Poverty (Number 1 Goal of the SDG) of Disabled People through Disability Studies and Ability Studies Lenses: A Scoping Review

Tsion Berie, Sean A. Kidd and Gregor Wolbring ()
Additional contact information
Tsion Berie: Community Rehabilitation and Disability Studies, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 4N1, Canada
Sean A. Kidd: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Complex Care and Recovery Building, Rm 3201 1025 Queen Street West Toronto, Toronto, ON M6J 1H1, Canada
Gregor Wolbring: Community Rehabilitation and Disability Studies, Cumming School of Medicine, Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 4N1, Canada

Sustainability, 2024, vol. 16, issue 13, 1-52

Abstract: According to the World Bank, the world will not meet the SDG of ending extreme poverty in 2030. Disabled people live disproportionally below the poverty line. Many societal developments and discussions can influence the poverty level of disabled people. This study aimed to better understand the academic engagement with the poverty of disabled people in general and in Canada. To fulfill this aim, we performed a scoping review of academic abstracts obtained from SCOPUS, the 70 databases of EBSCO-HOST, and Web of Science. We performed a frequency count and a content analysis of abstracts containing the terms “poverty” or “impoverish*” or “socioeconomic” or “SES” or “income”. We ascertained how the abstracts engaged with the poverty of disabled people in general and in Canada and in conjunction with keywords linked to a select set of societal developments and discussions we saw as impacting poverty and being impacted by poverty. We also looked at the use of concepts coined to discuss ability judgments and social problems with being occupied, two areas that impact the poverty of disabled people. We found that disabled people were mentioned in 0.86% of the abstracts using the term “poverty” in general and 4.1% (88 abstracts) for Canada. For the terms “impoverish*”, “socioeconomic”, “SES”, and “income”, the numbers were 3.15% in general and 0.94% for Canada. The poverty of disabled people who also belong to other marginalized groups was rarely covered. Our qualitative content analysis revealed that many of the hit-count positive abstracts did not cover the poverty of disabled people. We found 22 relevant abstracts that covered the poverty of disabled people in conjunction with technologies, eight in conjunction with accessibility not already mentioned under technology, eight with intersectionality, seven with “activis*” or advocacy, three with sustainability, two with climate change, and none for burnout or ally. The occupation and ability judgment-focused concepts were rarely or not at all employed to discuss the poverty of disabled people. Our findings suggest many gaps in the coverage of the poverty of disabled people that need to be fixed.

Keywords: poverty; disabled people; people with disabilities; Canada; global; impoverish; socioeconomic; SES; income; disability studies; ability studies; abilities (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/13/5814/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/13/5814/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:13:p:5814-:d:1431121

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().