Social Acceptance: Mapping the Perspectives of Stakeholder in the Development of Geothermal Power Plants in West Sumatra, Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Indonesian government is pushing for an increase in the development of geothermal power plants.West Sumatra is one of twenty provinces in Indonesia that have geothermal potential.The government has given the company permission to develop geothermal potential in two districts in West Sumatra.Phase I development has been successfully carried out in South Solok Regency, while Solok Regency has experienced problems.Social acceptance is one of the determining factors for the success of the project development.This article aims to look at the perspectives of stakeholders around the geothermal field, and analyze the social acceptance of a geothermal power plant project in West Sumatra.This research uses case study research method.Data collection is done by interview, observation, and document studies (such as Environmental Impact Assessment documents, government regulations on geothermal, and local media news).The results show that there are variations in stakeholder perspectives regarding geothermal power plants.Public acceptance of the geothermal power plant in South Solok Regency is relatively good because the company positions the surrounding community as partners.Social acceptance at the project site in Solok Regency was relatively weak and there was a resistance movement.Socio-political acceptance (by various stakeholders such as the Provincial Government, Regency Government, Nagari Government, and Regional House of Representatives) tends to be substantial due to the multiplier effect of development.This study has limitations in looking at the dynamics of local politics, which are the determinants of support, and the readiness of the Regional Government to face the rejection phenomenon at the local level.This is an input for further research, because in this study it was found that social acceptance requires the support and readiness of the Regional Government.So that the rejection by the local community can be resolved, so that the extraction of electrical energy goes according to the government's target, and the rights of the local community in the project site area are fulfilled.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".