ADS tour operators’ perspective of the Chinese tourism market and sustainable strategies for developing the Auckland city destination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report the findings of an exploratory research paper undertaken in Auckland, New Zealand which focused on the Approved Destination Status (ADS) inbound tour operators’ understanding of the Chinese market and their strategies for developing Auckland as a sustainable destination. Design/methodology/approach – Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten managers out of the 25 registered ADS inbound tour operators. The qualitative responses were coded and analysed using pattern identification and categorisation of emergent themes. Findings – The findings profile New Zealand ADS inbound operators, summarise their knowledge of the Chinese market in terms of visitor expectations and characteristics, present the operator’s perceptions of Qualmark quality accreditation scheme and ADS Code of Conduct, and demonstrate the quality management initiatives they have developed in addition to addressing the issues within the Chinese market operation. Originality/value – The study provides implications for destination marketers and tour operators in terms of the sustainable operation of the growing Chinese market.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".