MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410719581 · doi:10.1080/23800127.2025.2510124

Beyond destination accessibility: tourism infrastructure across mobilities, technologies and embodiments

2025· article· en· W4410719581 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Antonio Paolo Russo, Chiara Rabbiosi, Wilbert den Hoed, Isabel Paulino

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Mobilities · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónEuropean Commission
KeywordsMobilitiesTourismBusinessEconomic geographyTransport infrastructureRegional scienceGeographyTransport engineeringSociologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This introductory article to the Special Issue explores the evolving conceptualisation of tourism infrastructure through the lenses of assemblage thinking and the mobilities paradigm. Moving beyond traditional dichotomies of material versus immaterial infrastructure, it embraces a multidimensional, relational and dynamic understanding of infrastructure as an active agent in shaping tourism destinations, mobilities and socio-spatial inequalities. Drawing on interdisciplinary perspectives from critical geography and mobilities studies, the paper situates tourism infrastructure within the broader infrastructures of everyday life, emphasising its entanglement with bodies, affects, policies and power relations. The Special Issue’s contributions expand on this framework through diverse case studies across Sweden, Canada, France, Spain and Italy, highlighting how infrastructures are co-constituted through tourist, residential and labor mobilities, and how they mediate access, inclusion and transformation at multiple scales. In doing so, the Issue introduces new methodological and conceptual tools – such as “transpitality”, “sensing transit” and the infrastructural backstage – to rethink accessibility, sustainability and territoriality in tourism. It ultimately calls for an “infrastructural turn” in tourism studies that critically engages with the fluid, politicised and experiential nature of tourism mobilities infrastructures in an era marked by crises, socio-spatial inequality and planetary change.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueApplied MobilitiesSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207