Urban Planning (ISSN: 2183–7635)
2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52
DOI: 10.17645/up.v4i2.1896
Article

Understanding Belonging and Community Connection for Seniors Living in
the Suburbs
Sonya L. Jakubec 1, *, Marg Olfert 1 , Liza L. S. Choi 1 , Nicole Dawe 2 and Dwayne Sheehan 1
1 Faculty of Health, Community and Education, Mount Royal University, Calgary, T3E 6K6, Canada; E-Mails:

sjakubec@mtroyal.ca (S.L.J.), molfert@mtroyal.ca (M.O.), lchoi@mtroyal.ca (L.L.S.C.), dpsheehan@mtroyal.ca (D.S.)
2 Vivo for Healthier Generations, Calgary, AB T3K 6E3, Canada; E-Mail: ndawe@vivo.ca
* Corresponding author
Submitted: 14 December 2018 | Accepted: 5 March 2019 | Published: 18 June 2019
Abstract
While much has been explored about notions of both place and belonging in regard to community health of various populations, little is known of the phenomena specific to suburban dwelling seniors. More and more seniors are living in
suburban neighborhoods, communities that do not tend well to the belonging needs of this population. This qualitative
study sought the perspectives of suburban dwelling seniors about the role of belonging and community connection to
their health and wellbeing. Informed by strengths-based approaches to community development and health, the study
engaged people from three community groups of older adults in a Canadian suburb (a seniors’ recreational/social group,
and two cultural groups) in group interviews concerning the topic. Discoveries included an understanding of belonging as
both personal and social, and identification of facilitators and barriers to belonging at personal and systemic levels. Belonging was experienced through connection, contribution and cooperation. These findings are important to shape community
engagement with seniors and to inform decision-making and program developments in areas of recreation, leisure, health
services, community policing, city planning and other services.
Keywords
community belonging; health; seniors; suburban; wellbeing
Issue
This article is part of the issue “The City, Aging and Urban Planning”, edited by Matthias Drilling (University of Applied
Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland) and Fabian Neuhaus (University of Calgary, Canada).
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Cogitatio (Lisbon, Portugal). This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY).

1. Introduction
Concepts of social connectedness and belonging have increasingly garnered the interest of researchers and interventionists over the past two decades (Almedom, 2005;
Bruhn, 2009; Caxaj & Berman, 2010; Ottmann, Dickson,
& Wright, 2006). While much has been explored about
notions of both place and belonging regarding community health of various populations (Baldwin, 2014; Potvin
& Hayes, 2007), little is known of the phenomena of
seniors living in suburbs (Richard, Gauvin, & Gosselin,
2008). There are varied and inconsistent ways of describing suburbs, as well as recent discoveries of isola-

Urban Planning, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52

tion experienced by urban and suburban dwelling seniors, with little understanding, however, of the older
adults who live in these communities (Morris & Pfeiffer,
2017). The phenomenon is one of rapidly increasing relevance in many Canadian cities where urban housing costs
relegate many seniors to lower cost suburban regions,
and where many new immigrant families also co-house
in mixed generations (Miller, 2017; Patterson, Saddier,
Rezaei, & Manaugh, 2014). This study sought to explore
the views and perspectives of seniors (older adults, 60+)
living in the north central suburbs of Calgary, a large, multicultural and predominantly “young” (median age 36.4)
city in Western Canada (Statistics Canada, 2012).

43

Broad interests of this inquiry were about the experience of belonging and community connection to suburban dwelling seniors in relation to their health and wellbeing. Beginning the study with these interests and gathering the views of older adults who were already engaged
in group activities was central to the project on a number
of levels, namely providing seniors based in suburbs an
opportunity to belong, to be heard and for their opinions
to matter in community development. This knowledge is
also important for decision-making and program developments in areas of recreation, leisure, health services,
community policing, city planning and other services.
2. Background
Much has been explored internationally concerning
older adults and the phenomenon of loneliness, including social and neighbouhood factors, over the past
decade (Gerst-Emerson & Jayawardhana, 2015; Smith,
2012; Vozikaki, Papadaki, Linardakis, & Philalithis, 2018).
Linkages between health and social networks are extremely complex and poorly understood, however—with
numerous related variables of concern and relationships
that defy empirical analyses. If we focus on understanding population-specific perspectives of community belonging there are a variety of frameworks and concepts to consider. Social cohesion (Bruhn, 2009; Toye,
2007), social connectedness (Almedom, 2005; Ottmann
et al., 2006; Townsend & McWhirter, 2005), social capital (Putnam, 1995), neighbourhood (Abada, Hou, & Ram,
2007; Richard et al., 2008; Steptoe & Feldman, 2001),
communities (Völker, Flap, & Lindenberg, 2007), and belonging (Block, 2008; Caxaj & Berman, 2010) are all terms
identified in the literature.
In empirical studies drawing upon these concepts or
experiences, diverse approaches such as neighbourhood
mapping (Aronson, Wallis, O’Campo, & Schafer, 2007), indicator and demographic measurement studies (Nieminen et al., 2008; Rajulton, Ravanera, & Beaujot, 2007),
ecological (Pickett & Wilkinson, 2008), comparative analyses (Green, Preston, & Janmaat, 2006), and intervention studies (Pronyk et al., 2008) contribute to the growing literature. Despite a lack of clarity and inherent complexity, research studies have attempted to explicate the
terms to be used and to appreciate relationships between these social factors and health concerns (see, for
example, Grav, Hellzèn, Romild, & Stordal, 2012, for a
study on social support and depression). The linkages of
belonging and loneliness of older adults are gathering
current scholarly and programmatic interest, highlighting systemic and individual strategies for wellbeing (Goll,
Charlesworth, Scior, & Stott, 2015). Other meta-analyses
have focused on understanding the quality and quantity
of social relationships on mortality and taken together
these factors are found to be comparable to other risk
factors (Holt-Lunstad, Smith, & Layton, 2010).
While the swell of conceptual and empirical work
is building an understanding of community belonging

