Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Recovery science has traditionally focused on individual change, with less attention to the environments that make recovery possible. Socio-ecological models have advanced understanding of contextual factors but have not fully engaged with how recovery is experienced in and through place. Drawing on phenomenological and critical geographical perspectives, this think piece introduces the Recovering in Place Model, a framework that explains how physical, emotional, and socio-political dimensions of place interact to shape recovery. The model extends recovery-oriented systems of care (ROSC) and recovery capital (RC) by situating them within spatial contexts, showing how environments can both foster and hinder ontological security, belonging, and the experience of 'home' in recovery. Examples from Collegiate Recovery Programs and Inclusive Recovery Cities illustrate how recovery unfolds across scales, from campus lounges to city streets, through place-based processes that can either support or constrain recovery. The think piece concludes by outlining emerging approaches for measuring recovering in place, including adaptations of recovery capital, place attachment, and recovery ecosystem indices, to better capture how environments co-create the conditions for sustained recovery. By integrating phenomenological and critical geographic perspectives, it calls for a spatial turn in recovery science, providing implications for research, policy, and practice.
Victoria Burns (Mon,) studied this question.