MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095735178 · doi:10.1017/s0021855310000045

A Legislative Proposal for Public Participation in Oil and Gas Decision-Making in Nigeria

2010· article· en· W2095735178 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 African Law · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicOil, Gas, and Environmental Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislatureAlienationPublic participationNatural resourcePolitical scienceBusinessResource (disambiguation)Public administrationLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nigeria is on the verge of comprehensively reviewing its oil and gas laws. The review is aimed at, among other things, addressing the conflicts associated with the management of the resources and, especially, the affect on the people of the oil producing region of the country who have been vigorously protesting about their alienation from the resources. Drawing on the international law of public participation in natural resource management, this article seeks to develop a viable legislative framework for public participation in oil and gas decision-making that Nigeria can adopt. A viable legislative framework must take into account the various factors that shape the effectiveness of participation and the elements that promote the objectives of participation. It is premised on the ground that looking to international prescriptions might help to elucidate gaps in domestic laws, as well as alternatives to overcome them.

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 score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.269 · 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