Local Vancouver Island tourism (LOVIT) participation and its relationship to quality of life: an exploratory thesis research project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This timely and relevant research project was an exploratory study of local Vancouver Island tourism participation and its relationship to quality of life for Vancouver Island residents. Examining sustainable leisure management from the perspective of how residents utilize and enjoy products and services deemed for tourists creates the opportunity for an enhanced understanding of the tourism industry on Vancouver Island. Linking that understanding to the study of quality of life for residents provides a more collaborative and innovative approach to how stakeholders can develop and market tourism to the benefit of the people that live, work, and play on Vancouver Island. The qualitative data was collected through six semi-structured interviews with tourism industry stakeholders and one focus group of females in each of four separate communities across Vancouver Island during the summer of 2012. The richness of the information gathered formed the basis of a knowledge mobilization plan aimed at empowering residents to engage in truly sustainable tourism on the island they call home. This research was one of the first of its kind undertaken on Vancouver Island and the responses were both thoughtful and candid. Industry stakeholders and focus group participants were eager and appreciative of their inclusion in a discussion on local tourism and quality of life, as many had never been asked their opinions on this particular topic. Representing the supply side of tourism, industry stakeholders provided insight on the need to bring residents into conversations surrounding tourism. Focus group participants provided valuable information surrounding local tourism and quality of life from the demand perspective. The term local tourism has yet to be clearly defined within the literature so through the collection and analysis of the data from this study, a definition has been created. Local tourism is tourism activity within the context of one’s local community and is defined by the people within that community. Four local Vancouver Island tourism themes emerged from the analysis of data collected: people, emotions, activities, and places and spaces. When studying quality of life, the sense of space and pride of place the study participants have for the island is both embedded and explicit in their responses. When local tourism and quality of life were looked at together, the connection to place is overarching and is one of the key findings for the sustainability of simple, affordable, accessible local Vancouver Island tourism (LOVIT).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".