Urban Poverty in the Everyday Lives of Older People: A Qualitative Study Protocol

Abstract

Social conditions and pressures associated with city living cause particular challenges for older people given fixed incomes, life course needs (e.g., living alone, mobility issues, need for care), and reductions to essential public supports. The proposed study explores older people’s everyday experiences of poverty and low income in the urban contexts of Toronto and Montreal, Canada’s two largest cities. In Canada, a country where federal, provincial, and municipalities share responsibilities to tackle poverty, governmental authorities typically utilize a range of economic measures such as the Low Income Cut-Offs (LICO) and the Market Basket Measure (MBM) in their analyses. This project aims to understand and broaden existing measures and responses to poverty based on the experiences of older people in the context of their everyday lives, specifically as related to housing, transportation, and memory loss. Drawing on critical gerontology, our investigative methods include: a) a review of definitions and foundational knowledge about ‘what counts as poverty’ in policy frameworks and the academic literature; b) a policy review and document analysis of National (Canada), provincial (Ontario/Quebec) and municipal (Toronto/Montreal) strategies on poverty and aging; c) three targeted comparative case studies comprised of onsite ethnographic observations and ‘go along methods’; key informant interviews; and in-depth interviews with older people in Toronto and Montreal. The expected outcome is a better understanding of everyday experiences of poverty among older people at the micro level of experience, the meso-level of community practice, and the macro level of social programming and policy.

1. Introduction

The policy agenda of public authorities at international, federal, provincial, and municipal levels highlights rising costs of living, growing poverty rates, and the lack of affordable housing as key concerns, and this is especially the case for urban areas (United Nations, 2023; European Union, 2021; OECD, 2017; Government of Canada, 2022; City of Toronto, 2023; Gouvernement du Québec: Ministère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité sociale, 2010; Joy, 2020). However, little attention is placed on older people’s experiences of urban poverty, and how low income may operate as a mechanism of marginalization and social exclusion. According to Statistics Canada (2021a), 7.4% of Canadians live in poverty. Poverty is primarily measured by household income below a threshold at which one can purchase a basket of goods and services in one’s geographic region (set at $61,763 annual household income for Toronto using the MBM measure and $49,244 for Montreal in 2024) (Statistics Canada, 2025). Despite policy efforts to enhance income in retirement, recent studies demonstrate that poverty rates and the prevalence of low-income have been rising steadily among older people in Canada (Béland & Marier, 2022).

Most older people are outside of the labour force and thus live on a fixed income. Income for older persons (generally 65+) in Canada is provided via three core public programs: a quasi-universal benefit (Old Age Security, OAS); a mandatory earnings-related pension scheme (Quebec or Canada Pension Plan, QPP/CPP); and an income-tested benefit (Guaranteed Income Supplement, GIS). The amount received by each older person differs based on citizenship and labour contributions (maximum annual payment summing up OAS and CPP is $26,978 in 2025) (Government of Canada, 2026a; 2026c), with the annual income threshold for GIS at $22,488 for a single individual (Government of Canada, 2026b) ¹ . Life course needs may also cause challenges given fixed income and reductions to essential public supports that have taken place since the 1980s (Evans & McBride, 2018). For example, older people have high rates of living alone compared to the general population (28%) (Public Health Agency of Canada, 2020) and may have changing mobility issues and needs for care (Buffel & Phillipson, 2024; City of Toronto, 2023). While public programs provide financial support, these remain insufficient. Pressures associated with urban life, such as the rising cost of living, affordable housing crises, and inadequacies in transportation, can create challenges for older people. To our knowledge, no Canadian studies of the everyday lives of older people experiencing poverty exist, especially those living in urban areas, and further, where memory loss is concerned. Given population aging and the rising pressures of urban life, there is an urgent need to understand the impact of urban poverty among older people.

