Joplin Wsu 0251E 10847.Pdf (4.084Mb)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LIFE-SPACE FOR THE LIFESPAN: A MIXED METHODS EXPLORATION OF AGING IN THE ENVIRONMENT By AMBER JOPLIN A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF DESIGN WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY Interdisciplinary Design Institute MAY 2013 © Copyright by AMBER JOPLIN, 2013 All Rights Reserved © Copyright by AMBER JOPLIN, 2013 All rights reserved To the Faculty of Washington State University: The members of the Committee appointed to examine the dissertation of AMBER JOPLIN find it satisfactory and recommend that it be accepted. ___________________________________ Nancy H. Blossom, M.A., Chair ___________________________________ Kerry R. Brooks, Ph.D. ___________________________________ Bob Scarfo, Ph.D. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENT My committee members, Nancy H. Blossom, Kerry R. Brooks, and Bob Scarfo, have been patient, supportive, and unrelenting throughout this entire demanding and overwhelming process. Thank you for practical support and theoretical assistance in developing and articulating integrative approaches to complex problems. Thank you to the twenty eight individuals who participated in the interview portion of my study. I appreciate your time, openness, and enthusiasm for life. Thank you family and friends, especially Lois Kieffaber, Bob Horner, Kitty Bendixen-Park, Wendy Ann Hall, Deborah Napier, Ali Ilhan and Isil Oygur, Mike and Megan McKinlay, the Swagerty family, and the faculty and staff of the Interdisciplinary Design Institute, and Student Affairs at Washington State University, Spokane for innumerable acts of kindness, knowledge, and grace. Thank you to God, Country, and the taxpayers of Washington State for this golden moment. I am continually amazed at the places created by our shared vision and work. iii LIFE-SPACE FOR THE LIFESPAN: A MIXED METHODS EXPLORATION OF AGING IN THE ENVIRONMENT Abstract by Amber Joplin, D. Des. Washington State University May 2013 Chair: Nancy H. Blossom Aging seniors in Western society face a built environment that challenges wellbeing by progressively limiting their life activity space, excluding increasingly frail individuals from their environments of choice. Further, health effects and their economic consequences, and resource use are interconnected, thus, the disabling impact of most existing built environments must be included in any meaningful discussion of urban sustainability. While there is much research on lifespan development, aging, disability, and environments, there is a gap in the integration of knowledge from across disciplines, and in its availability to designers. The guiding paradigm of this research is Nigel Cross’ designerly ways of knowing, an iterative and emergent approach, using abductive reasoning through visualization to represent data and discover relationships. Models of contexts, values, aging, health, sustainability, and person-place relationships were identified in an interdisciplinary literature review and integrated via concept charts. Major elements were mapped using geographic information systems data across a medium sized city to identify neighborhoods of interest from which to iv recruit cases, and subsequently for data development and analysis of interviews with twenty eight community living seniors. Individuals express strong self-actualization, social dependence, and infrastructure concerns in accessing needed and desired goods, services, activities, and places. Poorly maintained sidewalks, traffic lights, steep hills, long distances to bus stops, long waits for bus and paratransit limited access for non-drivers. Drivers identified traffic, large parking lots, and crime as limitations. Home and property maintenance and estate issues were reasons to give up meaningful homes. Transportation, walking strength, and companionship were most often cited as essential for accessing meaningful places. The lifespan ecologic model emerged through iterative and sequential examination of theoretical models (qualitative), personal experiences (qualitative and quantitative), and geographic data (quantitative). Interviews and spatial analysis clarified the role of person-place processes of meaning, belonging, activity, and time, and integration of values with person-place processes propose a holistic approach to sustainability. This emergent model needs further testing in a variety of locales and age groups, as well as with populations that are not engaged in communities of belonging or meaning. v Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENT ...................................................................................................................... III ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................................... IV LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... XI LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................... XIII DEDICATION .................................................................................................................................. XV CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Deficiency in the literature ........................................................................................... 2 1.3 Statement of the research problem ............................................................................. 3 Significance for design and planning literature ...................................................... 4 Significance for practice .......................................................................................... 5 Significance for policy ............................................................................................. 5 1.4 The limitations of the research processes .................................................................... 6 Interdisciplinary models .......................................................................................... 6 Participant selection ............................................................................................... 6 Mapping with GIS .................................................................................................... 7 1.5 Structure of the dissertation ......................................................................................... 8 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW OF INTERDISCIPLINARY MODELS ...................................... 10 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 10 2.2 Key Terms .................................................................................................................... 13 Aging ..................................................................................................................... 13 Disability ................................................................................................................ 14 Context .................................................................................................................. 15 Sustainability ......................................................................................................... 16 Systems ................................................................................................................. 17 2.3 Theoretical Approaches Illustrated through Models: Models of Contexts ................ 17 Hierarchy of Purpose Model ................................................................................. 18 Human Ecology Model .......................................................................................... 21 Interior Ecosystem Model ..................................................................................... 26 Summary of Context Models ................................................................................ 28 vi 2.4 Values Model .............................................................................................................. 29 Modal Patterns for the Treatment of the Aged .................................................... 29 Summary of Values Model .................................................................................... 36 2.5 Person – Environment Interaction Models ................................................................. 36 Ecological Model of Aging (Competence-Press Model) ....................................... 37 Social-Physical Places over Time ........................................................................... 42 Summary of Person – Environment Interaction Models ...................................... 45 2.6 Models of Health and Disability .................................................................................. 48 Relationship of the health and disability models to the built environment ........ 49 Social Determinants of Health .............................................................................. 49 Human Ecology Model of a Settlement ................................................................ 54 2.7 Disablement Process Models ...................................................................................... 57 Disablement Process ............................................................................................