A Space for the Elderly: Inclusion Through Design

Abstract

Awareness of design when planning public urban spaces assumes particular importance through its mission to meet the diverse needs of the different segments within the community. The elderly is considered one of the pivotal segments, with their influence on strengthening social cohesion, fortifying values, and upholding traditions. On the other hand, such a segment demands special physical, behavioral, and mental requirements that would entail specific consideration in the design process of public common spaces. The study aimed to identify and evaluate the most relevant and important indicators pertaining to the most effective design of an age-friendly public space, with community parks taken as a particular case. The study relies on a mixed approach, combining desk research, expert views, the Delphi technique, and the Analytical Hierarchy Process to achieve that purpose. It resulted in a group of sourced, filtered, and evaluated indicators classified into Physical, Experiential, and Social/Emotional categories, which were evaluated by a mixed representative group of academics, practitioners, governmental officials, and end users, being the elderly or their caretakers. Focus was placed on the central park in the Dahiyat Al-Hussein suburb in Amman, Jordan, which was utilized as a contextual case through which a refined design framework was extracted. This framework serves as a potential base that can be expanded and adapted to create a more generalizable model.

1. Introduction

Community living is all about co-existence, which is the inclusion and cohabitation of urban areas by the different segments of the community. The proper design of urban areas would accordingly entail the accommodation of a range of requirements, in which the elderly represent a vital segment. Aging is a significant process that, if not managed carefully, could have a negative impact on an individual’s wellbeing, which in turn can affect the community at large. Although there is no global definition of aging—that is, the point at which an individual is judged to “have aged”—Kalinkara [1] associates the beginning of such a process with the reduction of vital activities and the ability to adapt within a changing environment, defined by some as the age of 65, where both issues are concerns of urban and spatial dimensions.

The increase in the number of aged residents within a neighborhood offers both advantages and disadvantages. Positively speaking, aging residents offer more stability within their places of residence. Most would be homeowners and, accordingly, would give more time and attention to the local affairs of their own community [2]. They become more open to volunteering and charity work that aim to uplift the welfare of their neighborhoods and, on a more personal level, bring their own family members together, encouraged by the strong sense of care towards the elderly family members [3]. On the other hand, aging members in a neighborhood require more services and attention, geared by a supporting surrounding environment. For example, elderly persons need enablement and safety, in consideration of their increasing limitations and potential disabilities. The absence of such an environment would force these individuals to remain confined to their own homes, leading to negative health and social consequences due to seclusion [4].

The elderly are underrepresented in Middle Eastern communities compared to Western countries. This is mainly a result of higher birth rates and higher mortality rates attained in Middle Eastern communities, resulting in a younger population. Despite their lower representation, incorporating the elderly’s views in the design of spaces they use is just as important as the inclusion of any other segment of society, as all groups deserve equal care and support of their basic needs. This matter is worthy of the attention of multiple stakeholders, including designers, property owners, municipal authorities, NGOs of relevance, in addition to the end users, where the development of age-friendly cities along with the wellbeing of the community at large are bound to result in a healthier and prosperous community—economically and socially. These endeavors would further contribute to the creation of sustainable cities hosting a harmonious resident base.

The World Health Organization (WHO) identifies an age-friendly city as one that offers continuous care and support to its residents throughout their age stages, where economic, social, and health affairs are properly planned, designed, and maintained. This is reflected in the urban development of cities through offering opportunities for the elderly to engage in active and normalized living routines, where initiatives are in place to maintain their health, physical, and mental activity, which accordingly results in an elevated quality of life [5].

Aging brings into focus a number of positive and negative factors that start to affect the daily routines and quality of life of the elderly. Practically, the elderly have more time on their hands and thus the ability to pursue more leisure activities, especially after retirement, which opens the door for further social enrichment of their lives. On a negative front, a segment of the elderly remains negatively impacted by economic, physical, and health pressures that counter elevated social interaction and engagement. Potential financial stresses associated with having a lower income, becoming more prone to aging and chronic diseases, and reduced engagement with a social circle dampen the possibility of expanding social activities. Furthermore, the overprotective nature of family members surrounding the elderly might further hamper the expansion of their social circle, especially when a safe and sound surrounding environment is found lacking, due to factors that might include hazardous pedestrian movement, unsafe traffic, and high crime rates, among others. This renders the elderly a segment of society that is seen as isolated and dependent on others most of the time [6]. All such factors render the surrounding physical environment and public spaces crucial to the physical, social, and mental wellbeing of the elderly [7].

Indeed, the physical environment plays a key role in ensuring an age-sensitive quality of life, where the positioning of such a community segment is viewed as either more vulnerable or as having particular needs for attention and care, compared to other segments. Factors such as the quality of internal and external spaces, safety and security, provision of services, and adequacy of pedestrian areas become significant and influential considerations for debate [8]. Social aspects promoting matters such as engagement and independent living are also key, as they encourage the elderly not only to make use of the facilities and services to care for themselves but also to engage with individuals from other age groups, fortifying communal bonding and transferring knowledge and wisdom through the generations. These matters position age-friendly (specifically, elderly-friendly) cities, neighborhoods, and venues as being of critical concern to policymakers, designers, contractors, and other stakeholders.

When considering urban spaces for the elderly, parks offer a space that is potentially more available to elderly users compared with other segments. Parks offer certain qualities that encourage visitors; they are an integral part of a healthy urban space and a place for multiple physical, sporting, and social activities and interactions. Since the elderly are less inclined to move out of the neighborhood, parks offer an outlet for spending a significant part of the day. Such use can result in improved physical and mental health, further bonding with their own communities and neighborhoods, as well as decreased levels of stress [9,10]. Parks are useful places to restore wellbeing by building stronger ties to nature; they are also important in addressing certain health conditions by offering fresh air to breathe and uplifting sights [11].

