An Indigenous capital switch? First Nation real-estate development and the provision of social housing in Vancouver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Vancouver, Canada, almost all housing is provided through private market development from which the municipality ‘captures’ social housing units. The xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (Musqueam), Sḵwx̱wú7mesh (Squamish), and səlilwətaɬ (Tsleil-Waututh) First Nations are currently emerging as major actors in this dynamic as they develop the massive Heather, Jericho, and Sen̓áḵw housing projects on central land parcels. By describing these developments’ role regarding housing provision in Vancouver, I aim at highlighting two interrelated dynamics in this paper. First, I describe an Indigenous capital switch as First Nations develop high-density real-estate and use Vancouver’s high-price environment to accrue much-needed revenue that might provide their membership with housing detached from market pressures. Second, I describe some of the developments’ broader consequences for (social) housing provision in that a fundamentally profit-oriented development model that mainly provides market housing with a factored-in number of below-market units is reproduced by First Nations. Development is bound to switch massive amounts of capital into Indigenous communities, but it also reinforces a development model that claims to create affordable living conditions by providing market supply. Consequently, actors that operate both as parastatal and profit-oriented private entities are bound to become the region’s largest housing developers and its largest social housing provider.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".