MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7119627514 · doi:10.17648/raoit.v5n4.3531

Incentives to support sustainable rural tourism in British Columbia

2011· article· pt· W7119627514 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lea Thuot, Amanda Hachey, Giuliana Netto

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2011
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncentiveRural developmentTourismWork (physics)Rural area

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A indústria de turismo rural da British Columbia (BC) tem a aspiração de contribuir para o aumento do bem-estar sociocultural, ambiental e econômico da província. Os operadores compreendem a importância da sustentabilidade para o futuro dessa indústria, contudo estão buscando incentivos para ajudá-los a melhorar suas práticas de negócios de modo a satisfazer essa aspiração. Olhando para o desenvolvimento sustentável com base em uma perspectiva estratégica, compreendendo os mecanismos de mudança de comportamento e considerando as características dos operadores como pioneiros na adoção de práticas sustentáveis, neste artigo, analisa-se o papel dos incentivos no sentido de encorajar a adoção de práticas de negócios sustentáveis, tendo como objetivo primordial a oferta de apoio teórico para auxiliar o turismo rural BC. O estudo consubstancia este artigo utilizou uma abordagem de investigação de método misto, combinando triangulação teórica — revisão de literatura, diálogo (grupo focal) e questionário e um painel de peritos — e triangulação de investigadores. As principais conclusões incluíram a importância das motivações intrínsecas para a mudança, o reconhecimento de que a tomada de decisão empresarial é altamente dependente de uma forte rede de apoio e de uma abordagem prática de aprendizagem, e que a remoção de barreiras pode ser usada para criar incentivos.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)→Same topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research→French-language works237,207→