Quantifying urban park use in the USA at scale: empirical estimates of realised park usage using smartphone location data

IF 24.1 1区 医学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Lancet Planetary Health Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00125-6
Michael T Young PhD , Swapnil Vispute MS , Stylianos Serghiou PhD MD , Akim Kumok MS , Yash Shah BS , Kevin J Lane PhD , Flannery Black-Ingersoll MPH , Paige Brochu PhD , Monica Bharel MD MPH , Sarah Skenazy MPH , Alan Karthikesalingam PhD MD , Shailesh Bavadekar BE , Mansi Kansal MBA , Tomer Shekel MBA , Evgeniy Gabrilovich PhD , Gregory A Wellenius ScD
{"title":"Quantifying urban park use in the USA at scale: empirical estimates of realised park usage using smartphone location data","authors":"Michael T Young PhD ,&nbsp;Swapnil Vispute MS ,&nbsp;Stylianos Serghiou PhD MD ,&nbsp;Akim Kumok MS ,&nbsp;Yash Shah BS ,&nbsp;Kevin J Lane PhD ,&nbsp;Flannery Black-Ingersoll MPH ,&nbsp;Paige Brochu PhD ,&nbsp;Monica Bharel MD MPH ,&nbsp;Sarah Skenazy MPH ,&nbsp;Alan Karthikesalingam PhD MD ,&nbsp;Shailesh Bavadekar BE ,&nbsp;Mansi Kansal MBA ,&nbsp;Tomer Shekel MBA ,&nbsp;Evgeniy Gabrilovich PhD ,&nbsp;Gregory A Wellenius ScD","doi":"10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00125-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>A large body of evidence connects access to greenspace with substantial benefits to physical and mental health. In urban settings where access to greenspace can be limited, park access and use have been associated with higher levels of physical activity, improved physical health, and lower levels of markers of mental distress. Despite the potential health benefits of urban parks, little is known about how park usage varies across locations (between or within cities) or over time.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We estimated park usage among urban residents (identified as residents of urban census tracts) in 498 US cities from 2019 to 2021 from aggregated and anonymised opted-in smartphone location history data. We used descriptive statistics to quantify differences in park usage over time, between cities, and across census tracts within cities, and used generalised linear models to estimate the associations between park usage and census tract level descriptors.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>In spring (March 1 to May 31) 2019, 18·9% of urban residents visited a park at least once per week, with average use higher in northwest and southwest USA, and lowest in the southeast. Park usage varied substantially both within and between cities; was unequally distributed across census tract-level markers of race, ethnicity, income, and social vulnerability; and was only moderately correlated with established markers of census tract greenspace. In spring 2019, a doubling of walking time to parks was associated with a 10·1% (95% CI 5·6–14·3) lower average weekly park usage, adjusting for city and social vulnerability index. The median decline in park usage from spring 2019 to spring 2020 was 38·0% (IQR 28·4–46·5), coincident with the onset of physical distancing policies across much of the country. We estimated that the COVID-19-related decline in park usage was more pronounced for those living further from a park and those living in areas of higher social vulnerability.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>These estimates provide novel insights into the patterns and correlates of park use and could enable new studies of the health benefits of urban greenspace. In addition, the availability of an empirical park usage metric that varies over time could be a useful tool for assessing the effectiveness of policies intended to increase such activities.</p></div><div><h3>Funding</h3><p>Google.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48548,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Planetary Health","volume":"8 8","pages":"Pages e564-e573"},"PeriodicalIF":24.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542519624001256/pdfft?md5=60d6073253211cf4bf97941c5fd35055&pid=1-s2.0-S2542519624001256-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Planetary Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542519624001256","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

A large body of evidence connects access to greenspace with substantial benefits to physical and mental health. In urban settings where access to greenspace can be limited, park access and use have been associated with higher levels of physical activity, improved physical health, and lower levels of markers of mental distress. Despite the potential health benefits of urban parks, little is known about how park usage varies across locations (between or within cities) or over time.

Methods

We estimated park usage among urban residents (identified as residents of urban census tracts) in 498 US cities from 2019 to 2021 from aggregated and anonymised opted-in smartphone location history data. We used descriptive statistics to quantify differences in park usage over time, between cities, and across census tracts within cities, and used generalised linear models to estimate the associations between park usage and census tract level descriptors.

