IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Demand response to improved walking infrastructure: A study into the economics of walking and health behaviour change


  • Longo, Alberto
  • Hutchinson, W. George
  • Hunter, Ruth F.
  • Tully, Mark A.
  • Kee, Frank


Walking is the most common form of moderate-intensity physical activity among adults, is widely accessible and especially appealing to obese people. Most often policy makers are interested in valuing the effect on walking of changes in some characteristics of a neighbourhood, the demand response for walking, of infrastructure changes. A positive demand response to improvements in the walking environment could help meet the public health target of 150 min of at least moderate-intensity physical activity per week. We model walking in an individual's local neighbourhood as a ‘weak complement’ to the characteristics of the neighbourhood itself. Walking is affected by neighbourhood characteristics, substitutes, and individual's characteristics, including their opportunity cost of time. Using compensating variation, we assess the economic benefits of walking and how walking behaviour is affected by improvements to the neighbourhood. Using a sample of 1209 respondents surveyed over a 12 month period (Feb 2010–Jan 2011) in East Belfast, United Kingdom, we find that a policy that increased walkability and people's perception of access to shops and facilities would lead to an increase in walking of about 36 min/person/week, valued at £13.65/person/week. When focussing on inactive residents, a policy that improved the walkability of the area would lead to guidelines for physical activity being reached by only 12.8% of the population who are currently inactive. Additional interventions would therefore be needed to encourage inactive residents to achieve the recommended levels of physical activity, as it appears that interventions that improve the walkability of an area are particularly effective in increasing walking among already active citizens, and, among the inactive ones, the best response is found among healthier, younger and wealthier citizens.

Suggested Citation

  • Longo, Alberto & Hutchinson, W. George & Hunter, Ruth F. & Tully, Mark A. & Kee, Frank, 2015. "Demand response to improved walking infrastructure: A study into the economics of walking and health behaviour change," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 107-116.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:143:y:2015:i:c:p:107-116 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.08.033

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Vic Adamowicz, 1998. "Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 413-428, April.
    2. Scarpa, Riccardo & Chilton, Susan M. & Hutchinson, W. George & Buongiorno, Joseph, 2000. "Valuing the recreational benefits from the creation of nature reserves in Irish forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-250, May.
    3. Alberto Longo & Anna Alberini, 2006. "What are the effects of contamination risks on commercial and industrial properties? evidence from Baltimore, Maryland," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(5), pages 713-737.
    4. Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Robert Wright, 2003. "Estimating the monetary value of health care: lessons from environmental economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(1), pages 3-16.
    5. repec:aph:ajpbhl:2004:94:4:549-553_4 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Burt, Oscar R & Brewer, Durward, 1971. "Estimation of Net Social Benefits from Outdoor Recreation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(5), pages 813-827, September.
    7. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, January.
    8. Lisa Farrell & Bruce Hollingsworth & Carol Propper & Michael A Shields, 2013. "The Socioeconomic Gradient in Physical Inactivity in England," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 13/311, Department of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    9. Babatunde O. Abidoye & Joseph A. Herriges & Justin L. Tobias, 2012. "Controlling for Observed and Unobserved Site Characteristics in RUM Models of Recreation Demand," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1070-1093.
    10. repec:aph:ajpbhl:1995:85:5:706-710_3 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Kenneth E. McConnell & Ivar Strand, 1981. "Measuring the Cost of Time in Recreation Demand Analysis: An Application to Sportfishing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 63(1), pages 153-156.
    12. Matthews, D.I. & Hutchinson, W.G. & Scarpa, R., 2009. "Testing the stability of the benefit transfer function for discrete choice contingent valuation data," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 131-146, January.
    13. Prior, L. & Scott, D. & Hunter, R. & Donnelly, M. & Tully, M.A. & Cupples, M.E. & Kee, F., 2014. "Exploring lay views on physical activity and their implications for public health policy. A case study from East Belfast," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 73-80.
    14. Brad R. Humphreys & Jane E. Ruseski, 2007. "Participation In Physical Activity And Government Spending On Parks And Recreation," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 25(4), pages 538-552, October.
    15. Philip M. Clarke, 2002. "Testing the convergent validity of the contingent valuation and travel cost methods in valuing the benefits of health care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(2), pages 117-127.
    16. Kevin J Krizek & Susan L Handy & Ann Forsyth, 2009. "Explaining changes in walking and bicycling behavior: challenges for transportation research," Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 36(4), pages 725-740, July.
    17. W. George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa & Susan M. Chilton & T. McCallion, 2001. "Parametric and Non-Parametric Estimates of Willingness to Pay for Forest Recreation in Northern Ireland: A Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Study with Follow-Ups," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 104-122.
    18. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
    19. Bockstael, N E & McConnell, K E, 1993. "Public Goods as Characteristics of Non-market Commodities," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(420), pages 1244-1257, September.
    20. Clarke, Philip M., 1998. "Cost-benefit analysis and mammographic screening: a travel cost approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 767-787, December.
    21. repec:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2007.114777_5 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L., 1999. "Valuing Recreation and the Environment: Revealed Preference Methods in Theory and Practice, New Horizons in Environmental Economics," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12330, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    23. Nancy E. Bockstael & Ivar E. Strand & W. Michael Hanemann, 1987. "Time and the Recreational Demand Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 69(2), pages 293-302.
    24. Kenneth Button, 2010. "Transport Economics, 3rd Edition," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1863.
    25. Willig, Robert D., 1978. "Incremental consumer's surplus and hedonic price adjustment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 227-253, April.
    26. Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo, 2006. "Combining the travel cost and contingent behavior methods to value cultural heritage sites: Evidence from Armenia," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 30(4), pages 287-304, December.
    27. S. M. Chilton & W. G. Hutchinson, 1999. "Exploring Divergence Between Respondent and Researcher Definitions of the Good in Contingent Valuation Studies," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 1-16.
    28. Jeuland, Marc & Lucas, Marcelino & Clemens, John & Whittington, Dale, 2010. "Estimating the private benefits of vaccination against cholera in Beira, Mozambique: A travel cost approach," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 310-322, March.
    29. Richard C. Bishop & Thomas A. Heberlein, 1979. "Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(5), pages 926-930.
    30. Scarpa, Riccardo & Hutchinson, W. George & Chilton, Susan M. & Buongiorno, Joseph, 2000. "Importance of forest attributes in the willingness to pay for recreation: a contingent valuation study of Irish forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 315-329, December.
    31. Humphreys Brad R & Ruseski Jane E, 2011. "An Economic Analysis of Participation and Time Spent in Physical Activity," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-38, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:143:y:2015:i:c:p:107-116. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.