MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415649507 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18110603

Financing Rural Futures: Governance and Contextual Challenges of Village Fund Management in Underdeveloped Regions

2025· article· en· W4415649507 on OpenAlex
Ari Warokka, Vetaroy Warokka, Aina Zatil Aqmar

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLocal Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceSustainabilityInvestment managementGood governanceDeveloping countrySustainable developmentQuality (philosophy)Natural resource

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective management of village funds is central to financing sustainable and equitable rural futures, particularly in underdeveloped and resource-diverse regions such as Papua, Indonesia. This study explores the governance factors that shape the sustainability of village fund management (VFM) by examining institutional, financial, and socio-cultural dimensions across 212 villages. Primary data from village heads and secondary data on village-owned enterprises (BUMDes) and 2024 village fund allocations were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), and multi-group analysis (MGA). Seven key governance constructs emerged, with ethical governance, implementation capacity, mandatory disclosure and reporting, community participation, and financial management capacity demonstrating significant positive effects on sustainable VFM outcomes. In contrast, perceived social and economic impacts were negatively associated with performance, and planning quality exerted an influence only under specific contextual conditions. These relationships proved highly context-dependent, varying by geography, natural resource availability, transport accessibility, and demographic composition. The findings underscore the need for adaptive and context-sensitive governance strategies to strengthen institutional resilience, enhance fiscal equity, and maximize the developmental impact of village funds in underdeveloped rural regions.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.250 · 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