Assaults, murders and walkers: The impact of violent crime on physical activity

What is it about?

How safe do you feel when walking around your local area? How would you respond to news that a young woman seems to have been abducted while walking to work in your local area? Crime causes direct costs such as loss of property and loss of income following injury as well as the costs of police investigations and the criminal justice system. But the indirect costs of crime could be much larger. For example, an increase in crime in the local area results in declining property values. It also leads to flight to the suburbs. Steven Levitt of Freakonomics fame showed that in the US during the 1970s and 1980s each reported city crime was associated with approximately a one-person decline in city residents. Two recent studies found for both the UK and Australia that crime in the local area causes mental distress for residents. Other studies show associations between crime in an area and aspects of physical health, such as an increase in the risk of coronary heart disease or preterm birth and low birth weight. Our research examines one route by which crime might impact upon health: through reducing participation in the most common form of physical activity, walking. We first explore the effect of two crimes that received extensive media coverage both locally and nationally: the disappearance of Claudia Lawrence in Yorkshire in 2009 and the murder of Joanna Yeates in Bristol in 2010. We find that in the local areas walking fell by 15%. We then look at the physical activity of almost one million people over a five-year period and examine links to local violent crime rates. After taking account of other factors that might affect people’s decision to leave the house, we find that an increase in crime from 480 to 930 violent offences per 100,000 people leads to a 4% fall in time spent walking. This effects is of the same magnitude as a drop in temperature of 7⁰ C.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Walking is an important form of exercise. It is free and available to everyone regardless of age, gender or income. For many adults walking is the only form of regular exercise. In our sample of individuals living in England, 30% of respondents report no exercise other than walking, while 20% report no exercise at all. The societal impact of a reduction in violent crime through its effect on walking is potentially wide-ranging. Physical activity such as walking reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease, some cancers and type 2 diabetes, improves musculoskeletal health and reduces depressive symptoms. Physical activity helps control body weight, but even without significant weight loss it improves control of blood glucose in overweight people. If walking replaced motorised transport, there would be less traffic congestion, road danger, noise and air pollution. Walking provides opportunities for social interactions and contributes to a sense of community. Pedestrians are also an important factor in ensuring a vibrant local economy. Our findings demonstrate the wider consequences of crime in society and show that policies that reduce the amount of violent crime can have positive effects well beyond the direct effects of fewer victims of crime.