Downsizing is not happening even if policy makers think it’s a good idea for older generations. This is the bottom line of the latest brief from AHURI. So, what is downsizing? First, this concept is mostly about home owners not renters. There is financial downsizing to release equity by buying a cheaper home. But only 20 per cent of owner-occupiers aged 55 to 64 years in 2001 moved to another home of lesser value by 2016 (this age cohort was the most likely to have ‘financially downsized’ during this 15 year period).
Physical downsizing is often seen as reducing the number of bedrooms, but this is a crude measure. This is because the number of bedrooms isn’t the issue. The size of all the rooms could be smaller, but it’s the size of the yard and maintenance that really matters to older people. Fewer than 15 per cent of older home-owners moved to another home with fewer bedrooms between 2001 and 2016. This latest research serves to confirm the key study by Bruce Judd and team where they found all bedrooms were in use. Also, older people spend more time at home, so it’s their space for recreation and activities
The title of the brief is, Understanding downsizing: What are the different types of downsizing and how common is it? There are references to other related AHURI research in this brief.
Editor’s comment: Government and the property industry might be keen to see older home owners move. However, the evidence is showing that the property industry might have to re-think their strategy of trying to entice people into their retirement villages by continuing to design and build homes so that people can’t age in place.
The tool has four steps: individual wants and issues; opportunities for improvement in the home and lifestyle: different options for maximising the use and value of the home; and other choices such as moving, sharing, home modifications and home support. This well researched tool is easily adapted from this New Zealand model.
Another research group has developed a prototype web application to use at home when needed, over time and at the user’s own pace. It consists of three modules Think, Learn and Act to facilitate awareness, offer information and knowledge and enable the user to decide and act on issues relating to housing. Topics are: preferences, the home, the neighbourhood, health status, social network and support, financial situation, the future, options for help and support and housing options.
A poor fit between the home and what older people need can lead to unnecessary care needs, loneliness, worse quality of life, increased caregiver time and early institutionalisation.
Good design means different things to different people, so how can you measure or evaluate it? As Trivess Moore says, “Poor design – an absence of ‘good’ design – locks in owners, the local community and cities to substandard urban environments, often for considerable time periods.” Moore believes that arguments for the value of good design are too easily dismissed because we lack a rigorous evidence base. Maybe this is one of the reasons the principles of universal design and notions of public good are ignored. An interesting argument in this paper to which the principles of universal design could be added. While written in 2014, it has relevance to the upcoming RIS on Accessible Housing.
Abstract: Methods for placing values on good design are under-researched in Australia. Without a rigorous evidence base, costs are anticipated and benefits unrecognised. This paper presents an overview of the current state of the value of good design research for the built environment, and reports upon a series of interviews with experienced building industry stakeholders in Australia and the UK. The research finds that while the benefits of good design are recognised by building practitioners, these are not being consistently translated into exchange value and are therefore not being picked up in mainstreaming best practice. In order to raise the quality of design there is a need to develop ways to measure and articulate these benefits to housing producers and consumers.
Home modifications can reduce the number of informal care hours people need by 47% and paid hours by 17%. So why don’t we design homes for longevity in the first place? These findings are from a study by Phillippa Carnemolla, and there is more to this story. People felt more independent and enjoyed improved quality of life. This had a positive impact on their general health as well. There is more to discover in this paperand it supports the need for all new homes to have basic access features included.
Abstract: A lasting legacy of all Olympic and Commonwealth games is their athletes villages. This paper discusses the potential for home modifications to support the process of ageing well that builds on this housing legacy and as such points to the benefits to be gained from both wider uptake of universal design in housing plus attention to special adaptations as needed. In the context of Australia’s ageing population, ageing well can encompass a number of different housing and care models, however common to all of these is a drive to maintain quality of life levels. There is evidence to suggest that home modifications impact recipients in a number of overlapping ways, by increasing independence within the home, increasing social participation and enabling people to remain in their own homes for longer as they age. This paper refers to completed stage one findings (Levels 1, 2 and 3) of an ongoing research project investigating the value of home modifications. It uses a mixed method approach and thematic analysis of survey responses from home modification recipients (n=157). This research design enables the measurement of the impact of home modifications to housing and resulting changes to care giving needs. The survey results reveal a decrease in reported care hours needed following home modifications, a trend which is further supported by the thematic analysis. In conclusion, the research contributes to developing evidence that home modifications can have a measurable impact on the care needs of recipients and support the changing social needs of ageing populations in ageing well.
Dr Phillippa Carnemolla is a board member of CUDA.
We expect to grow old, but because we don’t aspire to grow old, we rarely plan for it. “I’ll worry about it when the time comes” is a usual response. A new report from AHURI looks at the housing situation for older Australians and some previous research is confirmed.
Most respondents felt their current home would suit them as they grow older. Eliminating steps is obvious, but what about other features? Generally, older people would like to own a detached dwelling (69%) with three bedrooms (50%). Those in the 75+ group think that a two bedroom apartment is a good idea, probably because they can eliminate steps.Most importantly, they don’t want to be in the private rental market.
