In response to the US obesity epidemic, researchers in urban planning and public health have developed a number of built environment ‘audits’ to evaluate the presence of physical health determinants in neighborhoods and public spaces. These audits are most often framed in value-neutral and objective terms, overlooking the distributive justice dimension of built environment evaluations. I argue that audits always imply some underlying definition of distributive justice, and can be typologized according to three major theories, namely those of Mill, Rawls, and Sen. The study concludes with a practical model for framing the distributive dimension of audits.
AlkireS (2002) Valuing Freedoms: Sen’s Capability Approach and Poverty Reduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4.
ArchibugiF (2006) Pitfalls in planning and plan-evaluation. In: AlexanderEEvaluation in Planning: Evolution and Prospects. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
5.
BanerjeeTBaerW (1984) Beyond the Neighborhood Unit: Residential Environments and Public Policy. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
6.
Bedimo-RungALMowenAJCohenDA (2005) The significance of parks to physical activity and public health: A conceptual model. American Journal of Preventive Medicine28(2S2): 159–68.
7.
BoarnetMAndersonCDayKMcmillanTAlfonsoM (2005) Evaluation of the California Safe Routes to School legislation. American Journal of Preventive Medicine28(2S2): 134–40.
8.
BooneCBuckleyGGroveJSisterC (2009) Parks and people: An environmental justice inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers99(4): 767–87.
9.
BrownsonRCChangJJEylerAAAinsworthBEKirtlandKASaelensBE. (2004) Measuring the environment for friendliness toward physical activity: A comparison of the reliability of 3 questionaires. American Journal of Public Health94(3): 473–83.
10.
ByrneJWolchJ (2009) Nature race and parks: Past research and future directions for geographic research. Progress in Human Geography33(6): 743–65.
11.
ByrneJWolchJSwiftJRyanC (2005) Systematic audit of green-space environments (SAGE). Accessed 10 December, 2010, from www.greenvisionsplan.net.
12.
ClitheroeHCJrStokolsDZmuidzinasM (1998) Conceptualizing the context of environment and behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology18: 103–12.
13.
DayKBoarnetMAlfonzoM (2005) Irvine-Minnesota Inventory for observation of physical environment features linked to physical environment: Code book 1. Available at www.activelivingresearch.org/…/toolsandmeasures. Accessed 10 December 2010.
14.
DayKBoarnetMAlfonzoMForsythA (2006) The Irvine-Minnesota Inventory to measure built environments: Development. American Journal of Preventive Medicine30(2): 144–52.
DunstanFWeaverNArayaRBellTLannonSLewisG (2005) An observation tool to assist with the assessment of urban residential environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology25: 293–305.
21.
EllenIDillmanKMijanovichT (2001) Neighborhood effects on health: Exploring the links and assessing the evidence. Journal of Urban Affairs23: 391–408.
ForesterJ (1994) Political judgement and learning about value in transportation planning: Bridging Habermas and Aristotle. In: ThomasH. (ed.) Values and Planning. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 178–204.
25.
HarperTSteinS (2006) Dialogical planning in a fragmented society: Critically liberal, pragmatic, incremental. Center For Urban Policy Research.
26.
HarawayD (1988) Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies14: 575–99.
27.
HarveyD (2010) The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capitalism. London: Profile Books.
28.
HealeyP (2003) Editorial, Planning Theory and Practice4 (Issue 3): 245.
29.
HillierJ, 1999What values? Whose values?Ethics Place & Environment2: 179–99.
30.
HoehnerCMBrennan RamirezLKElliottMBHandySLBrownsonRC (2005) Perceived and objective environmental measures and physical activity among urban adults. American Journal of Preventive Medicine28(2S2): 105–16.
31.
HomeRBauerNHunzikerM (2010) Cultural and biological determinants in the evaluation of urban green spaces. Environment and Behavior42(4): 494.
32.
HouseE (1980) Evaluating with Validity. London: Sage Publications.
33.
KaufmanP (1997) Community values in cultural landscape decision making: Developing recommendations for ensuring planning processes include differing expectations of community interest. Historic Environment13: 57–62.
34.
KnoxP (1980) Measures of accessibility as social indicators: A note. Social Indicators Research7(1): 367–77.
35.
LawJ (2004) After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. London: Routledge.
36.
LichfieldN (1971) Cost-benefit analysis in planning: A critique of the Roskill Commission. Regional Studies5(3): 157–83.
37.
LindseyGMarajM. (2001) Access, equity, and urban greenways: An exploratory investigation. The Professional Geographer53(3): 332–46.
38.
LowN (1994) Planning and justice. In: ThomasH. (ed.) Values and Planning. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 116–39.
39.
MadanipourA (1996) Design of Urban Space: An Inquiry into a Socio-Spatial Process. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
40.
MckenzieTLMarshallSJSallisJFConwayTL (2000) Leisure-time physical activity in school environments: An observational study using SOPLAY. Preventive Medicine30: 70–77.
MilesRPLynn (2006) The influence of the perceived quality of community environments on low-income women’s efforts to walk more. Journal of Community Health31(5): 379–92.
44.
MillJS (1993) On Liberty and Utilitarianism. New York, NY: Bantam Books.
45.
