“Chiefs do not talk law, most of them talk power.” Traditional authorities in conflicts over land grabbing in Ghana*
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of large-scale land deals in sub-Saharan Africa, social conflicts have increased. In many of these conflicts, traditional authorities are central actors. Whereas several studies highlight their significance as mediators in conflicts, their role as conflict actors is hardly considered. I address this lacuna by referring to a conflict around an agro-industrial project in Ghana. Using Steven Lukes’ three-dimensional power approach I demonstrate how preexisting hierarchies between traditional authorities are reinforced. I argue that these hierarchies are mostly insignificant for everyday land use practices but become relevant in conflict settings, allowing traditional authorities to reinterpret existing social orders and institutional arrangements with the aim to achieve territorial control. An interplay of different forms of power simultaneously prevents broad opposition of land users against traditional authorities while, in this way, contributing to indirect legitimization of traditional authorities, the underpinning of their authority and deepening social division.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it