MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W346499713

Some Cultural and Historical Factors Influencing Rural Maori Tourism Development in New Zealand

2009· article· en· W346499713 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chrys M. I. Horn, Brenda Tahi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of rural and community development · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)TourismColonialismFace (sociological concept)Economic growthRural areaSociologyRuralityGeographyPolitical scienceSocial science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rural Maori face more challenges when setting up businesses than their urban or non-Maori counterparts. New Zealand's colonial history provides an important context for Maori development, particularly in rural areas where the effects of the marginalisation created by colonial processes are still strongly evident. Within this context, a range of other factors comes into play. These are the cultural calls that rural M?ori have on their time, the ways in which cultural practices clash with commercial practice, the expectations that rural M?ori have of business development, the ways in which land ownership operates, and the historical factors that have left rural M?ori marginalised and in a position of trying to recover what they have lost. Infrastructural issues and geographic isolation also create challenges for rural people over and above the challenges experienced by urban dwellers, whether M?ori or non-Maori. Participatory Action Research; Maori Culture; business development; Rural development

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of rural and community developmentSame topicRural development and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207