Effects of tourism growth in a UNESCO World Heritage Site: resource-based livelihood diversification in the Galapagos Islands, Ecuador
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
In the Galapagos, as elsewhere, tourism is promoted as a means of reconciling biodiversity conservation interests with the economic aspirations of local populations. However, the rapid expansion of tourism has triggered concerns about both social and biophysical impacts that may threaten sustainable development of the islands. These concerns, coupled with mounting constraints imposed by conservation regulations, have particular significance for two locally important resource-based livelihoods: fishing and agriculture. This paper examines recent patterns of livelihood diversification within these two sectors, and explores reasons behind livelihood decisions that people make, either to maintain existing resource-based activities or to transition into emergent livelihood opportunities. We examine drivers and inhibitors of diversification, focusing particularly on opportunities associated with tourism growth. Through a mixed-methods approach, we explore the perceptions, motivations, and actions of those still engaged in farming and fishing on the Galapagos’ three most populated islands. Results show that many are drawn to tourism, but there are notable differences in the appeal of, and the obstacles to, diversification. Considering the importance of both conservation and tourism in this iconic destination, these findings have significant implications for the role of sustainable tourism on the islands, and for the optimization of the conservation-tourism alliance elsewhere.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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