Impact of Tourism and Urbanization on Water Supply and Water Quality in Manali, Northern India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eighty percent of Indians drink polluted water and annually more than two million people die of enteric diseases caused by consumption of polluted water. Water shortages are also important, since water supply is unreliable even in larger centres (such as Calcutta) or not present at all. This study assesses the impact of tourism and urbanization on the water supply of Manali, a town in the Indian Himalayas, and on the water quality of the river that flows through the town. I used structured and unstructured interviews, published and unpublished documents and field observations. The results provide insight into the drinking water situation in terms of quantity and quality, the pollution sources of Manali, and their impact on the water quality of the Beas River. Findings reveal that water demand during the peak tourist season is critical despite augmentation of the water supply system. Water-borne diseases occur in all areas despite the location of drinking water sources upstream from major contaminants. The water quality in the Beas River in Manali is generally good, but urbanization and tourism affect the downstream water quality.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".