Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Exploring the relationships between heritage tourism, sustainable community development and host communities’ health and wellbeing: A systematic review

Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Translational Health Research Institute, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia

ORCID logo

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliations School of Social Sciences, Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia, Department of Archaeology, University of York, York, United Kingdom

* E-mail: [email protected]

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliations Translational Health Research Institute, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia, Maternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia

  • Cristy Brooks, 
  • Emma Waterton, 
  • Hayley Saul, 
  • Andre Renzaho

PLOS

  • Published: March 29, 2023
  • https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282319
  • Reader Comments

Fig 1

Previous studies examining the impact of heritage tourism have focused on specific ecological, economic, political, or cultural impacts. Research focused on the extent to which heritage tourism fosters host communities’ participation and enhances their capacity to flourish and support long-term health and wellbeing is lacking. This systematic review assessed the impact of heritage tourism on sustainable community development, as well as the health and wellbeing of local communities. Studies were included if they: (i) were conducted in English; (ii) were published between January 2000 and March 2021; (iii) used qualitative and/or quantitative methods; (iv) analysed the impact of heritage tourism on sustainable community development and/or the health and wellbeing of local host communities; and (v) had a full-text copy available. The search identified 5292 articles, of which 102 articles met the inclusion criteria. The included studies covering six WHO regions (Western Pacific, African, Americas, South-East Asia, European, Eastern Mediterranean, and multiple regions). These studies show that heritage tourism had positive and negative impacts on social determinants of health. Positive impacts included economic gains, rejuvenation of culture, infrastructure development, and improved social services. However, heritage tourism also had deleterious effects on health, such as restrictions placed on local community participation and access to land, loss of livelihood, relocation and/or fragmentation of communities, increased outmigration, increases in crime, and erosion of culture. Thus, while heritage tourism may be a poverty-reducing strategy, its success depends on the inclusion of host communities in heritage tourism governance, decision-making processes, and access to resources and programs. Future policymakers are encouraged to adopt a holistic view of benefits along with detriments to sustainable heritage tourism development. Additional research should consider the health and wellbeing of local community groups engaged in heritage tourism. Protocol PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018114681.

Citation: Brooks C, Waterton E, Saul H, Renzaho A (2023) Exploring the relationships between heritage tourism, sustainable community development and host communities’ health and wellbeing: A systematic review. PLoS ONE 18(3): e0282319. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282319

Editor: Tai Ming Wut, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, HONG KONG

Received: April 29, 2022; Accepted: February 14, 2023; Published: March 29, 2023

Copyright: © 2023 Brooks et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper.

Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Tourism, heritage, and sustainable development go hand in hand. Socio-economically, tourism is considered a vital means of sustainable human development worldwide, and remains one of the world’s top creators of employment and a lead income-generator, particularly for Global South countries [ 1 ]. For most low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), tourism is a key component of export earnings and export diversification, and a major source of foreign-currency income [ 1 ]. In 2019, prior to the international travel restrictions implemented to contain the spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), export revenues from international tourism were estimated at USD 1.7 trillion, the world’s third largest export category after fuels and chemicals with great economic impacts. Tourism remains a major part of gross domestic product, generating millions of direct and indirect jobs, and helping LMICs reduce trade deficits [ 1 ]. It accounts for 28 per cent of the world’s trade in services, 7 per cent of overall exports of goods and services and 1 out of 10 jobs in the world [ 1 ]. Given this, it is anticipated that tourism will play a strong role in achieving all of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), but particularly Goals 1 (No poverty), 8 (Decent work and economic growth), 12 (Responsible consumption and production), 13 (Climate action) and 14 (Life below water).

To ensure tourism’s continued contribution to sustainable development efforts, the World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) has established the T4SDG platform in order to “to make tourism matter on the journey to 2030” [ 2 ]. Likewise, in recognition of the relationship between heritage, tourism, and sustainable development, UNESCO launched the World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme, which was adopted by the World Heritage Committee in 2012. This Programme encapsulates a framework that builds on dialogue and stakeholder cooperation to promote an integrated approach to planning for tourism and heritage management in host countries, to protect and value natural and cultural assets, and develop appropriate and sustainable tourism pathways [ 3 ].

The addition of ‘heritage’ creates an important sub-category within the tourism industry: heritage tourism. This study adopts a broad definition of ‘heritage’, which encompasses the intersecting forms of tangible heritage, such as buildings, monuments, and works of art, intangible or living heritage, including folklore, cultural memories, celebrations and traditions, and natural heritage, or culturally infused landscapes and places of significant biodiversity [ 4 ]. This encompassing definition captures ‘heritage’ as it is understood at the international level, as evidenced by two key UNESCO conventions: the 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage , which protects cultural, natural, and mixed heritage; and the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage , which protects intangible heritage. Although the identification, conservation and management of heritage has traditionally been driven by national aspirations to preserve connections with history, ancestry, and national identity, the social and economic benefits of heritage tourism at community levels have also been documented [ 5 ].

Heritage tourism, as one of the oldest practices of travelling for leisure, is a significant sector of the tourism industry. It refers to the practice of visiting places because of their connections to cultural, natural, and intangible heritage and is oriented towards showcasing notable relationships to a shared past at a given tourism destination [ 4 ]. It contributes to global interchange and inter-cultural understanding [ 4 ]. Heritage tourism places economic and political value on recognised heritage resources and assets, providing additional reasons to conserve heritage further to the cultural imperatives for its maintenance [ 5 ]. By drawing on the cultural and historical capital of a community, heritage tourism can contribute to the flourishing of local communities and their positive sustainable development. However, as this systematic review will demonstrate, when applied uncritically and without meaningful engagement with the needs of local stakeholder, heritage tourism can also elicit damaging effects on community health and wellbeing.

First published in 1987, the classic report ‘ Our Common Future’ , more commonly known as the Brundtland Report, conceptualised sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [ 6 ]. Although this definition still works for many purposes, it emphasised the critical issues of environment and development whilst turning on the undefined implications of the word ‘needs’. In the report, the concept of sustainable development thus left unspecified the assumed importance of distinct cultural, political, economic, and ecological needs as well as health needs. Drawing on the work of globalization and cultural diversity scholar, Paul James [ 7 ], in this study we have defined ‘positive sustainable development’ as those “practices and meanings of human engagement that make for lifeworlds that project the ongoing probability of natural and social flourishing”, taking into account questions of vitality, relationality, productivity and sustainability.

Study rationale

For many years, the impact of heritage tourism has predominantly been viewed through ecological [ 8 , 9 ], economic and cultural [ 10 , 11 ] or political [ 12 ] lenses. For example, it has often been assumed that the conservation of historic, cultural, and natural resources, in combination with tourism, will naturally lead to sustainable local economies through increases in employment opportunities, provisioning of a platform for profitable new business opportunities, investment in infrastructure, improving public utilities and transport infrastructures, supporting the protection of natural resources, and, more recently, improving quality of life for local residents [ 13 – 15 ].

Similarly, the impact of heritage tourism on health and wellbeing has tended to focus on visitors’ wellbeing, including their health education and possible health trends, medical aspects of travel preparation, and health problems in returning tourists [ 16 – 18 ]. It has only been more recently that host communities’ health needs and wellbeing have been recognised as an intrinsic part of cultural heritage management and sustainable community development [ 19 ]. In this literature, it has been hypothesised that potential health implications of heritage tourism are either indirect or direct. Indirect effects are predominantly associated with health gains from heritage tourism-related economic, environmental, socio-cultural, and political impacts [ 20 ]. In contrast, health implications associated with direct impacts are closely associated with immediate encounters between tourism and people [ 20 ]. Yet, little is known of the overall generative effects of heritage tourism on sustainable community development, or the long-term health and wellbeing of local communities. For the first time, this systematic review identified and evaluated 102 published and unpublished studies in order to assess the extent to which heritage tourism fosters host communities’ participation and, consequently, their capacity to flourish, with emphasis placed on the long-term health impacts of this. The primary objective of the review was to determine: (1) what the impacts of heritage tourism are on sustainable community development; as well as (2) on the health and wellbeing of local host communities. Understanding the relationship between heritage tourism, sustainable community development and health is essential in influencing policies aimed at improving overall livelihood in local host communities, as well as informing intervention strategies and knowledge advancement.

This systematic review adhered to the guidelines and criteria set out in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement [ 21 ]. A protocol for this review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018114681) and has been published [ 22 ].

Search strategy

In order to avoid replicating an already existing study on this topic, Cochrane library, Google Scholar and Scopus were searched to ensure there were no previous systematic reviews or meta-analyses on the impact of heritage tourism on sustainable community development and the health of local host communities. No such reviews or analyses were found. The search then sought to use a list of relevant text words and sub-headings of keywords and/or MeSH vocabulary according to each searched database. Derived from the above research question, the key search words were related to heritage tourism, sustainable community development, and health and wellbeing of local host communities. A trial search of our selected databases (see below) found that there are no MeSH words for heritage and tourism. Therefore, multiple keywords were included to identify relevant articles.

To obtain more focused and productive results, the keywords were linked using “AND” and “OR” and other relevant Boolean operators, where permitted by the databases. Subject heading truncations (*) were applied where appropriate. The search query was developed and tested in ProQuest Central on 22 November 2018. Following this search trial, the following combination of search terms and keywords, slightly modified to suit each database, was subsequently used:

(“Heritage tourism” OR tourism OR “world heritage site” OR ecotourism OR “heritage based tourism” OR “cultural tourism” OR “diaspora tourism” OR “cultural heritage tourism” OR “cultural resource management” OR “cultural heritage management” OR “historic site”)

(“Health status” [MeSH] OR “health equity” OR health OR community health OR welfare OR wellbeing)

(“sustainable development” [MeSH] OR sustainab* or “community development” or “local development” or “local community” or “indigenous community”)

The search covered the following bibliographic databases and electronic collections:

  • Academic Search Complete
  • Australian Heritage Bibliography (AHB)
  • Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA)
  • CAB Abstracts
  • ProQuest Central
  • Science And Geography Education (SAGE)
  • Tourism, Hospitality and Leisure

In addition, grey literature were also sourced from key organisation websites including the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), the International Council of Museums (ICOM), the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the United Nations World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) and the Smithsonian Institution.

Where the full texts of included articles could not be accessed, corresponding authors were contacted via e-mail or other means of communication (e.g., ResearchGate) to obtain a copy. A further search of the bibliographical references of all retrieved articles and articles’ citation tracking using Google Scholar was conducted to capture relevant articles that might have been missed during the initial search but that meet the inclusion criteria. For the purposes of transparency and accountability, a search log was kept and constantly updated to ensure that newly published articles were captured. To maximise the accuracy of the search, two researchers with extensive knowledge of heritage tourism literature (EW and HS) and two research assistants with backgrounds in public health and social sciences implemented independently the search syntax across the databases and organisations’ websites to ensure no article was missed.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Criteria used in this systematic review focused on the types of beneficiaries of heritage tourism, outcomes of interest, as well as the intervention designs. The outcomes of interest were sustainable community development and evidence for the overall health and wellbeing of local host communities. In this systematic review, sustainable community development was defined in terms of its two components: ‘community sustainability’ and ‘development’. Community sustainability was conceptualised as the “long-term durability of a community as it negotiates changing practices and meanings across all the domains of culture, politics, economics and ecology” (pp. 21, 24) [ 23 ].

In contrast, development was conceptualised as “social change—with all its intended or unintended outcomes, good and bad—that brings about a significant and patterned shift in the technologies, techniques, infrastructure, and/or associated life-forms of a place or people” (p. 44) [ 7 ]. To this, we added the question of whether the development was positive or negative. Thus, going beyond the Brundtland definition introduced earlier and once again borrowing from the work of Paul James, positive sustainable development was defined as “practices and meanings of human engagement that make for lifeworlds that project the ongoing probability of natural and social flourishing”, including good health [ 23 ].

Health was defined, using the World Health Organisation (WHO) definition, as “overall well-being” and as including both physical, mental and social health [ 24 ]. While there is no consensus on what wellbeing actually means, there is a general agreement that wellbeing encompasses positive emotions and moods (e.g., contentment, happiness), the absence of negative emotions (e.g., depression, anxiety) as well as satisfaction with life and positive functioning [ 25 ]. Therefore, wellbeing in this systematic review was conceptualised according to Ryff’s multidimensional model of psychological wellbeing, which includes six factors: autonomy; self-acceptance, environmental mastery, positive relationships with others, purpose in life, and personal growth [ 26 ].

In terms of intervention and design, this systematic review included peer-reviewed and grey literature sources of evidence [ 27 , 28 ] from quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies. Intervention designs of interest were observational studies (e.g. longitudinal studies, case control and cross-sectional studies) as well as qualitative and mixed-methods studies. The following additional restrictions were used to ensure texts were included only if they were: (i) written in English; (ii) analysed the impact of heritage tourism on sustainable community development and health and/or wellbeing of local host communities; (iii) research papers, dissertations, books, book chapters, working papers, technical reports including project documents and evaluation reports, discussion papers, and conference papers; and (iv) published between January 2000 and March 2021. Studies were excluded if they were descriptive in nature and did not have community development or health and wellbeing indicators as outcome measures.

The year 2000 was selected as the baseline date due to the signing of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by Member States in September of that year. With the introduction of the MDGs, now superseded by the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), there was an increase in commitment from government and non-governmental organizations to promote the development of responsible, sustainable and universally accessible tourism [ 29 , 30 ]. Editorials, reviews, letter to editors, commentaries and opinion pieces were not considered. Where full text articles were not able to be retrieved despite exhausting all available methods (including contacting corresponding author/s), such studies were excluded from the review. Non-human studies were also excluded.

Study selection and screening

Data retrieved from the various database searches were imported into an EndNote X9 library. A three-stage screening process was followed to assess each study’s eligibility for inclusion. In the EndNote library, stage one involved screening studies by titles to remove duplicates. In stage two, titles and abstracts were manually screened for eligibility and relevance. In the third and final screening stage, full texts of selected abstracts were further reviewed for eligibility. The full study selection process according to PRISMA is summarised in Fig 1 . A total of 5292 articles from 10 databases and multiple sources of grey literature were screened. After removal of duplicates, 4293 articles were retained.

thumbnail

  • PPT PowerPoint slide
  • PNG larger image
  • TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282319.g001

Titles and abstracts were further screened for indications that articles contain empirical research on the relationship between heritage tourism, sustainable community development and the health and wellbeing of local host communities. This element of the screening process resulted in the exclusion of 2892 articles. The remaining 1401 articles were screened for eligibility: 1299 articles were further excluded, resulting in 102 articles that met our inclusion criteria and were retained for analysis. Study selection was led by two researchers (EW and HS) and one research assistant, who independently double-checked 40% of randomly selected articles (n = 53). Interrater agreement was calculated using a 3-point ordinal scale, with the scoring being ’yes, definitely in’ = 1, ’?’ for unsure = 2, and ’no, definitely out’ = 3. Weighted Kappa coefficients were calculated using quadratic weights. Kappa statistics and percentage of agreement were 0.76 (95%CI: 0.63, 0.90) and 0.90 (95%CI: 0.85, 0.96) respectively, suggesting excellent agreement.

Data extraction

Data extraction was completed using a piloted form and was performed and subsequently reviewed independently by three researchers (AR, EW and HS), all of whom are authors. The extracted data included: study details (author, year of publication, country of research), study aims and objectives, study characteristics and methodological approach (study design, sample size, outcome measures, intervention), major findings, and limitations.

Quality assessment

To account for the diversity in design and dissemination strategies (peer-reviewed vs non-peer-reviewed) of included studies, the (JBI) Joanna Briggs Institute’s Critical Review Tool for qualitative and quantitative studies [ 31 ], mixed methods appraisal Tool (MMAT) for mixed methods [ 32 ], and the AACODS (Authority, Accuracy, Coverage, Objectivity, Date, Significance) checklist for grey literature [ 33 ] were used to assess the quality of included studies. The quality assessment of included studies was led by one researcher (CB), but 40% of the studies were randomly selected and scored by three senior researchers (AR, EM, and HS) to check the accuracy of the scoring. Cohen’s kappa statistic was used to assess the agreement between quality assessment scorers. Kappa statistics and percentage of agreement were 0.80 (95%CI: 0.64, 0.96) and 0.96 (95%CI: 0.93, 0.99) respectively, suggesting excellent interrater agreement. The quality assessment scales used different numbers of questions and different ranges, hence they were all rescaled/normalised to a 100 point scale, from 0 (poor quality) to 100 (high quality) using the min-max scaling approach. Scores were stratified by tertiles, being high quality (>75), moderate quality (50–74), or poor quality (<50).

Data synthesis

Due to the heterogeneity and variation of the studies reviewed (study methods, measurements, and outcomes), a meta-analysis was not possible. Campbell and colleagues (2020) [ 34 ] recognise that not all data extracted for a systematic review are amenable to meta-analysis, but highlight a serious gap in the literature: the authors’ lack of or poor description of alternative synthesis methods. The authors described an array of alternative methods to meta-analysis. In our study we used a meta-ethnography approach to articulate the complex but diverse outcomes reported in included studies [ 35 ]. Increasingly common and influential [ 36 ], meta-ethnography is an explicitly interpretative approach to the synthesis of evidence [ 36 , 37 ] that aims to develop new explanatory theories or conceptualisations of a given body of work on the basis of reviewer interpretation [ 37 ]. It draws out similarities and differences at the conceptual level between the findings of included studies [ 37 ], with the foundational premise being the juxtaposition and relative examination of ideas between study findings [ 37 ]. Resulting novel interpretations are then considered to transcend individual study findings [ 36 ].

Originating with sociologists Noblit and Hare [ 36 , 38 ], and adopted and expanded upon by other researchers [ 36 , 37 ], meta-ethnography involves a 7-stage process of evidence synthesis and concludes with the translation and synthesis of studies [ 38 ]. The approach centres around the emergence of concepts and themes from included studies that are examined in relation to each other and used to synthesise and communicate primary research findings. In meta-ethnography, the diversity of studies such as the heterogeneity and variation of included studies in the present review, is considered an asset opposed to an issue in synthesis or translation of research findings [ 37 ].

Common threads, themes and trends were identified and extracted from both qualitative and quantitative narratives to generate insight on the impact of heritage tourism on sustainable community development and health. In order to increase reproducibility and transparency of our methods and the conclusions drawn from the studies, the narrative synthesis adhered to the “Improving Conduct and Reporting of Narrative Synthesis of Quantitative Data” protocol for mixed methods studies [ 39 ]. One of the primary researchers (CB) summarised the study findings and narrated the emerging themes and subthemes. The emerging themes were discussed with all authors for appropriateness of the content as well as for consistency. All studies were included in the synthesis of evidence and emergence of themes. The meta-ethnographic approach involved the following processes:

Identifying metaphors and themes.

Included studies were read and reviewed multiple times to gain familiarity and understanding with the data and identify themes and patterns in each study. As noted above, data was extracted from each study using a piloted template to remain consistent across all studies. The aims and/or objectives of each study was revisited regularly to validate any extracted data and remain familiar with the purpose of the study. Themes and, where relevant, sub-themes were identified, usually in the results and discussion section of included studies.

Determining how the studies were related.

Studies were grouped according to WHO regions (see Table 1 ). Thematic analysis was compared across all included studies regardless of region to identify common themes and/or sub-themes to determine how studies were related to one another. Although this review included a widely varied and large number of studies (n = 102), the findings of each study nonetheless had a common underpinning theme of heritage-based tourism. This enabled the identification of communal categories across the studies indicating their relatedness. For example, there were common themes of socio-cultural, socio-economic, community health, wellbeing, and empowerment factors and so on.

thumbnail

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282319.t001

Translation and synthesis of studies.

Themes and, where relevant, sub-themes within each study were considered and compared to the next study in a process repeated for all included studies. Such translation of studies compares and matches themes across a corpus of material, and usually involves one or more of three main types of synthesis: reciprocal translation, refutational translation, and line of argument [ 37 ]. Themes were condensed and streamlined into main thematic areas, in addition to outlining common topics within those thematic areas. The primary researcher (CB) undertook this process with discussion, validation and confirmation of themes and topics from three other researchers (EW, HS and AR). Translation between studies and the resulting synthesis of research findings followed the process of the emergence of new interpretations and conceptualisation of research themes. A line of argument was also developed, and a conceptual model produced to describe the research findings, which is shown in Fig 2 . Both the line of argument and conceptual model were agreed upon by all authors.

thumbnail

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282319.g002

A total of 102 studies were included in the analysis. Of these, 25 studies were conducted in the Western Pacific region, 23 in the African region, 20 in the Region of the Americas, 17 in the South-East Asia region, 12 in the European region, and 1 in the Eastern Mediterranean region. The remaining 4 studies reported on multiple regions. This may at first seem surprising given the prominence of European cultural heritage on registers such as the World Heritage List, which includes 469 cultural sites located Europe (equivalent to 47.19% of all World Heritage Properties that are recognised for their cultural values). However, any studies focusing on Europe that did not also examine sustainable community development and the overall health and wellbeing of local host communities were screened out of this systematic review in accordance with the abovementioned inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results of the data extraction and quality assessment across all included studies are presented in Table 1 . Of the included studies, 24 used a mixed methods design, 22 studies were qualitative, 36 were quantitative and 20 were grey literature (see Table 1 for more detail regarding the type of methods employed). Of these, 48 studies were assessed as high quality (>75), 32 as moderate quality (50–74) and 22 as poor quality (<50).

The major health and wellbeing determinant themes emerging from the included studies were grouped according to social, cultural, economic, and ecological health determinants. Fig 3 presents the proportion of included studies that investigated each of the four health determinants when assessed by WHO region. A large proportion of economic studies was shown across all regions, although this focus was surpassed by the social health determinant in the South-East Asia region ( Fig 3 ). Studies on the social health determinant also yielded a strong proportion of studies across most other regions, although notably not in the African region. This was closely followed by an ecological focus among the Americas, South-East Asia and Western Pacific regions. The Americas had the highest proportion of cultural studies, with the European region being the lowest proportionally ( Fig 3 ).

thumbnail

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282319.g003

More specifically, for studies focused on Africa, 100% of the publications included in this review explicitly investigated the economic benefits of tourism on wellbeing (74% of them exclusively), with European-focused studies reflecting a similarly high interest in economic wellbeing (91% of publications). Across the Americas, economic determinants of wellbeing were investigated in 86% of publications and in the Western Pacific, methods to investigate this variable were built into 80% of included studies. By comparison, this research demonstrates that only just over two thirds of articles reporting on the South-East Asia region shared this focus on economic determinants (65% of publications). Instead, social determinants of wellbeing form a stronger component of the research agenda in this region, with 76% of publications investigating this theme in studies that also tended to consider multiple drivers of health. For example, in 47% of publications reporting on the South-East Asia context, at least three themes were integrated into each study, with particular synergies emerging between social, economic and ecological drivers of wellbeing and their complex relationships.

Similarly, 47% of publication reporting on the Americas also included at least three health determinants. Research outputs from these two regions demonstrated the most consistently holistic approach to understanding wellbeing compared to other regions. In Africa, only 13% of the papers reviewed incorporated three or more themes; in the Western Pacific, this figure is 32% and in Europe only 8% of research outputs attempted to incorporate three or more themes. It seems unlikely that the multidimensional relationship between socio-economic and ecological sustainability that is always in tension could be adequately explored given the trend towards one-dimensional research in Africa, the Western Pacific and particularly Europe.

The associated positive and negative impacts of heritage tourism on each of the health and wellbeing determinants are then presented in Table 2 , along with the considered policy implications. Some of the identified positive impacts included improved access to education and social services, greater opportunities for skill development and employment prospects, preservation of culture and traditions, increased community livelihood and greater awareness of environmental conservation efforts. Negative impacts of tourism on host communities included forced displacement from homes, environmental degradation and over-usage of natural resources, barriers to tourism employment and reliance on tourism industry for income generation and economic stability, dilution and loss of cultural values and practices, civil unrest and loss of social stability, increased rates of crime and disease and lack of direct benefit to local communities. Both positive and negative impacts across each health and wellbeing determinant had acknowledged implications on policy development, many of which revolved around governance and ownership of tourist activities, participation of the local community in tourism sectors and active management of environmental protection programs. Such themes are shown in Table 2 .

thumbnail

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282319.t002

Recent thematic trends can be observed in Table 3 , whereby the percentage of research outputs that investigate economic drivers of health and wellbeing produced since 2019 are shown. In Africa, Europe and the Americas, the proportion of outputs investigating economic health determinants since 2019 is the smallest ( Table 3 ), being 17% in Africa and the Americas, and 36% in Europe, respectively. On the contrary, 50% of Western Pacific region studies since 2019 had research focused on the economic drivers of wellbeing in relation to heritage tourism. Moreover, 65% of studies included economy-focused research in South-East Asia, with more than half of those outputs produced in the last two years ( Table 3 ).

thumbnail

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282319.t003

The proportion of research outputs where local community members were asked to give their opinions as participants is presented in Table 4 , where they were invited to co-lead the research but were excluded from data production. In the Western Pacific region, there was a relative lack of participation (either as researchers or stakeholders) by local communities in the studies included in this review. Meaningful modes of community participation in the South-East Asian region can be calculated to 65%, more closely in line with Africa, Europe and the Americas ( Table 4 ).

thumbnail

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282319.t004

This systematic review is the first of its kind to explicitly consider the relationships between heritage tourism and host communities; specifically, the impact of tourism on host communities’ capacity to flourish and support long-term health and wellbeing. Such impacts were found to be both positive and negative, with either direct or indirect consequences on the development of local governance policies. Our synthesis revealed that there are important regional variations in the way that determinants of health–social, cultural, economic or ecological–drive tourism research agendas. They commonly included considerations of social dynamics, access and health of the local community, empowerment and participation of host communities in tourism-based activities and governance, employment opportunities, preservation or erosion of culture, and environmental influences due to tourism promotion or activity.

Economic impacts represented the strongest focus of the studies include in this review, often to the detriment of other cultural or environmental considerations. With the exception of South-East Asia, studies focused on all other WHO regions (Africa, Europe, the Americas and the Western Pacific) were overwhelmingly built around attempts to understand economic variables as determinants of health and wellbeing, and in some instances were likely to focus on economic variables in lieu of any other theme. Given the steady growth of an interest in economic variables in South-East Asia since 2019, it is plausible that this will soon represent the largest concentration of studies in that region, too.

This trend towards emphasis on economic influences is problematic given that some of the emerging impacts from tourism-related practices identified in this review were found to be common across multiple determinants of health and thus not limited to economic health alone. For example, the limitation placed on access to prime grazing land for cattle belonging to local residents was perceived to be a negative impact both ecologically and economically [ 60 , 141 ]. This may be considered detrimental from an environmental standpoint due to the alteration of the local ecosystem and destruction of natural resources and wildlife habitat, such as the building of infrastructure to support the development of tourist accommodation, transport, and experiences.

