Smart City Pandemic Response and Digital Equity for Age-Friendly Amman

Abstract

Rapid urbanization and aging population present global challenges for smart cities, especially for equitable pandemic response and age friendly urban transitions. This paper through a two-round Delphi study assessed Amman’s efficiency in pandemic response focusing on digital inclusion for older adults and critical barriers to age-friendly urbanism. The results indicate moderate satisfaction with Amman’s overall pandemic response alongside significant limitations, particularly in digital equity for older adults. Key systemic barriers included compromised air quality, inadequate public transportation, notably poor public Wi-Fi, and deficient digital infrastructure. Furthermore, political and financial obstacles, such as high living costs and low governance transparency, significantly hindered progress. Experts prioritized solutions emphasizing improved physical accessibility, expanded green spaces, and enhanced digital literacy. This study underscores the urgent need for integrated, multi-dimensional strategies, including participatory governance and targeted digital inclusion programs, to foster sustainable and equitable smart city development that enhances resilience and inclusiveness for aging populations in post pandemic urban planning contexts.

1. Introduction

Rapid global urbanization and escalating aging population [1] present complex challenges for contemporary urban planning, sustainable development, and smart city development [2,3,4]. While smart cities are increasingly recognized as pivotal paradigms for enhancing operational efficiency, quality of life, and sustainable economic growth through the integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) [5,6], their effectiveness in fostering truly inclusive, sustainable and resilient urban environments, particularly for vulnerable demographics like the elderly, remains a critical area of inquiry [7,8,9].

The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the imperative for urban systems to exhibit heightened responsiveness and adaptability, revealing both the potential and limitations of existing smart city frameworks in safeguarding public health and ensuring equitable access to essential services [10,11,12]. This paper posits that a robust conceptual framework for age-friendly smart cities must be firmly grounded in the principles of responsive urban system design [4]. Such a framework moves beyond technological integration to emphasize dynamic adaptability, and proactive resource allocation in the face of evolving urban challenges, including public health crises and demographic shifts [11,13].

Responsive urban systems are characterized by their capacity to sense, analyze, and react to changing conditions, thereby optimizing resource deployment and service delivery to meet diverse citizen needs [14]. This approach is particularly pertinent in contexts like Amman, Jordan, where rapid demographic changes, including a growing elderly population, necessitate sustainable urban solutions that are not only efficient but also inherently equitable and resilient. Recent advances in urban system management offer methodologies for operationalizing responsive urban design [15]. For instance, adaptive low-carbon scheduling has emerged as a crucial strategy for optimizing energy systems within urban environments, balancing energy demands with environmental sustainability goals [16]. Digital Twins approach provides a promising outlook for smart cities development, nonetheless, several technological and real-life obstacles should be addressed for optimum implementation [17].

The main obstacles that prevent smart cities from becoming friendly for the elderly, especially during crises and pandemics, include technological, social, financial, political, and physical obstacles [13]. Technological obstacles are related to the digital illiteracy of the elderly, which are at the core of the existence of smart cities and their tools. As for the social obstacles, these entail social isolation or inability to participate with the local community, or elderly forced isolation by community members. Political obstacles are represented by governance and political will from decision-makers to pay attention to this group and provide initiatives that are age-friendly in spite of any financial obstacles [18].

The challenges, on the other hand, encompass physical environment such as the surrounding environment, location of services and accessibility, as well as presence of green areas and parks, ease of using public transportation, and design of buildings as elderly appropriate [13].

These methodologies are instrumental in developing urban systems that can proactively address challenges such as digital infrastructure deficiencies and public transportation inadequacies, which are particularly critical for ensuring the well-being and inclusion of older adults [19]. In Jordan, the aging population, projected to reach 9.5% by 2050 [20], coupled with existing digital divides, as evidenced by only 32% computer usage among the elderly (13.7% for females and 47.7% for males), underscore the urgency for responsive urban interventions. This can be attributed to several factors; where the most prominent is the lack of digital literacy since older people find it challenging to perform basic digital tasks [21]. In addition, cultural perspectives influence older peoples’ adoption of technology, commonly due to lack of familiarity and the view of technology as related to younger generations [22]. While initiatives like Amman’s “Elderly Friendly” program demonstrate a commitment to improving urban livability for older adults, significant barriers persist across technological, social, financial, political, and environmental domains [21]. In recent analyses, Jordanian researchers have highlighted the need for effective policy frameworks to harness the potential of smart technologies. A study emphasized the slow progress in smart city development and called for more efficient engagement practices involving citizens in the adoption and implementation of smart solutions [23].

This study aims to contribute to the discourse on responsive urban system design by assessing Amman’s efforts in becoming an age-friendly smart city through expert perceptions, providing insights into the barriers and proposing solutions. This research seeks to inform more effective and equitable urban planning strategies for aging populations in a post-pandemic world.

The Delphi Approach

Several studies have investigated the use of Delphi method for smart city related studies, particularly in response to the pandemic. The pandemic has emphasized the importance of adaptability and urban resilience through smart city solutions. This method, considered as a consensus-based approach, has been proven effective for collecting expert opinions on such matters. Ref. [24] implemented the Delphi approach to identify mental health needs during the COVID-19 pandemic on a sample of decision-makers, experts, and users of mental health services. The authors reported a two round Delphi study in which (41) mental health activities were derived by the end of the second round. Similarly, the work of [11] emphasizes how smart city solutions can enhance urban resilience during health crises by leveraging expert insights collected through Delphi studies. This suggests that utilizing Delphi not only aids in consensus-building but also promotes inclusivity, ensuring that the needs of different community members are incorporated into planning frameworks. Moreover, the integration of smart city technologies in urban planning has been stressed as a response to challenges posed by the pandemic. Ref. [25] provided an example of using the Delphi method to develop a COVID-19 Severity Index, showcasing how expert consensus can help direct healthcare resource allocation. This highlights the usefulness of the Delphi method across different domains, reinforcing its utility in developing interconnected and robust urban strategies that address current needs and future vulnerabilities.

Two types of Delphi approaches are present in the literature: electronic Delphi and classical approaches. Both types are not significantly different, despite the use of computer technology in the former [26]. The main aspect in all Delphi studies is the consensus index. Inter-Quartile (IQR) Range has been reported as a measure of consensus provided in several studies. IQR measures the dispersion for median values and includes the middle 50% of the dataset, where (IQR < 1) states that (>50%) of the data is within (1) point on a scale [27].

