Share:


Emphasizing access to health and treatment services in order to identify the key factors influencing an age-friendly city

    Hossein Komasi Affiliation
    ; Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani Affiliation
    ; Jurgita Antuchevičienė Affiliation

Abstract

One of the most important goals of urban management is to provide comfort and well-being for all citizens. According to the population trend of the world, a massive segment of the future population will be the elderly. Therefore, it is crucial to pay attention to the needs of this segment of society. In this regard, the concept of an age-friendly city that provides a favorable urban environment for the elderly has entered the world’s scientific literature. Because one of the essential land utilization that the elderly have a lot of connection with is health-therapeutic use, the current research has been carried out to evaluate the current health-treatment situation of Songhor city in terms of its usefulness for the elderly. In the second step, the most important drivers influencing the location of these uses have been identified from the perspective of related experts. This research is applied in terms of purpose and descriptive-analytical in terms of research method. The required data has been collected using library-documentary studies, field surveys, and the distribution of questionnaires from related experts. According to the study’s findings, more than 60% of treatment facilities in Songhor city are inaccessible to the elderly. This difficulty varies by therapeutic use; in some cases, it is less difficult than the average, while in others, it is more difficult. In addition, three factors–investment cost (V3), rivalry (V10), and population density (V8)–have been identified as the age-friendly city’s main drivers out of a total of 18 main variables. The study’s findings indicate that the global population is aging, and urban managers and officials should design urban environments following the requirements of the projected population by putting forth medium- and long-term plans.

Keyword : age-friendly cities, healthy cities, sustainable cities, urban land use

How to Cite
Komasi, H., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., & Antuchevičienė, J. (2023). Emphasizing access to health and treatment services in order to identify the key factors influencing an age-friendly city. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 27(3), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.3846/ijspm.2023.19865
Published in Issue
Sep 11, 2023
Abstract Views
495
PDF Downloads
317
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

Ashton, J., Tiliouine, A., & Kosinska, M. (2018). The World Health Organization European Healthy Cities Network 30 years on. Gaceta Sanitaria, 32(6), 503–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2018.03.005

Balaban, O., & Puppim de Oliveira, J. A. (2017). Sustainable buildings for healthier cities: assessing the co-benefits of green buildings in Japan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 163, 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.086

Beck, D., & Ferasso, M. (2023). Bridging ‘Stakeholder value creation’ and ‘Urban sustainability’: the need for better integrating the Environmental Dimension. Sustainable Cities and Society, 89, 104316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.104316

Brooks-Cleator, L. A., Giles, A. R., & Flaherty, M. (2019). Community-level factors that contribute to First Nations and Inuit older adults feeling supported to age well in a Canadian city. Aging Studies, 48, 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2019.01.001

Buffel, T., & Phillipson, C. (2016). Can global cities be ‘age-friendly cities’? Urban development and ageing populations. Cities, 55, 94–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.03.016

Çetinkaya, C., Erbaş, M., Kabak, M., & Özceylan, E. (2023). A mass vaccination site selection problem: an application of GIS and entropy-based MAUT approach. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 85, 101376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2022.101376

Cheng, F., & Wang, Y. (2021). Research and application of 3D visualization and Internet of Things technology in urban land use efficiency management. Displays, 69, 102050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2021.102050

Chui, C. H., Lu, S., Chan, O. F., Cheung, J. C.-S., Guo, Y., Liu, Y., Chan, S. W., Tang, J. Y. M., Au, A., Wen, Z. V., Yu, R., Bai, X., Mok, K. H. J., Woo, J., & Lum, T. Y. S. (2022). Changes in older adults’ perceptions of age-friendliness in Hong Kong: a three-year mixed-methods study. Cities, 127, 103748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103748

Colnar, S., Dimovski, V., & Bogataj, D. (2021). Review of telecare in smart age-friendly cities. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 54(13), 744–749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2021.10.541

DellOvo, M., Capolongo, S., & Oppio, A. (2018). Combining spatial analysis with MCDA for the siting of healthcare facilities. Land Use Policy, 76, 634–644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.044

Dokl, D., Rogelj, V., & Bogataj, D. (2022). Smart age-friendly villages: literature review and research agenda. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 55(10), 928–933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.09.459

Estebsari, F., Rahimi Khalifeh Kandi, Z., Nasiri, M., Moradi Fath, M., Karimi Yeganeh, F., & Mostafaei, D. (2021). Evaluation of transportation infrastructure and urban space of Tehran based on the indicators of age friendly city. Iranian Journal of Health Education & Health Promotion, 9(2), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.52547/ijhehp.9.2.187 (in Persian).

