MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416926410 · doi:10.36939/cjur/vol31no1/art313

Refugee trajectories, imaginaries, and realities: Refugee housing in Canadian cities

2022· article· W4416926410 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Bragg Bronwyn, Daniel Hiebert

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of urban research · 2022
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeSettlement (finance)ImmigrationAgency (philosophy)CensusQualitative propertyQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The literature on refugee trajectories in Canada suggests that over time, and despite considerable hardship during the early years of resettlement, those who enter Canada as refugees eventually attain income and housing outcomes similar to other immigrants and to their Canadian-born counterparts. These positive achievements are partially described by the concept of an immigrant effect whereby immigrants to Canada are much more likely to purchase a home than their Canadian-born counterparts given their average financial circumstances. This paper seeks to deepen our collective understanding of the integration of refugees in the Canadian housing and labour market by presenting data from the 2016 census paired with findings from a qualitative case study exploring the initial years of settlement for one group of refugees. We argue that despite considerable hardship and barriers to housing and employment, refugee families exercise constrained forms of agency which helps explain their positive trajectories in the labour and housing market over the long term. This paper contributes to the literature on refugee integration by presenting data from Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver, as well as the additional cities of Ottawa, Edmonton and Calgary. This is an important addition as less is known about the outcomes of newcomers to these cities. Drawing our on our qualitative data, we also contribute to the literature by examining the specific strategies that refugee families employ to grow their social capital and share resources within households.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0220.010
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of urban researchSame topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207