Urban Planning, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52

and health (Mohnen, Völker, Flap, Subramanian, &
Groenewegen, 2013), little knowledge of the topic of
belonging specifically for suburban dwelling seniors has
been generated to date. A majority (66%) of the Canadian population lives in some form of suburb and, given
that one out of every four Canadians will be over the
age of 65 in fewer than 25 years (Miller, 2017), the phenomenon of seniors living in the suburbs poses many
important questions. Seniors in suburbs are unique because of perceived and real isolation from services, including health care and access to transportation (Patterson et al., 2014). Calgary’s suburbs are inhabited by people of diverse social, cultural, and economic backgrounds.
As such, our study engaged suburban-dwelling seniors
engaged in diverse community groups for a broad, qualitative exploration of the phenomena to establish foundational understanding of the experience of belonging for
suburban dwelling seniors.
Rather than relying on preconceived frameworks
of understanding social connection and belonging, we
wanted to hear the perspectives of people who identified as being connected to their community and, specifically, to hear the views of these older adults on belonging in relation to their wellbeing. In the study we
asked the following questions: 1) what are the facilitators and barriers to belonging and connection, and
2) what, ideally, could belonging and connection look like
in rapidly expanding, multi-cultural, multi-generational
suburban communities?
3. Research Methods and Approach
This exploratory, qualitative study employed a group interview method with thematic analysis (Krueger & Casey,
2009). The theoretical approach taken in this study design (one that guided the questions, as well as the methods and facilitation) was that of asset-based community development as described by McKnight and Block
(2010) who problematize the practice of “professionalizing community”, instead drawing on the notion of “abundant community”, concerned with strengths rather than
deficits related to experiences of belonging in communities. This strengths-based approach sought community learning and understanding of group experiences,
rather than “medicalizing” or “professionalizing” community health and development in an outside framework
of belonging (Block, 2008). Both the methods and this approach were appropriate to the broad exploratory and
community development goals of the project. The study
proceeded following ethical approval from a university
level research ethics board.
3.1. Participants
Members of three distinct community groups for
suburban-dwelling seniors comprised the sample for this
study. The groups were already connected to the site of
a large non-profit suburban recreation centre based in

44

north central Calgary, and thus considered well qualified
“expert informant” participants in terms of seniors’ experiences of belonging. As introduced, Calgary is a youthoriented city that has experienced rapid growth with
the resulting characteristics of decades of car-dependent
suburban sprawl and consequent social isolation. The
city experiences a long winter season for up to six
months of the year with snow and ice and warm chinook winds, elements that were key to participant experiences of their community access and connection. Participants were sought who had found community affiliation and group participation within the suburban community in north central Calgary. Their experiences included navigating age-related changes in driving and mobility in the latter seasons of their lives within the context of the weather and suburban conditions, as well as
changes of identity as a result of retirement from formal
employment or family roles (Goll et al., 2015; Patterson
et al., 2014).
Those recruited were retired seniors who were members of one of three distinct groups affiliated with the
suburban recreation centre: a physical activity group
from the local neighborhood association, a South Asian
(Punjabi) cultural group that routinely met at the recreation centre, and a Chinese Canadian group of older
adult neighborhood residents. A purposive snowball
sampling technique was employed in the study and leaders from each of these community groups were approached to invite members to participate in a group
interview process held at one of the community recreation centre group meeting rooms and the Chinese
Elderly Citizens’ Association where a volunteer interpreter/translator supported the data gathering. Confirmations were sought through the community leaders
and 8 to 16 older adults (ranging in age from 60 to 80
years of age) participated in each of the three group interviews (N = 36). Approximately half of the total group
identified as female, and half male.
3.2. Data Collection and Analysis
Data collection through audio recorded group interviews
occurred over the course of 60 to 90-minute group meetings and proceeded in three rounds, at a community
meeting room selected by participants. The ChineseCanadian participant group interview was conducted in
Mandarin, with English language translation provided for
the recorded transcript. All other interviews took place
in English language facilitated by two members of the research team. Interview questions asked were:
1. What does belonging in the community mean?
How is community belonging and connection valuable for your neighborhood (for different groups—
other individuals—you?)
2. What are the facilitators and barriers? What supports community belonging and connection in
your neighbourhood? What gets in the way?