The proposed qualitative ethnographic study explores older people’s everyday experiences of poverty and low income in Canada’s two largest urban areas, Toronto (metropolitan population: 6,202,225 in 2021) and Montreal (metropolitan population: 4,291,732) (Statistics Canada, 2023a; 2023b). According to the 2016 census, Toronto and Montreal have among the highest rates of poverty among older people in Canada (at 17.4% and 22.8% respectively, with Vancouver at 21%) (Queiser et al., 2020). In addition to inflation and the rising costs of basic needs, Toronto and Montreal are both undergoing an affordable housing crisis (August, 2021; Canadian Centre of Economic Analysis & Canadian Urban Institute, 2019; Kern, 2022; Leon & Iveniuk, 2020; Regroupement des Comités Logement et Associations de Locataires du Québec, 2022), knock-on effects from the pandemic (Cocuzzo et al., 2022; Statistics Canada, 2021b), and transportation infrastructure changes that may seriously impact older people with low incomes (Ravensbergen et al., 2021). Our study aims to broaden existing understandings of poverty based on the experiences of older people in the context of their everyday lives. We focus specifically on case studies of re-housing, transportation, and memory loss as moments of challenge. Given that policy documents and responses to older people use both terms of poverty and ‘low income’, we use both throughout the paper, with low income generally used to refer to an income cut off, and poverty, to a multi-dimensional experience of insufficient resources and unmet needs.

2. Background

Definitions and measures of poverty that underpin public responses tend to focus on income. Canada uses an Official Poverty Line, defined as not being able to ‘afford the cost of a specific basket of goods and services in their community’, as well as a measure of ‘deep income poverty’, defined by an income below 75% of the Poverty Line (Statistics Canada, 2023b). However, the United Nations and anti-poverty advocacy organizations point to poverty as ‘more than the lack of income and productive resources to ensure sustainable livelihoods’…‘manifesting in experiences such as limited access to basic services, social discrimination and exclusion, as well as the lack of participation in decision-making’ (Canada Without Poverty, 2022a; United Nations, 2023). Poverty, and urban poverty, are likely to have far-reaching and cumulative impacts on the lives of older people over the life course (Dannefer, 2003; Holman & Walker, 2021), including negative impacts on health (Jaspal & Breakwell, 2022; Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, 2021; Raphael, 2002;), social isolation, well-being, and participation in neighbourhood activities (De Jong Gierveld et al., 2015; Stewart et al., 2009). These effects have dire consequences for political participation and trust in government (Boulding & Claudio, 2021; Soss et al., 2011; World Health Organization, 2025). In addition, concerns about the coverage of these measures exist, such as the Market Basket Measure overlooking older people living at or near the poverty threshold. This would include many older people in urban centres and on fixed incomes (Biss, 2018; Noël, 2017).

The academic literature primarily refers to poverty as a structure within which individuals or families exist and live (Brown, 2011; Kaida & Boyd, 2011; Kwan & Walsh, 2018; McDonald, 1997; Milligan, 2008; Preston et al., 2012). While there is increasing attention to the everyday impacts of poverty in earlier periods of the life course, less attention has been devoted to later life, urban experiences, and the additional layer of memory loss. There is a need to re-invigorate debates on poverty given considerable transformations in the economic and social context, cuts to social programs over time, and the long-standing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, economic austerity, and inflation (Cocuzzo et al., 2022; European Union, 2021; Statistics Canada, 2021b). This would include an examination of everyday poverty in the context of austerity and welfare state retrenchment (Banting & Myles, 2014; McBride & Evans, 2017, 2018), urbanization and policy devolution to cities (Joy & Vogel, 2015, 2021), and precarious trajectories (Grenier et al., 2020a; 2020b) that limit older people’s access to public programs, both generally, but also via increasingly financialized housing and care sectors (Armstrong & Armstrong, 2019; August, 2021). Focusing only on the structural conditions of poverty via financial measures and income support such as retirement misses the relational nature of poverty in diverse and intersecting lives, and over time, as people age and the impacts of changes are cumulatively felt. It also ignores the extent to which urban living creates additional pressures on income and meeting basic needs. The costs of urban living compound with inflation, and access to and/or a shortage of crucial public supports may exacerbate the challenges of having needs met, as well as intensify the risks of stigma, marginalization, and exclusion.