Economically, the loss of grazing land results in reduced food sources for cattle and consequently a potential reliance on alternative food sources (which may or may not be accessible or affordable), or in the worst-case scenario death of cattle [ 92 ]. In turn, this loss of cattle has an adverse impact on the financial livelihood of host communities, who may rely on their cattle as a sole or combined source of income. Considered in isolation or combination, this single negative impact of tourism–reduced grazing access–has flow-on effects to multiple health determinants. Therefore, it is important to consider the possible multifactorial impacts of tourism, heritage or otherwise, on the host communities involved (or at least affected) given they may have a profound and lasting impact, whether favourable or not.

The potential interrelationships and multifactorial nature of heritage tourism on the health and wellbeing of host communities were also identified among a number of other studies included in this review. For example, a study from the Western Pacific Region explored connections between the analysis of tourism impacts, wellbeing of the host community and the ‘mobilities’ approach, acknowledging the three areas were different in essence but converging areas in relation to tourism sustainability [ 125 ]. That said, the cross-over between social determinants was not always observed or presented as many studies primarily focused on a single health domain [ 43 – 51 , 53 , 55 – 57 , 59 , 61 , 71 , 74 , 86 – 90 , 103 , 104 , 108 – 110 , 118 , 130 , 134 – 136 , 138 – 140 ]. Some studies, for instance, focused on poverty reduction and/or alleviation [ 134 , 135 ], while others focused solely on cultural sustainability or sociocultural factors [ 109 , 110 , 118 ], and others delved only into the ecological or environmental impacts of tourism [ 86 , 89 ]. As noted above, the majority of studies that focused on a single health determinant considered economic factors.

A common theme that spanned multiple health domains was the threat of relocation. Here, local communities represented in the reviewed studies were often at risk of being forced to relocate from their ancestral lands for tourism and/or nature conservation purposes [ 41 , 60 , 80 , 131 ]. This risk not only threatens their way of life and livelihood from an economic perspective, but will also have social implications, jeopardising the sustainability and longevity of their cultural traditions and practices on the land to which they belong [ 41 , 60 , 80 , 131 ]. Moreover, it may have ongoing implications for the displacement of family structures and segregation of local communities.

Importantly, this systematic review revealed that cultural determinants of health and wellbeing were the least explored in every region and were in many instances entirely omitted. This is at odds with the increasingly prevalent advice found in wider heritage and tourism academic debates, where it is argued that cultural institutions such as museums and their objects, for example, may contribute to health and wellbeing in the following ways: promoting relaxation; providing interventions that affect positive changes in physiology and/or emotions; supporting introspection; encouraging public health advocacy; and enhancing healthcare environments [ 142 – 144 ]. Likewise, Riordan and Schofield have considered the cultural significance of traditional medicine, citing its profound importance to the health and wellbeing of the communities who practice it as well as positioning it as a core element of both local and national economies [ 145 ].

Of greater concern is the finding of this review that of the relatively small number of papers investigating cultural health determinants, many recorded profoundly negative and traumatising outcomes of tourism development, such as a rise of ethnoreligious conflict, loss of ancestral land, a dilution of cultural practices to meet tourist demands, and a loss of cultural authenticity [ 41 ]. Consequently, comparative studies that focus on cultural determinants, in addition to economic and environmental determinants, are currently lacking and should therefore be prioritised in future research. In fact, only one fifth of those papers included in this review adopted the qualitative approach needed to probe the socio-cultural dimensions of health. Novel qualitative research methods to investigate community health are therefore a major research lacuna.

Just as solely equating community health and wellbeing with economic flourishing is problematic, so too is assuming that health is reducible only to clinical care and disease [ 146 ], given that "[i]deas about health … are cultural” [ 146 ]. Early indications of an acceptance that culture and heritage might be central to community health and wellbeing can be found in UNESCO’s 1995 report, Our Creative Diversity : Report of the World Commission on Culture and Development [ 147 ]. More recently, this notion is evidenced in the 2019 Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention [ 148 ] and the 2020 Operational Directives for UNESCO’s Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage [ 149 ], both of which indicate the need for a major shift in research foci towards cultural determinants of health and wellbeing if research is to keep pace with assumptions now operating within international policy [ 148 , 149 ].

Although Africa, Europe and the Americas are the three regions with the highest proportion of papers investigating the economic benefits of tourism on health and wellbeing, these regions are also the most responsive to the above recommended changes in policy and debate (see Table 3 ). In these three regions, the proportion of outputs investigating economic health determinants since 2019 is the smallest, demonstrating a recent decline in research that is persuaded by the a priori assumption that economic wellbeing automatically equates to cultural wellbeing. Despite demonstrating the most holistic approach to understanding health and wellbeing across all the themes, an upwards trend in economy-focused research was identified in South-East Asia, since more than half of the economic outputs were produced in the last two years. Such a trend is potentially problematic for this region because it may reinforce the notion that the main benefits of tourism are direct and financial, rather than refocusing on the tension created by indirect effects of tourism on quality of life and community wellbeing.

Conversely, this review demonstrates that the Western Pacific region has persisted with research focused on the economic drivers of wellbeing in relation to heritage tourism (see Table 3 ). This persistence may be explained by the relative lack of participation (either as researchers or stakeholders) by local communities in any of the studies included in this review (see Table 4 ). Indeed, the Western Pacific had the lowest occurrence of community participation and/or consultation in establishing indicators of wellbeing and health and/or opinions about the role of tourism in promoting these.

On the contrary, while seemingly demonstrating the second highest proportion of exclusionary research methods as discussed above, South-East Asia remains the only region where any attempts were made to ensure community members were invited to design and co-lead research (see Table 4 ). Nonetheless, meaningful modes of participation in this region were found to be more closely in line with the deficits found in Africa, Europe, and the Americas. This lack of approaches aimed at including affected communities as researchers in all but one instance in South-East Asia is an important research gap in tourism studies’ engagement with health and wellbeing debates.

Importantly, this failure to adequately engage with affected communities is at odds with the depth of research emanating from a range of health disciplines, such as disability studies, occupational therapy, public health, and midwifery, where the slogan ‘nothing about us without us’, which emerged in the 1980s, remains prominent. Coupled with a lack of focus on cultural determinants of health, this lack of participation and community direction strongly indicates that research studies are being approached with an a priori notion about what ‘wellbeing’ means to local communities, and risks limiting the relevance and accuracy of the research that is being undertaken. Problematically, therefore, there is a tendency to envisage a ‘package’ of wellbeing and health benefits that tourism can potentially bring to a community (regardless of cultural background), with research focusing on identifying the presence or absence of elements of this assumed, overarching ‘package’.

Interestingly, along with the paucity of full and meaningful collaboration with local community hosts in tourism research, there were no instances across the systematic review where a longitudinal approach was adopted. This observation reinforces the point that long-term, collaborative explorations of culturally specific concepts including such things as ‘welfare’, ‘benefit’, ‘healthfulness’ and ‘flourishing’, or combinations of these, are lacking across all regions. To bring tourism research more in line with broader debates and international policy directions about wellbeing, it is important for future research that the qualities of health and wellbeing in a particular cultural setting are investigated as a starting point, and culturally suitable approaches are designed (with local researchers) to best examine the effects of tourism on these contingent notions of wellbeing.

Importantly, a lack of longitudinal research will lead to a gap in our understanding about whether the negative impacts of tourism increase or compound over time. Adopting these ethnographies of health and wellbeing hinges upon long-term community partnerships that will serve to redress a research gap into the longevity of heritage tourism impacts. Furthermore, of those papers that asked local community members about their perceptions of heritage tourism across all regions, a common finding was the desire for greater decision-making and management of the enterprises as stakeholders. It seems ironic, therefore, that research into heritage tourism perceptions itself commonly invites the bare minimum of collaboration to establish the parameters of that research.

In a small number of papers that invited community opinions, local stakeholders considered that the tourism ‘benefits package’ myth should be dispelled, and that responsible tourism development should only happen as part of a wider suite of livelihood options, such as agriculture, so that economic diversity is maintained. Such a multi-livelihood framework would also promote the accessibility of benefits for more of the community, and this poses a significant new direction for tourism research. For example, an outcome of the review was the observation that infrastructure development is often directed towards privileged tourism livelihood options [ 150 ], but a more holistic framework would distribute these sorts of benefits to also co-develop other livelihoods.

Although there is a clear interest in understanding the relationship between heritage, tourism, health and wellbeing, future research that explores the intersections of heritage tourism with multiple health domains, in particular social and cultural domains, is critical. Indeed, the frequency with which the negative impacts of heritage tourism were reported in the small number of studies that engaged local community participants suggests that studies co-designed with community participants are a necessary future direction in order for academics, policymakers and professionals working in the field of heritage tourism to more adequately address the scarce knowledge about its socio-cultural impacts. The accepted importance of community researchers in cognate fields underscores that the knowledge, presence and skills of affected communities are vital and points to the need for similar studies in heritage tourism.

Conclusions

There are five main findings of this systematic review, each of which is a critical gap in research that should be addressed to support the health and wellbeing in local communities at tourism destinations. Firstly, whilst one of the primary findings of this systematic review was the increase in employment opportunities resulting from tourism, this disclosure arose because of a strong–in many cases, exclusive–methodological focus on economic indicators of health and wellbeing. Such research reveals that heritage tourism may significantly reduce poverty and may be used as a poverty-reducing strategy in low-income countries. However, the assumption underlying this focus on the economic benefits of tourism for health and wellbeing is that economic benefits are a proxy for other determinants of health, e.g., cultural, social, environmental, etc., which are otherwise less systematically explored. In particular, the ways in which combinations of environmental, social, cultural, and economic determinants on wellbeing interact is an area requires considerable future research.

Secondly, whilst economic drivers of wellbeing were the most common area of research across all regions, the impacts of tourism on cultural wellbeing were the least explored. Moreover, in many publications culture was entirely omitted. This is perhaps one of the most troubling outcomes of this systematic review, because in the relatively small number of papers that did investigate the cultural impacts of tourism, many reported traumatising consequences for local communities, the documentation of which would not be recorded in the majority of papers where cultural wellbeing was absent. Tourism’s profoundly damaging consequences included reports of a rise in ethnoreligious violence, loss of ancestral land and the threat of forced relocation, not to mentioned extensive reports of cultural atrophy.

Linked to this lack of understanding about the cultural impacts of tourism on wellbeing, the third finding of this review is that there are far fewer studies that incorporate qualitative data, more suited to document intangible cultural changes, whether positive or negative. Furthermore, more longitudinal research is also needed to address the subtle impacts of tourism acting over longer timescales. The systematic review revealed a lack of understanding about how both the negative and positive outcomes of heritage tourism change over time, whether by increasing, ameliorating, or compounding.

The fourth finding of this research is that, to a degree and in certain regions of the world, research is responding to international policy. This review has illustrated that, historically, Africa, Europe and the Americas prioritised research that measured the economic effects of tourism on health and wellbeing. However, after 2019 a shift occurred towards a growing but still under-represented interest in social-cultural wellbeing. We propose that this shift aligns with recommendations from UNESCO’s 2019 Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention [ 148 ] and the 2020 Operational Directives for UNESCO’s Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage [ 149 ]. The exception to this shift is the Western Pacific region, where the economic impacts of tourism are increasingly prioritised as the main indicator of wellbeing. Given the overall efficacy of policy for steering towards ethical and culturally-grounded evaluations of the impacts of tourism, we would urge heritage policymakers to take account of our recommendations ( Table 2 ).

The policy implications emerging from this review are the fifth finding and can be distilled into a few key propositions. There is a need for meaningful decolonising approaches to heritage tourism. More than half of the negative consequences of heritage tourism for health and wellbeing could be mitigated with policy guidance, contingent cultural protocols and anti-colonial methods that foreground the rights of local (including Indigenous) communities to design, govern, lead, and establish the terms of tourism in their local area. Although ‘participation’ has become a popular term that invokes an idea of power symmetries in tourism enterprises, it is clear from this systematic review that the term leaves too much latitude for the creep of poor-practice [ 151 ] that ultimately erodes community autonomy and self-determination. Participation is not enough if it means that there is scope for governments and foreign investors to superficially engage with community wellbeing needs and concerns.

Furthermore, calls for ‘capacity-building’ that effectively re-engineer the knowledges of local communities are fundamentally problematic because they presuppose a missing competency or knowledge. This is at odds with impassioned anti-colonial advocacy [ 152 ] which recognises that communities hold a range of knowledges and cultural assets that they may, and should be legally protected to, deploy (or not) as a culturally-suitable foundation that steers the design of locally-governed tourism enterprises. In short, to maximise and extend the benefits of heritage tourism and address major social determinants of health, host communities’ presence in heritage tourism governance, decision making processes, and control of and access to the resultant community resources and programs must be a priority. Future policymakers are encouraged to make guidance more explicit, enforceable and provision avenues for feedback from local communities that offers the protections of transparency. It is also imperative that researchers involve and empower local community groups as part of studies conducted in relation to their health and wellbeing. If current practices remain unchanged, the primary benefit of tourism could easily be rendered inaccessible through lack of education and/or appropriate training which was frequently identified as a barrier to community participation.

Supporting information

S1 checklist. prisma 2009 checklist..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282319.s001

Acknowledgments

We wish to acknowledge Della Maneze (DM) and Nidhi Wali (NW) for their contributions to the literature search and initial data extraction.

Declarations

The authors hereby declare that the work included in this paper is original and is the outcome of research carried out by the authors listed.

  • 1. World Tourism Organization. International Tourism Highlights, 2020 Edition. UNWTO, Madrid. 2021. https://doi.org/10.18111/9789284422456.2021
  • 2. World Tourism Organization. The T4SDG Platform Madrid, Spain. 2022 [cited 2022 October 11]. Available from: https://tourism4sdgs.org/the-platform/ .
  • 3. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Sustainable Tourism: UNESCO World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme. 2021 [cited 2021 June 20]. Available from: https://whc.unesco.org/en/tourism/ .
  • View Article
  • Google Scholar
  • 5. Leaver B. Delivering the social and economic benefits of heritage tourism. 2012 [cited 2021 June 28]. Available from: https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/f4d5ba7d-e4eb-4ced-9c0e-104471634fbb/files/essay-benefits-leaver.pdf .
  • 7. James P. Creating capacities for human flourishing: an alternative approach to human development. In: Spinozzi P, Mazzanti M, editors. Cultures of Sustainability and Wellbeing: Theories, Histories and Policies; 2018. p. 23–45.
  • 9. Paul-Andrews L. Tourism’s impact on the environment: a systematic review of energy and water interventions [Thesis]. Christchurch: University of Canterbury; 2017. Available from: https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/handle/10092/13416 .
  • PubMed/NCBI
  • 31. Joanna Briggs Institute. Joanna Briggs Institute reviewers’ manual: 2014 edition. The Joanna Briggs Institute [Internet]. 2014. Available from: https://nursing.lsuhsc.edu/JBI/docs/ReviewersManuals/Economic.pdf .
  • 33. Tyndall J. AACODS checklist. Flinders University [Internet]. 2010. Available from: http://dspace.flinders.edu.au/dspace/ .
  • 38. Noblit GW, Hare RD, Hare RD. Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies: Sage; 1988.
  • 52. Emptaz-Collomb J-GJ. Linking tourism, human wellbeing and conservation in the Caprivi strip (Namibia) [Ph.D Thesis]: University of Florida; 2009. Available from: https://www.proquest.com/docview/848632295?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true .
  • 56. Lepp AP. Tourism in a rural Ugandan village: Impacts, local meaning and implications for development [Ph.D. Thesis]: University of Florida; 2004. Available from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/305181950?accountid=36155 , https://ap01.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/uresolver/61UWSTSYD_INST/openurl?frbrVersion=2&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_id=10_1&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com&req_id=&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:&rft.genre=article&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournalrft.issn=&rft.title=&rft.atitle=&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.date=2004 .
  • 58. Mosetlhi BBT. The influence of Chobe National Park on people’s livelihoods and conservation behaviors [Ph.D. Thesis]: University of Florida; 2012. Available from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/1370246098?accountid=36155 , https://ap01.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/uresolver/61UWSTSYD_INST/openurl?frbrVersion=2&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_id=10_1&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com&req_id=&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:&rft.genre=article&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournalrft.issn=&rft.title=&rft.atitle=&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.date=2012 .
  • 60. Stone MT. Protected Areas, Tourism and Rural Community Livelihoods in Botswana [Ph.D. Thesis]: Arizona State University; 2013. Available from: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/79567367.pdf .
  • 61. Lyon A. Tourism and sustainable development: active stakeholder discourses in the waterberg biosphere reserve, South Africa [Ph.D. Thesis]: The University of Liverpool; 2013. Available from: https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/14953/4/LyonAnd_Dec2013_14953.pdf .
  • 62. DeLuca LM. Tourism, conservation, and *development among the Maasai of Ngorongoro District, Tanzania: Implications for political ecology and sustainable livelihoods [Ph.D. Thesis]: University of Colorado; 2002. Available from: https://search.library.wisc.edu/catalog/999942945102121 .
  • 69. Chazapi K, Sdrali D. Residents perceptions of tourism impacts on Andros Island, Greece. SUSTAINABLE TOURISM 2006: WIT Press; 2006. p. 10.
  • 70. Ehinger LT. Kyrgyzstan’s community-based tourism industry: A model method for sustainable development and environmental management? [M.A. Thesis]: University of Wyoming; 2016. Available from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/1842421616?accountid=36155 , https://ap01.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/uresolver/61UWSTSYD_INST/openurl?frbrVersion=2&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_id=10_1&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com&req_id=&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:&rft.genre=article&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournalrft.issn=&rft.title=&rft.atitle=&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.date=2016 .
  • 74. Labadi S. Evaluating the socio-economic impacts of selected regenerated heritage sites in Europe: European Cultural Foundation; 2011. 129 p.
  • 75. McDonough R. Seeing the people through the trees: Conservation, communities and ethno-ecotourism in the Bolivian Amazon Basin [Thesis]: Georgetown University 2009. Available from: https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/558153/McDonough_georgetown_0076M_10335.pdf;sequence=1 .
  • 81. Slinger VAV. Ecotourism in a small Caribbean island: Lessons learned for economic development and nature preservation [Ph.D. Thesis]: University of Florida; 2002. Available from: https://www.proquest.com/docview/304798500?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true .
  • 86. Barthel DJ. Ecotourism’s Effects on Deforestation in Colombia [M.A. Thesis]: Northeastern Illinois University; 2016. Available from: https://www.proquest.com/docview/1793940414?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true .
  • 89. Lottig KJ. Modeling resident attitudes on the environmental impacts of tourism: A case study of O’ahu, Hawai’i [M.S. Thesis]: University of Hawai’i; 2007. Available from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/304847568?accountid=36155 , https://ap01.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/uresolver/61UWSTSYD_INST/openurl?frbrVersion=2&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_id=10_1&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com&req_id=&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:&rft.genre=article&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournalrft.issn=&rft.title=&rft.atitle=&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.date=2007 .
  • 91. Raschke BJ. Is Whale Watching a Win-Win for People and Nature? An Analysis of the Economic, Environmental, and Social Impacts of Whale Watching in the Caribbean [Ph.D. Thesis]: Arizona State University; 2017. Available from: https://keep.lib.asu.edu/_flysystem/fedora/c7/187430/Raschke_asu_0010E_17442.pdf .
  • 94. Bennett N. Conservation, community benefit, capacity building and the social economy: A case study of Łutsël K’e and the proposed national park [M.E.S. Thesis]: Lakehead University (Canada); 2009. Available from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/725870968?accountid=36155 , https://ap01.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/uresolver/61UWSTSYD_INST/openurl?frbrVersion=2&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_id=10_1&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com&req_id=&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:&rft.genre=article&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournalrft.issn=&rft.title=&rft.atitle=&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.date=2009 .
  • 104. Rahman M. Exploring the socio-economic impacts of tourism: a study of cox’s bazar, bangladesh [Ph.D. Thesis]: Cardiff Metropolitan University; 2010. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344518546_Exploring_the_Socio-economic_Impacts_of_Tourism_A_Study_of_Cox’s_Bazar_Bangladesh .
  • 109. Anggraini LM. Place Attachment, Place Identity and Tourism in Jimbaran and Kuta, Bali [Ph.D. Thesis]: University of Western Sydney; 2015. Available from: https://researchdirect.westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws:32139 .
  • 111. Vajirakachorn T. Determinants of success for community-based tourism: The case of floating markets in Thailand [Ph.D. Thesis]: Texas A&M University; 2011. Available from: https://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-2011-08-9922 .
  • 118. Suntikul W. Linkages between heritage policy, tourism and business. ICOMOS 17th General Assembly; Paris, France 2011. p. 1069–76.
  • 119. Suntikul W. The Impact of Tourism on the Monks of Luang Prabang. 16th ICOMOS General Assembly and International Symposium: ‘Finding the spirit of place–between the tangible and the intangible’; Quebec, Canada 2008. p. 1–14.
  • 127. Murray AE. Footprints in Paradise: Ethnography of Ecotourism, Local Knowledge, and Nature Therapies in Okinawa: Berghahn Books; 2012. 186 p.
  • 132. Yang JYC, Chen YM. Nature -based tourism impacts in I -Lan, Taiwan: Business managers’ perceptions [Ph.D. Thesis]: University of Florida; 2006. Available from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/305330231?accountid=36155 , https://ap01.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/uresolver/61UWSTSYD_INST/openurl?frbrVersion=2&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_id=10_1&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com&req_id=&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:&rft.genre=article&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournalrft.issn=&rft.title=&rft.atitle=&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.date=2006 .
  • 137. Refaat H, Mohamed M. Rural tourism and sustainable development: the case of Tunis village’s handicrafts, Egypt". X International Agriculture Symposium "AGROSYM 2019"; 3–6 October 2019; Bosnia and Herzegovina 2019. p. 1670–8.
  • 141. Thinley P. Empowering People, Enhancing Livelihood, and Conserving Nature: Community Based Ecotourism in JSWNP, Bhutan and TMNP, Canada [M.Phil. Thesis]: University of New Brunswick; 2010. Available from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/1027149064?accountid=36155 , https://ap01.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/uresolver/61UWSTSYD_INST/openurl?frbrVersion=2&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_id=10_1&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com&req_id=&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:&rft.genre=article&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournalrft.issn=&rft.title=&rft.atitle=&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.date=2010 .
  • 147. World Commission on Culture and Development. Our creative diversity: report of the World Commission on Culture and Development. Paris: UNESCO: 1995.
  • 148. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Paris: UNESCO: 2019.
  • 149. UNESCO. Operational Directives for the Implementation of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Paris: UNESCO: 2020.
  • Research article
  • Open access
  • Published: 15 August 2023

People’s perspectives on heritage conservation and tourism development: a case study of Varanasi

  • Ananya Pati 1 &
  • Mujahid Husain 2  

Built Heritage volume  7 , Article number:  17 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

2184 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

The conservation of heritage and heritage-based tourism are interrelated activities in which the development in one can lead to the growth of the other and vice versa. In recent years, people have become increasingly aware of the importance of heritage and the necessity of its conservation. People’s knowledge and preservation of their roots and emotional attachments to traditions and places are beneficial for heritage conservation activities. Heritage places are also considered a growth point for the tourism industry that supports small- and medium-scale industries as well as numerous cottage industries. However, with the development of tourism and related industries in heritage areas, the local community may face difficulties in performing their day-to-day activities in the area. In many cases, local communities need to relocate and people must leave their residences due to the demand for tourism development. A case study of Varanasi City was conducted to obtain a detailed understanding of the impact of a recent tourism development programme (the Kashi Vishwanath Corridor Project) and people’s perception of it through a review of newspaper articles. It was found that people had mixed reactions regarding the development programme. The immediate residents of the area who were directly affected by the process in terms of emotional, economic and social loss were opposed to the project, while tourists and other residents of the city were pleased with the development activities. This paper attempts to identify the changes that occurred in the area due to the project and to capture people’s perspectives regarding the corridor project of Varanasi.

1 Introduction

The heritage of a country is a symbol of its national pride and produces cohesiveness and unity among the people. The importance of heritage and culture has increased significantly in recent years, particularly in the tourism sector. According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), ‘Cultural heritage is, in its broadest sense, both a product and a process, which provides societies with a wealth of resources that are inherited from the past, created in the present and bestowed for the benefit of future generations’ (UNESCO 2014 ). Most importantly, it includes not only tangible but also natural and intangible heritage. As Our Creative Diversity notes, however, these resources are a ‘fragile wealth’. As such, they require policies and development models that preserve and respect their diversity and uniqueness since they are ‘nonrenewable’ once lost. Modernisation and urbanisation spread rapidly worldwide during the past century, but people are now leaning towards their heritage to maintain the individuality and uniqueness of their communities and to present this uniqueness to the otherwise modern and developed world (Napravishta 2018 ). People have recognised the enormous potential of heritage and culture in the tourism industry and for economic and social development. Numerous industries consider heritage and culture to be a significant growth point for development and economic benefits (Xing et al. 2013 ). Although the growth of tourism may be considered beneficial for selected groups, in many cases, development and changes made with the goal of tourism development create significant negative effects on the host community, its culture and the heritage itself (Erbas  2018 ). The concept of heritage is based on its historical architecture and monuments, but it is also the heritage values and culture of the residents that have become part of their daily life. This combination of tangible and intangible heritage, called ‘fields of heritage’, is considered a capital stock worthy of conservation (Al-hagla 2010 ). In several cases, excessive tourist influx forces the local community to change its way of life and disrupts the day-to-day activities of the community. In other cases, a complete change of landscape due tourism development creates environmental and cultural degradation. One of the problems of tourism development is that it fails to maintain a balance between the goal of achieving an increased number of tourists and its impact on the existing heritage and the community (Erbas  2018 ). In planning for heritage cities, urban development dynamics and tourism development are equally important factors. In areas with historical backgrounds, the conservation of the existing environment must be the primary concern (Erbas  2018 ).

1.1 Aim and objective

This paper conducts a study of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple Corridor project using an analysis of culture-led tourism and heritage conservation. The Kashi Vishwanath temple corridor project is considered a perfect case study to analyse conflicts between the host community (local dwellers) of the city and the development programme aimed towards the betterment of the pilgrims and tourists who come to the heritage city. The main objective of the study is to assess the perspective of the local community on tourism-led development. A second objective is to understand the pros and cons of tourism-led developments in a heritage city.

While the case study in this paper is based on a recent occurrence, there has been little research on the effects of the Kashi Vishwanath Corridor Project. Although this development project affects only a small portion of the city, the area is heavily populated; therefore, the effects on the locals are significant. This situation must be addressed from the perspectives of the diverse groups who benefited or were harmed by the development initiative.

