On: 20 November 2013, At: 07:03 Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Heritage Tourism
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjht20
Heritage Tourism in the 21st
Century: Valued Traditions and New
Perspectives
Dallen J. Timothy a & Stephen W. Boyd b a
School of Community Resources and Development , Arizona State University , PO Box 874703, Arizona, USA
b
School of Hotel , University of Ulster, Leisure and Tourism , Northern Ireland
Published online: 22 Dec 2008.
To cite this article: Dallen J. Timothy & Stephen W. Boyd (2006) Heritage Tourism in the 21st Century: Valued Traditions and New Perspectives, Journal of Heritage Tourism, 1:1, 1-16, DOI: 10.1080/17438730608668462
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17438730608668462
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/ terms-and-conditions
Valued Traditions and New Perspectives
Dallen J. TimothySchool of Community Resources and Development, PO Box 874703, Arizona State University, Arizona, USA
Stephen W. Boyd
School of Hotel, Leisure and Tourism, University of Ulster, Northern Ireland
Introduction
At the end of the Second World War, tourism began to flourish and spread to all corners of the world, made possible in part by higher levels of affluence, record advancements in transportation and telecommunications technology, and enhanced international relations. Since that time, tourism has proved many times over to be one the most powerful economic, social, cultural, eco-logical and political forces in the world today. It touches every nation and community, either directly or indirectly, even where tourism does not exist, and influences decision making at even the highest national and supranational levels.
Given tourism’s global significance, communities throughout the world have welcomed it as an instrument for economic development, and scholars from many disciplinary backgrounds have embraced it as a subject worthy of scienti-fic study. As part of this trend during the past quarter century, the industry itself and the specialists who study it have started to compartmentalise tourism into subcategories, or types, recognising that tourism and tourists are not homo-geneous, undifferentiated phenomena. Rather, tourism is a complex system of supply and demand wherein destinations provide different products and the traveling public desires diverse experiences. This has led to the identification of many types of tourism that are seen as being individual enough to merit their own management approaches, marketing schemes, tour circuits and oper-ators, college and university courses, research agendas and in some cases scho-larly journals. Among the most prominent types are ecotourism (or more broadly, nature-based tourism), sport tourism, religious tourism, shopping tourism, adventure tourism, cultural tourism, sex tourism, beach and resort tourism, cruise tourism and heritage tourism. Although this is not a comprehen-sive list, it demonstrates the recent trend of categorising products and experi-ences that have existed far longer than their taxonomical designations.
Heritage tourism, which typically falls under the purview of cultural tourism (and vice versa), is one of the most notable and widespread types of tourism and is among the very oldest forms of travel. As history shows, even the ancient Egyptians and Romans, as well as the nobility of medieval times, travelled to experience historic places of cultural importance (Towner, 1996). While there
1
1743-873X/06/01 001-16 $20.00/0 #2006 D.J. Timothy & S.W. Boyd JOURNAL OF HERITAGE TOURISM Vol. 1, No. 1, 2006
may exist various interpretations and descriptions of ‘heritage’, perhaps the most commonly accepted definition among heritage scholars has at its core ‘the present-day use of the past’ (Ashworth, 2003; Graham et al., 2000). This definition is purpo-sefully broad and includes both tangible and intangible features of the cultural landscape. Some observers, including UNESCO, have extended the scope to include natural heritage as well (Boyd & Butler, 2000; Thorsell & Sigaty, 2001).
This form of travel entails visits to sites of historical importance, including built environments and urban areas, ancient monuments and dwellings, rural and agricultural landscapes, locations where historic events occurred and places where interesting and significant cultures stand out. The pervasiveness of heri-tage resources has put heriheri-tage tourism at the forefront of the industry in many parts of the world. It is one of the most significant types of tourism in terms of visitors and attractions, involving hundreds of millions of people every year. Owing to its weighty position in the global phenomenon of tourism and in its spatial ubiquity, heritage tourism has also become one of the most researched subjects in the field of tourism studies. Because of this omnipresence in both industry and academia, the Journal of Heritage Tourism was initiated as a channel for the creation and distribution of knowledge about this fascinating and popular form of tourism. This introductory paper has two purposes. The first is to highlight many of the current trends in heritage tourism studies and future research needs, and second to provide information about the new journal.
Existing and Emerging Trends in Heritage Tourism Research
Supply and demand
The range of resources that function as attractions in heritage tourism is extensive and the types and dimensions are manifold. The majority of research today focuses on the supply side of heritage tourism, focusing largely on interpretation, conservation, and other elements of resource management, as well as the support services that exist for visitors at historical locations (Fyall et al., 2003; Leask & Fyall, 2006; Shackley, 2001). There is still a need to under-stand better the supply side of heritage tourism, including how resources are ‘marked’ as heritage sites in different cultures and the unique management challenges and solutions in different heritage settings.
Poria et al. (2003) rightfully acknowledge that the majority of research on the demand side of heritage tourism focuses on motivations and segmenting visitor markets. This line of research has provided useful baseline information to understand who utilises heritage resources; in most cases, visitors to heritage sites are better educated, bigger spenders, travel in groups, and have average or higher than average incomes (Herbert et al., 1989). The research on demand for heritage has only begun scratching the surface, and while motivations and seg-mentation are important for site managers, there is a need to delve deeper into understanding human experiences at places of historical importance.
