MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414459828 · doi:10.1080/23748834.2025.2538362

“The whole community is like a dumpsite … ” the political ecology of health in Harare’s informal settlements

2025· article· en· W4414459828 on OpenAlexaff
Elmond Bandauko

Bibliographic record

VenueCities & Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformal settlementsPolitical ecologyHuman settlementPoliticsWork (physics)Human ecologyVariety (cybernetics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the Political Ecology of Health framework, this paper examines how socio-political and environmental processes intersect to shape health vulnerabilities and inequities in Hopley and Hatcliffe Extension, Harare’s largest informal settlements. Data were collected through four focus group discussions – two in each settlement – with eight participants each (n = 32). Data were thematically analysed using an inductive coding approach to identify patterns and narratives related to health vulnerability, spatial exclusion, and governance failures. The analysis shows that residents’ vulnerability to diseases and health risks in Hopley and Hatcliffe Extension is not merely the result of environmental exposure but is embedded in a broader context of colonial logics of exclusion, spatial marginalization, and infrastructural abandonment. The lived experiences of residents – ranging from reliance on contaminated shallow wells, makeshift pit latrines, and toxic urban ecologies to stigmatization in public health facilities – reveal how urban governance failures translate into everyday forms of harm and slow death. The paper makes a case for informal settlement upgrading interventions to build resilient and healthy urban environments.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.028
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.008
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCities & HealthSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207