Issues Negatively Influencing the Use of Public Outdoor Built Environment by Older People: A Case Study in a Typical Suburban Residential Setting in the United Kingdom

V. Garaj, SURFACE Inclusive Design Research Centre, Research Institute for the Built and Human Environment, The University of Salford, UK

R. Newton, SURFACE Inclusive Design Research Centre, Research Institute for the Built and Human Environment, The University of Salford, UK

M. Ormerod, SURFACE Inclusive Design Research Centre, Research Institute for the Built and Human Environment, The University of Salford, UK

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a case study conducted in order to identify the physical environmental features negatively influencing the use of the public outdoor built environment by the older people living in a typical suburban residential setting in the United Kingdom (UK). In addition, the case study undertook to recognise the aspects of the social environment having a negative impact on the use of the outdoors by the older population. The study was based on three focus group discussions with the residents aged 65 years and over, which were carried out in Marple, a town located on the southeastern outskirts of the city of Manchester, in the northern part of England, UK. The results of the study show that, amongst others, the negative physical features of the environment include poorly maintained pavements, poor visibility at road crossings, insufficient number of seats along walking routes, poor street-lighting conditions, inconsistency of the bicycle lanes and confusing traffic signs that make driving overly complicated. Some of the aspects of the social environment found to be negative in relation to the use of the outdoors are crime, vandalism of facilities such as public toilets and park benches, cycling on pavements, parking cars on pavements and road rage.

Keywords: Older People, Public Outdoor Built Environment, Issues Negatively Influencing the Environment Use

1. Introduction

In 2003, a United Kingdom (UK) based research consortium was awarded funding by the UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) to undertake a research project with the aim to identify various issues negatively affecting the use of the public outdoor built environment by the older people living in residential settings of diverse types across the UK. As the final outcome of the project, the consortium is expected to propose a set of recommendations as to how to improve the quality of life for the older people by improving the quality of the environment. The project, entitled Inclusive Design for Getting Outdoors (I'DGO) (Ward-Thompson, Burton and Newton, 2002; Garaj, Newton and Ormerod, 2003), commenced in September 2003 and is planned to be completed within the period of three years. The project funding was awarded under the EPSRC's Extending Quality of Life (EQUAL) research funding programme. The members of the consortium undertaking the project are the Open Space Research Centre for Inclusive Access to Outdoor Environments based at the Edinburgh School of Art and the Heriot-Watt University, the Oxford Centre for Sustainable Development based at the Oxford Brookes University and the SURFACE Inclusive Design Research Centre based at the University of Salford. The consortium members are to address different yet complimentary issues bearing a negative impact on the use of the outdoors by the older population.

2. The Case Study

The core of this paper is the presentation of the outcome of the initial part of the research carried out within the I'DGO project by the SURFACE research team. The research involved a case study aimed at identifying two groups of issues negatively associated with the use of the public outdoor built environment by the older people living in a typical suburban residential setting. These two groups of issues are:

the negative physical features of the public outdoor built environment;
the aspects of the social environment negatively affecting the use of the outdoors.

The case study consisted of three focus group discussions with the older residents of Marple, a town with the population of about 27,000 people situated in the county of Cheshire, in the northern part of England, UK (Whittaker, 2002).

2.1 Location

Marple was chosen as the location to carry out the case study for several reasons. Firstly and most importantly, it was deemed as representative of the suburban towns in the UK. The key characteristics that make Marple a typical suburban town, in addition to the comparatively small size of its population, are its close proximity (approximately 14 miles) and well established transport links to the city of Manchester. Furthermore, lifestyles of the Marple residents are stereotypical for the population of the UK's suburban towns; the greatest proportion of the adult residents of Marple either lead family lives in the town and commute to work in Manchester on a daily basis or have chosen Marple as a place to retire. Such lifestyles are supported by the relative affluence of Marple allowing for the provision of public services of a high quality, including very good schools and medical facilities. The second reason to select Marple as the location to conduct the focus group discussions was the existence of an association between one of the researchers in the SURFACE research team and a local church in Marple. This association facilitated the recruitment of the discussion participants, which were in the greatest part recruited with the help of the church's community services volunteers. The final and a very pragmatic reason for the choice of Marple was its geographic closeness to Salford, the base of the SURFACE research team (Salford, like Marple, is located near Manchester). The closeness permitted easy access of the researchers to the discussion venues; one discussion was held in a private home in Marple and other two in a Marple community hall.

