top of page
thumbnail_IMG_0660.jpeg

Creating your program

Creating your intergenerational program

Places for intergenerational social connection

What we learnt

The InterGen project took a ‘pro-connection’ approach to finding the spaces and places that might foster intergenerational connection.

​

Pro-connection places and spaces play a role in developing the social infrastructure of a community; this means, places that people together create the fabric of social connection for healthier communities (Karg, et al., 2021). Taking an approach to social connection means thinking about how spaces can be used or designed to encourage people to come together (Dart, 2018).

​

The team worked with our local council partners to link with facilities and venues that they thought would encourage intergenerational social connection. The places we chose were context-specific, responding to what the council perceived as a perceived social connection issue in a space, such as lack of use, or a need for interaction between distinct groups in a particular space. We then tested these places to see whether they helped to foster informal social connection between generations, using a number of activities in those spaces.

 

Spaces do not have to be directly designed for social connection to be successful at encouraging intergenerational connection, but here are some keys to successful pro-connection space planning:

Access to public transport is vital to connecting different generations

​

Public transport is an affordable and safe way for most people to travel, though success of a pro-connection space is dependent on the time it would take for a participant to get from transport to location, how accessible the route from transport to location was and whether participants would need to travel in the early mornings or evenings.

Safe and Inclusive spaces must be prioritized

​

Many participants have sensory or accessibility issues that create barriers to social connection.
 

Offering a few different ways to engage in a space, including separate, quiet spaces or places that encourage one on one interaction can be helpful ways to make spaces safe and inclusive.

Accessibility is important for older participants

​

Spaces that are not accessible for older people and those with disability are not pro-connection spaces. This can include: Lack of ramps, appropriate seating, sound proofing and echo reduction and lighting. Location and accessibility of toilets, and features such as gravel or rocky pathways, or long distances between initial access to a space and seating or toilets can all create space-based barriers to participation in social connection.

Ownership of spaces can strengthen community pride, but can also exclude others in an intergenerational context

​

Many of the spaces available for community use are linked to a particular purpose or demographic cohort. For example, seniors’ club spaces and youth group spaces tend to cater for singular groups. While these singular uses are an important part of creating community cohesion, a group feeling of ownership of a space can create friction and exclusionary behaviour when another demographic group is introduced to the space. 

thumbnail_IMG_0649.jpeg

What to do next

A pro-connection space checklist

  • What types of social connection do you want to encourage​ ​​

  • What is the original use of the space? How will your social connection program change the use of the space? ​

  • What is the local context for use of this space? ​

  • What are the community benefits of using the space in the ways you are envisioning?

  • Who will need to be consulted or communicated to about your use of this space?

  • ​ Are there groups of people using the space already?

  • What age groups will be using the space ​

  • What activities will they be doing in the space

  • What risk assessment will you need to do to use the space?

  • What accessibility issues might be apparent in space? ​

  • What are the emergency procedures in the space?

  • What are the first aid and defibrillator resources in the space?

  • What is the child safe policy at the location? ​

  • Is parental consent required for young people’s participation in the space?

  • Are working with children checks required for community use of this space?

  • Is there a cost associated with using the space or waived for community use?

  • Is there public transport and carparking nearby?

  • Are there toilets available on site?

  • Will facilitators be required to use this space appropriately?

Urban Interior Design

Educational Spaces

  • Primary or Secondary Schools

  • Playgroups

  • Libraries

Type of social connection fostered

  • Formal social connection programs

  • Learning or mentoring

  • Event or outcome based social activity

Potential barriers to intergenerational social connection

  • More detailed risk assessment needed

  • Secure facility – older cohorts may need to be signed in and out of spaces

  • May not be accessible

  • May not promote different types of activity

CASE STUDY

Making single use spaces intergenerational

Many community spaces are designed with a single cohort in mind as traditionally, ownership of a space was seen strengthen community cohesion. But this approach is not always successful when overlaying intergenerational social connection into single purpose spaces. In the Maroondah LGA council had been moving toward multiple use community spaces for some time, culminating in the Croydon Community wellbeing hub, which would serve as a central gathering place for different community groups across the lifespan. The InterGen project was responding to this context in its pro-connection approach to spaces.

 

While many of the seniors’ community groups had already moved into the Wellbeing hub, the InterGen project would be the first time teens from the local youth services centre would be introduced to the space. At first, older people who had been using the space for some time, responded negatively to seeing young people in a space that they claimed some community ownership of. This required some intervention to communicate to existing groups. This was to assure the older users of the space that they were not being ‘kicked out’ of their spaces, and to manage expectations of shared community spaces. But as the young people engaged with older participants in the InterGen project, they were gradually seen as a key part of the space and many of the older participants asked if they could continue to meet after the project was completed.

bottom of page