Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates connections between the extensive New Deal law and regulation that lead to the proliferation of single family detached houses and the continuing racial disparities in housing security and ownership in the United States. Too often, the pervasiveness of this house as the ideal form of ownership and racial inequalities in accessing it have been treated as merely results of free market forces or social preferences. This paper complicates that narrative by bring to the forefront the extensive federal and local governance that profoundly shaped the U.S. housing market and social preferences.\nDrawing on the work of urban historians, architects, and geographers as its foundation, this analysis then excavates the often overlooked histories of the law, zoning, and federal regulation that built America’s housing. This historical account of government intervention and ideology enables to understand the current crises in housing – from municipal bankruptcies to the disparate racial impacts of the Foreclosure Crisis – in the much larger context of the creation of suburbia at the expense of cities and racial minorities in them. Against this historical backdrop, these current crises appear not as separate phenomena (as they are portrayed in various scholarly and media accounts), but rather as closely intertwined events. Their disparate racial impacts also appear less accidental or unexpected. My argument is that these phenomena – depleted cities, the Foreclosure Crisis, and racial disparities in housing – are not the ‘natural’ results of a free market. They are the inevitable results of over seven decades of law and regulation enacted to entrench the white nuclear family living in a single family house as the organizing unit of American society.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".