MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600893166 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v10n2p37

This Is My Grand Pa’s Land: Land, and Development Projects and Evictions along Morogoro Highway, Tanzania

2017· article· en· W2600893166 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rehema Kilonzo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLand Rights and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTanzaniaPoliticsGovernment (linguistics)Argument (complex analysis)Political scienceEconomic growthFocus groupState (computer science)IndigenousCivil societyDemocracyLand tenurePublic administrationSociologyGeographySocioeconomicsEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article addresses one of the most contentious development and political issue facing Tanzania and many Southern African countries. The focus is on privatization of land as a result of neo-liberal economic reforms, evictions and conflicts generated. The study was conducted along Morogoro highway, in Dar es Salaam and Pwani regions. The study employed qualitative approaches where archival information, interview observations and focus group discussions were used to collect data. Key findings indicate that there is a gap between laws and policies of land, which are designed to protect customary land rights of indigenous communities and individuals, and the actual practices regarding land on the ground. Despite the multi-party system democratic reforms, ordinary people have not turned their elected representatives at the local, regional levels or NGOs as allies in the efforts to resist land evictions. To understand development as a concept and its outcome when translated into action, to see what is happening on the ground, I draw part of my arguments from Social Movements theories to understand local people’s reactions toward development programs that result into their evictions. The study also explored the relationship among key land stakeholders in Tanzania and analyzed how uncoordinated relationships and the state officials lead to conflict. The study revealed that there is gender inequality in land access and ownership and how women used their position as women to frame resistance and attract not only media but also government and international community. A central argument in this study is that for land development program to benefit the targeted population, all land actors from grassroots to top should be involved in the process.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicLand Rights and ReformsFrench-language works237,207