heritage tourism project

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.

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

Heritage Tourism

The late Alan Gordon was professor of history at the University of Guelph. He authored three books: Making Public Pasts: The Contested Terrain of Montreal’s Public Memories, 1891–1930, The Hero and the Historians: Historiography and the Uses of Jacques Cartier and Time Travel: Tourism and the Rise of the Living History Museum in Mid-Twentieth Century Canada.

• Published: 18 August 2022
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

Heritage tourism is a form of cultural tourism in which people travel to experience places, artifacts, or activities that are believed to be authentic representations of people and stories from the past. It couples heritage, a way of imagining the past in terms that suit the values of the present, with travel to locations associated with enshrined heritage values. Heritage tourism sites are normally divided into two often overlapping categories: natural sites and sites related to human culture and history. By exploring the construction of heritage tourism destinations in historical context, we can better understand how and through what attributes places become designated as sites of heritage and what it means to have an authentic heritage experience. These questions are explored through heritage landscapes, national parks, battlefield tourism, architectural tourism, and the concept of world heritage.

Heritage is one of the most difficult, complex, and expansive words in the English language because there is no simple or unanimously accepted understanding of what heritage encompasses. 1 We can pair heritage with a vast range of adjectives, such as cultural, historical, physical, architectural, or natural. What unites these different uses of the term is their reference to the past, in some way or another, while linking it to present-day needs. Heritage, then, is a reimagining of the past in terms that suit the values of the present. It cannot exist independently of human attempts to make the past usable because it is the product of human interpretation of not only the past, but of who belongs to particular historical narratives. At its base, heritage is about identity, and the inclusion and exclusion of peoples, stories, places, and activities in those identities. The use of the word “heritage” in this context is a postwar phenomenon. Heritage and heritage tourism, although not described in these terms, has a history as long as the history of modern tourism. Indeed, a present-minded use of the past is as old as civilization itself, and naturally embedded itself in the development of modern tourism. 2 The exploration of that history, examining the origins and development of heritage tourism, helps unpack some of the controversies and dissonance it produces.

Heritage in Tourism

Heritage tourism sites are normally divided into two categories: natural sites and sites of human, historical, or cultural heritage. the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) separates its list of world heritage sites in this manner. Sites of natural heritage are understood to be places where natural phenomena such as wildlife, flora, geological features, or ecosystems, are generally deemed to be of exceptional beauty or significance. Cultural heritage sites, which represent over three quarters of UNESCO-recognized sites, are places where human activity has left a lasting and substantial physical impact that reveals important features of a culture or cultures. Despite the apparent simplicity of this division, it is not always easy to categorize individual sites. UNESCO thus allows for a category of “mixed” heritage sites. But official recognition is not necessary to mark a place as a heritage destination and, moreover, some authors point to versions of heritage tourism that are not tightly place-specific, such as festivals of traditional performances or foodways. 3

The central questions at the heart of heritage tourism ask what it is that designates something as “heritage” and whether tourists have an “authentic” heritage experience there. At its simplest, heritage tourism is a form of cultural tourism in which people travel to experience places, artifacts, or activities that are authentic representations of people and stories from the past. Yet this definition encompasses two, often competing, motivations. Heritage tourism is both a cultural phenomenon through which people attempt to connect with the past, their ancestors, and their identity, and it is an industry designed to profit from it. Another question surrounds the source of the “heritage” in heritage tourism. Many scholars have argued that heritage does not live in the destinations or attractions people seek. Heritage is not innate to the destination, but is rather based on the tourist’s motivations and expectations. Thus, heritage tourism is a form of tourism in which the main motivation for visiting a site is based on the traveler’s perceptions of its heritage characteristics. Following the logic of this view, the authenticity of the heritage experience depends on the traveler rather than the destination or the activity. Heritage features, as well as the sense of authenticity they impart, are democratized in what might be called a consumer-based model of authenticity. 4 This is a model that allows for virtually anything or any place to be a heritage destination. Although such an approach to understanding heritage tourism may well serve present-day studies, measuring motivations is more complicated for historical subjects. Long-departed travelers are not readily surveyed about their expectations; motivations have to be teased out of historical records. In a contrasting view, John Tunbridge and Gregory Ashworth argue that heritage attractions are created through marketing: they are invented to be heritage attractions and sold to a traveling public as such. Yet, heritage attractions, in this understanding, are still deemed authentic when they satisfy consumer expectations about heritage. 5 This insight also implies that heritage tourism destinations might be deceptions, and certainly there are examples of the fabrication of heritage sites. However, if motivations and expectations are arbiters of heritage, then even invented heritage can become authentic through its acceptance by a public. While not ignoring the motivations and expectations of travelers, for historians, any understanding of heritage tourism must include the process by which sites become designated as a places of heritage. It must encompass the economic aspects of tourism development, tourism’s role in constructing narratives of national or group identity, and the cultural phenomenon of seeking authentic representations of those identities, regardless of their origins. Such a practice might include traveling to sites connected to diasporas, places of historical significance, sites of religious pilgrimages, and landscapes of scenic beauty or cultural importance.

Scholarly interest in heritage, at least in the English-speaking world, dates from the 1980s reaction to the emergence of new right-wing political movements that used the past as a tool to legitimize political positions. Authors such as David Lowenthal, Robert Hewison, and Patrick Wright bemoaned the recourse to “heritage” as evidence of a failing society that was backward-looking, fearful, and resentful of modern diversity. 6 Heritage, they proclaimed, was elitist and innately conservative, imposed on the people from above in ways that distanced them from an authentic historical consciousness. Although Raphael Samuel fired back that the critique of heritage was itself elitist and almost snobbish, this line continued in the 1990s. Works by John Gillis, Tony Bennett, and Eric Hobsbawm, among others, concurred that heritage was little more than simplified history used as a weapon of social and political control.

At about the same time, historians also began to take tourism seriously as a subject of inquiry, and they quickly connected leisure travel to perceived evils in the heritage industry. Historians such as John K. Walton in the United Kingdom and John Jakle in the United States began investigating patterns of tourism’s history in their respective countries. Although not explicitly concerned with heritage tourism, works such as Jakle’s The Tourist explored the infrastructure and experience of leisure travel in America, including the different types of attractions people sought. 7 In Sacred Places , John Sears argued that tourism helped define America in the nineteenth century through its landscape and natural wonders. Natural tourist attractions, such as Yosemite and Yellowstone parks became sacred places for a young nation without unifying religious and national shrines. 8 Among North America’s first heritage destinations was Niagara Falls, which drew Americans, Europeans, Britons, and Canadians to marvel at its beauty and power. Tourist services quickly developed there to accommodate travelers and, as Patricia Jasen and others note, Niagara became a North American heritage destination at the birth of the continent’s tourism trade. 9

As the European and North American travel business set about establishing scenic landscapes as sites worthy of the expense and difficulty of travel to them, they rarely used a rhetoric of heritage. Sites were depicted as places to embrace “the sublime,” a feeling arising when the emotional experience overwhelms the power of reason to articulate it. Yet as modern tourism developed, promoters required more varied attractions to induce travelers to visit specific destinations. North America’s first tourist circuits, well established by the 1820s, took travelers up the Hudson River valley from New York to the spas of Saratoga Springs, then utilizing the Erie Canal even before its completion, west to Niagara Falls. Tourist guidebooks were replete with vivid depictions of the natural wonders to be witnessed, and very quickly Niagara became heavily commercialized. As America expanded beyond the Midwest in the second half of the nineteenth century, text and image combined to produce a sense that these beautiful landscapes were a common inheritance of the (white and middle-class) American people. Commissioned expeditions, such as the Powell Expedition of 1869–1872, produced best-selling travel narratives revealing the American landscape to enthralled readers in the eastern cities (see Butler , this volume). John Wesley Powell’s description of his voyage along the Colorado River combined over 450 pages of written description with 80 prints, mostly portraying spectacular natural features. American westward exploration, then, construed the continent’s natural wonders as its heritage.

In America, heritage landscapes often obscured human activity and imagined the continent as nature untouched. But natural heritage also played a role in early heritage tourism in Britain and Europe. Many scholars have investigated the connection between national character and the depiction of topographical features, arguing that people often implant their communities with ideas of landscape and associate geographical features with their identities. In this way, landscape helps embed a connection between places and particular local and ethnic identities. 10 Idealized landscapes become markers of national identity (see Noack , this volume). For instance, in the Romantic era, the English Lake District and the mountains of the Scottish Highlands became iconic national representations of English, Scottish, or British nationalities. David Lowenthal has commented on the nostalgia inherent in “landscape-as-heritage.” The archetypical English landscape, a patchwork of fields divided by hedgerows and sprinkled with villages, was a relatively recent construction when the pre-Raphaelite painters reconfigured it as the romantic allure of a medieval England. It spoke to the stability and order inherent in English character. 11

Travel literature combined with landscape art to develop heritage landscapes and promote them as tourist attractions. Following the 1707 Act of Union, English tourists became fascinated with Scotland, and in particular the Scottish Highlands. Tourist guidebooks portrayed the Highlands as a harsh, bleak environment spectacular for its beauty as well as the quaintness of its people and their customs (see Schaff , this volume). Over the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, tourist texts cemented the image of Highland culture and heritage. Scholars have criticized this process as a “Tartanization” or “Balmoralization” of the country by which its landscape and culture was reduced to a few stereotypes appealing to foreign visitors. Nevertheless, guidebook texts described the bens, lochs, and glens with detail, helping create and reinforce a mental picture of a quintessential Highland landscape. 12 The massacre of members of the Clan MacDonald at Glencoe, killed on a winter night in 1692 for insufficient loyalty to the monarchy, added romance. Forgotten for over a century, the event was recalled in the mid-nineteenth century by the historian Thomas Babington Macaulay, and quickly became a tragic tale associated with the scenic valley. At the same time the Highlands were being re-coded from a dangerous to a sublime landscape, its inhabitants became romanticized as an untainted, simple, premodern culture. The natural beauty of the landscape at Glencoe and its relative ease of access, being close to Loch Lomond and Glasgow, made it an attraction with a ready-made tragic tale. Highlands travel guides began to include Glencoe in their itineraries, combining a site of natural beauty with a haunting human past. Both natural and cultural heritage, then, are not inherent, but represent choices made by people about what and how to value the land and the past. On France’s Celtic fringe, a similar process unfolded. When modern tourism developed in Brittany in the mid-nineteenth century, guidebooks such as Joanne’s defined the terms of an authentic Breton experience. Joanne’s 1867 guide coupled the region’s characteristic rugged coastlines with the supposedly backward people, their costumes, habitudes, beliefs, and superstitions, who inhabited it. 13 Travel guides were thus the first contributors in the construction of heritage destinations. They began to highlight the history, real and imagined, of destinations to promote their distinctions. And, with increasing interest in the sites of national heritage, people organized to catalog, preserve, and promote heritage destinations.

Organizing Heritage Tourism

Among the world’s first bodies dedicated to preserving heritage was the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB), organized in England in 1877. Emerging as a result of particular debates about architectural practices, this society opposed a then-popular trend of altering buildings to produce imaginary historical forms. This approach, which was most famously connected to Eugène-Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc’s French restorations, involved removing or replacing existing architectural features, something renounced by the SPAB. The society’s manifesto declared that old structures should be repaired so that their entire history would be protected as part of cultural heritage. The first heritage preservation legislation, England’s Ancient Monuments Protection Act of 1882, provided for the protection initially of 68 prehistoric sites and appointed an inspector of ancient monuments. 14 By 1895, movements to conserve historic structures and landscapes had combined with the founding of the National Trust, officially known as the National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty, as a charitable agency. Much of the Trust’s early effort protected landscapes: of twenty-nine properties listed in 1907, seventeen were acreages of land and other open spaces. 15 Over the twentieth century, however, the Trust grew more and more concerned with protecting country houses and gardens, which now constitute the majority of its listed properties.

British efforts were duplicated in Europe. The Dutch Society for the Preservation of Natural Landmarks was established in 1904; France passed legislation to protect natural monuments in 1906. And in Sweden, the Society for the Protection of Nature was established in 1909, to name only a few examples. Nature was often connected to the spirit of “the folk,” an idea that encompassed a notion of an original ethnic core to the nation. Various European nationalisms of the period embraced the idea of an “authentic” national folk, with each folk considered unique due to its connection with a specific geography. Folklore and the celebration of folk culture offered Europeans links to imagined national heritages in a rapidly modernizing world, as modern, middle-class Europeans turned their attention to the romanticized primitive life of so-called simple peasants and linked notions of natural and human heritage. Through the concept of the folk, natural and human heritage combined to buttress emerging expressions of nationalism. 16

Sweden provides an instructive example. As early as the seventeenth century, Swedish antiquarians were intrigued by medieval rune stones, burial mounds, and cairns strewn across the country, but also saw these connected to natural features. Investigations of these relics of past Nordic culture involved a sense of the landscape in which they were found. This interest accelerated as folk studies grew in popularity, in part connected to nationalist political ambitions of Swedes during the growing tensions within the Kingdom of Sweden and Norway, which divided in 1905. Sweden’s preservation law required research into the country’s natural resources to create an inventory of places. Of particular interest were features considered to be “nature in its original state.” The intent was to preserve for future generations at least one example of Sweden’s primordial landscape features: primeval forests, swamps, peat bogs, and boulders. But interest was also drawn to natural landmarks associated with historical or mythical events from Sweden’s past. Stones or trees related to tales from the Nordic sagas, for example, combined natural with cultural heritage. 17

Although early efforts to protect heritage sites were not intended to support tourism, the industry quickly benefited. Alongside expanding tours to the Scottish Highlands and English Lake District, European landscapes became associated with leisure travel. As Tait Kellar argues for one example, the context of the landscape is crucial in understanding the role of tourism in the German Alps. 18 Guidebooks of the nineteenth and early twentieth century did not use the term “heritage,” but they described its tenets to audiences employing a different vocabulary. Baedeker’s travel guides, such as The Eastern Alps , guided bourgeois travelers through the hiking trails and vistas of the mountains and foothills, offering enticing descriptions of the pleasures to be found in the German landscape. Beyond the land, The Eastern Alps directed visitors to excursions that revealed features of natural history, human history, and local German cultures. 19

Across the Atlantic people also cherished escapes to the countryside for leisure and recreation and, as economic and population growth increasingly seemed to threaten the idyllic tranquility of scenic places, many banded together to advocate for their conservation. Yet, ironically, by putting in place systems to mark and preserve America’s natural heritage, conservationists popularized protected sites as tourist destinations. By the second half of the nineteenth century, the conservation movement encouraged the US government to set aside massive areas of American land as parks. For example, Europeans first encountered the scenic beauty of California’s Yosemite Valley at midcentury. With increasing settler populations following the California Gold Rush, tourists began arriving in ever larger numbers and promoters began building accommodations and roads to encourage them. Even during the Civil War, the US government recognized the potential for commercial overdevelopment and the desire of many to preserve America’s most scenic places. 20 In 1864, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Yosemite Grant, designating acres of the valley protected wilderness. This set a precedent for the later creation of America’s first national park. In 1871, the Hayden Geological Survey recommended the preservation of nearly 3,500 square miles of land in the Rocky Mountains, in the territories of Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho. Ferdinand V. Hayden was concerned that the pristine mountain region might soon be as overrun with tourists as Niagara Falls had by then become. 21 The following year, Congress established Yellowstone National Park, the world’s first designated “heritage” site. Yet, from the beginning, Yellowstone and subsequent parks were assumed to be tourist attractions. By 1879, tourists to Yellowstone had established over 200 miles of trails that led them to the park’s most famous attractions. Although thought of as nature preserves, parks were often furnished with railway access, and amenities and accommodations appeared, often prior to official designation. National parks were immediately popular tourist attractions. Even before it had established a centralized bureaucracy to care for them, the United States government had established nine national parks and nearly two dozen national monuments. Canada lagged, but established Rocky Mountain National Park (now Banff) in 1885 to balance interests of resource extraction and conservation. (The world’s second national park was Australia’s Royal National Park, established by the colony of New South Wales in 1879.) By the outbreak of the Great War, Canada and the United States had established fifteen national parks, all but one west of the Mississippi River.

Establishing parks was one component of building a heritage tourism infrastructure. Another was the creation of a national bureaucracy to organize it. The Canadian example reveals how heritage and tourism drove the creation of a national parks service. Much of the mythology surrounding Canada’s national parks emphasized the role of nature preservationists, yet the founder of the parks system, J. B. Harkin, was deeply interested in building a parks network for tourists. 22 Indeed, from early in the twentieth century, Canada’s parks system operated on the principle that parks should be “playgrounds, vacation destinations, and roadside attractions that might simultaneously preserve the fading scenic beauty and wildlife populations” of a modernizing nation. 23 Although Canada had established four national parks in the Rocky Mountains in the 1880s, the administration of those parks was haphazard and decentralized. It was not until the approaching third centennial of the founding of Quebec City (now a UNESCO World Heritage Site) that the Canadian government began thinking actively about administering its national heritage. In 1908, Canada hosted an international tourist festival on the Plains of Abraham, the celebrated open land where French and British armies had fought the decisive battle for supremacy in North America in 1759. The event so popularized the fabled battlefield that the government was compelled to create a National Battlefield Commission to safeguard it. This inspired the creation of the Dominion Parks Branch three years later to manage Canada’s natural heritage parks, the world’s first national parks service. By 1919 the system expanded to include human history—or at least European settler history—through the creation of national historic parks. These parks were even more explicitly designed to attract tourists, automobile tourists in particular. In 1916, five years after Canada, the United States established the National Parks Service with similar objectives.

As in Europe, nationalism played a significant role in developing heritage tourism destinations in America. The first national parks were inspired by the series of American surveying expeditions intended to secure knowledge of the landscape for political control. Stephen Pyne connects the American “discovery” of the Grand Canyon, for example, to notions of manifest destiny following the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848) that ended the Mexican-American War and ceded over 500,000 square miles of what is today the western United States. Popularized by the report of John Wesley Powell (1875) , the canyon began attracting tourists in the 1880s, although Congress failed to establish it as a national park. 24 Tourism was central to developing the Grand Canyon as a national heritage destination. Originally seen by Spanish explorers as an obstacle, and as a sacred place by the Navajo, Hopi, Hualapai, and Havasupai peoples, the canyon came to mark American exceptionalism. Piece by piece, sections of the canyon were set aside as reserves and finally declared a national park in 1919. By then, the park had been serviced by a railway (since 1901) and offered tourists a luxury hotel on the canyon’s south rim.

Archaeology also entered into the construction of American heritage. Almost as soon as it was annexed to the United States, the American southwest revealed to American surveyors a host of archaeological remains. For residents of the southwest, the discovery of these ancient ruins of unknown age pointed to the nobility of a lost predecessor civilization. By deliberately construing the ruins as being of an unknown age, Anglo-American settlers were able to draw distinctions between the ancients and contemporary Native Americans in ways that validated their own occupation of the territory. The ruins also had commercial potential. In Colorado, President Theodore Roosevelt established Mesa Verde National Park in 1906 to protect and capitalize on the abandoned cliff dwellings located there. These ruins had been rediscovered in the 1880s when ranchers learned of them from the local Ute people. By the turn of the century, the ruins had attracted so many treasure seekers that they needed protection. This was the first national park in America designated to protect a site of archaeological significance and linked natural and human heritage in the national parks system. 25

If, as many argue, heritage is not innate, how is it made? Part of the answer to this question can be found in the business of tourism. Commercial exploitation of heritage tourism emerged alongside heritage tourism, but was particularly active in the postwar years. Given their association with tourism, it is not surprising that railways and associated businesses played a prominent role in promoting heritage destinations. Before World War II, the most active heritage tourism promoter was likely the Fred Harvey Company, which successfully marketed, and to a great degree created, much of the heritage of the American southwest. The Fred Harvey Company originated with the opening of a pair of cafés along the Kansas Pacific Railway in 1876. After a stuttering beginning, Harvey’s chain of railway eateries grew in size. Before dining cars became regular features of passenger trains, meals on long-distance trips were provided by outside business such as Harvey’s at regular stops. With the backing of the Santa Fe Railroad, the company also developed attractions based on the Southwest region’s unique architectural and cultural features. The image capitalized on the artistic traditions of Native Americans and early Spanish traditions to create, in particular, the Adobe architectural style now associated with Santa Fe and New Mexico. 26 These designs were also incorporated into tourist facilities on the South Rim of the Grand Canyon, including the El Tovar hotel and the Hopi House souvenir and concession complex, designed to resemble a Hopi pueblo.

