MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416220750 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2025-0205

The influence of forestland tenure security on rural labor migration—further discussion based on migration location

2025· article· en· W4416220750 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Longjunjiang Huang, Xian Liang, Fangting Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTobit modelLeverage (statistics)Property rightsGovernment (linguistics)Survey data collectionLand tenurePublicity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amid China’s comprehensive deepening of the new round of collective forest tenure reform, we integrate legal, actual, and perceived levels of tenure security into an analytical framework. Using survey data from 508 rural households in the Jiangxi’s collective forest area, we apply Tobit and IV-Tobit models to reveal the impact of multidimensional forestland tenure security on labor migration, distinguishing between outside-of-county and intra-county labor migration, with heterogeneity across forestland management scales. Our results show that ownership of forest rights certificates and positive evaluations of the “separation of three rights” policy have significant positive effects on labor migration. Additionally, we uncover nuanced effects of tenure security on migration patterns, with different dimensions and scales influencing intra-county versus outside-of-county migration. These findings suggest that policymakers should focus on enhancing legal clarity, facilitating actual tenure stability to encourage rational labor migration, and optimizing rural resource allocation in China’s collective forest areas. As the collective forest rights reform continues to advance broadly, the government should strengthen the oversight system for policy implication, intensify policy publicity efforts, prioritize the implementation of local forest reform policies, and enhance farmers’ awareness and understanding of forest rights policies to fully leverage the positive role of forest rights safeguards.

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)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207