An institutional perspective of “Glocalization” in two Asian tigers: The “StructureAgentStrategy” of building an age-friendly city Yi Sun a, * , Tzu-Yuan Chao b , Jean Woo a , Doreen W.H. Au a a CUHK Jockey Club Institute of Ageing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong b Department of Urban Planning, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan City, Taiwan article info Article history: Received 5 July 2016 Received in revised form 19 October 2016 Accepted 29 November 2016 Available online 3 December 2016 Keywords: Glocalization Politics of scale Strategic-relational approach (SRA) Age-friendly city Hong Kong Taiwan abstract This paper expands the focal point of glocalization to the non-western context, and revisits glocalization in light of the promulgation of an international policy regime. Particularly it examines how the politics of scale in various contexts assists local pragmatic exercises and institutional organizations in building up an age-friendly city (AFC). The functioning mechanisms of glocalization are conceptualized through a triadic framework incorporating structure (mode of local governance), agents, and strategies. The empirical cases examine how AFC has been promoted in Chiayi City of Taiwan and in Hong Kong, the former two Tiger economies. Drawing on a comparative analysis of the two cases, the paper presents three major findings. Firstly, local policy networks are integral to glocalization in that they govern how different resources (i.e., political commitment, professional knowledge, human resources, communica- tion skills, and financial resources) are synthesized under a local institutional framework. Often local policy networks reveal the fragmentation of resources provided by different stakeholders. Secondly, the case study illustrates two different modes of local governance. The Chiayi case reflects an institution- alized governing framework with both hierarchical coordination between levels of state bureaucracies and the horizontal exchange of information and resources between the state and non-state sectors. Hong Kong reflects a grassroots mode whereby the promotion and implementation of AFC initiatives are prompted among NGOs, charities, district councils, and universities. Both modes reveal pros and cons. Thirdly, academic associations have played a major role in promoting AFC, though the extent to which their advice can shape policy decisions relies much on the discretion and political commitment of district councils. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Population ageing is taking place across all countries and has become a global phenomenon. Overall, the segment of the popu- lation aged 60 and above is the fastest growing group globally. It is projected that by 2050, all major areas of the world (except Africa) will have nearly a quarter or more of their populations aged 60 or over (United Nations, 2015). Given population ageing is inevitable and continuing, the Age-Friendly Cities (AFC) Network proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2007 soon became a popular global movement. By 2015, a total of 258 cities and communities in 28 countries across the world had joined the network. Most participating countries are advanced economies, such as the United States, Canada, United Kingdom and countries of Western Europe. Development of age-friendly cities has been a more critical issue for developing economies as a result of longer life expectancy, lower fertility rates, and limited social welfare resources (Chao & Huang, 2016). This is particularly the case for China, since de- mographic ageing happens when issues like social welfare, poverty, and urban-rural integration have yet to be fully addressed. Also, the fast industrialization in the past few years turned a blind eye to the quality of built environment as well as the ecological sustainability conducive to producing livable communities for the elders. It is under such background that cities in the global South are one of the most active partners in this global AFC initiative. Currently, Asian partners include four members from China (including three from Hong Kong), one from Japan, two from South Korea and one from * Corresponding author. Room 908, Yasumoto International Academic Park, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong. E-mail addresses: sunyi@cuhk.edu.hk (Y. Sun), tychao@mail.ncku.edu.tw (T.-Y. Chao), jeanwoowong@cuhk.edu.hk (J. Woo), doreenau@cuhk.edu.hk (D.W.H. Au). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Habitat International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2016.11.013 0197-3975/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Habitat International 59 (2017) 101e109