MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3132113088 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2021.2.009

Country governance, tourism and environment quality: An emerging economy perspective

2021· article· en· W3132113088 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sadaf Akram, Nayyer Sultana, Tanzilla Sultana, Mamoona Majeed, Rufia Saeed

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismLanguage changeCorporate governanceGovernment (linguistics)BusinessQuality (philosophy)Rule of lawPoliticsControl (management)Work (physics)Public economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of the study has two folds: first, the study analyzes the role of country governance in tourism. Second, the study investigates the impact of tourism on the environmental quality. For this purpose, the data from 1997 to 2018 are collected from the World Bank and Global Economy. Augmented Dickey Fuller (ADF) test and ordinary least square regression models are used to analyze the impact. The study finds positive impact of rule of law, control of corruption, political stability and government effectiveness on tourism. The study also finds a negative relation between tourism and environmental quality of Pakistan. The study recommends the tourism destination planners to continuously monitor their country and to work with the government towards stability and protection and safety of tourists and for the general public. The rules to control corruption must also be implemented in a blanket form. The study also recommends the researchers to promote research on the relationship between country governance and tourism. Overall, the evidence of the study provides innovative information regarding the impact of country governance on tourism and tourism on environmental quality, which political leaders, tourist analysts and policymakers can use to shape policies in order to promote the tourist industries.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.892

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207