Samenvatting

A limited number of studies have addressed rural-urban differences in ageing in place, let alone at the spatial level of the dwelling, defined as ageing@home. Ageing@home in rural areas might be challenging, especially when health deteriorates and facilities and services may be less available or accessible in comparison to urban areas. This paper explores whether determinants like motives, socio-demographic characteristics, housing type and attitude towards multi-generational living differ between rural and urban mid-to-later-life homeowners who intend to age@home. Our analysis is based on a dataset (N = 11,010) of the ’55-plus Housing Needs Survey’ by the Dutch Homeowners Association, consisting of mid-to-later-life homeowners who all intend to age@home. Using logistic regression, we compare determinants like types of attachment, financial and social motives for ageing@home of rural and urban homeowners. Neighbourhood attachment and house attachment show to be significant determinants of rural, mid-to-later-life homeowners who intend to age@home, while urban homeowners appreciate ‘proximity to amenities’ significantly more. Especially 75-plus rural homeowners are more likely to age@home compared to 75-plus urban ones. Also, for rural homeowners living with a partner increases the probability of intending to age@home. Furthermore, mid-to-later-life rural homeowners are significantly more likely to have a positive attitude towards multi-generational living as an option to continue to live independently. Based on our results of rural homeowners’ attachment to their dwelling and neighbourhood, government policies to age@home could focus on encouraging housing modifications and smart technologies. Whereas ‘downsizing’ and multi-generational living in age-friendly rural communities might enable flow in the local housing market.