MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414015991 · doi:10.1080/1523908x.2025.2551567

The promises and pitfalls of Hanoi’s urban mobility transition: how residents are navigating the infrastructural politics of a new urban railway

2025· article· en· W4414015991 on OpenAlexafffund
Michelle Kee, Sarah Victoria Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Policy & Planning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWater Governance and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPoliticsUrban politicsTransition (genetics)MobilitiesPolitical scienceSociologyEconomic geographyEconomic growthEnvironmental planningRegional scienceGeographyEconomicsSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-carbon, urban mobility transitions are being fanfared across the Global South to promote environmental sustainability, while also improving mobility justice. In Vietnam’s capital city Hanoi, an ambitious campaign for such a mobility transition is underway, focusing on creating a ‘green, civilised, and modern’ future. A core feature of this campaign is a new urban railway system. The railway’s first segment, Line 2A, or the Cát Linh – Hà Đông Line, began operations in late 2021 after years of delays and numerous controversies. In this paper we examine how Line 2A has impacted a range of local residents and especially their everyday lived experiences, mobilities, and livelihoods. We draw on conceptual debates regarding infrastructural politics and mobility (in)justices, and ethnographic fieldwork before, during, and six months after Line 2A’s construction. We analyse how local residents have navigated Line 2A’s implementation and early operations, focusing on encounters, entwinements, and tensions that have emerged along the line. We demonstrate how residents’ everyday acts of living with the Line offer insights into how top-down transportation plans and policies are experienced and contested on-the-ground, often deviating from state visions of a ‘civilised and modern’ Hanoi.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Policy & PlanningSame topicWater Governance and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207