Assessment of barriers for people with disability to enjoy national parks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is increasing awareness of the importance of nature-based recreation to human wellbeing. Given its significant benefits, natural-protected area management has not always provided equitable access to all potential users. Limited research till now has been focused on how the outdoor barriers impact the equal enjoyment of people with mobility/motor disabilities (PwMDs) of nature when promoting sustainable nature-based tourism. This study intends to shed light on those aspects which constrain the PwMD's enjoyment of the great outdoors at national parks (NPs). The study was carried out in Canada and Spain through an online survey on amenities needed and accessibility barriers for PwMDs in parks. It was analyzed through log-linear models for cross-frequency tables, which allow us to estimate the associations between questions/variables and, thus, ultimately, obtain insights into how the needs of amenities and accessibility barriers can affect and limit PwMDs' enjoyment of natural parks. The results show a predisposition on the part of participants to enjoy parks more frequently than they usually do, as well as a preference for forests and mountain landscapes. Information and communication technologies are the tools most chosen to prepare for their trip and visit to the park. PwMD finds barriers in NPs as impediments to benefit from nature-based recreation and adding to their wellbeing. NP managers should take into consideration that PwMD's visits to parks are related to the main obstacles they perceive such as slopes and pavement and that they require amenities such as recreation and signposting. They would also like to enjoy parks more often, with footpaths suitable for walkability/wheelability, e.g., compact pavement, low inclines, and adequate signposting. In addition to the physical barriers, managers should also consider intrapersonal and interpersonal constraints to provide outdoor activities in parks focused on PwMDs' needs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".