Canada's Tourism Industry—Mitigating the Effects of Climate Change: A Lot of Concern but Little Action
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
A case study conducted with the Canadian tourism industry identified that the level of awareness and participation in climate change mitigation strategies is low and that there is a need for further action if Canada is to position and market itself as a destination which is taking responsibility for climate change. This study used a qualitative approach that consisted of 24 in-depth interviews with Provincial Deputy Ministers of Tourism, other federal and provincial agencies, marketing bodies and industry associations across Canada. Results indicate that despite a relatively high level of awareness about climate change, the implementation of mitigation strategies was piece-meal in its approach. This non-regulatory approach to climate change action indicated that several small initiatives were taking place without significant collective action. This paper concludes that without national leadership on this issue, there is limited action occurring. A comprehensive, national regulatory framework is required in order to move the agenda forward to be able to market Canada as a responsible destination with regard to climate change.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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