Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:04:26.484Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘That lot up there and us down here’: social interaction and a sense of community in a mixed tenure UK retirement village

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2009

SIMON EVANS
SIMON EVANS*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK.
*
Address for correspondence: Simon Evans, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of the West of England, Coldharbour Lane, BristolBS16 1QY, UK. Email: Simon.Evans@uwe.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Retirement villages have been slow to emerge as a housing model for older people in the United Kingdom (UK) but the sector is now growing rapidly, with an increasing number of both private and not-for-profit developers entering the market. Research findings to date have indicated high levels of satisfaction among residents, but commentators have criticised this form of provision on the grounds that they are only an option for the better off. This paper reports a study of a retirement village that has attempted to address this issue by integrating residents from a range of socio-economic backgrounds and by making various tenures available in the same development. The paper begins with a brief history of retirement villages in the UK and an overview of the concept of community, including those of communities of place and interest and their role in social policy. The presented findings highlight a number of factors that impact on a resident's sense of community, including social interaction, the development of friendships, the built environment and the existence of common interests. The discussion focuses on the development of cross-tenure social networks and how residents' health and social status shapes community experience. It is concluded that the clustering model of mixed tenure is likely to emphasise differences in the socio-economic backgrounds of residents and that the success of retirement villages as communities depends on grasping the subtleties of the diversity of later life.

Keywords

communityretirement villagediversityolder people
Type
Research Article
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , February 2009 , pp. 199 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, B. 1991. Imagined Community. Verso, London.Google Scholar
Bernard, M., Bartlam, B., Sim, J. and Biggs, S. 2007. Housing and care for older people: life in an English purpose-built retirement village. Ageing & Society, 27, 4, 555–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biggs, S., Bernard, M., Kingston, P. and Nettleton, H. 2000. Lifestyles of belief: narrative and culture in a retirement community. Ageing & Society, 20, 6, 649–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blandy, S., Lister, D., Atkinson, R. and Flint, J. 2003. Gated Communities: A Systematic Review of the Research Evidence. School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, Avon. Available online at www.bris.ac.uk/sps/cnrpaperspdf/cnr12pap.pdf [Accessed 5 July 2007].Google Scholar
Burholt, V. 2006. Adref: theoretical contexts of attachment to place for mature and older people in rural North Wales. Environment and Planning A, 38, 6, 1095–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calhoun, C. 1998. Community without propinquity revisited: communications technology and the transformation of the urban public sphere. Sociological Inquiry, 68, 3, 373–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croucher, K., Please, N. and Bevan, M. 2003. Living at Hartrigg Oaks: Resident's Views of the UK's First Continuing Care Retirement Community. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York. Available online at www.jrf.org.uk/bookshop/eBooks/1859351336.pdf [Accessed 20 June 2007].Google Scholar
Croucher, K., Hicks, L. and Jackson, K. 2006. Housing with Care for Later Life: A Literature Review. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.Google Scholar
Crow, G. and Allan, G. 1994. Community Life: An Introduction to Local Social Relations. Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire.Google Scholar
Department of Communities and Local Government 2006. Strong and Prosperous Communities. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Department for Communities and Local Government 2008. Lifetime Homes, Lifetime Neighbourhoods: A National Strategy for Housing in an Ageing Society. Her Majesty's Stationery Office (HMSO), London.Google Scholar
Gilleard, C. and Higgs, P. 2000. Cultures of Ageing: Self, Citizen and the Body. Prentice Hall, London.Google Scholar
Forrest, R. and Kearns, A. 2001. Social cohesion, social capital and the neighbourhood. Urban Studies, 38, 12, 2125–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankenberg, R. 1967. Communities in Britain: Social Life in Town and Country. Penguin, London.Google Scholar
Hanson, J. 2001. From ‘special needs’ to ‘lifestyle choices’: articulating the demand for ‘third age’ housing. In Peace, J. and Holland, C.(eds), Inclusive Housing in an Ageing Society: Innovative Approaches. Policy Press, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
Heywood, F., Oldman, C. and Means, R. 2002. Housing and Home in Later Life. Open University Press, Buckingham.Google Scholar
Hoggett, P. 1997. Contested Communities: Experiences, Struggles, Policies. Policy Press, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
Joseph Rowntree Foundation 2006. Mixed Communities: Success and Sustainability. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.Google Scholar
Kearns, A. and Mason, P. 2007. Mixed tenure communities and neighbourhood quality. Housing Studies, 22, 5, 661–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleinhans, R. 2004. Social implications of housing diversification in urban renewal: a review of recent literature. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 19, 4, 367–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, M. 1977. Maggie Kuhn on Aging. Westminster Press, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Lawton, M. P. 1985. The elderly in context: perspectives from environmental psychology and gerontology. Environment and Behaviour, 17, 4, 501–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, D. and Newby, H. 1983. The Problem of Sociology. George Allen and Unwin, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire.Google Scholar
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister 2003 a. Supporting People. HMSO, London.Google Scholar
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister 2003 b. Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future. HMSO, London.Google Scholar
Pahl, R. E. 1970. Patterns of Urban Life. Brill, London.Google Scholar
Phillipson, C. 2007. The ‘elected’ and the ‘excluded’: sociological perspectives on the experience of place and community in old age. Ageing & Society, 27, 3, 321–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, R. D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon and Schuster, New York.Google Scholar
Robertson, D., Smyth, J. and McIntosh, I. 2008. Neighbourhood Identity: People, Time and Place. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.Google Scholar
The Idea Works Inc. 2008. Qualrus: The Intelligent Qualitative Analysis Program. The Idea Works Inc., Columbia, Missouri. Available online at http://www.ideaworks.com/qualrus/index.html [Accessed June 2008].Google Scholar
Urban Task Force 2005. Towards a Strong Urban Renaissance. Urban Task Force, London. Available online at www.urbantaskforce.org.uk [Accessed 8 July 2007].Google Scholar
Webster, C. 2002. Property rights and the public realm: gates, green belts, and Gemeinschaft. Environment and Planning B, 29, 3, 315–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar