brent lane - ulisboaicomos.fa.utl.pt/documentos/2009/unc_whseconomicresearch.pdf · waitangi treaty...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Cultural Heritage and Sustainable Tourism for Local Economic Development
“Wh t Wh d H ? E h i “What, Who and How? Enhancing Economic Benefits of Archaeological
World Heritage Sites”
Brent LaneBrent LaneUniversity of North Carolina
Kenan-Flagler Business School
The Carolina Center for Competitive Economies (C3E) Kenan Institute for Private Enterprise
Brent Lane
Direct UNC Center for Competitive Economies an Direct UNC Center for Competitive Economies, an economic strategy research center focused on growth capital markets, local growth engines, and SMEs (esp. rural)
Former venture capital investor and entrepreneurial developerdeveloper
Active as sponsor, director and researcher in heritage economic s and ventures
2
Premise
World Heritage program focused on preservation World Heritage program focused on preservation, but the listing is commonly expected to also yield economic benefits through increased tourism
Tourism can challenge heritage conservation without significant local economic benefit
Record of local economic benefits especially uneven Record of local economic benefits especially uneven in rural locations and developing countries
Absence of clear local economic benefits may deter the listing of additional WHS in less developed areas
ICAHM/WHS
International Scientific Committee on Archaeological International Scientific Committee on Archaeological Heritage Management (ICAHM) advises UNESCO
World Heritage Sites (WHS) are cultural or natural heritage locations designated or “listed” by UNESCO to encourage their protection and preservation.
Currently 890 World Heritage Sites around the world Currently 890 World Heritage Sites around the world, a majority of which are cultural sites that encompass archaeological heritage resources.
3
UNC/ICAHM ResearchAction:
Research to better measure and enhance local economic benefits of archaeological World Heritage Sites (WHS)
Outcome:
Deployment of sustainable tourism and development practices that enhance the cultural, heritage and economic goals of archaeological WHS in targeted developing countries
Research to DateNov. 2008: UNC initial research phase begun
Nov. 2008 - now: research literature assessment
Jan. – Aug. 2009: on-site consultations in Japan, China, Morocco, New Zealand, Bolivia, UK pre/post WHS listing economic activity data
WHS expectations and outcome perceptions
Strategies and investment to capitalize on WHS
Current – distillation of initial findings and completion of study design
4
Initial Sites Fuerte de Samaipata, Bolivia
Mount Wuyi, China
Historic Monuments of Ancient Nara, Japan
Sacred Sites in the Kii Mountain Range, Japan
Archaeological Site of Volubilis, Morocco
Site de Chellah Morocco Site de Chellah, Morocco
Waitangi Treaty Grounds historic, New Zealand
Hadrian’s/Antonine’s Walls, UK
Today’s Agenda
What’s known and what’s not about the economic What s known and what s not about the economic benefit of WH listing
Examples of best practices with a focus on sustainable tourism practices that emphasize host community benefits
Describe plans for expanding the research Describe plans for expanding the research
Elicit suggestions for additional exemplars and prospective locations
5
Prior WHS Economic Assessment Results
Expectations of economic benefit remain strong but Expectations of economic benefit remain strong but ill-defined
Anecdotal evidence highly suggestive and politically persuasive
Numerous positive qualitative outcomes experiencedexperienced
Prior WHS Economic Assessment Results
Macro scale research show modest tourism Macro scale research show modest tourism specialization growth effect
An increase of one standard deviation in tourism activity would lead to an annualized additional growth of about 0.5 %/year (IMF’09)
Some EIAs show evidence of inconsistent marginal Some EIAs show evidence of inconsistent marginal effect (1-5%) that may not off-set costs
Most assessments are rendered inconclusive by data problems
6
UNESCO and World Heritage Sites
The limits of soft cultural powerSep 10th 2009The Economist
Prior WHS Economic Assessment Results
Conventional Economic Impact Assessment (EIAs) limited by the nature of World Heritage Siteslimited by the nature of World Heritage Sites
Revealed preference Before-After-Control Impact (BACI) assessment s designed to measure marginal tourism variation
Limited geographic scale and inadequate data from studied WH sitesstudied WH sites
WH uniqueness means lack of appropriate controls
8
Macroeconomic results do not yield info critical to local decision makers and community
EIAs offer Limited Operational Value
local decision-makers and community
Extent of local benefit not usefully calculated
Means of benefit accrual not described
Tourism market segmentation not characterized
Data granularity insufficient for entrepreneurial development planning
Tourism gains don’t equal economic benefit
Stonehenge
1 million visitors /year 1 million visitors /year
Average stay 20-30 minutes
About 50% of paid visitors never go beyond the visitor center/car parkvisitor center/car park
Exemplar of “High Impact/Low Benefit”
9
Questions?
Operational Info Needs
What does the WH “brand” mean to which tourists?
What forms of tourism most compatible with heritage What forms of tourism most compatible with heritage conservation?
Which tourism segments could provide highest local benefit in most sustainable manner?
What offerings most desired by optimal segments?
Wh t / t iti d it d t dd ? What gaps/opportunities do sites need to address?
How can economic progress be monitored?
