Main Article Content

Abstract

Environmental and sustainability issues are currently important in economic activities. One of the widely discussed environmental and sustainability issues is air pollution from coal burning in power plants (PLTU), which is not environmentally friendly or renewable. Besides the benefits felt, especially in electrical energy, it has negative economic, social, and environmental impacts, especially for local communities. Therefore, solutions are needed to minimize the negative impacts. The first three stages of design thinking, empathize, define, and ideate, become the initial stages to validate the ideas generated before further implementation. Literature study results show that idea generation is done using an empathy map in the empathize stage. The empathize stage indicates that handling air pollution from coal burning in PLTU is not yet optimal, causing public anxiety due to the resulting impacts. Therefore, efforts are needed to minimize the negative impacts. The define stage explains that emissions contributed by coal-fired power plants amount to 35%, and the sustainability of coal fuel is still questionable, thus requiring other fuel sources and a concept to obtain this biomass. The ideate stage produces a community ecosystem model through an intercropping pattern of energy crops that offers increased economic, social, and environmental benefits and reduces the negative impacts of air pollution from coal burning.

Keywords

Community Ecosystem Model Design Thinking Energy Crops Intercropping

Article Details

How to Cite
Fitria , R. ., Yuliariskha, F., Kharisma, M. F. U. H. ., & Asep Taryana. (2025). Model of Community Ecosystem Through Intercropping Pattern of Energy Crops With Design Thinking Approach. Golden Ratio of Data in Summary, 5(3), 79–86. https://doi.org/10.52970/grdis.v5i3.921

References

  1. Amaliani Putri S, Intan Sari D, Marzuki K, Taryana A, Bisnis M, Bisnis Institut Pertanian Bogor S. Journal of Technopreneurship on Economics and Business Review Penerapan Design Thinking Eco-Boba dalam Pemanfaatan Limbah Cacahan Plastik dan Kemasan Paket E-commerce. 3(2):2022. https://jtebr.unisan.ac.id.
  2. Chasanidou D, Gasparini AA, Lee E. 2015. Design Thinking Methods and Tools for Innovation. Springer International Publishing Switzerland. 1: 12-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20886-2_2.
  3. Cheng Y, Huang M, Chen M, Guan K, Bernacchi C, Peng B, Tan Z. 2020. Parameterizing Perennial Bioenergy Crops in Version 5 of the Community Land Model Based on Site-Level Observations in the Central Midwestern United States. J Adv Model Earth Syst. 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001719.
  4. Darmawan K, Setiawan AA, Dewayanto N. 2023. Potensi Perbandingan Pemanfaatan Kaliandra (Calliandra Calothyrsus) Dan Gamal (Gliricidia Sepium) Sebagai Co-Firing Untuk Potential Comparison Of The Utilization Of Kaliandra (Calliandra Calothyrsus) And Gamal (Gliricidia Sepium) As Co-Firing To Meet Fuel Needs For Pltu Sudimoro Pacitan—volume ke-02.
  5. Dennehy D, Kasraian L, O'Raghallaigh P, Conboy K, Sammon D, Lynch P. (2019). A lean start-up approach for developing minimum viable products in an established company. Journal of Decision Systems. 28(3): 224–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2019.1642081.
  6. Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral (ESDM). 2021. Cadangan Batubara Masih 38,84 Miliar Ton, Teknologi Bersih Pengelolaannya Terus Didorong. Diakses 28 Oktober 2024. https://www.esdm.go.id/id/media-center/arsip-berita/cadangan-batubara-masih-3884-miliar-ton-teknologi-bersih-pengelolaannya-terus-didorong.
  7. Khodaei S, Abdelrazeq A, Isenhardt I. (2023). Towards categorizing ethical questions in data literacy.
  8. Isadora FR, Hanggara BT, Mursityo YT. 2021. Perancangan user experience pada aplikasi mobile homecare Rumah Sakit Semen Gresik menggunakan metode deign thinking. Jurnal Teknologi Informasi dan Ilmu Komputer. 8(5): 1057- 1066. https://doi.org/10.25126/jtiik.202184550.
  9. Pande M, Bharathi SV. (2020). Theoretical foundations of design thinking – A constructivist learning approach to design thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 36: 1–17. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100637.
  10. Raditya Warman G, Kristiana R. 2018. Mengkaji Sistem Tanam Tumpangsari Tanaman Semusim. Volume ke-15.
  11. Sanderson MA, Archer D, Hendrickson J, Kronberg S, Liebig M, Nichols K, Schmer M, Tanaka D, Aguilar J. 2013. Diversification and ecosystem services for conservation agriculture: Outcomes from pastures and integrated crop-livestock systems. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems. 28(2):129–144. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170512000312.
  12. Sarooghi H, Sunny S, Hornsby J, Fernbacher S. (2019). Design thinking and entrepreneurship education: where are we, and what are the possibilities?. Journal of Small Business Management. 57: 78–93. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12541.
  13. Skaggs, P. (2018). Design thinking: empathy through observation, experience, and inquiry. Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC, USA.
  14. Wang A, Lv J, Wang J, Shi K. (2022). CO2 enrichment in greenhouse production: Towards a sustainable approach. Front Plant Sci. 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1029901.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.