The Sustainability of Ohanami Cherry Blossom Festivals as a Cultural Icon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: One important form of sustainability is the continuation of culture and cultural practices. This study examined the case of Japanese Ohanami or cherry blossom festivals. Historically, Ohanami focused on the cherry blossom as a symbol of spring’s arrival, where communal aspects, consumption of sake and seasonal foods, painting or photography, and pilgrimages to sacred sites were used to celebrate the ephemeral aspects of blossoms, spring, and life. Methods: This study examines how cherry blossom festivals are celebrated and understood and how these celebrations are changing. Results: Current celebrations demonstrate several forces are changing this celebration. The changes in cherry blossom festivals are seen in four areas (bonding, cultural continuity, marketing exploitation, and cultural symbolism). Cherry blossom festivals are also observed overseas—at first glance this suggests its continuity, however, the ways in which Ohanami is observed raise concerns about the accuracy of this cultural practice. Conclusion: Ohanami celebrations are celebrated both in Japan and overseas, and although their practice continues, the nature of the cultural celebrations are changing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".