Borrowing Spaces: The Geographies of ‘Libraries of Things’ in the Canadian Sharing Economy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Over the last decade, the sharing economy has resulted in numerous innovative sharing and borrowing practices, many of which have the potential to radically transform communities and societies. One such innovation is the Library of Things (LoT), a non‐profit sharing space modelled on traditional library systems, which enables users to borrow a diverse range of equipment, tools and goods. This paper contributes to the emerging literature and research on the non‐profit sharing economy and the role of LoTs as sharing spaces. Drawing on in‐depth interviews with LoT founders and managers, three main socio‐spatial themes are discussed in the development of Canadian LoTs: sharing cultures, sharing capital and sharing politics. Overall, this work highlights that the success and sustainability of these sharing spaces hinge on the negotiation of these complex social and spatial dynamics, ranging from their capacity to build spaces of collaboration, experimentation and community.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it