Equity, sustainability and governance in urban settings
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
In this commentary the urban setting is explored from the perspective of ecological sustainability and social equity. Urban-related issues are highlighted related to social inequality, deficits in urban infrastructures, behavior-related illnesses and risks, global ecological changes, and urban sprawl. Approaches to addressing these issues are described from the perspective of urban governance, urban planning and design, social determinants of health, health promotion, and personal and community empowerment. Examples of successful strategies are provided from Latin America, including using participatory instruments (assessments, evaluation, participatory budgeting, etc.), establishing intersectoral committees, increasing participation of civil society organizations, and developing virtual forums and networks to channel participatory and collaborative processes. A way forward is proposed, using the urban setting to show the imperative of creating intersectoral policies and programs that produce environments that are both healthy and sustainable. It will be important to include new forms of social participation and use social media to facilitate citizen decision-making and active participation of all sectors of society, especially excluded groups.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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