نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
دانشیار جغرافیا و برنامهریزی شهری، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران.
10.30473/psp.2026.77446.2801
چکیده
کیفیت زندگی سالمندان به شدت با ویژگیهای محیط شهری مرتبط است و طراحی فضاهای شهری فراگیر و حمایتکننده، بهویژه در کلانشهرهای ایران، یکی از چالشهای مهم برنامهریزی شهری محسوب میشود. این پژوهش با هدف ارزیابی شهرهای دوستدار سالمند در چهار کلانشهر تهران، مشهد، اصفهان و شیراز، رویکردی ترکیبی و دادهمحور مبتنی بر تجربه زیسته سالمندان را با تحلیل ژئوفضایی تلفیق کرده است. دادهها از طریق KoBo Toolbox و ثبت GPS جمعآوری و بر اساس شاخص AF_Score بهصورت کمی–ادراکی کدگذاری شدند تا امکان تحلیل مکانی و شناسایی «مکانها»، «ضدمکانها» و نواحی همپوشان فراهم شود. یافتهها نشان داد که کیفیت شهر دوستدار سالمند در این چهار شهر یکنواخت نیست؛ شیراز بیشترین سهم مکانهای مثبت و پیوستگی فضایی را دارد، تهران الگوی نسبتاً منسجمی را نشان میدهد، مشهد با تمرکز ضدمکانها مواجه است و اصفهان در وضعیت گذار قرار دارد. همبستگی بالای 82/0 میان ادراک سالمندان و پهنهبندی مکانی نشان داد که تجربه زیسته سالمندان بازتابدهنده سازمان فضایی واقعی شهر است. تحلیل حوزههای زیرساختی و مشارکت اجتماعی نیز مشخص ساخت که فضاهای عمومی و مسیرهای پیادهمحور، مؤلفههای کلیدی در تقویت حضور فعال سالمندان هستند. نوآوری این پژوهش در سه سطح قابل توجه است: (۱) پیوند نظری شهر دوستدار سالمند با عدالت فضایی و تجربه زیسته، (۲) استفاده از دادههای مشارکتی سالمندان و تحلیل نقاط داغ برای سنجش همزمان شدت، گستره و معناداری فضایی و (۳) ارائه چارچوب عملیاتی–مکانی برای شناسایی و اولویتبندی مداخلات شهری مبتنی بر شواهد. نتایج نشان میدهد که رویکردهای شاخصمحور کلانمقیاس نمیتوانند تفاوتهای خرد مکانی و ناهمگنی تجربه سالمندان را بازتاب دهند و تصمیمگیری شهری باید مبتنی بر تحلیلهای دقیق و مشارکتی باشد. این مطالعه، راهنمایی کاربردی برای سیاستگذاران و برنامهریزان شهری فراهم میکند تا با بهرهگیری از دادههای تجربهمحور و تحلیل ژئوفضایی، کیفیت زندگی سالمندان را ارتقا دهند و شهرهایی واقعی، پویا و دوستدار سالمند ایجاد کنند.
کلیدواژهها
Abedini, A., Ramesh, S., & Yousefi, N. (2024). Evaluating the historical fabric of Urmia for the elderly using the 15-minute city approach. Spatial Planning and Geomatics, 28(3), 119–140. [In Persian] https://hsmsp.modares.ac.ir/article_14776.html
Amini, E., Shabani, A., & Taghiani, S. (2023). Explaining the components of urban space for the elderly based on environmental psychology approach (Case study: District 8 of Shiraz). Applied Research in Geographical Sciences, 68, 403–426. [In Persian] http://dx.doi.org/10.52547/jgs.23.68.403
Araei, A., Ezzatpanah, B., & Nazmfarr, H. (2021). Evaluating the level of satisfaction with the realization of age-friendly city dimensions from the perspective of the local community (Case study: District 3 of Karaj metropolis). New Attitudes in Human Geography, 52, 81–106. [In Persian] https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.66972251.1400.13.4.3.8
Aslanoğlu, R., Chrobak, G., Dikken, J., van Hoof, J., Ivan, L., Kazak, J. K., & de Wit, L. (2025). Age-friendly cities and communities’ manifesto. In Connected generations, connected cities: The age-friendly vision. https://extranet.who.int/agefriendlyworld/wpcontent/uploads/2025/02/Manifesto-EN.pdf
Buffel, T. (2019). Older coresearchers exploring age-friendly communities: An “insider” perspective on the benefits and challenges of peer-research. The Gerontologist, 59(3), 538–548. https://doi.org/10.1093/GERONT/GNX216
Buffel, T., Phillipson, C., & Scharf, T. (2012). Ageing in urban environments: Developing ‘age-friendly’ cities. Critical Social Policy, 32(4), 597–617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018311430457
Chudyk, A. M., Winters, M., Moniruzzaman, M., Ashe, M. C., Gould, J. S., & McKay, H. (2015). Destinations matter: The association between where older adults live and their travel behavior. Journal of Transport & Health, 2, 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2014.09.008
Dikken, J., van den Hoven, R. F. M., van Staalduinen, W. H., HulseboschJanssen, L. M. T., & van Hoof, J. (2020). How older people experience the agefriendliness of their city: Development of the age-friendly cities and communities questionnaire. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186867
Dymnicka, M. (2011). Od miejsca do nie-miejsca [eng, From place to non-place], Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Sociologica, 36, 35–52. https://dspace.uni.lodz.pl/bitstream/handle/11089/320/35_dymnickaFoliaSociologica36.pdf?sequence=1&is Allowed=y.
