ArticlePDF Available

Can global cities be ‘age-friendly cities’? Urban development and ageing populations



Understanding the relationship between population ageing and urban change has become a major issue for public policy. An emerging theme has concerned the need to develop supportive urban communities for older citizens. This paper provides a critical perspective on what has been termed the development of 'age-friendly cities and communities' by exploring such policies in the context of urban change arising from globalisation, urban regeneration and austerity. A key argument is that research and policies on age-friendly cities require stronger integration with analyses of the impact of global forces transforming the physical and social context of cities. This theme is developed by examining: first, the arguments behind the development of the 'age-friendly' approach; second, the pressures affecting urban environments, and their relevance for the 'age-friendly' debate; and third, challenges for improving the urban environment for older populations. The article concludes by discussing the need to combine a conceptual model of 'age-friendliness' with analysis of the economic and social forces transforming urban environments.
Can global cities be age-friendly cities? Urban development and
ageing populations
Tine Buffel , Chris Phillipson
Humanities Bridgeford Street-2.13M, School of Social Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom
abstractarticle info
Article history:
Received 18 December 2015
Received in revised form 15 February 2016
Accepted 31 March 2016
Available online xxxx
Understanding the relationshipbetween population ageing and urban change has become a major issue for pub-
lic policy. An emerging theme has concerned the need to develop supportive urban communities for older citi-
zens. This paper provides a critical perspective on what has been termed the development of age-friendly
cities and communitiesby exploring such policies in the context of urban change arising from globalisation,
urban regeneration and austerity. A key argument is that research and policies on age-friendly cities require
stronger integration with analyses of the impact of global forces transforming the physical and social context
of cities.This theme is developed by examining: rst,the arguments behind the developmentof the age-friendly
approach; second, the pressures affecting urbanenvironments, and their relevancefor the age-friendlydebate;
and third, challenges for improving the urban environment for older populations. The article concludes by
discussing the need to combine a conceptual model of age-friendlinesswith analysisof the economic and social
forces transforming urban environments.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Social policy
Urban regeneration
1. Introduction
Population ageing is taking place across all countries of the world, al-
beit at varying levels of intensity. In OECD countries, the population
share of those 65 years and over increased from 7.7% in 1950 to 17.8%
in 2010, and is expected to reach 25% in 2050. Of equal signicance is
the global acceleration of urbanisation with nearly half of the world's
population now living in cities, this is set to increase to around two-
thirds by 2030. Understanding the relationship between population
ageing and urban change has become a major issue for public policy.
The case for such work is especially strong given that cities are where
the majority of people (of all ages) now live and where they will
spend their old age. A report from the Organisation of Economic Coop-
eration and Development (OECD 2015:18) makes the point that:
Designing policies that address ageing issues requires a deep under-
standing of local circumstances, including communitieseconomic as-
sets, history and culture. The spatially heterogeneous nature of ageing
trends makes it important to approach ageing from an urban perspec-
tive. Cities need to pay more attention to local circumstances to under-
stand ageing, and its impact. They are especially well-equipped to
address the issue, given their long experience of working with local
communities and profound understanding of local problems.
This argument raises an important challenge for policies relating to
ageing and urban environments. An emerging theme has concerned
the need to create what has been termed age-friendly cities and com-
munities. This approach, initiated by the World Health Organization
(WHO) (2007),reects attempts to develop supportive urban commu-
nities for older citizens. Work around this issue has produced various
accounts of the characteristics of such cities, as well as descriptions of
projects and collaborations between cities within and across countries
(Steels, 2015; Fitzgerald & Caro, 2016; Moulaert & Garon, 2016). Yet
this model also has to contend with substantial changes in urban envi-
ronments. The latter have been the subject of researchwithin urbanso-
ciology and urban geography, with studies exploring issues relating to
the emergence of global cities, the effects of de-industrialisation, prob-
lems associated with urban regeneration, and the impact of economic
recession (e.g. Bridge & Watson, 2011; Harvey, 2012; Sassen, 2012).
However, the implications of such developments for creating age-
friendly cities have yet to be examined in any detail. Following this,
this paper rst sets out some of the arguments behind the development
of the age-friendlyapproach, with particular emphasis on the work of
the WHO. Second, some of the pressures affecting urban environments
are reviewed, together with a summary of their relevance for the age-
friendly debate. Third, the paper identies a series of challenges for im-
proving the urban environment for older populations, drawing on per-
spectives from urban sociology and related disciplines.
2. The development of age-friendly cities
A range of factors have inuenced the development of age-friendly
cities (AFCs), including: rst, the global impact of demographic change,
with a range of housing and community needs emerging among those
Cities 55 (2016) 94100
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: (T. Buffel), (C. Phillipson).
0264-2751/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
journal homepage:
aged 50 and over; second, the policy goal of supporting people in their
own homes for as long as possible the idea of ageing in place
(Wiles, Leibing, Guberman, Reeve, & Allen, 2012); and third, awareness
of the impact of urban change on the lives of older people, for example
in areas experiencing high levels of economic deprivation (Buffel,
Phillipson, & Scharf, 2013).
The argument for AFCs relates to the way in which older people may
experience marginalisation within urban environments. Handler
(2015:12) makes the point that: Cities are, for the most part, spaces
that are imagined and structured with a younger, working age demo-
graphic in mind. Older people are not, typically, incorporated into the
mainstream of thinking and planning around urban environments.
Alley et al. (2007:4) dene an age-friendly community as a: []place
where older people are actively involved, valued, and supported with
infrastructure and services that effectively accommodate their needs.
The age-friendlyperspective is especially associated with an initiative
from the WHO studying the experiences of older people living in
urban communities. This produced a guide identifying the key charac-
teristics of an age-friendly environment in terms of service provision
(e.g. health services, transportation), the built environment (e.g. hous-
ing, outdoor spaces and buildings), and social aspects (e.g. civic and so-
cial participation) (WHO, 2007). Building on this work, in 2010 the
WHO launched the Global Network of Age-friendly Citiesin an attempt
to encourage implementation of policy recommendations from the
2007 project. The network has a membership of 287 cities and commu-
nities across countries in the Global North and South (2016 gures).
There are various approaches to creating age-friendly environments,
ranging from an emphasis on physical infrastructure to the quality of so-
cial relations that promote social participation (Lui, Everingham,
Warburton, Cuthill, & Bartlett, 2009; Scharlach, 2012). Partnerships be-
tween local authorities, public health professionals, architects, communi-
ty organisations, and older people are also viewed as a crucial dimension
to building AFCs (Glicksman & Ring, 2016; Garon, Paris, Lalibertė,&Veil,
2016). For example, in New York, local authorities, the police and commu-
nity organisations worked closely with older people to identify improve-
ments that increase the quality of daily life in particular neighbourhoods.
