Table of Contents

Table of Contents.............................................................................................................................1

1.Introduction..................................................................................................................................2

2.The City of Surabaya....................................................................................................................4

2.1 The History of Surabaya..................................................................................................4

2.2 The Development of Architecture in Surabaya...............................................................5

3.The Heritage Trails in Surabaya...................................................................................................7

3.1 The Process of Creating Heritage Trails..........................................................................8

3.2 The Challenges in Developing the Heritage Trails........................................................11

The Bureaucracy to Enter the Building..........................................................................12

The Law Enforcement....................................................................................................13

The Economics Values...................................................................................................14

4.The Market Opportunities..........................................................................................................14

5. Conclusion.................................................................................................................................17

Bibliography..................................................................................................................................18

Interpreting the Past - Creating Surabaya Heritage Trail

1. Introduction

The issue of historical place and cultural heritage as the main tourist attraction has been well

understood by many tourism stakeholders in the world. It is argued that the need of experiencing

other’s culture and history is an increasing demand in tourism activities. Globally, as stated in

Vand Deborg. et all (1996), there is growing interest in tourism industry toward cultural heritage,

historic places and cities. This phenomenon opens an opportunities as well as challenges to many

destinations, especially if they want to develop their heritage as tourism attraction. As stated by

Ritcher (2001) in Pearce and Butler .ed (2001), the concept of heritage tourism is elastic term

that applied by many to refers about the past as an object to be visited. This includes visit to

museum, historical areas, monuments, shrine, statues and also representation of historical events.

Moreover, utilizing the heritage assets as a tourist attraction in European countries is something

which is common. Many European cities, offer culture, heritage and arts as the main attraction of

urban tourism (Page and Hall, 2003). Most of the countries in Europe are under the category of

developed country, therefore, they do not have any significant difficulty in developing the

heritage tourism. They have the advantage of well managed government, good system

implication and also strong support from the community. Most discussion about the heritage

tourism is base on the European countries, and developed nations, such as study done by Verbke

and Lievois (2002), that gives explanation about the resources of heritage tourism in European

countries. Moreover, the development of heritage tourism needs to be seen from the

sustainability point of view for long-term benefit. As argued by Griffin (2002), the less develop

nations faces difficulties in developing sustainable tourism concept, since most of them base the

development of tourism on the immediate benefit rather than the long term one. This matter can

also be seen in development of the heritage attraction in Asian countries. Furthermore, there are

also extensive researches done about heritage tourism in Asian countries, including Indonesia,

however, most of them discussed cultural and environmental heritage. Works by Wall and

Simpson (2002) and Picard (1996) discuss about cultural heritage in Bali as the assets tour

tourism. Moreover, others discuss about ethnicity as the issues in tourism (Picard and Wood.

Eds, 1997). As mentioned previously, the historical buildings are also an important part of

heritage tourism. However, there is a limited discussion about developing the heritage building

as tourist attraction in Indonesia.

Based on the report of UNWTO (2007), the international tourist arrival has grown around 4.5%

in 2006. Therefore, the global tourism demand is increasing. Tourism in Asia has grown rapidly

in the last ten years, including Indonesia. The growth of Asia – Pacific region averagely reaches

8% in 2005 which is quite amazing since it was hit by the big disaster in 2004 (UNWTO 2006).

There are a lot of tourism developments take place in several Asian countries. Market share has

changed over time and tourist behavior has also changed in several areas (Horner, S and

Swarbrooke, J, 2004). As a country that consists of many ethnics, Indonesia is rich with cultural

and historical heritage. In 2005, Indonesia gets 5,002,101 foreign visitors visiting the countries

(Indonesian Statistic 2007), this fact is very little compared to potencies that the country has.

There is much potency left unmanaged in Indonesia. In this case, Indonesia, has plenty of

heritage tourism assets, from the way of life of the community up to the historical buildings. In

Indonesia, there is a growing demand on the heritage tourism for the local tourist. The

establishing of heritage societies in several cities in Indonesia, namely Bandung (Bisnis

Indonesia 2004), Yogya, Medan and Jakarta has proven that there is a potential market on

heritage tourism. A group named Indonesian Heritage societies is also actively do many

activities in exploring and learning about the heritage in Indonesia.

