Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intergenerational Communities as Healthy Places for Meaningful Engagement and Interaction

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Families, Intergenerationality, and Peer Group Relations

Part of the book series: Geographies of Children and Young People ((GCYP,volume 5))

Abstract

Shifting demographics, along with changing family structures and household dynamics worldwide, make it increasingly important to reflect on successful practices that provide opportunities for interaction, engagement, and support across more than two generations. This chapter, therefore, explores three key areas of research: (1) elder-friendly communities, (2) child-friendly communities, and (3) healthy communities, to identify how they align and intersect to form foundations for intergenerational approaches. Instead of a limited view that focuses on the amelioration of age-specific problems, research prioritizes shared principles that promote the development of intergenerational community assets. In addition, there is encouraging evidence suggesting the allocation of policy resources – financial, physical, human – is not necessarily a zero-sum game because intergenerational approaches can produce synergistic outcomes. The chapter concludes with recommendations for additional research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • AARP. (2005). Beyond 50.05: A report to the nation on livable communities creating successful environments for aging. Retrieved from www.aarp.org

  • AFP. (2014). Dutch students can live in nursing homes rent-free (as long as they keep the residents company). TheJournal.ie. Retrieved from http://www.thejournal.ie/help-the-aged-1814698-Dec2014/

  • Alley, D., Liebig, P., Pynoos, J, Banerjee, T, & Choi, I.H. (2007). Creating elder-friendly communities. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 49, 1–2, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1300/JO83v49n0101

  • Antonovsky, A. (1996). The salutogenic model as a theory to guide health promotion. Health Promotion International, 11(1), 11–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attar-Schwartz, S., Tan, J. P., & Buchanan, A. (2009). Adolescents’ perspectives on relationships with grandparents: The contribution of adolescent, grandparent, and parent–grandparent relationship variables. Children and Youth Services Review, 31, 1057–1066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Au, A., et al. (2015). Proactive aging and intergenerational mentoring program to promote the well-being of older adults: Pilot studies. Clinical Gerontology, 38(3), 203–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayalon, L., Kaniel, M., & Rosenberg, L. (2008). Social workers’ perspectives on care arrangements between vulnerable elders and foreign home care workers: Lessons from Israeli/Filipino caregiving arrangements. Home Health CareServices Quarterly, 27(2), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621420802022563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barken, J. (2014). In Israel, seniors and foreign caretakers develop symbiotic relationships. JNS.org New Service. Downloaded at http://www.jns.org/latest-articles/2014/6/3/in-israel-seniors-and-foreign-caretakers-develop-symbiotic-relationships#.VbrmfDooPal=

  • Bengtson, V. (2001). Beyond the nuclear family: The increasing importance of multigenerational bonds. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beth Johnson Foundation. (2001, April). Building better communities for all ages between the generations. Centre for Intergenerational Practice. Retrieved from http://www.centreforip.org.uk/about-us/what-is-ip

  • Biggs, S., & Carr, C. (2015). Age- and child-friendly cities and the promise of intergenerational space. Journal of Social Work Practice, 29(1), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2014.993942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blieszner, R., & Artale, L. (2001). Benefits of intergenerational service-learning to human services majors. Educational Gerontology, 27(1), 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blue Moon. (2006). Sustainable communities for all ages: A viable futures toolkit. Charlottesville: Blue Moon Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boduroglu, A., Yoon, C., Luo, T., & Park, D. (2006). Age-related stereotypes: A comparison of American and Chinese cultures. The Gerontologist, 52(5), 324–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boermel, A. (2006). “No wasting” and “empty nesters”: “Old age” in Beijing. Oxford Development Studies, 34(4), 401–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C., & Henkin, N. (2014). Praxis: Building communities for all ages: Lessons learned from an intergenerational community-building initiative. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 24, 63–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buffel, T., Phillipson, C., & Scharf, T. (2012). Ageing in urban environments: Developing ‘age-friendly’ cities. Critical Social Policy, 32(4), 597–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buffel, T., De Backer, F., Peeters, J., Phillipson, C., Reina, V., Kindekens, A., De Donder, L., & Lombaerts, K. (2014). Promoting sustainable communities through intergenerational practice. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 116, 1785–1791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capps, K. (2015, March 31). What have we learned from 30 years of ‘Aging in place’. The Atlantic CityLab. Retrieved from http://www.citylab.com/housing/2015/03/what-have-we-learned-from-30-years-of-aging-in-place/389201/