Relying on existing and manufactured heritage sites, North American railways popularized attractions as heritage sites. The Northern Pacific Railroad financed a number of hotels in Yellowstone Park, including the Old Faithful Inn in 1904. In 1910, the Great Northern Railroad launched its “See America First” campaign to attract visitors (and new investments) to its routes to the west’s national parks. In Canada, the Dominion Atlantic Railway rebuilt Grand Pré, a Nova Scotia Acadian settlement to evoke the home of the likely fictional character Evangeline from Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s 1848 poem by the same name. In the poem, Evangeline was deported from Acadia in 1755 and separated from her betrothed. By the 1920s, the railway was transporting tourists to Grand Pré, christened “Land of Evangeline,” where reproductions stood in for sites mentioned in the poem. 27 However, following World War I, heritage tourism in North America became increasingly dependent on automobile travel and the Dominion Atlantic eventually sold its interest to the Canadian government.

Conflict as Cultural Heritage

Tourism to sites of military history initially involved side trips from more popular, usually natural, attractions. Thomas Chambers notes that the sites of battles of the Seven Years’ War, Revolutionary War, and War of 1812 became tourist attractions as side trips from more established itineraries, such as the northern or fashionable tours. War of 1812 battlefields, many of them in the Niagara theater of the war, were conveniently close to the natural wonders people already came to see. By visiting the places where so many had sacrificed for their country, tourists began attaching new meaning to the sites. Ease of access was essential. Chambers contrasts sites in southern states with those in the north. In the south, the fields of important American Revolution victories at Cowpens and King’s Mountain were too remote to permit easy tourist access and long remained undeveloped. 28 In a contrary example, the Plains of Abraham, the scene of General Wolfe’s dramatic victory over France that led to the Conquest of Canada, was at first a curiosity. The visit to Quebec, a main destination on the northern tour, was originally based on its role as a major port and the attraction of the scenic beauty of the city on the cliffs, compared favorably to Cintra in Portugal. 29 Ease of access helped promoters convert an empty field near the city into the “hallowed Plains.”

Access to battlefields increased at almost the exact moment that one of the nineteenth century’s most devastating wars, the American Civil War, broke out. Railway travel was essential to both the success of the Union Army in reconquering the rebelling Confederacy, and in developing tourism to the sites of the slaughter. Railway travel made sites accessible for urban travelers and new technologies, such as photography and the telegraph, sped news of victories and defeats quickly around the nation. Gettysburg, the scene of a crucial Union victory in July 1863, became a tourist attraction only a few days later. Few would call the farmland of southeastern Pennsylvania sublime, but dramatic human history had unfolded there. The battle inspired the building of a national memorial on the site only four months later, the Soldiers’ National Cemetery. At the inauguration of the cemetery Abraham Lincoln delivered his “Gettysburg Address,” calling on the nation to long remember and cherish the “hallowed ground” where history had been made.

Gettysburg sparked a frenzy of marking sites of Civil War battles and events. Battle sites became important backdrops for political efforts at reunion and reconciliation after the war and attracted hundreds and later thousands of tourists for commemorative events and celebrations. Ten thousand saw President Rutherford Hayes speak at Gettysburg in 1878 and, for the 50th anniversary of Gettysburg, some 55,000 veterans returned to Pennsylvania in July 1913. What had once been a site of bloody, brutal combat had been transformed into a destination where tourists gathered to embrace their shared heritage, north and south. As the years progressed, more attractions were added as tourists began to see their heritage on the battlefield. 30

The conflict that most clearly created tourist attractions out of places of suffering was the World War I. Soon after the war ended, its sites of slaughter also became tourist attractions. As with the Civil War in America, World War I tourists were local people and relatives of the soldiers who had perished on the field of battle. By one estimate 60,000 tourists visited the battlefields of the Western Front by the summer of 1919, the same year that Michelin began publishing guidebooks to them. Numbers grew in the decades following the war. Over 140,000 tourists took in the sites of the war in 1931, which grew to 160,000 for 1939. Organizations such as the Workers’ Travel Association hoped that tourism to battle sites would promote peace, but the travel business also benefited. Travel agencies jumped at the chance to offer tours and publishers produced travel guides to the battlefields. At least thirty English guidebooks were published by 1921. 31

This interest in a conflict that killed, often in brutal fashion, so many might seem a ghoulish form of heritage tourism. Yet Peter Slade argues that people do not visit battlefields for the love for death and gore. They attend these sites out of a sense of pilgrimage to sites sacred to their national heritage. Organized pilgrimages reveal this sense of belonging most clearly. The American Legion organized a pilgrimage of 15,000 veterans in 1927 to commemorate the decade anniversary of America’s entry to the war. The following year 11,000 Britons, including 3,000 women, made a pilgrimage of their own. Canada’s first official pilgrimage involved 8,000 pilgrims (veterans and their families) to attend the inauguration of the Vimy Ridge Memorial, marking a site held by many as a place sacred to Canadian identity. Australians and New Zealanders marched to Gallipoli in Turkey for similar reasons. 32 As with the sites of the Western Front, Gallipoli and pilgrimages to it generated travel accounts and publishers assembled guidebooks to help travelers navigate its attractions and accommodations. In these episodes, tourism was used to construct national heritage. In the interwar years, tourist activity popularized the notion that sites of national heritage existed on the battlefields of foreign lands, where “our” nation’s history was forged. National heritage tourism, then, became transnational.

Since the end of World War II, battlefield tourism has become an important projection of heritage tourism. Commercial tour operators organize thousands of tours of European World War I and World War II battlefields for Americans and Canadians, as for other nationalities. The phenomenon seems particularly pronounced among North Americans. The motivation behind modern battlefield tourism reveals its connection to heritage tourism. If heritage is an appeal to the past that helps establish a sense of identity and belonging, the feelings of national pride and remorse for sacrifice of the fallen at these sites helps define them as sacred to a particular vision of a national past. The sanctity of the battle site makes the act of consuming it as a tourist attraction an act of communion with heritage.

Built Heritage and Tourism

During the upheaval of the Civil War, some Americans began to recognize historic houses as elements of their heritage worthy of preservation. These houses were initially not seen as tourist attractions, but as markers of national values. Their heritage value preceded their value as tourist attractions. The first major preservation initiative launched in 1853 to save George Washington’s tomb and home from spoliation. Behind overt sectional divisions of north and south was an implied vesting of republican purity among the patrician families that could trace their ancestors to the revolutionary age and who could restore American culture to its proper deferential state. The success of preserving Mount Vernon led to a proliferation of similar house museums. By the 1930s, the American museum association even produced a guide for how to establish new examples and promote them as sites of heritage for tourist interest. Historic houses provided tangible, physical evidence of heritage. Like scenic landscapes attached to the stories of history, buildings connected locations to significant events and people of the past. Architectural heritage came to be closely associated with tourism. Architectural monuments are easily identified, easy to promote, and, as physical structures, easily reproduced in souvenir ephemera. Although the recognition of architectural monuments as tourist draws could be said to have originated with the Grand Tour, or at least with the publication of John Ruskin’s “Seven Lamps of Architecture” (1849), which singled out the monuments of Venice for veneration, twentieth century mobility facilitated a greater desire to travel to see historic structures. Indeed, mobility, especially automobility, prompted the desire to preserve or even reinvent the structural heritage of the past.

A driving factor behind the growth of tourism to sites associated with these structural relics was a feeling that the past—and especially the social values of the past—was being lost. For example, Colonial Williamsburg developed in reaction to the pace of urban and social change brought about by automobile travel in the 1920s. Williamsburg was once a community of colonial era architecture, but had become just another highway town before John D. Rockefeller lent his considerable wealth to its preservation and reconstruction. 33 Rockefeller had already donated a million dollars for the restoration of French chateaux at Versailles, Fontainebleu, and Rheims. 34 At Williamsburg, his approach was to remove structures from the post-Colonial period to create a townscape from the late eighteenth century. By selecting a cut-off year of 1790, Rockefeller and his experts attempted to freeze Williamsburg in a particular vision of the past. The heritage envisioned was not that of ordinary Americans, but that of colonial elites. Conceived to be a tourist attraction, Colonial Williamsburg offered a tourist-friendly lesson in American heritage. Rockefeller, and a host of consultants convinced the (white) people of Williamsburg to reimagine their heritage and their past. America’s heritage values were translated to the concepts of self-government and individual liberty elaborated by the great patriots, Washington, Madison, Henry, and Jefferson. The town commemorated the planter elites that had dominated American society until the Jacksonian era, and presented them as progenitors of timeless ideals and values. They represented the “very cradle of that Americanism of which Rockefeller and the corporate elite were the inheritors and custodians.” 35

Rockefeller’s Williamsburg was not the only American heritage tourist reconstruction. Canada also underwent reconstruction projects for specifically heritage tourism purposes, such as the construction of “Champlain’s Habitation” at Port Royal, Nova Scotia or the attempt to draw tourists to Invermere, British Columbia with a replica fur trade fort. 36 Following World War I and accelerating after World War II, the number and nature of places deemed heritage attractions grew. Across North America, all levels of governments and private corporations built replica heritage sites with varying degrees of “authenticity.” Although these sites often made use of existing buildings and landscapes, they also manufactured an imaginary environment of the past. The motivation behind these sites was almost always diversification of the local economy through increased tourism. Canada’s Fortress of Louisbourg National Historic Site is perhaps the most obvious example. It is a reconstructed section of the French colonial town, conquered and destroyed in 1758, built on the archaeological remains of the original. Constructed by the government of Canada as a means to diversify the failing resource economy of its Atlantic provinces, the tourist attraction was also designated a component of Canada’s national heritage. The US government also increased its interest in the protection of heritage destinations, greatly expanding the list of national historic landmarks, sites, parks, and monuments. As postwar governments became more concerned with managing their economies, tourism quickly came to be seen as a key economic sector. The language of national heritage helped build public support for state intervention in natural and historic artifacts and sites that could be presented as sacred national places.

In Europe, many historic sites were devastated by bombardment during World War II. Aside from pressing humanitarian issues, heritage concerns also had to be addressed. In France, the war had destroyed nearly half a million buildings, principally in the northern cities, many of which were of clear heritage value. The French government established a commission to undertake the reconstruction of historic buildings and monuments and, in some cases, entire towns. Saint-Malo, in Brittany, had been completely destroyed, but the old walled town was rebuilt to its seventeenth century appearance. Already a seaside resort, the town added a heritage site destination. In the 1920s and 1930s, European fascist states had also employed heritage tourism. In Mussolini’s Italy and Nazi Germany, workers’ leisure time was to be organized to prevent ordinary Italians and Germans from falling into unproductive leisure activities. Given the attachment to racialized views of purity and identity, organized tourism was encouraged to allow people to bond with their national heritage. Hiking in the Black Forest or the alpine Allgau might help connect Germans to the landscape and reconnect them to the traditional costumes and folkways of rural Germany. As Kristin Semmens argues, most studies of the Nazi misappropriation of the past ignore the displays of history aimed toward tourists at Germany’s heritage sites. Many museums and historic sites twisted their interpretations to fit the Nazi present. 37 In ways that foreshadowed the 1980s British left’s critique of heritage, fascist regimes made use of heritage tourism to control society. After the war, a vigorous program of denazification was undertaken to remove public relics of the Nazi regime and in formerly occupied territories, as was a program of reconstruction. In the communist east, blaming the Nazis for the destruction of German heritage was an ideological gift. It allowed the communist regime to establish itself as the true custodian of German identity and heritage. 38 In the capitalist west, tourism revived quickly. By early 1947, thirteen new tourist associations were active in the Allied occupation zone. Tourism rhetoric in the postwar years attempted to distance German heritage from the Nazi regime to reintroduce foreign travelers to the “real Germany.” Despite this objective, Alon Confino notes that traces of the Nazi past can be located in postwar tourist promotions that highlighted Nazi-era infrastructure. 39

Postwar Heritage Tourism

As tourism became a more global industry, thanks in no small part to the advent of affordable air travel in the postwar era, heritage tourism became transnational. Ethnic heritage tourism became more important, and diaspora or roots tourism, which brought second- and third-generation migrants back to the original home of their ancestors, accelerated. Commodifying ethnic heritage has been one of the most distinctive developments in twenty-first century tourism. Ethnic heritage tourism can involve migrants, their children, or grandchildren returning to their “home” countries as visitors. In this form of tourism, the “heritage” component is thus expressed in the motivations and self-identifications of the traveler. It involves a sense of belonging that is rooted in the symbolic meanings of collective memories, shared stories, and the sense of place embodied in the physical locations of the original homeland. Paul Basu has extensively studied the phenomenon of “roots tourism” among the descendants of Scottish Highlanders. He suggests that in their trips to Scotland to conduct genealogical research, explore sites connected to their ancestors, or sites connected to Scottish identity, they construct a sense of their heritage as expatriate Scots. 40 Similar “return” movements can be found in the migrant-descended communities of many settler colonial nations. For second-generation Chinese Americans visiting China, their search for authentic experiences mirrored those of other tourists. Yet, travel to their parents’ homeland strengthened their sense of family history and attachment to Chinese cultures. 41 On the other hand, Shaul Kellner examines the growing trend of cultivating roots tourism through state-sponsored homeland tours. In Tours that Bind , Kellner explores the State of Israel and American Jewish organizations’ efforts to forge a sense of Israeli heritage among young American Jews. However, Kellner cautions, individual experiences and human agency limit the hosts’ abilities to control the experience and thus control the sense of heritage. 42

Leisure tourism also played a role in developing heritage sites, as travelers to sunshine destinations began looking for more interesting side trips. Repeating the battlefield tourism of a century before, by the 1970s access to historic and prehistoric sites made it possible to add side trips to beach vacations. Perhaps the best example of this was the development of tourism to sites of Mayan heritage by the Mexican government in the 1970s. The most famous heritage sites, at least for Westerners, were the Mayan sites of Yucatan. First promoted as destinations by the American travel writer John Lloyd Stephens in the 1840s, their relative inaccessibility (as well as local political instabilities) made them unlikely tourist attractions before the twentieth century. By 1923, the Yucatan government had opened a highway to the site of the Chichén Itzá ruins, and local promoters began promotions in the 1940s. It was not until after the Mexican government nationalized all archaeological ruins in the 1970s that organized tours from Mexican beach resorts began to feature trips to the ruins themselves. 43

Mexico’s interest in the preservation and promotion of its archaeological relics coincided with one of the most important developments in heritage tourism in the postwar years: the emergence of the idea of world heritage. The idea was formalized in 1972 with the creation of UNESCO’s designation of World Heritage Sites. The number of sites has grown from the twelve first designated in 1978 to well over 1,000 in 167 different countries. In truth, the movement toward recognizing world heritage began with the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, which did not limit its activities to preserving only England’s architectural heritage. Out of its advocacy, European architects and preservationists drafted a series of accords, such as the Athens Charter of 1931, and the later Venice Charter of 1964, both of which emerged from a growing sense of cultural internationalism. These agreements set guidelines for the preservation and restoration of buildings and monuments. What UNESCO added was the criterion of Outstanding Universal Value for the designation of a place as world heritage. It took until 1980 to work out the first iteration of Outstanding Universal Value and the notion has never been universally accepted, although UNESCO member countries adhere to it officially. Once a site has been named to the list, member countries are expected to protect it from deterioration, although this does not always happen. As of 2018, 54 World Heritage Sites are considered endangered. This growth mirrored the massive expansion of tourism as a business and cultural phenomenon in the late twentieth century. As tourism became an increasingly important economic sector in de-colonizing states of Asia and Latin America, governments became more concerned with its promotion by seeking out World Heritage designation.

Ironically, World Heritage designation itself has been criticized as an endangerment of heritage sites. Designation increases the tourist appeal of delicate natural environments and historic places, which can lead to problems with maintenance. Designation also affects the lives of people living within the heritage destination. Luang Prabang, in Laos, is an interesting example. Designated in 1995 as one of the best-preserved traditional towns in Southeast Asia, it represents an architectural fusion of Lao temples and French colonial villas. UNESCO guidelines halted further development of the town, except as it served the tourist market. Within the designated heritage zone, buildings cannot be demolished or constructed, but those along the main street have been converted to guest houses, souvenir shops, and restaurants to accommodate the growing tourist economy. Critics claim this reorients the community in non-traditional ways, as locals move out of center in order to rent to foreign tourists. 44 While heritage tourism provided jobs and more stable incomes, it also encouraged urban sprawl and vehicle traffic as local inhabitants yielded their town to the influx of foreign, mostly Western, visitors.

Heritage tourism may hasten the pace of change by making destinations into attractions worth visiting. To accommodate the anticipated influx of global tourists, Luang Prabang airport was renovated and its runway extended to handle larger jets in between 2008 and 2013. The influx of tourists at Machu Picchu in Peru has repeatedly led the Peruvian government to attempt to control access to the site, yet dependent on tourism’s economic contribution, such restrictions are difficult. The temple at Borobudur in Indonesia undergoes near continuous maintenance work to repair the wear and tear caused by thousands of tourists walking its steps every day. Indeed, the preserved ruins are said to be under greater threat than when they were discovered in the early nineteenth century, overgrown by the jungle.

Another colonial aspect of world heritage designation stems from the narratives of the sites themselves. Many critics accuse UNESCO of a Eurocentric conception of Outstanding Universal Value and world heritage. 45 Cultural heritage destinations in non-Western countries are often associated with sites made famous by the projects of European imperialism. The fables of discovering ancient ruins, for instance, prioritize the romance of discovery. Many of the most famous non-Western sites were “discovered” by imperial agents in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Angkor Wat in Cambodia was introduced to the world by the French explorer Henri Muhot in 1860. Machu Picchu, the Mayan sites of Yucatan, and the ancestral Anasazi sites of the American southwest were excavated, in some cases purchased, and their narratives constructed by American and European adventurers. The cultural relics of these ancient places were looted and assembled in Western museums, the stories of adventure and discovery published for Western audiences, and eventually a travel infrastructure was established to bring mostly Western tourists to the destinations. Western tourism thus forms another kind of imperialism, as the heritage of a destination is determined to suit the expectations and motivations of the visitors. This tends to obscure other features of local history, leaving those features of heritage not suitable to the tourist trade less valuable.

Made or Experienced?

Heritage is both made and experienced. Critics of heritage tourism rightly point to the ways in which heritage promotions can manipulate the past to defend specific ideological or commercial values. Yet, at the same time, heritage experiences are honestly felt and fundamental in the shaping of modern national or cultural identities. Thus, the questions of what constitutes “heritage” in a tourist attraction and whether or not the experience is “authentic” are fundamentally connected and contradictory. Neither heritage nor authenticity can be separated from both the process of their construction and the motivations and expectations of visitors. This makes heritage tourism a slippery subject for study. It involves numerous contradictions and complications. Indeed, contradiction and dissonance are at the heart of any notion of heritage tourism; what might be heritage for some is merely leisure and consumption for others. The dissonance comes from this dichotomy: the consumer exploitation of a destination that is held by many to have sacred properties. Yet, as this chapter suggests, the construction of those sacred properties is at times dependent on the consumer culture of the tourism industry.

Further Reading

Ashworth, Gregory J. , and John E. Tunbridge . The Tourist-Historic City: Retrospect and Prospect of Managing the Heritage City . London: Routledge, 2001 .

