Peninjauan Perencanaan Spasial dan Tata Kelola Pemerintahan dalam Pengembangan Kota Tambang: Studi Kasus Kabupaten Musi Banyuasin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More than 50% of Musi Banyuasin Regency's gross regional product performance comes from coal mining, making it one of the districts in South Sumatra where mining business activities dominate. The transformation of Musi Banyuasin Regency into a mining city is a complex process, requiring the fulfillment of numerous factors to establish an environmentally sustainable mining city that enhances community quality and city welfare. The goal of this research is to examine the level of implementation of the mining town governance system by the Musi Banyuasian Government. The research employs a qualitative approach through a comprehensive examination of various planning documents in Musi Banyuasin Regency, highlighting the potential for mining sector activities. However, the incorporation of these activities into the regional development framework remains unclear. This condition presents numerous problems and challenges for the urban governance system, particularly in achieving sustainable development in the Musi Banyuasin Regency area. Abstrak: Pertambangan batu bara berkontribusi lebih dari 50% terhadap performa produk domestik regional bruto Kabupaten Musi Banyuasin, yang mana hal ini menempatkan Kabupaten Musi Banyuasin sebagai salah satu kabupaten di Sumatera Selatan yang digerakkan oleh kegiatan usaha pertambangan. Perwujudan Kabupaten Musi Banyuasin menjadi Kota Tambang tidak mudah, ada banyak faktor yang harus dipenuhi agar dapat tercipta kota tambang yang berkelanjutan secara lingkungan dan dapat meningkatkan kualitas kesejahteraan masyarakat dan kota. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis sejauh mana sistem tata kelola kota tambang telah diterapkan oleh Pemerintah Musi Banyuasian. Dengan metode kualitatif berupa telaah mendalam pada beberapa dokumen perencanaan yang berlaku di Kabupaten Musi Banyuasin, pada dasarnya potensi kegiatan sektor pertambangan telah disebutkan, namun pengintegrasian kegiatan pertambangan dalam konsep pembangunan wilayah masih belum terdefinisikan dengan jelas. Kondisi ini menjadikan sistem tata kelola perkotaan yang digerakkan oleh kegiatan usaha pertambangan menghadapi banyak permasalahan dan tantangan, terutama dalam mewujudkan pembangunan wilayah Kabupaten Musi Banyuasin yang berkelanjutan.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".