The spread of neighborhood parks has been associated in multiple studies with a positive impact on the health of residents of all ages. They offer an easily reachable option for the elderly to access and enjoy. They further offer neighborhood residents an increasing and inherent familiarity with their physical features, nature of activities, and regular visitors [12]. In terms of sustainability, the development of age-friendly spaces represents one of the important pillars in achieving social sustainability, where attention paid to specific community segments (such as the elderly) and their inclusion is an important enabler and evaluator of the overall quality of space. The inclusion of the views of such a group in urban design and development initiatives should accordingly gain further attention from the key stakeholders involved in the process.

Research on aging in general and elderly-friendly public space design has been quite limited in Jordan, as well as other Middle Eastern countries [13,14]. This can be attributed primarily to the smaller percentage that the elderly currently represent within these generally young societies. This also relates to the current challenging realities of the countries in this region, where a mix of economic and geopolitical concerns impacts the developed national agendas as well as related studies, in which elderly-specific matters are not a high priority. This research aims to fill this gap by developing a systematic approach that leads to the development of a structured framework for evaluating elderly-friendly public spaces in Jordan, with a particular neighborhood park taken as a main case study.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Jordan in Context: The Reality of Aging

Jordan is a country that presents promise embedded in challenge. It is a country with an ambitious, young community that faces multiple geopolitical and economic challenges in light of its positioning within a region struck by political instability, a lack of natural resources, and rising global concerns. Despite such challenges, national agendas and actions maintained continuous improvement of community services, part of which included elevated healthcare services, which resulted in an increase in life expectancy from 43.2 years in the 1950s to 73.8 years in 2015 [15].

While the Jordanian community is considered to be relatively young, with the percentage of the elderly stated at around 5.5% of the total population [16], it poses a number of challenges when elderly care is considered for multiple reasons. Firstly, the current low percentage of the elderly is expected to almost triple by 2050, according to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) report [15], reaching around 16.6%. Furthermore, the low current percentage of the elderly is met by a relatively high percentage of individuals under 18, which stands at around 49.3%. This significantly larger portion of society in need of adult care and supervision reduces the availability of care for the elderly. Lastly, and most importantly, in light of the economic situation in Jordan, a large portion of the elderly, estimated at around 26.3%, still maintain regular employment to secure a sustainable income after the age of sixty. This indicates a higher level of independence expected from the elderly, along with lower levels of external support provided. This is also exacerbated by the generally lower income levels prevalent in Jordan, along with rising prices of consumer products [17].

When discussing the provided support, it is important to highlight that, despite the improvements in healthcare services, the elderly part of the community is not well supported by governmental initiatives or policies. Economically, a smaller portion of the elderly are supported through pension arrangements after retirement. It is estimated that 25% of elderly people have no pension arrangements, and 66% are paid a pension that falls below the poverty line [18]. With regard to special services, the country falls short in its care for disabled people, which has a severe impact when considering the disability rate of those aged 65 and above stands at 49.3%, compared to 11.2% in other age categories [15]. The 2025 to 2030 national strategy for the elderly has recognized some critical areas requiring support, including economic security, healthcare, social care, voice, and protection from violence to avoid the detrimental impact from their low availability [19]. Nevertheless, resolving such concerns is part of Jordan’s future agenda, which still needs years to bear fruit. Most importantly, and in consideration of the level of independence the elderly must adopt throughout their lives, there is a shortfall in public space design strategies and plans that support an independent and healthy physical, social, and emotional experience for this segment of society.

2.2. What Makes an Elderly-Friendly Space

As people age, their physical mobility and range of movement become more restricted, confining them to their immediate built environment. A combination of factors influences such restricted movement, including physical impediments in strength and eyesight; for example, familiarity and control of their own residence compared to the surrounding public space, and resistance to a changing urban environment through modernization that changes the look and feel of their once-familiar surroundings. This makes the creation of an age-friendly public space ever more challenging. According to WHO [6], an appropriate built environment should improve the performance of the elderly and enable them to move beyond their limitations and/or disabilities.

A multiplicity of interconnected aspects can influence the rendering of a particular space as elderly-friendly. While such aspects can diversify to cover a wider spectrum that addresses what exactly forms a space in such a manner, it is important to seek means through which they can be categorized to achieve a common purpose. Jan Gehl [20] emphasized the importance of inclusion, where the elderly, as a significant part of the community, should be free to benefit from public spaces in a manner that is safe, engaging, and respectful. This would work through processes that would ensure equality between the different user categories through sustainable processes, influencers, and a generally supporting surrounding that enables societal resilience. Alexander et al. [21] went further to highlight the presence of localized, interconnected patterns that recurring within the cohesive enclosure, where buildings, streets, and squares are organically interrelated in creating the ultimate user experience.

Numerous studies have detailed the different aspects that frame an elderly-friendly space. Speck [22], similar to Gehl [20], addressed them through the lens of walkability. While such a view might provide a restricted sense of the larger view of space, it nevertheless offers general guidelines that would possibly reflect on the friendliness of any urban space. Speck emphasized a number of objectives an elderly-friendly space should cater for, including offering comfort, being useful to their particular needs, clarity of space purpose, and, accordingly, ease of use, and the aesthetic/behavioral attractiveness to magnify use. Loukaitou-Sideris et al. [12], on the other hand, emphasized purposes such as the suitability of the space to ergonomic needs, safety of provided facilities, proper maintenance and upkeep, and facilitating way-finding. WHO [5] defined an age-friendly surrounding as one that is safe, pleasant to see and experience, and provides access to most necessary destinations to support a healthy daily routine. A study by Mathew Greenwald and Associates [23] identified a number of key characteristics of an age-friendly community, including door-to-door transportation, availability of public transportation, facilities maintenance, and accessibility to public venues.