Our approach focuses on urban poverty among older people across policy domains of housing, transportation, and memory loss. We combine this with attention to social locations such as age, (dis)ability, im/migration, sex/gender, race/racialization, Indigeneity and sexual orientation, which are known to be over-represented in poverty in earlier parts of the life course (Dionne & Raymond-Brousseau, 2025). A scoping review by Kwan and Walsh (2018) outlines how poverty among older people is defined and conceptualized through various domains: income and consumption; assets and wealth-based measures; self-perceived poverty; and measures of risk and protective factors including health status, residency, and resilience. This lends weight to our argument that current approaches to poverty emphasize economic measures over context and relational processes and overlook differences between poverty measures based on household income and older people’s tendency to live alone.

Benchmarks about poverty and aging will be used as reference points to develop and expand understandings through a study of older people’s everyday experiences of low income and urban poverty in Toronto and Montreal. The team will turn to classic works on urban poverty among older people in the UK (Phillips et al., 2000; Townsend, 1957) and the United States (Li & Dalaker, 2022; Minkler & Estes, 1997) to build out the focus on poverty in the everyday and as enacted and experienced in the two largest Canadian cities. It will also seek out comparisons with work conducted in earlier parts of the life course in Canada (Wellman, 1982; Wellman & Frank, 2011), as well as comparisons to studies of poverty among rural residing older people (Keating et al., 2011; Keating & Phillips, 2008), including attention to marginalization, inequality, social engagement, family/social networks, and health (Keating et al., 2011; Keating & Phillips, 2008). Research on the unequal distribution of poverty among racialized groups (Canada Without Poverty, 2022b), including older people where available (Brotman, 1998; Preston et al., 2012), as well as insights from scoping reviews on precarity (Grenier et al., 2020a) and social exclusion (Walsh et al., 2017), also provide important pathways for understanding older people’s experiences of urban poverty.

3. Theoretical Framework: Critical Gerontology

Our study draws on critical gerontology to develop detailed understandings of older people’s poverty via qualitative ethnography designed to understand experiences in context through engaged methods that centre older people’s voices and needs (James & Buffel, 2022; Littlechild et al., 2015; Ross et al., 2005). Critical gerontology draws attention to inequality and exclusion, power relations organized around age, and the interplay between structures, organizational practices, and everyday experiences of aging (Baars et al., 2014; Dannefer & Phillipson, 2013; Minkler & Estes, 1997). It situates social relations and experiences of older people in the contexts and communities within which they occur, inclusive of the intersections between poverty and social locations such as age, (dis)ability, im/migration, sex/gender, race/racialization, Indigeneity and sexual orientation (Crenshaw, 1991; Ferrer et al., 2017; Holman & Walker, 2021; McCall, 2014; Yuval-Davis, 2006).

A unifying theme in critical approaches to the study of aging has been to identify and reveal the contrasts between the shared risks associated with aging, and those related to circumstances, such as precarity or homelessness (Billette et al., 2020; Grenier, 2021; Grenier et al., 2020b) and rapid social change (Buffel et al., 2019; Buffel & Phillipson, 2019; Joy, 2020). This has included notable attention to the stigma and exclusion that occurs in relation to aging, as well as particular social locations such as dementia (Grenier et al., 2017; Kontos et al., 2020; Mitchell et al., 2020). The concern raised by critical gerontologists is that inequalities that result from social processes may be amplified for older people in contexts where the management of risk is expressed as an individual rather than collective responsibility. This includes where power dynamics and public responses (or the lack thereof) lead to discriminatory practices and/or the non-realization of rights, and where financialization and/or austerity measures may reduce public mechanisms of support (Beck, 1992; Grenier et al., 2020b; Grigorovich et al., 2019; Scharf et al., 2004, 2007).

