Skip to main content

Marginalized Communities

  • Reference work entry
  • 466 Accesses

Synonyms

Oppressed populations; Participatory research with marginalized communities; Peer-to-peer research; Undercounted populations; Underrepresented populations; Vulnerable populations

Definition

This entry describes how to involve marginalized populations also known as vulnerable populations, oppressed populations, underrepresented populations, or undercounted populations in community indicator projects and peer-to-peer research. These populations might include people of different races/ethnicities (as compared to the majority population in that region), low-income individuals, the homeless, youth, seniors, native people, GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual transgender), families that have experienced domestic violence and child maltreatment, and people with disabilities in applied quality of life research, specifically in community indicator projects and peer-to-peer research.

Description

The strength of a quality of life measurement system is the involvement of citizens/residents...

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_1725
  • Chapter length: 6 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   7,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-94-007-0753-5
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Hardcover Book
USD   8,999.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

References

  • Chambers, M. (2004). Quality indicators for progress: A guide to community quality-of-life assessments. Jacksonville, FL: Jacksonville Community Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, J. (2011). Community capacity-building learning collaborative final report. California Institute for Mental Health (CIMH).

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. (2003). Community indicators, planning advisory service (Report No. 517). Chicago: American Planning Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, J. (2006). The science of community indicators research: A certification manual. Blacksburg, VA: International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Smolko, R., Strange, C., & Ventoulis, J. (2006). Community indicators handbook. San Francisco: Redefining Progress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zachary, D. (2007). Connecting outcomes to indicators: The Santa Cruz county California community assessment project (CAP). Community quality-of-life indicators: Best cases III, (pp. 1–20)

    Google Scholar 

  • Zachary, D., & Brutschy, S. (2011). How one California community achieves better results for marginalized populations. Diversity and community development: An intercultural approach (pp. 123–132). Academy for Public Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zachary, D., Brutschy, S., West, S., Keenan, T., & Stevens, A. (2010). Connecting data to action: The Santa Cruz county California community assessment project contributes to better outcomes for youth. Applied Research Quality of Life, 5, 287–308.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan Brutschy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this entry

Cite this entry

Brutschy, S., Zachary, D. (2014). Marginalized Communities. In: Michalos, A.C. (eds) Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_1725

Download citation