Critical issues with world heritage status for destinations. Is world heritage status a good or bad thing?
Author: Ioannis Tosounidis
0 Commentries
Abstract
This paper discusses the arguments for and against for a destinations with a world heritage status. The concept and types of carrying capacity, visitors’ management and de-marketing as a management tool. Important recommendations for actions that could make better the management of the world heritage status destinations.
Keywords:
World heritage sites, visitor management, heritage tourism, de-marketing
Discussion Paper:
Is world heritage status a good or bad thing?
As can be expected, tourism is one of the biggest development that world is experiencing nowadays. To put it more simply, heritage tourism is one of the fascinating assets and an enormous marketing implement that has the power to influence all forms of tourism respectively. What is more, heritage tourism is beneficial to understand and acknowledge the past of a country. According to the World Heritage Council of 1996, they have put forward this definition for the word heritage, ’heritage is our legacy from the past, what we live today and what we pass on to the future generations’’. Although many visitors may not realize the intricacy of the process by which destinations are added to the list (which is administered by the World Heritage Centre at UNESCO headquarters in Paris). The phrase ‘World Heritage Site’ is directly recognized as designating something very extraordinary, in tourism terms a definite ‘must see’ ( Shackley, 1998).
Swanbrooke (1994) indicate that tourism is established on heritage, where heritage is the basis product that is offered, and heritage is the fundamental motivating factor for the consumers.
Turning to, visitor management which is enhancing a significantly substantial issue in world heritage site for those responsible for heritage sites, for the most part those that have obtained world heritage status. According to Shackley (2006) the number of visitors have been growing due to the accessibility to facilities by the society such as diminished travel costs, broad media publicity given to sites. Alternatively, visitors bring is not only source of revenue, through admission fees, but also these sites contribute them both educational and recreational potentials. On the other hand, those visiting the site bring the risk of harmful impacts upon the site. Under certain circumstances, encouraging more visitors may be at the same time a blessing as well as a curse for a characteristic heritage site. In particular, some world heritage sites are nearly solid and can confront increased levels of visitation, while others will be more receptive to damage.
As for advantages of WHS status, is conservation, the complementary funding generated by WHS status develop conservation levels and the higher publicity adds greater scrutiny in planning applications influencing the scale and quality of local development. Next, WHS status is believed to be catalyst for regeneration, mostly through exhilarating new investment, inward migration and increased tourism. Local people and businesses benefit from increased levels of economic activity in a different way. After that, the civic pride. WHS status is seen as structure for building local confidence and civic pride. This also seems to be an important are of benefit, however it is dependent on the local conditions and the nature of the site. Last but not least, education and learning. WHS status is deliberated to be a tool for learning engagement. In the same manner, visiting educational groups local and regional respectively.
Alternatively, it must be admitted that there are disadvantages that tourism brings in WHS. Undoubtedly, the most evident disadvantage is that tourism has negative effects on the local environment and the eco-system. For the most part a lot of businessmen are not concerned if the environment worsen, they just take into consideration whether they can earn money or not. In the same way, there tourists who have bad habit of throwing waste everywhere. Also, the local environment becomes worse and impacts the eco-systems. Nevertheless, listed destinations receive extra tourists and media attention. The higher profile that listing brings a big number of visitors that poorer countries cannot manage. Sometimes listing does more damage than good and upsets the delicate balance between preserving places and promoting them.
To summarise, it is obvious that there could be benefits from WHS status to develop the tourist industry if governments and companies could take the local environment into esteem. There is good economical aspect in the community but on the other hand, there is a high possibility of damaging environment by many tourists there. In the same way, some places changed like a tourist attraction. It is kind of irony, that increasing of recognition and worldwide awareness would be making damages and creating problems instead of protection.
References
Evans, G. (2002) ‘Living in a World heritage City: stakeholders in the dialectic of the universal and particular’, International Journal of Heritage Studies, vol. 8
Leask A., Fyall, A (2006). Managing World Heritage Sites. London: Butterworth Heinemann.
