MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215094677

Can Land Title Reduce Low-Intensity Interhousehold Conflict Incidences and Associated Damages in Eastern DRC?

2019· article· en· W3215094677 on OpenAlexaff
Naureen Fatema

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLand Rights and Reforms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDamagesMatching (statistics)Propensity score matchingConflict resolution researchDemocracyLand useConflict resolutionPolitical sciencePublic economicsGeographyDemographic economicsDevelopment economicsEconomicsLawStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The broad aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of land reform policy as a sustainable tool for averting low-intensity local conflict and protecting vulnerable households in conflict and post-conflict societies from adverse consequences of conflict. Empirical studies on micro-level conflict have been limited on two fronts - the difficulty of collecting survey data from conflict prone societies, and a general lack of attention to the consequences of low-intensity local conflict. This paper attempts to address both these limitations. Using a survey on violent and non-violent conflict experiences of 1582 farming households from the postwar society of North Kivu, in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), I explore whether land title can i) lower the probability of low-intensity conflict between households; and ii) lower the damages for households in the event of a conflict. To address concerns of potential selection bias, I employ the quasi-experimental estimation technique of propensity score matching (PSM). A rigorous set of tests and sensitivity analyses ensures both the quality of matching and reliability of estimates. These findings show that land title reduces a household’s probability of experiencing low-intensity interhousehold conflict roughly between 10 and 18 percentage points. However, I find no evidence that households with land title are subject to lower damages in the event of a conflict. These findings suggest that in vulnerable societies with high exposure to conflict, land reform programs that just grant title to households may reduce conflict to some extent but will not necessarily reduce the adverse consequences associated with conflict. Thus, land title is not a panacea for all conflict related adversities and cannot serve as a stand-alone tool for reducing adversities associated with conflict. Further research is required on whether supplementing land reform programs with policies such as promoting good governance and strengthening local institutions can sustainably promote peaceful societies.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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