Another important aspect of Delphi studies is when to stop the survey. Ref. [28] reviewed (41) Delphi studies from different fields and reported that two-round Delphi studies comprised (17%), while (71%) studies were composed of three-rounds and only (10%) of the studies implemented four-round Delphi surveys. Another review by [29] reported that most studies included two-rounds of Delphi surveys.

2. Methodology

2.1. Study Design

This study follows the Delphi study design that includes gathering experts’ opinions and assess “consensus” through two rounds of open and closed-ended questions. This study adopted a two-round Delphi design since the first round identified ley issues and the second narrowed them down. In addition, this study is exploratory, and the second Delphi round yielded suitable identification of the main themes. Furthermore, based the fact that only about (50%) of experts contacted agreed to undertake the survey, this study stopped after the second round to maintain engagement and reduce dropout rates.

2.2. Study Sample

Experts in the fields of smart cities and urban planning in Jordan were chosen based on the research topic. More than 60 experts were contacted, and thirty-two experts responded and were selected following a purposive non-probability sampling approach. It has been reported that the Delphi method can be applied on a sample of at least three participants [30].

To enhance the sample diversity, experts working in various positions were chosen. The sample included consultants, academics, and municipality administrators which provides a more holistic understanding of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the digital equity of Amman as a smart city and identifying the barriers. The eligibility criteria include experts who: (1) have access to email and (2) are able to participate in a two-round Delphi study. The survey included a consent statement, and all experts provided their consent. The ethical approval was granted by Al-Balqa Applied University in Jordan.

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the study sample. ✓: Participated.

Nub.	Position	Field of Experience	Delphi Round
			1	2
1	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
2	Academic	Urban Planning	✓	✓
3	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
4	Municipality Administration	Social Advisor	✓	✓
5	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
6	Academic	Urban Planning	✓	✓
7	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
8	Consultant	Health Care	✓	✓
9	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
10	Academic	Smart Cities	✓	✓
11	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
12	Academic	Urban Planning	✓	✓
13	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
14	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
15	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
16	Academic	Urban Planning	✓	✓
17	Consultant	Crisis Management	✓	✓
18	Academic	Urban Planning	✓	✓
19	Academic	Social Advisor	✓	✓
20	Academic	Urban Planning	✓	✓
21	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
22	Academic	Urban Planning	✓	✓
23	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
24	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
25	Consultant	Smart Cities	✓	✓
26	Municipality Administration	Smart Cities	✓	✓
27	Municipality Administration	Smart Cities	✓	✓
28	Municipality Administration	Smart Cities	✓	✓
29	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓
30	Municipality Administration	Smart Cities	✓	✓
31	Municipality Administration	Urban Planning	✓	✓
32	Consultant	Urban Planning	✓	✓

lists the demographic characteristics of the experts in the Delphi rounds.

2.3. Delphi Procedure

The current study employed a two-round Delphi approach. After obtaining the experts’ consent, demographic data were collected including position, field of experience and contact information. An online survey was then sent to the experts which included an explanation of the study, purpose, and confidentiality on the first page.

The pre-Delphi stage included literature review of studies discussing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the digital equity of smart cities and identifying the barriers that prevent cities from becoming more age-friendly [13,31]. The main themes extracted were included in the Delphi round (1).

The results of the Delphi study were analyzed using R Statistical Software (v 4.3.1) [32]. Inter-Quartile Range (IQR) and Likert scale mean values were used as indicators of consensus where values of (IQR ≤ 1) indicate high consensus, (1 < IQR ≤ 2) indicate moderate consensus, and (IQR > 2) indicate low consensus.

2.3.1. Delphi Round 1

During this stage, interviews were conducted with the experts to provide an initial understanding of their opinions regarding three main sections: (1) Section (1) comprised (5) open ended questions regarding the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the digital divide among older adults in cities, the key elements of a smart, age-friendly city, smart city approaches contribution to active aging and health equity, strategies that can be employed to improve digital inclusion for older adults in cities, and how can data-enabled, digitally connected “smart cities” make healthcare smarter; (2) Section (2) focused on the five barriers to transforming into an age-friendly city as reported in the literature. This section included (18) open ended questions covering (6) main domains of physical, environmental, technological, social, financial, and political barriers. (3) Section (3) included (3) open-ended questions and focused on how smart cities coped with the COVID-19 Pandemic (Supplementary S1). This round required about (30) min to complete.

2.3.2. Delphi Round 2

The second round was designed based on the feedback from the first round. The survey was expanded into (6) sections entitled “Assessing the Efficiency of Smart Cities of COVID-19 Response Measures, Towards Digital Equity and Age-friendly Smart Cities”. The first section focused on demographic information, Section (2) focused on “Dealing with the COVID-19 Pandemic” and included (6) questions using a (1–5) point Likert scale. Section (3) focused on the “Barriers to Age-Friendly Cities” and included (6) sub-sections on physical, technological, social, financial, political, and environmental barriers. Each sub-section included (3) questions using a (1–5) point Likert scale. Section (4) entailed questions regarding the prioritization of solutions to barriers mentioned in Section (3). Section (5) focused on challenges that highlight the complexity of transforming a city into a smart, age-friendly city with seven sub-sections. Finally, Section (6) provided the experts with an open-ended question to provide suggestions and additional comments. A pilot study on (10%, n = 4) of the sample was conducted to assess the questionnaire feasibility and reliability. The results showed that the questionnaire was clear to complete, and the Cronbach’s Alpha (α) value was (0.94) suggesting strong internal consistency of the items [33].

3. Results

3.1. Dealing with the COVID-19 Pandemic

For the Amman city response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the experts rated it as excellent (12.5%, n = 4), Good (28.12%, n = 9), Moderate (34.38%, 11), Poor (21.88%, n = 7), and Very Poor (3.12%, n = 1) with a moderate consensus level (IQR = 1.25; Likert mean value = 3.25, SD = 1).

For the use of technology in managing the pandemic, the responses were very effective (6.25%, n = 2), effective (18.75%, n = 6), moderate (50%, n = 16), ineffective (21.88%, n = 7), and very ineffective (3.12%, n = 1), with a high consensus level (IQR = 0.5) and a Likert mean value of (3, SD = 0.9). In terms of the elderly ease of access to digital health services during the pandemic, the responses spanned often (15.62%, n = 5), sometimes (18.75%, n = 6), rarely (53.12%, n = 17), and never (3.12%, n = 1), with a high consensus level (IQR = 1) and a Likert mean value of (2.38, SD = 0.9).

