MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165568098 · doi:10.1163/17087384-12340077

Protecting Land Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Africa: The Land Rights of Abuja Peoples of Nigeria and Ogiek Peoples of Kenya in Comparative Perspective

2021· article· en· W3165568098 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sylvanus Gbendazhi Barnabas

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Legal Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLand Rights and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousLand lawLand rightsState (computer science)Political scienceIndigenous rightsLegal pluralismCustomary landGeographyEconomic growthHuman rightsSocioeconomicsDevelopment economicsLand tenureEnvironmental protectionLawEnvironmental planningSociologyLegal researchAgricultureEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper examines the treatment of customary land rights of indigenous peoples by State law in Nigeria and Kenya. Nigeria is chosen as a case study and Kenya has on-going legal reforms in relation to customary land rights. Both Kenya and Nigeria have plural legal systems. The objective is to demonstrate how Kenya has responded to the challenges of protecting customary land rights and how other African States, like Nigeria, should respond to similar challenges.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of Legal StudiesSame topicLand Rights and ReformsFrench-language works237,207