Summary
It is a well-known fact that physical activity contributes significantly to overall health, yet approximately only half of adults in the United States achieve the recommended levels. Walking stands out as an accessible and straightforward way for most individuals to boost their physical activity. While self-reported walking rates among adults saw a 6% increase between 2005 and 2010, the trend beyond this period remained uncertain.
This report reveals that the prevalence of self-reported walking continued to rise significantly among women from 2005 to 2015 (2005: 57.4%; 2010: 62.5%; 2015: 65.1%). For men, although an overall increase was observed, the progress plateaued between 2010 and 2015 (2005: 54.3%; 2010: 61.8%; 2015: 62.8%). Significant disparities in walking prevalence exist across sociodemographic groups, with the lowest rates reported among non-Hispanic Black individuals and those with a high school education or less. Notably, educational disparities appear to have widened for men, with walking prevalence increasing steadily among college graduates but stagnating among men with lower levels of education.
These findings underscore the importance of public health initiatives promoting walking. Designing communities and streets to ensure walking is a safe and convenient option for everyone is crucial. Furthermore, implementing tailored walking programs that cater to the specific needs and interests of diverse population subgroups can be effective. Addressing barriers to walking in low-socioeconomic status and minority communities, through policies and practices that enhance community supports for physical activity (such as trails and sidewalks), may be key to reducing the observed disparities in walking.
Trends in Walking Prevalence: A National Health Perspective
Physical activity is a cornerstone of good health, reducing the risk of chronic diseases and enhancing overall well-being. Despite the widely recognized benefits, a significant portion of the U.S. adult population does not engage in sufficient physical activity to meet established guidelines (1,2). Recognizing this public health challenge, the Surgeon General’s “Step It Up! Call to Action to Promote Walking and Walkable Communities” (3) highlighted walking as a critical strategy to elevate physical activity levels across the nation. Building on previous research indicating a rise in self-reported walking for both transportation and leisure between 2005 and 2010 (4), this analysis investigates whether this positive trend has persisted, utilizing data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS).
Data from the NHIS, encompassing the years 2005 (26,551 respondents), 2010 (23,313), and 2015 (28,877), were meticulously analyzed to assess age-adjusted trends in self-reported walking among adults aged 18 years and older. The findings reveal a consistent upward trend in walking among women, increasing from 57.3% in 2005 to 62.5% in 2010 and further to 65.1% in 2015, demonstrating a significant linear progression. Men also exhibited a significant linear increase from 54.3% in 2005 to 61.8% in 2010 and 62.8% in 2015. However, it is important to note that the increase for men slowed down between 2010 and 2015, indicated by significant linear and quadratic trends. These trends reinforce the continued importance of community design policies and targeted programs aimed at encouraging pedestrian activity across diverse population segments (3).
Methodology: Analyzing Walking Data from the NHIS
The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) serves as a continuous, in-person survey designed to represent the noninstitutionalized, civilian population of the United States (5). It includes a core questionnaire gathering essential health and demographic data from all family members within sampled households, supplemented by modules focusing on specific health topics. In 2005, 2010, and 2015, the Cancer Control Supplements of the NHIS included questions about walking for leisure and transportation, directed to one randomly selected adult aged 18 years or older per household. The response rates for adult samples were 69.0% (2005), 60.8% (2010), and 55.2% (2015) (6), reflecting robust data collection over the study period.
Walking was defined as engaging in at least one instance of walking for transportation or leisure, lasting 10 minutes or more, within the 7 days preceding the survey. To evaluate transportation walking, respondents across all three survey years were asked: “During the past 7 days, did you walk to get someplace that took you at least 10 minutes?” For leisure-time walking, the question was slightly adapted. In 2005, it was: “During the past 7 days, did you walk for at least 10 minutes at a time [for fun, relaxation, exercise, or to walk the dog]?” In 2010 and 2015, the phrasing was slightly modified to: “During the past 7 days, did you walk for at least 10 minutes [for fun, relaxation, exercise, or to walk the dog]?”
In addition to walking behavior, the survey collected data on demographic characteristics—including sex, age, race/ethnicity, and education level—and health-related factors such as height, weight, walking assistance needs, and physical activity levels. Adherence to aerobic physical activity guidelines, defined as at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity equivalent aerobic activity weekly, was assessed using responses regarding the frequency and duration of light- to moderate-intensity and vigorous-intensity leisure-time physical activities (1).