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Basu, Paul.   Highland Homecomings: Genealogy and Heritage Tourism in the Scottish Diaspora . London: Routledge, 2006 .

Dearborn, Lynne M. , and John C. Stallmeyer . Inconvenient Heritage: Erasure and Global Tourism in Luang Prabang . Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press, 2010 .

Hall, Melanie , ed. Towards World Heritage: International Origins of the Preservation Movement, 1880–1930 . Farnham: Ashgate, 2011 .

Hewison, Robert.   The Heritage Industry: Britain in a Climate of Decline . London: Methuen, 1987 .

Harrison, Rodney.   Heritage: Critical Approaches . New York: Routledge, 2013 .

Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, Barbara.   Destination Culture: Tourism, Museums, and Heritage . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1998 .

Lowenthal, David.   The Past Is a Foreign Country: Revisited . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015 .

Miles, Stephen.   The Western Front: Landscape, Tourism and Heritage . Barnsley: Pen and Sword, 2017 .

Macdonald, Sharon.   Memorylands: Heritage and Identity in Europe Today . London: Routledge, 2013 .

Park, Hyung Yu.   Heritage Tourism . London: Routledge, 2014 .

Shaffer, Marguerite S.   See America First: Tourism and National Identity, 1880–1940 . Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2001 .

Schama, Simon.   Landscape and Memory . New York: Alfred A Knopf, 1995 .

Sears, John F.   Sacred Places: American Tourist Attractions in the Nineteenth Century . Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 1998 .

Timothy, Dallen J.   Cultural Heritage and Tourism: An Introduction . Bristol: Channel View, 2011 .

Winter, Tim.   Post-Conflict Heritage, Postcolonial Tourism: Culture, Politics and Development at Angkor . London: Routledge, 2007 .

1   Peter J. Larkham , “Heritage As Planned and conserved,” in Heritage, Tourism and Society , ed. David T. Herbert (London: Mansell, 1995), 85 ; Peter Johnson and Barry Thomas , “Heritage As Business,” in Heritage, Tourism and Society , ed. David T. Herbert (London: Mansell, 1995), 170 ; David Lowenthal , The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 94.

2   David C. Harvey , “The History of Heritage,” in Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity , eds. Brian Graham and Peter Howard (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008), 22.

3   Deepak Chhabra , Robert Healy , and Erin Sills , “Staged Authenticity and Heritage Tourism,” Annals of Tourism Research 30, no. 3 (2003): 702–719.

4   Tomaz Kolar and Vesna Zabkar , “A Consumer-Based Model of Authenticity: An Oxymoron or the Foundation of Cultural Heritage Marketing?” Tourism Management 31, no. 5 (2010): 652–664.

5   John Tunbridge and Gregory Ashworth , Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict (Chichester: J. Wiley, 1996), 10–13.

6 See Lowenthal, The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History ; Robert Hewison , The Heritage Industry: Britain in a Climate of Decline (London: Methuen London, 1987) ; Patrick Wright , On Living in an Old Country: The National Past in Contemporary Britain (London: Verso, 1985).

7   John A. Jakle , The Tourist: Travel in Twentieth-Century North America (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1985).

8   John F. Sears , Sacred Places: American Tourist Attractions in the Nineteenth Century (Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 1998).

9   Patricia Jasen , Wild Things: Nature, Culture, and Tourism in Ontario, 1790–1914 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995).

10   Simon Schama , Landscape and Memory (New York: Alfred A Knopf, 1995), 6–19 ; Pamela J. Stewart and Andrew Strathan (eds.), Landscape, Memory and History: Anthropological Perspectives (London and Sterling: Pluto, 2003), 2–3.

11   David Lowenthal , “European and English Landscapes as National Symbols,” in Geography and National Identity , ed. David Hoosen (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994), 21–24 ; and David Lowenthal , “Landscape as Heritage,” in Heritage: Conservation, Interpretation and Enterprise , eds. J. D. Fladmark (London: Routledge, 1993), 10–11.

12   Katherine Grenier , Tourism and Identity in Scotland, 1770–1914: Creating Caledonia (London: Routledge, 2005), 5–11.

13   Patrick Young , Enacting Brittany: Tourism and Culture in Provincial France, 1871–1939 (Farnham; Burlington: Ashgate, 2012).

14   Christopher Chippindale , “The Making of the First Ancient Monuments Act, 1882, and Its Administration Under General Pitt-Rivers,” Journal of the British Archaeological Association 86 (1983): 1–55 ; Tim Murray , “The History, Philosophy, and Sociology of Archaeology: The Case of the Ancient Monuments Protection Act (1882),” in Histories of Archaeology: A Reader in the History of Archaeology , eds. Tim Murray and Christopher Evans (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 145–176.

  National Trust Act, 1907 . 7 Edward 7, Ch cxxxvi, first schedule.

Other countries developed similar programs, especially after World War II: Australia, 1947; United States, 1949; Japan, 1964; and Italy, 1975.

17   Bosse Sundin , “Nature as Heritage: The Swedish Case,” International Journal of Heritage Studies 11, no. 1 (2005): 9–20.

18   Tait Keller , Apostles of the Alps: Mountaineering and Nation Building in Germany and Austria, 1860–1939 (Chapel Hill, NC: UNC Press Books, 2015).

19 See Karl Baedeker , The Eastern Alps, Including the Bavarian Highlands, The Tyrol, Salzkammergut, Styria, and Carinthia (Leipsic: K. Baedeker, 1879).

20   Eric Zuelow , A History of Modern Tourism (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), 108–109.

21   M. D. Merrill (ed.), Yellowstone and the Great West: Journals, Letters, and Images from the 1871 Hayden Expedition (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2003), 210–211.

22   Alan Gordon , Making Public Pasts: The Contested Terrain of Montreal’s Public Memories (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2001).

23   John Sandlos , “Nature’s Playgrounds: The Parks Branch and Tourism Promotion in the National Parks, 1911–1929,” in A Century of Parks Canada, 1911–2011 , ed. Claire Elizabeth Campbell (Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 2011).

24   Stephen Pyne , How the Canyon Became Grand (New York: Viking, 1998), 25–26, 55–60 ; J. W. Powell , The Exploration of the Colorado River and Its Canyons (New York: Dover Press, 1875).

25   Linda Rancourt , “Cultural Celebration,” National Parks 80, no. 1 (2006): 4.

26   Charles Wilson , The Myth of Santa Fe: Creating a Modern Regional Tradition (Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press, 1997).

27   Ian McKay and Robin Bates , In the Province of History: The Making of the Public Past in Twentieth-Century Nova Scotia (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2010), 71–129.

28   Thomas A. Chambers , Memories of War Visiting Battlegrounds and Bonefields in the Early American Republic (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press 2012).

29 See Alan Gordon, “Where Famous Heroes Fell: Tourism, History, and Liberalism in old Quebec,” 58–81 and J. I. Little , “In Search of the Plains of Abraham: British, American, and Canadian Views of a Symbolic Landscape, 1793–1913,” in Remembering 1759: The Conquest of Canada in Historical Memory , eds. Phillip Buckner and John G. Reid (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2011), 82–109.

30   John S. Patterson , “A Patriotic Landscape: Gettysburg, 1863–1913,” Prospects 7 (1982): 315–333.

31   David Lloyd , Battlefield Tourism: Pilgrimage and the Commemoration of the Great War in Britain, Australia and Canada, 1919–1939 (Oxford and New York: Berg, 1998), 100–111.

  Lloyd, Battlefield Tourism , 98–100.

33   George Humphrey Yetter , Williamsburg Before and After: The Rebirth of Virginia’s Colonial Capital (Colonial Williamsburg, 1988), 49–52 ; Stephen Conn , Museums and American intellectual life, 1876–1926 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 155.

34   Raymond B. Fosdick , John D. Rockefeller Jr.: A Portrait (New York: Harper, 1956), 356–357.

35   Michael Wallace , “Visiting the Past: History Museums in the United States,” in A Living History Reader , ed. Jay Anderson (Nashville: American Association of State and Local History, 1991), 190.

36   Alan Gordon , Time Travel: Tourism and the Rise of the Living History Museum in Mid-Twentieth-Century Canada (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2016), 65–70 ; Ben Bradley , “The David Thompson Memorial Fort: An Early Outpost of Historically Themed Tourism in Western Canada,” Histoire sociale/Social History 49, no. 99 (2016): 409–429.

37   Kristen Semmens , Seeing Hitler’s Germany: Tourism in the Third Reich (Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005).

38   Gregory Ashworth and Peter Larkham , “A Heritage for Europe: The Need, the Task, the Contribution,” in Building a New Heritage , ed. Gregory Ashworth and Peter Larkham (London: Routledge, 1994), 127–129.

39   Alon Confino , “Traveling as a Culture of Remembrance: Traces of National Socialism in West Germany, 1945–1960,” History & Memory 12, no. 2 (2000): 92–121.

40 See, for example, Paul Basu , Highland Homecomings: Genealogy and Heritage Tourism in the Scottish Diaspora (London: Routledge, 2007).

41   Huang, Wei-Jue , Gregory Ramshaw , and William C. Norman . “Homecoming or Tourism? Diaspora Tourism Experience of Second-Generation Immigrants,” Tourism Geographies 18, no. 1 (2016): 59–79.

42   Shaul Kelner , Tours That Bind: Diaspora, Pilgrimage, and Israeli Birthright Tourism (New York: New York University Press, 2010).

43   Dina Berger , The Development of Mexico’s Tourism Industry: Pyramids by Day, Martinis by Night (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006).

44 See, for example, Dawn Starin , “Letter From Luang Prabang: World Heritage Designation, Blessing or Curse?” Critical Asian Studies 40, no. 4 (December 2008): 639–652.

45   Tim Winter , “Heritage Studies and the Privileging of Theory,” International Journal of Heritage Studies 20, no. 5 (2014): 556–572.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

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.

• Armed Conflict and Heritage
• Culture in Emergencies
• Disaster Risk Reduction
• Illicit Trafficking of Cultural Property
• Revive the Spirit of Mosul
• Culture and Sustainable Development
• Culture and Climate change
• Culture and Biodiversity
• Culture and Education
• Culture and Africa
• World Heritage
• Intangible Cultural Heritage
• Underwater Cultural Heritage
• Memory of the World
• Diversity of Cultural Expressions
• Creative Cities
• Culture for Small Island Developing States
• World Book Capital Network
• COVID-19 pandemic
• UNESCO-MONDIACULT 2022 World Conference
• The Tracker Culture & Public Policy
• Culture in the G20
• Inter-Agency Platform
• International Funds for Culture
• Category 2 Centres and Institutes in Culture
• International Day of Nowruz
• World Art Day
• World Book and Copyright Day
• International Jazz Day
• African World Heritage Day
• International Day against Illicit Trafficking in Cultural Property
• International Day of Islamic Art
• World Olive Tree Day
• International Arts Education Week (20-26 May)
• 2023 - 20th Anniversary of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage
• 2021 - International Year of Creative Economy for Sustainable Development
• 2019 - International Year of Indigenous Languages
• 2017 - International Year of Sustainable Tourism
• 2010 - International Year for the Rapprochement of Cultures
• Legal Instruments
• Publications

Cultural heritage: 7 successes of UNESCO’s preservation work

The power of preserving cultural heritage to build a better world

Why do we go to great lengths to preserve culture and make it bloom? Culture is a resource for the identity and cohesion of communities. In today’s interconnected world, it is also one of our most powerful resources to transform societies and renew ideas. It is UNESCO’s role to provide the tools and skills we need to make the most of its ultimate renewable energy.

Historical landmarks, living heritage and natural sites enrich our daily lives in countless ways, whether we experience them directly or through the medium of a connected device. Cultural diversity and creativity are natural drivers of innovation. In many ways, artists, creators and performers help us change our perspective on the world and rethink our environment. These are precious assets to respond to current global challenges, from the climate crisis to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The notion of culture has greatly evolved over the last 75 years. UNESCO’s actions over the past decades bear witness to the many ways in which humanity tried to understand how culture can strengthen the sense of who we are – from the awareness of the necessity to protect heritage from destruction at the end of World War II, to the launch of international campaigns to safeguard World Heritage sites and the concept of living and intangible heritage, a focus on creative economy and the need to sustain cultural jobs and livelihoods. Our relationship with culture has deeply evolved over the last century. If we look into the past, we might be better prepared to tackle further changes ahead.

The United States will be participating in an international effort which has captured the imagination and sympathy of people throughout the world. By thus contributing to the preservation of past civilizations, we will strengthen and enrich our own.

Abu Simbel – We do not have to choose between the living and the dead

A few minutes before sunrise, thousands of visitors line up inside the temple of Abu Simbel, holding their breath. They are about to witness a rare phenomenon that has taken place twice a year for the last 3,000 years. Every February and October at 6:29 am, the light of the rising sun pierces through the narrow entrance. The rays penetrate over 70 metres deep across the giant pillared hall up to the inner sanctuary, illuminating the statue of the man who built the temple during the 13th century BC, Pharaoh Ramses II.

Carved out of a rocky hill, the Temple of the Rising Sun had been conceived to show the might of Egypt’s greatest pharaoh to the Nubian people in the Upper Nile. Over time, the great temple and the smaller buildings became covered in sand and lay forgotten for centuries, until their rediscovery in 1813. The supreme example of ancient Egypt’s knowledge of astronomy and the skill of its architects could be admired again.

But just over a century later, the southernmost relics of this ancient human civilization were threatened with underwater oblivion and destruction by the rising waters of the Nile following the construction of the Aswan High Dam. The construction of the Dam was meant to develop agriculture as well as Egyptian independence and economy, and triggered a global debate that has fuelled media front pages and discussions ever since: should we have to choose between the monuments of the past and a thriving economy for the people living today? Why should people care for ancient stones and buildings when so many people need food and emergency assistance?

In the course of an unprecedented safeguarding campaign to save the temples of Egypt, UNESCO demonstrated that humanity does not have to sacrifice the past to thrive in the present – quite the opposite. Monuments of outstanding universal value help us understand who we are and also represent massive opportunities for development. Two millennia after a Greek author and scientist drew the famous list of the world’s seven wonders, the very notion of World Heritage came to life.

The race against time began in 1964 , when experts from 50 nations started working together under the coordination of UNESCO in one of the greatest challenges of archaeological engineering in history. The entire site was carefully cut into large blocks, dismantled, lifted and reassembled in a new location 65 metres higher and 200 metres back from the river, preserving it for future generations.

Today, the four majestic statues that guard the entrance to the great temple stare at the river and the rising sun every day. As they did 3,000 years ago. The success of the international cooperation to save Abu Simbel raised awareness about the fact that all over the world there are places of outstanding universal value. Just like the Nile valley temples, they must be protected from many threats such as armed conflict, deliberate destruction, economic pressure, natural disasters and climate change.

The World Heritage Convention was adopted in 1972 as the most important global instrument to establish this notion, bringing all nations together in the pursuit of the preservation of the World’s Natural and Cultural Heritage. With its 194 signatory Member States, it is today one of the world’s most ratified conventions.

How is a site inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List?

For a site to be inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List, it must first be nominated by the country where it is located. The nomination is examined by international experts who decide whether the inclusion is justified. Finally, the World Heritage Committee, a body of 21 UNESCO elected Member States, takes a vote.

Venice – Can the safeguard of cultural heritage and global tourism coexist?

Launched only a few years after the Nubian temples initiative, the safeguarding campaign for Venice was a response to various challenges including the rising waters and the explosion of global tourism.

Stepping  outside the railway station early on an autumnal morning, visitors are met with the view of the chilly air colliding with the water, forming a thick, soft blanket of fog over the Grand Canal, the ‘main street’ of Venice. The church of San Simeone Piccolo, with its oversized dome and slender neoclassical columns, and the neighbouring buildings appear to be floating on the water of the lagoon. It’s a sight that has welcomed millions of visitors from all over the world since the heydays of the Serenissima, when the city ruled as one of Europe’s economic superpowers.

Yet, the breath-taking beauty that inspired countless painters, writers and artists over the centuries remains fragile and at risk of being lost forever. Like the Abu Simbel temples, the city’s survival is threatened by rising water levels. The inexorable increase in sea level has caused flooding to become a regular occurrence. Humidity and microorganisms are eating away the long wooden piles that early dwellers drove deep into the muddy ground of the lagoon to build the first foundations of Venice, 1,600 years ago.

After 1966, the year of the worst flooding in Venice’s history, UNESCO and the Italian Government launched a major campaign to save the city. An ambitious project involving giant mobile flood gates was undertaken to temporarily isolate the lagoon from the high tides and protect the lowest areas from flooding. Thirty years later there is unanimous agreement on the successful results both of the technical achievements and international cooperation.

But Venice still needs attentive care, and its continued survival calls for unflagging vigilance. The city remains threatened on several fronts – mass tourism, the potential damage of subsequent urban development and the steady stream of giant cruise ships crushing its brittle foundations.

International mobilization and pressure around the status of Venice led to the Italian Government’s decision in 2021 to ban large ships from the city centre, as a necessary step to protect the environmental, landscape, artistic and cultural integrity of Venice. This decision came a few days after UNESCO announced its intention to inscribe the city on its World Heritage in Danger list. Until a permanent big cruise docking place is identified and developed, liners will be permitted to pull up in Marghera, an industrial suburb of Venice. Such decisions illustrate the great complexity of protecting historic cities and cultural heritage urban centres, which in this particular situation called for tailor-made measures and techniques different from those implemented for the safeguarding of the fabled Egyptian temples.

If every museum in the New World were emptied, if every famous building in the Old World were destroyed and only Venice saved, there would be enough there to fill a full lifetime with delight. Venice, with all its complexity and variety, is in itself the greatest surviving work of art in the world.

Angkor – A successful example of longstanding international cooperation

Deep in the forests of Cambodia, in the Siem Reap Province, the five lotus-flower-shaped towers of majestic Angkor Wat soar towards the sky. When approaching from the main gate, the vast scale of the temple and the precise symmetry of the buildings are awe inspiring. This is the world's largest religious monument.

Angkor Wat was part of a sprawling city as big as London, the heart of an empire that between the 9th and 15th centuries extended from southern Vietnam to Laos, and from the Mekong River to Eastern Myanmar. By around 1500 A.D., the Khmer capital was abandoned, most likely after heavy floods and lengthy droughts. Its temples, buildings and complex irrigation network were swallowed by the surrounding forests and lay hidden until their rediscovery in 1860.

By the early 1990s, the site was under major threat, with many of the temples at high risk of collapse and several sites looted. Conservation work at Angkor had not been possible since the outbreak of the civil war, the rise of the Khmer Rouge regime and the following civil unrest.

Angkor Wat’s inclusion in UNESCO’s World Heritage List in 1992 marked a milestone in the country’s recovery after years of conflict. The UNESCO-backed preservation of the temples aimed to assist in nation-building and national reconciliation. The action of the International Coordinating Committee (link is external) (ICC-Angkor) for the safeguarding and development of this exceptional cultural site is a striking example of international solidarity and testifies to one of UNESCO's most impressive achievements for heritage. Thirty countries and an ad hoc experts group for scientific, restoration and conservation projects were brought together under an innovative approach, closely linking safeguarding operations to sustainable development efforts.

In 25 years, Angkor has thus become a living laboratory demonstrating the potential of sustainable tourism and crafts, with the mobilization of local communities for social cohesion in 112 villages. The gigantic site now supports 700,000 inhabitants and attracts some five million visitors whose flow must be managed each year. The park authorities are carrying out several projects aimed at improving the lives of communities through the implementation of sustainable tourism that respects local sensitivities. The removal from UNESCO’s List of World Heritage in Danger just fourteen years later is a credit to the Cambodian people.

The fact that a project of such magnitude was successfully carried out in a country emerging from more than two decades of conflict in 1992 is a testament to the potential of the World Heritage Convention and the international solidarity led by UNESCO.

