Course:GEOG350/2024/Spatial Inequality in Vancouver's Impoverished Neighborhoods

Spatial Inequality in Vancouver's Impoverished Neighborhoods

Introduction to the Chapter

This chapter focuses on the theme of "Place, Placelessness, and Spatial Inequality," a crucial section of the course that examines the implications of attachment or detachment to urban spaces. This theme is fundamental to understanding urban geography as it delves into how people's relationships with their environments shape their experiences, identities, and well-being. Analyzing these concepts within the context of Vancouver allows for the exploration of a city known for its diverse neighborhoods and significant socio-economic contrasts.

The course theme explores how places become meaningful through social and cultural connections, fostering a sense of belonging and identity. As Doreen Massey (1994) notes, places are dynamic and constructed through social interactions and power relations. The attachment to place involves the emotional bonds and meaningful experiences that individuals or groups associate with specific locations. This attachment can create a sense of belonging, identity, and stability. Conversely, the loss of these connections, or placelessness, can lead to feelings of alienation and disconnection (Knox and Pinch 215). Placelessness refers to environments that lack distinctiveness and fail to evoke a sense of attachment or belonging, often resulting from homogenization and the erosion of unique local characteristics.

In urban settings, these experiences are not uniformly distributed; spatial inequality results in varying levels of access to resources, services, and opportunities. Such disparities can profoundly impact residents' mental health and well-being, influencing their quality of life and prospects (Sassen). Spatial inequality refers to the uneven distribution of resources and services across different areas within a city. This can manifest in disparities in housing quality, education, healthcare, employment opportunities, and access to green spaces. These inequalities often reinforce social and economic divides, leading to concentrated areas of affluence and deprivation.

Vancouver presents a compelling case for studying these dynamics. The city's rapid development, diverse population, and stark contrasts between affluent and marginalized neighborhoods provide a rich backdrop for examining how place, placelessness, and spatial inequality manifest in urban environments. For instance, certain neighborhoods in Vancouver are known for their strong sense of community and cultural vibrancy, while others suffer from socio-economic marginalization and lack of essential services (Jones 13). Neighborhoods like Kitsilano and Commercial Drive have fostered strong community networks and cultural identities, offering residents a sense of belonging and support. These areas are often characterized by vibrant public spaces, community events, and a mix of local businesses that enhance social cohesion and attachment to place.

Conversely, other areas within Vancouver face significant challenges due to spatial inequality. These neighborhoods often experience higher levels of poverty, inadequate housing, limited access to quality education and healthcare, and fewer employment opportunities. The lack of investment in infrastructure and public services exacerbates feelings of alienation and disconnection among residents (Knox and Pinch 216). This disparity has profound implications for residents' quality of life and future opportunities. For instance, areas with higher poverty levels and inadequate public services face greater challenges in education and health outcomes, perpetuating cycles of deprivation.

The effects of spatial inequality on mental health and well-being are substantial. Research has shown that living in deprived neighborhoods with limited access to resources and services can lead to higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression. The lack of green spaces, recreational facilities, and social services further compounds these challenges, contributing to poorer mental health outcomes (Cummins et al. 1832). Moreover, the sense of alienation and lack of belonging in areas experiencing placelessness can contribute to feelings of isolation and depression. When people are disconnected from their surroundings and communities, their mental health suffers, highlighting the critical role of inclusive and supportive urban environments (Kawachi and Berkman 301).

By focusing on Vancouver, this chapter highlights the importance of equitable urban planning and the need to address socio-economic disparities to create inclusive and supportive urban spaces. Understanding these concepts is essential for urban geographers, planners, and policymakers. By analyzing the implications of attachment and detachment to urban spaces, we can develop strategies to enhance social cohesion, reduce inequalities, and improve the overall well-being of urban residents. This chapter aims to provide a comprehensive exploration of these themes, offering insights into the complex interplay between place, identity, and spatial justice in the context of Vancouver.