Studying poverty through a critical gerontological lens provides the intellectual space to consider questions such as: Where do older people fit in agenda(s) on poverty? How might encounters in re-housing, transportation and memory loss contribute to marginalization, social exclusion, and/or stigma? How are particular groups of older people differentially affected by poverty? What opportunities exist for developing interpersonal strategies, community supports and solidarity? Consistent with a critical gerontological approach, our study will make recommendations for just social change in the lives of older people (Walker & Phillipson, 1986). It will examine the extent to which communities and organizations can limit the effects of poverty and social exclusion, through for example the development of ‘personal communities’ (Wellman, 1982), and models of resilience and capacity building demonstrated in other research contexts with older people (Burholt, 2020; Dupuis-Blanchard et al., 2009; Golant, 1984). While there is a sense that the pandemic increased isolation among older people, there is also the possibility that it fostered new communities of support and care (Joy et al., 2025).

4. Study Design

This study uses a multi-method and multi-site ethnography to consider poverty in late life in the context of everyday lives. It draws together critical ethnographic (Carspecken, 2013; Madison, 2011), constructivist, and narrative approaches (Charmaz, 2014; Corbin & Strauss, 2014; Holstein & Gubrium, 2011; Riessman, 2008) to examine power-relations and understand subjective experience in context, and through relational and involved research encounters. This includes the collaboration of older people as advisors, as consistent with engaged research (Littlechild et al., 2015; Peace & Hughes, 2010). The study incorporates investigative methods of a scoping review, document analysis, and case studies of three boundaried, yet intersecting, sites of experience (Burawoy, 1998; Grenier, 2023; Lai & Roccu, 2019).

Three domains of experience are used to understand poverty among older people: re-housing, transportation, and memory loss. The domains were selected as existing sites of policy infrastructure that can help low-income older people meet their needs and/or hinder their participation (De Medeiros, 2013; Grenier, 2023; Stake, 2005). They also represent transitional moments and boundaried phenomenon that can provide a more complete picture of how older people move through their worlds, and the everyday experiences of poverty in late life. Re-housing refers to a group of older people who have secured housing after a period of instability or risk (e.g., homelessness, incarceration, eviction, financial insecurity, etc.). Transportation refers to the use of public transportation as an older person, and amidst infrastructure change and disruption due to construction. Memory loss refers to a moment of change, which we will recruit through community sampling. Each will be studied as stand-alone case studies, and we anticipate contrasts between the three sites and two cities. Structured as such, the ethnography permits a complex understanding of social policy relevant domains as they are experienced at the personal and community level.

The qualitative study pursues three inter-related objectives:

• To explore and compare urban residing older people’s everyday experiences of poverty and low income in Toronto and Montreal, and to contrast these with existing national, provincial, and municipal definitions and measures.

• To provide a cross-sectoral qualitative analysis which examines and links everyday and relational understandings of poverty across and within the domains of re-housing, transportation, and memory loss, revealing how poverty affects older people’s lives in these everyday contexts, and within rapidly changing cities.

• To comprehend the interplay between structures, relationships, and experiences, and assess features of municipal, provincial, and national policies to identify points for policy change and improve the well-being of urban residing older people.

Our research questions target three areas of experience:

• Everyday urban poverty among older people: How do urban residing older people understand and experience low income and poverty in their everyday lives? How does this align with the state of knowledge in gerontological and social sciences literature(s), and policy measures and responses at the national, provincial and municipal levels? What changes are needed?

• Relational encounters and social exclusion: How does low income affect aging in a city undergoing rapid social and urban infrastructure change? How does this play out in the everyday contexts and encounters with systems and supports intended to meet their needs (i.e., re-housing, transport and memory loss)? What challenges, contradictions, or opportunities do each of these intersecting contexts hold?

• Communities of support and solidarity: How do formal and informal systems, community programs and networks, and inter-personal relationships impact urban residing older people and their needs? How do older people negotiate the realities of lives on a fixed income and counter exclusion, marginalization and/or stigma? What lessons can be learned and integrated into planning efforts?

