Supportive Environments for Physical Activity, Community Action, and Policy in 8 European Union Member States: Comparative Analysis and Specificities of Context

in Journal of Physical Activity and Health

Click name to view affiliation

Alfred Ruetten
Search for other papers by Alfred Ruetten in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Annika Frahsa
Search for other papers by Annika Frahsa in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Luuk Engbers
Search for other papers by Luuk Engbers in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Narcis Gusi
Search for other papers by Narcis Gusi in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Jorge Mota
Search for other papers by Jorge Mota in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Rimantas Pacenka
Search for other papers by Rimantas Pacenka in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Jens Troelsen
Search for other papers by Jens Troelsen in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Jana Vasickova
Search for other papers by Jana Vasickova in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Anne Vuillemin
Search for other papers by Anne Vuillemin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Background:

A multilevel theoretical framework of physical activity (PA) promotion that addresses supportive environments, PA behavior, community action, and PA promoting policies is related to research and development in an international comparative study.

Methods:

Most-different and most-similar case selection was applied to data from 8 European Union Member States. Data from semistructured key informant qualitative interviews, focus group interviews with experts and policy-makers, as well as document analysis were linked to corresponding Eurobarometer data.

Results:

The framework on the interplay of environment, PA behavior, community action and policies appears to be working across most different countries. Comprehensive systems of PA infrastructures are interlinked with relatively high levels of PA prevalence. These countries implement comprehensive national policies on PA promotion and show a positive perception of related local governments’ engagement. Less comprehensive systems of infrastructures interplay with lower levels of PA prevalence, less community action and fewer policies. Differences between similar cases are linked to country-specific contexts.

Conclusions:

Framework application and comparative analysis indicates how to relate theory to empirical research and complex data sets. In-depth analysis of country-specific contexts and longitudinal observation on changes within and between countries might advise on how to integrate the framework into intervention research.

Ruetten and Frahsa are with the Institute of Sport Science and Sport, Friedrich-Alexander Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany. Engbers is with the Dept of Health Promotion, TNO Quality of Life, Leiden, The Netherlands. Gusi is with the Faculty of Sports Sciences, University of Extremadura, Caceres, Spain. Mota is with the Research Centre in Physical Activity, Health and Leisure, Faculty of Sport, University of Porto, Portugal. Pacenka is with the Dept of Physical Education, Lithuanian Academy of Physical Education, Kaunas, Lithuania. Troelsen is with the Institute of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense M, Denmark. Vasickova is with the Institute of Active Lifestyle, Center for Kinanthropology Research, Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic. Vuillemin is with the Faculté du Sport, Nancy-Université, Nancy, France.

  • Collapse
  • Expand