Walking through the temple, I saw reminders of the prosperous civilization that built it: hundreds of beautiful figures carved into the walls telling the stories of these ancient people; wide galleries they must have prayed in; long hallways lined with pillars they must have walked down.

No one knows for sure what caused the empire to abandon this temple and the surrounding city, but in the 15th century almost everyone left. Trees grew over the stones. Only Buddhist monks stayed behind to care for — and pray in — the hidden temples.

But that didn’t stop pilgrims and visitors from continuing to journey here to take in these incredible structures. And now, centuries later, I couldn’t be more thankful to count myself as one of these visitors

Mostar – Symbols do matter, in war and peace

It’s the end of July in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Peak summer means an influx of tourists to the cobbled alleys of Mostar. The cosy medieval town has a long, rich history marked by the peaceful coexistence of three communities: Muslim Bosniaks, Orthodox Serbs and Catholic Croats. Once they arrive in town, visitors from all over the world make a beeline for Mostar’s most emblematic monument, the Old Bridge.

A masterpiece of Ottoman architecture, Stari Most – as it’s known locally – is a symbol of the different communities that have existed side-by-side in the area. Since the 16th century, the bridge had brought them together across the Neretva river – until the Bosnian war. The bridge was a symbol of unity between the Bosnian community (Muslim), in the east of the city, and the Croats and Serbs to the west. The bridge of Mostar (of Ottoman, therefore Muslim origin) served as a link between all these communities – as a pedestrian bridge, it had no military or strategic value. Its destruction in 1993 was only meant to force the communities to separate, to deny their mixing with their neighbours. The bridge was in ruins and, with it, the values of peace and understanding this centuries-old structure had embodied.

Five years later, UNESCO coordinated a reconstruction project to rebuild the Old Bridge. Despite the scars of the war that are still visible today on the city walls, the reconstructed bridge has now become a symbol of reconciliation and post-conflict healing.

Today, the crowds jam the street to watch the traditional diving contest from the top of the bridge, a long-held custom resumed once Stari Most was restored to its former glory. Every July, young people of Mostar’s three communities compete with courage by jumping into the river 29 metres below, just like they did before the war.

For over four years after the ceasefire, former enemies worked together to retrieve the stones from the riverbed and rebuild their former symbol of friendship. Reconstructed in 2004 and inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage list in 2006, Stari Most today is a bridge between a common past and a common future. It is certainly not enough to rebuild a bridge to restore confidence and rebuild peace in a war-torn society. But it certainly matters to care for the symbols of peace.

I was in my office, working to the sound of mortar fire, when we heard the cries in the street – cries that the bridge had fallen. And what happened then was so impressive that I will never forget it. Everyone came out to see. Grenades and bombs were falling everywhere, but still they came out of their hiding places: young and old, weak and strong, Muslim and Christian, they all came, all crying. Because that bridge was part of our identity. It represented us all.

Timbuktu – When warlords target heritage, peacemakers respond with more heritage

Sitting at the gateway to the Sahara Desert, Timbuktu conjures images of a mythical city at the end of the world, where Arab and African merchants would travel from afar to trade salt, gold, cattle and grain. In the English language, the city in northern Mali has come to represent a place far away. Undaunted, caravans still ply the cross-desert route and come to the city several times a year. They carry rock salt extracted from the northern Sahara, just like their ancestors did for centuries.

In its heyday, during the 16th century, the city had 100,000 inhabitants, as its mosques and holy sites played an essential role in the spread of Islam in Africa. The city became an important centre of learning in Africa and its libraries the repository of at least 700,000 historical manuscripts on art, science and medicine, as well as copies of the Qur’an. These manuscripts, written in ornate calligraphy, bear witness to the richness of African history and intellectual life.

During the conflict of 2012–2013, more than 4,000 of the 40,000 manuscripts kept at the Ahmed Baba Institute were lost. Some were burnt or stolen, while more than 10,000 remained in a critical condition. The inhabitants of Timbuktu helped save their precious heritage by secretly spiriting away more than 300,000 manuscripts to the capital, Bamako. Other texts were sheltered between mud walls or buried. Although protected from immediate destruction, the manuscripts are now preserved in conditions that may not safeguard them for future generations.

To help preserve Timbuktu’s cultural heritage and encourage reconciliation, UNESCO has been supporting the local communities to take part in ancient manuscript conservation projects and ensure their lasting preservation for humanity.

UNESCO has coordinated the work to rebuild the fourteen mausoleums inscribed on the World Heritage List, as well as the Djingareyber and Sidi Yaha mosques, that were deliberately destroyed by armed groups during the conflict.

The reconstruction of Timbuktu’s devastated cultural heritage aimed to foster reconciliation among communities and restore trust and social cohesion. An important aspect of the project was the drive to include the reconstruction of the mausoleums in an overall strategy aimed at revitalizing building traditions and ensuring their continuity, through on-the-job training activities and conservation projects.

To ensure the rebuilt shrines matched the old ones as closely as possible, the reconstruction work was checked against old photos and local elders were consulted. Local workers used traditional methods and local materials, including alhor stone, rice stalks and banco – a mixture of clay and straw.

The destruction of the mausoleums of Timbuktu has been a shock, and a clear turning point revealing the importance taken of culture and heritage in modern conflicts fuelled by violent extremism and fundamentalist ideologies. It has shown how strongly fundamentalists are willing to destroy other Islamic cultures, and any other vision which differs from their own. Similar direct destruction of Islamic, pre-Islamic, Christian or Jewish heritage, has then been seen in Iraq and Syria. The need to restore heritage has become far more than a mere cultural issue – it has become a security issue, and a key component for the resilience and further cohesion of societies torn by conflicts.

At present, the monuments in Timbuktu are living heritage, closely associated with religious rituals and community gatherings. Their shape and form have always evolved over time both with annual cycles (that of the rain and the erosion of the plastering); that of regular maintenance (every three to five years); repairs of structural pathologies, often adding buttresses; and at times more important works, including extensions and raising of the roof structure. How to take that into account while trying to guide and assist the local people in their self-capacity, their resilience in keeping their heritage as they have done for over 600 years? What should be done and to what extent? Who should be responsible for what? These are tricky questions of heritage preservation, far beyond the mere inscription of a site on the famous World Heritage list.

Salt comes from north, gold from south and silver from the land of Whites, but the Word of God, the famous things, histories and fairy tales, we only find them in Timbuktu.

Preserving cultural identity and Korean traditions: The bond of living heritage

It’s the end of November in the countryside near Jeonju, the capital of the North Jeolla Province. The weather is getting chilly and winter is just a couple of weeks away.

It’s time to prepare for the long, icy-cold season. It’s time to make kimchi.

The Republic of Korea’s staple food is a side dish of salted and fermented vegetables that makes its appearance at every meal. It’s not just the country’s emblematic dish: its preparation ( kimjang ) is a community event.

Housewives monitor weather forecasts to determine the most favourable date and temperature for preparing kimchi. Entire families, friends and neighbours gather together to make it. The process is rather laborious and requires many hands to process the large quantities of vegetables required to last throughout the winter months. They all work together, exchange tips and tighten their relationships through kimjang. Families take turns making kimchi to form closer bonds.

Today, the entire village will get together in one of the houses for the occasion. Together, they will wash the napa cabbage that was pickled in salt the night before and mix in the seasonings that will give kimchi its unique sour-and-spicy flavour. The specific methods and ingredients are transmitted from mother to daughter so that kimjang culture is preserved through the generations.

Since 2013, kimjang has been included in UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity as an important part of Korean culture, embodying the country’s cooperative and sharing team spirit. Kimjang is a vital cultural asset of a community and worth preserving and celebrating for the rest of humanity. Even though there may be regional differences in the preparation of kimchi, it transcends class, regional and even national borders.

Cultural practices often precede the instauration of national borders and the start of conflict among its citizens. Shared cultural practices may even be a path to reconciliation. 

Such hopes materialized in 2018, when the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea decided to work together to submit a joint submission for traditional wrestling as an element of UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.

Ssirum/Ssireum (wrestling) is a physical game and a popular form of entertainment widely enjoyed all across the Korean peninsula. In the North, two opponents try to push each other to the ground using a satpa (a fabric strap connecting the waist and leg), their torso, hands and legs. Ssirum/Ssireum is distinguished by the use of the satpa and the awarding of a bull to the winner. In the South, Ssirum/Ssireum is a type of wrestling in which two players wearing long fabric belts around their waists and one thigh grip their opponents’ belt and deploy various techniques to send them to the ground. The winner of the final game for adults is awarded an ox, symbolizing agricultural abundance, and the title of ‘Jangsa’.

As an approachable sport involving little risk of injury, Ssirum/Ssireum also offers a means to improve mental and physical health. Koreans are widely exposed to Ssirum/Ssireum traditions within their families and local communities: children learn the wrestling skills from family members; local communities hold annual open wrestling tournaments; its instruction is also provided in schools.

Following UNESCO’s mediation, the two States Parties agreed for their respective nomination files to be jointly examined by the Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage in November 2018. UNESCO welcomed this initiative of regional cooperation and, through a historic decision, inscribed "Traditional Korean wrestling (Ssirum/Ssireum)" on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, as a joint inscription from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea. While the Lists of the Convention include several examples of multinational nominations prepared by several States (from couscous to the art of falconry and the Mediterranean diet), the coming together of the two States Parties for the joint inscription of Korean traditional wrestling by the Committee is unprecedented. It marks a highly symbolic step on the road to inter-Korean reconciliation. It is also a victory for the longstanding and profound ties between both sides of the inter-Korean border, and for the role cultural diplomacy may have in international relations.

It was the time when the women would gather and gossip. There would be matchmaking. There would be some marriages that came about during the time of kimchi making.

Promoting culture in a post-COVID-19 world

The cultural and creative industries are among the fastest growing sectors in the world. With an estimated global worth of US$ 4.3 trillion per year, the culture sector now accounts for 6.1 per cent of the global economy. They generate annual revenues of US$ 2,250 billion and nearly 30 million jobs worldwide, employing more people aged 15 to 29 than any other sector. The cultural and creative industries have become essential for inclusive economic growth, reducing inequalities and achieving the goals set out in the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda.

The adoption of the 2005 Convention for the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions was a milestone in international cultural policy. Through this historic agreement, the global community formally recognized the dual nature, both cultural and economic, of contemporary cultural expressions produced by artists and cultural professionals. Shaping the design and implementation of policies and measures that support the creation, production, distribution of and access to cultural goods and services, the 2005 Convention is at the heart of the creative economy.

Recognizing the sovereign right of States Parties to maintain, adopt and implement policies to protect and promote the diversity of cultural expression, both nationally and internationally, the 2005 Convention supports governments and civil society in finding policy solutions for emerging challenges.

Based on human rights and fundamental freedoms, the 2005 Convention ultimately provides a new framework for informed, transparent and participatory systems of governance for culture.

A constant rethinking of culture and heritage

The history of UNESCO bears witness to the deep transformation of the concept of culture over the past decades. From global Conventions mostly dealing with building and stones in the 60’s and 70’s, the international cooperation opened new fronts for the protection and promotion of culture, including intangible cultural heritage, cultural diversity and creative economy. The definition of "culture" was spearheaded by the committee led by former UN Secretary-General Javier Pérez de Cuellar and the Mondiacult Conference in 1982. In 2022, the global Mondiacult conference is expected to take stock of progress made in the past 40 years in cultural policies, and re-imagine its future in a post-COVID-19 world.

Have a look at these World Heritage sites

The 30,000-kilometre-long road system was built by the Inca Empire across mountains, valleys, rainforests and deserts to link the Inca capital, Cuzco, with distant areas of the empire, from the Amazon to the Andes. Thanks to its sheer scale, Qhapaq Ñan is a unique achievement of engineering skills, highlighting the Incas' mastery of construction technology.

The granting of World Heritage status in 2019 has made its trail – which every year sees thousands of visitors on their way to the area’s archaeological sites such as Machu Picchu in Peru – eligible for much-needed restoration funds.

Borobudur Temple Compound

Borobudur is the largest Buddhist temple in the world and one of the great archaeological sites of Southeast Asia. This imposing Buddhist temple, dating from the 8th and 9th centuries, is located in central Java. It was built in three tiers: a pyramidal base with five concentric square terraces, the trunk of a cone with three circular platforms and, at the top, a monumental stupa. The walls and balustrades are decorated with fine low reliefs, covering a total surface area of 2,500 m 2 . Around the circular platforms are 72 openwork stupas, each containing a statue of the Buddha. The monument was restored with UNESCO's help in the 1970s.

Bamiyan Valley, Afghanistan

This cultural landscape was simultaneously inscribed on the World Heritage List and the List of World Heritage in Danger in 2003. The property is in a fragile state of conservation, having suffered from abandonment, military action and dynamite explosions. Parts of the site are inaccessible due to the presence of anti-personnel mines.

Related items

• Lists and designations
• Intangible cultural heritage
• Intangible heritage
• Diversity of Cultural Expressions-2005 Convention
• Intangible Cultural Heritage-2003 Convention
• Underwater Cultural Heritage-2001 Convention
• World Heritage 1972 Convention
• Fight Illicit Trafficking-1970 Convention
• Armed Conflict and Heritage-1954 Convention
• Culture & Sustainable Development
• UNESCO Creative Cities Network

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

Lajos Hanzo

HERMES - Journal of Language and Communication in Business

Peter Colliander

Cmaj Canadian Medical Association Journal

Jeff Nisker

Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery

Carol Tenopir

Lobachevskii Journal of Mathematics

ion Armeanu

Composites: Mechanics, Computations, Applications: An International Journal

Francisco David Mateos Anzaldo

Open Journal of Marine Science

ALLEN CHRISTOPHER Y4PIT

RSC Advances

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

Soha Atallah

Buletin Informativ al Simpozionului Național Rolul Mănăstirii Secu în viața religioasă a Moldovei

Alexandru Berzovan

Journal of Student Research

Danny Zhang

International Journal of Medical Ophthalmology

Mayuri Sukumaran

Somayeh Komeylian

hassan ahmed

Journal of Ocean and Coastal Economics

Tobias Schwoerer

Web Technologies Research and Development - APWeb 2005

I. Garrigós

Harga Besek Bambu Bandung

irfan tusongpattu

Advances in Interventional Cardiology

Michał Lelek

Alpha Centauri

Josué Otoniel Dilas-Jiménez

arXiv (Cornell University)

Roland Schmehl

Nuevo itinerario

Maria Angelica Fierro

Mishal Iftikhar

Discourse, Context and Media

quanjiang guo

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

• Open access
• Published: 23 March 2022

Research progress and knowledge system of world heritage tourism: a bibliometric analysis

• Juan Zhang 1 , 2 ,
• Kangning Xiong 1 ,
• Zhaojun Liu 1 &
• Lixiang He 2 , 3  

Heritage Science volume  10 , Article number:  42 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

7926 Accesses

27 Citations

Metrics details

In the context of integrating culture and tourism, world heritage tourism research has become a focus in tourism research in recent years. There are increasing discussions in academic circles on the content and methods of this field. Clarifying the knowledge system of research is conducive to dialogue with international theoretical frontiers and integrating, analyzing, and predicting the progress and lineage from a more comprehensive perspective. Still, few studies on the knowledge system of world heritage tourism research have been conducted. To fill this gap, this study uses the SSCI and SCI sub-databases of Web of Science Core Collection as the data source with the help of CiteSpace and VOSviewer software to measure the knowledge system of world heritage tourism research. A bibliometric analysis of 567 publications between 1992 and 2020 was conducted to construct a framework of a knowledge system based on literature statistics and content analysis, revealing the geographic research regions, theories and methods, themes and contents, trend evolution, and future research inspiration. The results show that: (1) the number of publications tends to increase gradually, with the highest in 2019. The authors and research institutions are mainly concentrated in Europe, America, East Asia. China has the highest publications. More literature on cultural heritage as a geographical study area than natural heritage. (2) The research themes, objects, and methods of the sample literature have become more diversified with the advancement of the research stage. The literature on multi-stakeholder research is the largest, followed by tourism impacts and research on World Heritage Sites’ resource management techniques and methods. These studies provide a multifaceted interpretation of the sustainable development of World heritage tourism, mainly from the perspectives of both supply and demand. However, the theoretical system is still incomplete. (3) Future research should strengthen the theoretical system construction, research innovation, cooperation, and research exchange in world heritage tourism research. Pay more attention to the research on the pluralistic value system of world heritage. Focus on exploring research on world heritage tourism’s resilience and localization dilemmas under the impact of the New Crown epidemic. To reveal the synergistic mechanisms and paths of diversified livelihoods of World Heritage Sites’ residents in ecologically fragile and impoverished areas.

Introduction

Research on world heritage (WH) tourism began to emerge in the mid-twentieth century and has shown rapid growth in the early twenty-first century and continues today. A World Heritage Site (WHS) is a scarce area of outstanding universal value (OUV) that requires long-term protection, is non-renewable and irreplaceable, as identified by United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and World Heritage Committee (WHC) [ 1 ]. World Heritage-listed areas typically receive an order of magnitude more tourist visits than their non-listed counterparts [ 2 , 3 , 4 ]. These areas are also often used as a means of economic regeneration through tourism development [ 5 , 6 , 7 ], as they have a significant economic impact on local communities [ 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ]. In addition, WHSs contribute to national image building [ 12 , 13 , 14 ] and promote destination branding [ 13 , 15 , 16 ]. Thus various national and regional governments actively apply for WHSs [ 15 ]. As of December 2021, the total number of enlisted heritage sites is 1154, including cultural, natural, and mixed categories, registered in 167 countries. In recent decades, WHSs have attracted a great deal of attention in promoting tourism and economic development and heritage conservation, driven by the benefits of the “WH” brand. The series of impacts and challenges arising from the inscription and development frenzy has led to a lively debate and a re-examination of WH tourism in the light of the increasingly popular concept of sustainable tourism development.

Tourism utilization and WH conservation are inevitably intertwined, and there is a symbiotic or tension between the two [ 17 , 18 , 19 ]. The development of tourism can create new values and social relations for WHSs and is often seen as a tool to combat poverty and promote sustainable development [ 8 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ]. However, many WHSs also face challenges by the rapidly expanding tourism industry, population pressure, environmental pollution, conflicts between residents, tourists, government, and other stakeholders threaten WH conservation and sustainability. The interaction between conservation and use has become a vital issue in WH tourism research [ 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 ]. Development pressure due to local socio-economic issues, poor legislation and management, and inappropriate tourism operations are the leading causes of conflicts between heritage conservation and tourism development [ 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 ].

Controversies in academic circles regarding WH tourism research are becoming increasingly intense, and differences in positions and perspectives have divided the study into different categories. For example, environmentalists believe that WH and tourism are entirely contradictory. The development of tourism poses a threat to the environmental protection of WHSs [ 31 , 32 , 33 ]. Scholars concerned with social development emphasize that tourism can promote the economic development of WHSs [ 5 , 8 , 22 ]. Socio-ecological conservation advocates focus on exploring the synergy between environmental conservation and tourism economic development in WHSs [ 34 , 35 ]. It is essential to clarify WH tourism research’s progress and academic dynamics to advance research in the field, thus explaining the unique research objects and focus.

Existing studies have been categorized and reviewed mainly in terms of fundamental issues of WH tourism destinations, tourism activities, tourists, and other stakeholders, mostly an analysis of the content of the literature. While review studies based on bibliometric analysis have emerged in recent years, integrated accounting and prognosis of the development lineage of WH tourism research are relatively rare. A knowledge system is structured knowledge that members of a discipline or field use to guide their practice or work [ 36 ], including a systematization of the structure, principles, and examples of professional knowledge generated by members through continuous discovery and validation. The organization of the knowledge system facilitates the self-reflective growth and reproduction of WH tourism research [ 37 ]. A single visual knowledge map can hardly reflect the intrinsic nature of the knowledge system, and a single content analysis method is slightly lacking in objectivity. To fill this gap, this study mainly uses two types of scientometric tools, CiteSpace and VOSviewer, which integrates quantitative analysis represented by scientometric analysis, knowledge mapping, and keyword clustering, and content analysis represented by topic reading to identify the research progress and knowledge system of WH tourism research. To provide a comprehensive and objective overview of the current state of research in the field and provide a scientific reference for subsequent research. To achieve this, we set the following objectives:

To reveal the basic characteristics of the literature (section 3: changes in the number of publications, authors, research institutions, geographical research areas).