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014, January 23). Health and healthy places. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/healthyplaces/about.htm

  • Chawla, L. (2002). Growing up in an urbanising world. Michigan: UNESCO Publishing Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chawla, L., & van Vliet, W. (2008). Children's Rights to Child Friendly Cities. In M. Ruck, M. Peterson-Badali, and M. Freeman (Eds.) Handbook of Children's Rights: Global and Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Taylor and Francis (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherlin, A. (2010). Demographic trends in the United States: A review of research in the 2000s. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 403–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00710.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, S., Williams, M., & Ellis, R. (2003). Impact of an intergenerational program on 4th graders’ attitudes toward elders and school behaviors. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 8(1), 43–61. https://doi.org/10.1300/J137v08n01_03.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cushing, D. F. (2014). Promoting youth participation in communities through youth master planning. Community Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2014.975139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuyahoga Planning Commission. (2004). Guide to elder-friendly community building. Report, Cleveland. Downloaded at http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Guide_to_EFC_Building1_156733_7.doc.pdf

  • Dickerson, A. E., et al. (2007). Transportation and aging: A research agenda for advancing safe mobility. Gerontologist, 47(5), 578–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driskell, D. (2002). Creating better cities with children and youth: A manual for participation. Paris/London: UNESCO Publishing/Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumbaugh, E. (2008). Designing communities to enhance the safety and mobility of older adults: A universal approach. Journal of Planning Literature, 23(1), 17–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eicher, C., & Kawachi, I. (2011). Social capital and community design. In A. L. Dannenberg, H. Frumkin, & R. L. Jackson (Eds.), Making healthy places: Designing and building for health, well-being, and sustainability. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fry, R., & Passel, J. (2014). The growth in multi-generational family households. Pew Research Center: Social and Demographic Trends. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/07/17/the-growth-in-multi-generational-family-households/

  • Gaggioli, A., Morganti, L., Bonfiglio, S., Scaratti, C., Cipresso, P., Serino, S., & Riva, G. (2014). Intergenerational group reminiscence: A potentially effective intervention to enhance elderly psychosocial well-being and to improve children’s perception of aging. Educational Gerontology, 40(7), 486–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2013.844042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Generations United. (2005). Under one roof: A guide to starting and strengthening intergenerational shared site programs. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/pushbullet-uploads/ujzNDwQrsR2-FU6mFaxJ6i35ga24xorjysU9FJj7oKD1/05-SharedSites-Report-UnderOneRoof.pdf

  • Generations United. (2015a). Best intergenerational communities. Retrieved from http://www.gu.org/OURWORK/Programs/BestIntergenerationalCommunities.aspx

  • Generations United. (2015b). Grandfamilies. Retrieved from http://www.gu.org/OURWORK/Grandfamilies.aspx

  • George, D., Whitehouse, C., & Whitehouse, P. (2011). A model of intergenerativity: How the intergenerational school is bringing the generations together to foster collective wisdom and community health. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 9(4), 389–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giles, H., Hajek, C., Stoitsova, T., & Choi, C. (2010). Intergenerational communication satisfaction and age boundaries in Bulgaria and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 25(2), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10823-010-9114-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill, T. (2006). Home zones in the UK: History, policy and impact on children and youth. Children, Youth and Environments, 16(1), 90–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Alliance for the Rights of Older People. (2015). Strengthening older people’s rights. Retrieved October 19, 2015, from http://www.rightsofolderpeople.org

  • Green, G. (2013). Age-friendly cities of Europe. Journal of Urban Health, 90(Suppl 1), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-012-9765-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habinteg. (2010). Lifetime homes principles. Retrieved from http://www.lifetimehomes.org.uk/pages/lifetime-homes-principles.html