5. Methodology: An Ethnographic Account of Urban Poverty Among Older People

The investigative methods for our ethnographic study of urban poverty among older people include: a) a review of definitions and foundational knowledge about ‘what counts as poverty’ in policy frameworks and the academic literature; b) a policy review and document analysis of National (Canada), provincial (Ontario/Quebec) and municipal strategies (Toronto/Montreal) on poverty and aging; and c) three targeted comparative case studies comprised of onsite ethnographic observations and ‘go along methods’, key informant interviews, and in-depth interviews with older people in Toronto and Montreal. Though our project prioritizes the domains of re-housing, transportation, and memory loss, we anticipate that the process and results could later be expanded to other domains.

5.1. Phase 1: Document Analysis: Scoping Review and Policy Analysis (Year 1-2)

Phase one will use document-based methods to identify and understand how poverty and low income are understood, defined, and conceptualized in the academic literature and policy context. First, following Arksey & O’Malley’s (2005) guidelines for scoping reviews, the team will conduct a scoping review on poverty and aging in urban settings across a range of social science disciplines (1980s+). The scoping review will serve to map out existing research in our defined area of interest, provide a comprehensive review of available evidence, and identify gaps. We will also collate and review key academic and policy definitions and note historical trends. Analysis will focus on identifying inclusion/exclusion criteria in policies and research, similarities and differences across definitions, thematic areas of focus and investigation, and strategies older people use to meet their needs.

Second, the team will document and compare existing definitions of poverty in national (Canadian), provincial (Ontario/Quebec), and municipal (Toronto/Montreal) policy frameworks and strategies on poverty, aging, as well as social assistance schemes (e.g., Guaranteed Income Supplement, provincial benefits, etc.). Here, methods are guided by processes of critical ethnography, interpretive policy analysis, and discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2013; Taylor, 1997; Yanow, 2007). Documents will be obtained from public organizations such as: Employment and Social Development Canada; the Ontario Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility; Quebec’s Ministry of Health and Social Services; and the Social Affairs and Development departments in Toronto and Montreal. The analysis will: identify the focus of the documents (i.e., either aging or poverty; poverty and aging); identify the extent to which older people with low income are recognized in either set of documents; collate and analyze responses targeting poverty and aging over time; and identify challenges and contradictions in and across documents. Analysis will include attention to inclusion/exclusion (through discourse analysis) and identify gaps and areas for policy change (through policy measure comparison domestically and internationally). Identifying groups of older people in precarious positions, or whom are particularly vulnerable, is also a crucial feature of the analysis.

5.2. Phase 2: Three Case Studies in Toronto and Montreal (6 Total; Years 2-4)

Phase two will explore urban poverty among older people via case studies of re-housing, transportation, and memory loss in Toronto and Montreal (3 in each city=6). As outlined in Figure 1, the context is the cities of Toronto and Montreal, the phenomenon we are attempting to understand is urban poverty among older people, and the case studies through which to do so are re-housing, transportation, and memory loss (See Figure 1). Case studies will be identified in collaboration with advisory groups in each city, in the three domains of re-housing low-income older people, communities and older people disrupted by transportation projects and policy change, and memory loss Figure 2. To guide the process, the team has opted for a collaborative and co-research model with ongoing involvement of key organizations and older people, that is built with trust over time, and where older people are compensated for their involvement (Buffel, 2021).

Figure 1.

Case study contexts and methods

Figure 2.

Adapted from Grenier (2023)

5.2.1. Community Observations

Researchers in Toronto and Montreal will conduct ethnographic observations and shadowing of 4-5 months per domain, including: 2-3 planning and consultation processes for re-housing; 4-5 on-site observations as people begin moving into their new homes; 2-3 observations of public meetings related to transportation consultation; approximately 5 ‘go-along interviews’ as older people make their way along affected transit routes; and 4-5 observations of older people at memory clinics (Bartlett et al., 2023; Van Cauwenberg et al., 2012). While the case study of memory loss is more challenging to pinpoint, we will develop sampling strategies based on insights from the stakeholder interviews (see below) to identify the best means of accessing a sample of low-income older people that are beginning to experience memory loss. Memory loss is a known trajectory of precarity and risk (Grenier et al., 2017; Portacolone et al., 2019), as well as a potential stigmatized location (Fletcher, 2021; Kontos et al., 2020, 2021). Our outreach will target existing hospital and community groups known to work with low income and marginalized groups to carry out stakeholder interviews and build out from this process (e.g., Toronto’s Michael Garron Hospital and Unity Health Team; Regional Health Authority in Centre-West in Montreal; Woodgreen Services).