Place, Placelessness, and Spatial Inequality as Contemporary Issues

The focus of this chapter is on the interplay between place, placelessness, and spatial inequality within the urban context of Vancouver. These themes are central to urban geography, as they address how individuals' connections or disconnections to urban spaces influence their identities, experiences, and overall well-being. Place refers to locations imbued with meaning and significance through social and cultural connections, fostering a sense of belonging and identity (Massey). Conversely, placelessness describes spaces that lack distinctiveness and fail to evoke attachment or belonging, often resulting from homogenization and the erosion of unique local characteristics. Spatial inequality highlights the uneven distribution of resources, services, and opportunities across different urban areas, leading to significant socio-economic disparities that impact residents' quality of life (Hiebert 26).

Relevance to Vancouver

Understanding place, placelessness, and spatial inequality is crucial for several reasons. First, these concepts highlight how socio-economic disparities manifest spatially within urban areas, leading to uneven development and access to resources (Larner 449). This understanding is essential for urban planners and policymakers aiming to create more equitable cities. Moreover, the emotional and psychological impacts of attachment or detachment to urban spaces significantly influence residents' mental health and overall well-being. As noted by Cummins et al. (2007), living in deprived neighborhoods with limited access to resources can lead to higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (Cummins et al. 1833).

For Vancouver, this issue is particularly significant due to the city's rapid development and high cost of living. The disparity between affluent neighborhoods and marginalized areas like the Downtown Eastside (DTES) illustrates the severe socio-economic divides within the city. This spatial inequality not only affects the quality of life of residents in poorer areas but also undermines the social cohesion and economic vitality of the city as a whole. Vancouver’s reputation as a livable city is called into question by the existence of such stark inequalities, necessitating a closer examination and targeted interventions to address these issues (Ley and Lynch 2).

The Scale and Scope of the Issue

The scale of place, placelessness, and spatial inequality in Vancouver is significant, affecting various aspects of urban life. The city has experienced considerable income polarization, with growing gaps between high-income and low-income neighborhoods (Ley and Lynch 17). This polarization impacts residents' access to quality housing, education, healthcare, and employment opportunities. The DTES serves as a prominent example of spatial inequality. The DTES is characterized by high rates of poverty, homelessness, and substance abuse, in stark contrast to more affluent areas of the city (Smith 497). This neighborhood highlights the extreme socio-economic disparities that can exist within a single urban area.

Spatial inequality in Vancouver also extends to access to public amenities and services. Affluent neighborhoods often enjoy better infrastructure, green spaces, and public services, while marginalized areas face neglect and inadequate resources (Hiebert 26; Walks and Maaranen 297). These disparities contribute to differences in residents' quality of life and health outcomes. Research by Hiebert (2000) emphasizes that immigration and changing demographics further complicate these disparities, as new immigrants often settle in lower-income areas, exacerbating existing inequalities.

Global or Local Phenomenon

While spatial inequality is a global phenomenon, its manifestations can vary significantly depending on local contexts. Globally, cities in both developed and developing countries face challenges related to place, placelessness, and spatial inequality (Harvey) These issues are driven by factors such as economic globalization, urbanization, and neoliberal policies that prioritize market-driven development over social equity.

In Vancouver, the local context shapes the specific ways in which spatial inequality and placelessness are experienced. The city’s history of colonialism, immigration, and economic development has created a unique socio-economic landscape (Hiebert 25). Vancouver’s status as a major Pacific Rim city and its role in global trade also influence its urban dynamics, contributing to both economic opportunities and socio-economic divides (Olds 1774). The high cost of living and limited affordable housing options push marginalized populations into areas like the DTES, creating concentrated areas of poverty and deprivation.

The Urban Population of Vancouver and the Impact of Spatial Inequality

The urban population of Vancouver is directly and indirectly affected by the issues of place, placelessness, and spatial inequality. For residents of affluent neighborhoods, strong attachments to place and access to high-quality services contribute to a sense of stability and well-being (Forrest and Kearns 2126). These residents benefit from vibrant public spaces, cultural amenities, and social cohesion. Conversely, residents of marginalized neighborhoods face significant challenges due to spatial inequality and placelessness. In areas like the DTES, high levels of poverty, inadequate housing, and limited access to essential services contribute to social exclusion and poor health outcomes (Smith 498). The lack of investment in these neighborhoods exacerbates feelings of alienation and disconnection among residents.