Table 1. Common indicators in the reviewed literature on public space design for the elderly.

#	Indicator	Sheikhazami & Aliakbari [24]	MG&A [23]	Soltip et al. [25]	Speck [22]	Loukaitou-Sideris et al. [12]	WHO [5]	Pei et al. [26]	Feldman & Oberlink [27]	Lak et al. [28]	Gabriel and Bowling [29]	Murphy et al. [30]	Robleda & Pachana [31]
1	Access to local transportation		x	x	x		x
2	Availability of surrounding care services	x				x						x
3	Nearby service availability					x	x	x
4	Security of public premises		x	x		x		x	x	x	x		x
5	Respect towards the elderly	x	x									x	x
6	Eased accessibility to public spaces		x		x		x
7	Elderly-focused urban policies		x			x							x
8	Special support facilities for the elderly				x	x		x		x
9	Support for pedestrian mobility			x	x
10	Elderly-friendly leisure activities					x			x		x	x	x
11	Healthiness of surrounding atmosphere	x	x				x						x
12	Clear way-finding signage and guides			x	x			x		x
13	Clear zoning for visitor segments		x			x				x
14	Sporting activities for the elderly			x		x							x
15	Acoustic comfort/verbal interaction	x				x			x		x
16	Connectedness to traditions/social norms		x			x							x
17	Access to groceries and food retail stores	x		x	x			x
18	Availability of green areas		x		x				x		x
19	Periodic public events and activities					x	x		x		x
20	Consideration of elderly’s views on space	x					x
21	Social and voluntary initiatives at site		x			x							x
22	Cleanliness of space		x		x		x			x		x	x
23	Reduction of obstacles to mobility				x	x		x
24	Mobility assistance (rails, ramps, etc.)			x	x			x		x	x
25	Effective lighting after dark	x		x		x		x	x	x	x
26	Comfortable parking spaces	x		x
27	Enablement of social networks		x			x			x		x	x	x
28	Options for family activities					x					x	x	x
29	Availability of shaded spaces			x	x		x
30	Low-cost services/facilities	x				x			x
31	Sitting facilities (benches, seats, etc.)	x		x	x			x
32	Separation of play/walking areas		x		x
33	Availability of toilet facilities	x	x
34	Spaces/different segment requirements				x
35	Readability/color-friendliness of signage	x		x	x			x		x
36	Fast-health-response/facilities		x			x			x		x		x
37	Ease of access from parking spaces			x			x
38	Pleasant appearance of space	x		x						x		x
39	Multiplicity of access points				x
40	Levelling of pedestrian walkways			x		x		x			x
41	Avoidance of excessive stairs/slopes	x			x
42	Walking assistance (canes, wheelchairs)				x					x
43	Width of pedestrian trails			x	x			x			x
44	Familiarity of regular visitors					x				x
45	Limitation of vandalism	x					x		x	x			x
46	Limitation of crowdedness	x					x
47	Draining and rainwater management			x
48	Waste disposal facilities			x		x							x
49	Enclosure within surrounding buildings	x	x									x

shows the indicators for public space design that were most frequently demonstrated in the reviewed literature of relevance.

A deeper inspection of the most recurring aspects within the reviewed literature reveals certain themes upon which they can be classified. Aspects relating to the general independent experience that a public space user encounters were among the most common, including nearby service facilities, readability of signage, fast-health-response facilities, access to local transportation, availability of green areas, and acoustic comfort. Aspects relating to the physical environment of the public space were also recurrent, including the security and cleanliness of the public space, effective lighting, availability of sitting facilities, and the leveling and width of pedestrian trails. On the other hand, aspects relevant to social inclusion and support had less representation, with aspects relating to the availability of leisure facilities, enablement of social networks, limitation of vandalism, intimacy of space, and periodic events and activities.

The design of spaces acquires a particular importance through its mission to ensure that the varied needs of different end-user segments are catered for in order to develop a truly livable space. This relates to the concept of human-centric design, where consideration is given to wider end user segments, and their particular needs and requirements are treated equally [32]. While many other aspects factor into a comprehensive design process, the views of different stakeholders are necessary to ensure the suitability of the designs to all, including the elderly. This entails not only obtaining the feedback of experts such as academics, designers, contractors, or governmental officials but also includes the views and perspectives of the end users themselves concerning their opinions on what the space design should accommodate, in light of their particular spatial needs [33]. In fact, a number of studies have revealed the positive impact of parks within neighborhoods on the physical, mental, and social health of their elderly residents, where positive and healthy habits are promoted in terms of physical activity, engagement with others, elevated sense of safety and independence, as well as natural stress relief [9,34].

Considering the multi-dimensional nature of designing elderly-friendly, sustainable urban spaces—specifically, parks—this study aims at identifying the key indicators to guide and evaluate such designs, using the collective views of a diverse group of participants to widen the range of perspectives and feedback. It utilizes the case of Dahiyat Al-Hussein Park, located in one of Amman’s authentic neighborhoods, and draws insights from local residents, along with relevant academics and experts, to determine the key elements of age-friendly park design. The practical and context-specific nature of the study highlights the need to involve relevant participants, in particular, the views of the elderly, whether as academics, practical experts, or end users. Accordingly, the research fills a gap in current literature, especially on a national level in Jordan, where the issue of age-friendly cities and public spaces is rarely addressed, especially through a multidisciplinary lens that considers elderly wellbeing and inclusion through design, regardless of the small size of this demographic within the local community.

