The built environment and early childhood development: qualitative evidence from disadvantaged Australian communities

ABSTRACT

This paper explores neighborhood-built environment features related to ‘better than expected’ and ‘as expected’ early childhood development outcomes (ECD) in 14 Australian disadvantaged communities. This paper draws from mixed methods data collected in the Kids in Communities Study – an Australian investigation of community effects on ECD – in communities across five states and territories. In total, 93 interviews and 30 focus groups were conducted with service providers and parents, and geographic information systems were used to create built environment measures for each local community. Housing factors (e.g. better affordability, tenure, less high-density public housing) were consistently related to disadvantaged local communities with ‘better than expected’ ECD outcomes. Physical access to services and public transport, living in a walkable area, having high-quality public open space, and a mix of local destinations was perceived to be consistently important by community members in disadvantaged communities regardless of ECD outcomes. Findings may help policymakers to consider neighborhood features that contribute to better ECD outcomes.

KEYWORDS:

• Neighborhood
• community
• built environment
• early childhood development
• mixed methods

Acknowledgements

The Kids in Communities Study was funded by an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant (LP130100411) and in-kind and financial support from Partner Organisations are gratefully acknowledged for their contributions to the study. The KiCS collaboration includes the University of Melbourne (lead institution), University of Canberra, University of New South Wales, and The University of Western Australia, RMIT University and The University of Southern Queensland, and a range of government and non-government organisations such as The Australian Government Department of Education (now Australian Government Department of Education, Skills and Employment), the South Australian Department of Education, the Victorian Department of Education and Training, New South Wales Department of Education, Queensland Department of Education, the Australian Capital Territory Community Services Directorate, NSW Family and Community Services, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Wesley Mission Queensland, The Smith Family, The Benevolent Society, Uniting Care, Children’s Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Mount Saint Vincent University, University of British Columbia, and the University of Ohio. This work was also supported by The Australian Government Department of Social Services (4-4FE66UX). Ethics approval for KiCS was granted by the Royal Children’s Hospital (RCH) Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) #30016. We gratefully acknowledge those who have contributed to KiCS, including research staff, students, and investigators. We thank our stakeholders, service providers, and communities who have participated in the study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Australian Research Council [grant number LP130100411]; Australian Government Department of Social Services [grant number 4-4FE66UX].