MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388070027 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.181003

Socioeconomic Impacts of New Settlement Development on Local Communities: A Case Study in Pattalassang Sub-District, South Sulawesi, Indonesia

2023· article· en· W4388070027 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mimi Arifin, Wiwik Wahidah Osman, Andi Nada Zahirah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Fiscal Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitas Hasanuddin
KeywordsSettlement (finance)Socioeconomic statusGeographySocioeconomicsEnvironmental planningEnvironmental protectionBusinessSociologyPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid population growth and the development of new settlements have led to significant and uncontrolled land use change, particularly the conversion of agricultural land to residential areas.This study explores the socioeconomic impacts of such changes in Pattalassang District, South Sulawesi, Indonesia, a newly established satellite city.Using qualitative descriptive analysis, spatial analysis, and quantitative analysis, as well as SWOT analysis, we found that the conversion of agricultural land into settlements has led to an increase in population, changes in social activities, a decline in traditional harvesting culture, and a decrease in crime rates.Economically, these changes have opened up new employment sectors, created side jobs, reduced unemployment, and increased incomes and land prices.However, our analysis also revealed that 5.46% of residential land in 2011 and 30% in 2021 did not improve.Comply with spatial plans.Our findings underscore the need for coordination of spatial planning policies at the provincial, district, and metropolitan levels and emphasize the importance of consistent and transparent policy implementation, particularly in relation to protected paddy fields.

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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicEconomic Growth and Fiscal PoliciesFrench-language works237,207