MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2524765330 · doi:10.22500/sodality.v4i2.13377

KONFLIK PENGGUNAAN LAHAN DI TAMAN NASIONAL GUNUNG HALIMUN SALAK KABUPATEN LEBAK -- Land use Conflict in Gunung halimun Salak National Park Lebak District

2016· article· en· W2524765330 on OpenAlexaff
Nurman Abdul Hakim, Kukuh Murtilaksono

Bibliographic record

VenueSodality Jurnal Sosiologi Pedesaan · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureGeographyNational parkForestrySettlement (finance)Agricultural scienceAgroforestryEnvironmental scienceBusinessArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>ABSTRACT<br />Development for conservation, agriculture and settlements have equal importance for humankind. Reality showed, conflict is occured because of each goal use its own knowledge and values. The conflict was found in the forest area of Gunung Halimun Salak National Park. The study aimed to identify the landuse conflict between conservation with agriculture, settlement, include mining, and identify the strategic issues that arised from the conflict. This study was conducted in Gunung Halimun Salak National Park at Lebak regency. The study using qualitative and quantitative approach. Spatial multicriteria analysis was employed to identify the areas of conflict. List of issue derived from three sources: observing landuse conflict map, discussion with the expert and stakeholder’s strategic document. The strategic issues is classifyed based on level of agreement among experts.The result showed that conflict which had been occurred between conservation and agriculture of 22,061.11 ha (49%); between conservation and settlement of 1,830.36 Ha (4%); and between conservation and mining of 26,007.86 Ha (58 %). Analysis of strategic issues leads to 11 issues were grouped to three agendas, namely (1) Tenure and environmental damage, (2) disaster mitigation and food security, and (3) infrastructure development for agriculture and settlement.<br />Keywords: Gunung Halimun Salak district Lebak, landuse conflict, landuse preferences, multicriteria analysis.</p><p>ABSTRAK<br />Pembangunan untuk tujuan konservasi, pertanian dan permukiman memiliki nilai penting yang setara demi kesejahteraan manusia. Kenyataan menunjukan bahwa ketiga tujuan tersebut kerap berbenturan dan menimbulkan konflik karena masing-masing menggunakan pengetahuan dan nilainya sendiri-sendiri. Konflik tersebut dijumpai di kawasan hutan Taman Nasional Gunung Halimun Salak. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengidentifikasi konflik penggunaan lahan antara konservasi dengan pertanian, permukiman termasuk pertambangan, serta mengidentifikasi isu strategis yang muncul dari konflik yang terjadi. Penelitian dilakukan di kawasan hutan Taman nasional Gunung Halimun salak di Kabupaten Lebak. Penelitian ini menggunakan kombinasi pendekatan kualitatif dan kuantitatif. Analisis spasial multikriteria digunakan untuk mendeskripsikan area-area yang mengalami konflik. Isu-isu digali dari pengamatan peta konflik, wawancara narasumber ahli dan kajian dokumen strategis. Perumusan isu strategis didasarkan pada tingkat kesepakatan diantara para narasumber. Hasil penelitian memperlihatkan terjadi konflik penggunaan lahan antara konservasi dengan pertanian seluas 22.061,11 ha (49%); antara konservasi dengan permukiman seluas 1.830,36 Ha (4%); dan antara konservasi dengan pertambangan seluas 26.007,86 Ha (58 %). Terdapat 11 isu strategis yang dirumuskan menjadi 3 kelompok isu dan diajukan sebagai agenda bersama pengelolaan konflik penggunaan lahan, yaitu: (1) Isu lingkungan dan penyelesaian tenurial, (2) Isu mitigasi bencana dan ketahanan pangan, dan (3) Isu pengembangan infrastuktur pertanian dan permukiman.<br />Kata kunci: TNGHS Kabupaten Lebak, konflik penggunaan lahan, preferensi penggunaan lahan, analisis multikriteria.</p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSodality Jurnal Sosiologi PedesaanSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207