This paper specifically discusses about the assets of heritage tourism in one of the cities in

Indonesia, which is Surabaya. As the second biggest city in Indonesia, Surabaya is the former of

the Dutch colonial city. The history of the Dutch colonialism has left many heritage buildings in

the city. Unfortunately, such great tourism potency has been neglected by the stakeholder of

tourism, such as the government and the industries. However, there is a growing concern from

the community to preserve the heritage building through tourism activities. As argued by Hall

(2003), the community participations become an important factor in developing tourism. In the

case of Surabaya, the community is represented by a group of university students. The group

aims to develop the heritage tourism in Surabaya by creating the heritage trail in the city. The

trail explores the old colonial buildings that spread in several areas in the city. Furthermore, this

paper will give a description using a narrative approach to discuss about the process of creating

heritage trail as the new tourist attraction in Surabaya. The process of interpreting the past as a

heritage tourist attraction in Surabaya faces several challenges and the opportunities. The history

of Surabaya and the architectural values of the heritage buildings as well as the potential market

of heritage tourism will also be discussed in this paper.

2. The City of Surabaya

Being the second biggest city in Indonesia makes Surabaya as one of the important cities in Asia.

Surabaya is the home of 2,941,820 million people (www.sparklingsurabaya.com). This capital

city of East Java province covers 326,36 km2 (www.surabaya.go.id). Surabaya also becomes an

important hub to other area in Indonesia, especially the Eastern region. Economically, Surabaya

is well known as industrial city. Interestingly, in the past couple years Surabaya highest revenues

come from services and trade sector. This fact triggers the will of the government to make

Surabaya as the center of services and trade rather than industrial center. The government than

realizes that tourism is the fastest driving factor to develop the economics. Thus, using

“Sparkling Surabaya” as the tourism slogan, the city begins to think seriously about boosting

tourism in the city (Bisnis Indonesia, 2006). One of the important tourist assets in Surabaya is the

heritage buildings that mostly spread in North Surabaya. However, this area remains under

develop. To find out more about the heritage building, it is important to know the history of

Surabaya.

2.1 The History of Surabaya

Surabaya is one of the oldest cities in Indonesia. The history drawn back from the era of

Surabaya Kingdom around the 13th century until the era of the Indonesia independence in 19 th

century. Faber (1953) mentioned that in 1275 the King Kertanegara built a new settlement for his

troops after their victory over the riot of Kemuruhan. The new settlement was named Surabaya,

the city located in the coastal area of East Java, near the Madura strait. The development of

Surabaya is also related with the development of coastal area in Indonesia. Located near the

shore, Surabaya is growing fast in terms of economics. The societies are also become more

heterogenic. However, another version of the legend mentions that the name of Surabaya is taken

from the eternal fight between the Sura (the big fish - shark) and Baya (the crocodile) as stated in

the book by Institute of Technology Sepuluh November (1995). The legend still lives in

Surabaya, it value is taken as the symbol of the city which is Sura and Baya, (the Sura fish and

the crocodile). Basically, as argued by Handinoto 1996, the history Surabaya can be divided into

4 periods, namely the period of 1275 – 1625, the period of 1625 – 1743, the period of 1743 –

1808 and the period of 1808 – 1870. However, not many physical legacies can be seen from

those periods, since most of them were destroyed during the war.

Furthermore, from 1870 – 1940, the development of the city continued and there were many

buildings and public facilities built in the city. Historically, Surabaya has many stories to be told.

In terms of physical evidence, what left behind from the past are only the heritage buildings that

still easily be found in the city. Therefore, the effort to interpret the past for the sake of tourism is

best done from the perspectives of heritage buildings. In this case, architectural designs play

significant role in the development of the city. As stated by Kwanda and Handinoto (2003),

culturally Surabaya is divided into four major cultural areas, which have different landmark in

terms of architecture and communities life. Those major areas, namely the European quarter, the

Arab quarter, the Chinese quarter and the Upper city. However, in this paper the discussion will

be focus more on the buildings around the European Quarter and the Upper City, since the

Heritage Trails based on those areas.

2.2 The Development of Architecture in Surabaya

The development of building in Surabaya got a strong influence by the Dutch architectural

design. As argued by Handinoto (1996), the Dutch architects influence most of the European

architectural design. Therefore, in Surabaya the atmosphere of European city can also be seen

from the buildings that were built during 1870 – 1940. At this period, there were movements in

Netherlands in term of architectural design. This phenomenon also influenced the development

of building design in Surabaya, since several of the Dutch architects got a connection with the

architects in Indies, especially Surabaya. The Empire Style design with Neo Classic frame

initially came to dominantly influence the design of building in Surabaya. The design indicated

by the big pillars in front of the building, like the ones found in ancient Greeks buildings. This

style was popularized by Daendels around 1808 – 1811. Interestingly, the Empire design is not

known in the Netherland at that time, since it was inspired by the buildings in France that were

copied by Daendels for the purpose of giving the elegance touch on the Indies buildings. The

example of the Empire Style can be seen in the East Java Governor office, currently known as

Grahadi.

