Balancing Infrastructural Development and Social Welfare: An Islamic Perspective on the Ibadan Circular Road Project Controversy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the controversy on the Ibadan Circular Road (ICR) project in Oyo State, Nigeria, particularly its impact on residents displaced in six local government areas: Ido, Akinyele, Egbeda, Ona-Ara, Lagelu, and Oluyole. While the project aims at urban renewal and benefits for residents and commuters, many argue that the government's approach has imposed hardship on those displaced, leading to allegations of unfair practices. The study examines the issue through the lens of Islamic governance and urban development systems, suggesting that contemporary leaders can learn to balance infrastructure development with social justice. Using qualitative case study methodology, including government documents and surveys of 60 out of the displaced residents, the findings indicate that at least 500 individuals have become homeless due to government-initiated demolition. The paper recommends that the state government should have adopted Caliph Umar’s principles to ensure a balance between development and social welfare, setting a positive precedent for future projects.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".