Territorial Stigma and the Moral Politics of Place: Boundary Work and Social Distance in Disadvantaged Neighbourhoods

Abstract

This article refines territorial stigma theory by analysing how residents in three disadvantaged Dutch neighbourhoods respond to stigma through four distinct moral coping strategies. Drawing on 216 in-depth interviews, we identify and theorise the following patterns: moral boundary work, where residents distinguish ‘decent’ from ‘disorderly’ neighbours; moral classifications of deservingness, where the poor are divided into the ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving’; empathetic reframing of stigma, where problematic behaviour is humanised as a response to hardship; and withdrawal and internalised stigma, where residents disengage from community life and adopt negative views of their surroundings. These strategies cut across ethnic lines and serve to assert personal worth, accumulate symbolic capital, and manage stigma. However, they also produce intra-community fragmentation and reproduce symbolic violence, echoing Bourdieu. Rather than viewing internalised stigma solely as private shame, we show how it manifests in peer regulation, horizontal blame, and social retreat. While many responses reinforce stigma, instances of empathy and collective pride highlight the ambivalence of moral boundary work – as both a source of exclusion and a potential foundation for solidarity.