Condominium self-governance? Issues, external interests, and the limits of statutory reform
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
Condominiums are assumed in enabling statutes, related regulations, and statutory reforms to resemble ‘self-governing communities’ of owners whom collectively undertake numerous governance responsibilities to manage and sustain their buildings and living arrangements. Drawing from intensive interviews with condo owners and condo industry representatives in Ontario and New York State and a large qualitative survey of condo owners from Ontario, we outline five overlapping and longstanding governance issues that challenge the notion of self-governance and reveal it to be more illusion than reality. This disjuncture stems not only from common dilemmas of collective governance, but also from the growing influence of external and mostly commercial interests in condominiums broadly consistent with neo-liberalization. We also consider more recent reform attempts by Ontario and New York State and discuss statutory limitations in addressing these issues. We express doubt that condo statutory reform alone can successfully remedy the governance problems facing condo housing and proffer remedies including moving beyond the perception of condominiums as autonomous, self-governing realms.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it