Framing neoliberal urbanism: Translating ‘commonsense’ urban policy across the OECD zone
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper explores the evolution of urban policy discourses among advanced industrial nations in the period since the early 1980s, by way of a case study of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). The OECD, it is argued, has provided an arena for the consolidation of a particular form of neoliberal urbanism, conceived here as a mutating policy frame. As a consensus-finding organization, the OECD is more of a mediator than a unilateral driver of policy conventions. It is not a site of hard-edged or radical policy innovation, but seeks to define a ‘common ground’ in the form of a positive policy consensus. As such, the OECD’s coordinative discourse both reflects and refracts a particular reading of the ‘soft center’ of the urban policy consensus, revealing how (far) this has moved since the early 1980s. Hardly preordained, this transnational mode of neoliberal urbanism has been a constructed project, subject to significant adaption and evolution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it