Neighbourhoods are extremely important to older people, as this is where a great deal of their everyday life is spent and where social interaction happens. This is particularly the case in deprived neighbourhoods, where people with limited economic resources or physical limitations find it challenging to venture outside the neighbourhood. A growing body of research suggests studying age-friendly neighbourhoods from a bottom-up approach which takes the diversity of the age group into account. This paper aims to investigate how the go-along method can serve to co-construct knowledge about age-friendly neighbourhood design in a deprived neighbourhood of Copenhagen with a diverse group of older people. Sixteen go-along interviews were carried out with older people aged 59–90. The participants took on an expert role in their own everyday life and guided the researcher through the physical and social environments of their neighbourhood. The go-alongs were documented with a GoPro camera. The data was analysed using situational analysis and was grouped into thematic categories. Our findings conclude that social interaction is the overall motivator for going outdoors and that dimensions of pavements, the seating hierarchy, the purpose of lawns, sheltered spaces and ‘unauthorised’ places are all neighbourhood design elements that matter in this regard. The findings suggest to consider age-friendly details as the starting point for social interaction, to target the appropriate kind of age-friendly programs and to enhance empowerment through physical spaces. The go-along interview as a research method holds the potential for empowering older people and appreciating their diversity.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
The data sets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to ethical regulations from the Danish Data Protection Agency, but they are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Alidoust, S., Bosman, C., & Holden, G. (2018). Talking while walking: An investigation of perceived neighbourhood walkability and its implications for the social life of older people. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 33, 133–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-017-9558-1.
Brookfield, K., Ward Thompson, C., & Scott, I. (2017). The uncommon impact of common environmental details on walking in older adults. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14020190.
Buffel, T. (2018a). Older coresearchers exploring age-friendly communities: An “insider” perspective on the benefits and challenges of peer-research. The Gerontologist,59, 538–548.
Buffel, T. (2018b). Social research and co-production with older people: Developing age-friendly communities. Journal of Aging Studies,44, 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2018.01.012.
Buffel, T., De Donder, L., Phillipson, C., De Witte, N., Dury, S., & VertÈ, D. (2014). Place attachment among older adults living in four communities in Flanders, Belgium. Housing Studies,29(6), 800–822.
Buffel, T., Handler, S., & Phillipson, C. (2018a). Age-friendly cities and communities: A global perspective. Bristol: Policy Press.
Buffel, T., Handler, S., & Phillipson, C. (2018b). Introduction. In T. Buffel, S. Handler, & C. Phillipson (Eds.), Age-friendly cities and communities: A global perspective (pp. 3–12). Bristol: Policy Press.
Buffel, T., & Manchester Institute for Collaborative Research on, A., Age, U.K., Age-Friendly, M., University of, M., Office for Social, R. (2015). Researching age-friendly communities: Stories from older people as co-investigators. Manchester: University of Manchester Library.
Buffel, T., Phillipson, C., & Scharf, T. (2012). Ageing in urban environments: Developing age-friendly cities. Critical Social Policy Critical Social Policy,32(4), 597–617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018311430457.
Buscher, M., & Urry, J. (2009). Mobile methods and the empirical. European Journal of Social Theory,12(1), 99–116.
Cappelen, J., Kern-Hansen, C., & Danmarks Meteorologiske, I. (2012). Denmark: DMI historical climate data collection 1768–2011: With Danish abstracts.
Carlson, J. A., Sallis, J. F., Conway, T. L., Saelens, B. E., Frank, L. D., Kerr, J., et al. (2012). Interactions between psychosocial and built environment factors in explaining older adults’ physical activity. YPMED Preventive Medicine,54(1), 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.10.004.
Carpiano, R. M. (2009). Come take a walk with me: The “go-along” interview as a novel method for studying the implications of place for health and well-being. Health & Place,15(1), 263–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2008.05.003.
Clarke, A. E. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985833.
