Active living in Saskatchewan: A review of official community plans.

Hassan, Oluwasegun B. ; Herman, Katya M. ; Faulkner, Cathie D. Kryzanowski Guy E.J. 等

Physical activity is an integral contributor to health and well-being. Evidence points to a decline in physical activity levels globally and in Canada. (1-3) This trend has a strong relationship with the increasing prevalence of obesity and non-communicable diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and certain cancers. (4) According to the 2016 ParticipACTION report card on the physical activity of children and youth, fewer than 10% of Canadian children and youth are meeting the physical activity guidelines recommending 60 minutes/day moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). (3) Specifically in the province of Saskatchewan, fewer than 15% of 5-11 year olds are meeting these guidelines. (5) Furthermore, only 15% of adults nationwide are getting the recommended 150 minutes/week MVPA necessary for health benefits. (6) The proportion of Saskatchewan residents [greater than or equal to] 12 years of age engaging in moderate physical activity during their leisure time falls below the national average, (7) and the prevalence of obesity among Saskatchewan residents [greater than or equal to] 18 years of age (25.1%) is also higher than the national average (20.2%). (8)

The obesogenic environment model suggests that the direct relationship between physical inactivity and the obesity epidemic may be partly ascribed to environmental factors. (9) Environmental changes may be as effective as policy changes, but research has shown these factors to be interdependent. (10) Therefore, policy change is necessary around many built environment settings in order to significantly impact the lifestyles of the population. (10) Factors that enhance active transportation such as walking and cycling, and increased access to public transit may be positive contributors to population physical activity levels, as these forms of active transportation can replace passive automobile transit. (11-13) Land-use mix, housing density, and compact building designs have also been associated with improved walkability. (14) Active and safe routes to school have been highlighted as a means to empower Canadian children in meeting the recommended daily physical activity levels. (15) In a systematic review, 70% of the included studies reported a positive relationship between physical activity levels and active compared to passive commuting. (16) Parks and recreation settings, open spaces, and neighbourhood designs, especially in terms of walkability, have also been directly positively associated with higher physical activity. (17) It is clearly important for national, provincial and municipal governments and organizations to create and implement strategies to improve the quality of life of residents by influencing the school, work, residential, commercial and recreational environments. (18)

Strategic plan of Saskatchewan in motion (Active Saskatchewan 2020: AS2020)

Saskatchewan in motion (Box 1) is an independent (arm's length), not-for-profit organization that works in close strategic partnership with the Government of Saskatchewan. It was created in 2003 in response to a federal, provincial and territorial goal to increase population physical activity in each jurisdiction. The in motion strategic plan (AS2020) identifies a multi-sector, multi-level approach geared towards "getting more kids, more active, more often." (19) An identified outcome within AS2020 is that "Saskatchewan in motion contributes to evidence informed public policy that supports and encourages physical activity." (19) This includes, but is not limited to, municipal policies that identify physical activity opportunities, and it could be measured by an increase in physical activity-related content within official community plans (OCPs).

Policies with the potential to impact public health may exist in many different forms and originate from a variety of sources. (20) As one such source, an OCP is a comprehensive policy document developed by a municipality "to guide the physical, environmental, economic, social, and cultural development of the municipality." (21) According to The Planning and Development Act, 2007, every municipality in Saskatchewan is expected to adopt an OCP prepared with a community planning expert and reviewed by a solicitor. (21) The OCP benefits residents, investors and visitors by providing certainty about future plans and developments. (21) The OCP is suitable for physical activity-related content analysis as it sets the vision for sustainable development, drives decision making, and encompasses housing, transportation and recreation policies. Such a review may be informative as OCP inclusion of physical activity-related content may be indicative of both the value placed on physical activity, and the commitment of resources and political will to supporting physical activity.

Over the past few decades, researchers have continued to emphasize interventions combating physical inactivity by raising awareness, setting benchmarks for physical activity indicators, and making policy recommendations. (18) Although important, these processes may not be enough to effect change in physical activity behaviours, considering current physical inactivity trends. Emerging research seeks to ensure that recommendations to policy makers are indeed being converted to policies. (18) However, policy initiatives may be influenced by delicate factors such as political changes and preferences; hence, it is necessary to monitor prospectively and retrospectively the physical activity considerations contained within OCPs. Box 1. Saskatchewan in motion Objectives: * Creating understanding and awareness of physical activity at an individual level * Addressing built and social environments at a community level * Inspiring change at an institutional level * Influencing policy at a societal level Activities guided by AS2020 strategic plan: * Community mobilization and awareness building processes * Educating decision makers * Collaborative activities: Development of baseline community profiles, engaging stakeholders through symposiums, development and implementation of action plans * Evaluation processes Goal: * To increase policy maker and collaborator awareness of community policy initiatives that can be implemented towards encouraging healthy active lifestyles.

