Original Scientific Article
A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability
Elements for the Management of World Cultural
Heritage Sites
Rafael Almeida de Oliveira
Joao Pinheiro Foundation, Brazil
rafalolbh@ufmg.br
Silvia De Ascaniis
Università della Svizzera Italiana,
Switzerland
silvia.de.ascaniis@usi.ch
Renata Maria Abrantes Baracho
Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil
renatabaracho@ufmg.br
Hebert Canela Salgado
Federal University of Jequitinhonha
and Mucuri Valleys, Brazil
hebert.salgado@ufvjm.edu.br
Lorenzo Cantoni
Università della Svizzera Italiana,
Switzerland
lorenzo.cantoni@usi.ch
Different interpretations have been proposed of how culture is related to the concept
of sustainability. Culture has been described as the fourth dimension of sustainabil-
ity, together with the economic, environmental and social dimensions; it has been
considered a mediator that enables a balance among the other three dimensions; it
has also been seen as the very foundation for achieving sustainability goals. How-
ever, the elements that make culture a fundamental part of sustainability interven-
tions are neither yet clearly defined nor equally implemented. In tourism, when it
comes to World Cultural Heritage Sites (wchss), the issue of cultural sustainability
should be considered both from the position of the management and from the po-
sition of visitors: do wchss managers consider cultural sustainability dimensions
when developing sustainability strategies for their site? Are visitors’ experiences and
images of the site influenced by elements related to cultural sustainability? A study
is presented here, which aimed at answering these questions, analysing both faces
of the coin. First, the different interpretations proposed to explain the relationship
between culture and sustainability have been considered, to identify key descriptive
elements. Then, a sample of online travel reviews about visitors’ experiences at un-
esco wchss has been analysed, to see if such key elements were part of visitors’
stories and evaluations. Finally, managers and specialists of wchss in Switzerland
have been interviewed, to see if they agreed on the identified key descriptive ele-
ments. Results allowed us to categorize 24 elements related to cultural sustainability,
to aggregate them into five dimensions, and finally to organize them in a conceptual
framework.
Keywords: cultural sustainability, World Heritage Sites, categorization, tourists, site
managers, online travel reviews
https://doi.org/10.26493/2335-4194.16.9-22
Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023 | 9
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
Introduction
In the last decades, the development of Information
and Communication Technologies (icts) has become
the backbone of the networked society, just as power
grids were essential in industrial society (Castells,
2005). The fast technological development they al-
lowed has created concerns in society through ques-
tioning its ability to ensure sustainable development
(Haarstad, 2017; Höjer & Wangel, 2015). The concept
of sustainability is related in much of the literature to
the development of the social, economic and environ-
mental context of a given territory. There is a wide de-
bate about the role of culture in sustainability (Chew,
2009; Hawkes, 2001; Suntikul, 2016) and the concept
of cultural sustainability has been defined in differ-
ent ways. Some authors claim that culture can be seen
as a specific dimension of sustainability (Maggiore &
Velleco, 2012; Throsby, 2016). Others claim that it can
be integrated with the social dimension, thus result-
ing in a socio-cultural dimension (Aydin & Alvares,
2016; Ranasighe, 2018). Some researchers argue, then,
that culture serves as a central pillar for the develop-
ment of the other dimensions (Hawkes, 2001; Soini &
Birkland, 2014).
In the field of tourism, the issue of sustainability
has been a hot topic for some years. However, while
the perspective of managers and their actions regard-
ing sustainability have frequently been highlighted,
the tourists’ perspective has barely been studied (Ay-
din & Alvarez, 2016). Tourists generally assess the sus-
tainability of destinations based on those aspects that
affect their own experiences most. Thus, they do not
directly perceive some sustainability actions taken by
the territory, creating challenges for destinations to de-
velop strategies on how to communicate these actions
to the tourist efficiently.
On some social platforms for travel and tourism,
such as TripAdvisor, tools have been implemented that
allow users to identify establishments committed to
sustainability principles. Tripadvisor’s Green Lead-
ers stamp is highlighted for accommodations that are
committed to sustainable practices such as recycling
waste, organic food, and electric car charging stations.
The focus is, however,mostly on environmental issues.
