Digitalising the Age-Friendly City: Insights from Participatory Action Research
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Background
Digital Citizenship
Underpinned by a commitment to respect and social inclusion, an age-friendly community is engaged in a strategic and ongoing process to facilitate active ageing by optimising the community’s physical, social and digital environments and its supporting infrastructure[14] (p. 19).
3. Methods
- How can stakeholder organisations of older adults best exploit digital technologies to provide digital information and communications to support age-friendly city initiatives?
- What is the potential of digital audio to promote civic participation in later life and to facilitate public engagement with age-friendly issues?
3.1. Research Context
3.2. Working within the Information and Communication Domain
Research Methods and Analysis
3.3. Working within the Civic Participation Domain
Research Methods and Analysis
4. Findings
4.1. Communicating Age-Friendly Work Digitally
“When we did that back in 2006, 2007, we got a huge amount of flak because people said that older people don’t go online. Thanks very much to a colleague of mine, who really said, ‘No, we’ve got to do this as a digital platform, this has got to be online’ we really stuck to our guns. So, [the website] is a key information resource for people in the city, but alongside that, we then tried in a small way, I guess, to create opportunities for older people to improve their digital skills.”(Sarah)
Iris: “We also know, from looking at the analysis, what’s happening with it, which we didn’t know from Word. We knew nothing from Word at all, we just knew how many people were getting it. So, it’s about a 50% opening rate.”
Dora: “I can give you the facts and figures. The first one we did was on 4th October and it went out to 569 people, had a 45% open rate and an 8.3% click rate.”
“Because it would be helpful if we knew what was in the highest rating clicks, rather than look at the ones where… you know, so we don’t have to do every one, but if we get a really positive reaction to a particular [newsletter], what was it in that [newsletter] that really attracted people’s attention. That would be valuable.”(Dora)
“We always knew how many people it was going to. We have picked up more people, but they’re organisations, rather than individuals. So, we find a lot of organisations are using what we’re putting out, which is an interesting thing.”(Iris)
“I would like us to sit down together with the newsletter and email page and have a look at how you use it and how I use it. Because I think that I don’t use it in the most efficient way.”(Iris, Interview 1)
“From my point of view, the commitment with that is quite different because, if you were both doing it at the same time, you’re not actually having a break from it. I mean, I might put something in, or Iris might put something in and I might go, “That’s not suitable. Take it out.” So, there’s the different interest, different… and Sarah could come along and do something completely different. I’m happy with doing it two, four, however many issues and then having a break and it gives you time to think of other things as well and to read it when somebody else has done it and see, pick up different things.”(Dora, Interview 4)
“So, some of it needs to be face-to-face, we still like that, we like face-to-face, we like paper, we like all of that, we’ve got to have, but, actually, we also need this other dimension, which is both about trying to get broader engagement, but, also, about how we present ourselves to the world.”(Sarah)
4.2. Using Digital Audio to Increase Civic Participation
“Why is it [that people] are not interested? I’m sure they are, but we’re certainly not reaching them. The younger cohort. People in their 60s.”(Sarah)
5. Discussion
5.1. Limitations
5.2. Creating Digital Visibility of Age-Friendliness
5.3. Considering Digital Citizenship in Later Life
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- WHO. World Health Organization Global Age-Friendly Cities: A Guide; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007; p. 87. [Google Scholar]
- World Health Organisation. The Global Network for Age-Friendly Cities and Communities; WHO: World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018; p. 48. [Google Scholar]
- Age Friendly Ireland. 10 Years Delivering For Ireland | A Decade Of Progress Listening to the Voice of Older People—The Driving Force of Change at Local Level. Available online: https://www.meath.ie/system/files/media/file-uploads/2019-12/Age%20Friendly%20Meath%2010%20Year%20Report%20210x210mm%20FINAL.pdf (accessed on 4 October 2020).
- Centre for Ageing Better UK Network of Age-Friendly Communities. Available online: https://www.ageing-better.org.uk/uk-network-age-friendly-communities (accessed on 4 October 2020).
