MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038342101 · doi:10.1163/2211906x-00902004

A Conceptual Framework for Regulating Customary Law within Pluralistic African States: Reassessing Justice Sector Reforms for Reconciling Legal Traditions

2020· article· en· W3038342101 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Comparative Law · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLand Rights and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceLawDualismLegal pluralismPoliticsDemocracyLaw and economicsComparative lawSociologyLegal realism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Customary law and traditional institutions once constituted the comprehensive legal system regulating a wide spectrum of activities within African states. However, colonialism created a framework for the politics of legal dualism, which led to a process of transformation and shift in the nature of structures and practices of states. As such, now independent states are constantly trying to identify ways to sustain the cultural heritage reflected in customary laws and institutions, as they attempt to also function as modern democratic states. Scholars have highlighted the practical and structural changes that need to be made to ensure effective regulation of customary law. To this work, my paper provides a framework to supplement current judicial reforms within African states. I argue that for customary law to be effectively used as a mechanism for legal regulation within cultural communities, the current legal framework within African states needs to move beyond the idea of legal recognition and tolerance, to one that reconciles the complexities of different legal traditions.

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 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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.216 · 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