MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122671857

The Construction of Social Housing Pathways Across Australia

2019· article· en· W3122671857 on OpenAlexaff
Abigail Powell, Ariella Meltzer, Chris Martin, Wendy Stone, Edgar Liu, Kathleen Flanagan, Kristy Muir, Selina Tually

Bibliographic record

VenueLincoln Repository (University of Lincoln) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeasehold estatePublic housingBusinessPublic economicsPortfolioSpace (punctuation)FinanceEconomicsEconomic growthPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Housing pathways describe the changing experience of housing by tenants and their households over time and space. The impact of the transformation of social housing in recent years on these pathways is not well understood, and we investigate it in this report. Accessing and securing social housing is dependent on a range of eligibility criteria, with housing allocated on a priority needs basis. In some jurisdictions, having a low income alone does not guarantee eligibility for social housing. Living in social housing means that one’s housing can be subject to periodic eligibility reviews, which can also be triggered by (mis)use of premises or by changing household circumstances. For example, an increase in household income, the expansion of a household or when a household member needs to leave due to family violence. The way these issues are monitored and assessed across jurisdictions directly shapes the housing pathways of social housing tenants. Moves within social housing can be tenant-initiated or landlord-initiated. Tenant-initiated transfers are most likely to result from changing household circumstances, and landlord-initiated transfers from portfolio or tenancy management. Both tenant and landlord-initiated transfers are constrained by the wider policy context, specifically, a shortage of suitable alternative housing stock to transfer households to. Moves out of social housing may also be tenant or landlord-initiated. Previous research has demonstrated that regardless of who initiated the move, tenants often return to the social housing system. Returns to social housing are compounded by the increasing proportion of tenants with complex needs who are likely to require support to live in private housing. The lack of affordable and appropriate housing alternatives to social housing also increases pressure on the sector, including from tenants returning to the sector who have previously left. Many of the operational policies that shape housing pathways have been introduced in the context of sustained high demand and a lack of supply. They are therefore arguably designed to manage wait lists by rationing supply. While we are yet to explore the tenant experience of social housing pathways, reimagining social housing pathways likely requires a greater policy focus on ensuring positive outcomes for households. © Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute Limited 2019.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLincoln Repository (University of Lincoln)Same topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207