Researchers will use field notes and journalling to guide data collection and analysis (Atkinson, 1992; Clifford, 1990). Researchers will maintain detailed fieldwork journals throughout the observation which include sketches, concrete descriptive notes and reflective analytic notes, while acknowledging that the process of journaling is a dynamic and iterative process (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2019). The researchers will also pay special attention to situating the observations within context in relation to noting features such as “who was present, where, at what time, and under what circumstances” (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2019, p. 158). Field notes will be analysed to: understand the impacts of low income in action; how people manage everyday encounters; the extent to which older people may be marginalized or excluded by disruptions; opportunities for community connections; and any interactions that may help to better understand specific intersections of age, (dis)ability, im/migration, sex/gender, race/racialization, Indigeneity and sexual orientation.

5.2.2. Key Informant Interviews

Researchers in Toronto and Montreal will conduct semi-structured interviews of one hour each with a total of 10-12 community service providers and key informants who work with low-income older people in our two urban settings. Co-researchers and older advisors will help brainstorm the most relevant participants, and older people will be welcomed as co-interviewers should they wish to take up these roles. Interviews will focus on definitions and responses to poverty among older people, typical and challenging cases, needs as understood by providers, and suggestions for change. Beginning with key informants at case study sites, a snowball sampling technique will then be used to expand out from the sites to understand the breadth of challenges and opportunities related to urban poverty among older people (Parker et al., 2019). Previous success with this method suggests that key informant interviews provide a broad sense of the policy and program structure, professional perspectives, and ideas to probe further as part of the analysis. Interviews will follow the conversational and collaborative ‘active interview’ process, followed by thematic analysis (Clark et al., 2015; Holstein & Gubrium, 2004).

5.2.3. Interviews With Older People

Researchers in Toronto and Montreal will conduct 15-20 in-depth interviews of approximately 2-3 hours each with participants aged 50+ at each (up to 60 per city for a total of 120) (see Charmaz, 2014; Creswell & Poth, 2018; Roller, 2020; Urcia, 2021). Our sampling frame for each case study will evolve based on the principles of co-research, community consultation, and stakeholder interview results (Charmaz, 2014; Creswell & Poth, 2018). Age criteria for interview participants is 50+ years of age (rather than 65) to reflect the impact of poverty in reducing life expectancy among low-income groups (Grenier, 2021). The 120-person sample includes interviews with 30-40 people being re-housed in Toronto and Montreal; 30-40 people interviewed via go-along methods and identified as they use disrupted transit routes; and 30-40 older people experiencing memory loss (and in this case, low income, such as qualifying for the Guaranteed Income Supplement). Our proposed sample size for each case is based on 15-20 interviews per site as a rough guide for category saturation (Corbin & Strauss, 2014; Mason, 2010; Roller, 2020; Urcia, 2021). Issues of access and discrimination are likely in our sample, and working alongside partners is designed to facilitate trust, help gain access to older people living in poverty (or at its margins), as well as ensure our sample reflects the diverse composition of Toronto and Montreal in terms of age, gender, visible ethnic minority status, as well as groups known to be over-represented in poverty (e.g., women; people with disabilities; racialized groups, sexual orientation), although data is limited in this regard (Sepulveda & McLaren, 2025; Shahidi et al., 2020; Statistics Canada, 2022).

Interview questions will be set in collaboration with advisors and iteratively be informed by the results of the scoping review, policy analysis, and stakeholder interviews. Older people from an advisory group will assist with shaping the case studies, accessing community groups and initiatives, member-checking results, and mobilizing knowledge to affect change. Interview questions will focus on understanding everyday life with low income in the city; challenges people experience as they age in the city; challenges and opportunities in the contexts of re-housing, transportation, and memory loss, and their intersections. Interviews will be conversational in nature, with a series of pre-designed probes to allow participants to lead the process but also ensure that participants provide insights on the identified features of inquiry (Holstein & Gubrium, 2004). Interviews will be transcribed verbatim and analysed to understand the phenomenon of poverty in late life, definitions, challenges in context, and to assess the ‘fit’ between experiences and response.