3. Materials and Methods

The research adopted a mixed approach, combining quantitative and qualitative means in order to unpack what makes a park age-friendly. To identify the most impactful indicators that guide the design of such parks, the study combined desk research, the Delphi technique, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), and qualitative participant feedback to identify well-contextualized aspects that could guide the design of such public spaces. The research relied on a diverse set of participants that included academics, practitioners from the private and public sectors, governmental officials, and end users, namely, elderly residents or their caretakers, to maximize the relevance of its findings and outcomes.

Desk research aimed at reviewing an extensive set of previous literature, studies, and websites to identify the most recurrent indicators associated with the design for the elderly at large and public spaces in particular. From the outset, informal discussions with experts in the field were held to guide the search and review approach and the selection of keywords, ultimately resulting in an extensive set of indicators that would undergo further filtration, evaluation, and prioritization to best represent a locally contextualized best practice [35]. Themes relating to elderly-friendly cities, urban space design, open/public spaces, sustainable living, and healthy aging were among the key terms prioritized in the search for earlier literature to widen its range and source as many indicators and categories as possible through studies that focused on architecture, health, aging, and sustainable design. Considering the multidisciplinary nature of the subject, it was expected that only a few earlier studies would align with the scope of this research. For this reason, attention was focused on extracting the key areas of importance within the reviewed literature, which were then filtered and categorized in the stages that followed.

The research aimed to contextualize its outcomes by focusing on Dahiyat Al-Hussein Park, which is the vibrant central public space of the suburb (Figure 1). With the focus of the study applied to the needs of elderly-friendly public spaces, namely parks, the choice of this particular location assumes particular relevance, considering the history of the neighborhood. The suburb of Dahiyat Al-Hussein is one of the earliest housing projects in Jordan, developed by the Public Corporation for Housing in 1968 and first occupied in 1972. Being primarily a residential neighborhood, it consisted of around 500 apartments surrounding a main park, grocery outlets, and other communal services [36,37]. The concentric nature of the suburb ensured the cohesive community structure that remains intact today, and close social relations between residents are quite evident. The integrated services within the suburb, originally aimed at securing its self-sufficiency, have resulted in a stable base of residents who maintain a high level of familiarity with its facilities and public spaces [38].

The central park of the Dahiyat Al-Hussein suburb serves multiple uses through its design and features, providing areas that support sitting, walking, playing, and exercise (Figure 2). Its location within the neighborhood caters to its occupation by visitors for most of the day, especially when the weather conditions are suitable, and visitors from different age groups are among its most frequent users (Figure 3). The mix of facilities it offers, including walking paths, sitting areas, green landscapes, and playing areas, provides a multiplicity of options for both visitors and users.

Since multiple categories of participants were targeted by the research, sourcing them required several approaches, with targeted selection used to source academics and experts of relevance to the subject matter [39]. Snowball sampling was used to source participants from the user category, focusing on elderly participants or their caretakers. Initial user participants were selected through site visits, and they were asked to refer other users with similar characteristics. The aim was to obtain feedback from the most relevant participants, ensuring the research was informed by genuine needs and requirements. This method formed the basis for potential generalization, albeit with certain limitations [40]. However, this approach allowed access to an extended base of relevant participants to form a representative research sample [41] in terms of age, gender, educational background, and participant category. All participants were made aware of the research objectives and the methods used, and provided their consent based on the assurance of personal information confidentiality. Any quotes used pseudonyms when referring to participants to maintain confidentiality.

3.1. The Delphi Technique

A long list of possible indicators was accumulated, aimed at evaluating an effective design for an elderly-friendly public space. They were then classified into three representative thematic groups in order to ease filtration and evaluation. The grouping featured three distinct categories that included the following:

• Physical aspects: Indicators relevant to the physical appearance of the park and the main features it offered to facilitate use by the elderly in the public space. This included indicators that focused on space structure, safety and security, and physical features that offered assistance to elderly users.
• Experiential aspects: Induced feelings delivered to the elderly users in the space, driven by their experience of it. These included aspects of ease and reachability, the induction and facilitation of healthy behaviors and habits, and alignment with the key values and cultural tendencies of the elderly segment.
• Social/emotional aspects: Specificity of the communal surroundings of the elderly community. This includes contextual/social aspects that relate to their wellbeing and emotional care and indicators most relevant to strengthening the position of the elderly within the community, the facilitation of social connectedness and care, and supporting continuous engagement and a sense of belonging to their local community.

Informed opinions were sought from the different participant categories to assess the proposed indicators, their categorical classification, and relevance to the research topic. This started with a brief background on the research and its objectives, as well as what influenced its initial categorical structure and distributed indicators. In the first Delphi round, participants shared their views on the relevance of each indicator to the subject matter, the appropriateness of its placement within the suggested category, and the suggested removal or addition of indicators. Considering the nature of the research and the indicators that aimed to reflect the overall experience of the elderly, more emphasis was placed on participants’ general sensory reflections than on the specific definitions of such indicators when expressing their experiences and suggestions. The assessment of each indicator’s relevance to its proposed category used a five-point Likert scale, where “5” indicated an extremely strong relevance and “1” indicated an extremely weak relevance, or no relevance at all. The outcomes of each Delphi round were analyzed in terms of the average ratings assigned by the participants, as well as the standard deviation to monitor the consistency of the collective feedback. The cumulative outcomes of the first round were summarized and presented to the participants, who then reviewed, confirmed, or commented on the outcomes of the first round, including suggestions for adding, removing, or relocating certain indicators within the proposed categories. Upon concluding this stage, the refined framework was used as the basis for the paired comparisons that followed to assign the level of importance and significance of each indicator.

