Social and Environmental Justice in Waterfront Redevelopment: The Anacostia River, Washington, D.C.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Waterfront redevelopment projects have often been criticized for prioritizing attractive skylines and glittering facades over the needs of local communities. Recently, however, they have increasingly seen goals of social and environmental justice integrated into their vision statements. This article focuses on the redevelopment of the Anacostia River in Washington, D.C. Since the early 2000s, the formerly neglected and contaminated river has been at the center of extensive regeneration efforts through the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI). We examine to what extent the AWI has helped to overcome inequities between the two disparate sides of the river. To answer this question, we build on interviews, analysis of planning documents, and site visits. Examining efforts toward both social and environmental justice, we show the convergence of the two but also the contradictions that arise between them. The findings suggest that employing a joint social and environmental justice approach to analyze waterfront redevelopments is important to reveal these tensions.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it