MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188813286 · doi:10.29173/irie38

Challenges and opportunities in the protection and preservation of Indi-genous Knowledge in Africa

2007· article· en· W2188813286 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jangawe Msuya

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Information Ethics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland Management and Livestock Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTanzaniaMaasaiTraditional knowledgeIndigenousDeveloping countryPolitical sciencePublic relationsBusinessEnvironmental planningEconomic growthGeographyEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents challenges and opportunities in the protection and preservation of Indigenous Know-ledge (IK) in Africa. Specific examples have been taken from the Maasai pastoralists and the Sambaa and Zigua traditional medicine-men of North Eastern Tanzania. The paper argues that there is a threat of IK extinction due to lack of recording and problems associated with preservation and protection of the know-ledge from pirates. Examples on efforts made by Tanzania in IK preservation, including efforts made by Economic and Social Research Foundation in developing IK database and training initiatives at University of Dar es Salaam are discussed. Ethical issues in IK Systems are also discussed with emphasis on returning IK benefits to the owners of the knowledge, and involvement of people in IK researches. Finally, the paper highlights challenges in IK prevention and suggests measures that can be taken to alleviate the challenges. These include among others, developing appropriate IK policies and practices, establishing IK resource centres, training, researching and developing South South IK networks.

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 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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations67
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Information EthicsSame topicRangeland Management and Livestock EcologyFrench-language works237,207