Pic.1 The Grahadi Building

The Residence of East Java Governor

Moreover, around 1900, there were many Dutch educated architects came to Indies, including

Surabaya; they totally dissented the Empire Style (Handinoto, 1996). Those Dutch educated

architects came to bring the concept of architectural designs from the end of 19 century and the

early of 20 century. The styles were dominated with gavel, dormer and tower to adapt with the

condition of the weather in Surabaya. Those three components become the characters of the

heritage building in Surabaya. Furthermore, to adapt with the local weather, Handinoto (1996)

claims that many building use galleries around the building to avoid direct sunlight and protect

the buildings from the rain. They also avoid building the buildings facing East and West. The use

of local ornaments becomes the important points also at that time. This style then called

Eclecticism style. The example of this style can be seen in the PTP.XII in Merak street. At that

time, the Art and Craft style that were conveyed by many of PJH.Cuypers’ follower, was also

popular in the Indies buildings. In addition, H.P Berlage as one of the father of European

architects had also designed one building in Surabaya. This building is the Algamee building

located in Veteran street.

After 1920, there were two main streams developed in Indies. The first group tried to convey the

local architecture as the basic of the design. On the other hand, the next group tried to apply

modern shapes that were adapted with the new technology, the materials and local surrounding.

As argued by Handinoto (1996), the development of building in Surabaya tended to follow the

second stream as it was one of the major Indies cities. The architects such as G.C Citroen, Job

and Sprij were the users of the second stream. Many works done by G.C Citroen in Surabaya.

He was eventually considered as the architect of Surabaya, since many major buildings in the

cities were designed by him. As listed by Handinoto (1996), there were around 15 buildings

designed by G.C Citroen, including Wonokromo Bridge, the City Town Hall and the Residence

of the City Mayor. In 1930 – 1940, the modern architectures were dominated with square,

horizontal, flat roof and white color buildings. All the European influences were stopped in 1942

when the Japanese came to Surabaya. Based on the Surabaya Government Regulation no 5/2005

about Cultural Heritage, around 162 buildings are considered as heritage buildings. Therefore,

those buildings should be conserved and protected from demolition, since they are unique in

terms architecture and historical values.

3. The Heritage Trails in Surabaya

The needs to have a new tourist attraction of heritage tourism in Surabaya trigger the concern of

a group of tourism students from Petra Christian University. This group tries to create new ways

to enjoy the heritage buildings by using the tourist facilities and considering the condition of the

city. The making of the Heritage Trail is actually a cultural tourism class project. On the process,

this group is able to design and practiced the trails and offers it to the public as a new tour

activity. The activities got many national media coverage, such as Kompas (2005), Surya (2005)

and Jawa Pos (2006); there are also demands for another similar program for time to time. This

section discuses the process of creating the trails from the planning, the execution of the

programs and the promotion.

3.1 The Process of Creating Heritage Trails

The process of setting up the Heritage Trails includes the documentation of heritage buildings,

the training of the tour leaders and the marketing of the heritage trail program. Since the group’s

educational background is from tourism, therefore it has limited knowledge about Surabaya

heritage buildings. This shortcoming was solved by involving the Senior lecturer from the

Architecture Department of Petra Christian University, Timoticin Kwanda. Some of his works

also cited in this paper. On 2003, Kwanda had made a video presentation about the architectural

development in Surabaya to identify the heritage buildings. Thus, he gave briefing and

explanation to the students about the buildings historical and architectural values. Furthermore,

the group also got support from the Head of the Library of Petra. Aditya Nugraha. The program

of Surabaya Memory that had been set up by Nugraha in 2005 (www.surabaya-

memory.petra.ac.id), documented the heritage building in digital format. There are many photos

of heritage buildings and historical site within Surabaya that kept into digital formats. The

collections of the old Surabaya photos are collected from many sources, especially individual

who concern about the heritage assets of Surabaya. Therefore, the students were able to access

the information about the building easily. With the cooperation among three institutions, namely

Tourism and Leisure Management, The Architecture Department and The Library, the project of

Heritage Trails was carried out. The name of the projects was “Surabaya Memory Heritage

Walk”.

After several meetings and consideration the Heritage Trails was finally set up. To guarantee the

participants experience the tour leader play crucial role in the trails. The knowledge about the

buildings and the service given by the tour leaders influence the quality of the trails. As argued

by Jennings and Nickerson (2006) quality tourism experience is important to guarantee the

visitors satisfaction. Before the day of the program, the tour leaders that consist of the tourism

students were heavily trained about the historical and the architectural designed of the buildings.

