MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2748295184 · doi:10.1080/14927713.2017.1366277

Sustainability initiatives in zoos and aquariums: looking in to reach out

2017· article· en· W2748295184 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sarena Randall Gill, Wayne Warrington

Bibliographic record

VenueLeisure/Loisir · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArizona State University
KeywordsSustainabilityVisitor patternBusinessPublic relationsAccreditationCommunity engagementMarketingStakeholder engagementSocial sustainabilityPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As leisure destinations, Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) accredited institutions provide opportunities to interact and potentially inspire long-term sustainable behaviours of millions of annual visitors. This article identifies and explores the internal sustainability initiatives of these institutions and their efforts to influence visitor behaviour through sustainability-focused messaging and engagement in sustainability practices, while also identifying barriers hindering implementation. The majority of institutions reported the presence of a ‘green team’ for instigating and executing internal initiatives. Initiatives focused largely on operational metrics around water, energy, waste and transportation. Primary barriers to implementation or maintenance of internal initiatives and visitor engagement were time, money and institutional culture. These barriers will require pragmatic solutions as AZA institutions progressively broaden support of sustainability and embedded conservation messages. Increased sharing of sustainability practices as well as incorporating community-based social marketing techniques and emerging research from social and environmental psychology into engagement strategies will benefit the industry.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeisure/LoisirSame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207