MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367162839 · doi:10.24926/25730037.657

“Vancouver’s Favourite Country Music Pub,” Single Room Occupancy Hotels, and the Context of International Frameworks: Mapping Vancouver’s Urban Law and Cultural Policy

2023· article· en· W4367162839 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sara Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueMinnesota journal of law & inequality · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFavouriteOccupancyContext (archaeology)GeographyRegional scienceAdvertisingBusinessPolitical scienceLawArchaeologyCivil engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The public and private spaces of cities, their design, and the urban law and policy that shapes the lived spaces within cities provides a potent example of overlapping and often contested heritage(s) and heritage spaces that may have built heritage merit, may carry a high intangible value as gathering spaces for art, culture, and performance, or may be both characterized by their tangible and intangible heritage merit. The layers of diverging, contested, or interwoven heritage within the same urban spaces can diverge in what they mean to a group, community, or individual. They may represent significant moments of architectural grandeur, cultural capital, celebration, significant moments of horror that teeter within desires to forget their existence, or they may also represent a space for future cultural flourishing and community growth. Heritage space within a city may be less conventional than existing legal frameworks for assessing cultural heritage, value, or merit permit, and heritage assets can take numerous shapes involving sight, sound, smell, movement, and so on. This expanded and more inclusive manner of understanding the many iterations of what heritage can be in a city and what heritage spaces can signify for the many urban denizens and stakeholders who find meaning and community within the “third places” of a city, creates a complex web within which urban law and policy must navigate.\nIn addition to the mechanics of heritage preservation assessments and processes (and the laws and legislation surrounding cultural heritage protection) cities are increasingly developing neighbourhood plans and strategic cultural plans that engage with and shape how cultural heritage is understood, protected (or not protected), encouraged, or even strategically commodified in a city and neighbourhood. Whether or not these plans ultimately accomplish their purported goals is still unclear. Focusing on the case of Vancouver, Canada, this Article will explore the role of local cultural policy documents and cultural plans in localizing international frameworks and calls to action for the inclusive management, sustainable (re)development, and navigation of dissonant and overlapping cultural heritage spaces at the local city and neighbourhood level.3 After a general description of Vancouver, this Article will first give a brief overview of applicable international frameworks for inclusive heritage management and preservation. It will then describe a number of neighbourhoods within Vancouver’s Eastside and examine Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside Plan. Finally, it will turn to Vancouver’s newly adopted cultural plan for 2020–2029, Culture|Shift: Blanketing the City in Arts & Culture, its associated documents, and how these documents navigate urban cultural heritage matters and some of the “third places” of Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. This analysis aims to identify the particular policies that take strides towards localizing the international frameworks for inclusive heritage management and preservation introduced earlier in the Article.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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 venueMinnesota journal of law & inequalitySame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207