Aging and Place: The Importance of Place in Aging

This issue highlights research on the multilayered geographic and policy contexts that impact aging across the United States. Articles range in focus from federal, state, and local policies to local programs and the broad environmental contexts in which people age in place. This collection of articles emphasizes the disparate impacts of policies and local contexts on aging, paying particular attention to healthy aging in vulnerable populations (e.g. minority, low-income, rural, and immigrant populations). These articles are coauthored by teams of scientists who span a range of fields represented in the Behavioral and Social Sciences Section of The Gerontological Society of America (e.g., sociology, economics, epidemiology, gerontology).

Burgard, Montez, Ailshire, and Hummer (2021) provide a framework for thinking about policies and programs to support healthy aging that recognizes the multilayered nature of local, state, and federal contexts in which aging occurs. They focus on the growing inequality in health and life expectancies within the United States, noting that life expectancy improvements have been very differential by state. Montez and Farina (2021) describe the polarization in state policy contexts in recent decades as a source of this diverging life expectancy. Meanwhile, Hamilton and Hagos (2021) indicate that differential health in the United States is affected by the larger social world and that time spent in the United States has more negative impacts on the health of black and Hispanic immigrants than on that of white and Asian immigrants, suggesting links to racism and discrimination.

Reyes, Thunell, and Zissimopoulos (2021) examine how the experience of caregiving is integrated into federal and state policies. They highlight the complexity of caregiving due to diversity in caregiver time, relationships, tasks, competing demands, and so forth. However, they point to recent acts adopted by numerous states that begin to recognize the importance of integrating family caregivers as part of the care team as a positive change.

State policies are recognized as varying, but federal policies and programs are typically written to be place neutral; however, they might have differential impacts depending on population composition and/or geographic context. Rhubart, Monnat, Jensen, and Pendergrast (2021) discuss how three national policies/programs have had disparate impacts in rural versus urban America. Fenelon and Mawhorter (2021) also identify two groups of aging persons with different concerns and vulnerabilities: homeowners and renters. While housing is a fundamental determinant of health, financial security, and quality of life, policies to promote housing affordability and security across the life course are lacking. A future consideration might be to integrate these considerations into policies that address multiple issues relevant to older adults’ well-being.

Ailshire and Brown (2021) note the success of past policies at multiple levels to address air pollution; however, beginning in 2016, the trends reversed and some gains in air quality have been lost. Because of age differences in health, standards for pollution exposure might not be appropriate for vulnerable older members of the population.

Hargrove, Garcia, and Cagney (2021) examine the role of neighborhood context in responding to three recent challenges: the novel coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the social movement surrounding police brutality and racial inequity, and the recent economic recession. They note that the risk of contagion, economic vibrancy, and interactions with police are largely experienced locally, and conclude that reinvestment in the built and social aspects of neighborhoods may create better spaces for supporting vulnerable populations.

The collection of papers makes clear how levels of policy-making and program development interact with diversity in the needs and abilities of aging individuals to create complexity in making policy for promoting the welfare of an aging population. It also clarifies how place is related to the characteristics of people, the environment, government, and policies.