- Buffel, T.; Phillipson, C.; Rémillard-Boilard, S. Age-Friendly Cities and Communities: New Directions for Research and Policy. In Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Liddle, J.; Scharf, T.; Bartlam, B.; Bernard, M.; Sim, J. Exploring the age-friendliness of purpose-built retirement communities: Evidence from England. Ageing Soc. 2014, 34, 1601–1629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Neves, B.B.; Waycott, J.; Malta, S. Old and afraid of new communication technologies? Reconceptualising and contesting the ‘age-based digital divide’. J. Sociol. 2018, 54, 236–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vines, J.; Pritchard, G.; Wright, P.; Olivier, P. An Age-Old Problem: Examining the Discourses of Ageing in HCI and Strategies for Future Research. Tochi 2015, 22, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brewer, R.; Piper, A.M. “Tell It Like It Really Is”: A Case of Online Content Creation and Sharing Among Older Adult Bloggers. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, USA, 7–12 May 2016; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 5529–5542. [Google Scholar]
- Celdran, M.; Serrat, R.; Villar, F. Older Adults as Internet Content Producers: Motivations for Blogging in Later Life. In Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction Research with Older People; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 169–182. ISBN 9783030060763. [Google Scholar]
- Marston, H.R.; Van Hoof, J. “Who doesn’t think about technology when designing urban environments for older people?” A case study approach to a proposed extension of the who’s age-friendly cities model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Buffel, T.; Phillipson, C.; Scharf, T. Ageing in urban environments: Developing “age-friendly” cities. Crit. Soc. Policy 2012, 32, 597–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Buffel, T.; Handler, S. Age-Friendly Cities and Communities: A Global Perspective; Policy Press: Bristol, UK, 2018; ISBN 144733132X. [Google Scholar]
- Liddle, J.; Pitcher, N.; Montague, K.; Hanratty, B.; Standing, H.; Scharf, T. Connecting at Local Level: Exploring Opportunities for Future Design of Technology to Support Social Connections in Age-Friendly Communities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mossberger, K.; Tolbert, C.J.; McNeal, R.S. Defining Digital Citizenship. Digit. Citizsh. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vlachokyriakos, V.; Crivellaro, C.; Le Dantec, C.A.; Gordon, E.; Wright, P.; Olivier, P. Digital Civics: Citizen Empowerement With and Through Technology. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, USA, 7–12 May 2016; pp. 1096–1099. [Google Scholar]
- Olivier, P.; Wright, P. Digital Civics: Taking a Local Turn. Interactions 2015, 22, 61–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCarthy, J.; Wright, P. Taking [a] Part: The Politics and Aesthetics of Participation in Experience-Centered Design; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Asad, M.; Le Dantec, C.A.; Nielsen, B.; Diedrick, K. Creating a Sociotechnical API: Designing City-Scale Community Engagement. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Denver, CO, USA, 6–11 May 2017; pp. 2295–2306. [Google Scholar]
- Walsh, K.; Scharf, T.; Keating, N. Social exclusion of older persons: A scoping review and conceptual framework. Eur. J. Ageing 2017, 14, 81–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- GSMA Digital Inclusion 2014. 2014. Available online: http://www.gsma.com/mobilefordevelopment/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/GSMA_Digital-Inclusion-Report_Web_Singles_2.pdf (accessed on 4 October 2020).
- Bloch, N.; Bruce, B.C. Older adults and the new public sphere. In Proceedings of the 2011 iConference, Seattle, WA, USA, 8–11 February 2011; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Office for National Statistics UK. Internet Users UK; 2019; pp. 1–11. Available online: https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/itandinternetindustry/bulletins/internetusers/2019 (accessed on 4 October 2020).
- Office of Communications UK. Connected Nations 2018: UK Report; 2018; pp. 1–49. Available online: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/130736/Connected-Nations-2018-main-report.pdf (accessed on 4 October 2020).
