I agree that running has the benefits that you describe. So why don’t people run everywhere?
Walking can be social. Most people can converse while walking significantly more easily than while running. Empathetic groups tend to travel at the pace of the slowest individual that they want to stick together with.
Traveling more slowly offers more time to think and to observe one’s surroundings. Different people will, of course, derive different levels of benefit from a couple extra minutes of quiet reflection.
Many situations cause a perceived necessity of wearing clothes and shoes which are more comfortable to walk in than to run in. Many situations carry a social expectation of appearing calm and put-together upon arrival, which is often inconsistent with having recently been running. I’d speculate that this factor has a significantly greater effect on individuals in “lower-status” roles in society, whether by career, ethnicity, or gender. In other words, some people have to work harder than others to be viewed as the same degree of credible, and a habit of running from place to place impacts that credibility/respect/”normalcy” in a way that may not affect someone of your appearance and career, but does affect others. And even if one can look perfectly put together upon arrival, most people who see someone arrive on time by running would assume that that person was running late.
Running, especially in crowded or unfamiliar areas, seems to convey a higher risk of injury than walking. Traveling faster cuts down on the response time available to react to a potential threat, like a vehicle or a tripping hazard. Some people who see a stranger running through a crowded area will assume that that person is running away from something, possibly fleeing after committing a crime, depending on the runner’s appearance and the observer’s biases. If the observer is a law enforcement officer, runners on the negative side of those biases are running a health and safety risk by choosing not to walk.
Traveling more slowly offers more time to think and to observe one’s surroundings. Different people will, of course, derive different levels of benefit from a couple extra minutes of quiet reflection.
That is a great point. I recall hearing about research showing that walking helps you think, similar to how showers yield shower thoughts. And anecdotally I find it to be true for myself and to a lesser extent those who I talk to.
It doesn’t have to be all walking or all running though. You can mix it up, maybe walking 70% of the time and running 30% of the time. I think that’s what I’ll try myself.
I agree that running has the benefits that you describe. So why don’t people run everywhere?
Walking can be social. Most people can converse while walking significantly more easily than while running. Empathetic groups tend to travel at the pace of the slowest individual that they want to stick together with.
Traveling more slowly offers more time to think and to observe one’s surroundings. Different people will, of course, derive different levels of benefit from a couple extra minutes of quiet reflection.
Many situations cause a perceived necessity of wearing clothes and shoes which are more comfortable to walk in than to run in. Many situations carry a social expectation of appearing calm and put-together upon arrival, which is often inconsistent with having recently been running. I’d speculate that this factor has a significantly greater effect on individuals in “lower-status” roles in society, whether by career, ethnicity, or gender. In other words, some people have to work harder than others to be viewed as the same degree of credible, and a habit of running from place to place impacts that credibility/respect/”normalcy” in a way that may not affect someone of your appearance and career, but does affect others. And even if one can look perfectly put together upon arrival, most people who see someone arrive on time by running would assume that that person was running late.
Running, especially in crowded or unfamiliar areas, seems to convey a higher risk of injury than walking. Traveling faster cuts down on the response time available to react to a potential threat, like a vehicle or a tripping hazard. Some people who see a stranger running through a crowded area will assume that that person is running away from something, possibly fleeing after committing a crime, depending on the runner’s appearance and the observer’s biases. If the observer is a law enforcement officer, runners on the negative side of those biases are running a health and safety risk by choosing not to walk.
That is a great point. I recall hearing about research showing that walking helps you think, similar to how showers yield shower thoughts. And anecdotally I find it to be true for myself and to a lesser extent those who I talk to.
It doesn’t have to be all walking or all running though. You can mix it up, maybe walking 70% of the time and running 30% of the time. I think that’s what I’ll try myself.