MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133014457

Reconstructing Social Housing: The Socio-spatial Effects of Welfare State Transformation in Toronto's Regent Park

2015· dissertation· W7133014457 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sharon Ann Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2015
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegentPoliticsCorporate governanceGovernment (linguistics)Public housingWelfare stateLocal governmentRedevelopmentState (computer science)Social policy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation charts the socio-spatial impacts of welfare state reform on the landscape of public housing, and the transformation in modes of governance that mark the shift from a welfare state to a more neoliberal regime. Specifically, it explores the processes and implications of socially-mixed public housing redevelopment, and the ways in which urban planning is used as a social fix. Its focus is Toronto's Regent Park, Canada's first and largest government housing project, which is currently undergoing a $1.75 billion overhaul in which the entire 69-acre site will be razed and rebuilt. Regent Park is widely considered to be a mid-century planning project that failed. Its redevelopment, premised upon the planning philosophy of social mix - diversity of income groups and housing tenure - is intended to be a reversal of poor design and residential segregation. The redevelopment is also financially motivated, unrolling against a backdrop of encroaching neoliberal reform.The appeal to a "healthy" community is central to the re-imagined Regent Park. I explore Regent Park's redevelopment as an exercise in community building and as a political-economic project, with a focus on the rhetoric that underlies these motivations, and on the ways in which these interventions have material effects on the built environment, and on the people who live there. This dissertation, then, is an exploration of attempts to ensure physical and social well-being through an engineering of urban space, and the forms of governance made manifest in these attempts. As such, it is also an exploration of the intersection of two political rationalities. In the current moment, private entities are increasingly called upon to provide public services, in tandem with or in lieu of the state. In Regent Park, the ideals of neoliberal city-building sometimes clash with transforming, but still-existing, bureaucratic welfarist institutions. This thesis examines the ways in which discourses of redevelopment are in tension with the operating of the bureaucratic welfare state, and the ways in which social housing residents experience these competing rationalities and contradictions in political agency.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.303
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
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism→French-language works237,207→