  • Harding, E. (2007). Towards lifetime neighbourhoods: Designing sustainable communities for all. West Yorkshire: Communities and Local Government Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2003). The right to the city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(4), 939–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatton-Yeo, A. (2007). Intergenerational programmes, intergenerational solidarity and social cohesion. In M. Sanchez Martinez (Ed.), Intergenerational Programs: Towards a Society for All Ages (p.109–124). Barcelona, Spain: Obra Social Fundacion La Caixa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatton-Yeo, A. (2010). An introduction to intergenerational practice. Working with Older People, 14(2), 4–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Health Promotion Glossary. (1998). Retrieved from http://www.who.int/healthy_settings/types/cities/en/

  • Hebert, S. (2014). Local voices: On-the-ground perspectives on driving community change in the making connections sites. Baltinmore: Anne E Casey Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • HelpAge International. (2010). Strengthening older people’s rights: Towards a UN convention. London: HelpAge International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henkin, N., & Butts, D. (2002). Advancing an intergenerational agenda in the United States. In M. Kaplan, N. Henkin, & A. Kusano (Eds.), Linking lifetimes: A global view of intergenerational exchange (pp. 65–82). Lanham: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henkin, N., Holmes, A., Walter, B., Greenberg, B., & Schwarz, J. (2005). Communities for all ages: Planning across generations. Baltimore: Annie E. Casey Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilson, A., & Ennals, R. (2007). Virtual links: Intergenerational learning and experience sharing across age divides and distances. AI & SOCIETY, 23, 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-007-0166-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarrott, S. (2011). Where have we been and where are we going? Content analysis of evaluation research of intergenerational programs. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 9(1), 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • JustPartners Inc. (2012). Elders as resources for elders and families. Retrieved from http://www.viablefuturescenter.org/VFC_Site/AgeProducts.html

  • Kang, H. (2015). “We’re who we’ve been waiting for”: Intergenerational community organizing for a healthy community. Journal of Community Practice, 23(1), 126–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705422.2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, M., & Haider, J. (2015). Creating intergenerational spaces that promote health and well-being. In R. Vanderbeck & N. Worth (Eds.), Intergenerational space (pp. 33–49). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, M., Haider, J., Cohen, U., & Turner, D. (2007). Environmental design perspectives on intergenerational programs and practices: An emergent conceptual framework. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 5(2), 81–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karsten, L., & van Vliet, W. (2006). Children in the city: Reclaiming the street. Children Youth and Environments, 16(1), 151–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kawachi, I., & Berkman, L. (2000). Social cohesion, social capital and health. In Social epidemiology (pp. 290–317). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, C. (2010). The city of 2050 – An age-friendly, vibrant, intergenerational community. Journal of the American Society on Aging, 34(3), 70–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennison, S., & Ponce-Garcia, E. (2012). The role of childhood relationships with older adults in reducing risk-taking behavior by young adults. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 10, 22–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kessler, E., & Staudinger, U. (2007). Intergenerational potential: Effects of social interaction between older adults and adolescents. Psychology and Aging, 22(4), 690–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korkki, P. (2013, March 12). In Retiree housing, talking about multigenerations. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/13/business/retirementspecial/retirees-choose-intergenerational-cohousing.html?_r=1

  • Liddicoat, K., Simon, J., Krasney, M., & Tidball, K. (2007). Sharing programs across cultures: Lessons from Garden Mosaics in South Africa. Children Youth and Environments, 17(4), 237–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, J. (2012). Youth bulge: A demographic dividend or a demographic bomb in developing countries? Available on http://blogs.worldbank.org/developmenttalk/youth-bulge-a-demographic-dividend-or-a-demographic-bomb-in-developing-countries

  • MacCallum, J., Palmer, D., Wright, P., Cumming-Potvin, W., Brooker, M., & Tero, C. (2010). Australian perspectives: Community building through intergenerational exchange programs. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 8(2), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350771003741899.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macht, W. (2013, August 28). Intergenerational ingenuity: Mixing age groups in affordable housing. Urban Land Magazine. Retrieved from http://urbanland.uli.org/industry-sectors/residential/intergenerational-ingenuity-mixing-age-groups-in-affordable-housing/