Ebrahimpour, S., Alizadeh, K., & Ahmadian, M. A. (2025). A review of age-friendly city studies using content meta-analysis. Geographical Sciences (Applied Geography), 21(50), 80–105. [In Persian] https://sanad.iau.ir/Journal/geographic/Article/1205733/FullText
Esri. (2021). Adding x, y coordinate data as a layer—ArcMap documentation, USA. https://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/latest/map/working-with-layers/adding-xy-coordinate-data-as-a-layer.htm.
Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for people. Washington, DC, Island Press.
Gholami, M., Amininejad, G., & Banari, K. (2022). Measuring and evaluating age-friendly city indicators (Case study: Borazjan). Urban Environment Planning and Development, 5, 20–30. [In Persian] https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.27833496.1401.2.5.1.4
Gilroy, R. (2008). Places that support human flourishing: Lessons from later life. Planning Theory & Practice, 9(2), 145–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649350802041548
Green, G. (2013). Age-friendly cities of Europe. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 90, 23-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-012-9765-8
Hasanqolizadeh, A., Hajilou, F., Nokhastin Rouhi, M. R., & Jelokhani, M. R. (2020). Spatial analysis and evaluation of urban spaces from the perspective of age-friendly city (Case study: District 6 of Tehran). Urban Planning Geography Research, 8(2), 371–389. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22059/jurbangeo.2020.295771.1215
He, X., & He, S. Y. (2025). Decoding the spatial effects of walkability on walking behavior among older adults by integrating big data and small data. Cities, 156, 32-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.105537
Iranshahi, A., & Ghalenoeei, M. (2017). Evaluating the conformity of urban spaces with age-friendly city indicators (Case study: Chaharbagh Abbasi Street, Isfahan). Hoviatshahr (City Identity), 30, 69–76. [In Persian] https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.17359562.1396.11.2.6.0
Jolanta, M., Dikken, J. Hoof a, J., & Jan, K. (2025). Shaping age-friendly cities and communities: A geospatial approach to the assessment of four cities in Europe. Cities, 166, 1-13.
Li, X., Li, Y., Xi, B., & Han, Y. (2021). Pathways between neighbourhood walkability and mental wellbeing: A case from Hankow, China. Journal of Transport & Health, 20, Article 101012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2021.101012
Łuczak, K., & Le´sniak, A. (2021). Tozsamo ´s´c miejsca w kontek´scie architektonicznym [eng. Place identity in architectural context]. Przestrzen´ Urbanistyka Architektura, 1, 79–90. https://doi.org/10.37705/PUA/1/2021/006
Menec, V. H., Means, R., Keating, N., Parkhurst, G., & Eales, J. (2011). Conceptualizing age-friendly communities. Canadian Journal on Aging = La Revue Canadienne Du Vieillissement, 30, 479–493. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980811000237
Nasiri Henkhaleh, E., & Rezaei, M. (2018). Investigating the impact of physical and social components on the realization of an age-friendly city: Case study of Rasht. Sustainable City, 1(4), 73–87. [In Persian] https://www.jscity.ir/article_91139.html
Plouffe, L., Kalache, A., & Voelcker, I. (2016). A critical review of the WHO age-friendly cities methodology and its implementation. In T. Moulaert, & S. Garon (Eds.), Agefriendly cities and communities in international comparison: Political lessons, scientific avenues, and democratic issues (pp. 19–36). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24031-2_2.