This partnership resulted in older residents feeling safer and more en-
gaged with their community (Steels, 2015). One study comparing the
age-friendly models developed in Brussels and Manchester, two cities
which pioneered the adoption of the WHO approach, also highlighted
the importance of building partnerships with multiple stakeholders, in-
cluding public, private, and third-sector organisations and nongovern-
mental organisations (Buffel et al., 2014a). The research identied a
number of success factors in developing age-friendly strategies, these in-
cluded: the integration of policies for older people into those focusing on
urban (re)development and the management of cities, and the involve-
ment of older people as actors in setting the agenda for age-friendly de-
velopments. A signicant issue in this respect is the recognition that
older adults are not just the beneciaries of age-friendly communities:
they also have a key role to play in dening and shaping their distinctive
features (Menec, Means, Keating, Parkhurst, & Eales, 2011; Buffel, 2015b).
Despite the opportunities, a number of barriers both existing and po-
tential to implementing age-friendly programmes can also be identied.
Three in particular will be examined in this paper: rst, the impact of eco-
nomic austerity; second, pressures associated with urban development
and; third, the changing relationship between public and private space.
Each of these factors will now be explored followed by a summary of
the implications for developing the age-friendly policies.
3. Age-friendly cities and economic austerity
Despite many achievements resulting from age-friendly initiatives,
these have run parallel with the implementation of neo-liberal policies
leading to a scaling back of the welfare state and associated forms of
public investment (Phillipson, 2013). Many of the cities in the WHO
programme have experienced reductions in services of direct benet
to older people, notable examples being the closure of libraries, cuts to
adult education provision, leisure facilities, senior centres and home-
based care. Pressures on these services have affected work at a
neighbourhood level as well as city-wide interventions (Buffel et al.,
2014a; Hastings, Bailey, Bramley, Gannon, & Watkins, 2015).
This last point can be illustrated with examples from some of the
leading cities involved in developing age-friendly initiatives. New York
City joined the WHO Global Network following its launch in 2010. Not-
withstanding the existence of the programme and the importance at-
tached to age-friendly work,
local funding for senior services suffered
cuts of 20% over the period 20092012, declining from approximately
$181 million in FY 2009 to $145 in FY 2012. The impact of this was rein-
forced by reductions in fundingfor New York from federal programmes
such as the Older Americans Act (OAA), with the city's share of OAA
funding declining by 16% over the period 20052012 (Center for an
Urban Future, 2013). The age-friendly programme has also found it dif-
cult to inuence provision in core areas such as housing, where pres-
sures on global cities such as New York are especially acute. Navarro
and Yee (2014) note that: [] of the 165,000 affordable housing units
created under Mayor Bloomberg [under whose administration the
age-friendly programme was launched] fewer than 10,000 were set
aside for older residents. And a report from the New York Ofce of
Comptroller (2014:27) commented that: New York City is woefully be-
hind other areas of the country in providing viable subsidized and
market-rate housing suitable for and affordable to seniors.
In the UK, Manchester was also in the rst wave of cities to join the
Global Network and is regarded as an exemplar of the age-friendly
As in the case of New York, signicant achievements have
been recorded, not least empowering groups of older residents living
in areas characterised by high levels of deprivation, and gainingthe sup-
port of signicant stakeholders including a range of community organi-
sations and actors (McGarry & Morris, 2011). Widening access to arts
and cultural institutions has been an important strand in age-friendly
work within the city. Manchester has pioneered a Cultural Champions
programme whereby in return for offers and invitations to specicac-
tivities, older people encourage friends within their networks and com-
munities to engage with a variety of cultural events throughout the
year. Launched in 2011, the programme had recruited 120 older people
serving as cultural champions within their neighbourhoods by 2016.
The programme now works with 16 cultural organisations within the
city, drawing in a diverse range of older people to arts-related events.
However, age-friendly work in Manchester has also been affected by re-
ductions in nancial support for its core activities. The programme re-
ceived a 50% reduction in funding in the period 2013/2014 and 2014/
2015, following steep cuts to local government funding in the wake of
the nancial crisis of 2007/08. Key programmes linked to the age-
friendly work in Manchester have ended or have been reduced in
scale. An important group of staff linked to the programme left the
local authority to take advantage of voluntary severance schemes, tak-
ing with them important skills, commitment and organisational
Despite a strategic focus on shifting resources from treatment
to preventive measures, and commitment at senior levels to the pro-
gramme, such pressures present signicant challenges to achieving
the ambitions of the age-friendly model.
A number of London boroughs have developed age-friendly initia-
tives, for example in Camden, Kilburn, and Islington. The Greater
For further informationabout the Global Network of Age Friendly Cities and Commu-
nities, see:
For further information on Age-Friendly New York see http://www.agefriendlynyc.
Information aboutAge Friendly Manchester can befound on http://www.manchester.
For further information about the Cultural Champions Pr ogramme, see Audience
Agency (2013)
Personal communication, Senior Strategy Manager, Manchester City Council
95T. Buffel, C. Phillipson / Cities 55 (2016) 94100
London Authority (GLA) aims to make London: a more accessible and
welcoming city for older people(cited in Tinker & Ginn, 2015:5).
Research undertaken by Tinker and Ginn in 2014 (2015:2) noted con-
siderable improvementsin the city's environment for older people,
since their last report in 2006. But they also sounded a note of caution
about the scope of what has been achieved:
Well-intentioned plans have been obstructed by austerity policies
since 2008 that include widespread cuts in public spending, job losses
in the public sector, reduced grants to local authorities that lead to con-
traction in community support and health services on which older peo-
ple rely. These cuts in resources have undermined efforts by LAs [local
authorities] to improve the material and social environment of older
people(Tinker and Ginn, 2015:49).
Walsh and Harvey's (2012) review of Ireland's Age-Friendly Cities
and Counties programme identies a number of challenges arising
from the introduction of austerity policies. These echo the Manchester
experience in terms of the impact of cuts in the number of core staff ad-
ministering programmes. Walsh (2015:93) summarises the conse-
quences of austerity as follows:
[] limited resources [for implementing age-friendly programmes],
staff shortages in public stakeholder partner organisations (due to em-
ploymentmoratoriums) and, consequently, difculties in securing com-
mitment from stakeholder partners. Such challenges signify the realities
of implementing suchcommunity-based programmeson a cost-neutral
basis in difcult economic conditions. This raises important concerns
about the effectiveness and sustainability of Ireland's age-friendly pro-
gramme. It also raises concerns about how the age-friendly programme,
through a combination of its cost-neutral approach and its activeageing
focus, may end up unintentionally supporting policies that effectively
reduce state involvement in ageing communities.
Kendig et al. (2014:21), reviewing progress on developing age-
friendly cities in Canberra, Melbourne and Sydney, highlight the im-
portance of the AFC approach in empowering older people and de-
veloping [] social and physical environments that enhance their
participation and well-being. They note the benets of the AFC
model in bringing to public notice the positive potential of older
people. Yet they also point out that AFC policies have often not
moved very far beyond statements of values and aspirationswith
growing scal austerity a major factor limiting progress, concluding
that: A barrier to successful implementation of AFC strategies at all
levels of government is a tight scal environment combined with
organisational inertia and established community expectations
(Kendig et al., 2014:18).