To identify key areas of research progress (sections 4–5: key research areas and contents, research theories and methods, and evolution of research trends).

To build a framework of knowledge (sections 6–7).

Material and methods

Research methods.

Bibliometric analysis helps decipher and map the cumulative scientific knowledge and evolutionary nuances of well-established fields by making sense of large volumes of unstructured data in rigorous ways. It enables and empowers scholars to gain a one-stop overview, identify knowledge gaps, derive novel ideas for investigation, and position their intended contributions to the field [ 38 ]. In recent years, bibliometric analysis in heritage tourism has emerged sporadically [ 39 , 40 ]. However, there is a relative lack of bibliometrics on tourism research in WHSs.

Science mapping is a generic domain analysis and visualization [ 41 ]. It is a study of scientific knowledge and belongs to scientometrics [ 42 ]. Several valuable scientific knowledge mapping tools have been born in bibliometric analysis, such as CiteSpace, VOSviewer, Sci2, BibExcel, Carrot2, etc. CiteSpace software can more intuitively and quickly visualize the focus and evolutionary trends in a specific field than other visualization and analysis software. It can reveal the inner connection between knowledge bases, conducive to better grasping the key points and future research development direction. VOSviewer software has unique advantages in graph display and clustering technology and is often used to display large networks [ 43 ]. The combined use of CiteSpace and VOSviewer software visualizes the highlights and trend evolution of WH tourism research. Using bibliometric visualization software for statistical data analysis, combined with content analysis, we objectively interpret WH tourism research progress and construct a knowledge system framework to provide scientific reference for WH conservation and utilization.

Defining terms

WHS is a rare and irreplaceable treasure of humanity recognized by UNESCO and WHC as a heritage site and natural landscape of OUV. OUV is the criterion for being selected as a WHS. It means cultural and/or natural significance, which is exceptional to transcend national boundaries and be of common importance for present and future generations of all humanity. The World Heritage List (WHL) published by UNESCO divides WHS into three main categories: cultural site (including cultural landscapes), natural site, and mixed cultural and natural site. According to the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (Convention) promulgated in 1972, world cultural heritage means cultural objects, architectural ensembles, and sites of OUV. World natural heritage refers to natural features of OUV, threatened animal and plant habitat areas, wild places of interest, or delineated natural areas. Only properties that partially or fully satisfy cultural and natural heritage definitions in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention can be considered “mixed cultural and natural heritage.” Following the Convention’s definition of WH, we focus on the tourism development of world cultural, natural, and mixed heritage sites. Therefore, publications that meet the following conditions are excluded.

A study of heritage tourism unrelated to WHS.

Articles and comments on intangible heritage.

Document selection

In this study, we used the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection database as the data source, selected one of the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) databases to search. The reason for using this database is that it is one of the most widely recognized international databases with data going back to 1900 and provides a rich, comprehensive collection of information from more than 18,000 authoritative, high-impact scholarly journals worldwide. Search the literature using 5 sets of keywords. (a) “world heritage” and “tourism,” (b) “world cultural heritage” and “tourism,” (c) “world natural heritage” and “tourism,” (d) “mixed heritage” and “tourism,” (e) “cultural landscape,” “world heritage” and “tourism.” Without limiting the starting time, the data were last updated on December 31, 2020.

Searches returned 672 documents (Fig.  1 ): (a) 604 documents for world heritage and tourism, (b) 29 documents for world cultural heritage and tourism, (c) 24 documents for world natural heritage and tourism, (d) 3 documents for mixed heritage and tourism, and (e) 12 documents for cultural landscape, world heritage and tourism. We excluded 10 documents not in English, and 28 documents that appeared in two searches or more (duplicates). Finally, a full-text assessment was carried out, resulting in 567 papers (Additional file 1 : Appendix S1).

Approach for the material selection

Document analysis

In the final data analysis phase, an analysis protocol has been applied to critically analyze the collected publications’ content and describe it in a structured way (Fig.  2 ). It sought to gather each document’s essential characteristics, focus, content, and existing gaps and needs in WH tourism research. Finally, a full-text assessment was conducted to summarize findings and problems with existing studies and present future research needs.

Analysis protocol for the material collection

Basic characteristics of the selected publications

Year of publication.

As shown in Fig.  3 , the number of publications generally showed an upward trend from 1992 to 2020. At the end of the twentieth century, related scholars began to pay attention to this emerging field, and the results appeared one after another. However, the number of articles published between 1992 and 2006 was small because of the initial research stage, with an average of only 2 articles per year. Since 2007, the number of articles has increased significantly, in 2019 was as high as 94, indicating that the academic community’s research on world heritage tourism is highly enthusiastic.

The number of publications per year

First author’s country

The sample literature came from more than 50 countries in total, and the top 10 countries in terms of the number of publications were mainly concentrated in East Asia, Europe, and America (Fig.  4 ). China has the most significant number of publications, accounting for 20%. The early research literature was mainly concentrated in developed countries like Australia and the United Kingdom. Research in China began to appear in 2003, with a significant increase in volume in 2009, and maintained the world’s top-ranking number of publications during 2014–2020. Since China joined the Convention in 1985, it has become one of the fastest-growing countries in the world in terms of the number of WHSs, attracting the attention of the academic community and increasing the number of research results year by year. By the 43rd World Heritage Conference, 55 WHSs have been successfully nominated, ranking first in the world with Italy. It can be seen that the geographical distribution of research literature is positively related to the level of regional economic development and the number of WHSs.

Number of publications from the top 10 countries at different periods

Authors and institutions

(1) authorship and cooperation networks.

There were 475 first authors on the 567 sample papers. In Fig.  5 , the larger font size of the authors’ names indicates more publications, and the larger nodes indicate more collaboration between authors. It shows that Su, Rasoolimanesh, Martinez-Perez A, Xu, and Buckley are the top five in terms of the total number of publications. And the collaborative network has a core–edge structure with fewer connections between the nodes, indicating that only a few researchers collaborate, and the majority of scholars are weakly connected. Most research teams were formed after 2011, indicating that research on WH tourism has gradually increased since then. For example, Su and Wall have collaborated on many publications on community engagement in heritage sustainable management research. Rasoolimanesh and Jaafar have produced many results around resident perception research in heritage sites, with 6 articles published in 2016.

Author co-cited network

(2) Issuing institution

According to the frequency in Table 1 , the top ten research institutions in terms of the number of publications are mainly universities and colleges, and there are relatively few research institutes. Sun Yat-Sen University and the Renmin University of China are the primary research institutions in China. The rest of the research institutions are mainly located in Canada, Australia, Spain, and Malaysia. Research institutions have specialized WH tourism research groups, such as Sun Yat-sen University in China, whose primary literature is contributed by the team of Zhang, Xu, and Sun.

Geographical study area

There are 56 world natural heritage sites and 123 cultural heritage sites studied in 434 documents. 155 of these articles (36%) are about natural sites, 254 (59%) about cultural sites, and 25 about mixed heritage sites (5%). The WHSs that appeared more than 2 times in the sample literature were counted and sorted by their countries (Table 2 ). It shows that China, Australia, Spain, Malaysia, Korea, and Cambodia are the hot geographical areas of academic research, with the Great Barrier Reef (n = 18), Melaka and George Town (n = 15), and Angkor (n = 11) being the most prominent. In recent years, research results about Jiuzhaigou Valley Scenic and Historic Interest Area and Wulingyuan Scenic and Historic Interest Area in China and the archaeological heritage of the Lenggong Valley in Malaysia have increased.

Key research areas and content

Keywords are a condensation and distillation of the core content of the literature. A high frequency of keywords can reflect the focus in a particular area [ 44 ]. Using the CiteSpace keyword analysis function to identify the main topics of interest to the academic community. Table 3 shows the keywords with a word frequency greater than 10 times. It can be seen that management, conservation, impact, perception, satisfaction, sustainable tourism, and stakeholders are the concerns in WH tourism research. In addition, we found that keywords such as customized authenticity, adaptive management, social-ecological system, sustainable livelihood, and resilience had a word frequency of fewer than 5 times, giving us some clues to track the frontier. Although the high-frequency keywords can reflect the main focus of existing research, the article’s overall idea and the mainline cannot be seen through the keywords.

Research themes

After identifying the high-frequency keywords, the research themes in the field were further clarified. To avoid the limitation of keywords, combining keyword clustering with full-text reading, the key research areas of WH tourism research were summarized into the following 8 themes.

(1) Sustainable tourism

The sustainable tourism theme contains 86 articles (15% of total). Scientific research has always been very focused on assessing the sustainability of tourism [ 45 ]. The development of governmental sustainable management strategies (n = 25), community residents’ perceptions and attitudes towards participation in tourism development (n = 28), spatial evolution of destinations (n = 8), low-carbon environmental measures in ecotourism (n = 12), and community livelihood diversification (n = 13) have been studied as factors influencing sustainable tourism in WHSs. Among them, the most crucial academic attention has been paid to the relationship between community support and sustainable tourism. Several empirical studies have been conducted, showing that local and community participation in WH management is necessary for sustainable tourism [ 46 , 47 ]. Empowering local communities to participate effectively in tourism decision-making and to be able to share equitably in the benefits of tourism development is an essential principle of sustainable tourism [ 25 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]. Sustainable tourism has been widely accepted to mediate tensions and balance the relationship between heritage conservation, tourism management, social pressure, and economic development.

(2) Authenticity

The theme includes 14 articles (2% of total). The UNESCO have adopted authenticity as a critical principle for inscription on the WHL [ 1 ]. In the tourism context, three commonly used authenticity concepts are objective authenticity, constructive authenticity, and existential authenticity [ 53 ]. Studies of authenticity in WH tourism focus on existential authenticity (n = 10) and constructive authenticity (n = 4). Existential authenticity emphasizes tourists’ perceptions, experiences, and preferences of authenticity, including experiences, emotions, attachments, and identities [ 54 ]. Scholars generally agree that the authenticity of the tourist experience has a significant impact on satisfaction and loyalty and that the quality of WH tourism is enhanced by authenticity [ 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 ]. The perception of authenticity increases the heritage destination value [ 60 ]. Constructed authenticity discussions focus on customized authenticity that tourists can seek and embrace even in publicly staged or produced contexts [ 61 ]. The debate on the authenticity of WH tourism has shifted from the static perspective to how authenticity is interpreted [ 62 ]. The acceptance of authenticity itself depends on tourists’ perceptions.

Authenticity is a controversial concept in WH tourism studies [ 53 , 63 ]. Some scholars have even suggested that the concept should be abandoned because of its problematic nature [ 64 ]. Despite its clear importance, authenticity is a problematic and insufficiently explored concept, which hinders its practical application [ 53 ]. So fewer articles are examining the use of authenticity in WH tourism practice. However, with the rapid development of WH tourism and the microscopic shift in WH tourism research, Scholars have attempted to explore the impact of different authenticity on the visitor experience. They have confirmed that understanding how visitors interpret authenticity is vital for marketing and managing heritage sites [ 56 , 57 ]. After 2017, there has been a marked increase in research on the application of authenticity in WH tourism practice. The number of articles is relatively small because it is still exploratory.

(3) Management techniques and methods of tourism resources

The second-highest number of publications (22% of the total) studied management techniques and strategies for WH tourism resources, with 124 articles. Dynamic conservation and multidisciplinary research are fundamental approaches to planning and sustainable management of WH. The main focus is on techniques and methods for WH resource survey and assessment (n = 32), management and conservation enhancement (n = 57), presentation and education (n = 14), visitor flow forecasting (n = 3), visitor safety management (n = 6), and itinerary design (n = 12). Thanks to the continuous progress of technology, a series of new technologies and methods such as 3D technology [ 65 ], geoinformation technology, and remote sensing(RS) [ 66 , 67 ], augmented reality(AR) [ 68 ], and mixed reality (MR) [ 69 ] have facilitated the management and conservation of WH tourism resources. Western scholars focus on the physical conservation of heritage sites, and research and conservation also focus on achieving this goal through technology [ 65 , 70 , 71 ]. Recently, scholars have taken social-ecological system theory [ 34 ], adaptive management theory [ 72 ], and resilience theory [ 35 , 73 ] to analyze the resource conservation and tourism development contradictions and propose synergistic paths on this basis.

(4) Tourism impacts

There are 110 articles on the tourism impacts (20% of total). The impacts of tourism on WHSs is mainly environmental (n = 50), economic (n = 13), social (n = 15), and cultural (n = 5), with some studies discussing the combined impact (n = 27). There is a consensus in the academic community that demographic pressure from tourism remains a major threat to WHSs’ environmental and cultural integrity. Highly intensive tourist demand significantly challenges the sustainability of WHSs [ 74 , 75 ]. In addition, local socio-economic development pressures and mismanagement also pose challenges to its health. Most studies have examined the objective environmental impacts by assessing tourism environmental capacity, ecological tourism footprint, and eco-efficiency. The destruction of the natural environment and ecosystems of WHSs and the intensification of environmental pollution of air, water, vegetation, soil, etc. are the major negative environmental impacts [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 ], or assessing the environmental impacts from the perspective of residents’ perceptions [ 10 , 80 , 81 ]. Tourism development contributes to sustainable livelihoods, women’s empowerment and gender equality, and improved recreational facilities and public amenities in WHSs [ 9 , 22 , 23 , 82 , 83 , 84 ]. However, it can also result in negative impacts such as increased cost of living, rising real estate and prices, income imbalance, littering, and host-client conflict [ 85 ]. In addition, scholars represented by Jimura, Rasoolimanesh, and Kim have confirmed through their studies that the rapid development of WH tourism has improved the cultural identity of residents to some extent. Traditional arts and culture have been preserved and revived to some extent. Still, it has also weakened the local spirit of local communities and created a series of conflicts between village historical heritage conservation and tourism development [ 8 , 9 , 80 , 86 , 87 ].

(5) Stakeholders

This topic has the largest publications, including 143 articles (25% of total). WH tourism stakeholders were studied mainly by residents (n = 45), tourists (n = 54), government departments (n = 19), tourism enterprises (n = 10), and multiple stakeholder interactions (n = 15). Scholars often use perception studies as a breakthrough to study stakeholder synergy. Visitor perception studies are useful for understanding their motivations and expectations for undertaking WH tourism, strengthening visitor management, and promoting destination marketing and promotion. Studies have been conducted on visitor perceptions mainly from heritage presentation and interpretation, marketing, and management. The research mainly focuses on the relationship between tourists’ perceived value, quality of experience, satisfaction, and loyalty [ 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 ]. The perceived impact of tourism development by community residents is a key and necessary element of community engagement research [ 25 , 95 , 96 , 97 ]. Scholars have studied residents’ perceptions or attitudes through cross-sectional and longitudinal comparisons. They agree that socio-economic status, local attachment, environmental attitudes and values, and participation in the planning and decision-making process become the main factors determining residents’ perceptions of tourism impacts [ 98 , 99 ]. The local attachment is the most critical element [ 100 ].

As the leading force in the “inscription” process, the government is the guarantor of the rational development of heritage tourism resources and the involvement of stakeholders. Many issues hinder the sustainable development and management of heritage tourism in developing countries. Lack of political will, government priorities, and financial assistance are the main constraints to WH management [ 101 , 102 , 103 ]. Although governments do not hesitate to develop tourism, their mismanagement is inevitably criticized [ 104 , 105 , 106 ]. Travel agencies and tourism companies are an integral part of WH conservation. Research on tourism companies has focused on maximizing economic benefits and exploring breakthrough innovations at the firm level in the context of cultural tourism clusters [ 107 , 108 ]. The perceptions of corporate managers regarding their social responsibility in WH conservation have not received much attention from scholars [ 109 , 110 ].

(6) World heritage value

21 papers discuss the value of WH (4% of total). The study is mainly focused on OUV (n = 8), economic value (n = 6), and social value (n = 7). Research on OUV of WH focuses on different stakeholders’ perceptions of heritage values and the factors that influence them. Some studies focus on discussing OUV narration from a guide’s perspective [ 111 , 112 ]. However, the understanding and claiming of the pluralistic value of heritage has not been given much attention. Tourists’ tourism satisfaction and education level are the main factors influencing their perception of OUV [ 113 , 114 ]. Residents’ perception of OUV positively impacts local attachment and willingness to preserve heritage. The conditional value assessment method (CVM) is a commonly used method for estimating the economic value of WHSs, providing a scientific reference for admission management systems and better brand marketing [ 86 , 103 , 115 , 116 ]. In addition, recent studies have explored how to construct heritage social values based on OUV and have indicated that social values are beneficial to enhance the international and national image and tourism attractiveness of WH destinations [ 117 ]. Heritage values are artificially assigned by different heritage subjects rather than naturally generated and self-evidently existing. The identified OUV emphasizes the materiality of heritage with a Eurocentric perspective. However, there is also a need to focus on non-material content such as people and activities associated with WHSs to better convey heritage stories and a sense of place [ 112 , 118 ].

(7) Destination brand image building and marketing

The theme includes 40 articles (7% of total). Studies have focused on WH brand equity management (n = 11), marketing strategies, platforms and tools (n = 12), stakeholder perceptions of WHS brand image (n = 8), visitor market segmentation (n = 5), and heritage promotional discourse (n = 4). WH represents the international identity of the inducted country, and it can play an essential role in building a national image and the highly competitive global tourism market [ 12 ]. The success of the inscription is a great honor for the selected country, and the “WH” brand is widely used in marketing campaigns to promote national tourism and increase the destination’s visibility. Scholars generally agree that the WHL helps build destination images [ 13 , 119 ] and discusses using the WH brand for destination image building and marketing. It is also argued that establishing emotional attachment to build destinations and the interpretation of authenticity by tourists are vital issues in branding tourism destinations in today’s tourism market [ 56 , 120 ]. Although the WHL is a powerful brand that significantly impacts tourism, it still requires proper management to maintain brand equity. However, brand image building and marketing need to be integrated with the local culture [ 121 ], focus on local storytelling, and highlight the elements that characterize its heritage value to develop differentiated marketing.

(8) Impact of the World Heritage List on tourism demand

The literature examining the impact of the WHL on tourism demand includes 29 articles (5% of total). The majority of scholars see “inscriptions” and “accessions” as “magnets” that attract tourists and guarantee an increase in the number of visitors to heritage sites. They generally believe that “inscription” positively impacts local tourism demand (n = 22). It has been shown to have a positive impact on local tourism demand through the use of “inscription” in China [ 4 , 122 , 123 , 124 ], Italy [ 125 , 126 ], Spain [ 127 ], Israel [ 15 ], and other case studies confirm this finding. Contrary findings (n = 7) argue that the WHL does not necessarily promote tourism [ 128 , 129 , 130 ]. Some scholars in the recent literature have questioned the assumption of a linear relationship between the total number of WHSs and tourism demand in previous studies, emphasizing the need to distinguish between the different impacts of tangible and intangible heritage on tourism demand [ 131 ]. The effects of the WHL on heritage tourism vary from country to country and region to region, with findings running depending on the study area, research perspective, and methodology. The disagreement among scholars makes the research on the effect of WHL on tourism demand consistently popular [ 4 , 130 , 132 ].

