Coal mine management in East Kalimantan: a review of public policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problems posed by coal mining in East Kalimantan have an environmental impact and an imbalance of economic growth with social development. In practice, mine management that does not meet the principles of good management, such as corrupt practices, uncontrolled mining permits, indicates the need for a particular study related to coal mining policies and regulations in East Kalimantan Province. Therefore, this paper is intended to analyze aspects of coal mining policy and regulation as well as policy implications to improve coal mining governance, especially in the perspective of preventing corruption in coal mining management in East Kalimantan. This research uses the desk study method with descriptive analysis of related literature related to coal mining management, especially in East Kalimantan. The results of this study indicate that the governance of coal mining in East Kalimantan needs to be improved in the context of Law Number 3 of 2020 concerning Amendments to Law Number 4 of 2009 concerning Mineral and Coal Mining through the application of natural resource management principles as well as the application of the concept of governance. , the need to improve policies and governance of coal mines (licensing, transparency, and law enforcement) and the need to strengthen the institutional system in the management of this mine.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".