accessibility to urban parks in montreal from the perspective of children

7/13/2019 Accessibility to Urban Parks in Montreal From the Perspective of Children

1/20

ACCESSIBILITY TO URBAN PARKS IN MONTREAL FROM THE

PERSPECTIVE OF CHILDREN

Mario Reyes Galfn, McMaster University, r e y e s mf@m c mast e r.caAntonio Pez, McMaster University, p ae z h a @m c mast e r.ca

Catherine Morency, cole Polytechniqe !e Montr"al,cmor enc y@pol ymt l.ca

ABSTRACT

Par#s are elemental components of r$an environments that provi!e environmental valean! serve vala$le social fnctions. %n or!er to en&oy the $eneficial opportnities foractivities in par#s, sers mst have reasona$le access to these resorces. 'he o$&ective ofthis paper is to measre accessi$ility to r$an par#s from the perspective of chil!ren

travellin( $y )al#in( in the islan! of Montreal, Cana!a. *e evalate the relationship$et)een the !istri$tion of chil!ren poplation an! con!itions of accessi$ility to r$anpar#s, in or!er to n!erstan! the potential for se an! possi$le spatial !isparities in the!istri$tion of vala$le environmental resorces. 'his research contri$tes to the assessmentof the !istri$tion of access to r$an par#s $y chil!ren, an! can inform planners an! policyma#ers in or!er to improve the spply of p$lic facilities +par#s from a transportationperspective.

Keywords: Accessibility, children, mobility, Montreal, urban parks
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/20

-

1 INTRODUCTION

rin( past !eca!es, the isse of accessi$ility to r$an (reen spaces or par#s has attracte!consi!era$le attention +e.(. 'alen an! Anselin /0012 3icholls -44/2 5e)#o, 6moyer7'omic et al.

-44-2 8an 5erzele an! *ie!emann -4492 :otfi an! ;oohsari -4402 *eiss, Prciel et al. -4//2or physical characteristics of cities $t have $een more limite! in terms of accontin( forvariations in mo$ility $et)een !ifferent sers, !e to a(e, (en!er, income level, an! other socio7economic an! !emo(raphic attri$tes +Paez, 6cott et al. -4/-.

=or this research, the concept of accessi$ility is !efine! as the nm$er of opportnities, alsocalle!

+5anson 6. -44?. %n that sense, accessi$ility col! $e se! as an in!icator of social eqity +Paez,Merca!o et al. -4/42 :cas -4/-2 :cas an! ones -4/-. 'he notion of eqity is paramont inresearch that focses on !eterminin( )hat factors accont for, or are correlate! )ith, spatialvariation in p$lic services. Accessi$ility is also a tool se! to !iscover )hether or not eqity has$een achieve! +'alen an! Anselin /001 consi!erin( that accessi$ility measres are typicallycomprise! of t)o $asic components, the cost of travel +!etermine! $y the spatial !istri$tion oftravelers an! opportnities an! qality>qantity of opportnities.

=rom a (eo(raphical vie)point, the spatial confi(ration, !istri$tion an! nm$er of par#s inr$an areas, represents the $asic par# access potential for local resi!ential poplations. 'hs, itis not srprisin( that the spatial accessi$ility of nei(h$orhoo! par#s, mainly $ase! on par#proimity, location an! size, is sally se! to estimate the contri$tion of par#s to physical an!social activities +


3/20

$eneficial for chil!ren +Maas, 8erhei& et al. -440. %n effect, the topic of chil!>yoth mo$ility isan emer(in( important topic in transport (eo(raphy +Blin(, 6ltana et al. -4/- mainlyfrom concerns over the !ecreasin( rates of active travel amon( chil!ren an! the risin( rates of

o$esity in !ifferent parts of the )orl!, incl!in( Cana!a +Ctts, ar$y et al. -4402 Potestio, Patelet al. -4402 Blin(, 6ltana et al. -4/-. %n this sense, research concernin( the physical

characteristics ofpar#s in Montreal nei(h$orhoo!s )ith contrastin( health otcomes +Coen an!Ross -44E epose! that hile nei(h$orhoo! par#s sho)e! a variety of featre qality ratin(s,

those locate! in poor health areas !isplaye! several prononce! material !isa!vanta(es,incl!in( concentration of physical incivilities, limite! provision of facilities for physical

eercise, an! a!&acency to in!strial sites an! mlti7lane roa!s. qalizin( par# qality $et)eenareas may $e an important step forp$lic

qantify their potential to satisfy social fnctions.

'he *orl! 5ealth Dr(anization +*5D recommen!s that cities provi!e a minimm of 0 sq.m of(reen area per inha$itant, assmin( that (reen areas are !esi(ne! so that resi!ents live )ithin a /F

minte )al# of an open space. %n the case of a st!y in Montreal, in -4/4 the city ha! /- sq.m of(reen area per inha$itant )hich follo)s (i!elines $y *5D, $t the st!y !oes not !escri$e the!istri$tion of access to r$an par#s. =rther, it is important to mention that t he yon(estinha$itants in -44E are lar(ely locate! otsi!e the islan! of Montreal an! :aval an! composin(theHne)H s$r$s +httpI>>)))/- .s ta tca n .ca > ce n s s 7 r ece n s e m e nt>-44E> a s 7 s a >0 7 FF/>p- 47e n( .c f m J m o n tr ea l , $t this !oes not mean that no chil!ren live in this area. Actally, 14 chil!renas Censs Metropolitan Area +CMA of the islan!

