Neo-liberalizing social service provision: Reactions and responses to the limits and constraints of housing and settlement services for refugees in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article engages with the impacts of neoliberalism on the experiences of social service providers working with refugees searching for shelter and affordable housing in Toronto, Canada. The 1990s in Toronto consisted of intergovernmental restructuring, which downloaded federal housing responsibilities onto provincial and municipal governments. Additionally, changes made to settlement funding had direct impacts on non-profit organizations serving immigrants and refugees. This devolution and decentralization of Canada's housing and settlement services have led to a complex hybrid of informal and formal social networks. Based on semi-structured interviews with service providers, this study reveals institutional gaps in Toronto's housing and settlement support models. This paper enriches scholarly debates on (1) neoliberal cities, (2) social service provision for immigrants and refugees, and (3) informal social networks, by engaging with critical feminist frameworks that highlight the importance of a profound understanding of the types of informal networks developed by social service providers.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".