Small-business owners' attitudes towards tourism and capacity for innovation: a case study in rural northwestern ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rural communities in much of the developed world have turned to tourism as a possible means to assist with the decline of traditional extractive industries (such as forestry and mining) and the resulting negative impacts on the economy and population (Petrzelka et al, 2005; Beshiri, 2005a, 2005b; Fuller-Love, 2008; Byrd et al, 2009; Harril, 2004; Long et al, 1990). In northern Ontario many communities remain reliant on the traditional primary sectors (Ministry of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry, 2009). There is an increasing reliance on the private sector, specifically the small-business sector to provide product and service development for tourism in rural communities including accommodation options, restaurants, attractions, entertainment and retail opportunities (Frederick, 1993; Siemens, 2007; Ioannides, 1995).These rural small-business owners face the dual pressures of providing everyday products not only to their community but also to tourists that come throughout the year. \nA qualitative case study analysis was conducted in northwestern Ontario, Canada in the Top of the Superior region on small-business owners (n=17) involved in tourism (directly and indirectly) specifically examining their attitudes towards tourism and the opportunities for innovation at the firm and network levels. The study took place in the communities of Dorion, Red Rock, and Nipigon, as this is a region identified as in need of tourism product development. In the last decade this region has experienced change in its economic and social structure due to the decline of the forest industry which served as the primary economic foundation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".