Past studies have concentrated on how population health can be improved at the local and provincial levels through the embedding of health considerations into policy- and decision-making across all sectors. (22) A Canadian study analyzed the contents of OCPs for built environment policies promoting health equalities across all sectors. (23) However, we are not aware of any analysis of policies aimed at improving physical activity specifically contained within OCPs in the Canadian context.

The purpose of this study was to review the OCPs of the 17 cities in the province of Saskatchewan, Canada, and specifically to identify policies within those plans that are supportive of physical activity. In doing so, our analysis provides a basis for monitoring policy changes in the OCPs over time and highlights potential areas for policy development within OCPs. It also provides one template for other Canadian provinces and territories to assess and monitor municipal physical activity strategies.

METHODS

Study area

Saskatchewan is the middle province of Canada's three Prairie provinces, with a total surface area of 651 036 [km.sup.2]. As of the 2011 Census, Saskatchewan has a population of 1 033 381, with city populations ranging from 4517 to 260 660. Melville is the least densely populated city, while Saskatoon is the most densely populated. Saskatchewan is a unique province due to its population distribution across cities. Regina and Saskatoon are the only mid-sized cities, with populations over 200 000. The next two most populated cities (Prince Albert and Moose Jaw) each have close to 40 000 people. Following this is another drop in population to 15 000 and below for the remaining cities.

Data sources

The OCPs of 17 communities were included in this project

(Table 1). All communities were represented as cities provided they met the following criteria for inclusion: a) communities meeting the SK population criteria for a city which is a minimum population of 5000, or communities (towns) not meeting this criteria but with a population [greater than or equal to] 4500; and b) an approved OCP that was publicly accessible, with an exception given to cities having a final draft OCP to be approved before end of 2015. The cut-off date for inclusion of official documents was set at July 31, 2015, as an OCP may be amended at the discretion of the municipal council and the date of approval of amendment may or may not be stated on the OCP or city website. Official documents referred to in OCPs such as Transportation Master Plans were further searched and reviewed. Documents excluded in this project included school division policies and OCPs of towns with population <4500.

Data extraction and analysis

All OCP documents were located and downloaded via the city websites and carefully read. A conventional content analysis was carried out in which categories were derived directly from the textual data. (24) Textual data were extracted through statements from fundamental goals, objectives and policies directly related to the support of physical activity. Some of the keywords used to identify physical activity-related content included: active, active transportation, walking, walkable, pedestrian, sidewalk, crosswalk, cycling, cyclist, trail, linkage, connectivity, network, green space, parks, recreation, and active recreation. The data were coded and categorized inductively. This involved thematically categorizing texts both independently within cities and across cities. From the emerging patterns within the developing categories, a series of indicators supportive of physical activity were derived. For example, in developing the indicator residential neighbourhood plans associated with active living, texts directly related to the promotion of pedestrian or cycling activities as well as open spaces in the residential area were categorized. We also developed indicators related to master plans by identifying the presence of the master plan (i.e., a comprehensive official action plan) in at least one of the OCPs.

The OCPs were then categorized as "yes" for having one or more plans for an indicator, "NR" (not reported) for not having any plans for an indicator, and "considering" for plans being considered for an indicator. Due to the variable nature of OCP design, two indicators (other pedestrian plans and other connectivity plans) for which all OCPs contained policies were labelled differently as "str-many" (structured and many plans), "str-few" (structured but few plans), "unstr-many" (unstructured and many plans), and "unstr-few" (unstructured and few plans). This allowed a general categorization of how pedestrian and networking plans were addressed textually throughout the OCPs. Presence of [less than or equal to] 3 policy statements supporting these indicators was considered few, while presence of [greater than or equal to] 4 statements was considered many. From the established baseline information, descriptive statistics were derived. These included the proportions of cities with, without, or in consideration of each indicator. The frequencies of inclusion of indicators per OCP were also determined, without and with those being considered, and the mean and standard deviation were calculated.

Inter-rater reliability

Inter-rater reliability was evaluated to assess the consistency of interpretation and categorization, and determined by the percentage of agreement between the primary researcher and an assistant. Following review of all OCPs and derivation of indicators by the primary researcher, one OCP was selected, collectively reviewed and recoded by two reviewers. Approximately 50% of the OCPs (n = 8) were then randomly selected and independently reviewed by the secondary reviewer using the established coding system.

