MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413579614 · doi:10.1177/08912424251369834

Can Industrial Reinvestment Reverse Neighborhood Decline? Evidence from Automotive Investment in Detroit, Michigan, and Windsor, Ontario, 1980s-2020s

2025· article· en· W4413579614 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew Guinn, Patrick Cooper-McCann

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomic Development Quarterly · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWindsorInvestment (military)Automotive industryBusinessIndustrial cityRelocationEconomic growthEconomicsEngineeringEconomic geographyPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Under what conditions does industrial reinvestment contribute to the revitalization of distressed central-city neighborhoods? This paper compares the redevelopment of the Greater Conner District in Detroit, Michigan, which is home to the largest Stellantis automotive assembly complex in North America, with that of the East Windsor District in Windsor, Ontario, which is similarly cut through and encircled by automotive factories. Thanks to significant reinvestment from the early 1990s onward, both districts have retained thousands of advanced manufacturing jobs after previously suffering deindustrialization. Both are touted as economic development success stories. Yet whereas East Windsor has stabilized as a community, Greater Conner has suffered ongoing abandonment. This paper compares the history of economic and community development initiatives in the two districts, including investments at the community, local, state/provincial, and federal levels, to explain why East Windsor's residential and commercial areas have fared significantly better than those of Greater Conner.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconomic Development QuarterlySame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207