2.2 Participants

Participants in the focus group discussions were all aged 65 years or over and retired at the time when the discussions took place. In terms of the functional status, all the participants were reasonably physically fit and active. As for the living arrangements, all the participants were living at home, either on their own or with a partner and/or other family members. The demographic data breakdown for each of the three groups is as follows. The first group consisted of four participants; three participants in this group were female and one participant was male. The youngest group participant was male, aged 65 years, and the oldest participant was female, aged 73 years. The mean age of the participants in the first group was 69.25 years. The second group involved a total of six participants, four of which were female and two male. The youngest participant was female, aged 65 years, and the oldest was male, aged 82 years. The mean age of the participants in the second group was 78.00 years. The third group comprised four participants, with the same sex structure as the first group, that is, three female participants and one male participant. The youngest participant in this group was female, aged 67, and the oldest was male, aged 80. The mean age for the third group was 74.25 years. The summary of the demographic data is given in Table 1 below. The details of the participants presented in this section were provided by the participants themselves in the participant details sheet they filled in at the end of the discussion sessions.

**Table 1:** Summary of the focus groups demographic data
Data Type	Group 1	Group 2	Group 3
Number of Participants	4	6	4
Female to Male Ratio	3:1	4:2	3:1
Youngest Participant: Sex, Age	M, 65 years	F, 65 years	F, 67 years
Oldest Participant: Sex, Age	F, 73 years	M, 82 years	M, 80 years
Group Mean Age	69.25 years	78.00 years	74.25 years

2.3. Method

All three discussions in the case study were based on the standard focus group discussion methodology (Gibbs, 1997; Morgan, 1997; Bernard, 1999), which was modified according to the guidelines for running focus group discussions with older people (Quine and Cameron, 1995; Quine, 1998). The modifications took into account the number of participants in a group and the length of discussion. Although the focus group discussions with younger people usually include up to twelve participants, in the case of focus groups involving older people it is recommended that a group does not comprise more than six participants. A smaller number of participants in a focus group enables all the participants to have the opportunity to contribute to the discussion and facilitates interaction between the participants, which is very important in the focus group discussions with older people because older people are often less vocal in nature in comparison to younger people. As reported previously in the text, all the focus groups in this case study involved six or less participants. The length of the discussions in the case study was timed so that it did not exceed 90 minutes. This consideration is significant because older people, due to their age and reduced fitness, would most probably become very tired if a discussion lasted for a longer period.

Two researchers assisted each of the discussions; one researcher undertook the function of the discussion moderator whereas the other researcher acted as a scribe. The scribe was taking notes of the key points raised in the discussions. In addition, the discussions were recorded using a digital voice recorder. At the beginning of each of the discussions, the moderator explained the discussion goal to the participants. The given goal was, in terms of the applied terminology, a simplified version of the overall aim of the case study as presented at the beginning of this paper. Subsequently, the participants were presented with a succession of photographs of different public outdoor built environment scenes. The photographs, which were taken in and around Marple, were intended to serve as the primary facilitator for the discussion. Following the presentation of the photographs, in order to facilitate the discussion further, the moderator asked the participants a series of questions about their negative experiences with the physical features of the public outdoor built environment in Marple as well as with the aspects of the social environment influencing the use of the outdoors. In asking the questions, like in explaining the discussion goal, the moderator used a colloquial language.

2.4 Results

Based on the notes taken during the discussions, and the recordings, an analysis was conducted of the discussions content. In the analysis, the main issues raised by the participants in all three discussions were summarised and combined. The results of the analysis are given in the two tables beneath. Table 2 presents the physical features of the public outdoor built environment that the participants experience as negative. Furthermore, the table provides the details of the consequences of the features existence on the use of the environment. For clarity, the features in the table are grouped in sections by the form of mobility in the context of which they were mentioned, i.e. walking, cycling and driving. In addition, Table 2 contains the section named "Other", which includes the reported features that do not fit into the three mobility categories. Table 3 displays the aspects of the social environment that the participants mentioned as having a negative impact on the use of the outdoors.

Table 2: Negative physical features of the public outdoor built environment and the consequences of the features on the use of the environment:

Features Affecting Walking
- Uneven and cracked pavements pose a danger of tripping over and falling
- Uncompleted and inappropriately completed works on pavements disrupt the walking route and pose a danger of tripping over and falling as well as a hazard of being hit by passing vehicles if the pedestrian steps off the pavement into the road in order to avoid the works
- Poor visibility at some road crossings makes it difficult to see approaching traffic thus posing a danger of being hit by passing vehicles whilst crossing the road
- Roundabouts traffic control system causes confusion in crossing roads at the road crossings near roundabouts
- Traffic lights system favouring the road traffic over pedestrians is a nuisance because the pedestrians are required to wait overly long to cross roads
- Insufficient number of seats along walking routes makes it difficult to rest during a walk
- Insufficient number of public toilets; existing public toilets not properly maintained and unclean
- Low level of cleanliness of pavements and footpaths causes an inconvenience and a visual discomfort
- Poor street-lighting conditions increase the sense of insecurity and the fear of crime during night walks
Features Affecting Cycling
- Inconsistency and absence of bicycle lanes requires cycling on roads hence risking being hit by passing vehicles
- Insufficient number and poor maintenance of bicycle stands and sheds makes it difficult to secure a bike whilst it is not being used
Features Affecting Driving
- Traffic signs are often confusing and cause an uncertainty in making driving related decisions
- One-way road traffic control system is difficult to follow Inconsistency and absence of way-finding signs makes maintaining orientation difficult
- "Sleeping policemen" on roads and other traffic calming schemes are disruptive and a nuisance
- Insufficient number of car parking spaces
- Inadequately regulated vehicles traffic in car parks makes it dangerous to walk away from and towards a parked car
Other
- Insufficient number of public telephones; public telephones are difficult to find
- Public transport information is often difficult to read

