MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387432611 · doi:10.23920/litra.v2i1.1014

ANALISIS YURIDIS TERHADAP PROGRAM PEMBANGUNAN FOOD ESTATE DI KAWASAN HUTAN DITINJAU DARI ECO-JUSTICE

2022· article· id· W4387432611 on OpenAlexaff
Rizkia Diffa Yuliantika, Imamulhadi Imamulhadi, Supraba Sekarwati

Bibliographic record

VenueLITRA Jurnal Hukum Lingkungan Tata Ruang dan Agraria · 2022
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Security and Socioeconomic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceEstateForestryBusinessGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRAK Pada tahun 2020 Presiden Joko Widodo mengemukakan wacana pembangunan food estate sebagai respon atas peringatan krisis di masa pandemi Covid-19. Maka dari itu untuk memenuhi kebutuhan pangan dalam negeri, pemerintah menerbitkan Peraturan Menteri LHK No.24/2020 melalui Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan tentang Penyediaan Kawasan Hutan untuk Pembangunan Food Estate, yang kemudian peraturan tersebut dicabut dan digantikan dengan PermenLHK No. 7 Tahun 2021. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kebijakan pembangunan food estate di kawasan hutan memiliki banyak problematika, yaitu bertentangan dengan peraturan yang lebih tinggi serta masalah dalam pengimplementasiannya. PermenLHK tersebut juga bertentangan dengan nilai-nilai keadilan ekologi di mana seharusnya manusia hidup berdampingan dengan harmonis bersama alam. Kata kunci: Kebijakan, Keadilan Ekologi, Lumbung Pangan, Penggunaan Lahan. ABSTRACT In 2020 President Joko Widodo announced a discourse on food estates as a response to the crisis warning during the Covid-19 pandemic. Therefore, to meet domestic food needs, the government issued Minister of Environment and Forestry Regulation No. 24/2020 through the Ministry of Environment and Forestry concerning Provision of Forest Areas for Food Estate Development, which was later revoked and replaced by PermenLHK No. 7 of 2021. The results show that the food estate development policy in forest areas has many problems, namely contrary to higher regulations and problems in its implementation. The PermenLHK also contradicts the values of ecological justice where humans should live side by side in harmony with nature. Keywords: Ecological Justice, Food Estate, Land Use, Policy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLITRA Jurnal Hukum Lingkungan Tata Ruang dan AgrariaSame topicFood Security and Socioeconomic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207