MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896518126 · doi:10.1080/00083968.2018.1484296

Land grabbing, gender and access to land: implications for local food production and rural livelihoods in Nguti sub-division, South West Cameroon

2018· article· en· W2896518126 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Frankline A. Ndi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africaines · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivelihoodLand tenureCustomary landLand grabbingAgrarian societySecurity of tenureSubdivisionMainstreamLeasehold estateSharecroppingProduction (economics)Economic growthStatutory lawLand reformLand lawGeographyResource (disambiguation)BusinessNatural resource economicsPolitical scienceAgricultureEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the disproportionate gendered impacts of land grabbing amongst affected communities in Nguti subdivision of the South West Region of Cameroon. I argue that, first, pre-existing land tenure systems and a shift to a capitalist agrarian production structure has led to unequal access to land between men and women. Second, I show that the loss of land to commercial interests has constrained women’s abilities to access land either for crop production and/or to harvest non-timber forest products (NTFPs), creating significant livelihood stress for them and their communities. I conclude by advocating that the state should formally recognise customary tenure, and mainstream gender within its institutions (customary and statutory) governing land and forest resources. Women need to be empowered through education and capacity-building programs to enable them to exercise their rights to access land, and benefit from resources.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africainesSame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207