MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3140923838 · doi:10.1111/csp2.425

Heterogeneous consumer preferences for local community involvement in nature‐based tourism drive triple‐bottom‐line gains

2021· article· en· W3140923838 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Science and Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Commission on Research, Science and TechnologyUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsTourismPreferenceGeographyMarketingLocal communityWildlifeBusinessValue (mathematics)Choice modellingEconomicsPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Relatively few studies have examined how the degree of involvement of local communities in nature‐based tourism, and the benefits that are generated for them, impact the choices that tourists make when visiting developing countries. We surveyed over 400 visitors in multiple locations in Namibia, using a discrete choice experiment to elicit preferences for attributes reflecting tracking safaris of the critically endangered, desert‐adapted black rhinoceros ( Diceros bicornis bicornis ) in the northwest of the country. Attributes included those related to local community involvement and the benefits they receive from tourism, as well as the reinvestment of tourism profits back into rhino conservation, and the wildlife likely to be seen on safari. Using a latent class model that assigned tourists to market segments based on the observed pattern of responses in the choice experiment, we find that respondents can be divided into four classes that reflect differences in tourism preferences and their own demographics and experiences. While responses to attributes varied across classes, respondents were consistent in demonstrating a strong preference for the largest share of profits being returned to the local community, and were willing to pay an additional $43–670 to ensure this happens. Respondents in the four classes differed in their views toward the financing of rhino conservation and the participation of community trackers in rhino safaris, although those respondents in the class most interested in rhino tracking safaris were willing to pay an additional $34 per trip for tracker involvement. Our results demonstrate the value of assessing heterogeneity in tourists' preferences for wildlife experiences, and suggest that appropriate pricing and marketing may result in “triple bottom line” gains for nature‐based tourism.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.250
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.080 · 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