1.2 The project details

The project of the Kashi Vishwanath temple corridor aimed to connect the Vishwanath Temple with the Ghats of Ganges. The pathway would connect the Manikarnika and Lalita ghat to the temple (Fig.  1 ), and the temple would be visible from the river front (Singh 2018 ). The temple, which is located 400 m from the ghats, was accessible to visitors only by narrow lanes (gali) through a crowded neighbourhood. The project mainly focused on building a wider and cleaner road and stairs with bright lights from the ghats to the temple. Because tourists and pilgrims come to Varanasi mainly to visit the older part of the city (i.e., the ghats of Ganges and the Vishwanath Temple), a connecting corridor would be of great use to them. By making the temple accessible to pilgrims and tourists through waterways, tourists could reach the temple ghat from the Khidkiya ghat and Raj ghat via a boat ride. The project also aimed to build stairways and escalators to reach the temple (Pandey and Jain 2021 ). This major makeover of the Vishwanath temple was the first since 1780. The Maratha queen of Indore, Ahilyabai Holker, renovated the Vishwanath temple and its surroundings, but no major changes have occurred in this area since then.

figure 1

Kashi Vishwanath Corridor after Completion, 12 December 2021 (Source: NDTV.com)

The project was launched in 2018, and the work was initiated in March 2019. The project known as Kashi Vishwanath Mandir Vistarikaran-Sundarayakaran Yojana (Kashi Vishwanath Temple extension and beautification plan) was estimated at Rs. 400 crore. According to the plan for redevelopment, an area of 43,636 sq. m was cleared by demolishing all the construction between the river and the ancient shrine (Ghosh 2018 ). A development board was created to accomplish the plan. To create this huge space, 314 properties were bought and demolished by the board. A total of Rs. 390 crore was spent to acquire the properties that were selected for the project in the area. Of this Rs. 390 crore, a sum of Rs. 70 crore was allotted for the rehabilitation of the 1,400 people living in this area, who were mainly encroachers, vendors and shopkeepers (Tiwari 2021 ).

The narrow lanes and the surroundings that were demolished for the project were known as Lahoritola, Neelkanth and Brahamanal (Singh 2018 ). The neighbourhood of Lahoritola is one of the oldest parts of Varanasi City. The first settlers migrated to this place from Lahore during the reign of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. Currently, the sixth generation of the original settlers are living in this area, but as the area was cleared for the project, they had no other option but to settle somewhere else (Ghosh 2018 ). The project has specific planning for people affected by it. According to the authorities, rehabilitation houses are to be built at Ramnagar on eight acres of government land. Shopkeepers affected by the process are to be allotted shops near the temple after the completion of the project (Singh 2018 ).

The project aims not only to create a wide corridor connecting the temple to the ghat but also to develop several buildings for various tourism purposes. The Kashi Vishwanath temple complex will have 23 new structures after the completion of the plan. Along with the construction of a new temple chowk, these structures will include a tourist information centre, salvation house, city gallery, guest house, multipurpose hall, locker room, bhog shala, tourist facilitation centre, Mumukshu Bhaban, vedic kendra, city museum, food court, viewing gallery, and restroom (Tiwari 2021 ). The Ganga View gallery will provide a clear panoramic view for tourists. According to officials, the Mandir Chawk will be a place for pilgrims to relax and meditate (Pandey and Jain 2021 ). After the completion of the corridor and other proposed buildings, the temple complex will have 50,000 sq. ft. of space, which is approximately 200 times larger than the previous area of the temple complex. According to authorities, the space of the entire temple complex will be able to manage 50,000 to 75,000 pilgrims at a time, compared to a few hundred previously. The project has also considered the importance of green cover, and it was decided that 70% of the total 5.50 lakh sq. ft. will be green (Tiwari 2021 ). With the completion of the project, it is believed that there will be a boost in tourism, and the attraction of the heritage of the city will increase substantially.

2 Literature review

Since the 1980s, sustainable development has become an important concept worldwide. In the case of heritage tourism, Sustainable Tourism Development (STD) has become an important issue. STD includes developmental policies and the protection of the local environment. The common dilemma faced by all interested parties in tourism development is finding a sustainable tourism development plan that will conserve heritage while influencing the positive growth of tourism and tourism-related economic activities (Xing et al. 2013 ). When discussing sustainable tourism, the main focus is economic and environmental sustainability. The issue of social sustainability is overlooked, although it should be considered with equal importance. Exponential growth in a tourism location does not ensure the betterment of the local community, the prevention of community migration, or tangible benefits from tourism (Sirima and Backman 2013 ).

The tourism development process has both negative and positive impacts on heritage cities. While the negative impacts regarding the conservation of the area are concerning, the positive impacts of tourism cannot be ignored. The present-day commodification of heritage assets poses a serious question regarding the extent to which the development and modification of heritage areas is sustainable. Increased tourism activities and an influx of national and international tourists may expand the economy of the area and create job opportunities, but in the commodification of tourism, the heritage site may lose its aesthetic value and become artificial, and its originality may fade (Al-hagla 2010 ). In many cases, the benefits received by heritage locations through increased tourism activities may eventually be overshadowed by the negative long-term effects of the process (Benur and Bramwell 2015 ). To ensure that future generations inherit a resource base that is sufficient to fulfil their needs and wants, sustainability necessitates that such assets be prudently managed. The goal of this paper is to investigate how sustainability principles might be used most effectively in the context of heritage tourism with a focus on the administration of historic homes and gardens (Fyall and Garrod 1998 ).

‘Over tourism’ is defined as ‘destinations where hosts or guests, locals or visitors, feel that there are too many visitors and that the quality of life in the area or the quality of the experience has deteriorated unacceptably’. The condition of ‘over tourism’ is the opposite of the expected condition of ‘responsible tourism’. Responsible tourism is a tourism practice by which the tourism destination ascends to a better condition that benefits both the host and the tourists (Goodwin 2017 ). When tourism-related changes are introduced by persons external to the local community, the possibility of social conflict arises because of the fluctuating relationship between the stakeholder authorities and the host community (Yang et al. 2013 ).

Studies on the entangled relationships between stakeholders are just as important as studies ofthe growth of historic tourism, which have also been the subject of research. Conflicts of interest arise when the local community participates in the tourism development process without being guaranteed equitable involvement by the stakeholders. These complex scenarios must be studied to fully comprehend the implications of heritage site development initiatives (Li et al. 2020 ). The aim of using a cultural heritage space in a consumer-dominant space may lead to the complete commercialisation or ‘touristification’ of the area (Nasser 2003 ). This term is used to describe the particular forms and functions that take place due to the increased growth of tourism activity. The effect of ‘touristification’ is particularly prominent in the parts of historical cities that tourists use most (historic tourist cities) (Hernández et al. 2017 ). Developmental activities in heritage cities may lead to conflicts regarding land acquisition if the local community does not participate in planning (Porter and Salazar 2005 ). To prevent potential conflicts, it is imperative to focus on the interests, needs, and concerns of the local community at all phases of decision-making (Erbas  2018 ). The host community of the location must be included in planning for tourism development; otherwise, it will lead to ‘zoo syndrome’, where the local community is negatively affected by the development plans (De Ascaniis et al. 2018 ). Bill Bramwell and Bernard Lane ( 1993 ) attempted to explain the connection between the interpretation and sustainable development of natural and heritage sites of the world. According to these authors, the host community’s involvement in interpreting and promoting cultural heritage is beneficial for sustainable tourism development. The paper also suggests that ‘historic and natural features [are] to be retained wherever possible, not swept away by new developments’. Tourism in urban areas has started to create different types of problems in local communities (Hernández et al. 2017 ).

The influx of tourists has recently increased at a spectacular rate, particularly in urban tourist destinations. A study by María García-Hernández noted that historic urban landscapes are more affected by being tourism destinations (García-Hernández et al. 2017 ). Tourism development in these places is only sustainable when socioeconomic, physical and cultural characteristics are unharmed in the tourism process. The tourism development planning of a historic city must be based on the ‘historic urban landscape approach’. To address community aspects, the development needs to be comprehensive and must address different perspectives with sincerity and humanity. In addition to the physical conservation and protection of the heritage, the social and economic aspects of the preservation and conservation area are equally important (Al-hagla 2010 ). An essential component of the growth of the tourism industry is the preservation of a heritage site's aesthetic value. A site's high aesthetic value may be a major factor in the growth of the tourism business, particularly in developing nations, and the tourism sector can convert this aesthetic value into economic benefit. In contrast, a site's deteriorating aesthetic value will worsen the quality of life for the people who live there. At the Rio meeting, more than 20 nations agreed that maintaining heritage sites’ aesthetic value is crucial for sustainable development (Zhang et al. 2023 ). Because the locations were regarded as the core or centre of the cultural area, contemporary developments were prevented in several areas of the old heritage towns. For millennia, the unique social structures, customary pastimes, and street layouts of these areas remained unaltered. The heart of the cultural areas consists of a uniform collection of tangible and intangible assets. Several cities throughout North Africa and the Middle East have such examples. These ancient cities have not changed since the Arab civilisation's Middle Ages. These cultural centres, which include religious structures, paths, and gathering places, frequently serve as a main attraction for tourists, gathering places for pilgrims, and a source of revenue for nearby businesses (Bigio and Licciardi 2010 ).

At the UNESCO world heritage site Hampi in India, conflicts between the local community and the authorities pose challenges to the overall growth of the tourist site. A lack of communication between the government and locals, negligence in community involvement and participation and inequality in power distribution hinder the social sustainability of the heritage site (Nair et al. 2022 ). Similar features can be found in the older parts of Varanasi, where the ghat area, narrow alleys and surroundings of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple have remained unchanged for centuries. Thus, sudden reconstruction in the long-unchanged part of the city will have a significant impact on the neighbourhood.

Several regions of the world have conducted heritage reconstruction projects similar to the corridor project. The ancient town of Skopje in Macedonia, also known as the Old Bazaar, which consists of small stores, streets, independent businesses, and historic cultural establishments, has descended into social instability and dire economic conditions. To improve the condition of the area, a project was started in 2010. The project's primary goal was to implement better amenities and commercial development, which would in turn contribute to improved citizen livelihoods and improved tourism activity. According to the study, since the beginning of the project, the number of business establishments in the Old Bazaar has increased by 50% and its daily revenue has grown by 80%. Furthermore, the daily number of tourists increased by approximately 90% in the city. Jordan offers another illustration of this sort. The artistic mosaic creations have made Madaba, an ancient city with a rich heritage and culture, particularly well known. To address the city’s physical deterioration, population growth and encroachment, and poor maintenance, the World Bank launched a redevelopment project in the city of Madaba. After the project was finished, the city saw a significant rise in tourists within a period of two to three years (Throsby 2015 ).

The physical and socioeconomic regeneration of urban areas is prominent after tourism development. The assimilation of the local community in the process, as a source of heritage value and the inheritors of the heritage space, can result in sustainable tourism development.

2.1 Methodology

Each historically significant building has value or cultural heritage significance, and different stakeholders have varied perspectives on what those values are. Currently, determining the historical relevance of a site depends not only on professionals but also on the public at large. The need for public participation in cultural conservation initiatives is widely acknowledged in the literature (Bakri et al. 2015 ). The information for this study was gathered from newspaper articles published between 2018 and 2022 during the demolition of houses and the construction of new structures according to the Kashi Vishwanath Temple Corridor Project plans. The newspapers used for this study were in English and were published in digital media. The source of the newspapers was reliable national news agencies. Thirteen such articles were used for this study, and nine of them are cited in this article.

In addition to news articles, Google Earth Pro software was used to evaluate change detection within the study area. Google Earth Pro software has very fine resolution and is regularly used in research papers on urban development. To show the urban sprawl and changes over time, Google Earth Time Series Images were used, and area delineation was performed using the polygon tool in ArcMap software (Boussema et al. 2020 ).

In this paper, the polygon creation method was used to demarcate the study area within which the demolition of old structures and development of new structures have occurred. A landscape change analysis was performed using Google Earth images from three different years. The Google Earth images of different stages of the project provide a visual understanding of the changes that occurred in only 5 years. This paper includes images of the area before the commencement of the project (2018), during the project (2019) and after the completion of the project (2022). Following flow chart explains the various materials and methodology used in the present study (Fig.  2 ).

figure 2

Research Methodology Flow Chart (Source: the author)

2.2 The heritage of Varanasi

The city of Varanasi, popularly known as Varanasi or Kashi, is situated on the left bank of the mighty Ganges in the district of Uttar Pradesh. The city has been a centre of religious practices and devotion and a pilgrimage site. Varanasi or Kashi is one of the oldest living cities in the world. Varanasi recorded its first human settlement in approximately 1000 BCE (before the Christian Era), although the city mainly developed during the 18th century. Other ancient cities worldwide have hardly survived after imperial and colonial forays, whereas the city of Varanasi continued to thrive through the ages. The city has successfully retained its ancient charms and rich culture even in the era of modernisation. During the 8th century, Adi Shankara started the worship of Shiva in this place. Later, in 1780, the temple of Kashi Vishwanath was built by queen Ahilyabai Holkar of Indore. This is also known as the golden temple and is one of the most famous temples of Varanasi.

The main iconic attraction of Varanasi City is its riverbanks and ghats with stairways. The riverfront heritage area spreads approximately 200 m inwards from the river and 6.8 km along the Ganges River. This heritage part of the Ganges Riverbank has a crescent shape and is located between the confluence of Ashi Nala in the south and Varana River in the north. A total of 84 ghats are located within this inherited river front. The ghats are overlooked by enormous old buildings, shrines and temples built mainly under the patronage of kings and lords between the 18th and 20th centuries. The ghats of Varanasi hold a special significance as they connect heritage with everyday life. Centuries-old ghats and neighbouring monuments are part of the everyday life of local residents as well as tourists and pilgrims. The river front also serves as an intangible part of cultural heritage as it is a necessary part of every ritual and festival of the city. All rituals start at the ghats with a sacred bath in the Ganges River. Although the city of Varanasi is not yet inscribed as a world heritage site, ‘ The Riverfront and Old City Heritage Zone of Varanasi ’ is being presented to UNESCO as a potential world heritage site (Singh and Rana 2015 ). Another creative proposal has recently been revealed for the renovation and rebuilding of the Kashi ghats, known as the River Front Development Project. The riverfronts and ghat areas are projected to undergo significant modification as a result of this project. On the other side of the river from the ghats, the project includes a four-lane elevated road that will be eight kilometres long. According to the project, three additional bridges will be constructed. It is anticipated that after this project is finished, tourism will flourish (Seth 2022 ).

2.3 The landscape change

As discussed earlier, an area of 43,636 sq. m. was selected, and the existing properties were demolished. The clearance of the area was planned to make space for building up the new structures decided according to the project. This particular area has experienced a significant change in landscape within a couple of years. From being a congested agglomeration of houses, shops and unplanned built-ups to narrow lanes filled with tourists, pilgrims and locals, it turned into a clean modern wide-spaced corridor. Modern construction also contains new buildings to facilitate tourists.

Google Earth images were taken in different years to compare the landscape changes that took place in the area of the project. Three images were selected: November 2018 (Fig.  3 ), November 2019 (Fig.  4 ), and January 2022 (Fig.  5 ).

figure 3

The original settlement pattern around the temple, November 2018 (Source: Google Earth)

figure 4

a The project area (cyan colour boundary) after demolishing the settlements, November 2019 (Source: Google Earth). b Demolition work in full swing for the Kashi Vishwanath Temple Project, 20 January 2019 (Source: the Hindu). c Properties being demolished for the project, 8 March 2019 (Source: the wire). d Temples amidst destruction, 13 May 2021 (Source: the Print)

figure 5

The project area (orange colour boundary) after the construction of new structures, January 2022 (Source: Google Earth)

The first figure (Fig.  3 ) was selected from the time when the area was unchanged, and all the existing built-ups were intact. It is clear from the image that the Kashi Vishwanath Temple was surrounded by closely spaced compact settlements, and the only way to access the temple was through narrow alleys. Varanasi is particularly famous for these old narrow alleys, through which one could reach the ghats of Ganges and the Vishwanath Temple. Some of these alleyways were also market areas with numerous shops. The range of goods sold in those areas ranges from religious goods and decorative items to food stalls. This area, known as Lahori Tola, is a residential area with numerous shops and businesses.

The figure (Fig.  4 ) was selected from 2019, when the whole area under project was cleared by demolishing the properties. The barren land in the image clearly shows the parts where complete demolition has been done. The space between the Vishwanath Temple and the Ghat of Ganges appeared to be unhindered and waiting to be transformed into a tourism-based landscape.

In the third and final figure of 2022 (Fig.  5 ), the new constructions are visible, which were built according to the Kashi Vishwanath Temple extension and beautification plan. The whole area has changed from a compact residential space to a space for tourists and pilgrims within a couple of years. The existing properties were mostly private properties, temples, and shops. Although the private properties were demolished, the temples remained unharmed.

2.4 People’s perspectives

2.4.1 perspective of the residents.

The opinion of the public regarding the project is divided. Despite the restoration of religious glory and decongestion of the surroundings of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple, the situation of the locals who have lost their homes is painful and devastating. The locals of the area have discussed their loss and destruction with news reporters (Press Trust of India- PTI 2021 ). The people who were living in the area have clearly expressed their anguish about losing their homes and businesses. People have voiced their disagreement regarding the amount of compensation paid to them and have stated that the close proximity of their homes to the temple was an additional advantage that they lost due to this project. The locals stated that this tourism project has significantly affected them, not only economically but also emotionally (Ghosh 2018 ). Many people who had homes in the area selected for the corridor project recalled memories of their homes and the old neighbourhood. While many of the residents of Varanasi were enthusiastic about the ambitious project of redevelopment, many others grieved the loss of their family homes, where their families had lived for more than a hundred years. Many stated that extended families living in these old houses were broken up after the property was demolished. Family members became segregated and began living separately in different places in Varanasi (PTI 2021 ).

2.4.2 Perspective of shop owners

All the businesses operating in the area have been closed (Ghosh 2018 ). Many people who had shops in the area face the loss of their businesses due to complete demolition and relocation as shifting shops does not shift customers to new locations (PTI 2021 ). Several residents of the area had shops on the ground floor of the houses, and they lost their shops along with their residential properties during the demolition.

2.4.3 Perspective of the authorities

In an interview with the chief executive officer (CEO) of Shri Kashi Viswanath Temple Trust, Vishal Singh, who was in charge of implementing the project on the ground, the perspective of the stockholders was showcased more clearly. When he was asked about the disruption caused by the corridor project and how the people’s displeasure was handled, he replied that the clearance of the temple area was envisaged for 10 − 15 years, but the plan was implemented very recently. The problems faced by pilgrims were the key consideration in planning. Providing ‘Suraksha aur Suvidha’ (security and facilities) to pilgrims is the main focus of the corridor project. When asked about the residents of the area who had to leave due to the project and how they were compensated, he said, ‘We have paid every family, every household living here, including tenants. We have paid every single person who has been shifted out of this place’ (Basu 2019 ).

According to the authorities, the main reason behind the planning of the expansion of the temple complex was to provide facilities to tourists and pilgrims. On special occasions, the temple expects 4–5 lakh visitors in a day, and pilgrims must wait in a long queue, sometimes for more than a day. The aim of developing an extended temple complex was to provide basic amenities such as toilets, drinking water, first aid and medical care to visitors in need (Basu 2019 ). The authorities of the project applied a positive perspective to the situation and confirmed that every problem associated with the evacuation of the area was treated with a humanitarian approach (Basu 2019 ). According to the authorities, rehabilitation and compensation were not only for real owners of the area; other permanent settlers, such as tenants and people living illegally, were also included in the planning (Tiwari 2021 ).

Many people stated their opinions in support of the development project. Many supported the decision to remove the temple area encroachment. In some people’s opinions, most of the rightful owners of the neighbourhood in question did not live there. The people who were displaced due to the project were mostly tenants or had unauthorised occupancy (Ghosh 2018 ). According to the authorities, the process of purchasing property from the owners was the most difficult task. The real owners of the area were descendants of the kings or wealthy people of the past. Most of the properties were given to the shebait or caretakers, who looked after the property and temples. The shebait of the properties started to expand the buildings using every kind of construction, some of which were illegal and unsafe. Shebait began renting the rooms to tenants. Finally, when the properties were bought and vacated, the authorities had to compensate the real owners of the property, the shebait who looked after the property, the tenants and some illegal encroachers (Basu 2019 ).

Despite all the disputes regarding the acquisition of the properties, there is no pending case in the court (Tiwari 2021 ). The CEO of Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Trust has confirmed that Rs. 262 crore was paid to the owners of the property, and another Rs. 16.54 crore was paid to the tenants, including illegal encroachers (Basu 2019 ).

2.4.4 Perspective of the Tourists

The experiences of the tourists and pilgrims who visited Vishwanath Temple in its previous condition were not very positive. Slow-moving traffic around the temple and a long queue to enter the temple were regular affairs. Due to overcrowding, people could obtain only a glimpse of the deity before being forced to move ahead even after waiting in the queue for hours or days. It is expected that after the completion of the project, this situation will improve (Pandey and Jain 2021 ). Tourists visiting Kashi again after several years are surprised by the changed landscape of the temple. A visitor from Kolkata who was visiting Kashi after seven years was astonished by the wide space at the entrance of the temple instead of narrow and cramped lanes. The visitor shared his experience from his last visit when he had a ‘tough time’ reaching the temple through a narrow, crowded lane (Pandey 2019 ). The tour companies shared great joy in the news reports about the completion of the corridor project as they predicted an enormous increase in tourism business in Kashi. According to the president of a tour company, they had already witnessed a 10% increase in travellers interested in travelling Kashi. According to another president of a renowned tour company, along with the increased interest in visiting the Kashi temple, tourists show interest in visiting Sarnath Temple and river cruises (Bhuniya 2022 ). It can be inferred that with the rejuvenation of the Vishwanath temple, other surrounding attractions of Kashi will also benefit from the tourism business.

2.4.5 Other perspectives

According to historians, some parts of the neighbouring area of the temple that were demolished for the new construction were as old as the temple itself (Ghosh 2018 ). Families have stated that they had their own temples at their family homes that were also old and had beautiful carvings, but those too were demolished along with the remaining property. Structures that were demolished for the project, such as old family temples, houses and dharamshalas, were 250–300 years old. The locals stated that these structures were equally important parts of the heritage of the old city, but they are now lost due to the tourism development project. A police officer who chose to remain anonymous shared his grief regarding the destruction of heritage buildings for the project. According to this officer, some of the iconic buildings of the area were destroyed in the process. Although he admitted that the new structure looked beautiful, the loss of old stone carvings and structures was absolutely tragic. He stated that development at the cost of heritage is never acceptable (PTI 2021 ). Demolition for the Kashi Vishwanath corridor has disrupted the balanced harmony that existed between the Vishwanath Temple and the Gayan Vapi Mosque: ‘Such exposure, and particularly the haunting sight of the object remains – detritus, scraps of the city’s fabric and broken deities – led to protest and debates…’. The residents of the area have also stated their powerlessness in fighting the government project and saving the neighbourhood from destruction (Lazzaretti 2021 ) .

3 Implication: rediscovering the ancient temples

Conservation of the ancient temples can be considered one of the positive aspects of the corridor project (Singh 2018 ). While clearing the settlements for the projected corridor, more than 40 ancient temples were rediscovered. These temples were surrounded by dense settlements; in some cases, they were completely engulfed and new settlements were built around them, covering the ancient temples. The Archaeological Survey of India has confirmed that none of the temples that were found during the destruction of personal and commercial properties along the project site were older than the 17th century (PTI 2021 ). According to the architect of the project, the goal was to increase facilities for tourists by connecting the temple with the ghat of Ganges without changing the existing formation of the temple. The architect also stated that the aim was not to tamper with the original structure of the temple and to maintain it as it was. According to Atul Tripathi of Banaras Hindu University, ‘The corridor will give glimpses of the sculptural art and architectural history of temples over 300 years because the 41 temples, which were found among the buildings purchased and demolished, have been preserved’ (Indo-Asian News Service—(IANS), 2023 ).

Rediscovering the ancient temples on which illegal construction was performed has become one of the important reasons for many people to support the project (Ghosh 2018 ). During the demolition of houses in the area, numerous old temples were found inside the properties. Religious sentiment was given priority in this case, and the temples were not demolished. The plan of the project was revised due to the discovery of the old temples. The location of the guest house and the Vedic centre were changed to accommodate these temples within the temple complex. All the temples were incorporated into the plan and restored to their former glory (Tiwari 2021 ).

4 Discussion and conclusion

A limitation of this study is that a field survey would have enhanced the quality of the work. Unfortunately, when the project was in progress, there were several restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the chance of possible health risks from a field survey were also considered. There is future potential to continue this work by interviewing the affected residents and obtaining a broader perspective of how their lives changed after the completion of the project.

The case study of Varanasi City with regard to the newly developed Kashi Vishwanath Corridor Project provides a clear view of the existing conflicts between heritage conservation planning and the affected community. The opinions of the people are clearly divided based on their gains or losses from the development project. Temple-centric tourism development, increased facilities and amenities for tourists and pilgrims have pleased a great number of devotees. Larger space around the temple, less congestion, and the elimination of long queues to visit the deity have created a positive effect, especially for pilgrims and tourists as well as many other residents of Varanasi. For visitors, this development project will help to provide a better experience while visiting the holy temple, but outsiders will not realise the actual effect resulting from the redevelopment of the area. The complete demolition of private properties and the loss of businesses and means of income will no doubt cause socioeconomic damage to the people of the area. Although the people received compensation for their loss, several reports have confirmed the locals’ disappointment as the sum was not sufficient to compensate what they lost. In addition to the socioeconomic damage, the loss of heritage that took place in the process is undeniable. The area was one of the oldest parts of Varanasi and was part and parcel of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple. The locals, along with many others around the country, have revealed their anguish about losing heritage in the name of tourism development. Some damages are measurable in terms of economic value, whereas some damages are completely unfathomable. The emotional and sentimental loss suffered by the residents due to their attachment to this area cannot be compensated.

Varanasi, now known as Kashi, is a city of incredible heritage value and is one of the oldest living cities in the world. The importance of heritage in Kashi cannot be confined to heritage structures; it spreads to the people, culture, and values of the place. The area that was demolished was considered a residential area, and the properties were not declared heritage buildings or may not have contained significant heritage monuments or architecture, but the heritage value of the space was undeniable. Areas with various historical, architectural, local, artistic and aesthetic characteristics incorporated into natural urban landscapes, when taken collectively, are more valuable than their individual values. The clustering of various aspects of tangible and intangible heritage value existing in the area that was lost in the process of tourism development is the only drawback for the otherwise ambitious project.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

Sustainable Tourism Development

Before the Christian Era

Press Trust of India

Chief Executive Officer

Indo-Asian News Service

Al-hagla, K.S. 2010. Sustainable urban development in historical areas using the tourist trail approach: A case study of the Cultural Heritage and Urban Development (CHUD) project in Saida. Lebanon. Cities 27 (4): 234–248.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bakri, A. F., N. Ibrahim, S. S. Ahmad, and N. Q. Zaman. 2015. Public perception on the cultural significance of heritage buildings in Kuala Lumpur. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 202: 294–302.

Basu, J. 2019. Vishwanath Corridor will be ready by June 2021: CEO of Kashi Temple Trust. e-paper The Sunday Guardian .