Hopefully, in the future, user comments and evalua-
tions might include more sustainability elements (Ay-
din & Alvarez, 2016).
Visitors’ evaluation of their experiences at cultural
heritage sites can suggest the elements that the man-
agement should focus on to increase awareness of the
cultural elements and to increase their satisfaction
during the visit. Tourism could in this way strengthen
a positive connection between residents, tourists, and
managers within a society and help to point out the
central role of culture in sustainability issues (Terkenli
& Georgoula, 2021).
In the specific case of wchss, understanding visi-
tors’ awareness of the cultural aspects of heritage that
need to be considered for sustainable management is
even greater. Since a site is inscribed in the unesco
World Heritage List, there is, on the one hand, an in-
crease in visitation interest that can expand the po-
tential for knowledge and preservation while, on the
other hand, the site may suffer from over-tourism and
external cultural influences that might directly affect
the preservation of cultural elements (Tan et al., 2020;
Oliveira et al., 2022). It is the responsibility of the site
management to ensure that cultural elements of her-
itage are maintained and enhanced through tourism,
maximizing positive impacts andminimizing negative
impacts (Sonuç, 2020).
This study aims to identify the elements of cultural
sustainability that wchs visitors recognize in the visi-
tation experience, to classify them in comparison with
the elements put forward by heritage managers and,
on this base, to elaborate a conceptual framework of
cultural sustainability for heritage cultural sites.
Literature Review
The Role of Culture in Sustainability
The concept of sustainability originated as an evolu-
tion of the concept of development. The concept of
development originally highlighted the economic and
productive activities that provide employment, con-
sumption and wealth to a society. Gradually, it ex-
panded its scope to human development, including
values and social goals such as life expectancy, educa-
tion, equity, opportunity and well-being (Maggiore &
Vellecco, 2012).
The concept of sustainable development or sustain-
10 | Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
ability was presented in 1987 by the World Commis-
sion on Environment and Development (wced). In
very rough terms, it focuses on satisfying the needs of
the present societywithout compromising the needs of
future generations (Hawkes, 2001; Soini & Birkeland,
2014).
This concept was further elaborated by Throsby
(2016)whendefining somebasic principles that should
characterize sustainability: continuity, intergenera-
tional and intragenerational equity, diversity, a balance
between natural and cultural ecosystems, and interde-
pendence between the cultural, social, ecological and
economic dimensions.
It should be noted that the principle of interdepen-
dence between the four dimensions and, especially,
the role of culture in sustainability are much debated
in the literature and sometimes controversial. There
is a consensus that sustainability is composed of three
basic dimensions: economic, social and environmen-
tal (Hawkes, 2001; Maggiore & Vellecco, 2012; Soini
& Birkeland, 2014; Suntikul, 2018; Weng et al., 2019).
The dimensions were agreed upon in 2002 during the
Sustainable Development Congress (Soini & Birke-
land, 2014) and later reaffirmed by the United Nations
in 2005 (Suntikul, 2018). This division ended up ex-
panding a debate about the role of culture within sus-
tainability, which still remains undervalued compared
with the other dimensions (Chew, 2009;Hawkes, 2001;
Suntikul, 2018).
Culture can be seen as composed of three aspects:
the values and aspirations of a society, its forms of de-
velopment and transmission, its tangible manifesta-
tions (physical structures, works of art and places of
great cultural value) and intangible ones (ideas, prac-
tices, beliefs and traditions), that help to create cohe-
sion within a specific group (Hawkes, 2001; Maggiore
& Vellecco, 2012).
As far as sustainability is concerned, there are some
specific characteristics of culture that foster its de-
velopment, namely: the valuing of cultural identity
(Chew, 2009; Hawkes, 2001; Maggiore & Vellecco,
2012), knowledge (Maggiore & Vellecco, 2012; Ay-
din & Alvarez, 2016), social empowerment (Throsby,
2003; Chew, 2009; Ranasinghe, 2018), cultural capi-
tal (Murzyn-Kupisz, 2012), diversity (Hawkes, 2001;
Throsby, 2003), creativity and innovation (Hawkes,
2001; Maggiore & Vellecco, 2012) and finally, technol-
ogy (Maggiore & Vellecco, 2012).
