A systems view of temporary housing projects in post‐disaster reconstruction
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
Natural cataclysms (earthquakes, hurricanes and so forth) become natural disasters when they coincide with vulnerabilities; unfortunately, informal settlements in developing countries are only too often highly vulnerable – a reality amply and unhappily confirmed by available statistics. In this context, reconstruction projects are sandwiched between the short‐term necessity to act promptly and the long‐term requirements of sustainable community development – a situation that is currently reflected in alternative and conflicting paradigms at the policy level. Adopting a case‐study approach, we explore the use of temporary housing within two post‐disaster environments, where the impact of different organizational designs leads to fundamentally different solutions to the short‐term housing problem. Our research adopts a dynamic systems approach, associating strategic organizational team design with the development of tactical technical proposals. Two case studies from Turkey and Colombia show that a coherent approach to the sequential stages of providing immediate shelter, temporary housing and permanent reconstruction is not always obtained. The research results emphasize that the performance of reconstruction projects is directly linked to the design and management of the project team.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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