Other examples of where age-friendly policies appear to be in ten-
sion with economic and social realities are found in Spanish cities
such as Barcelona and Madrid, both members of the WHO Global Net-
work since 2011 and 2014 respectively. Barcelona City Council
(2011:5) aims to encourage active, healthy ageing for older people
and improve the well-being of those older people who are vulnerable
due to dependency, isolation or very low levels of income. However,
such ambitions are under severe pressure due to the impact of the eco-
nomic recession. The cuts in public and private funding to the
healthcare system, freezing of pensions, housing foreclosures, and the
general impoverishment of the population have signicantly increased
the risk of social exclusion and isolation for particular groups of older
people. In this context, Clarke (2014) discusses the example of the De-
pendency Law, passed in 2006 by the then socialist Government of
Spain, which aimed to improve the quality of life of people facing de-
pendency due to disability, illness or advanced age. The law was
intended to provide families with nancial help to hire home assistance.
However, as Clarke (2014),n.p.):
[] the budget for the Dependency Law was cut by13% in 2011, and
even before the economic crisis the service was already insufcient to
cover all the necessary expenditures. The cuts have seriously hindered
the application of the law, which is under-budgeted considering its am-
bitious objectives and challenges.
Following the above examples, the concept of age-friendliness
must itself be kept under critical scrutiny given the impact of economic
constraints on urban areas. Many of the cities in the WHO programme
are experiencing substantial reductions in physical infrastructure and
services. The handling of these cuts will be a major test for the ideals
and initiatives associated with building supportive communities for
older people. Whether applying the age-friendly approach makes a sig-
nicant difference to the quality of people's lives, given the challenges
facing cities, will need careful attention over the next phase of the
movement's development. But pressure on services is only one aspect
of the challenge of creating an age-friendlyenvironment. A more gen-
eral issue concerns the nature of urban change itself and the extent to
which this promotes or restricts age-friendly developments. The follow-
ing sections of the paper examine different aspects of this issue.
4. Age-friendly cities: pressures from urban development
The previous section illustrated tensions implementing age-friendly
programmes in a context of economic austerity. But the problems asso-
ciated with AFC policies may also be related to a second factor: pres-
sures associated with urban development and the characteristics of
neighbourhood change. The study of urban society and population
ageing has tended, as argued in this paper, to be kept separate in re-
search and policy. One consequence of this is the relative invisibility
of older people in discussions around, for example, the development
of global cities, urban lifestyles, and economic inuences affecting
neighbourhoods and communities (Gottdiener, Hutchison, & Ryan,
2015). The argument put forward in this paper is that integrating the
study of population ageing with that of urban studies is crucial to under-
standing both the limits and the potential of age-friendly communities.
As noted earlier, theidea of ageing in placehas been a centraltheme
in policies targeted at supporting older people (Rowles and Chaudhury,
2005). However, Golant (2014:13) observes that this approach
raises critical questions such as: [] whether communities have ac-
quired the structural capacity that is the resources and opportunities
to accommodate the needs and goals of their aging populations…’
Resources may be especially limited in economically deprived urban
neighbourhoods which may experience a variety of environmental
pressures arising from the closure of local services and amenities,
crime-related problems, poor housing and social polarisation (Rodwin
& Gusmano, 2006; Smith, 2009). Such elements may increase the haz-
ards and risks experienced in later life (Buffel et al., 2013). Low-
income groups of older people may be exposedto rapid shifts in housing
markets as a consequence of housing renewal and/or gentrication
(Burns, Lavoie, & Rose, 2012). Harvey (1982:89) outlines the context
for this as follows: Under capitalism there is [] a perpetual struggle
in which capital builds a physical landscape appropriate to its own con-
dition at a particular moment in time, only to have to destroy it, usually
in the course of a crisis, at a subsequent point in time.Elsewhere,
Harvey (2008:33) has termed this as one of creative destruction,
which he argues: [] nearly always has a class dimension since it is
the poor, the underprivileged and those marginalized from political
power that suffer rst and foremost from this process.
The experience described by Harvey can be illustrated in the UK
through programmes of housing regeneration such as the Housing Mar-
ket Renewal (HMR) Pathnder programme, which operated from 2002
to 2011 in parts of the North and Midlands regions of England, support-
ed by £2.2 billion of public funding. The purpose of the scheme was to
rebuild housing markets and communities in areas where demand for
housing was weak, and where there were declining populations, poor
services, dereliction, and poor social conditions(Wilson, 2013:2).
Wilson's (2013:5) Parliamentary note on some of the problems associ-
ated with the scheme nds echoes in Harvey's argument above:
The[Labour]Government's housing market renewalpathnder
programme imposed large-scale Whitehall targets for demolition
96 T. Buffel, C. Phillipson / Cities 55 (2016) 94100
and clearance across the Midlands and the north of England. The
centrally-driven schemes were often resented by local communities
and created as many problems as they solvedThere was wide-
spread public controversy over an obsession with demolition over
refurbishment [] large prots by developers [] and perverse in-
centives to run-down neighbourhoods [] Local communities in
some of the most deprived areas of the country were told they
would see a transformation of their areas, which in reality amounted
to bulldozing buildings and knocking down neighbourhoods, pitting
neighbour against neighbour and leaving families trapped in aban-
doned streets.
However, the trapped familieswere in many cases older people
either renting social housing or owner-occupiers and who were on
the receiving end of the problems identied by Wilson (2013). Judge-
ments about the Pathnder programme indicate a complex range of is-
sues and the evaluations suggest a mix of losers and winners for the
different communities and groups involved.
But the striking feature
of all of the evaluations is the absence of any consideration concerning
the impact on older people, despite the fact that as long-term commu-
nity residents typically 30 or 40 more years they would potentially
experience the most disruption. There is evidence about groups such
as older residents ndingnew properties in Pathnder areas too expen-
sive to buy notwithstanding compensation (Deen, 2012); and about
lack of consultation of residents in the programme (Turcu, 2012;
Minton, 2009;Simpson, 2010). Yet accounts about the experiences
benets or otherwise for older people are missing in ofcial evalua-
tions, although reports by Minton (2009) and Crookes (2012) suggest
that many long-term residents paid a heavy price for the process
which Wilson (2013) describes.
Pressures on older people in the context of gentrication have been
highlighted in a number of studies. In a study of social exclusion in ve
Spanish cities, Blanco and Subirats (2008:145) reported that: []the
most deprived elderly individuals are common targets of eviction
from their homes(experiences which almost certainly increased fol-
lowing the 2007/8 crisis). Galcanova and Sykovova (2015:1212) in a
study of older people's experiences of urban change in three Czech cit-
ies, found that in gentrifying parts of Prague: [] strong feelings of in-
security [among older people] were reported, and inhabitants were
involuntarily displaced from their ats, sometimes by illegal means.In
a similar vein, research in two neighbourhoods in Montreal, Canada
(Burns et al., 2012:1) concluded that: []gentrication triggered pro-
cesses of social exclusion among older adults: loss of social spaces ded-
icated to older people led to social disconnectedness, invisibility and
loss of political inuence on neighbourhood planning(see, also,
Zukin, 2010).
San Francisco, a member of the WHO Global Network since 2014,
provides a further illustration of the pressures on policies to assist age-
ing in place. Here, the presence of afuent residents, primarily em-
ployees from high-tech companies based in Silicon Valley, has led to
the gentrication of low-income neighbourhoods and an increase in
rental prices three times higher than the national average (Erwert,
2014). Despite a policy of rent control and strict rules on eviction, nu-
merous examples have been reported of landlords evicting older ten-
ants who have occupied the same apartment for decades, replacing
them with executives in the remunerative high-tech sector.