10
Industry Cluster Analysis for WHS
Cluster are trading networks of local and non-Cluster are trading networks of local and nonlocal business and employees
Establishment level analysis reveals beneficiary demographics - employment , wages , ownership
Captures pervasiveness of local economic benefits and extent of indigenous population participationand extent of indigenous population participation
Delineates areas of unrealized economic potential by segmenting “monolithic tourism industry construct
Heritage Tourism Cluster
11
Archaeo-Tourism Cluster
Sites in less developed areas suffer from anemic Sites in less developed areas suffer from anemic heritage tourism industry cluster
Thin cluster – unavailable goods/services
Nonexistent or low value heritage offerings
Non local ownership = profit exportation
Overemphasis on high impact/low benefit segments
Filling Cluster Gaps
Cluster analysis reveal gaps in the local tourism Cluster analysis reveal gaps in the local tourism economy that represent business opportunities
unoccupied tourism product niches or niches primarily served by non-local providers
"targets of opportunity“ for entrepreneurial development programsdevelopment programs
Toolkit: business skills, market info, microfinance, business incubators, etc.
13
Best Practices create Goal Convergence
Communicate Culture and preserve Heritage Communicate Culture and preserve Heritage while maximizing local Economic benefits
Conflict, Coincidence, Convergence
Best Promises/PracticesHost community based sustainable tourism
enterprises Unify cultural, heritage and economic goals
Strengthen cluster density to capture benefits
Draw on archaeological research for authenticity value-additionvalue addition
Promising and proven examples of success
Constitute a portfolio for application WH sites in developing economies
14
Archaeology’s Value Proposition
Archaeological R&D enhances authenticity in portfolio of heritage tourism offeringsportfolio of heritage tourism offerings
Conventional
Academic papers
Museums
Archaeo-tourism
Reconstructions
Guide services
Media content Media content
Performance
Hospitality/cuisine
Artisan crafts/replicas
Artisan Crafts/Replica Production
Common tourism complaint is lack of local Common tourism complaint is lack of local crafts and souvenirs
Archaeology research adds significant value
Local crafts enhance visitor experience and cultural awareness
Artisan training recaptures host culture heritage
Business skills, financing needs have limited several pilot projects
15
Belize Slate Carvings
Community development effort Community development effort trained artisans in slate carvings
Incorporated local Mayan archaeological research
Validated Mayan self- Validated Mayan self-identification
Multi-generational impact
Replicas Discourage Looting
Archaeology : “Forging Ahead: Archaeology : Forging Ahead: How I stopped worrying and love eBay”
Rather than rewarding artifact looting, eBay has created more lucrative market for replicas/fakes
Market is rewarding authenticity of replicas and ti b i t iti i h t iticreating business opportunities in host communities
Higher quality replicas create economic disincentives that have dampened the artifact black-market
16
“Lost Colony” Outdoor Drama
Started in 1937 is oldest US heritage performance Started in 1937, is oldest US heritage performance
Performed at site of first English New World colony
Archaeological excavations inform performance
Effective heritage education, tourism attraction and high value employment
Direct employment of 250
Over 3 million attendees to date
Hadrian’s Wall WHS
Cluster Enhancement
Remains of Roman fortification 73 mile long located in rural northern England
Integration of archaeological sites at numerous locations with variety of offerings
Branded transportation serving site wide tourists Branded transportation serving site wide tourists
Coordinated local lodging promotion
Local artisan products program
Hiking/cycling trail and Pilgrimage
17
Archaeo-Tourism
Specialized segment with low impact/high Specialized segment with low impact/high benefit potential
Motivated by heritage experience immersion from tours to home stays to volunteering
Market premium reward for authenticity of offerings
Smaller market than mass tourism but with better Impact/Benefit profile
Amateur Excavators
Tourists who PAY to assist archaeologists in Tourists who PAY to assist archaeologists in excavations
Valuable low impact/high benefit segment
Long-term visitors with big local economic footprint
Informal inter-cultural ambassadors
Limited data suggests demographic diversity across a global market
18
Vindolanda Trust
Active archaeological site in Active archaeological site in Hadrian’s Wall WHS
over 3000 excavation volunteers since 1970
Typical two week stay at local lodginglodging
Expansion to 500 excavators annually
Next Research Phase
1) Heritage Tourism segmentation trend forecasts 1) Heritage Tourism segmentation, trend forecasts, and Impact/Benefit valuation
2) Stated and revealed WH Brand analysis by tourism segment, market, and media
3) Senior and Junior WHS Cluster analysis, BACI and base level assessments (15 sites)base level assessments (15 sites)
4) Best practice case studies and codification
5) Archaeology financing program design
19
WHS Research Sites
Senior: mature sites with established clusters and learning curve experiences
Junior: Recent or tentative listing with ambiguous market definition
Criteria Developing economy and/or rural locations Primary, secondary and tertiary tourism statisticsy y y Archaeological heritage
Appropriate control sites from WH Tentative List
Build on existing development agency relationships
Questions/Suggestions?
Brent LaneBrent LaneDirectorUNC Center for Competitive EconomiesUniversity of North CarolinaKenan Flagler Business SchoolCampus Box 3440pChapel Hill NC [email protected]