The transcripts from the key informant and older person interviews will be analyzed through thematic analysis (Clarke et al., 2015) though the following steps: familiarizing with data, generalizing initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing and defining themes. The analysis of older person interviews will also be informed by a range of techniques used to understand experiences in context, including drawing on interpretive and constructivist processes (Charmaz, 2014; Hsieh & Shannon, 2005), memo writing, constant comparison, as well as informed by narrative features (e.g., stories, turning points, actors, metaphors) (De Medeiros, 2013; Polkinghorne, 2007; Riessman, 2008). In practice, this means transcripts will be examined for sets of ideas and observations (i.e., open coding); second, for embodied experiences of poverty, relational encounters with systems, and impressions (i.e., refocused coding); and third, to identify connections, patterns and contrasts within and between categories, embedded cases, place-based contexts, and across the multiple methods of the ethnography. Member checking with our advisory group will be used to support analytic development in line with critical qualitative research (Eakin & Gladstone, 2020).

5.3. Phase 3: Comparative Analysis and Merger of Ethnographic Findings (Year 5)

In Year 5 we compare findings from each city, and across the case studies and methods of data collection (i.e., observations; interviews; texts) to define poverty in later life via older people’s experiences, identify points of conversion and contrast, and develop strategies and suggestions for change. The involvement of the research team, connection with stakeholders and older people are included as strategies for ensuring relevance and trustworthiness within the parameters of critical qualitative research. Observations and interview data will be combined to develop descriptive and interpretive definitions and stories about ‘poverty and aging in the city’, including attention to elements of risk, exclusion, and marginalization, as well as relational and community strategies of resilience (Gardner, 2011; Klinenberg, 2001; Rowles, 2013; Wellman & Frank, 2001). Comparisons will be made between interview data in each case study site, and across cases and sites to understand poverty as it is experienced in context, via structures, and everyday lives.^.Results will be compared with the agenda on poverty, situated within the contradictions of existing measures, and the literature relevant to aging, low income, exclusion and marginalization.

This study will use a collaborative co-research model that incorporates insights from key organizations working with older people and older people themselves as advisors and research partners to ensure the trustworthiness. Rigor in the case studies will be established through credibility (via prolonged engagement, triangulation, peer debriefing, and member checking), transferability (through thick descriptive fieldnotes), dependability (via audit trails and triangulation), and confirmability (via reflexivity and triangulation) (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Morse, 2015; Roller & Lavrakas, 2015).

6. Ethics

The team will apply for ethics for consent with human participants via the tri-council boards at the University of Toronto and Concordia University (CIHR, 2022). The study will be conducted according to: the Tri-council policy, gerontological expertise on true informed consent as an ongoing process, critical qualitative research, and leading evidence-based guidelines on research with populations deemed ‘vulnerable’ (Boilevin et al., 2019; Cheff, 2018; Grenier et al., 2021). Researchers on this team are dedicated to meaningfully including the voices of older people who are all too often denied the space to speak about their lives. The team have extensive experiences navigating community and research ethics board processes which tend to be complex and lengthy for this population.

7. Conclusion

The proposed study explores older people’s everyday experiences of poverty and low income in the urban contexts of Toronto and Montreal. It carries out a critical ethnography comprised of a scoping review, policy document analysis, and case studies of re-housing, transportation disruption, and memory loss. Expected findings will uncover how older people’s everyday experiences of poverty and low income are mediated by policy structures, place-based features, and inter-personal relationships, and how these may facilitate or limit access to appropriate support. The study will contribute to research on how urban poverty and low income are experienced in everyday lives to better understand mechanisms of marginalization and social exclusion, as well as individual and community strategies. Findings aim to insert the voices and experiences of older people into strategies and frameworks on aging and poverty reduction so that their needs may be recognized and met.