Heritage politics
Heritage is a complex and highly political phenomenon. There are few social elements and types of tourism that are more hotly contested at so many levels (Hall, 1997; Timothy & Boyd, 2003; Timothy & Prideaux, 2004). One
example is social/collective amnesia, which refers to selective memory in relation to certain events and people, or a purposeful course of ignoring history. This has been a particularly poignant issue in the context of indigenous Africans in South Africa, Native Americans and African Americans in the United States, Aboriginal peoples in Australia, and even the Chinese in some parts of southeast Asia (Boniface & Fowler, 1993; Goudie et al., 1996; Jones, 1997; Leong, 1989). These groups have at some point in history been oppressed by the ethnic group in power, which has resulted in their pasts having been de-emphasised or even written out of official history in some cases. Fortunately, this situation is changing, as the world begins to demand more accurate and balanced depictions of history. While many countries are embar-rassed by the cruelties performed against racial minorities (and sometimes majorities) throughout history, special interest groups and proponents of heri-tage commemoration are forcing legislators and other public officials and organisations to acknowledge the atrocities of the past and commemorate them. Plantation houses in the southeastern US, prisons in South Africa and Nazi concentration camps in Europe are prime examples. In many cases these endeavours attempt to begin the process of healing, while all of them have a role to play in telling a more accurate story of historical events.
In some cases, intentional efforts are made not only to ignore certain pasts, as with social amnesia, but also to erase it entirely. Light (2000) describes a 1990s situation in Romania and Hungary where post-communist governments and the public at large attempted to dispose of remnants of the communist past. Fortunately these efforts were disrupted by pressure groups, who argued that while the communist history in eastern Europe was not much to boast of, the story should nonetheless be told.
Politics is also vivid in situations where history and heritage are contested between different groups of stakeholders. Dissonant views of history and the perceived superiority of various heritages have been at the root of many con-flicts. This results from the fact that there is no such thing as a single history. Each view of the past and each way of presenting it will be subjective in nature and will vary between interest groups (Buchholtz, 2005; Digance, 2003; Mordue, 2005; Olsen & Timothy, 2002; Poria et al., 2003; Timothy & Boyd, 2003; Tunbridge & Ashworth, 1996).
Heritage tourism is also commonly used to build patriotism at the domestic level and spread propaganda to international visitors. Heritage places are often shown in an effort to highlight the virtues of particular political ideologies. For instance, in state-socialist countries, tours typically involve visits to shrines and monuments dedicated to great communist leaders and patriots. Tours also include visits to schools, community centres, factories and specially designed villages where the people (often actors) live an idealised communist lifestyle. This was certainly the case in China and the former Marxist-Leninist countries of eastern Europe and is an especially distinctive feature of tourism in North Korea today. Heritage places and events are also commonly utilised as tools to build nationalism and patriotism among domestic tourists (McLean, 1998; Morales Cano & Mysyk, 2004). Battlefields, cemeteries, monuments to national heroes and other places important in the national psyche are central to this particular use of heritage (Chang, 1999; Chronis, 2005; Leong, 1989).
Conservation concerns
The literature has identified several extended reasons that heritage con-servation and precon-servation are high priorities in western societies: fear of over-industrialisation or rapid modernisation; national pride and collective nostalgia; education and scientific research; economics; aesthetic and artistic value; and heritage has utilitarian value (Boyd, 2002; Hewison, 1987; Kim, 2005; Prentice et al., 1998; Tiesdell et al., 1996; Timothy & Boyd, 2003).
While efforts to protect heritage are laudable, and more places are jumping on the conservation bandwagon, conservation faces many challenges. Among the most significant of these is the human impact on historical resources. Wear and tear is a major problem at most sites, especially those that are visited by large numbers of tourists each day during high season. Graffiti, litter and pollution are other major problems. Perhaps the most pervasive chal-lenge facing conservationists and conservation legislation is souvenir hunting, particularly in cases of mass pillaging of heritage locations and the subsequent black market dealing in antiquities (Dutton & Busby, 2002; Littrell & Dickson, 1999; Timothy, 1999a).
Scarce funds are another important problem that results in a lack of protec-tion, interpretation and adequate visitor management. This is common throughout the world, but particularly in developing regions where public funds are scarce to begin with. Modernisation also tends to push historic properties to the periphery. Often there is a great deal more support for rapid urban development than for preserving cultural and historical integrity. There is also a unique psyche in the developing world with regards to heri-tage in that most people are more interested in basic survival and have little concern for conservation efforts. Thus, conservationists are constantly faced with challenges to convince the needy not to sell or otherwise destroy their heritage.
Finally, war is an important conservation problem in some regions. Unfortunately, because heritage resources are so important to nations and ethnic groups, they are often targeted for destruction by enemies in times of conflict. Dubrovnik, Croatia, is an example from 1990s war in Yugoslavia, and the Buddhist landscape at Bamyam, Afghanistan, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, was destroyed by the Taliban regime in 2001 largely because of its importance to the outside world.
Heritage economics
The enormity of the economic impact of heritage tourism cannot be over-stated. As one of the largest forms of tourism, visitors to historic places and the spending that accompanies them in the areas of lodging, food, admission fees and shopping, contribute billions of dollars every year to the global economy and employ millions of people directly and indirectly (Timothy & Boyd, 2003). Nonetheless, with only a few exceptions (e.g. Prentice, 1993; Var et al., 2004) relatively little research has been conducted specifically on the economic impacts of heritage sites. Most work on economic impacts, albeit still rather diminutive, has been done in the context of temporary heritage and cultural festivals (e.g. Senior & Danson, 1998; Tohmo, 2005).
Despite the immeasurable importance of jobs and income that heritage attractions and events bring into communities and regions, perhaps the most significant economic issue in the heritage sector today is funding. This has been the centre of academic debate for many years as public funds for heritage conservation and interpretation have begun to dry up during the past quarter of a century (Garrod & Fyall, 2000). Site administrators must now be creative in finding ways to support their endeavours. In addition to limited public funds, user fees, special events, retailing, lodging and food services, grants, sponsor-ship, donations and interpretation fees are the most common sources of revenue today for historic sites (Timothy & Boyd, 2003).