From an initial sample pool of 92,257 individuals (31,428 in 2005, 27,157 in 2010, and 33,672 in 2015), 13,516 (15%) were excluded from the final analysis. Exclusion criteria included being unable to walk (2,280 individuals) and missing data for walking behavior (6,044), physical activity levels (1,054), health-related characteristics (3,708), or demographic information (430). The final analytical sample comprised 78,741 respondents (26,551 from 2005, 23,313 from 2010, and 28,877 from 2015), ensuring a substantial dataset for trend analysis.
Statistical analysis involved calculating the proportion of adults reporting walking each year, along with 95% confidence intervals. Logistic regression models, controlling for age group, were used to test linear and quadratic trends in walking prevalence from 2005 to 2015. The inclusion of both linear and quadratic trend terms for three time points helps identify temporal changes, indicating not only overall increases or decreases but also deviations from linear trends, such as a leveling off or stalling. Given significant interactions observed between sex and trend terms, results are presented separately for men and women. Subgroup analyses explored variations by age group, race/ethnicity, education level, U.S. Census region, body mass index category, walking assistance needs, and adherence to aerobic physical activity guidelines. Pairwise differences between subgroups and across years were assessed using adjusted Wald tests, with statistical significance set at p<0.05 (7).
Walking Prevalence Trends: Gender and Sociodemographic Insights
In 2015, a notable difference emerged between genders, with women (65.1%) reporting higher walking prevalence than men (62.8%) (Figure). Among women in 2015, the lowest walking rates were observed in those aged 65 years and older, non-Hispanic Black women, and residents of the South, compared to their respective counterparts (Table 1). For men in 2015, the lowest prevalence was among Black and Hispanic men, while the highest was among men in the West, compared with other groups (Table 2). Interestingly, no significant age-related differences in walking prevalence were found among men. Across both genders, walking prevalence was lower among individuals with a high school education or less, those with obesity, individuals needing walking assistance, and those not meeting aerobic physical activity guidelines, compared to their respective counterparts.
Analyzing trends over time, women demonstrated a significant linear increase in walking prevalence from 2005 to 2015, without a significant quadratic trend (Figure) (Table 1). This linear trend held across most subgroups, with exceptions noted among women who were overweight or resided in the Midwest, where both linear and quadratic trends were significant. The increase in walking prevalence among women between 2010 and 2015 was statistically significant overall (2.7 percentage points) and within specific subgroups, including women aged 45–64 and ≥65 years, non-Hispanic White women, college graduates, residents of the Northeast and South regions, those underweight or of normal weight, those with obesity, and those not requiring walking assistance.
Men, in contrast, showed a significant positive linear and negative quadratic trend in reported walking from 2005 to 2015, both overall and within most subgroups. This pattern indicates an increase in walking that stalled between 2010 and 2015 (Figure) (Table 2). The change in walking prevalence among men from 2010 to 2015 was not statistically significant overall or within subgroups, except for men aged 65 years and older, who showed a 3.8 percentage point increase in walking prevalence during this period.
Discussion: Sustaining and Expanding Walking Initiatives
The data reveals a positive trend in reported walking for transportation or leisure among both men and women between 2005 and 2015. However, the stall in the increase observed among men after 2010 mirrors similar trends in overall leisure-time physical activity, where progress in meeting physical activity guidelines plateaued between 2012 and 2015 (2).* Despite the overall increase, a substantial portion of the population—nearly one-third of both women and men—still report not walking for at least 10 minutes in a week.
Walking is a readily accessible form of physical activity for most adults. While women are generally less likely than men to meet recommended physical activity levels (2), the increasing prevalence of walking among women since 2005 presents a promising avenue for addressing this gender disparity in overall physical activity. Sustaining and enhancing the observed increase in walking among adults could significantly contribute to a larger proportion of the population meeting physical activity guidelines. This, in turn, could lead to a reduction in the burden of chronic diseases and premature mortality linked to physical inactivity. To further promote walking, communities can create more opportunities by implementing walking programs tailored to the interests and abilities of specific population subgroups (3). Moreover, policies and community design practices that prioritize safety and walkability are essential in making walking a convenient and appealing option for nearly everyone.
The study highlights that walking prevalence remains lowest among Black individuals and those with lower educational attainment. These groups are consistently reported to have lower overall physical activity levels compared to their counterparts (8). Alarmingly, disparities in walking appear to be widening over time in certain segments of the population. For instance, among men, walking rates among college graduates steadily increased from 2005 to 2015, while rates for men who did not graduate high school stalled between 2010 and 2015. Lower socioeconomic status (SES) neighborhoods and minority communities often face environmental barriers to physical activity, including perceptions of lower safety due to traffic or crime, and less appealing environments compared to higher SES and predominantly White neighborhoods (9). Addressing these environmental barriers in underserved communities through policies and practices that enhance the safety and quality of community supports for physical activity, such as trails and sidewalks, is crucial for reducing disparities in walking (3).
