IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i2p837-d483264.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Commentary on Blue Zones ® : A Critical Review of Age-Friendly Environments in the 21st Century and Beyond

Author

Listed:
  • Hannah R. Marston

    (Health & Wellbeing Strategic Research Area, School of Health, Wellbeing & Social Care, The Open University, Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire MK7 6HH, UK)

  • Kelly Niles-Yokum

    (Department of Health and Public Management, College of Business & Public Management, University of La Verne, La Verne, CA 91750, USA)

  • Paula Alexandra Silva

    (Centre for Informatics and Systems (CISUC), Department of Informatics Engineering (DEI), University of Coimbra, 3030-290 Coimbra, Portugal)

Abstract

This paper explores the intersection of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) concepts of age-friendly communities and The Blue Zones ® checklists and how the potential of integrating the two frameworks for the development of a contemporary framework can address the current gaps in the literature as well as consider the inclusion of technology and environmental press. The commentary presented here sets out initial thoughts and explorations that have the potential to impact societies on a global scale and provides recommendations for a roadmap to consider new ways to think about the impact of health and wellbeing of older adults and their families. Additionally, this paper highlights both the strengths and the weaknesses of the aforementioned checklists and frameworks by examining the literature including the WHO age-friendly framework, the smart age-friendly ecosystem (SAfE) framework and the Blue Zones ® checklists. We argue that gaps exist in the current literature and take a critical approach as a way to be inclusive of technology and the environments in which older adults live. This commentary contributes to the fields of gerontology, gerontechnology, anthropology, and geography, because we are proposing a roadmap which sets out the need for future work which requires multi- and interdisciplinary research to be conducted for the respective checklists to evolve.

