ReviewFrontiers in big data2025
Multistakeholder fairness in tourism: what can algorithms learn from tourism management?
Review in Frontiers in big data, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Algorithmic decision-support systems, i.e., recommender systems, are popular digital tools that help tourists decide which places and attractions to explore. However, algorithms often unintentionally direct tourist streams in a way that negatively affects the environment, local communities, or other stakeholders. This issue can be partly attributed to the computer science community's limited understanding of the complex relationships and trade-offs among stakeholders in the real world. In this work, we draw on the practical findings and methods from tourism management to inform research on multistakeholder fairness in algorithmic decision-support. Leveraging a semi-systematic literature review, we synthesize literature from tourism management as well as literature from computer science. Our findings suggest that tourism management actively tries to identify the specific needs of stakeholders and utilizes qualitative, inclusive and participatory methods to study fairness from a normative and holistic research perspective. In contrast, computer science lacks sufficient understanding of the stakeholder needs and primarily considers fairness through descriptive factors, such as measureable discrimination, while heavily relying on few mathematically formalized fairness criteria that fail to capture the multidimensional nature of fairness in tourism. With the results of this work, we aim to illustrate the shortcomings of purely algorithmic research and stress the potential and particular need for future interdisciplinary collaboration. We believe such a collaboration is a fundamental and necessary step to enhance algorithmic decision-support systems toward understanding and supporting true multistakeholder fairness in tourism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.