Chapter One: The History and Incubation of Gerontechnology

DOI:

10.1891/9780826128898.0001

Authors

  • GRAAFMANS, JAN A. M.

Abstract

The term “gerontechnology” was coined in 1988. Gerontechnology, a collaboration of engineers, social scientists, and other disciplines, emerged as the result of the need felt by professionals coming from many fields. From the beginning of gerontechnology, its agenda has been the development of insight-based optimal technological environments for aging and aged individuals, targeting real people in their physical, mental, social, economic, and cultural environment. Rehabilitation medicine and rehabilitation technology resulting in products and services for disabled people already have a long history and gerontechnology can use these results to find solutions for the general consumer market. The major concepts of gerontechnology provide a framework for understanding and guiding research on human aging. Gerontechnology has made considerable efforts to assess and influence the development in national and international innovation policies and the opportunities these present for the sustainable growth of this emerging field.

KEYWORDS

aging

COST A5

De helpende hand

design

environment

gerontechnology

history

human–technology–environment interaction

incubation

prevention

products

International Society for Gerontechnology (ISG)

market

multidisciplinary

person–environment interaction

policy

services

user perspective

World Health Organization (WHO)

Before the 1990s, already many scientific disciplines devoted attention to the challenges of aging and the aging society. However, these activities stemmed mainly from the life sciences and social sciences. Some efforts were made toward integration of the research results from different disciplines as was the case in various human factors and ergonomics studies. But the involvement of technological sciences, architecture, and design was sparse or nonexistent in those days. Therefore, in 1988, a small team of researchers at the Eindhoven University of Technology, in Eindhoven, Netherlands, started an effort to develop a program of research and education in gerontechnology aiming at further integration of engineering sciences with those disciplines already involved in aging studies. The author invented the term “gerontechnology” in 1988.

CHRONOLOGY

The incubation of gerontechnology started in 1984 with the visit of a senior social worker to Eindhoven University of Technology: He asked for engineers to be involved in solving the problems and challenges encountered by aging people. The term “gerontechnology” was coined in 1988. A linguistic and content discussion about the use of this term is ongoing, but no other identifiers of the field that came up later could be appreciated as an alternative or a better solution (Graafmans & Brouwers, 1989). The first simple concepts for interdisciplinary discussion and collaboration were defined. This led to the organization of the first International Conference in 1991 in Eindhoven, with Herman Bouma acting as scientific chair (Bouma & Graafmans, 1992). The success of the conference gradually convinced many technological, social, and medical sciences researchers to come on board. During the visiting professorship of James Fozard at Eindhoven (in 1992 and later), a more elaborate model for gerontechnology studies was developed (van Bronswijk, 2010). Furthermore, in the early 1990s, the European network COST A5 (Cooperation in Science and Technology: Aging and Technology) was established. The political and scientific achievements of this network were instrumental to the success of the second international conference in Helsinki in 1996 (Graafmans, Taipale, & Charness, 1998), and in 1997 for the foundation of the International Society for Gerontechnology (ISG) under the leadership of Vappu Taipale, chair of COST A5, president of the Helsinki Conference, and first president of the ISG. Gerontechnology, a collaboration of engineers, social scientists, and other disciplines, emerged as the result of the need felt by professionals coming from many fields.

TRANSLATING NEEDS AND DEMANDS OF OLDER PEOPLE TO THE ENGINEERING COMMUNITY

In the middle of the 1980s, it became clear to the Dutch government that demographic and social developments demanded radical interventions. A research and development program was started by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Culture, which, among other things, would facilitate collaboration between health and welfare workers and engineers, architects, and industrial designers. The ultimate goal was to create a better quality living environment for aging and aged people, supporting them to live an independent life of their own choice and for as long as possible.

An assessment was made of elderly individuals’ actual living environments with 500 questionnaires (response rate 25%), 30 site visits, and in-depth interviews. It became clear that (a) good-quality products and services exist, but most clients were not aware of this, (b) there were a lot of bad designs and many useless products, and (c) there was a need for new products and services in the market. There exists a potential for mass production at affordable prices when, at the same time, customizability to individual needs of products and services is taken into account. The assessment resulted in three major successes: (a) The field of gerontechnology was created, standing for the interdisciplinary collaboration between all professionals concerned with an aging society; (b) over 100,000 copies of “De helpende hand” (the helping hand), an information brochure, were distributed nationwide; and (c) the first simple models and concepts for gerontechnology were developed and used for a worldwide discussion between all relevant actors and experts.

After this long incubation period, a more refined human–technology–environment interaction model emerged, with an emphasis on older people, and this was used as the starting point by all the keynote speakers during the First International Conference on Gerontechnology in Eindhoven, 1991 (see Figure 1.1). The conference was a step forward toward future collaboration between technology and other sciences, targeting the challenges posed by an aging society (Bouma, 1992).

