Urban renaissance and the contested legality of begging in Scotland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Programmes and visions of urban regeneration and beautification, present in many of the most affluent cities in the world, have raised serious questions about social exclusion, citizenship, and the plight of the urban poor. A common feature of the politics of this movement is a crackdown on so-called ‘aggressive beggars’ and others types of disorderly people. Indeed, demands for removal of people begging from city pavements have become a tired cliche of urban politics today. Unlike in England and Wales and in North American cities such as Toronto or New York, Scottish cities, in forging their own urban renaissance, are without one of the main tools of ‘cleaning up the streets’. Since 1991, begging in Scotland has been legal, a situation that has not sat well with officials in cities such as Glasgow, Edinburgh, and Aberdeen who have argued that those begging are a serious public threat that requires the police to be armed with vagrancy-type law. This chapter offers an analysis of the campaign to re-criminalise begging by City of Edinburgh officials in the late 1990s, and the response of the then Scottish office. In arguing for a new begging offence, Edinburgh officials exercised familiar tropes in depicting those begging as a public menace: vague appeals to public safety and ‘community’, the protection of tourist and consumer dollars, and aspirations for a ‘world class’, cosmopolitan city where visitors are not distracted by unpleasant reminders of poverty and social inequality (Helms, forthcoming). What is notable about this case, is how the response of the then Scottish Office (now the Scottish Executive) represented an unusually tolerant position when compared to other jurisdictions: citing a number of legal and practical concerns the Scottish Executive declined to allow Edinburgh to promote a begging byelaw, a position that has been reiterated in more general terms earlier this year (2006) to the City of Aberdeen that argued that a criminal offence was needed to deal with the presence of those begging. We begin by briefly examining how anti-begging ordinances, as an aspect of a much wider ‘criminalisation of urban policy’, effectively reduce the homeless to the status of ‘bare life’.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.050 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".