  • McIntyre, M. (2014). CBS spotlights program that puts Cleveland Institute of Music students into apartments at Judson Manor senior community: Michael K. McIntyre’s Tipoff. Cleveland.com. Retrieved from http://www.cleveland.com/tipoff/index.ssf/2014/10/cbs_spotlights_program_that_pu.html

  • Mehta, V. (2013). The street: A quintessential social public space. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meshel, D., & McGlynn, R. (2004). Intergenerational contact, attitudes, and stereotypes of adolescents and older people. Educational Gerontology, 30(6), 457–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601270490445078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morhayim, L. (2012). From counterpublics to counterspaces: Livable city advocates’ efforts to reshape cities through carfree-streets events. Proquest Dissertation, Ann Arbor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morphy, K., & Ping, R. (2015). The imagining livability design collection: A visual portfolio of tools and transformations. Walkable and Livable Communities Institute. Retrieved from aarp.org/livability-design

  • National Association of Realtors. (2015, July 28). News release: Millennials favor walkable communities says NAR poll. Retrieved from http://www.realtor.org/sites/default/files/reports/2015/nar-psu-2015-poll-press-release.pdf

  • Okoye, U. O. (2005). Young children’s perception of the elderly: A comparison of data from the United States and Southeastern Nigeria. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 3(3), 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okoye, U. O., & Obikeze, D. S. (2005). Stereotypes and perceptions of the elderly by the youth in Nigeria: Implications for social policy. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 24(5), 439–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pain, R. (2005). Intergenerational relations and practice in the development of sustainable communities. Background paper for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Durham University: ICRRDS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penninx, K. (2003). What research or evaluation question, if answered, would best advance intergenerational program development in the Netherlands? Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 1(3), 105–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinto, T., Hatton-Yeo, A., Marreel, I., Waser, M., Limacher, A., Duaigües, M., LaFond, M., Clarke, G., Di Pietro, D., & Schmolling, J. (2009). Guide of ideas for planning and implementing intergenerational projects: Together yesterday, today and tomorrow. Project MATES. Retrieved from http://ibk-kubia.de/IBK-Dateien/PDFs/IntergenerationalProjects.pdf

  • Riggio, E. (2000). The international secretariat for child-friendly cities: A global network for urban children. Environment and Urbanization, 12(2), 201–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocco, L., & Suhrcke, M. (2012). Is social capital good for health? A European perspective. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruble, B., et al. (2003). Youth explosion in developing world cities approaches to reducing poverty and conflict in an urban age. In B. A. Ruble, J. S. Tulchin, D. H. Varat, & L. M. Hanley (Eds.), Comparative Urban Studies Project ©2003. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. www.wilsoncenter.org

  • Rusnak, B. (Producer), & Cassaday, S. (Director). (2015). Cyber seniors (Documentary). Canada: Best Part Productions, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson, R. C., & Richards, M. H. (2010). The after-school needs and resources of a low-income urban community: Surveying youth and parents for community change. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45(3–4), 430–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scales, P. C., Benson, P. L., Roehlkepartain, E. C., Hintz, N. R., Sullivan, T. K., Mannes, M., & Grothe, R. (2001). The role of neighborhood and community in building developmental assets for children and youth: A national study of social norms among American adults. Journal of Community Psychology, 29, 703–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharlach, A. E. (2009). Creating ageing-friendly communities. Generations, 33(2), 5–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharlach, A. E., & Lehning, A. J. (2013). Ageing-friendly communities and social inclusion in the United States of America. Ageing and Society, 33(Special Issue 01), 110–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, S., & Moneti, F. (2007). The child friendly cities initiative. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, 160(ME2), 77–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skropeta, C. M., Colvin, A., & Sladen, S. (2014). An evaluative study of the benefits of participating in intergenerational playgroups in aged care for older people. BMC Geriatrics, 14, 109. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-14-109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sleap, B. (2015). In our own words: What older people say about discrimination and human rights in older age: A consultation by the Global Alliance for the Rights of Older People. HelpAge International. Available online at http://www.rightsofolderpeople.org/new-garop-report-in-our-own-words/