Portacolone and Halpern (2014:13) suggest that as a result: older
adults living alone may be forced to relocate into senior developments
for their inability to nancially compete for the limited spatial resources
available. Limited nancial resources constrain the choices available to
this population. The prohibitive costs of real estate and the limited
services available for older residents who are ageing in placein con-
ventional housing often facilitates this move.
For older people who have accrued nancial capital based on owner
occupation, benets may arise from gentrication with increases in the
value of property. This may strengthen commitments to age in place;
alternatively, possession of housing wealth may loosenattachments
to neighbourhood as people prefer to cash in on the value of their
house. ReseADD: (eds.)ADD: (eds.) arch published in 2014 found that
in the UK nearly two in ve over-55 homeowners plan to sell their
home with the aim of releasing £85,000 in equity (cited in ILC/Centre
for Later Life Funding, 2015). In this example, spatial inequalities
might be said to reinforce advantages which have operated over the
life course and which foster highly divergentexperiences amonggroups
in old age. But these may be further reinforced by urban-wide processes
which limit control over public space within cities, restricting the scope
and potential of age-friendly developments. A review of this issue forms
the next section of this paper.
5. Age-friendly cities: the privatisation of public space
Athirdfactorinuencingthe development of age-friendlycities con-
cerns the control and ownership of public space. The policy of develop-
ing age-friendly cities makes a number of assumptions about access to,
and ownership of, public space: namely, that it can be controlled and in-
uenced on behalf of the changing needs and expectations of people in
later life. But space in cities is not itself freely available. Increasingly,
ownership and control are vested in particular groups for whom the is-
sues raised by the age-friendly agenda may have limited appeal. This is a
crucial problem for the idea of an age-friendlycity, where interven-
tions in the built environment are seen as a key element in securing
changes to the quality of life in old age. However, attempts to initiate
change now have to work more often within the context of private/cor-
porately-owned rather than public-owned spaces. Minton (2009:19),for
example, notes that: Multinational property corporates are now the
most likely owners of large chunks of British cities. And she goes on
to observe that:
As the twenty-rst century corporate estates take over large parts of
the city, the last decade has seen a huge shift in landownership, away
from streets, public spaces and buildings in public ownership and to-
wards the creation of new private estates, primarily given over to shop-
ping and ofce complexes, which, while not actually gated, feel very
much like separate enclaves(Minton 2009:25).
This observation highlights the extent to which proposals for age-
friendly interventions to re-shape urban environments, such as those
proposed by Ball (2012) in the USA and Handler (2015) in the UK,
need to take account of the way corporations and developers now con-
trol many aspects of city life. This process has been especially character-
istic of many of the global cities attempting to implement the age-
friendly model. Harvey (2012:23) noted in relation to New York that
under the leadership of its former Mayor Michael Bloomberg a
champion of the age-friendly city approach: [there was a] reshaping
of the city along lines favourable to the developers, to Wall Street and
transnational capitalist elements, while continuing to sell the city as
an optimallocation for high-value businesses and a fantastic destination
for tourists, thus turning Manhattan in effect into one vast gated com-
munity for the rich.Zukin (2010) from her research (also in New
York) suggests that developments such as the gentrication of
neighbourhoods make claims on space which subsequently displace or
marginalise long-term residents.
Examples such as the above suggest that particular groups of older
people may nd difculties creatingspace within cities (Phillipson,
2007; 2011). Global cities, it might be argued, raise tensions between
ahyper-mobileminority and those ageing in place; de-industrialising
cities (with shrinking populations) may create different kinds of prob-
lems arising from contraction of an economic base which can support
sustainable social networks (Buffel et al., 2014b). The challenge is
The national evaluation of the Housing Market Renewal Pathnders programme: is
ments/housing/pdf/1362833.pdf See also:
97T. Buffel, C. Phillipson / Cities 55 (2016) 94100
creating an urban environment that supports the autonomy and equal
rights of older people with others to a shareof urban space
(Vanderbeck and Worth, 2015). This issue will be especially important
to implement at a local level, with a particular focus on improving the
quality of urban design and promoting safety and inclusion as key fea-
tures of urban living (Gehl, 2010). One way forward could be to make
age-friendlinessa central part of policy making aimed at promoting
sustainable development across a broad range of social, environmental
and economic domains. However, implementing such policies in prac-
tise will require involvementof a range of stakeholders including pub-
lic, private, and third-sector organisations; multiple levels of
government; and nongovernmental organisations as well as on-
going efforts to build bridges among these groups. Reconciling the dif-
ferent interests, goals and priorities of these stakeholders will be a key
issue for the age-friendly city movement to address. Another will be
to create opportunities for older people, including the most
marginalised and vulnerable groups, to have a voice in decision-
making processes relating to urban developments and regeneration.
The nal section of this paper will explore these issues in the context
of an alternative framework to support the WHO approach.
6. Conclusion: developing cities for all ages
This paper has argued that the implementation of age-friendly policies
is being challenged by three major elements: the impact of nancial cuts
on social programmes; pressures arising from the characteristics of urban
development; and the shift towards the privatisation of urban space. One
result of these factors is that although age-friendly cities (AFCs) have
many achievements to their name, their material impact on older people
has been more limited. AFCs have been inuential in moving ageing pol-
icies beyond a health and social care framework towards one which in-
corporates cultural activities, education and the environment. AFCs have
also helped to promote a debate about the contribution which ageing
populations can make to the economic life of cities, notably with the de-
velopment of new nancial and technological services (Cox, Henderson,
&Baker,2014). However, the AFC approach has yet to develop policies
which can prevent or reduce the inequalities associated with urban living,
especially as regards their impact on the neighbourhoods in which people
may have spent the majority of their lives.
A central argument of this paper is that AFC policies are unlikely to
be successful unless embedded in the networks of power which control
urban life. However, a number of initiatives will need to be taken for-
ward to achieve this goal. The rst of these concerns developing a
more coherent link between research and policies on urban ageing. Re-
search on environmental aspects of ageing has an impressive literature
to its name, yet it remains detached from analysing the impact of pow-
erful global and economic forces transforming the physical and social
context of cities. Remedying this will require close integration with in-
sights from a range of disciplines, including urban sociology, urban eco-
nomics, design and human geography. Understanding optimum
environments for ageing must be seen as an inter-disciplinary enter-
prise requiring understanding of the impact of developments such as
the changing dynamics of urban poverty on older people, the conse-
quences of urban renewal and regeneration, and the impact of transna-
tional migration (Buffel, 2015a).
A second issueconcerns applying age-friendlinessin a way that rec-
ognises the complexity of the urban environment. The techniques for
ensuring an age-friendly approach will vary considerably depending
on the characteristics of urban change. Whilst the trend towards
urban living is world-wide, the pattern of urban growth demonstrates
considerable variation: shrinking city populations in the developed
world (Europe especially); and accelerating urbanisation in Africa and
Asia, with both continents demonstrating a mix of rapidly expanding
cities in some cases, declining ones in others (UN-HABITAT, 2012). Se-
curing age-friendlinessin the context of the rise of mega-citiesand
hyper-citiesprovides another variation. At the same time, processes
for developing age-friendliness will need radical adaptation given the
slum cities prevalent in Southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa (UN-
HABITAT, 2012). The bulk of population growth in these continents
has taken place largely through the rise of slums, many of these located
on the periphery of capital cities (Davis, 2006). The problem of reaching
older people and migrants who are ageing in placealbeit housed in
temporary accommodation bereft of basic facilities, underlines the
need for new models of intervention which can respond to the highly
unequal contexts experienced by urban elders across the world.
