Suppr超能文献

自行车基础设施带来的身体活动和可达性效益分配公平吗?

How equitable are the distributions of the physical activity and accessibility benefits of bicycle infrastructure?

机构信息

Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, School of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia.

Health Equity Research and Development Unit, Sydney Local Health District, Missenden Road, PO Box M30, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia.

出版信息

Int J Equity Health. 2021 Sep 15;20(1):208. doi: 10.1186/s12939-021-01543-x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cycling for transport provides many health and social benefits - including physical activity and independent access to jobs, education, social opportunities, health care and other services (accessibility). However, some population groups have less opportunity to reach everyday destinations, and public transport stops, by bicycle - owing in part to their greater aversion to riding amongst motor vehicle traffic. Health equity can therefore be improved by providing separated cycleway networks that give more people the opportunity to access places by bicycle using traffic-free routes. The aim of this study was to assess the health equity benefits of two bicycle infrastructure development scenarios - a single cycleway, and a complete network of cycleways - by examining the distributions of physical activity and accessibility benefits across gender, age and income groups.

METHODS

Travel survey data collected from residents in Sydney (Australia) were used to train a predictive transport mode choice model, which was then used to forecast the impact of the two intervention scenarios on transport mode choice, physical activity and accessibility. The latter was measured using a utility-based measure derived from the mode choice model. The distributions of the forecast physical activity and accessibility benefits were then calculated across gender, age and income groups.

RESULTS

The modelled physical activity and accessibility measures improve in both intervention scenarios. However, in the single cycleway scenario, the benefits are greatest for the male, high-income and older age groups. In the complete network scenario, the benefits are more equally distributed. Forecast increases in cycling time are largely offset by decreases in walking time - though the latter is typically low-intensity physical activity, which confers a lesser health benefit than moderate-intensity cycling.

CONCLUSIONS

Separated cycleway infrastructure can be used to improve health equity by providing greater opportunities for transport cycling in population groups more averse to riding amongst motor vehicle traffic. Disparities in the opportunity to access services and economic/social activities by bicycle - and incorporate more physical activity into everyday travel - could be addressed with connected, traffic-free cycleway networks that cater to people of all genders, ages and incomes.

摘要

背景

骑自行车出行具有许多健康和社会效益——包括身体活动以及独立获得工作、教育、社交机会、医疗保健和其他服务(可达性)的机会。然而,由于一些人群对在机动车交通中骑车的抵触情绪更大,他们骑自行车到达日常目的地和公共交通站点的机会较少。因此,通过提供更多人使用无机动车交通路线骑自行车到达目的地的机会的分离自行车道网络,可以改善健康公平性。本研究旨在通过检查体力活动和可达性益处在性别、年龄和收入群体中的分布情况,评估两种自行车基础设施发展情景(单车道和完整的自行车道网络)的健康公平收益。

方法

利用从澳大利亚悉尼居民那里收集的出行调查数据,训练了一个预测交通方式选择的模型,然后使用该模型预测两种干预情景对交通方式选择、体力活动和可达性的影响。后者是使用从模式选择模型中得出的基于效用的度量来衡量的。然后,在性别、年龄和收入群体中计算预测体力活动和可达性益处的分布情况。

结果

在两种干预情景中,模型化的体力活动和可达性指标都有所提高。然而,在单车道情景中,男性、高收入和年龄较大的群体受益最大。在完整的网络情景中,收益分布更为平均。预测的自行车骑行时间增加在很大程度上被步行时间的减少所抵消——尽管后者通常是低强度的体力活动,其带来的健康益处不如中等强度的自行车骑行大。

结论

分离的自行车道基础设施可用于改善健康公平性,为更不愿意在机动车交通中骑车的人群提供更多的交通自行车机会。通过连接、无机动车的自行车道网络,可以解决骑自行车获取服务和经济/社会活动的机会不平等问题,并将更多的体力活动纳入日常出行中,这些网络可以满足所有性别、年龄和收入群体的需求。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/46c8/8444547/a12bee1f9f62/12939_2021_1543_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验