Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this essay I examine ‘ethical’ western tourism in Garbage-City, Cairo, to demonstrate how contemporary international governance works through everyday practices in ‘non-western’ tourism destinations. To do so, I use ethnography and discourse analytic methods to analyse the ways in which tourism practices at this site regulate the conduct of individuals by shaping the subject positions of ‘western tourists’ and ‘Garbage-City residents’. I found that, on Garbage-City tours, western tourists were positioned as worldly in their unique knowledge of the ‘real’ Cairo and responsible in their support for the free-market recycling innovations of Garbage-City residents. Tourists were defined in relation to Garbage-City residents who were represented as marginalized, authentically local entrepreneurs. Drawing on governmentality and postcolonial approaches, I argue that western tourism practices in Garbage-City function as a technology of governance that reinforces neoliberal rationalities by naturalizing market-based environmental initiatives. Meanwhile, they obscure the ways that international and Egyptian neoliberal practices, in which tourists are complicit, have increased the marginalization of Garbage-City residents. The tour therefore functions less to teach tourists about the complex context of Garbage-City and more to shape the standards and means for individuals to become ‘good’ international neoliberal subjects who develop and fulfil themselves according to market logics. Western tourism and neoliberal practices in this contact zone ultimately define and privilege these international neoliberal subjects in relation to ‘others’. Studying western tourism therefore helps us understand how the co-positioning of western tourists and Garbage-City residents reproduces neoliberal forms of power that perpetuate (post)colonial asymmetries and exclusions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".