MoroniS (2006) The ethics behind evaluation: Lichfield’s approach and utilitarianism. In: AlexanderER. Evaluation in Planning: Evolution and Prospects: Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
46.
MoudonAVLeeC (2003) Walking and bicycling: An evaluation of environmental audit instruments. American Journal of Health Promotion18(1).
47.
MoudonAVLeeCCheadleADGarvinCJohnsonDBSchmidTL. (2007) Attributes of environments supporting walking. Health Promotion21(3).
48.
NasarJ (2007) Assessing Environmental Perceptions. Presentation prepared for the Active Living Research Annual Conference, 21–24 February, Coronado, CA.
49.
NasarJL (1998) The Evaluative Image of the City. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
50.
National Research Council (2005) Does the built environment influence physical activity? Examining the evidence. Transportation Research Board Committee on Physical Activity Health Transportation and Land Use. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board, Institute of Medicine (US).
51.
NussbaumMC (2000) Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
PikoraTGiles-CortiBBullFKnulmanMJamrozikKDonovanR (2006) Systematic pedestrian and cycling environmental scan (spaces) instrument. Available at http://www.activelivingresearch.org/node/10617. Accessed 10 December 2010.
54.
RamirezLKBHoehnerCMBrownsonRCCookROrleansTHollanderM. (2006) Indicators of activity-friendly communities an evidence-based consensus process. American Journal of Preventive Medicine31(6): 515–24.
55.
RauschmayerF (2001) Reflections on ethics and multi-criteria analysis in environmental decisions. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis10: 65–74.
56.
RawlsJ (1999) A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard Univeristy Press.
57.
RawlsJKellyE (2001) Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
58.
SaelensBEFrankLAuffreyCWhitakerRCBurdetteHLColabianchiN (2006) Measuring physical environments of parks and playgrounds: EAPRS instrument development and inter-rater reliability. Journal of Physical Activity and Health3 (Supplement 1): 190–207.
59.
SallisJCerveroRBAscherWHendersonKAKraftKMKerrJ (2006) An ecological approach to creating active living communities. Annual Review of Public Health27.
60.
SandercockL (1998) Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for Multicultural Cities. Chichester, UK: J. Wiley.
61.
SandercockL (2000) When strangers become neighbours: Managing cities of difference. Planning Theory & Practice1(1): 13–30.
62.
SandercockLDoveyK (2002) Pleasure, politics, and the ‘public interest’: Melbourne’s riverscape revitalization. Journal of the American Planning Association68(2): 151–64.
63.
SandercockL (2004) Towards a planning imagination for the 21st century. Journal of the American Planning Association70(2): 133–41.
64.
SenA (1980) Equality of what? In: McMurrinSM (ed.). The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press. Reprinted in Sen (1982), Chapter 16.
65.
SenA (1992) Inequality Reexamined. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
66.
SenA (2000) Development as Freedom. New York: Knopf Publishers.
67.
SisterCWolchJWilsonJ, 2009Got green? Addressing environmental justice in park provisionGeoJournal doi 10.1007/s10708-009-9303-810.1007/s10708-009-9303-8.
68.
SisterCWolchJWilsonJLinderASeymourMByrneJ. (2007) The green visions plan for 21st century Southern California: Park and open space resources in the green visions plan area. Avalaible at http://www.greenvisionsplan.net/html/publications.html. Accessed 10 December 2010.
69.
SmithNHarveyD (2008) Uneven Development: Nature, Capital, and the Production of Space. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.
70.
SteinSMHarperTL (2005) Rawls’s ‘justice as fairness’: A moral basis for contemporary planning theory. Planning Theory4(2): 147–72.
71.
TalenE (1998) Visualizing fairness: Equity maps for planners. Journal of the American Planning Association64(1): 22–38.
72.
TalenE (2006) Design for diversity: Evaluating the context of socially mixed neighbourhoods. Journal of Urban Design11(1): 1–32.
73.
TalenEAnselinL (1998) Assessing spatial equity: An evaluation of measures of accessibility to public playgrounds. Environment and Planning A30: 595–614.
74.
TaylorN (1994) Environmental issues and the public interest. In: ThomasH. (ed.) Values and Planning. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 87–115.
75.
TropedPJCromleyEKFragalaMSMellySJHasbroukHHGortmakerSL. (2006) Development and reliability and validity testing of an audit tool for trail/path characteristics: The path environment audit tool (PEAT). Journal of Physical Activity and Health3 (Supplement 1).
76.
Van HerzeleAWiedemannT (2003) A monitoring tool for the provision of accessible and attractive urban green spaces. Landscape and Urban Planning63: 109–26.
77.
WeberJKwanM-P (2003) Evaluating the effects of geographic contexts on individual accessibility: A multilevel approach. Urban Geography24(8): 647–71.
78.
WholeyJS (1987) Evaluability assessment: Developing program theory. New Directions for Program Evaluation1987(33): 77-92 %@ 1551-2371.
79.
WholeyJNayJScanlonJSchmidtR (1975) Evaluation: When is it really needed?Evaluation2(2): 89–93.
80.
WholeyJSHatryHPNewcomerKE (2004) Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
81.
ZabinskiMFSaelensBESteinRIHayden-WadeHAWilfleyDE (2003) Overweight children’s barriers to and support for physical activity. Obesity Research11(2): 238–46.
