‘The older adult’ doesn’t exist: using values to differentiate older adults in the Dutch housing market

Abstract

To date most prognoses of older adults in the housing market have been based on average housing preferences and average housing market behaviour of all persons in a certain age cohort. Due to socialcultural and social-economic dynamics, the relationship between age and housing is expected to change for successive cohorts. This study sets out to improve housing preferences estimates by recognizing the growing differentiation among older adults. This heterogeneity is analysed by differentiating older adults on their lifestyles (operationalized as values), using latent class analysis as a clustering technique. These analyses result in older adults being classified into five segments on the basis of their viewpoints, motivations and attitude. Next, for each lifestyle segment a separate discrete choice model is estimated, offering insight in the relative importance that these segments give to various housing attributes. The findings demonstrate advantages over a traditional, single model approach and can be helpful in formulating contemporary housing policy.

The Potential of Small, Low- Carbon, Zero- Energy Housing

“…Within the broader context of housing market supply, this questions the assumption that there is a demand from the elderly population group for smaller, more accessible dwellings that tailor to their evolving needs. Also, with the majority of the senior respondents not willing to move, this corroborates the tendency of 'ageing in place ' (de Jong et al, 2018). Last but not least, concerning income, respondents with low to middle incomes demonstrated to assign more similar values to housing preferences with most differences recorded with the high income group.…”

“…On the one hand, literature around the potential impact of age raises contradictory expectations from the housing preferences of elderly households. Some argue that age affects the importance assigned to functional housing attributes and that elderly households prefer to downsize for more accessibility within and around the dwelling and lower maintenance requirements (Andersson, Abramsson, & Malmberg, 2019;de Jong, van Hattum, Rouwendal, & Brouwer, 2018;Hasu, 2018). Others emphasize the 'ageing in place' trend that describes elderly households' unwillingness to move.…”

“…Others emphasize the 'ageing in place' trend that describes elderly households' unwillingness to move. This entails a stronger preference for the current dwelling as a result of the mismatch between the price of the family home and that of a smaller dwelling, the instability and uncertainty within the rental market and/or the cultural norm of passing on family wealth to offspring de Jong et al, 2018).…”

Best living concepts for elderly homeowners: combining a stated choice experiment with architectural design

“…a research question about the impact of the individual's personality and socio-economics on the preferences. De Jong et al (2018) provides some insights on this subject and suggests that there exist divergent types of housing preferences among the seniors. Another relevant research question that could be studied when more data are available, concerns existence of regional differences in the housing priorities of the elderly.…”

“…Using surveys and interviews among the elderly, various papers document willingness to move to smaller houses and rented dwellings (Abramsson and Andersson 2016), a strong desire to age in place (Costa-Font et al 2009; Kramer and Pfaffenbach 2016), a pervasive desire for community and social connection (Bohle et al 2014) and importance of the built environment quality (Feng et al 2018;Liu et al 2017). In a stated choice experiment among Dutch seniors, De Jong et al (2018) find existence of several groups with clearly different preferences. We are not aware of any other stated choice experiments with the elderly group, although there are quite a few such experiments with other target groups (see Verhetsel et al 2017, for housing preferences of students; Del Mistro and Hensher 2009, for slum inhabitants in developing countries; Ibraimovic and Masiero 2014, Ibraimovic and Hess 2017, for ethnic minorities; Tillema et al 2010, for car commuters, etc.).…”