Cultural Planning in the Eastern Pori Suburbs: Applicability of the Approach?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes an attempt to apply cultural planning in a group of high-rise suburbs with an aging population in the mid-size city of Pori, on the West Coast of Finland. First, the background of the project and the motive for adopting a cultural planning approach is explained. A preceding pilot study on cultural planning in Finland is described, providing background information about the recent spread of the approach into the country and the current state of cultural planning processes. Second, the starting points and conceptual framework of the cultural planning project are briefly discussed in the light of research literature. After that, the objectives of the cultural mapping phase and the baseline studies linked with it are elaborated. Cultural resources of the Eastern Pori suburbs, as identified in the mapping, are analyzed. Prescriptions for cultural development follow, based on collaborative planning and focusing on public spaces and community art in the Eastern suburbs. Finally, the further applicability of cultural planning in the Finnish context is assessed, judging from the Pori experience.Keywords: cultural planning, cultural mapping, co-creation, suburbs, FinlandRésumé: Cet article met en relief l’expérience de la mise en oeuvre d’un projet de planification culturelle à Pori (en Finlande), une banlieue de taille moyenne, à la population vieillissante et caractérisée par ses nombreux gratte-ciels. Après avoir discuté du contexte entourant ce projet, cet article aborde les tentatives de planification culturelle antérieures à ce projet tout en situant ce projet en rapport à d’autres expériences de planification culturelle réalisées en Finlande. Après avoir mis en évidence les grandes orientations théoriques appuyant le propos de cet article, le cas de la partie est de la ville de Pori est analysé et les données de la cartographie culturelle sont mises en évidence. Cet article apporte de nombreux constats qui participent à alimenter le débat et à enrichir la pratique de la planification culturelle en Finlande.Mots clé: planification culturelle, cartographie culturelle, co-création, la banlieue, Finlande
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".