Third, implementing an age-friendlyapproach requires the close
engagement of older people and those approaching oldage in urban re-
generation. Studiesin the UK by Riseborough and Sribjilanin (2000) and
Simpson (2010) found that older people were often invisiblein regen-
eration policies. The problem here was less the absence of older people
in consultations around policies, more an underlying ageismwhich
viewed them only as victimsof neighbourhood change. The authors
make the point that regeneration practise could benet from the expe-
rience of older people, their attachment to neighbourhoods, and their
involvement in community organisations. Targeting urban regeneration
strategies at different groups within the older population will be essen-
tial, with awareness of contrasting issues faced by different ethnic
groups, those with particular physical/mental health needs, and those
living in areas with high levels of economic and social deprivation. At
the same time, age-friendly efforts should focus not only on changes
for current cohorts of older residents, but also work towards longer-
term neighbourhood change that can benet successive cohorts of
older residents. There is therefore an urgent need to reconnecturban re-
generation policies with strategies that support resident-led planning
for lifetime neighbourhoods(Bevan & Croucher, 2011)orageing-
friendly communities(Scharlach & Lehning, 2013). Such models pro-
mote the empowerment of residents of any age to bring about
neighbourhood changes which enable people to meet their basic
needs, maintain signicant relationships, and participate in the commu-
nity in meaningful ways as they grow older (Scharlach & Lehning,
2013). This involves public and private sector, and voluntary and com-
munity organisations working in such a way that residents of any age
are enabled to set out their needs and concerns, and identify priorities
for action and change within their own neighbourhoods.
Fourth, and following from the above, implicit in the notion of age-
friendly communities is that older adults are a central part of ensuring
that a seniors' lens is applied in planning decisions and policies. As
Menec et al. (2011:487) argues older adults must be involved in identi-
fying areas of need, prioritizing key issues, and ensuring appropriate im-
plementation. Whilst progress has been made in identifying some key
policies for age-friendly work, there has been much less success in
terms of making older people themselves central to the creation and de-
velopment of policies and age-friendly initiatives. Here, methods drawn
from participatory research can advance efforts to engage older resi-
dents as leaders and visionaries in identifying features of their
neighbourhood in need of improvement. The case for involving older
residents as co-researchers in exploring the age-friendliness of their
neighbourhood is that it represents a viable method to engage older res-
idents and mobilise their expertise, skills and knowledge and to stimu-
late co-production in developing age-friendly initiatives. In addition, it
provides benets to the older co-researchers, community stakeholders
and policy-makers involved, because it provides a forum for rich and
meaningful social engagement and mutual learning and exchange
(Buffel, 2015b). However, there remains a need for experimentation
to test and learn from participatory and collaborative approaches in-
volving older people in the co-production of urban space. The success
of communities in becoming more age-friendly will, to a large extent,
depend on whether older people, including those facing social exclu-
sion, will be involved as key actors in setting the agenda for future re-
search and policies on age-friendly developments.
Finally, and following on from the lastpoint, there is a strong casefor
incorporating issues about ageing in urban environments with debates
98 T. Buffel, C. Phillipson / Cities 55 (2016) 94100
concerning spatial justice. Here, we would underline the relevance of
Soja's (2010:19) argument that the: ‘…geographies in which we live
can have both positive and negative effects on our lives.Hewrites:
They are not just dead background or a neutral physical stage for the
human drama but are lled with material and imagined forces that
can hurt us or help us in nearly everything we do, individually and col-
lectively. He concludes: This is a vitally important part of the new spa-
tial consciousness, making us aware that the geographies in which we
live can intensify and sustain our exploitation as workers, support op-
pressive forms of cultural and political domination based on race, gen-
der, and nationality, and aggravate all forms of discrimination and
injustice. Ensuring spatial justice for different groups of older people
is now a crucial part of this debate, with developing an integrated ap-
proach to demographic andurban change representing a key taskfor re-
search and public policy.
The authors would like to thank the members of the Population and
Ageing and Urbanisation (INPAU) network, and all research groups,
local authorities, NGOs and charitable foundations involved in promot-
ing active ageing in urban environments through high quality research.
We are also grateful for the feedback from the journal editor, the
referees, and the participants and co-researchers involved in public
Age-Friendly Research events organised by the Manchester Institute
for Collaborative Research on Ageing (MICRA). This research has been
supported through a Marie Curie Fellowship at the University of
Alley, D., Liebig, P., Pynoos, J., Benerjee, T., & Choi, I. H. (2007). Creating elder-friendly
communities: Preparation for an aging society. Journal of Gerontological Social Work,
Audience Agency (2013). Valuing older people Cultural champions scheme: Evaluation.
London: The Audience Agency.
Ball, M. S.(2012). Livable communities foraging populations:Urban design for longevity.Ho-
boken, NJ: John Wiley.
Barcelona City Council (2011). Barcelona Age-Friendly City: Together we build a city for all
ages. Barcelona: Barcelona City Council.
Bevan, M., & Croucher, K. (2011). Lifetime neighbourhoods. London: Department for Com-
munities and Local Government.
Blanco, I., & Subirats, J. (2008). Social exclusion, area effects and metropolitan gover-
nance: A comparative analysis of ve large Spanish cities. Urban Research and
Bridge, G., & Watson, S. (2011). Reections on Materialities. In G. Bridge, & S. Watson
(Eds.), The new Blac kwell companion to t he city (pp. 315). West Sussex: Wiley-
Buffel, T. (2015a). Ageing migrants and the creation of home: Mobility and the mainte-
nance of transnational ties. Population Space and Place, 1994 Article rst published
online: 27 OCT 2015 |
Buffel, T. (2015b). Researching age-friendly communities. Stories from older people as co-in-
vestigators. Ma nchester: The University of Manchester Library. Available online
Buffel, T., DeDonder, L., Phillipson, C., De Witte, N., Dury, S., & Verte, D. (2014b). Place at-
tachment among ol der adults living in four communities in Flanders, Belgium.
Housing Studies,29,800822.
Buffel, T.,McGarry, P., Phillipson, C., De Donder, L., Dury, S., De Witte,N., & Smetcoren, A. -
S. (2014a).Developing age-friendly cities:Case studies from Brussels and Manchester
and implications for policy and practice. Journal of Aging and Social Policy,26,5272.
Buffel, T., Phillipson, C., & Scharf, T. (2013). Experiences of neighbourhood exclusion and
inclusion among older people living in deprived inner-city areas in Belgium and En-
gland. Ageing & Society,33 (Special Issue 01), 89109.
