Making a Music City: The Commodification of Culture in Toronto’s Urban Redevelopment, Tensions between Use-Value and Exchange-Value, and the Counterproductive Treatment of Alternative Cultures within Municipal Legal Frameworks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Meaningful diversity and inclusion within today’s cities requires attention on many fronts, including that of city redevelopment strategies and policies. To that end, this article focuses on culture-led regeneration strategies—specifically, those of Toronto’s “Music City” initiative and “Creative City” strategy—and unpacks the mechanics of using culture and heritage as tools for redevelopment where their commodification can reveal the clash between divergent value interests that exist within spaces of culture in the city. Sustainable urban development must carefully account for these divergences to avoid the displacement and lack of equitable accounting of relationally vulnerable individuals, groups, (sub)cultures, and space. Counterproductive effects of culture-led redevelopment initiatives which have, despite themselves, wound up either dismantling or failing to curb the disappearance of the “culture” that served as their initial impetus, are an example of where urban governance and planning have not effectively engaged precarious groups and spaces in the city that are affected by redevelopment strategies and where exchange-value interests have overwhelmed use-value interests to their detriment.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".