Gold is not a metaphor*: locating financialisation and housing injustice in settler colonial property regimes in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Settler colonial urbanisms and financialisation are two well cultivated areas of thought; however, both have been underutilised to explain the state of housing precarity in contemporary Canada. To address this gap this paper reframes financialisation and assetization through the lens of the settler colonial city and its racialised labour and property regimes. Through analysis of current literature and data on specific practices and outcomes of financialisation and assetization in major Canadian cities, we show how extractive techniques reproduce colonial, gendered, and racialised inequalities and precarities in the housing system. Our intervention demonstrates how settler colonial urbanism and processes of financialisation extend and transform longstanding colonial processes in relation to property, unhoming, and land. We draw on research into homelessness, rental, and owner-occupied housing to expose extraction and precarity as broad structural features of the settler colonial housing system. Ultimately, we argue that financialisation on its own does not explain the multifaceted nature of contemporary housing crisis in Canada. The extractive nature of housing financialisation is situated within an analysis of the specifically settler colonial nature of property and labour in Canadian urbanism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".