MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145821733 · doi:10.1177/146735840200300303

Cultural and Heritage Tourism in Canada: Opportunities, Principles and Challenges

2002· article· en· W2145821733 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTourism and Hospitality Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismCultural heritageHeritage tourismDestinationsCultural heritage managementAppealMarketingResource (disambiguation)Product (mathematics)Industrial heritageTourism geographyDiversity (politics)Face (sociological concept)EcotourismBusinessQuality (philosophy)Public relationsPolitical scienceSociologyGeographyArchaeologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tourists today are increasingly seeking new and different experiences beyond those provided within ‘three S’ destinations and traditional holiday places. Heritage appeal within destinations is capturing the interest of a more mature and discerning market. Canada as a destination is well placed to benefit from this trend, marketing heritage over other forms of travel experience. This paper is in three parts. First, a discussion of heritage tourism in Canada is presented that stresses diversity over the myth of a product base that is limited around a few themes, namely Mounties, mountains and moose. Secondly, principles of sustainable heritage tourism are advanced that include authenticity and quality, conserving and protecting the resource base, provision of learning as integral to the experience, and the development of partnerships between hosts, guests and managers. Thirdly, based on field visits undertaken in 1998 to sites containing cultural and heritage tourism attractions within the provinces of Ontario (mainly the south-western region) and Alberta, these principles are examined and discussion is provided on the challenges managers of sites face in implementing such principles.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.400
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.026 · 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