Several limitations should be considered when interpreting these findings. First, the analysis relies on self-reported data, which may be subject to social desirability bias, potentially leading to overestimations of walking behavior (10). Second, a slight modification in the wording of the leisure walking question occurred between 2005 and 2010. To enhance comparability across years, participants who reported a typical walking period lasting at least 10 minutes were consistently included in the definition of walking across all survey years.
The reported prevalence of walking for transportation or leisure among women and men increased from 2005 to 2015. However, among men, this increase has slowed in recent years. By prioritizing community and street-scale design strategies that encourage pedestrian activity and by actively supporting walking programs in places where people live, work, and play, communities can significantly improve walkability, making walking a safer, easier, and more appealing choice for increasing physical activity (3).
Conflict of Interest
No conflicts of interest were reported.
Corresponding author: Emily N. Ussery, [email protected], 770-488-3766.
1Epidemic Intelligence Service, CDC; 2Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC; 3Division of Cancer Control & Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
* https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/downloads/trends-in-the-prevalence-of-physical-activity.pdf.
References
FIGURE. Percentage* of U.S. women† and men§ aged ≥18 years who reported recent walking for transportation or leisure — National Health Interview Survey, 2005–2015
* Weighted percentages, age-standardized to the 2000 U.S. standard population. Error bars represent upper and lower bounds of 95% confidence intervals.
† Significant linear trend from 2005 to 2015 only (p<0.05).
§ Significant linear trend from 2005 to 2015 (p<0.05) and significant quadratic trend from 2005 to 2015 (p<0.05).
The figure above is a line graph illustrating the percentage of U.S. women and men aged 18 years and older who reported recent walking for transportation or leisure between 2005 and 2015.
TABLE 1. Proportion of U.S. women aged ≥18 years who reported recent walking for transportation or leisure, by selected demographic and health characteristics — National Health Interview Survey, 2005–2015
TABLE 1. Proportion of U.S. women aged ≥18 years who reported recent walking for transportation or leisure, by selected demographic and health characteristics — National Health Interview Survey, 2005–2015
| Characteristic | %* (95% CI) | Absolute change from 2010 to 2015 |
|—|—|—|
| 2005 | 2010 | 2015 |
| (n = 14,609) | (n = 12,734) | (n = 15,562) |
| Total | 57.4 (56.1–58.6) | 62.5 (61.3–63.6) | 65.1 (64.0–66.2)† | 2.7§ |
| Age group (yrs) |
| 18–24 | 61.4 (58.0–64.7) | 65.4 (62.1–68.6) | 66.2 (62.5–69.8) | 0.8 |
| 25–34 | 59.7 (57.3–62.1) | 66.6 (64.1–69.0) | 69.0 (66.7–71.2)† | 2.4 |
| 35–44 | 62.1 (59.9–64.3) | 66.2 (63.8–68.5) | 68.4 (65.9–71.0)† | 2.2 |
| 45–64 | 56.7 (54.9–58.6) | 62.8 (61.0–64.6) | 65.7 (63.8–67.5)† | 2.9§ |
| ≥65 | 46.8 (44.6–49.0) | 50.6 (48.1–53.0) | 55.0 (52.8–57.2)† | 4.4§ |
| Race/Ethnicity |
| White, non-Hispanic | 59.5 (58.0–60.9) | 64.0 (62.6–65.5) | 66.6 (65.2–68.1)† | 2.6§ |
| Black, non-Hispanic | 47.5 (45.0–50.1) | 53.8 (51.2–56.5) | 55.5 (52.4–58.5)† | 1.7 |
| Hispanic | 54.0 (51.0–57.0) | 60.6 (58.2–63.0) | 63.9 (61.5–66.3)† | 3.3 |
| Other race¶ | 59.2 (55.2–63.3) | 66.9 (63.8–69.9) | 69.9 (66.6–73.3)† | 3.0 |
| Education level |
| Less than high school graduate | 47.0 (44.3–49.7) | 51.2 (48.4–54.0) | 55.1 (52.2–58.0)† | 3.9 |
| High school graduate | 49.8 (47.8–51.9) | 55.6 (53.4–57.9) | 56.4 (54.1–58.7)† | 0.8 |