- Clarke, R. Tinkering in Cities: Aging and Careful Technology Design for Participation in Urban Infrastructures. Des. Cult. Care 2018, 85–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Righi, V.; Sayago, S.; Blat, J. When we talk about older people in HCI, who are we talking about? Towards a ‘turn to community’ in the design of technologies for a growing ageing population. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2017, 108, 15–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lindley, S.E.; Harper, R.; Sellen, A. Designing for elders: Exploring the complexity of relationships in later life. In People and Computers XXII Culture, Creativity, Interaction; British Computer Society: London, UK, 2008; pp. 77–86. [Google Scholar]
- Essén, A.; Östlund, B. Laggards as innovators? Old users as designers of new services & service systems. Int. J. Des. 2011, 5, 89–98. [Google Scholar]
- Frohlich, D.M.; Lim, C.; Ahmed, A. Co-designing a Diversity of Social Media Products with and for Older People. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-Exclusion, Vila Real, Portugal, 1–3 December 2016; pp. 323–330. [Google Scholar]
- Vines, J.; Blythe, M.; Lindsay, S.; Dunphy, P.; Monk, A.; Olivier, P. Questionable concepts: Critique as a resource for designing with eighty somethings. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Austin, TX, USA, 5–10 May 2012; pp. 1169–1178. [Google Scholar]
- Leong, T.; Robertson, T. Voicing values: Laying foundations for ageing people to participate in design. In Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference: Full Papers-Volume 1; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 31–40. [Google Scholar]
- Clarke, R.; Crivellaro, C.; Di Mascio, D.; Wright, P. Re-configuring participatory media for citizen elders in urban planning. In Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Media Architecture Biennale, Sydney, Australia, 1–4 June 2016; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Davidson, S. Digital Inclusion Evidence Review. Age UK 2018, 1–30. Available online: https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/reports-and-publications/age_uk_digital_inclusion_evidence_review_2018.pdf (accessed on 4 October 2020).
- UK Government Digital Skills and Inclusion Policy Paper. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-digital-strategy/2-digital-skills-and-inclusion-giving-everyone-access-to-the-digital-skills-they-need (accessed on 8 July 2019).
- Seifert, A.; Rössel, J. Digital Participation—Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging; Gu, D., Dupre, M.E., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 1–5. ISBN 978-3-319-69892-2. [Google Scholar]
- Ferreira, S.M.; Sayago, S.; Blat, J. Older people’s production and appropriation of digital videos: An ethnographic study. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2017, 36, 557–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reuter, A.; Bartindale, T.; Morrissey, K.; Scharf, T.; Liddle, J. Older voices: Supporting community radio production for civic participation in later life. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Glasgow, UK, 4–9 May 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Waycott, J.; Vetere, F.; Pedell, S.; Kulik, L.; Ozanne, E.; Gruner, A.; Downs, J. Older adults as digital content producers. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Paris, France, 27 April–2 May 2013; pp. 39–48. [Google Scholar]
- Ferreira, S.; Sayago, S.; Blat, J. Older People Positive, Active and Creative ICT Use: A Study in Three Countries. In Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction Research with Older People; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 183–197. ISBN 978-3-030-06076-3. [Google Scholar]
- Buffel, T.; De Donder, L.; Phillipson, C.; Dury, S.; De Witte, N.; Verté, D. Social participation among older adults living in medium-sized cities in Belgium: The role of neighbourhood perceptions. Health Promot. Int. 2014, 29, 655–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buffel, T.; Phillipson, C. Can global cities be “age-friendly cities”? Urban development and ageing populations. Cities 2016, 55, 94–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- British Society of Gerontology Ethical Guidelines. Available online: https://www.britishgerontology.org/about-bsg/bsg-ethical-guidelines (accessed on 13 August 2018).
- Hayes, G.R. Taking action in your research. Interactions 2012, 19, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual. Res. Sport. Exerc. Health 2019, 11, 589–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006, 3, 77–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Houston, S. Prising open the black box: Critical realism, action research and social work. Qual. Soc. Work 2010, 9, 73–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tomitsch, M. User Scenarios. Available online: http://designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com/methods/scenarios/ (accessed on 4 October 2020).
