The Political Direction of Indonesian Economic Law as the Conception of Welfare State in the 1945 Constitution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Political law, political economy and political economy law are three concepts that arise from a deep understanding of the 1945 Constitution as statutory norms. A series that tries to align the interests and desires of the 1945 Constitution with the interests of the state and the people's wishes, which often have different views and practices between the two. This article aims to analyze the direction of Indonesian economic law politics policy in the Welfare State conception based on the 1945 Constitution. The method used is a normative juridical approach with descriptive-analytical techniques using qualitative juridical data analysis methods. This article concludes that the direction of Indonesian economic policy shows some adoption of neoliberalism values that have become references in the formulation of monetary policy in Indonesia. As a government law politics, the direction of economic policy must be oriented towards the institutionalization of the status of the Indonesian nation to advance the general welfare. And the "vehicle" for institutionalizing this staatsidee, as formulated in Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, is the concept of a welfare state.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".