+Cana!a -44E.

'he (eneral o$&ective of this research is to measre accessi$ility to r$an par#s in the %slan! ofMontreal from the perspective of chil!ren, in this case from to /E years ol!. %n Cana!a, thele(al a(e for a(e ma&ority, an! hence the en! of chil!hoo!, is /1 years. %n this )or#, )e aim toa!!ress the follo)in( qestionsI *hat is the !istance, consi!erin( variations in socio7economican! !emo(raphic attri$tes that chil!ren typically travel $y )al#in( in MontrealK Given atypical )al#in( trip for a !efine! chil!ren profile, )hat is the level of accessi$ility to r$anpar#s at !ifferent locations in the cityK An!, to )hat etent can !isparities in eqity $e i!entifie!!e to variations in accessi$ilityK. Respon!in( to the qestions epose! previosly, it )ill $epossi$le evalate the relationship $et)een the !istri$tion of the poplation of chil!ren an! thecon!itions of accessi$ility to r$an par#s, in or!er to comprehen! the possi$le spatial !isparitiesin the !istri$tion of these vala$le environmental resorces.

2 DATA

')o !ata$ases are se! in or!er to implement the accessi$ility measre to r$an par#s in the%slan! vel 6rvey of -441 an! inventory of Montreal

r$anpar#sfrom open 6treet map.

Le$ec, Cana!a. rin( the last ?4 years, this ori(in7!estination +D travel srvey has $eenn!erta#en every five years, )ith the latest availa$le iteration in -441. 'he o$&ective of this
http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/as-sa/97-551/p20-http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/as-sa/97-551/p20-


4/20

!ata$ase is to offer !ata a$ot the mo$ility aspects of people )ho live in the re(ion to spporttransportation plannin( an! research.

'he srvey is con!cte! sin( Compter Ai!e! 'elephone 6rveys. %t collects information ofa$ot

F of all hosehol!s in the re(ion, that is, approimately 4,444 hosehol!s. An importantaspect of the srvey is that it recor!s information a$ot the travel $ehavior of participatin(hosehol! mem$ers ol!er than F years ol!, an! their trips, incl!in( nm$er, prpose, location ofori(in an! !estinations, an! mo!e of travel. =rthermore, socio7economic an! !emo(raphicinformation a$ot the hosehol! an! its mem$ers is o$taine!. Dri(ins an! !estinations of tripsare (eoco!e! sin( strctre! !ata$ases on a!!resses, intersections, an! trip (enerators. 'hereslt is a !ata$ase comprisin( /--,?-4 in!ivi!al recor!s correspon!in( to in!ivi!als )hoperforme! ot of home activities.

ata a$ot Montreal p$lic r$an par#s )ere etracte! from open street map )hich )as create!$y a (rop of researchers from the !epartment of Civil, Geolo(ical an! Minin( n(ineerin(,

cole Polytechniqe !e Montr"al +see =i(re /.

=i(re /. Ur$an par#s of Montreal islan!

3 METHODS

3.1 Estimates ! t"a#e$ %e&a#i'"

stimates of trip len(th are o$taine! $ase! on the application of mltivariate linear re(ression. %nor!er to assess possi$le variations in travel $ehavior !e to location +in a!!ition to otherin!ivi!al an! contetal attri$tes, the epansion metho! !evelope! $y Casetti +/0- can $ese!. 'he epansion metho! is a simple tool to (enerate mo!els )ith spatially7varyin(coefficients, )hich allo) the analyst to o$tain location7 an! person7specific estimates of !istancetravele! 'his approach has $een effectively se! in previos travel $ehavior an! accessi$ilityresearch to $rin( an eplicitly spatial !imension as part of the analysis +Paez, Merca!o et al.-4/42 Roor!a, Pez et al. -4/42 Morency, Pez et al. -4//.


5/20

'his analysis ses !ifferent cate(orical parameters an!>or inpts li#e (en!er +male or female,income levels +less than -4;, -47?4;, ?47E4;, E4714;, 147/44;, an! more than /44;, mainoccpation +flltime, part7time, st!ent, retire!, )or# at home, hosehol! type +sin(le, cople,cople )ith chil!, an! sin(le parent, class of transportation mo!e +car !river, car passen(er,transit, school $s, )al#in(, cyclin(, ;iss an! Ri!e, Par# an! Ri!e an! Dther mo!e an! river:icense o)nership +yes or no, an! continos varia$le sch as a(e.

'he epansion metho! $e(ins )ith an initial mo!el )ith one or more parameters. 'he initialmo!el is epan!e! to incl!e parameters, typically the (eo(raphic coor!inates of theo$servations to captre the effect of (eo(raphic variation. =inally, the epan!e! parameters ares$stitte! into the initial mo!el to yiel! the terminal mo!el, as sho) $elo)I

Consi!er an initial mo!el )ith a constant term constant + , one eplanatory varia$le an!

correspon!in( parameter + , an! error term + I

+/

3o) assme that the coefficient is a fnction of the (eo(raphic coor!inates .

