Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T01:15:05.926Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Older adults' perceptions of age-friendly communities in Canada: a photovoice study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2013

SHEILA NOVEK  and
VERENA H. MENEC
SHEILA NOVEK*
Affiliation:
Centre on Aging, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
VERENA H. MENEC
Affiliation:
Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
*
Address for correspondence: Sheila Novek, Centre on Aging, 338 Isbister Building, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3 T 2N2, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The concept of age-friendly communities has garnered international attention among researchers, policy makers and community organisations since the World Health Organization launched its Global Age-friendly Cities Project in 2006. Despite the growth of the age-friendly communities movement, few studies have examined age-friendly characteristics within different community contexts. The goal of the present study was to use a participatory methodology to explore older adults’ perceptions of age-friendliness. The study employed the photovoice technique with 30 community-based older adults in one urban community and three rural communities in the province of Manitoba, Canada. Participants were provided with cameras and took photographs to illustrate the relative age-friendliness of their communities and to generate discussion in interviews and focus groups. Themes from photographs, interviews and focus groups were organised into three broad categories: age-friendly features, contextual factors and cross-cutting themes. The age-friendly features we identified in this study generally correspond to the World Health Organization domains of age-friendliness. In addition, we identified three contextual factors that impact the experiences of older adults within their community environment: community history and identity, ageing in urban, rural and remote communities, and environmental conditions. Finally, independence, affordability and accessibility were identified as cross-cutting themes that intersect with various community features and contextual factors.

Keywords

age-friendly communitiesphotovoicequalitative
Type
Articles
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 34 , Issue 6 , July 2014 , pp. 1052 - 1072
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alley, D., Liebig, P., Pynoos, J., Banerjee, T. and Choi, I. H. 2007. Creating elder-friendly communities: preparations for an aging society. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 49, 1/2, 1–18.Google Scholar
Baker, T. and Wang, C. C. 2006. Photovoice: use of a participatory action research method to explore the chronic pain experience in older adults. Qualitative Health Research, 16, 10, 1405–13.Google Scholar
Broome, K., Worrall, L., McKenna, K. and Boldy, D. 2010. Priorities for an age-friendly bus system. Canadian Journal on Aging, 29, 3, 435–44.Google Scholar
Catalani, C. and Minkler, M. 2010. Photovoice: a review of the literature in health and public health. Health Education & Behavior, 37, 3, 424–51.Google Scholar
Chiou, S.-T. and Chen, L.-T. 2009. Towards age-friendly hospitals and health services. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 49, 2, S3–6.Google Scholar
Gabriel, Z. and Bowling, A. 2004. Quality of life from the perspectives of older people. Ageing & Society, 24, 5, 675–91.Google Scholar
Gitlin, L. 2003. Conducting research on home environments: lessons learned and new directions. The Gerontologist, 43, 5, 628–37.Google Scholar
Hanson, D. and Emlet, C. A. 2006. Assessing a community's elder friendliness: a case example of the AdvantAge initiative. Family & Community Health, 29, 4, 266–78.Google Scholar
Keating, N. and Phillips, J. 2008. A critical ecology perspective on rural ageing. In Keating, N. C. (ed.), Rural Ageing: A Good Place to Grow Old? Policy Press, Bristol, UK, 1–10.Google Scholar
Lawton, M. P. and Nahemow, L. 1973. Ecology and the aging process. In Eisdorfer, C. and Lawton, M. P. (eds), The Psychology of Adult Development and Aging. American Psychological Association, Washington DC, 619–74.Google Scholar
Lockett, D., Willis, A. and Edwards, N. 2005. Through seniors’ eyes: an exploratory qualitative study to identify environmental barriers to and facilitators of walking. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 37, 3, 48–65.Google Scholar
Lui, C.-W., Everingham, J.-A., Warburton, J., Cuthill, M. and Bartlett, H. 2009. What makes a community age-friendly: a review of the international literature. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 28, 3, 116–21.Google Scholar
Menec, V. H., Means, R., Keating, N., Parkhurst, G. and Eales, J. 2011. Conceptualizing age-friendly communities. Canadian Journal on Aging, 30, 3, 479–93.Google Scholar
Novek, S., Morris-Oswald, T. and Menec, V. 2012. Using photovoice with older adults: some methodological strengths and issues. Ageing & Society, 32, 3, 451–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillipson, C. 2011. Developing age-friendly communities: new approaches to growing old in urban environments. In Settersten, R. A. Jr and Angel, J. L. (eds), Handbook of Sociology of Aging. Springer, New York, 279–93.Google Scholar
Rowles, G. D. 1983. Geographical dimensions of social support in rural Appalachia. In Rowles, J. D. and Ohta, R. J. (eds), Aging and Milieu: Environmental Perspectives on Growing Old. Academic Press, New York, 111–28.Google Scholar
Rowles, G. D. 1993. Evolving images of place in aging and ‘aging in place’. Generations, 17, 2, 65–70.Google Scholar
Sacco-Peterson, M. and Borell, L. 2004. Struggles for autonomy in self-care: the impact of the physical and socio-cultural environment in a long-term care setting. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 18, 4, 376–86.Google Scholar
Statistics Canada 2007. 2006 Census of Population. Catalogue No. 97-551-XCB2006005, Statistics Canada, Ottawa.Google Scholar
Stokols, D. 1992. Establishing and maintaining healthy environments. American Psychologist, 47, 1, 6–22.Google Scholar
Wahl, H.-W. and Oswald, F. 2010. Environmental perspectives on aging. In Dannefer, D. and Phillipson, C. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Social Gerontology. Sage, London, 111–24.Google Scholar
Wahl, H.-W. and Weisman, G. D. 2003. Environmental gerontology at the beginning of the new millennium: reflections on its historical, empirical, and theoretical development. The Gerontologist, 43, 5, 616–27.Google Scholar
Wang, C. C. and Burris, M. A. 1997. Photovoice: concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Education & Behavior, 24, 3, 369–87.Google Scholar
Wang, C. C., Morrel-Samuels, S., Hutchison, P. M., Bell, L. and Pestronk, R. M. 2004. Flint photovoice: community building among youths, adults, and policymakers. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 6, 911–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, C. C. and Redwood-Jones, Y. A. 2001. Photovoice ethics: perspectives from Flint photovoice. Health Education & Behavior, 28, 5, 560–72.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (WHO) 2002. Active Aging: A Policy Framework. Second United Nations World Assembly in Ageing, Madrid.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (WHO) 2007. Global Age-friendly Cities: A Guide. WHO, Geneva.Google Scholar