Evidence of Impact

Research has shown that spatial inequality and placelessness have profound impacts on residents' mental health and well-being. Living in deprived neighborhoods with limited access to resources and services is associated with higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (Cummins et al.1834). The lack of green spaces, recreational facilities, and social services in these areas further compounds these challenges, leading to poorer mental health outcomes.

In Vancouver, evidence of the impact of spatial inequality can be seen in the stark differences in health and social outcomes between neighborhoods. Studies have documented higher rates of chronic diseases, mental health issues, and mortality in marginalized areas compared to more affluent parts of the city (Isvins et al. 2). These disparities highlight the urgent need for equitable urban planning and policies that address the root causes of spatial inequality. The social determinants of health, as discussed by Wilkinson and Marmot (2003), underscore the importance of addressing socio-economic disparities to improve overall public health.

The City of Vancouver’s Housing and Homelessness Strategy outlines plans to address these issues by increasing affordable housing, improving living conditions in marginalized areas, and providing better support services for vulnerable populations (City of Vancouver). These initiatives are critical for mitigating the impacts of spatial inequality and fostering a more inclusive urban environment.

Issue/Focus Conclusion

The concepts of place, placelessness, and spatial inequality are essential for understanding the complexities of urban life in Vancouver. These issues affect how residents interact with their environments, form identities, and access resources. The city's unique socio-economic landscape, marked by significant contrasts between affluent and marginalized neighborhoods, underscores the importance of addressing spatial inequality to create inclusive and supportive urban spaces. By examining the dynamics of place and placelessness in Vancouver, we can develop strategies to enhance social cohesion, reduce inequalities, and improve the overall well-being of urban residents. This understanding is not only crucial for Vancouver but also offers valuable insights for other cities facing similar challenges worldwide.

Case Study: The Downtown East Side

Introduction

Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside (DTES) is a neighborhood that exemplifies the broader issues of place, placelessness, and spatial inequality within an urban context. The DTES is commonly associated with criminal activity, illicit drug use, and poverty, exacerbating social inequality in this particular neighbourhood (Ivsins et al. 1). This part of the chapter delves into why these issues are particularly relevant in Vancouver, examining the problems, situations, and potential solutions experienced by the urban population, and assessing how the broader population of Vancouver is directly or indirectly affected by these issues.

Relevance of Place, Placelessness, and Spatial Inequality in Vancouver

The themes of place, placelessness, and spatial inequality are particularly significant in Vancouver due to the city's diverse socio-economic landscape. Vancouver is renowned for its high quality of life, yet this reputation is challenged by the severe socio-economic disparities seen in neighborhoods like the DTES (Ley and Lynch 3). The rapid urban development and high cost of living in Vancouver have exacerbated these disparities, making it crucial to understand and address the underlying issues that contribute to spatial inequality.

The DTES serves as a microcosm of these broader issues. It is an area with a rich history and strong community ties, but it is also marked by significant social and economic challenges. The neighborhood's struggles with homelessness, drug addiction, and inadequate housing are not just local issues but are indicative of broader urban problems related to socio-economic inequality and urban planning (Smith 499). Understanding the dynamics of the DTES can provide valuable insights into how to create more inclusive and equitable urban environments.

Problems, Situations, and Solutions Experienced by the Urban Population

Problems

The DTES faces numerous challenges, many of which are rooted in spatial inequality. The high concentration of poverty in the area is a significant issue. According to a report by the City of Vancouver (2020), the DTES has one of the highest rates of poverty in the city. This poverty is compounded by inadequate housing conditions, with many residents living in single-room occupancy (SRO) hotels that are often in poor repair and lack basic amenities (Collins et al. 174).

Homelessness is another critical problem in the DTES. The 2020 Homeless Count in Metro Vancouver identified over 2,000 homeless individuals, with a significant portion residing in the DTES (BC Non-profit Housing Association). These individuals face daily struggles to find safe and secure shelter, exacerbating their vulnerability to other issues such as health problems and violence.