Burns, V. F., Lavoie, J. P., & Rose, D. (2012). Revisiting the role of neighbourhood change in
social exclusion and inclusion of older people.Journal of Aging Research.http://dx.doi.
org/10.1155/2012/148287 Available onlineat
2012/148287/ [Accessed 6th of March 2014].
Center for an Urban Future (2013). The new face of New York's seniors. New York: Centre
for an Urban Future.
Clarke, B. (2014). The age of ageing: Barcelona's growing elderly population. Society &
Science Available online at
item/the-age-of-ageing-barcelona-s-growing-elderly-population [accessed 30th of
November 2015].
Cox, E., Henderson, G., & Baker,R. (2014). Silver cities: Realisingthe potential of our growing
older population. Manchester: Institute of Public Policy North.
Crookes, L. (2012). The making of space and the losing of space: A critical geography of
gentrication by bulldozer in the north-east of England. In B. Tunstall (Ed.), Breaking
up communities? The social impact of housing demolition in the late-20th century.York:
York University.
Davis, M. (2006). Planet of slums. London: Verso.
Deen, S. (2012). An evaluation of housing regeneration: The Manchester, Salford housing
market renewal pathnder. master's dissertation. School of Environment, Education
and Development: The University of Manchester.
Erwert, A. M. (2014). S.F. rentsup more than 3 times higher than national average. Avail-
able online at http://b
than-3-times-higher-than-national-average/#20080 101=0 &20081103=
Fitzgerald, K. G., & Caro, F. (2016). An overview of age-friendly cities and communities
around the world. Journal of Aging and Social Policy,26,118.
Galcanova, L., & Sykorova, D. (2015). Socio-spatial aspects of ageing in an urban context:
An example from three Czech Republic cities. Ageing & Society,35,12001220. http://
Garon, S.,Paris, M., Lalibertė, A., Veil,A., & Beaulieu, M. (2016). Age-friendly city in Quebec
(Canada), or alone it goes fa ster, together it goes fur ther. 2016 In G. Caro, & K.
Fitzgerald (Eds.), International perspectives on age-friendly cities (pp. 119136). New
York: Routledge.
Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for Europe. London: Island Press.
Glicksman, A., & Ring, L. (2016). The environment of environmental change: The impact
of city realities on the success of age-friendly programs. (2016) In G. Caro, & K.
Fitzgerald (Eds.), International perspectives on age-friendly cities (pp. 154170). New
York: Routledge.
Golant, S. (2014). Age-friendly communities: Are we expecting too much. Montreal: IRRP
Gottdiener, M., Hutchison, R., & Ryan, M. (2015). The new urban sociology. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.
Handler, S. (2015). An alternative age-friendly handbook. Manchester: University of Man-
chester Library.
Harvey, D. (1982). The urban process under capitalism: A framework for analysis. In M.
Dear, & A. Scott (Eds.), Urbanization and ur ban planning in capitalist society
(pp. 265295).
Harvey, D. (2008). Right to the city. New Left Review,53(September/October), 2342.
Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel cities: From the right to the city to the urban revolution. London:
Verso Books.
Hastings,A., Bailey, W., Bramley, G., Gannon, M., & Watkins, D. (2015). The cost of the cuts:
The impact on local government and poorer communities.York: Joseph Rowntree Trust.
ILC/Centre for Later Life Funding (2015). At a cross-roads: The future likelihood of low in-
comes in old age. London: ILC-UK.
Kendig, H., Elias, A. -M., Majwijiw, P., & Anstey, K. (2014). Developing age-friendly cities
and communities in Australia. Journal of Aging and Health,26(8), 13901414. http://
Lui, C. W., Everingham, J.A., Warburton, J., Cuthill, M., & Bartlett, H. (2009). What makesa
community age-friendly: A review of international literature. Australian Journal on
Ageing,28(3), 116121.
McGarry, P., & Morris, J. (2011). A great place to grow older: a case study of how Man-
chester is developing an age-friendly city. Working with Older People,15(1), 3846.
Menec, V. H., Means, R., Keating, N., Parkhurst, G., & Eales, J. (2011). Conceptualizing age-
friendly communities. Canadian Journal on Aging,30, 479493.
Minton, A. (2009). Ground control: Fear and happiness in the twenty-rst cen tury city.
London: Penguin Books.
Moulaert, T., & Garon, S. (2016). Age-friendly cities and communities in international com-
parison. Political lessons, scientic avenues, and democratic issues. New York: Springer.
Navarro, M., & Yee, V. (2014). Up in years and all but priced out of New York. New York
Times (April 24).
Ofce of the Comptroller (2014). The growing gap: New York City's housing affordability
challenge. New York: Ofce of the Comptroller.
Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (2015). Ageing in cities. Paris:
Phillipson, C. (2007). Theelectedand the excluded: Sociological perspectives on the ex-
perience of place and community in old age. Ageing & Society,27,321342. http://dx.
Phillipson, C. (2011). Developing age-friendly communities: new approaches to growing
old in urban environments. In J. L. Angel, & Settersten R. (Eds.), Handbook of the soci-
ology of aging. New York: Springer, Verlag.
Phillipson, C. (2013). Ageing. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Portacolone, E., & Halpern, J. (2014). Move or sufferis age-segregationthe new norm for
older Americans living alone? Journal of Applied Gerontology.
Riseborough, M., & Sribjilanin, A. (2000).Overlooked and excluded? Older people and regen-
eration: A review of policy and practice. London: Age Concern England.
Rodwin, G., & Gusmano, M. (Eds.). (2006). Growing older in world cities. Nashville, TN:
Vanderbilt University.
Rowles, G., & Chaudhury, H. (Eds.). (2005). Home and identity in later life: International
perspectives. New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Sassen, S. (2012). Cities in a world economy. London: Sage.
Scharlach, A. (2012). Creating age-friendly communities in the United States. Ageing
Internatio nal,37,2538.
99T. Buffel, C. Phillipson / Cities 55 (2016) 94100
Scharlach, A. E., & Lehning, A. J. (2013). Ageing-friendly communities and social inclusion
in the United Statesof America. Ageing and Society,33,110136.
Simpson, C. (2010). Older people and engagement in neighbourhood renewal: A qualitative
study of stoke-on-trent. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis Keele: Keele University.
Smith, A. (2009). Ageing in urban neighbourhoods. Bristol: Policy Press.
Soja, E. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.
Steels, S. (2015). Key characteristics of age-friendly cities and communities: A review.
Tinker, A., & Ginn, J. (2015). An age-friendly city How far has London come? London:
King's College.
Turcu, C. (2012). Local experiences of urban sustainability: Researching housing market
renewal interventions in three English neighbourhoods. Progress in Planning,
UN-HABITAT (2012). State of the world's cities 2012/2013. New York, NY: UN habitat. Divide.
London: Earthscan.
World Health Organization (2007). Global age-friendly cities:A guide. Geneva: WHO Press.
Vanderbeck, R. M., & Worth, N. (Eds.). (2015). Intergenerational space. London: Routledge.
Walsh, K. (2015). Interrogating the age-friendlycommunity in austerity: Myths, reali-
ties and the inuence of place context. In K. Walsh, G. Carney, & A. Lèime (Eds.), Age-
ing through austerity. Bristol: Policy Press.
