By Andy Pumfman, Head of Insight, London Sport
Last week, we explored how the places we live can shape our opportunities to be active. But there is another part of that picture that deserves closer attention: the financial circumstances people are living in.
It is well known that London is the wealthiest city the country by most measures, but that can too often be misleading. Once you take a closer look, it becomes clear that wealth is not shared equally. Behind the headline figures are significant levels of poverty and financial inequality, with many Londoners facing high housing costs and other pressures that affect almost every part of daily life, including their ability to be active.
The gap between rich and poor
The scale of financial inequality in London is stark. The richest 10% of households earn around 11 times more than the poorest 10%, around twice the level of inequality seen across the rest of the UK.
Around 27% of Londoners live in poverty after housing costs, the highest rate of any English region. Housing makes a significant difference: poverty rises from 15% before housing costs to 27% after them. For many Londoners, the cost of simply having somewhere to live is a major factor in whether they can make ends meet.
Despite London’s wealth, poverty has remained stubbornly persistent over the past two decades. Behind these figures are households making difficult decisions about how to spend limited income, often while also dealing with high rents, insecure work and rising everyday costs.
What does this mean for being active?
Being active is often presented as something that is available to everyone, but financial circumstances will often shape how realistic that is.
For someone with enough disposable income, being active might mean paying for a gym membership, joining a sports club, taking part in organised activities, or crucially travelling to sessions or facilities. For someone already struggling with housing, food and other essential costs, those expenses quickly become harder to justify.
Financial pressure also affects people’s time and energy. Working longer hours, taking on additional work or managing household pressures can all leave less capacity for being active. These are not simply questions of motivation. When people are dealing with financial insecurity, being active becomes harder to prioritise, even when they understand the benefits.
This is reflected in activity levels. Adults in London’s most deprived boroughs are twice as likely to be inactive as those in the least deprived. The challenge, therefore, isn’t simply encouraging people to make different choices. It’s about creating conditions where being active is a realistic and accessible choice in the first place.
London’s wealth shouldn’t hide its poverty
Looking at London through averages can make these inequalities easy to overlook. The capital’s overall wealth can give the impression that opportunity is widely shared, when the reality is very different for many households and communities.
This matters for how we think about investment in physical activity. If the people facing the greatest financial pressures are also more likely to experience inactivity and poorer health, then treating every community in the same way won’t necessarily reach those who need support most.
Financial inequality is also an inequality in opportunity. Being able to access affordable activities and local opportunities to move more should not depend on how much money someone has left after paying for the essentials.
Evidence-based action is needed
London’s overall wealth can make it easy to overlook the very different financial realities experienced across the capital. If we want to understand where the greatest barriers to being active exist, we need to look beyond London-wide averages and use local evidence to understand the experiences of different communities.
That means making sure our understanding of poverty and financial inequality informs how we think about physical activity – from where investment is directed, to how opportunities are designed and who they are intended to reach.
London may be a wealthy city, but that doesn’t mean all Londoners are wealthy. If we want a healthier, more active capital, we need to make sure our approach reflects the reality of people’s lives – using the evidence to challenge assumptions, target action where it is needed most and ensure that financial circumstances don’t determine who gets to be active.
