How physically active are our children?A global view Barbara E.Ainsworth

How physically active are our children?A global view Barbara E.Ainsworth

School of Nutrition and Health Promotion,College of Health Solutions,Arizona State University,Phoenix,AZ 85004,USA

In a special issue of theJournal of Physical Activity and Healthpublished in November 2016,guest editors Cooper et al.1share the results from theGlobal Matrix 2.0arising from theActive Healthy Kids Global Alliance.With participation from 38 countries on 6 continents,theGlobal Matrix 2.0provides a Report Card on 9 indicators supportive of physical activity in children and youth.The indicators include overall physical activity levels,organized sports participation, active play,active transportation,sedentary behaviors,family and peers,school,community and built environment,and government strategies and investments.A summary grade is averaged across indicator grades.At firs glance,it is startling to see so many C,D,and F grades assigned to the overall physical activity level and sedentary behavior indicators in countries globally.The scores were equally poor regardless of the continent and the country’s level of development.The grades were best for active transportation and organized sports participation(mostly Bs and Cs),but incomplete in other indicators for many countries.Overall,across all indicators,92% of the countries had an average grade of C(68%)or D(24%), and only 3 countries received a grade of B(Denmark,Netherlands,and Slovenia).As noted by Tremblay et al.,2the grades for these latter 3 countries show that it is possible to provide the infrastructure,programs,and policies that offer physical activity opportunities for children and youth. However,as evidenced by only 2 countries earning an A or B grade in overall physical activity(Slovenia,A-;New Zealand, B-)and 3 countries earning a B(highest grade)in reducing sedentary behaviors(Kenya and Zimbabwe,B;Slovenia,B-), translating gains in infrastructure,programs,and policies is possible,but it is a slow process.

The grades reflecte in theGlobal Matrix 2.0are not from a lack of effort from committed persons and organizations worldwide.More likely,the grades reflec the late start(ca.1990)in recognizing that physical inactivity is a global public health problem that affects the health,function,and well-being of alarge number of people.Although many countries globally were early adopters of initiatives to monitor and increase physical activity,it was not until 2002 that the World Health Organization presented its firs resolution on diet,physical activity,and health at the 55th World Health Assembly calling for a strategy on diet and physical activity to reduce the impact of a rising incidence of noncommunicable diseases.3In 2010,the International Society for Physical Activity and Health(organized in 2008)released the firs Toronto Charter for Physical Activity:A Global Call for Action,4and in 2016 they released the Bangkok Declaration on Physical Activity for Global Health and Sustainable Development.5

We have come a long way to increase awareness of physical inactivity as a public health problem globally and we must stay the course.The problem of insufficien physical activity,especially in children and youth,is characterized by large social, cultural,political,legal,and economic dimensions that cannot be addressed by a single group of individuals or by a single approach.Growing levels of sedentary behaviors dictate prompt,organized,and coordinated efforts by governments and communities.Tremblay et al.2noted that in Slovenia(the country with the highest grade for overall physical activity) physical activity in children is monitored in the school system with nationwide physical fitnes testing;school physical activity programs are modifie based on the test results to assure an adequate level of physical activity and fitness In the United States,school physical education was mandated by most states in the early to mid-20th century;fitness-oriente curricula were adopted during times of national security threats.However, with changes in educational goals and economic challenges, school physical education programs have been reduced without establishing sufficien opportunities for physical activity and fitnes programs that reach all children and youth.No doubt, similar stories can be told in other countries.

Overall,the grades presented in theGlobal Matrix 2.0Report Card should be seen as a wake-up call for countries to step up efforts to adopt coordinated multidisciplinary team approaches that assure infrastructures,programs,and policies that can provide opportunities for active lifestyles for children and youth are in place.This is an outstanding report,and theleaders and each author in theJournal of Physical Activity and Healthsupplement are to be applauded for their efforts in completing this important project.

Competing interests

The author declares no competing financia interests.

1.Cooper AR,Klentrou P,Page A,Pfeiffer KA.The Global Matrix 2.0.J Phys Act Health2016;13(Suppl.2):S85–86.

2.Tremblay MS,Barnes JD,Gonzalez SA,Katzmarzyk PT,Onywear VO, Reilly JJ,et al.Global Matrix 2.0 research team.Global Matrix 2.0:report card grades on the physical activity of children and youth comparing 38 countries.J Phys Act Health2016;13(Suppl.2):S343–65.

3.Fifty-Fifth World Health Assembly.Diet,physical activity and health.Agenda item 13.11.Available at:http://apps.who.int/gb/archive/pdf_files WHA55/ewha5523.pdf?ua=1;2002[accessed 18.05.2002].

4.Global Advocacy Council for Physical Activity,International Society for Physical Activity and Health.The Toronto charter for physical activity: a global call for action.Available at:https://www.dropbox.com/s/9q0a6 asx7e2dggx/TorontoCharter_ENG_May20_2010.pdf?dl=0;2010[accessed 20.05.2010].

5.International Society for Physical Activity and Health.The Bangkok declaration on physical activity for global health and sustainable development.Available at:https://static1.squarespace.com/static/559a3 ff1e4b0b0193b9d9862/t/5843cdfbe3df28eae5f43c10/1480838663699/BKK _Declaration+FINAL+Dec2.pdf;2016[accessed 02.12.2016].

Received 9 December 2016;accepted 12 December 2016

Available online 14 December 2016

Peer review under responsibility of Shanghai University of Sport.

E-mail address:Barbara.Ainsworth@asu.edu

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2016.12.003

2095-2546/©2016 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.on behalf of Shanghai University of Sport.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).