MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032248610 · doi:10.1080/1743873x.2011.632483

An analysis of the literature at the nexus of heritage, tourism, and local economic development

2011· article· en· W2032248610 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle Madden, Robert Shipley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Heritage Tourism · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismNexus (standard)Heritage tourismLocal economic developmentTourism geographyRural tourismWork (physics)Set (abstract data type)SociologyRegional scienceMarketingPolitical scienceEconomic growthBusinessEconomicsComputer scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is clear that tourism is an important industry. It is equally true that it is being pursued in many areas as an alternative to more traditional economies that have failed. Often tourism is based on local heritage resources such as older buildings and customs that attract visitors. The concepts of heritage, tourism, and local economic development are therefore linked in many places but researchers have not necessarily explored all the possible links. This paper first selects articles and books that deal with all three of these subjects, draws out the themes contained in them, and finally analyzes the relationships among them. The works identified were classified according to their focus, what they are about; their locus, where they refer to; and intent, what the authors set out to do. Each one of those categories was then subdivided further. The extent to which papers in these different categories relate to each other or overlap was described. The purpose is to expose the places where more work is needed and where research opportunities lie. While the strongest link is between papers that are analytical in intent and deal with rural tourism, there are also connections between papers analytical in intent and focussed on society or economic development. Weaker connections are noted between studies that are theoretical in intent while focussing on and tourism or society.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score0.839

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Heritage TourismSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207