La participation aux processus de planification urbaine : Le cas de Lachine-Est au regard d’acteurs impliqués
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La participation est devenue une dimension incontournable des pratiques de planification \nurbaine. Bien que ce phénomène soit largement étudié, peu de travaux s’attardent à la \nperception qu’en ont les acteurs impliqués. C’est donc à cet aspect que s’intéresse notre \nrecherche, à travers laquelle nous souhaitons comprendre comment ces acteurs perçoivent la \nmultiplication des espaces de participation. Nous nous penchons sur le cas du réaménagement \nde Lachine-Est, une friche industrielle située dans l’arrondissement de Lachine, à Montréal, et \nappelée à devenir un écoquartier. L’exercice de planification de ce secteur a effectivement \ndéclenché un nombre important de démarches participatives. L’analyse se base plus \nparticulièrement sur l’Atelier Lachine-Est, une démarche de concertation à laquelle nous avons \nparticipé comme observatrice au printemps 2020. Cette démarche impliquait des expert·e·s, des \nélu·e·s, des acteurs de la société civile et des propriétaires fonciers. Des entretiens avec des \nacteurs y ayant participé ou ayant contribué à sa mise en oeuvre ont également été réalisés. \nCette recherche permet dans un premier temps de comprendre comment s’inscrit l’Atelier \nLachine-Est dans un ensemble plus large d’espaces de participation, et d’explorer les relations \nentre ces espaces de participation dans un second temps. Si la multiplicité des espaces de \nparticipation est généralement perçue comme étant avantageuse par les acteurs impliqués, \nleurs témoignages permettent de relever plusieurs ambiguïtés que porte la participation, en \npratique. \n \nParticipation has become an essential dimension to urban planning. Although this dimension is \nwidely studied, few of them focus on the perception of the actors involved. In this master thesis, \nwe discuss participation and the proliferation of participatory spaces as viewed from actors \ninvolved in the redevelopment of the Lachine-Est sector. Lachine-Est is a former industrial \ncentre, called to be transformed into an eco-district, and is located in Lachine, one of Montreal’s \nboroughs. It’s planning exercise has brought a significant number of participatory processes. Our \ndiscussion focuses on “Atelier Lachine-Est”, a series of consultation (concertation) workshops in \nwhich we participated as an observer in the spring of 2020. These workshops included \nemployees of Ville de Montréal and the borough of Lachine, specialists, elected officials, civil \nsociety actors and landowners. Interviews with actors who participated in it or who contributed to \nits implementation were also conducted. This research first allows us to understand how Atelier \nLachine-Est fits into a larger set of spaces of participation, and to explore the relationships \nbetween them in a second step. If the multiplication of spaces for participation is generally \nperceived as being advantageous by the actors involved, their testimonies make it possible to \nidentify several ambiguities and challenges that participation entails, in practice.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".