MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739563981 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v10n4p56

Institutional Structure Models in Implementation of Spatial Planning

2017· article· en· W2739563981 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ngakan Made Anom Wiryasa, Ngakan Ketut Acwin Dwijendra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLocal Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpatial planningZoningPlan (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Marine spatial planningSanctionsDevelopment planService (business)Local governmentPosition (finance)Control (management)BusinessEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementGeographyPolitical sciencePublic administrationEconomicsMarketingEngineeringCivil engineeringManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the implementation of spatial planning involves two components: natural and human, with their interaction. Interaction of the both causes a conflict of interest and will also affect the ecosystem and social system. The spatial plan needs to be regulated as an institution to achieve the spatial orderly. Based on these problems, the purpose of this study was to obtain structural institutional models in the implementation of spatial regulations. Data obtained by depth interviews in 75 (seventy five) interviewees. Data processed by the methods of ISM (Interpretive Structural Model). The conclusions of this research are: (i) the regulation direction which is the task of the government in spatial planning must consider the welfare of the people, the human right, and indigenous peoples rights as outlined in the form of spatial structure plan, spatial pattern plan, and the establishment of strategic areas. Spatial planning will go well in the event orderly. Orderly space will be achieved when people pay attention to the direction of zoning, the direction of licensing, intensive disincentives, the direction of sanctions, minimum service standards and monitoring procedures. (ii) The control and supervision of a government authority that is guided by the spatial structure plan, spatial pattern plan, and the determination of strategic areas as outlined in the form national spatial planning, wich in details contained in the main indication of the development program, land uses, water control, air uses, and spatial planning provincial strtegic areas. (iii) The position of the government in spatial planning, in accordance goverment of the structure beginning with spatial of national planning and thereafter in accordance with the following order: long- term development plan/annual, spatial plans (regency/city), reference of the traditional village, the main indication of the development program, land uses, water control, air uses, and spatial planning provincial strtegic areas.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.016
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicLocal Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207