Recovery Landlordism: Accumulation through Confinement in the Landscape of Winnipeg’s Meth Crisis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From late Victorian Model Housing tenements to the public housing projects of high modernity, western states have attempted to use housing as a tool of moral transformation. This paper investigates the case of a Winnipeg landlord who has recently transitioned their private market apartments towards a drug addiction recovery model, and asks how a new form of rehabilitative capitalism has adopted disciplinary techniques from both the welfare and the carceral state. While the landlord has rebranded into an altruistic entity, forming new relationships with community organizations and various arms of the state, they have simultaneously created polices of confinement for their tenants including curfews, a pass system, rules of partitioning, and mandatory volunteer hours. In a long line of state-led projects that have attempted to use Foucauldian techniques of totalizing surveillance and control, the cracks in the landlord’s rehabilitative project will show where disciplinary power continues to fail and to renovate itself. Interviews with tenants and other actors in the landlord’s network help to understand where this project has met resistance, where it has been accepted, and where it has had to change. Further, the case study explores how confinement has been adopted into the accumulation strategies of private capital, and how rehabilitation creates new subjectivities based on intersecting categories of ‘risk’ in order to justify intervention.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".