Curl A., Tilley S., Van Cauwenberg J. (2018). Walking with older adults as a geographical method. In A. Curl & C. Musselwhite (Eds.), Geographies of Transport and Ageing. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76360-6_8.
Day, R. (2008). Local environments and older people’s health: Dimensions from a comparative qualitative study in Scotland. Health & Place,14(2), 299–312.
De Donder, L., Verté, D., & Messelis, E. (2005). Fear of crime and elderly people: Key factors that determine fear of crime among elderly people in West Flanders. Ageing International,30(4), 363–376.
De Leon, J. P., & Cohen, J. H. (2005). Object and walking probes in ethnographic interviewing. Field Methods,17(2), 200–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05274733.
de Vries, S., Verheij, R. A., Groenewegen, P. P., & Spreeuwenberg, P. (2003). Natural environments-healthy environments? An exploratory analysis of the relationship between greenspace and health. Environment & Planning A,35, 1717–1732. https://doi.org/10.1068/a35111.
Evans, J., & Jones, P. (2011). The walking interview: Methodology, mobility and place. JAPG Applied Geography,31(2), 849–858.
Finlay, J. M., & Bowman, J. A. (2017). Geographies on the move: A practical and theoretical approach to the mobile interview. The Professional Geographer,69(2), 263–274.
Forsman, A., Herberts, C., Nyqvist, F., Wahlbeck, K., & Schierenbeck, I. (2013). Understanding the role of social capital for mental wellbeing among older adults. Ageing & Society,33(05), 804–825. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X12000256.
Gardner, P. J. (2011). Natural neighborhood networks important social networks in the lives of older adults aging in place. AGISTU Journal of Aging Studies,25(3), 263–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2011.03.007.
Gilroy, R. (2008). Places that support human flourishing: Lessons from later life. Planning Theory & Practice,9(2), 145–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649350802041548.
Grahn, P., & Stigsdotter, U. A. (2003). Landscape planning and stress. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening,2(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1078/1618-8667-00019.
Gray, A. (2009). The social capital of older people. Ageing & Society,29(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X08007617.
Groenewegen, P. P., van den Berg, A. E., de Vries, S., & Verheij, R. A. (2006). Vitamin G: Effects of green space on health, well-being, and social safety. BMC Public Health,6, 149. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-6-149.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great american cities. New York: Random House.
Kusenbach, M. (2003). Street phenomenology: The go-along as ethnographic research tool. Ethnography,4(3), 455–485. https://doi.org/10.1177/146613810343007.
Lager, D., Van Hoven, B., & Huigen, P. P. P. (2015). Understanding older adults social capital in place: Obstacles to and opportunities for social contacts in the neighbourhood. Geoforum,59, 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.12.009.
Lui, C. W., Everingham, J. A., Warburton, J., Cuthill, M., & Bartlett, H. (2009). What makes a community age-friendly: A review of international literature. Australasian Journal on Ageing,28(3), 116–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6612.2009.00355.x.
Miaux, S., Drouin, L., Morency, P., Paquin, S., Gauvin, L., & Jacquemin, C. (2010). Making the narrative walk-in-real-time methodology relevant for public health intervention: Towards an integrative approach. Health & Place,16(6), 1166–1173.
Miller, M., & Siggins, I. (2003). A framework for intergenerational planning. Foresight,5(6), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680310698801.
Moulaert, T., & Garon, S. (2018). Age-friendly cities and communities in international comparison political lessons, scientific avenues, and democratic issues. New York: Springer.
Pawlowski, C. S., Winge, L., Carroll, S. Schmidt, T., Wagner, A. M., Nørtoft K. P. J. et al. (2017). Move the neighbourhood: Study design of a community-based participatory public open space intervention in a Danish deprived neighbourhood to promote active living. BMC Public Health, 17(1), 481. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4423-4.
Phillipson, C., Bernard, M., Phillips, J., & Ogg, J. (2001). The family and community life of older people: Social networks and social support in three urban areas. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203459058.
Pink, S. (2007). Walking with video. Visual Studies,22(3), 240–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/14725860701657142.