Drug addiction and mental health issues are also prevalent in the DTES. The neighborhood has been described as the epicenter of Vancouver’s opioid crisis, with high rates of overdose deaths. According to the City of Vancouver, the DTES had one of the highest concentrations of drug-related harms in Canada (City of Vancouver)). This crisis is further compounded by inadequate access to mental health services, leaving many residents without the support they need.

Situations

The concentration of social issues in the DTES creates a challenging living environment for its residents. Many individuals face daily struggles to meet basic needs such as food, shelter, and healthcare. Public spaces in the neighborhood often become sites of conflict and tension, as marginalized individuals compete for limited resources.

The sense of placelessness in the DTES is palpable. Many residents feel disconnected from the broader urban fabric of Vancouver, experiencing alienation and social exclusion. This detachment is compounded by the stigma associated with living in a marginalized area, further isolating residents from the opportunities and resources available in other parts of the city (Harvey).

Solutions

Addressing the issues in the DTES requires a multifaceted approach. Various initiatives have been implemented to improve conditions in the neighborhood, with varying degrees of success. Housing First programs, which prioritize providing stable housing to homeless individuals, have shown promise in reducing homelessness and improving health outcomes (Gaetz et al.).

Community-based organizations play a crucial role in supporting DTES residents. These organizations provide essential services such as healthcare, food, and shelter, while also advocating for systemic changes to address the root causes of poverty and inequality. The Portland Hotel Society and Insite, North America’s first legal supervised injection site, are notable examples of successful community initiatives in the DTES (Boyd et al. 2662).

Urban planning and policy reforms are also essential to addressing spatial inequality in the DTES. The City of Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside Plan aims to revitalize the neighborhood through a combination of affordable housing development, economic revitalization, and improved access to services (City of Vancouver). However, the effectiveness of these initiatives depends on sustained investment and a commitment to addressing the underlying socio-economic disparities that affect the area.

How the Urban Population of Vancouver is Affected

Direct Effects

The residents of the DTES are directly affected by the issues of place, placelessness, and spatial inequality. The lack of affordable housing, healthcare, and employment opportunities creates a cycle of poverty and deprivation that is difficult to escape. The high prevalence of drug addiction and mental health issues further exacerbates these challenges, leading to poor health outcomes and reduced quality of life for residents (BCCSU, 2019).

The sense of alienation and social exclusion experienced by DTES residents also has profound psychological effects. Many individuals in the neighborhood struggle with feelings of hopelessness and disconnection, which can contribute to mental health issues such as depression and anxiety (Kawachi and Berkman 302). The stigma associated with living in the DTES further isolates residents, making it difficult for them to access the resources and opportunities available in other parts of Vancouver.

Indirect Effects

The issues faced by the DTES have broader implications for the urban population of Vancouver. The concentration of poverty and social issues in the neighborhood affects the city’s overall social cohesion and economic vitality. Areas of deprivation become less attractive for investment and development, limiting economic growth and perpetuating cycles of inequality (Sassen).

Moreover, the challenges in the DTES put pressure on the city’s public services and infrastructure. The high demand for healthcare, social services, and emergency responses in the neighborhood strains resources, affecting the availability and quality of services for the broader population (City of Vancouver). The opioid crisis, in particular, has highlighted the need for comprehensive and coordinated public health responses to address the complex issues facing the DTES and similar neighborhoods.

The presence of such stark socio-economic disparities within Vancouver also has implications for the city’s social fabric. Spatial inequality undermines social cohesion, leading to increased tensions and reduced social mobility (Walks and Maaranen 295). The visibility of poverty and deprivation in the DTES challenges the city’s image as a livable and inclusive urban environment, prompting calls for more equitable and sustainable urban development.

Evidence of the Issue

Numerous studies and reports provide evidence of the issues of place, placelessness, and spatial inequality in the DTES. The City of Vancouver’s annual homeless count consistently highlights the high levels of homelessness in the neighborhood, with a significant portion of the city’s homeless population residing in the DTES (BC Non-Profit Housing Association).