Two related subjects that are also important for site managers are price elasticity and willingness to pay. Very little is actually known about price elasticity in the context of heritage tourism, although some earlier works logi-cally indicate that the higher the price for admission, the lower the attendance will be, particularly by specific social sectors (Herbert et al., 1989). Related to this, among site managers there are several concerns/problems associated with people paying for the use of ‘their own heritage’. These include the over-commercialisation or commoditisation of heritage and the exclusion of people who cannot afford to pay user fees. There is also a danger of the commercial side of site management occupying too much time and effort, thereby taking time and resources away from the more important goals of conservation and interpretation (Fyall & Garrod, 1998).
Authenticity
The idea of authenticity has been of concern to tourism scholars for many years. It gained popularity as a conceptual problem during the 1980s and 1990s and continues to drive research and debate today. In addition to its scholarly importance, authenticity is an important buzzword in the industry as well, to which the multitude of tourism-related agencies, organisations and businesses using the term in their marketing campaigns, slogans and itineraries bears witness (Apostolakis, 2003). Authenticity is an especially relevant theme in the study of heritage tourism. Some observers have argued that people travel in a constant search for authentic experiences and genuine places (e.g. MacCannell, 1976). This assertion has been variously critiqued by other scholars who suggest that tourists do not seek truly authentic experiences (Herbert, 1995; Moscardo, 2000) and are able to discern artificial from authentic heritages (Urry, 1995). Instead of seeking reality, most tourists simply want a holiday experience that is entertaining, enjoyable and memorable (Halewood & Hannam, 2001; Moscardo, 2000; Schouten, 1995). Even if they desire authentic experiences, tourists are often duped into believing that inauthentic heritage is authentic through site and destination promotional efforts that ‘present fairy tales as facts and replicas as reality’ (Timothy & Boyd, 2003: 239). The debate on whether or not all heritage tourists seek some objective form of authenticity aside, research has demonstrated that many do desire ‘authentic encounters’ of some sort, and at least perceived authenticity creates more satisfactory visitor experiences (Moscardo & Pearce, 1986).
Timothy and Boyd (2003: 244–254) categorised inauthentic heritage (distorted pasts) as invented places, relative authenticity, ethnic intruders and sanitised and
idealised pasts. Invented pasts are epitomised in the creation of places and events that never existed, the presentation of replicas of historic sites and objects and unreal accounts of history. Many popular heritage tourist destinations fall within this category. For instance, the farm of Mr. McGregor and the garden where Peter Rabbit ate McGregor’s vegetables have been marked as ‘the actual scene’ of Beatrix Potter’s fabled story. Likewise, in Kansas, USA, tourists can walk the yellow brick road to the Land of Oz and catch a glimpse of the Tin Man, the Lion and the Scarecrow along the way. ‘Indeed it is even possible to gaze upon the burial site of Alice in Wonderland, the House that Jack Built . . . and the precise spot where George slew the dragon’ (Dann, 1998: 29–30).
Relative authenticity is the idea that authenticity is a subjective notion that varies from person to person depending on one’s own social conditioning. It also suggests that heritage meaning does not derive directly from the artefact or place itself, but rather a combination of the viewer’s background and the message relayed in the way items are displayed to be gazed upon (Burnett, 2001; Herbert, 1995; Moscardo, 2000; Timothy & Prideaux, 2004; Wall & Xie, 2005). In this sense, then, authenticity cannot be generalised (Jamal & Hill, 2004). Ethnic intruders are people involved in the interpretation and management of places who have little to do with the historic site or event being explained. People participating in a German festival in the US Midwest, pretending to be of German lineage but who in reality have little connection to Germany is an example. A Tahitian playing the part of a Samoan, or a Maori doing a Tongan dance at the Polynesian Cultural Center in Hawaii, according to Douglas and Douglas (1991), renders the presentation inauthentic.
Sanitised and idealised pasts are universal throughout the world. As noted earlier, there is a common tendency to focus on the pieces of the past that emphasise positive events and people and exclude the elements that are unpleasant and socially unacceptable. This line of thinking suggests that if tour-ists were to experience truly authentic situations, they would be repulsed, annoyed and dissatisfied. In living outdoor heritage museums, for instance, people are portrayed as happy communities with little concern for basic survi-val. However, a truly historically accurate colonial American village would be concerned about disease, death, poverty and starvation (Barthel, 1990). A truly genuine 12-century castle would have no running water, no toilets, and no heaters. The streets of a small village would be strewn with horse manure and mud, while the pastures would be kept tidy by goats and cattle, not mowed by gasoline-powered lawnmowers. Similarly, in general only the ‘noble past’ is portrayed at the expense of ‘real history’ or the ‘warts’ of history (Hardy, 1988). The societal amnesia described earlier creates idealised pasts by deleting elements that are difficult to bear. In this sense, public memory tends to forget the negative times and situations in history and high-light the good times or the pleasantries of the past (Lowenthal, 1996).
Recent research on authenticity in tourism has focused on handicrafts and souvenirs. More research needs to be done to translate these studies into measuring authenticity in other heritage contexts, such as ethnic festivals and villages and living outdoor museums. Future studies should also be aimed at understanding what visitors perceive as authentic in different contexts and how community stakeholders attempt to portray their places as
authentic. As societies in the developed world are becoming ever more sophis-ticated in their demands for unique and unusual holiday experiences, the need for more research into authenticity and how it plays out in visitor experiences and site management will become ever more useful from both practical and conceptual perspectives.
Recent and Future Trends
The subjects presented to this point are representative of the types of theories, concepts and ideas that have long been of interest to scholars, but there is much more to do as new types of heritage tourism are being classified, investigated and marketed. This section aims to examine briefly a selection of the many areas of research that are emerging in the field of heritage tourism and suggests future directions for research.