| Some college | 59.9 (57.9–61.8) | 63.4 (61.3–65.4) | 63.7 (61.9–65.6)† | 0.3 |
| College graduate | 68.5 (66.3–70.7) | 72.4 (70.3–74.4) | 76.0 (74.2–77.8)† | 3.6§ |
| U.S. Census region |
| Northeast | 66.1 (63.8–68.5) | 65.7 (62.8–68.5) | 70.4 (68.0–72.8)† | 4.7§ |
| Midwest | 56.7 (54.3–59.0) | 62.6 (60.4–64.9) | 62.9 (60.8–65.1)†,** | 0.3 |
| South | 50.8 (48.6–52.9) | 56.4 (54.3–58.4) | 59.9 (57.9–61.9)† | 3.6§ |
| West | 61.8 (59.4–64.2) | 69.2 (66.9–71.5) | 71.8 (69.8–73.8)† | 2.6 |
| Body mass index category†† |
| Underweight/Normal weight | 61.4 (59.9–62.9) | 66.6 (65.0–68.2) | 70.3 (68.8–71.8)† | 3.7§ |
| Overweight | 56.7 (54.6–58.7) | 63.8 (62.0–65.6) | 65.0 (63.1–66.9)†,** | 1.2 |
| Has obesity | 50.0 (47.9–52.0) | 54.6 (52.5–56.8) | 57.8 (55.9–59.7)† | 3.1§ |
| Walking assistance status§§ |
| Does not need assistance | 59.7 (58.5–61.0) | 65.3 (62.6–64.9) | 67.9 (63.1–65.6)† | 2.6§ |
| Needs assistance | 25.8 (20.5–31.0) | 23.6 (19.3–34.2) | 30.3 (23.1–35.6) | 6.7 |
| Meets aerobic physical activity guideline¶¶ |
| No | 44.6 (43.2–46.1) | 49.1 (47.6–50.7) | 51.0 (49.5–52.6)† | 1.9 |
| Yes | 76.8 (75.4–78.1) | 79.3 (78.0–80.7) | 80.6 (79.3–82.0)† | 1.3 |
Abbreviation: CI = confidence interval. * Weighted percentages, age-standardized to the 2000 U.S. standard population. † Significant linear trend from 2005 to 2015 (p<0.05). § Significant change from 2010 to 2015 (p<0.05). ¶ “Other race” category includes non-Hispanic Asian, non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaskan Native, and persons reporting more than one race. ** Significant deviation from linear trend from 2005 to 2015 (p<0.05). †† Body mass index (weight [kg]/height [m2]) estimates were calculated from self-reported weight and height. Underweight and normal weight: <25 kg/m2. Overweight: 25–29.9 kg/m2. Has obesity: ≥30 kg/m2. §§ Needing walking assistance was defined as being unable or finding it very difficult “to walk one-quarter mile without special equipment.” ¶¶ Meeting the 2008 aerobic physical activity guideline was defined as participating in ≥150 minutes of moderate-intensity equivalent aerobic activity per week (light- to moderate-intensity minutes plus two times vigorous-intensity minutes).
TABLE 2. Proportion of U.S. men aged ≥18 years who reported recent walking for transportation or leisure, by selected demographic and health characteristics — National Health Interview Survey, 2005–2015
TABLE 2. Proportion of U.S. men aged ≥18 years who reported recent walking for transportation or leisure, by selected demographic and health characteristics — National Health Interview Survey, 2005–2015
| Characteristic | %* (95% CI) | Absolute change from 2010 to 2015 |
|—|—|—|
| 2005 | 2010 | 2015 |
| (n = 11,942) | (n = 10,579) | (n = 13,315) |
| Total | 54.3 (53.0–55.5) | 61.8 (60.6–63.0) | 62.8 (61.6–64.1)†,§ | 1.0 |
| Age group (yrs) |
| 18–24 | 56.0 (52.5–59.4) | 65.7 (62.2–69.3) | 63.6 (59.8–67.5)†,§ | −2.1 |
| 25–34 | 52.5 (50.0–55.0) | 63.7 (61.0–66.3) | 64.5 (61.9–67.2)†,§ | 0.8 |
| 35–44 | 54.4 (52.1–56.7) | 61.3 (58.7–63.9) | 62.3 (59.2–65.3)† | 1.0 |
| 45–64 | 54.5 (52.7–56.4) | 61.8 (60.0–63.7) | 62.8 (60.8–64.8)†,§ | 1.0 |
| ≥65 | 54.3 (51.6–56.9) | 57.4 (54.6–60.2) | 61.2 (58.9–63.5)† | 3.8¶ |
| Race/Ethnicity |
| White, non-Hispanic | 55.1 (53.6–56.6) | 62.9 (61.5–64.3) | 64.1 (62.4–65.8)†,§ | 1.2 |
| Black, non-Hispanic | 50.8 (47.9–53.7) | 55.5 (52.3–58.7) | 58.3 (55.2–61.4)† | 2.8 |
| Hispanic | 52.5 (49.6–55.3) | 60.1 (57.4–62.8) | 59.6 (56.7–62.5)†,§ | −0.5 |
| Other race** | 53.8 (48.5–59.1) | 64.5 (60.6–68.4) | 67.6 (64.2–71.1)† | 3.1 |
| Education level |
| Less than high school graduate | 46.1 (43.6–48.7) | 53.8 (51.1–56.5) | 53.3 (50.0–56.6)†,§ | −0.5 |