The City of Vancouver and Isvins et al. underscores the severity of the opioid crisis in the DTES, noting the high rates of overdose deaths and drug-related harms in the neighborhood (City of Vancouver; Isvins et al.). The study by the latter emphasizes the need for targeted interventions to address the specific challenges faced by DTES residents, including expanded access to harm reduction services and mental health support.

The social and economic disparities in the DTES are also well-documented in academic literature. Ley and Lynch (2012) highlight the socio-spatial income polarization in Vancouver, noting the concentration of poverty in the DTES and its implications for social equity and urban development. Hiebert (2000) examines the impact of immigration on the city’s socio-economic landscape, noting how marginalized communities, including those in the DTES, are disproportionately affected by spatial inequality.

In their study, Ivsins et al. (2019) explore how residents of the DTES reassemble spaces to create safer environments amidst the pervasive risks. This reassembly highlights the resilience of the community and the importance of spatial dynamics in shaping health outcomes. Similarly, Masuda et al. (2019) discuss the urban rights praxis of remaining in the DTES post-dispossession, emphasizing the community’s fight against displacement and the social injustices they face.

Example of Spatial Inequality: The Case of Robert Pickton

The case of Robert Pickton, a convicted serial killer who preyed on vulnerable women from the DTES, underscores the severe consequences of spatial inequality and social marginalization. Many of Pickton's victims were marginalized women who lived in the DTES and were often involved in the sex trade or struggling with addiction (Lowman and Fraser). The lack of adequate social support and protection for these women highlights the profound neglect and systemic failures that characterize spatial inequality in Vancouver. The Pickton case also exposed the deep-rooted societal indifference to the plight of marginalized populations, prompting calls for better social policies and support systems to protect vulnerable individuals (Oppal).

Conclusion

The Downtown Eastside is a powerful example of the broader issues of place, placelessness, and spatial inequality that affect urban areas globally. The neighborhood’s high levels of poverty, homelessness, and drug addiction highlight the severe socio-economic disparities that exist within Vancouver. Addressing these issues requires a multifaceted approach, including targeted interventions, community-based support, and comprehensive urban planning and policy reforms.

The challenges faced by the DTES have profound implications for the broader urban population of Vancouver. The concentration of poverty and social issues in the neighborhood affects the city’s social cohesion, economic vitality, and public services. Addressing the root causes of spatial inequality and fostering inclusive urban development are essential to creating a more equitable and resilient city.

Relevance to other Urban Contexts

The challenges and strategies observed in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside (DTES) provide valuable insights that can be applied to other urban contexts globally. By examining the DTES, urban planners and policymakers can gain a deeper understanding of how to address issues related to place, placelessness, and spatial inequality. The lessons learned from this case study highlight the importance of comprehensive and inclusive urban planning, community engagement, and targeted interventions to improve the quality of life for marginalized populations.

Comprehensive and Inclusive Urban Planning

One of the key lessons from the DTES is the necessity of comprehensive and inclusive urban planning. Spatial inequality often results from fragmented and unequal urban development. In the DTES, the concentration of poverty, inadequate housing, and limited access to essential services have created a cycle of deprivation and exclusion (Ley and Lynch 2). To address these issues, urban planning must integrate affordable housing, accessible healthcare, and employment opportunities into the development process. This approach helps distribute resources more equitably and reduce socio-economic disparities (City of Vancouver).

Community Engagement and Empowerment

Another crucial lesson from the DTES is the importance of community engagement and empowerment. Effective solutions require the active participation of community members, particularly those directly affected by urban inequalities. Initiatives such as Insite, North America’s first legal supervised injection site, demonstrate the benefits of involving local communities in the design and implementation of health interventions (Boyd et al. 2663). By empowering residents to take part in decision-making processes, cities can create more responsive and sustainable solutions to urban challenges (Masuda et al.).