Urban Planning, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52

3. What would you like to happen? What would be
happening—ideally—if there was community belonging and connection in your neighborhood?
What would that look like?
Group interview analysis, as a form of thematic analysis, aims to capture themes elicited from group dialogue
and relevant to group concerns (Braun & Clarke, 2006).
The analytic interest of our study was on experiences
of community belonging identified by groups of suburban dwelling older adults. Research team members completed thematic analysis by hand-coding transcripts from
all 3 group interviews. An initial reading of the texts allowed for researchers to “define” themes from the data,
rather than searching for pre-defined themes or theoretically driven concepts of belonging (Braun & Clarke, 2006,
p. 92). During the first reading, notes were made of individual comments arising from the interviews in order
to acquire a sense of the topics of benefits, barriers and
desires for belonging embedded in the data. Later, text
was manually highlighted, and notes were made in a data
organizing form with the individual transcript reviews
and broad themes were identified. It must be emphasized that this was not considered a-theoretical work—
community development models guiding the project similarly framed the analysis of the interview data.
Participants reviewed the identified preliminary
themes in a large group meeting, bringing together
all three participant groups, as well as interested community agencies and municipal neighbourhood leaders,
which allowed for confirmation of the findings. The collaborative research process also enabled an opportunity to seek resonance with those who hold expertise
in the subject, work directly in the field, and those who
were present at the interviews and part of the larger research team.
4. Findings
4.1. Belonging Is Personal but Connected to Place
and People
Belonging was identified as a “feeling” (involving sensations and attitudes), a “knowing” (or having access to information and wisdom), a state of “being” (experienced
in connection to others in defined community spaces),
and as “doing” (activities and goings on). These characteristics were personal, but also connected or social, and
are described in more detail with examples from the data.
One participant described the social aspect of belonging
in regard to the need for ongoing and sustained activities.
He said:
We did a project last year and we had five communities come together from five different cultures and
have five different events. That was great, but that
was only limited to there and then; after that you forget again and don’t get connected. Connecting means

45

you should be connecting with everybody in the community, not just one group and the other group and
the other group.
A “feeling” of belonging meant a sensation or an attitude,
for example feeling attached, comforted, accepted, and
appreciated/respected. For the participants, belonging
also meant feeling they were seen or visible and feeling
valued in a youth-focused city/culture:
It can be an isolated and abandoned feeling [described struggling to get to health resources or community activities for loved ones in need]—they just
haven’t built these necessary things in the suburbs.
Belonging, for the seniors, was a part of “having
knowledge”—knowing information about what “what is
happening” in the community, about the goings on in
a neighbourhood beyond the family. Knowing the resources available, the gossip, and the best places to go
and find things were all a key part of this belonging as a
kind of knowing. A participant explained how knowledge
was part of belonging:
Being connected is the comfort zone—knowing where
to get help. It is scary when you don’t know, as
in when your partner is “going downhill” and you
don’t know where to turn. It is good to know who
to approach; the facilities in your neighbourhood
are helpful.
Not having knowledge in the community, it seemed,
could have challenges or even bring “scary” consequences. At the other end of the continuum of knowledge, was a lack of belonging. According to a participant
who sought out a community centre with translation and
interpretation supports:
They [those struggling to belong] do not know where
the community centre is or other centres of information….That’s why they do not know where activities,
events are and there isn’t a sense of belonging at all.
“Being” part of something (more than home and family) was key to belonging in the community. This connection to something, beyond the bounds of one’s home and
family, included all sorts of differences (ages, ways of life,
social status, culture and so on). In fact, the process of
the group interviews and research study impacted this
desire to connect, as seniors in one group asked about
the other groups that would be participating in the study
and requested a meeting with the other groups. Navigating these variances, however, was not easy. Being able to
participate in the reciprocal relationship as a friend and
a neighbour was generally identified as “harder as one
gets older”. Practicalities of life in suburban areas compounded these challenges, as well as the physical isolation and unfamiliar cultural connections challenging the