Rosemary, L., Denise, T., & Kelly, H. (2015). Co-research with older people: Perspectives on impact. Qualitative Social Work,14(1), 18–35.
Sanders, E., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign,4(1), 5–18.
Scharf, T., Phillipson, C., Smith, A. E., Kingston, P. (2002). Growing older in socially deprived areas: Social exclusion in later life. Help the Aged.
Scharf, T., Phillipson, C., & Smith, A. (2003). Older people’s perceptions of the neighbourhood: Evidence from socially deprived urban areas. Sociological Review Online,8, 1–12.
Smith, A. E. (2009). Ageing in urban neighbourhoods: Place attachment and social exclusion. Bristol: Policy Press.
Stender, M., Hausenberg, Spektrum, A., Danmark, Ministeriet for By, B.o.L. (2012). Byen som dagligstue? byfornyelse med plads til socialt udsatte. Ministeriet for By, Bolig og Landdistrikter, [Kbh.].
Områdefornyelse Sydhavnen (2014). Kvarterplan områdefornyelse Sydhavnen. Copenhagen: Københavns Kommune.
Thomése, F., Buffel, T., & Phillipson, C. (2018). Neighbourhood change, social inequalities and age-friendly communities. In T. Buffel, S. Handler, & C. Phillipson (Eds.), Age-friendly cities and communities: A global perspective (pp. 33–50). Bristol: Policy Press.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2018). World urbanization prospects: The 2018 revision.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, P. D. (2015). World population ageing, 2015 highlights.
Victor, C. R., Scambler, S. J., & Bond, J. (2009). The social world of older people. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Visser Sleeswijk, F., Stappers, P. J., van der Lugt, R., & Sanders, E. B. N. (2005). Contextmapping: Experiences from practice. CoDesign,1(2), 119–149.
Völker, B., Flap, H., & Lindenberg, S. (2007). When are neighbourhoods communities? Community in Dutch neighbourhoods. European Sociological Review,23(1), 99–114.
Walker, R. B., & Hiller, J. E. (2007). Places and health: A qualitative study to explore how older women living alone perceive the social and physical dimensions of their neighbourhoods. SSM Social Science & Medicine,65(6), 1154–1165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.04.031.
White, S., & Hammond, M. (2018). From representation to active ageing in a Manchester neighbourhood: Designing the age-friendly city. In T. Buffel, S. Handler, & C. Phillipson (Eds.), Age-friendly cities and communities: A global perspective (pp. 193–210). Bristol: Policy Press.
Williamson, Z. (2016). Intergenerational design in the West. Australasian Parks and Leisure,19(1), 20–22.
Wood, L., Giles-Corti, B., & Bulsara, M. (2012). Streets apart: Does social capital vary with neighbourhood design? Urban Studies Research Urban Studies Research,2012(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/507503.
Woods, D., & Fassnacht, C. (2016). Transana v3.02.
World Health Organization. (2007). Global age-friendly cities: A guide. Geneva: World Health Organization.
We thank the two housing associations for their enthusiastic collaboration as well as the participants for sharing their experiences. We thank the (APEN/Move the Neighbourhood) research team that have collaborated on the overall research setup and provided insight and expertise that greatly assisted the project: (Rene Kural & Kamilla Nørtoft, The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, Schools of Architecture, Design and Conservation, Bettina Lamm, Anne Wagner & Laura Winge, University of Copenhagen and Charlotte Skau Pawlowski & Tanja Schmidt, University of Southern Denmark. This research was supported by Områdefornyelsen Sydhavnen, The Danish Foundation for Culture and Sports Facilities, The Velux Foundations, and TrygFonden.).
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Carroll, S., Jespersen, A.P. & Troelsen, J. Going along with older people: exploring age-friendly neighbourhood design through their lens. J Hous and the Built Environ 35, 555–572 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-019-09700-z
- Age-friendly neighbourhoods
- Go-along interviews
- Neighbourhood design
- Older people
- Social interaction