Benur, A. M., and B. Bramwell. 2015. Tourism product development and product diversification in destinations. Tourism Management 50: 213–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.02.005 .

Bhuniya, A. 2022. Tourists flock to Kashi Vishwanath Corridor . New Delhi: The Media India.

Google Scholar  

Bigio, A. G., and G. Licciardi. 2010. The urban rehabilitation of medinas: the World Bank experience in the Middle East and North Africa . Washington: The World Bank.  https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/21285a69-9361-5d55-8a31-bc9e2e8b810c/content .

Boussema, S. B. F., F. K. Allouche, A. Bekaoui, Y. Khalifa, and H. M’Sadak. 2020. Using Google Earth™ And Geographical Information System data as method to detect Urban Sprawl and Green Spaces for better wellbeing case of a coastal landscape. International Journal of Research 8 (9): 266–276.

De Ascaniis, S., M. Gravari-Barbas, and L. Cantoni. 2018. Tourism Management at UNESCO world heritage sites. ISBN 978-88-6101-018-5

Erbas, A. E. 2018. Cultural Heritage Conservation And Culture-Led Tourism Conflict Within The Historic Site In Beyoğlu, Istanbul. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment  217: 647–659. https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP180551 .

Fyall, A., and B. Garrod. 1998. Heritage tourism: At what price? Managing Leisure 3 (4): 213–228.

García-Hernández, María, Manuel De la Calle-Vaquero, and Claudia Yubero. 2017. Cultural Heritage and Urban Tourism: Historic City Centres under Pressure. Sustainability 9 (8): 1346. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081346 .

Ghosh, B. 2018. Beautification plan destroys oldest neighbourhoods in Varanasi. The Hindu , December 9.

Goodwin, H. 2017. The challenge of overtourism. Responsible Tourism Partnership 4: 1–19.

IANS. 2023. Varanasi's corridor of change seamlessly merges past with future. Indo-Asian News Service. https://ians.in/index.php/iansin/d2J0bg .

Lane, B. B. 1993. Interpretation and Sustainable Tourism: The Potential and the Pitfalls. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1: 2.

Lazzaretti, V. 2021. The boundary within: Demolitions, dream projects and the negotiation of Hinduness in Banaras. In  Spaces of Religion in Urban South Asia ,edited by István Keul. London: Routledge.

Li, Y., C. Lau, and P. Su. 2020. Heritage tourism stakeholder conflict: A case of a World Heritage Site in China. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change 18: 267–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2020.1722141 .

Nair, B. B., S. Sinha, M. R. Dileep. 2023. Who Owns the Heritage? Power and Politics of Heritage Site Management in Tourism, Hampi, India. Archaeologies 19: 276–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-022-09459-w .

Napravishta, F. 2018. The Fragility of Cultural Heritage in the Era of Globalization: Skanderbeg Square Modernization. Paper presented at IFAU 2018 - 2nd International Forum on Architecture and Urbanism, Pescara, Italy, November 8–10.

Nasser, N. 2003. Planning for Urban Heritage Places: Reconciling Conservation, Tourism, and Sustainable Development. Journal of Planning Literature 17 (4): 467–479.

Pandey, N. and J. Parveen. 2021. Kashi Vishwanath makeover races to meet Nov Dadeline, blending heritage with the modern. The Print .

Pandey, S. 2019. Corridor for Kashi tourists proves a bane for locals . Varanashi: The Deccan Herald.

Porter, B. W., and N. B. Salazar. 2005. Heritage Tourism, Conflicts and the Public Interest : An Introduction. International Journal of Heritage Studies 11: 361–370.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13527250500337397 .

PTI. 2021. Kashi corridor: Section of locals unhappy over 'lost homes', demolition of iconic buildings e-paper. The Indian Express . https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/lucknow/ .

Seth, M. 2022. An 8-km elevated road, 3 ‘finger bridges’ to ghats: UP govt comes up with plan to transform Ganga riverfront . Lucknow: The Indian Express.

Singh, R. P. 2015. Varanasi, the Cultural Capital of India: Visioning Cultural Heritage and Planning. SANDHI, A Journal of Interfacing Science-Heritage and Technology-Tradition of India IIT Kharagpur, India 1 (1): 100–122.

Singh, S. 2018. Kashi Vishwanath Pathway: over 100 houses to be demolished, rehabilitation in Ramnagar. The Economic Times .

Sirima, A., and K. F. Backman. 2013. Communities’ displacement from national park and tourism development in the Usangu Plains.  Current Issues in Tourism  16 (7–8): 719–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2013.785484 .

Throsby, D. 2015. Investment in urban heritage conservation in developing countries: Concepts, methods and data , 1–6. City: Culture and Society.

Tiwari, O. M. 2021. Marvel of Kashi Vishwanath Corridor: 314 buildings acquired, Rs 390 crore paid to owners, but zero litigation. News Nine .

UNESCO. 2014. UNESCO Culture for Development Indicators: Methodology Manual . Paris: UNSCO. www.unesco.org/creativity/cdis .

Xing, H., A. Marzuki, and A.A. Razak. 2013. Conceptualizing a Sustainable Development Model For Cultural Heritage Tourism in Asia. Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management 8 (1): 51–66.

Yang, J., C. Ryan, and L. Zhang. 2013. Social conflict in communities impacted by tourism. Tourism Management 35: 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.06.002 .

Zhang, S., K. Xiong, G. Fei, H. Zhang, and Y. Chen. 2023. Aesthetic value protection and tourism development of the world natural heritage sites: A literature review and implications for the world heritage karst sites. Heritage Science  11: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-023-00872-0 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors are very thankful to the Google Earth Pro for providing the open access to download the real time satellite imageries.

No fund received during this research work.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Geography, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, 110025, India

Ananya Pati

BIM Plus Plus Project Consultants L.L.C, Lynx Tower, Dubai Silicon Oasis, 341041, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Mujahid Husain

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

First author’s contribution: writing Abstract, Literature review, Discussion and conclusion. Second Author’s contribution: Modification/Rewrite Abstract and literature review. News agencies’ reporting photos of study area. Study area Google Earth Pro work, Study area delineation and calculation in ArcMap software. Common work: Throughout the communication with the editor of the Journal Built Heritage . Both authors did revision of manuscript with discussion and common understanding in every suggestion that were received from the reviewers. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mujahid Husain .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Pati, A., Husain, M. People’s perspectives on heritage conservation and tourism development: a case study of Varanasi. Built Heritage 7 , 17 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43238-023-00098-w

Download citation

Received : 25 November 2022

Accepted : 23 July 2023

Published : 15 August 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s43238-023-00098-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Conservation
  • Development

heritage in tourism development

  • Research article
  • Open access
  • Published: 19 July 2021

Joint development of cultural heritage protection and tourism: the case of Mount Lushan cultural landscape heritage site

  • Zhenrao Cai 1 ,
  • Chaoyang Fang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6695-7169 1 , 2 , 5 ,
  • Qian Zhang 1 &
  • Fulong Chen 3 , 4  

Heritage Science volume  9 , Article number:  86 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

7479 Accesses

25 Citations

Metrics details

A Correction to this article was published on 08 November 2021

This article has been updated

The joint development of cultural heritage protection and tourism is an essential part of sustainable heritage tourism. Mount Lushan in China is such a site which in the past has had shortcomings in heritage protection and heritage tourism marketing. The present research addresses this issue by using digital technologies such as oblique aerial photography, 3D laser scanning technology, and 360 degrees panorama technology to digitize the Mount Lushan cultural landscape heritage site, integrating all elements to create a virtual tourism subsystem. It provides users with a virtual experience of cultural landscape heritage tourism and promotes cultural landscape tourism marketing. In addition, tourist flow and environmental subsystems were built through the integration of Internet of Things (IoT) technology and analytical models. The tourist flow subsystem can help managers to regulate tourist flow according to the tourist carrying capacity threshold. Managers can also conduct environmental health assessment and management through the "pressure-state-response" model provided by the environmental subsystem. Finally, a comprehensive platform was developed based on the system concept, which integrated the three subsystems and their functions, and developed different versions to provide a visual platform for tourists and managers. This study provides a new model for the joint development of cultural heritage protection and tourism activities.

Introduction

Cultural heritage tourism is an increasingly prominent form of tourism globally, bolstered by heritage listings of UNESCO [ 1 ]. Built environment or other forms of heritage are often regarded as a focus of social and economic development [ 2 ], and the tourism industry can be a driving force to promote heritage protection. Cultural heritage management departments generally assume asset ownership and daily management tasks, while the tourism industry is responsible for product development and marketing [ 3 ]. However, poor management of cultural heritage may lead to its degradation. Heritage sites may be damaged by fire or natural disasters, or by human-induced factors [ 4 ]. For example, the large flow of people typical of popular tourist destinations may indirectly damage the principal tangible and intangible cultural value of a heritage site [ 5 ]. It is thus imperative to strengthen the protection and management of heritage. The Internet has become an important marketing tool for tourism promotion [ 6 ], mainly because it can speed up information dissemination. However, whether the website efficiently conveys travel information or effectively promotes destinations is often uncertain as designers tend to focus on aesthetics rather than content [ 7 ]. In addition, the quantity and quality of information will affect the time it takes for users to visit the website pages, thereby further restricting the development of the tourism industry.

The "digitalization" of heritage can provide a suitable way to address these issues. Field surveys and mapping, photo files, and data collection are traditional methods of acquiring cultural heritage data, and these results have become an essential foundation for heritage protection [ 8 ]. Novel and advanced technologies, such as digital photogrammetry and spectral imaging, are becoming more widely employed in heritage science and are often used to comprehensively record, understand and protect historical relics and artworks [ 9 ]. Some examples of these advances include the use of drones to obtain high-resolution images and using the data for 3D modeling [ 10 ]; using 360 degrees panorama technology to obtain panoramic photos [ 11 ]; or using terrestrial laser scanners to obtain point clouds. Such observations can be used to generate highly accurate models or drawings [ 12 ]. GIS also plays a vital role in protecting and utilizing cultural heritage. Using the Web and mobile GIS support, cultural heritage data, such as text, audio, or video stories, location information, and images, can be obtained through portable devices. GIS has unique advantages for data collection, storage, and manipulation of datasets [ 13 ]. By integrating historical building information models and 3D-GIS attribute data, the visibility and interactivity of the information models used in cultural heritage sites can be enhanced [ 14 ]. Virtual reality (VR) technology also has exceptional value in tourism marketing and cultural relic protection, involving computer graphic rendering, artificial intelligence, networks, and sensor technology, and can virtually reconstruct and simulate cultural heritage. These are examples of effective "digital protection" of cultural heritage [ 15 ] which can also assist in attracting more tourists [ 16 ].

In addition to the digitization of heritage resources, the flow of visitors and its associated impact to the environment of heritage sites is also intimately related to heritage protection and tourism development, and this factor may also be assisted by advanced technology. The Internet of Things (IoT) can be used to monitor and manage the tourist flow, for example, beam sensors can be employed to count the number of tourists and use these numbers to improve tourist management [ 17 ]. The adoption of video monitoring technology in combination with GIS can be used to analyze and visualize the spatial distribution of pedestrian numbers and flow in different areas, providing a strong foundation for tourist flow management [ 5 ]. Ground laser scanning technology, sensor monitoring technology, and digital photography can be used to monitor and manage the local environment [ 18 , 19 , 20 ], and IoT technology can dynamically evaluate whether environmental conditions are suitable to protect cultural heritage.

Such digital technologies have helped to promote the modernization of heritage tourism. Many studies have considered these issues from discrete and separated aspects such as heritage protection, tourism marketing, and tourism management, but less attention has given to the integration of heritage protection and tourism development. Cultural heritage protection and tourism are interdependent by nature [ 21 ], and a holistic approach to cultural heritage protection and tourism management is likely to be more effective for all concerned [ 22 ]. This research will explore a sustainable development model of cultural heritage to construct a bridge between cultural heritage protection and tourism development via an integrated platform approach.

Mount Lushan (29°28'-29° 40' N, 115°50'-116°10' E) is located in Lushan County, Jiujiang City, Jiangxi Province, China. Figure  1 shows the location and main attractions of Mount Lushan. It has a rich cultural and natural heritage and is known for its beautiful and unique scenery. The mountains, rivers, and lakes of Mount Lushan blend into landscape tapestry, and Buddhist, Taoism, Christianity, Catholicism, and Islam coexist here. It is known as a mountain of culture, education, and politics. Historically, it has inspired artists, philosophers, and thinkers and inspired many famous works of art. Thirty churches and schools built in the 1920s remain, and 600 villas are influenced by the architectural styles of 18 countries. It is a site of historical importance to the Chinese Nationalist Party and the Chinese Communist Party, and many major meetings are still held here. It is a world-famous cultural landscape heritage site and one of the spiritual centers of Chinese civilization. Its main area covers 30,200 hectares, and its buffer area is greater than 50,000 hectares. Ontological areas and buffer zones include ancient buildings, ruins, modern villas, stone carvings, alpine plants, waterfalls, and streams. Mount Lushan in its entirety for the conservation of the subtropical forest ecosystem and historical sites [ 23 ]. These elements fully demonstrate the cultural and natural elements of the Mount Lushan World Heritage Site. Mount Lushan is listed as one of the top ten most famous mountains in China in 2003 and was rated as a national 5A Tourist attraction (5A is the highest level of China's tourist scenic spots, representing the level of China's world-class quality scenic spots) in 2007. These accolades have stimulated the rapid development of tourism in Mount Lushan, attracting tens of millions of tourists every year.

figure 1

Geographical location and main attractions of Mount Lushan

However, online and field research on Mount Lushan has revealed significant obstacles to the sustainable development of cultural heritage tourism in this area. On one hand, Mount Lushan promotes and displays the cultural heritage landscape through tourism websites, such as the "China Lushan Network" ( http://www.china-lushan.com/ ). This approach only introduces this heritage site in a two-dimensional way (through pictures and text). Although there is a virtual tour section, tourists can only browse a few scenic spots via panoramic views. The possible immersion and interaction, and thus, the virtual experience, is not adequate or conducive to tourism marketing in the heritage site. On the other hand, the increased influx of tourists has given rise to a series of ecological and environmental problems [ 23 , 24 ]. There is a lack of equipment to monitor the flow of passengers and environmental quality, and there is little visual management information or monitoring capability of tourist flow and environmental information. The quantity and quality of information available at a heritage site directly affects the time spent by users visiting the website and also affects the satisfaction of users (or tourists) [ 25 , 26 ].

Technologies and models

In the method of system thinking [ 27 ], a cultural heritage tourism system can be divided into cultural heritage tourism resource elements, tourist flow elements, and environmental elements. Here we construct subsystems for each of these elements. Our approach involves the digitization of cultural landscape resources to realize a virtual cultural heritage tourism and marketing system. This subdivision into a virtual tourism subsystem, tourist flow subsystem, and environment subsystem build a complete foundation for cultural heritage protection and tourism development. The technical flow chart of the holistic construction of these three subsystems is shown in Fig.  2 .

figure 2

Technical process of the subsystems in the holistic cultural heritage protection and tourism development

Digitalization technologies

Different digital technologies were adopted for cultural tourism information, such as macro-topographic scenes, ancient buildings, panoramic views which considered the complex landscape composition, diverse tourism elements, and the wide geographical diversity of Mount Lushan. The comprehensive application of multiple digitization technologies avoids the deficiencies associated with a single digitization technology and allows large cultural landscape heritage sites to be comprehensively and systematically digitized.

For the large-scale terrain scene of Mount Lushan, it was necessary to purchase 350 km 2 of digital orthophoto map (DOM) data and digital elevation model (DEM) data from the government and use image processing technology to process the original data.

We used an integrated production technology process of 3D models, digital line graphs (DLG), DEM, and digital orthopedic maps (TDOM). The flow chart of this process is shown in Fig.  3 . First, aerial photography was used to obtain oblique photography images [ 28 ]. The flight route and altitude of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) were planned, the aerial photography area was delineated, and then the UAV was equipped with a digital oblique camera, and stereo images were then extracted from the UAV videos for aerial triangulation [ 29 ]. Next, 3D models were constructed by creating point clouds, constructing irregular triangulations, and performing texture mapping. The 3D model results were edited to obtain the digital surface model (DSM) results and TDOM results. The DEM results were then obtained by editing the DSM results, and the original DLG data were collected from the 3D models. The DLG data were further supplemented and improved, and were redrawn through field surveys to improve their accuracy. Finally, contour lines and elevation points were generated to supplement the line elements in the DLG supported by the DEM results.

figure 3

Flow chart of the integrated production technology process

Terrestrial laser scanners allow rapid scans of measured objects. They can directly obtain high-precision scanning point clouds, efficiently carrying out 3D modeling and virtual reproduction of historic buildings [ 30 ]; here, we applied this approach to obtain point clouds of historical buildings in Mount Lushan. Using the point cloud data, the Smart3D software was used to perform fine 3D modeling.

360 degrees panorama technology can yield a 360 degrees horizontal viewing angle and a 180 degrees vertical viewing angle, and can integrate 360 degrees panoramas in a virtual environment [ 11 ]. We employed this technology, using a digital camera to take initial images, then using Photoshop for image stitching to form spherical and cube panoramas.

This study also used traditional data collection methods such as digital photography, digital video shooting, digital recording, image, and text scanning, and interview records to collect cultural heritage resource information. We additionally employed a mobile collection method, using personal digital assistants (PDAs) to obtain real-time wireless communication with the back-end system through the wireless data transmission network, and sent the collected cultural heritage coordinate data to the back-end system in real-time [ 31 ].

Monitoring technologies

We employed IoT technology to monitor and manage the flow of tourists and the environmental conditions in the cultural heritage landscape. Video surveillance technology and electronic ticket checking technology were used to monitor travel traffic, and Internet technology was used to visualize surveillance data. First, cameras were set up at the entrance and exit of the scenic spot and near its main attractions to monitor the flow of tourists. Electronic ticketing technology was used to measure the total number of tourists entering the scenic spot. Then, an established tourist flow subsystem was used to process tourist video data and obtain statistics of the flow of tourists in real-time. In addition, we used wireless sensor technology for environmental monitoring in scenic spots [ 32 ]. We installed sensors to measure the levels of harmful oxygen ion concentrations, sulfur dioxide, temperature, and humidity. Finally, we connected the environmental data with the established environment subsystem to display the environmental status of the cultural heritage site in real-time.

To fully exploit the monitoring data, we applied several analytical models to strengthen cultural landscape management. Specifically, we combined a spatial carrying capacity model with the tourist flow monitoring data and the "pressure-state-response" (PSR) model for environmental monitoring of the cultural landscape heritage site.

The spatial carrying capacity model was adopted to represent the tourist carrying capacity of Mount Lushan. The model refers to the number of tourist activities that can be effectively accommodated by tourism resources within a certain period and still maintain the quality of the resource. It can also reflect the capacity of the cultural heritage landscape, which can be measured from the aspects of planar capacity and linear capacity.

The planar calculation method applies to areas with relatively flat terrain and relatively uniform distribution of scenic spots and reception facilities [ 33 ], expressed as:

where C 1 is the spatial carrying capacity (persons/day, i.e., the number of persons suitable for the scenic spot every day), A is the scenic spot (m 2 ), A 0 is the reasonable area occupied per capita (m 2 ), and T is the average daily opening time (hours). Although the scenic spot is open 24 h per day, tourists are mainly visiting during the daytime, so T is set for 8 h in our study. t 0 is the average time required for visitors to visit the scenic spot (h).

The linear capacity calculation method is suitable for tourism sites along a path, with the resource space capacity expressed as:

If the path is incomplete and the entrance and exit are in the same position, tourists can only return by retracing their steps on the original path. In this case, the spatial carrying capacity formula becomes:

In Eqs. ( 2 ) and ( 3 ), C 2 and C 3 both refer to spatial carrying capacity (persons /d). L is the length of the path (m), L 0 is the length of reasonable possession per capita (m), and t 1 is the return time along the original route (h). The total number of tourists calculated using the area method and the line method constitutes the resource space capacity of the cultural heritage landscape.

The PSR model was first proposed in 1979 to study environmental problems. It has become a commonly used model to evaluate environmental quality [ 34 ]. In the PSR model, "P" refers to the pressure index, which is used to describe the pressure applied to the ecological environment under the influence of human activities. "S" refers to the state index, which is used to describe the status of the ecological environment. "R" refers to the response indicator, which describes the positive management actions taken by human beings towards the ecological environment. The PSR model answers three basic sustainable development questions: what happened, why it happened, and what will happen in the future.

Our study used this comprehensive evaluation index to reflect the ecosystem quality of Mount Lushan. A weighted summation method was used to perform the calculation [ 35 ]:

where Z represents the comprehensive evaluation index, X i is the normalized value of a single index, and Y i is the normalized weight of the evaluation index.

Case study verification

Heritage digitization and visualization, multiple types of digitization.

Digitized results are shown in Fig.  4 a–i. For the 350 km 2 DOM, image fusion, color uniformity, stitching, and resampling were used to generate DOM data with a resolution of 0.2 m (Fig.  4 a shows the spring scene in Guling). Using oblique aerial photography, we made 3D models of White Deer Cave Academy, Donglin Temple, Guling, and Mao Zedong Poetry Garden. The generated large-scale scene 3D model has high accuracy, for example, the accuracy of the 3D model of Donglin Temple is 0.06 m (Fig.  4 b). The DLG data collected only has a small margin of error that satisfies the accuracy of a 1/1000 scale map (such as White Deer Cave Academy shown in Fig.  4 c).

figure 4

Digitization results for selected spots in Mount Lushan

Education, politics, architecture, natural scenery, religion, and other elements of typical cultural heritage landscapes were considered when conducting the digital modeling process. This process was based on 3D laser scanning, 3D modeling, 360-degree panoramas, and other technologies. These results are shown in Fig.  4 d–f. 3D laser scanner was used to model ancient buildings such as the White Deer Cave Academy, Mao Zedong Poetry Garden, and Xianren Cave and obtain delicate point clouds of the buildings. The point clouds contain important appearance features (as shown in Fig.  4 d), such as the characteristic feature lines. The elevation, plan, and cross-sectional views of ancient buildings generated from the point clouds were combined with the collected DLG data to generate a 3D model with fine texture and spatial characteristics (Fig.  4 e). These 3D models can provide accurate and detailed information for cultural heritage protection. UAVs and ground collection equipment were used to obtain aerial and ground panoramas of the cultural landscape heritage site in each season, and a total of 304 main scenic spots in Mount Lushan were collected (Fig.  4 f).

We collected and digitized materials from Taoist and Buddhist cultures, including ancient poems and paintings, ancient books, ancient cultural relics, historical narratives, and written accounts by using traditional data collection methods. Figure  4 g shows a stone carving, which is a poem (its title is "Peach Blossoms in Dalin Temple") written by a famous ancient Chinese poet. Other data on the heritage site (scenic spots, traffic, shopping, accommodations, entertainment, tourist facilities, geological data, vertical zonal soil profiles, plant communities) were collected and digitized using mobile data collection. Figure  4 h displays 7,128 geographical names and addresses covering an area of about 350 km 2 were collected. Figure  4 i shows major geological and geomorphologic features of Xiufeng Mountain.

Virtual tourism of Mount Lushan

From the digitized results, a fundamental geographic information database and a cultural heritage resource database were constructed. The SuperMap software was then used to develop the virtual tourism subsystem. This software can manage a large amount of data, can support directly imported data, has high-quality rendering capabilities, and can optimize the scene. The Lushan virtual tourism subsystem was developed into a display platform integrating sound, text, images, 3D models, maps, and various human–computer interaction technologies.

This subsystem has the following functions of 3D scene browsing:

Generation of a 3D terrain scene: the high-resolution DEM data of about 350 km 2 superimposes with the multi-temporal DOM to generate a 3D terrain scene of Mount Lushan. The "majestic, peculiar and beautiful" natural landscape features of the cultural heritage site can clearly be seen in Fig.  5 a.

figure 5

Browsing the virtual scene of the virtual tourism subsystem

Generation of 3D architectural scenes: the original files of the oblique photography model data included many fragmented files, and the amount of data was enormous. We used SuperMap to process oblique photography models, including generating configuration files, compressing textures, simplifying models and type conversion, meeting the needs of viewing oblique photography models on web pages, and achieving a smooth browsing experience. We located and integrated the processed 3D model of Donglin Temple into the scene (Fig.  5 b). For the 3D model generated by laser scanning, we imported the constructed model data into the data engine provided by SuperMap and integrated it into the scene (Fig.  5 c).

Integration of different types of 3D models: the oblique photographic and geometric modeling data were imported into the terrain scene and accurately matched. By controlling the visibility of layers under different viewing angles, seamless switching between terrain scenes and 3D model data was realized. When users viewing the model from a distance, the subsystem can display the DSM; when viewing it at a close distance, the oblique photographic model is displayed on the periphery, and the internal core building is loaded with an intricately detailed 3D model (see Fig.  5 d). Users can also continue to zoom in to view the fine texture formed by the laser scan data (Fig.  5 e). The subsystem also sets the number of objects and layers in the scene under different viewing angles to reduce the memory and video memory usage of the system to ensure the fluency and stability of the subsystem and speed up the browsing speed of the scene.

Assisted by GIS, the subsystem has the functions of query, recommendation, and popular science. When the user opens the subsystem interface and enters the query keyword through the interactive interface, the result is displayed on the left sidebar and in the 3D scene. The query results will be introduced in pictures and texts (for example, Fig.  5 f, which shows a picture of a stone carving, and its poem). Based on the collected geological geomorphology and vegetation ecological data (Fig.  4 i), we set up the query and positioning function of geological relics, vegetation, and other attribute information in the subsystem, providing 3D elements, pictures, text, and other display elements, which is helpful to popularize the natural background knowledge of the heritage site to tourists. The subsystem provides an automatic roaming function for famous scenic spots and designed several common roaming routes. When performing automatic roaming, it will be supplemented by voice introduction. A "virtual tour guide" is implemented, and the user can control the broadcast process of the route at any time. Figure  5 b shows a roaming scene, and the roaming operation symbol can be seen in the lower right corner. The subsystem can also simultaneously integrate panoramas. By clicking on the panoramic location in the scene, the 360 degrees panoramas of the current position is displayed as a pop-up (see Fig.  5 g). Using the scenic spot location data displayed in Fig.  4 h, we set up multiple travel planning routes in the subsystem (Fig.  5 h). When the user clicks on a specific route, the subsystem will display the route direction and scenic spots on the map to provide convenience for tourists with travel intentions.

The subsystem can provide a unique virtual experience through rich visual content. It can interact with users through query, tourism recommendations, science popularization, and other functions. It can allow to know Mount Lushan in advance, making it an effective marketing tool.

