MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1857664419 · doi:10.25916/sut.26294392

Comparative housing research and policy: social housing rent-setting in western countries

2024· other· en· W1857664419 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sean McNelis

Notice bibliographique

RevueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology) · 2024
Typeother
Langueen
DomaineEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
ThématiqueHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPublic housingEconomic growthBusinessEconomics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The conference theme, 'Housing and the Credit Crunch---International Experiences and Responses', raises questions about the impact of the current Global Financial Crisis upon housing. The recent resurgence of interest in comparative housing research and policy also raises the possibility of global collaboration in the resolution of housing issues and problems. In the 1990s, debates ensued about the possibility, purpose and methodologies appropriate for comparative housing research. In an article written in 2001, Michael Oxley examined its aims and methodologies. He concluded that 'one of the greatest confusions in housing research that covers several countries is to box all such work together and call it 'comparative'.' He further suggested that 'the use of the term 'comparative housing research' should be limited to research that genuinely compares and contrasts.' He continues 'the best of such research produces plausible, evidence-based conclusions about the reasons for the similarities and differences.' In this article, he advocates 'a more scientific approach' (90) to comparative housing research and proposes that teams with different purposes and methodologies collaborate on projects: explorers, empiricists, theorists and scientists. He also raised the difficult issue of the transferability of policies and practices between countries. In his concluding comments on methodology in comparative housing research, Michael Oxley notes: 'International housing research should not be driven by a single methodological approach. Methods and purpose should go together. A variety of aims demand a variety of approaches. Methodology has to be fit for the purpose and it should be explicit. Too much housing research is without a clear method that has been reasoned to be the best way of tackling a particular issue. This is a reflection of a lack of theorising and a concern to engage in lots of description.' It is this linking of method and purpose that characterises, his article, particularly in his exposition of explorers, empiricists, theorists and scientists. Each of these research groups has a particular purpose and method that characterise their work. This paper begins with a brief review of Michael Oxley's article. But it moves beyond a simple review by suggesting (i) some refinements to the structure of comparative research proposed by Oxley - refinements in the purpose and method of each research group and in the relationships between the work of each research group (ii) the addition of a further research group, evaluators, with its own purpose and methodology, and (iii) some links between the research groups and the contexts for transferring policy between countries and, thus reworking these contexts of transferability into four 'implementation' groups. As such it builds on this significant article by Michael Oxley and proposes a division of labour whereby research and implementation groups can divide up the complex work of housing research and the transferability of policies and practices. In this division of labour each group is identified as having a particular purpose and associated method within the whole process of research and implementation. In the second section, I will present an extended illustration of how these research and implementation groups might operate. Coincidentally the same illustration is used by Michael Oxley in relation to the transferability of housing policy, viz. rent-setting. The illustration proposes an analytical framework2 for rent-setting. It then outlines how this analytical framework is important to each of the research and implementation groups. In doing so it elaborates further on these groups and locates comparative housing research within one of them. The illustration also presents some material on rent-setting, finance and the role of social housing in some selected countries: United Kingdom, United States of America, Canada, The Netherlands, Sweden, Australia and New Zealand. A conclusion will suggest that a division of work among these research and implementation groups provides a framework for collaborative global creativity, one which more efficiently facilitates the movement of results of work in one group to the next, which addresses the difficulties confronting comparative housing research and policy and, which raises the possibility of global collaboration in the resolution of housing issues and problems.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Bibliométrie, Études des sciences et des technologies, Intégrité de la recherche
Catégories consensuellesIntégrité de la recherche
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,503
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0130,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,004
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,083
Tête enseignante GPT0,333
Écart entre enseignants0,250 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology)Même sujetHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismTravaux en français237 207