Second-home tourism is a complex phenomenon shaped by various socio-economic structures and local contexts. Legislating these destinations proves challenging, as most prioritise a growth-oriented approach over a socially sustainable one, affecting both residents and second-home owners. Despite its significance, second-home tourism remains largely overlooked in policy and planning. Hence, this study explores how the two communities of & Oslash;yer and Tinn in Norway are socially impacted by second-home tourism, and how public stakeholders address these impacts. Through cross-case analysis, the study examined the challenges local and regional authorities face in governing second homes and their effects on these communities. Empirical data includes in-depth interviews, action research participation in southeast Norway, and document analysis. The findings reveal that second-home tourism presents a growing strain on residents, presenting a disconnect between growth-oriented tourism approaches and community needs. Governance approaches significantly shape the trajectory of second-home destinations, often hindering socially sustainable development. The study highlights the need for stronger institutional capacity, contextual sensitivity, and resident inclusion to align second-home tourism with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Errors in thematically detailed land-cover maps have large consequences for downstream applications. Moreover, simulation-based studies suggest that land-cover classifiers are sensitive to errors in reference data. We (1) quantified the expected error from field interpretation of land-cover types; (2) the sensitivity of classifiers to reference data errors; and (3) the error transferred from reference data to classifiers. Lastly, we (4) recommended strategies to reduce errors. The study area was mapped by 12 field interpreters divided into three equal-sized experience-level groups. The field-based land-cover maps were aggregated to three thematic resolutions and used to train 6804 land-cover classifiers by varying inputs, algorithm, and hyperparameter values. Separately from the first field campaign, four field interpreters classified validation data points, which were used to quantify error for each field interpreter and land-cover classifier, as the proportion of incorrectly classified validation points. We observed (1) generally high and varying levels of interpreter error; (2) a strong relationship between interpreter and classifier error; and (3) a net positive transfer of errors from reference data to classifiers. Because classifier error seems largely driven by interpreter error at the levels commonly observed in thematically detailed land-cover mapping, we (4) recommend strategies to reduce interpreter error before modelling.
The concept of "prefigurative politics" invites geographers to envision transformative change through a shift in practices stemming from a micro level. This article examines and substantiates how this idea is mobilised in relation to current sustainability transformations. A large interdisciplinary group of geographers and transition scholars present topic clusters of prefigurative enablers that instigate and catalyse the enactment of transformative policymaking towards sustainable futures. Drawing on dozens of rich and diverse examples to illustrate cases of transformation, we provide a conceptual perspective to advance the theoretical discussion about triggers and processes of transformative change amongst geographers. We argue for three principles for examining the prefigurative politics of present transformation: (a) multi-scalarity, to consider prefigurative politics across personal-systemic spheres; (b) boundary transgression, to span interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary as well as inward- and outward-looking prefigurative politics; and (c) temporalities, to address institutionalisation and change processes that play out along short and long timelines. Approaching present transformations through a prefigurative politics lens helps identify scope for action that aligns with transformative change. We argue for wider deployment of these principles, to synthesise scholarship, channel micro-level prefigurative political efforts into systemic transformative change, and guide future research and policymaking towards sustainability transformations.
