Housing Affordability, Social Policy and Economic Conditions: Food Bank Users in the Greater Toronto Area, 1990–2000*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article examine les tendances dans les corrélats sociaux et économiques de L'utilisation des banques alimentaires dans la région du Grand Toronto au moyen d'entrevues annuelles auprès d'utilisateurs entre 1990 et 2000. L'analyse teste la thèse selon laquelle les incidences des réductions des allocations d'aide sociale et les coûts de logement contribuent à la vulnérabilitééconomique des families et des ménages déjà marginalisés. L'auteur a eu recours à la statistique descriptive et à la modélisation de régression à plusieurs variables pour évaluer les changements dans les revenus après coûts d'habitation disponibles auprès des utilisateurs de banques alimentaires avant (1990–1995) et apres (1996–2000) les compressions d'aide sociale en Ontario. Les résultats confirment L'importance des réductions des taux des prestations d'aide sociale et les problemes de logement abordable comme étant des facteurs qui contribuent au déclin des revenus après coûts d'habitation disponibles auprès de ces utilisateurs. The following paper examines trends in the social and economic correlates of food bank usage in the Greater Toronto Area through annual interviews with food bank users between 1990–2000. The analysis tests the thesis that the effects of social assistance rate reductions and housing costs contributed to the economic vulnerability of these already marginalized families and households. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression modelling were used to assess changes in post‐shelter income available to food bank users prior to (1990–1995) and following Ontario social assistance cuts (1996–2000). The results confirm the importance of social assistance rate reductions and housing affordability problems as factors contributing to the decline in post‐shelter income available to food bank users.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".