| Literature DB >> 32349334 |
Fomba Louisette Naah1, Aloysius Mom Njong2, Jude Ndzifon Kimengsi3.
Abstract
This paper examines the determinants and policy implications of active and healthy ageing in Sub-Saharan Africa, taking the case of Bamenda, in Cameroon. Specifically, the study sought to identify and explore the determinants of active and healthy ageing using a mixed-methods approach involving qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis. Focus group discussions were conducted complemented by a survey (random and snowball sampling) using a structured questionnaire. Narratives and thematic analysis were used to analyze the data generated from the focus group discussion and Tobit regression was employed to analyze the multiple determinants of active ageing by dimensions and on a global scale in Cameroon. Results identified three key dimensions of active and healthy ageing: employment/livelihood options (EL), community support and health (CH) and housing and living in Bamenda (HL). The regression results reveal gender bias in active ageing, a non-effect of education and health on active ageing, and a positive effect of income on active and healthy ageing. This study contributes, among others, to the competence-environmental press theory on active ageing with regards to unbundling context specific determinants of active and healthy ageing. It equally derives policy considerations with regards to gender mainstreaming and the identification of age friendly income earning options to enhance the active and healthy ageing process.Entities:
Keywords: active ageing; community support; determinants; employment; healthy ageing; housing
Year: 2020 PMID: 32349334 PMCID: PMC7246554 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17093038
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Determinants of active ageing. Source: [7].
Figure 2Map of Bamenda in the North-West Region of Cameroon. source [29].
Accepted rule of thumb for interpreting the Cronbach’s alpha.
| Crombach’s Alpha | Interpretation |
|---|---|
| α ≥ 0.9 | Excellent |
| 0.9 > α ≥ 0.8 | Good |
| 0.8 > ≥ 0.7 | Acceptable |
| 0.7 > α ≥ 0.6 | Questionable |
| 0.6 > α ≥ 0.5 | Poor |
| 0.5 > α | Unacceptable |
Source: George and Mallery (2003, p. 231). [31].
Variables and measures of active ageing indices and socio-economic determinants.
| Variable | Indicator | Measurement Unit | Min/Max Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Employment (Emp) | Gainful employment (employed, unemployed) | 1 = employed | Min = 0 |
| Community support and health (CH) | Health status | 1 = good | Min = 0 |
| Housing and Living in the city (HL) | Living space | 1 = own house | Min = 0 |
Characteristics of focus group participants.
| Characteristics | N° | Characteristics | N° |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Marital status | ||
| Men | 52 | With spouse | 56 |
| Women | 48 | Widower /Widow | 44 |
| Total | 100 | Total | 100 |
| Age | Health status | ||
| 60-69 | 63 | Poor | 24 |
| 70-79 | 34 | Fair | 49 |
| 80+ | 3 | Good | 27 |
| Total | 100 | Total | 100 |
| Home | Council area | ||
| Own home | 73 | Bamenda I | 31 |
| Rental/Others | 27 | Bamenda II | 34 |
| Total | 100 | Bamenda III | 35 |
| Education | Total | 100 | |
| No education | 24 | ||
| Primary | 39 | ||
| Secondary | 27 | ||
| University | 10 | ||
| Total | 100 |
World Health Organisation (WHO) age friendly cities guide.
| Age Friendly Criteria | What Each Criterion Covers | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Outdoor spaces and buildings | Public areas, pavements, outdoor safety, public toilets, green spaces |
| 2 | Transportation | Public transport cost and accessibility, taxis, roads |
| 3 | Housing | Sufficient and affordable housing, modifications |
| 4 | Social participation | Venues, events and activities, information, cost, outreach |
| 5 | Respect and social inclusion | Consultation, visible in media, recognized and respected in community |
| 6 | Civic participation and employment | Volunteering, paid work opportunities, training |
| 7 | Communication and information | Information for all ages, appropriate printed info, phone answering services |
| 8 | Community and health services | Adequate health and community services, home care, information |
Source: WHO [6].
