Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In 2011, colleagues and I (Menec, Means, Keating, Parkhurst, & Eales, 2011 Menec, V. H., Means, R., Keating, N., Parkhurst, G., & Eales, J. (2011). Conceptualizing age-friendly communities. Canadian Journal on Aging, 30(3), 479–493.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) conceptualized age-friendly communities from an ecological perspective in order to highlight key assumptions of the interplay between the person and the environment, including both the community environment and the larger policy and political environment. Moreover, we proposed that a basic benefit of an age-friendly community is that it creates social connectivity. Fundamentally, we argued, age-friendly communities create connections—between the older person and the environment in which he or she lives and vice versa. The purpose of the present article is to expand on the notion of social connectivity. By drawing on diverse bodies of literature, such as social epidemiology, community development, empowerment, and organizational effectiveness, I aim to conceptualize social connectivity in terms of four interrelated components: (1) creating connections; (2) empowerment; (3) social influence; and (4) access to material resources and services. Consistent with ecological theory, each of these components is described at the individual, organizational, and community level. Implications for implementing age-friendly initiatives and research are discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Verena Menec (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: