MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394112194 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.3837813

Understanding consumer behaviour and adaptation planning responses to climate-driven environmental change in Canada's parks and protected areas: a climate futurescapes approach

2016· dataset· en· W4394112194 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mark Groulx, Christopher J. Lemieux, John L. Lewis, Sarah Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2016
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeAdaptation (eye)Climate change adaptationEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningGeographyEnvironmental scienceEcologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parks and protected areas are a global ecological, social and health resource visited by over 8 billion people annually. Their use can yield substantial benefits, but only if a balance between ecological integrity and sustainable visitation is struck. This research explores the potential influence of climate-driven environmental change on visitation to North America's most popular glacier, the Athabasca Glacier in Jasper National Park, Canada. Photorealistic environmental visualizations were used to gauge visitors’ perceptions of environmental change and potential impacts on consumer behaviour. Results suggest that impacts could substantially diminish the site's pull as a tourism destination. Rather than improving visitation prospects, expert-proposed adaptations underestimated the importance of perceived naturalness and contributed to further potential decline. Findings are relevant to protected areas planning and management. They suggest that a natural path to climate change adaptation is the best way to support both ecological integrity and the long-term tourism pull of protected areas.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business→French-language works237,207→