MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063173004 · doi:10.1080/09669582.2011.558626

Rethinking resort growth: understanding evolving governance strategies in Whistler, British Columbia

2011· article· en· W2063173004 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Tourism · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsCorporate governanceWhistlerPolitical scienceGeographyEnvironmental resource managementEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines shifts in governance and management strategies that have occurred in response to endogenous and exogenous pressures on the mountain resort of Whistler, British Columbia. Since its inception in the mid-1970s, Whistler has pursued successive innovative management approaches that have emphasized growth. The most recent approach, integrated comprehensive sustainability planning, reflects a response to reaching the planned limits of resort development and suggests the emergence of a new “corporatist” governance model based on principles of sustainability. However, the complex effects associated with exogenous factors, such as the global economic crisis, hosting the Winter Olympic Games and the increasing political necessity of collaboration with local First Nations (indigenous peoples), raise questions concerning the degree to which Whistler is “locked-in” to the pro-growth model of governance. A path dependency framework is employed to explore and explain Whistler's evolving forms of governance. While briefly reviewing the earlier pro-growth path of Whistler's development, particular attention is paid to factors underlying the implementation and continuing challenges of the comprehensive sustainability governance model. Other issues explored include the viability of no-growth governance, the issues surrounding growth limits and the role of “The Natural Step” framework in tourism governance.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.228 · 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