How does a (Smart) Age-Friendly Ecosystem Look in a Post-Pandemic Society?

Abstract

COVID-19 has impacted not only the health of citizens, but also the various factors that make up our society, living environments, and ecosystems. This pandemic has shown that future living will need to be agile and flexible to adapt to the various changes in needs of societal populations. Digital technology has played an integral role during COVID-19, assisting various sectors of the community, and demonstrating that smart cities can provide opportunities to respond to many future societal challenges. In the decades ahead, the rise in aging populations will be one of these challenges, and one in which the needs and requirements between demographic cohorts will vary greatly. Although we need to create future smart age-friendly ecosystems to meet these needs, technology still does not feature in the WHO eight domains of an age-friendly city. This paper extends upon Marston and van Hoof’s ‘Smart Age-friendly Ecosystem’ (SAfE) framework, and explores how digital technology, design hacking, and research approaches can be used to understand a smart age-friendly ecosystem in a post-pandemic society. By exploring a series of case studies and using real-life scenarios from the standpoint of COVID-19, we propose the ‘Concept of Age-friendly Smart Ecologies (CASE)’ framework. We provide an insight into a myriad of contemporary multi-disciplinary research, which are capable to initiate discussions and bring various actors together with a positive impact on future planning and development of age-friendly ecosystems. The strengths and limitations of this framework are outlined, with advantages evident in the opportunity for towns, regions/counties, provinces, and states to take an agile approach and work together in adopting and implement improvements for the greater benefits of residents and citizens.

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

“…While installing the Internet may also be a contentious debate especially if a person is on a low income, this too continues the debate of the digital divide [ 75 ]. However, technology and IoT devices cannot be ignored because this area of society has grown phenomenally since the turn of the 21st century and continues to develop and become smarter [ 48 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 ].…”

“…Worldwide, we observe the growing pervasiveness of digital technologies and services in people’s everyday living and ecosystems. Yet, while the presence of technology is widely acknowledged [ 48 , 68 ], both the Blue Zones ® checklists [ 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 ] and the WHO age-friendly cities framework [ 3 ] devote little attention to this important dimension of societies’ current way of living, respective ecosystems, or consideration for future societies. For example, neither the WHO age-friendly cities framework [ 3 ] nor the Blue Zones ® checklists [ 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 ] have undergone recent iterations and revisions to reflect the changing world.…”

“…As a starting point, we propose that the AFCC survey could be complemented by qualitative data collections such as diaries, fieldtrips, first-hand accounts, interviews, and observations, taking an action research approach [ 77 ] to ensure a positive impact upon the respective regions as noted by Marston and colleagues [ 68 ]. However, it is possible that the AFCC survey [ 78 ] may have to be adapted to accommodate the differing facets of the Blue Zones ® regions.…”

“…Similarly, this type of technology can also be used for lighting (Item 4) on the Bedroom checklist, and via the various products available on the market, dimming lights can be set for various times of the evening and of the day. For more information relating to IoT devices implemented into real world settings, see Marston and van Hoof [ 48 ], and Marston et al [ 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 ]. Item 10, “Install double paned windows in the bedroom”, assumes users of this checklist own their own home.…”

“…To date there has been a wealth of research surrounding age-friendly cities and further reading can be found via the works of Marston and van Hoof [ 48 ], Marston and Samuels [ 67 ], Marston et al [ 68 ], Buffel et al [ 7 , 10 , 72 ], and van Hoof et al [ 2 , 6 , 73 ], which provide an extensive overview of literature surrounding age-friendly research.…”