According to Braganca et al. [42], it is important to involve as many stakeholders as possible in debates that entail certain levels of complexity and layers, and where each category of participants offers a different view of the subject matter to assist in developing a relevant framework structured around the key indicators to ensure a holistic assessment [43]. Such an approach was chosen as it promises organized outcomes and views drawn from a set of participants demonstrating diversified backgrounds, interests, and areas of knowledge and expertise to reach consistent decision-making, in consideration of the multifaceted nature of the topic under study [44]. The quantitative accumulation of views received from participants with relevant knowledge, expertise, and first-hand experience promises to shed significant light on such a strategic purpose [45].

Table 2. Distribution of the expert and user panel.

Experts: Sample Distribution
Gender	Male	Female
	51.8%	49.2%
Background	Academia	Professional	Government
	40.0%	27.9%	32.1%
Education level	Graduate	Postgraduate
	47.7%	52.3%
Users: Sample Distribution
Gender	Male	Female
	46.8%	53.2%
Years (Y) in the neighborhood	Below 5 Years	5–10 Years	Above 10 Years
	26.3%	39.1%	34.6%
Education level	Secondary	Graduate	Postgraduate
	22.9%	61.5%	15.6%

demonstrates the characteristics of the participant sample used throughout the Delphi rounds. Individual feedback was analyzed to identify the key areas of consensus. Academics and practitioners provided expert insights while the users offered context-relevant, realistic views on the usability of such spaces by the elderly community. The questionnaire developed for the research purpose aimed at obtaining the demographic attributes of the participants, along with their views on the classification of the indicators, relevance of the categories, and relevance to the design of elderly-friendly public spaces.

The first Delphi round included 42 invited experts, of whom 40 responded in the first round, and 38 in the second. A total of 52 users were sourced, all of whom responded in the first round and 43 in the second.

3.2. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

AHP, originally developed by Thomas Saaty, offers a structured, multi-criteria decision-making tool used as a key decision-support approach. It focuses on the quantitative breakdown of a multi-faceted topic through conducting paired comparative assessments to reach and analyze the assigned levels of importance and significance [39].

This approach was employed in this study to assign the levels of importance to the proposed categories. It entailed indicators to assign specific weights to each category, which would eventually form a structured assessment framework. The assessment utilized a square matrix using Saaty’s nine-point scale system [46]. The rating scale ranges from 1, representing the equal weighting of the compared categories/indicators, to 9, representing the highest level of importance of the considered aspect compared to the others (Figure 4). The final weights assigned relied on the cumulative outcomes of the paired comparisons by summing the total points each category/indicator received throughout the conducted comparisons [47].

The consistency of the obtained results was checked using the consistency ratio (CR) to validate the outcomes and ensure minimal bias among participants, confirmed by a CR value that did not exceed 0.1 [46]. The formula below was the one used for calculating the consistency ratio:

CR = CI/RCI

CI = (λmax − n)/(n − 1)

• CI: the level of consistency
• λmax: the maximum eigenvalue of the matrix
• RCI: a random consistency index taken according to the number of factors

The research outcomes were supported by qualitative insights represented by the obtained participant comments, particularly from the users, which highlighted a number of key issues pertaining to the relevance and contextual suitability of the structured assessment framework.

4. Results

The participants shared their views via the two Delphi rounds and their evaluation of categories and indicators via the AHP. The purpose of the Delphi rounds was to ensure the relevance and suitability of the indicators included in each of the categories and to establish whether further indicators should be added, removed, or transferred between categories. The participants were aligned regarding the importance of the research subject and understood the need to provide suitable public spaces that enhance the quality of life and community engagement of the elderly. Accordingly, they were keen to ensure that the sourced indicators were representative, resulting in a meaningful assessment of public spaces from this perspective.

4.1. Categorical Findings

The participants were satisfied with the categories selected to represent the chosen indicators. The categories reflected the key pillars influencing what the elderly experience while using the public spaces. The three categories were similar in terms of their relative importance, with the Experiential category receiving a slightly higher rating (4.6, with a weight percentage of 38%), followed by the Social/Emotional category (4.2, with a weight percentage of 34%), and the ‘Physical’ category (3.8, with a weight percentage of 28%). Such views supported a balanced level of engagement as well as independence offered to the elderly while experiencing public spaces at their own pace and convenience. Rana, a resident of the Dahiyat Al-Hussein neighborhood, stated that the elderly should be offered the chance to enjoy such spaces without necessarily being accompanied by their relatives or caretakers, who are engaged with employment or housekeeping responsibilities for parts of the day. Nader, a practitioner, stated that empowering the elderly within their own community necessitates enabling them to enjoy activities independently while ensuring their safety and security. Baha, representing the academic’s view, stated that the importance of the Physical category is drawn from the ability of public spaces to cater to the needs of the elderly and enable them to manage their activities independently. If this is not possible, the physical preparedness of the space should be deemed inadequate.

Regarding the allocation of indicators within categories, the participants agreed on their suitability and placement during the two Delphi rounds, with some minor exceptions. Two indicators in the Physical category—“Levelling of pedestrian walkways” and “Avoidance of excessive stairs/slopes”—were considered similar in scope, so it was proposed that only one of them should remain. Likewise, comments were received regarding two indicators in the Experiential category—“Nearby service facilities” and “Access of groceries and food retail stores”, as well as “Availability of mobility assistance” and “Availability of free walking assistance equipment”—and it was recommended that the former should be retained in each case. In the same category, a new indicator was proposed and included, which was related to the availability of mobility assistance features, such as rails and ramps. Furthermore, it was recommended that two indicators be relocated from the Experiential category to the Social/Emotional category, namely, “Intimacy and Pleasant Appearance of Space” and “Consistency and familiarity of regular visitors”.

