the built

environment (as indicated by Ewing et al. (2002)) were taken into

consideration.

The lack of physical activity data for children by the CDC made it impossible

to gather data for them that matched the independent variables’ data from

metro areas. The only data made available by CDC’s Youth Risk Behavior

Surveillance System (YRBSS) that pertained to children’s physical activity

only were measured at state and national levels, not community or

metropolitan levels. Attempting to correlate metropolitan levels of urban

form with state levels of physical activity would not have provided accurate

results. Nor would it have been accurate to measure the built environment at

a state level since the urban form across one state is too large and diverse to

measure. As noted by Smart Growth America (2005), the influence of the

built environment on public health is greater at community levels as opposed

to larger scales.

Due to the time span allotted for the project, it was also impossible for the

author to gather and compute street accessibility data that was necessary

for the 12 metro areas. Street shape file data was gathered by county from

ESRI’s Free Data website after determining which counties composed each

respective MSA. Street shape file data was not available exclusively by MSA
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 17

that included data on street length. The union tool was used to combine

separate county’s road files to form each respective MSA (i.e.: Buffalo’s MSA

is composed of both Erie and Niagara counties), but after performing a

union, the street length data lost. Because of this and the time allotted for

data collection, it was impossible to calculate block lengths of MSA’s which

were composed of more than one county.

Findings and Analysis

The urban form of metropolitan statistical areas was found to be associated

with the proportion of MSA residents who achieve the recommended levels of

moderate intensity physical activity. Specifically, the percentage of adults

who achieve recommended levels of physical activity is positively associated

with higher residential densities of MSAs as well as with a greater mix of land

uses. The correlation between land use mix and physical activity is higher (r

= .42) than that between residential density and physical activity (r = .13).

Figure 1. Residential Density & Physical Activity (r = .13)

The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 18

Source: American Housing Survey (2002) and Center for Disease Control (2005)

Figure 2. Land Use Mix & Physical Activity (r = .42)

Source: American Housing Survey (2002) and Center for Disease Control (2005)
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 19

The findings of this study support the results from Frank et al. (2004) and

Frank et al. (2005). While it is evident that land use mix has a stronger,

positive correlation with physical activity as opposed to residential density,

Frank et al. (2004) also found that land use mix had the strongest

association with obesity (BMI≥30kg/m2) as opposed to residential density

and street connectivity.

When putting these findings into context with the built environment,

residential density can exist independently without land use mix (i.e.:

apartments that are not near any other land uses or transit). One would just

need an automobile to drive to their destination. On the other hand, if a

neighborhood has a high land use mix, it means that residents are within

walking distance of nearby shopping and are able to walk to their

destinations instead of depending on their personal automobile.

Despite the higher correlation of land use mix over density on physical

activity, both land use mix and density are closely associated. According to

the Urban Land Institute a “critical mass of at least 200,000 square feet of

retail and 2,000 dwelling units within a ten-minute walk of each other is

necessary to sustain a mixed use neighborhood” (Dunham-Jones et al.,

2008); therefore in order to sustain a successful mixed use neighborhood, it

is dependent on residential density.

The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 20

Conclusion

There is a clear correlation between land use mix and residential density
with the percentage of adults who achieve the recommended level of
moderate intensity physical activity in metro areas. The findings are
consistent and support previous literature (except Eid et al. (2008)) that
argues that urban form is correlated with public health. The higher the land
use mix a metropolitan statistical area is, the higher correlation there is with
being physically active. Despite the low correlation between residential
density and physical activity, there still is a correlation that supports the
notion that the higher the density a neighborhood is, the more likely it is that
its residents will be physically active. Conversely, the more sprawling in
development a neighborhood is (in terms of lower densities and a poor land
use mix), the higher the correlation there is with a lower percentage of
people achieving the recommended levels of moderate physical activity.

Based upon the literature review and the results of this study, future urban
and community policies should support higher densities and mixed use
development in specific areas of concentrated growth, namely downtowns to
promote more compact and walkable communities where residents will be
healthier and physically active. Local municipalities should make exceptions
or allow for changes in any local zoning codes that may restrict higher
density or mixed use development in a municipality’s downtown. In addition,
tax incentives should be provided to developers who are willing to invest and
redevelop downtown neighborhoods to help become mixed use and more
dense.

Endnotes
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 21

i. MSA was chosen as the unit of analysis because relevant data was (e.g. residential
density, land use mix, and physical activity) was available only at this geographic
scale.

ii. The initial intent of the study was to use physical activity data for children. However,
physical activity data for children was either only available by state or nationally
through the Center for Disease Control’s Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System
(YRBSS). The local surveys that the Center for Disease Control did posses were
limited and did not address the sampling frame of metropolitan statistical areas.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2010) points to this dearth
of data noting that, “There has been less research on the relationship between
the physical environment and physical activity for children than for adults,
however the findings for children appear to be consistent with those of the adult
population.” By studying the percentage of adults who achieve the recommended
levels of physical activity it is possible to use these findings for the target
population as well.

References

Alliance for a Healthier Generation. (2010). Childhood Obesity Costs.

