Literature DB >> 27986540

The physical environment of positive places: Exploring differences between age groups.

Tiina E Laatikainen1, Anna Broberg2, Marketta Kyttä3.   

Abstract

Features of the physical environment have an impact on the human behaviour. Thus, planners and policymakers around the world should aim at providing environments that are perceived as being of good quality, in which the residents enjoy spending time and moving around in. It is widely acknowledged that urban environmental quality associates with well-being, but there is currently very little research examining which features of urban environments people of different ages perceive as appealing in their living environments. Individuals experience different age-related developmental environments throughout their life course. Thus, the usage and perceptions of different spaces can also differ between various age groups. Public Participation GIS datasets collected in 2009 and 2011 in Helsinki Metropolitan Area were used to study places perceived as being positive by adults (n=3119) and children (n=672). Participants marked points on a map that were overlaid with GIS data to study whether the physical environment of positive places of different age groups differed. The results demonstrated that the physical environment differs significantly in the positive places of different age groups. The places of adult age groups were characterized by green, blue and commercial spaces, whereas sports, residential and commercial spaces characterize children's and adolescents' places. Older adults' places were found to be closest to home, while adolescents' places were the most distant. Providing appealing environments for all age groups in one setting remains problematic but should nevertheless be strived for, especially in the urban context where a constant competition over different usages of space occurs.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Built environment; Life course; Motivating environments; PPGIS; Perceptions; Physical environment; Place mapping; Positive place

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27986540     DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.11.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  5 in total

1.  Capturing exposure in environmental health research: challenges and opportunities of different activity space models.

Authors:  Tiina E Laatikainen; Kamyar Hasanzadeh; Marketta Kyttä
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2018-07-28       Impact factor: 3.918

2.  Environmental, Individual and Personal Goal Influences on Older Adults' Walking in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area.

Authors:  Tiina E Laatikainen; Mohammad Haybatollahi; Marketta Kyttä
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-12-26       Impact factor: 3.390

3.  The Use of Urban Parks by Older Adults in the Context of Perceived Security.

Authors:  Kinga Kimic; Paulina Polko
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  Recovery of mobility function and life-space mobility after ischemic stroke: the MOBITEC-Stroke study protocol.

Authors:  R Rössler; S A Bridenbaugh; S T Engelter; R Weibel; D Infanger; E Giannouli; A Sofios; L Iendra; E Portegijs; T Rantanen; L Streese; H Hanssen; R Roth; A Schmidt-Trucksäss; N Peters; T Hinrichs
Journal:  BMC Neurol       Date:  2020-09-16       Impact factor: 2.474

5.  Independent Mobility and Social Affordances of Places for Urban Neighborhoods: A Youth-Friendly Perspective.

Authors:  Frederico Lopes; Rita Cordovil; Carlos Neto
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-11-13
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.