Older Australians are not planning ahead. If they are, they lack information on how to go about it, what to look for, and what their options are other than age-segregated housing. A significant proportion of respondents hadn’t thought about planning ahead for their living arrangements.
Plenty of material in this report for anyone interested in housing and older people. Title of the report is, Older Australians and the housing aspirations gap. You can download the Executive Summary and the Full Report separately.
Editors’s comment: Although home owners said their homes would support them in later life, this might not be an objective view. With a desire to stay put, can we rely on their self-assessment when they have so much emotional and financial investment in their current home?To be sure that homes will suit people throughout their life, every home needs to be designed for the life course. We need all new homes to be fit for that purpose.
What home modifications are needed most and how much are they needed? Mary Ann Jackson analysed 50 home modification reports in Victoria to get an answer. The homes visited were built before any advocacy for accessible housing began. Consequently they all had a doorsill or step at the front door and tight spaces. This was further complicated with a screen door. Meter boxes also intruded on entry space. Many of the fittings, such as taps and handles were poorly designed to suit ageing in place. Jackson advises that accessibility issues are endemic to Australia’s existing housing stock. This is a big problem when 39.5% of households include a person with disability. If it is too expensive for governments or individuals to finance the required renovations, we will need another approach. Let’s hope the Regulatory Impact Statement due next year supports accessible design in all new homes.
Architect and Planner Jackson says, “Cooperation, collaboration, and a clear recognition of the emotional, physical, and economic cost-benefit of ageing in place will be needed to rebuild Australia’s housing stock to better accommodate all inhabitants throughout life.” The title of the newsletter article is Ageing in place – are we there yet?
The picture above is famous for its technical compliance, but not usability, and definitely not aesthetics.
People expect to grow old, but they don’t plan to grow old. Public policy has to do more than just capture people when they can no longer care for themselves. Even if people plan for their older age, there are policy and built barriers preventing the continuation of a “decent life”. And housing is a key barrier. The report, The 100-year life: the role of housing, planning and design, highlights the issues and provides recommendations. The report recommends an integrated approach to housing, planning and design to support people in later life. It stresses the importance of taking a universal design approach and co-production. Developers, planners and local authorities also have an important role to play. And of course, focusing on older people means that people of all ages are included. While this is a UK project, there are many aspects that apply to other countries including Australia.
The research was conducted jointly by Design Council, Centre for Ageing Better and Social Care Institute for Excellence. The report in PDFwas published in June 2018. The report includes references and resources.
Policy makers and researchers have looked at the issue of older home owners and downsizing a few times now. The picture still looks the same. Whether older Australians want to downsize or stay put, our housing stock is not fit for purpose. For those who want to stay put, their current home is unlikely to support them as they age. This is particularly difficult for renters. For those who are prepared to move, there is nothing suitable to move to – not if they are planning to stay put later on.
When it comes to house size, Bruce Juddand colleagues from UNSW found that retirees generally want three bedrooms for flexibility of lifestyle. Some for visiting family and looking after grandchildren. Others need room for hobbies or a study. Some couples sleep separately for health reasons. Typically, retirees spend more time at home now that they are not working, so space becomes even more important.
What’s interesting in all the studies, it’s generally the size of the yard and house maintenance that needs downsizing, not the home. Those who say they don’t want to move, might consider the idea if there was a more suitable place in their current neighbourhood. And not age-segregated living. However, if industry had rolled out the Livable Housing Design Guidelines as promised, there would be more suitable choices available throughout our housing stock.
Roberta Ryan writes in The Conversation that vested interests are continuing business as usual without reference to demographic and lifestyle changes within the population. They are actively resisting change and arguing against policies to deliver more diverse housing types. Ryan argues that governments need to challenge vested interests that want to keep the status quo. The title of the article is, People want and need more housing choice. It’s about time governments stood up to deliver it. While this article doesn’t mention universal design or accessibility, it is inherent in the argument that governments need to challenge, on all fronts, vested interests that lobby for the status quo to remain.
Environments that include older people include everyone else too. So it’s good to ask older people what works for them. The findings from a Helsinki study indicate that neighbourhood design, public transport and green environments influence mobility and social integration. Mainstream housing design is a key factor in supporting older people to stay within their communities.
The title of the dissertation by Ira Verma is, Housing Design for All? The challenges of ageing in urban planning and housing design – The case of Helsinki. The abstract summarises the findings well.
From the abstract: The results indicate that the neighbourhood design, public transport network and proximity of green environments influence mobility and the sense of integration within a community. Moreover, the length of residency was related to the familiarity of the living environment, which gave residents a sense of security, and supported their activities of daily life. Furthermore, the results show that older residents preferred the local services that were the most accessible ones.
Comprehensive design and a versatile environment with various activities may promote Ageing in Place policies and enhance cross-generational social encounters. Moreover, many obstacles caused by reduced physical and sensory functioning capacities can be lessened by applying Universal Design of the built environment. Architects and urban planners have a major role in designing the city and ensuring that it does not exclude any resident groups. Mainstream housing developments with attention to a variety of resident groups will enhance living at home at old age. Moreover, frail people with high care needs should experience being part of community life. Collaboration with local service providers, schools, cafés and restaurants may enable to providing a variety of activities to the residents in sheltered housing.