MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008998533

Democracy, participation and empowerment: Poverty alleviation programs in Sleman, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

2009· article· en· W7008998533 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Administration in Developing Nations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsPovertyGovernment (linguistics)EmpowermentUnemploymentGlobalizationCulture of povertyBasic needsAdministration (probate law)Citizen journalism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Keywords: poverty; micro credit; good governance; international social work; Indonesia. Indonesia has experienced a shift from authoritarianism to democracy since the late 1990s. After the severe economic crisis of 1997, which ultimately forced Soeharto to relinquish power, Indonesia embarked on a more liberal and participatory form of democracy. To overcome the economic and social crisis that caused many to fall into poverty, the new government administration launched a number of poverty alleviation programs. This dissertation explores one such effort, namely, the Program Penanggulangan Kemiskinan di Perkotaan (P2KP), an extensive scheme that utilized democratic, participatory, and empowerment approaches to help the poor deal with unemployment and other problems of poverty. Using qualitative methodology, this study has explored and examined the process and outcomes of poverty alleviation programs in several villages in the southern parts of Sleman District, Yogyakarta Special Province, Indonesia, from February-May 2006. The thesis begins with a review of the literature on the factors leading to poverty, development and participation, globalization and its negative impacts, and various strategies for ending the problems of poverty, such as multiple occupations, empowerment, and human capital improvement. Findings were based on interviews, observation, and reviews of written documents concerning the P2KP poverty alleviation programs. Over 30 individuals were interviewed, ranging from government officials to facilitators and organizers of the programs, non-government activists, and the poor who benefitted or were excluded from the programs. The process of the es

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicPublic Administration in Developing NationsFrench-language works237,207