RESULTS

Indicator development and inter-rater reliability

A total of 17 indicators supportive of physical activity were derived from the review of 17 OCPs (Table 2). In terms of inter-rater reliability, agreements averaged 77% across the OCPs (53%-100%), and 75% across the indicators (37%-100%). The indicators cycling master plan, downtown cycling and pedestrian plan and pedestrian master plan had 100% agreements, while encouraging public transit, recreation master plan and joint-use agreement between communities and schools had 87% agreement. However, the indicators other connectivity plans, connectivity master plans and school travel plan had agreements of only 50%, 62% and 75% respectively. These indicators were then jointly reviewed and consensus was met through discussion between the senior author and the two reviewers. The remaining OCPs were then re-reviewed and modified to ensure consistency.

Inclusion of indicators in OCPs

The proportions of OCPs with supporting plans for each indicator (including those being considered) ranged from 5.8% to 88.2% (Table 3). The most common indicator across the OCPs was residential neighbourhood plan associated with active living while the indicator pedestrian master plan had no OCP with a current plan for its development. Pedestrian master plan was being considered for development by only one OCP with a population of just over 5000. Some other indicators (with % OCPs having supportive plans) were: downtown cycling and pedestrian plans (58.8%), presence of plan to improve active recreation (52.9%), joint-use agreement between community and schools (52.9%), school travel plan (41.2%), and active transportation master plan (17.6%). The indicator referring to the presence of explicit statement "increasing or promoting physical activity or active living" was present in 35.3% of the OCPs.

Table 4 identifies the year of adoption of each OCP, the population of the city, and the frequency of indicators included per OCP, both without and with those indicators being considered for development. The frequency of the identified indicators included per OCP varied from 17.6% to 82.4%, with the lowest and highest proportions of indicators included in the Lloydminster and Yorkton OCPs respectively (Table 4). The mean (standard deviation) frequency of indicators included per OCP was 7.4 (3.1). A total of 11 OCPs were identified as including <50% of the indicators identified in this study. Four OCPs included only 35.7% of the indicators, while the highest indicator inclusion levels were 82.4%, 70.6%, 64.7% and 58.8%. Taking population size differences into account, the mean (standard deviation) frequency of inclusion was 5.3 (1.9) for cities with a population of <10 000, and 9.1 (2.9) for those with a population of [greater than or equal to] 10 000.

Five OCPs reported plans to consider the development of one or more indicators (Table 1). These included Humboldt (1), Meadow Lake (1), North Battleford (3), Saskatoon (1), Swift Current (1) and Yorkton (1). With the addition of indicators being considered within the OCPs, the mean (standard deviation) frequency of indicators included rose to 7.8 (3.3). The maximum number of indicators included was found in the Yorkton OCP (n = 14; n = 15 with inclusion of indicators being considered).

DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to review the OCPs of 17 Saskatchewan cities, and to identify policies supportive of physical activity. Overall, the findings of this study demonstrate that Saskatchewan OCPs make little direct reference to policies supportive of physical activity, leaving clear room for future improvement. In particular, the current findings highlight some policy gaps which will now be discussed in turn.

Very few cities mentioned the existence of master plans for active transportation, cycling or pedestrians within their OCPs. Advocating for the inclusion of an active transportation master plan in city plans may serve as a way for individual cities to satisfy their development agenda regarding the different modes of active transportation. This would encompass plans on cycling, walking, carpooling, public transit, and other active wheel-related modes such as skateboarding, longboarding and rollerblading. Most OCPs also did not have plans to promote public transit and ridership. Commuting by transit is associated with increased moderate daily physical activity, and transit systems as well as transportation planning may play a significant part in influencing the assessment of the impact of policies on the health of a population. (11,12) Ensuring built environment features such as walkable transit stops, bus shelters, benches, and enhanced lightings may encourage the use of public transit, thereby reducing automobile usage. (12) However, this result should be interpreted with caution because many cities that had plans to improve the public transit system had a population of >10 000, which may have created the need for this plan. The low consideration for active modes of transportation within many OCPs is supported by a study which reported that carpooling is not optimally used within Canadian cities, whereas a reduction of vehicles particularly around school areas may improve safety, and may in turn encourage active transportation to and from schools. (25)

Cycling-friendly initiatives such as barrier setting, use of lane reductions, bike share systems with docking stations across the city, and inclusion of bike networks on transit websites, may be expensive to implement and maintain, and therefore difficult for some cities to implement. Nevertheless, some OCPs (23.5%) have few policies directly ensuring the promotion of walk-ability, which highlights another avenue to be addressed in active transportation. This is similar to a study in the Canadian provinces of Ontario and British Columbia, showing that while the potential for walkability was apparent, the demand remained unmet, leading to the recommendation of active transportation strategies as means to promote healthy, active lifestyles. (26)

Only one city OCP (Meadow Lake) was considering the development of a pedestrian master plan. This city's population of >5000 may show the need for the master plan; however, all other cities with smaller or bigger populations did not have this indicator. Thus, this plan represents a strategy that may be incorporated by many Saskatchewan communities to improve pedestrian opportunities. Additionally, less than half of the reviewed OCPs mentioned policies specifically to improve cycling features independently without being attached to a pedestrian plan.

