In this video (published in February 2013) IBM presents their view for an “Age-Smart City”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDvW8R4BL0I
As usual, the perspective about ageing is pretty narrow. However, the video can be a good starting point for a discussion and brings some interesting examples.
Thanks for mentioning our research, a work in which I was personally involved. This story refers to an experience we’ve done six years ago: since then we have been constantly committed to explore new ways to improve the quality of life of the aging population in cities as well in other context, leveraging the possibilities of cognitive computing. As you say this is a “good starting point for the discussion”: I am available to talk about if and when you would like to keep on with this discussion. Nicola.
Thank your for posting your message. My main issues after watching the video derives from what I consider a mis-interpretation of the “longevity revolution”. One simple way to put it, is the idea that we might be creating solutions for a type of older person we do not want to be/become. In doing so, we are probably shaping the perception (and the possibilities) for the older generation in a very damaging and limiting way.
The video focuses on the aspects of fragility that might come with age. But the bulk of older persons who will shape the near future are independent and productive. Their contribution to society will only be limited by societies’ narrow perspectives on ageing. The solution you present in the video is tremendously valuable. Welfare technologies are in vougue all over Europe. However, most developers of such technological welfare devises are struggling commercially.
I believe the root of the problem relates to the fact that most projects depart from a similar mindset: Develop tools to solve the problems of ageing.