Urban Planning, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52

participants. Despite this difficulty, participants emphasized that connecting to “something more” was important. Several participants noted that one’s world could
rapidly become small without expanding and diversifying one’s social connections. One participant said it best
as she commented:
Once you retire from work you lose that social circle
and are cut off very quickly. Humans are social beings,
sometimes seniors are happy at home, but some are
looking for something outside their home—volunteer
work, socializing, activities, etc.
Actively “doing” things (activities, meeting together,
reading/gathering information, hearing from one another, or sharing ideas, customs and news) was another
feature of belonging to community that was important
for health and wellbeing. The gap in organized activities
for those aged 50 to 75 was noted, with several participants emphasizing they “[we]re not old”. One participant
described it in this way:
There are just lots of stereotypes around what being
“senior” means—we want to do things and feel alive
and be part of things. There is also an individual responsibility. Sometimes you can know about things,
but then the individual has to actually do something
to act on it.
4.2. Facilitators and Barriers to Belonging Are Both
Personal and Systemic
Factors that would facilitate or constrain a sense of belonging were also established in the group interviews
and larger group analysis. The facilitators and barriers
were, much like the meaning of belonging for participants, identified as both personal and systemic concerns.
Participants confirmed that, in abundance, these factors
would be facilitators, while if lacking would pose barriers
to community belonging. Key factors influencing community belonging were thought to be hope, similarities, desire, effort, access and leaders.
Hope for connection with different people, organizations, research and community/city was a starting place
to facilitate belonging. Without hope for belonging other
factors could not be seen or supported. Participants
expressed hope that “‘something’ will come from this
[community engagement] work” that brought people together; others expressed hope that with their views and
perspectives “on the record”, that these opinions could
be mobilized for other community development, grantwriting or other activities.
Similarities provided connection that was crucial to
belonging, as did breaking through false separations that
emerged from fears, habits and expectations. Separations emerged in particular when people were not alike,
or when the interests seemed different on the surface
(as in some of the generational or cultural differences).

46

This need for similar interests was highlighted by a participant who said:
Similar interests are needed; people want to feel that
they belong. Seniors attend [the] centre downtown
because programs [are held] in Chinese, providing
a common language, also dancing, exercise, Chinese
newspaper [free on Fridays], singing, cooking.
At times the similar interests and activities that brought
comfort and belonging to some people were viewed by
others as exclusionary or barriers to belonging. Language
was identified by some as a barrier in this way, where
groups who met and engaged in the language of their origins, were points of contention. According to some participants, “people need to make an effort to learn English, to
be Canadian”. Some participants sought more dialogue
and discussion-focused or segregated community activities (including activities with translators and interpreters)
while others proposed activities that were more active
than verbal (for example, games, dancing, singing, gardening and so on). Some participants explained that language was a barrier in many complex ways, for instance:
It’s hard to be inclusive in this community. Lots of people are speaking their own languages, even if they
can speak English. It [language] is a barrier to being inclusive.
Belonging in an extended community; learning from others; exercising and being active; seeking connections;
trying (some) new things, required a strong desire and
will. This desire took effort, and at times participants explained that others who might not feel a sense of belonging may be inhibited by their own will—perhaps as a result of fatigue, grief or loss or even illness, but regardless, a desire to belong was seen as essential. One participant explained how her recognition of the desire to belong emerged after retiring and becoming aware of how
isolated she had become: “I didn’t know people in the
community, and didn’t realize that I even wanted to until I stopped working”.
The recognition and desire for belonging involved a
certain curiosity that also existed in a tension with desires to keep things the same and distaste for change. Repeatedly, participants explained: “Sometimes change is
hard for seniors”. This conflicted curiosity and distaste for
change revealed itself in terms of cultural learning and
fears about cultures other than their own. Several participants placed an emphasis on learning more about diversity and particularly understanding cultural differences
and strengths. This conflict was highlighted in the following interview comment regarding facilitators of belonging:
As with drinking and driving, education and awareness made a difference. The same with isolation and
seniors mingling. We need to learn what makes other
cultures good, how have they survived.

Urban Planning, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52

Another participant explained this learning in terms of
family life and intergenerational belonging, as he explained the value of change and learning:
At first, I thought boys and girls should not spend time
together, but I have changed my views on that.
Effort and openness, such as the effort to learn about
cultural and generational changes, were facilitators to
belonging. This effort required acceptance, give and
take; getting past prejudices/judgments and an openness to change. Sometimes this openness was difficult,
and required considerable effort, particularly when people may have experienced losses, fatigue or difficulties
with mobility:
It is a two-way effort: You have to try to belong, but
cultures sometimes make it difficult. A person might
like to know where the community centre is, but they
do not proactively find out.
Certainly addressing systemic issues (such as access to
transportation) required effort, especially if meetings or
events demanded transportation or language interpretation that was not assured. Personal factors to enhance
openness and increase effort were identified as managing the sense of intimidation. Attending events in groups
was helpful to manage intimidation. It was identified that
more systematic ways of welcoming newcomers could be
helpful for all groups:
Seniors are often intimidated by new things. Something could be in place to help newcomers integrate
[to neighbourhoods or community groups], and also
to help those in existing groups to be welcoming.
Access to physical and social connections was viewed as
central to belonging. Facilitators (and barriers) included
transportation; information; familiar language and translations; common places to meet (such as coffee shops
and food courts as well as community and recreation centres), along with consistent routines that bring people together (i.e., every Friday newspapers, water fitness class
on Tuesdays). It was clear that sustainability and consistency were important to participants who expressed interest in activities “at the same times and places…for consistency”. These access issues were significant practical
and physical barriers to belonging for suburban seniors.
Participants highlighted the importance of access in the
suburbs of a city like Calgary that does not routinely plow
suburban side streets when snow falls, explaining:
How the hell do you get there [to a community gathering place]? Especially when the weather is inclement?
Access was also a point of controversy particularly in the
suburban neighbourhoods that predominantly served
young families. One participant emphasized the barriers