The communication effectiveness responses rated the communication from the city of Amman institutions regarding COVID-19 safety measures and update as poor (40.62%, n = 13), moderate (50%, n = 16), and good (9.38%, n = 3) with weak consensus (IQR = 2) and a Likert mean value of (3, SD = 0.86). The classification of citizens access to health services digitally during the pandemic was rated as rarely (40.6%, n = 13), often (50%, n = 16), and sometimes (9.38%, n = 3) with IQR value of (1) and a Likert mean value of (2.69, SD = 0.64) indicating strong consensus.

The last question in this section was related to ranking the city of Amman balancing the needs of older residents during the pandemic compared to other citizens and the responses rated it as very poor (6.25%, n = 2), poor (43.75%, n = 14), moderate (37.5%, n = 12), and good (12.5%, n = 4) with a strong consensus (IQR = 1) and a Likert mean value of (2.56, SD = 0.8). Experts agree that elderly needs were only partially met and that there is a need to develop specialized services for elderly populations during crises.

3.2. Barriers, Solutions and Challenges to Age-Friendly Amman

3.2.1. Physical Barriers, Proposed Solutions, and Challenges

The physical barriers questions focused on public transportation accessibility, building accessibility, and city improvement efforts. For the accessibility of public transportation for older adults, the responses varied from very poor (25%, n = 8), to poor (34.4%, n = 11), to moderate (25%, n = 8), good (12.5%, n = 4), and excellent (3.1%, n = 1). The responses had a median of (poor), a Likert mean value of (2.34, SD = 1.1) and an IQR value of (1.25). The frequency of encountering inaccessible buildings/facilities was rated with a median of (often) and an IQR of (2). The responses spanned rarely (31.3%, n = 10), to sometimes (18.8%, n = 6), often (40.6%, 13), and always (9.4%, n = 3). The higher median with 50% of respondents rating the frequency of encountering inaccessible buildings as “often” indicates a prevalent issue with physical accessibility of buildings and facilities. The larger IQR (2.00) and the Likert mean value of (3.28, SD = 1) suggests more varied experiences among respondents, potentially reflecting differences in mobility needs or geographic areas within the city. The city efforts in improving physical accessibility over the past decade were viewed by the respondents as very poor (3.1%, n = 1), poor (28.1%, n = 9), moderate (43.8%, n = 14), good (21.9%, n = 7), and excellent (3.1%, n = 1). The median rating of (good) with a small IQR (1.25) and a Likert mean value of (2.94, SD = 0.88) indicates moderate consensus that city efforts to improve physical accessibility are average. The concentration of responses around the middle of the scale (43.8%, n = 14; rated good) suggests acknowledgment of some progress but room for improvement.

The proposed solutions for these barriers as seen by the experts can be categorized as illustrated in Figure 1 and

Table 2. The consensus analysis based on IQR values for the proposed solutions for physical barriers.

	Proposed Solution	Median Rating	IQR	Consensus Level	Interpretation
1	Implementing universal design principles in city planning	2	2	Moderate	High priority with moderate consensus. 37.5% rated this as the highest priority.
2	Increasing the number of accessible public transportation options	2	2.25	Weak	High priority but with weak consensus. 43.8% rated this as the highest priority.
3	Improving sidewalk and crosswalk design for better mobility	1	2	Moderate	High priority with moderate consensus. 56.2% rated this as the highest priority.
4	Retrofitting existing buildings to be more accessible	2	2	Moderate	High priority with moderate consensus. 31.2% rated this as the highest priority.
5	Promoting assistive technologies that help people with difficulty	2	2	Moderate	High priority with moderate consensus. 31.2% rated this as the highest priority.

. Improving sidewalk and crosswalk design emerged as the highest priority solution with a median rating of 1 and moderate consensus (56.2%, n = 18, rated it as highest priority). All proposed solutions were rated as high priority (median ≤ 2), indicating that experts generally agree on the importance of all these interventions. Public transportation accessibility shows the weakest consensus (IQR = 2.25; Likert mean = 2.31, SD = 1.5), suggesting more varied opinions among experts, despite (43.8%, n = 14) rating it as the highest priority. Retrofitting buildings and promoting assistive technologies received identical overall ratings, with (31.2%, n = 10) giving highest priority and (46.9%, n = 15) giving medium priority. Universal design principles implementation received moderate consensus with (37.5%, n = 12) rating as highest priority.

Implementing these solutions in smart cities can face several challenges. Those challenges highlight the complexity of transforming a city into a smart, age-friendly city. This study proposed challenges that are ordered by the experts according to their effects. For “Budget Constraints” the IQR is (1.25) and the Likert mean is (1.75, SD = 0.8) indicating moderate consensus. Half of the participants (50%, n = 16) rated this as the most efficient challenge to address, while the rest were split between moderate and low efficiency. “Infrastructure Limitations” also has an IQR of (1.25; Likert mean = 1.9, SD = 0.8), showing similar consensus. Responses are more evenly distributed between 1 (37.5%, n = 12) and 2 (37.5%, n = 12), with fewer ratings as least efficient (3, 25%, n = 8), while “Regulatory Hurdles” has the highest consensus (IQR = 1.00, Likert mean = 1.8, SD = 0.7), suggesting participants are more aligned in their views. The majority rated it as moderate or least efficient.

3.2.2. Environmental Barriers, Proposed Solutions, and Challenges

The study evaluated three key environmental dimensions: air quality, presence of litter in public spaces, and environmental sustainability efforts. Responses were collected on a 5-point Likert scale.

The responses show that air quality in Amman is consistently perceived as a significant environmental barrier with a median of (3-good) and a moderate consensus (IQR = 1) with a Likert mean score of (3.2, SD = 0.75). The experts did not provide any (5) rating, indicating the lack of excellence in this field where very poor was reported by (15.6%, n = 5), poor by (50%, n = 16), moderate by (31.2%, n = 10), and good by (3.1%, n = 1). The higher variability in responses (IQR = 2-rarely; median = 3-sometimes; Likert mean = 3, SD = 1.1) regarding encountering litter in public spaces suggests inconsistent experiences across different areas of the city. The responses varied from never (3.1%, n = 1), to rarely (34.4%, n = 11), sometimes (25%, n = 8), often (25%, n = 8), to always (12.5%, n = 4). The distribution (peaks at ratings 3-moderate and 4-good) suggests that certain sustainability efforts may be more visible or effective than others. The responses spanned very poor (6.2%), poor (21.9%, n = 7), moderate (34.4%, n = 11), good (31.2%, n = 10), and excellent (6.2%, n = 2).

The proposed solutions for these barriers as seen by the experts can be categorized as listed in

Table 3. The consensus analysis based on IQR values for the proposed solutions for environmental barriers.

