Enhancing Access to Quality Rental Housing for People with Pets as Healthy Public Policy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
When pets are considered in housing studies, attention tends to be paid towards vulnerable pet owners, namely in the context of homelessness, domestic violence situations, or disaster circumstances. Targeted interventions are important since vulnerable pet owners may risk their lives if they anticipate being separated from their pets or being turned away from shelters because of them. Intervention strategies that target the whole population are also needed, however, since pets are regularly restricted, if not banned outright, from the private rental sector and in social housing. Moreover, a “no pets” policy may force homeowners, specifically condominium or strata owners, to give up their pets. This thesis is comprised of three papers linking housing, health, and pet ownership in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. As a relatively new area of study, issues surrounding housing accessibility, affordability, location, and quality among pet owners were mainly explored qualitatively. The first paper drew upon online rental listings and focused on housing recovery for tenants with pets in the aftermath of a flood. The second paper moved beyond disaster circumstances and compared perspectives towards pets in rental housing more generally. Finally, the need to address housing issues for pet owners must be considered within the context of social, economic, and demographic pressures. Millennials not only represent a majority of pet owners today, they are also disproportionately tenants and they tend to move frequently. As a result, the third paper considered what life is like for millennials with dogs once they are housed in the rental market, paying close attention to the potential influence of pet ownership on their identities, relationships, and environments. Overall, this thesis begins to answer important questions about how restrictive policies on pets in rental housing impacts human health and development. Without the proper supports in place, people with access to fewer resources may face greater challenges keeping their pets, because they cannot opt for homeownership. Improvements in access to housing for pet owners, and integrated programs and services to support pet ownership in housing and neighbourhood contexts, are essential to addressing animal relinquishment and to reducing inequities in health outcomes among pet owners.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».