Suggested Citation

  • Hannah R. Marston & Kelly Niles-Yokum & Paula Alexandra Silva, 2021. "A Commentary on Blue Zones ® : A Critical Review of Age-Friendly Environments in the 21st Century and Beyond," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-33, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:2:p:837-:d:483264
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/2/837/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/2/837/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hannah Ramsden Marston & Linda Shore & P.J. White, 2020. "How does a (Smart) Age-Friendly Ecosystem Look in a Post-Pandemic Society?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-43, November.
    2. Graziella Caselli & Rosa Maria Lipsi, 2006. "Survival differences among the oldest old in Sardinia: who, what, where, and why?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 14(13), pages 267-294.
    3. Joost Van Hoof & Jan K. Kazak & Jolanta M. Perek-Białas & Sebastiaan T. M. Peek, 2018. "The Challenges of Urban Ageing: Making Cities Age-Friendly in Europe," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Hannah R. Marston & Joost van Hoof, 2019. "“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," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-35, September.
    5. Hannah R. Marston, 2019. "Millennials and ICT—Findings from the Technology 4 Young Adults (T4YA) Project: An Exploratory Study," Societies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Jennifer Liddle & Nicole Pitcher & Kyle Montague & Barbara Hanratty & Holly Standing & Thomas Scharf, 2020. "Connecting at Local Level: Exploring Opportunities for Future Design of Technology to Support Social Connections in Age-friendly Communities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-25, July.
    7. Eszter Hargittai & Steven Shafer, 2006. "Differences in Actual and Perceived Online Skills: The Role of Gender," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 87(2), pages 432-448, June.
    8. Melanie Davern & Rachel Winterton & Kathleen Brasher & Geoff Woolcock, 2020. "How Can the Lived Environment Support Healthy Ageing? A Spatial Indicators Framework for the Assessment of Age-Friendly Communities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-20, October.
    9. Arlind Reuter & Jennifer Liddle & Thomas Scharf, 2020. "Digitalising the Age-Friendly City: Insights from Participatory Action Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-18, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jianbin Wu & Linghao Zhang & Xiangfang Ren, 2022. "Incorporating the Co-Creation Method into Social Innovation Design to Promote Intergenerational Integration: A Case Study of a Public Square," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Jo-Ying Huang & Hui-Chuan Hsu & Yu-Ling Hsiao & Feng-Yin Chen & Shu-Ying Lo & Tzu-Yun Chou & Megan F. Liu, 2022. "Developing Indicators of Age-Friendliness in Taiwanese Communities through a Modified Delphi Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-17, November.
    3. Peyman Najafi & Masi Mohammadi, 2024. "Redefining Age-Friendly Neighbourhoods: Translating the Promises of Blue Zones for Contemporary Urban Environments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(3), pages 1-26, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joost van Hoof & Hannah R. Marston, 2021. "Age-Friendly Cities and Communities: State of the Art and Future Perspectives," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-13, February.
    2. Jianbo Han & Edwin H. W. Chan & Esther H. K. Yung & Queena K. Qian & Patrick T. I. Lam, 2022. "A Policy Framework for Producing Age-Friendly Communities from the Perspective of Production of Space," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-23, February.
    3. Chunmei Zhang & Jun Yang, 2023. "Evaluation of the Quality of the Age-Friendly Environment in Liaoning Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-13, November.
    4. Belinda Paulovich & Sonja Pedell & Erica Tandori & Jeanie Beh, 2022. "Weaving Social Connectivity into the Community Fabric: Exploring Older Adult’s Relationships to Technology and Place," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-13, July.
    5. Ivis García, 2024. "Understanding the Housing Preferences of Older Adults: Insights from a Study on Micro-Housing in Salt Lake City, U.S," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, February.
    6. Hannah Ramsden Marston & Linda Shore & P.J. White, 2020. "How does a (Smart) Age-Friendly Ecosystem Look in a Post-Pandemic Society?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-43, November.
    7. Joost van Hoof & Jeroen Dikken & Willeke H. van Staalduinen & Suzan van der Pas & Rudy F. M. van den Hoven & Loes M. T. Hulsebosch-Janssen, 2022. "Towards a Better Understanding of the Sense of Safety and Security of Community-Dwelling Older Adults. The Case of the Age-Friendly City of The Hague," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-20, March.
    8. Sariyamon Tiraphat & Doungjai Buntup & Murallitharan Munisamy & Thang Huu Nguyen & Motoyuki Yuasa & Myo Nyein Aung & Aung Hpone Myint, 2020. "Age-Friendly Environments in ASEAN Plus Three: Case Studies from Japan, Malaysia, Myanmar, Vietnam, and Thailand," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-15, June.
    9. Tine Buffel & Sophie Yarker & Chris Phillipson & Luciana Lang & Camilla Lewis & Patty Doran & Mhorag Goff, 2023. "Locked down by inequality: Older people and the COVID-19 pandemic," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 60(8), pages 1465-1482, June.
    10. Loredana Ivan & Dorin Beu & Joost van Hoof, 2020. "Smart and Age-Friendly Cities in Romania: An Overview of Public Policy and Practice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-25, July.
    11. Jeroen Dikken & Rudy F.M. van den Hoven & Willeke H. van Staalduinen & Loes M.T. Hulsebosch-Janssen & Joost van Hoof, 2020. "How Older People Experience the Age-Friendliness of Their City: Development of the Age-Friendly Cities and Communities Questionnaire," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-24, September.
    12. Sabina Baraković & Jasmina Baraković Husić & Joost van Hoof & Ondrej Krejcar & Petra Maresova & Zahid Akhtar & Francisco Jose Melero, 2020. "Quality of Life Framework for Personalised Ageing: A Systematic Review of ICT Solutions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-20, April.
    13. Shannon Freeman & Hannah R. Marston & Janna Olynick & Charles Musselwhite & Cory Kulczycki & Rebecca Genoe & Beibei Xiong, 2020. "Intergenerational Effects on the Impacts of Technology Use in Later Life: Insights from an International, Multi-Site Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-14, August.
    14. Paola Monachesi, 2023. "Age Friendly Characteristics and Sense of Community of an Italian City: The Case of Macerata," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(10), pages 1-15, May.
    15. Eugene Seo & Sanghee Lee, 2023. "Implications of Aging in Place in the Context of the Residential Environment: Bibliometric Analysis and Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(20), pages 1-30, October.
    16. Katja M. Rusinovic & Marianne E. van Bochove & Suzanna Koops-Boelaars & Zsuzsu K.C.T. Tavy & Joost van Hoof, 2020. "Towards Responsible Rebellion: How Founders Deal with Challenges in Establishing and Governing Innovative Living Arrangements for Older People," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-15, August.
    17. Zhiyu Feng & Longfei Li & Jingchun Zhang & Xinqun Feng, 2024. "Towards a Communication Ecology in the Life of Rural Senior Citizens: How Rural Public Spaces Influence Community Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-23, May.
    18. Galperin, Hernan & Arcidiacono, Malena, 2021. "Employment and the gender digital divide in Latin America: A decomposition analysis," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7).
    19. Mingyu Sun & Leizi Min & Na Xu & Lei Huang & Xuemei Li, 2021. "The Effect of Exercise Intervention on Reducing the Fall Risk in Older Adults: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-14, November.
    20. Katrien Luijkx & Leonieke van Boekel & Meriam Janssen & Marjolein Verbiest & Annerieke Stoop, 2020. "The Academic Collaborative Center Older Adults: A Description of Co-Creation between Science, Care Practice and Education with the Aim to Contribute to Person-Centered Care for Older Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-14, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:2:p:837-:d:483264. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.