Moreover, the tour leaders were also extensively given the knowledge about the history of

Surabaya. There were several practices and trials done by the tour leaders before the day of the

program. In this case, the set up of Heritage Trail is based on the historical values, the condition

of the road, and the length of the activities. The project carried out on 50 seats tourist bus on

Sunday morning. The reason of choosing Sunday morning is because the traffic is not really busy

in this time. There are very limited pavements around the area so it is hard to do the activities on

the weekdays where the road is full of vehicles. Moreover, the capacity of the place was also put

into consideration. The big bus is only the medium to take the participants from the starting point

to the destination. Then, the rest of activities will be carried out by walking around from one

building to another. In the practice, the big groups will be divided into small groups; each group

had one tour leader. By the middle of the journey, the participants served with lunch in a well-

preserved old building, which is Café at the House of Sampoerna. The reason of this

arrangement is to maximize the participants’ experience. Since, the activity is a practice of

cultural tourism class, so it tries to apply the concept of cultural tourism. The small group of

people traveling, the information given and the experience are the three main concerns of the

trip.

Pic 2. The Participants of the Heritage Trails are exploring the Old Building

As mentioned previously, there are 162 buildings that are considered by the government as

heritage building, however, since it was almost impossible to include all the building in one

route. Therefore, the team decided to visit only 20 buildings. This consideration mainly based on

tourism perspectives, which considering the length of trip based, the boredom level of

participants and the cost of trip. In this case, the trip was set up as half day trip. However, the trip

tended to be longer, it started from 7 am and finish at 4 pm. This condition happens since the

starting point was Petra, where the campus location quite far from the main route of Heritage

Trails. The list of those visited buildings can be seen from the table below:

Fig 1. The Buildings on the Heritage Trails

Number Name of Buildings Location Year

1 Petekan Bridge Jakarta Street Unknown2 *Telkom Building Garuda Street 19153 *De Javache Bank Garuda Street 19124 *Internatio Rajawali Street 19245 *Ibis Hotel Rajawali Street 19136 *Gedung Cerutu (Cigarette

Building)Rajawali Street 1916

7 PT Aperdi office Jembatan Merah Street 19008 BII Jembatan Merah Street 1914-19169 *PT Perkebunan X Jembatan Merah Street 192710 Post Office Kebon Ijo Street 1926-192811 Catholic Church Kepanjen Street 189912 Kalimas Harbor Kalimas Street Unknown13 House of Sampoerna Taman Sampoerna Street 186214 Heroes Monument Pahlawan Street 195115 *East Java Governor Office Pahlawan Street 193116 Majapahit hotel Tunjungan Street 191117 Grahadi Gubernur Suryo Street 1794-179818 Balai Pemuda Gubernur Suryo Street 190719 The City Town Hall Walikota Mustajab Street 192520 Darmo area Darmo Street Unknown

The list above is done in chronological order. Therefore the first destination in the Petekan

bridge and the last is the Darmo area. Unfortunately, on the journey, not all of the buildings from

the destination can be accessed. Many of them we only see it from outside, since the access to

the building, in terms of permission to enter inside, was difficult to get. This issue will be

discussed later on the next section. The * sign on the list above are the building that could not be

accessed.

After all the preparation had been set up, the next process is marketing the Heritage Trails

program. This part is quite challenging, since as a tourism activity, the program is quite new.

Therefore, to promote the program it takes extra efforts, from the design up to the distribution of

The Planning Consolidate with the expertsIdentify the Heritage BuildingsDecide the trailsTry out the trails in small scale

The PreparationSend permission letter to access some buildingsInvite sponsor to reduce the cost Make the information brochure for the participantsTour leader Training

The Promotion Creates the promotional material, such as poster and brochureContact the media especially newspaperMouth to mouth promotion

The Surabaya Memory Heritage Walk

The development of Heritage Trail as regular tourist attraction

the promotional materials. In terms of product, this Heritage Trails considered as a new and

unique products. As mentioned by Johnson (2000), the new concept of products faces greater

difficulties to market them. Many tourists will tend to follow what others had done and get the

experience from them before they really join the program. Therefore, it was quite challenging to

market “the Surabaya Memory Heritage Walk”, since it is the first Heritage Trails activities with

a large group of participants in Surabaya. The marketing aim to create an image of educational

tour, therefore the brochure is designed to give information about the products. As suggested by

Johnson (2000), communicating the benefit to the customer about the new products is important.

Moreover, the selling uses the method of mouth to mouth promotion as the main strategy. In this

case, several students also act like a marketer. They also put poster to several public places such

as hotels and malls, but this way is not effective since not many people are familiar with the

activities. The following figure gives more vivid explanation about the process of creating the

Heritage Trails in Surabaya.

