MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794457084 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v11n2p141

Trading Facilities and Socio-spatial Character of Informal Settlements: The Case of Mlalakuwa in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

2018· article· en· W2794457084 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daniel Mbisso, Shubira L. Kalugila

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsInformal settlementsHuman settlementDar es salaamTanzaniaContext (archaeology)Settlement (finance)BusinessCharacter (mathematics)GeographyEconomic growthEnvironmental planningEconomicsArchaeologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Informal settlements constitute the largest means of habitation in the urbanizing world especially in the developing countries. In Dar es Salaam, informal settlements serve over 75% of the population. Among the often-mentioned characteristics of informal settlements include the dominance of informal economic activities. In particular, spaces for trading activities are observed to be randomly distributed in the informal settlements as they serve for the everyday life of its dwellers.However, little had been studied and analysed on the role of trading in shaping socio-spatial character of informal settlements. The aforesaid called for the need to investigate the underlying trading processes and products that characterise the setting of informal settlements. Using Mlalakuwa settlement in Dar es Salaam as a case, this paper maps and analyzes the social and institutional context of trading facilities and the resulting spatial character of informal settlements. One of the key findings in this paper is that trading activities along the main roads transform most of the bounding residential houses into trading facilities. The nature and character of trading facilities appear to define the spatial character of informal settlements in the context of the coexistence of formal and informal systems.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicUrban and Rural Development ChallengesFrench-language works237,207