Rights, meaning and the privatization of public space: A case study of Toronto's Dundas Square
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following dissertation is an investigation into the creation of a new public space in Toronto. The evaluation involved examining the space in relation to changes occurring in the public realm, including increased privatization and control. It also examined the project within the context of global changes affecting urban growth, such as place marketing, adoption of entrepreneurial strategies and the increasing role of private interests in public development. The research involved a qualitative case study investigating the planning, implementation, and outcome of the square. A series of in depth interviews were performed with relevant stakeholders and urban professionals, supported by examination of planning documents, newspaper articles, journal articles and site analysis. The research revealed that the use of a new method of management and the intention to manage the square as a profit making events venue to interfered with the public nature of the square. It concluded that the space's ability to fulfill the needs, rights, and development of meaning necessary for good public space was sacrificed by the desire to create a commercial space that satisfies the goals of local businesses and their desired consumers. Dundas Square is reminiscent of controlled, homogenized public spaces being created in newly regenerated downtowns across the globe. The implications are increased polarization in cities and the creation of spaces that are sanitized and exclusionary.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".