MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103025774 · doi:10.1002/wcc.243

Challenges of tourism in a low‐carbon economy

2013· article· en· W2103025774 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismGreenhouse gasClimate changeLow-carbon economyNatural resource economicsBusinessClimate change mitigationGovernment (linguistics)Global warmingEconomyDecoupling (probability)EconomicsPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reviews the interrelationships of tourism and climate change from a mitigation perspective. Tourism is an increasingly important part of the global economy that is dependent on the annual movement of billions of travelers, often over large distances. The current contribution of the tourism sector to global climate change is reliably established at approximately 5% of CO 2 emissions, though national tourism economies can be considerably more carbon‐intense. Great uncertainty remains regarding tourism's future emission trajectories. However, in all scenarios, tourism is anticipated to grow substantially and to account for an increasingly large share of global greenhouse gas emissions, particularly if other sectors manage to achieve absolute emission reductions. The emission reduction challenges facing tourism in a low‐carbon economy are analyzed and current industry, government, and consumer responses critically examined. The article ends with a discussion of the implications of business‐as‐usual emissions trajectories versus the +2°C climate policy target for future tourism development. WIREs Clim Change 2013, 4:525–538. doi: 10.1002/wcc.243 This article is categorized under: The Carbon Economy and Climate Mitigation > Decarbonizing Energy and/or Reducing Demand Climate and Development > Decoupling Emissions from Development

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.146 · 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