Fig 2. The Process of Creating the Heritage Trail

3.2 The Challenges in Developing the Heritage Trails

The Heritage Trails that has been set up by Petra Christian University is the only trail that exists

in Surabaya. As it was stated by Graham (2005), the well organized activity was such a novelty

that it was the first time he found such thing in the city. The trail was used primary by the group

of students and small public participants in total of 40 – 50 people. The activities of Heritage

Trails have been done three times, once time in 2005 and two times in 2006. Moreover, the

successful arrangement of the Heritage Trails had drawn an idea to make a kind of hop on/off

bus to trace the history and explore the beauty of the old building in Surabaya. However, this

wonderful idea may have to gone through a long process, since there are several challenges in

developing the trails as permanent tourist attraction in the city.

The Bureaucracy to Enter the Building

One of the main obstacles to develop the Surabaya Heritage Trails is the fact that not all of the

buildings are accessible. The main reasons for this matter are the difficulty in finding the owner

of the building and the difficulty to get permission from the management. Many of them are

empty buildings, no one uses or no activities found. It means that it is hard to trace the owner or

the management of the buildings. Most of the heritage buildings are private own, and many of

the owners are unidentified. Many of the heritage buildings in Surabaya are poorly managed. Not

many information about the current owner of those building. Even the local government may not

have up date information about the current owner of the building. It will be a good experience to

observe the interior of the heritage buildings; however, to get into the buildings it is another

tricky thing to do. Some of the buildings take a long bureaucracy process just to get into it.

Sadly, some of the difficult ones to enter are own by the government. For example the Governor

Offices and the City Town Hall, to enter those buildings, formal inquiries and formal letter

needed. The permission should be arranged long before the day of visit and the letter should be

shown on the day of visit. This would be very troublesome if an independent visitor should do

that kind of things before entering the building. This happens, since those buildings are not really

open for public and not really visitor friendly. Therefore, it should be the main agenda to make

the building open to public before it is used as one of the heritage attractions in Surabaya.

The Law Enforcement

To develop the Heritage Trails as permanent tourist attraction, it needs a certainty in the

sustainability of the heritage buildings. In this case, the existence of the heritage buildings plays

significant part. Sadly, many of the heritage buildings in Surabaya are poorly managed (Surya

2007). Many of them even destroyed and replaced by the new buildings. The main reason of this

phenomenon is the weak law enforcement by both the national and the local government to

protect the heritage building from demolition. There are law and regulations that have been set

up by the national government of Indonesia about Heritage matter in Indonesia. As quoted in

Bagyono (2005), the Government Law number 5 in 1992 says that the heritage assets such as

heritage buildings, historical site, are natural environment protected by the governments.

Therefore, those who destroy them can be brought before law, with fine or jail punishment. The

Government Law about the heritage site has been described more details by the Government

Regulation number 10 in 1999. This regulations consist of instruction of implication of the

preserving the heritage assets. The national regulations has been followed by the local

government of Surabaya by establishing law on Cultural Heritage, so called “Perda Cagar

Budaya”. The points stated in the regulations are good and very comprehensive; however, the

problem is in the application of the law.

There are limited knowledge and commitment of the personnel to really understand and applied

what have been decided on the regulation. This condition affects the development of the Heritage

Trails in Surabaya. As argued by Kelly and Nankervis (2001), the actions of the government

have crucial direct and indirect impacts on tourism. Therefore, in Surabaya case, it is quite hard

to rely on the government to protect the heritage buildings. Although the regulations have been

set up nicely, the law enforcement is weak (Jawa Pos, 2007). When the demolitions are done by

private companies or individuals, it seems that the government doesn’t have any control to

protect the heritage buildings. In many cases, sometimes the local government does not want to

protect the heritage buildings for the economics reasons. If this happens, most of the time the

higher authorities do not do anything, since they don not see any significant about the heritage

building in the city.

The Economics Values

Another significant challenge of developing the Heritage Trails in Surabaya is the fact that there

is very low public awareness of the potencies. The economics cost and benefit always appear on

the top of the people’s mind when talking about maintaining the heritage building, especially for

the owner of those buildings. Many of the heritage buildings are strategically located in the city

central or in the main road. It means that the property tax is quite high. Moreover, because of the

materials and the style of the building, it is quite costly for the owner to maintain the buildings as

they were. Many of the owners just left the buildings unpreserved, only some are successfully

restored them (Surya, 2007). The cost to maintain the building remains important issues in the

developing the Heritage Trails on bigger and regular bases. Ironically, although there has been a

scheme set up by Tourism and Cultural Department of Surabaya to give a property tax reduction,

many owners still find hard to maintain the buildings because there is not any incentive from the

local government.