THE RESEARCH AGENDA OF GERONTECHNOLOGY

From the beginning of gerontechnology, its agenda has been the development of insight-based optimal technological environments for aging and aged individuals, targeting real people in their physical, mental, social, economic, and cultural environment. The concept of “real people” means those living an active life of their own choosing, adapted to their interests, abilities, and restrictions. It is important to understand that restricting disease, both physical and mental, is not central in gerontechnology, although health issues such as prevention and compensation of decline are part of the agenda. Rehabilitation medicine and rehabilitation technology resulting in products and services for disabled people already have a long history and gerontechnology can use these results to find solutions for the general consumer market.

Figure 1.1
Human–technology–environment interaction.
9780826128898_fig1_1

In the beginning of the 1980s, the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES) started a working group on aging and ergonomics. Initial findings were a perfect and resourceful breeding ground for gerontechnology. Design for aging did not exist in those days, and it was not considered to be interesting for consumer markets that were dominated by young or rich cohorts. Of course, there were undercover design and marketing activities in major multinational companies, but the findings of these were kept carefully “inside.”

The most important principle in gerontechnology is that people are just more than only their shortcomings. Developments in the field stemmed from three dynamic sources: (a) different generations of people, (b) ever and faster changing technological environments, and (c) advancing scientific insights (Bouma, Fozard, Bouwhuis, & Taipale, 2007; Bouma, Fozard, & van Bronswijk, 2009). The position of aging people in changing, innovative environments has been characterized by Powell Lawton (1998) as individual and sociocultural lag, the origin of which is that natural adaptation to technological and other environments stops at about age 30 and is then replaced by explicit learning directed at daily needs (e.g., at work). Here, it is worthwhile to note that retraining efforts at work in general stop at age 45 or even younger and that the average age of retirement is still around 60 or earlier. This implies that formal training or work experiences are not a resource for older people to adapt or adjust to the rapid cascade of technological innovations.

RELATION BETWEEN GERONTECHNOLOGY AND MONO- AND MULTIDISCIPLINARY STUDIES ON HUMAN AGING

The major concepts of gerontechnology provide a framework for understanding and guiding research on human aging. The field is defined as the development and adaptation of technology toward the goals and ambitions of aging and aged people and it is application oriented in nature. The fundamental concepts underlying gerontechnology comprise: (a) four research and application areas of technology, (b) five domains of life activity to which technology is applicable, (c) the changing dynamics of person–environment interactions over time, and (d) the identification of a multidisciplinary knowledge base. These four concepts are relevant and can contribute to basic and applied studies of human aging.

The goals of gerontechnology are derived from those for public health such as the delay of age-associated changes in health and daily functioning (primary prevention); compensation for well-known and common functional declines, mostly in perceptual motor function (secondary prevention); care for persons with disabilities (tertiary prevention); and for all three to improve the quality of life as defined by the World Health Organization.

The four application areas of gerontechnology are equally relevant to five domains of human activity (see Table 1.1): (a) health and self-esteem, (b) housing and everyday functioning, (c) communication, (d) transportation and mobility, and (e) work and leisure (Bouma et al., 2009; van Bronswijk, Bouma, & Fozard, 2003).

The changing dynamics of interactions between people and their environment reflect both human aging within and between successive age cohorts and secular changes. This transactional view of aging addresses both the questions and methods used in gerontological research (Fozard, 2005). The interdisciplinary bases for gerontechnology, being the engineering and basic sciences of technology as well as the biological and behavioral sciences supporting gerontology, are basically the same as in gerontological research (van Bronswijk, Fozard, Kearns, Davison, & Tuan, 2008).

TABLE 1.1
Matching Human Life Domains Needs With Technology Goals
Life Domains/Technology GoalsHealth and Self-EsteemHousing and Daily LivingMobility and Transport GovernanceCommunicationWork and Leisure
Enrichment and SatisfactionSelf-care Software personalizationInteractive controls Teleservices E-shopping Adapting controlsHybrid bicycles Navigation tools Info public transportMobile phone E-mail, e-info Multimedia E-learning mouse, touch screenDigital camera Telegames, DVD Social computing Cash dispensers Telebanking
Prevention and EngagementHealthy diet Hip protectors Health monitoring E-health infoSmart ventilation Safety illuminationCar-automationNoise abatement Automated messagesWork simulators Social media
Compensation and AssistancePassive alarms Medication alerts Telerehabilitation ViagraCleaning robotsScoot mobile Smart walker Navigation toolsAccommodating lens implants Cochlear implants Retinal implants Delayed speechGarden robots Robot pets
Care support and Care organizationControl PDA Career-training system Clinical GTElectronic keysNavigation toolsVideo linksTelecare

Note: Technological products and services mentioned do not reflect the ample opportunities as of 2015.

GT, Gerontechnology; PDA, Personal Digital Assistant.

POLICY DEVELOPMENT RESULTING IN THE FOUNDATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF GERONTECHNOLOGY

Gerontechnology has made considerable efforts to assess and influence the development in national and international innovation policies and the opportunities these present for the sustainable growth of this emerging field. Almost endlessly, different policies on old age, technology, and innovation are reviewed by scientists and professionals concerned with the challenge of an aging society.