| High school graduate | 46.5 (44.4–48.5) | 55.5 (53.3–57.6) | 56.2 (53.7–58.6)†,§ | 0.7 |
| Some college | 55.7 (53.7–57.8) | 61.6 (59.5–63.7) | 61.0 (58.8–63.2)†,§ | −0.6 |
| College graduate | 64.8 (62.4–67.2) | 71.5 (69.3–73.7) | 72.8 (70.8–74.9)† | 1.3 |
| U.S. Census region |
| Northeast | 61.8 (58.9–64.6) | 66.2 (63.5–69.0) | 63.7 (60.8–66.6)§ | −2.6 |
| Midwest | 54.2 (51.7–56.6) | 60.4 (58.0–62.7) | 61.0 (58.5–63.5)†,§ | 0.6 |
| South | 47.8 (45.7–50.0) | 57.5 (55.4–59.6) | 59.6 (57.5–61.7)†,§ | 2.2 |
| West | 58.8 (56.0–61.6) | 66.3 (64.0–68.7) | 68.7 (66.0–71.5)† | 2.4 |
| Body mass index category†† |
| Underweight/Normal weight | 54.8 (52.7–56.9) | 63.9 (62.0–65.9) | 64.3 (62.0–66.5)†,§ | 0.4 |
| Overweight | 55.8 (54.0–57.6) | 62.8 (61.0–64.6) | 63.0 (61.3–64.8)†,§ | 0.2 |
| Has obesity | 51.8 (49.5–54.1) | 58.2 (56.1–60.4) | 60.8 (58.4–63.2)† | 2.6 |
| Walking assistance status§§ |
| Does not need assistance | 55.8 (54.5–57.1) | 63.8 (62.6–64.9) | 64.4 (63.1–65.6)†,§ | 0.6 |
| Needs assistance | 26.6 (19.5–33.8) | 26.7 (19.3–34.2) | 29.3 (23.1–35.6)† | 2.6 |
| Meets aerobic physical activity guideline¶¶ |
| No | 41.0 (39.3–42.6) | 48.4 (46.7–50.1) | 47.5 (45.5–49.4)†,§ | −0.9 |
| Yes | 70.5 (69.0–71.9) | 74.5 (73.1–76.0) | 76.2 (74.8–77.5)† | 1.7 |
Abbreviation: CI = confidence interval. * Weighted percentages, age-standardized to the 2000 U.S. standard population. † Significant linear trend from 2005 to 2015 (p<0.05). § Significant deviation from linear trend from 2005 to 2015 (p<0.05). ¶ Significant change from 2010 to 2015 (p<0.05). ** “Other race” category includes non-Hispanic Asian, non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaskan Native, and persons reporting more than one race. †† Body mass index (weight [kg]/height [m2]) estimates were calculated from self-reported weight and height. Underweight and normal weight: <25 kg/m2. Overweight: 25–29.9 kg/m2. Has obesity: ≥30 kg/m2. §§ Needing walking assistance was defined as being unable or finding it very difficult “to walk one-quarter mile without special equipment.” ¶¶ Meeting the 2008 aerobic physical activity guideline was defined as participating in ≥150 minutes of moderate-intensity equivalent aerobic activity per week (light- to moderate-intensity minutes plus two times vigorous-intensity minutes).
Suggested citation for this article: Ussery EN, Carlson SA, Whitfield GP, Watson KB, Berrigan D, Fulton JE. Walking for Transportation or Leisure Among U.S. Women and Men — National Health Interview Survey, 2005–2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2017;66:657–662. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6625a1.
MMWR and Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report are service marks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Use of trade names and commercial sources is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. References to non-CDC sites on the Internet are provided as a service to MMWR readers and do not constitute or imply endorsement of these organizations or their programs by CDC or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. CDC is not responsible for the content of pages found at these sites. URL addresses listed in MMWR were current as of the date of publication.
All HTML versions of MMWR articles are generated from final proofs through an automated process. This conversion might result in character translation or format errors in the HTML version. Users are referred to the electronic PDF version (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr) and/or the original MMWR paper copy for printable versions of official text, figures, and tables.
Questions or messages regarding errors in formatting should be addressed to [email protected].