Moreover, most of Surabaya people don not aware of the potencies of the heritage buildings.

Many of them just think that the heritage buildings are just a bunch of old buildings which don

not have any social or economical values. The low awareness of the societies about the values of

the heritage building opens more opportunities for the demolition of the heritage buildings. In

this case, not many people will stand against demolition of the buildings, since they don not

know the values. From business perspectives, it is easier and more efficient to destroy the

buildings and build the new ones rather than keeping the original ones. As mentioned by Kwanda

and Handinoto (1995), the modern architects tend to design and build buildings on the basis of

function and cost efficiency, therefore many of the modern buildings have less aesthetic and

cultural values.

4. The Market Opportunities

Up to the year 2007, there were no formal Heritage Trails set up on regular basis in the cities of

Indonesia. Therefore, the idea of creating the heritage tour on the regular basis in Surabaya has

an important meaning. Despite of the challenges, the efforts of developing the Heritage Trails in

Surabaya remain visible. From the business perspectives, there are demands of the heritage tours

from different group of people. The markets exist but need more effort to capitalize on the

products and the promotion. There is a growing demand on the city attraction that involves the

heritage buildings in Surabaya. Deciding the market segment is crucial to get a better result of

sale (Morgan and Pritchard, 2001). Therefore, to market the Heritage Trails, it is important to

segment the market before doing a promotion. In this case, the potential market of Surabaya

Heritage Trails consist of young professional, students, the expatriates , and international visitor

that have emotional bound with Surabaya, namely the Dutch visitors.

A study conducted by Limastoro (2005) gives an insight about the existence of the market,

especially for the young professional in Surabaya. From the research, it is known that almost

60% of the 68 respondents have positive respond about the idea of Heritage tours in Surabaya.

Specifically, the findings also reveal the needs of the respondents on the heritage tours that may

be conducted in regular basic. From Limastoro’s study (2005), the big numbers of respondents,

around 22%, choose Sunday Morning as the best time to do the Heritage Trails. Moreover, they

prefer to do the Heritage Trails by bus and walking. The main supporting facility of the Heritage

Trails is the meals, since 63% choose this item. Furthermore, many of the respondents expect to

gain new experience and get knowledge about the heritage building in Surabaya. In this case, this

market remains quite promising for the development of Heritage Trails in Surabaya

Students are also important for the Heritage Trails. The educational values that strongly attached

to the activities give an additional point to the products. This activity is suitable for the Junior

High School students up to the University students. Leiper (2004), states that one of the need of

human being is to indulge in curiosity. Tourism can be the medium to satisfy the need of

education, since it allows individual to personally learn something. From the three activities

that had been conducted, the participants mostly come from students, about 70% from the whole

participants. This fact proofs the students have been the backbone of the products. However, the

chance to develop the Heritage Trails to a wider audience of Students is widely open.

Moreover, others big market of the heritage tours is the expatiate living in Indonesia, specifically

Surabaya. Most of them travel during weekend or public holidays. This is quite a big market that

has not been recognized by many local governments. It is arguable that the expatriates in

Surabaya need a quality attraction that they can do in the city. Learning the history and the

culture of Surabaya will be an interesting activity for them to do on their spare time. The seek to

novelty is also the main reasons for the expatriates to explore the heritage of Indonesia. As

mentioned by Leiper (2004), the need for novelty is common among tourists that need a new

experiences, new environment, new activities and new possessions. The set up of Indonesian

Heritage Society is one of the proofs that many expatriate have the interest on Indonesian

heritage (Indonesian Heritage Societies 2007). The organization was set up and run by

expatriates in Indonesia, their activities cover many things, including publication and traveling

together to certain destination.

The most important market of the heritage tours is the European people, especially the Dutch

people. As reported by Indonesian statistics (2007), the total number of European visitors to

Indonesia by 2005 is 798,408. From this figure, the Dutch visitors reach 114,687 visitors and

overall they spend 1,454.95 US. This is reasonable since the Dutch have a long history of

colonialism in Indonesia, therefore many of them visiting Indonesia to have nostalgia. Most of

the Dutch visitors visit big colonial cities in Indonesia, including Surabaya. Many old

generations of the Dutch people have their own nostalgic values about Surabaya. The need to

indulge in nostalgia can also be capitalized to attract the Dutch market. As Leiper (2004) has

argued that the need of nostalgia will bring people to visit a place that have historical connection

with the tourists. Since the Dutch can be considered as the big spender when they visit Indonesia,

therefore the market is profitable for the Heritage Trails in Surabaya. The data from Surabaya

Tourism Promotion Board (2006) shows that there is an increase of the European visitors from

2003 – 2005, especially the Dutch visitors, from 1,695 in 2003 up to 2,690 in 2005. Almost all

the heritage buildings in Surabaya were built by the Dutch; therefore the emotional bound is

quite strong between the Dutch and Indonesian. If promoted and packaged well enough the

Heritage Trails will be one of the consumption of any Dutch tourists visiting Indonesia specially

Surabaya.

