Procedural environmental (in)justice at multiple scales: examining immigrant advocacy for improved living conditions
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
Distributional injustices have been documented by many environmental justice scholars in recent years, while procedural justice issues remain less explored. For instance, immigrants and newcomers disproportionately experience substandard housing conditions and discrimination in the housing market, but few studies have examined how immigrant communities are seeking to improve their living conditions or engage in related governance and advocacy processes. Drawing upon interviews and focus groups with residents, community organisers and representatives from social service agencies in Rexdale, an inner suburb of Toronto, this paper examines how immigrants and newcomers are reacting or taking action to improve conditions in a high-rise neighbourhood at the scale of their housing units, high-rise buildings, and neighbourhood. Through a procedural justice lens, cumulative, multi-scale injustices experienced by immigrants and newcomers are revealed. Findings reveal obstacles and barriers that are preventing immigrants from engaging in advocacy and other means of improving their living conditions, in addition to opportunities for increasing newcomer participation in housing and neighbourhood improvement efforts.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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