SPATIAL STRATEGIES FOR STRENGTHENING THE SOCIAL PARTICIPATION OF OLDER ADULTS IN SHOPPING MALLS
Öz
Most of the studies conducted to date on the socialization of elderly users have focused on the creation of ideal spaces where older adults can interact exclusively with their own age group. However, designing environments that enable older adults to engage with all segments of society will significantly contribute to social sustainability. This study aims to identify the spatial design features of semi-public interiors that support intergenerational interaction and contribute to the sustainability of socialization. The field study was conducted in a shopping centre located in a densely populated district with a high concentration of elderly people in Ankara. A survey was conducted with 400 elderly people to question the design features of the selected shopping centre and its suitability for social interaction. In the questionnaire study, Kendall's tau-b correlation test was applied to the data to evaluate the connection between the design features of the space and the level of socialization. When the data obtained from the study were evaluated, it was revealed that elderly individuals, especially when alone in public interior spaces, were influenced by the spatial characteristics of the environment in enhancing their passive and temporary forms of socialization. The survey results indicated that a consciously designed and applied variety of colours, textures, and forms in shopping malls could enhance the spatial perception of elderly users and thereby contribute to different forms of socialization.
Anahtar Kelimeler
intergenerational interaction, older adults, semi public interiors, social sustainability
Kaynakça
- Abbasalipour, S. & Judd, B. (2011). Blurring the boundaries: The interface of shopping centres and surrounding urban public space. 5th State of Australian Cities National Conference, 29 November–2 December 2011. Melbourne, Australia. https://apo.org.au/node/60007 adresinden alındı
- Aelbrecht, P., Stevens, Q. & Kumar, S. (2022). European public space projects with social cohesion in mind: Symbolic, programmatic and minimalist approaches. European Planning Studies, 30(6), 1093-1123. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2021.1959902
- Brown, S. C. & Lombart, J. (2014). Neighborhoods and social interaction. Wellbeing: A complete reference guide, 2(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118539415.wbwell059
- Cabe & Detr. (2001). The value of urban design: a research project commissioned by CABE and DETR to examine the value added by good urban design. Thomas Telford.
- Carmona, M. (2015). Re-theorising contemporary public space: a new narrative and a new normative. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 8(4), 373-405. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2014.909518
- Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc, T. & Tiesdell, S. (2003). Public space, urban space: The dimensions of urban design. Edisi, 2, 114.
- Cattell, V. D. (2008). Mingling, observing, and lingering: Everyday public spaces and their implications for well-being and social relations. Health & place, 14(3), 544-561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2007.10.007
- Chau, H., & Jamie, E. (2021). Age-Friendly Built Environment. Encyclopedia, 1(3), 781-791. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia1030060
- Gehl, J. (2010). Life between buildings: Using public space. Washington DC: Island Press.
- Gökgür, P. (2017). Kentsel mekanda kamusal alanın yeri. Bağlam Yayıncılık.
