Discourses of Non-Formal Pedagogy in Two Youth-Oriented Indonesian Environmental NGOs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractThis article compares two youth-oriented ENGOs (Environmental Non-Government Organisations) in Indonesia. Comparative analysis focuses on how the two organisations provide discourses that configure differently the pedagogic space of experiential learning for children and young people. Despite an apparent low level of environmental awareness generally among the Indonesian population there does seem to be some enthusiasm for environmental activities among certain groups of young people. However, it seems different kinds of young people are drawn to different kinds of environmental activities. Conceptually, if we accept that there is an imagined space of the nation (Anderson, 1991) we can logically propose an imagined national space of the physical environment. Thus different agents of change will imagine and configure this space differently so that certain kinds of engagement and learning follow. Escobar (1999) points out that what we perceive in the environment as is always also cultural and social. So for example, transnational logging companies understand the Indonesian forests as a natural resource to be exploited, while student nature-lover groups - Mahasiswa Pencinta Alam - constitute forests as recreational places to camp and walk in nature. This paper examines two ENGOs designed to appeal to young Indonesians: Sahabat Alam - Friends of Nature - founded in 2008 by a 12 year old schoolgirl after Jakarta flooding, and Tanam Untuk Kehidupan - Planting for Life - an arts collective which aims for learning about the environment through creative practices and festivals in Salatiga.Keywords: non-formal education, environmentalism, Indonesia, NGOs, young people1. Introduction1.1 Indonesia and Environmental AwarenessThe Indonesian archipelago is a site of extraordinary tropical biodiversity. However, a long history of natural resource extraction has stripped forests away and damaged ecosystems, sometimes irreparably. The islands are vulnerable to rising sea levels and geothermal activity. Illegal forest burning blankets the nearby region in thick, choking smoke every year. Concerted action needs to be taken now to reverse damaging environmental trends that threaten not only the nation, but the region and the world, since Indonesia is the world's third largest emitter of greenhouse gases that cause global climate change (Measey, 2010, p. 31). Yet relatively little is happening on the ground.Indonesia is the largest Muslim majority country in the world, with a population of over 250 million. The median age is 28.9 years, and 44 per cent of the population lives in urban areas (BPS, 2012). Indonesia is currently ranked at only 121 of 187 countries according to the 2013 Human Development Index. There are still high levels of poverty, unemployment and corruption (World Bank, 2013). The current strong economic growth rate signals the expansion of the urban middle class, incurring higher rates of domestic consumerism, energy usage and CO2 (Savage, 2012, p. 244), with more industry, more vehicles, larger houses, more roads and greater stress on already weak urban infrastucture such as water supply, drainage, rubbish disposal and sewerage. Urban prosperity has also seen an increase in resource-intensive shopping mall culture (Douglass et al., 2008). In other words, as the nation has grown economically, so has the negative impact on the urban environment.The countryside has also felt the impact. 80 per cent of Indonesian greenhouse gas emissions result from changed land use following logging and forest/swamp fires, especially deforestation (World Bank, 2011). The Kyoto Protocol was signed by Indonesia in 1998 and ratified in 2004. However, despite policies and regulations to reduce greenhouse emissions by roughly 26 per cent (World Bank, 2010), and the goal of a 41 per cent reduction with donor assistance, progress has been slow. Legal implementation and enforcement remains very weak (Measey, 2010, 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".