A cost-benefit analysis of physical activity using bike/pedestrian trails.

From a public health perspective, a cost-benefit analysis of using bike/pedestrian trails in Lincoln, Nebraska, to reduce health care costs associated with inactivity was conducted. Data was obtained from the city's 1998 Recreational Trails Census Report and the literature. Per capita annual cost of using the trails was 209.28 U.S. dollars (59.28 U.S. dollars construction and maintenance, 150 U.S. dollars of equipment and travel). Per capita annual direct medical benefit of using the trails was 564.41 U.S. dollars. The cost-benefit ratio was 2.94, which means that every 1 U.S. dollar investment in trails for physical activity led to 2.94 U.S. dollars in direct medical benefit. The sensitivity analyses indicated the ratios ranged from 1.65 to 13.40. Therefore, building trails is cost beneficial from a public health perspective. The most sensitive parameter affecting the cost-benefit ratios were equipment and travel costs; however, even for the highest cost, every 1 U.S. dollar investment in trails resulted in a greater return in direct medical benefit.

Cost analysis of the built environment: the case of bike and pedestrian trials in Lincoln, Neb.

We estimated the annual cost of bike and pedestrian trails in Lincoln, Neb, using construction and maintenance costs provided by the Department of Parks and Recreation of Nebraska. We obtained the number of users of 5 trails from a 1998 census report. The annual construction cost of each trail was calculated by using 3%, 5%, and 10% discount rates for a period of useful life of 10, 30, and 50 years. The average cost per mile and per user was calculated. Trail length averaged 3.6 miles (range = 1.6-4.6 miles). Annual cost in 2002 dollars ranged from 25,762 to 248,479 (mean = 124,927; median = 171,064). The cost per mile ranged from 5735 to 54,017 (mean = 35,355; median = 37,994). The annual cost per user was 235 (range = 83-592), whereas per capita annual medical cost of inactivity was 622. Construction of trails fits a wide range of budgets and may be a viable health amenity for most communities. To increase trail cost-effectiveness, efforts to decrease cost and increase the number of users should be considered.

Cost effectiveness of a bicycle/pedestrian trail development in health promotion.

BACKGROUND: A persistently low population level of physical activity is a challenge for public health. Data on cost effectiveness of environmental interventions are needed to inform the development and implementing of such interventions. OBJECTIVE: To conduct cost-effectiveness analysis of bicycle/pedestrian trails. DESIGN: The costs of trail development and number of users of four trails in Lincoln, NE, were obtained. The costs were adjusted to 2003 dollars. The physical activity-related outcomes/items are number of users who were more physically active since they began using the trails, number of users who were physically active for general health, and number of users who were physically active for weight loss. Cost-effectiveness measures were derived. Sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: The annual trail development cost US$289,035, 73% of which was construction cost. Of the 3,986 trail users, 88% were active at least 3 days a week. The average annual cost for persons becoming more physically active was US$98 (range US$65-253); the cost was US$142 (range US$95-366) for persons who are active for general health, and US$884 (range US$590-2,287) for persons who are active for weight loss. CONCLUSION: This analysis provides basic cost-effectiveness measures of bicycle/pedestrian trails. Policymakers can use this information in making resource allocation decisions.