MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403238424 · doi:10.29313/bcsurp.v4i3.13135

Tingkat Kinerja Implementasi City branding “Solo, The Spirit of Java” di Kota Surakarta

2024· article· en· W4403238424 on OpenAlexaff
Luqmanul Hakim, Ernady Syaodih

Bibliographic record

VenueBandung Conference Series Urban & Regional Planning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSMEs Development and Digital Marketing
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJavaBusiness administrationBusinessSociologyComputer scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. City branding aims to create a positive image and attractiveness of the city, attract tourists, investment, as well as promote economic growth and overall development of the city. Surakarta is identified as one of the cities that has implemented a city branding strategy, as a cultural city with the slogan “Solo, The Spirit of Java”. However, there is no research that identifies the performance in implementing the city branding “Solo, The Spirit of Java”. Meanwhile, branding should involve sustainable and integrated management, not just a logo or slogan. Therefore, this research aims to identify the level of performance in implementing the city branding “Solo, The Spirit of Java” in Surakarta City. This research uses a qualitative approach, with the delphi method to collect assessments from respondents of the Surakarta City Government. The indicators used to assess were prepared using the theoretical approach of the City Brand Management (CBM) Model (Gaggiotti, 2008). The data collection methods used were questionnaires and interviews. The results of this study indicate that in general, the performance in implementing the city branding “Solo, The Spirit of Java” of Surakarta City is sufficient with a score of 3.17 on a scale of 1-5, which consists of a good value of the cultural element aspect; a sufficient value of the aspects of infrastructure development, community empowerment, policy, governance, monitoring and evaluation, and stakeholder synergy; and a poor financing aspect. This research is expected to provide an overview of the existing performance in implementing city branding in Surakarta City. Abstrak. City branding bertujuan untuk menciptakan citra positif dan daya tarik kota, menarik wisatawan, investasi, serta memajukan pertumbuhan ekonomi dan pembangunan kota secara keseluruhan. Surakarta diidentifikasi sebagai salah satu kota yang telah menerapkan strategi city branding, sebagai kota budaya dengan slogan “Solo, The Spirit of Java”. Meski demikian, belum ada penelitian yang mengidentifikasi kinerja dalam pengimplmenetasian city branding “Solo, The Spirit of Java”. Sedangkan branding seharusnya melibatkan manajemen yang berkesinambungan dan terintegrasi, bukan hanya sekedar logo ataupun slogan. Maka dari itu, penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengidentifikasi tingkat kinerja dalam pengimplementasian city branding “Solo, The Spirit of Java” di Kota Surakarta. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif, dengan metode delphi untuk menghimpun penilaian dari responden Pemerintah Kota Surakarta. Indikator yang digunakan untuk menilai disusun dengan menggunakan pendekatan teoritis mengenai City Brand Management (CBM) Model (Gaggiotti, 2008). Adapun metode pengumpulan data yang digunakan dengan menggunakan kuesioner dan wawancara. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa secara umum kinerja dalam pengimplementasian city branding “Solo, The Spirit of Java” Kota Surakarta sudah cukup dengan skor 3,17, yang terdiri dari penilaian aspek unsur budaya yang baik; aspek pengembangan infrastruktur, pemberdayaan komunitas, kebijakan, tata kelola pemerintahan, monitoring dan evaluasi, dan sinergitas pemangku kepentingan yang cukup; serta aspek pembiayaan yang masih kurang baik. Penelitian ini diharapkan dapat memberikan gambaran mengenai kinerja eksisting dalam pengimplementasian city branding di Kota Surakarta.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBandung Conference Series Urban & Regional PlanningSame topicSMEs Development and Digital MarketingFrench-language works237,207