Population aging was insufficiently politically targeted in the 1980s, despite the United Nations Summit on Aging in 1982. Gerontological issues deserve to be understood as cultural, social, and physiological phenomena, which demand multidisciplinary research and development in this young field of endeavor. Pioneers in Europe, the United States, and Japan created the core concepts that led to the creation of gerontechnology (Graafmans et al., 1998). From the very beginning, there was a strong user perspective and user-driven orientation. One of the leitmotivs was listening to the needs of an aging person and to communicate her or his needs to the multidisciplinary innovation teams and to the wider community, summarized as user involvement.

Thus, gerontechnology constitutes an excellent partner for innovation policies. There are many interesting opportunities to be challenged by in everyday life, self-care, and proactive prevention, as well as in creating better living environments in social, financial, and human terms. The existing political and research cooperation structures were slow to understand the new needs but COST (2012) accepted the agenda Ageing and Technology (Graafmans & Taipale, 1994) and the international networks started to develop, resulting in the foundation of the International Society of Gerontechnology. The European Union explored the issue (Smith, 1998) and gave it financial recognition in a substantial grant as a part of the Fifth Framework Programme of Research.

However, later developments have not been only positive. Today, there is a considerable interest in demand-side innovation policies in a number of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries (Taylor, 2011). National policies increasingly stress the importance of innovation as an important part of research and development. In the European Innovation Partnerships (European Commission, 2011), one of the first topics was active and healthy aging. The lack of economic research and evaluation still makes evidence-based policy making difficult. If the world sees a positive development, we will be faced with an operating model based on which a well-informed aging citizen, the consumer of products and services, becomes a driving force of development.

REFERENCES

  1. Bouma, H. (1992). Gerontechnology: A framework on technology and aging. In Bouma H. & Graafmans J. A. M. (Eds.), Gerontechnology (pp. 15). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  2. Bouma, H., Fozard, J. L., Bouwhuis, D. G., & Taipale, V. (2007). Gerontechnology in perspective. Gerontechnology, 6(4), 190216. doi:10.4017/gt.2007.06.04.003.00
  3. Bouma, H., Fozard, J. L., & van Bronswijk, J. E. M. H. (2009). Gerontechnology as a field of endeavour. Gerontechnology, 8(2), 6875. doi:10.4017/gt.2009.08.02.004.00
  4. Bouma, H., & Graafmans, J. A. M. (1992). Gerontechnology. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  5. COST. (2012). European Cooperation of Science and Technology. Retrieved from www.cost.esf.org
  6. European Commission. (2011). Pilot European Innovation Partnership on active and healthy ageing. Retrieved from ec.europa.eu/active-healthy-ageing
  7. Fozard, J. L. (2005). Impacts of technology on health and self-esteem. Gerontechnology, 4(2), 6376. doi:10.4017/gt.2005.04.02.002.00
  8. Graafmans, J. A. M., & Brouwers, A. (1989). Gerontechnology, the modelling of normal aging. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 33rd Annual meeting, Denver, Colorado.
  9. Graafmans, J. A. M., & Taipale, V. (1994). COST-A5, Ageing and Technology 1991–1995. Final Report. Eindhoven, Netherlands: EUT-Centre BMGT.
  10. Graafmans, J. A. M., Taipale, V., & Charness, N. (1998). Gerontechnology: A sustainable investment in the future. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  11. Lawton, M. P. (1998). Future society and technology. In Graafmans, J., Taipale, V. & Charness N. (Eds.), Gerontechnology. A sustainable investment in our future (pp. 1222). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  12. Smith, K. (1998). The ageing population and technology: Challenges and opportunities. ETAN working paper. Retrieved from http://cordis.europa.eu/documents/documentlibrary/28262301EN6.pdf
  13. Taylor, R. (2011). Ageing, health and innovation: Policy reforms to facilitate healthy and active ageing in OECD countries. In OECD (Ed.), Health reform: Meeting the challenge of ageing and multiple morbidities (pp. 3779). Paris, France: OECD Publishing. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264122314-5-en
  14. van Bronswijk, J. E. M. H. (2010). James Leonard Fozard, Grand Master of Gerontechnology, for his 80th birthday. Gerontechnology, 9(3), 359428. doi:10.4017/gt.2010.09.03.000.00
  15. van Bronswijk, J. E. M. H., Bouma, H., & Fozard, J. L. (2003). Technology for quality of life: An enriched taxonomy. Gerontechnology, 2(2), 169172. doi:10.4017/gt.2002.02.02.001.00
  16. van Bronswijk, J. E. M. H., Fozard, J. L., Kearns, W. D., Davison, G. C., & Tuan, P. C. (2008). Implementing gerontechnology. Gerontechnology, 7(3), 325329. doi:10.4017/gt.2008.07.03.007.00