The impact of omitting key built environment factors on the potential health outcomes of active travel to school

Active travel to school (ATS) programs promote walking and cycling because of the proven health benefits, which underpin the economic and social justifications for these initiatives. ATS programs often focus on improving the built environment (BE) around schools to encourage active accessibility. However, BE variables are frequently intercorrelated, making it challenging to include all relevant factors in choice models. Additionally, they are strongly associated with home-to-school distance, the primary determinant of ATS. Overlooking these interactions increases the risk of omitted variable bias (OVB) in travel mode choice models, reducing their effectiveness in accurately evaluating and informing ATS policies. Using a sample of 6269 students from 86 schools in New South Wales, Australia, we evaluate OVB in multinomial logit models of active, public transit, and car travel. Factor analysis condenses eleven built environment variables into five factors. Incremental models assess the impact of excluding BE factors on ATS participation, while elasticity comparisons illustrate the practical effects of OVB. We also evaluate hypothetical BE scenarios to demonstrate how OVB can distort ATS policy decisions. We find that omitting key BE factors results in biased and inconsistent parameter estimates. The elasticity analysis of BE variables indicates a variation ranging from 1 % to 36 %. Scenario analyses further reveal that projected walking distance gains from BE enhancements can differ by up to 55 % across models. Differences in elasticity and projected scenario benefits highlight the impact of OVB in ATS evaluations, showing that inadequate BE representation can lead to misleading policy decisions. Bias direction varies, making it difficult for policymakers to determine whether benefits are over- or underestimated. This issue is amplified in equity-focused policies, where accurate benefit estimation is essential. Our findings emphasise the need for robust, nuanced, and inclusive model specifications, particularly when precise walking distance projections inform policy decisions. • Active travel, especially for children, depends on built-environment (BE) factors. • BE determinants tend to be correlated and vulnerable to omitted variable bias. • Excluding one or more of the ‘6D’ BE variables produced biased estimates. • The biased estimates reflected coefficient and elasticity variation up to 36 %. • These models produced active travel estimates that differed by up to 55 %.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Transport & Health
Published
2025-05-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2025.102083
Primary Topic
Urban Transport and Accessibility
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The impact of omitting key built environment factors on the potential health outcomes of active travel to school

Jennifer Kent, Emily Moylan, Laya Hossein Rashidi
Journal of Transport & Health
Urban Transport and Accessibility
article

The impact of omitting key built environment factors on the potential health outcomes of active travel to school

Jennifer Kent, Emily Moylan, Laya Hossein Rashidi
article en

Abstract

Active travel to school (ATS) programs promote walking and cycling because of the proven health benefits, which underpin the economic and social justifications for these initiatives. ATS programs often focus on improving the built environment (BE) around schools to encourage active accessibility. However, BE variables are frequently intercorrelated, making it challenging to include all relevant factors in choice models. Additionally, they are strongly associated with home-to-school distance, the primary determinant of ATS. Overlooking these interactions increases the risk of omitted variable bias (OVB) in travel mode choice models, reducing their effectiveness in accurately evaluating and informing ATS policies. Using a sample of 6269 students from 86 schools in New South Wales, Australia, we evaluate OVB in multinomial logit models of active, public transit, and car travel. Factor analysis condenses eleven built environment variables into five factors. Incremental models assess the impact of excluding BE factors on ATS participation, while elasticity comparisons illustrate the practical effects of OVB. We also evaluate hypothetical BE scenarios to demonstrate how OVB can distort ATS policy decisions. We find that omitting key BE factors results in biased and inconsistent parameter estimates. The elasticity analysis of BE variables indicates a variation ranging from 1 % to 36 %. Scenario analyses further reveal that projected walking distance gains from BE enhancements can differ by up to 55 % across models. Differences in elasticity and projected scenario benefits highlight the impact of OVB in ATS evaluations, showing that inadequate BE representation can lead to misleading policy decisions. Bias direction varies, making it difficult for policymakers to determine whether benefits are over- or underestimated. This issue is amplified in equity-focused policies, where accurate benefit estimation is essential. Our findings emphasise the need for robust, nuanced, and inclusive model specifications, particularly when precise walking distance projections inform policy decisions. • Active travel, especially for children, depends on built-environment (BE) factors. • BE determinants tend to be correlated and vulnerable to omitted variable bias. • Excluding one or more of the ‘6D’ BE variables produced biased estimates. • The biased estimates reflected coefficient and elasticity variation up to 36 %. • These models produced active travel estimates that differed by up to 55 %.

Journal of Transport & HealthVol. 43
Shepherd University (US), The University of Sydney (AU)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 88%
Urban Transport and Accessibility
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.