In summary, Dessein et al. (2015) state that culture
can participate in the concept of sustainability by tak-
ing three different roles. The first role characterizes
culture as support for sustainability, that is, it is seen as
a fourth dimension of themodel togetherwith the eco-
nomic, social and environmental dimensions. The sec-
ond role of culturewould be connection andmediation,
serving to balance the relationships between the three
other dimensions. Finally, the third role highlights cul-
ture as the main element for the achievement of sus-
tainability objectives. The last perspective is based on
the understanding that culture creates all moral and
ethical values of a society that will serve as the main
goals to be achieved by sustainability. The authors be-
lieve that, depending on the circumstances and objec-
tives, one or the other perspectivemight better explain
the role of culture in sustainability.
In the case of wchss, it is questioned which of the
three roles highlighted by Dessein et al. (2015) could
better represent culture in the sustainability discourse
from a tourism perspective. Understanding the per-
spective of the managers and that of the tourists who
visit those places can shed light on this issue.
Cultural Sustainability in Tourism
Tourism can be considered a fundamental activity for
the development and cultural preservation of a soci-
ety, ensuring benefits for future generations (Ranas-
inghe, 2018). However, if not well managed, tourism
can negatively affect the culture of a society, generating
problems such as excess demand (García-Hernández
et al., 2017;Murzyn-Kupisz, 2017; Yeniasir&Gökbulut,
2018), loss of values and traditions (García-Hernández
et al, 2017; Jamal et al., 2010), lack of respect between
tourists and residents (Jamal et al., 2010) and poor re-
ceptivity of tourists by the population (Ranasinghe,
2018; Yeniasir & Gökbulut, 2018).
Based on the principles of sustainability outlined
by Throsby (2016), on the other hand, there are several
ways in which tourism can positively impact culture.
First, the cultural exchange helps visitors’ access to the
reality of residents (Aydin & Alvarez, 2016). Also, it
Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023 | 11
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
might involve inhabitants in guiding tourists and pro-
moting local products through communication chan-
nels and encouraging green actions, cultural knowl-
edge and pre-trip preparation on cultural elements
(Jamal et al., 2010). Second, sustainable tourismmight
positively impact well-being, guaranteeing an inclu-
sive, empowered and happy society. What is good for
the economy is not always good for society (Hawkes,
2001). The city must be good for the resident and the
tourist; therefore, one must think of means such as
controlling the number of visitors or limiting con-
gestion (Throsby, 2016). Third, tourism might impact
the quality of life, which brings as a consequence the
improvement in community needs, such as aesthetic,
spiritual, cultural and leisure elements (Murzyn-Ku-
pisz, 2012). In addition, it enables greater economic
gains, as tourists spendnot only onheritage but also on
services around the spaces (Murzyn-Kupisz, 2012), in-
creasing local income, employment (Yeniasir & Gök-
bulut, 2018) and direct, indirect and induced impacts
on the economy (Maggiore & Vellecco, 2012). The
fourth impact is related to strengthening cultural per-
ception (Yeniasir & Gökbulut, 2018), enabling invest-
ments in cultural heritage (Murzyn-Kupisz, 2012). Fi-
nally, the last impact is connected to ethical issues, fo-
cused on the understanding that physical and cultural
space are correlated (Jamal et al., 2010).
To enhance the benefits of considering and man-
aging cultural aspects in heritage sites, it is recom-
mended that managers make use of cultural elements
in an integrated way with heritage (Eversole, 2006). In
this case, managers are perfectly aware of all cultural
elements of society (authenticity, history, lifestyle), in-
cluding them completely in space, without damaging
the territory. Heritage development processes tend to
be participatory and inclusive, presenting solutions
that benefit several dimensions.However, it often hap-
pens that heritage sites that push tourismundergo sev-
eral changes in their original elements, usually stress-
ing only some isolated cultural elements for promo-
tion. The principle is that the story shown is authen-
tic, but with no direct connection between the initia-
tive and the cultural context. The community, despite
knowing the context, does not fully identify with what
is produced without participating in its production or
using local skills. The worst case scenario is the one
when the manager invents non-existent spaces within
the space for the exclusive use of tourism,without con-
nection with cultural aspects of the region. It can even
generate the creation of a new local identity, but is
focused on external consumption and is unrelated to
local needs.
