MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194312544

Rentier States in Guyana and Suriname and the Consequent Lack of a Social Contract

2016· article· en· W3194312544 on OpenAlexaff
Janette Bulkan

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLand Rights and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousState (computer science)Corporate governanceGovernment (linguistics)ScrutinyBusinessColonialismLoggingNatural resourcePolitical economyEconomyFinancePolitical scienceEconomicsForestryLawGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Successive coastland-dominated governments in independent Guyana have retained both rentier control of resource extractive activities located on State-claimed public lands and the colonial tradition of absentee holders of State-issued concession licences to logging and mining. The colonial pattern persists of concentrated control of mining licences by a small number of persons who then rent access to evergreen concessions. Transnational logging companies concentrate on the intensive extraction of a few key timber species for export as unprocessed logs, leading to localized commercial extinction of iconic timbers. The State’s failure to capture an equitable share of the economic rent from resource extractive industries is evident in transfer pricing and the scale of illicit financial flows. The legal communal titles held to some of their ancestral lands by about three-quarters of Indigenous Villages are circumscribed by public access to all rivers and roads. Indigenous rights in State Forests are also ignored in practice by the quasi-corporate forestry and mining commissions (government agencies). The centralized government control, combined with superficial and ineffective parliamentary scrutiny, help to explain the lack of a unifying national narrative or social contract. Rentier practices can be reformed by decentralized governance structures, transparent allocation and civil society involvement in monitoring of concession licences and equitable benefit sharing.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.653
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicLand Rights and ReformsFrench-language works237,207