Active travel (walking and cycling) is beneficial for people’s health and has many co-benefits, such as reducing motor vehicle congestion and pollution in urban areas. There have been few robust evaluations of active travel, and very few studies have valued health and emissions outcomes. The ACTIVE before-and-after quasi-experimental study estimated the net benefits of health and other outcomes from New Zealand’s Model Communities Programme using an empirical analysis comparing two intervention cities with two control cities. The Programme funded investment in cycle paths, other walking and cycling facilities, cycle parking, ‘shared spaces’, media campaigns and events, such as ‘Share the Road’, and cycle-skills training. Using the modified Integrated Transport and Health Impacts Model, the Programme’s net economic benefits were estimated from the changes in use of active travel modes. Annual benefits for health in the intervention cities were estimated at 34.4 disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and two lives saved due to reductions in cardiac disease, diabetes, cancer, and respiratory disease. Reductions in transport-related carbon emissions were also estimated and valued. Using a discount rate of 3.5%, the estimated benefit/cost ratio was 11:1 and was robust to sensitivity testing. It is concluded that when concerted investment is made in active travel in a city, there is likely to be a measurable, positive return on investment.

Background The adverse health and environmental effects of poor housing quality are well established. A central requirement for evidence-based policies and programmes to improve housing standards is a valid, reliable and practical way of measuring housing quality that is supported by policy agencies, the housing sector, researchers and the public. Methods This paper provides guidance on the development of housing quality-assessment tools that link practical measures of housing conditions to their effects on health, safety and sustainability, with particular reference to tools developed in New Zealand and England. Results The authors describe how information on housing quality can support individuals, agencies and the private sector to make worthwhile improvements to the health, safety and sustainability of housing. The information gathered and the resultant tools developed should be guided by the multiple purposes and end users of this information. Other important issues outlined include deciding on the scope, detailed content, practical administration issues and how the information will be analysed and summarised for its intended end users. There are likely to be considerable benefits from increased international collaboration and standardisation of approaches to measuring housing hazards. At the same time, these assessment approaches need to consider local factors such as climate, geography, culture, predominating building practices, important housing-related health issues and existing building codes. Conclusions An effective housing quality-assessment tool has a central role in supporting improvements to housing. The issues discussed in this paper are designed to motivate and assist the development of such tools.