Author: Jane Bringolf

Housing: What next for an ageing Australia?

a blue glowing house icon is held in the handsIf you ask an older person if their home will suit them in their later years, they are likely to say yes. But how will they know and will they find out when it’s too late? That is the key issue when policy makers talk about ageing in place. Are we actually prepared for it? And not only are they people’s homes, they are potentially the workplaces for care service staff. So what next for an ageing Australia?

The intersection of home design and support services is one of the factors looked at by Matthew Hutchinson from QUT. His thesis looks at a myriad of housing types including collective living and mutual support, which on the face of it, looks like group home living. Building design is mentioned in passing. The thesis proposes several ways of re-thinking the types of dwelling and dwelling arrangements that might better suit older people to age in place and receive care at home.

This is a very academic text with lots of diagrams and flow charts. Suitable for architects who are interested in housing typology and policy makers interested in ageing in place strategies. The title of the thesis is, Housing for an ageing Australia: What next?  

Abstract: Within the policy context of ageing-in-place aspirations, this thesis examines the potential nature of housing for Australia’s ageing population. By conceptualising housing and support together as an ecology and using grounded theory methodology to involve relevant stakeholders the thesis reveals both the desire and need for new urban and suburban based housing typologies arranged around collective living and mutual support. It further proposes a performance brief comprising desirable housing design principles. The thesis makes a contribution theoretically to the fields of architecture and critical gerontology.

Ageing well in suburbia

A single story home viewed from the back yard. A woman reaches up into a small tree and dog sits nearby. Ageing well in the bluefields.
Image by Damian Madigan

The context of this magazine article is suburban infill sites. The problem is how to increase housing supply and diversity while maintaining the existing character of the area. Madigan comes up with models based on the Livable Housing Design Guidelines. 

The overall aim is to support ageing in place and multi-generational living.

Madigan describes suburbs that have an established character and high financial values as ‘blue’. They are often exempt from density increases and also housing diversity. 

Madigan explains a collaborative design research project that developed ‘bluefield housing models’. The models are based on four different allotment sizes, small, medium, large and extra large. They are also based on Livable Housing Australia gold or platinum levels. Floor plans are included in the article. Madigan explains:

Ageing well in the bluefields is on the ArchitectureAU website and will be of interest to building designers and smaller developers. 

 

Inclusive: does that include disability?

Grant Maynard says that using the word ‘inclusive’ is leaving out people with disability. Racism, sexism, ageism, homophobia and transphobia are taking the spotlight. Events that celebrate the International Day of People with Disability cater specifically for people with disability. So is this a good thing on just one day of the year?

In the week of International Day of People with Disability, “I can rock up to any advertised event confidently, knowing it will be accessible and affordable.”

Banner for the United Nations International Day of Persons with Disabilities.

Start times, access information, wheelchair accessibility and bathroom availability will be clearly set out. Maynard says, “then, like magic, the conversations and accessibility stop.” He calls it pinkwashing for people with disabilities.

It’s a tokenistic gesture that doesn’t translate to long-term positive outcomes. One day does not make a difference in and of itself.

Maynard’s thoughts are published in QNews and the title is, “All-inclusive” has become pinkwashing for disabilities.

Opportunity in neurodiverse design

When the term ‘neurodiversity’ entered our language it gave us a new world view and perspective on humanity and diversity. It challenges the notion that there is such as thing as a ‘standard’ brain. Design disciplines have seen opportunity in sustainable design. Now there is opportunity in neurodiverse design.

Workplaces should design for brains not just for bodies. But what does that look like? Big companies like Deloitte and EY are re-shaping their workplaces. Image of EY Perth office.

Perth EY office depicting opportunity for neurodiverse design.

Neurodiverse design in architecture

An article in The Fifth Estate by Catherine Carter takes up the topic of neurodiversity and architecture. Current estimates are that around 15-20 percent of the global population is neurodivergent. This means their brains process information differently from the ‘typical’ population. Consequently, they may perceive and interact differently with their surroundings.

Carter says the best designs won’t be where differences coexist, but where they are celebrated. They will include spaces that avoid harsh lighting, distracting noise and visual clutter. Flexible layout with distinct zones and quiet areas, and collaborative spaces to suit tasks and moods are also helpful. Natural elements such as plants and organic materials help reduce cognitive load.

One of the big consulting firms, EY has established 23 Neurodiverse Centers of Excellence where tech people work on complex projects. EY is also redesigning their offices with soundproof spaces, enhanced lighting and signage.