- Buckner, S.; Pope, D.; Mattocks, C.; Lafortune, L.; Dherani, M.; Bruce, N. Developing Age-Friendly Cities: An Evidence-Based Evaluation Tool. J. Popul. Ageing 2019, 12, 203–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lehning, A.J.; Greenfield, E.A. Research on Age-Friendly Community Initiatives: Taking Stock and Moving Forward. J. Hous. Elder. 2017, 31, 178–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Russell, E.; Skinner, M.W.; Fowler, K. Emergent Challenges and Opportunities to Sustaining Age-friendly Initiatives: Qualitative Findings from a Canadian Age-friendly Funding Program. J. Aging Soc. Policy 2019, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Members | Time | Topic |
---|---|---|
Iris and Dora | February 2019, Design Meeting 1 | General ideas for the newsletter layout |
Iris and Dora | February 2019, Design Meeting 2 | Developing a Mailchimp concept to be presented to the wider organisation |
Iris and Dora | March 2019, Design Meeting 3 | Setup of Mailchimp account |
Iris and Dora | March 2019, Design Meeting 4 | Template setup and content layout |
Iris and Dora | April 2019, Interview 1 | Creating efficient workflows |
Iris and Dora | April 2019, Design Meeting 5 | Ideas for cover stories and name of newsletter |
Iris, Dora and Sarah | May 2019, Interview 2 as part of Design Meeting 6 | Re-design of newsletter to Mailchimp |
Iris and Dora | September 2019, Design Meeting 7 | Technical Advice |
Sarah | September 2019, Design Meeting 8 | Creation of mailing list and campaign |
October 2019: first digital Newsletter | ||
Iris | December 2019, Design Meeting 9 | Increase audience engagement |
Iris and Dora | February 2020, Interview 3 | Evaluation of use of Mailchimp |
Sarah | February 2020, Interview 4 | Digital AFC and communications |
Themes | Example Code | Data |
---|---|---|
Reaching wider audiences | Retrieving audience statistics | It went out to 569 people, had a 45% open rate and an 8.3% click rate. (Dora) |
Getting personal feedback | There was a lovely comment yesterday. A lady had sent a message in. (Dora) | |
Showcasing AFC collaborations | Networking organisations | So, we find a lot of organisations are using what we’re putting out. (Iris) |
Strategically distributing information between AFC members | I’ve been at a meeting this morning and both the ladies that were there said ‘We read the articles and we share with our members’ (Dora) | |
Creating efficient workflows | Committing time | It’s capacity timing, isn’t it. That’s the problem with that. (Iris) |
Learning from each other | I would like us to sit down together with the newsletter and email page and have a look at how you use it and how I use it. (Iris) | |
Balancing digital and non-digital interactions | Connecting socially and reaching out | We like face-to-face, we like paper, we like all of that, we’ve got to have, but, actually, we also need this other dimension, which is both about trying to get broader engagement, but, also, about how we present ourselves to the world. (Sarah) |
Delivering online and offline information | You can go on the website and you can find one there, but actually, have one delivered to you too. (Iris) |
Themes | Example Code | Data |
---|---|---|
Engaging citizens | Reaching different age groups | Why is it [that people] are not interested? I’m sure they are but we’re certainly not reaching them. The younger cohort. People in their 60s. (Sarah) |
Inviting public feedback | For the moment, everything is very hidden. I put this out and wait for people to tell us what they think... (Iris) | |
Demonstrating impact | Creating digital evidence | Digital technologies are a creative way of evidencing work that had been done. (Author 1, field notes) |
Tracking audience engagement | Engaging digitally offers the opportunity to diagnose trends and be more responsive to the audience. (Author 1, field notes) |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Reuter, A.; Liddle, J.; Scharf, T. Digitalising the Age-Friendly City: Insights from Participatory Action Research. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8281. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218281
Reuter A, Liddle J, Scharf T. Digitalising the Age-Friendly City: Insights from Participatory Action Research. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(21):8281. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218281
Chicago/Turabian StyleReuter, Arlind, Jennifer Liddle, and Thomas Scharf. 2020. "Digitalising the Age-Friendly City: Insights from Participatory Action Research" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 21: 8281. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218281
APA StyleReuter, A., Liddle, J., & Scharf, T. (2020). Digitalising the Age-Friendly City: Insights from Participatory Action Research. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), 8281. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218281