MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226481189 · doi:10.21787/jbp.13.2021.555-567

Implementation of Village Fund Management Policy Affirmation in Village Development

2021· article· en· W4226481189 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Bina Praja · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLocal Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentGovernment (linguistics)Agency (philosophy)Distribution (mathematics)Community developmentEconomic growthVillage communitiesService (business)Community organizationBusinessPublic administrationPolitical scienceSociologyMarketingEconomicsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pendulum direction of development which initially only leans in the city is now directed to rural areas. Affirmation of government policies to villages is evidenced by the distribution of Village Funds since 2015. This study aims to find out how the implementation of village fund management in village development is through the role of village governments with an approach to rights of origin and local authority on a village scale. This study uses an explanatory approach by combining a case study design with a comparative study, which focuses on conducting an in-depth study on the role of village government in village development in Sirnagalih Village, Cipongkor District, West Bandung Regency. Data sources include the Village Head, Village Apparatus, Regional Personnel, and Training Agency, Village Community Institutions and Village Traditional Institutions, Community Leaders, Head of Subdistrict and Echelon Officials in the subdistrict, Head of Regency Village Community Empowerment Service and Echelon Officials at the Village Community Empowerment Service, as well as elements of the Community. The data analysis method used was qualitative analysis. The analysis results show that village development has a very strategic role in spurring regional development. It happens because it contains elements of equitable distribution of development and its results and directly touches the interests of the majority of the people who live in rural areas. It was found that village development programs and activities responsive to Community need to have resulted in high community participation. Therefore, the optimization of development implementation is influenced by community participation activities in implementing and preserving development results. For this reason, the main solution that needs to be given to the problem of managing Village Funds in Village development is the application of policy affirmations in the management of Village Funds.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.447
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.325 · 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