	Proposed Solution	Median Rating	IQR	Consensus Level	Interpretation
1	Promoting the use of renewable energy sources.	2	2	Moderate	Median priority with moderate consensus. 43.8% rated this as a high priority. (3.1%) of least priority ratings.
2	Enhancing waste management systems.	2	2	Moderate	Median priority with moderate consensus. 31.2% rated this as a high priority. Balanced distribution across priority levels
3	Creating more green spaces in the city.	1	2	Moderate	Highest priority solution with moderate consensus. 59.4% rated this as the highest priority. 12.5% rated it as least priority.
4	Encouraging community involvement in environmental conservation efforts.	2	2	Moderate	Median priority with moderate consensus. 34.4% rated this as a high priority. (15.6%) of least priority ratings.

. All four proposed solutions for environmental barriers show moderate consensus among respondents (IQR = 2) and a Likert mean score (2 to 2.4), indicating general agreement but with some variation in opinions.

For the challenges, the results revealed that all three challenges have an IQR of (1.25) and Likert mean score (1.8 to 1.9), indicating moderate levels of consensus among participants. For “Cost,” (50%, n = 16) of the respondents rated it as most efficient (1), suggesting it is seen as a significant challenge. “Public Awareness” and “Regulation” have more distributed responses with the highest percentage of (2) ratings, indicating it is often seen as a moderate challenge.

3.2.3. Social Barriers, Proposed Solutions, and Challenges

The study evaluated three key dimensions: inclusivity of community events, experiences of social isolation, and city efforts in promoting social inclusion.

The inclusivity of community events in Amman received a median rating of (3-moderate) with an IQR of (2-poor) and a Likert mean score of (3, SD = 0.8), indicating moderate consensus among respondents and a perception of average inclusivity. The frequency distribution shows that (40.63%, n = 13) of respondents rated inclusivity as moderate (3), while (28.13%, n = 9) rated it as poor (2) and another (28.13%, n = 9) as good (4) while only (3.13%, n = 1) rated it as excellent (5). Notably, no respondents rated it as very poor (1). The question regarding whether elderly citizens experience feelings of social isolation showed a median of (3-sometimes) with an IQR of (2) and a Likert mean score of (3, SD = 1), indicating moderate consensus. This suggests that respondents perceive elderly citizens as experiencing moderate to high levels of social isolation. The frequency distribution reveals that (37.5%, n = 12) of respondents rated this at the midpoint (3-sometimes), while (25%, n = 8) each rated it as (2-rarely or 4-often). Additionally, (9.38%, n = 4) rated it as (5-always) (indicating severe isolation), and (3.13%, n = 1) rated it as (1-never). The assessment of Amman’s efforts in promoting social inclusion received a median rating of (3-moderate) with an IQR of (1) and a Likert scale mean of (2.8, SD = 0.9), indicating higher consensus among respondents compared to the other aspects. The frequency distribution shows that (43.75%, n = 14) of respondents rated these efforts as moderate (3), while (31.25%, n = 10) rated them as poor (2). Only (18.75%, n = 6) rated them as good (4), and equal proportions (3.13%, n = 1) rated them as very poor (1) or excellent (5).

The proposed solutions for these barriers, as seen by the experts, can be prioritized as follows. Organizing inclusive community events is seen by a low consensus (IQR = 2.25; median = 2; Likert mean = 2.5, SD = 1.3) by the experts with (56.25%, n = 18) rating this as high or high-medium priority (ratings 1–2). Implementing policies for diversity and inclusion shows higher consensus compared to the first solution, albite moderate (IQR = 2; Likert mean = 2.2, SD = 1.1) with (68.75%, n = 22) rating this as high or high-medium priority.

Offering social programs that target isolated individuals (Median = 2; IQR = 2; Likert mean = 2.3, SD = 1.3) shows moderate consensus with (59.38%, n = 19) rating this as high or high-medium priority. It is notable that (37.5%, n = 12) gave this the highest priority rating. Encouraging community involvement in decision-making processes (Median = 1.5, IQR = 2.25; Likert mean = 2, SD = 1.4) shows weak consensus; however, it received the strongest support with (50%, n = 16) giving it the highest priority. The higher IQR could reflect some polarization in responses. Promoting intergenerational interactions and activities showed moderate consensus (Median = 2, IQR = 2; Likert mean = 2.4, SD = 1.3) with (59.38%, n = 19) rating this as high or high-medium priority.

The proposed challenges results showed strong consensus on “Resistance to Change” (IQR = 0.25; Likert mean score = 1.9, SD = 0.7), moderate to weak consensus on “Lack of Understanding” (IQR = 1.0; Likert mean score = 1.7, SD = 0.8), and moderate to weak consensus on “Cultural Differences” (IQR = 1.25; Likert mean score = 2, SD = 0.7). Specifically, “Lack of Understanding” is considered most pertinent (50%, n = 16 rated it 1), “Resistance to Change” is moderate (53.1%, n = 17 rated it 2), and “Cultural Differences” has the most distributed ratings, suggesting less agreement on its pertinency.

3.2.4. Technological Barriers, Proposed Solutions, and Challenges

The analysis focuses on three key dimensions: public Wi-Fi availability, difficulties with digital services, and efforts to improve digital accessibility, using a 5-point Likert scale.

Public Wi-Fi availability was reported by the respondents as very poor (37.5%, n = 12), poor (34.4%, n = 11), moderate (3.1%, n = 1), good (21.9%, n = 7) and excellent (3.1%, n = 1) with a weak consensus (IQR = 2.3; Likert mean = 2.2, SD = 1.2). For the difficulties with digital services, the respondents reported that they never (9.4%, n = 3), rarely (21.8%, n = 7), sometimes (28.1%, n = 9), often (31.2%, n = 10), always (9.4%, n = 3) encounter difficulties in using city-provided digital services, with a moderate consensus level (IQR = 2; Likert mean = 3, SD = 1.1). Furthermore, the experts reported that Amman’s efforts in improving digital accessibility are very poor (9.4%, n = 3), poor (25%, n = 8), moderate (31.25%, n = 10), good (25%, n = 8), excellent (9.4%, n = 3), with a moderate consensus (IQR = 2; Likert mean = 3, SD = 1.1). This suggests that while some accessibility initiatives exist, they may not be sufficiently comprehensive or visible to elderly residents.

