Exploring the Potential of Halal Tourism Through Institutional Analysis of Halal Certifiers in the Philippines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study analyses various institutions’ halal certification and standards in the Philippines and their potential for halal tourism. The demand for halal services and products has been increasing in the Philippines, however, the major halal certifiers in the country uphold different standards, leading to confusion and abuse in halal accreditation and certification. The unification of halal standards is a complex process due to varying interpretations and thus, this research utilised case study methods to analyse the similarities and differences of the three major halal certifiers in the country within the lenses of the Work System Elements Framework and the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework which examine the participants, processes, information needs, and environment. Results show that halal certifiers do not have a common standard in their certification practices. Additionally, there is no national certification scheme or a standard scheme that certifiers can follow. Therefore, each certifying body has its own standard, scheme, and policy regarding halal certification, resulting in a fragmented development of certification schemes. An appropriate halal standard in the Philippines is essential to attract Muslim visitors, as the country initiated a halal programme that aims to increase the arrival of international Muslim travellers. The findings provide implications for developing and managing halal tourism and for diversifying tourism products in the Philippines. Further, this study makes a valuable contribution to the understudied phenomenon of halal certification in a Muslim-minority country that could benefit from incorporating halal tourism in their destinations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".