For and by the People? Internal Versus External Slum Tourism Entrepreneurs’ Impacts
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
The controversial impacts of slum tourism have sparked debate and raised questions about its benefits for impoverished communities. The potential positive effects of slum tourism often hinge on “last mile” strategies and the crucial role of local entrepreneurs who manage the visits and interactions in determining the benefits to these areas. Drawing on a blend of Social Entrepreneurship Theory and Economic Development Theory, we explore and compare the contributions of both internal and external slum tourism entrepreneurs. Our findings reveal striking differences in their strategies and orientations. For example, internal entrepreneurs are deeply rooted in the focal slum and prioritize long-term poverty alleviation through the creation of permanent jobs and innovative approaches, whereas external entrepreneurs tend to focus on profit maximization and diversification of their offer outside the slums. However, both internal and external entrepreneurs actively challenge stereotypes, catalyze skills’ development, and channel resources back into the slum communities. This research sheds light on the multifaceted impacts of slum tourism entrepreneurship, providing critical insights for future endeavors in community development and slum tourism studies.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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