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

7

World Heritage Effect?

World Heritage Effect?

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.

12

Economic Terracing

External spending External spending

Imports

Questions?

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 27540919-962-8871brent_lane@unc.edu