47

as she described how:
The City is now building capacity for bicycles all over
the place, to the tune of millions of dollars. This enhances life for younger people but not seniors.
Supporting the hope, will, and ways forward, seniors
who are community leaders were identified as facilitators of belonging. These were the people who step up
and nudge the connections and happenings in communities. They are also the ones who move forward community belonging and the needs of seniors in broader organizations and to municipal decision makers. At times,
these leaders could see that they needed breaks and had
to find others to hold up their leadership activities if they
were on vacation or felt unwell.
Internal leadership and the activities of neighbourhood belonging contrasted with overly regulated or professional support. This professionalization of belonging
was particularly noted by immigrant seniors, as in one
participant who said:
In India, a neighbour would come over to help settle
an argument; here [suburban Calgary] the police are
called first.
Similar concerns were expressed by participants who described the barrier to belonging that emerged as a result
of overly regulated volunteering and professionalization
of community helping:
I can clean areas around the neighbourhood, but now
there are regulations around who can do this, liabilities, so my small way of volunteering and belonging is
shut down.
The effort to become involved and belong, or to step into
leadership roles to try to understand the barriers were
reflected on by participants. Some felt that, for those seniors not already active in suburban life, that a myriad
of reasons impacted their belonging. Health, grief, language or other barriers were factors, but some participants also considered that professional helping and “programs” were barriers of sorts, creating dependencies and
inhibiting people from seeking community support and
belonging. It was bluntly put by one participant:
Why do some people make an effort and others
don’t? That is a whole other research study. There is a
sense of entitlement. Some people are waiting to be
catered to.
5. Discussion, Implications and Limitations
Belonging in the community is complex for seniors living in suburbs, particularly as these individuals and
their neighbourhoods experience diversity and change.
Olesen and Berry (2011, p. 194) found that social needs

Urban Planning, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52

generally change across the life course, especially during the transition from paid work to retirement. Retirement and other losses are a feature of aging in any
neighbourhood.
The diverse social and cultural groups of suburban
dwelling seniors highlighted a variety of facilitators and
barriers to belonging. Despite some unique differences,
all expressed a desire for feeling connected and knowing
others and the resources available; being active contributors in their communities and doing community work
in cooperation with others across cultures and generations. Belonging, in this way, was both an aspect of individual identity and neighbourhood structures and experienced in connection to people and places; at times
places were indeed held in much affection: “our walking track”, “our Wednesday morning at the pool”, “our
coffee spot in the shopping mall”, they said. The older
adults’ identities were understood only through places
and a complex relationship of knowing, being and doing
as affiliated and in connection to others.
Participants expressed a strong desire to be in connection with others particularly to share ideas and views
in community, and to exchange information about daily
activities, such as where to eat, how to access transport,
and general support. Learning about others was identified as an essential component of connection. Connections within one’s cultural group and with other groups
were deemed as key to nurturing a sense of belonging.
However, language remained a barrier for some in terms
of being able to enact these connections. In Canadian
and other suburban communities characterized by varied linguistic and cultural groups, needs for translation
and other supports for older adults to engage more fully
in community life are encouraged.
Desires to contribute were pronounced with an expression of the need for “give and take” or “a twoway effort”. Seniors who admitted to not knowing the
location of a local community centre recognized that
they bore the responsibility to be proactive and find
out its location and services offered. Giving back to
the community—outside of the home and family—was
an important aspect of belonging. Seniors expressed
a desire to participate in maintaining their neighbourhoods and believed this could happen with support from
community agencies. This emphasis on supportive programming needs was similarly found by Dare, Wilkinson,
Marquis and Donovan (2018) in relation to fostering Australian seniors’ community participation. The benefits
of this belonging are noted by Olesen and Berry (2011,
p. 194) who found that greater contact with neighbours
and through volunteering was associated with improved
mental health in newly retired people. Indeed, expanded
information and supports for seniors’ volunteering in
suburban communities are recommendations that have
emerged from this project.
Learning and exchanging knowledge together (across
diverse generations and cultures) were aspects of belonging that were universally expressed. A common in-

