On the Role and Future of Calgary’s Community Associations
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Calgary’s 151 volunteer-run, non-profit community associations (CAs) need updated and clearly defined roles as they strive to deliver programs and services to their neighbourhoods, and advocate in local planning issues. With a council driven mandate to begin a review of CAs’ roles in community representation, The City of Calgary has a prime opportunity to help them to better deliver local government to the people whose interests they represent. This paper is intended to inform The City’s review by examining the forces at play in Calgary’s network of CAs, such as the need to maintain aging infrastructure, competition with residents associations and The City itself in providing recreational amenities, misaligned expectations in local planning and volunteer burnout. The paper explores the neighbourhood association systems in Seattle and Portland, two cities that undertook large-scale institutional formalization in the late 1980s and 2000s, respectively, and outlines best practices that are applicable to the local context. Potential solutions to the problems CAs face involve partnering with local businesses and other community-oriented organizations, bringing together CAs into a district-based system that elevates neighbourhood decisions above the block-face – aggregating multiple perspectives up to The City and directing money and resources down to individual neighbourhoods – and generally moving beyond the present system which focuses primarily on neighbourhood livability. The City of Calgary needs to decide the extent of its own future involvement in community governance, and this paper provides several prospective methods from which to choose. Including strengthening the support services already provided, taking a leadership role in neighbourhood representation, or downloading authority and resources to a dedicated third-party, such as the non-profit Federation of Calgary Communities. Key to governance is reviewing how the system is funded. If the role of CAs is valued, then dedicated funding needs to extend beyond facility maintenance. Furthermore, creating opportunities to support CAs partnering with residents associations – instead of competing – would aid in resolving problems faced by CAs connected with funding, resources, space-sharing, amenities and volunteers. Calgary’s CAs have come a long way from the informal community “get-togethers” of the early 20th century. As they continue to evolve, The City must take charge to prevent existing problems from languishing, and strengthen CAs’ ability to provide the programming and services Calgarians expect and enjoy.
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) | 0,001 | 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 ».