MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1719186930

Aboriginal Title and Private Property

2009· article· en· W1719186930 on OpenAlex
Gordon Christie

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLand Rights and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPossession (linguistics)Simple (philosophy)Law and economicsPolitical scienceLawProperty (philosophy)Private propertyExclusive rightProperty rightsCommon lawIntellectual propertySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“Aboriginal title” is a legal construct described as a right to land, encompassing a right to the exclusive use and occupation of lands held under this title. Private property, particularly fee simple title, is protected within registry systems as “indefeasible title.” Fee simple title signals the right of exclusive possession of a defined parcel of land, and encompasses a bundle of rights tied to this form of fundamental ownership in the common law system. Indefeasible title protects the fee simple titleholder form external challenge, even from the government.The existence of these two forms of property interests, Aboriginal title and fee simple title, seems to demand some sort of “reconciliation.” It appears these two legal regimes must intersect “on the ground” in some manner, for it seems unavoidable that at some point in the future Aboriginal title will be established over an extent of land held as private property by third parties.This chapter explores the development of Aboriginal title, and juxtaposes this legal concept with common understandings of fee simple title, to see if sense can be made of the idea that both could apply to one common parcel of land (or if the exclusion of one in the face of the other is the likely outcome.) The chapter examines possible guiding principles (minimization of social disruption and respect) and focuses on what might be responsible for development and implementation of such guiding principles into “law on the ground.” The author then considers how to think about, and potentially react to, the fact that this matter plays out within the power structure of the colonial society that ignored the existence of the claims of Indigenous societies for so long.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · 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