MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1939598755

Opportunities for marine research tourism in Australia

2009· article· en· W1939598755 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Wood

Notice bibliographique

RevueResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University) · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueTourism, Volunteerism, and Development
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésTourismWildlife tourismStakeholderMarine conservationEcotourismEnvironmental resource managementBusinessGeographyMarketingPublic relationsPolitical science
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Marine research tourism is defined as marine ecotourism where marine research is an important part of the tourism attraction (adapted from Benson, 2005). Marine research tourism is also a form of volunteer tourism (Benson, 2005). This paper reports on results from research that aimed to further understand the views of key stakeholders about potential opportunities for both marine research key stakeholders and tourists in Australia. (2009). For this paper, key Australian marine research tourism (marine research tourism) stakeholders include marine researchers, marine managers, marine conservation groups, marine education groups, and marine tour operators from Australia and elsewhere (adapted from Coghlan, 2007, Cuthill, 2000, Musso and Inglis, 1998). Furthermore, a marine research tourism product must last for one or more days, be advertised publicly, take paying tourists or paying volunteers, and operate on a commercial basis (adapted from Ellis, 2003a). An online survey and subsequent analysis of 49 key stakeholder views was undertaken. Stakeholders were asked their views about who are potential marine research tourists, what are likely activities and programs for marine research tourists, issues that affect the involvement of volunteers in marine research tourism, and stakeholder opportunities to provide services to marine research tourists. Survey results indicate that survey respondents consider potential marine research tourists to include marine wildlife tourists, repeat marine research tourists, ecotourists, scientists, volunteers, adventure tourists and SCUBA divers. Additionally, potential marine research tourists in Australia are more likely to be from countries such as Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Canada, Germany and New Zealand. Such information provided a foundation for the assessment of the preferences of potential marine research tourists for different marine research tourism products as undertaken by Wood and Zeppel (2008). With some exceptions, research outcomes suggests that opportunities for marine research tourism in Australia should focus mainly on ‘popular’ marine research topics whales, dolphin, turtle, seals, sharks, dugongs, penguin, coral reef, sea dragon, coral reef spawning and ship wreck research programs. The research programs that survey respondents appear to have some ambivalence (i.e. maybe or no) about are ship wreck, coral spawning and sea dragon research. Broader suggestions also included research related to climate change, and coastal clean ups. A survey respondent suggested that marine research program that provides a simple mechanism for tourists to get involved and actually participate in the research process is a potential marine research program for marine research tourism. Simple marine research activities such as undertaking bleach watch, coral watch, fish counts, taking notes, plankton sampling, using cameras and video, temperature measurements, habitat restoration, and data input into a computer are also highlighted as suitable for inexperienced marine research tourists. Such results indicate that opportunities to involve inexperienced volunteer minded tourists in active volunteer tourism roles on marine research tourism ventures that need advanced marine research skills are limited. However, it is suggested that less active but still inexperienced tourists can be catered by quality interpretation, close observation of marine research, and closer interaction with marine researchers. Survey respondents considered that there are many existing marine tourism ventures such as SCUBA diving, snorkelling, live aboards, aquariums, day cruises, fishing boats, intertidal walks, and coastal based research tours, that can be adapted to marine research tourism. Furthermore, much of the Australian coastline and marine areas have been identified as likely marine research tourism destinations. The main reasons for excluding parts of the Australian marine environment were considered to be relative closeness to population centres and tourism infrastructure, and have relatively comfortable coastal and ocean environments. Special emphasis is placed on World Heritage and marine parks as suitable marine research tourism attractions. Much interest was placed on the increased role of Indigenous Australians in marine research tourism in Australia. In summary, this information indicates the potential range of marine research tourism attraction across Australia. However, to further ascertain the full potential of marine research tourism in Australia, there needs to be a study of the preferences of the potential marine research tourism market for different types of marine research tourism ventures as undertaken by Wood and Zeppel, (2008). A likely hindrance to development of marine research tourism in Australia is acknowledged difficulty for marine researchers to supervise volunteer tourists. A marine research tourism guide role is suggested to interpret the marine research to tourists, and ensure that the needs of marine researchers, managers and tourists are met. While a majority of key stakeholders would likely consider this to be good idea, the research suggests that some marine researchers would be hesitant about this suggestion. Factors that would influence the supervision of volunteer tourists are said to include the role of the personalities of researchers and tourists, quality communication, research complexity, training protocols, and time available to the volunteer tourist. Many marine researchers may also be reticent to encourage the development of marine research programs that involve tour guides, operators and tourists. Furthermore, many marine researchers and managers appear to have an ambivalent view towards the helpfulness of actively involving the tourist within the marine research activity. Most key stakeholders groups also appear to have warranted concerns about any training schemes for potential marine research tourists. Together these results indicate that that many marine researchers and managers are concerned about the involvement of tourism and tourists in marine research tourism. Such views and other stakeholder views are further assessed in Wood and Rumney, (2009). Research outcomes can be used by entrepreneurial MRT stakeholders to identify and develop MRT. Results are also intended to be directly relevant to marine research tourism in Australia, marine research tourism stakeholders from other locations.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,650
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0030,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,002
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,146
Tête enseignante GPT0,356
Écart entre enseignants0,210 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University)Même sujetTourism, Volunteerism, and DevelopmentTravaux en français237 207