Design of Islamic Agricultural Insurance Model: Evidence from Indonesia
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The agricultural sector is a role model that can be the basis for policymakers to integrate Islamic insurance patterns in agriculture. This research aims to design a model of the Islamic agricultural insurance system based on Islamic law in the context of Indonesia. This study is expected to contribute for Indonesian government to accommodate the implementation of the Islamic agricultural insurance system and pattern in Indonesia. This study used an expert system approach through data collection and information as a reference in the formulation of model designs, including interviews, questionnaires, direct observation, and data synthesis in the field. This research stage used a systems development conceptual model described in the research process, including planning, analysis, design, verification, validation, and building models. The research hypothesis is confirmed that Islamic agricultural insurance can be implemented based on risk and investment with tabarru’ funds (mutual financial aid funds) and investment funds. Islamic agricultural insurance is a way out for farmers, especially Muslim farmers, in ensuring agriculture management by managing the level of risk due to crop failure. Islamic agricultural insurance systems can guarantee risks that arise in agricultural businesses to provide inner peace to farmers in getting the good and right protection for businesses that run following Islamic principles. This research has resulted in innovative features and development models of Islamic agricultural insurance for the Protection and Empowerment of Farmers in Indonesia.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it