MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086446791 · doi:10.2753/jei0021-3624440107

In the Shadow of the Anticommons: The Paradox of Overlapping Exclusion Rights and Open-Access Resource Degradation in India's Wastelands

2010· article· en· W2086446791 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Economic Issues · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWater Governance and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShadow (psychology)Resource (disambiguation)EconomicsNeoclassical economicsLaw and economicsNatural resource economicsDevelopment economicsEconomic geographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

India's wastelands have been classified as both over utilized and underutilized. Perplexingly, an apparent tragedy of the commons exists alongside extensive official management powers. In this paper, I argue that the complexity of governance structures may be inadvertently worsening the situation. Looking to recent work on contested property and the anticommons concept, I suggest that an anticommons amongst those officially controlling the lands is casting a long and unexpected shadow by encouraging the emergence of open-access de facto resource exploitation and discouraging de facto management. This extension of the anticommons concept implies that the effects of anticommons are not necessarily limited to under exploitation, as most commonly used in the developing anticommons literature. It points to a wider examination of the harmful effects of anticommons situations.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.318 · 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