“6% productivity boost in active-travel cities could save millions”
Well, duh.
But it’s nice to have a number:
New research from the Parsons Brinckerhoff-Curtin University Sustainability Policy Institute Alliance shows productivity is 6% higher in active-travel cities, which could save close to AU$40 million in health care and productivity costs.
Speaking from Canberra, PB’s Director of Sustainability Darren Bilsborough explained three reasons why the research supported an alternative approach to urban development.
The research shows active-travel cities, which encourage people to walk or cycle, have more productive workforces – by over 6%
“Second, these cities generate considerable health and productivity savings for their communities – close to $40 million measured over a 50-year period.
“Third, these cities provide a framework for sustainable population growth.
“It is very important to include our nation’s health and productivity in any measure of the sustainability of city infrastructure.
“Active-travel cities encourage higher levels of physical activity through incidental exercise – with a proportional decrease in health costs.
“Increased workforce productivity was measured by lower absenteeism, stress levels, job satisfaction and turnover due to better health.”
Link’s not working for me. Appears to be a link to someone’s web mail?? Is it available somewhere else? Thanks.
===>>> Daniel
Here is a link to the actual study.
http://www.pb.com.au/NR/rdonlyres/F0D6B16E-9595-44E3-B66D-958F08C3FD21/0/CUSPActivityHealthLR.pdf
If you turn to their Sect 3.4 you’ll find how they calculated their estimates based on the average weekly wage in Australia and on results from mostly company or industry specific investigations that were summarized by another author in 1992.
Personally, I think it’s a bit of a stretch to go from company specific impacts of workplace wellness programs to entire municipalilties or precincts. No one disputes that higher average health levels, however obtained (immunization, sanitation, nutrition, exercise) will result in a greater on the job productivity.
However, the suggestion that a skilled worker will become obese, unhealthy and unrpoductive if they move from a Kitsilano apartment to a Surrey detached dwelling strikes me as the sort of “research result” one gets when one has a end point goal, a communications purpose, clearly in view. And of course, it’s worthwhile remembering that calling people fat is the last permissible smear tactic left, a point that won’t be lost on people who have a marketing goal in mind.
BTW, has there ever been a larger mouthful than “Parsons Brinckerhoff-Curtin University Sustainability Policy Institute Alliance”?