A Mixed Method Study to Inform the Implementation and Expansion of Pop-Up Parks for Economic, Behavioral, and Social Benefits

Revisiting public open space and physical activity: What we know, what we still don't, and emerging issues-A decade later

Public open spaces provide settings for physical activity, but research on their role continues to develop. A decade ago, a paper published by Koohsari et al. (2015) in Health & Place identified key conceptual and methodological challenges in public open spaces and physical activity research. Since its publication, the paper has been widely cited, with over 340 citations and a field-weighted citation impact of 10.70 (Scopus). The current interdisciplinary commentary revisits the original study, evaluates progress over the past decade, and discusses emerging issues. While some conceptual and methodological gaps have been addressed, challenges remain. Emerging issues such as intensifying climate change, pandemics, and technological shifts continue to shape how public open spaces influence physical activity. Further interdisciplinary studies among urban designnce, parks and recreation, geography, public health, and other relevant fields are needed to address these challenges.

Implementation Strategies to Support Built Environment Approaches in Community Settings

BACKGROUND

Built environment approaches are recommended to improve population physical activity levels. Implementation strategies are needed to improve uptake, but little is known about effective strategies to translate research to practice in community settings.

PURPOSE

Inform implementation strategies through understanding delivery agents' perceptions of (1) built environment approaches, (2) a toolkit developed to support implementation, and (3) other required implementation strategies.

METHOD

A toolkit was developed to detail the process of partnering to change the built environment and provide examples of built environment approaches (e.g., walking paths, traffic calming). Data were collected through focus groups (N = 3) with Extension Agents (n = 46) in 2020. The semi-structured focus group script was based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Technology Acceptance model. Rapid content analysis techniques and a deductive, grounded theory approach were used to interpret the data. Results. Focus groups generated meaning units coded into themes of perceptions of the intervention (subthemes: barriers, resources needed, and facilitators) and perceptions of the toolkit (subthemes: components to add, positive perceptions, and helpful components). The most common resources needed were coalition guidance and funding.

CONCLUSION

Agents experience barriers and facilitators to implementing built environment approaches and have specific needs for support. Based on the results, we created implementation strategies: (1) Places for Physical Activity toolkit, (2) Coalition Coaching, and (3) Mini-Grants. Future work is needed to investigate the effectiveness of these implementation strategies.

Harnessing Citizen Science to Assess and Improve Utilization of Metropolitan Parks: the Park Activity, Recreation, and Community Study (PARCS) in St. Louis, MO

Access to and use of parks is associated with physical activity participation. Our Voice is a systematic method blending community-based participatory research (CBPR) and citizen science. As part of a comprehensive, mixed-methods study in St. Louis, Missouri (PARCS), we tested the feasibility of the Our Voice method for gathering community input on the barriers to and facilitators of accessibility and use of large metropolitan parks, by describing the implementation of the Our Voice method among recreational and commuter users of a large metropolitan park in St. Louis, MO. Due to challenges posed by COVID-19, the Our Voice methodology was adapted for remote participation. Twenty-three citizen scientists (14 recreational park users and 9 commuters) collected and analyzed geolocated route, photo, and audio or text data on facilitators and barriers to park use and access. They identified 6 priority themes and 12 solution ideas, and presented them to stakeholders. In contrast to previous Our Voice studies, separate user groups (recreation and commuter users) independently prioritized many of the same themes. Adaptation of the Our Voice protocol to virtual practices during COVID-19 revealed positive implications for cost, reach, and scale of studies grounded in CBPR and citizen science. We provide a set of recommended practices for using Our Voice as a method to evaluate and promote equity of access and use of metropolitan parks.

The Role of Citizen Science in Promoting Health Equity

While there are many definitions of citizen science, the term usually refers to the participation of the general public in the scientific process in collaboration with professional scientists. Citizen scientists have been engaged to promote health equity, especially in the areas of environmental contaminant exposures, physical activity, and healthy eating. Citizen scientists commonly come from communities experiencing health inequities and have collected data using a range of strategies and technologies, such as air sensors, water quality kits, and mobile applications. On the basis of our review, and to advance the field of citizen science to address health equity, we recommend (a) expanding the focus on topics important for health equity, (b) increasing the diversity of people serving as citizen scientists, (c) increasing the integration of citizen scientists in additional research phases, (d) continuing to leverage emerging technologies that enable citizen scientists to collect data relevant for health equity, and (e) strengthening the rigor of methods to evaluate impacts on health equity. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Public Health, Volume 43 is April 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Community-Based Approaches to Reducing Health Inequities and Fostering Environmental Justice through Global Youth-Engaged Citizen Science

Growing socioeconomic and structural disparities within and between nations have created unprecedented health inequities that have been felt most keenly among the world's youth. While policy approaches can help to mitigate such inequities, they are often challenging to enact in under-resourced and marginalized communities. Community-engaged participatory action research provides an alternative or complementary means for addressing the physical and social environmental contexts that can impact health inequities. The purpose of this article is to describe the application of a particular form of technology-enabled participatory action research, called the Our Voice citizen science research model, with youth. An overview of 20 Our Voice studies occurring across five continents indicates that youth and young adults from varied backgrounds and with interests in diverse issues affecting their communities can participate successfully in multiple contributory research processes, including those representing the full scientific endeavor. These activities can, in turn, lead to changes in physical and social environments of relevance to health, wellbeing, and, at times, climate stabilization. The article ends with future directions for the advancement of this type of community-engaged citizen science among young people across the socioeconomic spectrum.