Women in Bamenda : survival strategies and access to land
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report is a historical-anthropological study of the survival strategies of urban women in the town of Bamenda in West Cameroon, insofar as they are related to changing access to land. The emphasis is on historical developments from the sixties on, a period in which the commercialization and urbanization of Bamenda has accelerated. The author inquires into the present importance of land as a source of income for women, and examines the alternatives that are developed in situations of land shortage, such as in a densely populated quarter of Bamenda town. Although theoretically urban women have more economic sources at their disposal than just land (such as trade or formal employment), various ideological and socioeconomic forces seem to cooperate in preventing them from exploiting these sources to the full. The author examines these obstructive factors and looks into the strategies adopted by women to acquire access to economic resources. For this purpose, she compares the situation of 'big' business women to that of small women traders in Bamenda. One of women's strategies is to start a court action to defend or claim their rights to land. In order to understand the character of their conflicts special attention is paid to the development of legal pluralistic land tenure systems in western Cameroon and the specific land rights of women
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".