48

terest connected to community belonging in our study
was learning with others and contributing to the knowledge of future generations. While seniors expressed concerns over the differences seen in the younger generation (“kids these days…”), the underlying sense of
care and concern for the future was evident. Generational changes were sometimes viewed as difficult, but
also necessary, and the tensions were accepted and
appreciated by many as a part of community belonging. Mixed generation interventions are further highlighted in the growing field of intergenerational community health (VanderVen & Schneider-Munoz, 2012).
A sense of belonging as part of engagement with generational, cultural and other aspects of community diversity
expressed by participants mirrors the perceived sense of
expanded social support that can support mental wellbeing as discovered by Harasemiw, Newall, Mackenzie,
Shooshtari and Menec (2018) and Reitz (2009).
The emergent understanding of belonging highlighted older adults’ active engagement in their communities. This agency was part of the “two-way street” of
community belonging emphasized by participants. Community access through information and physical means
(transportation, road clearing and so on) are essential
services to support belonging for older adults in suburbs.
The belief that governmental organizations were responsible to meet their changing needs, was questioned by
some participants with many challenging others about
the need to accept new ways of doing things and giving
way for progress and the next generation. Acceptance
and use of public transportation and car sharing versus
driving were particular examples of the variety of transportation options that could enhance belonging in suburban community life characterized by sprawl and car
culture. This example of expanded access and use of
public transportation may also provide the double benefit of sparking patterns of intergenerational connection
many were seeking—after all, accessible transportation
meets the needs of diverse ages and abilities within a
population. Design elements that support driving in communities for older adults (Stav, Arbesman, & Lieberman,
2008) and seniors’ car sharing options (Shaheen, Cano,
& Camel, 2015) are further transportation possibilities to
expand access and connection for seniors living in suburban communities. Further study and program evaluation
in all these areas of information and physical design will
be important future steps.
Despite being a fairly small scale, localized study with
particular features of people and place, such as the diverse, new immigrant concentrated neighbourhoods and
winter conditions in suburban Calgary—the topics of connection and isolation of seniors in suburbs (Pekmezaris
et al., 2013; Zeitler & Buys, 2015) and aspects of seniors’ community decision making (Gallant & Hutchinson, 2016) are of broad, current concern. In terms of
societal and community health, these research discoveries are novel in the field. While drawing from diverse
cultural groups, the study was limited in that it sought

Urban Planning, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52

the views of well-seniors who were already connected
to community supports and actively engaged in community life. This necessarily biased the findings, though it
was indeed these views that were of interest at the time
of the study. Future studies will approach participation
differently to hear from seniors who are more isolated or
not actively engaged in community connections. Seeking
out these views will contribute to another set of questions and build a more complete picture of how belonging in community happens for suburban dwelling seniors,
how this sense of belonging impacts individual and community health. Future studies, informed by knowledge
of the meaning of belonging for seniors themselves, can
then examine the impact of belonging (including yet unstudied concerns of racialization and discrimination specific to this population) and particular interventions on
the health of suburban dwelling seniors.
This study is seen as a place to begin to understand
the experience of community belonging for seniors living
in suburban neighbourhoods. The results have provided
valuable insights about seniors’ desires and interests for
community belonging for the community site where the
study was based. Most specifically, for the participants
themselves, this research process has given older adults
an opportunity to engage in knowledge making and to
connect with one another in ways that exemplified their
desires for belonging through feeling, knowing, being
and doing within community life. The group data analysis
experience brought participant groups, who would otherwise not connect, together and enabled their collaboration in community activity planning. Understanding
community belonging from those who experience it was
a goal of the study, and sparking connections and activity
was an unexpected and positive project by-product, providing an example of McKnight and Block’s (2010) “abundant community”.
6. Conclusions
This qualitative research project employed group interview methods to explore community health and belonging with seniors living in the north east/north central suburbs of Calgary, a culturally diverse western Canadian
city of over a million people. The purpose was to gather
the views and opinions of groups of seniors who were
currently engaging in community recreation and social
activities in order to inform future program planning and
contribute to a beginning understanding of the issues of
belonging and connection for suburban dwelling seniors.
When a sense of belonging and connection is recognized and nurtured, seniors wish to contribute to each
other and the community as a whole. Belonging is a holistic experience of knowing each other, being active citizens, doing things to employ one’s talents for the community and the next generations and a feeling of affiliation and connection. This desire for diverse connection
and belonging itself was found to be a powerful resource
through which all communities can benefit. The findings

49

of the study have informed decision making and program
development for seniors attending the recreation centre at the site of this project. The results and process of
this work have also been shared with stakeholders such
as city planners and health services. In addition, translation services, transportation and support for diverse
groups and individuals to contribute to the community in
various ways may benefit from these discoveries. Future
lines of inquiry into the personal and structural supports
of belonging will benefit multiple sectors concerned with
urban planning and the growing older adult population
living in suburban communities.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the administrative support of
their home organizations, Mount Royal University and
Vivo for Healthier Generations, as well as the contributions of participants and organizers with the participant groups in north-central Calgary. These older adults
showed the potential of neighbourhoods, and generously shared their time, their personal reflections and
their hope for belonging for all people in their suburban communities.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare no conflict of interests.
References
Abada, T., Hou, F., & Ram, B. (2007). Racially mixed neighborhoods, perceived neighborhood social cohesion,
and adolescent health in Canada. Social Science &
Medicine, 65, 2004–2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.socscimed.2007.06.030
Almedom, A. M. (2005). Social capital and mental health:
An interdisciplinary review of primary evidence. Social Science & Medicine, 61(5), 943–964.
Aronson, R. E., Wallis, A. B., O’Campo, P. J., & Schafer,
P. (2007). Neighborhood mapping and evaluation: A
methodology for participatory community health initiatives. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 11(4),
373–383.
Baldwin, C. (2014). Assessing impacts on people’s relationships to place and community in health impact
assessment: An anthropological approach. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 33(2), 1–6. https://
doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2014.983725
Block, P. (2008). Community: The structure of belonging.
San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis
in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3,
77–101.
Bruhn, J. G. (2009). The group effect: Social cohesion and
health outcomes. New York, NY: Springer.
Caxaj, C. S., & Berman, H. (2010). Belonging among newcomer youths: Intersecting experiences of inclusion

