MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387637997 · doi:10.14246/irspsd.11.4_205

Tourism Economic Impact Assessment

2023· article· en· W4387637997 on OpenAlex
Zeli Hu, Jeetesh Kumar, Suresh Kannam

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersLiupanshui Normal University
KeywordsTourismEconomic impact analysisComputable general equilibriumRegional scienceScopusConfusionPanoramaEconomic evaluationEnvironmental economicsGeographyEconomicsComputer sciencePolitical scienceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The abundance of diverse and varied tourism economic impact studies can be overwhelming for new researchers in this field. The extensive and heterogeneous nature of these studies often creates confusion regarding the specific study topic, the relevant location, and the appropriate assessment models to employ. This paper employs the systematic literature method, co-occurrence network analysis of author keywords, and crosstable analysis to review 70 articles in the Scopus database from 1988 to April 2021. The result shows that tourism economic impact assessment topics can be grouped into tourism demand and factors affecting tourism demand. Locations of studies consist of nations, regions, cities, towns, and communities. Primary assessment models are Input-Output, CGE, TSA, and SAM; the CGE model and SAM have been applied in nations and regions; TSA has been applied to nations. The Input-Output model can be effectively utilised at different levels, including national, regional, and local scales, encompassing countries, regions, and towns. This study offers a comprehensive panorama of study topics, locations, and appropriate measurement models for economic impact assessment, enabling scholars to delve into further research with a clear understanding and direction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.389 · 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