  • Smart Growth America. (2015). Core values: Why American companies are moving downtown. Retrieved from http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/core-values.pdf

  • Smith, W. (2001). Hope Meadows: Real life stories of healing and caring from an inspiring community. California: Berkley Hardcover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. (2010). Generation recreation: From multigenerational to intergenerational programming. Recreation Management. Downloaded from http://recmanagement.com/feature_print.php?fid=201002fe03

  • Solomon, S. (2014). The science of play: How to build playgrounds that enhance children’s development. London: University Press of New England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, W. C., Kuo, F. E., & DePooter, S. F. (2004). The fruit of urban nature: Vital neighborhood spaces. Environment & Behavior, 36(5), 678–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thang, L. (2015). Creating an intergenerational contact zone: Encounters in public spaces within Singapore’s public housing neighbourhoods. In R. Vanderbeck & N. Worth (Eds.), Intergenerational space (pp. 33–49). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, N. (2014). Age-friendly: The 2014 world tour. AARP. Retrieved from http://www.aarp.org/livable-communities/info-2014/age-friendly-world-tour.html

  • Under One Roof. (2012). Connecting generations. Retrieved from http://underoneroofinc.org

  • UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre (2004). Building Child Friendly Cities: A framework for action. florence, Italy. Retrieved from www.unicef.org/irc

  • van Vliet, W. (2011). Intergenerational cities: A framework for policies and programs. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 9(4), 348–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vera-Sanso, P. (2006). Experiences in old age: A South Indian example of how functional age is socially structured. Oxford Development Studies, 34(4), 457–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vladeck, F., & Altman, A. (2015). The future of the NORC-supportive service program model. Public Policy Aging Report, 25(1), 20–22. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppar/pru050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, C., & Smith, T. (1997). Forging intergenerational communities through information technology. Generations, 21(3), 38–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weidt, T. (2015, August 20). 5 ways cities are making their communities more walkable. Retrieved from http://citiesspeak.org/author/twiedt/

  • Wilks, J. (2010). Child-friendly cities: A place for active citizenship in geographical and environmental education. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 19(1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382040903545484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolcock, G., & Steele, W. (2008). Child-friendly community indicators- A literature review. Urban Research Program, Griffith University, NSW Commission for Children and Young People, Nathan Queensland, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. (2007). Global age-friendly cities: A guide. Geneva: WHO Press, Available from http://www.who.int/ageing/publications/Global_age_friendly_cities_Guide_English.pdf

  • World Health Organization. (2015). Healthy settings. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/healthy_settings/types/cities/en/)

  • Yamashita, T., Kinney, J., & Lokon, E. (2013). The impact of a gerontology course and a service learning program on college students’ attitudes toward people with Dimentia. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 32(2), 139–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • YMCA. (2015). The league of extraordinary grandparents. Retrieved from http://www.camps.ymca.org.au/programs/camping-programs/the-league-of-extraordinary-grandparents.html

  • Zuehlke, E. (2015). Immigrants work in riskier and more dangerous jobs in the United States. Population Reference Bureau. Retrieved from http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2009/usimmigrantsriskyjobs.aspx

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Design, Creative Industries Faculty, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, 2434, 4001, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Debra Flanders Cushing

  2. Community Engagement, Design and Research (CEDaR) Center, University of Colorado, 1060 18th St., Rm. 234, 80309-0314, Boulder, CO, USA

    Willem van Vliet

Authors
  1. Debra Flanders Cushing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Willem van Vliet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Debra Flanders Cushing .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom

    Samantha Punch

  2. The School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom

    Robert M. Vanderbeck

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Cushing, D.F., van Vliet, W. (2018). Intergenerational Communities as Healthy Places for Meaningful Engagement and Interaction. In: Punch, S., Vanderbeck, R. (eds) Families, Intergenerationality, and Peer Group Relations. Geographies of Children and Young People, vol 5. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-026-1_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation