MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412159950 · doi:10.3389/past.2025.14918

The Community Land Act and the subdivision of Kenya’s Maasailand’s remaining commons: implications for community conservation

2025· article· en· W4412159950 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gabriella Santini

Bibliographic record

VenuePastoralism Research Policy and Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland Management and Livestock Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaRoyal Anthropological InstituteNational Commission for Science, Technology and InnovationParkes Foundation
KeywordsCommonsSubdivisionEnvironmental planningGeographyNature ConservationEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceEcologyEconomicsLawArchaeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The introduction of the Community Land Act (2016), heralded by Kenya’s National Land Policy under its 2010 Constitution, reignited debates around the formalisation of customary property rights, leading many Maasai group ranches to dissolve communal land into private, individualised parcels rather than register as community lands. This trend has often resulted in land enclosures and unsustainable resource use, threatening vital community-managed resources such as forests, grasslands, and wildlife. This study employs a qualitative comparative case study of two Maasai group ranches’ transition to private tenure in order to investigate local perceptions of the CLA and the factors motivating communities to move away from communal land holdings. It also examines how the two different approaches to land subdivision affect resource management and conservation outcomes. It draws from ethnographic fieldwork conducted in Oloirien (Narok County) and Olgulului/Ololarashi (Kajiado County), including semi-structured interviews, household questionnaires and participant observation, conducted between 2022 and 2023 among Maasai communities, as well as a review of secondary sources. The findings reveal that Olgulului/Ololarashi, which integrated demands for private property rights with communal access and management of the commons, was able to mitigate many unintended consequences of privatisation, such as path dependency and resource fragmentation. In contrast, Oloirien’s approach led to increased land enclosures and weakened collective management. This paper argues that, in an enclosure context, conservation initiatives that allow for the continuity of customary resource management and give people a tangible stake in projects are more likely to foster a collective sense of environmental responsibility and stewardship. These insights have broader relevance for land policy and conservation strategies across African rangelands.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.021
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePastoralism Research Policy and PracticeSame topicRangeland Management and Livestock EcologyFrench-language works237,207