Less than 20% of the OCPs have a recreation master plan (n = 3) and a connectivity master plan (n = 2). Plans for improving parks and recreation were commonly addressed by most of the cities in SK; however, networking plans did not show the same trend. The use of trails to potentially improve active living has been documented. (27) However, the development of trails and creating awareness of the linkages between natural systems, open spaces, mixed-use area and residential areas, remains undocumented in many OCPs. This might be a significant way for some cities to improve people's capacity for actively getting to desired destinations to work, study, play, and have fun. It has been shown that access and proximity to parks and recreation facilities is associated with walkability, especially among children. (28) Noticeably, a few city OCPs in SK included policies stating that "open spaces will be distributed such that no residential property is located more than 400 meters from nearest public open space" (Moose Jaw OCP and Humboldt OCP), and "locating neighbourhood parks at 5 minutes walking distance" (Warman OCP). Generally from the findings of this study, the indicator residential neighbourhood plans associated with active living was well reported by almost 90% (n = 15) of the OCPs.

"Smart growth" is a development approach which has been considered by researchers and urban planners, encompassing factors including walkability, mixed land use, transportation diversity, housing diversity, compact development design, neighbourhood infill, etc. (14) From the current findings, only one OCP (Yorkton) used smart growth principles in fundamental settings for land use planning. As other cities used some of the smart growth principles such as mixed land use in their OCPs, it was unclear whether smart growth was specifically considered as a basis for development. Cities not considering the smart growth principles may be ignoring these principles due to their population, growth rate, or developmental priorities. Nevertheless, it is necessary to monitor the progress of the city of Yorkton over the projected years of its OCP, which included most of the indicators derived in this study (n = 14). Interestingly, this city with the highest inclusion of indicators was not one of the most highly populated cities. With a population of <20 000, this city might be using its size to its advantage in creating effective responsive action groups, and plans that can be efficiently implemented.

Nearly half of the OCPs mentioned school travel plans (n = 6), and joint-use agreements between schools and communities (n = 7). School travel plans may be an effective strategy to promote greater active school travel. (29) Although active school travel may be decreasing due to confounders of independent mobility such as age, distance, and safety issues, (30) school travel behaviour is still sensitively influenced by the neighbourhood construct. (31) Despite the growing evidence, many SK cities do not have any plans for active and safe routes to and from school documented within their OCPs. This indicator also represents an important area that is recommended for the attention of policy makers in Saskatchewan communities when considering strategies for developing the built environment.

Strengths and limitations

The strength of this project lies in the unique and innovative approach to achieving a better understanding of active living development plans in Canadian communities. The project may ensure that SK communities consider how policies supportive of physical activity can be integrated within OCPs. Furthermore, the indicators derived from this study may serve as one possible template for other provinces in Canada to conduct baseline assessments and also for ongoing monitoring. Another strength of this project is the population of the cities reviewed, which cumulatively covered over half of the provincial population. In contrast, we did not conduct a policy evaluation of the individual master plans for quality (in design or implementation), nor was there a ranking of the indicators (informed empirically from the different literature discussed). The exclusion of many smaller towns in the province may be a limitation as some of these less populated communities could have some of the indicators derived in this study in their OCPs. This study may also be limited by the primary researcher's subjective bias in interpreting the language within the OCPs for the initial identification of indicators, subsequently rated by the secondary reviewer. Further, the indicators coded were retrieved from OCPs which for some cities may be their only development plan, whereas other cities may have more specifics and/or more structured consideration of other pedestrian and/or other connectivity plans in additional documents separate from their OCP. Many cities are working on modifying their OCPs, and therefore the results of this study are limited to the policies available during the time of review.

