Access to Free and Safe Spaces for Physical Activity: An Equity-driven Physical Activity Security Approach

Background:

Access to free and safe environments for physical activity is essential for ‘physical activity security’ defined as, “access to sufficient, safe, and enjoyable opportunities for physical activity.”

Purpose:

To assess access to free and safe places for physical activity; and determine if access varies by area-level socioeconomic status (SES), in Austin, Texas, USA.

Methods:

This was an ecological, cross-sectional GIS study of Austin, Texas, USA neighborhoods, operationalized as zip codes. Public-access (free) space measures included sidewalk coverage (proportion), park-counts and recreation center-counts. Neighborhood safety was assessed with count of crimes in public spaces. Neighborhood socioeconomic status (NSES) was categorized as high/low using Austin’s median household income as the cut-point. An “access and safety score” was calculated for each neighborhood by summing asset/variable-specific scores of 0 to 2, where 0 was indicated lack of positive assets or negative circumstances (e.g., no parks or high crime), 1 for medium values, and 2 for positive values (e.g., many parks, low crime), with a possible overall score range of 0-8. Neighborhoods were then categorized as having low (0-2), medium (3-5), or high (6-8) overall access and safety score. T-tests assessed differences in access and safety scores by NSES.

Results:

Three-quarters of zip codes (75.9%) in Austin had a medium access and safety score, a fifth (20.3%) had a low score, and 3.7% had a high score. Marginally significant differences (p= 0.07) were observed by NSES.

Conclusions:

An alarmingly low number of Austin neighborhoods have high access to free and safe places for physical activity, putting many residents at risk of physical activity insecurity.

Practical Implications:

Austin must invest in improving the quantity, quality, and safety of public access places for physical activity, with emphasis on low-income areas, where residents are more likely to exclusively rely on public access locations for activity.

Funding:

N/A.