Represente! asI

+-

'he eqation +- can $e )ritten as a linear form li#e $elo),

+9

'he final mo!el can $e o$taine! $y simply replacin( the eqation +9 into the eqation +/ as

sho)n $elo),Yi ui vi)Xi Xi uiXi viXi +?

Clearly, the epansion metho! is simply a systematic approach to intro!ce varia$le interactions.%ts po)er lies in the a$ility to mo!el contetal variations, in this case !e to location. :astly, itshol! $e clear that implementation in the case of more eplanatory varia$les, an!>or hi(her7or!er epansions +e.(. qa!ratic, c$ic, is strai(htfor)ar!.

%n the present case, the in!epen!ent varia$le is the lo(arithm of the avera(e trip len(th, $ase! onall trips an! prposes con!cte! $y in!ivi!al respon!ents +)ith the eception of the retrn home

trip !rin( the !ay. Avera(e trip len(th can $e se! as a $asic measre of reveale! mo$ility+Morency, Pez et al. -4//

environment +Merca!o an! Pez -440. 'his varia$le )as !efine! as the cli!ean !istance fromori(in to !estination. Altho(h many st!ies ar(e in favor of sin( net)or# !istance, strai(htline !istance is simple to compte, an! in the case of Montreal is hi(hly correlate! )ithnet)or# !istance +Apparicio, A$!elma&i! et al. -441. A lo(arithmic transformation isappropriate to ensre that the mo!el pre!icts strictly positive trip len(ths, an! helps to compressthe scale of the varia$le, )hich has a lon( tail. %n terms of the epansions, the follo)in( varia$lesare selecte! for estimation of epan!e! parametersI a(e, a(e sqare! +to accont for a potentiallynon7linear relationship )ith


6/20

trip len(th, (en!er, income levels an! !river license. 'he epansions are (iven in terms of si(eo(raphic attri$tes viz. latit!e, lon(it!e, latit!e sqare!, lon(it!e sqare!, latit!e timeslon(it!e, an! !istance from Central Bsiness istrict +CB. A specification search )ascon!cte! $e(innin( )ith a flly specifie! mo!el, an! follo)in( a $ac#)ar! step)ise search.8aria$les )ere remove! $ase! on the si(nificance of their correspon!in( parameters, in sch a)ay that all varia$les retaine! for the final mo!el have coefficients that are si(nificant at the p

%t important to note that eplanatory varia$les )ere selecte! $ase! on theoretical

consi!erations an! a srvey of the previos literatre on !istance travelle!. =or !etaile!!iscssions concernin( the selection of varia$les appear, )e refer the lector to Merca!o an! Pez+-440, an! Morency et al. +-4//.

3.2 Estimates ! a((essi%i$it)

%n or!er to estimate the level of accessi$ility to p$lic r$an par#s of chil!ren livin( in the %slan!of Montreal, )e may relate their travel $ehavior pattern )ith location of these par#s.

'his is achieve! $y first creatin( a chil! profile consi!erin( a(e, (en!er, transportation mo!e,main occpation, income class an! family stats. %n this case, the a!vanta(e of the approach isthat the analyst can select !ifferent attri$tes of travelers to o$tain estimates of trip len(th. 'his is!one to sit the o$&ectives of the research. =or eample, if the interest is in analyzin( an!comparin( socio7 economic !ifferences in access $et)een a /4 year ol! chil! of lo) income an!a chil! of the same a(e $t of hi(h income, estimates for each of these profiles can $e o$taine!for comparative analysis.

6econ!, the (eo(raphic location of the p$lic r$an par#s is represente! $y a centroi! from !ata)hich )as o$taine! from a (rop of researchers of the cole Polytechniqe !e Montr"a l, as )as

mentione! $efore.

'hir!, travel $ehavior is estimate! in a!!ition to the (eo7localization of p$lic r$an par#s)hich allo)s s to calclate the area of r$an par# that is accessi$le )ithin the !istance of atypical )al#in( trip from the perspective of chil!ren.

=inally, the level of accessi$ility to p$lic par#s is epresse! as a cmlative opportnitiesmeasre, that is, the total area r$an (reen space availa$le epresse! in meters sqare! )ithin the!istance of the aforementione! typical )al#in( trip.

3.3 *e+"a,&i(a$ "e,"ese-tati-

Dne of the $est means to appreciate the level of accessi$ility to r$an par#s is to (enerate a (ri!)ith centroi!s that sho)s the area of r$an par#s as a fnction of travel $ehavior patterns.

'he proce!re $e(ins $y !efinin( a sqare (ri! for par#s an! for other lan! ses sin( a G%6system. %n this case, is consi!ere! for r$an par#s a (ri! )ith centroi!s of -FN-F meters +m. %nor!er to represent locations of potential travelers, a secon! (ri! of -F4N-F4 m is also create!. %t isimportant to note that these selections for the (ri!s are for representation prposes only, an! can$e refine! as !esire!. After eperimentin( )ith !ifferent (ri! sizes )e fon! that these (ave themost effective visal representation of accessi$ility variations.


