National Perspectives on Housing Rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More than one billion people around the world do not have adequate housing. How far does human rights law help to remedy this problem? What measures must governments take to protect people against housing rights violations? What are the strengths and weaknesses of human rights law in the housing area? Is the current law enough, or are new laws necessary? These and many other questions are addressed in the various chapters contained in National Perspectives on Housing Rights. While most coverage of economic, social and cultural rights has tended to focus on international standards and principles, this book examines the more challenging question of how housing rights are implemented at the national and local level. Chapters from recognised housing rights practitioners from Brazil, Canada, India, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, Philppines, South Africa, the US and elsewhere provide some of the first national-level legal analyses of the implementation of housing rights standards recognised under international law. A foreword by Nelson Mandela and a preface by international legal scholar Professor Philip Alston provide interesting perspectives on the fundamental role of housing rights within the broader human rights field.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".