Trade-offs between dimensions of sustainability: exploratory evidence from family firms in rural tourism regions
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
Family firms often pursue social and environmental sustainability, or corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts that go beyond regulations. This is particularly true in nature-based industries. This study draws on socio-emotional wealth (SEW) and tourism literatures, as well as random utility theory, to disentangle the drivers of sustainability in rural tourism family firms (RTFFs). Informed by interviews, this study applied a novel choice-method survey, that brings understanding to the CSR payoffs and trade-offs between ecological, social and economic attributes in RTFFs. The results from 152 family firms in Western Austria show that after satisfying financial requirements, RTFFs are predominantly motivated by ecological and social considerations. The findings indicate that RTFFs obtain greater utility from positive ecological and social outcomes than additional financial profits, which the authors hypothesise is because of family-related SEW dynamics that enhances CSR. The findings from this study offer theoretical and practical insight into the motivations for proactive sustainability strategies among RTFFs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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