MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400987323 · doi:10.54097/pzy1pj31

The Impact of New Tourism Models on People’s Living Standards

2024· article· en· W4400987323 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education Humanities and Social Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismLivelihoodTourism geographyDestinationsPsychological resilienceEcotourismCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BusinessSustainable tourismEnvironmental planningRegional sciencePolitical scienceMarketingEconomic growthGeographyEconomicsPsychologyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The backdrop of this study stems from the profound impact of COVID-19 on the tourism sector in 2020. Post-pandemic, nations globally embarked on robust tourism development efforts. Drawing on data from the 2020-2023 Urban Economic Report, this research delves into discerning disparities between emerging and traditional tourism paradigms. Employing a multi-case comparative analysis approach, taking Iceland, Vancouver, and Harbin as the research objects, it examines the ramifications of post-COVID-19 tourism strategies implemented by three distinct tourist destinations on resident livelihoods. By encapsulating diverse impacts, the study amalgamates findings from these cases for a comprehensive comparison. It serves to elucidate shortcomings while elucidating the merits of novel tourism models, thereby offering insights crucial for the sustainable evolution and innovation of the tourism industry. This research serves as a compass for tourism practitioners, facilitating a nuanced understanding of emerging trends and contributing to informed decision-making in navigating the path toward industry resilience and growth.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education Humanities and Social SciencesSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207