Tourism, protected areas and development in South Africa: views of visitors to Mkambati Nature Reserve
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tourism to areas of natural beauty has recently been seen as one of the fastest growing interests in many countries around the world. This brand of tourism also encompasses celebrating and sharing with tourists the uniqueness and diversity of different cultures in areas visited. Through a case study of current tourism trends in Mkambati Nature Reserve on the Wild Coast, where an ambitious ecotourism project under the auspices of the Spatial Development Initiative (SDI) is planned, this paper attempts to emphasize the role played by local visitors in making ecotourism a success or failure. The study found that local tourists are currently the majority of visitors to Mkambati Nature Reserve. It also shows that while unimpressed with infrastructure and other services, local tourists are prepared to spend money to enjoy the quietness that is offered by protected environments. However, local tourists to Mkambati are not as enthusiastic about visiting and sharing experiences in adjacent rural areas. If based on current trends, then planning of ecotourism ventures should, at least initially, be based on local visitors ’ patterns. Key words: conservation, development, recreation, visitor preferences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it