An Industry Stakeholder SWOT Analysis of Wine Tourism in the Okanagan Valley, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Until the last decade British Columbia was not well known as an area that produced premium wines. In 1994 Mission Hill Wineries, located in the heart of the Okanagan Valley, won the prestigious Avery Trophy for the best Chardonnay, beating out entrants from all the major wine growing regions in the world. Since that time many other accolades and awards have followed. These achievements reflect an increase in the quality of wine produced and level of viticultural expertise since the ‘rebirth’ (Aspler, 1999) of the British Columbia wine industry brought about by massive replanting programmes in response to the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which liberalised export markets and made the production and sale of wine significantly more competitive in both the United States and Canada (Hackett, 1998). To the growing awareness of domestic and international markets, the British Columbia wine industry has been able to reinvent itself as an international premium vinifera wine producer (Aspler, 1999).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".