Inscrire le pouvoir municipal dans l'espace urbain: la formation du réseau des pares à Montréal et Toronto, 1880–1940
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comment le réseau des pares urbains, ce précieux legs constitué en majeure partie entre la fin du 19e siècle et le milieu du 2CP siècle, s'est‐il forméà Montréal et Toronto? Est‐il possible de dégager un pattern d'implantation des pares et plus globalement des espaces de loisir qui nous renseignerait sur les logiques ayant présidéà leur aménagement? En reconstituant le processus de formation de tels réseaux entre 1880 et 1940, cet article met aujour certaines des caractéristiques de l'intervention des administrations montréalaise et torontoise dans le secteur des loisirs urbains et plus largement dans le développement de la ville. Autant que des espaces récréatifs, les pares peuvent être considérés comme des lieux par l'intermédiaire desquels le pouvoir municipal, en plein développement à cette époque, a cherchéà marquer le tissu urbain de sa présence, a se déployer dans l'espace. Plus qu'un travail d'aménagement physique, l'aménagement des pares représente ainsi un travail de structuration politique. Cet article presente ce double processus de structuration du territoire montréalais et torontois: d'abord sur le plan physique, en reconstituant comme les réseaux des pares se sont déployés dans l'espace urbain des deux villes; puis sur le plan politique, en examinant la manière dont les autorités locales vont considérer le problème et les modalités de leurs interventions. How was the system of urban parks, a treasured legacy of the end of the nineteenth and the first half of the twentieth centuries, formed in Montreal and Toronto? Is it possible to discern a pattern regarding the creation of parks and leisure spaces in general that would enlighten us on the principles of their management? By retracing the development of this network between 1880 and 1940, this article identifies certain traits characterizing Montreal and Toronto municipal governments with regard to their policies in the urban leisure sector, and more generally, the cities' growth. In addition to being recreational spaces, parks may also be seen as a medium through which emerging municipal powers sought to make their mark on the urban fabric, to increase their visibility in the city. Therefore, park management was more than a simple administrative question: it also served a broader goal of fashioning political structures. This article describes both facets of territorial development in Montreal and Toronto: on a geographical/material level, by retracing the process through which a network of parks was incorporated into the urban landscape of both cities; and on a political level, by examining way in which local authorities conceived of this process and planned their actions.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".