MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013181639 · doi:10.23912/9781911396734-4242

Sustainable Tourism Policy Frameworks

2019· book-chapter· en· W3013181639 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexandra Coghlan

Bibliographic record

VenueGoodfellow Publishers eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal ProtocolRatificationTourismSustainable tourismEuropean unionOzone layerSustainabilityPolitical scienceBusinessEnvironmental planningInternational tradeGeographyMeteorologyPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Having looked at the external and internal challenges facing the move towards more sustainable tourism, and the impacts of tourism, you should now be wondering how sustainability in tourism can be turned into more than an ideal. Perhaps one of the most obvious way to achieve this is simply to regulate the sector. After all regulation worked for the ozone layer: scientists raised the alarm in the 1970s that a hole was appearing in the atmosphere’s ozone layer, caused by Ozone Depleting Substances or ODS (most notably CFCs) and resulting in adverse effects on human health and the environment. By 1987 the Montreal Protocol was established to phase out the use of ODS, and by June 2015, all countries in the United Nations, the Cook Islands, Holy See, Niue and the supranational European Union had ratified the original Protocol. The result was a 98% drop in ODS since ratification, and the hole is expected to have fully repaired itself by 2050. A significant achievement in terms of international cooperation, based on scientific advice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.006

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGoodfellow Publishers eBooksSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207