4.2. AHP Findings—Indicators

The paired comparisons conducted provided varying levels of importance to the indicators within each category. Focus was placed on indicators that most accurately reflected their respective categories and had the greatest relevance when assessing the suitability of a public space to its elderly users.

4.3. Physical Category Indicators

The relative level of importance assigned to the related indicators was determined by the participants’ views, as shown in

Table 3. Rating and weight of indicators—Physical category.

#	Indicator	Rating ± SD	Weight
1	Security of public premises	3.67 ± 0.61	8.5%
2	Special supporting facilities for the elderly	4.19 ± 0.82	10.1%
3	Clear zoning for different visitor segments	2.63 ± 0.46	4.3%
4	Cleanliness of space	4.21 ± 0.56	10.5%
5	Elimination/reduction of obstacles to mobility	3.41 ± 0.71	7.4%
6	Effective lighting after dark	4.35 ± 0.62	11.6%
7	Availability of comfortable parking spaces	1.78 ± 0.49	1.4%
8	Availability of shaded spaces	3.44 ± 0.60	7.9%
9	Availability of sitting facilities (benches, seats, etc.)	4.16 ± 0.78	9.6%
10	Separation of play areas from walking/sitting areas	2.47 ± 0.53	3.2%
11	Availability of toilet facilities	3.29 ± 0.66	7.7%
12	Ease of access from parking spaces	1.65 ± 0.72	2.3%
13	Multiplicity of access points	2.41 ± 0.81	2.7%
14	Leveling of pedestrian walkways	1.55 ± 0.64	1.7%
15	Width of pedestrian trails	3.22 ± 0.63	6.3%
16	Effective drainage and rainwater management	2.17 ± 0.84	2.6%
17	Availability of waste disposal facilities	2.19 ± 0.92	2.2%

and Figure 5. Indicators that received the highest ratings were those that showed the availability of public spaces for use by the elderly at different times of the day, allowing freedom of utilization. Highly rated indicators included effective lighting after dark (a rating of 4.35 and a weight of 11.6%); cleanliness of the space (a rating of 4.21 and a weight of 10.5%); special supporting facilities for the elderly (a rating of 4.19 and a weight of 10.1%); and the availability of sitting facilities (a rating of 4.16 and a weight of 9.6%). Another group of highly rated indicators included those that supported an extended duration for utilizing and enjoying the public space, including the security of public premises (a rating of 3.67 and a weight of 8.5%); availability of shaded spaces (a rating of 3.44 and a weight of 7.9%); elimination/reduction of obstacles to mobility (a rating of 3.41 and a weight of 7.4%); availability of toilet facilities (a rating of 3.29 and a weight of 7.7%); and the width of pedestrian trails (a rating of 3.22 and a weight of 6.3%). Less regarded indicators were those focused mainly on the accessibility of space and its internal segregation, which included the clear zoning for different visitor segments (a rating of 2.63 and a weight of 4.3%), separation of play areas from walking/sitting areas (a rating of 2.47 and a weight of 3.2%), multiplicity of access points (a rating of 2.41 and a weight of 2.7%), suitable drainage and rainwater management (a rating of 2.17 and a weight of 2.6%), and the availability of waste disposal facilities (a rating of 2.19 and a weight of 2.2%). Bassem, a practitioner, stated that the elderly cannot be expected to manage their leisure activities within a certain time period each day. Use of the public space should provide flexibility in terms of timing. Raya, a resident of the neighborhood, stated that her father tends to enjoy the nearby park at different times of the day, sometimes more than once during the same day, depending on whether he was visiting the park alone or accompanied by his grandchildren to play there.

A number of insights can be drawn from these findings. First, participants tended to emphasize indicators that highlight the freedom of the elderly to explore and engage with the public space, with particular emphasis on facilitating access at different times of the day. Participants also tended to place more weight on factors related to the general use of space by the elderly. However, there was no evidence for any particular focus on walkability (as a sport) versus general sitting or casual walking. More importantly, the lack of emphasis on indicators such as zoning or the separation of play areas from walking/sitting areas highlights the priority placed on inclusion and engagement of the elderly within public spaces. The openness to a mix of activities, for both the elderly and others, was seen as a positive impact.

4.4. Experiential Category Indicators

Although regarded as the highest priority in general, the indicators in this category scored varying levels of importance among the participants (

Table 4. Rating and weight of indicators—Experiential category.

#	Indicator	Rating ± SD	Weight
1	Access to local transportation	2.57 ± 0.51	6.6%
2	Availability of surrounding care services	2.23 ± 0.66	2.1%
3	Availability of nearby services	3.65 ± 0.45	8.4%
4	Ease of accessibility to public spaces	1.92 ± 0.63	5.2%
5	Support for pedestrian mobility	3.49 ± 0.58	8.1%
6	Healthiness of surrounding atmosphere	4.52 ± 0.53	9.9%
7	Clear wayfinding signage and guides	2.47 ± 0.78	5.8%
8	Acoustic comfort to allow verbal interaction	4.21 ± 0.61	9.3%
9	Availability of green areas	3.89 ± 0.49	8.7%
10	Availability of mobility assistance (rails, ramps, etc)	3.93 ± 0.94	8.9%
11	Availability of free/low-cost services/facilities	1.81 ± 0.65	4.4%
12	Fair distribution of spaces for segment requirements	2.32 ± 0.77	5.4%
13	Readability/color-friendliness of signage	2.77 ± 0.59	6.7%
14	Availability of fast-health-response/facilities	4.73 ± 0.46	10.5%