7/20

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

.1 Estimates ! t"a#e$ %e&a#i'"

'he epansion metho! is se! to (enerate estimates of travel $ehavior an! spatial location ofMontreal inha$itants. 'he !epen!ent varia$le is trip len(th after sin( a lo(7transformation to(enerate a more compact, normal7li#e !istri$tion. 'he coor!inates se! for the epansion +OIlatit!e, I lon(it!e, O-I latit!e sqare!, -I lon(it!e sqare!, OI latit!e times lon(it!ean! !istance from Central Bsiness istrictI CB correspon! to the place of resi!ence of eachrespon!ent. 'hs, the relationship )ith the in!epen!ent varia$les, !istance an! trip len(th, )erepositive. 'a$le / sho)s the estimates of the varia$les o$taine!.

After estimatin( the mo!el, the coefficients of the mo!el can $e se! to o$tain estimates of)al#in( trip len(th $y chil!ren. 'he estimates are o$taine! $y !efinin( a profile, )hichesta$lishes the vales of the varia$les for evalation of the mo!el. =or instance, a profile can $e!efine! for a chil! $ase! on a(e +e.(. /4 years ol!, (en!er +e.(. male, income class +e.(. -47?4

thosan!, occpation +e.(. st!ent, mo!e of travel +e.(. )al#in(, an! hosehol! type +e.(.cople )ith chil!ren. 'he coor!inates nee!e! for evalatin( the epan!e! parameterscorrespon! to the centroi!s of the (ri! create! for this prpose. %n other )or!s, )e se the mo!elto estimate the trip len(th of a chil! of type p at m locations, )here m is the nm$er of cells inthe (ri!. 'he estimates o$taine! from the mo!el correspon! to typical )al#in( trip len(thsspecific to a person7location.

'a$le /. Re(ression Mo!el )ith spatially epan!e! coefficients

Va"ia%$e T),e Va"ia%$e Estimate ,/#a$'e

Constant Constant -.4F?? 4.4444

:atit!e sq. 4.4/19 4.4444:atit!e 74.-E41 4.4444'ren! srface :atit!e N :on(it!e 74.44009 4.4444

:on(it!e 4.-94F4 4.4444 : on(it !e s q. 4 .4/F44 4 .4444

A(e 7/1.-1F1/ 4.4444N istance from Central Bsiness istrict -.?/?4? 4.4444N :atit!e sq. 74.9?1? 4.4444

A(e N :atit!e ?.?-0?F 4.4444N :atit!eNlon(it!e 4.49/F 4.4444N :on(it!e 7-.14-1 4.4444

N : on(it!e s q. 7 4 .-/-/ 4 .4444A(e sq. --.494E 4.4444N istance from Central Bsiness istrict 7-.0FF-F 4.4444N :atit!e sq. 4.?914- 4.4444

A(e sq. N :atit!e 7F./0F/ 4.4444N :atit!eN:on(it!e 74.4099 4.4444N :on(it!e 9.9EE-- 4.4444

N : on(it!e s q. 4 .-F?99 4 .4444


8/20

Gen!er

N : on(it!e s q. 4 .44F?F 4 .4444

=amily 6tats

6in(l e )ith C hil! 7 4 .- E ??0 4 .4444

Dccpation

Dther 74.9014/ 4.4444

%ncomeI Q-4,444%ncomeI -4,444 ?4,444 +%-4?4;

Reference4.9F11? 4.4419

N istance from Central Bsiness istrict 74.4E1-0 4.4444N :atit!e sq. 4.440E1 4.44FN :atit!e 74.4E1/4 4.4?0?N :on(it!e 4.4E10 4.444-N :on(it!e sq. 4.44F11 4.4444%ncomeI ?4,444 E4,444 +%?4E4; 4.990-1 4.44-4N istance from Central Bsiness istrict 74.49EEE 4.4444N :atit!e sq. 4.4//-1 4.4449N :atit!e 74.//F?- 4.44/-

N :atit!eN :on(it!e 4.44-94 4.4F?N :on(it!e 74.4-?F 4.44-?%ncomeI E4,444 14,444 +%E414; 4.E4EF1 4.444/

%ncome Class N istance from Central Bsiness istrict 74.4-?- 4.4?9-+CA N :atit!e sq. 4.4419- 4.4-4E

N :atit!e 74.400-4 4.4/-1N :atit!eN :on(it!e 74.44-FF 4.4FEFN :on(it!e 4.4F-? 4.444-N :on(it!e sq. 4.44?E 4.44/%ncomeI 14,444 /44,444 +%14/44; 4.?E9?9 4.4444N :atit!e 74.4E4FF 4.4444

N :atit!eN :on(it!e 74.4/4?- 4.4444N :on(it!e 4.4FF/ 4.4444%ncomeI Grater than /44,444 +%G/44; 4.?90?9 4.4444N istance from Central Bsiness istrict 4.4-?11 4.4410N :atit!e sq. 74.4440/ 4.4E-FN :on(it!e 4.419F9 4.4444N :on(it!e sq. 4.44E44 4.444/

% nco mesIRef se 4 ./-9F0 4 .4444

=emale 4.?49? 4.4444N istance from Central Bsiness istrict 74.41?F9 4.4444N :atit!e sq. 4.4/-E 4.4444N :atit!e 74./94-? 4.4444N :on(it!e 4.4F194 4.4444

6in(le ReferenceCople 4.4F//9 4.4444Cople )ith Chil! 74.-949- 4.4444

=ll7time ReferencePart 'ime )or#er 74.-?E 4.44446t!ent 4.4--9F 4.440/Retire! 74.99F/1 4.4444At home 74.?09E 4.4444


9/20

rivin( :icense

'ransportationMo!e

3oteI F confi!ence level in the ta$le that !isplays the reslts.