Monitoring and management of tourist flow and environment

When tourists enter a heritage site, they induce environmental pressure. Using our system, tourists can interact virtually before travelling without exerting direct pressure on the cultural heritage site. The virtual tourism subsystem can also help managers improve the protection of the heritage site and carry out tourism marketing. This system can provide better monitoring of tourist flow and the environment of the site, which can greatly assist managers with tourism management and heritage protection. The three subsystems share GIS data to provide a strong data-based foundation for visualization services. These processes are shown schematically in Fig.  6 .

figure 6

Interaction of the three subsystems that improve the management of tourist flow and environmental monitoring of the cultural heritage site

Monitoring and regulation of tourist flow

We used video surveillance technology and electronic ticket checking technology to collect tourist information, built a tourist database, and integrated it with geographic information data (including the location and entrance of the scenic spots and major tour paths). The database is used to record and manage data and to calculate the number of people entering and leaving the scenic spot and the number of people staying in the scenic spot in real-time. We then developed s tourist flow subsystem, which mainly provides services for managers.

Managers can use the subsystem to monitor and manage the tourist flow of the cultural heritage site visually and provide travel services. When visitors buy tickets, their ID number and name will be associated with the identity of the e-ticket. The scope of their travel will be identified in the scenic area. When visitors enter the video surveillance area, face recognition information will be collected by the monitoring equipment, so the general location of the travelers can be identified through the ticket information and video information, and missing tourists can be quickly located to ensure safety.

The determination of tourist capacity thresholds can be vital to the scientific regulation and management of tourist flows within the cultural heritage site. We selected the main scenic spots and routes of Mount Lushan for analysis, and the parameters and results are shown in Tables 1 and 2 . The capacity of general scenic spots should be 100–400 square meters per person (based on the "Standards for the Master Planning of Scenic Spots" issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban–Rural Development of China [ 36 ]). Guling is a tourist destination, but it is also a town with permanent residents, so we here assume that its reasonable per capita area is 100 m 2 /person. For other spots, we assume that the reasonable per capita living area is 400 m 2 /person. Using these assumptions, the tourist capacity of these scenic spots in Mount Lushan is 46,472 persons/d (Table 1 ). Since the Guling scenic spot has 21,400 permanent residents, the remaining capacity for visitors is thus 25,072 persons/d. The per capita area of tour routes calculated by the linear capacity calculation method is 5–10 m 2 /person. We choose a value in the middle of this range, 8 m 2 /person for our further analyses. The total tourist capacity of the three paths is 4734 persons/d according to this approach (Table 2 ).

The tourist flow subsystem integrates the number of tourists and GIS data and displays the number of people in each scenic spot by way of map visualization. Similarly, the tourist capacity threshold data of each scenic spot is displayed in the subsystem, and managers can compare the tourist flow real-time data with the tourist capacity threshold data. When the number of tourists in each route and scenic spot exceeds the tourist capacity threshold, the cultural heritage site manager can temporarily restrict ticket sales for overcrowded attractions and guide visitors to other areas. The tourist capacity threshold subsystem thus provides a strong data-based foundation for heritage protection and tourist flow pressure.

Monitoring and evaluation of the environment

We used IoT technology, wireless sensors, and GIS technology to monitor the environment. We first determined the geographic location of the monitoring site and installed the sensor to obtain atmospheric and environmental data through General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) data transmission equipment. Then we established an environmental database to integrate and manage various data resources to develop an environment subsystem that can analyze and express data and realize serving managers.

The subsystem provides a real-time visual management platform for managers that provides a visual map. Managers can use this map to monitor and understand the environment and weather conditions of each scenic spot in real-time to address any possible emergency environmental events in a timely manner.

This tool can also assist with longer-term management. The environmental database stores monthly or longer-period monitoring data and social and economic data. The subsystem can then integrate socio-economic data and annual monitoring data into the PSR model. Table 3 shows the original data of the PSR model, and the analysis results calculated by Eq. ( 4 ). As compared with 2017, the comprehensive index of environmental health in 2018 was higher (0.64) because the comprehensive index of response in 2018 was higher than in 2017. However, the pressure index in 2018 was lower than that in 2017. This is attributed to an increase in the number of permanent residents and tourists in 2018, as well as an increase in sulfur dioxide emissions; the combination of both factors has put more pressure on the environment. Future adjustment of the population capacity and better control of the discharge of pollutants could likely improve the comprehensive environmental index.

The analysis results of the PSR model (environmental health index) can be visualized in detail by the environmental subsystem for managers. The comprehensive evaluation results of the environment can play an important role in feedback and early warning. It encourages managers to carry out annual environmental assessments and take corresponding measures, which is conducive to the long-term environmental protection of the heritage site.

Construction of a comprehensive platform

Concept and method of construction.

The relationship between heritage and tourism is problematic and intricate, and considering these factors separately is insufficient [ 37 ]. Synergies should be developed between tourism and heritage protection [ 38 ]. Our integrated system that considered virtual tourism, tourist flow, and environment subsystems is constructed by the integration of different data sources, which have the functions of tourism marketing, digital protection, and information service, and environment management. The interactivity of these different functions improve the overall tourism development and heritage protection. The effective integration of all subsystems allows the construction of a complete platform, detailed in Fig.  7 , which displays the path of "data integration-subsystems integration-functions integration-effects integration", thus our system integrates discrete data and subsystems to yield a comprehensive platform for cultural heritage tourism.

figure 7

Path of the comprehensive platform construction

Products and a new mode

Our first step was to build a comprehensive database. We classified and selected multi-source data, set up a cultural heritage resource database, a GIS database, a tourist and environment database, and a tourism management database to realize the unified storage and management of the data in the cultural heritage tourism comprehensive database. This provided a seamless data interface which includes different types of essential service data for the construction of a comprehensive platform.

The comprehensive platform for Mount Lushan cultural heritage tourism using this complete database is displayed in Fig.  8 . It uses multiple display media (e.g., personal computer, smartphones, LED displays), multiple content presentation forms (3D models, maps, charts, text, audio), and multi-subsystem and multi-functional integration forms (virtual tourism subsystem, tourist flow, environment monitoring subsystem, tourist service subsystem, and corresponding functions), providing comprehensive cultural heritage services for tourists and management.

figure 8

Information of each version

The functions displayed by different media terminals can meet the individual needs of users at different times and places. The Web version is intended for tourists to use before traveling, functioning as a virtual tourism subsystem. It can introduce the cultural heritage site, and can "educate" users to have a more responsible and respectful relationship with the cultural heritage site. It can help to attract potential tourists, as they can “virtually experience” the site before traveling. The LED version of the product is intended for managers, integrating the tourist flow subsystem and the environment subsystem. Managers can monitor tourists and the environment through the LED screen and can visually operate and manage the tourist capacity and environmental health based on the results of the tourist capacity model and PSR model. The smartphone-based application product is intended for tourists during and after travel. It integrates components of the functionality of both the Web-based and LED products to facilitate tourists in obtaining and sharing heritage site information. Tourists can get an overview of the heritage site, navigate the site via the maps and receive tourist recommendation services. They can also find information on the total number of tourists and environmental and weather information of heritage sites. Tourists can then arrange effective plans for their visit based on these functions. It also provides post-tour services such as evaluation of tourist attractions. These functions enrich the experience and satisfaction of tourists.

The comprehensive cultural heritage tourism platform and its corresponding products demonstrate a new paradigm of cultural heritage tourism. Our model can coordinate and integrate multiple key elements to improve the sustainable development of cultural heritage tourism through the combination of in-person and virtual tourism, the combination of service and management to meet the needs of different users, and the combination of heritage protection and tourism.

Results and discussion

The digitization of cultural heritage is becoming more critical, including intangible heritage [ 39 ], historical sites [ 40 ], archaeological sites [ 41 ]. We here developed and described a cultural heritage tourism subsystem, which applies a variety of technologies and methods (such as computer technology, IoT, photogrammetry, geographic information technology, VR technology, and environment assessment methods). We obtained a series of digital results and developed several digital products for tourism marketing and heritage protection.

We also integrated environmental assessment models to provide real-time and long-term assessment and management plans. We accounted for cultural heritage protection, tourism marketing, and management, and the development of cultural heritage tourism digital products. These products show the geographical characteristics of the heritage area, which is conducive to improved heritage protection and the sustainable development of tourism.

The salient point of our research is "integration", which is manifested by integrating multiple subsystems, and connecting themes of different perspectives (including cultural heritage protection, tourism marketing, management, and services) to provide a holistic system. Our important results and finding are now summarized.

(1) Through the use of comprehensive and diverse digital technologies, we obtained a wealth of digital results, including 3D large-scale terrain scenes, 3D cultural relic images, 360-degree panoramas, and pictures. This information was used to create a virtual tourism subsystem to display the regional characteristics of cultural landscape heritage sites through 3D scenes, popular science, and tourism recommendations to improve tourism marketing.

(2) IoT technology was combined with a tourist carrying capacity model and a PSR model to construct tourist flow and environmental subsystems. The tourist flow subsystem allows managers to monitor and manage the tourist flow using capacity models. The environmental subsystem allows the monitoring and management of the environment in real-time and non-real-time using an integrated PSR model.

(3) Finally, a new model of cultural heritage tourism was proposed, and a comprehensive platform for cultural heritage tourism was constructed. We developed products for Web, smartphone, and LED formats, integrating heritage protection and tourism development functions. The platform has rich visual content, including 3D models, maps, charts, and text.

Each subsystem in our comprehensive platform plays a fundamental role. The virtual tourism subsystem can be used before the actual visit to attract more tourists and to provide personalized tourism planning which can improve the virtual experience. Our approach provides a sound foundation, but the continued improvement of this part of the platform is an essential future task [ 42 ]. The environmental management subsystem is also an important result of our approach, however, the integrated tourist capacity threshold used here only considered capacities of single scenic spots at a time. Future directions of study could extend the tourist capacity model to multiple entry/exit areas and scenic spots and could set model parameters and thresholds that meet the unique particularity of each scenic spot. Additionally, while our approach demonstrated the effectiveness of many novel elements, the model and parameters employed here were relatively simple and static. In the future, more attention should be paid to the practicality of the model, such as by setting a dynamic tourist capacity threshold, and how this information can be used to implement efficient evacuation plans in case of sudden emergencies. Finally, since the tourist flow subsystem integrates tourist identity information the privacy of users’ needs to be considered in greater detail in the future.

The study has provided a sustainable model of cultural heritage tourism using digital tools. It considered the Lushan cultural landscape heritage site as a case study, and designed a holistic mode of cultural heritage protection and tourism by the comprehensive use of various digital technologies and the development of digital products. We designed and built a digital framework of a large-scale cultural heritage landscape and built a virtual tourism subsystem that integrates 3D model browsing, popular science, and tourism route recommendation functions to meet the needs of tourism marketing.

We proposed and demonstrated a heritage management method that integrates IoT technology with a tourist carrying capacity model and a PSR model to assist in protecting the environment and ensuring the environmental health of the heritage site. The comprehensive cultural heritage tourism platform developed here can provide valuable services for different target audiences (e.g., tourists and managers) through a variety of visualization technologies, and provides a novel demonstration for future development of cultural heritage protection and tourism that can be applied at other heritage sites worldwide.

Availability of data and materials

The dataset supporting the conclusions of this article is included within the article.

Change history

08 november 2021.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00613-1

Abbreviations

Virtual reality

Internet of things

Digital orthophoto map

Digital elevation model

Digital line graphic

True digital orthophoto map

Unmanned aerial vehicle

Digital Surface Model

Pressure-state-response

General Packet Radio Service

Light-emitting diode

Bak S, Min C-K, Roh T-S. Impacts of UNESCO-listed tangible and intangible heritages on tourism. J Travel Tour Mark. 2019;36(8):917–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2019.1658034 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Timothy DJ. Contemporary cultural heritage and tourism: development issues and emerging trends. Public Archaeology. 2014;13(1–3):30–47. https://doi.org/10.1179/1465518714z.00000000052 .

Zhang C, Fyall A, Zheng Y. Heritage and tourism conflict within world heritage sites in China: a longitudinal study. Curr Issue Tour. 2015;18(2):110–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2014.912204 .

Ryu H-C. Cultural Heritage Management System and Improvement of the Limits - focused on establishing the tangible cultural heritage on-site management organization. 2013;54:183–214.

Google Scholar  

Zubiaga M, Izkara JL, Gandini A, et al. Towards smarter management of overtourism in historic centres through visitor-flow monitoring. Sustainability. 2019;11(24):7254. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11247254 .

Law R, Qi SS, Buhalis D. Progress in tourism management: A review of website evaluation in tourism research. Tour Manage. 2010;31(3):297–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.11.007 .

Li J, Whitlow M, Bitsura-Meszaros K, et al. A preliminary evaluation of World Heritage tourism promotion: comparing websites from Australia, China, and Mexico. Tourism PlanDevelop . 2016;13(3):370–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568316.2015.1101393 .

Shah K. Creation of cultural heritage inventories: case of the historic city of Ahmadabad. J Cult Heritage Manag Sustain Develop. 2016;6(2):166–94. https://doi.org/10.1108/jchmsd-02-2016-0011 .

Adamopoulos E, Bovero A, Rinaudo F. Image-based metric heritage modeling in the near-infrared spectrum. Heritage Sci. 2020;8(1):53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-020-00397-w .

Dasari S, Mesapam S, Kumarapu K, et al. UAV in Development of 3D Heritage Monument Model: A Case Study of Kota Gullu, Warangal, India. J Indian Soc Remote Sensing. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-020-01250-0 .

Walmsley AP, Kersten TP. The imperial cathedral in Konigslutter (Germany) as an immersive experience in virtual reality with integrated 360 degrees panoramic photography. Appl Sci Basel. 2020;10(4):1517. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10041517 .

Davis A, Belton D, Helmholz P, et al. Pilbara rock art: laser scanning, photogrammetry and 3D photographic reconstruction as heritage management tools. Heritage Sci. 2017;5:25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-017-0140-7 .

Hadjimitsis D, Agapiou A, Alexakis D, et al. Exploring natural and anthropogenic risk for cultural heritage in Cyprus using remote sensing and GIS. Int J Digital Earth. 2013;6(2):115–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2011.602119 .

Ma Y-P. Extending 3D-GIS district models and BIM-based building models into computer gaming environment for better workflow of cultural heritage conservation. Appl Sci Basel. 2021;11(5):2101. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11052101 .

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Zhong H, Wang L, Zhang H. The application of virtual reality technology in the digital preservation of cultural heritage. Comput Sci Inf Syst. 2021;18(2):535–51. https://doi.org/10.2298/csis200208009z .

Frey BS, Briviba A. A policy proposal to deal with excessive cultural tourism. Eur Plan Stud. 2021;29(4):601–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2021.1903841 .

Jones, T.E., Y. Yang, and K. Yamamoto, Comparing Automated and Manual Visitor Monitoring Methods: Integrating Parallel Datasets on Mount Fuji's North Face. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 2018. 36(1): p. 22–38. https://doi.org/10.18666/jpra-2018-v36-i1-7976 .

Campiani A, Lingle A, Lercari N. Spatial analysis and heritage conservation: Leveraging 3-D data and GIS for monitoring earthen architecture. J Cult Herit. 2019;39:166–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2019.02.011 .

Constantinidis D. GIS for managing the analysis and protection of archaeological remains in the Willandra Lakes World Heritage Area. Archaeol Ocean. 2009;44(2):112–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1834-4453.2009.tb00054.x .

Lombardo L, Parvis M, Corbellini S, et al. Environmental monitoring in the cultural heritage field. Eur Phy J Plus. 2019;134(8):411. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/i2019-12800-2 .

Lai LWC. Sustainable development of heritage conservation and tourism: A Hong Kong case study on colonial heritage. Sustain Dev. 2020;28(5):1181–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2067 .

Iliopoulou-Georgudaki J, Theodoropoulos C, Konstantinopoulos P, et al. Sustainable tourism development including the enhancement of cultural heritage in the city of Nafpaktos - Western Greece. Int J Sust Dev World. 2017;24(3):224–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2016.1201021 .

Hui W, Ceming T, Wen X, et al. Vascular plants in the tourist area of Lushan National Nature Reserve, China: status, threats and conservation. Eco Mont J Protected Mountain Areas Res. 2020;12(1):60–3. https://doi.org/10.1553/eco.mont-12-1s60 .

Xie DM, Huang QH, Xu S, et al. Assessment of surface water quality in Lushan: a world heritage sites in China. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2020;27(15):18934–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08304-3 .

Yassierli V, MSS Mohamed. The Importance of Usability Aspect in M-Commerce Application for Satisfaction and Continuance Intention. Makara J Technol. 2018. 22(3): 149–158. Doi: https://doi.org/10.7454/mst.v22i3.3655 .

Bastida U, Huan TC. Performance evaluation of tourism websites’ information quality of four global destination brands: Beijing, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Taipei. J Bus Res. 2014;67(2):167–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.10.008 .

Roxas FMY, Rivera JPR, Gutierrez ELM. Framework for creating sustainable tourism using systems thinking. Curr Issue Tour. 2020;23(3):280–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2018.1534805 .

Wang JJ, Zhu S, Luo XG, et al. Refined micro-scale geological disaster susceptibility evaluation based on UAV tilt photography data and weighted certainty factor method in Qingchuan County. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2020;189: 110221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.110005 .

He H, Chen T, Zeng H, et al. Ground control point-free unmanned aerial vehicle-based photogrammetry for volume estimation of stockpiles carried on barges. Sensors. 2019;19(16):3534. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19163534 .

Pavlidis G, Koutsoudis A, Arnaoutoglou F, et al. Methods for 3D digitization of cultural heritage. J Cult Herit. 2007;8(1):93–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2006.10.007 .

Zhou Y, Lobo NF, Wolkon A, et al. PGMS: a case study of collecting PDA-based geo-tagged malaria-related survey data. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2014;91(3):496–508. https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.13-0652 .

Agbota H, Mitchell JE, Odlyha M, et al. Remote assessment of cultural heritage environments with wireless sensor array networks. Sensors. 2014;14(5):8779–93. https://doi.org/10.3390/s140508779 .

Zhao GL, Deng ZJ, Shen J, et al. Carrying capacity and its implications in a Chinese ancient village: the case of Hongcun. Asia Pacific J Tour Res. 2018;23(3):260–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2017.1421566 .

Rapport DJ, Singh A. An ecohealth-based framework for state of environment reporting. Ecol Ind. 2006;6(2):409–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.05.003 .

Zhang J, Zhang Y. Assessing the low-carbon tourism in the tourism-based urban destinations. J Clean Prod. 2020;276: 124303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124303 .

Standards for the Master Planning of Scenic Spots. 2019. http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/wjfb/201903/t20190320_239842.html . Accessed 1 MAR 2021.

Chang-Vargas GV. Between discourse and practice: heritage and cultural tourism in the ICOMOS charter. Pasos-Revista De Turismo Y Patrimonio Cult. 2019;17(2):389–408. https://doi.org/10.25145/j.pasos.2019.17.027 .

PargaDans E, P Alonso Gonzalez, R OteroEnriquez. The social value of heritage: Balancing the promotion-preservation relationship in the Altamira World Heritage Site, Spain. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management. 2020. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100499 .

Deng X, Kim IT, Shen C. Research on Convolutional Neural Network-Based Virtual Reality Platform Framework for the Intangible Cultural Heritage Conservation of China Hainan Li Nationality: Boat-Shaped House as an Example. Math Probl Eng. 2021;2021:5538434. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5538434 .

di Filippo A, L Javier Sanchez-Aparicio, S Barba et al. Use of a Wearable Mobile Laser System in Seamless Indoor 3D Mapping of a Complex Historical Site. Remote Sensing. 2018. 10(12): 1897. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10121897 .

Tanasi D, Hassam S, Kingsland K, et al. Melite Civitas Romana in 3D: Virtualization Project of the Archaeological Park and Museum of the Domus Romana of Rabat. Malta Open Archaeology. 2021;7(1):51–83. https://doi.org/10.1515/opar-2020-0126 .

Broderick M, Cypher M, Macbeth J. critical masses: augmented virtual experiences and the Xenoplastic at Australia’s cold war and nuclear heritage sites. Archaeol J World Archaeol Congress. 2009;5(2):323–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-009-9110-3 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Xiao Xin and Adam Thomas Devlin of Jiangxi Normal University for their technical and linguistic help.

This work was supported by the National Key Technologies R&D Program of China under Grant 2015BAH50F03; Major project of Art Science of the National Social Science Foundation of China under Grant 19ZD27; Cultural Arts and Tourism Research Project under Grant xxhfzzx201907; Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences under Grant No. XDA19030502.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Geography and Environment, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, 330022, China

Zhenrao Cai, Chaoyang Fang & Qian Zhang

Key Laboratory of Poyang Lake Wetland and Watershed Research, Ministry of Education, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, 330022, China

Chaoyang Fang

Key Laboratory of Digital Earth Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100094, China

Fulong Chen

International Centre on Space Technologies for Natural and Cultural Heritage (HIST) Under the auspices of UNESCO, Beijing, 100094, China

Nanchang Base, International Centre on Space Technologies for Natural and Cultural Heritage (HIST) under the auspices of UNESCO, Nanchang, 330022, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

ZC, CF: Wrote this article; QZ, FC: Reviewed the whole paper and put forward suggestions for improvement. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chaoyang Fang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original version of this article was revised: the author names were transposed and a funding note was added.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Cai, Z., Fang, C., Zhang, Q. et al. Joint development of cultural heritage protection and tourism: the case of Mount Lushan cultural landscape heritage site. Herit Sci 9 , 86 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00558-5

Download citation

Received : 08 March 2021

Accepted : 06 July 2021

Published : 19 July 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00558-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Heritage protection
  • Tourism sustainability
  • Heritage site

heritage in tourism development

Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

World Heritage and Sustainable Development

heritage in tourism development

Heritage was long absent from the mainstream sustainable development debate despite its crucial importance to societies and the wide acknowledgment of its great potential to contribute to social, economic and environmental goals.

Based on a strong appeal from national and local stakeholders, the 2030 Agenda adopted by the UN General Assembly integrates, for the first time, the role of culture, through cultural heritage and creativity, as an enabler of sustainable development across the Sustainable Development Goals. World Heritage may provide a platform to develop and test new approaches that demonstrate the relevance of heritage for sustainable development.

On 19 November 2015, the 20th General Assembly of the States Parties to the World Heritage Convention adopted a Policy on the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention . The overall goal of the policy is to assist States Parties, practitioners, institutions, communities and networks, through appropriate guidance, to harness the potential of World Heritage properties and heritage in general, to contribute to sustainable development and therefore increase the effectiveness and relevance of the Convention whilst respecting its primary purpose and mandate of protecting the Outstanding Universal value of World Heritage properties. Its adoption represents a significant shift in the implementation of the Convention and an important step in its history.

heritage in tourism development

Policy for the Integration of a Sustainable Development Perspective into the Processes of the World Heritage Convention

English French

The Contribution of World Heritage to Sustainable Development

Outside the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) N. 7, on environmental sustainability, which addresses in part the need to protect biodiversity and natural resources, the MDGs adopted by the international community in 2000 made no specific reference to heritage or even to culture in general. Yet, the contribution of heritage to a sustainable human development is major.

Certainly, the protection of exceptional heritage properties cherished by people all over the world – such as great natural sceneries and landmark monuments - can be considered as an intrinsic contribution to human wellbeing. It would be hard to imagine our countries, cities and landscapes without the familiar remnants of our past, a witness to continuity through the passing of time, and the presence of nature, to inspire us with a profound sense of wonder and joy.

But in addition to its intrinsic value for present and future generations, World Heritage – and heritage in general – can make also an important instrumental contribution to sustainable development across its various dimensions.

Through a variety of goods and services and as a storehouse of knowledge, a well-protected World Heritage property may contribute directly to alleviating poverty and inequalities by providing basic goods and services, such as security and health, through shelter, access to clean air, water, food and other key resources.

Preserving natural resources, including outstanding sites containing some of the richest combinations of terrestrial and marine biodiversity, is obviously a fundamental contribution to environmental sustainability. Most of these sites, on the other hand, have developed over time through mutual adaptation between humans and the environment, and thus demonstrate how, rather than existing in separate and parallel realms, biological and cultural diversities interact with and affect one another in complex ways in a sort of co-evolutionary process.

Very often, World Heritage is also an important asset for economic development, by attracting investments and ensuring green, locally-based, stable and decent jobs, only some of which may be related to tourism. Activities associated to the stewardship of cultural and natural heritage, indeed, are local by definition (i.e. cannot be de-localised) and green “by design” since they embody an intrinsically more sustainable pattern of land use, consumption and production, developed over centuries if not millennia of slow adaptation between the communities and their environment. This is true for natural protected areas rich in biodiversity, of course, but also for cultural landscapes and historic cities.

World Heritage, of course, is also essential to the spiritual wellbeing of people for its powerful symbolic and aesthetic dimensions. The acknowledgment and conservation of the diversity of the cultural and natural heritage, fair access to it and the equitable sharing of the benefits deriving from its use, enhance the feeling of place and belonging, mutual respect for others and a sense of purpose and ability to maintain a common good, which contribute to the social cohesion of a community as well as to individual and collective freedom of choice and action. The ability to access, enjoy and care for one’s heritage is essential for what the Nobel prize winner Amartya Sen calls the “capability of individuals to live and to be what they choose”, that is a fundamental component of human development.

A well-maintained heritage is also very important in addressing risks related to natural and human-made disasters. Experience has shown how the degradation of natural resources, neglected rural areas, urban sprawl and poorly engineered new constructions increase the vulnerability of communities to disaster risks, especially in poorer countries. On the other hand, a well-conserved natural and historic environment, based on traditional knowledge and skills, considerably reduces underlying disaster risks’ factors, strengthens the resilience of communities and saves lives.

At times of crisis, moreover, access to and care for the heritage may help vulnerable people recover a sense of continuity, dignity and empowerment. In conflict and post-conflict situations, in particular, the acknowledgment and conservation of heritage, based on shared values and interests, may foster mutual recognition, tolerance and respect among different communities, which is a precondition for a society’s peaceful development.

All of the above concerned potential positive contributions that an appropriate WH conservation and management could make to sustainable development.

Sustainable development within the World Heritage Convention

The text of the Convention, adopted in 1972, does not make any specific mention of the term “sustainable development”. It has been argued, however, that the World Heritage Convention “carries in itself the spirit and promise of sustainability, …in its insistence that culture and nature form a single, closed continuum of the planet’s resources, the integrated stewardship of which is essential to successful long-term sustainable development – and indeed to the future of life on the Earth as we know it” (Richard Engelhardt).

This idea is enshrined in particular in Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention, recognizing that States Parties have the duty “of ensuring the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission to future generations (emphasis added) of the cultural and natural heritage”, as well as “to adopt a general policy which aims to give the cultural and natural heritage a function in the life of the community and to integrate the protection of that heritage into comprehensive planning programmes”. In these articles, moreover, the scope of action of the Convention seems to go beyond the sites included in its List of World Heritage properties, to encompass national heritage policies and wider development strategies.

The notion of sustainability entered the Operational Guidelines in 1994, with reference to the “sustainable use” of cultural landscapes, then introduced for the first time as a new category of heritage properties. At its 26th Session (Budapest, 2002), the World Heritage Committee adopted the so-called “Budapest Declaration”, which stressed the need to “ensure an appropriate and equitable balance between conservation, sustainability and development, so that World Heritage properties can be protected through appropriate activities contributing to the social and economic development and the quality of life of our communities”.

In 2005, furthermore, the notion of sustainable development was taken into account in the introductory part of the Operational Guidelines, which notes that “The protection and conservation of the natural and cultural heritage are a significant contribution to sustainable development” (paragraph 6). The Operational Guidelines further recognize (paragraph 119) that World Heritage properties “may support a variety of on-going and proposed uses that are ecologically and culturally sustainable”.

At its 31st Session (Christchurch 2007), the World Heritage Committee decided to add “Communities” to the previous four strategic objectives, “to enhance the role of communities in the implementation of the World Heritage Convention” (Decision 31 COM 13B).

At its 35th Session (Paris, 2011), the World Heritage Committee made a number of additions to the Operational Guidelines which refer to sustainable development, notably in paragraphs 112, 119, 132, as well as in Annex 5, points 4.b and 5.e. These amendments are aimed on one hand at ensuring that any use of World Heritage properties be sustainable with respect to the imperative of maintaining their Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), and on the other hand to affirm the idea that management systems of World Heritage properties “should integrate sustainable development principles”. Various paragraphs of the Operational Guidelines, moreover, call for a full participatory approach in the identification, protection and management of World Heritage properties (e.g. paragraphs 64, 111 and 123).

The recent “ Strategic Action Plan for the Implementation of the Convention, 2012-2022 ”, adopted by the 18th General Assembly (Paris, 2011), also integrates a concern for sustainable development, notably in its “Vision for 2022”, which calls for the World Heritage Convention to “contribute to the sustainable development of the world’s communities and cultures”, as well as through its Goal N.3 which reads: “Heritage protection and conservation considers present and future environmental, societal and economic needs”, which is to be achieved particularly through “connecting conservation to communities”.

All of these developments should be seen in the larger context of UNESCO’s initiative to integrate culture within the international sustainable development agenda (see: https://en.unesco.org/themes/culture-sustainable-development ). In this context, World Heritage sites could provide the testing ground where innovative approaches could be applied.

The Need for a Policy

Despite these advances, contributing to sustainable development is not an explicit policy in the framework of the implementation of the Convention, as this continues to focus primarily on protecting Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), which justifies the inscription of properties on the World Heritage List.

The current procedures and guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, indeed, do not currently include specific recommendations, checks and controls that would enable governments to fully harness the potential of World Heritage for sustainable development, on one hand, and to ensure that their heritage conservation and management policies and programmes are aligned with broader sustainable development goals, on the other hand.

This means that many opportunities could be missed in the implementation of the Convention simply because those responsible may not consider them or may not know how to translate them in concrete sustainable development gains. Conversely, the current procedures of the Convention offer no clear means to encourage heritage conservation and management to better align its activities with important sustainable development objectives, such as the respect of human rights, addressing basic needs of local communities or non-depletion of natural resources.

All the ideas and recommendations formulated in the context of the 40 th Anniversary, in fact,  have not yet found their way into the policies of the World Heritage Convention, and thus have not become mainstream practice for nearly 1000 of the most outstanding heritage properties around the planet and, even more significantly, within the national heritage policies that – in many countries – are inspired by the standards set by the 1972 Convention.

For all these reasons, at its 36th Session (Saint Petersburg, 2012), the World Heritage Committee considered that the integration of sustainable development into the processes of the Convention should be promoted through a specific policy.

Policy to integrate a sustainable development perspective within the processes of the World Heritage Convention

To make a real impact on nearly a thousand sites around the world, the outcomes of expert meetings and other consultations on World Heritage and sustainable development need to be translated into actual policy for the implementation of the Convention.

Recognizing this, at its 36th session (St. Petersburg, 2012), the World Heritage Committee requested in Decision 36 COM 5C   that the World Heritage Centre, with the support of the Advisory Bodies, convene a small expert working group to develop, within a year, a policy for the integration of sustainable development into the processes of the World Heritage Convention, for possible inclusion in the future Policy Guidance document.

On 19 November 2015, the 20th General Assembly of the States Parties to the World Heritage Convention adopted a Policy on the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the Convention.The overall goal of the policy is to assist States Parties, practitioners, institutions, communities and networks, through appropriate guidance, to harness the potential of World Heritage properties and heritage in general, to contribute to sustainable development and therefore increase the effectiveness and relevance of the Convention whilst respecting its primary purpose and mandate of protecting the Outstanding Universal value of World Heritage properties. In line with the “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”, adopted last September by the UN General Assembly, this new policy revolves around the three dimensions of sustainable development, namely environmental sustainability, inclusive social development and inclusive economic development, complemented by the fostering of peace and security. Its adoption represents a significant shift in the implementation of the Convention and an important step in its history.

Following the adoption of the policy, relevant changes will have to be introduced within the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention , so as to translate its principles into actual procedures. The concrete implementation of the policy will no doubt require the building of necessary capacities among practitioners, institutions, concerned communities and networks, across a wide interdisciplinary and inter-sectorial spectrum. The necessary tools and programmes will therefore have to be developed, and appropriate indicators defined, to monitor progress in the implementation of the policy. Ongoing consultation with States Parties and other relevant stakeholders will be also established with a view to enriching the policy in the future.

Paraty Meeting on the Relationship between the World Heritage Convention, Conservation and Sustainable Development (29-31 March 2010)

The Paraty meeting’s conclusions recognized the important contribution of World Heritage to sustainable development while noting that securing sustainable development is – almost by definition - an essential condition to guarantee the conservation of the heritage. The results of the Paraty Meeting included an Action Plan (see Annex I). By its Decision 34 COM 5D, the World Heritage Committe agreed “that it would be desirable to further consider, in the implementation of the Convention, policies and procedures that maintain the Outstanding Universal value of properties, and also contribute to sustainable development”.

A brief summary of the outcomes of the Paraty Meeting is provided in Document 34 COM 5D . See:  https://whc.unesco.org/en/events/665/

Ouro Preto Meeting on World Heritage and Sustainable Development (5 to 8 February 2012)

The Meeting acknowledged that, in the current context of changing demographics, growing inequalities and diminishing resources, heritage institutions would need to view conservation objectives within a larger system of social and environmental values and needs encompassed in the sustainable development concept. « Ultimately - the participants in the meeting noted - if the heritage sector does not fully embrace sustainable development and harness the reciprocal benefits for heritage and society, it will find itself a victim of, rather than a catalyst for wider change ».

A brief summary of the outcomes of the Ouro Preto Meeting is provided in Document 36 COM 5C . The full proceedings are accessible. See: whc.unesco.org/en/events/794/

40th Anniversary Events

The year 2012 marked the 40th anniversary of the World Heritage Convention . Significantly, the choice of theme for the anniversary was “World Heritage and Sustainable Development: the role of local communities”. Over 100 meetings and conferences were held to mark the occasion, culminating in the final event of Kyoto  and the resulting declaration called “Kyoto Vision” . These events produced a wealth of reflections, principles and recommendations concerning ways to integrate local community concerns in World Heritage.

An analytical summary of the events associated to the 40th Anniversary was prepared by the World Heritage Centre, focusing on the specific outcomes that are relevant to the debate on World Heritage and sustainable development. This analysis is accessible here .

Toyama Meeting on “World Heritage and Sustainable Development: from principles to Practice” (3-5 November 2012)

The Toyama meeting took place immediately before the conclusive event of the 40 th Anniversary (Kyoto, 6-8 November 2012), to prepare and nourish its deliberations.

Its outcome document, the “Toyama Proposal on World Heritage and Sustainable Development”, reiterates the importance of mainstreaming heritage in the current and future international policies on sustainable development, but also stresses the need to mainstream sustainable development in heritage policies and practice, starting from the World Heritage Convention.  The document also recommends placing emphasis on capacity-building for local development actors, drawing in particular from various successful models and practices and to consider all the above in the drafting of the policy that the World Heritage Committee has asked the Centre and the Advisory Bodies to draft.

Working Document for the Toyama Meeting Toyama Proposal on World Heritage and Sustainable Development See:  https://whc.unesco.org/en/events/930/

Hangzhou Congress

The International Congress "Culture: Key to Sustainable Development" was held in Hangzhou (China) from 15 May to 17 May 2013. This event was the first International Congress specifically focusing on the linkages between culture and sustainable development organized by UNESCO since the Stockholm Conference in 1998.  As such, the Congress provided the very first global forum to discuss the role of culture in sustainable development in view of the post-2015 development framework, with participation of the global community and the major international stakeholders.

Heritage and its contribution to sustainable development was a key consideration within the Congress (a specific session was devoted to this theme) and was strongly reflected in the final outcome of the event, the Hangzhou Declaration.

Background Paper:  “Introducing Cultural Heritage into the Sustainable Development Agenda” Watch the video of the Session on Cultural Heritage The Hangzhou Declaration

The Vilm workshop on World Heritage and Sustainable development – From Policy to Action (14–16 November 2016)

To operationalize the Policy for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention , the participants of the Vilm workshop elaborated an action plan, which was produced as an aspirational set of activities and timescales for the implementation of the policy, aiming to engage all the stakeholders of the Convention, at international, regional, and local levels. The meeting was organised jointly by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) with its International Academy for Nature Conservation, IUCN, ICCROM and ICOMOS, in cooperation with the World Heritage Centre.

The proceedings of the Vilm expert workshop

  • UN Conference on Environment and Development (Earth Summit) – (Rio 1992)
  • United Nations Millennium Declaration (New York, 2000)
  • Johannesburg World Summit on SD (Johannesburg, 2002)
  • UN MDG Summit – (New York, September 2010) 
  • Paraty Meeting Outcome and Action Plan –Decision 34 COM 5D – (Paraty and Paris, June 2010)
  • Ouro Preto Meeting – Brazil (February 5-8, 2012)
  • Rio+20 Conference – (Rio, June 2012)
  • Kyoto Vision – (Kyoto, November 2012)
  • Hangzhou Declaration: Placing Culture at the Heart of Sustainable Development Policies – (Hangzhou, May 2013)
  • The World Heritage Review n°65 - Sustainable Development
  • The publication: “World Heritage: Benefits Beyond Borders

Related Themes and Programmes

heritage in tourism development

UNESCO and Sustainable Development Goals

heritage in tourism development

Climate Change

heritage in tourism development

Cultural Landscapes

heritage in tourism development

World Heritage Sustainable Tourism Programme

Economic impact of World Heritage Listing

heritage in tourism development

World Heritage and Indigenous Peoples

heritage in tourism development

World Heritage Marine Programme

heritage in tourism development

Synergies to protect Global Heritage

World Heritage and Ramsar Convention on Wetlands

heritage in tourism development

Small Island Developing States Programme

heritage in tourism development

World Heritage Education Programme

heritage in tourism development

UNESCO @UN Oceans Conference

heritage in tourism development

World Heritage Cities Programme

heritage in tourism development

World Heritage and Gender Equality

Publications.

  • Brochure UNESCO moving forward the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
  • UNESCO Global Report on Culture for Sustainable Cities, Culture: Urban Future
  • UNESCO global priority: gender equality - tools and resources 2014 UNESCO Report on Gender Equality and Culture
  • World Heritage: Benefits Beyond Borders
  • World Heritage Review n°65- Sustainable Development
  • World Heritage Review n°82 - African Heritage and its sustainable development
  • Exhibition- African World Heritage: a pathway for development

heritage in tourism development

Decisions / Resolutions (8)

The World Heritage Committee,

  • Having examined Document WHC/17/41.COM/5C,
  • Recalling Decisions 36 COM 5C , 38 COM 5D , and 39 COM 5D , and 40 COM 5C , adopted respectively at its 36th (Saint Petersburg, 2012), 38th (Doha, 2014) and 39th (Bonn, 2015) and 40th (Istanbul/UNESCO, 2016) sessions, as well as Resolution 20 GA 13 , adopted by the General Assembly at its 20th session (UNESCO, 2015),
  • Welcomes the follow-up activities and the progress made by the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in disseminating the “Policy Document for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention ” and mainstreaming it into statutory processes, international policies and operational activities and requests that this effort be pursued;
  • Reiterates the need to achieve the right balance between environmental, social and economic sustainability, while fully respecting and protecting the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties;
  • Underscores the important role and the contribution of the Convention towards achieving Sustainable Development Goal, Target 11.4: “Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage”;
  • Takes note of the support provided by the World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies to Members States in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and of the further work anticipated on developing indicators in this regard;
  • Also welcomes the work by the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) for monitoring the Sustainable Development Goal, Target 11.4. through an indicator that reflects the total amount per capita each country spends to protect their cultural and natural heritage, and invites UNESCO and all parties to identify and make visible the many ways in which the implementation of the World Heritage Convention contributes to achieving the SDGs, in particular SDG 11 for cultural sites and SDGs 14 and 15 for natural sites;
  • Calls upon States Parties to ensure that sustainable development principles are mainstreamed into their national processes related to World Heritage, in full respect of the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties;
  • Further calls on States Parties to support capacity-building programmes and activities aimed at providing methodologies and tools for integrating heritage conservation into sustainable development frameworks and mainstreaming the Sustainable Development approach in conservation and management activities;
  • Recalling Resolution 20 GA 13 and Decision 40 COM 12 , and in view of the ever increasing urgency to balance sustainable development and implementation of the Convention at the site level, urges the World Heritage Centre in collaboration with the Advisory Bodies to finalize a clear framework of the Policy Compendium for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 42nd session in 2018;
  • Commends the efforts undertaken by the State Party of Germany in collaboration with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies concerning the operationalization of the World Heritage – Sustainable Development policy and calls for wider collaboration in consolidating these efforts;
  • Decides to inscribe an agenda item concerning World Heritage and Sustainable Development at its 43rd session in 2019 and also requests the World Heritage Centre, in cooperation with the Advisory Bodies, to present a progress report in this regard.
  • Having examined Document WHC/16/40.COM/5C,
  • Recalling Decisions 36 COM 5C , 38 COM 5D , and 39 COM 5D , adopted respectively at its 36th (Saint Petersburg, 2012), 38th (Doha, 2014) and 39th (Bonn, 2015) sessions, as well as Resolution 20 GA 13 , adopted by the General Assembly at its 20th session (UNESCO, 2015),
  • Welcomes the adoption of the “Policy Document for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention ” by the 20th General Assembly of States Parties (UNESCO, 2015);
  • Reiterates the need to achieve appropriate balance and integration between the protection of the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties and the pursuit of sustainable development objectives and invites the World Heritage Centre to develop a strategy in due time, as appropriate, for the implementation of the sustainable development policy;
  • Takes note of the follow-up activities and the progress made by the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in disseminating and mainstreaming the policy into operational activities, as requested by Decision 39 COM 5D and Resolution 20 GA 13 ;
  • Also takes note of the active participation of the World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies in supporting Members States in the implementation of SDG 11 and Target 11.4 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and of the further work anticipated on developing indicators in this regard;
  • Also notes contributions by the World Heritage Convention to a number of other SDG goals and also invites the World Heritage Centre, Advisory Bodies and States Parties to highlight all World Heritage related contributions in their follow-up processes and reporting on the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development;
  • Calls upon States Parties to ensure that sustainable development principles are mainstreamed into their national processes related to World Heritage and integrated at the level of local communities, in full respect of the boundaries and the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties;
  • Recalls the Article 13.7 of the World Heritage Convention and encourages all States Parties, the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to invite the perspectives of non-governmental and civil society organizations with practical experience of conservation of World Heritage properties in the further development of principles intended to mainstream sustainable development into national, regional and other relevant policies related to World Heritage;
  • Decides to inscribe an agenda item concerning World Heritage and Sustainable Development at its 41st session in 2017 and requests the World Heritage Centre to present a progress report in this regard.

The General Assembly,

  • Having examined Documents WHC-15/20.GA/13 and WHC-15/20.GA/INF.13 ,
  • Recalling Decisions 36 COM 5C , 38 COM 5D , and 39 COM 5D , adopted respectively at the 36th (Saint Petersburg, 2012), 38th (Doha, 2014), and 39th (Bonn, 2015) sessions of the World Heritage Committee,
  • Thanks the Technical University of Brandenburg, the Government of Germany and the Government of Viet Nam for their support in the development of the draft policy document on the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention;
  • Welcomes the work accomplished by the group of experts on a voluntary basis despite the lack of resources, under the coordination of the World Heritage Centre, and in close consultation with the Advisory Bodies, to develop the draft of the policy document annexed to Document WHC-15/39.COM/5D;
  • Notes the debate on this item that took place at the 39th session of the World Heritage Committee (Bonn, 2015), the comments expressed by the States Parties on this draft through a broad consultation process, as well as the main outcomes of UN 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda;
  • Adopts the revised policy document as a first step toward the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the implementation processes of the Convention , contained in document WHC-15/20.GA/INF.13 as amended;
  • Invites the World Heritage Centre and States Parties to continue engagement through an ongoing consultation process involving all stakeholders to enrich the policy document and invites the World Heritage Centre to provide an update on progress made to the 40th session of the World Heritage Committee (Istanbul, 2016);
  • the necessary changes to the Operational Guidelines , which would translate the principles of the policy document on sustainable development into specific operational procedures,
  • indicators for measuring the progress of the policy’s implementation;
  • capacity-building initiatives, needed to enable implementation, including an indication of the related costs;
  • Calls on States Parties to contribute financially towards this end;
  • Encourages the World Heritage Centre to sensitize States Parties, as appropriate, to the implications of the policy, notably in terms of the need to establish appropriate governance mechanisms to achieve the right balance between World Heritage and Sustainable Development, and integration between the protection of the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties and the pursuit of sustainable development objectives and to that same end encourages the World Heritage Centre to cooperate with all of UNESCO’s sectors and in particular with the relevant programmes such as MAB and MOST;
  • Also encourages UNESCO and the Advisory Bodies to widely disseminate the Policy Document as adopted by the General Assembly, and other related publications, to the world heritage community and the broader public, and promote its application;
  • Recommends that Category 2 Centres and UNESCO Chairs related to World Heritage, and the wider network of the UNESCO Forum University and Heritage, prioritize issues related to the implementation of this policy within their capacity-building and research initiatives;
  • Further requests the World Heritage Centre to present to the General Assembly, at its 21st session in 2017, a report on the progress made in the implementation of the above provisions.
  • Having examined Document WHC-15/39.COM/5D ,
  • Recalling Decisions 36 COM 5C and 38 COM 5D , adopted respectively at its 36th (Saint Petersburg, 2012) and 38th (Doha, 2014) sessions,
  • Thanks the Technical University of Brandenburg, the Government of Germany and the Government of Viet Nam for having supported the development of the policy for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention through the organization of two workshops in Cottbus (Germany) and Ninh Binh (Viet Nam), respectively in October 2014 and January 2015;
  • Welcomes the work accomplished by the group of experts on a voluntary basis, under the coordination of the World Heritage Centre and in close consultation with the Advisory Bodies, despite the lack of resources;
  • Endorses the “Policy Document for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention ” as described in Annex to Document WHC-15/39.COM/5D;
  • Requests the World Heritage Centre to disseminate the draft Policy Document to all States Parties and collate their comments;
  • Also requests the World Heritage Centre, in consultation with the Advisory Bodies, to revise the Policy Document by incorporating views expressed at the 39th session and other comments received from States Parties, as well as by taking into account the final outcome of the negotiations for the establishment of the UN Post-2015 development agenda and other relevant processes;
  • Decides to transmit the revised Policy Document for discussion and adoption at the 20th General Assembly of States Parties in 2015;
  • Further requests the World Heritage Centre, along with the Advisory Bodies, to ensure - once the Policy Document is adopted by the General Assembly of the States Parties that the Policy Document will be taken into account in the preparation of the overall Policy Guidelines as one of the essential elements to be inserted in the text;
  • Requests furthermore the World Heritage Centre along with the Advisory Bodies, to elaborate – once the overall Policy Document is adopted by the General Assembly of the States Parties – proposals for specific changes to the Operational Guidelines that would be required to translate the principles of the Policy Document into actual operational procedures;
  • Calls on States Parties to contribute financially to this end and after adoption by the General Assembly in 2015, to strengthen the Policy by promoting a wider participation of the government, private sector and communities;
  • Encourages the World Heritage Centre to sensitize States Parties, as appropriate, to the adoption of the policy as well as to its implications, notably in terms of the need to establish the appropriate governance mechanisms to achieve the appropriate balance and integration between the protection of the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties and the pursuit of sustainable development objectives;
  • Also encourages UNESCO and the Advisory Bodies to disseminate widely the Policy Document as adopted by the General Assembly, and other related publications through appropriate means to the World Heritage community and the broader public, and promote its application and a wider fostering in multilateral scenarios, especially in those related to sustainable development;
  • Recommends to the Category 2 Centres and UNESCO Chairs related to World Heritage and to the wider network of the UNESCO Forum – Universities and Heritage, to prioritize issues related to the implementation of the policy within their capacity-building and research initiatives as well as involving in their activities other actors and sectors related to sustainable development;
  • Finally requests the World Heritage Centre to present to the Committee, at its 40th session in 2016, a report on the progress made in the implementation of the above provisions.
  • Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/5D,
  • Recalling Decisions 35 COM 5E and 36 COM 5C , adopted at its 35th (UNESCO, 2011) and 36th (Saint-Petersburg, 2012) sessions respectively,
  • Welcomes the progress made towards the development of a draft policy for integrating a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention , despite the lack of resources;
  • Acknowledges the eight key dimensions of sustainable development, namely Inclusive Economic Development, Environmental Sustainability, Peace and Security, Resilience/Disaster Risk Reduction, Gender Equality, Local Communities/Indigenous Peoples and Human Rights;
  • Acknowledges the significance of developing a policy which would emphasize the link between World Heritage and sustainable development in conjunction with the upcoming establishment of the UN post-2015 development agenda;
  • Endorses the proposed methodology for developing the draft policy for integrating a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention ;
  • Recognizes however, that broader consultations should be conducted in the drafting process of the policy and that adequate financial resources should be mobilized in this regard;
  • Strongly encourages all States Parties, other potential donors and partner institutions to provide financial or in-kind support for the successful completion of this initiative;
  • Requests the World Heritage Centre along with the Advisory Bodies, if feasible, within the available resources, to submit a draft of the policy for examination by the Committee at its 39th session, in 2015. 

1. Having examined document WHC-12/36.COM/5C ,

2. Recalling Decisions 33 COM 14A.2 , 34 COM 5D and 35 COM 5E adopted at its 33rd (Seville, 2009), 34th (Brasilia, 2010) and 35th(Paris, 2011) sessions respectively,

3. Welcomes the outcome of the Consultative Meeting on World Heritage and Sustainable Development held in Ouro Preto (Brazil) from 5 to 8 February 2012, takes note of its recommended actions and thanks the State Party of Brazil for having generously hosted this event;

4. Recognizing that the conservation of cultural and natural heritage is of critical importance for the achievement of sustainable development in its various dimensions at global and local levels, recommends that, in full consistency with the Convention ’s primary objectives, the processes of the Convention should seek to appropriately integrate a sustainable development perspective to realize the full benefits of heritage to society, and the benefits of sustainable development approaches to the enhanced protection and conservation of heritage;

5. Requests the World Heritage Centre, with the support of the Advisory Bodies to convene a small expert working group to develop, within a year, a proposal for a policy on the integration of sustainable development into the processes of the World Heritage Convention , for possible inclusion in the future Policy Guidelines document. This policy should take into consideration the outcomes of the Ouro Preto Meeting, of other meetings that are taking place in the anniversary year across the world and of the Rio + 20 Conference, as well as integrate the relevant reflection from previous and ongoing discussions on related topics, in connection with the UNESCO initiative to promote the role of culture in development;

6. Further requests the interested States Parties to consider provision of extrabudgetary resources to enable the implementation of this and the other actions recommended by the Ouro Preto Meeting;

7. Also requests , within available resources, the World Heritage Centre to submit a draft of the above-mentioned policy and a report on the progress made in the implementation of other actions recommended by the Paraty and Ouro Preto meetings, for examination by the Committee no later than at its 38th session in 2014. 

1. Having examined Document WHC-11/35.COM/5E ,

2. Recalling Decisions 32 COM 10, 33 COM 14A.2 , 34 COM 5D adopted at its 32nd (Quebec City, 2008), 33rd (Seville, 2009) and 34th (Brasilia, 2010) sessions respectively,

3. Welcomes the progress made in implementing the recommended actions;

4. Requests the World Heritage Centre, in collaboration with the Advisory Bodies, and with the support of interested States Parties to continue its efforts to implement various activities contained in the Action Plan 2012;

5. Also requests that the results of the proposed consultative meeting on "World Heritage and Sustainable Development" be reported for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 36th session in 2012 and thanks the State Party of Brazil for its offer to host such a meeting.

1. Having examined Document WHC-10/34.COM/5D,

2. Recalling Decisions 32 COM 10 and 33 COM 14A.2 , adopted at its 32nd (Quebec City, 2008) and 33rd (Seville, 2009) sessions respectively,

3. Thanks the State Party of Brazil for supporting the organization of an expert meeting on the relations between the World Heritage Convention , conservation and sustainable development, held in Paraty (Brazil) from 29 to 31 March 2010;

4. Welcomes the outcomes of the above-mentioned meeting and agrees that it would be desirable to further consider, in the implementation of the Convention , policies and procedures that maintain the Outstanding Universal Value of properties, and also contribute to sustainable development; 

5. Also welcomes the proposed Action Plan for 2012 developed during the Expert Meeting at Paraty and presented in the above-mentioned Document, and encourages to reflect and to pursue the efforts to strengthen linkages between the World Heritage Convention and other relevant multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs);

6. Requests the World Heritage Centre, in close collaboration with the Advisory Bodies, to pursue the study of the revision of the Operational Guidelines , to integrate sustainable development, and to further consider these matters within the framework of the reflection on the Future of the Convention ;

7. Also requests the World Heritage Centre, in close collaboration with the Advisory Bodies, to seek extra-budgetary funding to organize, within the framework of the reflection on the Future of the Convention , a consultative meeting on "World Heritage and Sustainable Development" with all States Parties and secretariats of the concerned MEAs, before the 36th session of the World Heritage Committee in 2012, and further requests the World Heritage Centre, within the limits of its capacity, to seek extra-budgetary funding for the implementation of the other activities mentioned in the Action Plan for 2012 presented in Document WHC-10/34.COM/5D;

8. Also requests the World Heritage Centre to identify opportunities, of potential collaboration with the UNESCO Man and Biosphere Programme (MAB), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and other MEAs, and taking into account the needs of Small Island Developing States (SIDS), in the form of pilot projects to address the relation between conservation and sustainable development at regional/ecosystem scales;

9. Further requests the World Heritage Centre to report on the progress accomplished in the implementation of the above for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011.

Book cover

Cultural Urban Heritage pp 165–180 Cite as

Models of Heritage Tourism Sustainable Planning

  • Ana Mrđa 18 &
  • Hrvoje Carić 19  
  • First Online: 29 January 2019

1521 Accesses

6 Citations

Part of the The Urban Book Series book series (UBS)

The study is based on the theory models of heritage tourism sustainable planning that act as a catalyst for the destinations’ market positioning. From the spatial-planning point of view, the competitiveness of the destination is based on the specific cultural experiences, environmental quality and scenic landscape, that positions destination as a quality place for living, working and investing as result of (positive) tourism–heritage interaction. Models of heritage tourism sustainable planning imply the harmony and balance between the global tourism standards and the preservation of the cultural identity of the destination. They are comprised of two main components: an autochthonous place with its cultural–social–economic characteristics and a viable tourism scenario with its sustainable cultural product. The research, based on the visual perception questionnaire, reinforces the paradigm that the heritage tourism sustainable planning models should aim to support the development of tourism without jeopardizing the spatial and socio-economic characteristics of both natural and anthropogenic features of the area and without creating social or economic difficulties for the local community. At the same time, they should be empowered to regulate the tourism/visitor issues consistent with the destinations’ lifescape image and cultural tourism experience.

  • Heritage tourism
  • Cultural landscapes
  • Sustainable planning
  • Spatial planning

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Cultural tourists are motivated to travel for different reasons than other tourists and, therefore, feel that motivation must be considered an important element when defining cultural tourism (Richards 1996 ).

In the case of cultural tourism, the issue is that of the ‘wise exploitation’ of the heritage for tourist use (Russo and van der Borg 2002 ).

In 1998, Hall and Piggin conducted a survey of 44 World Heritage Sites, in which over two-thirds of the site managers reported there had been an increase in visitor numbers after their site gained World Heritage status.

Abu Hassan Z, Bin Jailani M, Rahim AF (2014) Assessing the situational analysis of heritage tourism industry in Melaka. Procedia—Soc Behav Sci 130:28–36

Article   Google Scholar  

Boer B, Wiffen G (2006) Heritage law in Australia. Oxford University Press, Melbourne, p 43

Google Scholar  

Brown G (2005) Mapping spatial attributes in survey research for natural resource management: methods and applications. Soc Nat Resour 18(1):17–39

Chhabra D (2009) Proposing a sustainable marketing framework for heritage tourism. J Sustain Tourism 17(3):301–320

Croatian Bureau of Statistics (2017) Statistical yearbook of the Republic of Croatia. Retrieved 21 March 2017. Web site: http://www.icomos.org/tourism/ , https://www.dzs.hr/Hrv_Eng/ljetopis/2017/sljh2017.pdf

Davenport MA, Anderson DH (2005) Getting from sense of place to place based management: an interpretive investigation of place meanings and perceptions of landscape change. Soc Nat Resour 18:625–641

Drost A (1996) Developing sustainable tourism for World Heritage Sites. Ann Tourism Res 23(2):479–492

Farid SM (2015) Tourism management in world heritage sites and its impact on economic development in Mali and Ethiopia. Procedia—Soc Behav Sci 211:595–604

Farina A (2000) The cultural landscape as a model for the integration of ecology and economics. Bioscience 50(4):313–320

Garrod B, Fyall A (2000) Managing heritage tourism. Ann Tourism Res 27(3):682–708

Herbert D (2001) Literary places, tourism and the heritage experience. Ann Tourism Res 28(2):312–333

Ho P, McKercher B (2004) Managing heritage resources as tourism products. Asia Pac J Tourism Res 9(3):255–266

Huang C, Tsaur J, Yang C (2012) Does world heritage list really induce more tourists? Evidence from Macau. Tour Manag 33:1450–1457

ICOMOS (1997) Charter for cultural tourism. Retrieved 9 March 2017. Web site: http://www.icomos.org/tourism/

Jacobsen J, Steen K (2007) Use of landscape perception methods in tourism studies: a review of photo-based research approaches. Tourism Geographies 9(3):234–253

Jamal T, Hil S (2004) Developing a framework for indicators of authenticity: the place and space of cultural and heritage tourism. Asia Pac J Tourism Res 9(4):353–372

Kaltenborn BP, Bjerke T (2002) Associations between landscape preferences and place attachment: a study in Roros, Southern Norway. Landscape Res 27(4):381–396

Kaufman P (1997) Community values in cultural landscape decision making: developing recommendations for ensuring planning processes include differing expectations of communities of interest. Historic Environ 13(3 and 4):57–62

Ko TG (2005) Development of a tourism sustainability assessment procedure: a conceptual approach. Tour Manag 26(3):431–445

Leask A, Fyall A (2006) Managing world heritage sites. Butterworth-Heinemann, MA, USA

Book   Google Scholar  

Lee SL (1996) Urban conservation policy and the preservation of historical and cultural heritage: the case of Singapore. Cities 13(6):399–409

Li M, Wub B, Cai L (2008) Tourism development of World Heritage Sites in China: a geographic perspective. Tour Manag 29:308–319

Lim C (2006) A survey of tourism demand modeling practice: issues and implications. In International handbook on the economics of tourism. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

Maessen R, Wilms G, Jones-Walters L (2008) Branding our landscapes: some practical experiences from the LIFESCAPE project. In: 8th European IFSA symposium, Clermont-Ferrand (France), pp 551–561

Maharjan M (2013) Conflict in World Heritage Sites of Kathmandu Valley: a case study on the conservation of private houses in three durbar squares. Nepal Tourism Dev Rev 2(1):87–104

Maikhuri RK, Nautiyal S, Rao KS, Saxena KG (2001) Conservation policy-people conflicts: a case study from Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve (a world heritage site), India. Forest Policy Econ 2(3):355–365

McCain G, Ray NM (2003) Legacy tourism: the search for personal meaning in heritage travel. Tour Manag 24:713–717

McIntosh A, Prentice R (1999) Affirming authenticity: consuming cultural heritage. Ann Tourism Res 26:589–612

McKercher B, Hoa PSY, du Crosb H (2005) Relationship between tourism and cultural heritage management: evidence from Hong Kong. Tourism Manag 26:539–548

Moy LYY, Phongpanichanan C (2014) Does the status of a UNESCO World Heritage City make a destination more attractive to Mainland Chinese tourists? A preliminary study of Melaka. Procedia—Soc Behav Sci 144:280–289

Mrđa A (2015) Method for determining tourism carrying capacity in spatial planning. Doctoral thesis, Faculty of Architecture, University of Zagreb, Zagreb

Mrđa A, Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci B (2014) The importance of the concept of tourism carrying capacity for spatial planning—previous research, development and methodological approaches. Prostor 22(2):212–227

Mrđa A, Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci B (2016) Heritage touristscapes: a case study of the Island of Hvar. Annales-Anali za Istrske in Mediteranske Studije-Series Historia et Sociologia 26(3):553–572

OECD (2009) The impact of culture on tourism. Retrieved 4 October 2016. Web site: http://www.oecd.org/cfe/tourism/theimpactofcultureontourism.htm

Pendlebury J, Short M, While A (2009) Urban World heritage sites and the problem of authenticity. Cities 26(6):349–358

Poria Y, Butler R, Airey D (2003) The core of heritage tourism. Ann Tourism Res 30(1):238–254

Richards G (1996) Production and consumption of European cultural tourism. Ann Tourism Res 23(2):261–283

Richards G (2013) Tourism development trajectories: from culture to creativity. In: Smith M, Richards G (eds) The Routledge handbook of cultural tourism. Routledge, London, pp 297–303

Russo AP, van der Borg J (2002) Planning considerations for cultural tourism: a case study of four European cities. Tourism Manag 23:631–637

Saarinen J (2006) Traditions of sustainability in tourism studies. Ann Tourism Res 33(4):1121–1140

Silberberg T (1995) Cultural tourism and business opportunities for museums and heritage sites. Tour Manag 16(5):361–365

Stebbins RA (1996) Cultural tourism as serious leisure. Ann Tourism Res 23(4):948–950

Swarbrooke J (2002) Heritage tourism in UK—a glance from things to come. From http://www.insights.org.uk/article.aspx?title=Heritage+Tourism+in+the+UK+a+Glance+at+Things+to+Comeandtype=7andlang=en_usandoutput=json

The Mediterranean Strategy for Sustainable Development (2005) UN Environmental program. UNEP/MAP, Atena

Tunbridge J, Ashworth G (1996) Dissonant heritage: the management of the past as a resource in conflict. Wiley, London

Wager J (1995) Developing a strategy for the Angkor world heritage site. Tour Manag 16(7):515–523

Wang Y, Bramwell B (2012) Heritage protection and tourism development priorities in Hangzhou, China: a political economy and governance perspective. Tour Manag 33:988–998

WHC (2005) Retrieved 5 October 2016. Web site: http://whc.unesco.org/

Yang CH, Lin HL, Han CC (2010) Analysis of international tourist arrivals in China: the role of World Heritage Sites. Tour Manag 31(6):827–837

Zhang X, Zhou L, Wu Y, Skitmore M, Deng Z (2015) Resolving the conflicts of sustainable world heritage landscapes in cities: fully open or limited access for visitors? Habitat Int 46(91):91–100

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Architecture, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Institute of Tourism, Zagreb, Croatia

Hrvoje Carić

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana Mrđa .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Urban Planning, Spatial Planning, Landscape Architecture, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Mladen Obad Šćitaroci

Bojana Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Mrđa, A., Carić, H. (2019). Models of Heritage Tourism Sustainable Planning. In: Obad Šćitaroci, M., Bojanić Obad Šćitaroci, B., Mrđa, A. (eds) Cultural Urban Heritage. The Urban Book Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10612-6_14

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10612-6_14

Published : 29 January 2019

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-10611-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-10612-6

eBook Packages : Earth and Environmental Science Earth and Environmental Science (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Publish with us

Policies and ethics

  • Find a journal
  • Track your research

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

Each year, millions of travelers visit America’s historic places. The National Trust for Historic Preservation defines heritage tourism as “traveling to experience the places, artifacts, and activities that authentically represent the stories and people of the past and present.”  A high percentage of domestic and international travelers participate in cultural and/or heritage activities while traveling, and those that do stay longer, spend more, and travel more often. Heritage tourism creates jobs and business opportunities, helps protect resources, and often improves the quality of life for local residents.

The ACHP has encouraged national travel and tourism policies that promote the international marketing of America’s historic sites as tourism destinations. The ACHP also engages in ongoing efforts to build a more inclusive preservation program, reaching out to diverse communities and groups and engaging them in dialogue about what parts of our national legacy should be more fully recognized, preserved, and shared. A retrospective look at ACHP efforts related to heritage tourism was created as part of Preservation50 , the 2016 celebration of the 50th anniversary of the National Historic Preservation Act. It provides a historical overview, as well as links to important documents and resources.

The ACHP developed Preserve America , a national initiative to encourage and support community efforts for the preservation and enjoyment of America’s cultural and natural heritage. In partnership with other federal agencies, the initiative has encouraged the use of historic assets for economic development and community revitalization, as well as enabling people to experience and appreciate local historic resources through heritage tourism and education programs. These goals have been advanced by an Executive Order directing federal agencies to support such efforts, a community designation program, and a recognition program for outstanding stewardship of historic resources by volunteers.

Since the Preserve America program was created in 2003, over 900 Preserve America Communities   have been designated in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and two territories, as well as nearly 60 Preserve America Stewards . Many Preserve America Communities are featured in “Discover Our Shared Heritage” National Register on-line travel itineraries . From 2006 through 2010, the National Park Service (in partnership with the ACHP) awarded more than $21 million in Preserve America Grants   to support sustainable historic resource management strategies, with a focus on heritage tourism. 

These links are being provided as a convenience and for informational purposes only; if they are not ACHP links, they do not constitute an endorsement or an approval by the ACHP of any of the products, services or opinions of the corporation or organization or individual. The ACHP bears no responsibility for the accuracy, legality, or content of the external site or for that of subsequent links. Please contact the external site for answers to questions regarding its content, including its privacy policies.

Related resources.

Home

Search form

Revitalizing urban heritage for tourism development: a case study of baghdad's old city center.

© 2023 IIETA. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ).

OPEN ACCESS

Heritage is widely recognized as one of the key expressions of civilizations, acting as a conduit for customs, traditions, and human values. The revitalization and development of certain tourist sites are deeply intertwined with heritage and archaeological elements, particularly those bearing historical significance or associated with specific events. The aim is to promote and thereby invigorate these sites. Certain urban treatments and their extrapolations are considered attractive and supportive factors for the revitalization of tourism, designed with a view to their application within the local context. This research aims to spotlight the center of the old city of Baghdad, highlighting its most significant heritage monuments of historical and social value. It seeks to identify the potential factors and essential elements for the success of these sites, with the goal of transforming them into appealing tourist points for both local and international tourism. This endeavor is intended to stimulate the tourism industry and serve as a central axis for the development of the city center at large. The research adopts a descriptive analytical approach in order to gather and analyze information. It employs a comprehensive framework for local sites, incorporating contemporary urban treatments that activate tourism and emphasize the identity of the place. The research concluded that there are three beneficial components to revitalizing urban tourism effectively towards enhancing the tourism product in heritage tourism: creativity, innovation, and leadership. A case study was conducted on Al-Mutanabbi Street, demonstrating how it is possible to activate the tourism product by utilizing these three components. These elements work in tandem to ensure the success of the initiative locally, and subsequently, globally.

heritage tourism development, revitalization, tourism product, Baghdad

Tourism acts as a significant source of national income for many countries, with nations vying to develop tourist destinations that bolster the economy, as well as urban and social development. The revitalization of tourism has heightened competitive capabilities, with success factors for heritage sites being identified in numerous countries. This has led to an increase in tourism promotion, with the aim of elevating heritage tourist destinations, strengthening collective memory and spirit of place. The public and private sectors are empowered by a vision primarily crafted by decision-makers and stakeholders, focusing on preparing visitors, promoting destinations, and associating them with specific cultural or heritage events, or with the local or collective memory of the community, as a backdrop for events [1-3].

The heritage tourism sector is expanding at a more rapid rate than all other forms of tourism, especially in third-world countries. Visitors to cities seek to appreciate and enrich their understanding of cultural and historical aspects, making this sector a potentially effective tool for poverty alleviation and community economic development (UNWTO 2005) [4].

The historic quarter of Old Rusafa is a city area where historical quality is embodied in places, buildings, and spaces steeped in history, culture, and significant political and popular events dating back to the thirteenth century. Examples include Al Mustansiryia School, The Abbasid Palace, and Al Khulafa Mosque [5], along with many distinctive buildings and spaces reflecting important political, social, and architectural changes over time.

Heritage tourism is defined as a subset of cultural tourism, where the primary motive for the visit is dependent on the characteristics of the place as perceived by tourists in terms of their own heritage [6]. Previous discussions [7] have emphasized the importance of a tourist's perception, motives, and expectations. The motives for heritage tourism include nostalgia for the past, social distinction, and the desire for an authentic experience, with nostalgia and authenticity being significant motivational factors driving demand for heritage tourism. Heritage tourism encompasses all activities undertaken by tourists in areas with historical monuments [8]. Thus, heritage tourism shares some attributes of cultural tourism, but it is more focused on the characteristics of the place as perceived spatially, in terms of tangible heritage aspects and their connection with intangible aspects. Another study [9] suggests that the preservation of heritage extends to maintaining the economic structure, and that economic activity is not confined to tourism aspects solely. There needs to be an integrated organization benefiting all parties involved in the process, including the government sector, international and local organizations, as well as the residents of the heritage area.

Existing literature primarily categorizes heritage into two types: tangible and intangible. Tangible heritage includes all assets that possess a degree of physical embodiment of cultural values, encompassing cultural assets, movable materials, historical cities, archaeological sites, and the cultural landscape [10-12].

Heritage tourism is introduced as one of the most popular forms of tourism related to all visitors who travel to experience the culture, scientific performances, or the lifestyle/heritage of a community, region, group, or institution. In this context, the cultural experience is the foundation of entertainment and constitutes a repository of the values of modern society, including economic values. Meanwhile, van Renswouw et al. [13] suggests that it involves implicit or active and interactive engagement with cultures, civilizations, and societies, where the tourist gains new experiences of an educational, creative, and recreational nature.

Another study highlights the significance of promoting health aspects and improving the quality of life in outdoor spaces in heritage tourism. It suggests the possibility of designing urban activity environments as places that increase the physical activity of users or passers-by with the aid of interactive technology [14].

In this vein, another study indicates that tourism is a pioneering, profit-driven industry at the levels of economy and use. It leverages information and communication technology to provide new tools for marketing tourism, aiming to develop, manage, and market the product and the tourist destination using points of attraction between the tourism and culture sectors, thereby preserving and developing heritage [15, 16].

Smith proposes a comprehensive taxonomy of cultural tourism, including: heritage sites, performance venues, visual arts, festivals and special events, religious sites, rural environments, indigenous communities and traditions, modern popular culture, and creative activities such as painting, photography, and dancing. Culture encompasses both tangible and intangible elements of a group or society passed down from previous generations.

Urban outdoor spaces, in this context, play a crucial role as “factories of meaning” for the sensory experience of the visitor and tourist [3]. Cultural tourism parallels the growing interest in culture in general. However, Richards [1] suggests that rather than an increase in cultural stimuli, there are more people making short visits, thus boosting the number of visitors to all kinds of attractions. As highlighted by the World Tourism Organization (2002), the creation of a cultural tourism destination is not confined to cities or regions boasting an impressive cultural background or rich heritage. Cultural attractions allow travelers to experience human and intellectual creations (ibid).

According to marketing theory, the term “product” is defined as “any service that can be offered to the market for interest, acquisition, and consumption use that may satisfy a need or desire” [17]. This definition emphasizes "meeting customer needs". Meanwhile, González et al. [18] defines the tourism product as "a satisfying experience in a desirable destination". Other studies suggest that the tourism product is a blend of tangible and intangible elements, tourist attractions, facilities, services, and activities centered around a specific element of interest that generates a comprehensive tourism experience for potential customers [19]. Some suggest it is any product marketed by a country or an institution to attract visitors and experience the aforementioned product [20], while others propose that the tourism product is a set of elements based on impressions, interpretations, concepts, and sensations, primarily experiences that shape the tourist’s feelings and attitudes towards their visit [21].

Middleton Pointed that the tourism product is a geographical area containing administrative borders [21]:

- A place where the tourist finds the means of entertainment and stay, such as entertainment and shopping events, attractions and event areas;

- Existence of tourism marketing efforts, i.e., the place should market itself to attract visitors;

- Establishing an organizational structure that coordinates and leads the management of the tourist destination and coordinates tourism efforts in the place;

- Perceptions about what the place should offer to tourism. These images may or may not be accurate;

- Government agencies have introduced special laws, regulations and regulations that control various aspects of tourism;

- Mix of stakeholders in tourism: private sector companies, government agencies, organizations, non-profit organizations, including NGOs.

By reviewing the previous literature, it is possible to summarize what was presented with regard to heritage tourism and tourism product because it represents the main focus of the research topic, as shown below in (Table 1), the literature review shows that lack in studying the major concepts of revitalizing tourism product so it was needed to be more studies in further in the upcoming section.

Table 1. Previous studies and literature review

The research aim focused on revitalizing heritage tourism by enhancing heritage tourism product achieved by three components, which are Creativity, Innovation and Leadership, as an essential step in revitalizing and enhancing the tourism product locally which a collaborative efforts of various stakeholders. The following is an explanation for each of them.

5.1 Creativity

The first component of activating tourism product is creativity that many studies and dictionaries indicated that creativity was defined in the Cambridge dictionary as a term that reflects the ability to produce or use original and unusual ideas. While oxford dictionary referred to creativity as involving the use of skill and the imagination to produce something new or a work of art. While academic discussions refer to creativity as the ability to think in new ways and apply fresh perspectives to old problems [22], or the capability or act of conceiving something original or unusual [22], or a critical skill that enables people to adapt and create unique approaches that may be even better suited than tried-and-true methods.

5.1.1 Types of creativity

According to Dietrich [23], there are four types of creativity: deliberate and emotional, deliberate and cognitive, spontaneous and emotional, and spontaneous and cognitive. Creativity is an active process necessarily involved in innovation. It is a learning habit that requires skill as well as specific understanding of the contexts in which creativity is being applied. The creative process is at the heart of innovation and often the words are used interchangeably.

(Richards)coined the term in creative tourism first in 2000 and developed it through the years [24] as “Tourism which offers visitors the opportunity to develop their creative potential through active participation in courses and learning experiences, which are characteristic of the holiday destination where they are taken”, by appreciating everyday life to build an authentic and unique sense about the destination visited through active participation.

5.2 Innovation

The second component of activating tourism product is innovation that is defined as:

Cambridge dictionary defined the term as a new idea or method that is being tried for the first time, or the use of such ideas or methods, Also Oxford dictionary referred to term as the introduction of new things, ideas or ways of doing something. While Nilssen [25] referred to urban innovation as solutions, provisions and/or ways of adapting to the challenges surrounding major cities. Innovation can be both multidisciplinary and multifaceted, including product, service, process, position, strategic, rhetoric, and governance innovation. Another point of view is an actively intended process of change that leads to discontinuity, with the aim of improving institutional structures and/or practices in a given context.

The implementation or creation of something new that has realized value to others [22]. Innovation can be broadly thought of as new ideas, new ways of looking at things, new methods or products that have value. Innovation contains the idea of output, of actually producing or doing something differently, making something happen or implementing something new.

5.3 Leadership

The third component was leadership that was defined in the Oxford dictionary as a state or position of being a leader or the action of leading a group of people or an organization, or the set of characteristics that make a good leader.

(Rada) pointed to the concept of Burn’s Theory of Transformational leadership that involves leaders and followers working together to develop mutual goals, to recognize and achieve higher order needs [26], he argues that leadership can occur at all levels of organization and society

Another point of view [27] that referred to Leadership as crucial role for successful projects and has an important function to satisfy the needs of all stakeholders developed three aspects of leadership: Communication of Vision, Stakeholder Engagement, and Adaptation to the Transition Process.

While Van Serters referred to the term as [28]:

Leadership is a complex process, consisting of behavioural, relational and situational elements. It exists not only in the leader, but also in individual, dyadic, group and organisational relationships. Leadership can stem upwards from lower organisation levels as much as it is initiated downwards from higher levels. Leadership occurs both internally and externally in the situational environment. It motivates people intrinsically by improving expectations, as well as extrinsically by enhancing reward systems.

Table 2 shows literature review on creativity, innovation and leadership

The most important components of the tourism product have been reached that deal effectively with each other when available to activate heritage tourism in the areas that are being rehabilitated and redeveloped, namely (as shown in Table 3):

- Innovation : Which is achieved through indicators of fair use, providing flexibility in design, providing sustainability in urban spaces.

- Leadership : Which is achieved through indicators of social participation in decision making process, Activating the tourism process, giving more attention to traditional activities, developing government legislation and laws, keeping pace with technological developments, Decentralized management model and the establishment of companies to coordinate projects in the city and the use of public-private partnership.

- Creativity: Which is achieved through indicators of authenticity in preserving architectural elements that carry value for historical continuity, The creativity of the designer in drawing inspiration from the heritage revival in architecture, Enhancing the commercial identity, Exploiting open spaces for urban events.

Table 2. Literature review on components of tourism product activation

Table 3. Ways to achieve the components of tourism product activation

6.1 The history of Al-Mutanabbi Street

Al-Mutanabbi Street was chosen as a sample for the case study, as Al-Mutanabbi Street is located in the center of Baghdad near Al-Midan area in Al-Rusafa district, and it is considered the vibrant axis of the cultural side in the city of Baghdad because it contains many libraries, printing and publishing houses, in addition to containing some old Baghdadi buildings and significant landmarks. The historic street was named in 1932 during the reign of King Faisal I after the famous poet Abu al-Tayyib al-Mutanabbi, who was born during the Abbasid state [34, 35].

6.2 Redevelopment efforts for Al-Mutanabbi Street

Al-Mutanabbi Street, like other heritage areas, was exposed to neglect and deterioration of conditions, especially after what it witnessed of the 2007 bombing. A joint committee was formed from the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Municipalities, and the Baghdad Provincial Council to reconstruct it and open it in 2008, in the presence of many Iraqi personalities, writers, and intellectuals. Then, the area was redeveloped in 2021 [36] with the support of the Tamkeen initiative of the Central Bank of Iraq and the Association of Iraqi Banks within the Baghdad Revival Project launched by the Municipality of Baghdad (as shown in Figure 1) to beautify the streets of the capital and its heritage places, in addition to holding many artistic and musical activities and events along the street, which has been paved again. The facades of the brick shops were re-coated and painted, as were the small ornate iron balconies and compact columns. Small identical wooden boards bearing the names of the shops were hung over their entrances. The street is about one kilometer long, and leads to one of the banks of the Tigris River, preceded by a large statue of Al-Mutanabbi, and ends with an inscription on which is one of the verses of his famous poems (Figures 1-4).

heritage in tourism development

Figure 1. The proposed design for Al-Mutanabbi Street

Source: https://www.shayd-eng.com/post/how-to-make-the-most-out-of-remote-meetings

heritage in tourism development

Figure 2. Maintenance work on the project and restoration of building facades

Source: https://www.ina.iq/132164--.html

heritage in tourism development

Figure 3. The end result and the reality of the situation for Al-Mutanabbi Street

Source: www.googlephotos.com

heritage in tourism development

Figure 4. The river front and the end of the axis of Al-Mutanabbi Street overlooking the Tigris River, with the presence of a small river transport station and the statue of Al-Mutanabbi

The case study was analyzed through what was extracted shown in Table 3, the theoretical framework presented, and ways to achieve this in the chosen area of the case study.

7.1 The innovation component

The innovation component is employed through the nature of the place and its personal identity, and the combination between daily life practices the could enrich the visitors exppeience through innovative ways and functions by spatial preserving heritage contents that help restore heritage identity, for instance the recall of authentic experience to have a cup of tea in Al-Zahawii coffee shop as a way to experience the community traditional values and introducing new functions that are more flexible for multi functions of space as using libraries for communicating with intellectuals, writers and poets in small groups in two or three to discuss cultural, poetic and literary matters. fair use for all and equalities is achieved through rehabilitate urban spaces within archaeological areas and provide them with floor elements that facilitate movement providing flexibility in use and designing a structure of paths to achieve visual and functional diversity, usability and interaction with the surrounding buildings achieving the suitability of urban spaces for use and linking all urban spaces with a set of paths and corridors that provide proper movement.

7.2 The leadership component

The leadership component is achieved through the development of applicable governmental legislation and laws to activate heritage tourism and the laws of restoration of sites and the development of a leadership plan for government institutions in cooperation with the private sector and the local community that reflects multiple interests by establishing a decentralized management model and facilitating legal procedures to activate heritage tourism in addition to keeping pace with technological developments in publicity and advertisement for available tourist sites, and it is necessary to give more attention to heritage and cultural activities and festivals, thus increasing the ability to compete between cities by attracting new companies and building urban revitalization projects to change the city, and establishing companies to coordinate projects in the city and using partnership between the public and private sectors to contribute to the implementation of projects Local governments, active municipal government, interaction with the judiciary and adoption of exemplary management practice.

