MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613333377 · doi:10.5539/ilr.v6n1p109

Empowering Fishermen through Local Wisdom and Sustainable Development: a Policy Research

2017· article· en· W2613333377 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sukarmi Sukarmi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Law Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and Coastal Ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainable developmentWelfareGovernment (linguistics)BusinessFishingLocal governmentCompetition (biology)Environmental planningEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomicsPublic administrationGeographyEcologyMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study was to observe to what extent efforts are taken by the local government of Demak Regency, Central Java Indonesia to empower the fishermen based on local wisdom, as well as what model is right with the sustainable development. Technically, the government can take benefit from this study to issue a policy of ‘empowering and protecting fisherman with sustainable development model. The regency has bio and non-bio potential resources. However, due to the lack of visionary attention to the resources and the absence of the comprehensive maritime planning, the ecology and the socio-economy of the area are facing serious problems, such as unhealthy competition in fishing in its multiple manifestations contributing to the poor welfare of the fishermen along the coastline. In-depth interviews were held among 20 fishermen to find out their wishes for improvement of the welfare. It was concluded that policies of pro-fishermen have to be developed on the basis of local wisdom and sustainable development and recommendations were offered accordingly.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Law ResearchSame topicMarine and Coastal EcosystemsFrench-language works237,207