La Covid-19 et le sans-abrisme. Enquête sociologique sur l’engagement institutionnel et l’éthique de l’action des intervenants du médico-social auprès des sans-abri dans le cadre de l’épidémie (COVABRI): Compte-rendu final ANR RA-Covid-19- Mémoire scientifique
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
March 2020, France is confined. But how can you be confined to your home when you live on the streets or in collective shelters?As housing has become the central social space for experiences of confinement during the Covid-19, our study focuses on those who are excluded from it: houseless, homeless or rough sleepers. How were they contained and protected in this pandemic context? By whom? In what way? In what type of housing? And with what consequences? The COVABRI study aims to analyze how homeless, usually sheltered, fed or cared, have been confined and protected during this period. The COVABRI research relies on a sociology of assistance to the homeless in pandemic period, in order to provide an understanding of the adjustments of public action towards the most vulnerable and logics behind the implemented actions in this crisis context where the need for action is required and urgent. Our investigation was focused to the city of Saint-Étienne in order to understand the administrative, legal and practical organization of assistance to the homeless. Guided by the triptych - shelter, food, care -, to understand a plurality of viewpoints on public action the qualitative survey was carried out with field stakeholders, professionals, volunteers, activists and homeless people. The research team conducted individual interviews, observations on the sites of assistance, as well as group interviews. This ethnographically inspired approach led us to document the changes at work as well as the issues at stake, whether in the areas of housing, care or food aid. The field survey started the first days of the first confinement in March 2020 and continued until March 2022, following the uncertainties health crisis’ management: confinement, deconfinement, curfews, exit hours, closures of so-called non-essential places and then partial reopenings, etc.The COVABRI survey underlines three central actions in the public response to the pandemic: taking homeless people off the streets in order to comply with security measures related to containment, trying to space out individuals housed in crowded collective facilities, and isolating homeless people who were ill with covid-19. These actions exacerbate the social, security, medical, and humanitarian dimensions of assistance. The COVABRI survey also highlights an unprecedented situation: food insecurity. Due to the closure of food distributions held by the charitable and humanitarian sector, and the prohibition of access to public space, the homeless no longer had access to the quantity and quality of foodstuffs. The study explored how non-food aid actors mobilized and cooperated, in an transient period, to deal with this food insecurity. The results of the survey have been used in several applications: scientific communications (national and international symposiums, seminars); scientific publications (articles in the process of being published in peer-reviewed journals); presentations in social work training modules as well as feedback to the participants of the survey in new formats: a participatory timeline, podcasts (freely available on arte radio), and a conference.
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 | 0,009 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,016 |
| Communication savante | 0,010 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 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 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 ».