MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999183285 · doi:10.5539/eer.v10n1p1

Community Participation in the Community Nursery Program in Manokwari Regency, West Papua Province

2020· article· en· W2999183285 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jacob Manusawai, Eva Herlina, Ihwan Tjolli, Rina Nelly Jowei, Anton S. Sinery

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy and Environment Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMethodology and Impact of Social Science Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocializationCommunity participationEthnic groupBusinessSocioeconomicsSociologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to determine and analyze the degree of community participation in the Community Nursery (Kebun Bibit Rakyat-KBR) program in Wasai Village and Arfai I Village, the district of South Manokwari, in the Manokwari Regency. Also this study aims to identify the factors that influence the level of community participation, and then formulates several management efforts to improve community participation in the program. The result found that communities that get involved in the KBR program are community groups of various types of professions, ethnicities and genders. The level of community participation in the KBR program is included in the high category for the whole set of activities in the KBR. However, for activities related to technical knowledge on planting and administration, community participation was still low. The significant factor affects the successful implementation of the KBR program was the direct involvement of community leaders. The support and involvement of community leaders played an important role in motivating the community to actively age in the KBR program. In addition, financial benefits of the program for individuals and village communities became the other determining factor that motivated the community to actively join in the KBR program. The alternative formulation offered in the early preparation of KBR activities was the program socialization. The early information has to be designed more effectively, so that the community is able to understand the procedures for implementing the KBR program, especially activities related to technical knowledge. Moreover, the involvement of other community leaders was a concern for the implementation of the KBR program since they were considered as the role models of social communities. Finally, collaborative programs with multi-stakeholders would be a solution to provide multiple benefits for the community as part of regional and national development goals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.366
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.135 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy and Environment ResearchSame topicMethodology and Impact of Social Science ResearchFrench-language works237,207