Discusión y conclusiones

The theories and research concerned with environmental gerontology (EG) have been applied at various scales within the field. Micro level aspects of environmental gerontology include home modifications, housing design and institutional environments, while the macro level elements include ‘age-friendly’ neighbourhoods, communities and even countries. Research on residential environments has enhanced the independence and well-being of older adults (Kendig, 2003). While a central focus of environmental gerontology has included the relationship of housing arrangements, home modifications and institutional living

environments to ageing, it is also concerned with the macro level role of neighbourhoods and community settings as they present both opportunities and constraints to older adults. In

2003, Kendig stated that there is an “astonishing paucity” of gerontological research on macro environments (p. 612). A shift appears to be occurring, however, with an increase in interest in person environment interaction at the macro level in ageing research.

Recognition of the macro level environmental influence on ageing and health is reflected in a current global initiative coordinated by the World Health Organization. The Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion, developed by the World Health Organization in 1986, identified the importance of environments supportive of health, stating that the “inextricable links between people and their environments are the basis for a socio-ecological approach to health” (Maller et al., 2002, p. 112). Several years later the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing (2002a), endorsed by the United Nations, identified age-friendly cities as one of their three priority directions. The World Health Organization Age-friendly Cities Project, implemented in 2006, aims to make cities more age-friendly by ensuring that urban environments support and enable active ageing (World Health Organization, 2007). Environmental gerontology is providing a strong theoretical and empirical foundation for advancing healthy ageing through the development of age-friendly cities.

Person-environment theories on ageing have built on ecological models that study

interrelationships between organisms and their environment (Wahl & Weisman, 2003). The historical roots of environmental gerontology have influenced the view that the ageing process is significantly influenced by the environment. Wahl and Weisman (2003) suggest that the “explicit consideration of environmental variables having an impact on the course and outcome of human ageing was an important step in the historical development of

gerontology” (p. 617). Other important influences include the growth of the new field of social gerontology in the 1940’s, which emphasized a social science perspective, the prominent role of learning theories in the 1950’s and 1960’s, which recognized the

importance of the environment throughout life. A further influence includes Lewin’s writing from the 1940’s and 1950’s, and particularly Lewin’s Field Theory which argued that

behaviour is generally a function of the interaction between people and their environment.

The emergence of environmental psychology during the 1960’s and 1970’s provided another influence on the development of environmental gerontology (Wahl & Weisman, 2003).

The social ecological perspective highlights the relationships among environmental, social and individual factors. The influence of multiple aspects of the social and physical

environment, along with personal factors, provides a perspective for ageing research.

Research into the influence of the environment on healthy ageing, in which health is described as encompassing physical and emotional well-being and social cohesion, reflects the social

ecological perspective (Stokols, 1992). Stokols (1992) describes several assumptions about human health and healthy environments that are central to the social ecological perspective.

The healthfulness of a situation and the well-being of individuals are assumed to be influenced by various aspects of the physical environment, the social environment, and a variety of personal attributes. “Efforts to promote human well-being should be based on an understanding of the dynamic interplay among diverse environmental and personal factors”

(Stokols, 1992, p. 7). Analysis of health and health promotion should acknowledge the multidimensional and complex nature of human environments. These can be described in terms of physical and social components, objective (actual) or subjective (perceived) qualities, and as specific independent attributes or the blending of several features, for example, the person-environment fit. Concepts derived from systems theory, which is the dynamic relationship between people and their environments, are incorporated into the social ecological perspective.

Thus, people-environment transactions are characterized by cycles of mutual

influence, whereby the physical and social features of settings directly influence their occupants’ health and, concurrently, the participants in settings modify the

healthfulness of their surroundings through their individual and collective actions (Stokols, 1992, p. 8).

The social ecological perspective emphasizes the interactions among physical-material and social-symbolic features of environments as they affect the emotional, physical, and social well-being of individuals.

A further contribution to the field of environmental gerontology includes Lawton &

Nahemow’s ecological model of ageing (1973). This model, also known as the

‘environmental press paradigm’, has influenced research and policy in the field of

environmental gerontology. This model explains the relationship between the demands of the environment, referred to as ‘press’, and the older adult’s ability to cope with these demands, referred to as ‘competence’. Environmental ‘press’ describes the supportive or difficult aspects of the environment. ‘Competence’ refers to the capabilities of the individual, including sensory ability, motor skills, and cognitive functioning, and is measured from low to high. According to Lawton’s model, increasing levels of ‘press’ leads an older adult to respond in two potential ways: (1) Alter his or her competence; or, (2) alter the demands from the social or physical environment to compensate for lower levels of competence.

More recently, three basic functions of the environment related to ageing have been described as maintenance, stimulation, and support. The environmental function of maintenance is concerned with the “important role of constancy and predictability of the environment” (Wahl

& Weisman, 2003, p. 620). This aspect of environmental experience is concerned with the role of place in the maintenance of self and continuity in later life. Gerontological research concerned with the meaning of home to older adults is often related to the environmental function of maintenance. The second function of the environment, referred to as stimulation, describes the “departure from the usual in the environment, the appearance of a novel array of stimuli and their effects on behaviour” (Wahl & Weisman, 2003, p. 620). The stimulating role of the environment can contribute to new social or other leisure behaviours. The support function of the environment can typically be seen in the “environment’s potential to compensate for reduced or lost competencies” (Wahl & Weisman, 2003, p. 620). The accessibility of the environment is a core aspect of the support function.

While the role of the physical environment in ageing has been emphasized in environmental gerontology, it has also widely acknowledged that the “physical, social, organizational, and cultural environment are deeply interwoven in reality” (Wahl & Weisman, 2003, p. 617).

Gerontologists have emphasized the need to address both the physical and social environment in environmental research (Baltes & Carstenson, 1996; Lawton, 1999; Wahl & Lang, 2003).

Inclusion of a wide range of environmental elements has led to a broad and diverse focus in ageing research. The diverse nature of environmental gerontology is reflected in the

theoretical approaches, research strategies, application of findings and value orientations. In a review of research in environmental gerontology, Wahl & Weisman (2003), suggest that pluralism is among “the most essential characteristics of EG” (p. 617). Kendig (2003) agrees that this plurality does not necessarily hinder theoretical development, and may contribute to creating conceptual bridges across disciplines.

For a field with a plurality of concepts and applications, there are some advantages in allowing a thousand flowers to blossom on the edges of orthodoxies (Kendig, 2003, p. 612).

This plurality of theoretical perspectives on ageing is also reflected in approaches to research.

Research in environmental gerontology has applied three primary approaches: (1) a focus on an evaluation of the environment as a designed ‘product’ with the gathered information guiding future environmental design; (2) a focus on environmental process, such as environmental cognition, independent of the places where they occur; and (3) a place orientation where behaviour and psychological processes are studied as they relate to particular places (Wahl & Weisman, 2003). Wahl and Weisman (2003) rate the place orientation as most relevant to environmental gerontology, stating that there “appears to be increasing interest, within EG as well as in environmental psychology, in viewing ‘place’ as

the key integrative construct in conceptualizing both the environments occupied by older persons and older persons’ interactions with these environments” (p. 625). Place research concerned with person-environment interaction emphasizes the meanings and emotional ties associated with physical environments. Researchers in environmental gerontology employing a place orientation often apply qualitative methodologies to explore the meaning, affective experience, and symbolic representations of person-environment interaction. The concept of

‘place’ provides a valuable perspective in research on ageing, described in the following section.