MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Urban Question as Cargo Cult: Opportunities for a New Urban Pedagogy

2008· article· en· W1547920102 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Urban and Regional Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Urban Networks and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyUrban studiesUrban theoryScholarshipCreative cityGlobal cityCreative CitiesHegemonyHumanitiesEpistemologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyLawCivil engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Urban research is unreflexive toward its object of study, the city, compromising its methodologies and theoretical capacity. This polemic draws on examples such as ‘creative cities’, which have been profiled and analysed for their local recipes for economic success. ‘Global cities’ have become stereotypes of a neoliberal form of the ‘good life’ to which much recent urban research is a handmaiden, a hegemonic knowledge project. These ‘metro‐poles’ of value are a form of urban pedagogy that presents lesser local elites with lessons to be followed. A form of cargo cult theory suggests, build it and wealth will come — hence the symmetry of urban scholarship with the fad for city rankings in pop journalism. In contrast to neo‐structural analyses of the global city, other research focuses too closely on regional geographies, local forces and urban affordances. A synthetic level of theory is proposed to bridge the divide which marks urban and regional studies. The ‘urban’ needs to be rediscovered as a central question. The urban is an object of theory and the city is a truth spot. The urban is more than infrastructure and bodies but an intangible good or ‘virtuality’ that requires an appropriate methodological toolkit. Résumé La recherche urbaine manque de réflexivitéà l’égard de son objet d’étude, la ville, ce qui compromet ses méthodologies et sa capacité théorique. Cette critique part d’exemples tels que les “villes créatives” dont on a établi le profil et l’analyse pour en déterminer les recettes locales de réussite économique. Les “villes planétaires” sont devenues des stéréotypes d’une forme néolibérale de la “bonne vie” au service de laquelle se met généralement la recherche urbaine, un projet de savoir hégémonique. Ces métro‐pôles de valeur constituent une sorte de pédagogie urbaine qui expose aux moindres élites locales des leçons à suivre. Un genre de théorie du culte du cargo suggère qu’il suffit de construire pour voir la richesse arriver, d’où la symétrie entre les travaux de recherche urbaine et la mode pour les palmarès de villes dans le journalisme populaire. Contrairement aux analyses néo‐structuralistes de la ville planétaire, d’autres études se consacrent de trop près aux géographies régionales, aux forces locales et aux affordances urbaines. Un niveau de théorie synthétique est proposé pour franchir la ligne de démarcation des études urbaines et régionales. Il faut redécouvrir “l’urbain” en tant que question centrale. L’urbain est un objet de théorie, la ville est un lieu de vérité. L’urbain est plus qu’une infrastructure et des entités, c’est un bien intangible, une “virtualité”, qui nécessite un jeu d’outils méthodologiques approprié.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.221
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it