Search results

The objective of this study was to assess the relationship among intersectionality, vulnerability and resilience with evidence. The conceptual framework developed by the study believed that intersectionality and vulnerabilities intersect and reduce the level of disaster resilience.

A qualitative approach was followed with relevant support from both primary and secondary data to conduct the study. The study focused on flood as a specific natural hazard to assess the relationship among the indicators of the objective. Focus group discussions (FGDs) were performed in two different flood-prone areas of Bangladesh. FGDs included young men, young women, men and women with disabilities and older people. Also, secondary literature helped to support ground-level data.

In the face of a flood, results showed that people with intersectional characteristics become more vulnerable within the at-risk groups. There are differences in people's level of vulnerabilities among the people of vulnerable groups. The results support the discussion that intersectionality exaggerates vulnerabilities, thus reducing the level of disaster resilience. The study summarizes that intersectionality needs to be addressed while supporting groups at risk to achieve a resilient community.

The study is only based on qualitative and secondary data. For more generalized findings and implications, further research is needed. Also, this study will work as a guideline for future studies.

The study is one of the few works related to intersectionality. This study will open a new window to understand the importance of focusing on intersectional conditions while developing plans for disaster risk reduction (DRR).

Work-life flexibility policies (e.g., flextime, telework, part-time, right-to-disconnect, and leaves) are increasingly important to employers as productivity and well-being strategies. However, policies have not lived up to their potential. In this chapter, the authors argue for increased research attention to implementation and work-life intersectionality considerations influencing effectiveness. Drawing on a typology that conceptualizes flexibility policies as offering employees control across five dimensions of the work role boundary (temporal, spatial, size, permeability, and continuity), the authors develop a model identifying the multilevel moderators and mechanisms of boundary control shaping relationships between using flexibility and work and home performance. Next, the authors review this model with an intersectional lens. The authors direct scholars’ attention to growing workforce diversity and increased variation in flexibility policy experiences, particularly for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality, which is defined as having multiple intersecting identities (e.g., gender, caregiving, and race), that are stigmatized, and link to having less access to and/or benefits from societal resources to support managing the work-life interface in a social context. Such an intersectional focus would address the important need to shift work-life and flexibility research from variable to person-centered approaches. The authors identify six research considerations on work-life intersectionality in order to illuminate how traditionally assumed work-life relationships need to be revisited to address growing variation in: access, needs, and preferences for work-life flexibility; work and nonwork experiences; and benefits from using flexibility policies. The authors hope that this chapter will spur a conversation on how the work-life interface and flexibility policy processes and outcomes may increasingly differ for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality compared to those with lower work-life intersectionality in the context of organizational and social systems that may perpetuate growing work-life and job inequality.

Treatment of intersectionality in empirical studies has predominantly engaged with individual categories of difference. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that there is utility in exploring intersectionality at the intersection of individual and institutional levels. As such the authors move beyond the polarised take on intersections as either individual or institutional phenomenon and tackle intersectionality as a relational phenomenon that gains meaning at the encounter of individuals and institutions in context. Therefore, the authors explicate how intersectionality features as forms of solidarity and hostility in work environments. As such the authors posit that not only individuals but also the institutions should change if inclusion is aimed at societal and organisational levels.

A thematic analysis on qualitative interview data of a purposive- and snowball-selected sample of 11 lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer working adults in Turkey was used.

This paper finds evidence to support the existence of a multidimensional model of intersectionality, where conflicting and complementary individual and institutional intersections create four intersectional typologies in the form of intersectional hostility, intersectional struggle, intersectional adjustment and intersectional solidarity.

The extant literature offers rich insights into individual intersectionality but sheds very little light on institutional intersectionality and its interaction with individual intersectionality. This paper attempts to fill in this gap by investigating intersectional encounters as interactions between the individual and institutional intersections.

This chapter explores variation in direct care workers’ health risks within institutional and home-based settings, according to the demographic composition of workers and the gendered, raced, and citizenship-based expressions of their work roles.

This quantitative intersectional study draws on two nationwide datasets from the US National Center for Long-term Care Statistics, a division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Nursing Assistant Study (NNAS), and National Home Health Aide Survey (NHHAS).

Workplace context was the strongest predictor of workers’ health risks and working conditions. Physical injuries affected more than half of facility-based workers annually compared to less than 10% of home-based workers. Facility-based workers are more likely to report insufficient time for tasks, lower job satisfaction, and less respect and appreciation from patients. Home-based workers may be more likely to experience emotional distress, be offered fewer benefits, but experience fewer injuries, due to the better relative health of their patients and having more time for client care. Women reported more injuries and more time pressure than men across racial and citizenship groups within the same work setting.

There are limitations to the NHHAS and NNAS public-release data file data. We are unable to fully capture citizenship, some racial/ethnic categories, workers over age 65, supervisory workers, facilities with fewer than three residents, and facilities not certified with Medicare or Medicaid. The exclusion of these questions, workers, and contexts is a weakness of the present study.

Analyses draw on data from the first nationally representative sample surveys of home health aides and nursing assistants in the United States. Direct care workers are an important population to capture through intersectional research since care work is done predominantly by multiracial women and immigrants. This research also underscores the importance of workplace contexts in shaping the labor performed and the workers’ experiences.

