MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124590454 · doi:10.18352/ijc.236

Diversity of resource use and property rights in Tam Giang Lagoon, Vietnam

2011· article· en· W2124590454 on OpenAlexafffund
Tạ Thị Hường, Fikret Berkes

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of the Commons · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLand Rights and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsProperty rightsCommonsLivelihoodResource (disambiguation)Common-pool resourceDiversity (politics)Bundle of rightsBusinessBoomNatural resource economicsEnvironmental resource managementGeographyPolitical scienceEcologyEconomicsHuman rightsFundamental rightsRight to propertyLawEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the early 1990s, aquaculture has become the most important livelihood activity in Tam Giang Lagoon, Vietnam. The aquaculture boom has reduced the available water area for mobile gear fishers, polarized different user-groups, created resource conflicts, and increased pressures on the lagoon systems. Aquaculture in the lagoon is governed by both customary and legal rights. The objective of this paper is to explore the diversity of resource use and the complexity of property rights in one of the villages located in the lagoon. The paper emphasizes the linkages between changes in commons institutions and changes in resource use and property rights. First, the political and socio-economic changes in Vietnam are examined as well as how they have influenced traditional commons institutions and lagoon resource management in the village. Second, the linkages between common institutions and the diversity of property rights are analyzed. Particular attention is given to the analysis of different types of resource use associated with "bundle of rights" and the diversity of property rights regimes in the village.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.163 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of the CommonsSame topicLand Rights and ReformsFrench-language works237,207