Abstract
School choice has implications for school travel as it allows students to attend schools that are further away from their residence than their neighborhood schools. The aim was to study the implications of school choice (i.e., private or public) for active commuting to school (ACS). Differences on ACS, parental attitudes, socio-economic status (SES) and CO2 emissions with respect to the type of school and the threshold distance to ACS were analyzed. The influence of distance, parents' attitudes, and family socioeconomic status, in the frequency of ACS by type of school were also analyzed. All students aged 9 to 11 years old, from eleven public or private primary education schools in Huesca (Spain), and their parents (i.e., mother and father, separately), participated in this study. The results show differences among students, who live above the threshold distance and attend public and private schools, in terms of frequency of ACS, mothers’ attitudes, and SES. CO2 emissions were higher in the area around private schools than public schools, regardless of the threshold distance. Effects of school choice on weekly frequency of ACS behavior appear to be mostly explained by its connection with travel distance, SES and by mothers’ attitudes, in students attending public schools. While, for private schools, the final model showed an influence of distance, mother’s attitudes, and gender, on weekly frequency of ACS. This paper highlights how school choice can influence the mode of commuting to school, and some other related variables such as distance, mothers’ attitudes, and CO2 emissions.
1. Introduction
More than 80% of the European population are expected to live in urban areas by 2030 (European Union, 2016). The growth model of European cities has been characterized by an expansion into peripheral areas (Jaraiz-Cabanillas et al., 2018), creating a decentralization of services (e.g., schools), changing mobility patterns (Dombriz, 2009; Pozueta and Gurovich, 2007), increasing the use of private vehicles for school travel (Ortúzar and Willumsen, 2008) and, consequently, reducing active transportation, such as walking or cycling (European Union, 2019; Galvez-Fern ´ andez ´ et al., 2020). This car reliance has led to negative impacts on the environment in several ways. For example, cars emit greenhouse gasses, such as carbon dioxide, which contribute to global warming (Van Ristell et al., 2013). A reduction in active commuting to school (ACS) patterns, has led to concerns over such environmental consequences as greenhouse gas emission, air and water pollution, and traffic congestion (Ewing, 2003; Ewing et al, 2004). Moreover, car reliance causes traffic congestion around schools and adverse health impacts related to less physical activity (PA) levels (Faulkner et al., 2009). The World Health Organization (WHO, 2016), recommends urban planners to encourage PA through the design of urban spaces, and to promote active transportation as a serious alternative to motorized options.