For the proposed solutions and priority rating, expanding the coverage and access to public Wi-Fi was rated as most priority (34.4%, n = 11), high (25%, n = 8), moderate (15.6%, n = 5), low (15.6%, n = 5), and very low (9.4%, n = 3). This solution had a low consensus (IQR = 2.25%; Likert mean = 2.4, SD = 1.3). Offering digital literacy programs for residents was viewed as most priority (31.2%, n = 10), high (25%, n = 8), moderate (25%, n = 8), low (9.4%, n = 3), and very low (9.4%, n = 3). This solution had a moderate to low consensus (IQR = 2; median =2; Likert mean = 2.4, SD = 1.3). Improving the user-friendliness of digital services was reported as most priority (34.4%, n = 11), high (21.9%, n = 7), moderate (18.8%, n = 6), low (15.6%, n = 5), and very low (9.4%, n = 3). This solution had a low consensus (IQR = 2.25%; median =2; Likert mean = 2.4, SD = 1.3). Ensuring digital services are accessible to people with disabilities was reported as most priority (31.2%, n = 10), high (31.2%, n = 10), moderate (12.5%, n = 4), low (12.5%, n = 4), and very low (12.5%, n = 4). This solution had a low consensus (IQR = 2.25%; median = 2; Likert mean = 2.4, SD = 1.4). Regularly updating and maintaining digital infrastructure on the other hand was viewed as most priority (34.4%, n = 11), high (31.2%, n = 10), moderate (12.5%, n = 4), low (9.4%, n = 3), and very low (12.5%, n = 4). This solution had a moderate to low consensus (IQR = 2%; median =2, Likert mean = 2.3, SD = 1.4) (

Table 4. The consensus analysis based on IQR values for the proposed solutions for technological barriers.

	Proposed Solution	Median Rating	IQR	Consensus Level	Interpretation
1	Expanding the coverage and access to public Wi-Fi	2	2.25	low	Median priority with low consensus. 62.625% rated this as a high priority.
2	Offering digital literacy programs for residents	2	2	Moderate to low	Median priority with moderate to low consensus. 56.2% rated this as a high priority.
3	Improving the user-friendliness of digital services	2	2.25	Moderate to low	Median priority solution with moderate to low consensus. 57.3% rated this as a high priority.
4	Ensuring digital services are accessible to people with disabilities	2	2.25	Moderate to low	Median priority with moderate to low consensus. 62.4% rated this as a high priority.
5	Regularly updating and maintaining digital infrastructure	2	2	Moderate	Median priority with moderate consensus. 64.8% rated this as a high priority.

).

3.2.5. Financial Barriers, Proposed Solutions, and Challenges

Financial barriers analysis for elderly residents in Amman revealed that the experts reported the affordability of living in Amman as very poor (21.9%, n = 7), poor (40.6%, n = 13), moderate (25%, n = 8), good (9.4%, n = 3), and excellent (3.1%, n = 1) with an IQR of (1) and a Likert mean score of (2.3, SD = 1) suggesting high to moderate consensus. For the financial help old citizens need to meet their basic needs in Amman, the responses showed that this never occurs (6.25%, n = 2), rarely (3.1%, n = 1), sometimes (28.1%, n = 9), often (37.5%, n = 12), and always (25%, n = 8) with a moderate to weak consensus (IQR = 2) and a Likert mean of (3.7, SD = 1.1). The third barrier rating Amman’s efforts to improve its old residents’ financial security was seen by the experts as very poor (40.6%, n = 13), poor (28.1%, n = 9), moderate (25%, n = 8), and good (6.2%, n = 2) with an IQR of (2) suggesting moderate to low consensus.

The proposed solutions for the financial barriers revealed that encouraging the establishment of businesses that offer affordable goods and services (IQR = 2; median = 2; Likert mean = 2, SD = 1.2) was classified as high priority by (43.8%, n = 14) and low priority by (6.2%, n = 2) of respondents. Implementing policies that promote economic stability (IQR = 2; median = 1; Likert mean = 2, SD = 1.3) was classified as high priority by (53.1%, n = 17) and low priority by (6.2%, n = 2) of respondents. Providing financial literacy programs for residents (IQR = 2; median = 2.5; Likert mean = 2.4, SD = 1.2) was classified as high priority by (31.2%, n = 10) and low priority by (3.1%, n = 1) of respondents. Offering subsidies or financial aid for low-income residents (IQR = 2.25; median = 2; Likert mean = 2.4, SD = 1.4) was classified as high priority by (37.5%, n = 12) and low priority by (12.5%, n = 4) of respondents. Increasing the supply of affordable housing options (IQR = 1; median = 1.5; Likert mean = 2, SD = 1.2) was classified as high priority by (50%, n = 16) and low priority by (3.1%, n = 1) of respondents.

For the challenges, the results indicate that for “Economic Inequality”, the IQR is (1) with a Likert mean of (1.7; SD = 0.8), suggesting relatively high consensus. “Funding” and “Economic Instability” both have an IQR of (2), indicating more varied opinions. Furthermore, 43.75% (n = 14) rated Economic Inequality as most efficient (1), while (37.5%, n = 12) rated Economic Instability as least efficient (3), Funding was rated as most efficient by (40.6%, n = 13) and least efficient by (28.1%, n = 9), while Economic Instability was rated as most efficient by (31.25%, n = 10) and least efficient by (37.5%, n = 12).

3.2.6. Political Barriers, Proposed Solutions, and Challenges

This study assessed three key dimensions of political participation and transparency in Amman, using a 5-point Likert scale. The transparency of the city of Amman local authorities was reported as very poor (21.9%, n = 7), poor (43.75%, n = 14), moderate (21.9%, n = 7), good (9.4%, n = 3), and excellent (3.1%, n = 1) with an IQR of (1) and a Likert mean of (2.3, SD = 1) suggesting high to moderate consensus. How elderly voices are heard in local government decisions was viewed as never (21.9%, n = 7), rarely (37.5%, n = 12), sometimes (21.9%, n = 7), and often (18.7%, n = 6) with a high to moderate consensus (IQR = 1; Likert mean = 2.4, SD = 1). Amman efforts in promoting civic participation was reported as very poor (16.6%, n = 5), poor (40.6%, n = 13), moderate (25%, n = 8), good (16.6%, n = 5), and excellent (3.1%, n = 1) with an IQR of (1; Likert mean = 2.5, SD = 1) suggesting high to moderate consensus.