Thanatourism
Thanatourism, or dark tourism, has existed for millennia. Pilgrims travelling to places associated with the death of Christ and the martyrdoms of his apostles are good examples. Today, thanatourism – tourism motivated by a desire to visit places of death, atrocity, disaster and other forms of human suffering – is growing in popularity, and ever more scholars are beginning to turn their research attention to it. The millions of people who travel each year to visit Holocaust memorials and concentration camps, former war zones, cemeteries, prisons, slave centres, places where famous people died or where major terror-ist attacks occurred, testify of the growing importance of this form of heritage tourism. Researchers have begun picking up on both the supply and demand sides of this phenomenon (e.g. Ashworth, 2003; Ashworth & Hartmann, 2005; Bruner, 1996; Lennon & Foley, 2000; Miles, 2002; Seaton, 1996, 2000; Teye & Timothy, 2004). Nonetheless, there is a need to understand issues of personal or social identity associated with visits to these places. The location of the former World Trade Center in New York City has become an important tourist destination that is redolent with deep meaning; the terrorist event of 2001 turned profane space into sacred space for Americans, creating a common sense of national identity. We also need to know more about individ-ual motivations for visiting places of atrocity, special management constraints and sensitive issues that must be addressed by managers of human tragedy. Ordinary landscapes, ordinary people
Most heritage attractions focus on artefacts associated with royalty, nobility or other elites, usually at the expense of the ‘heritage of the ordinary’. This clearly has created a major unrepresentative imbalance in the heritage industry, for most physical remnants of the past (e.g. farms, fishing boats, villages, houses, dockyards, jails, cemeteries, schools, factories, cultural landscapes, etc.) are aligned more closely with common folks and mundane lifestyles, rather than lives of the privileged in history. Certainly, the traditional over-emphasis on stately places (e.g. castles, cathedrals, cities, mansions, etc.) as heritage resources misrepresents the realities of the past and reflects the elitist tendencies of those in positions of power. This trend is beginning to
change, however, as heritage managers, governments and academics are begin-ning to appreciate the need for the preservation and interpretation of sites and places associated with peasants, rural areas, agrarian life and the working class in general.
Related to this is the acknowledgement of marginalised peoples in society (Smith, 2003). Ethnic and racial minorities, the poor and indigenous people, for instance, are now recognised as having contributed in an important way to the development of nation-states. There is considerably less ethnocen-tricity and racism in heritage conservation and interpretation today than in the past, particularly in countries with bad records in this regard, such as the United States, South Africa and the United Kingdom.
Markers of cultural heritage
There is a small but growing body of literature on the material culture of tourism (e.g. handicrafts and souvenirs), which is rich in ideas and information related to the meanings of tangible, consumable products made for tourists as representations of the cultural heritage of places visited (Timothy, 2005). Such items are revealing about what images destination influentials wish to portray of their communities. Among the most common research in this area includes the representation of culture through handicrafts and other souvenirs (Gordon, 1986; Hitchcock & Teague, 2000; Richards, 2004) and the commodifi-cation of craftworks for tourist consumption (Graburn, 1984; Markwick, 2001; Moreno & Littrell, 2001). Research on this subject has focuses largely on auth-enticity, identifying variables that tourists perceive as making souvenirs and handicrafts authentic. These include originality/uniqueness, cultural and his-torical integrity, alluring aesthetics, quality of workmanship, handmade by local artisans, watching the craft being produced, functional use of the object and a formal certification guaranteeing the product’s authentic origins (Littrell et al., 1993; Revilla & Dodd, 2003).
Heritage linkages with other sectors
There is mounting interest in the crossover between heritage and other sectors of the tourism industry. One of the most notable is the relationship between heritage and shopping. Thus far, work on this subject suggests that shopping and heritage make good bedfellows and complement each other well (Marsh, 1991; Timothy, 2005). Likewise, heritage settings are becoming important shopping destinations. Jansen-Verbeke (1991) notes that shopping and heritage create a highly symbiotic tourism ambience in the historic cities of Europe and North America where historic buildings, streetscapes and homes combine with leisure retail opportunities to create a pleasant atmos-phere for tourists. Villages that have a tourist appeal based on their cultural or natural heritage amenities often develop into significant shopping desti-nations, which Getz (1993) labels ‘tourist shopping villages’. In many cases, renewal of historic urban areas can be enhanced by shopping. Many examples abound where shopping has become a catalyst for the redevelopment of inner cities and waterfronts (Ashworth, 2003; Ashworth & Tunbridge, 2000; Craig-Smith, 1995; Orbas¸li, 2000; Wordon, 1996).
There is some understanding of nature-based tourism and its relationship with heritage tourism, but most attention in this regard has been placed upon understanding the management implications of cultural sites (e.g. log cabins, archaeological sites, indigenous communities, etc.) located within nature preserves and parklands. There is a need to understand better how heri-tage tourism interacts with other forms of tourism, such as sports, nature-based and cruise tourism.
Heritage trails and routes
Thousands of heritage trails exist throughout the world at many different scales and sizes, but only recently have scholars begun to examine their unique charac-teristics (Cheung, 1999; Prideaux, 2002; Sevigny, 1992). At one extreme are very large, international trails, such as the Silk Route, which runs through Central Asia and the Middle East, the Ruta Maya, which traverses Central America and the Slave Route through West Africa (Timothy & Boyd, 2003).
Also at a large scale, but generally not crossing international boundaries, are heritage trails that cover great distances within a country. Examples of this in the United States include the Lewis and Clark trail, the Mormon Trail, the Black History trails of the southeast, and the Appalachian Trail, which com-bines natural and cultural heritage. In the United Kingdom, the Hadrian’s Wall National Trail crosses England in the north and Scotland’s Malt Whisky Trail takes visitors by road to the best places to purchase and drink whiskey and watch its production.
At the local scale are shorter paths and trails, such as the Boston Trail, which links the most important historic sites in that city. These types of trails are present in almost all parts of the world where heritage resources exist and once again function more to link individual sites together for tourists rather than for the importance of the route in an historical context.
