MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319333629 · doi:10.1111/cars.12423

Neoliberalism and vulnerability in social housing

2023· article· en· W4319333629 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eryn Leigh, Katie MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe artsSociologyLibrary scienceVisual artsArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While social housing 1 is of increasing interest to researchers and policy makers in Canada, there is little research about the experiences of those working in the sector.One of the foundational assumptions of social housing in Canada is that those in need of affordable housing are vulnerable (Hosken, 2016;Zhu, 2021).We suggest that the vulnerability that housing research, policy and programming focuses on is often also experienced by frontline workers in the sector.Neoliberal shifts in housing policy not only impact people living in and in need of social housing, but also housing workers.Housing workers are rarely included in Canadian housing research and are seen as outsiders to the poverty and vulnerability central to housing provision.Instead, workers often emerge in research as actors who enforce rules and regulations of social housing, and support those who live there.Yet, the lived reality for many workers on the frontline who interact with tenants and applicants regularly is much closer to the vulnerability of people waiting for and living in social housing.In this paper we argue that there is a need for more robust research on the working conditions of the housing sector, especially those on the frontline of social housing. NEOLIBERALISM IN CANADA'S SOCIAL HOUSINGIt is beyond the scope of this piece to detail the development of affordable housing policy other than to highlight some key turning points that impacted working conditions (for a more thorough analysis of Canadian housing policy see Sutter, 2016;Skelton, 2015).An economic recession in the 1990s saw backlash against previous government initiatives that were antiracist and pro-equity and fostered a "political climate where hostility toward the poor[. . .] was widespread" (Coulter, 2009, p. 29).The housing sector itself was undergoing a process of devolution, where control and responsibility of social housing was passed down to lower levels of government (Suttor, 2016).This included implementation of "neoliberal strategies of rule," used

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.557
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0190.065
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.014
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologieSame topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207