MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sustainable tourism on Instagram: insights from Hispanic centennials

2025· article· en· W4413887617 on OpenAlexaff
Reinaldo Miranda de Sá Teles, Edgar Romario Aranibar Ramos, Miguel Angel Demetrio Olarte Pacco

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability in Debate · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrassrootsSustainabilityTourismStorytellingPublic relationsSocial mediaSustainable tourismNarrativeCertificationDestinationsPolitical scienceBusinessSociologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines sustainable tourism representation on Instagram through #turismosostenible and #turismosustentable, focusing on Spanish-speaking users and posts from 2023. Content analysis reveals a strong emphasis on environmental conservation and sustainable practices, predominantly showcased through natural landscapes and informational content. User-generated content, especially personal photos, dominates the narrative, highlighting the role of grassroots storytelling. However, cultural heritage, community engagement, and certified destinations are notably underrepresented, signalling opportunities to diversify sustainability narratives. Rural and peak-season tourism are the most prominent, while off-peak travel and urban green spaces receive less attention. The limited participation of official tourism boards and non-governmental organisations suggests the need for more robust institutional involvement. This research provides insights into leveraging social media to promote inclusive and impactful sustainability communication, offering practical recommendations to enhance digital strategies.

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)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainability in DebateSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207