MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047231774 · doi:10.1139/x04-184

Forest harvesting, resource-based tourism, and remoteness: an analysis of northern Ontario's sport fishing tourism

2005· article· en· W2047231774 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Len M. Hunt, Peter C. Boxall, Jeffrey Englin, Wolfgang Haider

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of AlbertaMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks
FundersMinistry of Natural ResourcesNorthwestern University
KeywordsFishingTourismRevenueResource (disambiguation)BusinessForest managementGeographyRecreationEnvironmental resource managementNatural resource economicsEconomicsFisheryForestryEcologyFinanceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper assesses the impact that the routine application of Ontario's forest management planning process has on the revenue generation of sport fishing tourism sites. The analysis employs a hedonic pricing model to examine jointly these effects on revenue for three tourism experiences. These tourism experiences offer different degrees of remoteness, and as a consequence, require different levels of effort and cost to visit. Modelling the relationship between price and attributes of sites such as remoteness permits the analysis to forecast the revenue generation potential of sport fishing tourism sites under a range of forest management schemes. The results show that the extent of forest harvesting had no statistical relationship with prices charged for fishing packages at road-, boat-, or train-accessible sites and a negative but small impact on the prices charged for fishing packages at sites accessible by float plane.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207