Ethical and sustainability dimensions of foodservice in Australian ecotourism businesses
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first decades of the twenty-first century are witnessing growing public interest in the ethical and sustainability dimensions of food production and consumption. Increasing numbers of consumers are buying meat that has been produced using ‘free-range’ rather than intensive, ‘factory-farm’ methods and for seafood harvested from sustainable fisheries. This paper examines the ethics and sustainability of food provision within the specific context of ecotourism. The websites of a sample of Australian accredited ecotourism businesses were subjected to content analysis to assess the extent to which ethical and sustainability dimensions of food production, distribution and consumption were mentioned and discussed. Findings suggest that overall very few ecotourism businesses mention ethical and sustainability dimensions of food on their websites. Food and wine ecotourism operators were more likely than ecolodges or wildlife tourism operators to acknowledge aspects of ethical sourcing of food and food sustainability. Operators with the highest level of ecotourism certification did not perform better than other operators in terms of the website descriptions of their foodservice business practices in relation to ethics and sustainability.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it