Sharon Lord Gaber

Seeing People Differently: The Sociospatial Construction of Disability

In this paper the authors develop the concept of difference as it applies to people with disabilities. The production of difference is characterized as necessarily a social and a spatial process which allows the self to be partitioned from the Other. In the aggregate, such processes facilitate the stigmatization of whole classes of people and the institutionalization of rules for boundary maintenance between different groups. One important consequence among the population at large is a ‘hierarchy of acceptance’, that is, a structure of preferential ranking among various disability categories. A metaanalysis of 44 acceptance hierarchy studies since 1968 reveals both stability and change in community preference structures. The largest impetus for change derives from the appearance of new ‘disabilities’ including most especially people with AIDS, and homeless people. Evidence also suggests that significant attitudinal variations occur through space as well as time and when different facility types are considered and that actual behavior may differ from expressed attitudinal preferences. This paper concludes with remarks directed toward a more adequate sociospatial theory of disability.

CONTROVERSIAL FACILITY SITING IN THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT : RESIDENT AND PLANNER PERCEPTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES

Conflict over facility siting has become increasingly common across facility types and neighborhoods throughout the United States. This article posits that the conflict about facility siting stems from the distinct roles played by the state (with a central role played by planners), the shadow state (consisting of voluntary and nonprofit organizations), and interest groups (primarily community residents). This article explores the similarities and differences in perception toward controversial facilities for two of these three actors: the state (represented by planning directors) and interest groups (in this case, community residents). To investigate the similarities and differences between resident and planner perceptions, this article analyzes the first national survey of resident attitudes, which included both environmental and human service facilities, and a recent national survey of planning directors. Implications of this analysis for understanding facility siting, community opposition, and planning responses are discussed.

FROM NIMBY TO FAIR SHARE: THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW YORK CITY'S MUNICIPAL SHELTER SITING POLICIES, 1980-1990

A trajectory of city siting policies for homeless shelters is examined, reflecting either community opposition per se or the citys fear of community opposition. Furthermore, these policies created distinct geographic patterns of shelter siting. New York Citys shelter siting history, from the beginning of mandatory shelter provision in the early 1980s to the institution of fair-share planning for the dispersal of city-owned facilities in 1990, is examined. City siting responses—isolation, circumvention, and cooperation—correlate with the type of community opposition being mounted.

Utilizing Mixed-Method Research Designs in Planning: The Case of 14th Street, New York City

Planning researchers tend to use single quantitative and/or qualitative research methods in their investigations. Unfortunately, single method research strategies run the risk of missing significant data sets that can cripple a planning investigation. We argue that combining methods into a mixed-method research design provides planning investigators a more comprehensive understanding than would be possible under a single method. The goal of the paper is to cultivate interest in combining quantitative and qualitative investigations into mixed-method planning research strategies and to highlight how and why investigators use mixed-method research strategies.

Using Focus and NomiNal Group Techniques for a Better Understanding of the Transit Disadvantaged Needs

The research presented in this paper explores the context, method, and value of focus group research in transit needs assessments. Group participatory research can generate data that are not easily obtained by other methods. The paper focuses on lessons from three Nebraska communities whose transit disadvantaged rely on community-based paratransit services. Because of the size of the paratransit population and the inability to control who showed up to the focus group sessions, a modified group research protocol was adopted in order to garner information from whomever attended the session. The population parameters and the number of people at the meetings were anticipated by the researchers and mitigated by incorporating nominal group techniques. Research findings from the focus group sessions are discussed paying particular attention to the candid and policy-specific comments made by the focus group participants. The paper concludes with an application of focus group research in transit planning.