Deloitte claims to have found five key drivers that neurodivergent thinkers bring to problem solving. Cognitive diversity can drive new ideas and counter groupthink. Neurodivergent people often have intense focus to push through setbacks and overcome problems.

Building for brains not bodies

Designing for neurodivergent employees means that everyone benefits. Who doesn’t like a comfortable office with plants and soundproofing? As an AI-powered future looms, workplaces are shapeshifting again. Places need to nurture minds of employees, not just their bodies. People have more flexibility today in how and where they work. Let’s design for that and for the diversity of the population.

The title of the article is, When great minds don’t think alike: designing for neurodiversity. There are links to the work of EY and Deloitte.

Neurodiversity and built environments: A guide

A woman's face in multicolours wearing sunglasses. representing neurodiversity in building design.A significant number of people find certain aspects of the built environment uncomfortable, distressing or a barrier due to neurological differences. To address this, the British Standards Institute has a guide for designing built environments to include people who are neurodivergent. The whole population is neurodiverse, individuals might be neurotypical or neurodivergent. 

The guide covers external spaces for public and commercial use as well as residential accommodation for independent living. It is one of the few documents that explains neurodiversity in a way that designers can understand.

Neurodiverse and neurotypical

The term ‘neurodiversity’ and ‘neurodiverse’ are clarified in the introduction. Neurodiversity is about us all – it is not one condition. It is about the way each of thinks, speaks, moves and communicates. It is better explained as “sensory and/or information processing difference” and this is the term frequently used in the guide. 

Different terms are used to describe different neurological profiles: 

1. Neurotypical: someone fitting a majority neurological profile and is not neurodivergent.
2. Neurodivergent: someone who sits outside majority neurological profile commonly associated with autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, dyspraxia, dyscalculia, dysgraphia and Tourette’s syndrome. 
3. Neurodegenerative: A condition whereby sensory processing differences develop over time such as Parkinson’s.

The guide deals with:

    • Lighting
    • Acoustics
    • Décor
    • Flooring
    • Layout
    • Wayfinding
  • Familiarity
  • Clarity
  • Safety
  • Thermal comfort
  • Odour

Neurodiversity and the built environment guide front cover.Design for the Mind

The title of the guide is, PAS 6463:2022 Design for the mind. Neurodiversity and the built environment. Guide. The link will take you to the introductory web page where you can request a free digital copy for download. Note that you will need an additional app to open the document and to sign in as a user. It’s worth the effort.

The guide is just that. It is not a specification or code of practice and it is assumed that it will be used by qualified people. The guide does not cover special education environments, dementia or complex care settings or detailed guidance on sensory room design.

 

Fare free public transport: social outcomes

Policy decisions to provide fare free public transport is based on the assumption that it will reduce car use. However, several case studies show this is not the case. Car owners are strongly connected to their vehicles for many reasons. While more journeys might be made on free transport, it could lead to walking less. Nevertheless, free public transport is good for people on low incomes.

Fare-free public transport does not necessarily lead to less car use. However, it does lead to more people making more journeys. But what about social outcomes?

A woman is getting on a bus. The footpath has a built up pad to raise the height so she can get on the bus. When universal design isn't enough.

Free transport as social justice

A research paper from Norway looks as the impact of free public transport on social outcomes. In the process, it looks at case studies is several cities across the world. The paper covers attitudes towards free transport, accessibility, and the impact on travel behaviour.

Positive outcomes included benefits to low income people in most case studies, but not to increased employment. One of the findings is that when free transport is provided, it does not, by itself, equalise mobility for people. It’s much more complex than that.

Social plus environmental policy

The research paper turns to Stavanger, a large city in Norway that is committed to reducing their carbon footprint. Significant progress is underway with electric buses, intelligent traffic lights, and parking solutions. Cars, cyclists, buses, and pedestrians all have to be managed for the best outcomes for all.

Norway has an overarching policy of implementing universal design principles in the built environment, digital technology, and services. Consequently, transport accessibility is at a higher level than most other countries.

Rather than a widespread move away from driving, current transit users just used it more. However, the case studies generally show a small shift away from car use. Image from Life in Norway.

A green bus in downtown Stavanger waiting at a bus stop.

Service quality such as comfort and frequency needed to be carefully managed to retain customer satisfaction. This in turn can lead to greater costs in expanding and maintaining infrastructure. Nevertheless, people on low incomes can get about more easily and increase participation in everyday activities.

Respondents in the Stavanger study found financial barriers were removed with free transport. This enabled them to access healthcare, education and job possibilities. In the Stavanger case, the public awareness campaign was successful in encouraging a shift away from private vehicles. Emphasis on service quality is needed to continue this success.

From the conclusion

In Stavanger, free public transport advanced accessibility, public transport use, and social welfare outcomes. It has potential as a game-changing urban transportation policy. However, investments in infrastructure, service quality, and integration with more comprehensive urban planning initiatives are necessary to guarantee long-term sustainability.

Utilising technology such as Intelligent Transportation Systems and real-time updates will optimise services and improve user experience. Targeted education programs to highlight the advantages of public transport can encourage people to switch from driving their cars.

Working together with neighborhood organizations, businesses, and educational institutions can help to further promote public transportation as an accessible, equitable, and sustainable mode of transportation for all groups. Stavanger’s experience serves as a model for communities looking for fair and environmentally friendly transportation options.

The title of the article is, Impact of Free Public Transport Scheme on Social Welfare in Stavanger Municipality. A timely study when cities are mobilising to reduce carbon emissions and at the same time provide equitable transport options.

The Nordic Road and Transport Research magazine article also reviewed this research and compared it to an earlier study.

A local publication announces the introduction of fare free public transport in Stavanger.

Myth busting ageing at work

Based on evidence, Philip Taylor’s blog article busts some well-worn myths about ageing and work. Population ageing has led to a lot of debate about prolonging working lives to reduce pension costs. There’s also much said about labour shortages as many current workers retire. But older people say they are discriminated against in the workplace. So, what is the reality?

International evidence challenges the current assumptions and misconceptions about older people and work. Age discrimination can happen at any age.

Two men are working on a construction site. One is holding a circular saw which has just cut through a large timber board. Myths about ageing at work.

Taylor’s article goes right to the point in dispelling eight myths about discrimination only happening to older people. The research references are included in the article. Here are the myths in brief.

The myths

Myth 1: Age discrimination is only experienced by older people. Younger people also report discrimination based on age. Paradoxically, older people may also be perpetrators of age discrimination, including other older people.

Myth 2: Generations have different orientations to work. Employee life stage and competing home life responsibilities at any age are key – not generation. Claims that one generation has ‘better’ attributes than another are not helpful for workplace managers.

Myth 3: Older people are a homogenous group. Older and younger people have different aspects of their identity that impact their work experience of inclusion and exclusion. People are not one dimensional at any age. Should we, therefore, even talk about ‘older workers’ or just talk about workers or staff?

Myth 4: Older workers outperform younger ones in terms of reliability, loyalty, work ethic and life experience. Performance is unrelated to age. Addressing ageism with these stereotypes is no good for either older or younger people. Job performance varies more between people of the same age than between different ages.

Myth 5: Older people have a lifetime of experience that managers should recognise. It’s not experience itself that’s valuable, it’s relevant experience. It’s too easy to see older people as societal perceptions of ‘the past’ and not able to contribute to the future.

Myth 6: Younger workers are more dynamic, entrepreneurial, and tech-savvy than older workers. People should not be assumed to have (or not have) a given quality just because of their age. Workers of various ages may have similar skills, attributes and experiences.

Myth 7: Younger workers feel entitled and won’t stick around. In reality younger workers are more likely to be in insecure employment and to experience unemployment. Age has little to do with commitment to work. Youth unemployment rates are often higher than those of older people.

Myth 8: Older people who stay on at work are taking jobs from younger people. Evidence is that when employment rates increase for older people, they also increase for younger people. So age may have no effect. One is not substituting the other.

In summary

Ageism can happen at any age and using stereotypes is unhelpful at both ends of the age spectrum. Pitting generations against each other doesn’t engender an inclusive workplace approach for either management or staff. The focus on discrimination of older people in the workplace leaves younger people invisible in the discourse.

The title of this informative article is, Myth busting aging at work. You will re-think the way ageism is applied – it’s about all ages. After all, we are all in this together.

Housing: social and economic benefits

Mainstream housing remains one of the last areas to be subject to mandated universal design principles or access standards. Public infrastructure, such as commercial buildings, shopping centres and transport, is subject to at least some basic access requirements. Regardless of the evidence of social and economic benefits, mainstream housing developers remain resistant to change.

A conference paper from Ireland adds to the existing literature on why universally designed homes are good for everyone. The paper is a prelude to a larger study with a detailed cost benefit analysis.

There is a substantial body of evidence indicating that investment in universally designed homes can result in savings in other areas of expenditure.

An illustration showing facades of different styles of free standing homes in lots of colours. They look like toy houses.

Investment in universally designed homes is particularly cost effective when compared to age-specific housing and long term residential care. Reduction in injurious falls is a saving for the health budget as well as quality of life for the occupant.

The authors cite research by others on the economic value of universal design which indicate the benefits outweigh the costs. Consequently, policy interventions to encourage construction of accessible housing are justified. However, future research should include longitudinal studies to assess the full impact of benefits.

The title of the short paper is Universal Designed Homes: Social Value and Economic Benefits. This open access paper was presented at UD2024 in Olso, Norway.

From the abstract

This paper examines the social value and economic benefits of Universal Design (UD) Homes. It focuses on assessing the potential financial savings arising in various areas of expenditure due to investment in UD Homes. Investment in the provision of UD Homes can result in improved quality of life and more cost-effective forms of investment.

UD Homes are particularly cost-effective in the context of age friendly housing. It has the potential to reduce the need for long-term residential care and to avoid injurious falls.

Note: This research underpins a forthcoming cost benefit analysis (CBA) under development by the Irish National Disability Authority (NDA). This paper and the associated CBA research have been informed by a comprehensive stakeholder consultation process. This includes persons with disabilities and older persons, Disabled Persons’ Organisations (DPOs), Approved Housing Bodies, Irish Local Authority representatives, officials of housing and disability policy focussed Government departments and other public bodies, academics and industry representatives.

Diversity of digital mobility users

Established public transportation systems are built on roads and rail: buses, trams and trains with fixed routes. Digital technology has brought some disruptive features to the mobility landscape. Rideshare, demand-responsive transport, and Mobility as a Service are examples of systems that rely on digital technology. Digital mobility users are a diverse group but what about those who are left out?

The rapid advancement of digital technology has led to a shift of travel habits. New business models have emerged along with transport patterns. But what if you can’t use this technology?

A man stands on a train platform looking at his smartphone. He is wearing a hat and has a bright yellow backpack. Digital mobility.

The race for improvements in digital services is good news for experienced users, but such improvements are lost on others. Exclusion arises from online only services, access to a suitable device, and ability to use the technology. Prior experience or negative attitudes are also a barrier to inclusion.

According to the literature, the main reasons for digital exclusion are:

  • Age – being older is related to lower levels of tech use
  • Income level – affordability of devices
  • Gender – women underestimate their skills
  • Education level – correlated with digital skills
  • Place of residence – rural / urban divide
  • Disability – physical ability to use transport and apps
  • Migrant status – linguistic and cultural differences

Can personas explain diversity for designers?

In a case study, researchers found that only about 10% of the population uses the new mobility solutions regularly. So they devised 8 personas to see if this was a way of helping designers improve their applications.

Their research paper explains how the they devised the personas based on population data. They claim this is a new method for developing personas specifically for analysing the digital divide in mobility. While 90% of people had no problem using the internet regularly, around 15% had serious issues with mobility related technology.

The researchers were able to identify “pain points” for users and highlight the main limitations users have while using digital mobility solutions. Peoples’ motivations and attitudes also play an important role in the uptake of this technology.

The title of the article is, Exploring the diversity of users of digital mobility services by developing personas – A case study of the Barcelona metropolitan area.

From the abstract

Addressing digital exclusion requires an understanding of the factors leading to it. In this paper, we explore to what extent new digital mobility solutions can be considered inclusive. First we take into account the diverse perspectives of the users of transport services.

We present a set of personas which are derived from a population survey of a Barcelona metropolitan area. From this we gained an understanding of end user needs and capabilities in digital mobility. Overall, roughly 15% of this population cannot access and effectively use digital technologies, thereby hindering their use of many digital mobility services.

This work provides information about the diversity of potential users by analysing different stories and travel experiences of the personas; this in turn can inspire decision makers, developers, and other stakeholders along the design process. The methodological approach for developing personas could be also potentially useful for mobility service providers and policymakers who aim to create more inclusive and user-centred transport ecosystems that meet the needs of diverse users.

Inclusive language tips

Amnesty International has created a list of five inclusive language tips that puts the person first rather than how society defines them. The five elements are pronouns, gender, First Nations Peoples, cultural diversity, and disability. The aim of this list is to help create a culture of respect and inclusion.