Most abuse affecting older adults in the UK, as across Europe, takes place within caring relationships, where one person is disabled and needs care/support. This paper critically appraises two of the key theoretical explanations. First, feminist theories of “intimate partner abuse” tell us that it is mostly men who perpetrate abuse against women. Second, “carer strain”: the stress caused by caring responsibilities, often with inadequate help from services. Neither fully reflects the complex dynamics of “dangerous care” leading to a lack of voice and choice in safeguarding responses. This paper aims to articulate the need for an overarching theoretical framework, informed by a deeper understanding of the intersectional risk factors that create and compound the diverse experiences of harm by disabled people and family carers over the life course.

The critical synthesis of the theoretical approaches informing UK policy and practice presented here arises from a structured literature review and discussions held with three relevant third sector agencies during the development of a research proposal.

No single theory fully explains dangerous care and there are significant gaps in policy, resources and practice across service sectors, highlighting the need for joint training, intersectional working and research across service sectors.

Drawing both on existing literature and on discussions across contrasting policy and practice sectors, this paper raises awareness of some less well-acknowledged complexities of abuse and responses to abuse in later life.

We are long overdue for a conversation about ethical treatment of student researchers. Ethical treatment of research participants has been carefully defined through decades of public conversation, and ethical practices have been institutionalized through mechanisms like mandatory ethics trainings and Institutional Review Boards. Student researchers deserve the same level of consideration. While there are many types of ethical violations of student labor in research projects, there are two that are of particular concern to social movements researchers: use of volunteer labor without clear academic or professional benefits, and failure to ensure the safety of student researchers. The first of these ethical violations is especially common in social movements research because of the emergent nature of protests: new rounds of protests begin and researchers seek to rapidly collect data on a tight timeframe, making grant funding to pay student researchers challenging. The second situation emerges when faculty researchers do not consider the ways students' race, gender identity, or other characteristics, or the nature of the protests themselves might create potential risks for students.

In this paper, I propose using the Belmont Report principles to create guidelines for ethical treatment of student researchers. While these principles were developed for the purposes of protecting research participants, the principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice help us to clarify the risks and benefits for student researchers, to find ways to maximize the benefits of student research participation, and to understand and address the inequalities that plague graduate student training.

Education in recent years has witnessed an increasing involvement in the conversations regarding anti-oppressive practice and contemplation, particularly as foundations for pedagogy and curricular design. Naturally, both discourses have intersected with each other through the attempts at their integration, potentially leading toward new practices of enhanced educational impact. This chapter serves as a deliberate reflection and elaboration upon the nature and potential implications of their integration. As both discourses reflect valuable approaches and ideas, it is important to carefully examine and approach their integration to ensure that the value of each perspective is preserved as well as enriched in its power to educatively stimulate meaningful learning in the classroom. In order for such an educative situation to emerge, I argue that the integration should be defined by a sustained friction and differentiation between each perspective. By sustaining the friction, each perspective preserves their power to illuminate alternative possibilities in understanding the self and the world for the other. The educative value of such friction rests within its power to carry students onto a journey of continuous learning without settling upon finalized answers. Ultimately, I conclude that this friction is made possible and sustained by being embodied as the very self of the teacher.

The intent of this chapter is to examine the historical and present-day intersections of injury, impairment, pain and risk-taking in the Paralympic Movement. While much has been written about injuries that end an athlete’s career, far less consideration has been given to how an injury might launch a sports career. In this chapter, I explore the experiences of athletes for whom injury and sports participation are fundamentally entwined.

To accomplish this, I draw on sociological literature on sport and injury, psychological literature on identities and sport retirement and feminist disability theories. The discussion is further enriched by interviews with Paralympic athletes and informed by own experience as a researcher, guide and volunteer in the Paralympic Movement.

This work illustrates how systems of representation intersect to (re)produce identities. This includes demonstrating how some individuals use sport as a means of claiming an athletic identity while distancing themselves from devalued disabled identities and the subsequent impact this can have on their psycho-social well-being.

This chapter demonstrates how sociologists of sports can engage with critical disability scholarship to deepen understandings of how and why individuals with impairments enter into sport and their experiences therein.

Rates of anxiety, depression, and suicidality have long been known to be elevated among LGBTQ+ communities and it was expected that the COVID-19 pandemic would deepen systemic injustices and inequities in mental health outcomes. However, it remains difficult to document inequities as surveillance systems do not typically capture LGBTQ+-inclusive data necessary to study the impact of COVID-19 on LGBTQ+ population health. This chapter reports on two studies designed to address this gap. The COVID-19 Impacts Study (CIS) documented the early mental health and social impacts of COVID-19 among sexual and gender minority adults, as well as adults with HIV, during the first round of shut-downs and initial economic disruptions. Subsequently, the Youth and Young Adults COVID-19 Study (YYA) measured the impacts of COVID-19 on the mental health outcomes, testing/vaccination behaviors, and stigmatization experiences of LGBTQ+ and BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) young people. Several recommendations are discussed – including mandated collection of data on sexual orientation and gender identity in all surveillance systems, policy solutions to better address access and cost barriers, and deep and meaningful engagement that empowers communities.