A EVOLUÇÃO DA SEGREGAÇÃO SOCIAL E DAS DESIGUALDADES URBANAS: o caso da metrópole parisiense nas últimas décadas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artigo analisa a evolução da segregação social e das desigualdades urbanas na metrópole parisiense, no decorrer das últimas décadas. Apoiando-se sobre os resultados de inúmeras pesquisas desenvolvidas pelo autor, reafirma a crítica ao modelo de dualização urbana, da “cidade partida”, mostrando o caráter relativo e não-descontínuo da segregação nessa metrópole, e o fato de a tendência à bipolarização socioespacial, apesar de nela presente, não permitir caracterizar sua evolução no conjunto. Quanto aos efeitos da segregação, o artigo analisa principalmente sua significação em termos das desigualdades urbanas, vistas, sobretudo, a partir da acessibilidade residencial aos equipamentos e serviços urbanos. Desse ponto de vista, também a questão da segregação é um fenômeno bastante complexo, sendo as desigualdades urbanas apenas parcialmente cumulativas às desigualdades sociais. Concluindo, o autor questiona as supostas virtudes da “mescla social”, discutindo interpretações da segregação em termos das relações entre categorias sociais, e também a mobilidade, na qual alguns enxergariam a dissolução do problema. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Segregação, polarização relativa, categorias socioprofissionais, desigualdades urbanas, equipamentos e serviços urbanos. SOCIAL SEGREGATION AND URBAN INEQUALITIES EVOLUTION: the case of the Parisian metropolis Edmond Préteceille This article analyses the evolution of social segregation and urban inequalities in the Parisian metropolis in the last decades. Based on the result of countless researches carried out by the author, it confirms the criticism concerning the urban dualization model of the “divided city”. It shows the relative and non-discontinuous character of segregation in this metropolis and that whenever the social and spatial bipolarization trend is present, it does not enable the characterization of its evolution in the ensemble. As far as the segregation effects are concerned, the article focus on its meaning in terms of urban inequalities, seen above all from the inhabitants accessibility to facilities and urban services. From this standpoint, the segregation issue is also a very complex phenomenon, whereas urban inequalities are only partially cumulative to social inequalities. Summing up, the author questions the assumed virtues of the “social mixture”, discussing not only the interpretations of segregation in terms of relationships between social categories but also mobility, which might be seen as a dissolution of the problem. KEY-WORDS: Segregation, relative polarization, social and professional categories, urban inequalities, facilities and urban services L'ÉVOLUTION DE LA SÉGRÉGATION SOCIALE ET DES INÉGALITÉS URBAINES: le cas de la métropole parisienne Edmond Préteceille Cet article analyse l'évolution de la ségrégation sociale et des inégalités urbaines dans la métropole parisienne au cours des dernières décennies. S'appuyant sur les résultats de plusieurs recherches menées par l'auteur, il confirme la critique du modèle de la dualisation urbaine, de la “ville éclaté”, en montrant le caractère relatif et nondiscontinu de la ségrégation dans cette métropole, et le fait que la tendance à la bipolarisation socio-spatiale, si elle y est bien présente, ne permet pas de caractériser son évolution d'ensemble. Quant aux effets de la ségrégation, l'article analyse principalement leur signification en termes d'inégalités urbaines, elles-mêmes vues d'abord à partir de l'accessibilité résidentielle des équipements et services urbains. De ce point de vue aussi, la ségrégation est un phénomène assez complexe, où les inégalités urbaines ne sont que partiellement cumulatives avec les inégalités sociales. La conclusion s'interroge sur les vertus supposées de la mixité sociale, en discutant des interprétations de la ségrégation en termes de relations entre catégories sociales. Elle évoque aussi la question de la mobilité, où certains verraient la dissolution du problème. MOTS-CLÉS: Ségrégation, polarisation relative, catégories socioprofessionnelles, inégalités urbaines, équipements et services urbains. Publicação Online do Caderno CRH: http://www.cadernocrh.ufba.br
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".