Living space and the struggle against geothermal energy projects in Flores, Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Framed as part of the country's green energy transition, the Indonesian government declared Flores a “Geothermal Island” in 2017. However, geothermal projects have provoked strong opposition due to concerns about risks of water and air pollution, lethal accidents, and loss of livelihoods. This article examines how two Manggarai communities on Flores have struggled against geothermal development by mobilizing around the defense of ruang hidup or “living space,” a term that expresses the inseparable unity of homes, fields, water sources, and ritual sites - that is, of land, community, and ancestors. Although indigeneity is a contested category in Indonesia, these communities have strategically positioned themselves as indigenous through their articulation of ruang hidup in relation to the principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). These articulations, rooted in local practices of dwelling and place-making, and expressed through acts of translation that enable the scaling up of their claims, have led to temporary halts in projects funded by the World Bank and German Development Bank. The article contributes to geographies of indigeneity and decarbonization by showing how the contingent articulation and translations of living space have reshaped the meaning and implementation of geothermal energy projects.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".