Heritage trail use is difficult to measure and analyse because people can in most cases join the route at any point along its length. This makes data collec-tion and gathering user fees a very difficult challenge, even when people are channelled as much as possible through a primary gateway or visitor’s centre. Multiple ownership and control of land through which trails run also create management challenges. Often agricultural land and urban sprawl are at cross-purposes with conservation bodies, and getting all parties to agree on policies, protection measures and levels of use can be a significant challenge. Decisions must also be made regarding which interpretive media will be uti-lised most effectively and efficiently to tell the story of the trail itself and sites along its course. Marking trails is important for both long-distance and small-scale trails to guide visitors (on foot or in cars) along the trail course and from point to point, and hardening short heritage trails can play an import-ant role in managing visitor impacts on the physical environment. There remains a dearth of research on heritage trails and routes, which needs to be addressed with some urgency.
Inclusive planning
Traditional management approaches in the service industries have been top-down and at times heavy handed. Recent planning models, however,
have suggested a more democratic and sustainable method to manage sites, personnel and visitors (Fyall et al., 2003; Shackley, 2001).
In the context of heritage, intersectoral cooperation is particularly important. Collaboration or partnerships between private, public and non-profit sectors, as well as between destinations, is crucial in achieving and promoting the principles of sustainable development (Boyd & Timothy, 2001; McKercher & du Cros, 2002). Better planning can be achieved when different agencies, owners and service providers work together to set common goals and do not function at cross-purposes.
A second aspect of inclusive management, related to the first, is cross-border cooperation in planning for heritage tourism. Often, historic places overlie pol-itical boundaries at international and subnational levels. It is not uncommon, for example, for a heritage route or trail to pass through two or more counties, cities, states, provinces and even in some cases, countries. This is particularly common throughout the world in the realm of national/international parks, which often include cultural heritage resources. In these cases, cooperation between autonomous political entities is critical in establishing common stan-dards of conservation and use, as well as to share information about the site itself and tourism-related data (Boyd & Timothy, 2001; Timothy, 1999b).
The third form of inclusive management is stakeholder participation. This includes participation in decision making and planning, as well as partici-pation in the economic and social benefits of tourism. In addition to govern-ment officials, stakeholders in the realm of heritage tourism include site managers, land owners, destination residents, business owners and the tourists themselves. All of these groups have important roles to play in heritage tourism development, and each person should be empowered enough to be able to make contributions (Aas et al., 2005; Mattsson & Praesto, 2005; Timothy, 1999c). Unfortunately, this is still not the reality in most parts of the world, as minority groups, women and people who live in peripheral regions still have very little control over their own circumstances, particularly in the realm of tourism, even when the industry is based on their own built and living cultural heritage. These issues have come to the fore in the past few years under the guise of pro-poor tourism, wherein even the most marginal and poorest seg-ments of society must be enabled to benefit from tourism, rather than simply bearing its burdens.
There is a need to refine these ideas further and to understand the various power relations at play in the planning and development of heritage tourism. Ways in which various stakeholders can be more involved in tourism planning and heritage conservation and management are problems facing planners all over the world. In many cases, the poor population and even entire villages have been forced out of their traditional homes to make way for the growth of heritage tourism. Future research should address these issues and try to solve problems associated with the preclusion of certain segments of the population.
Personal heritage and individual identity
One of the most under-studied areas of heritage tourism is that of personal heritage and individual and group identity. Several levels or scales of heritage
experience exist, but the least understood is personal heritage (Timothy, 1997). This involves places that have direct or indirect connections with an individ-ual’s own lineage, typically centred on familial legacies. This scale of heritage is the least understood in heritage tourism studies, probably because it is more elusive than other forms and the experience more nostalgic, personal, subjective and sometimes spiritual. Thus it is harder to define and measure. Nonetheless, it is one of the most important forms of heritage tourism and is growing fast as people in the western world are beginning to realise that they need stronger inner connections to their distant personal pasts to counter the pressures of living in a postmodern world where everything is mechanised, mass produced and impersonal (Lowenthal, 1996; Timothy, 1997). A growing interest in genealogy, or family history research, is a manifes-tation of this phenomenon (Meethan, 2004). Likewise, personal heritage-based tourism is the foundation of visits to ancestral homelands and regions, geneal-ogy tours, family history work, visiting cemeteries and churches/synagogues, attending mass family reunions and meeting distant relatives (Stephenson, 2002; Timothy, 1997). The experience at places associated with one’s own heri-tage versus that of a general global heriheri-tage is usually quite different from that of people simply visiting historic places on a routine day trip or as part of a tour itinerary (Poria et al., 2003).
This notion of personal attachment to place and time is a significant issue in today’s world and needs a great deal of additional research attention. Some of the most recent work on diasporas and travel to ancestral homelands, geneal-ogy tourism, religious tourism and even thanatourism (primarily to holocaust sites) (e.g. Coles & Timothy, 2004; Gustafson, 2002; Stephenson, 2002; Teye & Timothy, 2004) are beginning to reflect the growing importance of the social, psychological and historical bonds between heritage places and individual identity.
Religious tourism
One of the earliest antecedents to mass tourism today was religious pilgrim-age. Religious travel has existed for thousands of years, and it is still a promi-nent form of tourism today. The Hajj in Saudi Arabia is an annual event, and the Kumbha Mela in India is an occasional event, both of which draw millions of people at one time to specific locations. While the Hajj is obligatory for Muslims, there are many other forms of religious heritage tourism that are motivated by less compulsory spiritual or religious factors (Gonza´les & Medina, 2003; Olsen, 2003; Singh, 2004; Vukonic´, 1996). Pilgrimages, or reli-gious tourism, may be seen as heritage tourism from at least two perspectives. First, the locations and structures visited have become venerated through time and are now considered important heritage attractions and destinations. Second, the pilgrimage route itself has become an historical phenomenon and thereby gained recognition as an important element of religious heritage. Olsen and Timothy (2006) identified several primary themes that permeate the study of religious tourism, including the debate on the pilgrim-tourist dichotomy, or the conceptual argument about whether or not pilgrims are tour-ists; the travel patterns and characteristics of religious tourtour-ists; the negative impacts of religious tourism on culture and environment; and the economics
of religious tourism. Religious specialists and tourism scholars are beginning to focus more attention on the notion of religious tourism, but there are many questions still left unanswered.
