MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ten questions concerning housing sufficiency

2025· article· en· W4408981650 on OpenAlexafffund
Aldrick Arceo, Marianne F. Touchie, William O’Brien, Tianzhen Hong, Jeetika Malik, Matan Mayer, Terri Peters, Shoshanna Saxe, Ruth Tamas, Hannah Villeneuve, Benoît Schmaltz

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding and Environment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityCarleton UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Ten relevant questions concerning housing sufficiency are posed. • Consumption corridors determine decent living standards and ecological housing limits. • Housing sufficiency in developed and developing countries is reviewed. • Design, occupancy models, and policies for housing sufficiency are provided. Housing sufficiency is an emerging concept in the provision of environmentally sustainable housing. It aims for demand-side strategies that reduce excessive, aggregate consumption levels to promote efficient resource utilization and sustainability in the construction sector while providing everyone with a decent standard of housing. However, it is challenging to implement as it interferes with housing-related social and cultural norms. This paper poses and answers ten questions that highlight the challenges, opportunities, and examples of sufficiency strategies in the context of housing provision and the environmental crisis. Question 1 discusses the need for sufficiency as a tool to complement supply-side strategies including efficiency and renewable energy strategies in providing housing. Question 2 examines the concept of housing sufficiency from different perspectives, such as ecological economics and social ecology. Question 3 summarizes the methods used to measure housing sufficiency, with specific focus on the upper and lower limits that respect planetary boundaries and basic human needs. Questions 4 and 5 describe the benefits, potential drawbacks, and rebound effects of housing sufficiency. Questions 6 and 7 examine housing sufficiency in developed and developing countries, respectively. Questions 8 and 9 discuss design strategies, housing occupancy, and tenure models that are needed for housing sufficiency. Finally, Question 10 provides a summary of policies and regulations that are needed to systematically support the implementation of sufficiency strategies. The questions and answers provide insights for wider application of housing sufficiency in research and practice.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuilding and EnvironmentSame topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207