Empowering Rural Communities to Measure Walkability: Co‐Development of a Digital Tool

BACKGROUND: Local neighbourhood environments are important for shaping walkability, but few instruments exist to assess walkability in rural areas. Furthermore, there are no existing tools that have been designed with and for communities to collect local data on walkability, which has the potential to empower communities with ownership and knowledge of the resulting information. OBJECTIVE: This paper aimed to describe the development and evaluation of a digital tool designed to measure walkability in rural areas. METHODS: The Communities for Walkability (C4W) digital tool was co-developed by researchers and community members. Sixty-one community members in 10 small rural Tasmanian towns conducted 80 street segment audits and/or participated in workshops; 16 participants engaged in semi-structured interviews. Geospatial assessments of walkability were completed using Geographic Information Systems (GIS). Qualitative data were content/thematically analysed and quantitative data analysed descriptively. Exploratory analysis was performed to assess correlations between geospatially assessed walkability and a range of audit scores. RESULTS: It was feasible for citizen scientists to collect data using the largely acceptable digital tool, with some areas for improvement identified, particularly the conflict between the sequential nature of tool items and the non-sequential nature of attributes encountered during data collection, the inability to review/save findings, and technical difficulties uploading photographs. Exploratory analysis revealed some correlations between geospatially assessed walkability and safety, commercial land use, and perceived overall walkability; however, the small sample size and exploratory nature of analyses suggest cautious interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: Although feasible and acceptable for rural communities to collect walkability data using a citizen science approach, future digital walkability tools should allow greater flexibility for real-time data collection, provide streamlined systems for uploading photographs, and include review and save features. The inclusion of citizen perspectives in the design and collection of local data has the potential to be a powerful mechanism to support communities and stakeholders to engage in collective efforts and create environments that support walkability. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Members of the public were involved in this study in four key ways: co-development of the digital walkability tool, data collection using the digital walkability tool, sense-making and interpretation of findings from the digital walkability tool, and through interviews providing feedback on the tool.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health Expectations
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.70661
Primary Topic
Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Empowering Rural Communities to Measure Walkability: Co‐Development of a Digital Tool

Kate Garvey, Yvonne Laird, Melanie Davern, Samantha Rowbotham et al.
Health Expectations
Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
article

Empowering Rural Communities to Measure Walkability: Co‐Development of a Digital Tool

Kate Garvey, Yvonne Laird, Melanie Davern, Samantha Rowbotham, Claire Morley, Kim Jose, Verity J Cleland, Sharon Campbell, Lynden Leppard, Georgia McGrath, Anna Timperio
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Local neighbourhood environments are important for shaping walkability, but few instruments exist to assess walkability in rural areas. Furthermore, there are no existing tools that have been designed with and for communities to collect local data on walkability, which has the potential to empower communities with ownership and knowledge of the resulting information. OBJECTIVE: This paper aimed to describe the development and evaluation of a digital tool designed to measure walkability in rural areas. METHODS: The Communities for Walkability (C4W) digital tool was co-developed by researchers and community members. Sixty-one community members in 10 small rural Tasmanian towns conducted 80 street segment audits and/or participated in workshops; 16 participants engaged in semi-structured interviews. Geospatial assessments of walkability were completed using Geographic Information Systems (GIS). Qualitative data were content/thematically analysed and quantitative data analysed descriptively. Exploratory analysis was performed to assess correlations between geospatially assessed walkability and a range of audit scores. RESULTS: It was feasible for citizen scientists to collect data using the largely acceptable digital tool, with some areas for improvement identified, particularly the conflict between the sequential nature of tool items and the non-sequential nature of attributes encountered during data collection, the inability to review/save findings, and technical difficulties uploading photographs. Exploratory analysis revealed some correlations between geospatially assessed walkability and safety, commercial land use, and perceived overall walkability; however, the small sample size and exploratory nature of analyses suggest cautious interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: Although feasible and acceptable for rural communities to collect walkability data using a citizen science approach, future digital walkability tools should allow greater flexibility for real-time data collection, provide streamlined systems for uploading photographs, and include review and save features. The inclusion of citizen perspectives in the design and collection of local data has the potential to be a powerful mechanism to support communities and stakeholders to engage in collective efforts and create environments that support walkability. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Members of the public were involved in this study in four key ways: co-development of the digital walkability tool, data collection using the digital walkability tool, sense-making and interpretation of findings from the digital walkability tool, and through interviews providing feedback on the tool.

Health ExpectationsVol. 29(2)
The University of Sydney (AU), University of Tasmania (AU), Deakin University (AU), Tasmanian Abalone Council (Australia) (AU), RMIT University (AU)
University of Tasmania
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
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.