7.3 The creativity component

The creativity component is achieved by containing creative cultural, social and commercial activities such as establishing visitor reception centers that include (showrooms, administrative offices, a public library and an archaeological museum) and strengthening the commercial identity in the region of Al-Mutanabi and Al-Karkh region and revitalizing and initiating national projectsto revive and enhance the traditional markets that meet the needs of the visitor in achieving sence of place and nostalgia to the past through traditional crafts that are It disappeared with time as a result of the lack of artisans working in the fields of handicrafts, which were replaced by ready-made goods imported from other countries. In addition to that the case study region have potentials to develop the river front by introducing river taxi which exist but need much more attention and development matching the value of the place and developing the tatic entenventions as an approach to maximize the percentage of marketing activites in the campus of heritage areas with distinguished identity and exploitation of open spaces to establish public gardens and terraces for celebrations, festivals and cultural activities and work to rehabilitate the main movement axes surrounding the region and provide the necessary commercial services for the region with the need to take into account the services necessary for the local community in addition to flexibility and ease of change and the possibility of modification and reconfiguration in order to respond with the variables of time and place to meet the need The user takes advantage of the capabilities of the era and expresses the identity of the community as a result of local creativity with authentic values and a contemporary spirit, through originality in preserving the elements of the heritage that have a fixed character and that are still of value for historical continuity, and through temporal and spatial communication, the creativity of the designer is inspired by the revival of heritage in Architecture (Think Design A new water that bears the changing character of inherited), a changing use of inherited architectural elements (such as shanasheels, iwans, mashrabiyas, air catchers, tents and domes) in a contemporary manner by simplifying and abstracting ideas and achieving contemporary formally and functionally (environmentally, economically, socially).

Tourism is a major source of national income for many countries, and many countries are competing over increasing the competitive value of the city through the possibility of developing tourist product that enrich the economic aspect and urban and social development.

The most important components to enrich and revitalize heritage tourism product have been indicated as: the first component was Innovation, which is achieved through indicators of fair use, providing flexibility in design, providing sustainability in urban spaces, the second component was Leadership, which is achieved through indicators of social participation in decision making process and urban interventions, stakeholders synergy to maintain and recall the essence of Baghdad and spirit of place and activating the tourism process, Giving more attention to traditional activities, Developing govermental legislation and laws, Keeping pace with technological developments, Decentralized management model and the establishment of companies to coordinate projects in the city and the use of public-private partnership. the last component was Creativity, Which is achieved through indicators of identity by providing an authentic experiences to the visitors and tourists and preserving architectural elements that carry a unique value for historical continuity, the adaptation to change and transforming it to urban potentials to enhance the commercial intellectual and cultural identity, Exploiting open spaces for urban events and national festivals and taking advantage of existing landmarks and benefit from them as a design power and potential for revival process in urban design that reflect the nostalgia to the past and empower the future generations by recalling the values of the past, reflecting on it, taking lessons and learning from them (Figure 5).

heritage in tourism development

Figure 5. Components of activating tourism product in heritage tourism

[1] Richards, G. (2001). Cultural Attractions and European Tourism. CABI Publishing. [2] Morrison, A.M. (2013). Marketing and Managing Tourism Destinations. Routledge. [3] Barrera-Fernandez, D., Hernández-Escampa, M., Vázquez, A.B. (2016). Tourism management in the historic city. The impact of urban planning policies. International Journal of Scientific Management and Tourism, 2(4): 349-367. [4] Timothy, D.J., Nyaupane, G.P. (2009). Cultural Heritage and Tourism in the Developing World. Routledge. [5] Poria, Y., Butler, R., Airey, D. (2003). The core of heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(1): 238-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(02)00064-6 [6] Poria, Y., Butler, R., Airey, D. (2001). Clarifying heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(4): 1047-1048. [7] Garrod, B., Fyall, A. (2001). Heritage tourism: A question of definition. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(4): 1049-1052. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(00)00068-2 [8] Experts of the Iraqi Consultative Commission for Reconstruction and Development. (2022). A comprehensive scientific study for the reconstruction of Iraq. London. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/576771645715123591/pdf/Iraq-Reform-Recovery-and-Reconstruction-Fund-I3RF-Trust-Fund-Annual-Progress-Report-to-Development-Partners-2021.pdf. [9] Chhabra, D. (2010). Sustainable Marketing of Cultural and Heritage Tourism. Routledge. [10] Richards, G., Richards, G.B. (1996). Cultural Tourism in Europe. Cab International. [11] Silberberg, T. (1995). Cultural tourism and business opportunities for museums and heritage sites. Tourism Management, 16(5): 361-365. https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-5177(95)00039-Q [12] Smith, M.K. (2015). Issues in Cultural Tourism Studies. Routledge. [13] van Renswouw, L., Vos, S., Van Wesemael, P., Lallemand, C. (2021). Exploring the design space of InterActive urban environments: Triggering physical activity through embedded technology. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2021, pp. 955-969. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461778.3462137 [14] Katiyar, R.C., Priyanka, P. (2015). Sustainable heritage tourism marketing through intelligence ICT solutions. Scholarly Journal of Business Administration, 5(1): 1-7. [15] Hadžić, O. (2004). Tourism and digitization of cultural heritage. Pregled nacionalnog centra za digitalizaciju. http://hdl.handle.net/10760/11865. [16] Kotler, P., Turner, R.E. (1989). Marketing Management, Canadian. Scarborough, Ontario, Prentice Hall Canada. [17] Jefferson, A., Lickorish, L.J. (1988). Marketing Tourism. A Practical Guide. Longman Group UK Ltd. [18] González, O.L., Rodríguez, R.M., Fernández, J.I.P. (2022). Actor networks and development of cultural tourist destinations. In Handbook of Research on Cultural Tourism and Sustainability, pp. 209-230. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-9217-5.ch010 [19] Kuznik, L. (2018). Fifty shades of dark stories. In Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Fourth Edition, pp. 4077-4087. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2255-3.ch353 [20] Amaral, M.I., Rodrigues, A.I. (2020). The importance of social media for the improvement of the tourist experience offered by rural tourism enterprises: the case of the Alentejo. In Handbook of Research on Social Media Applications for the Tourism and Hospitality Sector, pp. 309-333. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1947-9.ch018 [21] Middleton, V.T.C., Clarke, J.R. (2012). Marketing in Travel and Tourism. Routledge. [22] Hunter, G.S. (2013). Out Think: How Innovative Leaders Drive Exceptional Outcomes. John Wiley & Sons. [23] Dietrich, A. (2004). The cognitive neuroscience of creativity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11: 1011-1026. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196731 [24] Richards, G. (2009). Creative tourism and local development. Creative Tourism: A Global Conversation, 78-90. [25] Nilssen, M. (2019). To the smart city and beyond? Developing a typology of smart urban innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142: 98-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.060 [26] Rada, D.R. (1999). Transformational leadership and urban renewal. Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(3-4): 18-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/107179199900600302 [27] Kirn, L., Schmidt, J., Rothfeld, N. (2018). Urban Development Projects: The Role of Leadership for Social Sustainability in a Multicultural District-A Case Study of Drottninghög, Helsingborg. [28] Van Seters, D.A., Field, R.H. (1990). The evolution of leadership theory. Journal of organizational change management, 3(3): 29-45. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534819010142139 [29] Mohamed Ali, E.E.D., Mahmoud, M.A.S.R., Al-Jumaili, Z.H. (2022). Towards activating comprehensive ‘global’ urban design standards to develop heritage ‘tourist’ urban spaces. Journal of Urban Research, 46. https://jur.journals.ekb.eg/article_253899_459ebbab73cc374a1950642b57100454.pdf. [30] Nayef Alsarayreh, M. (2017). Heritage tourism and its role in the tourism industry and activating the process of attracting tourists to Jordan. The International Journal of Heritage, Tourism and Hospitality - published by the Faculty of Tourism and Hotels - Fayoum University, 11: 41-51.  [31] Ali ElSayyad, N.A.H.M., Gizawi, E., El Din, L.S. (2022). The flexibility effect of using heritage formation vocabulary in contemporary architecture. MEJ. Mansoura Engineering Journal, 47(2): 71-79. https://dx.doi.org/10.21608/bfemu.2022.248285 [32] Al Rajoub A.M., Al Shawabkeh, R. (2019). Employing urban heritage in tourism. https://repository.aabu.edu.jo/jspui/handle/123456789/2096. [33] Oliveira, F.B.D., Sant'Anna, A.D.S., Diniz, D.M., Carvalho Neto, A.M.D. (2015). Leaderships in urban contexts of diversity and innovation: The Porto Maravilha case. BAR-Brazilian Administration Review, 12: 268-287. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-7692bar2015140080 [34] Duclos, D. (2016). Revisiting Iraqi cultural heritage from “outside” in times of looting and destruction: Al-Mutanabi Street in Motion 1. Autrepart, (2): 219-233. https://doi.org/10.3917/autr.078.0219 [35] Al Waily, T. (2017). Baghdad_21st_Century_The_Historical_City (1). Dar al Adeeb, Jordan. https://issuu.com/turath/docs/part_1_632b2a962c42af. [36] Almousawi, N.H., Al-Hinkawi, W.S., Al-Askary, A.A.H.A. (2022). Temporal awareness in urban place: Al-Mutanabbi street-case study. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning, 17(5): 1461-1470. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.170510

Phone: + 1 825 436 9306

Email: [email protected]

Subscription

Language support

Please sign up to receive notifications on new issues and newsletters from IIETA

Select Journal/Journals:

Copyright © 2024 IIETA. All Rights Reserved.

UN Tourism | Bringing the world closer

Sustainable development

  • SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
  • Competitiveness
  • Innovation and Investments
  • ETHICS, CULTURE AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
  • TECHNICAL COOPERATION
  • UN Tourism ACADEMY

share this content

  • Share this article on facebook
  • Share this article on twitter
  • Share this article on linkedin

Sustainable development

"Tourism that takes full account of its current and future economic, social and environmental impacts, addressing the needs of visitors, the industry, the environment and host communities"

Sustainable tourism development guidelines and management practices are applicable to all forms of tourism in all types of destinations, including mass tourism and the various niche tourism segments. Sustainability principles refer to the environmental, economic, and socio-cultural aspects of tourism development, and a suitable balance must be established between these three dimensions to guarantee its long-term sustainability.

Thus, sustainable tourism should:

  • Make optimal use of environmental resources that constitute a key element in tourism development, maintaining essential ecological processes and helping to conserve natural heritage and biodiversity.
  • Respect the socio-cultural authenticity of host communities, conserve their built and living cultural heritage and traditional values, and contribute to inter-cultural understanding and tolerance.
  • Ensure viable, long-term economic operations, providing socio-economic benefits to all stakeholders that are fairly distributed, including stable employment and income-earning opportunities and social services to host communities, and contributing to poverty alleviation.

Sustainable tourism development requires the informed participation of all relevant stakeholders, as well as strong political leadership to ensure wide participation and consensus building. Achieving sustainable tourism is a continuous process and it requires constant monitoring of impacts, introducing the necessary preventive and/or corrective measures whenever necessary.

Sustainable tourism should also maintain a high level of tourist satisfaction and ensure a meaningful experience to the tourists, raising their awareness about sustainability issues and promoting sustainable tourism practices amongst them.

COMMITTEE ON TOURISM AND SUSTAINABILITY (CTS)  

Biodiversity

Biodiversity

UN Tourism strives to promote tourism development that supports, in equal measure, the conservation of biodiversity, the social welfare and the economic security of the host countries and communities.

Climate Action

CLIMATE ACTION

Tourism is both highly vulnerable to climate change while at the same time contributing to it. Threats for the sector are diverse, including direct and indirect impacts such as more extreme weather events, increasing insurance costs and safety concerns, water shortages,  biodiversity loss and damage to assets and attractions at destinations, among others.

Global Tourism Plastics Initiative

Global Tourism Plastics Initiative

The problem of plastic pollution in tourism is too big for any single organisation to fix on its own. To match the scale of the problem, changes need to take place across the whole tourism value chain.

Hotel Energy Solutions (HES)

Hotel Energy Solutions (HES)

Hotel Energy Solutions (HES) is a UN Tourism -initiated project in collaboration with a team of United Nations and EU leading agencies in Tourism and Energy . 

Observatories (INSTO)

Sustainable Tourism Observatories (INSTO)

The UN Tourism International Network of Sustainable Tourism Observatories (INSTO) is a network of tourism observatories monitoring the economic, environmental and social impact of tourism at the destination level. 

One Planet

When responsibly planned and managed, tourism has demonstrated its capacity to support job creation, promote inclusive social integration, protect natural and cultural heritage, conserve biodiversity, generate sustainable livelihoods and improve human wellbeing.  As the sector is experiencing tremendous growth, collective efforts to ensure its long-term sustainability are essential.

Resource Efficiency in Tourism

 Resource Efficiency in Tourism

The report aims to inspire stakeholders and encourage them to advance the implementation of the SDGs through sustainable tourism.

Small Islands Developing States (SIDS)

Small Island Developing States (SIDS)

Small Island Developing States face numerous challenges. For a significant number, their remoteness affects their ability to be part of the global supply chain, increases import costs - especially for energy - and limits their competitiveness in the tourist industry. Many are increasingly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change - from devastating storms to the threat of sea level rise.

Travel facilitation

Travel facilitation

Travel facilitation of tourist travel is closely interlinked with tourism development and can be a tool to foster increased demand and generate economic development, job creation and international understanding.

UNGA Sustainable Tourism Resolutions

UNGA Sustainable Tourism Resolutions

The UN Tourism is regularly preparing reports for the General Assembly of the United Nations providing updates on sustainable tourism policies both from UN Tourism member States and States Members of the United Nations, as well as relevant agencies and programmes of the United Nations system.

  • Latest News
  • Emergencies
  • Ask the Law
  • GN Fun Drive
  • Visa+Immigration
  • Phone+Internet
  • Reader Queries
  • Safety+Security
  • Banking & Insurance
  • Dubai Airshow
  • Corporate Tax
  • Top Destinations
  • Corporate News
  • Electronics
  • Home and Kitchen
  • Consumables
  • Saving and Investment
  • Budget Living
  • Expert Columns
  • Community Tips
  • Cryptocurrency
  • Cooking and Cuisines
  • Guide to Cooking
  • Art & People
  • Friday Partner
  • Daily Crossword
  • Word Search
  • Philippines
  • Australia-New Zealand
  • Corrections
  • From the Editors
  • Special Reports
  • Pregnancy & Baby
  • Learning & Play
  • Child Health
  • For Mums & Dads
  • UAE Success Stories
  • Live the Luxury
  • Culture and History
  • Staying Connected
  • Entertainment
  • Live Scores
  • Point Table
  • Top Scorers
  • Photos & Videos
  • Course Reviews
  • Learn to Play
  • South Indian
  • Arab Celebs
  • Health+Fitness
  • Gitex Global 2023
  • Best Of Bollywood
  • Special Features
  • Investing in the Future
  • Know Plan Go
  • Gratuity Calculator
  • Notifications
  • Prayer Times
  • Cinema Listing

Oman to invest Dh21.6 billion in its tourism sector

The ministry of heritage and tourism will invest in 360 projects, including infrastructure

An aerial view of Muscat city, at night.

Dubai: Oman’s Ministry of Heritage and Tourism is set to invest $5.9 billion (Dh21.6 billion) in its tourism sector as part of its national tourism strategy 2040.

The ministry said it will invest in 360 projects, including tourism-friendly initiatives, investments in infrastructure, and tourist attractions. The investments would also focus on the 2050 net-zero emissions target as part of the efforts to preserve heritage sites and monuments, Azzan bin Qassim al Busaidy, under-secretary of the Ministry of Heritage and Tourism, said.

He made this comments at the World Travel Week – Middle East, which kicked off in Oman on Sunday.

“We are achieving this through the introduction of tourism-friendly legislation and enterprise-driven initiatives, investments in infrastructure and attractions, capacity building, the creation of specialized investment zones for tourism development and more,” Busaidy added.

The director-general of tourism promotion said the ministry hosted the third edition of World Travel Week to give companies specialized in adventure and luxury tourism an opportunity to meet counterparts from other countries as well as arrange introductory visits to touristic sites in Muscat.

The heritage sites chosen for delegate visits included the Sultan Qaboos Mosque in Salalah, Al Hisn palace, Al Hisn market, Al Baleed archaeological park, the land of Frankincense museum, Samhan mountain, Wadi Darbat, the Samharam archaeological park, Taqah castle, and Kofan heritage hostel.

More From Oman

Lab work

Oman: New fees for health ministry services announced

Oman_Rain

Heavy rains in Oman: Holiday announced for some schools

Floods in Oman

Torrential rains wreak havoc in Oman

Oman_Rain

Oman braces for heavy rain, wind, hailstorms

Saudi Arabia announces start of Ramadan on Monday

Saudi Arabia announces start of Ramadan on Monday

Saudi Arabia arrests record 23,040 illegals in a week

Saudi Arabia arrests record 23,040 illegals in a week

Saudi Arabia urges Muslims to sight Ramadan crescent

Saudi Arabia urges Muslims to sight Ramadan crescent

8-year separation ends: An invitation reunites dad, son

8-year separation ends: An invitation reunites dad, son

Heavy rains in Oman: Holiday announced for some schools

Will Saudi Arabia scrap SR400 expat dependents' fee?

Cannon to celebrate contributors to mothers’ endowment, these are the year’s most hotly anticipated luxury cars, ‘i’m trying to keep my confidence as high as i can’, will zalatoris qualifies for open championship, bkr international welcomes trc pamco onboard.

Gulf News

Get Breaking News Alerts From Gulf News

We’ll send you latest news updates through the day. You can manage them any time by clicking on the notification icon.

heritage in tourism development

Dear Reader,

This section is about Living in UAE and essential information you cannot live without.

Register to read and get full access to gulfnews.com

By clicking below to sign up, you're agreeing to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Forgot password

IMAGES

  1. culture and heritage tourism development

    heritage in tourism development

  2. PPT

    heritage in tourism development

  3. Framework of heritage tourism development at Dymarki...

    heritage in tourism development

  4. PPT

    heritage in tourism development

  5. Preserving Cultural Heritage With Sustainable Tourism

    heritage in tourism development

  6. Different heritage tourism policies required in different tourism

    heritage in tourism development

COMMENTS

  1. Exploring the relationships between heritage tourism, sustainable

    Introduction. Tourism, heritage, and sustainable development go hand in hand. Socio-economically, tourism is considered a vital means of sustainable human development worldwide, and remains one of the world's top creators of employment and a lead income-generator, particularly for Global South countries [].For most low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), tourism is a key component of ...

  2. World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme

    World Heritage partnerships for conservation. Ensuring that World Heritage sites sustain their outstanding universal value is an increasingly challenging mission in today's complex world, where sites are vulnerable to the effects of uncontrolled urban development, unsustainable tourism practices, neglect, natural calamities, pollution, political instability, and conflict.

  3. People's perspectives on heritage conservation and tourism development

    The conservation of heritage and heritage-based tourism are interrelated activities in which the development in one can lead to the growth of the other and vice versa. In recent years, people have become increasingly aware of the importance of heritage and the necessity of its conservation. People's knowledge and preservation of their roots and emotional attachments to traditions and places ...

  4. Cultural Heritage and Tourism Development (English version)

    Cultural Heritage and Tourism Development (English version) Author: WTO. Published: 2001 Pages: 217. eISBN: 978-92-844-0484-1. Abstract: Tourism has grown at an accelerated pace over the last few decades and forecasts indicate an ever faster rate of growth into the new Millenium, with Asia and the Pacific becoming the second most important ...

  5. Tourism, heritage and cultural performance: Developing a modality of

    Heritage tourism, then, is a social phenomenon that allows the creation of heritage from below, ... Often, this mode of inquiry is identified as community-based approach or a community-based tourism development, where researchers stress the needs and desires of locals in the planning process (Iorio & Wall, 2012; ...

  6. Making sense of heritage tourism: Research trends in a maturing field

    Dallen J. Timothy is Professor of Community Resources and Development at Arizona State University and Senior Sustainability Scientist at the Julie Ann Wrigley Global Institute of Sustainability. He is also a visiting professor at universities in Italy, Spain and China. Professor Timothy is the editor of the Journal of Heritage Tourism and serves on the editorial boards of 20 additional ...

  7. Joint development of cultural heritage protection and tourism: the case

    The joint development of cultural heritage protection and tourism is an essential part of sustainable heritage tourism. Mount Lushan in China is such a site which in the past has had shortcomings in heritage protection and heritage tourism marketing. The present research addresses this issue by using digital technologies such as oblique aerial photography, 3D laser scanning technology, and 360 ...

  8. Exploring the Factors Influencing Heritage Tourism Development ...

    Exploring destinations that are of cultural importance is becoming popular among tourists of all age groups. The unique blend of culture and heritage associated with such sites make them particularly interesting destinations to visit. Despite being relatively new, the idea of World Heritage Sites as a brand is gaining popularity among tourists. UNESCO designates certain locations as World ...

  9. Sustainable Tourism, Culture and Heritage Promotion: Development

    It includes cultural heritage tourism management, how the digitalization of data has impacted and further developed tourism, World Heritage classification in urban tourism destinations, cultural tourism products, and experiences. ... It covers topics such as ecotourism and rural sustainable development, heritage in socioeconomic sustainable ...

  10. Cultural Heritage , Tourism and the UN Sustainable Development Goals

    With 1.3 billion international tourist arrivals in the world in 2018 (United Nations World Tourism Organization/UNWTO/, 2019), tourism is inevitably a very important factor of economic, social and environmental transformation of the world.It is one of the most important consumers of natural and cultural heritage, contributor to their safeguarding and protecting as well as their re-use.

  11. World Heritage and Sustainable Development

    World Heritage partnerships for conservation. Ensuring that World Heritage sites sustain their outstanding universal value is an increasingly challenging mission in today's complex world, where sites are vulnerable to the effects of uncontrolled urban development, unsustainable tourism practices, neglect, natural calamities, pollution, political instability, and conflict.

  12. Models of Heritage Tourism Sustainable Planning

    Number of studies have identified factors that have an impact on the demand for tourism—they have concluded that the cultural and natural heritage sites are the one of tourist's attractions (Lim 2006).In the process of economic development, many cultural and natural heritage sites were increasingly threatened by the traditional causes of decay and industrialization.

  13. Cultural heritage tourism as a catalyst for sustainable development

    Cultural heritage tourism development has evolved 112 riad hotels between 1997 and 2016 (Alami, El Khazzan, and Souab Citation 2017), or more than 150 boutique hotels located within the medina designated as a UNESCO historic site (Sutton Citation 2012). In addition, local inhabitants are actively invested in the rehabilitation processes to ...

  14. Full article: Rising tensions: heritage-tourism development and the

    Heritage management has become a significant issue in the development of policies impacting tourism in Southeast Asia (du Cros et al., Citation 2005) and scholars have argued sustainable tourism is the necessary foundation of long-term development in the region, which requires a mutual commitment from both federal government officials and local ...

  15. Heritage tourism

    Cultural heritage tourism is a form of non-business travel whereby tourists engage with the heritage, tangible and intangible, ... Sustainable development. Cultural heritage tourism has a number of objectives that must be met within the context of sustainable development. These are the conservation of cultural resources, accurate interpretation ...

  16. Heritage resources as a driver of cultural tourism development in

    Ethiopia is gifted with unique and marvelous heritages that include cultural landscapes; rock-cut churches, parks, paleo-anthropological sites, & historic cities. Hence, Ethiopia is identified, cherished, and has become renowned as a tourist destination across the world. Based on this view, assessing cultural tourism development is the target ...

  17. Heritage tourism destinations: preservation, communication and development

    Beginning with an overview of the subject, this book considers the conservation and revitalization of heritage destinations, as well as the role local communities have in supporting an attraction. It then discusses product development and communication around the world, using new techniques such as social media and examples from food tourism ...

  18. Heritage Tourism

    Each year, millions of travelers visit America's historic places. The National Trust for Historic Preservation defines heritage tourism as "traveling to experience the places, artifacts, and activities that authentically represent the stories and people of the past and present." A high percentage of domestic and international travelers participate in cultural and/or heritage activities ...

  19. Revitalizing Urban Heritage for Tourism Development: A Case Study of

    The heritage tourism sector is expanding at a more rapid rate than all other forms of tourism, especially in third-world countries. Visitors to cities seek to appreciate and enrich their understanding of cultural and historical aspects, making this sector a potentially effective tool for poverty alleviation and community economic development (UNWTO 2005) [4].

  20. PDF HERITAGE TOURISM Guidebook

    Heritage tourism is one of the fastest-growing segments of the tourism industry. It is widely believed that heritage tourism can successfully help preserve resources while boosting local economies by generating jobs, new businesses and tax dollars. However, little information exists about heritage tourism development, such as who should

  21. Sustainable development

    Sustainable tourism development requires the informed participation of all relevant stakeholders, as well as strong political leadership to ensure wide participation and consensus building. Achieving sustainable tourism is a continuous process and it requires constant monitoring of impacts, introducing the necessary preventive and/or corrective ...

  22. (PDF) Resident Attitudes toward Heritage Tourism Development

    Both practitioners and researchers are interested in the authenticity of tourism experiences when it comes to heritage tourism planning, marketing and management (Buchmann et al., 2010).

  23. (PDF) Exploring the Factors Influencing Heritage Tourism Development: A

    1. Introduction. Destination branding (DB) is defined as a communication form that includes identity. representations (as notified by a place's culture, history, economy, and people) and that ...

  24. Heritage Tourism and Cultural Identity in China: Challenges and

    for the development of heritage tourism as a contemporary concept. This coincided with a . period in which international politics were more stable, making it possible to travel to a greater .

  25. A Study on the Effect of Authenticity on Heritage Tourists' Mindful

    While heritage tourism has been explored widely in the tourism literature, there remains a need to further understand the antecedent variables that influence tourist experiences in such a context. This study applied mindfulness theory, investigating the effect of authenticity and mindfulness on the tourist experience and how the tourist experience influenced satisfaction and loyalty.

  26. Sustainable urban heritage development of Babagan Lasem Chinatown

    The development is carried out by utilizing the city's heritage as a source of entertainment and education. Babagan is one of the villages in Lasem Regency, Rembang Regency. Babagan is also a batik tourism city that has developed into a separate location that seeks to become a Chinatown with attention to sustainability aspects.

  27. Oman to invest Dh21.6 billion in its tourism sector

    The ministry of heritage and tourism will invest in 360 projects, including infrastructure Dubai: Oman's Ministry of Heritage and Tourism is set to invest $5.9 billion (Dh21.6 billion) in its ...