MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285094587 · doi:10.3390/su14148479

Ecolodge Entrepreneurship in Emerging Markets: A New Typology of Entrepreneurs; The Case of IRAN

2022· article· en· W4285094587 on OpenAlexaff
Hojjat Varmazyari, Seyed Hamid Mirhadi, Marion Joppe, Khalil Kalantari, Alain Decrop

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTypologyEntrepreneurshipTourismContext (archaeology)SeekersBusinessGrounded theoryMarketingProcess (computing)Emerging marketsAction (physics)Set (abstract data type)Industrial organizationQualitative researchSociologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to clarify how ecolodge entrepreneurship evolves from idea formation to ecolodge establishment in emerging markets. The related process affects authentic ecolodge development. The research employed grounded theory to explore this process and its implications to examine for the first time how individuals enter the ecolodge industry in an emerging market. The interaction of four constructs (namely drivers, motives, context, and idea sources) explains the costs and benefits that ecolodge entrepreneurs perceive in entering this industry. Moreover, we develop a new typology of tourism entrepreneurs in an ecolodge context based on the combined approach. Entrepreneurs are classified into three segments, including ecolodge lovers, cool job seekers, and young detached entrepreneurs. Although the ecolodge lovers were most in line with the principles of sustainable tourism and most likely to set up authentic ecolodges, most of the entrepreneurs belonged to the other two clusters. The explored process and typology highlight coordinated action in the development of ecolodges.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicEnvironmental Sustainability in BusinessFrench-language works237,207