Research theory and methodology

Given the small number of high-frequency keywords regarding research methods reflected in Table 3 , all keywords were analyzed in this paper to gain insight into the main theories and methods in the field. In addition, a glossary of terms representing specific research theories and methods was summarized by analyzing the content of the literature (Table 4 ). Various well-established theories such as sustainability development theory (n = 67), community participation theory (n = 62), stakeholder theory (n = 25), place attachment theory (n = 17), authenticity theory (n = 16), sustainable livelihood (n = 13), social-ecological system theory (n = 10), resilience theory (n = 7), social exchange theory (n = 6), and planned behavior theory (n = 5). Scholars have used these theories to argue for problem and pathway studies of WH tourism. Research methods are mainly qualitative (n = 151) and quantitative (n = 327), or a combination of both (n = 89), and quantitative analysis methods are becoming increasingly diverse.

Evolution of research trends

With the continuous advancement of WH conservation practices, WH tourism research themes are becoming increasingly diverse (Fig.  6 ). Based on the number of publications, keyword clustering analysis, and interpretation of the leading research content of the literature, the following stages are used to characterize the evolution of research trends in this field.

Evolution map of world heritage tourism research theme

The first stage (1992–2006): the newborn stage. The number of WHSs grew slowly during this period, and research in WH tourism is beginning to receive attention, but not much heat. The literature in this stage is small, and the clustering of keywords is not apparent because of the small amount of literature. The research package mainly includes the functional zoning planning of WHSs, the impact of tourism activities on the natural environment, and the impact of national tourism policies on the development of WHSs. More studies at the macro level mainly focus on proper conservation management of tourism resources and exploring sustainable development strategies. In addition, there are more studies on the management and conservation of WH based on tourists’ perspectives, emphasizing the management of tourists to promote the WH conservation. In terms of resource types, there are more case studies about the Great Barrier Reef, a world natural heritage site.

Phase 2 (2007–2017): rapid development phase. During this period, the proliferation of WHSs and the range of challenges and impacts of tourism overdevelopment have generated a lively debate in academic circles. The publications showed a rapid growth trend in 2007 and beyond, with increasingly rich keywords and rapidly diversifying research themes. Theoretical thinking and practical research have been expanded, and research perspectives have been broadened with distinctive interdisciplinary features. The research on WH conservation gradually changes from “balancing conservation and development” to the paradigm of “conservation for development.” Therefore, besides focusing on the conservation of heritage resources, the socio-economic benefits of WH are gradually being paid attention to, and the impact of WHL on tourism demand has become a more intense issue of debate among scholars. In addition, the conservation philosophy of world natural heritage sites is undergoing a shift from neglecting communities to valuing them, from absolute conservation to gradient conservation, and paying more attention to human needs and development. Therefore, studies on multiple stakeholders have become more prosperous. Residents’ perception, community involvement, local attachment, tourists’ experience, tourists’ loyalty, and satisfaction and the relationship between them have become the focus of scholars’ attention.

Phase 3 (2018-): deepening research phase. The WH has moved from rapid quantitative growth to enhanced conservation and management quality. Research in this period expands slowly and is the most in-depth type of research. New ideas such as digitalization, cultural creativity, and low-carbon tourism are also penetrated in WH resource conservation. Scholars began to focus on areas such as the evolution of cultural space in WHSs, the construction of WH brand assets, residents’ responsibility and attitude towards heritage conservation, well-being, and the resilience of socio-ecological systems. Meanwhile, further deepening research on the impact of the WHL on tourism continuity, the spatial and temporal evolution of residents’ perceptions, the promotion of destination images and brand effects, the construction of heritage authenticity, and sustainable livelihoods of communities. Continued attention is paid to exploring pathways for the management and sustainable tourism development of WHSs.

Knowledge system framework for world heritage tourism research

To better understand the progress and lineage of WH tourism research, a framework of knowledge system is constructed. This framework is based on the basic characteristics of the literature, the key research areas and content, research theories, the evolution of research trends, and future research gaps summarized in the previous section [ 133 ] (Fig.  7 ). The first box’s contents in the left column are derived from high-frequency keywords. The keywords in each box are sorted in word frequency from highest to lowest. For example, in the first box of the first column, the highest frequency is “management,” and the lowest is “conflict.” The sustainable tourism theme is summarized by extracting 11 keywords and interpreting the content of the literature and presented inside the first column of key research areas and content. The other 7 themes were extracted by the same method. The endpoint of the whole knowledge system framework points to two intersecting circles. It consists of three high-frequency keywords: “world heritage,” “tourism,” and “world heritage tourism,” indicating that world heritage and tourism are inseparable.

Knowledge system of world heritage tourism research

Around the binary debate of conservation and utilization, the conservation and management practices and the tourism and leisure practices of WHSs have become two main lines of research, respectively. Research perspectives are mainly cut from both supply and demand sides but are not discrete. For example, WH tourism authenticity focuses on both the interpretation of authenticity by tourists in the demand perspective and the management and development of heritage resources in the supply perspective. The supply-side perspective emphasizes the study of destination management, the tourism impacts on WHSs, and stakeholders such as communities and governments in management as the focus of WH tourism. In particular, the ecological, social, economic, and cultural impacts of tourism on WHSs, sustainable livelihoods, and community perceptions have received continued attention from scholars. The demand-side perspective focuses on WH tourism from a marketing perspective, with branding and marketing of destinations, the impact of the WHL on tourism demand, and the relationship between visitor experience, perception, and satisfaction as the primary research components.

In terms of research theories, academics mainly draw on relevant theories from sociology, anthropology, and ecology to explain and solve the contradiction between WH conservation and tourism development. The interdisciplinary trend is more prominent. However, there is a lack of theoretical research on geography. From the perspective of the human-land relationship system in WHS, future research should fully use geography’s comprehensive and systematic nature. And apply it more to the management techniques and methods of WH tourism resources to better understand the contradiction between WH conservation and tourism development and balance the relationship between them.

Knowledge gaps with implications for future research

WH tourism research focuses on the conservation and use of WHSs and examines the development of society through the interaction of the two. How to realize the synergy between WH conservation and tourism development will be a continuing focus of scholars in this field of research. Future research can focus on exploring the following areas.

Innovative ways of representing World Heritage

From a demand-side perspective, subsequent WH tourism demand research should focus on people’s subjective constructs, such as tourists’ cultural needs and preferences. To match consumer perceptions with the intrinsic values characterized by WH [ 14 ] and target brand building and marketing. Demand research on the supply side should explore how to cut through the origin and form of WH and bring heritage back to today’s social life through the industrialization of cultural tourism. The storytelling of WH and cultural communication in WH tourism should be the focus of scholars’ later research. Among them, local culture plays a vital role in the sustainable management of WHSs, and intangible elements such as memories, emotions, and feelings related to WHSs should also attract the attention of scholars. In addition, most of the current studies are on cultural heritage, while there is relatively little research literature on the cultural lineage of natural heritage. Future research should strengthen the value of natural heritage constructed based on OUV and pay attention to local spiritual maintenance and humanistic values. Mainly focus on exploring the mechanism of the construction of cultural confidence and cultural identity in WH conservation and exploring the synergistic path of heritage conservation and tourism development.

To explore world heritage management models with local characteristics in developing countries to synergize conservation and tourism development

Compared with leading foreign studies, WH tourism research in developing countries is more concerned with management systems, government policies, and community participation. Most of the existing studies have explored the issues themselves. There are more case studies and fewer studies that summarize the patterns. More attention needs to be paid to micro-area studies to draw on the results and paradigms of current research. Taking China as an example, localized management and development models should be explored in light of the unique characteristics of WHS, such as focusing on the sustainable development of WHS in karst ecologically fragile and poor areas. It is necessary to propose targeted WH tourism management policies based on adaptive and collaborative community management [ 77 ] and seek a win–win model for WH conservation and regional development. A multi-element, multi-scale and multi-system approach should be adopted to explore the evolutionary patterns of tourism development in WHSs. The aim is to strengthen the capacity to predict the evolution of WHSs’ spatial patterns and structures and improve the ability to regulate and support decision-making for sustainable development. In addition, it is necessary to build an inclusive, democratic, and dialogical space, deepen the research on the role mechanisms of different stakeholders in WH conservation and tourism development, pay attention to the research on the value perception and local attachment of tourism business managers, further clarify their social responsibilities, attitudes, and behaviors, and their influencing factors, and optimize their roles in heritage conservation and management. At the same time, it should strengthen the research on the localization dilemma of WH under the influence of the new corona epidemic and focus on the multiple livelihood synergy mechanism and path of residents in WHSs in ecologically fragile and poverty-stricken areas.

Promote the integration of World Heritage research with cutting-edge issues of the times

The help of modern science and technology such as big data, cloud computing, the internet of things, artificial intelligence, digital conservation technology, interactive display technology, information space management technology, and other vital technologies provide new paths for comprehensive, systematic, and complex research on WH. They provide scientific and technological support to expand further the depth and breadth of research on WH tourism. Subsequent research should focus on combining technology and local heritage characteristics, highlighting the “materialization” of technology while emphasizing humanistic care. In addition, the new crown epidemic has exposed and exacerbated tourism’s vulnerability, especially for communities that are highly dependent on tourism as a source of livelihood, and sustainability is threatened. At the same time, the epidemic has also had a tremendous impact on government management practices, tourist travel behavior, tourism business operation models, changes in management models, host-client relationships, market demand, and consumption habits. They are making it necessary to explore adaptive management models and future directions for the industry appropriate for local practices. Finally, resilience theory emphasizes studying the historical relationship between society and its environment. The study of the mechanism of community resilience on WH conservation may become a breakthrough point for adaptive management research. In the future, we need to pay attention to the study of the resilience path of WH tourism after the new crown epidemic to enhance the resilience of communities in WHSs.

Based on the “Web of Science” database, the knowledge mapping software CiteSpace and VOSviewer were applied, combined with bibliometric and content analysis methods, to reveal the knowledge system’s themes, trends, and frameworks of WH tourism research. From the essential characteristics of the literature, chronologically, the research began in the 1990s, achieved rapid development in the first decade of the twenty-first century, and is booming. It is mainly concentrated in countries and regions with rich WH resources, developed economies, and more mature tourism industries. Although a specific group of authors has been formed, a particular research circle has not yet been created. The cooperative relationship between most authors is weak. Research institutions are mainly concentrated in universities.

The increasing refinement of WH conservation concepts and tourism development practices has contributed to research trends. The evolution of the research phases shows that WH tourism research has gradually become more microscopic and specific, with further development of theoretical analysis and scientific practice and the expansion of the study to multiple stakeholders such as tourist objects and external societies. Research topics have shifted to the micro-level, such as residents’ perceptions of tourism impacts and the cultural and economic impacts on WHSs. As research deepened and diversified, several new concepts and techniques began to be applied to WH resource conservation and evaluation. Although the expansion of research has gradually slowed down, deepening research exploring the multidisciplinary intersection and multiple research methods and perspectives have further advanced.

The knowledge system has formed a multidisciplinary and multi-level comprehensive research situation. In terms of research methods, the combination of qualitative and quantitative is the main focus. The methods of quantitative analysis are becoming more and more diversified, mostly cutting from micro cases for empirical research, and the research content is mainly focused on both supply and demand of WH tourism. However, the theoretical system is not yet perfect. The knowledge mapping, constructed knowledge systems, and inherent knowledge linkages presented in WH tourism research have specific academic value. The evolution of the knowledge system further deepens the disciplinary innovativeness. Whether from supply or demand, future research should seek breakthrough points based on existing research, innovate WH representation, tell heritage stories, and strengthen research on the cultural lineage of natural heritage sites. To promote the integration of WH research with cutting-edge issues of the times, research the paths of resilience and localization dilemmas of WH tourism after the new crown epidemic, and focus on the inhabitants of WHSs in ecologically fragile and impoverished areas. We will also study the mechanism and paths of multi-livelihood synergy for residents in environmentally vulnerable and poor regions. We will strengthen theoretical system construction, research innovation, and exchange and cooperation to form a more prosperous and in-depth knowledge system of WH tourism research.

Availability of data and materials

Data sharing is not applicable to this manuscript as no datasets were generated or analyzed.

Abbreviations

World Heritage

World Heritage Site

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

World Heritage Committee

World Heritage List

Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage

Conditional value assessment method

Geographic information system

Partial least square-structural equation modelling

Analytic hierarchy process

Principal component analysis

Analysis of variance

Remote sensing

Augmented reality

Mixed reality

UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Operational guidelines for the implementation of the world heritage convention. WHC.21/01. Paris: UNESCO, 2021. https://whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines/ . Accessed 17 Jan 2022.

Yang CH, Lin HL, Han CC. Analysis of international tourist arrivals in China: the role of world heritage sites. Tour Manag. 2010;31(6):827–37.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Gao YY, Su W. Is the world heritage just a title for tourism? Ann Tour Res. 2019;78: 102748.

Google Scholar  

Han W, Cai JM, Wei YG, Zhang Y, Han Y. Impacts of the world heritage list inscription: a case study of Kaiping Diaolou and Villages in China. Int J Strateg Prop Manag. 2020;24(1):51–69.

Buckley R, Shekari F, Mohammadi Z, Azizi F, Ziaee M. World heritage tourism triggers urban–rural reverse migration and social change. J Travel Res. 2020;59(3):559–72.

Agapiou A. UNESCO World Heritage properties in changing and dynamic environments: change detection methods using optical and radar satellite data. Herit Sci. 2021;9(1):1–14.

Su MM, Wall G, Xu KJ. Heritage tourism and livelihood sustainability of a resettled rural community: mount Sanqingshan world heritage site, China. J Sustain Tour. 2016;24(5):735–57.

Jimura T. The impact of world heritage site designation on local communities—a case study of Ogimachi, Shirakawa-mura, Japan. Tour Manag. 2011;32(2):288–96.

Zhang X. Impact of rural tourism on residents’ well-being in traditional ancient villages: a case of North Guangxi. Herit Sci. 2021;9:138.

Slabbert E, Du Plessis E, Digun-Aweto O. Impacts of tourism in predicting residents’ opinions and interest in tourism activities. J Tour Cult Chang. 2021;19(6):819–37.

Christensen J, Jones R. World heritage and local change: conflict, transformation and scale at Shark Bay, Western Australia. J Rural Stud. 2020;74:235–43.

Silverman H. Border wars: the ongoing temple dispute between Thailand and Cambodia and UNESCO’s world heritage list. Int J Herit Stud. 2011;17(1):1–21.

Kim H, Stepchenkova S, Yilmaz S. Destination extension: a faster route to fame for the emerging destination brands? J Travel Res. 2019;58(3):440–58.

Wang ZG, Yuan BC. Harmonizing the branding strategy of world natural heritage in China: visitors’ awareness of the multiple brands of Wulingyuan, Zhangjiajie. Geoheritage. 2020;12:1–11.

Poria Y, Reichel A, Cohen R. World heritage site—is it an effective brand name? A case study of a religious heritage site. J Travel Res. 2011;50(5):482–95.

Xu HG, Ye T. Dynamic destination image formation and change under the effect of various agents: the case of Lijiang’, The Capital of Yanyu’. J Destin Mark Manag. 2018;7:131–9.

Li Y, Lau C, Su P. Heritage tourism stakeholder conflict: a case of a world heritage site in China. J Tour Cult Change. 2020;18(3):267–87.

Panzera E, De Graaff T, De Groot HL. European cultural heritage and tourism flows: the magnetic role of superstar world heritage sites. Pap Reg Sci. 2021;100(1):101–22.

Ryan C, Zhang CZ, Deng Z. The impacts of tourism at a UNESCO heritage site in China—a need for a meta-narrative? The case of the Kaiping Diaolou. J Sustain Tour. 2011;19(6):747–65.

Vargas A. The tourism and local development in world heritage context. The case of the Mayan site of Palenque, Mexico. Int J Herit Stud. 2018;24(9):984–97.

Lin YX, Chen MH, Lin BS, Su CH. Asymmetric effects of cultural and natural world heritage sites on tourism receipts. Curr Issue Tour. 2020;23(24):3134–47.

Su MM, Wall G, Xu KJ. Tourism-induced livelihood changes at Mount Sanqingshan world heritage site, China. Environ Manag. 2016;57(5):1024–40.

Maruyama NU, Woosnam KM. Representation of ‘mill girls’ at a UNESCO world heritage site in Gunma, Japan. J Sustain Tour. 2021;29(2–3):277–94.

Drost A. Developing sustainable tourism for world heritage sites. Ann Tour Res. 1996;23(2):479–84.

Rasoolimanesh SM, Jaafar M. Sustainable tourism development and residents’ perceptions in world heritage site destinations. Asia Pac J Tour Res. 2017;22(1):34–48.

Zhen RC, Chao YF, Qian Z, Fu LC. Joint development of cultural heritage protection and tourism: the case of Mount Lushan cultural landscape heritage site. Herit Sci. 2021;9(1):1–16.

Rongna A, Sun J. Integration and sustainability of tourism and traditional livelihood: a rhythm analysis. J Sustain Tour. 2020;28(3):455–74.

Zhang CZ, Fyall A, Zheng YF. Heritage and tourism conflict within world heritage sites in China: a longitudinal study. Curr Issue Tour. 2015;18(2):110–36.

Bloch N. Evicting heritage: spatial cleansing and cultural legacy at the Hampi UNESCO site in India. Crit Asian Stud. 2016;48(4):556–78.

Allen A, Lennon M. The values and vulnerabilities of ‘Star Wars Island’: exploring tensions in the sustainable management of the Skellig Michael world heritage site. Int J Sust Dev World. 2018;25(6):483–90.

Thinh NA, Thanh NN, Tuyen LT, Hens L. Tourism and beach erosion: valuing the damage of beach erosion for tourism in the Hoi An world heritage site, Vietnam. Environ Dev Sustain. 2019;21(5):2113–24.

Simsek S, Günay G, Elhatip H, Ekmekci M. Environmental protection of geothermal waters and travertines at Pamukkale, Turkey. Geothermics. 2000;29(4–5):557–72.

Galas A. Problems of the environmental resources management around Colca Canyon, Peru. Gospodarka Surowcami Mineralnymi-Miner Resour Manag. 2008;24(2):135–52.

Van Dijk J, Broersma L, Mehnen N. Options for socioeconomic developments in ICZM for the tri-national Wadden area. Ocean Coast Manag. 2016;119:76–92.

Heslinga J, Groote P, Vanclay F. Understanding the historical institutional context by using content analysis of local policy and planning documents: assessing the interactions between tourism and landscape on the Island of Terschelling in the Wadden Sea Region. Tour Manag. 2018;66:180–90.

Varghese J, Crawford SS. A cultural framework for Indigenous, local, and science knowledge systems in ecology and natural resource management. Ecol Monogr. 2021;91(1): e01431.

Yang R, Duan ZW, Du MJ, Miao X. A comprehensive knowledge pedigree on environmental transparency. Pol J Environ Stud. 2020;30(1):535–54.

Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, Pandey N, Lim WM. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: an overview and guidelines. J Bus Res. 2021;133:285–96.

Bhowmik P. Heritage tourism: a bibliometric review. Anatolia. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2021.1875250 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Kumar S, Sureka R, Vashishtha A. The journal of heritage tourism: a bibliometric overview since its inception. J Herit Tour. 2020;15(4):365–80.

Chen CM. Science mapping: a systematic review of the literature. J Data Inf Sci. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis-2017-0006 .

Powell TH, Kouropalatis Y, Morgan RE, Karhu P. Mapping knowledge and innovation research themes: using bibliometrics for classification, evolution, proliferation and determinism. Int J Entrep Innov Manag. 2016;20(3–4):174–99.

Feng Y, Cui SZ. A review of emergency response in disasters: present and future perspectives. Nat Hazards. 2021;105(1):1109–38.

Xie L, Wang JW, Lv JH. Knowledge mapping of international dark tourism research: a bibliometric analysis using CiteSpace. Resour Sci. 2019;41(3):454–66 ( In Chinese ).

Marinello S, Butturi MA, Gamberini R, Martini U. Indicators for sustainable touristic destinations: a critical review. J Environ Plan Manag. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2021.1978407 .

