Sustainability and infrastructure planning in South Africa: a Cape Town case study
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
This paper highlights the importance of considering ecological sustainability issues in any city's infrastructure plans and investments. It reviews the South African government's current and planned investment in urban infrastructure, both to enhance economic growth and to contribute to poverty reduction, and what this implies for Cape Town. It highlights the lack of attention given to ecological issues and the dangers of assuming that the resources will be available to support it, and that prices for fresh water, fossil fuels and food will not rise. It also points to Cape Town's large ecological footprint (comparable to that of Canada, per person) and its heavy dependence on non-renewable resources, especially oil – which means that every oil price rise transfers money from the Cape Town economy to national and global financial circuits. Housing lower-income groups in conventional housing with no attention to a more compact, less automobile-dependent city form exposes them to high water and energy costs. The paper ends by pointing to the advantages for the city and for lower-income groups of including ecological issues, and outlines the possibilities for doing so.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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