Using a Place-Based Harms Typology to Inform Community Practice and Research

Illustrative Cases and Contexts

Datos Bibliográficos

ID12424697
AutoresJason Sawyer (enCircle, Richmond VA), Jason M Sawyer (0000-0001-8584-5886, University of Richmond), Greer A Hamilton (0000-0003-4880-5337, University of Michigan), Amie Thurber (0000-0003-0753-5895, Portland State University), Amy Krings (0000-0001-5499-5101, The Ohio State University, autor de correspondencia)
Año2026
Volumen34
Número1
Páginas1-18
Fecha de publicación2026-03-16
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaJournal of Community Practice (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1070-5422 • E-ISSN: 1543-3706
EditorialTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/10705422.2026.2642309
OpenAlexW7137207168
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas1
Referencias citadas24

Place-based harms comprise direct threats to community wellbeing within the spaces where people live. These harms, rooted in structural and cultural violence, are codified in policies and programs that contribute to poverty, homelessness, over-policing and surveillance, and environmental injustices. This paper argues, although community practitioners are needed to work alongside communities impacted by place-based harms, there are critical tensions and tradeoffs embedded within the place-based strategies. To illustrate this, we draw from the Contested Places Typology and present cases that highlight key tensions, tradeoffs, and nuances associated with its six approaches: (1) Reparation, (2) Remembrance, (3) Regeneration, (4) Resistance, (5) Reform, and (6) Repatriation and Rematriation. We contend these six approaches can help students and practitioners imagine new possibilities for justly responding to place-based harms

Community of practice · Community practice · Context (archaeology · Qualitative research · Typology · Work (physics · Community Health and Development · Homelessness and Social Issues · Indigenous and Place-Based Education