MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413984815 · doi:10.1080/1369183x.2025.2544085

Migration narratives and urban space management: the politics of migrant worker housing in Doha

2025· article· en· W4413984815 on OpenAlexaff
Jérémie Molho

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ethnic and Migration Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsMigrant workersNarrativeSpace (punctuation)Urban spaceGender studiesPolitical scienceSociologyMigration studiesEconomic geographyDemographic economicsEconomic growthGeographyEconomicsLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the politics surrounding the segregated housing of migrant workers in Doha. The issue drew global media scrutiny ahead of the 2022 FIFA World Cup, with commentators condemning migrant workers' deplorable living conditions. Meanwhile, local authorities strived to create a counter-narrative by highlighting their attempts to enhance housing standards. This study aims to deconstruct the varied migration narratives, shaping the creation of such urban spaces, characterised by the segregation and enclosure of migrant workers. The research combines the analysis of census data, strategic planning documents and media reports and fieldwork conducted in 2018 and 2022. This fieldwork included site visits and interviews with diverse stakeholders, including international organisations, government officials and migrant NGOs. The paper argues that these segregated migrant accommodations constitute transient spaces that materialise and project the city's regime of temporary and circular migration. The construction of these urban spaces serves a communicative purpose, which I describe as narrative enclosures. Segregated migrant worker housing does not merely serve to control the movement and lives of these workers; it also shapes the narratives surrounding their living conditions and their place within the urban production system and society.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ethnic and Migration StudiesSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207