As !iscsse! a$ove, the mo!el of travel $ehavior spports very flei$le comparative analysis. 'oillstrate, )e consi!er t)o )al#in( profiles for chil!ren as in the eample a$ove +a(e /4, income?47E4#, st!ent, livin( )ith t)o parents, )ith the only !ifference $ein( (en!er +6ee =i(re 9. %tcan $e seen in the fi(re that males ten! to n!erta#e some)hat lon(er )al#in( trips, somethin(that $ecomes more evi!ent in the s$r$an parts of the islan!. *hereas the lon(est trips $yfemales ten! to $e less than 944 m, for males the maimm trip len(th can ecee! 944 m inplaces. =i(re9 illstrates )al#in( trip len(th for a profile !efine! as a$ove, $t no) income class is (reaterthanCA /44 thosan!. Compare! to their lo)er income conterparts, )al#in( trip len(ths areconsi!era$ly lon(er. Dther thin(s $ein( eqal, this is epecte! to reslt in (reater accessi$ility to

r$an par#s. Dther profiles can $e !efine! an! compare! as !esire!.

rivin( :icense 4./1?E/ 4.4444Car as a riverCar Passen(er

Reference4.4/1?? 4.44E/

'ransit 4.90E9E 4.44446chool Bs 4.4EF/- 4.4444*al#in( 7/.14?F 4.4444Cyclin( 74.E194E 4.4444;iss an! Ri!e /./4/F1 4.4444Par# an! Ri!e /.41/E 4.4444Dther Mo!e -.?10/ 4.4444

R- 4.9096tan!ar! error /.4?

n -19,E/F


10/20

/4

=i(re -. *al#a$le !istance of chil!ren +/4 years ol!, incomeI -4,444 ?4,444 CA

Fema$e Ma$e

=i(re 9. *al#a$le !istance of chil!ren +/4 years ol!, incomeI /44,444 CA

Fema$e Ma$e


11/20

.2 A((essi%i$it)

Base! on the estimates of )al#in( trip len(th o$taine! a$ove, the cmlative opportnitiesaccessi$ility in!icator previosly eplaine! can $e implemente!. 'he reslts in!icate that the!istance that chil!ren typically )al# Montreal %slan! is inflence! $y a(e, (en!er, income class,an! place of resi!ence. A(e is one factor that !isplays a positive association )ith )al#in(!istance. %n other )or!s, )al#in( trip len(th ten!s to increase )ith increasin( a(e an! income.=emales travel shorter !istances. %n (eneral, trip len(ths are shorter near the center of the city. Asmentione! $efore, the availa$le evi!ence in!icates that socio7economic stats is an importantfactor in terms of sa(e of facilities an! a sorce of !isparities in health otcomes. 'his is partly$ase! on the fact that chil!ren )ithot access have a lo)er pro$a$ility of sin( facilities an!therefore are more li#ely to $e a!versely affecte! $y this isse +:cas S ones, -4/-. 'hea$ility to con!ct comparative analysis therefore provi!es a po)erfl tool to n!erstan!(aps in service, an! !isparities in potential access. Given variations in travel $ehavior, an! a(eo(raphically non7 niform !istri$tion of p$lic r$an par#s, it follo)s that accessi$ility tothese facilities mst also !isplay spatial variations. %n this section, )e se t)o eamples in or!erto illstrate variations in the patters of accessi$ility to par#s $y chil!ren in the st!y area. Usin(the same profiles as a$ove, )e eplore !ifferences in (en!er an! income, an! their impact onaccessi$ility to r$an par#s in Montreal %slan!. 'he first eample correspon!s to the profile )ithincome class -47?4#. *e compte the Accessi$ility

Measre to P$lic Par#s, for males an! females, as sho)n in =i(re?

=i(re ?. Accessi$ility measre of p$lic par#s +/4 years ol!, incomeI -4,444 ?4,444 CA

Fema$e Ma$e


12/20

'a$le -. Accessi$ility measre of p$lic par#s +/4 years ol!, incomeI -4,444 ?4,444 CA

Chil!renofthisprofile )ithotaccess

'he fi(re sho)s the area availa$le to chil!ren in correlation )ith the !istance that chil!ren area$le to )al#. As epecte!, females have lo)er accessi$ility. Base! on these accessi$ilitycalclations, 'a$le - ta$lates the percenta(e of chil!ren that have access to !ifferent amonts ofpar# area. 'he nm$ers ran(e from ?/ +female an! 9E +male of chil!ren )ho lac# access top$lic par#s )ithin )al#in( !istance, to a fe) chil!ren )ho have access to areas in ecess ofF4,444 m-.

