Cultural Sustainability and Heritage Tourism Development: Problems in Developing Bun Festival Tourism in Hong Kong
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study contributes to the debate on tourism and local development through evaluating an ambivalent case of traditional festival revival and development in Hong Kong: the Bun Festival of Cheung Chau Island. The significance of this case is that it will put into relief the significance of ‘cultural sustainability’— an evaluative factor that is very insufficiently emphasized in current critical studies of tourism development. I will illustrate that the most often mobilized critiques against heritage tourism development— including cultural inauthenticity, commercialization, lack of local economic development, and local disempowerment— can be applied to the case of the Bun Festival revival. However, particular social circumstances are weakening the force of those critiques in the Hong Kong case. Many local residents of the Cheung Chau Island approve the neoliberal direction of tourist development and derive substantive benefits from it. Even critical commentators in Hong Kong are not entirely against it. This study will point to evidence and arguments that reveal a serious and neglected problem in Bun Festival tourism: that neoliberal exploitation of heritage tourism resources is threatening the cultural sustainability of historically inherited local practices in the long run.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".