MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382281044 · doi:10.1080/02723638.2023.2227511

Displaced for housing: analysing the uneven outcomes of the Addis Ababa Integrated Housing Development Program

2023· article· en· W4382281044 on OpenAlexafffund
Fikir Haile

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Geography · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEconomic growthGeographyEnvironmental planningSocioeconomicsBusinessSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The population of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia’s capital and largest city is growing at a remarkable pace. Similar to other places in the Global South, rapid urban population growth poses significant challenges for Addis Ababa, the most important of which is acute housing shortage. Around 80% of the housing stock in the city is considered sub-standard, lacking essential utilities and services. In recognition of the severity of the housing crisis, the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), which governed Ethiopia from 1991–2018 introduced the Integrated Housing Development Program (IHDP), an ambitious plan to construct hundreds of thousands of condominium units. However, despite the IHDP’s pro-poor aims, the program has been criticized for failing to benefit the city’s poorest residents. Focusing on IHDP-induced displacement and resettlement to re-politicize the issue, this article demonstrates how in some instances, the IHDP not only failed to benefit the urban poor but actually deepened material inequality.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban GeographySame topicUrban and Rural Development ChallengesFrench-language works237,207