MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212097164 · doi:10.36941/ajis-2021-0148

Ecotourism in Times of Covid-19: A Systematic Review from the Five Continents on How This Activity is Being Carried Out and What Proposals They Have for the Near Future

2021· review· en· W3212097164 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Víctor Hugo Fernández-Bedoya, Mónica Elisa Meneses-La-Riva, Josefina Amanda Suyo-Vega

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHalal products and consumer behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecreeTourismQuarter (Canadian coin)PopulationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ScopusPandemicEconomic growthEcotourismBusinessSustainabilityPolitical scienceGeographySocioeconomicsLawEconomicsEnvironmental healthMedicineMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of the covid-19 virus has prompted governments in several countries to close their international borders, close transportation routes and decree quarantines as a public health measure to prevent the spread of the virus among the population. Globally, essential businesses have continued to operate, while others such as tourism must wait. Ecotourism is a sustainable activity that attracts tourists concerned about the environment and local culture, which generates income for the locals. In order to have a broader picture of how the ecotourism sector is dealing with covid-19, a systematic review was conducted to identify Scopus records detailing such evidence disclosed from 2020 to the first quarter of 2021. As results, records were identified in the five continents, which agree that the pandemic has negatively affected the income of local people, who have been forced to close their businesses and even perform illegal acts; however, there are also encouraging proposals of economic reactivation plans presented by villagers, who expect the opening of this activity to operate keeping all the health safety measures decreed by their governments. Received: 6 May 2021 / Accepted: 27 September 2021 / Published: 5 November 2021

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0120.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic Journal of Interdisciplinary StudiesSame topicHalal products and consumer behaviorFrench-language works237,207