The proposed solutions for these challenges showed varied priority ratings. The consensus analysis indicated that “Encouraging resident participation in decision-making processes” had a median of (1- Highest priority) and IQR of (2.25) (low consensus) with a Likert mean of (2.2, SD = 1.4), “Promoting transparency in government processes” had a median of (2) and IQR of (2) with a Likert mean of (2.1, SD = 1.2) (moderate to low consensus), “Implementing policies that protect the rights of residents” had a median: (2) and IQR of (2) with a Likert mean of (2.3, SD = 1.2) (Moderate to low consensus), and “Offering platforms where residents can voice out their concerns” had a median of (2) and IQR of (3) with a Likert mean of (2.2, SD = 1.4) (low consensus), while “Regularly conducting surveys” had a median of (2) and IQR of (3) with a Likert mean of (2.4, SD = 1.4) (Low consensus). Priority analysis showed that “Encouraging resident participation” shows the highest priority with (53.12%, n = 17) rating it as highest priority (1), “Promoting transparency” received the second-highest proportion of top priority ratings (40.62%, n = 13). All solutions have a median of 1 or 2, indicating generally high perceived importance.

For the challenges, “Public Trust” has the lowest IQR (1) with a Likert mean of (1.7, SD = 0.75), indicating strongest consensus among experts, with (75%, n = 24) rating it between (1 and 2). “Political Will” IQR of (1.25) with a Likert mean of (2.3, SD = 1.2) shows moderate agreement, skewed toward “most efficient” (56.2%, n = 18 at 1). “Bureaucracy” exhibits the widest dispersion (IQR = 2) with a Likert mean of (1.8, SD = 8), suggesting least consensus on its relative importance despite (81.2%, n = 26) rating it as either most significant or significant. Medians reinforce these rankings where “Public Trust and Bureaucracy” both median equals (2), while “Political Will” is seen as relatively more “efficient” (median = 1).

3.2.7. Coping with COVID-19 Pandemic

This survey provided the experts with five proposed solutions that could have helped older adults in Amman cope better with the COVID-19 Pandemic. The first solution “Implementing effective and timely health protocols” was viewed by the experts as (40%, n = 13) high priority, (40%, n = 13) moderate priority, and (20%, n = 7) low priority with a moderate to high consensus (IQR = 1; median = 2; Likert mean = 2.1, SD = 1.1). “Utilizing technology for contact tracing and information dissemination” solution was reported as (80%) high priority and (20%) moderate priority with a strong consensus (IQR = 0; median = 1; Likert mean = 2.3, SD = 1.2). Similarly, “Offering telemedicine services” was viewed as (100%, n = 32) high priority with a strong consensus (IQR = 0; median = 1; Likert mean = 2.4, SD = 1). “Ensuring the availability of health services during lockdowns” was reported as (40%, n = 13) medium priority and (60%, n = 20) medium-low priority with moderate consensus (IQR = 1; median = 3; Likert mean = 2.1, SD = 1.1). “Implementing policies that protect the welfare of residents during a pandemic” solution was reported as (34%, n = 11) medium priority, and as highest priority by 9.4% (n = 3), with a low consensus (IQR = 2; median = 3; Likert mean = 2.1, SD = 1.1).

For the challenges faced during the implementation of these solutions, the results indicate that “Balancing Priorities” shows moderate to high agreement (IRQ = 1; median = 1.5; Likert mean = 1.6, SD = 0.7) toward high efficiency (50%, n = 16 rated most efficient, 34.4%, n = 11 moderate); “Information Dissemination” has moderate to high agreement (IRQ = 1; median = 2; Likert mean = 1.9, SD = 0.7) with (53.1%, n = 17) chose moderate efficiency, (28.1%, n = 9) high and (18.8 %, n = 6) low; “Healthcare Capacity” has the least consensus (IRQ = 2; median = 2; Likert mean = 2, SD = 0.8) and more polarized views where (28.1%, n = 9) rated most efficient, (40.6%, n = 13) moderate, (31.2%, n = 10) least efficient.

3.3. Suggestions and Additional Comments

In this section, the experts shared any additional insights, suggestions, or comments regarding the challenges faced by citizens, especially the elderly, in Amman during the pandemic.

The results revealed several key themes and suggestions:

1.

Community and Social Support

• Establish community centers and social clubs near elderly residences to promote social cohesion. Creating large parks and recreational areas can encourage physical activity and social interaction.

2.

Urban and Transportation Design

• Incorporate age-friendly features such as ramps, elevators, and accessible sidewalks in urban planning. Implement smart city solutions gradually to allow community adaptation.

3.

Technology Integration

• Embed digital technology in public infrastructure to assist elderly citizens. Develop real-time transportation information systems that are accessible to seniors.

4.

Policy and Financial Measures

• Provide social welfare programs for the elderly. Ensure that government policies are inspiring, well-funded, and strategically planned to support elderly needs.

5.

Education and Literacy

• Enhance digital and financial literacy among the elderly to empower their independence and participation in smart city initiatives.

6.

Health and Well-being

• Promote health services and care facilities tailored to the elderly, ensuring their well-being and access to necessary resources.

4. Discussion

4.1. Dealing with the COVID-19 Pandemic

The responses establish that the experts perceive that Amman city overall response was moderate to good, in agreement with the results of the comparative study conducted by [21] who concluded that the city response was good and aligned with WHO policies, compared to other cities like Abu Dhabi. Specifically, the experts view technology implementation by the city of Amman in managing the pandemic with moderate satisfaction suggesting that current technology solutions are acceptable but have room for improvement. In addition, the results suggest that the elderly population faced significant digital barriers, urging the need for targeted digital inclusion programs for elderly citizens. These programs have been gaining wide attention where several countries focus on digital inclusion, particularly for the elderly populations. Research suggests that these efforts should combine governmental, social, and other efforts to achieve social and digital inclusion. Mixing virtual with physical environments could serve as a suitable environment for interconnectedness at small and large scales [34]. Jordan could also benefit from experiences from surrounding countries such as Saudi Arabia where [35] reported that (19) applications were launched to serve healthcare services during the pandemic. In addition, the strong correlation (r = 0.64) between city response (Q1) and technology use (Q2) suggests that technology implementation was a key factor in perceived response effectiveness. Similarly, the high correlation (r = 0.60) between digital access (Q5) and elderly needs (Q6) indicates that digital inclusion is critical for addressing elderly populations’ needs during crises. Indeed, studies have shown that social media, such as Facebook, was effective in disseminating information during the pandemic in Jordan [36] and other regions around the world [37].

4.2. Barriers, Solutions and Challenges to Age-Friendly Amman

The results reveal substantial challenges in physical accessibility for elderly individuals in Amman, particularly in public transportation. While there is recognition of some improvement efforts by the city, the frequency of encountering inaccessible buildings remains high. These findings highlight the need for targeted interventions to enhance physical accessibility in urban planning and development to better accommodate the needs of older adults in smart city initiatives. Similarly, Ref. [38] reported that active transportation is not often achieved in age-friendly cities and recommended the implementation of age-friendly policies and practices.

