MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493494261 · doi:10.1177/0042098016661464

Protest in the city: Urban spatial restructuring and dissent in New York, 1960–2006

2016· article· en· W2493494261 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Patrick Rafail

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Social and Economic SciencesSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaTulane UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDissentRestructuringRight to the cityUrban theoryPolitical scienceEconomic geographySpace (punctuation)Built environmentSociologyPublic spacePolitical economyPoliticsLawGeographyCivil engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accessible space is a necessary component of urban protest. Little research, however, has examined the spatial evolution of protest activity over time. Much of the existing research emphasises the legal right to protest, however, less effort has been made to examine how micro-contexts may facilitate or impede dissent. This research focuses on how the built environment of cities can serve as either attractors or detractors of protest using a unique geocoded sample of 6217 protest events taking place in New York City between 1960 and 2006. I use a spatial count model to examine the relationship between the built environment and protest intensity. The results point to significant shifts in where protests have occurred over time. Protests become increasingly spatially concentrated, with a disproportionate amount of activism taking place on or in close proximity to privately owned public spaces. Spaces in close proximity to powerful organisational or institutional targets also experience heightened protest activity. Overall, I show that the built environment, and the social relationships creating it, powerfully influence where dissent occurs. This is consistent with the advent of neoliberal policies directing urban spatial restructuring, which have brought about a process of structural funnelling for protest, ultimately making events more likely to occur in spaces that are hostile to mobilisation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.121
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban StudiesSame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207