5. Conclusion

Heritage tourism may not be a new stream of tourism in the cities within the developed

countries, particularly in cities in Europe. In those regions the heritage tourism destinations have

been well developed. Many heritage buildings, historical sites and culture have been well

preserved for the sake of tourism and the local people as well. However, that is not the case in

the cities within the developing countries such as Surabaya. In this case, the stakeholders such as

the government and tourism industries do not do any significant action to maximize the heritage

assets in the city. Therefore, the process of creating the Heritage Trails in Surabaya comes from

the community, namely the academics from university. The main aim of the Heritage Trails is to

preserve the heritage building by utilizing tourism in the city. Through this paper, it has been

discussed how a group of tourism students tries to develop the Heritage Trails in the city. The

planning, the process and the promotion activities show how careful is the Heritage Trails has

been set up.

To develop the Heritage Trails in Surabaya, there are challenges that need to be overcome.

Ironically, as mentioned previously in this study, several barriers to develop the Heritage Trails

come from the stakeholders who should be the ones that directly responsible on the matter.

Problems, such as hard access, complicated bureaucracy and the lack of awareness are

significantly drawn the development of the heritage trail. However, this paper has revealed the

optimism of developing the heritage trail from the academics perspectives can really make a

change, in this case, preserving the heritage buildings through tourism activity. The market of

heritage tourism in Surabaya remains promising, since there are still very few tourists attraction

in the city of Surabaya. Study by Limastoro (2006) had shown the interest of the people toward

the heritage tourism in Surabaya. Several markets are also quite promising for the Heritage

Trails, including the European visitors. The next step of developing the Heritage Trails as regular

tourist attraction in the city needs investor who has not only the capital but also a concern on the

heritage building. There is still on going process and discussion about the development of the

Heritage Trails in Surabaya. The success of the activities done by Petra’s students has triggered

the awareness of the society as well as a response by the government and the industry. This paper

has shown how academics approach can be used to prompt the development of tourism products

in the area where the government and the industries stagnant.

Bibliography

Bagyono (2005). Pariwisata dan Perhotelan, Alfabeta, Bandung

Bisnis Indonesia (2004). Bandung Kembangkan Wisata Sejarah, Jumat, 26 Maret

Bisnis Indonesia (2005). Kembangkan Wisata Heritage, 23 September

Bisnis Indonesia (2006). STPB Sebarkan Logo Sparkling Surabaya, 10 Mei

Faber , G.H. V (1931). Oud Soerabaia: De Geschiedenis van Indie’s eerste koopastad van de

oudste tijden tot de intelling van gemmenterrad 1906, as quoted in Handinoto (1996),

Perkembangan Kota dan Arsitektur Kolonial Belanda di Surabaya 1870 -1940, LPPM

Universitas Kriste Petra dan ANDI Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Faber, G.H.V, (1933). Nieuw Soerabaia: De Geschiedenis van Indie’s voornamste koopstad in

de eerste kwarteeuw sedert van gemeenteraad 1906 -1931, as quoted in Handinoto

(1996), Perkembangan Kota dan Arsitektur Kolonial Belanda di Surabaya 1870 -1940,

LPPM Universitas Kriste Petra dan ANDI Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Graham, D (2005). “Old Surabaya: A City Doomed to Fall into Decay?”, The Jakarta Post, 2

December

Hall, C.M and Page, S (2000). Tourism in South and South East Asia: Issues and Cases,

Butterworth – Heinemann, Oxford, UK

Hall, M (1993). “Politics and Place: an Analysis of Power in Tourism Communities”, as quoted

in Singh S, Timothy,J and Dowling, R.K (eds) (2003), Tourism in Destination

Communities, CABI Publishing, UK

Handinoto (1996). Perkembangan Kota dan Arsitektur Kolonial Belanda di Surabaya 1870 -

1940, LPPM Universitas Kriste Petra dan ANDI Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Haris, R, Griffin, T and Williams, P (eds) (2002). Sustainable Tourism: A Global Perspectives,