Figueiredo, M., Eloy, S., Marques, S., & Dias, L. (2023). Older people perceptions on the built environment: a scoping review. Applied Ergonomics, 108, 103951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2022.103951

Ghaffari Gilandeh, A., Mohammadi, C. H., & Davari, E. (2022). Evaluating elderly-friendly city indicators (a case study of Sari). Environmental Based Territorial Planning (Amayesh), 15(56), 1–25. https://sid.ir/paper/956771/en (in Persian).

Grafakos, S., Viero, G., Reckien, D., Trigg, K., Viguie, V., Sudmant, A., Graves, C., Foley, A., Heidrich, O., Mirailles, J. M., Carter, J., Chang, L. H., Nador, C., Liseri, M., Chelleri, L., Orru, H., Orru, K., Aelenei, R., Bilska, A., … & Dawson, R. (2020). Integration of mitigation and adaptation in urban climate change action plans in Europe: a systematic assessment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 121, 109623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109623

Gudowsky, N., Sotoudeh, M., Capari, L., & Wilfing, H. (2017). Transdisciplinary forward-looking agenda setting for age-friendly, human centered cities. Futures, 90, 16–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2017.05.005

Han, B., Jin, X., Wang, J., Yin, Y., Liu, C., Sun, R., & Zhou, Y. (2022). Identifying inefficient urban land redevelopment potential for evidence-based decision making in China. Habitat International, 128, 102661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2022.102661

Harrison, A., Hall, M., Money, A., Mueller, J., Waterson, H., & Verma, A. (2021). Engaging older people to explore the age-friendliness of a rural community in Northern England: a photo-elicitation study. Journal of Aging Studies, 58, 100936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2021.100936

Hu, H.-Y., Chiu, S.-I., & Yen, T.-M. (2009). Modified IPA for order-winner criteria improvement: a MICMAC approach. Journal of Applied Sciences, 9(21), 3792–3803. https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2009.3792.3803

Iqbal, A., Anil, G., Bhandari, P., Crockett, E. D., Hanson, V. M., Pendse, B. S., Eckdahl, J. S., & Horn, J. L. (2022). A digitally capable mobile health clinic to improve rural health care in America: a pilot quality improvement study. Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Innovations, Quality & Outcomes, 6(5), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2022.08.002

Jelokhani-Niaraki, M., Hajiloo, F., & Samany, N. N. (2019). A web-based public participation GIS for assessing the age-friendliness of cities: a case study in Tehran, Iran. Cities, 95, 102471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102471

Joy, M. (2021). Neoliberal rationality and the age friendly cities and communities program: reflections on the Toronto case. Cities, 108, 102982. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102982

Khomenko, S., Nieuwenhuijsen, M., Ambròs, A., Wegener, S., & Mueller, N. (2020). Is a liveable city a healthy city? Health impacts of urban and transport planning in Vienna, Austria. Environmental Research, 183, 109238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.109238

Komasi, H., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., & Cavallaro, F. (2022). The COVID-19 pandemic and nature-based tourism, scenario planning approach (case study of nature-based tourism in Iran). Sustainability, 14(7), 3954. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14073954

Komasi, H., Zolfani, S. H., & Nemati, A. (2023). Evaluation of the social-cultural competitiveness of cities based on sustainable development approach. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 6(1), 583–602. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame06012023k

Kumar, H., Singh, M. K., & Gupta, M. P. (2019). A policy framework for city eligibility analysis: TISM and fuzzy MICMAC-weighted approach to select a city for smart city transformation in India. Land Use Policy, 82, 375–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.12.025

Liang, Y., Yi, P., Li, W., Liu, J., & Dong, Q. (2022). Evaluation of urban sustainability based on GO-SRA: case study of Ha-Chang and Mid-Southern Liaoning urban agglomerations in Northeastern China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 87, 104234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.104234

Liu, B., Yang, Z., Xue, B., Zhao, D., Sun, X., & Wang, W. (2022). Formalizing an integrated metric system measuring performance of urban sustainability: evidence from China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 79, 103702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103702

Lowe, M., Arundel, J., Hooper, P., Rozek, J., Higgs, C., Roberts, R., & Giles-Corti, B. (2020). Liveability aspirations and realities: implementation of urban policies designed to create healthy cities in Australia. Social Science & Medicine, 245, 112713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112713

Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J. (2020). Urban and transport planning pathways to carbon neutral, liveable and healthy cities; A review of the current evidence. Environment International, 140, 105661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.105661

Palutturi, S., Saleh, L. M., Rachmat, M., Malek, J. A., & Nam, E. W. (2021). Principles and strategies for aisles communities empowerment in creating Makassar healthy city, Indonesia. Gaceta Sanitaria, 35, 46–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2020.12.013

Pee, L. G., & Pan, S. L. (2022). Climate-intelligent cities and resilient urbanisation: challenges and opportunities for information research. International Journal of Information Management, 63, 102446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102446

