The Importance of Tourism in Cross-Border Cooperation: Evidence from the Borderlands of Poland
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
Cross-border cooperation (CBC) is considered an important element in the formation of borderlands and is often characterized by significant tourism development potential. The aim of this study was to determine the importance of tourism projects in the CBC within the EU cohesion policy and Neighbourhood Policy implemented in Poland's borderlands, and to identify regularities in the formation of cooperation from the point of view of the organizations involved in its implementation. We applied a mixed-method approach. The quantitative analysis included all CBC projects co-financed by EU funds (INTERREG, ETC, ENPI, ENI) in 2007–2013 and 2014–2020 in the borderlands of Poland, understood as the area on both sides of the border. The qualitative analysis was based on direct in-depth interviews conducted with selected Polish and foreign organizations involved in tourism projects. This study shows that tourism is an important component of cooperation in terms of its quantitative, qualitative, and spatial dimensions.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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