Outcome of focus group discussions.
|
| |
| Challenges | Recommendations |
|
Lack of rest areas along sidewalks Lack of public restrooms. No streets and house numbers No street lights in the quarters Lack of sidewalks, and inaccessible public buildings No lifts in most public buildings Slippery streets and buildingsNo reserved parking for the disabled and elderly |
Build public toilets Provide sitting benches Improved cleanliness of city Repair roads and provide sidewalks Number houses and streets Sensitize architects and engineers on the needs of the elderly City council should give building permits only to age friendly buildings Light the streets in the neighborhoods Increase parks and green spaces |
|
| |
| Challenges | Recommendations |
|
Narrow and bad roads Bike riders and most taxi drivers do not know the high way code and no refresher courses for drivers. No reserved parking for the disabled and elderly No seats in the few waiting places for caps Overloading taxis and reckless driving. Difficulty climbing on bikes, bikes are risky for the elderly and are involved in many accidents. The disorderly nature of bike riders and the traffic congestion makes it difficult for the elderly to cross the road. |
Create bus service for seniors, with specific waiting points and time Provide seats in waiting places for caps Repair roads Traffic police should increase support to the elderly Regulate activities of bike riders in town |
|
| |
| Challenges | Recommendations |
|
Poor drainage system around house High rent payment Slippery bath tubs in houses House very near the road, so lots of noise from cars Rooms for seniors located upstairs in some houses Stairs in the house with no internal toilet facility and small bed rooms |
Construct low cost houses for the elderly with indoor facilities, e.g., toilets, not too many windows and no slippery floors. Build a centre to house elderly people who have been abandoned by their family and are homeless. |
|
| |
| Challenges | Recommendations |
|
Fond sizes in newspapers are very small and not easy to read except with glasses No radio or television programs and information targeting elderly people Internet not accessible to the elderly |
Continue giving information to the elderly via the churches Encourage the use of town criers for information dissemination. Produce targeted programs and information for elderly persons by audio visual and print media Increase pidgin English programs |
|
| |
| Challenges | Recommendations |
|
There is high youth unemployment, so elderly people have limited opportunity to be employed Elderly persons are exploited when employed with pay packages not usually encouraging Rare opportunities for voluntary services and no volunteering spirit in the population Some seniors do not have Identity cards so cannot register to vote Available jobs are strenuous and not adapted to elderly people |
Encourage self-employment of seniors in farming and livestock production Encouraged elderly persons to create groups for producing marketable products Create employment for the youths Provide simple employment task for elderly persons which will give them an opportunity to go out and be active Make cash transfers to the elderly to start a small-scale business Encourage income generating activities like small pig or poultry farms or marketing |
|
| |
| Challenges | Recommendations |
|
Healthcare is expensive and seniors lack finances to buy medications Lack of health information Absence of persons to take the elderly without careers to hospital. No home visits to the elderly No specialized health services for the elderly and no geriatric nurses and doctors Absence of emergency health services No social insurance coverage for those who had no formal employment. No preference given to the elderly in health structures |
Train health specialist for the elderly (geriatric nurses and doctors) Provide free or subsidized health care to seniors by reducing cost of consultation and medication. Put Policy in place to give preference to elderly people at public places especially in hospitals. Promote “an elderly people adoption scheme”, where well to do persons can support a needy elderly person in the community. Educate population on the needs of elderly people Organize home visits by medical teams to the elderly especially those without caregivers |
|
| |
| Challenges | Recommendations |
|
Community respect for seniors is reducing No intergenerational interaction exists except at churches and village gatherings Younger persons are not conscious of the challenges of seniors Wisdom of elderly not exploited by the young Opinions and concern of the elderly is not solicited in public forums Councils have no specific program for the elderly |
Organize intergenerational activities where the young will learn from the old how to cook, do needle work, tell stories of the past just to name a few. Provide specific sections for seniors at public places like banks, hospitals just to mention a few. Carry out advocacy for the right of the elderly Educate the young on respect for the elderly in schools and at home for change of mentality and attitude of youths Implement existing laws in the penal code (article 188) that protect the elderly |
|
| |
| Challenges | Recommendations |
|
Absence of recreational activities provided for seniors by the councils or other organizations Club 58 only for well to do seniors |
Create recreational activities for the elderly at age friendly venues and time Create clubs and social centres for the elderly around their neighbourhoods Put in place University of the 3rd age for adult education |
Active ageing indices (descriptive statistics).
