Droits fonciers collectifs et gouvernance des ressources naturelles dans le Bushi, en phase post-conflits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les guerres à répétition ont sévi dans la région des Grands Lacs en Afrique centrale, entraînant une dégradation très remarquable des ressources naturelles, et particulièrement les ressources naturelles collectives. Les institutions étatiques chargées de la gestion des ressources naturelles se sont affaiblies au point qu’elles ne fournissent plus les services attendus d’elles. Dans ce contexte, il se pose le problème de gouvernance des ressources naturelles pour répondre aux besoins socioéconomiques des usagers. Les travaux sur la gouvernance des ressources naturelles portent essentiellement sur les ressources communes. L’on retiendra cependant que les ressources naturelles collectives, qui seraient une spécificité des sociétés africaines n’ont pas encore fait objet d’étude scientifique. Il s’agit des ressources qui portent l’identité d’un peuple pris dans son ensemble comme unité fonctionnelle. Ce chapitre démontre que le caractère collectif est un atout pour la gouvernance des ressources naturelles dans le contexte post conflit.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".