Speaker
Description
Population ageing is one of the major challenges facing cities today. As life expectancy continues to rise faster than healthy life expectancy, it poses challenges for the built environment in supporting older adults' lives. Driven by the growing importance of social ecological and gerontological theories on how the environments significantly influence older adults’ health, mobility, and social engagement—and considering the challenges faced by this demographic—several strategies and policies, particularly the World Health Organisation’s Age-Friendly Cities and Communities (WHO AFCCs) initiative, have been implemented to address the specific needs of older adults (Lawton and Nahemow, 1973; Lui et al., 2009).
The AFCCs initiative has generated a global response, raising awareness among planners of the potential for involving older adults in urban planning and community regeneration strategies (Buffel et al., 2014). While the physical environment and outdoor spaces are recognised as core areas in the AFCCs' eight dimensions, much of the relevant literature appears in gerontology and health policy journals rather than urban planning and design publications, highlighting the need for further research into spatial interventions (Salmistu and Kotval, 2023).
In recent years, planning discourse has shifted significantly from a top-down approach to a more communicative style. This shift emphasises the importance of including diverse voices in planning processes to create inclusive environments for all age groups. Active participation of older adults in community planning is essential, not only to improve their quality of life but also to safeguard their rights in urban spaces and foster age-friendly environments. However, research on age-friendly community planning remains insufficient, particularly in varied local contexts (Atkins, 2019).
In the UK, Neighbourhood Planning (NP), introduced by the Localism Act 2011 as a collaborative, community-level planning initiative, offers older residents opportunities to influence local planning discussions and promote more inclusive and age-friendly outcomes. However, ensuring the meaningful inclusion of older adults in NP faces considerable challenges. These arise from demographic, individual, and community environmental factors affecting older people’s social participation (Townsend, Chen and Wuthrich, 2021) and barriers inherent in the NP participation process itself (Brookfield, 2017). Despite these challenges, the factors influencing older adults’ participation in NP and strategies for improvement remain underexplored.
This research aims to identify and categorise the factors that influence older adults’ (aged 65 and above) participation in NP and to explore innovative and inclusive engagement approaches to encourage their involvement. It adopts a mixed-methods approach, incorporating quantitative data from surveys and qualitative data from interviews conducted at two levels: nationally across England and through a case study in Leeds.
Findings reveal how personal level factors, community level factors, and NP process-related factors influence older adults’ participation. Key factors include health and age-related constraints, socio-economic conditions, attitudes towards ageing, trust in the planning system, and challenges in planning competence and coordination, etc.
Additionally, innovative strategies to encourage older adults’ participation in NP are explored. These include the use of artist impressions and exhibitions to simplify planning concepts, creative outreach methods such as art projects and multilingual engagement, and trust-building activities. Community engagement officers played a pivotal role in implementing these approaches to involve marginalised groups, including older adults and culturally diverse residents.
By identifying barriers and proposing inclusive practices, this study contributes to fostering a more age-friendly planning participation process, enabling older adults to actively participate in shaping their community environments.
References
Atkins, M. T. (2019). ‘Creating age-friendly cities: prioritizing interventions with Q-methodology’. International Planning Studies, 25(4), 303–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563475.2019.1608164.
Brookfield, K. (2017). ‘Getting involved in plan-making: Participation in neighbourhood planning in England’ Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 35 (3), pp. 397-416. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X16664518.
Buffel, T., et al. (2014). ‘Developing Age-Friendly Cities: Case Studies From Brussels and Manchester and Implications for Policy and Practice’ Journal of Aging & Social Policy, 26 (1-2), pp. 52-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959420.2014.855043.
Lawton, M., & Nahemow, L. (1973). ‘Ecology and the aging process’. in Eisdorfer, C. & Lawton, M. (eds.), The psychology of adult development and aging, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 619–674.
Lui, C. W., et al. (2009). ‘What makes a community age‐friendly: A review of international literature’ Australasian journal on ageing, 28 (3), pp. 116-121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6612.2009.00355.x.
Salmistu, S. and Kotval, Z. (2023). ‘Spatial interventions and built environment features in developing age-friendly communities from the perspective of urban planning and design’ Cities, 141, p. 104417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2023.104417.
Townsend, B. G., Chen, J. T. and Wuthrich, V. M. (2021). ‘Barriers and facilitators to social participation in older adults: a systematic literature review’ Clinical gerontologist, 44 (4), pp. 359-380. https://doi.org/10.1080/07317115.2020.1863890.
| Keywords | Neighbourhood planning; Participation; Age-Friendly; Older People |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
