Bibliographic record
Abstract
For more than a decade, serious public concern has been growing over the cost of housing and the shortage of affordable options geared to low- and moderate-income households globally. Research has shown that a large and increasing share of the population cannot afford its housing costs. In Canada, the gap has increased between the number of households that need supportive housing geared to income and the number of these units the current housing system can deliver. Increasing demand for this type of housing has put incredible pressure on cities and social housing providers to try and meet demand. Cities have been depending on market-developers to provide affordable options through varied incentive programs, but uptake has been slow due to their lower profitability. Within the global context of unaffordability, we are seeing a re-emergence of alternative models of provision and ownership being piloted by cities and community groups around the world. These alternatives are largely based on principles of co-production and community ownership that recognize that housing can be both a strong driver of productive economic development as well as a means to improving social well-being and the quality of life for all. Such models include co-operatives and community land trusts. While these models are still seen as alternatives to mainstream supply, public and social housing operators have proven their viability and potential in helping fill the affordable housing gap. \n \nThrough a combination of research methods taken from the fields of design thinking, foresight, and systems thinking, this Major Research Project explores alternative housing models in Canada and abroad. A focus is made on building institutional resilience, by looking at emerging patterns of increased self-reliance, entrepreneurial strategies, and partnerships for the provision of new social housing. Additionally, this project considers new paradigms being explored in the housing and city-building space which acknowledge the complexity of varied perspectives in cities, as well as the climate-related emergencies and other factors that impact the housing ecosystem. Finally, this project proposes a conceptual co-production model of housing provision by leveraging public land.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.142 | 0.026 |
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".