Transforming a Day-Laborer's Quarter into a Service Hub: An Analysis of the Case of Kotobuki in Yokohama, Japan, Using Public Choice and Neo-Hegelian Theories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inadequate provision of welfare services has long represented a persisting issue in addressing urban poverty, especially in districts where poverty converges. One such district, once a day laborer's quarter, is Kotobuki of Yokohama. However, given that Kotobuki is now recognized as a welfare center, this study analyzes why the abovementioned transformation occurred. Previous research examining this question focused especially on the role of civil society, neglecting that of the city government, despite its crucial role in providing welfare services. Furthermore, few studies have employed robust theories in their analysis. Against this background, this study aims to bridge these gaps, conducting in-depth interviews with city government officials and civil society personnel while using public choice and neo-Hegelian theories. The findings provide useful implications for policymakers in day laborers’ quarters worldwide, as well as insight into future welfare strategies, informing the development of public policies to address urban poverty.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".