CONCLUSION

This study reviewed the OCPs of 17 Saskatchewan cities for policies supportive of physical activity, identifying 17 baseline indicators of which OCPs on average included fewer than 50%. Most Saskatchewan OCPs make little direct reference to policies supportive of physical activity. Impacting community-level policy is an expected outcome of AS2020/Saskatchewan in motion. This study has now identified a range of indicators for monitoring this process, while highlighting potential areas for policy development within OCPs. This study has also highlighted some indicators that can be considered by Saskatchewan cities and towns, and provides one assessment template for other Canadian provinces and territories. Consequently, this study may aid various community action groups and stakeholders in setting priorities for future strategic planning that are directed toward the development of more active communities in Saskatchewan and in Canada.

doi: 10.17269/CJPH.108.6068

Acknowledgement: We would like to acknowledge research assistant Lauren White from the University of Toronto, who was the secondary reviewer of the OCPs.

REFERENCES

(1.) Hallal PC, Andersen LB, Bull FC, Guthold R, Haskell W, Ekelund U, for the Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group. Global physical activity levels: Surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. Lancet 2012; 380(9838):230-37. PMID: 22818937. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60646-1.

(2.) Kohl HW 3rd, Craig CL, Lambert EV, Inoue S, Alkandari JR, Leetongin G, et al., for the Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group. The pandemic of physical inactivity: Global action for public health. Lancet 2012; 380(9838):294-305. PMID: 22818941. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60898-8.

(3.) ParticipACTION. Are Canadian Kids Too Tired to Move? The 2016 PartlcipACTION Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth, Toronto, ON: ParticipACTION, 2016.

(4.) World Health Organization. Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 2010. Available at: http://www.who.int/ dietphysicalactivity/publications/9789241599979/en/ (Accessed September 29, 2016).

(5.) Saskatchewan in motion. Physical Activity by the Numbers. Regina, SK: Saskatchewan in motion, 2015. Available at: http://www.saskatchewanin motion.ca/issues/physical-activity-by-the-numbers (Accessed September 29, 2016).

(6.) Statistics Canada, Health Reports. Physical Activity of Canadian Adults: Accelerometer Results From 2007 to 2009 Canadian Health Measures Survey. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada, 2011. Available at: www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/ 82-003-x/2011001/article/11396-eng.htm (Accessed September 29, 2016).

(7.) Statistics Canada, Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS). Percentage at Least Moderately Active in Leisure-Time, by Province or Territory, Household Population Aged 12 or Older, Canada, 2005. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada, 2007. Available at: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-003-x/2006008/article/ phys/c-g/4060706-eng.htm (Accessed September 29, 2016).

(8.) Statistics Canada, Health Fact Sheets. Overweight and Obese Adults (Self-Reported), 2014. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada, 2015. Available at: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-625-x/2015001/article/14185-eng.htm (Accessed September 29, 2016).

(9.) Corbin CB, Welk GJ, Corbin WR, Welk KA. Concepts of Physical Fitness: Active Lifestyles for Wellness, 17th ed. [Place of publication]. New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2013; 351-57.

(10.) Litt JS, Reed HL, Tabak RG, Zieff SG, Eyler AA, Lyn R, et al. Active living collaboratives in the United States: Understanding characteristics, activities, and achievement of environmental and policy change. Prev Chronic Dis 2013; 10(E19):1-14. PMID: 23391295. doi: 10.5888/pcd10.120162.

(11.) Besser LM, Dannenberg AL. Walking to public transit: Steps to help meet physical activity recommendations. Am J Prev Med 2005; 29(4):273-80. PMID: 16242589. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.06.010.

(12.) Lachapelle U, Frank L, Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Conway TL. Commuting by public transit and physical activity: Where you live, where you work, and how you get there. JPhys Act Health 2011; 8(Suppl 1):S72-82. PMID: 21350265. doi: 10. 1123/jpah.8.s1.s72.

(13.) Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Frank LD. Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: Findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Ann Behav Med 2003; 25(2):80-91. PMID: 12704009. doi: 10. 1207/S15324796ABM2502_03.

(14.) Durand CP, Andalib M, Dunton GF, Wolch J, Pentz MA. A systematic review of built environmental factors related to physical activity and obesity risk: Implications for smart growth urban planning. Obes Rev 2011; 12:e173-82. PMID: 21348918. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2010.00826.x.

(15.) Wong BYM, Faulkner G, Buliung R, Irving H. Mode shifting in school travel mode: Examining the prevalence and correlates of active school transport in Ontario, Canada. BMC Public Health 2011; 11(618):1-12. PMID: 21812976. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-618.

(16.) Faulkner GEJ, Buliung RN, Flora PK, Fusco C. Active school transport, physical activity levels and body weight of children and youth: A systematic review. Prev Med 2009; 48(1):3-8. PMID: 19014963. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.10. 017.