Resideh, B., Marsoosi, N., Taleshi, M., & Mousavi Kazemi, S. M. (2023). Applying the age-friendly city approach in urban transport planning (Case study: Mashhad metropolitan area). Spatial Planning and Physical Development, 10(3), 85–100. [In Persian] https://psp.journals.pnu.ac.ir/article_10676.html
Saberifar, R. (2023). Evaluating the practical outcomes of policymaking in the field of age-friendly cities in Iranian metropolises. Hoviatshahr (City Identity), 17(54), 93–106. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.30495/hoviatshahr.2023.69115.12255
Schmidt, T., Kerr, J., & Schipperijn, J. (2019). Associations between neighborhood open space features and walking and social interaction in older adults-A mixed methods study. Geriatrics (Switzerland), 4(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/geriatrics4030041
Steels, S. (2015). Key characteristics of age-friendly cities and communities: A review. Cities, 47, 45-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.02.004
Swiąder, M., & Łukowiak, M. (2016). Społeczna waloryzacja przestrzeni zyciowej naprzykładzie miasta Wołow (Polska, wojewodztwo ´ dolno´sląskie) [eng. The socialvalorization of life space for Wołow ´ city (Lower Silesia, Poland)]. Problemy Rozwoju Miast [Eng. Urban Developemnt Issues], XIII (III), 13–22.
van Hoof, J., & Marston, H. R. (2021). Age-friendly cities and communities: State of the art and future perspectives. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041644
van Hoof, J., Dikken, J., Buttigie S. C., van den Hoven, R. F. M., Kroon, E., & Marston, H. R. (2020). Age-friendly cities in the Netherlands: An explorative study of facilitators and hindrances in the built environment and ageism in design. Indoor and Built Environment, 29(3), 417–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/1420326X19857216
van Hoof, J., Kazak, J. K., Perek-Białas, J. M., & Peek, S. T. M. (2018). The challenges of urban ageing: Making cities age-friendly in Europe. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(11), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15112473
van Hoof, J., Marston, H. R., & Dikken, J. (2025). Who doesn’t think about financial security when designing urban environments for older people? Advocating for the inclusion of financial factors in the age-friendly agenda. In H. R. Marston (Ed.), Ethics and aging: A cross-disciplinary approach. Cognella (in press).
van Hoof, J., van den Hoven, R. F. M., Hess, M., van Staalduinen, W. H., HulseboschJanssen, L. M. T., & Dikken, J. (2022). How older people experience the agefriendliness of The Hague: A quantitative study. Cities, 124, Article 103568. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CITIES.2022.103568
van Hoof, J., van Staalduinen, W. H., & Dikken, J. (2024). A multi-year quantitative study of the experienced age-friendliness in The Hague: A tale of four personas. Social Science & Medicine, 340, Article 116362. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SOCSCIMED.2023.116362
Vanderbeck, R. M. (2007). Intergenerational geographies: Age relations, segregation and re-engagements. Geography Compass, 1(2), 200–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2007.00012.x
Wang, Z., Ettema, D., & Helbich, M. (2023). Age as effect modifier of the associations between the physical environment and adults’ neighborhood walking in the Netherlands. Cities, 135(104), 194-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2023.104194
Wei, Z., Cao, K., Kwan, M. Jiang, Y., & Feng, Q. (2024). Measuring the age-friendliness of streets' walking environment using multi-source big data: A case study in Shanghai, China. Cities, 148, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.104829
Wood, G. E. R., Pykett, J., Daw, P., Agyapong-Badu, S., Banchoff, A., King, A. C., & Stathi, A. (2022). The role of urban environments in promoting active and healthy aging: A systematic scoping review of citizen science approaches. Journal of Urban Health, 99(3), 427–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-022-00622-w
World Health Organisation. (2007). Global age-friendly cities: A guide. Geneva, World Health Organisation.
World Health Organisation. (2017). Global strategy and action plan on ageing and health. Geneva, World Health Organisation, Retrieved from: 17240_Multisectoral action for a life course approach to healthy ageing-draft global strategy and plan of action on ageing and health For Web (who.int)
World Health Organization. (2002). Active ageing: a policy framework. World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/67215
)