The Governance of Land Use: A Conceptual Framework
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
How land is used is connected to some of the most important issues of our time: sustainable development, economic development, reducing territorial inequalities and the rights of future generations, to name but a few. There is growing recognition that a wide range of policies shape how land is used and managed beyond that of land use and environmental planning systems. From fiscal and tax incentives to industry subsidies and infrastructure or transportation program design, a myriad of incentives and disincentives shape the decisions and interventions that play out across our land, often leading to adverse outcomes, such as a loss of agricultural land, environmental degradation, high housing prices or costlier services. This paper shares a conceptual framework for the governance of land use encompassing a range of policies and other factors across scales that shape how land is used and managed. This framework encourages consideration of the incentives, disincentives and complementarities across a range of policies and practices and the need for stronger alignment to meet land management goals.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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