HOW DO WE DEVELOP AGE-FRIENDLY
STRATEGIES FOR OUR CITIES? PERSPECTIVES
FROM RESEARCH
Chris Phillipson
Sociology/MICRA
The University of Manchester
AREAS FOR DISCUSSION
• CONTEXT FOR AGE-FRIENDLY WORK
• CHALLENGES FOR DEVELOPING AGE-FRIENDLY
CITIES
• DEVELOPING RESEARCH
• SOME CRITICAL QUESTIONS
Diversity of cities and ageing populations
Developing age-friendly policies important in urban areas but
need to work within context of:
• Shrinking urban populations in many UK regions (e.g. parts
of Midlands & North West)
• Impact of gentrification and extremes of inequality (e.g.
London)
• Forces promoting age segregation (Social Integration
Commission, 2014) may be greater than those promoting
integration (Mumford, 1956)
• Importance of macro-economic goals promoting urban
growth – unclear where ageing fits (IPPR 2014)
3
Three main contexts for age-friendly work in
cities
• The Intimate Environment
(The Home)
• The Proximate Environment
(The Immediate neighbourhood)
• The Public Environment
(City centre/facilities)
What should age-friendly environments do to
promote positive ageing in cities?
• Promotion of social connectivity: age-friendly
communities should create connections - between
the older person and the environment in which
they live. (Menec et al., 2011)
• A key task in the building of AFCs is to identify
‘leverage points’ that need to be acted upon to
achieve effective connections between different
groups (e.g. housing, transport, services).
CHALLENGES TO DEVELOPING AGE-FRIENDLY
CITIES: ISSUES RAISED BY RESEARCH (1)
• Problem of maximising impact of age-friendly
initiatives on wider local government agendas –
especially in context of austerity (Scharlach,
2011)
• Many communities lack structural capacity to
support ageing populations – age-friendly
initiatives not a panacea (Buffel et al., 2014)
• ‘Ageing in place’ may be unattractive where the
places in which people are ageing are facing
economic and social decline (Scharf et al., 2002)
CHALLENGES TO DEVELOPING AGE-FRIENDLY CITIES:
ISSUES RAISED BY RESEARCH (2)
• Lack of evaluation is an issue in terms of knowing
whether AFC model is viable (Golant, 2014)
• ‘Ageing in place’ may be appropriate for some
but not all phases of ageing. (Scharlach, 2014)
• Discussion on developing AFCs disconnected from
pressures on urban environments, where private
developers dominate in terms of urban planning
and design (Hatherley, 2012)
• Tension between social needs in old age and
private ownership of public space (Minton, 2009)
RESEARCH INITIATIVES ON BUILDING AN AGEFRIENDLY CITY
PARTNERS:
• MANCHESTER CITY COUNCIL – AGE-FRIENDLY
MANCHESTER
• MANCHESTER SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE
• MICRA
• MANCHESTER METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY
• SOUTHWAY HOUSING TRUST
• UK URBAN AGEING CONSORTIUM
RESEARCH PROJECTS
• A RESEARCH AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
FOR AGE-FRIENDLY CITIES
http://www.micra.manchester.ac.uk/medialibrary/A%20Research%20and%20Evaluation%20Framework%
20for%20Age-friendly%20Cities_web%20version.pdf
• OLD MOAT RESEARCH PROJECT
http://www.micra.manchester.ac.uk/medialibrary/OLDMOATREPORT110413.pdf
• MANCHESTER AGEING SURVEY
Developing a research and evaluation framework
(Handler, 2013)
DIMENSIONS OF AN AGE-FRIENDLY CITY
• Outdoor spaces and buildings (e.g. public toilets, wellmaintained pavements)
• Transportation (reliable, frequent)
• Housing (affordable, support to ‘age in place’)
• Social Participation (outreach for those isolated)
• Respect and social inclusion (anti-discrimination)
• Civic participation and employment (good quality
employment, volunteering)
• Communication and information (good access to
information about services & activities)
• Community support and health services (good range of
services, community emergency plans in place).
WHO Research Domains
City Neighbourhood
WHO Principle of active ageing
KEY POINTS FROM FOCUS GROUPS AND
AUDIT
• Importance of informal networks
• Concerns with physical environment: pavements,
lack of seating, lack of public toilets
• Decline of local shopping area
• Build on positive attitudes to public transport
• Desire for more community spaces but underutilisation of existing spaces.
•
http://www.micra.manchester.ac.uk/medialibrary/OLDMOATREPORT110413.pdf
THE MANCHESTER AGEING STUDY
A participatory research project involving older co-researchers
(Buffel, T)
AIM
• To explore the ‘place’ dimension of older people’s
experiences of social exclusion and inclusion
• To identify the issues older residents and community
stakeholders view as important in developing the agefriendliness of their neighbourhood
• To involve older people as experts and actors in the
development of the study
• To promote evidence-based policy making and practice
at the local level
THE MANCHESTER AGEING STUDY
A participatory research project involving older co-researchers
METHODS
• Older people play a key role in each stage of the research process
• Advisory committee consisting of local older residents and
community stakeholders
• 18 older residents were trained: Focus on
research process, fieldwork conduct,
interviewing skills, data analysis
• Each co-researcher conducted 2 to 6
interviews with ‘difficult-to-reach’ older
people about their experiences of
exclusion and inclusion in the
neighbourhood (n=68)
• 14 focus groups with community
stakeholders across the 3 study areas
(n=123)
What are the Key Policy Questions
for AFCs to Address?
1. Cities are viewed as key drivers for economic
success – ‘the urban renaissance’ – but can they
integrate ageing populations as well?
2. Can the resources of the city be used to improve
quality of life in old age – only 1 in 20 older
households may have the money to take
advantage of what great cities have to offer.
3. Can cities be designed in the interests of
all age groups?
18
What are the Key Policy Questions
for AFCs to Address?
4. Investigate new ways of securing participation
of older people in regeneration and planning.
5. New approaches to bringing together urban
designers, developers, architects with older
people to assess
• accessibility of built environment
• location and accessibility of services
• development of secure public space
19
REFERENCES
Phillipson, C (2011) Developing age-friendly communities: New
approaches to growing old in urban communities. In Settersten, R and
Angel, J (eds) Handbook of Sociology of Aging. New York: Springer
Phillipson, C (with Kendig, H) (2014) Building Age-Friendly
Communities, In “If You Could Do One Thing…” Nine local actions to
reduce health inequalities”. British Academy for the Humanities and
Social Sciences [available as download from British Academy Website]
Buffel, T. et al. (2014) Developing Age-Friendly Cities: Case Studies
from Brussels and Manchester: Implications for Policy and Practice.
Journal of Aging and Social Policy, Vol 26 (1-2)