(17.) Kaczynski AT, Henderson KA. Parks and recreation settings and active living: A review of associations with physical activity function and intensity. J Phys Act Health 2008; 5(4):619-32. PMID: 18648125. doi: 10.1123/jpah.5.4.619.

(18.) Schilling JM, Gilles-Corti B, Sallis JF. Connecting active living research and public policy: Transdisciplinary research and policy interventions to increase physical activity. J Public Health Policy 2009; 30(Suppl 1):S1-15. PMID: 19190567. doi: 10.1057/jphp.2008.59.

(19.) Saskatchewan in motion. Active Saskatchewan 2020. Regina, SK: Saskatchewan in motion, 2015. Available at: http://www.saskatchewanin motion.ca/about-us/our-story (Accessed January 9, 2017).

(20.) Crammond B, Gemma C. What is policy and where do we look for it when we want to research it? J Epidemiol Community Health 2017; 71(4):404-8. PMID: 27864323. doi: 10.1136/jech-2016-207945.

(21.) Saskatchewan Ministry of Municipal Affairs. Official Community Plans: Preparation of an OCP. Saskatoon, SK: Saskatchewan Ministry of Municipal Affairs, 2011. Available at: http://publications.gov.sk.ca/documents/313/ 97950-Preparation-Official-Community-Plan.pdf (Accessed May 11, 2017).

(22.) Rudolph L, Caplan J, Ben-Moshe K, Dillon L. Health in All Policies: A Guide for State and Local Governments. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association, 2013.

(23.) Collins PA. Examining municipal government uptake of health inequities discourse: An analysis of official community plans of five metro Vancouver municipalities. Can J Urban Res 2014; 23(Suppl 1):21-45.

(24.) Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 2005; 15(9):1277-88. PMID: 16204405. doi: 10.1177/ 1049732305276687.

(25.) Arbour-Nicitopoulos K, Faulkner GEJ, Buliung RN, Lay J, Stone M. The school run: Exploring carpooling as an intervention option in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), Canada. Transp Policy 2012; 21:134-40. doi: 10. 1016/j.tranpol.2012.03.004.

(26.) Frank LD, Kershaw SE, Chapman JE, Campbell M, Swinkels H. The unmet demand for walkability: Disparities between preferences and actual choices for residential environments in Toronto and Vancouver. Can J Public Health 2015; 106(Suppl 1):eS12-20. PMID: 25955542. doi: 10.17269/cjph.106.4397.

(27.) Kaczynski AT, Henderson KA. Environmental correlates of physical activity: A review of evidence about parks and recreation. Leisure Sci 2007; 29(4):315-54. doi: 10.1080/01490400701394865.

(28.) Ding D, Sallis JF, Kerr J, Lee S, Rosenberg DE. Neighbourhood environment and physical activity among youth: A review. Am J Prev Med 2011; 41(4): 442-55. PMID: 21961474. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.06.036.

(29.) Buliung R, Faulkner G, Beesley T, Kennedy J. School travel planning: Mobilizing school and community resources to encourage active school transportation. J Sch Health 2011; 81(11):704-12. PMID: 21972991. doi: 10. 1111/j.1746-1561.2011.00647.x.

(30.) Mammen G, Faulkner G, Buliung R, Lay J. Understanding the drive to escort: A cross-sectional analysis examining parental attitudes towards children's school travel and independent mobility. BMC Public Health 2012; 12(862): 1-12. PMID: 23051005. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-862.

(31.) Mitra R, Buliung RN. Built environment correlates of active school transportation: Neighborhood and the modifiable areal unit problem. J Transp Geo 2012; 20(1):51-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.07.009.

Received: January 18, 2017

Accepted: August 3, 2017

Oluwasegun B. Hassan, MSc, [1] Katya M. Herman, PhD, [1] Cathie D. Kryzanowski, [2] Guy E.J. Faulkner, PhD [3]

Author Affiliations

[1.] Faculty of Kinesiology and Health Studies, University of Regina, Regina, SK

[2.] Saskatchewan in motion, Regina, SK

[3.] School of Kinesiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC

Correspondence: Oluwasegun B. Hassan, Faculty of Kinesiology and Health Studies, University of Regina, 3737 Wascana Pkwy, Regina, SK S4S 0A2, Tel: 306-585-4360, E-mail: Oluwasegun.Hassan@uregina.ca

