Innovation in island ecotourism in different contexts: Yakushima (Japan) and Tahiti and its Islands
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
: This article examines whether the future of tourism in island destinations lies in more and continued innovation on the part of all stakeholders so tourists will consider the extra expense of travelling a worthwhile investment. Islands have long been icons as tourism destinations. However, established destination images can cause a lack in adaptability to changing markets. Though located in different parts of the world and seeking different markets most island destinations would benefit from innovative strategies and products to enhance their attractiveness to high yield visitors. The article uses two examples to analyse the innovative forms that have been adopted in island destinations in the hope they could become models or encourage imitation by other destinations. Two aspects of innovation are discussed. New imaginary can creatively and innovatively (re-)imagine representations; sustainability could be an important innovative pursuit, which requires new narratives for continued tourism growth. These concepts are applied next to the island of Yakushima in Japan and Tahiti and its Islands to determine the main innovative elements used or required to jumpstart the attractiveness of island destinations, though it is recognized that implementation is complex.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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