The Right to the City in Windsor, ON
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cities are not merely economic networks and spaces for production. Being the sites of day-to-day experiences, affective interactions, and exchanges, cities constitute the basis of political and social relations. People rely on places to promote change and convey new meanings. Emotions experienced during encounters in the lived space afford individuals and groups the agency to challenge patterns and routine expressions of socio-spatial alienation and build sense of place, community, and belonging. By changing the built environment, people change the affective and physical landscapes of their cities and propose alternative relations of power. However, cities have also emerged as primary spaces for surplus accumulation subordinating development to the dictates of financial flows, considerations of competitiveness, and the logic of capitalist market relations. This neoliberal urbanism interferes with people's collective capacity to negotiate their sense of belonging in the city and contest alienating conditions of everyday life. By privatizing public space for the needs of market, neoliberal urbanism challenges individuals' right to define and transform their lived space. Using Windsor, ON as a case study, this research analyzes how neoliberal urbanism disrupts civic engagement through altering the built environment, changing people's perceived ownership of the city, and affecting their ability to exercise informal powers over it. In exploring how the type of urbanization in the city influences social participation, this research also contributes existing democratization studies and expands the notion of citizenship rights. Canada's democracy has been growing stronger, and attention to transformation in cities can become another element for advancing the country's democratic development. A sustainable community that is representative of peoples of different social, economic, and cultural backgrounds can enhance participatory practices and further the democratic effort.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".