Conflict of Interest: None to declare. Table 1. List of OCPs reviewed City OCPs Source/website 1. Estevan OCP http:--estevan.ca-Portals-0- Planning- Planning%20and%20Development%20Documents- Office%20Edition-Official %20Community%20Plan- Schedule%20A.pdf 2. Humboldt OCP http://www.humboldt. 3. Kindersley OCP https:// evogov.s3.amazonaws.com/ media/8/media/1049.pdf 4. Lloydminster OCP http://crosbyhanna.ca/assets/ LPD-OCP-FINAL.pdf 5. Martensville OCP http://www.martensville. 6. Meadow Lake OCP http://meadowlake.ca/2008-06/ pdf/OCP%20Bylaw.pdf 7. Melfort Basic http://cityofmelfort.ca/ Planning District siteimages/ Basic%20Planning%20Statement.pdf 8. Melville OCP https:// melville.civicweb.net/ document/7556 9. Moose Jaw OCP http://www.moosejaw. 10. North-Battleford http://cityofnb.ca/mrws/ OCP filedriver/ OCP_-_OCP_Report.pdf 11. Prince Albert OCP http://citypa.ca/Portals/0/ Planning/ Official%20Community%20Plan/ OCP%20Complete%20Doc.pdf 12. Design Regina OCP ftp://ftp.regina.ca/ web_files/planning/ 13. Saskatoon OCP https://www.saskatoon. ca/sites/default/files/8769. pdf 14. Swift Current http://www.swiftcurrent. Development Plan ca/home/showdocument?id=726 15. Warman OCP Draft http://www.warman. ca/DocumentCenter/View/721 16. Weyburn OCP http://www.weyburn. ca/pdfs/Dev_Plan.pdf 17. Yorkton OCP https://www.yorkton. Note: OCP = official community plan. Table 2. Description of the indicators derived Presence of explicit policy statement "increasing or promoting physical activity or active living" Active transportation master plan: Acknowledgement of an active transportation master plan in the OCP. Plans to improve public transport system: Presence of policy promoting the public transit system and its usage. Pedestrian master plan: Acknowledgement of a pedestrian master plan in the OCP. Other pedestrian plans: The manner in which policies on pedestrian plans are generally addressed in the OCP. The categories for this indicator and the frequency of OCPs categorized were: * Structured plans and many; structured plans but few; unstructured plans and many; unstructured plans and few. Cycling master plan: Acknowledgement of a cycling master plan in the OCP. Cycling plans separated from pedestrian plans: Presence of policy to promote cycling opportunities separately without being in conjunction with pedestrian plans. Downtown cycling and pedestrian plans: Presence of policy addressing the improvement of pedestrian and cycling features in the Downtown area. Recreation master plan: Acknowledgement of a recreation/park/open space master plan in the OCP. Presence of policy statement to "improve or promote active recreation": Presence of policy explicitly stating to promote active recreation or active engagement in recreation. Residential neighbourhood plans associated with active living: Presence of policy addressing the support of pedestrian or cycling features, as well as provision of public open space for parks and recreation in the residential neighbourhood. Housing density plans associated with active living: Presence of policy addressing the density of houses with a link to physical activity features such as parks, open green space, or active travel means. Connectivity master plan: Acknowledgement of a network/trail/connectivity master plan in the OCP. Other networking plans: The manner in which networking/connectivity plans are generally addressed in the OCP. The categories for this indicator and the frequency of OCPs that were categorized are: * Structured plans and many; structured plans but few; unstructured plans and many; unstructured plans and few. Asset deficits addressed: Presence of policy that acknowledges the deficiency of assets or infrastructures such as parks or recreational facilities. Joint-use agreement between communities and schools: Presence of policy addressing joint-use agreement between schools and communities for usage of facilities such as parks and recreational facilities. School travel plan: Presence of policy to promote access or facilities for active and safe routes to and from school. Table 3. Cities, indicators and inclusion frequencies Indicator city PA AT Pub Ped