Wiles, J., Leibing, A., Guberman, N., Reeve, J., & Allen, R. (2012). The meaning of aging in
placeto older people. The Gerontologists,52(3), 357366.
Wilson, W. (2013). Housing market renewal pathnders. London: Library of the House of
Zukin, S. (2010). The Naked city: The Death and life of authentic urban places. New York:
Oxford University Press.
100 T. Buffel, C. Phillipson / Cities 55 (2016) 94100
The municipality of The Hague has been a member of the WHO's Global Network for Age-Friendly Cities and Communities since 2015. The municipality commissioned a survey to investigate how older citizens view the age-friendliness of their city. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among a diverse sample of 393 community-dwelling older citizens. The survey made use of the Age Friendly Cities and Communities Questionnaire (AFCCQ), and multilevel regression techniques to investigate how social groups differ on the domains of the AFCCQ. The Hague scored a satisfied as an overall score (16.9 ± 8.87), and a satisfied on social participation (2.6 ± 2.46), civic participation and employment (1.4 ± 1.34), communication and information (1.4 ± 1.32), respect and social inclusion (1.6 ± 1.59), community support and health services (2.7 ± 2.79), transportation (1.7 ± 1.26) and financial situation (1.9 ± 1.26). The Hague has an above-average score in the field of housing (2.4 ± 1.06). For Outdoor spaces and buildings, the municipality scores a moderate positive score (0.9 ± 1.41). Significant differences were found for sex, age, socio-economic position, receiving care support, and use of mobility aids. The findings show that older people have different perceptions regarding their city's age-friendliness. Policy makers must acknowledge this heterogeneity among their older citizens and adapt city policies accordingly.
The age-friendly regeneration of urban settlements has been promoted in China to meet older people's demand for "aging in place". However, there are some contradictions among stakeholders in the decision making, hindering the regeneration process. Therefore, after identifying the stakeholders and their contradictions and clarifying their benefits and strategies, this paper established an evolutionary game model of the local government, investors and residents and then explored the stable strategy set of the evolutionary game of stakeholders. A case simulation method was used to test the theoretical results. This paper found the incentive measures that improve the efficiency of the decision making regarding the age-friendly regeneration of urban settlements. This paper also found that under limited conditions, the only stable strategy set of the stakeholder game was the local government, investors and residents implementing active intervention, coordinating opinions and agreeing on benefits strategies, respectively. The evolutionary sequence of the stable strategy set is "local government → investors → residents", which was very important to the application of incentive measures and the proposal of policy implications and suggestions. The effective incentive measures to improve the age-friendly regeneration decision-making efficiency included the following: direct subsidies, indirect subsidies and direct punishment for investors and passive compensation and sharing coefficient optimization for residents. Some policy implications and suggestions for improving decision-making efficiency and promoting the age-friendly regeneration of urban settlements in China are proposed in this paper. The local government can appropriately increase direct and indirect incentives and apply moderate punishment. It is very important that the local government pays attention to the design and operating principles of incentive measures. Otherwise, the wrong design and operation might lead to the failure of incentive measures. The higher-level government should supervise the local government carefully and propose relevant policies and regulations to clearly punish the negative attitudes of the local government. Investors can share more incremental income with residents to promote the development of corporations and the recognition of the local government and residents. Residents should make a good balance of advantages and disadvantages in the decision-making of age-friendly regeneration.
Background and Objectives Spatial practices and changing urban environments affecting identity, experiences, and everyday life were examined among a diverse sample of older adults as they negotiated and navigated an age-friendly city. Research Design and Methods Ethnographic interviews, observations, and visual methods were used to understand spatial practices and lived experiences of four older adults, who chronicled their lives using disposable cameras. Results Informant identities emerged in their everyday practices, reflecting varied positionalities that fundamentally shaped their notions of “age-friendly.” Informants sought to sustain or improve their lives while attempting to negotiate socio-environmental forms and forces that often threatened their identity and increased their precarity. Discussion and Implications Contrast exists between “invariant” macro/meso issues all older adults face as they age and “multivariant” ways in which age is accomplished based on place, biography, and intersectionality. Age-friendly environments may simultaneously maintain the status quo and exacerbate inequalities. Gerontology must take seriously how stratified life chances can undermine seemingly universal potential benefits of age-friendly environments.
This study developed a method of improving Seoul's thermal environment by focusing on sensible heat flux and types of land-use and cover to mitigate the urban heat island (UHI) effect. First, the relationships between the sensible heat flux in summer and (a) the land cover ratio, and (b) the heights and densities of buildings in different land-use zoning districts were identified and analysed. The rationale for improving the thermal environment was then considered based on the physical relationships among heat, space, and the thermal-environment type. Energy budget distribution data were then used to identify an optimised land-use plan to mitigate the UHI effect. Spatial data describing the physical elements in land-use zoning were then generated using high-resolution images of the sensible heat flux distribution and directly correlated to existing land-use and thermal comfort. Finally, a K-means clustering analysis was employed to determine the unfavourable and favourable thermal areas in each zoning district based on correlated sensible heat flux data. The results indicate that the highest concentration of unfavourable thermal areas of all studied zoning districts was neighbourhood commercial districts, which accounted for 9.9% of the total identified unfavourable thermal areas, whereas the lowest level of sensible heat flux was observed in single-family residential areas. This study thus developed a basis for a spatial planning framework that can be used to improve the thermal conditions of cities and encourage summer energy savings using zoning-based requirements.
There is an increasing global population of older adults in recent years, and the trend will be more acute in the following decades. Owing to low mobility and physical impairment, the elderly are sensitive to their nearby neighborhood environment. However, it is challenging to accurately judge changes of the elderly’ quality of life (QoL) before conducting improvement strategies of neighborhood environment due to complicated environmental impacts. This study proposes a QoL prediction approach by integrating artificial neural network (ANN) model, scenario analysis and Monte Carlo experiment. The QoL of the elderly is measured from four domains, and the neighborhood environment is measured by 16 key indicators. Based on the measurement data collected from Nanjing, the ANN model is trained to fit the influence relationship between neighborhood environment and the elderly’s QoL. Scenario analysis sets up potential scenarios for neighborhood environment under natural progressions and human interventions. Finally, Monte Carlo experiment is conducted to predict the probability distribution of the elderly’s QoL values under potential scenarios by using the trained ANN model as functions. The predictive QoL values of the elderly show the change pattern of the elderly’s QoL with dynamic neighborhood environment, reveal the independent and compound effects of natural progressions and human interventions, and confirm the mutual promotions between human interventions. Furthermore, the integrated prediction approach can be implemented in other cities and regions to forecast the local elderly’s QoL under possible scenarios, and offer concise evidence for deciding improvement strategies of neighborhood environment to support aging-in-place.
Full-text available
The development of ‘age-friendly cities’ has become a major area of work in the field of ageing and the built environment. This movement is driven by the observation that cities are home to an ever-increasing ageing population. Over the past decade, a multitude of age-friendly initiatives have been developed with the aim of making physical and social environments more favourable for older people's well-being, health and ability to live in the community. This article explores ten key questions associated with the age-friendly cities and communities' movement, with a particular focus on the built environment. It provides an overview of the history of the age-friendly cities' movement and the underlying models, the aspects of the built environment that are relevant for age-friendly cities, the ways age-friendliness can be evaluated, and the interactions between age-friendly cities initiatives and other strategic agendas such as smart cities. The paper concludes by discussing future perspectives and possible directions for further development of the age-friendly movement.
