THE IMPLEMENTABILITY OF LOW CARBON CITIES IN THAILAND: A CASE OF HAT YAI CITY MUNICIPALITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The movement for low carbon cities has substantially received attention and cooperation from many countries around the world, including developed and developing countries, which have and have not ratified the Kyoto Protocol. Many developed countries and members of the Annex-I parties to the Kyoto Protocol (e.g., China, Japan, United Kingdom, Canada, America, Germany, and other European Union members) have already implemented schemes of low carbon cities using multi-actor mechanisms that form robust participation among public sectors, private entities, civil societies, and local communities (Van der Heijden, 2016). Currently, low carbon cities are widespread. Many of these cities are in 27 European Union nations (daGraaCarvalho et al., 2011)to ensure that 20% of final energy Abstract: This study aimed to describe the importance of low carbon policies and address strategies to promote community participation in implementing low carbon cities. Hat Yai City Municipality was observed as a case study on policy and participation. Although Hat Yai is an important economic city in Southern Thailand, it is prone to climate change threats and impacts. The study employed a qualitative design. Primary and secondary data were collected from documents, semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and participant observations. Thirty-seven key informants comprising 7 policy representatives of Hat Yai City Municipality, 20 stakeholders in low-carbon model communities, 4 private sector members, 2 media workers, 2 NGO members, and 2 civil society representatives were involved. Through content analysis and data triangulation, the results revealed key influencing factors of low carbon city implementation. The results revealed that the success of low carbon cities depends on the three P-S-P factors. The initial letter P refers to policies at the national and local levels. The following letterS refers to stakeholders who should be fostered on networking and cooperation. The final letter P refers to participation, which should be encouraged through context-based promotion of learning, whereas a cooperation network should be expanded to reach all stakeholders in society.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".