Bibliographic record
Abstract
As one of the booming subsidiaries of the tourism sector, volunteer tourism (voluntourism) offers tourists, NGOs, and host communities an alternative experience through “authentically based destinations.” By definition, this should benefit destinations more in terms of cultural preservation and have less unpleasant tourism impacts. The possibilities for these destinations to develop and grow through the promotion of their cultural resources without, at the same time, spoiling them is the goal of sustainable tourism. However, without sufficient consideration of primary factors and careful destination resources management, voluntourism may lead to less sustainable tourism development. The purpose of this study is to examine whether voluntourism contributes to socio-cultural sustainability by examining the level of control over cultural resources in the host/guest relationship. Thus, the goal of this research is to examine voluntourism and determined whether it leads to cultural disturbance like mass tourism or to enhanced tourism practices through its relationship to socio-cultural sustainability. The research also examines what the central motivations and experiences of voluntourism are and if they focus on self-entertainment or helping-the-other. Finally, the research examines how this adds to social sustainability in the host/guest relationship. The research relies on qualitative research methods using in depth-interviews and participant observation of First Nations people on the Eden Valley reserve, Alberta. Volunteer tourists and organisers from the Global Citizens Network (GCN) were consulted in order to examine these issues. The research conducted suggests that organisations such as GCN can, in fact, play a positive role in cultural preservation and communication
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.486 | 0.291 |
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".