Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transition from a centrally planned to a market-based economy in Central and Eastern Europe has been one of the fundamental transformations of the 1990s.The 'shock therapy' effectively dismantled the state-owned economy and state institutions.The profound transformation no doubt has major economic, social and political implications for post-socialist societies and is reflected in the restructuring of national housing systems.The purpose of this book is to explore both theoretically and empirically the impacts of housing reforms on housing system performance in post-socialist countries.In exploring this phenomenon, it views housing systems as a set of institutions organised in the process of promotion, production, allocation and consumption of housing as socially embedded in political, social and economic contexts.The work, based on a comparative analysis of housing policy reforms in nine countries in South East Europe, seeks to identify major patterns of change in the housing systems in the context of the transition from planning to markets.The conceptual framework for this comparative evaluation is designed to offer insights into policy intervention to achieve more efficient and equitable performance of housing systems.Although housing policy in the region was 'lost' in multiple transitions, the book argues for more strategic policy reforms that enable market institutions to work more efficiently in national and local contexts.The book draws on a comparative study on Trends and Progress in Housing Reforms in South East Europe commissioned by the Council of Europe Development Bank.The author gratefully acknowledges the financial support for the study as well as the assistance of the Council of Europe
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".