Bentuk dan Tingkatan Pelibatan Masyarakat dalam Proses Serah Terima PSU di Perumahan BMI 2 Karawang
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. This study examines community involvement in the handover process of Public Infrastructure, Facilities, and Utilities (PSU) at Bumi Mutiara Indah (BMI) 2 Housing Complex, Cikampek, Karawang Regency. The research is motivated by the phenomenon of delayed PSU handovers due to weak coordination among developers, local government, and residents, which hampers proper maintenance and decreases the quality of public services. The objective of this study is to identify the forms of community participation, analyze enabling and inhibiting factors, and propose a more collaborative model of engagement. A qualitative approach was employed using thematic analysis supported by NVivo software. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with residents, and community figures, complemented by field observations of PSU conditions. The findings reveal that residents’ participation remains limited to community meetings and informal monitoring, while involvement in formal administrative processes is minimal. Key enabling factors include strong local leadership and collective awareness. The analysis highlights the importance of adopting a collaborative participation model grounded in communicative planning and Islamic values (syura, amanah, and adl), to ensure that PSU handovers are more transparent, accountable, and sustainable. Abstrak. Penelitian ini membahas pelibatan masyarakat dalam proses serah terima Prasarana, Sarana, dan Utilitas (PSU) di Perumahan Bumi Mutiara Indah (BMI) 2 Cikampek, Kabupaten Karawang. Permasalahan penelitian berangkat dari fenomena banyaknya PSU yang belum diserahterimakan akibat pengembang yang tidak bertanggung jawab, lemahnya koordinasi antara pemerintah daerah dan warga, sehingga berdampak pada keterbatasan pemeliharaan serta menurunkan kualitas pelayanan publik. Tujuan penelitian untuk mengidentifikasi bentuk partisipasi masyarakat, faktor pendukung dan penghambat efektivitasnya, serta merumuskan model pelibatan yang lebih kolaboratif. Metode penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan teknik thematic analysis dengan memakai perangkat lunak NVivo. Data dikumpulkan melalui wawancara mendalam dengan warga, forum warga serta dilengkapi observasi lapangan terhadap kondisi fisik PSU. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa partisipasi warga masih terbatas pada forum musyawarah dan pengawasan swadaya, sementara keterlibatan dalam proses administratif sangat minim. Analisis menegaskan pentingnya model partisipasi kolaboratif berbasis communicative planning dan nilai Islam (syura, amanah, adl) agar serah terima PSU dapat lebih transparan, akuntabel, dan 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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 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".