=or comparison, =i(re F illstrates the accessi$ility to p$lic par#s from the perspective ofchil!ren i!entical to the t)o profiles a$ove, $t )ho $elon( to the hi(her income class +(reaterthan CA /44 thosan!. As epecte!, the level of accessi$ility is (reater, an! it can $e seen in'a$le 9 that the percenta(e of chil!ren )ithot access to r$an par#s )ithin )al#in( !istance!rops to 9? in the case of females, an! to 94 in the case of males. 6ome chil!ren in thisincome class have in places access to r$an par# areas in ecess of /44,444 m-. 'hese reslts

in!icate the eistence of !isparities in accessi$ility to par#s, $y (en!er, $t more mar#e!ly, $yincome level. As note! a$ove, these profiles are se! for illstrative prposes only, an! otherscol! $e !efine! as !esire!.


13/20

=i(re F. Accessi$ility measre of p$lic par#s +/4 years ol!, incomeI /44,444 CA

Fema$e Ma$e

'a$le 9. Accessi$ility measre of p$lic par#s +/4 years ol!, incomeI /44,444 CA

Chil!renofthisprofile )ithotaccess

4 /4,444

/4,44/ -F,444

-F,44/ F4,444

F4,44/ /44,444

/44, 44/ or m ore

0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

%n this paper )e investi(ate! the accessi$ility to r$an par#s from the perspective of chil!ren inMontreal %slan!. By sin( metho!s of spatial analysis, )e o$taine! estimates of )al#in( triplen(th specific to an in!ivi!al profile an! location. 'his approach )as inspire! $y the relativeaccessi$ility in!icators presente! $y Pez et al. +-4/4. An attractive featre of the metho!a!opte! for this research is that it allo)s s to evalate accessi$ility in a very flei$le )ay, $y


14/20

!efinin( in!ivi!al profiles of interest. =rthermore, $y accontin( for the mo$ility patterns ofchil!ren,


15/20

more accrate an! responsive estimates of service (aps can $e o$taine!. *e )ol! ar(e thatcstomize! accessi$ility profiles are an improvement over crrent practice, )here$y analystsassme that par#s provi!e access in certain inflence areas that !isre(ar! )ell !ocmente!variations in trip len(th.

'he analysis of chil!ren mo$ility is a relatively ne) theme +Blin(, 6ltana et al. -4/-,especially ta#in( into accont the active transport as a )ay of transportation. %n fact, thisresearch stron(ly contri$tes in n!erstan!in( the relationship of chil!ren mo$ility patterns an!their access to r$an p$lic par#s, sin( a metho! $ase! on the creation of specific profiles)hich ha! not $een con!cte! in the analysis of access to par#s so far. Moreover, the propose!metho! allo)s performin( a comparative analysis $et)een chil!ren )ith !ifferent mo$ilitycharacteristics, (en!er, a(e, an! other socio7economic factors )hich can $e se! to stren(theneqity isses sch as accessi$ility, health7 relate!, financial7 relate! an! commnity7relate!+:cas an! ones -4/-

Dne of the principal contri$tions of this research is that policy ma#ers may se this

metho!olo(y to provi!e $etter accessi$ility to p$lic par#s, to improve the lan! se an!transportation isses as )ell as health otcomes of chil!ren consi!erin( their social,environmental an! economic sitation. %n fact, the conceptal chan(e propose! in this st!y liesin that the measrement of access to r$an par#s is analyze! from the perspective of mo$ilitypatterns, in this case of chil!ren, consi!erin( the !istances that each one of these are )illin(to )al#. 'his is opposite to the present form of analysis on accessi$ility to r$an par#s)hich consi!ers that par#s provi!e access in certain inflence areas +!irect an! > or in!irectconsi!erin( that the entire poplation has the same patterns of access to the r$an par#s )hichsometimes falls into an ecess of !eman! for p$lic r$an par#s as many people )ill not havethat avera(e level of mo$ility.

'he avera(e )al#in( !istance for chil!ren in the islan! of Montreal is 9F4 ?44 meters an! this!istance is hi(hly correlate! )ith (en!er an! income class +socioeconomics. A!!itionally, theqantity of p$lic par#s +area availa$le to chil!ren )ith hi(h incomes is (reater than lo)incomes $ecase chil!ren )ith hi(her incomes presente! hi(her mo$ility patterns, in this case)al#in( %n the same sense, one of the points that it )ill $e interestin( to investi(ate in the ftre)ill $e analyse if the fact that )ealthier chil!ren )al# farther is more li#ely a reflection of thestreet net)or#s than income levels +)ealthier areas on the islan! ten! to have more crvilinearstreet patterns )hich ten! to ma#e trips farther consi!erin( Dri(in estination ata.

'he activity stan!ar!s of the *orl! 5ealth Dr(anization +*5D are perhaps too lenient. 'heirrecommen!ation s((ests /F mintes, $t $ase! on a )al#in( spee! of ?#m>hor, that )ol! $e

/444 m. Dr research fon! that most )al#in( trips )ere less than half of that +9F4 7 ?44 m sothat the assessment of social, environmental an! economic col! $e overvale! ths (eneratin(, amisn!erstan!in( in the analysis of (aps in topics li#e social eqity an! transportation!isa!vanta(e +:cas -4/-. *e have to emphasize that chil!ren otsi!e Montreal or Cana!ami(ht $e )illin( to )al# more or less, $ecase that !epen!s on ata that are se!.