Butterworth – Heinemann, Oxford, UK

Horner, S and Swarbrooke, J (2004). International Cases in Tourism Management, Elsevier,

Oxford, UK

Indonesian Heritage Societies (2007). http://www.heritagejkt.org/, accessed in 25 January 2007

Institute of Technolgy Surabaya (1995). Selayang Pandang Surabaya Tempo Doeloe, Surabaya

Jawa Pos (2006). “Kunjungi Surabaya Masa Lalu”, 27 November

Jawa Pos (2007). ”Mati Suri, Perda Cagar Budaya”, 6 January

Jennings, G and Nickerson, N.P (2006). Quality Tourism Experiences, Elsevier Butterworth –

Heinemann, USA

Jogya Heritage (2007). www.jogjaheritage.org, accessed in 25 January 2007

Johnson, D (2000). Sales and Marketing in the Tourism Industry, The McGraw – Hill

Companies, Inc, Australia

Kelly, I and Nankervis, T (2001). Visitor Destination, John Wiley and Sons Australia, Ltd,

Australia

Kompas (2003), http://kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0303/31/teropong/218749.htm, accessed in 25

January 2007

Kompas (2005). “Heritage Walk: Bentuk Kepedulian pada Sejarah”, Kompas, 26 September

Kwanda, T and Handinoto (2003). Surabaya Architectural Heritage : Tour Guide, Department

of Architecture, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Planning Petra Christian University,

Surabaya

Leiper, N (2004). Tourism Management, Pearson Education Australia Pty, Ltd, Australia

Limastoro, A (2006). Wisata Budaya Mengunjungi Gedung-Gedung Kuno: Study Market atas

Masyarakat Muda Surabaya, unpublished research of Petra Christian University,

Surabaya

Morgan, N and Pritchard (2001). Advertising in Tourism and Leisure, Butterworth-Heinemann,

UK

Page, S and Hall, C.M (2003). Managing Urban Tourism, :Theme in Tourism, Prentice Hall,

London

Pearce, D and Butler, R.W (eds) (2002). Contemporary Issues in Tourism Development,

Routledge, London

Picard, M (1996). Bali: Cultural Tourism and Touristic Culture, Archipelago Press, Singapore

Picard, M and Wood, R.E (eds) (1997). Tourism, Ethnicity and the State in Asian and Pacific

Societies, University of Hawai’i Press, USA

Ritcher, L.K (2002). “The Politics of Heritage Tourism Development: Emerging Issues of the

Millennium”, as quoted in Pearce, D and Butler, R.W (eds) (2002), Contemporary Issues

in Tourism Development, Routledge, London

Sigala, M and Leslie, D (2005). International Cultural Tourism: management, implications and

cases, Elsevier Butterworth – Heinemann, Great Britain

Simpson and Wall (2002). “Environmental Impacts Assessments for Tourism: a discussion and

an Indonesian example”, as quoted in Pearce, D and Butler, R.W (eds) (2002),

Contemporary Issues in Tourism Development, Routledge, London

Singh S, Timothy,J and Dowling, R.K (eds) (2003). Tourism in Destination Communities, CABI

Publishing, UK

Statistics Indonesia (2007). Average Expenditure Per Visit By Country Of Residence 2001-2005,

BPS, Indonesia

Statistics Indonesia (2007). Number Of Foreign Visitor Arrivals To Indonesia By Country Of

Residence 2001-2005, BPS, Indonesia

Surabaya Government (2006). www.surabaya.go.id, accessed in 4 March 2007

Surabaya Tourism Promotion Board Surabaya and Indonesia (2006).

www.sparklingsurabaya.com, accessed in 4 March 2007

Surabaya Tourism Promoton Board (2006), Evaluasi Kinerja STPB sampai dengan Juli 2006,

STPB, Surabaya

Surya (2005). “The Heritage Walk UK Petra : Jalan Kaki Menelusuri Peninggalan Kolonial

Belanda”, Surya, 26 September

Surya (2007). Rp 10 M untuk Stasiun Semut, 9 January

UNWTO (2006). “Tourism Highlight 2006 Edition”, www.unwto.org, accessed in 3 January

2007

UNWTO (2007), “UNWTO World Tourism Barometer”, www.unwto.org, accessed in 3 January

2007

Van den Borg,J.,Costa, P.,and Gotti,G (1996). ”Tourism in European Heritage Cities”, Annals of

Tourism Research 23 (2): 306-21

Verbeke,M.J and Lievois, E (2002). “Analyzing Heritage Resources for Urban Tourism in

European Cities”, as quoted in Pearce, D and Butler, R.W (eds) (2002), Contemporary

Issues in Tourism Development, Routledge, London