The results suggest that while improving physical infrastructure (particularly sidewalks and crosswalks) is seen as most critical, all proposed solutions are considered important with varying degrees of consensus. This indicates a multi-faceted approach is needed to address physical barriers for older people in Amman. Nonetheless, retrofitting projects commonly entail high costs, structural modifications, elevators, installation of ramps, and compliance with accessibility standards. These projects require detailed financial plans. In Amman, where financial efforts are “poor” and “budget constraints” is a challenge, conducting such projects requires acquiring financial funding. Such mechanisms may include governmental funding, international aid, public–private sectors partnerships, sustainable financing, and community funds. However, retrofitting the entire city of Amman entails long-term projects particularly with constraints such as “infrastructure limitations” and “regulatory hurdles”.

For the environmental dimensions, the results highlight that environmental factors, particularly air quality, represent significant barriers for elderly individuals in Amman. The findings suggest that while some environmental management efforts are in place, they are perceived as inadequate or inconsistently implemented. Smart city initiatives should prioritize improving air quality and waste management systems, with particular attention to areas frequented by elderly residents. Indeed, research has shown that air quality is of paramount significance to age-friendly cities. Studies have highlighted that air pollution poses higher risks for older population and could increase the risk of illnesses [39].

Furthermore, the creation of more green spaces emerged as the most prioritized solution, though all four proposed solutions were generally considered important (median ≤ 2). The moderate consensus (IQR = 2) across all solutions suggests that while there is general agreement on their importance, there are still varying perspectives among stakeholders that would benefit from further discussion in subsequent Delphi studies. The most significant challenge was reported to be the “cost”, in agreement with the challenges for physical barriers solutions suggesting a consensus amongst the experts that this is a well-recognized challenge in the context of Jordan. The cost has been previously viewed as a challenge for the implementation of urban green spaces [40]. Studies reported that using recycled greywater [41] or reflective roofs [42] could reduce the cost of the implementation of green spaces in smart cities.

From a social aspect, the results suggest that while community events are not perceived as highly exclusive, there remains significant room for improvement in making them more inclusive for the elderly. This is further confirmed by the experts concern regarding social isolation for elderly citizens in Amman and the consensus toward insufficient efforts in promoting social inclusion. These results agree with previous studies that reported social inclusion as a key issue for older populations [43]. Since older people do not commonly contribute to the economy of their societies, they are treated as burdens placing them at higher risks of depression and morbidity [44]. The results of this study included “implementing policies for diversity and inclusion” and “offering social programs that target isolated individuals” as solutions to social barriers. Furthermore, the challenges in implementing these solutions primarily comprised “resistance to change” and “lack of understanding”. The significance of this aspect for building age-friendly smart cities has been addressed in several studies such as the WHO new guide on building age-friendly cities [45]. Ref. [46] explored the experience of older people in age-friendly smart cities with a focus on China. The authors reported the need for enhancing social participation and social support, encouraging interdependence among older adults, and reconciling of the age-friendly agenda with smart city policy and practices to ensure that social inclusion is achieved.

The results addressing the technological aspects highlight a critical infrastructure gap that may impede elderly citizens’ digital participation. While, regularly updating and maintaining digital infrastructure, expanding the coverage and access to public Wi-Fi and offering digital literacy programs for residents emerge as significant solutions to ensure that the older population in Amman has what it requires to adapt to the fast-pacing technological advancements. Nonetheless, several factors contribute to inadequate internet infrastructure in Jordan. A main factor could be the lack of telecommunication markets liberalization, resulting in monopolized services [47]. The World Bank report also reports on fragmented regional markets that contribute to the digital divide between urban and rural areas due to uneven distribution of internet infrastructure. In addition, the high cost of broadband services along with insufficient incentives limit the investment in expanding and upgrading telecommunication networks. Thus, the observed poor Wi-Fi availability is not an isolated outcome but reflects a deep systemic issue related to technological adoption, market structure, regulatory frameworks, and investment incentives, within the broader MENA region [47]. The consensus in this study is strongest regarding difficulties with digital services and perceptions of accessibility efforts, particularly public Wi-Fi availability, since smart cities generally aim to modernize urban management through technological innovations [48]. The technological infrastructure in smart cities entails technology, institution, and community aspects [49]. In Amman, these three aspects should be addressed to ensure appropriate infrastructure is in place to enable older citizens to engage in the city’s efforts in transforming into age friendly.

The results also reveal significant financial challenges facing elderly residents in Amman. The low affordability ratings combined with the high frequency of needed financial assistance suggest a substantial gap between elderly citizens’ financial resources and living costs. It has been reported that economic growth is a common target for smart cities [50] which commonly increases housing prices and results with the issue of affordability of housing for the elderly [51].

The city’s efforts to address these barriers through special discounts and complimentary entries are perceived as insufficient. The consensus is strongest regarding affordability, indicating reliable agreement among experts about the severity of this issue. The financial assistance needs show good consensus, with a clear trend indicating that most elderly citizens frequently need financial support. The analysis suggests that economic policies and housing solutions are considered the highest priorities. Affordable business initiatives also received strong support, while financial literacy and subsidies show more varied responses among participants. Furthermore, the highest consensus on economic inequality suggests it is an important challenge to address. These findings suggest a need for more comprehensive financial support systems and improved city-level initiatives to address the economic challenges faced by elderly residents in Amman.

The experts’ consensus across all three dimensions of political barriers reveals that systematic challenges, limited engagement, and room for improvement need to be addressed, with “Encouraging resident participation” as the highest priority solution. These findings agree with other studies that report that regardless of the importance of inclusion in smart cities, older people often encounter age-related barriers that hinder efforts of inclusion [13]. In addition, smart cities might adopt a universal standard that does not necessarily meet the older population needs resulting in their exclusion [52].

For the “coping with the COVID-19 pandemic”, the results suggest that technological solutions (telemedicine and contact tracing) are considered the highest priorities with strong consensus among experts. Health protocols implementation showed more varied opinions, while welfare policies and health services availability were consistently rated as medium to lower priorities. The challenges mainly focused on “Balancing Priorities” and “Information Dissemination” as main challenges to be resolved.

4.3. Comparative Analysis

It is important to compare the results of this study and the overall efforts of Amman in becoming a smart, age-friendly city with other established smart cities such as Barcelona. Amman is an emerging, in the early stages, smart city, facing significant infrastructural and socio-economic challenges [23], while Barcelona is a mature smart city, offering a valuable case study for comparison [53].