Peng, S., & Maing, M. (2021). Influential factors of age-friendly neighborhood open space under high-density high-rise housing context in hot weather: a case study of public housing in Hong Kong. Cities, 115, 103231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103231

Ran, L., Tan, X., Xu, Y., Zhang, K., Chen, X., Zhang, Y., Li, M., & Zhang, Y. (2021). The application of subjective and objective method in the evaluation of healthy cities: a case study in Central China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 65, 102581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102581

Ravi, K. E., Fields, N. L., & Dabelko-Schoeny, H. (2021). Outdoor spaces and buildings, transportation, and environmental justice: a qualitative interpretive meta-synthesis of two age-friendly domains. Journal of Transport & Health, 20, 100977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2020.100977

Ren, Z., Fu, Y., Dong, Y., Zhang, P., & He, X. (2022). Rapid urbanization and climate change significantly contribute to worsening urban human thermal comfort: a national 183-city, 26-year study in China. Urban Climate, 43, 101154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101154

Ruza, J., Kim, J. I., Leung, I., Kam, C., & Ng, S. Y. M. (2015). Sustainable, age-friendly cities: an evaluation framework and case study application on Palo Alto, California. Sustainable Cities and Society, 14, 390–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2014.05.013

Şahin, T., Ocak, S., & Top, M. (2019). Analytic hierarchy process for hospital site selection. Health Policy and Technology, 8(1) 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2019.02.005

Senvar, O., Otay, I., & Bolturk, E. (2016). Hospital site selection via hesitant fuzzy TOPSIS. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49(12), 1140–1145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.07.656

Shi, J., Liu, X., & Feng, Z. (2023). Age-friendly cities and communities and cognitive health among Chinese older adults: evidence from the China health and retirement longitudinal studies. Cities, 132, 104072. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.104072

Steels, S. (2015). Key characteristics of age-friendly cities and communities: a review. Cities, 47, 45–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.02.004

Swanson, A. (2021). Physician investment in hospitals: specialization, selection, and quality in cardiac care. Journal of Health Economics, 80, 102519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2021.102519

Thang, L. L., Yui, Y., Wakabayashi, Y., & Miyazawa, H. (2023). Promoting age-friendly community of support and care in Japan’s aging neighborhood: the Nagayama model. Aging and Health Research, 3(1), 100111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahr.2022.100111

The World Bank. (2020). https://www.worldbank.org/

Valenzuela-Levi, N., Fuentes, L., Ramirez, M. I., Rodriguez, S., & Señoret, A. (2022). Urban sustainability and perceived satisfaction in neoliberal cities. Cities, 126, 103647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103647

Van Hoof, J., Marston, H. R., Kazak, J. K., & Buffel, T. (2021). Ten questions concerning age-friendly cities and communities and the built environment. Building and Environment, 199, 107922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.107922

Van Hoof, J., van den Hoven, R. F. M., Hess, M., van Staalduinen, W. H., Hulsebosch-Janssen, L. M. T., & Dikken, J. (2022). How older people experience the age-friendliness of the Hague: a quantitative study. Cities, 124, 103568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103568

Wang, L., Zhang, S., Tang, L., Lu, Y., Liu, Y., & Liu, Y. (2022a). Optimizing distribution of urban land on the basis of urban land use intensity at prefectural city scale in mainland China. Land Use Policy, 115, 106037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106037

Wang, M., & Zhou, T. (2022). Understanding the dynamic relationship between smart city implementation and urban sustainability. Technology in Society, 70, 102018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102018

Wang, S., Yung, E., Yu, Y., & Tsou, J. Y. (2022b). Right to the city and community facility planning for elderly: the case of urban renewal district in Hong Kong. Land Use Policy, 114, 105978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.105978

Wang, Y., Pei, R., Gu, X., Liu, B., & Liu, L. (2023). Has the healthy city pilot policy improved urban health development performance in China? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment. Sustainable Cities and Society, 88, 104268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.104268

World Health Organization. (2019). Age-friendly environments. https://www.who.int/teams/social-determinants-of-health/demographic-change-and-healthy-ageing/age-friendly-environments

Wu, S., Fu, Y., & Yang, Z. (2022). Housing condition, health status, and age-friendly housing modification in Europe: the last resort? Building and Environment, 215, 108956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.108956

Yan, D., Wu, S., Zhou, S., Li, F., & Wang, Y. (2021). Healthy city development for Chinese cities under dramatic imbalance: evidence from 258 cities. Sustainable Cities and Society, 74, 103157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103157

Zhang, X., Bayulken, B., Skitmore, M., Lu, W., & Huisingh, D. (2018). Sustainable urban transformations towards smarter, healthier cities: theories, agendas and pathways. Journal of Cleaner Production, 173, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.345