Collaborative َUrban Planning Capacity to Respond to Issues of َUrban Elderly

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 PhD student of Islamic urban planning, Isfahan Art University, Isfahan, Iran

2 Associate Professor Isfahan Art University, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

With the growth of living facilities and citizen’s health protection, every year, the share of the elderly from the population of cities is increasing. This increase in share contributes to new challenges facing urban management. The elderly, due to their specific psychological and physical characteristics, are not able to use some of the facilities in the cities, and on the other hand have special needs that have been neglected in the traditional urban development plans. Urban management should always be responsive to the needs of citizens, and especially to vulnerable target groups. In fact, in a desirable platform, urban management in addition to justice in the provision of services (aimed at the general public) should have a kind of "positive discrimination" in the city's atmosphere. On a global level, collaborative planning as a new paradigm of urban planning that aims to address the issue of "democracy in urban planning" by empowering citizens to formulate, approve, and ultimately implement development proposals, in many upstream domains planning has been used. The present paper, by explaining the capacity of this urban planning paradigm responding to the citizenship issue, suggests that using collaborative planning at the level of local urban development plans, can prevent repeating the failure of traditional, comprehensive planning against the aging issue. And thereby improve the quality of life of the elderly as a vulnerable social group.

Keywords


Alexander, E. (2015). Iinstitutional Transformation and Planning: From Iinstitualization Theory to Institutional Design. 4, 209-223.
Atchley, R. C. (1989, April 1). A continuity theory of normal aging. The Gerontologist, 29(2), 183–190.
Bengtson, V. L., Gans, D., Putney, N. M., & Silverstein, M. (2012). Handbook of Theories of Aging (Second Edition ed.). New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Cuellar, J. B., Stanford, E. P., & Miller-Soule, D. I. (1992). Understanding Minority Ageing: Perspectives and Sources. San Diego: University Center of Ageing.
Cumming, E., & Henry, W. E. (1981). Growing Old, the process of disengagement. New York: Basic Book.
Ebersole, P., Hess, P., Touhy, T., & Jett, K. (2015). Gerontological Nursing and Healthy Aging. Mosby Canada: Elsevier Mosby.
Faludi, A. (2000). The Performance of Spatial Planning, Planning Practice and Research.
Harris, N. (2002). Collaborative Planning: From Critical Foundations to Practice. (P. Allmendinger, & M. Tewdwr-Jones, Eds.) London: Routledge.
Harwood, J. (2007). Understanding Communication and Aging: Developing Knowledge and Awareness. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Healey, P. (1997). Collaborative planning: Shaping places in fragmented societies. UBc Press.
Hochschild, A. R. (1998). The Unexpected Community: Portrait of an Old Age Subculture. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Innes, J., & Booker, D. (1999). Consensus Building as Role Playing and Bricolage. American Plnning Association, 65(1), 9-26.
Loue, S., & Sajatovic, M. (2008). Encyclopedia of Aging and Public Health. New York: Springer US.
Mantysalo, R. (2005). Approaches to Participation in Urban Planning Theories.
McClelland, K. A. (1982). Self-Conception and Life Satisfaction: Integrating Aged Subculture and Activity Theory. Journal of Gerontology, 37(6), 723-732.
Morgan, L., & Kunkel, S. (2011). Aging: The Social Context (Second Edition ed.). California: Pine Forge Press.
Palmore, E. (1978). Are the Aged a Minority Group? Journal of The American Geriatrics Society, 214-217.
Schulz, R. (2016). The Encyclopedia of Aging (Forth Edition ed., Vol. 1). New York: Springer Publishing Company.
فارس, خ. (۱۳۹۶, ۱۰ ۴). Fars News Agency. بازیابی در ۲ ۱۰, ۱۳۹۷، از http://www.farsnews.com/13961003001554