Emphasizing access to health and treatment services in order to identify the key factors influencing an age-friendly city

    Hossein Komasi Affiliation
    ; Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani Affiliation
    ; Jurgita Antuchevičienė Affiliation


One of the most important goals of urban management is to provide comfort and well-being for all citizens. According to the population trend of the world, a massive segment of the future population will be the elderly. Therefore, it is crucial to pay attention to the needs of this segment of society. In this regard, the concept of an age-friendly city that provides a favorable urban environment for the elderly has entered the world’s scientific literature. Because one of the essential land utilization that the elderly have a lot of connection with is health-therapeutic use, the current research has been carried out to evaluate the current health-treatment situation of Songhor city in terms of its usefulness for the elderly. In the second step, the most important drivers influencing the location of these uses have been identified from the perspective of related experts. This research is applied in terms of purpose and descriptive-analytical in terms of research method. The required data has been collected using library-documentary studies, field surveys, and the distribution of questionnaires from related experts. According to the study’s findings, more than 60% of treatment facilities in Songhor city are inaccessible to the elderly. This difficulty varies by therapeutic use; in some cases, it is less difficult than the average, while in others, it is more difficult. In addition, three factors–investment cost (V3), rivalry (V10), and population density (V8)–have been identified as the age-friendly city’s main drivers out of a total of 18 main variables. The study’s findings indicate that the global population is aging, and urban managers and officials should design urban environments following the requirements of the projected population by putting forth medium- and long-term plans.

Keyword : age-friendly cities, healthy cities, sustainable cities, urban land use

How to Cite
Komasi, H., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., & Antuchevičienė, J. (2023). Emphasizing access to health and treatment services in order to identify the key factors influencing an age-friendly city. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 27(3), 176–187.
Published in Issue
Sep 11, 2023
Abstract Views
PDF Downloads
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


Ashton, J., Tiliouine, A., & Kosinska, M. (2018). The World Health Organization European Healthy Cities Network 30 years on. Gaceta Sanitaria, 32(6), 503–504.

Balaban, O., & Puppim de Oliveira, J. A. (2017). Sustainable buildings for healthier cities: assessing the co-benefits of green buildings in Japan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 163, 68–78.

Beck, D., & Ferasso, M. (2023). Bridging ‘Stakeholder value creation’ and ‘Urban sustainability’: the need for better integrating the Environmental Dimension. Sustainable Cities and Society, 89, 104316.

Brooks-Cleator, L. A., Giles, A. R., & Flaherty, M. (2019). Community-level factors that contribute to First Nations and Inuit older adults feeling supported to age well in a Canadian city. Aging Studies, 48, 50–59.

Buffel, T., & Phillipson, C. (2016). Can global cities be ‘age-friendly cities’? Urban development and ageing populations. Cities, 55, 94–100.

Çetinkaya, C., Erbaş, M., Kabak, M., & Özceylan, E. (2023). A mass vaccination site selection problem: an application of GIS and entropy-based MAUT approach. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 85, 101376.

Cheng, F., & Wang, Y. (2021). Research and application of 3D visualization and Internet of Things technology in urban land use efficiency management. Displays, 69, 102050.

Chui, C. H., Lu, S., Chan, O. F., Cheung, J. C.-S., Guo, Y., Liu, Y., Chan, S. W., Tang, J. Y. M., Au, A., Wen, Z. V., Yu, R., Bai, X., Mok, K. H. J., Woo, J., & Lum, T. Y. S. (2022). Changes in older adults’ perceptions of age-friendliness in Hong Kong: a three-year mixed-methods study. Cities, 127, 103748.

Colnar, S., Dimovski, V., & Bogataj, D. (2021). Review of telecare in smart age-friendly cities. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 54(13), 744–749.

DellOvo, M., Capolongo, S., & Oppio, A. (2018). Combining spatial analysis with MCDA for the siting of healthcare facilities. Land Use Policy, 76, 634–644.

Dokl, D., Rogelj, V., & Bogataj, D. (2022). Smart age-friendly villages: literature review and research agenda. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 55(10), 928–933.

Estebsari, F., Rahimi Khalifeh Kandi, Z., Nasiri, M., Moradi Fath, M., Karimi Yeganeh, F., & Mostafaei, D. (2021). Evaluation of transportation infrastructure and urban space of Tehran based on the indicators of age friendly city. Iranian Journal of Health Education & Health Promotion, 9(2), 187–200. (in Persian).

Figueiredo, M., Eloy, S., Marques, S., & Dias, L. (2023). Older people perceptions on the built environment: a scoping review. Applied Ergonomics, 108, 103951.