Heritage in the developing world
As with all types of tourism, there are significant economic, social, political, management, conservation and interpretation differences between the developed and developing worlds in terms of heritage tourism (Timothy, 1999a). There are many issues in the less-developed world that create everyday obstacles to the sustainable development and management of heritage tourism, including the role of the community in decision making, sharing in the benefits of tourism development, empowerment and power, ownership of historic places and artefacts, lack of funding and skills and forced displacement to accommodate the growth of heritage tourism (Hampton, 2005; Mattsson & Paestro, 2005). While most of these problems are also evident in developed countries, they tend to be more pronounced in the developing regions of the world. In certain countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America, for instance, it is difficult to rouse interest in heritage conservation when people’s very mor-tality is in question, and foreign assistance is typically required for successful designation and management of heritage properties.
The Journal of Heritage Tourism
Given the importance and pervasiveness of heritage as a tourism resource, the Journal of Heritage Tourism (JHT) was created for the generation and diss-emination of knowledge. Each issue will consist of major articles that test exist-ing theory, develop new ideas, or contribute otherwise to the conceptual development of heritage tourism through empirical research and/or critical reviews of current trends and issues. Additionally, shorter pieces are welcome for the research notes/case studies section that reflect works in gress, specific case study reports, descriptive analyses of projects and pro-cesses, industry reports, or conceptual propositions that might not otherwise warrant the status of a full-length article. These will, however, also be double-blind, peer-reviewed. Book reviews pertinent to heritage and cultural tourism will also be a regular and valued feature of JHT. As this review paper demonstrates, there is a vast array of theories, concepts and cases that may fruitfully be researched within the scope of heritage tourism. The past as a resource for today is a broad enough definition for creative scholarship. The Journal of Heritage Tourism would welcome manuscript submissions based on any of the points touched upon in this review, and because we are cog-nisant that this paper has been in no way comprehensive or exhaustive, works on all other heritage topics would also be of considerable interest.
Concluding Remarks
Until now, heritage tourism studies have been variously published in the many tourism journals that now exist, yet we realised that such a popular and fast-growing area of scholarship deserved to have its own outlet – hence the production of the Journal of Heritage Tourism. No journal can address all
facets of a specialised subject area, but the goal of JHT is to provide a suitable frame of reference to give the topic of heritage tourism serious attention by the academic community. While this overview paper has been general in its treat-ment of heritage tourism, it is hoped that the more detailed nuances have also been apparent and stirred people’s interest in carrying out further research on this fascinating subject. Perhaps what is most notable from this review is the need for sustained research on all aspects of heritage tourism. We are only starting to scratch the surface in researching timely topics. It is the hope of everyone involved in the editing and production of the Journal of Heritage Tourism that the journal will become a valued venue for the publication of inno-vative research in heritage tourism, forging linkages with research on other forms of tourism, but also in building necessary bridges across the aca-demic –heritage industry divide, which too often operate in isolation from one another.
References
Aas, C., Ladkin, A. and Fletcher, J. (2005) Stakeholder collaboration and heritage man-agement. Annals of Tourism Research 32 (1), 28–48.
Apostolakis, A. (2003) The convergence process in heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 40 (4), 795–812.
Ashworth, G.J. (2003) Heritage, identity and places: For tourists and host communities. In S. Singh, D.J. Timothy and R.K. Dowling (eds) Tourism in Destination Communities (pp. 79–97). Wallingford: CABI.
Ashworth, G.J. and Hartmann, R. (eds) (2005) Horror and Human Tragedy Revisited: The Management of Sites of Atrocities for Tourism. New York: Cognizant.
Ashworth, G.J. and Tunbridge, J.E. (2000) The Tourist-Historic City: Retrospect and Prospect of Managing the Heritage City. New York: Pergamon.
Barthel, D. (1990) Nostalgia for America’s village past: Staged symbolic communities. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society 4 (1), 79–93.
Boniface, P. and Fowler, P.J. (1993) Heritage and Tourism in ‘The Global Village’. London: Routledge.
Boyd, S.W. (2002) Cultural and heritage tourism in Canada: Opportunities, principles and challenges. Tourism and Hospitality Research 3 (3), 211–233.
Boyd, S.W. and Butler, R.W. (2000) Tourism and national parks: The origin of the concept. In R.W. Butler and S.W. Boyd (eds) Tourism and National Parks: Issues and Implications (pp. 13–27). Chichester: Wiley.
Boyd, S.W. and Timothy, D.J. (2001) Developing partnerships: Tools for interpretation and management of World Heritage Sites. Tourism Recreation Research 26 (1), 47–53. Bruner, E. (1996) Tourism in Ghana: The representation of slavery and the return of the
Black Diaspora. American Anthropologist 98, 397–415.
Buchholtz, D. (2005) Cultural politics or critical public history?: Battling on the Little Bighorn. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change 3 (1), 18–35.
Burnett, K.A. (2001) Heritage, authenticity and history. In S. Drummond and I. Yeoman (eds) Quality Issues in Heritage Visitor Attractions (pp. 39–53). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Chang, T.C. (1999) Local uniqueness in the global village: Heritage tourism in Singapore. Professional Geographer 51 (1), 91–103.
Cheung, S.C.H. (1999) The meanings of a heritage trail in Hong Kong. Annals of Tourism Research 26, 570–588.
Chronis, A. (2005) Coconstructing heritage at the Gettysburg storyscape. Annals of Tourism Research 32, 386–406.
Coles, T.E. and Timothy, D.J. (eds) (2004) Tourism, Diasporas and Space. London: Routledge.
