A visit to a cultural site, if it goes ‘right’, can be a very strengthening experience. It has the capacity to disturb us, and if it does this it is not necessarily a bad thing. Tourism is now integral to modern life: not merely in financial terms, such as the assessment of the WTTC that by 1990 tourism accounted for 5.5 per cent of the world gross national product,1 but in much deeper, more radical ways as well. As Deyan Sudjic has unequivocally pronounced in his book The 100 Mile City, ‘As a force for social change, tourism has had an impact of the same order as the industrial revolution. In less than three decades, tourism has transformed the way the world looks and works.’ The first and only basis for consideration of the most appropropriate way to conduct cultural tourism is a recognition that the agenda must be determined, and then implemented, globally, on the basis of an acceptance of our complete interdependence. To the question ‘Western vs Non-Western: Whose Culture will Save the Environment?’ which UNESCO posed for its International Symposium on Culture and Environment in Indonesia, the answer would be that there can only be one answer and that is ‘both, together’. This is, of course, much easier said than done but the existence, and their concern in this area, of supraorganizations such as UNESCO, ICOMOS, ICOM, WTO and the WTTC, and the staging of such events as the global Earth Summit in Rio, are indicative that, whether in theory or not, at least acceptance of the principle is widespread. Putting noble thoughts and aims into action, however, perhaps because of other consequences regarded as more immediately dire at the local level, may militate against the necessary ‘follow through’. Emblem to such difficulty is the global split revealed at the 1992 Rio conference: and much is the sympathy for hardpressed areas, desperately trying to solve urgent basic problems of human need, who see conservation, preservation and gentle tourism as luxuries they cannot afford. As was opined by François Ascher in a UNESCO publication,4 ‘Tourism is an economic activity which may be said to trade in the cultural and natural heritage of countries. It thus involves an inseparable combination of economic and socio-cultural problems and immediately raises the issue of development options.’ While not all the world’s population yet travel physically, we are a stage when most places are, to a degree, visited by outsiders. Viewed from some perspectives, this can produce unfortunate inequalities: some people can enjoy the life of a global citizen, while others may rarely, or never, go further than their own backyard. However, when considering how to manage cultural tourism, that entity is being viewed in its widest sense, since it is regarded as essential to the search and discovery of an appropriate agenda for cultural tourism that this be done. The ‘think global, act local’ mantra has permeated well certain strata of society, including many of the media. This can tend, due to the high visibility character of their opinion, to lend the impression that the point has been taken universally. It is debatable whether, even in this day and age, everyone knows what is said in such media-orientated circles, and if they do they will not necessarily share their viewpoint. For reasons such as ignorance, self-interest or selfishness, some portions of world society are still likely only to think, as well as to act, local. Even well-meaning pannational or cultural gatherings can end with the victory of individual interest against that of the group as a whole. So tourism, as a global industry, is liable to be influenced by the forces of, politics, economics and culture. For the practice of cultural tourism, the Preface outlined the suggested aims for achievement in terms of suitable conduct, by the meeting of the three needs of: i) an item of heritage, ii) its presenter, iii) its audience.
Heritage Tourism, Visitors and Their Needs