Orgaz-Agüera F, Castellanos-Verdugo M, AcostaGuzmán JA, Cobeña M, Oviedo-García MDLÁ. The mediating effects of community support for sustainable tourism, community attachment, involvement, and environmental attitudes. J Hosp Tour Res. 2020;12:1–24.

Rastegar R, Zarezadeh Z, Gretzel U. World heritage and social justice: insights from the inscription of Yazd, Iran. J Sustain Tour. 2021;29(2–3):521–40.

Zheng DN, Liang ZX, Ritchie BW. Residents’ social dilemma in sustainable heritage tourism: the role of social emotion, efficacy beliefs and temporal concerns. J Sustain Tour. 2020;28(11):1782–804.

Kaltenborn BP, Thomassen J, Wold LC, Linnell JD, Skar B. World heritage status as a foundation for building local futures? A case study from Vega in Central Norway. J Sustain Tour. 2013;21(1):99–116.

Lee TH. Influence analysis of community resident support for sustainable tourism development. Tour Manag. 2013;34:37–46.

Tavares AO, Henriques MH, Domingos A, Bala A. Community involvement in geoconservation: a conceptual approach based on the geoheritage of South Angola. Sustainability. 2015;7(5):4893–918.

Eslami S, Khalifah Z, Mardani A, Streimikiene D, Han H. Community attachment, tourism impacts, quality of life and residents’ support for sustainable tourism development. J Travel Tour Mark. 2019;36(9):1061–79.

Wang N. Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience. Ann Tour Res. 1999;26(2):349–70.

Su XY, Sigley GG, Song CQ. Relational authenticity and reconstructed heritage space: a balance of heritage preservation, tourism, and urban renewal in Luoyang Silk Road Dingding Gate. Sustainability. 2020;12(14):5830.

Park E, Choi BK, Lee TJ. The role and dimensions of authenticity in heritage tourism. Tour Manag. 2019;74:99–109.

Fu X. Existential authenticity and destination loyalty: evidence from heritage tourists. J Destin Mark Manag. 2019;12:84–94.

Katahenggam N. Tourist perceptions and preferences of authenticity in heritage tourism: visual comparative study of George Town and Singapore. J Tour Cult Chang. 2020;18(4):371–85.

Latiff K, Ng SI, Aziz YA, Basha NK. Food authenticity as one of the stimuli to world heritage sites. Br Food J. 2019;122(6):1755–76.

Shen SY, Guo JY, Wu YY. Investigating the structural relationships among authenticity, loyalty, involvement, and attitude toward world cultural heritage sites: an empirical study of Nanjing Xiaoling Tomb, China. Asia Pac J Tour Res. 2014;19(1):103–21.

Kolar T, Zabkar V. A consumer-based model of authenticity: an oxymoron or the foundation of cultural heritage marketing? Tour Manag. 2010;31(5):652–64.

Wang Y. Customized authenticity begins at home. Ann Tour Res. 2007;34(3):789–804.

Lugosi P. Socio-technological authentication. Ann Tour Res. 2016;58:100–13.

Zhu YJ. Performing heritage: rethinking authenticity in tourism. Ann Tour Res. 2012;39(3):1495–513.

Reisinger Y, Steiner CJ. Reconceptualizing object authenticity. Ann Tour Res. 2006;33(1):65–86.

Aldighieri B, Testa B, Bertini A. 3D exploration of the San Lucano Valley: virtual geo-routes for everyone who would like to understand the landscape of the Dolomites. Geoheritage. 2016;8(1):77–90.

Orimoloye IR, Kalumba AM, Mazinyo SP, Nel W. Geospatial analysis of wetland dynamics: wetland depletion and biodiversity conservation of Isimangaliso Wetland, South Africa. J King Saud Univ Sci. 2020;32(1):90–6.

Liu J, Ren HG, Wang XY, Shirazi Z, Quan B. Measuring and predicting urban expansion in the Angkor region of Cambodia. Remote Sens. 2019;11(17):2064–85.

Koo S, Kim J, Kim C, Kim J, Cha HS. Development of an augmented reality tour guide for a cultural heritage site. J Comput Cult Herit. 2019;12(4):1–24.

Okura F, Kanbara M, Yokoya N. Mixed-reality world exploration using image-based rendering. J Comput Cult Herit. 2015;8(2):1–26.

Wright AM. Assessing the stability and sustainability of rock art sites: insight from southwestern Arizona. J Archaeol Method Theory. 2018;25(3):911–52.

Saintenoy T, Estefane FG, Jofré D, Masaguer M. Walking and stumbling on the paths of heritage-making for rural development in the Arica Highlands. Mt Res Dev. 2019;39(4):D1–10.

Wardell-Johnson G, Schoeman D, Schlacher T, Wardell-Johnson A, Weston M, Shimizu Y, et al. Re-framing values for a world heritage future: what type of icon will K’gari-Fraser Island become? Australas J Environ Manag. 2015;22(2):124–48.

Heslinga J, Groote P, Vanclay F. Towards resilient regions: policy recommendations for stimulating synergy between tourism and landscape. Land. 2020;9(2):44.

Li MM, Wu BH, Cai LP. Tourism development of world heritage sites in China: a geographic perspective. Tour Manag. 2008;29(2):308–19.

Berg F. Wear and tear of world heritage: preventive conservation and tourism in Norway’s stave churches. Stud Conserv. 2018;63(sup1):320–2.

Hardiman N, Burgin S. Effects of trampling on in-stream macroinvertebrate communities from canyoning activity in the Greater Blue Mountains world heritage area. Wetl Ecol Manag. 2011;19(1):61–71.

Lin MS, Xiao XN, Xu Y, Xie HB. The impact of water quality changes on tourism capacity at Golden Lake, China. J Food Agric Environ. 2013;11:1069–72.

Pan YD, Deng GP, Wang LZ, Cao Y, Pang WT, Wang QX, et al. Effects of in situ phosphorus enrichment on the benthos in a subalpine karst stream and implications for bioassessment in nature reserves. Ecol Ind. 2017;73:274–83.

Li QY, Wu JL, Zhou JC, Sakiev K, Hofmann D. Occurrence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) in soils around two typical lakes in the western Tian Shan Mountains (Kyrgyzstan, Central Asia): local burden or global distillation? Ecol Indic. 2020;108: 105749.

Rasoolimanesh SM, Jaafar M, Kock N, Ramayah T. A revised framework of social exchange theory to investigate the factors influencing residents’ perceptions. Tour Manag Perspect. 2015;16:335–45.

Türker N. Host community perceptions of tourism impacts: a case study on the world heritage city of Safranbolu, Turkey. Revista de Cercetare şi Intervenţie Socială. 2013;43:115–41.

Tucker H, Boonabaana B. A critical analysis of tourism, gender and poverty reduction. J Sustain Tour. 2012;20(3):437–55.

Qian C, Sasaki N, Jourdain D, Kim SM, Shivakoti PG. Local livelihood under different governances of tourism development in China—a case study of Huangshan Mountain area. Tour Manag. 2017;61:221–33.

Chen FF, Xu HG, Lew AA. Livelihood resilience in tourism communities: the role of human agency. J Sustain Tour. 2020;28(4):606–24.

Jha S. Can natural world heritage sites promote development and social harmony? Biodivers Conserv. 2005;14(4):981–91.

Kim SS, Wong KK, Cho M. Assessing the economic value of a world heritage site and willingness-to-pay determinants: a case of Changdeok Palace. Tour Manag. 2007;28(1):317–22.

Okech RN. Socio-cultural impacts of tourism on world heritage sites: communities’ perspective of Lamu (Kenya) and Zanzibar Islands. Asia Pac J Tour Res. 2010;15(3):339–51.

Su DN, Nguyen NAN, Nguyen QNT, Tran TP. The link between travel motivation and satisfaction towards a heritage destination: the role of visitor engagement, visitor experience and heritage destination image. Tour Manag Perspect. 2020;34: 100634.

Hoang TDT, Brown G, Kim AKJ. Measuring resident place attachment in a world cultural heritage tourism context: the case of Hoi An (Vietnam). Curr Issue Tour. 2020;23(16):2059–75.

Shakoori A, Hosseini M. An examination of the effects of motivation on visitors’ loyalty: case study of the Golestan Palace, Tehran. Tour Manag Perspect. 2019;32: 100554.

Lee KY, Lee H. Traditional costume experience at a cultural heritage festival. Tour Manag Perspect. 2019;32: 100555.

Hew JJ, Leong LY, Tan GWH, Lee VH, Ooi KB. Mobile social tourism shopping: a dual-stage analysis of a multi-mediation model. Tour Manag. 2018;66:121–39.

Chen CF, Leask A, Phou S. Symbolic, experiential and functional consumptions of heritage tourism destinations: the case of Angkor world heritage site, Cambodia. Int J Tour Res. 2016;18(6):602–11.

Prayag G, Hosany S, Odeh K. The role of tourists’ emotional experiences and satisfaction in understanding behavioral intentions. J Destin Mark Manag. 2013;2(2):118–27.

Gannon M, Rasoolimanesh SM, Taheri B. Assessing the mediating role of residents’ perceptions toward tourism development. J Travel Res. 2021;60(1):149–71.

Escudero Gómez LA. Residents’ opinions and perceptions of tourism development in the historic City of Toledo, Spain. Sustainability. 2019;11(14):3854.

Md Noor S, Rasoolimanesh SM, Jaafar M, Barghi R. Inscription of a destination as a world heritage site and residents’ perceptions. Asia Pac J Tour Res. 2019;24(1):14–30.

Benham CF. Editor understanding local community attitudes toward industrial development in the Great Barrier Reef region world heritage area: are environmental impacts perceived to overshadow economic benefits? Natural Resources Forum; 2017: Wiley Online Library.

Della Lucia M, Franch M. The effects of local context on world heritage site management: the Dolomites natural world heritage site, Italy. J Sustain Tour. 2017;25(12):1756–75.

Aleshinloye KD, Fu X, Ribeiro MA, Woosnam KM, Tasci AD. The influence of place attachment on social distance: examining mediating effects of emotional solidarity and the moderating role of interaction. J Travel Res. 2020;59(5):828–49.

Yan HL, Bramwell B. Cultural tourism, ceremony and the state in China. Ann Tour Res. 2008;35(4):969–89.

Sun JX, Zhou Y, Wang XJ. Place construction in the context of world heritage tourism: the case of ‘Kaiping Diaolou and Villages.’ J Tour Cult Chang. 2019;17(2):115–31.

Othman J, Rahajeng A. Economic valuation of Jogjakarta’s tourism attributes: a contingent ranking analysis. Tour Econ. 2013;19(1):187–201.

Nicholas LN, Thapa B, Ko YJ. Residents’ perspectives of a world heritage site: the pitons management area, St. Lucia. Ann Tour Res. 2009;36(3):390–412.

Gao X, Roder G, Jiao YM, Ding YP, Liu ZL, Tarolli P. Farmers’ landslide risk perceptions and willingness for restoration and conservation of world heritage site of Honghe Hani Rice Terraces, China. Landslides. 2020;17(8):1915–24.

Wardana A. Neoliberalizing cultural landscapes: Bali’s agrarian heritage. Crit Asian Stud. 2020;52(2):270–85.

Martínez-Pérez Á, Beauchesne M-M. Overcoming the dark side of closed networks in cultural tourism clusters: the importance of diverse networks. Cornell Hosp Q. 2018;59(3):239–56.

Martínez-Pérez Á, Elche D, García-Villaverde PM, Parra-Requena G. Cultural tourism clusters: social capital, relations with institutions, and radical innovation. J Travel Res. 2019;58(5):793–807.

Chi CG, Zhang CZ, Liu YY. Determinants of corporate social responsibility (CSR) attitudes: perspective of travel and tourism managers at world heritage sites. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-03-2018-0217 .

Su LJ, Hsu MK, Swanson S. The effect of tourist relationship perception on destination loyalty at a world heritage site in China: the mediating role of overall destination satisfaction and trust. J Hosp Tour Res. 2017;41(2):180–210.

Weng LS, Liang ZX, Bao JG. The effect of tour interpretation on perceived heritage values: a comparison of tourists with and without tour guiding interpretation at a heritage destination. J Destin Market Manag. 2020;16: 100431.

Gao J, Zhang CZ, Liu L. Communicating the outstanding universal value of world heritage in China? The tour guides’ perspective. Asia Pac J Tour Res. 2020;25(9):1042–55.

Verma A, Rajendran G. The effect of historical nostalgia on tourists’ destination loyalty intention: an empirical study of the world cultural heritage site—Mahabalipuram, India. Asia Pac J Tour Res. 2017;22(9):977–90.

Alazaizeh MM, Ababneh A, Jamaliah MM. Preservation vs. use: understanding tourism stakeholders’ value perceptions toward Petra Archaeological Park. J Tour Cult Change. 2020;18(3):252–66.

Baral N, Kaul S, Heinen JT, Ale SB. Estimating the value of the world heritage site designation: a case study from Sagarmatha (Mount Everest) National Park, Nepal. J Sustain Tour. 2017;25(12):1776–91.

Dong XW, Zhang J, Zhi RZ, Zhong SE, Li M. Measuring recreational value of world heritage sites based on contingent valuation method: a case study of Jiuzhaigou. Chin Geogr Sci. 2011;21(1):119–28.

Parga-Dans E, González PA, Enríquez RO. The social value of heritage: balancing the promotion-preservation relationship in the Altamira world heritage site, Spain. J Destin Mark Manag. 2020;18: 100499.

Santos PM. Crossed gazes over an old city: photography and the ‘experientiation’ of a heritage place. Int J Herit Stud. 2016;22(2):131–44.

Wuepper D, Patry M. The world heritage list: which sites promote the brand? A big data spatial econometrics approach. J Cult Econ. 2017;41(1):1–21.

Veasna S, Wu WY, Huang CH. The impact of destination source credibility on destination satisfaction: the mediating effects of destination attachment and destination image. Tour Manag. 2013;36:511–26.

Brown S, Baldwin C, Chandler L. Representation of Butchulla cultural heritage values in communication of K’gari (Fraser Island) as a tourism destination. Australas J Environ Manag. 2015;22(2):163–80.

Yang CH, Lin HY. Revisiting the relationship between world heritage sites and tourism. Tour Econ. 2014;20(1):73–86.

Su YW, Lin HL. Analysis of international tourist arrivals worldwide: the role of world heritage sites. Tour Manag. 2014;40:46–58.

Gao YY, Su W. The disclosure of quality on tourism performance: evidence from top tourist cities in China. J Travel Res. 2021;60(7):1492–509.

Patuelli R, Mussoni M, Candela G. The effects of world heritage sites on domestic tourism: a spatial interaction model for Italy. J Geogr Syst. 2013;15(3):369–402.

Cellini R. Is UNESCO recognition effective in fostering tourism? A comment on Yang, Lin and Han. Tour Manag. 2011;32(2):452–4.

Santa-Cruz FG, López-Guzmán T. Culture, tourism and world heritage sites. Tour Manag Perspect. 2017;24:111–6.

Huang CH, Tsaur JR, Yang CH. Does world heritage list really induce more tourists? Evid Macau Tour Manag. 2012;33(6):1450–7.

Cuccia T, Guccio C, Rizzo I. The effects of UNESCO world heritage list inscription on tourism destinations performance in Italian regions. Econ Model. 2016;53:494–508.

Ribaudo G, Figini P. The puzzle of tourism demand at destinations hosting UNESCO world heritage sites: an analysis of tourism flows for Italy. J Travel Res. 2017;56(4):521–42.

Bak S, Min CK, Roh TS. Impacts of UNESCO-listed tangible and intangible heritages on tourism. J Travel Tour Mark. 2019;36(8):917–27.

Yang Y, Xue L, Jones TE. Tourism-enhancing effect of world heritage sites: Panacea or placebo? A meta-analysis. Ann Tour Res. 2019;75:29–41.

Yu GX, Dai GQ. Construction of Chinese and English event study knowledge system based on tourism perspective. Tour Tribune. 2018;2(33):90–104 ( In Chinese ).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of Guizhou normal university. We would also like to thank anonymous reviewers for their helpful and productive comments on the manuscript.

This work was supported by the Key Project of Science and Technology Program of Guizhou Province (No. 5411 2017 Qiankehe Pingtai Rencai), the World Top Discipline Program of Guizhou Province (No.125 2019 Qianjiao Keyan Fa), the China Overseas Expertise Introduction Program for Discipline Innovation (No.D17016), the Strategic Action Plan of Guizhou Undergraduate Higher Education Institutions to Serve the Rural Industrial Revolution(No. Qianjiaohe KY[2018]086), the Postgraduate Education Innovation Program Project of Guizhou Province (No. Qianjiaohe YJSCXJH [2020] 112).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Karst Science, Guizhou Normal University/State Engineering Technology Institute for Karst Desertification Control, Guiyang, 550001, China

Juan Zhang, Kangning Xiong & Zhaojun Liu

School of Management Science, Guizhou University of Finance and Economics, Guiyang, 550025, China

Juan Zhang & Lixiang He

School of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, 430079, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

JZ and KNX developed the concept of this work. JZ wrote the manuscript, KNX and ZJL reviewed the whole text and made comments and suggestions to improve it. LXH edited parts of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kangning Xiong .

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.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: appendix s1..

List of the 567 publications considered in bibliometric analysis.

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.

Zhang, J., Xiong, K., Liu, Z. et al. Research progress and knowledge system of world heritage tourism: a bibliometric analysis. Herit Sci 10 , 42 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-022-00654-0

Download citation

Received : 15 November 2021

Accepted : 21 January 2022

Published : 23 March 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-022-00654-0

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

• World natural heritage
• World cultural heritage
• Sustainable tourism
• Stakeholders
• Tourism impacts
• Conservation
• Development

Heritage Tourism Research Project

About the Heritage Tourism Research Project

The Heritage Tourism Research Project website represents the work of the ASEAN-Japan Tourism Exchange Project, sponsored by a grant from The Japan Foundation .

The current aim of the Tourism Exchange Project is to involve Japanese, Malaysian, Thai, Vietnamese, and Indonesian university students in field research, and in discussions at conferences, of current issues in commercial, governmental and non-governmental efforts to promote sustainable local and international tourism that is not only economically productive, but also, culturally constructive in the impact of tourism on central cultural values and traditional cultural practices.

Project Partners

Kyoto University of Foreign Studies – Kyoto, Japan

Universiti Sains Malaysia – Penang, Malaysia

Chiang Mai University – Chiang Mai, Thailand

Hanoi University – Hanoi, Vietnam

Gadjah Mada University – Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Souphanouvong University – Luang Prabang, Laos

Research Directors

Dr. Badaruddin Mohamed , Head of Sustainable Tourism Research Cluster, and Head of Local Knowledge Research Universiti Sains Malyasia, Penang, Malaysia

Professor Nguyen Duc Hua Cuong , Head of Tourism Department, Faculty of Management and Tourism Hanoi University, Hanoi, Vietnam

Dr. Ploysri Parananond , Head of the Centre for Asian Tourism Research and Editor-in-Chief of the Asian Journal of Tourism Research, Research Administration Centre, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand

Dr. Wiwik Sushartami , Lecturer, Tourism Study Program, Faculty of Social and Political Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Ms Dalivanh Sirisack , Lecturer, Faculty of Economics and Tourism Management, Souphanouvong University, Luang Prabang, Laos

Dr. Ryohei Kageura , Department of Global Affairs, Kyoto University of Foreign Studies, Kyoto, Japan

Administrative Directors

Director Mr. Takashi Arita , Division of International Relations, Kyoto University of Foreign Studies

Project Manager Ms. June Matsuura , Division of International Relations, Kyoto University of Foreign Studies

Communications Coordinator Professor Craig Smith , Chair, Department of Global Affairs Kyoto University of Foreign Studies

Kyoto Field Research Director Professor Kevin Ramsden , Department of Global Affairs Kyoto University of Foreign Studies

Website Director Professor Aaron Campbell , Department of British & American Studies, Kyoto University of Foreign Studies

Policy Planning Advisor Professor Jay Klaphake , Division of International Relations, Kyoto University of Foreign Studies

Special Advisors

Professor Jeff Berglund , Professor of Intercultural Communication, Kyoto University of Foreign Studies and Kyoto City Cultural Ambassador, Kyoto City Government

Mr. Shigenori Shibata , Former Director- General of the International Affairs Bureau of Kyoto City, Former Director General  of Department of Culture, Sports and Civic Affairs of Kyoto City, Former Director of the Kyoto Accord International Community House, Treasurer of Amnesty International Japan, Board Member  of Amnesty International Japan, Judicial Mediator of the local Court  of Justice of Kyoto, Founding Member of the Secretariat of the League of Historical Cities

Photo Credits

Many of the beautiful photos we are using are published under Creative Commons licenses and come from the following sources:

Penang header: https://www.flickr.com/photos/phalinn/15713931791 Chiang Mai header: https://www.flickr.com/photos/vasenka/8972288372 Yogyakarta header: https://www.flickr.com/photos/stuckincustoms/2342380918 Hanoi header: https://www.flickr.com/photos/dalbera/4366422734/ Kyoto header: https://www.flickr.com/photos/philia17/15913347558

All other photos were taken by students and faculty involved in the project.

