Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the impact of British colonial rule on land tenure in Esan (Anglicized Ishan), the second major ethnic group in Edo State of Nigeria. Land was very important to the social, political and economic wellbeing of Esan, just like other societies the world over. It was regarded as collective property which everyone could utilize for agriculture and building of houses. Although land was regarded as collective property, individuals owned the plots which they either inherited or acquired. The laid down methods of acquisition and utilization eliminated land disputes throughout the pre-colonial period of Esan history. By the first decade of the twentieth century, Esan and elsewhere in what is today Nigeria, found themselves under British colonial domination. The British colonial authorities introduced the production rubber and other cash crops into Esan agricultural system in line with their policies of encouraging the production of raw materials for the industries in Europe. The introduction of rubber production especially in plantations thus necessitated the utilization of more land beyond what was hitherto required for the production of food crops. The introduction of plantation system thus altered the land tenure system in Esan as individuals began to lay permanent claims to their rubber plantations to the extent that they began to alienate such land in the guise of selling their rubber trees. This article therefore examines the role played by British Colonial authorities in the gradual transformation of land from communal to individual ownership in Esan.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".