Abstract
Regular participation in physical activity improves health across the life course, and proximal access to parks can facilitate activity among youth. The 10-minute walk guideline demonstrates the health-promoting benefits of accessible parks. Yet, the contributions of other park attributes to young people’s activity levels are underexplored. In this study, we conceptualize how a public health threshold for park acreage could complement the currently available 10-minute walk standard for park access. We examined cross-sectional associations between park acreage and physical activity among a sample of adolescents living in two U.S.-based “green cities” with highly accessible park systems. Data were drawn from the Project EAT (Eating and Activity over Time; 2010 cohort) study. Adolescents (n = 2271) lived in Minneapolis or St. Paul (Minnesota) and were diverse in race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES). To isolate the potential contributions of park acreage, we restricted the sample to adolescents with adequate park access per the 10-minute walk guideline. Next, we used established land-use data to assign participants to groups that differed by neighborhood-level park acreage composition. After testing various land-use cut-points within a specified network buffer, we conceptualized “Urban Park Oases” as areas in which adolescents had at least 10% park acreage within a 10-minute ride/drive of their homes. Adjusting for socioeconomic, environmental, and structural privilege factors, adolescents living in neighborhoods with less than 10% park acreage land-use reported significantly fewer weekly hours of moderate-vigorous physical activity (β [95% confidence interval]: −0.25 [−0.49, −0.01]) compared with peers living in acreage-rich neighborhoods. Parkland was inequitably distributed, such that racially/ethnically minoritized and low-SES adolescents were less likely to live in Urban Park Oases. Park acreage may support adolescents’ physical activity. However, public health initiatives and land-use policies should prioritize more equitable allocation of parkland, including in cities known for accessible park systems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
