MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407578513 · doi:10.1080/14650045.2025.2462955

Tourism Development on China’s Northwestern Border: Territorialisation, Reterritorialisation, and Geopolitics of the Great Altai Region in Inner Asia

2025· article· en· W4407578513 on OpenAlexaff
Yao Qu

Bibliographic record

VenueGeopolitics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCross-Border Cooperation and Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsChinaTourismGeographyEconomic geographyPolitical scienceEconomyRegional sciencePoliticsArchaeologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyses tourism development in the Great Altai Region (GAR), both within and outside Chinese borders, to explore how the Chinese party-state uses tourism development as a strategy to simultaneously territorialise an ethnic minority border region and reterritorialise the entire GAR. This spatial reconfiguration aims to align the regional geopolitics and geo-economics with the Belt and Road Initiative. Document collection and participant observation methods were used to gather data. The findings show that the party-state enhances its control over the border and ethnic minorities in the Kanas Tourist Attraction area by developing eco-tourism, intersecting territoriality, tourism, and ecologism. Concurrently, cross-border tourism has been promoted in the GAR to reterritorialise the region, both materially and discursively, in favour of China’s spatial vision. Although territorialisation of the Chinese borderland helps the party-state manage the reterritorialisation processes in the GAR, it also creates a securitisation-integration dilemma, arising from conflicts between the Chinese national territorial logic and GAR territorial logic.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeopoliticsSame topicCross-Border Cooperation and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207