Smith, S.J. (1995) The role of tourism in inner-harbor redevelopment. In S.J. Craig-Smith and M. Fagence (eds) Recreation and Tourism as a Catalyst for Urban Waterfront Redevelopment: An International Survey (pp. 15–35). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Dann, G.M.S. (1998) There’s no business like old business: Tourism, the nostalgia indus-try of the future. In W.F. Theobald (ed.) Global Tourism (2nd edn, pp. 29–43). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Digance, J. (2003) Pilgrimage at contested sites. Annals of Tourism Research 30 (1), 143–159. Douglas, N. and Douglas, N. (1991) Where the tiki are wired for sound and poi glow in the dark: A day at the Polynesian Cultural Center. Islands Business Pacific 17 (12), 60–64. Dutton, S. and Busby, G. (2002) Antiques-based tourism: Our common heritage? Acta
Turistica 14 (2), 97–119.
Fyall, A. and Garrod, B. (1998) Heritage tourism: At what price? Managing Leisure 3, 213–228.
Fyall, A., Garrod, B. and Leask, A. (eds) (2003) Managing Visitor Attractions: New Directions. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Garrod, B. and Fyall, A. (2000) Managing heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 27, 682–708.
Getz, D. (1993) Tourist shopping villages: Development and planning strategies. Tourism Management 14, 15–26.
Gonza´les, R.C.L. and Medina, J.S. (2003) Cultural tourism and urban management in northwestern Spain: The pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela. Tourism Geographies 5 (4), 446–460.
Gordon, B. (1986) The souvenir: Messenger of the extraordinary. Journal of Popular Culture 20 (3), 135–146.
Goudie, S.C., Khan, F. and Kilian, D. (1996) Tourism beyond apartheid: Black empower-ment and identity in the ‘New’ South Africa. In P.A. Wells (ed.) Keys to the Market-place: Problems and Issues in Cultural and Heritage Tourism (pp. 65–86). Enfield Lock: Hisarlik Press.
Graburn, N. (1984) The evolution of tourist arts. Annals of Tourism Research 11 (3), 393–419.
Graham, B., Ashworth, G.J. and Tunbridge, J.E. (2000) A Geography of Heritage: Power, Culture and Economy. London: Arnold.
Gustafson, P. (2002) Place, Place Attachment and Mobility. Go¨teborg: Kompendiet. Halewood, C. and Hannam, K. (2001) Viking heritage tourism: Authenticity and
commodification. Annals of Tourism Research 28, 565–580.
Hall, C.M. (1997) The politics of Heritage tourism: Place, power and the representation of values in the urban context. In P.E. Murphy (ed.) Quality Management in Urban Tourism (pp. 91–101). Chichester: Wiley.
Hampton, M.P. (2005) Heritage, local communities and economic development. Annals of Tourism Research 32, 735–759.
Hardy, D. (1988) Historical geography and heritage studies. Area 20, 333–338. Herbert, D.T. (ed.) (1995) Heritage, Tourism and Society. London: Mansell.
Herbert, D.T., Prentice, R.C. and Thomas, C.J. (eds) (1989) Heritage Sites: Strategies for Marketing and Development. Aldershot: Avebury.
Hewison, R. (1987) The Heritage Industry: Britain in a Climate of Decline. London: Methuen. Hitchcock, M. and Teague, K. (eds) (2000) Souvenirs: The Material Culture of Tourism.
Aldershot: Ashgate.
Jamal, T. and Hill, S. (2004) Developing a framework for indicators of authenticity: The place and space of cultural and heritage tourism. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 9 (4), 353–371.
Jansen-Verbeke, M. (1991) Leisure shopping: A magic concept for the tourism industry? Tourism Management 12, 9–14.
Jones, R. (1997) Sacred sites or profane buildings? Reflections on the Old Swan Brewery conflict in Perth, Western Australia. In B.J. Shaw and R. Jones (eds) Contested Urban Heritage: Voices from the Periphery (pp. 132–155). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Kim, H.G. (2005) Nostalgia and tourism. Tourism Analysis 10 (1), 85–88.
Leask, A. and Fyall, A. (eds) (2006) Managing World Heritage Sites. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Lennon, J.J. and Foley, M. (2000) Dark Tourism: In the Footsteps of Death and Disaster. London: Cassell.
Leong, W.T. (1989) Culture and the state: Manufacturing traditions for tourism. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 6 (4), 355–375.
Light, D. (2000) Gazing on communism: Heritage tourism and post-communist identi-ties in Germany, Hungary and Romania. Tourism Geographies 2 (2), 157–176. Littrell, M.A., Anderson, L.F. and Brown, P.J. (1993) What makes a craft souvenir
auth-entic? Annals of Tourism Research 20, 197–215.
Littrell, M.A. and Dickson, M.A. (1999) Social Responsibility in the Global Market: Fair Trade of Cultural Products. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lowenthal, D. (1996) Possessed by the Past: The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. New York: The Free Press.
Markwick, M.C. (2001) Tourism and the development of handicraft production in the Maltese islands. Tourism Geographies 3 (1), 29–51.
Marsh, R. (1991) Selling heritage. Leisure Management 11 (10), 38–40.
Mattsson, J. and Praesto, A. (2005) The creation of a Swedish heritage destination: An insider’s view of entrepreneurial marketing. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 5 (2), 152–166.
MacCannell, D. (1976) The Tourist. New York: Schocken Books.
McKercher, B. and du Cros, H. (2002) Cultural Tourism: The Partnership between Tourism and Cultural Heritage Management. New York: Haworth.
McLean, F. (1998) Museums and the construction of national identity: A review. International Journal of Heritage Studies 3 (4), 244–252.
Meethan, K. (2004) ‘To stand in the shoes of my ancestors’: Tourism and genealogy. In T. Coles and D.J. Timothy (eds) Tourism, Diasporas and Space (pp. 139–150). London: Routledge.
Miles, W.F.S. (2002) Auschwitz: Museum interpretation and darker tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 29, 1175–1178.