Table 3: The aspects of the social environment negatively influencing the use of the outdoors:

Crime
Cycling on pavements and footpaths poses a danger of collision between pedestrians and cyclists
Parking cars alongside roads causes difficulties in driving due to the subsequent narrowing of the road for two-way traffic
Road rage; lack of manners; other drivers pushing to drive faster
Parking cars on pavements disrupts the walking route and poses a danger of being hit by passing vehicles if the pedestrian steps off the pavement into the road in order to avoid a parked car
Vandalism of facilities such as public toilets and park benches
Not having "dial-a-ride" service available makes it difficult to go to places
Inadequate provision for removal of snow off pavements in winter leaves the pavements dangerously slippery

3. Conclusion

This case study provided a valuable insight into the negative experiences regarding the use of the public outdoor built environment for a part of the older residents population of a typical suburban town in the UK. The issues identified as negatively affecting the use of the outdoors by the older people that participated in the focus group discussions in Marple are doubtlessly present in other suburban towns across the UK as well. Although the issues in question are not essential, addressing and tackling them at a national level would most probably contribute to an extent to improving the quality of life for the older residents population of the suburban UK. What is more, it is highly likely that resolving the issues would add not only to the quality of life for the older people but also for the population as a whole.

As the immediate further work on the I'DGO project, the SURFACE research team will carry out two additional focus group discussions based case studies. The intended studies are aimed to identify the physical environmental features having a negative impact on the use of the public outdoor built environment as well as the aspects of the social environment negatively influencing the use of the outdoors by the older residents of a typical rural and a typical urban residential setting in the UK. The outcomes of these two studies should complement the results of the study presented in this paper thus enabling fulfilment of the I'DGO project goal to gain the understanding of the issues having negative effects on the use of the outdoors by the older people living in a range of different types of residential settings in the UK. In the latter stage of the project, the focus group discussions localities will be revisited and a series of in-depth face-to-face interviews with the older residents will be carried out in order to verify and extend the focus group discussions findings.

4. The Conference Presentation

During the forum presentation at the conference, the outcome of the case study provided in this paper will be introduced to the audience. Following the introduction, the audience will be encouraged to discuss the presented issues and, through the discussion, place the issues in the international context in general and in the context of the developing world in particular.

5. References

Bernard, H.R. (1999) "Social Research Methods, Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches." London, UK: Sage Publications.

Garaj, V., Newton, R. and Ormerod, M. (2003) "Salford University Research Focus on Accessible Environments and the Inclusive Design for Getting Outdoors Project." In Proceedings of the "Social and Environmental Supports for Enhancing Active Ageing" Conference. 17 November 2003, London, UK: The UK National Collaboration on Ageing Research.

Gibbs, A. (1997) "Focus Groups" [online]. Social Research Update, Issue 19. Guildford, UK: University of Surrey.
Available from: http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/sru/SRU19.html
[Accessed on: 15 February 2004].

Morgan, D.L. (1997) "The Focus Group Kit: Focus Group Guidebook." Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications.

Quine, S. (1998) "Practical Guidelines for Organising and Running Focus Groups with Older People." Generations Review, 8 (4), pp. 4-6.

Quine, S. and Cameron, I. (1995) "The Use of Focus Groups with the Disabled Elderly." Qualitative Health Research, 5 (4), pp. 454-462.

Ward-Thompson, C., Burton, E.J. and Newton, R.A. (2002) "Inclusive Design for Getting Outdoors (I'DGO)." Research Proposal Submitted to the Extending Quality of Life (EQUAL) Research Funding Programme (Call 4) by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), No.GR-S29102-01. Edinburgh, Oxford, Salford, UK: Edinburgh School of Art/Heriot-Watt University, Oxford Brookes University, The University of Salford.

Whittaker, M. (2002) "The Marple Website: Marple Today: Introduction" [online]. Marple, UK: M. Whittaker.
Available from: http://www.marple-uk.com/Marple.htm
[Accessed on: 25 March 2004].

Top