KERANGKA HUKUM BURSA KARBON DI INDONESIA: PERKEMBANGAN TERKINI DAN TANTANGAN KE DEPAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Carbon Exchange is a system that regulates carbon trading and/or carbon unit ownership records. The plan to implement a carbon exchange in Indonesia was certainly welcomed with great enthusiasm to encourage the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by imposing emission limits and trading permits or carbon units, as well as providing economic benefits for the country by increasing investment in the renewable energy sector and environmentally friendly technology. This article analyzes the latest developments in the legal framework related to carbon exchanges to support the carbon trading ecosystem in Indonesia. The research method used is normative juridical, namely literature legal research carried out by examining literature materials or secondary data. Comparisons were made in New Zealand, China, Canada, Germany regarding legal frameworks and emissions trading schemes. The research results show that several aspects of the carbon exchange legal framework are still needed to be sharpened and that they still need to be supplemented with derivative regulations to create a carbon exchange that is more conducive to service users. Best practices from the four countries become a reference for adjustments for the rapid acceleration of the Indonesian carbon exchange to become a bona fide exchange considering the size of the market and carbon potential in Indonesia. Abstrak Bursa Karbon adalah suatu sistem yang mengatur perdagangan karbon dan/atau catatan kepemilikan unit karbon. Rencana implementasi bursa karbon di Indonesia tentu disambut dengan sangat antusias dalam rangka mendorong pengurangan emisi gas rumah kaca dengan memberlakukan batas emisi dan memperdagangkan izin atau unit karbon, serta memberikan manfaat ekonomi bagi negara dengan meningkatkan investasi di sektor energi terbarukan dan teknologi ramah lingkungan. Tulisan ini menganalisis perkembangan terkini kerangka hukum terkait bursa karbon dalam rangka mendukung ekosistem perdagangan karbon di Indonesia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif yaitu penelitian hukum kepustakaan yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan-bahan pustaka atau data sekunder. Komparasi dilakukan di Selandia Baru, Cina, Kanada, Jerman terkait kerangka hukum dan skema perdagangan emisi. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa masih diperlukan penajaman dalam beberapa aspek terhadap kerangka hukum bursa karbon dan masih perlu dilengkapi dengan peraturan turunan dalam rangka menciptakan bursa karbon yang lebih kondusif bagi pengguna jasa. Best practices dari keempat negara menjadi acuan penyesuaian bagi semakin cepatnya bursa karbon Indonesia berakselerasi menjadi bursa bonafid mengingat besarnya pasar dan potensi karbon di 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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".