Ghaffari Gilandeh, A., Mohammadi, C. H., & Davari, E. (2022). Evaluating elderly-friendly city indicators (a case study of Sari). Environmental Based Territorial Planning (Amayesh), 15(56), 1–25. (in Persian).

Grafakos, S., Viero, G., Reckien, D., Trigg, K., Viguie, V., Sudmant, A., Graves, C., Foley, A., Heidrich, O., Mirailles, J. M., Carter, J., Chang, L. H., Nador, C., Liseri, M., Chelleri, L., Orru, H., Orru, K., Aelenei, R., Bilska, A., … & Dawson, R. (2020). Integration of mitigation and adaptation in urban climate change action plans in Europe: a systematic assessment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 121, 109623.

Gudowsky, N., Sotoudeh, M., Capari, L., & Wilfing, H. (2017). Transdisciplinary forward-looking agenda setting for age-friendly, human centered cities. Futures, 90, 16–30.

Han, B., Jin, X., Wang, J., Yin, Y., Liu, C., Sun, R., & Zhou, Y. (2022). Identifying inefficient urban land redevelopment potential for evidence-based decision making in China. Habitat International, 128, 102661.

Harrison, A., Hall, M., Money, A., Mueller, J., Waterson, H., & Verma, A. (2021). Engaging older people to explore the age-friendliness of a rural community in Northern England: a photo-elicitation study. Journal of Aging Studies, 58, 100936.

Hu, H.-Y., Chiu, S.-I., & Yen, T.-M. (2009). Modified IPA for order-winner criteria improvement: a MICMAC approach. Journal of Applied Sciences, 9(21), 3792–3803.

Iqbal, A., Anil, G., Bhandari, P., Crockett, E. D., Hanson, V. M., Pendse, B. S., Eckdahl, J. S., & Horn, J. L. (2022). A digitally capable mobile health clinic to improve rural health care in America: a pilot quality improvement study. Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Innovations, Quality & Outcomes, 6(5), 475–483.

Jelokhani-Niaraki, M., Hajiloo, F., & Samany, N. N. (2019). A web-based public participation GIS for assessing the age-friendliness of cities: a case study in Tehran, Iran. Cities, 95, 102471.

Joy, M. (2021). Neoliberal rationality and the age friendly cities and communities program: reflections on the Toronto case. Cities, 108, 102982.

Khomenko, S., Nieuwenhuijsen, M., Ambròs, A., Wegener, S., & Mueller, N. (2020). Is a liveable city a healthy city? Health impacts of urban and transport planning in Vienna, Austria. Environmental Research, 183, 109238.

Komasi, H., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., & Cavallaro, F. (2022). The COVID-19 pandemic and nature-based tourism, scenario planning approach (case study of nature-based tourism in Iran). Sustainability, 14(7), 3954.

Komasi, H., Zolfani, S. H., & Nemati, A. (2023). Evaluation of the social-cultural competitiveness of cities based on sustainable development approach. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 6(1), 583–602.

Kumar, H., Singh, M. K., & Gupta, M. P. (2019). A policy framework for city eligibility analysis: TISM and fuzzy MICMAC-weighted approach to select a city for smart city transformation in India. Land Use Policy, 82, 375–390.

Liang, Y., Yi, P., Li, W., Liu, J., & Dong, Q. (2022). Evaluation of urban sustainability based on GO-SRA: case study of Ha-Chang and Mid-Southern Liaoning urban agglomerations in Northeastern China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 87, 104234.

Liu, B., Yang, Z., Xue, B., Zhao, D., Sun, X., & Wang, W. (2022). Formalizing an integrated metric system measuring performance of urban sustainability: evidence from China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 79, 103702.

Lowe, M., Arundel, J., Hooper, P., Rozek, J., Higgs, C., Roberts, R., & Giles-Corti, B. (2020). Liveability aspirations and realities: implementation of urban policies designed to create healthy cities in Australia. Social Science & Medicine, 245, 112713.

Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J. (2020). Urban and transport planning pathways to carbon neutral, liveable and healthy cities; A review of the current evidence. Environment International, 140, 105661.

Palutturi, S., Saleh, L. M., Rachmat, M., Malek, J. A., & Nam, E. W. (2021). Principles and strategies for aisles communities empowerment in creating Makassar healthy city, Indonesia. Gaceta Sanitaria, 35, 46–48.

Pee, L. G., & Pan, S. L. (2022). Climate-intelligent cities and resilient urbanisation: challenges and opportunities for information research. International Journal of Information Management, 63, 102446.

