Characteristics Associated with Local Government Adoption of Aging-Friendly Innovations

Background and Purpose: Recent growing interest in making existing communities more aging friendly is a reaction to a confluence of factors, including the aging of the U.S. population, a projected increase in disability and chronic disease in future cohorts of older adults, and an inadequate long-term care system. This study examined local government adoption of aging-friendly innovations, defined as the policies, programs, and changes in infrastructure that offer the promise of improving the health and well-being of older adults and helping them age in place. Framed by an internal determinants and diffusion model, this study explored the diffusion factors, community characteristics, and government characteristics associated with such adoption.

Methods: The researcher collected and analyzed quantitative and qualitative data from local government employees in a large metropolitan region. In the quantitative phase, primary data collected from 62 city planners/community development directors through online surveys were combined with secondary data from the 2000 U.S. Census and the 2000 California Cities Annual Report. In the qualitative phase, a subsample of 18 survey respondents participated in open-ended telephone interviews to provide a more in-depth understanding of the process of the adoption of aging-friendly innovations and expand on the quantitative findings.

Results: Bivariate analyses of city-level data provide partial support for an internal determinants and diffusion model. Cities with a larger total population, larger percent of the population with a disability, and have experienced public pressure or individual advocacy for aging-friendly innovations adopted more aging-friendly policies, programs, and infrastructure changes. Contrary to hypotheses, cities with higher population educational attainment, higher median household income, and a larger proportion of the population age 65 and older adopted fewer aging-friendly innovations. Qualitative interviews offered potential explanations for these results. First, disability groups may be more active than older adults in terms of advocating for the adoption of certain aging-friendly innovations, such as accessible housing and walkable neighborhoods. Second, communities whose population enjoys a higher socioeconomic status may not perceive a strong role for local government in terms of creating more aging-friendly communities, and these residents may get their needs met through nongovernmental sources. Third, while there was no significant association between per capita government spending and the adoption of aging-friendly innovations, interviews suggest that funding plays an important role, and perhaps grant funding, slack resources, and recent increases or decreases in local government financial resources are a better measure of this factor.

Conclusions and Implications: Results offer a number of strategies that residents, advocates, service providers, and policymakers could employ in their efforts to create more aging-friendly communities. These strategies include mobilizing public support of and pressure for aging-friendly innovations, targeting advocacy efforts at individuals working within government who could bring about policy change, and working towards vertical diffusion of innovations via state and federal mandates and funding.