Harnessing community participation tourism development in Himalayan region of Uttarakhand State, India
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 article aims to evaluate the participation of below-poverty-line local community in tourism-related business activity in Himalayan state of Uttarakhand. Further, this article addressed for those who work in the tourism sector. The study employs a mix of methods, including survey data from 500 respondents with a random sampling approach, using Analysis of variance (ANOVA) statistical tools for analysis, other methods were interviews and observations at six tourism sites in Garhwal and four sites in Kumaun. Our findings showed that there has declined in community participation in tourism development, due to the lack of economic benefits obtained in the tourism sector, many believe that the tourism sector does not provide much income growth for them and does not make a significant contribution to the development of their region. Moreover, lack of understanding is considered the basis for community’s inability to play an active role, and lack of stakeholders’ involvement in encouraging them to improve their economy and culture through the tourism sector. Ultimately, this research also underlines the existence of some efforts by tourism travel to encourage public trust, which can help reduce poverty and increase community trust in tourism development in their region.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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