Morales Cano, L. and Mysyk, A. (2004) Cultural tourism, the state, and Day of the Dead. Annals of Tourism Research 31, 879–898.
Mordue, T. (2005) Tourism, performance and social exclusion in ‘Olde York’. Annals of Tourism Research 32, 179–198.
Moreno, J.M. and Littrell, M.A. (2001) Negotiating tradition: Tourism retailers in Guatemala. Annals of Tourism Research 28, 659–685.
Moscardo, G. (2000) Cultural and heritage tourism: The great debates. In B. Faulkner, G. Moscardo and E. Laws (eds) Tourism in the 21st Century: Lessons from Experience (pp. 3–17). London: Continuum.
Moscardo, G. and Pearce, P.L. (1986) Historic theme parks: An Australian experience in authenticity. Annals of Tourism Research 13, 467–479.
Olsen, D.H. (2003) Heritage, tourism, and the commodification of religion. Tourism Recreation Research 28 (3), 99–104.
Olsen, D.H. and Timothy, D.J. (2002) Contested religious heritage: Differing views of Mormon heritage. Tourism Recreation Research 27 (2), 7–15.
Olsen, D.H. and Timothy, D.J. (2006) Tourism and religious journeys. In D.J. Timothy and D.H. Olsen (eds) Tourism, Religion and Spiritual Journeys (pp. 1–21). London: Routledge.
Orbas¸li, A. (2000) Tourists in Historic Towns: Urban Conservation and Heritage Management. London: E & FN Spon.
Poria, Y., Butler, R.W. and Airey, D. (2003) The core of heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 30, 238–254.
Prentice, R.C. (1993) Tourism and Heritage Attractions. London: Routledge.
Prentice, R.C., Guerin, S. and McGugan, S. (1998) Visitor learning at a heritage attraction: A case study of discovery as a media product. Tourism Management 19, 5–23.
Prideaux, B. (2002) Creating rural heritage visitor attractions: The Queensland Heritage Trails Project. International Journal of Tourism Research 4, 313–323.
Revilla, G. and Dodd, T.H. (2003) Authenticity perceptions of Talavera pottery. Journal of Travel Research 42 (1), 94–99.
Richards, G. (2004) Textile tourists in the European periphery: New markets for disadvantaged areas? Tourism Review International 8 (4), 323–338.
Schouten, F.F.J. (1995) Heritage as historical reality. In D.T. Herbert (ed.) Heritage, Tourism and Society (pp. 21–31). London: Mansell.
Seaton, A.V. (2000) ‘Another Weekend Away Looking for Dead Bodies’: Battlefield tourism on the Somme and in Flanders. Tourism and Recreation Research 25 (3), 63–78. Seaton, A.V. (1996) Guided by the dark: From thanatopsis to thanatourism. International
Journal of Heritage Studies 2, 232–244.
Senior, G. and Danson, M. (1998) Liam and Noel in Balloch: An economic impact assess-ment. Tourism Economics 4 (3), 265 –277.
Sevigny, R. (1992) Florida’s black heritage trail. Historic Preservation Forum 6 (4), 6–9. Shackley, M. (2001) Managing Sacred Sites. London: Continuum.
Singh, S. (2004) Religion, heritage and travel: Case references from the Indian Himalayas. Current Issues in Tourism 7 (1), 44–65.
Smith, M.K. (2003) Issues in Cultural Tourism Studies. London: Routledge.
Stephenson, M.L. (2002) Travelling to the ancestral homelands: The aspirations and experiences of a UK Caribbean community. Current Issues in Tourism 5 (5), 378–425. Teye, V.B. and Timothy, D.J. (2004) The varied colors of slave heritage in West Africa:
White American stakeholders. Space and Culture 7 (2), 145–155.
Thorsell, J. and Sigaty, T. (2001) Human use in world heritage natural sites: A global inventory. Tourism Recreation Research 26 (1), 85–101.
Tiesdell, S., Oc, T. and Heath, T. (1996) Revitalizing Historic Urban Quarters. Oxford: Architectural Press.
Timothy, D.J. (1997) Tourism and the personal heritage experience. Annals of Tourism Research 34, 751–754.
Timothy, D.J. (1999a) Built heritage, tourism and conservation in developing countries: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Tourism 4, 5–17.
Timothy, D.J. (1999b) Cross-border partnership in tourism resource management: International parks along the US-Canada border. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 7 (3/4), 182–205.
Timothy, D.J. (1999c) Participatory planning: A view of tourism in Indonesia. Annals of Tourism Research 26, 371–391.
Timothy, D.J. (2005) Shopping Tourism, Retailing and Leisure. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Timothy, D.J. and Boyd, S.W. (2003) Heritage Tourism. Harlow: Prentice Hall.
Timothy, D.J. and Prideaux, B. (2004) Issues in heritage and culture in the Asia Pacific region. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 9 (3), 213–223.
Tohmo, T. (2005) Economic impacts of cultural events on local economies: An input-output analysis of the Kaustinen Folk Music Festival. Tourism Economics 11 (3), 431–451.
Towner, J. (1996) An Historical Geography of Recreation and Tourism in the Western World: 1540–1940. Chichester: Wiley.
Tunbridge, J. and Ashworth, G.J. (1996) Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict. Chichester: Wiley.
Urry, J. (1995) Consuming Places. London: Routledge.
Var, T., Cheng, C.K. and Oh, Y.J.J. (2004) Economic impact of Bush Presidential Library and Museum on Brazos County. Tourism Analysis 9 (1/2), 117–121.
Vukonic´, B. (1996) Tourism and Religion. Oxford: Pergamon.
Wall, G. and Xie, F.F.P. (2005) Authenticating ethnic tourism: Li dancers’ perspectives. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 10 (1), 1–21.
Worden, N. (1996) Contested heritage at the Cape Town Waterfront. International Journal of Heritage Studies 1 (1/2), 59–75.
