MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Exploring stakeholder perspectives on sustainable tourism development in Canada: An empirical study

2025· article· en· W4412058760 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vivek Kumar Gaur, Dinesh Dhankhar, Yogesh Dahiya

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Management and Commerce · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismStakeholderSustainable developmentSustainable tourismBusinessEnvironmental planningEmpirical researchRegional scienceEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceGeographyPublic relationsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates stakeholders’ perceptions of sustainable tourism development in Canada, focusing on balancing environmental conservation, economic growth, and social well-being. Through empirical data collected via semi-structured interviews and surveys from key stakeholders, local communities, policymakers, and tourism operators the research identifies both challenges and opportunities within Canada’s sustainable tourism landscape. Findings reveal a high awareness of sustainability principles, yet significant barriers persist in policy enforcement, community engagement, and funding. The study proposes a collaborative governance model and enhanced community-based tourism initiatives to foster long-term resilience. This paper adds to the increasing library of literature on sustainable tourism by providing practical insights for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers in the Canadian context.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0200.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of Management and Commerce→Same topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research→French-language works237,207→