Targeted Interventions and Support Services

The DTES also underscores the need for targeted interventions and support services. Programs that focus on specific issues, such as homelessness, addiction, and mental health, can significantly improve the quality of life for marginalized populations. Housing First programs, which prioritize providing stable housing before addressing other needs, have been particularly effective in reducing homelessness and improving health outcomes (Gaetz et al.). Additionally, harm reduction strategies, such as safe injection sites, have proven successful in mitigating the negative impacts of drug addiction and promoting public health (City of Vancouver).

Addressing Systemic Inequality

Addressing systemic inequality is another critical lesson from the DTES. The neighborhood’s struggles with poverty, addiction, and social exclusion are rooted in broader systemic issues, including colonialism, racism, and economic inequality (Ivsins et al. 2). Urban policies must therefore tackle these root causes by promoting social justice, equity, and inclusion. This can be achieved through comprehensive anti-poverty strategies, investments in education and job training, and reforms aimed at dismantling systemic barriers to equality (Hiebert 26).

Multisectoral Collaboration

Finally, the DTES highlights the importance of multisectoral collaboration. Effective urban interventions often require coordinated efforts across various sectors, including government agencies, non-profit organizations, healthcare providers, and community groups. The success of initiatives like the Mayor’s Task Force on Mental Health and Addiction in Vancouver demonstrates the value of such collaborations in addressing complex urban issues (City of Vancouver). By working together, different stakeholders can leverage their unique strengths and resources to create more comprehensive and effective solutions.

References

BC Non-Profit Housing Association. "News Release: Full Report on the 2020 Homeless Count in Metro Vancouver Provides New Details on Homelessness Prior to the Pandemic." BC Non-Profit Housing Association, 26 Nov. 2020, bcnpha.ca/news-release-full-report-on-the-2020-homeless-count-in-metro-vancouver-provides-new-details-on-homelessness-prior-to-the-pandemic/#:~:text=A%20total%20of%203%2C634%20people,region%20during%20the%202020%20count.

Blomley, Nicholas. Unsettling the City. Routledge, 2004. Taylor and Francis, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203499801.

Boyd, Jade, et al. "Gendered Violence and Overdose Prevention Sites: A Rapid Ethnographic Study during an Overdose Epidemic in Vancouver, Canada." Addiction, vol. 113, no. 12, 14 Sept. 2018, pp. 2261-70. Wiley Online Library, https://doi.org/10.1111/add.14417.

City of Vancouver. "Downtown Eastside Plan." City of Vancouver, 2014, vancouver.ca/home-property-development/dtes-local-area-plan.aspx#:~:text=The%20Downtown%20Eastside%20(DTES)%20Plan,DTES%20residents%20and%20community%20members.

---. "Vancouver's Approach to the Overdose Crisis." City of Vancouver, 2017, vancouver.ca/people-programs/drugs.aspx.

---. "Vancouver's Housing and Homelessness Strategy 2012-2021." City of Vancouver, 2011, vancouver.ca/files/cov/Housing-and-Homeless-Strategy-2012-2021pdf.pdf.

Collins, Alexandra B., et al. "Surviving the Housing Crisis: Social Violence and the Production of Evictions among Women Who Use Drugs in Vancouver, Canada." Health & Place, vol. 51, May 2018, pp. 174-81. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2018.04.001.

Cummins, Steven, et al. "Understanding and Representing 'place' in Health Research: A Relational Approach." Social Science & Medicine, vol. 65, no. 9, Nov. 2007, pp. 1825-38. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.036.

Forrest, Ray, and Ade Kearns. "Social Cohesion, Social Capital and the Neighbourhood." Urban Studies, vol. 38, no. 12, Nov. 2001, pp. 2125-43. SAGE Journals Online, https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980120087081.

Gaetz, Stephen, et al. Housing First in Canada: Supporting Communities to End Homelessness. Homeless Hub, 2013, homelesshub.ca/sites/default/files/HousingFirstInCanada_0.pdf.

Harvey, David. "The Right to the City." New Left Review, 2008, newleftreview.org/issues/ii53/articles/david-harvey-the-right-to-the-city.

Hiebert, Daniel. "Immigration and the Changing Canadian City." Canadian Geographies / Géographies Canadiennes, vol. 44, no. 1, Mar. 2000, pp. 25-43. Wiley Online Library, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0064.2000.tb00691.x.