Other Cycle stmt master trans master ped master Estevan Y SM Humboldt C SM Kindersley SM Lloydminster UF Y Martensville UF Meadow Lake C UM Melfort UM Melville UF Moose Jaw Y SM North Battleford Y SF C Prince Albert Y Y UM Regina Y Y Y UM Saskatoon Y SM C Swift Current Y UM Warman Y Y SM Weyburn Y UM Yorkton Y Y Y SM Y % OCPs 35.3 17.6 47.1 5.8 M77 23.5 F23 Indicator city Cycle Down Rec Active Res House only town master rec plan dens Estevan Y Y Y Y Humboldt Y Kindersley Y Lloydminster Martensville Y Y Meadow Lake Y Y Y Melfort Y Y Melville Y Y Moose Jaw Y Y Y North Battleford Y Y C Y Prince Albert Y Y Y Y Y Y Regina Y Y Y Y Y Saskatoon Y Y Y Y Swift Current Y C Y Y Warman Y Y Weyburn Y Y Y Y Yorkton Y Y C Y Y Y % OCPs 41.2 58.8 35.3 47.1 88.2 41.2 Indicator city Connect Other Asset Joint School master connect deficit use travel Estevan UF Y Humboldt UF Y Y Y Kindersley SM Lloydminster SL Martensville UF Y Meadow Lake UM Melfort UF Y Melville UF Moose Jaw UF Y Y Y North Battleford C SM Y Prince Albert SM Y Y Regina SM Y Saskatoon SF Y Y Swift Current UM Y Warman SM Y Y Weyburn UM Yorkton Y UM Y Y % OCPs 11.8 M53 F47 23.5 52.9 41.2 Indicator city % Ind Estevan 29.4 Humboldt 52.9 Kindersley 23.5 Lloydminster 17.6 Martensville 29.4 Meadow Lake 35.3 Melfort 29.4 Melville 23.5 Moose Jaw 52.9 North Battleford 58.8 Prince Albert 70.5 Regina 64.7 Saskatoon 58.8 Swift Current 47.1 Warman 47.1 Weyburn 41.2 Yorkton 88.2 % OCPs Note: Y = yes; C = considering; SM = structured many; UM = unstructured many; SF = structured few; UF = unstructured few; % OCPs = percent of official community plans; % Ind = percent of indicators; PA stmt = physical activity statement; AT master = active transportation master plan; Pub trans = public transit; Ped master = pedestrian master plan; Other ped = other pedestrian plans; Cycle master = cycling master plan; Cycle only = cycling separate from pedestrian; Downtown = downtown cycling and pedestrian plans; Rec master = recreation master plan; Active rec = active recreation statement; Res plan = residential plans with active living; House dens = housing density and active living; Connect master = connectivity master plan; Other connect = other connectivity plans; Asset deficit = Asset deficits addressed; Joint use = joint-use agreement; School travel = school travel plan. Table 4. Cities, population, and mean frequency of indicators included per OCP City Year of 2011 OCP adoption population Estevan 2011 11483 Humboldt 2008 5678 Kindersley 2014 4678 Lloydminster 2014 9772 Martensville 2008 7716 Meadow Lake 2012 5045 Melfort 1996 5576 Melville 2013 4517 Moose Jaw 2011 33 274 North-Battleford 2013 13888 Prince Albert 2015 35129 Regina 2013 210556 Saskatoon 2013 260 600 Swift Current 2003 15 503 Warman 2015 7084 Weyburn 2003 10484 Yorkton 2014 15 689 Mean (SD) Mean (SD) for city population <10 000 Mean (sd) for city population [less that equal to] 10 000 Mean (sd) for city population >30 000 City Indicators included in OCP (% of 17) Estevan 5 (29.4) Humboldt 8 (47.1) Kindersley 4 (23.5) Lloydminster 3(17.6) Martensville 5 (29.4) Meadow Lake 5 (29.4) Melfort 5 (29.4) Melville 4 (23.5) Moose Jaw 9 (52.9) North-Battleford 7 (41.2) Prince Albert 12 (70.6) Regina 11 (64.7) Saskatoon 10 (58.8) Swift Current 7 (41.2) Warman 9 (52.9) Weyburn 7 (41.2) Yorkton 14 (82.4) Mean (SD) 7.4 (3.1) Mean (SD) for city 5.3 (1.9) population <10 000 Mean (sd) for city 9.1 (2.9) population [less that equal to] 10 000 Mean (sd) for city 10.5 (1.3) population >30 000 City Indicators included in OCP + those being considered (% of 17) Estevan 5 (29.4) Humboldt 9 (52.9) Kindersley 4 (23.5) Lloydminster 3 (17.6) Martensville 5 (29.4) Meadow Lake 6 (35.3) Melfort 5 (29.4) Melville 4 (23.5) Moose Jaw 9 (52.9) North-Battleford 10 (58.8) Prince Albert 12 (70.6) Regina 11 (64.7) Saskatoon 11 (64.7) Swift Current 8 (47.1) Warman 9 (52.9) Weyburn 7 (41.2) Yorkton 15 (88.2) Mean (SD) 7.8 (3.3) Mean (SD) for city 5.6 (2.1) population <10 000 Mean (sd) for city 9.8 (2.9) population [less that equal to] 10 000 Mean (sd) for city 10.8 (1.3) population >30 000 Note: OCP = official community plan; SD = standard deviation.