THE CANADIAN 'WORLD CITY' AND SUSTAINABLE DOWNTOWN REVITALISATION: MESSAGES FROM MONTREAL 1962–2002
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
THE CITY GOVERNMENTS OF CANADA's largest metropolitan centres have, in recent years, experienced some dramatic changes of civic leadership and policy agenda, as well as reductions in financial support, and reorganisations that include the controversial 'megacity' mergers in Toronto and Montreal. Nevertheless, city governments are permanent and relatively stable institutions in a 'world of flows', characterised by 'floating populations, transnational politics within national borders, and mobile configurations of technology and expertise' (Appadurai 2001: 5). In Canada, they are creations of Provincial statute with specified powers and duties to perform. Their democratic raison d'etre is to serve local electors and promote their well-being: a role that has somehow to be reconciled with the ebbs and flows of globalisation. In North America, there is a long history of 'civic boosterism'. For a century or more, Canadian city governments have fought hard to position themselves in global markets that are expected to deliver economic benefits and further enhance their competitive advantage. Over the past ten years or so, more sophisticated and subtle techniques of 'place marketing' have been developed and the goals have widened, so that the desired benefits now embrace improvements to the physical environment and amenities for disadvantaged communities, as well as well as local income and employment. In this context, a favourable international profile is considered critical to the success of strategies to revitalise downtown areas and adjacent inner city neighbourhoods as vibrant cosmopolitan centres. In the early 1990s, Metropolitan Toronto (1992) and the City of Vancouver (1992) both adopted development plans for their Central Business Districts (CBDS) expressing their intention to nurture sustainable growth, and foster the ideal of the 'liveable city' (Shaw 1995; Marshall 2001). Likewise, Ville de Montreal wanted to be a 'modern city on a human scale': Montreal must make a change in direction towards sustainable urban development. The decisions made today affect future generations and must take into account the environmental, economic and social impacts, both in the short and long term. (1992: iii-iv) The benefits would be distributed to improve 'quality of life' for all urban communities, including those in the most disadvantaged areas. With reference to the case of Montreal's central Ville-Marie District, this article discusses the changing discourse of promotion to international audiences and the emerging framework of public policy that espouses the principles of sustainable development and social equity. Raising the international profile For the past forty years, successive civic leaders of Montreal - like their counterparts in Toronto and Vancouver - have placed a very high priority, not only on competing successfully with other metropolitan centres in North America, but on attracting inward movement of capital, people and knowledge spanning all continents. Until comparatively recent times, most Canadian city governments focused their promotional efforts on luring investors with promises of hard infrastructure, tax concessions and development sites (Ward 1998). Economic growth through modernisation over-rode all other considerations. Grand civic projects that signified 'progress' were key indicators of success. Under the leadership of Mayor Jean Drapeau from the late 1950s, Ville de Montreal adopted a pragmatic approach and saw little need to consult local communities on the desirability of large-scale reconstruction in the CBD and surrounding inner-city areas to accommodate flagship commercial and public buildings. Mayor Drapeau's vision was expressed very powerfully in the 'superblock' Place Ville-Marie (1962): symbolic centrepiece of downtown modernisation and prototype for subsequent complexes. Designed by signature architect I.M. Pei, circulation was separated on three levels - pedestrian, motor traffic and rail - with shopping and offices integrated in a monolithic structure that defied the traditional street. …
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,025 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».