Rapid population aging is underway across the entirety of Canada. With the proportion of older adults increasing and the majority of the older generation planning to age in place, understanding how older adult vulnerability differs spatially is paramount to developing targeted policy interventions and creating a more age-friendly society. Our study examines the locational differences of older adult vulnerability through statistical and spatial analysis. A nationwide neighbourhood analysis of Canada (n = 55,003) found that older adult vulnerability differs considerably in urban, suburban, and rural neighbourhoods. Rural areas have the highest proportion of older adults, whereas urban areas are far more diverse. Spatial analysis of neighbourhoods in Toronto (n = 3702) identified clusters of older adult vulnerability. The findings highlight opportunities to target aging-in-place health, social, and built environment initiatives to support Canadians as they age.
The literature recognizes the great diversity of care arrangements among rural-dwelling older people. However, little is known about the complex relationships between spatial, social and infrastructural characteristics of place and the strategies that older people develop to navigate care. Even less is known about how navigating care impacts social exclusion from the perspective of older adults themselves. To fill this gap, in this secondary analysis we draw on data from twenty-one in-depth interviews from two studies conducted in rural environments in Germany and Poland. We identify three main strategies of navigating care in the rural environment: adaptation to circumstances, making use of the environment, and shaping circumstances. We present details from four cases that exemplify how strategies are interconnected with characteristics of place. The relationships between place and navigating care in rural environments is discussed with reference to the overall level of social exclusion experienced by rural-dwelling older adults with continuing care needs.
Full-text available
Mushrooming of illegal housing on the periphery of cities is one of the main consequences of rapid urbanization associated with social and environmental problems in developing countries. This book discusses the linkage between urbanism and sustainability, and how sustainable urbanism can be implemented to overcome the problems of housing and living conditions in urban areas. Through case studies from India, Indonesia, China, etc. using advanced GIS techniques, it analyses several planning and design criteria to solve physical, social, and economic problems, and refers to urban planning as an effective measure to protect and promote cultural characteristics of specific locations in developing countries. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Naked City is a continuation of Prof. Sharon Zukin's earlier books (Loft Living and Cultures of Cities) and updates her views on how people use culture and capital in New York. Its focus is on a conflict between city dwellers' desire for authentic origins and new beginnings, which many contemporary megalopolises meet. City dwellers wish to defend their own moral rights to redefine their places for living given upscale constructions, rapid growth, and the ethics of standardization. The author shows how in the frameworks of this conflict they construct the perceived authenticity of common and uncommon urban places. Each book chapter tells about various urban spaces, uncovering different dimensions of authenticity in order to catch and explain fundamental changes in New York that emerged in the 1960s under the mixed influences of private investors, government, media, and consumer tastes. The Journal of Economic Sociology published "Introduction. The City That Lost Its Soul," where the author explains the general idea of the book. She discusses the reasons for the emergence and history of the social movement for authenticity, having combated both the government and private investors since the 1960s. Prof. Zukin also traces the transformation of the concept of authenticity from a property of a person, to a property of a thing, to a property of a life experience and power.
Many western nations have experienced a rise in the number of marginalised and deprived inner-city neighbourhoods. Despite a plethora of research focused on these areas, there remain few studies that have sought to capture the ‘optimality’ of ageing in place in such places. In particular, little is known about why some older people desire to age in place despite multiple risks in their neighbourhood and why others reject ageing in place. Given the growth in both the ageing of the population and policy interest in the cohesion and sustainability of neighbourhoods there is an urgent need to better understand the experience of ageing in marginalised locations. This book aims to address the shortfall in knowledge regarding older people’s attachment to deprived neighbourhoods and in so doing progress what critics have referred to as the languishing state of environmental gerontology. The author examines new cross-national research with older people in deprived urban neighbourhoods and suggests a rethinking and refocusing of the older person’s relationship with place. Impact on policy and future research are also discussed. This book will be relevant to academics, students, architects, city planners and policy makers with an interest in environmental gerontology, social exclusion, urban sustainability and design of the built environment.
The supportive role of urban spaces in active aging is explored on a world scale in this unique resource, using the WHO’s Age-Friendly Cities and Community model. Case studies from the U.S., Canada, Australia, Hong Kong, and elsewhere demonstrate how the model translates to fit diverse social, political, and economic realities across cultures and continents, ways age-friendly programs promote senior empowerment, and how their value can be effectively assessed. Age-friendly criteria for communities are defined and critiqued while extensive empirical data describe challenges as they affect elders globally and how environmental support can help meet them. These chapters offer age-friendly cities as a corrective to the overemphasis on the medical aspects of elders’ lives, and should inspire new research, practice, and public policy. Included in the coverage: • A critical review of the WHO Age-Friendly Cities Methodology and its implementation. • Seniors’ perspectives on age-friendly communities. • The implementation of age-friendly cities in three districts of Argentina. • Age-friendly New York City: a case study. • Toward an age-friendly European Union. • Age-friendliness, childhood, and dementia: toward generationally intelligent environments. With its balance of attention to universal and culture-specific concerns, Age-Friendly Cities and Communities in International Comparison will be of particular interest to sociologists, gerontologists, and policymakers. “Given the rapid adoption of the age-friendly perspective, following its development by the World Health Organization, the critical assessment offered in this volume is especially welcome”. Professor Chris Phillipson, University of Manchester
Develops the 2 inter-related themes of accumulation and class struggle. The Marxist theory of accumulation views the role of investment in the built environment in the light of the internal contradictions of the accumulation process. Hence, investment in the built environment is seem as a response to the different forms of crisis which appear within the capitalist system. Then considers the issue of class struggle and how it influences investment in the built environment. Of particular interest is the manner in which class stuggle in the workplace is in part transformed, via the urbanization process, into struggles around the reproduction of labour in the living place. -from Editors
A vital but often neglected part of the urban restructuring of Los Angeles has been a resurgent activism that has created some of the most innovative urban social movements in the country. The Justice Riots of 1992, as they are now called, stimulated vigorous grassroots and place-based coalitions of labor unions and community-based organizations seeking to deal with the enormous inequalities and injustices brought about by globalization and the formation of the New Economy. Affected to some degree by the critical spatial perspective espoused by the Los Angeles research cluster, these new coalitions were among the earliest in the United States to adopt specifically spatial strategies, and in these cases, thinking spatially about justice made a difference. This spatial turn in the justice movement is traced through three organizations: the Bus Riders Union and its initiating sponsor, the Labor/Community Strategy Center; the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy (LAANE); and, most recently, the Right to the City Alliance.
This book considers the state of the city and contemporary urbanisation from a range of intellectual and international perspectives. The most interdisciplinary collection of its kind Provides a contemporary update on urban thinking that builds on well established debates in the field. Uses the city to explore economic, social, cultural, environmental and political issues more broadly. Includes contributions from non Western perspectives and cities.
Towards Active Urban Materialities Neoliberalism, the Market, and the City Urban Materialities of Nature Rethinking Urban Economies? References