Reclaiming the 'Public' Lands: Community Conflict and Rural Gentrification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current aspirations of the British coalition government to sell-off publicly-owned land and building assets to facilitate new housing development, raise capital, and engage local communities is an emotive issue. Why 'public' assets are relinquished, and how land and buildings are redeveloped by private sector organisations can stimulate conflicts/resistance within local communities. Using the case study of Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, this paper explores how a local community group opposed the proposed development of a local authority-owned 'car park' on the premise that it was 'out of place' in the rural small town, and more congruous with a large urban setting. As the disposal of public land and buildings is more widely taken-up, it is possible that similar NIMBY protests may become more pronounced and spatially diffused in the UK as the make-up of local places is transformed. Keywords: rural change, rural housing, NIMBY, rural gentrifiers, resistance
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".