MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010068069 · doi:10.1080/02673037.2011.603270

Inclusionary Housing in International Perspective: Affordable Housing, Social Inclusion, and Land Value Recapture

2011· article· en· W2010068069 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHousing Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Affordable housingLand valueValue (mathematics)Inclusion (mineral)SociologyGeographyEconomicsEconomic growthSocial scienceAgricultural economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inclusionary housing, also broadly known in the United States as inclusionary zoning, is a means of using the planning system to create affordable housing and foster social inclusion by capturing resources created through the marketplace. Programs, regulations, and laws prompt private developers to incorporate affordable housing on-site, build it elsewhere, or contribute money or land for the production of social or affordable housing by others. Inclusionary Housing in International Perspective examines inclusionary housing programs in-depth in seven countries (Canada, England, France, Ireland, Italy, Spain, and the United States) and reports on experiences in others, including Australia, Colombia, India, Israel, Malaysia, New Zealand, and South Africa, Inclusionary housing originated in the U.S in the early 1970s, and gradually spread to Canada, western Europe, and more recently to countries throughout the world. The initial intellectual impetus came from the civil rights movement of the 1960s, and the recognition of the close relationship between the pervasive racial segregation in American society and land use regulations that perpetuated it through what came to be known as exclusionary zoning. Indeed, the term inclusionary zoning was coined as the converse, and was first used to refer more broadly to any strategy designed to foster the production of affordable housing in otherwise exclusive and affluent suburban jurisdictions. The authors found that two countries (Canada and the United States) decentralize land use regulation to the state or provincial level; two countries (Ireland and Spain) centrally mandate inclusionary housing; two countries (England and France) centrally enable its use; and one country (Italy) until recently did neither centrally, thus prompting inclusionary housing as a local initiative. Other nations including Colombia, India, Israel, Malaysia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and South Africa offer their own variations of inclusionary housing. Global political shifts and changes in economic and social policy have all contributed to the emergence of inclusionary housing as arguably the most significant new public policy direction in the realm of social and affordable housing in recent decades. The chapter authors explore how variations in political, social, and economic cultures and conditions have led to different forms of inclusionary housing, and how the policies are working on the ground to address the need for better housing and greater social inclusion.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.273 · 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