Trapped by social discrimination or emotional fragility? A mixed-method analysis of ageing-in-place older widows' spatial exclusion in public rental housing

“Ageing in place” is a global strategy for managing demographic change, whilst its implementation in dense urban environments can confront spatial constraints. For older widows in public rental housing, intersecting disadvantages place them at a pronounced risk of spatial exclusion, yet the mechanisms driving this process remain underexplored. This paper develops and tests a theoretical model to explain the psychosocial pathways from personal vulnerabilities to spatial exclusion among this demographic. It examines how social discrimination and emotional fragility affect spatial exclusion in public rental housing. It employs a multiphase mixed-method design. The quantitative survey of 167 older widows was analysed using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). These statistical results were explained through a narrative analysis of in-depth interviews with 24 older widows from one of the surveyed estates. Social discrimination is associated with spatial exclusion entirely through an indirect pathway: it is linked to subjective well-being, which is linked to social network formation and community identity; these diminished resources in turn weaken community attachment, the most powerful defence against exclusion. Emotional fragility operates through the same mediating chain, yet its total effect on spatial exclusion does not reach statistical significance owing to a partial countervailing buffer. Micro-aggressions and chronic grief deplete the psychological resources needed for social engagement, prompting strategic withdrawal from potentially hurtful encounters. Where sufficient well-being was maintained, low-intensity reciprocal exchanges fostered biographical community bonds that matured into deep place attachment, providing ontological security and a sense of entitlement to communal space that constituted the primary defence against exclusion. • Social discrimination and emotional fragility affect spatial exclusion. • Subjective well-being is the key mediator from vulnerability to exclusion. • Community attachment is the strongest protective factor against spatial exclusion. • Policy should prioritise well-being and facilitate community social capital.