Abstract
The authors consider the definition and measurement of deprivation and of rurality in the context of health-care research. Parallels are drawn between the methodological issues involved in the measurement of deprivation and of rurality. An empirical study of the South West of England reveals the extent of disagreement between standard rurality measures; in particular, the authors suggest that rural deprivation will be poorly represented by the conventional approaches. They argue for the development of new approaches to the measurement of deprivation in rural areas, in which advantage is taken of contemporary data sources.
Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References
41
[1]
ACRE (1998)
[2]
Bailey T C (1995)
[3]
Bentham G Family Practitioner Services (1986)
[4]
Birkin M (1995)
[7]
Coombes M Planning Outlook (1991) 10.1080/00320719108711889
[8]
Craig J Population Trends (1987)
[12]
Dunn J (1998)
[18]
McLaren G (1998)
[19]
Martin D Pollution Trends (1998)
[22]
Morris R Journal of Public Health Medicine (1991)
[24]
OPCS (1992)
[25]
Openshaw S (1995)
[26]
Payne J (1995)
[27]
Payne S (1996)
[28]
Payne G, Payne J, Hyde M, 1996b, “Refuse of all classes? Social indicators and social deprivation” Sociological Research Online 1 http://www.socresoline.org.Uk/1/1/3.html 10.5153/sro.2
[29]
Phillimore P Journal of Public Health Medicine (1992)
[30]
RDC (1998)
[34]
Shucksmith M (1990)
[38]
Townsend P (1988)
[39]
Wallace M Population Trends (1995)
Metrics
66
Citations
41
References
Details
Published
Apr 01, 2000
Vol/Issue
32(4)
Pages
735-751
License
View
Cite This Article
David Martin, Philip Brigham, Paul Roderick, et al. (2000). The (mis)Representation of Rural Deprivation. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 32(4), 735-751. https://doi.org/10.1068/a32130
Related

You May Also Like