and Figure 6). The indicators that scored highest were those that focused on providing a healthy experience for elderly visitors, such as the availability of a fast health response (a rating of 4.73 and a weight of 10.5%); the healthiness of the surrounding atmosphere (a rating of 4.52 and a weight of 9.9%); and acoustic comfort to allow verbal interaction (a rating of 4.21 and a weight of 9.3%). The second group of indicators, in terms of importance, consisted of ones that related to enhancing the convenience of using public spaces from the perspective of the elderly. These included the availability of mobility assistance (rails, ramps, etc.), with a rating of 3.93 and a weight of 8.9%; availability of green areas (a rating of 3.89 and a weight of 8.7%); availability of nearby services (a rating of 3.65 and a weight of 8.4%); and the support for pedestrian mobility (a rating of 3.49 and a weight of 8.1%). Indicators that focused mostly on guidance and wayfinding received a lower priority score from the participants. These included readability/color-friendliness of signage (a rating of 2.77 and a weight of 6.7%); access to local transportation (a rating of 2.57 and a weight of 6.6%); clear wayfinding signage and guides (a rating of 2.47 and a weight of 5.8%); and fair distribution of spaces to support different activity requirements (a rating of 2.32 and a weight of 5.4%). Maryam, one of the neighborhood residents, was particularly concerned with the health assurance her elderly parents received when visiting the local park, as this was a key aspect of their being able to enjoy the public space independently. Muthanna, an urban planning government official, stated that health indicators are important to ensuring the wellbeing of the community. Accordingly, it is important for the elderly to combine a healthy and enjoyable lifestyle, which would eventually enhance cohesion within the community.

These findings emphasize some aspects worthy of highlighting, such as the concern about health issues of the elderly while using public spaces, reflecting the emphasis placed on this matter by the participants. This is reinforced by the relatively high level of independence and activity pursued by elderly users of public spaces, which is an outcome of the economic and social realities specific to the local context of Jordan, as previously discussed. The localized impact of parks is worth highlighting. Accessibility to parks was not highly emphasized by participants, suggesting that they are generally within easy reach of homes within the same neighborhood.

4.5. Social/Emotional Category Indicators

The indicators related to this category are those that focused on a multiplicity of aspects pertaining to the inclusion and engagement of the elderly with the community through an active, healthy lifestyle (

Table 5. Rating and weight of indicators—Social/Emotional category.

#	Indicator	Rating ± SD	Weight
1	Respect towards the elderly	4.45 ± 0.74	10.2%
2	Elderly-focused urban policies and initiatives	2.38 ± 0.91	5.2%
3	Availability of elderly-friendly leisure activities	3.78 ± 0.96	8.3%
4	Provision of sporting activities for the elderly	3.16 ± 0.53	7.2%
5	Connectedness to traditions and social norms	4.23 ± 0.87	9.7%
6	Periodic public events and activities	2.21 ± 0.67	4.1%
7	Consideration of the elderly’s views in space development	4.06 ± 0.53	8.7%
8	Social and voluntary initiatives at site	2.71 ± 0.69	5.7%
9	Enablement of social network development	3.56 ± 1.21	8.1%
10	Enablement of multiple options for family activities	3.32 ± 0.62	7.6%
11	Limitation of vandalism/abuse of facilities	2.56 ± 0.75	5.5%
12	Limitation of crowdedness	1.45 ± 0.62	2.1%
13	Enclosure within surrounding buildings	1.22 ± 0.46	1.9%
14	Intimacy and pleasant appearance of space	3.09 ± 0.59	6.8%
15	Consistency and familiarity of regular visitors	4.19 ± 0.72	8.9%

and Figure 7). The inclusion of the elderly was rated with relatively high importance, reflected in indicators that included the level of respect shown towards them (a rating of 4.45 and a weight of 10.2%); connectedness to traditions and social norms (a rating of 4.23 and a weight of 9.7%); consistency and familiarity of regular visitors (a rating of 4.19 and a weight of 8.9%); and consideration of the elderly’s views in space development (a rating of 4.06 and a weight of 8.7%). A second group of highly rated indicators included ones that supported an active lifestyle and fulfillment of leisure needs, such as the availability of elderly-friendly leisure activities (a rating of 3.78 and a weight of 8.3%); enablement of developing a social network (a rating of 3.56 and a weight of 8.1%); enablement of multiple forms of family activities (a rating of 3.32 and a weight of 7.6%); provision of sporting activities for the elderly (a rating of 3.16 and a weight of 7.2%); and the intimacy and pleasant appearance of the space (a rating of 3.09 and a weight of 6.8%). A third group of indicators of comparatively less importance addressed aspects of general perception and space governance through social norms, including on-site social and voluntary activities (a rating of 2.71 and a weight of 5.7%); limitation of vandalism and abuse of the public space (a rating of 2.56 and a weight of 5.5%); elderly-friendly urban strategies and policies (a rating of 2.38 and a weight of 5.2%); and availability of periodic public events and activities (a rating of 2.21 and a weight of 4.1%). The participants’ views provided further perspective on the importance of social and emotional engagement. Malak, an architect, emphasized the need for thoughtfully designed spaces to stimulate daily activities that would engage the elderly in fresh routines, preferably with their friends and loved ones. Yaser, an academic, advised that although elderly-focused urban strategies and policies were quite premature within the current context of the country, the enduring norms and social values—especially respecting elders and ensuring they are supported within the community—assume a crucial relevance in determining how such public spaces are used in the future, particularly in the absence of official urban planning directives and procedures. These findings provide valuable insights into the social positioning of the elderly within their families and communities. Respect and long-lasting inclusion drive the high levels of importance placed on indicators relevant to the elderly. In the absence of governmental initiatives and policies that are particular to elderly convenience and welfare within public spaces, the role of families and local communities becomes even more important in ensuring their social inclusion and emotional support.