Hutton, Thomas A. "Post-industrialism, Post-modernism and the Reproduction of Vancouver's Central Area: Retheorising the 21st-century City." Urban Studies, vol. 41, no. 10, Sept. 2004, pp. 1953-82. SAGE Journals Online, https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098042000256332.

Ivsins, Andrew, et al. "From Risky Places to Safe Spaces: Re-assembling Spaces and Places in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside." Health & Place, vol. 59, Sept. 2019, pp. 1-8. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2019.102164.

Jones, Craig E. Income Polarization and the Emergence of a Low Income Skytrain Corridor in Metro Vancouver, 1971-2006. 2012. U of british Columbia, PhD dissertation.

Kawachi, Ichiro, and Lisa F. Berkman. "Social Capital, Social Cohesion, and Health." Social Epidemiology, by Ichiro Kawachi and Lisa F. Berkman, 2nd ed., Oxford UP, 2014, pp. 290-319. Social Epidemiology. Oxford Academic, https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780195377903.003.0008.

Knox, Paul, and Steven Pinch. Urban Social Geography. Routledge, 2014. Taylor and Francis, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315847238.

Larner, Wendy. "Book Review: A Brief History of Neoliberalism." Economic Geography, vol. 82, no. 4, 2006, pp. 449-51. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/30033090.

Ley, David, and Nicholas Lynch. "Divisions and Disparities in Lotus-Land: Socio-Spatial Income Polarization in Greater Vancouver, 1970-2005." Cities Centre, U of Toronto, Oct. 2012. University of Toronto Library, tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/94388/1/223%20Ley%20Lynch%202012%20Vancouver%20Income%20Polarization.pdf. Working paper.

Lowman, John, and Laura Fraser. Violence against Persons Who Prostitute : the Experience in British Columbia. Justice Canada, 1996. Government of Canada, publications.gc.ca/site/eng/475856/publication.html.

Massey, Doreen. Space, Place, and Gender. NED - New ed., U of Minnesota P, 1994. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.cttttw2z. Accessed 24 June 2024.

Masuda, Jeffrey R., et al. "After Dispossession: An Urban Rights Praxis of Remaining in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside." Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, vol. 38, no. 2, 15 July 2019, pp. 229-47. SAGE Journals Online, https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775819860850.

Nicholls, Walter J. "Book Review: Urban Outcasts: A Comparative Sociology of Advanced Marginality." Urban Studies, vol. 46, no. 10, 14 Aug. 2009, pp. 2239-43. SAGE Journals Online, https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009340820.

Olds, K. "Globalization and the Production of New Urban Spaces: Pacific Rim Megaprojects in the Late 20th Century." Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, vol. 27, no. 11, Nov. 1995, pp. 1713-43. SAGE Journals Online, https://doi.org/10.1068/a271713.

Oppal, Wally T. Forsaken: The Report of the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry. 2012. Government of British Columbia, www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/law-crime-and-justice/about-bc-justice-system/inquiries/forsaken-es.pdf.

Raphael, Dennis, et al. Social Determinants of Health: The Canadian Facts. 2nd ed. The Canadian Facts, thecanadianfacts.org/The_Canadian_Facts-2nd_ed.pdf.

Sassen, Saskia. The Global City. Princeton UP, 2013. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt2jc93q.

Smith, Heather A. "Planning, Policy and Polarisation in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside." Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie, vol. 94, no. 4, Sept. 2003, pp. 496-509. Wiley Online Library, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00276.

Walks, Alan, and Amy Twigge-Molecey. Income Inequality and Polarization in Canada's Cities : an Examination and New Form of Measurement. Toronto, Cities Centre, U of Toronto, 2014. Neighbourhood Change.

Walks, R. Alan, and Richard Maaranen. "Gentrification, Social Mix, and Social Polarization: Testing the Linkages in Large Canadian Cities." Urban Geography, vol. 29, no. 4, May 2008, pp. 293-326. Neighborhood Change, https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.29.4.293.