The approach to a smart city adopted by Amman is primarily driven by the immediate needs of its residents, particularly the elderly. However, there are significant barriers to Amman’s progress. Barcelona represents a more advanced stage of smart city development [54]. The smart city movement in Barcelona started with energy-oriented policies and spread to all sectors. It is thought that the smart city will contribute to creating a sustainable city, ensuring citizen participation and mobility, described as transverse growth [55]. With its smart city model, Barcelona has improved public services, access to information, infrastructure, and highly creative business opportunities [56].

The comparison between Amman and Barcelona highlights two different stages and approaches to smart city development. Amman’s journey is defined by its focus on addressing fundamental urban challenges and ensuring the well-being of its elderly population, a focus that was emphasized by the COVID-19 pandemic. Barcelona, on the other hand, demonstrates the potential of a technology-driven smart city strategy, while also illustrating the importance of evolving to address social and environmental concerns [55]. For Amman, the path forward involves a concerted effort to overcome its infrastructural and socio-economic barriers, while continuing to prioritize the needs of its most vulnerable citizens. For Barcelona, the challenge is to ensure that its advanced technological capabilities are used to create a more equitable, sustainable, and inclusive city for all [56]. Both cities, in their own ways, underscore the importance of a human-centric approach to smart city development.

4.4. Proposed Age-Friendly Plan for Amman

Based on the outcomes of the current study and in line with the WHO guidelines, the following plan could serve as a guide for the city to become more age friendly.

1-

Outdoor Spaces

• Universal Design Implementation: Enforcing universal design principles in all new public and private construction to ensure accessibility for all ages and abilities, including ramps, wider doorways, and accessible restrooms [45]. For existing structures, prioritize retrofitting key public buildings and transportation hubs with age-friendly features such as ramps, elevators, and clear signage. This should be a phased approach, focusing on high-traffic areas first.
• Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvement: Enhance and maintain sidewalks and crosswalks. Implement sufficient resting points and benches along pedestrian routes [43].
• Development of Green Spaces: Creation and maintenance of more green spaces and parks. These should be easily accessible, well-maintained, and offer opportunities for physical activity and social interaction [40]. Consider cost-effective solutions for green space implementation, such as using recycled greywater or reflective roofs.

2-

Transportation

• Accessible Public Transport: Ensure all public transportation (buses, future metro) is fully accessible with features like low-floor entry, designated seating for elderly, and clear announcement systems. Implement real-time transportation information systems accessible to seniors.
• Subsidized Transportation: Explore options for subsidized or free public transportation for elderly citizens to encourage their mobility and participation in city life.
• Safe Walking Routes: Complement accessible public transport with safe and well-maintained walking routes to and from transport hubs.

3-

Housing

• Affordable Housing Initiatives: Develop and implement policies that promote the availability of affordable, age-friendly housing options, including subsidized housing, rent control, and incentives for developers to build age-friendly units [51].
• Home Modification Programs: Establish programs that provide financial assistance or technical support for elderly residents to modify their homes for increased safety and accessibility (e.g., grab bars, wider doorways, stairlifts).

4-

Social Participation

• Community Centers and Social Clubs: Establish and support community centers and social clubs, especially near elderly residences, to promote social cohesion and provide opportunities for interaction and engagement.
• Inclusive Community Events: Design and promote community events that are inclusive and accessible to elderly citizens, considering their interests, mobility, and communication needs.
• Intergenerational Programs: Foster intergenerational programs that bring together different age groups, promoting mutual understanding and support.

5-

Respect and Social Inclusion

a.

Public Awareness Campaigns: Launch public awareness campaigns to promote positive perceptions of aging and highlight the contributions of older adults to society. Address ageism and stereotypes.

b.

Diversity and Inclusion Policies: Implement policies that explicitly promote diversity and inclusion across all sectors, ensuring that the needs and perspectives of older adults are considered in urban planning and service delivery.

c.

Combat Social Isolation: Offer social programs specifically targeting isolated individuals, providing outreach and support to reintegrate them into community life.

6-

Civic Participation and Employment

• Encourage Resident Participation: Create accessible platforms and mechanisms for elderly citizens to participate in local governance, urban planning, and decision-making processes. This includes elderly advisory committees and community forums.
• Flexible Employment Opportunities: Promote policies and initiatives that support flexible employment opportunities for older adults who wish to continue working, including part-time jobs, telecommuting, and mentorship programs.
• Volunteer Programs: Develop and promote volunteer programs that leverage the skills and experience of older adults, allowing them to contribute to their communities.

7-

Communication and Information

• Expand Public Wi-Fi and Digital Access: Significantly expand the coverage and access to public Wi-Fi in public spaces, community centers, and transportation hubs.
• Digital Literacy Programs: Develop and offer comprehensive digital literacy programs tailored for the elderly, focusing on practical skills for using digital services, online communication, and accessing information. These programs should combine governmental, social, and other efforts to achieve social and digital inclusion.
• Accessible Information Formats: Ensure that all public information (e.g., city services, health information, event schedules) is available in multiple accessible formats, including large print, audio, and simplified digital interfaces.

8-

Community Support and Health Services

a.

Comprehensive Financial Support Systems: Implement more comprehensive financial support systems for elderly residents, including enhanced pensions, social welfare programs, and targeted financial assistance for living costs. Address economic inequality as a significant challenge.

b.

Affordable Business Initiatives: Support and promote affordable business initiatives that cater to the needs of the elderly, providing essential goods and services at reasonable prices.

c.

Tailored Health Services: Promote and expand health services and care facilities specifically tailored to the elderly, ensuring easy access to necessary medical resources, preventive care, and long-term care options. This includes telemedicine as highlighted during the pandemic.

5. Conclusions

Amman’s path to becoming age-friendly requires a comprehensive, multifaceted approach that addresses current socio-economic, infrastructural, and technological barriers. Through a systematic implementation of the plan based on the eight WHO domains, the city can be more inclusive and supportive of the well-being and participation of older adults. The outcomes of this study emphasize the significance of implementing the solutions to overcome challenges and barriers to achieve the desired goal of an age-friendly smart city with digital equity.

6. Limitations and Future Research

This study provides an outlook into Amman response to the COVID-19 pandemic and digital equity. Nonetheless, some limitations should be acknowledged. The study sample (32 experts) could introduce sampling bias related to sample characteristics and the representation of the wide range of stakeholders. Furthermore, the Delphi approach prevents direct interactions between the experts which could limit the ability to produce novel perspectives and discussions.

Future research should focus on implementing initiatives and measuring their effectiveness and impact on the quality of life for older adults in Amman. In addition, detailed comparative studies with other emerging smart cities could add valuable information to understanding Amman’s path towards becoming an age-friendly smart city.