Retrieved fromhttp://www.healthiergeneration.org/

Boseley, S. (2009, March 18). Obese die up to 10 years early, study of a

million people finds. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/

ICF International. (2010). Childhood Obesity Prevention. Retrieved from

http://www.icfi.com/

Dunham-Jones, E. and Williamson, J. (2008). Retrofitting Suburbia.

Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 22

Eid, J., Overman, H., Puga, D., and Turner, M. (2008). Fat city:
Questioning the relationship between urban sprawl and obesity. Journal of
Urban Economics, 63(2), 385-404. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com

European Environment Agency. (2006). Urban Sprawl in Europe: The

ignored challenge. Retrieved from http://www.eea.europa.eu/

Ewing, R., Brownson, R., and Berrigan, D. (2006, December).

Relationship between urban sprawl and weight of United States youth.
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 31(6), 464-474. Retrieved from
http://www.ajpm-online.net/

Frank, L., Andresen, M., and Schmid, T. (2004). Obesity relationships

with community design, physical activity, and time spent in cars. American
Journal of Preventive Medicine, 27(2), 87-96. Retrieved from
http://www.ajpm-online.net/

Frank, L., Schmid, T., Sallis, J., Chapman, J., and Saelens, B. (2005).
Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured
urban form: Findings from SMARTRAQ. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine, 28(2), 117-125. Retrieved from http://www.ajpm-online.net/

Frumkin, H. (2002). Urban sprawl and public health. Public Health Reports,
117(3), 201-217. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 23

Gunnell, D., Frankel, S., Nanchanal, K., Peters, T., and Smith, G.
(1998). Childhood obesity and adult cardiovascular mortality: a 57-y follow-
up study based on the Boyd Orr cohort. The American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, 67(6), 1111-1118. Retrieved from http://www.ajcn.org

Jaret, C., Ghadge, R., Williams Reid, L., and Adelman, R. (2009). The
measurement of suburban sprawl: An evaluation. City & Community, 8(1),
65-84. Retrieved from http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/

Kachigan, K. (1991). Multivariate Statistical Analysis: A conceptual

introduction. New York, NY: Radius Press.

Lopez, R. (2004). Urban sprawl and risk for being overweight or obese.
American Journal of Public Health, 94(9), 1574-1579. Retrieved from
http://ajph.aphapublications.org/

National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive, and Kidney Diseases.

(2007, June). Statistics Related to Overweight and Obesity. Retrieved from
www.win.niddk.nih.gov

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. (2010, January 14). Robert Wood

Johnson Foundation Statement Regarding Release of Estimates of Obesity
Prevalence Among U.S. Children and Teens. Retrieved from
http://www.rwjf.org/
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 24

Rodriguez, D., Khattak, A., and Evenson, K. (2006). Can new urbanism
encourage physical activity? Comparing a new urbanist neighborhood with
conventional suburbs. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72(1),
43-54. Retrieved from http://www.informaworld.com/

Smart Growth America. (2005). Measuring Sprawl and its Impact.

Retrieved from http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/

Smart Growth America. (2003, September). Measuring the Health Effects

of Sprawl; A national analysis of physical activity, obesity, and chronic
disease. Retrieved from http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/

United States, Department of Health and Human Services; Assistant

Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. (2010). Childhood Obesity.
Retrieved from http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/child_obesity/

Appendix 1. Collected Raw Data from MSA’s

Metropolitan Physical Population Mix of Uses

Statistical Activity (%)1 Density (persons
Area (MSA) per square mile) (%)2

Buffalo, NY 53% 746.64 86.21%

Charlotte, NC- 42% 444.00 52.75%

SC

Columbus, OH 50% 490.30 66.92%

Dallas, TX 42% 753.70 73.69%

The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 25

Fort Worth – 49% 987.60 71.81%

Arlington, TX

Kansas City, 47% 329.80 66.92%

MO-KS

Miami – Ft. 46% 1230.00 82.72%

Lauderdale, FL

Milwaukee, WI 54% 1027.90 72.68%

Phoenix, AZ 54% 333.80 78.47%

Portland, OR- 56% 373.60 71.39%

WA

Riverside – San 50% 118.80 66.33%

Bernardino –
Ontario

San Diego, CA 54% 670.00 75.36%

1
Percentage of adults who achieve 30+ minutes of moderate physical activity five
or more days per week, or vigorous physical activity for 20+ minutes three or more
days per week.
2
Percentage of residents within satisfactory neighborhood shopping within 1 mile.

Appendix 2. Data and Data Sources

Variable Factor Source

Physical Activity Adults with 30+ Center for Disease
minutes of moderate Control – SMART: BRFSS
physical activity five City and County Data
or more days per (2005) – used 2005 data
week, or vigorous to establish causality
physical activity for and also 2005 was the
The Built Environment’s influence on Physical Activity 26

20+ minutes three or most recent physical

more days per week activity data available
Residential Density Gross population American Housing
density in persons per Survey (2002)
square mile
Land Use Mix Percentage of American Housing
residents within Survey (2002)
satisfactory
neighborhood
shopping within 1 mile