| Variable | Obs | Mean | Std. Dev. | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dependent variables | |||||
| Emp_index | 400 | 0.2753 | 0.3019 | 0 | 1 |
| CH_index | 396 | 0.4799 | 0.3456 | 0 | 1 |
| H_index | 397 | 0.3482 | 0.2828 | 0 | 1 |
| G_index | 396 | 0.3673 | 0.2306 | 0.1064 | 0.8489 |
| Independent variables | |||||
| Male | 400 | 0.455 | 0.4986 | 0 | 1 |
| Female | 400 | 0.5425 | 0.4989 | 0 | 1 |
| Age | 398 | 68.6307 | 6.8893 | 60 | 98 |
| age2 | 398 | 4757.51 | 1005.033 | 3600 | 9604 |
| No Education | 400 | 0.29 | 0.4543 | 0 | 1 |
| Primary Education | 400 | 0.34 | 0.4743 | 0 | 1 |
| Secondary Education | 400 | 0.2525 | 0.4349 | 0 | 1 |
| University Education | 400 | 0.115 | 0.3194 | 0 | 1 |
| Poor_health | 400 | 0.2625 | 0.4405 | 0 | 1 |
| Fair_health | 400 | 0.4975 | 0.5006 | 0 | 1 |
| Good_health | 400 | 0.2325 | 0.4229 | 0 | 1 |
| Monthly_income Yes | 400 | 0.6075 | 0.4889 | 0 | 1 |
| Monthly_income No | 400 | 0.3775 | 0.4854 | 0 | 1 |
Where Emp. Index = 27.53%; CH index = 34.82%; HL index = 47.99%.
Tobit regressions.
| Emp_index | CH_index | H_index | G_index | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male (ref) | - | - | - | - |
| Female | −0.00366 | −0.07308 | −0.05790 * | −0.03733 * |
| (−0.12) | (−1.47) | (−1.87) | (−1.72) | |
| Age | 0.03002 | 0.00292 | 0.02463 | 0.019157 |
| (1.08) | (0.06) | (0.84) | (0.94) | |
| age2 | −0.00018 | 0.00002 | −0.00014 | −0.00011 |
| (−0.93) | (0.06) | (−0.71) | (−0.76) | |
| No education (ref) | - | - | - | - |
| Primary Education | −0.06584 * | −0.13450 ** | −0.10062 ** | −0.0815 *** |
| (−1.78) | (−2.15) | (−2.59) | (−3.01) | |
| Secondary Education | −0.19308 *** | −0.45943 *** | −0.15179 *** | −0.22235 *** |
| (−4.62) | (−6.49) | (−3.47) | (−7.27) | |
| University Education | −0.23210 *** | −0.43565 *** | −0.15624 *** | −0.23812 *** |
| (−4.32) | (−4.85) | (−2.79) | (−6.02) | |
| Poor health (ref) | - | - | - | - |
| Fair health | −0.10758 *** | −0.07642 | −0.06921 * | −0.07797 *** |
| (−3.01) | (−1.27) | (−1.85) | (−2.98) | |
| Good health | −0.18480 *** | −0.19826 *** | −0.02400 | −0.12059 *** |
| (−4.22) | (−2.7) | (−0.52) | (−3.75) | |
| Monthly income Yes (ref) | - | - | - | - |
| Monthly income No | −0.04441 | −0.00631 | −0.04731 | −0.03591 |
| (−1.44) | (−0.12) | (−1.47) | (−1.59) | |
| Constant | −0.28197 | 0.54914 | −0.47706 | −0.22559 |
| (−0.28) | (0.31) | (−0.45) | (−0.3) | |
| Number of obs | 398 | 394 | 395 | 394 |
| Log likelihood | −59.433033 | −286.6758 | −97.071186 | 56.594992 |
| LR chi2(9) | 85.31 | 94.14 | 31.77 | 123.14 |
| Prob > chi2 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0002 | 0.0000 |
NB: values in parentheses are t-values; *** = significance at 1%; ** = significance at 5%; * = significance at 10%.