Base! on the assmptions ma!e, 9F +avera(e of the chil!ren !i! not have access to p$licpar#s, mainly !e to !ifferences li#e (en!er, a(e an! income. 'herefore, the islan! of Montreal!oes not have pro$lems )ith the qantity of (reen area per inha$itant if )e contemplate the setstan!ar!s +*5D2 instea! the isse is )ith the !istri$tion of par#s in the re(ion. %n this sense,the reslts of this st!y may inflence the evalation of r$an par#s $y provi!in( insi(ht into ther$an p$lic


16/20

policies on the re(ion, on topics sch as health, environment, social eqity, social &stice an!inte(ration.

=rom the crrent st!y, )e are not sre )hether chil!ren )ith access to p$lic par#s are actallysin( these par#s. %n or!er to flly n!erstan! chil!renTs se of par#s, ftre research col! focs

on relatin( accessi$ility )ith the health stats of chil!ren to flly n!erstan! the real contri$tionof r$an par#s to chil! health otcomes. 6imilarly, fiel! srveys col! focs on thecharacteristics an! patterns of active mo$ility of chil!ren accessin( r$an par#s, to n!erstan!the !istances that they travel an!, )ith this information compare )ith the !istances arisin(from the mo!el. A!!itionally, )e can !evelop a comparative analysis of these (reen areasthro(h a!its of city par#s in or!er to !etermine the most relevant varia$les )hen choosin($et)een !ifferent par#s. 'his )ill enhance the n!erstan!in( the main con!itions that chil!renan! > or their parents have in min! )hen choosin( to access r$an par#s.

A!!itionally, this research (enerate! many qestions that $oth the rea!er an! the athor is left)on!erin(. 6hol! there $e more par#sK %s the !istri$tion of these r$an par#s eqita$leK

6hol! there $e $etter pe!estrian rotes to access par#sK 5o) !oes access to par#s !iffer acrossthe islan! of MontrealK o more !ensely poplate! areas have more par#sK. ven tho(ht it )asnot a (oal to respon! these qestions in this research, )e emphasize that it )ill $e necessary inftre research eplore these qestions in or!er to assist r$an or transportation policy for the%slan! of Montreal an! for any other city, $ecase this metho!olo(y is flly applica$le to othercities )hich have an 5osehol! 'ravel 6rvey.

Moreover, to improve the accessi$ility calclation, the semi7private (reen areas sch as schools,niversities, chrches, p$lic $il!in(s, an! malls col! $e a!!e! to the analysis, )hile ecl!in(areas impossi$le to se li#e airports, seaports, private property, etc. %n the same sense, ftreefforts can help to measre accessi$ility of par#s an! others r$an services in !ifferent )ays, for

eample $y evalatin( an! comparin( the entire non7motorize! mo!es of transportation sin( thenet)or# !istance instea! cli!ean !istance. =inally, in the ftre )or#s, it col! $e anopportnity to eamine )here chil!ren play !rin( the year, an! then loo# at access to thoseplaces. =or instance, it mi(ht $e that chil!ren play at malls, especially in )inter.


17/20

REFERENCES

S(ie-ti!i( '"-a$ A"ti($es

Apparicio, P., M. A$!elma&i!, et al. +-441. Comparin( alternative approaches to measrin( the(eo(raphical accessi$ility of r$an health servicesI istance types an! a((re(ation7error isses.% nt e r n a tion a l o r n a l of 5 ea lth G e o( r a phi c s .

Ba$ey, 6. 5., '. A. 5astert, et al. +-441. Physical activity amon( a!olescents 7 *hen !o par#smatterK A m e r ic a n o r n a l of P r e v e ntive M e !i c ine 3+?I 9?F79?1.

Bar$osa, D., . A. 'ratalos, et al. +-44. *ho $enefits from access to (reen spaceK A case st!yfrom 6heffiel!, U;. : a n! s ca pe a n! U r $ a n P la nnin( 43+-79I /17/0F.

Blin(, R., 6. 6ltana, et al. +-4/-. Gest e!itorialI special section on chil! an! yoth mo$ility7 crrent research an! nascent themes. or nal of ' ranspor t Geo( raph y 25+/I 9/799.

Br(ess, ., C. M. 5arrison, et al. +/011. People, par#s an! the r$an (reen 7 a st!y of poplarmeanin(s an! vales for open spaces in the city. U r $ a n 6 t!i e s 20+EI ?FF7?9.

Cana!a, 6. +-44E. Censs of Cana!a.

Casetti, . +/0-. Generatin( Mo!els $y the pansion Metho!I Applications to Geo(raphicResearch. Geo(r aphical Analys is 24I -1/7-01.

Coen, 6. . an! 3. A. Ross +-44E. plorin( the material $asis for healthI Characteristics ofpar#s in Montreal nei(h$orhoo!s )ith contrastin( health otcomes. 5 ea lth S P lac e 12+?I 9E/79/.

Cohen, . A., . Golinelli, et al. +-440. ffects of Par# %mprovements on Par# Use an!PhysicalActivity Policy an! Pro(rammin( %mplications. A m e r ic a n o r n a l of P r e v e ntive M e ! ic ine3+EI?F7?14.

Ctts, B. B., ;. . ar$y, et al. +-440. City strctre, o$esity, an! environmental &sticeI Aninte(rate! analysis of physical an! social $arriers to )al#a$le streets an! par# access. 6 o c ia l6 c ie n c e S M e !i c ine 6+0I /9/?7/9--.

