‘Housing First’ and the Changing Terrains of Homeless Governance
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
Abstract Over the last fifteen years, programs based on ‘housing first’ models have swept to prominence as solutions to homelessness. Such programs serve a small subset of the overall homeless population, namely the ‘chronically’ homeless, offering direct access to permanent housing with comprehensive and flexible support services attached. Hailed as socially progressive responses to homelessness—based on their opposition to traditional emphases on client passivity, sobriety and moralised deservingness—the popularity of housing first models has often depended on congruence with wider projects of welfare retrenchment and fiscal austerity. Despite the rapid globalisation and high public profile of housing first ideas, they have been largely overlooked in geographical accounts of homeless governance. In response, this article discusses the growing importance and influence of housing first ideas, before looking to contemporary debates on homeless governance for interpretive insights. Informed by these debates, we sketch conceptual areas to which future research on housing first models and programs might attend: first, to their ambivalent politics and, second, to the processes and practices of translation that are central to their implementation and political consequence. Moving beyond questions of operational efficacy, efficiency and fidelity, we call for critical but constructive accounts focused on the constitutive relations between housing first ideas and governance transformations at and across a range of scales and sites.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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