Findings

In spring (March 1 to May 31) 2019, 18·9% of urban residents visited a park at least once per week, with average use higher in northwest and southwest USA, and lowest in the southeast. Park usage varied substantially both within and between cities; was unequally distributed across census tract-level markers of race, ethnicity, income, and social vulnerability; and was only moderately correlated with established markers of census tract greenspace. In spring 2019, a doubling of walking time to parks was associated with a 10·1% (95% CI 5·6–14·3) lower average weekly park usage, adjusting for city and social vulnerability index. The median decline in park usage from spring 2019 to spring 2020 was 38·0% (IQR 28·4–46·5), coincident with the onset of physical distancing policies across much of the country. We estimated that the COVID-19-related decline in park usage was more pronounced for those living further from a park and those living in areas of higher social vulnerability.

Interpretation

These estimates provide novel insights into the patterns and correlates of park use and could enable new studies of the health benefits of urban greenspace. In addition, the availability of an empirical park usage metric that varies over time could be a useful tool for assessing the effectiveness of policies intended to increase such activities.

Funding

Google.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大规模量化美国城市公园的使用情况:利用智能手机定位数据对公园实际使用情况进行实证估算。
背景:大量证据表明,使用绿地对身心健康大有裨益。在绿地有限的城市环境中,公园的进入和使用与较高水平的体育活动、身体健康的改善以及较低水平的精神压力有关。尽管城市公园具有潜在的健康益处,但人们对公园使用率在不同地点(城市之间或城市内部)或不同时间的变化却知之甚少:我们通过汇总和匿名的智能手机定位历史数据,估算了 2019 年至 2021 年美国 498 个城市的城市居民(城市人口普查区的居民)的公园使用率。我们使用描述性统计来量化公园使用率在不同时期、不同城市之间以及城市内不同人口普查区之间的差异,并使用广义线性模型来估计公园使用率与人口普查区级别描述符之间的关联:2019 年春季(3 月 1 日至 5 月 31 日),18%-9% 的城市居民每周至少游览一次公园,美国西北部和西南部的平均使用率较高,东南部最低。在城市内部和城市之间,公园使用率差异很大;在人口普查区一级的种族、民族、收入和社会脆弱性指标中,公园使用率分布不均;与人口普查区绿地的既定指标仅有适度相关性。在2019年春季,根据城市和社会脆弱性指数进行调整后,步行到公园的时间每增加一倍,平均每周公园使用率就会降低10-1%(95% CI 5-6-14-3)。从 2019 年春季到 2020 年春季,公园使用率的中位数下降了 38-0%(IQR 28-4-46-5),这与全国大部分地区开始实施物理距离政策相吻合。我们估计,与 COVID-19 相关的公园使用率下降对于那些居住在距离公园较远的地区和那些居住在社会脆弱性较高的地区的人来说更为明显:这些估计结果为了解公园使用的模式和相关因素提供了新的视角,有助于对城市绿地的健康益处进行新的研究。此外,提供一个随时间变化的经验性公园使用指标,可以成为评估旨在增加此类活动的政策效果的有用工具:资助:谷歌
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
28.40
自引率
2.30%
发文量
272
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Lancet Planetary Health is a gold Open Access journal dedicated to investigating and addressing the multifaceted determinants of healthy human civilizations and their impact on natural systems. Positioned as a key player in sustainable development, the journal covers a broad, interdisciplinary scope, encompassing areas such as poverty, nutrition, gender equity, water and sanitation, energy, economic growth, industrialization, inequality, urbanization, human consumption and production, climate change, ocean health, land use, peace, and justice. With a commitment to publishing high-quality research, comment, and correspondence, it aims to be the leading journal for sustainable development in the face of unprecedented dangers and threats.
期刊最新文献
Bridging the gender, climate, and health gap: the road to COP29. No silver bullets, no shortcuts: confronting the commercial determinants of the climate crisis. Correction to Lancet Planet Health 2024; published Oct 17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00229-8. Climate injustice: lessons from the Philippines' jeepney modernisation programme Climate emotions, thoughts, and plans among US adolescents and young adults: a cross-sectional descriptive survey and analysis by political party identification and self-reported exposure to severe weather events
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1