Christie, 3., R. ;im$erlee, et al. +-4//. Chil!ren a(e! 0 /? livin( in !isa!vanta(e! areas inn(lan!I Dpportnities

an! $arriers for cyclin(. or nal of ' ranspor t Ge o(r aph y 16+?I 0?970?0.

!e 8ries, 6., R. A. 8erhei&, et al. +-449. 3atral environments 7 healthy environmentsK Aneploratory analysis of the relationship $et)een (reenspace an! health. nv ir on m e nt a n!P la nnin( A 30+/4I //7/9/.

5anson 6., G. G. +-44?. 'he Geo(raphy of Ur$an 'ransportation, 'hir! !ition.


18/20

5e)#o, ., ;. . 6moyer7'omic, et al. +-44-. Measrin( nei(h$orhoo! spatial accessi$ility tor$an amenitiesI !oes a((re(ation error matterK nv ir on m e nt a n! P la nnin( A 3+I //1F7/-4E.

5i((s, G., R. =ry, et al. +-4/-. %nvesti(atin( the implications of sin( alternative G%67$ase!techniqes to measre accessi$ility to (reen space. nv ir on m e nt a n! P la nnin( B7 P la nnin( S

e s i(n 36+-I 9-E79?9.

aco$s, P. +/00. Beyon! par#s 7 sta(es in the innovation an! re7creation of the city ofMontreal. : a n! s ca pe P la nnin( +-I --F7-9F.

;)an, M. P. +/001. 6pace7time an! inte(ral measres of in!ivi!al accessi$ilityI Acomparative analysis sin( a point7$ase! frame)or#. G e o( r a phi ca l An a l y s is 35+9I /0/7-/E.

:ac#ey, ;. . an! A. '. ;aczyns#i +-440. Correspon!ence of perceive! vs. o$&ective proimityto par#s an! their relationship to par#7$ase! physical activity. % nt e r n a tion a l o r n a l ofB e h a vio r a l 3t r ition a n! P h y s ica l A c tivi t y .

:in!sey, G., M. Mara&, et al. +-44/. Access, eqity, an! r$an (reen)aysI An eploratoryinvesti(ation. P r o f e s s ion a l G e o( r a p h e r 03+9I 99-79?E.

:otfi, 6. an! M. . ;oohsari +-440. Measrin( o$&ective accessi$ility to nei(h$orhoo! facilitiesin the city +A case st!yI


19/20

Moore, 6. an! . ;estens +-4//. 3ei(h$orhoo! nvironmental Correlates of Perceive! Par#Proimity in Montreal. Ca n a !i a n o r n a l of P $lic 5 ea lt h 7 Re v e C a n a !i e nne e 6 a nte P $liqe152+9I /E7/0.

Morency, C., A. Pez, et al. +-4//. istance travele! in three Cana!ian citiesI 6patial analysis

from the perspective of vlnera$le poplation se(ments. o r n a l of ' r a n s po r t G e o( r a p h y 16+/I907F4.

3icholls, 6. +-44/. Measrin( the accessi$ility an! eqity of p$lic par#sI a case st!y sin(G%6. Man a(in( :eisr e +?I -4/7-/0

Paez, A., R. G. Merca!o, et al. +-4/4. Relative Accessi$ility eprivation %n!icators for Ur$an6ettin(sI efinitions an! Application to =oo! eserts in Montreal. U r $ a n 6 t!i e s +I /?/F7/?91.

Pez A, M. M., Bor$onnais :P, Morency C +-4/-. evelopin( a )e$7$ase! accessi$ilitycalclator prototype for the Greater Montreal Area. 'r a n s po r ta tion Re s ea r c h A + s $ m itt e ! .

Paez, A., . M. 6cott, et al. +-4/-. Measrin( Accessi$ilityI Positive an! 3ormative%mplementations of 8arios Accessi$ility %n!icators. o r n a l of ' r a n s po r ta tion G e o( r a p h y7-$i-e !i"st89i: 15.151;


20/20

'so, ;. *., . '. 5n(, et al. +-44F. An accessi$ility7$ase! inte(rate! measre of relativespatial eqity in r$an p$lic facilities. C iti e s 22+EI ?-?7?9F.

8an 5erzele, A. an! '. *ie!emann +-449. A monitorin( tool for the provision of accessi$lean! attractive r$an (reen spaces. : a n! s ca pe a n! U r $ a n P la nnin( 3+-I /407/-E.

*ar$rton, . . R., C. *. 3icol, et al. +-44E. 5ealth $enefits of physical activityI theevi!ence. Ca n a !i a n M e !i c a l A s s o c ia tion o r n a l 1+EI 14/7140.

*eiss, C. C., M. Prciel, et al. +-4//. Reconsi!erin( AccessI Par# =acilities an! 3ei(h$orhoo!isamenities in 3e) or# City. o r n a l of U r $ a n 5 ea lt h 7 B ll e tin of the 3 e ) o r # A ca ! e m y ofM e !i c ine 44+-I -079/4.

*itten, ;., R. 5iscoc#, et al. +-441. 3ei(h$orhoo! access to open spaces an! the physicalactivity of resi!entsI A national st!y. P r e v e nti v e M e !i c ine +9I -007949.

accessibility to urban parks in montreal from the perspective of children

Documents