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 15 August 2023

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

• Ananya Pati 1 &
• Mujahid Husain 2  

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

2888 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

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

1 Introduction

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

1.1 Aim and objective

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

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

1.2 The project details

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

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

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

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

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

2 Literature review

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2.1 Methodology

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

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

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

Research Methodology Flow Chart (Source: the author)

2.2 The heritage of Varanasi

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

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

2.3 The landscape change

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2.4 People’s perspectives

2.4.1 perspective of the residents.

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

2.4.2 Perspective of shop owners

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

2.4.3 Perspective of the authorities

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

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

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

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

2.4.4 Perspective of the Tourists

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

2.4.5 Other perspectives

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

3 Implication: rediscovering the ancient temples

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

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

4 Discussion and conclusion

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

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

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

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

Sustainable Tourism Development

Before the Christian Era

Press Trust of India

Chief Executive Officer

Indo-Asian News Service

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

Article   Google Scholar  

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

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

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

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

Google Scholar  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Download references

Acknowledgements

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

No fund received during this research work.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

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

Ananya Pati

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

Mujahid Husain

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

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

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mujahid Husain .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

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

Download citation

Received : 25 November 2022

Accepted : 23 July 2023

Published : 15 August 2023

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

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Conservation
• Development

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 )

UN Tourism | Bringing the world closer

Share this content.

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

UNWTO / UNESCO Silk Road Heritage Corridors Tourism Strategy Project

• All Regions

Following the successful launch during the 3rd UNWTO Silk Road Ministers’ Meeting held last March at ITB Berlin 2013 , the UNESCO/UNWTO Silk Road Heritage Corridors Tourism Strategy Project is now underway. 

UNWTO and UNESCO, together with heritage and tourism experts from the five participating countries, are developing a comprehensive and sustainable Silk Roads Heritage Corridors Tourism Strategy focused on two heritage corridors crossing five countries: China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

On 22 June 2014, the World Heritage Committee inscribed a section of the Silk Roads network submitted by Kyrgyzstan, China and Kazakhstan on the World Heritage List. The Chang'an-Tianshan Corridor stretches 5,000 kilometres from Chang’an/Luoyang, the central capital of China in the Han and Tang Dynasties, to the Zhetysu  Region of Central Asia. To learn more, please click here.

The joint UNESCO/ UNWTO strategy, which addresses the overarching principles of sustainable growth, community development, heritage management and conservation, follows years of ground-breaking research carried out by UNESCO, the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and University College London (UCL).

Specifically, the project aims to:

• Set priority projects for developing tourism and safeguarding heritage across the Corridors
• Guarantee a balanced approach between site-conservation and site-promotion
• Identify strategic opportunities for economic growth and job creation
• Outline the different components of the project while demonstrating their inter-dependence
• Promote maximum engagement from all relevant stakeholders
• Provide a step-by-step picture of how this wide-ranging project will be implemented

For additional information, please see:

Work documents:

• UNESCO/UNWTO Silk Roads Heritage Corridors Project - Roadmap for Development
• UNESCO/UNWTO Silk Roads Heritage Corridors Project - Project Outline (English)
• The Silk Roads: An ICOMOS thematic study, by Tim Williams
• Thematic Studies for the World Heritage Convention
• UNESCO/UNWTO Silk Road Heritage Corridors Tourism Strategy Project – Workshop in Almaty, Republic of Kazakhstan
• UNESCO - Developing a Sustainable Tourism Strategy for the Silk Roads Heritage Corridors
• Netherlands Funds-In-Trust

Related Content

Unwto briefing paper “towards measuring the economic va..., vikings along the silk road, unwto silk road training and capacity building programme, western silk road university challenge.

• Staff Login
• Send Feedback

OECS Regional Heritage Tourism Project Progresses

• Share  
• Facebook Messenger

With heavy emphasis placed on the longevity of heritage tourism – the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) is undertaking a Development Strategy, which articulates promoting environmental and cultural sustainability in the sub-region.

According to a latest release , the OECS Commission has received approval to move forward with an OECS Heritage Tourism project that will include establishing a Heritage Tourism Network, a Heritage Tourism Trail Design, and a website with information on these heritage tourism products.

The Heritage Tourism Project Steering Committee at its third meeting on December 6, 2022 reviewed the input from stakeholder engagements and validated the project proposal.

This project has its beginnings in March 2022, when technical assistance was given to National Trusts and similar institutions that have the responsibility for managing protected areas and the safeguarding of historic sites, to offer viable tourism products in the OECS. The initiative, which included two regional consultations, resulted in the submission of a Regional Heritage Tourism project proposal.

Input from stakeholders – including the generation and selection of ideas and opportunities – was guided by the following criteria: Individual/Collective Benefit and Rationale, Market Fit, Readiness Level, Priority Ranking, Ease of Implementation and Sustainability.

Senior Technical Specialist for Tourism at the OECS Commission, Mrs. Maria Fowell said:  “Following extensive and successful stakeholder consultations this year, with the most recent being held in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, we are thrilled to receive the endorsement from the Project Steering Committee, comprising Permanent Secretaries of Tourism to move forward with a strong OECS Heritage Tourism proposal conceptualised by representatives of National Trusts and similar institutions, with input from tourism technical officers.”

The Consultation provided an opportunity for the host country, St. Vincent and the Grenadines to showcase their tourism products. The St. Vincent and the Grenadines National Trust and the St. Vincent and the Grenadines Parks, Rivers and Beaches Authority presented a case study, while the island’s Ministry of Tourism and Tourism Authority hosted a field trip to Fort Charlotte and the St. Vincent and the Grenadines Botanical Gardens.

Both the technical assistance programme and the OECS Heritage Tourism project are funded by the 11th European Development Fund (EDF) Regional Integration through Growth, Harmonisation and Technology (RIGHT) programme. The project will provide a sustainable avenue for National Trusts and similar institutions to continue to collaborate and benefit from each other.

As of September 21, 2022, an OECS Historic Heritage Asset Inventory recorded 70 heritage sites across the OECS that are vested in or managed by National Trusts and similar Institutions, and 11 tours and activities available to the public and visitors to the region. Also listed were a total of 16 experts with knowledge relating to heritage sites.

Several OECS Member States have identified Heritage Tourism as an important niche market. Moreover, the OECS Development Strategy articulates promoting environmental and cultural sustainability, developing a network of OECS heritage sites, and encouraging regional and national commitments to conserve, interpret and promote the region’s cultural heritage.

These actions are in keeping with the Revised Treaty of Basseterre Protocol Article 12 that mandates the Member States to develop a sustainable tourism industry whilst improving the quality of life of its citizens.

Check these out before you leave!

New Bloodlines to be Introduced into St. Lucia’s Livestock Sector to Enhance Food Security

‘Life in Colour’ Oozes Creativity

CARPHA Conference Tackles Violence Through Research and Evidence

105-Year-Old Ms Iris Passes On

Saint Lucia’ Ginger Production Gets Major Boost

ISSL Secretariat Plans for Upcoming Symposium

Funds to Assist with Upgrading Sports Facilities Approved by Legislators

Government Enacts Legislation to Attract Mega Investment Projects to Saint Lucia

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Yes, add me to your mailing list.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

You may also like.

Bank of Saint Lucia and LUCELEC Give local Youth a rare look into the Music and Recording Industry

Kingdom Night Returns to Pigeon Island Tonight

PM Pierre: Opposition Forces Deliberately seeking to Sully Saint Lucia’s Image

All Set for two-day Serenity Park Jazz & Arts Festival

GOV.WALES uses cookies which are essential for the site to work. Non-essential cookies are also used to tailor and improve services. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Evaluation of the Heritage Tourism Project

The report describes the findings from the end of project evaluation of the Heritage Tourism Project (HTP), and provides an analysis of its achievements.

This is the latest release

Funded via the European Regional Development Fund, the HTP aimed to maximise the economic value of heritage in Wales by increasing the number, length and value of visits to Wales. The project also aimed to open Wales’ heritage to a wider audience by making it more enjoyable both for visitors and for people who live in Wales.

The aim of this evaluation was to assess the success of the HTP in meeting its targets, its effectiveness in terms of how it was delivered and the difference the investment made to organisations and visitors.

The evaluation report is based on a work programme undertaken between July and September 2015 which involved:

• reviewing documents relating to the design and delivery of the HTP
• undertaking a desk based review of wider policy literature relating to heritage tourism in Wales
• interviewing representatives involved with 14 HTP funded initiatives led by external organisations, including staff from across six local authorities and the Welsh Government
• interviewing ten Cadw staff as well as six Cadw Custodians based at HTP funded sites
• interviewing Visit Wales and Wales European Funding Office officials
• analysing project outputs and achievements to undertake a final assessment of the economic impact of the HTP.

Evaluation of the Heritage Tourism Project , file type: PDF, file size: 1 MB

Evaluation of the Heritage Tourism Project: summary , file type: PDF, file size: 293 KB

Heledd jenkins.

Telephone: 0300 025 6255

Rydym yn croesawu galwadau yn Gymraeg / We welcome calls in Welsh.

Telephone: 0300 025 8099

Last updated

Share this page.

• Share this page via Twitter
• Share this page via Facebook
• Share this page via Email

Chester County Launches Plan to Boost Heritage Tourism and Preservation

WEST CHESTER, PA — Chester County has taken a significant step toward enhancing heritage tourism and community pride with the adoption of a new Heritage Tourism Plan. This strategic initiative, endorsed by Commissioners Josh Maxwell, Marian Moskowitz, and Eric Roe, aims to spotlight the rich history and identity of communities within the county, contributing to local preservation, conservation, and economic growth through tourism.

The Heritage Tourism Plan, acknowledged by the Commissioners as a vital component for the local economy, seeks to celebrate and leverage Chester County’s unique natural, historic, and cultural attributes. These efforts are positioned not only to enrich the quality of life for residents but also to draw visitors interested in exploring the depth of the county’s character.

David Blackburn, Chester County’s Heritage Preservation Coordinator, outlined the plan’s objectives during a presentation at the Commissioners’ Meeting. The plan focuses on bolstering heritage tourism as a key economic driver, promoting the preservation and investment in heritage sites and resources, and amplifying the public’s understanding of the county’s historical significance.

“This Plan will nurture community engagement, foster pride, stimulate preservation efforts, and serve as a foundational element for our America250 commemoration in 2026,” Blackburn stated. He emphasized the plan’s role in empowering communities to showcase their heritage through various mediums, including exhibits, public art, and storytelling, ensuring a lasting impact on heritage tourism in Chester County.

The planning process identified six primary themes that frame Chester County’s historical narrative: The Natural Landscape, The Cultural Landscape, Evolving Values, The Philadelphia Campaign, Iron and Steel, and Creative Expression. The comprehensive strategy was developed in collaboration with Chester County Planning Commission and consultants from Heritage Strategies, LLC, SWELL, ConsultEcon, and Heritage Consulting, Inc. This collaborative effort also involved coordination with the America250PA Chester County Commission and incorporated feedback from a wide range of partners and the general public.

The Heritage Tourism Plan represents a proactive approach to acknowledging and preserving Chester County’s diverse history. By encouraging local communities to engage with and promote their unique stories, the plan not only aims to enhance the visitor experience but also to stimulate economic development through increased tourism. Additionally, this initiative underscores the importance of safeguarding historical sites and landscapes for future generations, aligning with broader goals of conservation and sustainable growth.

Once lost, heritage cannot be rebuilt says Frederik Franken

KOCHI: In 1994, when Frederik Franken first visited Fort Kochi, he was undertaking a study which, as part of his graduation project, made an inventory of the monumental values of the region. The report eventually paved the way for a conservation plan for Bastion Bungalow.

Today, 30 years later, Frederik, who hails from the Netherlands, is a renowned figure in the field of architectural conservation. As monument advisor for the city of Amsterdam, he advises and directs the maintenance of key monuments, including the Portuguese Synagogue and Our Lord in the Attic Museum in Amsterdam, the Binnenhof (Houses of Parliament) in The Hague, castle Gunterstein in Breukelen, and various canal houses.

In a free-flowing chat with TNIE , Frederik talks about the need to conserve built heritage, the hidden dangers of unchecked tourism, conservation efforts undertaken across the world, and more…

Could you elaborate on your interest in conservation of architecture?

I have always enjoyed visiting cities with historical architecture in Europe, particularly in the Netherlands, where you can easily sense the past through these old buildings. I believe understanding the past is essential for envisioning the future. Historic cities are often designed with human scale in mind, making them more walkable compared with car-dependent modern layouts.

The craftsmanship of historic buildings is an art I greatly admire, far surpassing today’s industrial construction methods. Older structures have proven their durability and functionality, and conserving them is important for preserving their historical value. Studies in the Netherlands show that towns with designated monuments are more appreciated and have higher property values. Therefore, conserving these old structures benefits entire communities.

Could you elaborate on your graduation project at Delft Technical University, which involved building an inventory of monumental values in Fort Kochi?

The project – in collaboration with Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH), the School of Planning and Architecture in New Delhi, and TU Delft – was a unique opportunity to explore the world. Fort Kochi had already been declared a heritage zone, but Mattanchery needed attention as well. We focused on Fort Kochi because we had better access to information.

We conducted research in Dutch archives, surveyed the area, and analysed its historical development and architectural features. We created maps documenting each building’s origin and condition and suggested tools for renovation. Our report was shared with local authorities but we did not expect to see it implemented. The Bastion Bungalow plan aimed to convert the building into a museum with a contemporary design, but it was ultimately too ambitious. Besides, the plan formulated then does not follow the rules that I now apply for building conservation.

How do India’s conservation efforts compare with the likes of the UK, the Netherlands, and Italy?

In Italy, the focus is on preserving the construction history of a building and adding contemporary design where appropriate. The building’s present function is not displaced by blind efforts to historicise it. In the UK, there’s a stronger emphasis on restoring buildings to their original state by removing later additions. The reconstruction of the interiors of the Royal Pavilion in Bristol is a good example. The Netherlands prefers a neat and clean approach, which can, sometimes, lead to unnecessary interventions. Restoration efforts here also mean to make buildings beautiful again. This can sometimes risk damage to the monument’s value.

India’s approach may differ, but I observed remnants of paint and plaster in Agra and the Red Fort during my recent visit. This suggests that these buildings have undergone coloured finishes recently. I hope the upcoming Architectural Finishes Research Conference in the Netherlands could do with Indian input on measures employed here.

What are the key advantages of having a city-specific monument adviser overseeing conservation projects, rather than a centralised administrative body?

A local conservation department, like Amsterdam’s, has specific knowledge of the area’s construction and architectural styles that can differ across regions. Monument advisers can visit buildings early in the permit application process, share their expertise with architects and building owners, and guide them through renovation guidelines. They can also assist city inspectors during renovations. Amsterdam’s department has seven monument advisers, seven building historians, and several policy officers and archaeologists. This reflects the importance accorded to conserving over 9,800 monuments in the city. Smaller cities may not have such large teams, but still benefit from localised knowledge.

What changes did you notice in today’s Fort Kochi when compared with 1994? Has tourism impacted its cultural and historical significance?

Tourism has increased significantly in Fort Kochi, transforming it into a bustling destination. While some feared that many historic houses had been demolished, I found the area’s charm largely intact, with new construction blending well. However, many homes are now hotels, shops, and restaurants catering to tourists. The residential population has diminished. When the tourism economy takes over a city, the ensuing change risks turning the area into an open-air museum devoid of life. Mattancherry, where people still live and work, now feels more vibrant and authentic. For me, it is here that I experience the real Kerala.

How do you ensure that measures taken to provide tourist amenities don’t impair the built heritage of Amsterdam?

Amsterdam is known for its well-preserved medieval, 17th-century, 19th-century, and early 20th-century urban districts. The old town, with its canals, has Unesco status. Strict rules and clear guidelines govern renovations and maintenance. Zoning plans define which buildings can be converted into hotels, shops, or restaurants. The city restricts new hotel construction and limits bed-and-breakfast rentals to a maximum of 30 days per year.

What measures would you suggest for efficiently conserving the Mattancherry synagogue, given your experience with the Portuguese synagogue in Amsterdam?

The synagogue in Amsterdam remains in active use, while the Mattancherry synagogue is in ruins. Representatives of INTACH Kochi and I discussed restoration approaches, including whether to recreate the interior fully. An alternative is to transform it into a museum, highlighting the history of Kerala’s Jews and religious tolerance. Such a museum could also host lectures and events for the local community. It would help preserve Kerala’s legacy of peaceful coexistence, which is increasingly relevant worldwide.

Canal houses are significant in Amsterdam. Could they also be adopted in Kerala, which has a similar topography?

In the Netherlands, canal houses are built on deep piles due to the region’s low elevation and muddy ground. While Kerala’s geography is different, Dutch expertise in water management could prove useful. This was highlighted during our king’s state visit to India, and later, Kerala, in 2019. Our expertise could help in finding effective solutions for protecting low-lying regions.

[Editor’s note: A delegation from the Kerala government had, in the same year, visited the Netherlands to explore cooperation in water management and flood prevention. It assumed significance given the large-scale calamity witnessed the year before on account of floods.]

What was the purpose of your recent visit to Fort Kochi?

I visited Fort Kochi after my wife had a meeting in Delhi. K J Sohan, former Kochi mayor and a conservation enthusiast, facilitated a meeting with INTACH Kochi, where we discussed Fort Kochi, and the Mattancherry synagogue. Though not currently involved in any local conservation projects, I would love to collaborate. In 1994, I fell in love with India, and my affection for the country remains strong.

What advice would you offer officials and volunteers tasked with conserving built heritage in Kochi/Kerala?

Stay persistent and have faith in your work. Once lost, heritage cannot be rebuilt authentically. Future generations will appreciate your efforts, even if they are not immediately understood today.

Follow The New Indian Express channel on WhatsApp  

Download the TNIE app to stay with us and follow the latest

Related Stories

or with email

United states.

Quick Facts:

Things to Know:

Share via social media or copy the url above!

Latest Verified Reviews about United States

Top sights and attractions.

Grand Canyon South Rim

Yosemite National Park

Grand Canyon

Golden Gate Bridge

Zion National Park

Grand Teton National Park

Denali National Park And Preserve

Antelope Canyon

Central Park (New York)

Canyonlands National Park

Statue Of Liberty

USS Arizona Memorial

Grand Canyon West Rim

More Destinations

Select Account Type

Sign-up with

Almost there!

Find booking.

How should we contact you?

Thank you! We'll get back to you as soon as possible!

Click here to register and track your question!

If you would like to follow up with us:

+1 (855) 782-3006

Forgot your password?

Enter your email address below and we'll send you a reset link: