City Governments and Aging in Place: Community Design, Transportation and Housing Innovation Adoption

Lehning, Amanda J.

doi:10.1093/geront/gnr089

Cited by 55 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While our findings confirm the importance of planning, public engagement, and local leadership found in prior studies (Lehning 2012(Lehning , 2014 Rukus 2013), we do not find the link between service delivery and the community's built environment that has been called for in the APA Aging Policy Guide (APA 2014). It could be that better measures of plan content and more fine-grained indicators of the built environment, if available, would reveal a link.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 78%

“…Research on innovation in local government service delivery and policy diffusion points to the importance of financial capacity, professional leadership, public engagement, and planning (Warner and Morken 2013;Lehning 2012;Nelson and Svara 2012;Warner and Hefetz 2008). Our capacity controls include population size as we expect larger cities to provide more services and engage in more planning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Planning for Aging in Place

Warner

Homsy

Morken³

2016

Journal of Planning Education and Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a national survey of U.S. local governments, we explore the drivers of planning and service delivery for older adults. Our regression models find that planning for aging and elder engagement are the most influential factors explaining the level of community services for elders. Services are lower in less dense suburban and rural communities, and market-based services are lower in communities with more senior poverty. This creates two challenges for planners: to help generate a market response for aging services, and to articulate the link between the built environment and services so communities that lack supportive physical environments can become better places to age.for aging (land use, comprehensive and strategic planning) and elder participation in the planning process.Our model results show that planning for seniors and elder participation in the planning process help explain differences in the level of community services. Communities with built environments that are less favorable to aging in place, such as suburban communities, show lower service provision levels. While market delivery is higher in communities with more older adults, it is lower in communities with more seniors in poverty-presumably the ones who would need services most. This raises a challenge for planners in how to stimulate both a market and a government response. We conclude by proposing a conceptual model that suggests services may complement limitations in the built environment. Focusing on service delivery in the near term offers a way forward for planners who work in communities where changes to the built environment are difficult to achieve.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 78%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning for Aging in Place

Warner

Homsy

Morken³

2016

Journal of Planning Education and Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While research is increasingly focused on understanding the individual (and more rarely the environmental) factors that relate to aging in place, 39 comparatively less research has considered the unique needs of socieconomically and physically frail older adults struggling to remain in their communities. Due to its rapid socioeconomic and structural decline, the city of Detroit presents unique challenges for frail community-dwelling elders.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing Mobility in Later Life: The Role of the Urban Built Environment for Older Adults Aging in Place

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hazards in the urban built environment can create barriers to mobility among older adults aging in place. We investigated the relationship between urban built environment characteristics and 15-month trajectories of mobility disability in a sample of 1,188 older adults living in Detroit, MI, a city that has undergone rapid economic and structural decline. Data come from the Michigan Minimum Data Set for Home Care (2001Care ( -2008, an enumerative database of older adults in Michigan who qualify for federal or state-funded home and community-based long-term care through a Medicaid waiver program. Standardized assessments are made at intake and every 90 days by case managers. Built environments were assessed with a virtual audit using the "Street View" feature of Google Earth. A summary accessibility score was created for each block based on a count of the number of accessible features (e.g., continuous barrier-free sidewalks and proximity of public transportation). Using growth mixture models, two latent trajectories of outdoor mobility were identified: one capturing occasional outdoor mobility (representing 83 % of the sample) and one capturing almost no mobility outside the home. Controlling for sociodemographic and health risk factors, individuals living in more accessible environments had a 18 % higher odds of being in the more mobile group (OR01.18, 95 % CI01.01, 1.41). These findings emphasize the importance of the built environment for mobility among urban-dwelling older adults.

show abstract

“…However, even if the recommendations that emerged from the example above are put in place, transforming suburban neighbourhoods is a long process. Moreover, increasing densities and combining residential and commercial zones in suburban areas may be delayed or prevented by public resistance fostered by NIMBY (not in my backyard) feelings (Lehning 2012).…”

Section: Housingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ageing-friendly communities and social inclusion in the United States of America

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synthesising the social capital and ageing-friendly communities literature, this paper describes how efforts to make communities more ageing-friendly can promote social inclusion among older adults. Making existing communities more ageing-friendly involves physical and social infrastructure changes that enable older adults to pursue lifelong activities, meet their basic needs, maintain significant relationships, participate in the community in personally and socially meaningful ways, and develop new interests and sources of fulfilment. Such efforts can enhance bonding, bridging and linking capital, and thereby promote social inclusion. The authors discuss the link between ageing-friendly communities and social inclusion, and provide examples of programmes with potential to change existing communities into ones that promote the social inclusion of older adults.

show abstract

City Governments and Aging in Place: Community Design, Transportation and Housing Innovation Adoption

Cited by 55 publications

References 40 publications

Planning for Aging in Place

Planning for Aging in Place

Optimizing Mobility in Later Life: The Role of the Urban Built Environment for Older Adults Aging in Place

Ageing-friendly communities and social inclusion in the United States of America

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About