Peng, S., & Maing, M. (2021). Influential factors of age-friendly neighborhood open space under high-density high-rise housing context in hot weather: a case study of public housing in Hong Kong. Cities, 115, 103231.

Ran, L., Tan, X., Xu, Y., Zhang, K., Chen, X., Zhang, Y., Li, M., & Zhang, Y. (2021). The application of subjective and objective method in the evaluation of healthy cities: a case study in Central China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 65, 102581.

Ravi, K. E., Fields, N. L., & Dabelko-Schoeny, H. (2021). Outdoor spaces and buildings, transportation, and environmental justice: a qualitative interpretive meta-synthesis of two age-friendly domains. Journal of Transport & Health, 20, 100977.

Ren, Z., Fu, Y., Dong, Y., Zhang, P., & He, X. (2022). Rapid urbanization and climate change significantly contribute to worsening urban human thermal comfort: a national 183-city, 26-year study in China. Urban Climate, 43, 101154.

Ruza, J., Kim, J. I., Leung, I., Kam, C., & Ng, S. Y. M. (2015). Sustainable, age-friendly cities: an evaluation framework and case study application on Palo Alto, California. Sustainable Cities and Society, 14, 390–396.

Şahin, T., Ocak, S., & Top, M. (2019). Analytic hierarchy process for hospital site selection. Health Policy and Technology, 8(1) 42–50.

Senvar, O., Otay, I., & Bolturk, E. (2016). Hospital site selection via hesitant fuzzy TOPSIS. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49(12), 1140–1145.

Shi, J., Liu, X., & Feng, Z. (2023). Age-friendly cities and communities and cognitive health among Chinese older adults: evidence from the China health and retirement longitudinal studies. Cities, 132, 104072.

Steels, S. (2015). Key characteristics of age-friendly cities and communities: a review. Cities, 47, 45–52.

Swanson, A. (2021). Physician investment in hospitals: specialization, selection, and quality in cardiac care. Journal of Health Economics, 80, 102519.

Thang, L. L., Yui, Y., Wakabayashi, Y., & Miyazawa, H. (2023). Promoting age-friendly community of support and care in Japan’s aging neighborhood: the Nagayama model. Aging and Health Research, 3(1), 100111.

The World Bank. (2020).

Valenzuela-Levi, N., Fuentes, L., Ramirez, M. I., Rodriguez, S., & Señoret, A. (2022). Urban sustainability and perceived satisfaction in neoliberal cities. Cities, 126, 103647.

Van Hoof, J., Marston, H. R., Kazak, J. K., & Buffel, T. (2021). Ten questions concerning age-friendly cities and communities and the built environment. Building and Environment, 199, 107922.

Van Hoof, J., van den Hoven, R. F. M., Hess, M., van Staalduinen, W. H., Hulsebosch-Janssen, L. M. T., & Dikken, J. (2022). How older people experience the age-friendliness of the Hague: a quantitative study. Cities, 124, 103568.

Wang, L., Zhang, S., Tang, L., Lu, Y., Liu, Y., & Liu, Y. (2022a). Optimizing distribution of urban land on the basis of urban land use intensity at prefectural city scale in mainland China. Land Use Policy, 115, 106037.

Wang, M., & Zhou, T. (2022). Understanding the dynamic relationship between smart city implementation and urban sustainability. Technology in Society, 70, 102018.

Wang, S., Yung, E., Yu, Y., & Tsou, J. Y. (2022b). Right to the city and community facility planning for elderly: the case of urban renewal district in Hong Kong. Land Use Policy, 114, 105978.

Wang, Y., Pei, R., Gu, X., Liu, B., & Liu, L. (2023). Has the healthy city pilot policy improved urban health development performance in China? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment. Sustainable Cities and Society, 88, 104268.

World Health Organization. (2019). Age-friendly environments.

Wu, S., Fu, Y., & Yang, Z. (2022). Housing condition, health status, and age-friendly housing modification in Europe: the last resort? Building and Environment, 215, 108956.

Yan, D., Wu, S., Zhou, S., Li, F., & Wang, Y. (2021). Healthy city development for Chinese cities under dramatic imbalance: evidence from 258 cities. Sustainable Cities and Society, 74, 103157.

Zhang, X., Bayulken, B., Skitmore, M., Lu, W., & Huisingh, D. (2018). Sustainable urban transformations towards smarter, healthier cities: theories, agendas and pathways. Journal of Cleaner Production, 173, 1–10.