Myra L. Shackley (1998). Visitor management: case studies from World Heritage sites. : Butterworth Heinemann.
This paper discusses the arguments for and against for a destinations with a world heritage status. The concept and types of carrying capacity, visitors’ management and de-marketing as a management tool. Important recommendations for actions that could make better the management of the world heritage status destinations.
Keywords:
World heritage sites, visitor management, heritage tourism, de-marketing
Discussion Paper:
Is world heritage status a good or bad thing?
As can be expected, tourism is one of the biggest development that world is experiencing nowadays. To put it more simply, heritage tourism is one of the fascinating assets and an enormous marketing implement that has the power to influence all forms of tourism respectively. What is more, heritage tourism is beneficial to understand and acknowledge the past of a country. According to the World Heritage Council of 1996, they have put forward this definition for the word heritage, ’heritage is our legacy from the past, what we live today and what we pass on to the future generations’’. Although many visitors may not realize the intricacy of the process by which destinations are added to the list (which is administered by the World Heritage Centre at UNESCO headquarters in Paris). The phrase ‘World Heritage Site’ is directly recognized as designating something very extraordinary, in tourism terms a definite ‘must see’ ( Shackley, 1998).
Swanbrooke (1994) indicate that tourism is established on heritage, where heritage is the basis product that is offered, and heritage is the fundamental motivating factor for the consumers.
Turning to, visitor management which is enhancing a significantly substantial issue in world heritage site for those responsible for heritage sites, for the most part those that have obtained world heritage status. According to Shackley (2006) the number of visitors have been growing due to the accessibility to facilities by the society such as diminished travel costs, broad media publicity given to sites. Alternatively, visitors bring is not only source of revenue, through admission fees, but also these sites contribute them both educational and recreational potentials. On the other hand, those visiting the site bring the risk of harmful impacts upon the site. Under certain circumstances, encouraging more visitors may be at the same time a blessing as well as a curse for a characteristic heritage site. In particular, some world heritage sites are nearly solid and can confront increased levels of visitation, while others will be more receptive to damage.
As for advantages of WHS status, is conservation, the complementary funding generated by WHS status develop conservation levels and the higher publicity adds greater scrutiny in planning applications influencing the scale and quality of local development. Next, WHS status is believed to be catalyst for regeneration, mostly through exhilarating new investment, inward migration and increased tourism. Local people and businesses benefit from increased levels of economic activity in a different way. After that, the civic pride. WHS status is seen as structure for building local confidence and civic pride. This also seems to be an important are of benefit, however it is dependent on the local conditions and the nature of the site. Last but not least, education and learning. WHS status is deliberated to be a tool for learning engagement. In the same manner, visiting educational groups local and regional respectively.
Alternatively, it must be admitted that there are disadvantages that tourism brings in WHS. Undoubtedly, the most evident disadvantage is that tourism has negative effects on the local environment and the eco-system. For the most part a lot of businessmen are not concerned if the environment worsen, they just take into consideration whether they can earn money or not. In the same way, there tourists who have bad habit of throwing waste everywhere. Also, the local environment becomes worse and impacts the eco-systems. Nevertheless, listed destinations receive extra tourists and media attention. The higher profile that listing brings a big number of visitors that poorer countries cannot manage. Sometimes listing does more damage than good and upsets the delicate balance between preserving places and promoting them.
To summarise, it is obvious that there could be benefits from WHS status to develop the tourist industry if governments and companies could take the local environment into esteem. There is good economical aspect in the community but on the other hand, there is a high possibility of damaging environment by many tourists there. In the same way, some places changed like a tourist attraction. It is kind of irony, that increasing of recognition and worldwide awareness would be making damages and creating problems instead of protection.
References
Evans, G. (2002) ‘Living in a World heritage City: stakeholders in the dialectic of the universal and particular’, International Journal of Heritage Studies, vol. 8
Leask A., Fyall, A (2006). Managing World Heritage Sites. London: Butterworth Heinemann.
Myra L. Shackley (1998). Visitor management: case studies from World Heritage sites. : Butterworth Heinemann.