“Moving in Data”: The Open Data Gaze as a form of Municipal Statecraft in the Entrepreneurial City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally speaking, data-driven urbanism is on the rise. As data becomes more readily available and important in contemporary economies, municipal governments are adopting new ways of managing and planning cities. By transforming themselves via urban data, cities can position themselves to be economically competitive, embedded in global networks, and increasingly connected to their citizens. Edmonton is a city that has reacted to these global trends and adopted smart city policies and data-driven processes. By implementing initiatives such as the Smart City Strategy (2017) and the Open City Policy (2015), and creating the Open Data Program, Edmonton has capitalized on this digital shift and positioned itself to use data and technology to promote and manage growth. This research set out to address the following question: how has data-driven urbanism unfolded in Edmonton, Alberta? It addresses this question using a multi-method qualitative research approach which included key informant interviews, policy document analysis, and a case study of the Open Data Program. To analyze data-driven urbanism in Edmonton scholarly literature on data-driven urbanism, entrepreneurial urbanism and the data gaze was applied. Through researching data-driven urbanism in Edmonton, the thesis developed an original concept: the open data gaze. The open data gaze describes the discourses, infrastructures and practices at work in Open Data Program, and how they work together to apply and expand the data gaze. The thesis concludes with an exploration of the open data gaze in relation to literature consulted. This exploration addresses how the open data gaze acts as an exemplar of municipal statecraft. As a form of municipal statecraft, the open data gaze is applied towards entrepreneurial ends. The City of Edmonton uses the open data gaze as a process for transforming Edmonton into a data-driven city. This transformation is predicated on the desire to become an entrepreneurial city. Ultimately, the thesis concludes that the open data gaze can be understood as a process by which data-driven urbanism in Edmonton is entrepreneurialized.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".