MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7011351414

Loose Coupling, Burden Shuffling, and Pervasive Penality: The Role of Bylaw Enforcement in Managing Homelessness

2022· article· en· W7011351414 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscretionEnforcementPolice brutalityMandateCompliance (psychology)ScholarshipOfficerVisibilityClosure (psychology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, over 235,000 people experience homelessness per year. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the visibility of homelessness and the use of homeless encampments across Ontario. As visibility has increased, so too have community members’ expectations to manage homelessness or find a solution to minimize the visibility of homelessness. While there has been some scholarship about the police management of homelessness, far less is known about the role of bylaw enforcement. Yet, bylaw officers play a critical role in responding to homelessness due to their increasing responsibility for enforcing municipal bylaws and COVID-19 public health mandates, such as stay at home orders and social distancing requirements. This project addresses this gap in the literature by analyzing bylaw officers’ perceptions of their roles and responsibilities when responding to and managing homelessness in their communities. Drawing on 46 surveys and nine in-depth, semi-structured interviews with bylaw officers from across Ontario, I examine how they understand their role in managing homelessness, and how they address complaints about homelessness and homeless encampments. From this analysis, I argue that officers’ organizational mandates and responsibilities, which focus on the regulation of space, are loosely coupled to their roles on the frontline, which require the management and regulation of people. This loose coupling situates bylaw officers in a regulatory ‘grey zone’ where they are left to rely on their experiential knowledge and discretion when responding to homeless complaints. Further, I argue that bylaw officers’ primary goal is to invisibilize homelessness for prioritized community members, and accomplish this mandate by moving people along, often to isolated areas in the municipality. This displacement constitutes a form of pervasive penality, further harming people who are unhoused. I conclude with achievable recommendations for bylaw enforcement agencies and directions for future research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University)→Same topicHomelessness and Social Issues→French-language works237,207→