Urban Planning, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52

and exclusion. Advances in Nursing Science, 33(4),
E17–E30.
Dare, J., Wilkinson, C., Marquis, R., & Donovan, R.
(2018). “The people make it fun, the activities we
do just make sure we turn up on time”. Factors
influencing older adults’ participation in community-based group programmes in Perth, Western Australia. Health & Social Care in the Community, 26(6),
871–881. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12600
Gallant, K., & Hutchinson, S. (2016). Perceptions of
power within a membership-based seniors’ community center. Leisure Sciences, 38(4), 357–372. https://
doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2015.1095660
Gerst-Emerson, K., & Jayawardhana, J. (2015). Loneliness
as a public health issue: The impact of loneliness on
health care utilization among older adults. American
Journal of Public Health, 105(5), 1013–1019. https://
doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2014.302427
Goll, J., Charlesworth, G., Scior, K., & Stott, J. (2015).
Barriers to social participation among lonely older
adults: The influence of social fears and identity.
PLoS One, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0116664
Grav, S., Hellzèn, O., Romild, U., & Stordal, E. (2012).
Association between social support and depression
in the general population: The HUNT study, a crosssectional survey. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21(1/2),
111–120.
Green, A., Preston, J., & Janmaat, J. G. (2006). Education,
equality and social cohesion: A comparative analysis.
New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Harasemiw, O., Newall, N., Mackenzie, C. S., Shooshtari,
S., & Menec, V. (2018). Is the association between
social network types, depressive symptoms and life
satisfaction mediated by the perceived availability
of social support? A cross sectional analysis using
the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. Aging and
Mental Health, 8, 1–10.
Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., & Layton, J. B. (2010). Social relationships and mortality risk: A meta-analytic
review. PLoS Med, 7(7), e1000316. https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A
practical guide for applied research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
McKnight, J., & Block, P. (2010). The abundant community: Awakening the power of families and neighborhoods. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Miller, G. (2017). No place to grow old: How Canadian
suburbs can become age friendly (IRPP Insight Report
March 2017/14). Montreal: Institute for Research
on Public Policy. Retrieved from http://irpp.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/02/insight-no14.pdf
Mohnen, S., Völker, B., Flap, H., Subramanian, S., & Groenewegen, P. (2013). You have to be there to enjoy
it? Neighbourhood social capital and health. European Journal of Public Health, 23(1), 33–39. https://
doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cks039

50

Morris, E., & Pfeiffer, D. (2017). Who really bowls
alone? Cities, suburbs, and social time in the
United States. Journal of Planning Education and
Research, 37(2), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0739456X16647160
Nieminen, T., Martelin, T., Koskinen, S., Simpura, J., Alanen, E., Härkänen, T., & Aromaa, A. (2008). Measurement and socio-demographic variation of social capital in a large population-based survey. Social Indicators Research, 85(3), 405–423.
Olesen, S., & Berry, H. (2011). Community participation and mental health during retirement in community sample of Australians. Aging & Mental Health,
15(2), 186–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.
2010.501053
Ottmann, G., Dickson, J., & Wright, P. (2006). Social
connectedness and health: A literature review
(GLADNET collection Paper 471). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University ILR School. Retrieved from https://
digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1474&context=gladnetcollect
Patterson, Z., Saddier, S., Rezaei, A., & Manaugh, K.
(2014). Use of the urban core index to analyze
residential mobility: The case of seniors in Canadian metropolitan regions. Journal of Transport
Geography, 41, 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jtrangeo.2014.08.013
Pekmezaris, R., Kozikowski, A., Moise, G., Clement, P. A.,
Hirsch, J., Kraut, J., & Levy, L. C. (2013). Aging in suburbia: An assessment of senior needs. Educational
Gerontology, 39(5), 355.
Pickett, K., & Wilkinson, R. (2008). People like us:
Ethnic group density effects on health. Ethnicity
& Health, 13(4), 321–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13557850701882928
Potvin, L., & Hayes, M. V. (2007). Place and health
research in Canada. Canadian Journal of Public
Health/Revue Canadienne de Sante’e Publique, 98,
S6–S7.
Pronyk, P. M., Harpham, T., Busza, J., Phetla, G., Morison, L. A., Hargreaves, J. R., . . . Porter, J. D. (2008).
Can social capital be intentionally generated? A randomized trial from rural South Africa. Social Science
& Medicine, 67(10), 1559–1570.
Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining
social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65–78.
Rajulton, F., Ravanera, Z. R., & Beaujot, R. (2007). Measuring social cohesion: An experiment using the Canadian national survey of giving, volunteering, and participating. Social Indicators Research, 80(3), 461.
Reitz, J. G. (2009). Multiculturalism and social cohesion:
Potentials and challenges of diversity. New York, NY:
Springer.
Richard, L., Gauvin, L., & Gosselin, C. (2008). Staying connected: Neighbourhood correlates of social participation among older adults living in an urban envi-