5. Discussion

When analyzing the refined outcomes of the study, a consolidated framework for assessing the elderly-friendliness of open urban spaces was developed based on the top identifiers per category, as shown in Figure 8.

Examination of the developed framework reveals some alignment with existing literature on the subject. The focus placed on the experiential and social needs of the elderly segment of the community resonates with the outcomes expressed by Sheikhazami and Aliakbari [24], despite the lower emphasis assigned to aspects of reach and transportation. The framework’s focus on the wellbeing of the elderly within a safe physical environment aligns with the outcomes highlighted by Speck [22], although Speck placed more emphasis on the physical category identified in this study. When considering the work of Loukaitou-Sideris et al. [12], similarities with the outcomes of the study are observed, particularly with respect to the indicators in the Experiential category, with emphasis placed on aspects of the space that provide a safe, healthy, and enjoyable independent experience for the elderly. The intention of this study was to contribute to the current body of literature by applying a multidisciplinary, categorized view of the subject. This approach required a focus on various aspects involved in the design of elderly-friendly spaces in a manner that demonstrates the multiple dimensions such an undertaking entails.

The framework developed in this study, with its focus on the local context within Jordan, which is synonymous with other countries in the Middle East, has allocated greater emphasis to Experiential and Social/Emotional aspects than to the Physically oriented indicators. This reveals a combination of independence and inclusion of the elderly in their use of public spaces, reflecting the specific elements of the local context. The economic and regulatory realities of Jordan contribute to a relatively high level of independence among elderly communities, while the social and cultural values encourage inclusion within their families and local communities. Such values are visible in Jordan in particular and across the Middle East region generally.

6. Conclusions

The design of an elderly-friendly city is a current subject of significant importance, contributing to the sustainability of such cities through the fortification and cohesion of their communities. The inclusion of the elderly segment of the community, by appropriately addressing their particular needs to enable sustainable, independent use of public spaces, is a matter of utmost importance. Accordingly, the study aimed to develop a guiding assessment framework for open space design that considers the needs of the elderly, centered around the main area of Dahiyat Al-Hussein—one of Amman’s oldest suburbs—as a case study. This area was chosen for the relative stability of its residential community, which has helped maintain its identity. The study aimed to reveal the multidisciplinary nature of the subject by using a diverse base of participants from the academic, practical, governmental, and common user segments, and by applying Delphi rounds and AHP to establish a balanced framework for assessing the elderly-friendly design of public spaces within the particular context of Jordan, which is representative, socially and culturally, of the Arabic region.

Considering the outcomes of the study, a number of key points are worth mentioning. First, the importance of the contextual influence over such a design framework is evident, where an emphasis on experiential and social aspects took precedence over purely physical attributes. Second, in the absence of regulations and institutionalized guidelines to safeguard the comfort and engagement of the elderly within urban public spaces, strengthening prevailing social and cultural norms of care and welfare for the elderly—an intrinsic value in this particular context—is paramount. These values are pivotal in providing an organic alternative, helping to form a safe and inclusive space for this important segment of society. In this context, relevant regulations on the inclusion of the elderly segment within their local communities—which are currently underserved—become particularly important. While the national strategy for the elderly in Jordan addressed multiple aspects of elderly support, it does not dedicate enough attention to the attributes of public spaces. Existing initiatives are limited to a few physical indicators highlighted in this research, such as mobility aids and the safety of premises. Further attention is required to empower the elderly to lead independent lives in such locations, while maintaining a feeling of belonging and inclusion. Third, from the multidisciplinary nature of the proposed model, it is evident that no design challenge should be viewed independently. Physical, experiential, and social factors are interconnected to create an elderly-friendly public urban space.

While the study aimed at reaching a generalizable framework for the assessment of elderly-friendly urban space design, the limitations of the approach used should be acknowledged, including the focus on a single, particular locality (Dahiyat Al-Hussein Park in this case), the limitations encountered in sourcing the participants—particularly the local users of the public space in question—and the nature of the neighborhood itself, which cannot be considered fully representative of all neighborhoods within the selected city, especially given the variety and ongoing evolution of new modern suburbs within Amman. While parks were taken as an example of public urban spaces and are considered among their most common forms, the model used in this study needs further refinement by incorporating other forms of public spaces. Therefore, this study should be reinforced with future research, both within Amman and in other cities with similar characteristics to further refine a design assessment framework that can be more broadly applied and bridge the gap in the current body of literature regarding the ultimate design of elderly-friendly public urban spaces. Furthermore, given the multifaceted nature of the subject, involving multiple stakeholders, further research is required to examine the inter-group differences in perceptions of elderly-friendly design of public spaces—especially considering possible diverse opinions of academics, practitioners, governmental officials, and end users. While the research adopted an approach that grouped the indicators into three distinct categories, the interplay between such categories and the means through which they can influence each other in developing an elderly-friendly public space is yet to be investigated through further research. This research, exploratory in nature, was aimed at laying the foundation for the comprehensive evaluation of elderly-friendly public space design within a particular area in the city of Amman, Jordan. Such initial steps would benefit from further studies that build upon its findings and expand its reach and validity across more public spaces throughout the cities of Jordan. This would help bring us closer to a generalizable assessment framework applicable at the national level, which could later be expanded to include other cities and countries in the region that have similar economic, demographic, social, and cultural attributes.