“Inclusive language is language free from words, phrases or tones that reflect prejudiced, stereotyped or discriminatory views of particular people or groups.”

A mosaic of many different faces and nationalities. Use inclusive language.

How people use pronouns for themselves and others has changed significantly in recent years. If you are not sure what someone’s pronoun is, ask respectfully and preferably privately. Avoid ask “What pronouns do you prefer?” because their pronouns and identity are not a preference.

The list of tips gives examples of language to use and avoid in relation to gender-specific terms. Many of these are commonly understood now.

The section on First Nations Peoples has a longer list of language to avoid. A lesser known aspect is using generic terms that excludes the lived experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. Comments such as ‘all Australians have access to quality medical care’ excludes their lived experience.

More than 30% of Australia’s population was born overseas. Asking where a person is from can make them feel set apart from others. Avoid referring to their ethnic or racial background unless there is a valid or legal reason for doing so.

The section on disability and accessibility covers the usual material. Avoid language that implies heroism or victim status. If it is not necessary to acknowledge that a person has a disability then don’t mention it. A list of language to use and avoid is included here.

There are more detailed language guides for people with disability on this website. See Reporting Disability Issues in the Media, and Language Guide for Journalists and Others.

The title of the blog article is 5 Inclusive Language Tips You Need to Know About. Of course, people can fall into more than one of the five groups. Take care not to miss one while focusing on another.

Join the dots: universal design and UDL

Universal design, as a general concept across all aspects of design isn’t always connected to universal design for learning (UDL). The ‘average’ learner is a myth. Together, the learners previously labelled as in the minority are collectively the majority. That’s why we need to join the dots between universal design and UDL.

“Learners today are not a homogeneous group, instead they bring a variety of rich cultures, abilities, multiple and intersectional
identities, varied lived experiences, and educational backgrounds.”

A large and diverse group of small plastic cartoon characters placed around a dark greet star shape.

An opinion piece by Tracy Galvin discusses the role universal design and UDL in tertiary education. With financial pressures across the education sector globally, the answers aren’t simple. The focus is on profit making, the reduction in government funding and the shift toward competition, marketisation and privatisation of education. That means learners have become consumers.

Learners who cannot readily consume market model education services are more likely to be left out. However, inclusive education is a basic human right that aligns with the sustainable development goals. The updated CAST UDL Guidelines attempt to address critical barriers rooted in biases and systems of exclusion.

UDL Guidelines 3.0

Key themes in the CAST 2024 update are:

  • Making UDL part of other asset-based approaches to learning frameworks
  • Emphasising identity and intersectionality as part of diversity
  • Acknowledging individual and systemic biases as barriers to learning
  • Shifting from educator-centred to learner-centred language.
Graphic with wording essential updates and practical applications. Overarching changes.

This opinion piece aims to frame the changing nature of tertiary education by advocating a shared unified inclusive approach through a UD/UDL lens. Learning environments, staff development, structures, processes and technologies need an inclusive practice lens.

There will always be structural societal factors at play, but there’s an opportunity to move towards a shift to find a balance. The paradigms of capitalism and privatisation continue to dominate. A universal design approach can mitigate those extremes and bring them closer to a social model of education.

The title is, The two ends of the tertiary education spectrum: Can universal design and universal design for learning provide a unified enhancement approach across the sector?

From the abstract

Across institutions there are many inclusion allies, advocates, initiatives, strategies, policies and professional development supports. So why are so many learners leaving courses, not engaging, not attending and not seeing the value of education?

Is it the pendulum shift toward marketisation, commercialisation and privatisation? Learners are not seeing institutions as spaces and places of equity and justice any more. Do they see factories where money needs to cross hands? Where on this spectrum is the balance for enhancement? Could universal design and universal design for learning be at least the starting point?

The diversity of learners is due to international students, refugees, asylum seekers, neurodivergent learners, carers, and disabled learners. We know this variability exists with the increase in learners registered with the disability or wellbeing services.
While variability and diversity should be celebrated it requires adequate resources and funding.

Universal design for future mobility

A literature review from Norway takes an older person’s view of transport equity and accessibility. Being able get out and about on a daily basis to shop, visit friends, and medical appointments is essential for everyone. As people age, this ability becomes even more important in terms of maintaining health and independence. The review proposes that local government implement universal design for future mobility.

