We have found many links between the built environment and children's physical activities, but we have yet to find conclusive evidence that aspects of the built environment promote obesity. For example, certain development patterns, such as a lack of sidewalks, long dis
More
We have found many links between the built environment and children's physical activities, but we have yet to find conclusive evidence that aspects of the built environment promote obesity. For example, certain development patterns, such as a lack of sidewalks, long distances to schools, and the need to cross busy streets, discourage walking and biking to school. Eliminating such barriers can increase rates of active commuting. But researchers cannot yet prove that more active commuting would reduce rates of obesity. It note that recent changes in the nutrition environment, including greater reliance on convenience foods and fast foods, a lack of access to fruits and vegetables, and expansion in portion sizes, are also widely believed to contribute to the epidemic of childhood obesity. But again, conclusive evidence that changes in the nutrition environment will reduce rates of obesity yet does not exist. Research into the link between the built environment and childhood obesity is still in its infancy. Analysts do not know whether changes in the built environment have increased rates of obesity or whether improvements to the built environment will decrease them. Nevertheless, the policy implications are clear. Finally, environment can have a sustainable effect in children activities. The attempt of this research is to identify the effective variables of friendly places by kids. Prioritization according to the importance of variables is the main goal of the research. The Delphi technique has been used to collect the opinions of experts about the priorities of criteria. The research method was qualitative, and the data were collected conducting a questionnaire. Firstly, by using literature review, several factors that are strongly related to design field (Child- friendly place, Child- friendly City (CFC), and Friendly places) have been identified. The questionnaires was sent to 25 experts, out of them 18 key experts answered to the research. Their responses were analyzed for the purpose of identifying. Following revisions as a result of the comments received from the first round, the participants were asked to repeat the assessment in the second round. A t-test was used to determine whether or not the experts’ opinions on the first and second round were similar. The results of the research showed that the final set of variables grouped into 5 categories: (1) physical factors; (2) safe access factors; (3) location factors; (4) ecological factors; and (5) personal factors. Physical factors consisted of functional distance, scale, variety of functions, quality of environment, density of neighborhood, texture and color of material, and so on. Safe access factors were distance (km/hr), to home, school, play space, parks and center of neighborhood. Contextual factors consisted of neighborhood, services and safety. Location factors were proximity with home, school, play space, parks. Personal factors consisted of age, gender, education, economic place and sense of safety. We used Shannon’s entropy to determine the importance weights of variables. Physical factors were the most important attribute and personal factors were the least important one. The physical factors of residential neighborhood have a significant role in increasing loveable place for children.
Manuscript profile
