The use and abuse of ‘community’ and ‘neighbourhood’ within disability research: an exposé, clarification, and recommendation

Abstract

Almost invariably in the disability literature, the terms ‘neighbourhood’ and ‘community’ are used as though they have some commonly understood meaning. They do not, and authors rarely offer a definition. This problem adds opacity to the literature describing people’s living environment and the nature of their interaction with others living in the same area. This ambiguity becomes crucial to understanding when these terms are linked to other vague, but emotionally-charged words, such as ‘inclusion’ or ‘integration’. This review presents some of the ways ‘neighbourhood’ and ‘community’ may be correctly employed. It also explores the theoretical basis for understanding how and why their use may be misleading. Finally, it is demonstrated that the assumed relevance of neighbourhood participation for life quality has been greatly exaggerated. We recommend that authors carefully define their use of these terms in order to facilitate understanding free from emotional bias.

Keywords:

• community
• neighbourhood
• quality of life
• share-homes
• subjective well-being