Older people who do not have access to private transport need to use public transport. Yet they face barriers in the built environment and public transportation infrastructure such as:

  • Poorly built public vehicles and road systems
  • Insecure and unsafe services
  • Lack of wayfinding and walkability assistance
  • Reduced accessible transportation options
  • Undesirable attitudes of the general public.
Inside a bus looking down the aisle towards the front of the bus with seats on both sides.

The research paper covers the method for the literature review and the search terms used. A three tiered system is one way of solving the problem. First, a traditional fixed route service that suits people with no, or low level limitations. Second, fixed route services offering some flexibility with low floor buses. The third option is a special transport service. The bottom line is that a “one size fits all” is not the answer.

Implementing an equitable mobility design involves an integrated method to address the weaknesses of traditional design approaches. However, this requires a user-centred approach that involves older peoples’ requirements. Hence a universal design approach with co-design methods for future transport.

Several factors impact the mobility of older people: psychological state, health, and physical ability that can vary from day to day.

“Thus, for any public transportation system to achieve social inclusion or equity and equality its accessibility must be universal for everyone in society.”

An arial view of a bus stop shelter with autumn leaves. A woman is standing and another person is seated.

Conclusions

The research paper compares policies and strategies in the UK, Canada and European countries. Investment at a local level is essential for features such as wind shelters, accessible vehicles, level footpaths, and appropriate ways to provide transport information.

Another paper that recommends that the design of public spaces should consider older people at the outset of the design. That is, they should involve older people in the design and redesign of pedestrian and walkway networks. The findings highlight how to employ universal design for mobility equity and compare mobility policies for older people.

The title of the paper is, Exploring mobility equity, equality, and accessibility for older people in the local environment.

From the abstract

The ability to travel independently and freely to participate in society is crucial for our quality of life. The question of how to maintain mobility equity and equality for older people is, however, a complex one.

This is because older people are often faced with physical barriers around the public transportation and built environment. Municipalities have not involved older people in the design of mobility accessibility initiatives.

The findings from our study present factors influencing local environment in achieving mobility equity from the perspectives of older people. Evidence underpins guidelines grounded in a universal design framework to help inform urban transport policies.

Transportation in the future

The language of transport has shifted from discussions about infrastructure to the mobility of people. It’s therefore essential to consider the the diversity of our population in future thinking and designing. But what would people with disability want from transportation in the future to make mobility easy and useful? A group in Europe decided to find out. 

An interactive, real time, accessible journey planner was the most popular idea. This is because it would make travel more convenient and safer and enable independence. On the other hand, bike sharing, e-scooters and motorbike taxis were not popular with respondents.

People with vision impairment and hearing impairment weren’t that interested in an accessible journey planner. Two-wheeled solutions weren’t popular either with these two groups. Women had the most reservations around transport and different modes of mobility. 

Cycle lanes received a luke-warm response across all disabilities. However, accessible cycle lanes were relatively more popular. 

People with disability are open to using robots, artificial intelligence alerts and wearables. Therefore, designers of environments and systems need to work together for seamless integration.

As we know, what is good and useful for people with disability usually ends up being good for everyone. Consequently, the white paper is a useful resource with good recommendations for transport planners.

The white paper title is, Views of people with disabilities on future mobility. The research was funded by the European Union. The white paper explains their survey methods and findings, the issue of gender balance and future recommendations. It also offers design directions and policy and industry recommendations. Bottom line – we need universal design for future mobility.

Front cover of the TRIPS White Paper on the Future Mobility.

Key points for future mobility

  • Getting on and off the means of transport
  • Reaching the transport mode
  • Using station facilities
  • Travel delays
  • Comfort on board
  • Limited access to information
  • Autonomy
  • Social barriers
  • Accessing help
  • Friendliness of the surrounding environment
  • Getting users oriented

Age Friendly Ecosystems: A book

This book examines age friendliness from a place-based approach. It looks at neighbourhoods, campuses and health environments. The topics covered are:

  • Creating an Age-Friendly Environment Across the Ecosystem
  • Age Friendliness as a Framework for Equity in Aging
  • Age-Friendly Voices in the Pursuit of an Age-Friendly Ecosystem
  • Age-Friendly Futures: Equity by Design
Front cover of the Age Friendly Ecosystems book.

The book emphasises the connection between design and health, examines the age-friendly movement and resources for equity and environmental justice. The full title is, Age-Friendly Ecosystems for Equitable Aging by Design. This is not open access.