A bibliometric analysis of ecotourism: A safeguard strategy in protected areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecotourism projects are mostly implemented in naturally fragile ecosystems as a savior of nature, culture, and indigenous people. This paper aims to make quantitative study of ecotourism in protected areas by using bibliometric analysis. VOSviewer, a popular bibliometric software, was used to analyze as many as 1182 research articles published from 2002 to 2020. Those articles were collected from the Scopus database. The study measured three distinct types of bibliometric indicators (quantity, quality, and structural indicators) to analyze the published articles scientifically. The analysis uncovers ecotourism research in protected areas as an emerging and predominant field of research with a sound growth in annual publications and citations. Importantly, the majority of ecotourism research articles are published in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, South Africa, Canada, and China. Nevertheless, ecotourism as a relevant research theme of is getting due importance in African and Asian countries for two key reasons: (1) wildlife and tribal populations, and (2) uncontaminated ecology and environment of ecotourism sites. Further, the main research themes of articles in the field of ecotourism in protected areas are broadly focused on conservation, visitor management, and community. Our findings reveal that controversial issues surrounding ecotourism and its relationship to protected areas, dominated by human-wildlife conflict, gender, and climate change, are attracting the attention of researchers worldwide.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.063 | 0.284 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".