MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792118621 · doi:10.1080/09599916.2018.1436582

Time to completion in the Lagos commercial real estate market: an examination of institutional effects

2018· article· en· W2792118621 on OpenAlexaff
Alirat Olayinka Agboola, David Scofield

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Property Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersCommonwealth Scholarship CommissionWorld Bank Group
KeywordsReal estateDatabase transactionBusinessReal estate investment trustTransaction costInvestment (military)FinanceProperty managementProperty marketComputer scienceDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores how institutions affect the process of investment and the time it takes to buy and sell commercial property in Lagos, Nigeria. We isolate institutional factors that impact transaction efficiency and provide a snapshot of the process with average transaction times for the largest commercial real estate market in the most populous country in Africa. This study adopts a qualitative approach and relies on information collected from semi-structured interviews with 36 senior level individuals active in the Lagos commercial real estate market. Among our findings, we note the commercial real estate transaction process is divided into seven distinct stages and the average time to complete an acquisition across all stages (all property types) is 306 days. Title registration/perfection stage takes the longest time (around 132 days) and represents a significant risk to investors. We argue this is a consequence of imperfections in the formal institutions of title registration.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Property ResearchSame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207