Synchronization Of the RTRW Utilization Program to The RPJMD and RKPD of North Lampung District In 2020-2024
Bibliographic record
Abstract
North Lampung Regency currently has a North Lampung Regency RTRW for 2014-2034, apart from that, North Lampung Regency has also prepared a medium-term development plan in the form of an RPJMD document and an annual short-term one in the form of an RKPD document. The mandate of Law Number 26 of 2007 concerning Spatial Planning as amended by Law Number 6 of 2023 concerning the Determination of Government Regulations in Lieu of Law Number 2 of 2022 concerning Job Creation into Law states that spatial planning plans must be able to act as direction. regional development. Synchronization of spatial plans with regional development plans ensures the implementation of regional development well. However, synchronizing space utilization programs in regional spatial plans with development plans has problems in North Lampung Regency. Therefore, the aim of this research is to evaluate the synchronization of the North Lampung Regency RTRW medium-term space utilization program with the North Lampung Regency RPJMD in 2020-2024 and evaluate the synchronization of the North Lampung Regency RTRW short-term space utilization program with the North Lampung Regency RKPD in 2020-2024. The research method uses quantitative descriptive analysis with secondary data from planning documents in the North Lampung Regency Government. The research results show that the synchronization of the medium-term space utilization program (RTRW-RPJMD) is still not optimal, with low levels of synchronization dominating. This is caused by a lack of socialization and involvement of implementing agencies in the preparation of spatial planning and development documents. Furthermore, at the short-term level (RTRW-RKPD), the level of synchronization is also relatively low. Several factors that are obstacles include inadequate planning, budget limitations, lack of community proposals, land availability, and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".