MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076306843 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v2n3p34

Cultural Sustainability and Heritage Tourism Development: Problems in Developing Bun Festival Tourism in Hong Kong

2009· article· en· W2076306843 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Matthew Ming-tak Chew

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismSustainabilityCultural heritageAmbivalenceCommercializationTourism geographyPolitical scienceEnvironmental ethicsSociologyEconomyLawEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.272 · 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.

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

Citations21
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207