Urban Planning, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52

ronment in Montreal, Quebec. Health Promotion International, 24(1), 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/
heapro/dan039
Shaheen, S., Cano, L., & Camel, M. (2015). Exploring electric vehicle carsharing as a mobility option for older
adults: A case study of a senior adult community in
the San Francisco Bay area. International Journal of
Sustainable Transportation, 10(5), 406–417. https://
doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2014.962675
Smith, J. (2012). Toward a better understanding of loneliness in community-dwelling older adults. The Journal of Psychology, 146(3), 293–311. https://doi.org/
10.1080/00223980.2011.602132
Statistics Canada. (2012). Census metropolitan area of
Calgary: Calgary age distribution. Statistics Canada.
https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/
Retrieved
from
census-recensement/2011/as-sa/fogs-spg/Factscma-eng.cfm?LANG=Eng&GK=CMA&GC=825
Stav, W., Arbesman, M., & Lieberman, D. (2008).
Background and methodology of the older driver
evidence-based systematic literature review. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62(2), 130–135.
https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.62.2.130
Steptoe, A., & Feldman, P. J. (2001). Neighborhood problems as sources of chronic stress: Development of
a measure of neighborhood problems, and associations with socioeconomic status and health. Annals
of Behavioral Medicine, 23(3), 177.
Townsend, K. C., & McWhirter, B. T. (2005). Connectedness: A review of the literature with implications
for counseling, assessment, and research. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 83, 191–201.
Toye, M. (2007). Social cohesion: The Canadian urban
context. Ottawa: Parliamentary Information and Research Service.
VanderVen, K., & Schneider-Munoz, A. J. (2012). As the
world ages: Attaining a harmonious future world
through intergenerational connections. Journal of
Intergenerational Relationships, 10(2), 115–130.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2012.673972
Völker, B., Flap, H., & Lindenberg, S. (2007). When
are neighbourhoods, communities? Community in
Dutch neighbourhoods. European Sociological Review, 23(1), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/
jcl022
Vozikaki, M., Papadaki, A., Linardakis, M., & Philalithis, A.
(2018). Loneliness among older European adults: Results from the survey of health, aging and retirement
in Europe. Journal of Public Health, 26(6), 613–624.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-018-0916-6
Zeitler, E., & Buys, L. (2015). Mobility and out-of-home
activities of older people living in suburban environments: ‘Because I’m a driver, I don’t have a problem’.
Ageing & Society, 35(4), 785–808. https://doi.org/10.
1017/S0144686X13001086

51

About the Authors
Sonya L. Jakubec is a Professor in the School of Nursing and Midwifery at Mount Royal University. She
is a Registered Nurse and community health researcher with a focus on social inclusion, belonging and
multiple levels of intervention. The author of several articles and books in community health nursing,
mental health and research literacy, Sonya’s research program is concerned with lifespan wellbeing,
including palliative care for those who experience structural vulnerabilities, social support for older
adults and caregivers, and the connection of parks and natural places and health/wellbeing.

Marg Olfert holds graduate degrees in both nursing (University of Saskatchewan) and education
(University of Calgary). She has a professional background in adult surgical nursing, critical care, and
cardiology as well as nursing education and leadership. Her research interests include nursing history,
interprofessional education, community development, seniors’ health and belonging, licensure examination preparation and collaborative nursing programs.

Liza L. S. Choi is an Associate Professor in the School of Nursing in Midwifery at Mount Royal University.
Liza’s academic interests focus on diverse population health, and she has investigated the critical success factors for learning in English-as-an-Additional-Language among nursing students, online learning
in the area of diversity and health along with studies of societal factors that impact the health of elderly (Chinese) Canadians and the use of electronic health tools to improve the health of patients.

Nicole Dawe holds an MBA from Memorial University in her home province of Newfoundland and
Labrador on the east coast of Canada. She has a passion for integrating community building and storytelling into everything. She is currently sharing those gifts in development and leadership with the
north-central Calgary’s “Vivo for Healthier Generations”, a large recreation, research and innovation
hub on a mission to raise healthier generations and achieve their optimal health wherever they choose
to live, work and play.

Dwayne Sheehan is an Associate Professor at Mount Royal University in Calgary Canada. His recent
work in the area of physical literacy extends beyond the classroom and into the community. He collaborates extensively with municipal recreation, parks, charities and other leisure partners in conducting
applied research related to physical literacy and community health. Dwayne is also an Adjunct Professor at the University of Calgary in the Faculty of Kinesiology.

Urban Planning, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 43–52

52