MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7035697143

African Water Laws: Plural Legislative Frameworks For Rural Water Management in Africa: an international workshop, Johannesburg, South Africa, 26-28 January 2005.

2017· article· en· W7035697143 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment for International DevelopmentEuropean CommissionNetherlands Organization for International Cooperation in Higher EducationUniversity of PretoriaUniversity of California, DavisInternational Development Research CentreUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsLegislatureWater tradingPluralWater sectorAdministration (probate law)Water industryIntegrated water resources managementWater useWater resourcesWater utility
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

flexible, adaptive to shocks and changes, locally appropriate • areas of jurisdiction often localized (yet: migration, transhumance, upstreamdownstream) • hierarchies/accountability, gender, age Customary arrangements Existence and effectiveness -2• context: predominance in rural Africa, globally least formalized (water) economy • evolution, impacts urbanization, literacy, religion, etc ?• local government: negotiated co-existence re-emergence, contest/ overlap, dwindling?Customary arrangements Existence and effectiveness -3• integrating uses, users, and sources, within cosmology • livelihood-oriented water development with incentives to invest • life-oriented sharing of god-given common resource • water authorities, committees, functional groupingsCustomary arrangements Existence and effectiveness: water-1 • hierarchies, e.g.gender • increased pressure on available water resources • limited access to technologies, mid-term credits, range of other factors for enterprise development • limited awareness of upstream-downstream Customary arrangements Existence and effectiveness: water-2 state statutory policies, law, administration custodian of the nation's water resources two roles • investor in hydraulic mission: increasing the pie • regulator: sharing a limited pie (workshop less focus on quality issues) Formal Investor in infrastructure development • colonial era: colonial minority • independence: majority, esp.domestic uses • IWRM: 'nation-wide, year-round water scarcity', so stifling water development for productive uses; ongoing domestic water development Formal -hydraulic mission Water use authorization • colonial era: expropriation by minority • independence: state property -dormant • IWRM: revival property issue to expand to rural areas through registration-cumauthorization-cum-taxation; basin institutions Formal -regulator Exception South Africa • hydraulic mission: domestic and productive water development for 'Historically Disadvantaged Individuals' • regulator in stressed areas • taking water from the haves to allocate to the havenots through compulsory licensing • taxation for self-financing, cross-subsidization • 19 basin institutions: state-steered participatory democracyFormal -to redress inequities• systematic design and implementation of complementary roles at nested levels • principles (e.g.CDD World Bank)• priorities of rural communities and their local governments as basis • integration e.g.multiple use water, other factors • subsidiarity: self-planning and implementation • financing stream downwards, fiscal strength • simplification bureaucracies • staff incentive structures to improve accountability downwards, etc. Formal recognition -genericRole government at local level • support (technical, financial, institutional, empowerment of marginalized) for storage and abstraction technologies Role government at basin level • informing and ensuring (?) access to basin/aquifer water resources Formal recognition -hydraulic mission -Examples role government in local conflict management (dry season): • 'nested arbiter' at highest customary tier and lowest formal tier • codification into formal law/bye-laws (stifling?removing safety nets for poorest?) • bottom-up participatory water management • formalizing proportional shares of dry season flows over river stretches Formal recognition -regulator at local level -1 Impact of formal permits ?Administration • "cadastre disaster" of registering many scattered, remote, illiterate users • transition, forever, phased ?• only existing collectivities?Formal recognition -regulator at local level -2 Impact of formal permits -ctd ?Effectiveness • inadequacy permit information (sites, volumes in annual averages, if available) • enforcement of upper ceiling impossible • corruption-prone Formal recognition -regulator at local level -3 Impact of formal permits -ctd ?Effectiveness • criminalizes (!) all non-registered users • distorts customary arrangements • ownership contested • confusion, forum shopping • 'I paid, so I can use' Formal recognition -regulator at local level -4 Impact of formal permits -ctd ?Effectiveness • compatibility with role as nested arbiter ?• discourages investment in storage Formal recognition -regulator at local level -5 Impacts of permits: aggregate local problems ?Water resources planning • information value of registration • unpacking 'water scarcity' by area and season 'problemsheds' Formal recognition -regulator at basin level -1If stress and zero-sum allocation: government's political choice• Recognizing customary and/or small-scale uses for compensation, if taken away or sold • Prioritization by sector / people • Allocating future water development Formal recognition -regulator at basin level -2Implementation alternatives to permits • Blanket prioritization or authorization • to areas/groups • below thresholds colonial legacy of 'allocating' to the colonial labor power to survive ?Human rights?Democratic equal rights for all ?• Other measures: legal aid, strategic links, effective devolution Formal recognition -regulator at basin level -3 Conclusions

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207