Multi-Level Mining Governance in Guinea: The Case of the Local Economic Development Fund (FODEL) in the Bauxite Region of Boké
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
In 2010, Guinea, through multi-level governance, undertook profound legal and institutional reforms to promote more participatory, equitable and sustainable mining development and the bauxite region of Boké is at the heart of this vision. The Local Economic Development Fund (FODEL) anchored in the Mining Code in force, was deployed for this purpose in Boké in December 2019. However, its implementation conditions encounter several challenges and issues as revealed by the controversial narratives of the various social actors who diverge in the analysis of the emergence, operationalization and evaluation process of FODEL. The article highlights the conditions incumbent on each category of actors that would create a favorable environment to promote sustainable local economic development for the communities of Boké and ultimately initiate a transformation of mining governance practices and relations between social actors in a peaceful climate.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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