Circular Economy of Cultural Heritage—Possibility to Create a New Tourism Product through Adaptive Reuse
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cultural heritage is a particularly significant resource in creating tourism. When a local community recognizes its cultural heritage (small historic towns, buildings, castles, and forts), it is possible to create new value to meet the needs of tourists, using the principles of a circular economy. Adapting, reusing and restoring heritage sites can contribute to the revitalization of the local economy by creating jobs (increased employment), increased spending, economic development, etc. Adaptive reuse, as one of the principles of a circular economy, represents how the circular economy can pave the way to create new tourism products. The three basic principles of sustainable waste management are reduce, reuse, and recycle (3R). This paper tackles the reuse principle by analyzing case studies involving the application of a circular economy to cultural heritage in the Kvarner tourism destination (Croatia) in the context of reusing resources to create a sustainable destination. The goal is to determine to what extent the reuse of heritage sites makes them useful for the local community, and for tourists to stay in the destination. The research showed positive examples in the Kvarner tourism destination, primarily of a cultural tourism nature and that were achieved in the last ten years; however, the conclusion is that this is still insufficient. By aggregating knowledge and research results, the paper emphasizes the importance of applying the concept of the circular economy to cultural heritage in tourism destinations, with special emphasis on the role of all stakeholders in creating sustainable heritage tourism (local self-government, destination management, local population, and entrepreneurship).
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it