cultural heritage tourism development

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

Sustainable Tourism

UNESCO World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme

The UNESCO World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme represents a new approach based on dialogue and stakeholder cooperation where planning for tourism and heritage management is integrated at a destination level, the natural and cultural assets are valued and protected, and appropriate tourism developed.

World Heritage and tourism stakeholders share responsibility for conservation of our common cultural and natural heritage of Outstanding Universal Value and for sustainable development through appropriate tourism management.

Facilitate the management and development of sustainable tourism at World Heritage properties through fostering increased awareness, capacity and balanced participation of all stakeholders in order to protect the properties and their Outstanding Universal Value.

Focus Areas

Policy & Strategy

Sustainable tourism policy and strategy development.

Tools & Guidance

Sustainable tourism tools

Capacity Building

Capacity building activities.

Heritage Journeys

Creation of thematic routes to foster heritage based sustainable tourism development

A key goal of the UNESCO WH+ST Programme is to strengthen the enabling environment by advocating policies and frameworks that support sustainable tourism as an important vehicle for managing cultural and natural heritage. Developing strategies through broad stakeholder engagement for the planning, development and management of sustainable tourism that follows a destination approach and focuses on empowering local communities is central to UNESCO’s approach.

Supporting Sustainable Tourism Recovery

Enhancing capacity and resilience in 10 World Heritage communities

Supported by BMZ, and implemented by UNESCO in collaboration with GIZ, this 2 million euro tourism recovery project worked to enhance capacity building in local communities, improve resilience and safeguard heritage.

Policy orientations

Defining the relationship between world heritage and sustainable tourism

Based on the report of the international workshop on Advancing Sustainable Tourism at Natural and Cultural Heritage Sites (Mogao, China, September 2009), the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session adopted the policy orientations which define the relationship between World Heritage and sustainable tourism ( Decision 34 COM 5F.2 ).

World Heritage and Tourism in a Changing Climate

Providing an overview of the increasing vulnerability of World Heritage sites to climate change impacts and the potential implications for and of global tourism.

Sustainable Tourism Tools

Manage tourism efficiently, responsibly and sustainably based on the local context and needs

People Protecting Places is the public exchange platform for the World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme, providing education and information, encouraging support, engaging in social and community dialogue

The ' How-To ' guides offer direction and guidance to managers of World Heritage tourism destinations and other stakeholders to help identify the most suitable solutions for circumstances in their local environments and aid in developing general know-how.

English French Russian

Helping site managers and other tourism stakeholders to manage tourism more sustainably

Capacity Building in 4 Africa Nature Sites

A series of practical training and workshops were organized in four priority natural World Heritage sites in Africa (Lesotho, Malawi, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe) with the aim of providing capacity building tools and strategies for site managers to help them manage tourism at their sites more sustainably.

Learn more →

15 Pilot Sites in Nordic-Baltic Region

The project Towards a Nordic-Baltic pilot region for World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism (2012-2014) was initiated by the Nordic World Heritage Foundation (NWHF). With a practical approach, the project has contributed to tools for assessing and developing sustainable World Heritage tourism strategies with stakeholder involvement and cooperation.

Supporting Community-Based Management and Sustainable Tourism at World Heritage sites in South-East Asia

Entitled “The Power of Culture: Supporting Community-Based Management and Sustainable Tourism at World Heritage sites in South-East Asia", the UNESCO Office in Jakarta with the technical assistance of the UNESCO World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme and the support from the Government of Malaysia is spearheading the first regional effort in Southeast Asia to introduce a new approach to sustainable tourism management at World Heritage sites in Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia.

Cultural tourism is one of the largest and fastest-growing global tourism markets. Culture and creative industries are increasingly being used to promote destinations and enhance their competitiveness and attractiveness.

Many locations are now actively developing their cultural assets as a means of developing comparative advantages in an increasingly competitive tourism marketplace, and to create local distinctiveness in the face of globalization.

UNESCO will endeavour to create networks of key stakeholders to coordinate the destination management and marketing associated with the different heritage routes to promote and coordinate high-quality, unique experiences based on UNESCO recognized heritage. The goal is to promote sustainable development based on heritage values and create added tourist value for the sites.

UNESCO World Heritage Journeys of the EU

Creating heritage-based tourism that spurs investment in culture and the creative industries that are community-centered and offer sustainable and high-quality products that play on Europe's comparative advantages and diversity of its cultural assets.

World Heritage Journeys of Buddhist Heritage Sites

UNESCO is currently implementing a project to develop a unique Buddhist Heritage Route for Sustainable Tourism Development in South Asia with the support from the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA). South Asia is host to rich Buddhist heritage that is exemplified in the World Heritage properties across the region.

Programme Background

In 2011 UNESCO embarked on developing a new World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme.

The aim was to create an international framework for the cooperative and coordinated achievement of shared and sustainable outcomes related to tourism at World Heritage properties.

The preparatory work undertaken in developing the Programme responded to the decision 34 COM 5F.2 of the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session in Brasilia in 2010, which requested

“the World Heritage Centre to convene a new and inclusive programme on World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism, with a steering group comprising interested States Parties and other relevant stakeholders, and also requests the World Heritage Centre to outline the objectives and approach to the implementation of this programme".

The Steering Group was comprised of States Parties representatives from the six UNESCO Electoral Groups (Germany (I), Slovenia (II), Argentina (III), China (IV), Tanzania (Va), and Lebanon (Vb)), the Director of the World Heritage Centre, the Advisory Bodies (IUCN, ICOMOS and ICCROM), the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) and the Swiss Government as the donor agency.

The Government of Switzerland has provided financial support for specific actions to be undertaken by the Steering Group. To coordinate and support the process, the World Heritage Centre has formed a small Working Group with the support of the Nordic World Heritage Foundation, the Government of Switzerland and the mandated external consulting firm MartinJenkins.

The World Heritage Committee directed that the Programme take into account:

• the recommendations of the evaluation of the concluded tourism programme ( WHC-10/34.COM/INF.5F.3 )
• the policy orientation which defines the relationship between World Heritage and sustainable tourism that emerged from the workshop Advancing Sustainable Tourism at Natural and Cultural Heritage Sites (Mogao, China, September 2009) ( WHC-10/34.COM/INF.5F.1 )

Overarching and strategic processes that the new World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme will be aligned with include the Strategic Objectives of the World Heritage Convention (the five C's) ( Budapest Declaration 2002 ), the ongoing Reflections on the Future of the World Heritage Convention ( WHC-11/35.COM/12A ) and the Strategic Action Plan for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention 2012-2022 ( WHC-11/18.GA/11 ), the Relationship between the World Heritage Convention and Sustainable Development (WHC-10/34.COM/5D), the World Heritage Capacity Building Strategy ( WHC-10/34.COM/5D ), the Global Strategy for a Representative, Balanced and Credible World Heritage List (1994), and the Evaluation of the Global Strategy and PACT initiative ( WHC-11/18.GA/8 - 2011 ).

In addition, the programme development process has been enriched by an outreach to representatives from the main stakeholder groups including the tourism sector, national and local governments, site practitioners and local communities. The programme design was further developed at an Expert Meeting in Sils/Engadine, Switzerland October 2011. In this meeting over 40 experts from 23 countries, representing the relevant stakeholder groups, worked together to identify the overall strategic approach and a prioritised set of key objectives and activities. The proposed Programme was adopted by the World Heritage Committee in 2012 at its 36th session in St Petersburg, Russian Federation .

International Instruments

International Instruments Relating to Sustainable Development and Tourism.

Resolutions adopted by the United Nations, charters adopted by ICOMOS, decisions adopted by the World Heritage Committee, legal instruments adopted by UNESCO on heritage preservation.

Resolutions adopted by the United Nations

• Report by the Department of Economics and Social Affairs: Tourism and Sustainable Development: The Global Importance of Tourism at the United Nations’ Commission on Sustainable Development 7th Session (1999)
• Resolution A/RES/56/212 and the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism adopted by the United Nations World Tourism Organization (1999)

Charters adopted by ICOMOS

• The ICOMOS International Cultural Tourism Charter (1999)
• The ICOMOS Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites (2008)

Decisions adopted by the World Heritage Committee

• Decision (XVII.4-XVII.12) adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 25th Session in Helsinki (2001)
• Decision 33 COM 5A adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 30th Session in Seville (2009)
• Decision 34 COM 5F.2 adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 34th Session in Brasilia (2010)
• Decision 36 COM 5E adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 36th Session in Saint Petersburg (2012)

Legal instruments adopted by UNESCO on heritage preservation in chronological order

• Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (1970)
• The Recommendation for the Protection of Movable Cultural Property (1978)
• The Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore (1989)
• The Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural heritage (2001)
• The Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005)

Other instruments

• Other instruments OECD Tourism Trends and Policies 2012 (French forthcoming)
• Programme on Sustainable Consumption and Production (In English)
• Siem Reap Declaration on Tourism and Culture 2015 – Building a New Partnership Model

Decisions / Resolutions (5)

The World Heritage Committee,

• Having examined Document WHC/18/42.COM/5A,
• Recalling Decision 41 COM 5A adopted at its 41st session (Krakow, 2017) and Decision 40 COM 5D adopted at its 40th session (Istanbul/UNESCO, 2016), General:
• Takes note with appreciation of the activities undertaken by the World Heritage Centre over the past year in pursuit of the Expected Result to ensure that “tangible heritage is identified, protected, monitored and sustainably managed by Member States, in particular through the effective implementation of the 1972 Convention ”, and the five strategic objectives as presented in Document WHC/18/42.COM/5A; 
• Welcomes the proactive role of the Secretariat for enhancing synergies between the World Heritage Convention and the other Culture and Biodiversity-related Conventions, particularly the integration of relevant synergies aspects in the revised Periodic Reporting Format and the launch of a synergy-related web page on the Centre’s website;
• Also welcomes the increased collaboration among the Biodiversity-related Conventions through the Biodiversity Liaison Group and focused activities, including workshops, joint statements and awareness-raising;
• Takes note of the Thematic studies on the recognition of associative values using World Heritage criterion (vi) and on interpretation of sites of memory, funded respectively by Germany and the Republic of Korea and encourages all States Parties to take on board their findings and recommendations, in the framework of the identification of sites, as well as management and interpretation of World Heritage properties;
• Noting the discussion paper by ICOMOS on Evaluations of World Heritage Nominations related to Sites Associated with Memories of Recent Conflicts, decides to convene an Expert Meeting on sites associated with memories of recent conflicts to allow for both philosophical and practical reflections on the nature of memorialization, the value of evolving memories, the inter-relationship between material and immaterial attributes in relation to memory, and the issue of stakeholder consultation; and to develop guidance on whether and how these sites might relate to the purpose and scope of the World Heritage Convention , provided that extra-budgetary funding is available and invites the States Parties to contribute financially to this end;
• Also invites the States Parties to support the activities carried out by the World Heritage Centre for the implementation of the Convention ;
• Requests the World Heritage Centre to present, at its 43rd session, a report on its activities. Thematic Programmes:
• Welcomes  the progress report on the implementation of the World Heritage Thematic Programmes and Initiatives,  notes  their important contribution towards implementation of the Global Strategy for representative World Heritage List, and  thanks  all States Parties, donors and other organizations for having contributed to achieving their objectives;
• Acknowledges  the results achieved by the World Heritage Cities Programme and calls States Parties and other stakeholders to provide human and financial resources ensuring the continuation of this Programme in view of its crucial importance for the conservation of the urban heritage inscribed on the World Heritage List, for the implementation of the Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape and its contribution to achieving the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals related to cities as well as for its contribution to the preparation of the New Urban Agenda, and further thanks to China and Croatia for their support for the implementation of the Programme;
• Also acknowledges the results achieved of the World Heritage Marine Programme, also thanks Flanders, France and the Annenberg Foundation for their support, notes the increased focus of the Programme on a global managers network, climate change adaptation strategies and sustainable fisheries, and  invites  States Parties, the World Heritage Centre and other stakeholders to continue to provide human and financial resources to support for the implementation of the Programme;
• Further acknowledges the results achieved in the implementation of the World Heritage Sustainable Tourism Programme, in particular the development of the Sustainable Tourism and Visitor Management Assessment tool and encourages States Parties to participate in the pilot testing of the tool, expresses  appreciation for the funding provided by the European Commission and  further thanks the Republic of Korea, Norway, and Seabourn Cruise Line for their support in the implementation of the Programme’’s activities;
• Further notes the progress in the implementation of the Small Island Developing States Programme, its importance for a representative, credible and balanced World Heritage List and building capacity of site managers and stakeholders to implement the World Heritage Convention , thanks furthermore Japan and the Netherlands for their support as well as the International Centre on Space Technology for Natural and Cultural Heritage (HIST) and  the World Heritage Institute of Training & Research for the Asia & the Pacific Region (WHITRAP) as Category 2 Centres for their technical and financial supports and also requests the States Parties and other stakeholders to continue to provide human, financial and technical resources for the implementation of the Programme;
• Takes note of the activities implemented jointly by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) and ICOMOS under the institutional guidance of the World Heritage Centre, in line with its Decision 40 COM 5D, further requests the World Heritage Centre to disseminate among the States Parties the second volume of the IAU/ICOMOS Thematic Study on Astronomical Heritage and renames this initiative as Initiative on Heritage of Astronomy, Science and Technology;
• Also takes note of the progress report on the Initiative on Heritage of Religious Interest, endorses the recommendations of the Thematic Expert Consultation meetings focused on Mediterranean and South-Eastern Europe (UNESCO, 2016), Asia-Pacific (Thailand, 2017) and Eastern Europe (Armenia, 2018), thanks the States Parties for their generous contribution and reiterates its invitation to States Parties and other stakeholders to continue to support this Initiative, as well as its associated Marketplace projects developed by the World Heritage Centre;
• Takes note of the activities implemented by CRATerre in the framework of the World Heritage Earthen Architecture Programme, under the overall institutional guidance of the World Heritage Centre, and of the lines of action proposed for the future, if funding is available;
• Invites  States Parties, international organizations and donors to contribute financially to the Thematic Programmes and Initiatives as the implementation of thematic priorities is no longer feasible without extra-budgetary funding;
• Requests furthermore  the World Heritage Centre to submit an updated result-based report on Thematic Programmes and Initiatives, under Item 5A: Report of the World Heritage Centre on its activities, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 44th session in 2020.

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

2.  Recalling Decision 34 COM 5F.2 adopted at its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010),

3.  Welcomes the finalization of the new and inclusive Programme on World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism and notes with appreciation the participatory process for its development, objectives and approach towards implementation;

4.  Also welcomes the contribution of the Steering Group comprised of States Parties representatives from the UNESCO Electoral Groups, the World Heritage Centre, the Advisory Bodies (IUCN, ICOMOS, ICCROM), Switzerland and the United Nations World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) in the elaboration of the Programme;

5.   Thanks the Government of Switzerland, the United Nations Foundation and the Nordic World Heritage Foundation for their technical and financial support to the elaboration of the Programme;

6.   Notes with appreciation the contribution provided by the States Parties and other consulted stakeholders during the consultation phase of the Programme;

7.   Takes note of the results of the Expert Meeting in Sils/Engadin (Switzerland), from 18 to 22 October 2011 contributing to the Programme, and further thanks the Government of Switzerland for hosting the Expert Meeting;

8.   Adopts the World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme;

9.   Requests the World Heritage Centre to refine the Draft Action Plan 2013-2015 in an Annex to the present document and to implement the Programme with a Steering  Group comprised of representatives of the UNESCO Electoral Groups, donor agencies, the Advisory Bodies, UNWTO and in collaboration with interested stakeholders;

10.   Notes that financial resources for the coordination and implementation of the Programme do not exist and also requests States Parties to support the implementation of the World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme;

11.  Further requests the World Heritage Centre to report biennially on the progress of the implementation of the Programme;

12.   Notes with appreciation the launch of the Programme foreseen at the 40th Anniversary of the World Heritage Convention event in Kyoto, Japan, in November 2012

1. Having examined Document WHC-10/34.COM/INF.5F.1 and WHC-10/34.COM/INF.5F.3,

2. Highlighting that the global tourism sector is large and rapidly growing, is diverse and dynamic in its business models and structures, and the relationship between World Heritage and tourism is two way: tourism, if managed well, offers benefits to World Heritage properties and can contribute to cross-cultural exchange but, if not managed well, poses challenges to these properties and recognizing the increasing challenges and opportunities relating to tourism;

3. Expresses its appreciation to the States Parties of Australia, China, France, India, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, and to the United Nations Foundation and the Nordic World Heritage Foundation for the financial and technical support to the World Heritage Tourism Programme since its establishment in 2001;

4. Welcomes the report of the international workshop on Advancing Sustainable Tourism at Natural and Cultural Heritage Sites (Mogao, China, September 2009) and adopts the policy orientation which defines the relationship between World Heritage and sustainable tourism ( Attachment A );

5. Takes note of the evaluation of the World Heritage Tourism Programme by the UN Foundation, and encourages the World Heritage Centre to take fully into account the eight programme elements recommended in the draft final report in any future work on tourism ( Attachment B );

6. Decides to conclude the World Heritage Tourism Programme and requests the World Heritage Centre to convene a new and inclusive programme on World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism, with a steering group comprising interested States Parties and other relevant stakeholders, and also requests the World Heritage Centre to outline the objectives and approach to implementation of this programme, drawing on the directions established in the reports identified in Paragraphs 4 and 5 above, for consideration at the 35th session of the World Heritage Committee (2011);

7. Also welcomes the offer of the Government of Switzerland to provide financial and technical support to specific activities supporting the steering group; further welcomes the offer of the Governments of Sweden, Norway and Denmark to organize a Nordic-Baltic regional workshop in Visby, Gotland, Sweden in October 2010 on World Heritage and sustainable tourism; and also encourages States Parties to support the new programme on World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism including through regional events and the publication of materials identifying good practices;

8. Based upon the experience gained under the World Heritage Convention of issues related to tourism, invites the Director General of UNESCO to consider the feasibility of a Recommendation on the relationship between heritage conservation and sustainable tourism. 

Attachment A

Recommendations of the international workshop

on Advancing Sustainable Tourism at Natural and Cultural Heritage Sites  

Policy orientations: defining the relationship between World Heritage and tourism

1. The tourism sector

The global tourism sector is large and rapidly growing, is diverse and dynamic in its business models and structures.

Tourists/visitors are diverse in terms of cultural background, interests, behaviour, economy, impact, awareness and expectations of World Heritage.

There is no one single way for the World Heritage Convention , or World Heritage properties, to engage with the tourism sector or with tourists/visitors.

2. The relationship between World Heritage and tourism

The relationship between World Heritage and tourism is two-way:

a. World Heritage offers tourists/visitors and the tourism sector destinations

b. Tourism offers World Heritage the ability to meet the requirement in the Convention to 'present' World Heritage properties, and also a means to realise community and economic benefits through sustainable use.

Tourism is critical for World Heritage:

a. For States Parties and their individual properties,

i. to meet the requirement in the Convention to 'present' World Heritage

ii. to realise community and economic benefits

b. For the World Heritage Convention as a whole, as the means by which World Heritage properties are experienced by visitors travelling nationally and internationally

c. As a major means by which the performance of World Heritage properties, and therefore the standing of the Convention , is judged,

i. many World Heritage properties do not identify themselves as such, or do not adequately present their Outstanding Universal Value

ii. it would be beneficial to develop indicators of the quality of presentation, and the representation of the World Heritage brand

d. As a credibility issue in relation to: i. the potential for tourism infrastructure to damage Outstanding Universal Value

i. the threat that World Heritage properties may be unsustainably managed in relation to their adjoining communities

ii. sustaining the conservation objectives of the Convention whilst engaging with economic development

iii. realistic aspirations that World Heritage can attract tourism.

World Heritage is a major resource for the tourism sector:

a. Almost all individual World Heritage properties are significant tourism destinations

b. The World Heritage brand can attract tourists/visitors,

i. the World Heritage brand has more impact upon tourism to lesser known properties than to iconic properties.

Tourism, if managed well, offers benefits to World Heritage properties:

a. to meet the requirement in Article 4 of the Convention to present World Heritage to current and future generations

b. to realise economic benefits.

Tourism, if not managed well, poses threats to World Heritage properties.

3. The responses of World Heritage to tourism

The impact of tourism, and the management response, is different for each World Heritage property: World Heritage properties have many options to manage the impacts of tourism.

The management responses of World Heritage properties need to:

a. work closely with the tourism sector

b. be informed by the experiences of tourists/visitors to the visitation of the property

c. include local communities in the planning and management of all aspects of properties, including tourism.

While there are many excellent examples of World Heritage properties successfully managing their relationship to tourism, it is also clear that many properties could improve:

a. the prevention and management of tourism threats and impacts

b. their relationship to the tourism sector inside and outside the property

c. their interaction with local communities inside and outside the property

d. their presentation of Outstanding Universal Value and focus upon the experience of tourists/visitors.

a. be based on the protection and conservation of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property, and its effective and authentic presentation

b. work closely with the tourism sector

c. be informed by the experiences of tourists/visitors to the visitation of the property

d. to include local communities in the planning and management of all aspects of properties, including tourism.

4. Responsibilities of different actors in relation to World Heritage and tourism

The World Heritage Convention (World Heritage Committee, World Heritage Centre, Advisory Bodies):

a. set frameworks and policy approaches

b. confirm that properties have adequate mechanisms to address tourism before they are inscribed on the World Heritage List

i. develop guidance on the expectations to be include in management plans

c. monitor the impact upon OUV of tourism activities at inscribed sites, including through indicators for state of conservation reporting

d. cooperate with other international organisations to enable:

i. other international organisations to integrate World Heritage considerations in their programs

ii. all parties involved in World Heritage to learn from the activities of other international organisations

e. assist State Parties and sites to access support and advice on good practices

f. reward best practice examples of World Heritage properties and businesses within the tourist/visitor sector

g. develop guidance on the use of the World Heritage emblem as part of site branding.

Individual States Parties:

a. develop national policies for protection

b. develop national policies for promotion

c. engage with their sites to provide and enable support, and to ensure that the promotion and the tourism objectives respect Outstanding Universal Value and are appropriate and sustainable

d. ensure that individual World Heritage properties within their territory do not have their OUV negatively affected by tourism.

Individual property managers:

a. manage the impact of tourism upon the OUV of properties

i. common tools at properties include fees, charges, schedules of opening and restrictions on access

b. lead onsite presentation and provide meaningful visitor experiences

c. work with the tourist/visitor sector, and be aware of the needs and experiences of tourists/visitors, to best protect the property

i. the best point of engagement between the World Heritage Convention and the tourism sector as a whole is at the direct site level, or within countries

d. engage with communities and business on conservation and development.

Tourism sector:

a. work with World Heritage property managers to help protect Outstanding Universal Value

b. recognize and engage in shared responsibility to sustain World Heritage properties as tourism resources

c. work on authentic presentation and quality experiences.

Individual tourists/visitors with the assistance of World Heritage property managers and the tourism sector, can be helped to appreciate and protect the OUV of World Heritage properties.  

Attachment B

Programme elements recommended by the Draft Final Report of the Evaluation of the World Heritage Tourism Programme by the UN Foundation:

1. Adopt and disseminate standards and principles relating to sustainable tourism at World Heritage sites;

 2. Support the incorporation of appropriate tourism management into the workings of the Convention ;

 3. Collation of evidence to support sustainable tourism programme design, and to support targeting;

 4. Contribution of a World Heritage perspective to cross agency sustainable tourism policy initiatives;

 5. Strategic support for the dissemination of lessons learned;

 6. Strategic support for the development of training and guidance materials for national policy agencies and site managers;

 7. Provision of advice on the cost benefit impact of World Heritage inscription;

 8. Provision of advice on UNESCO World Heritage branding.

1. Having examined Documents WHC-09/33.COM/5A, WHC- 09/33.COM/INF.5A.1, WHC-09/33.COM/INF.5A.2, and WHC-09/33.COM/INF.5A.3 ,

2. Recalling Decision 32 COM 5 adopted at its 32nd session (Quebec City, 2008),

3. Takes note with appreciation of the activities undertaken by the World Heritage Centre over the past year in pursuit of the Committee's five Strategic Objectives;

4. Takes also note of the findings of the study undertaken by UNESCO's Internal Oversight Service on the mapping of the workload of the World Heritage Centre presented in Document WHC-09/33.COM/INF.5A.3;

5. Notes with satisfaction that the World Heritage Centre is working with the secretariats of intergovernmental committees of related conventions such as the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage , and the Convention for the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage-2001 and recommends that such cooperation be encouraged as this would further strengthen the work of the Centre;

6. Requests the World Heritage Centre to prepare a document on the World Heritage Convention and its cooperation and exchange with other conventions and programmes in the field of cultural heritage for discussion at the 34th session of the World Heritage Committee (2010);

7. Also requests the World Heritage Centre, in future reports on activities undertaken, to further strengthen the information and analysis available to States Parties by:

a) Retaining the current format to report activities and including an update on progress with implementing the Committee's decisions,

b) Describing the criteria by which the World Heritage Centre makes decisions as to which activities under the Convention it undertakes,

c) And including, on a discretionary basis, analysis of strategic issues and new directions;

8. Further requests the World Heritage Centre to produce, on an experimental basis, an indexed audio verbatim recording of the proceedings of the 33rd Session in addition to the standard summary records (as produced since the 26th session of the World Heritage Committee);

9. Notes the outline provided by the World Heritage Centre of its roles and the roles of the Advisory Bodies and agrees that this topic be further discussed at the 34th session of the Committee in 2010 under a separate agenda item;

10. Requests furthermore the World Heritage Centre to outline the forward direction of the World Heritage thematic programmes and initiatives, to enable an understanding of how these themes connect with and integrate into general programmes, and how they might be resourced;

11. Notes that the Centre already proactively engages women in its Heritage Programmes in Asia, Africa and the Caribbean as part of its gender balance policy and the provision of equal opportunity to all, and recommends that gender balance and community involvement be prioritized in the Centre's programmes;

12. Adopts the World Heritage Thematic Programme on Prehistory presented in Annex 1 of document WHC-09/33.COM/5A ;

13. Requests the World Heritage Centre to reconsider the term "prehistory", to better recognize the continuing cultures of indigenous communities, to ensure global representation in the identification and conservation of related properties, and to present a report on progress in developing an Action Plan on Prehistory and World Heritage at its 34th session in 2010;

14. Notes with concern the ongoing destruction of some of these fragile sites, including the recent destruction of the Rock Art sites of Tardrat Acacus in Libya, and requests the State Party to take immediate action and other measures as necessary to address the problem in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and to invite a joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS mission;

15. Expresses its gratitude to the Governments of Bahrain, South Africa and Spain for the financial and technical support for the various international scientific encounters, and recognizes the proposal of the Government of Spain in establishing a centre for the research of Prehistory;

16. Recalling the Decision of the World Heritage Committee 31 COM.21C to carry out a programme of sustainable development concerning the conservation of earthen architecture, thanks the Governments of Italy and France for their support of the programme on earthen architecture in Africa and the Arab States in particular, and requests the potential financial donors and the States Parties to support the implementation of activities and further requests the World Heritage Centre to submit a progress report at its 35th session in 2011;

17. Takes note of the progress report on the World Heritage Tourism Programme;

18. Thanks the Governments of Australia, China, France, India, Switzerland and United Kingdom, who have worked in close collaboration with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, the World Tourism Organization and other partners, for contributing to the Initiative of Sustainable Tourism;

19. Expresses its gratitude to the Governments of Australia and China for the organization of a workshop on sustainable tourism at the World Heritage site, Mogao Caves, China, in September-October 2009 and requests that the following elements be submitted to the Committee for examination at its 34th session in 2010:

a) A report on the workshop,

b) The subsequent recommendations of the workshop regarding the adoption of best practices policy guidance, and concerning the changes proposed for the Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention ,

c) A document concerning the progress of the World Heritage Programme on Tourism;

20. Finally requests the Director of the World Heritage Centre to identify supplementary sources of funding to put into place a sufficient number of staff and resources at the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in order to continue to efficiently contribute to the resolution of problems related to World Heritage conservation.

XVII.8 The Secretariat provided the following justifications for the selection: 

• Tourism - growing threats on World Heritage sites from tourism which, if sustainably managed could offer socio-economic development opportunities;
• Forests - since close to 60 of the natural sites on the World Heritage List are forests and that the lessons being learned from the large-scale UNESCO-UN Foundation projects in the tropical forest sites in the Democratic Republic of the Congo can serve as case studies to enrich the programme;
• Cities - since close to 200 of the cultural sites on the List are historic centres or entire cities, and because 20% of the Fund's international assistance have served to address the challenge of urban heritage conservation;
• Earthen structures - since some 30 of the cultural sites on the List are included in this category, and due to the particularity of conservation of earthen heritage, and threats.

XVII.10 The Committee expressed its appreciation for the clarity of the presentation and the justifications provided. Indicating strong support for the overall programming approach, the Committee however indicated the need for the programme to respond to the priorities established by the Committee and to create strong links with the results of the Global Strategy actions and Periodic Reporting. The Committee approved the four proposed themes of the programmes in this first series of initiatives and authorized the Centre to proceed in their 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

8091 Accesses

31 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.

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 .

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.

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).

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.

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 .

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

• 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.

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.

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 ).

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 .

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 ).

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 ).

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.

Through our community-based approach, we design tourism experiences to support tradition-bearers and to ensure their communities benefit from having their cultural heritage shared with the world.

The Cultural Heritage Tourism Initiative uses research and presentation methods from the Smithsonian Folklife Festival to curate engaging, inclusive, and sustainable community-based tourism experiences. We help hosts convey their heritage by working together to create extraordinary experiences—both immersive and unforgettable—instilling a sense of place and leaving travelers with enduring memories.

Our process prioritizes an equitable relationship in order to ensure communities directly benefit from sharing their cultural heritage worldwide. Our work in tourism leverages other synergistic initiatives, such as the Center’s work with artisans and the Festival. Activities include cultural heritage documentation, participatory community engagement, destination assessment and asset inventory, experience design and product development, workshops and trainings, enterprise development, market access and linkages, policy reform, and strategic planning.

UPLIFT North Carolina

The Center’s partnership with UPLIFT North Carolina provides participatory workshops and mentorship, working with partners to support and develop festivals and cultural heritage tourism experiences that benefit both visitors and communities. Our partnership is focused on strengthening rural economies through bolstering quality tourism experiences. The two-year project began in July 2023.

UPLIFT supports tourism through community-driven efforts in rural North Carolina. This team works regionally—across county borders—to support local tourism leaders and practitioners in realizing their vision for tourism in their community. Their work supports natural, recreational, cultural, agricultural, culinary, built, and additional areas of tourism.

At the nexus of North Africa, the Middle East, and Europe, Tunisia is a confluence of history and culture. Thousands of archaeological and cultural sites, including UNESCO-recognized Carthage, El Jem, and Kairouan, are a visual testament to its diverse heritage. Tunisia’s living culture is also vibrant, from medinas bustling with artisanal production to the traditional practices of Indigenous Amazigh communities. However, despite this abundance of cultural heritage, tourists visiting Tunisia seldom leave its low-cost Mediterranean beach resorts.

In 2021, we launched a partnership with the USAID Visit Tunisia Activity to research and document Tunisia’s living culture and develop equitable and sustainable models of community-based cultural heritage tourism. Our work includes training, mentorship, and exchange for local festival organizers and research-based product development to share Tunisia’s living culture with visitors and the world.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Situated in southeastern Europe, where Eastern and Western cultures meet, Bosnia and Herzegovina has a rich history of religious, natural, and cultural diversity. We partnered with USAID Turizam to highlight the contemporary cultural life of Bosnia and Herzegovina—experienced through music, dance, food, and craft. In 2021, we led workshops for more than a hundred cultural festival organizers, sharing best practice and case studies from the Smithsonian Folklife Festival. In 2022, we led workshops for more than a hundred tourism enterprises to share our approach to community-centered, research-based cultural heritage tourism product development, incorporating cultural practices into tourism experiences that promote cultural sustainability and exchange.

Prior to 2015, most visitors to Armenia stayed in the capital and ventured out only to visit iconic natural landscapes and built heritage sites. This model limited interaction and exchange between visitors and local people and concentrated tourism spending in the capital, Yerevan. With USAID Armenia, we co-created the My Armenia Cultural Heritage Tourism Program, a seven-year program that piloted a new, community-centered, and research-based approach to experiential tourism. The program concluded in December 2021, but the impact remains—a radically different approach to tourism and more than 150 resilient tourism and artisan enterprises.

By Rachel Barton

Layers of Armenia’s fascinating cultural heritage are embedded in the country’s pristine landscapes, which are dotted with ancient cave dwellings, mountain monasteries, fortresses, and Armenian  khatchkars  (cross-stones).

By Jackie Flanagan Pangelinan

Vahagn Hambardzumyan and Zara Gasparyan are the husband-and-wife team behind Sisian Ceramics. Founded in 2010, the studio they named for their hometown is located in Armenia’s Syunik Province.

By Tony Cohn

The oldest known evidence of winemaking was discovered in the Areni-1 cave complex. It’s this very site in southern Armenia that has had a major impact on how archeologists understand humanity’s earliest civilizations.

By Rebecca Wall

What makes a wine Armenian? Irina Ghaplanyan and Vahe Keushguerian emphasize the unique grape varietals indigenous to Armenia and the country’s exceptional  terroir .

By Halle Butvin

In October 2018, the My Armenian program hosted the second annual My Handmade Armenia Festival in Yerevan and celebrated the official launch of FestivAr Association of Armenian Festivals.

By Yuri Horowitz

In August 2020, Yerevan Magazine printed a special issue featuring opportunities to travel within Armenia, based on My Armenia research and collaborations.

Donors & Local Partners

• Ferring Pharmaceuticals USAID

Local Partners

• Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia Teryan Cultural Center

Email powered by MailChimp ( Privacy Policy , Terms of Use )

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Cultural Heritage Tourism: Five Steps for Success and Sustainability

Cultural Heritage Tourism: Five Steps for Success and Sustainability has a clear focus on the United States and reads as a how-to manual for cultural heritage tourism development. It provides very clear step-by-step instructions for and advice related to all steps of the heritage tourism planning process, and the addition of descriptive case studies at the end of each chapter which highlight the discussed aspects are particularly useful.

Related Papers

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

Cheryl Hargrove

Ellen McHale

International Journal of Tourism Research

Hilary du Cros

Sumira Bhatia

Chris Landorf

This paper considers the relationship between heritage tourism and sustainable development, with special reference to World Heritage Sites (WHSs). It notes that while WHS status is not necessarily linked to tourism growth, all WHSs must now develop and implement a management plan to mitigate tourism impacts and sustain site significance. The paper explores the concept of sustainable heritage tourism and identifies two key principles of sustainable practice – a planning process that is long term and holistic, and multiple stakeholder participation in that planning process. Qualitative content analysis is used to determine the extent to which these principles have been integrated into the tourism planning process at six WHSs. The study found that a formal goal-oriented planning process was in evidence at all six sites. However, the process lacked a comprehensive and holistic approach to the wider issues of sustainable development, and genuine engagement with local community stakeholders.

The ESACH Quarterly

Rebecca Friedel Juan

Sustainability has become a buzzword; everyone strives to be sustainable in some way or another nowadays. The United Nations has made it their overarching goal to lead the world to sustainability in all aspects of life. This, of course, includes those aspects of life related to heritage management and, ultimately, the tourism industry. Of issues related to sustainable heritage management and tourism, perhaps most salient is the fact that adjacent, indigenous, and vulnerable communities are often excluded from tourism development and because of tourism development.

Rui Alexandre Castanho

This book discusses the the integration between tourism and heritage and strategies to achieve sustainability in the tourism sector. The book adds innovative insights into the development of new practices solving challenges of sustainability in this sector and promoting responsible tourism. The book in hands also offers solutions and discusses sustainable tourism environment, social and economic impacts of tourism, and policies and mechanisms for heritage preservation. The primary audience of this book will be scholars, planners, architects, and stakeholders interested in sustainable tourism. This book is a culmination of selected research papers from IEREK’s third edition of the International Conference on Cultural Sustainable Tourism (CST) held online in collaboration with the University of Maya, Portugal (2021).

Brian Garrod

This article discusses the ®ndings of a Delphi survey of owners and managers of historic properties, of®cers of heritage-based organizations, consultants, and academics from across the United Kingdom. The purpose of the study was to investigate the major constraints and imperatives relating to the long-term management of built heritage attractions. Three related issues were assessed: the fundamental mission of heritage attractions; the factors which impact upon decisions relating to charging for tourist entry; and the perceptions of heritage managers as to the respective roles of such attractions and public agencies in funding tourism management and heritage conservation programs. The paper then considers the signi®cance of these issues in assessing potential strategies for moving heritage tourism toward sustainability. Re Âsume Â: La gestion du tourisme patrimonial. Cet article discute des re Âsultats d'une enque Ãte Delphi parmi des proprie Âtaires et ge Ârants des proprie Âte Âs historiques, des comite Âs directeurs d'organisations patrimoniales, des consultants et des universitaires de partout dans le Royaume-Uni. L'objet de l'e Âtude e Âtait d'examiner les contraintes et impe Âratifs lie Âs a Á la gestion a Á long terme des attractions patrimoniales construites. On e Âvalue trois questions apparente Âes: la mission fondamentale des attractions patrimoniales, les facteurs qui in¯uent sur la tari®cation et les perceptions des ge Ârants au sujet du ro Ãle des attractions et des organismes gouvernementaux pour le ®nancement de la gestion du tourisme et des programmes de sauvegarde. On conside Áre ensuite l'importance de ces questions pour e Âvaluer des strate Âgies e Âventuelles pour faire progresser le tourisme patrimonial vers la durabilite Â.

Tourism hospitality management

Milena Filipova

Tourism as a world culture phenomenon furthers the discovery of various aspects and manifestations of culture. The cultural tourism allows the familiarization with and illustration of the historical development of various civilizations throughout the centuries and the achievements in the various fields of human activities. The tourist travel activates cognitive, informative, communicational and evaluating functions of perception of reality at the place of destination. Each travel brings a new knowledge and a touch to an alien social cultural environment; each tourist, even at a subconscious level, performs a comparative analysis of the alien and of their own culture. Cultural tourism furthers the knowledge, study and comparison of the cultural heritage. The more unique, authentic and valuable it is, the greater is the power of attraction of the corresponding tourism destination. Apart and independent from the expert’s evaluation of the cultural heritage qualities and features, its v...

RELATED PAPERS

Economía y Administración (E&A)

Mohammad Eshraghian

Roger Pullin

Joachim Höhle

Ukrainian journal of cardiovascular surgery

Dmytro Babliak

Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging

Vikash Kumar

silvia sterzi

Revista Peruana de Biología

Caroline S Chaboo

Maria Mont Algamasilla

Educação (UFSM)

ken zeichner

Ali arslanoğlu

Applied Intelligence

Hoang Bui Viet

Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata

Nikos T. Papadopoulos

Rosario Victoria Chumpitaz Aguirre

American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology

Olivier Fahy

International Journal of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology

Suresh Dange

Stem Cell Research &amp; Therapy

hector Gonzalez

DergiPark (Istanbul University)

美国全套办理佐治亚理工学院毕业证 学历文凭各种证书制作

Scientific Reports

Amiel Ishaaya

Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi

Rabia YİLAR

Ian J Martins

Tissue Engineering Part A

Yoshiki Sawa

Elsa Mendizabal

HEALTH SCIENCES AND DISEASES

YAOUBA DJIBRILLA

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

UN Tourism | Bringing the world closer

• 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

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

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

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

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. 

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

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 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 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

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.

• China Daily PDF
• China Daily E-paper

Integration of culture, tourism proves lucrative

Vigorous growth in traveler numbers, spending seen throughout the nation.

The integration of culture and tourism has been playing an increasingly important role in spurring the development of China's tourism sector since the country unveiled the Outline of the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-25) for National Economic and Social Development in 2021.

Related proposals, such as those for preserving and utilizing intangible cultural heritage through tourism and using high-tech to help tourists better understand history, have been raised over the past two years at the annual meetings of China's top legislative and political advisory bodies.

Through the integration of culture and tourism, Yu Wulin, a deputy to the National People's Congress, has led efforts to build a prosperous tourism industry in his village in Yunnan province.

Yu, who is from Laomudeng, a village in the Nujiang Lisu autonomous prefecture, has set up a local ethnic cultural exhibition at his rural inn, displaying traditional farming tools.

He has also helped to arrange local cultural performances which have attracted many tourists to the village.

"I'll explore the further development of intangible cultural heritage and how it can create a more prosperous tourism sector and bring my fellow villagers a better life," Yu said.

Travelers' numbers and spending have experienced vigorous growth, as shown in many recent provincial government work reports.

"High-level recovery and high-quality development have become the most prominent features of the tourism industry this year," Du Jiang, vice-minister of culture and tourism, said at the China Tourism Industry Development Annual Conference in December.

Du attributed this to the resilience, potential and vitality of the economy, continuous reform and innovation in the industry, and the deep integration of culture and tourism.

Guizhou province in southwestern China has promoted the accelerated recovery of its tourism sector through multiple approaches, including the organization of the Rongjiang Village Super League, which became a national sensation.

At least 1 million people attended the soccer matches in person and more than 50 million watched online in three months, according to local authorities.

Videos and live broadcasts of the event went viral, having received more than 30 billion clicks.

Last year, the province saw its traveler numbers and total tourism revenue recover to 113 percent and 119 percent of the levels in 2019, before the pandemic hit.

In northern Shaanxi province, new cultural and tourism formats were created last year, including two national-level tourist leisure districts, two national immersive cultural and tourism demonstration projects, and three national tourism performances.

These initiatives have spurred the development of Shaanxi's cultural and tourism industries. The province received 109 million traveler visits last year, up 271.9 percent year-on-year.

During the recently concluded Spring Festival, the authorities in Beijing arranged diverse cultural activities, such as temple fairs and themed exhibitions, which received a positive market feedback.

The number of these events exceeded 2,100, which was 300 percent more than the figure for the Spring Festival holiday in 2019.

These played an important role in stirring up the public's travel enthusiasm during the eight-day holiday, said a senior official from the Beijing Municipal Bureau of Culture and Tourism.

The capital city received a total of 17.5 million traveler visits during the festival, up 25.7 percent over the same holiday period in 2019, with total tourism income increasing by 27.4 percent over 2019, the bureau reported.

In particular, traditional folk arts made their presence felt at the major temple fairs across Beijing, attracting a total of 5.2 million visits.

Tang Yan drew a great deal of attention with her seven-day display of delicate Beijing Juanren at the Ditan temple fair, one of the most popular of its kind.

"Visitors lay siege to our booth, making inquiries and buying our art products," Tang said, taking great pleasure in the popularity of her beloved traditional art, a silk figurine which first appeared during the Han Dynasty (206 BC-AD 220).

Li Yingqing contributed to this story.

Today's Top News

• China keeping each step firmly to the moon
• China ready to strengthen high-level exchanges with France
• Mainland to send support to Taiwan quake areas
• Beijing dismisses bogus overcapacity claims from US
• Airlines should stand test of extreme weather
• Beijing supports Palestinian unity

Most Viewed

At this time, we recommend all  Penn-affiliated  travel to Israel, West Bank, Gaza, and Lebanon be deferred.  If you are planning travel to any of these locations, please reach out to [email protected] for the most up to date risk assessment and insurance exclusions. As a reminder, it is required that all Penn-affiliated trips are registered in  MyTrips .  If you have questions, please contact  [email protected] . 

Utility Navigation

Utility links.

• University of Pennsylvania
• Office of the Provost
• Penn Global

Secondary Nav Penn Global

• For Penn Students
• For Penn Faculty
• For Alumni & Friends

Primary Nav Penn Global

Drawer menu penn global.

• Back to main menu
• Our Strategic Framework
• Perry World House
• Penn Biden Center
• Penn Abroad
• International Student & Scholar Services
• Global Support Services
• Penn in Africa
• Penn in China
• 2022 PLAC Symposium
• Pulitzer International Reporting Student Fellowship
• Connect with PLAC
• Penn in Oceania
• Penn in the Middle East
• Penn in Northern America
• Global at Penn's Schools
• Global Centers & Programs
• Global Engagement Fund
• China Research and Engagement Fund
• India Research and Engagement Fund
• Holman Africa Research and Engagement Fund
• Apply for a Convening Grant
• Apply for a Research Grant
• Manage My Grant
• Grants Database

PENN GLOBAL RESEARCH & ENGAGEMENT GRANT PROGRAM 2024 Grant Program Awardees

Basic page sidebar menu penn global.

In 2024, Penn Global will support 24 new faculty-led research and engagement projects at a total funding level of $1.5 million.

The Penn Global Research and Engagement Grant Program prioritizes projects that bring together leading scholars and practitioners across the University community and beyond to develop new insight on significant global issues in key countries and regions around the world, a core pillar of Penn’s global strategic framework. 

PROJECTS SUPPORTED BY THE HOLMAN AFRICA RESEARCH AND ENGAGEMENT FUND

• Global Medical Physics Training & Development Program  Stephen Avery, Perelman School of Medicine
• Developing a Dakar Greenbelt with Blue-Green Wedges Proposal  Eugenie Birch, Weitzman School of Design
• Emergent Judaism in Sub-Saharan Africa  Peter Decherney, School of Arts and Sciences / Sara Byala, School of Arts and Sciences
• Determinants of Cognitive Aging among Older Individuals in Ghana  Irma Elo, School of Arts and Sciences
• Disrupted Aid, Displaced Lives Guy Grossman, School of Arts and Sciences
• A History of Regenerative Agriculture Practices from the Global South: Case Studies from Ethiopia, Kenya, and Zimbabwe Thabo Lenneiye, Kleinman Energy Center / Weitzman School of Design
• Penn Computerized Neurocognitive Battery Use in Botswana Public Schools Elizabeth Lowenthal, Perelman School of Medicine
• Podcasting South African Jazz Past and Present Carol Muller, School of Arts and Sciences
• Lake Victoria Megaregion Study: Joint Lakefront Initiative Frederick Steiner, Weitzman School of Design
• Leveraging an Open Source Software to Prevent and Contain AMR Jonathan Strysko, Perelman School of Medicine
• Poverty reduction and children's neurocognitive growth in Cote d'Ivoire Sharon Wolf, Graduate School of Education
• The Impacts of School Connectivity Efforts on Education Outcomes in Rwanda  Christopher Yoo, Carey Law School

PROJECTS SUPPORTED BY THE INDIA RESEARCH AND ENGAGEMENT FUND

• Routes Beyond Conflict: A New Approach to Cultural Encounters in South Asia  Daud Ali, School of Arts and Sciences
• Prioritizing Air Pollution in India’s Cities Tariq Thachil, Center for the Advanced Study of India / School of Arts and Sciences
• Intelligent Voicebots to Help Indian Students Learn English Lyle Ungar, School of Engineering and Applied Sciences

PROJECTS SUPPORTED BT THE CHINA RESEARCH AND ENGAGEMENT FUND

• Planning Driverless Cities in China Zhongjie Lin, Weitzman School of Design

PROJECTS SUPPORTED BY THE GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT FUND 

• Education and Economic Development in Nepal Amrit Thapa, Graduate School of Education
• Explaining Climate Change Regulation in Cities: Evidence from Urban Brazil Alice Xu, School of Arts and Sciences
• Nurse Staffing Legislation for Scotland: Lessons for the U.S. and the U.K.  Eileen Lake, School of Nursing
• Pathways to Education Development & Their Consequences: Finland, Korea, US Hyunjoon Park, School of Arts and Sciences
• Engaged Scholarship in Latin America: Bridging Knowledge and Action Tulia Falleti, School of Arts and Sciences
• Organizing Migrant Communities to Realize Rights in Palermo, Sicily  Domenic Vitiello, Weitzman School of Design
• Exploiting Cultural Heritage in 21st Century Conflict   Fiona Cunningham, School of Arts and Sciences
• Center for Integrative Global Oral Health   Alonso Carrasco-Labra, School of Dental Medicine

This first-of-its-kind Global Medical Physics Training and Development Program (GMPTDP) seeks to serve as an opportunity for PSOM and SEAS graduate students to enhance their clinical requirement with a global experience, introduce them to global career opportunities and working effectively in different contexts, and strengthens partnerships for education and research between US and Africa. This would also be an exceptional opportunity for pre-med/pre-health students and students interested in health tech to have a hands-on global experience with some of the leading professionals in the field. The project will include instruction in automated radiation planning through artificial intelligence (AI); this will increase access to quality cancer care by standardizing radiation planning to reduce inter-user variability and error, decreasing workload on the limited radiation workforce, and shortening time to treatment for patients. GMPTDP will offer a summer clinical practicum to Penn students during which time they will also collaborate with UGhana to implement and evaluate AI tools in the clinical workflow.

The proposal will address today’s pressing crises of climate change, land degradation, biodiversity loss, and growing economic disparities with a holistic approach that combines regional and small-scale actions necessary to achieve sustainability. It will also tackle a key issue found across sub-Saharan Africa, many emerging economies, and economically developed countries that struggle to control rapid unplanned urbanization that vastly outpaces the carrying capacity of the surrounding environment.

The regional portion of the project will create a framework for a greenbelt that halts the expansion of the metropolitan footprint. It will also protect the Niayes, an arable strip of land that produces over 80% of the country’s vegetables, from degradation. This partnership will also form a south-south collaboration to provide insights into best practices from a city experiencing similar pressures.

The small-scale portion of the project will bolster and create synergy with ongoing governmental and grassroots initiatives aimed at restoring green spaces currently being infilled or degraded in the capital. This will help to identify overlapping goals between endeavors, leading to collaboration and mobilizing greater funding possibilities instead of competing over the same limited resources. With these partners, we will identify and design Nature-based Solutions for future implementation.

Conduct research through fieldwork to examine questions surrounding Jewish identity in Africa. Research will be presented in e.g. articles, photographic images, and films, as well as in a capstone book. In repeat site-visits to Uganda, South Africa, Ghana, and Zimbabwe, we will conduct interviews with and take photographs of stakeholders from key communities in order to document their everyday lives and religious practices.

The overall aim of this project is the development of a nationally representative study on aging in Ghana. This goal requires expanding our network of Ghanian collaborators and actively engage them in research on aging. The PIs will build on existing institutional contacts in Ghana that include:

1). Current collaboration with the Navrongo Health Research Center (NCHR) on a pilot data collection on cognitive aging in Ghana (funded by a NIA supplement and which provides the matching funds for this Global Engagement fund grant application);

2) Active collaboration with the Regional Institute for Population Studies (RIPS), University of Ghana. Elo has had a long-term collaboration with Dr. Ayaga Bawah who is the current director of RIPS.

In collaboration with UNHCR, we propose studying the effects of a dramatic drop in the level of support for refugees, using a regression discontinuity design to survey 2,500 refugee households just above and 2,500 households just below the vulnerability score cutoff that determines eligibility for full rations. This study will identify the effects of aid cuts on the welfare of an important marginalized population, and on their livelihood adaptation strategies. As UNHCR faces budgetary cuts in multiple refugee-hosting contexts, our study will inform policymakers on the effects of funding withdrawal as well as contribute to the literature on cash transfers.

The proposed project, titled "A History of Regenerative Agriculture Practices from the Global South: Case Studies from Ethiopia, Kenya, and Zimbabwe," aims to delve into the historical and contemporary practices of regenerative agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa. Anticipated Outputs and Outcomes:

1. Research Paper: The primary output of this project will be a comprehensive research paper. This paper will draw from a rich pool of historical and contemporary data to explore the history of regenerative agriculture practices in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Zimbabwe. It will document the indigenous knowledge and practices that have sustained these regions for generations.

2. Policy Digest: In addition to academic research, the project will produce a policy digest. This digest will distill the research findings into actionable insights for policymakers, both at the national and international levels. It will highlight the benefits of regenerative agriculture and provide recommendations for policy frameworks that encourage its adoption.

3. Long-term Partnerships: The project intends to establish long-term partnerships with local and regional universities, such as Great Lakes University Kisumu, Kenya. These partnerships will facilitate knowledge exchange, collaborative research, and capacity building in regenerative agriculture practices. Such collaborations align with Penn Global's goal of strengthening institutional relationships with African partners.

The Penn Computerized Neurocognitive Battery (PCNB) was developed at the University of Pennsylvania by Dr. Ruben C. Gur and colleagues to be administered as part of a comprehensive neuropsychiatric assessment. Consisting of a series of cognitive tasks that help identify individuals’ cognitive strengths and weaknesses, it has recently been culturally adapted and validated by our team for assessment of school-aged children in Botswana . The project involves partnership with the Botswana Ministry of Education and Skills Development (MoESD) to support the rollout of the PCNB for assessment of public primary and secondary school students in Botswana. The multidisciplinary Penn-based team will work with partners in Botswana to guide the PCNB rollout, evaluate fidelity to the testing standards, and track student progress after assessment and intervention. The proposed project will strengthen a well-established partnership between Drs. Elizabeth Lowenthal and J. Cobb Scott from the PSOM and in-country partners. Dr. Sharon Wolf, from Penn’s Graduate School of Education, is an expert in child development who has done extensive work with the Ministry of Education in Ghana to support improvements in early childhood education programs. She is joining the team to provide the necessary interdisciplinary perspective to help guide interventions and evaluations accompanying this new use of the PCNB to support this key program in Africa.

This project will build on exploratory research completed by December 24, 2023 in which the PI interviewed about 35 South Africans involved in jazz/improvised music mostly in Cape Town: venue owners, curators, creators, improvisers.

• Podcast series with 75-100 South African musicians interviewed with their music interspersed in the program.
• 59 minute radio program with extended excerpts of music inserted into the interview itself.
• Create a center of knowledge about South African jazz—its sound and its stories—building knowledge globally about this significant diasporic jazz community
• Expand understanding of “jazz” into a more diffuse area of improvised music making that includes a wide range of contemporary indigenous music and art making
• Partner w Lincoln Center Jazz (and South African Tourism) to host South Africans at Penn

This study focuses on the potential of a Megaregional approach for fostering sustainable development, economic growth, and social inclusion within the East African Community (EAC), with a specific focus on supporting the development of A Vision for An Inclusive Joint Lakefront across the 5 riparian counties in Kenya.

By leveraging the principles of Megaregion development, this project aims to create a unified socio-economic, planning, urbanism, cultural, and preservation strategy that transcends county boundaries and promotes collaboration further afield, among the EAC member countries surrounding the Lake Victoria Basin.

Anticipated Outputs and Outcomes:

1. Megaregion Conceptual Framework: The project will develop a comprehensive Megaregion Conceptual Framework for the Joint Lakefront region in East Africa. This framework, which different regions around the world have applied as a way of bridging local boundaries toward a unified regional vision will give the Kisumu Lake region a path toward cooperative, multi-jurisdictional planning. The Conceptual Framework will be both broad and specific, including actionable strategies, projects, and initiatives aimed at sustainable development, economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental stewardship.

2. Urbanism Projects: Specific urbanism projects will be proposed for key urban centers within the Kenyan riparian counties. These projects will serve as tangible examples of potential improvements and catalysts for broader development efforts.

3. Research Publication: The findings of the study will be captured in a research publication, contributing to academic discourse and increasing Penn's visibility in the field of African urbanism and sustainable development

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has emerged as a global crisis, causing more deaths than HIV/AIDS and malaria worldwide. By engaging in a collaborative effort with the Botswana Ministry of Health’s data scientists and experts in microbiology, human and veterinary medicine, and bioinformatics, we will aim to design new electronic medical record system modules that will:

Aim 1: Support the capturing, reporting, and submission of microbiology data from sentinel surveillance laboratories as well as pharmacies across the country

Aim 2: Develop data analytic dashboards for visualizing and characterizing regional AMR and AMC patterns

Aim 3: Submit AMR and AMC data to regional and global surveillance programs

Aim 4: Establish thresholds for alert notifications when disease activity exceeds expected incidence to serve as an early warning system for outbreak detection.

  Using a novel interdisciplinary approach that bridges development economics, psychology, and neuroscience, the overall goal of this project is to improve children's development using a poverty-reduction intervention in Cote d'Ivoire (CIV). The project will directly measure the impacts of cash transfers (CTs) on neurocognitive development, providing a greater understanding of how economic interventions can support the eradication of poverty and ensure that all children flourish and realize their full potential. The project will examine causal mechanisms by which CTs support children’s healthy neurocognitive development and learning outcomes through the novel use of an advanced neuroimaging tool, functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS), direct child assessments, and parent interviews.

The proposed research, the GIGA initiative for Improving Education in Rwanda (GIER), will produce empirical evidence on the impact of connecting schools on education outcomes to enable Rwanda to better understand how to accelerate the efforts to bring connectivity to schools, how to improve instruction and learning among both teachers and students, and whether schools can become internet hubs capable of providing access e-commerce and e-government services to surrounding communities. In addition to evaluating the impact of connecting schools on educational outcomes, the research would also help determine which aspects of the program are critical to success before it is rolled out nationwide.

Through historical epigraphic research, the project will test the hypothesis that historical processes and outcomes in the 14th century were precipitated by a series of related global and local factors and that, moreover, an interdisciplinary and synergistic analysis of these factors embracing climatology, hydrology, epidemiology linguistics and migration will explain the transformation of the cultural, religious and social landscapes of the time more effectively than the ‘clash of civilizations’ paradigm dominant in the field. Outputs include a public online interface for the epigraphic archive; a major international conference at Penn with colleagues from partner universities (Ghent, Pisa, Edinburgh and Penn) as well as the wider South Asia community; development of a graduate course around the research project, on multi-disciplinary approaches to the problem of Hindu-Muslim interaction in medieval India; and a public facing presentation of our findings and methods to demonstrate the path forward for Indian history. Several Penn students, including a postdoc, will be actively engaged.  

India’s competitive electoral arena has failed to generate democratic accountability pressures to reduce toxic air. This project seeks to broadly understand barriers to such pressures from developing, and how to overcome them. In doing so, the project will provide the first systematic study of attitudes and behaviors of citizens and elected officials regarding air pollution in India. The project will 1) conduct in-depth interviews with elected local officials in Delhi, and a large-scale survey of elected officials in seven Indian states affected by air pollution, and 2) partner with relevant civil society organizations, international bodies like the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), domain experts at research centers like the Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI), and local civic organizations (Janagraaha) to evaluate a range of potential strategies to address pollution apathy, including public information campaigns with highly affected citizens (PHFI), and local pollution reports for policymakers (Janagraaha).

The biggest benefit from generative AI such as GPT, will be the widespread availability of tutoring systems to support education. The project will use this technology to build a conversational voicebot to support Indian students in learning English. The project will engage end users (Indian tutors and their students) in the project from the beginning. The initial prototype voice-driven conversational system will be field-tested in Indian schools and adapted. The project includes 3 stages of development:

1) Develop our conversational agent. Specify the exact initial use case and Conduct preliminary user testing.

2) Fully localize to India, addressing issues identified in Phase 1 user testing.

3) Do comprehensive user testing with detailed observation of 8-12 students using the agent for multiple months; conduct additional assessments of other stakeholders.

The project partners with Ashoka University and Pratham over all three stages, including writing scholarly papers.

Through empirical policy analysis and data-based scenario planning, this project actively contributes to this global effort by investigating planning and policy responses to autonomous transportation in the US and China. In addition to publishing several research papers on this subject, the PI plans to develop a new course and organize a forum at PWCC in 2025. These initiatives are aligned with an overarching endeavor that the PI leads at the Weitzman School of Design, which aims to establish a Future Cities Lab dedicated to research and collaboration in the pursuit of sustainable cities.

This study aims to fill this gap through a more humanistic approach to measuring the impact of education on national development. Leveraging a mixed methods research design consisting of analysis of quantitative data for trends over time, observations of schools and classrooms, and qualitative inquiry via talking to people and hearing their stories, we hope to build a comprehensive picture of educational trends in Nepal and their association with intra-country development. Through this project we strive to better inform the efforts of state authorities and international organizations working to enhance sustainable development within Nepal, while concurrently creating space and guidance for further impact analyses. Among various methods of dissemination of the study’s findings, one key goal is to feed this information into writing a book on this topic.

Developing cities across the world have taken the lead in adopting local environmental regulation. Yet standard models of environmental governance begin with the assumption that local actors should have no incentives for protecting “the commons.” Given the benefits of climate change regulation are diffuse, individual local actors face a collective action problem. This project explores why some local governments bear the costs of environmental regulation while most choose to free-ride. The anticipated outputs of the project include qualitative data that illuminate case studies and the coding of quantitative spatial data sets for studying urban land-use. These different forms of data collection will allow me to develop and test a theoretical framework for understanding when and why city governments adopt environmental policy.

The proposed project will develop new insights on the issue of legislative solutions to the nurse staffing crisis, which will pertain to many U.S. states and U.K. countries. The PI will supervise the nurse survey data collection and to meet with government and nursing association stakeholders to plan the optimal preparation of reports and dissemination of results. The anticipated outputs of the project are a description of variation throughout Scotland in hospital nursing features, including nurse staffing, nurse work environments, extent of adherence to the Law’s required principles, duties, and method, and nurse intent to leave. The outcomes will be the development of capacity for sophisticated quantitative research by Scottish investigators, where such skills are greatly needed but lacking.  

The proposed project will engage multi-cohort, cross-national comparisons of educational-attainment and labor-market experiences of young adults in three countries that dramatically diverge in how they have developed college education over the last three decades: Finland, South Korea and the US. It will produce comparative knowledge regarding consequences of different pathways to higher education, which has significant policy implications for educational and economic inequality in Finland, Korea, the US, and beyond. The project also will lay the foundation for ongoing collaboration among the three country teams to seek external funding for sustained collaboration on educational analyses.

With matching funds from PLAC and CLALS, we will jointly fund four scholars from diverse LAC countries to participate in workshops to engage our community regarding successful practices of community-academic partnerships.

These four scholars and practitioners from Latin America, who are experts on community-engaged scholarship, will visit the Penn campus during the early fall of 2024. As part of their various engagements on campus, these scholars will participate after the workshops as key guest speakers in the 7th edition of the Penn in Latin America and the Caribbean (PLAC) Conference, held on October 11, 2024, at the Perry World House. The conference will focus on "Public and Community Engaged Scholarship in Latin America, the Caribbean, and their Diasporas."

Palermo, Sicily, has been a leading center of migrant rights advocacy and migrant civic participation in the twenty-first century. This project will engage an existing network of diverse migrant community associations and anti-mafia organizations in Palermo to take stock of migrant rights and support systems in the city. Our partner organizations, research assistants, and cultural mediators from different communities will design and conduct a survey and interviews documenting experiences, issues and opportunities related to various rights – to asylum, housing, work, health care, food, education, and more. Our web-based report will include recommendations for city and regional authorities and other actors in civil society. The last phase of our project will involve community outreach and organizing to advance these objectives. The web site we create will be designed as the network’s information center, with a directory of civil society and services, updating an inventory not current since 2014, which our partner Diaspore per la Pace will continue to update.

This interdisciplinary project has four objectives: 1) to investigate why some governments and non-state actors elevated cultural heritage exploitation (CHX) to the strategic level of warfare alongside nuclear weapons, cyberattacks, political influence operations and other “game changers”; 2) which state or non-state actors (e.g. weak actors) use heritage for leverage in conflict and why; and 3) to identify the mechanisms through which CHX coerces an adversary (e.g. catalyzing international involvement); and 4) to identify the best policy responses for non-state actors and states to address the challenge of CHX posed by their adversaries, based on the findings produced by the first three objectives.

Identify the capacity of dental schools, organizations training oral health professionals and conducting oral health research to contribute to oral health policies in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean region, identify the barriers and facilitators to engage in OHPs, and subsequently define research priority areas for the region in collaboration with the WHO, oral health academia, researchers, and other regional stakeholders.

3539 Locust Walk University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19104

[email protected]

©2024 University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104   

Footer Menu

• Report Accessibility Issues and Get Help
• Privacy Policy

Cultural Heritage in Japan and Italy

Perspectives for Tourism and Community Development

• © 2024
• Nobuko Kawashima   ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0267-7504 0 ,
• Guido Ferilli 1

Faculty of Economics, Doshisha University, Kyoto, Japan

You can also search for this editor in PubMed   Google Scholar

Faculty of Arts and Tourism, IULM University, Milano, Italy

• Analyzes various policy issues related to heritage tourism in Japan and Italy
• Covers economic and social values of cultural heritage in Japan and Italy
• Addresses the impact of COVID-19 on heritage tourism policy

Part of the book series: Creative Economy (CRE)

222 Accesses

1 Altmetric

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

Access this book

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

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

Table of contents (12 chapters)

Front matter, introduction: recent growth of cultural heritage tourism in japan and italy.

Nobuko Kawashima

Cultural Heritage Tourism—Policy Development

Recent development of cultural policy in japan—emerging instrumentalism for heritage policy, the proper relationship between preservation and utilization of cultural assets: recent trends in cultural heritage protection policy in japan.

• Masaomi Tsuchiya

Lost in Translation: Japan Heritage and the New Direction of Heritage Policy in Japan

• Takao Terui

Topics from Cultural Goods to Cultural Heritage and Its Implications Regarding Theoretical Reflection and Region-Specific Italian Policies

• Fabio Bacchini, Roberto Iannaccone, Pietro Antonio Valentino

The Value and Utilization of Modern Cultural Heritage in Korea

• Jiyoung Lee

Cultural Heritage Tourism—Market, Management and Governance

Trends and issues in japanese cultural tourism.

• Noriko Yagasaki

Cultural Heritage Tourists in Japan—An “Orientations” Approach to Understanding Tourist Preferences

• Tadashi Yagi, Nobuko Kawashima

Sustainable Cultural Heritage Preservation: Trail Maintenance Walks in UNESCO World Heritage “Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes in the Kii Mountain Range”

Tourism and theatre: building a new relationship for a new cultural tourism.

• Martha Friel

Re-Imagining Italian Cultural Tourism. Creative Economy in the Face of Crisis and the Case of Museums and Live Music

• Massimiliano Raffa

Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Destination Development: The Role of Collaborative Strategies

• Francesca d’Angella, Manuela De Carlo
• Cultural heritage
• Cultural heritage in Japan
• Cultural heritage in Italy
• Heritage tourism
• Cultural tourism
• Cultural policy

About this book

This book identifies emerging trends, issues, and problems in such policy shifts. The book breaks a new ground in the bourgeoning studies of tourism, heritage, and cultural policy by adopting an international, inter-disciplinary approach. The chapters on Japan in particular make an original contribution to these fields in the English literature in which discussion of Japan despite its economic and cultural presence on the globe has hitherto been less available.

Editors and Affiliations

Guido Ferilli

About the editors

Nobuko Kawashima is a Professor at the Faculty of Economics of Doshisha University in Kyoto, Japan. Her research focuses on the areas of cultural policy, cultural economics and the creative industries. She has extensive experience in policy-making and evaluation at the local and national levels, including chairing the Japanese government’s Council for Cultural Policy Making. Her recent co-edited volumes include Asian Cultural Flows (with Hye-Kyung Lee, Springer, 2018) and Film Policy in a Globlalised Cultural Economy (with John Hill, Routledge, 2017). She is currently writing a book on Japan’s creative and cultural industries analysing their industrial and economic features (Routledge, forthcoming).

Guido Ferilli is Associate Professor and Director of the Cultural Industries and Complexity Observatory at IULM University, Milan. His research focuses upon economics, data science, and European programmes. He researches and consults internationally in the fields ofcultural economics policy design and regional development. He has a wide international experience in coordinating research and policy design projects.

Bibliographic Information

Book Title : Cultural Heritage in Japan and Italy

Book Subtitle : Perspectives for Tourism and Community Development

Editors : Nobuko Kawashima, Guido Ferilli

Series Title : Creative Economy

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-1499-5

Publisher : Springer Singapore

eBook Packages : Economics and Finance , Economics and Finance (R0)

Copyright Information : The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2024

Hardcover ISBN : 978-981-97-1498-8 Published: 09 April 2024

Softcover ISBN : 978-981-97-1501-5 Due: 10 May 2024

eBook ISBN : 978-981-97-1499-5 Published: 08 April 2024

Series ISSN : 2364-9186

Series E-ISSN : 2364-9445

Edition Number : 1

Number of Pages : XI, 207

Number of Illustrations : 5 b/w illustrations, 26 illustrations in colour

Topics : Cultural Economics , Cultural Heritage , Tourism Management

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research