MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2488599977 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v11-n3-325-333

Assessing the sustainability of tourism products – as simple as it gets

2016· article· en· W2488599977 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fabian Weber, Barbara Taufer

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityTourismProduct (mathematics)BusinessValuation (finance)PortfolioEnvironmental economicsSustainable developmentSustainable tourismDestinationsProcess managementEnvironmental resource managementMarketingEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The balance between the three dimensions of sustainability forms the basis for the successful development of a tourism region.The development of sustainable products is crucial for a destination in order to create true sustainable experiences for their guests.The research project aimed to determine the criteria for sustainable tourism and to develop a simple method for the sustainability assessment of tourism products.While most valuation methods require the presence and the analysis of a comprehensive data set, the assessment tool should enable the destination to analyse the sustainability of their products as easily as possible.Together with five Swiss tourism destinations an assessment tool was developed and tested.In a first step, the central sustainability criteria for tourism products were defined based on existing criteria sets.Then an inventory of all tourist products was created.Every single product was quantitatively assessed with regards to the sustainability criteria by the project manager of the destination management organisation (DMO).Their experiences were evaluated through qualitative interviews.The sustainability assessment using the framework showed various challenges such as the dependence of the prior knowledge of the evaluator.The variety of the products also hampers a consistent assessment and a comparison between destinations.The strengths of such a simplified model are that it allows a comparison to changes of sustainability in the product portfolio over time.In addition, it promotes the internal discussion and awareness.Using the new framework during the development of new products helps to take all criteria into account.It also supports the connection with service providers and the communication of sustainability requirements.The instrument tested represents a compromise that reduces complexity and enables the assessment of sustainability without the use of a comprehensive monitoring system -as simple as it gets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicEnvironmental Sustainability in BusinessFrench-language works237,207