MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2556593470 · doi:10.24043/isj.346

Tourism as the development driver of Easter Island: the key role of resident perceptions

2016· article· en· W2556593470 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Eugenio Figueroa B., Elena S. Rotarou

Bibliographic record

VenueIsland Studies Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersUniversidad de Chile
KeywordsTourismTourism geographySustainable tourismPerceptionSmall islandSustainable developmentGeographyCorporate governanceEcotourismEconomic growthBusinessEconomyEconomic geographyPolitical scienceEconomicsPsychologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Residents’ attitudes concerning tourism evolution and impacts in tourism host localities are a crucial determinant of the ability of the tourism sector to develop. Easter Island has recently experienced a tremendous tourism growth, which has nurtured expectations that the tourist sector could become the economic driver of the island. Using fieldwork, interviews and surveys, we investigate residents’ perceptions towards tourism and analyse their implications for the sector’s future development. The survey results show that 96% of residents believe that tourism is important or very important for the island’s economy. We conclude that while residents of Easter Island are aware of tourism’s negative impacts, they support the tourism sector, because they recognize it as the main future driver of the island’s economy. However, due to the current environmental threats and the serious governance problems of the island, it is not clear if further expansion of the tourism sector will be sustainable.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations25
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIsland Studies JournalSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207