Off-cycle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comparative case study research in two prototype model sustainable neighbourhoods, Fréquel Fontarabie in Paris (France) and Dockside Green in Victoria (Canada), sheds new light on questions of ecogentrification in urban redevelopment cycles. The two cases are chosen for their superficial similarities, as mutual but independent frontrunners of the international movement to build sustainable neighbourhoods. They are also chosen for contrast value; the notable difference is that Fréquel is state-led and state-certified, dominated by social housing, compared to Dockside which is private sector-led and third party certified, dominated by market housing. The two cases offer certain shared features, including urban design, infrastructure, and amenities associated with green, bourgeois, and participatory democratic values. Beneath the surface, we examine how the redevelopment models pursued cycles of creative destruction of waste and value differently from how this cycle functions under hegemonic neoliberalism. In both cases, new wastes are identified and new values created, that reach beyond economic capital into social, political and ecological territory as well. Confronting the specific dynamics of waste and value formation in different urban contexts offers new means to advance understanding of neighbourhood redevelopment and transformation and how values of solidarity and nature can be advanced off-cycle from the persistent churn of new forms of capital.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".