Culture is recognized as an essential part of the
tourism activity, and understanding the ways it can
positively or negatively impact the tourism experi-
ence might help in the development of effective strate-
gies for the management of heritage. How, though, do
tourists conceive the culture of the place they visit?
Which elements of the place relate to the cultural di-
mension?Do such elements influence their experience
and, if yes, how?The study presented here aimed at an-
swering these questions, focusing on the experience of
tourists at wchss.
Research Methodology
2,750 comments published by visitors to wchss on
the online platform TripAdvisor were collected and
analysed. Tripadvisor provides not only data of users’
ratings, but also comments about tourist attractions,
allowing owners andmanagers of these spaces to know
about positive and negative aspects of visitors’ ex-
periences (Torres, 2013). Data were collected using
the web scraping technique, that is, using automated
tools to extract data fromdigital platforms, transform-
ing them into a structured database (Marres & Wel-
tevrede, 2013).
The choice of the sites to be included in the sam-
ple was based on the analysis of wchs that had ded-
icated pages on TripAdvisor. 504 attractions (as of 4
April 2020) were identified, having on average 4,354
comments each. To collect the greatest diversity of
heritage, the main attraction of each of the coun-
tries that had at least the total number of the above-
average comments was selected; following this crite-
ria, Gibraltar, the Czech Republic and French Polyne-
sia were disregarded. In the case of the United States,
two attractions were selected, since the country has
different wchss spread over its territory, which in-
creased diversity. The final database was composed
of 22 attractions from 21 countries: Robben Island
12 | Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
Figure 1 Example of Classification of Expressions
in Visitors’ Comments Related to Cultural
Sustainability
Museum (South Africa), Cologne Cathedral (Ger-
many), Sydney Opera House (Australia), Schonbrunn
Palace (Austria), Grand Palace (Belgium), Corcovado
– Christ the Redeemer (Brazil), Mutianyu Great Wall
(China), Changdeokgung Palace (South Korea), Al-
hambra (Spain), Statue of Liberty and San Jose Mis-
sion (United States), Eiffel Tower (France), Acropolis
(Greece), Kinderdijk (Netherlands), Taj Mahal (In-
dia), Naqsh-e Jahan Centre (Iran), Baha’i Gardens (Is-
rael), Gallerie Degli Uffizi (Italy), Atomic BombDome
(Japan), Tower of London (United Kingdom), Bern’s
Historic Centre (Switzerland) and Hagia Sophia Mu-
seum (Turkey).
Within each comment, those expressions that cor-
responded to elements aimed at cultural sustainabil-
ity and the visitor’s experience as a whole were clas-
sified. The elements of culture that foster sustainable
development taken out of the literature (i.e. valuing
of cultural identity, social empowerment, knowledge,
cultural capital, diversity, creativity and innovation,
technology) were used as references to identify such
expressions and to aggregate similar concepts. Each
comment was read individually and the classification
of the sentences was done manually by three indepen-
dent coders.
In total, 7,340 expressions related to cultural as-
pects of the sites were identified and classified into 49
categories. Figure 1 provides an example of how the
expressions in each text were classified; each category
is described in brackets after the respective (under-
lined) expression. The three coders then, compared
their analyses and agreed on reducing the 49 cate-
gories into 24, and later to aggregate them into 5 di-
mensions, based on similarities among each other. The
entire procedure was performed using the Atlas soft-
ware. The software allows for classifying words that
are repeated throughout one or more texts, manually
or automatically, so to assist in the investigation of lin-
guistic patterns within the texts.
Results
Table 1 shows the 49 categories defined on the basis of
the characteristics of sustainable development in cul-
ture, later reduced to 24 and then aggregated into 5 di-
mensions. Table 2 shows the weight of each category
in the sample.
A definition of each category was elaborated and
agreed upon by the three coders, so as to have a reli-
able classification procedure for users’ comments. The
following is the working definition of each category:
• Quality of information: capacity of the site to
create strategies to pass on historical and cul-
tural information so as to expand visitors’ knowl-
edge. Information can be given through informa-
tion panels, signposts, audiovisual technologies,
training tour guides, and storytelling. Regard-
less of the format, it must be ensured that visitors
understand the given information in a clear and
non-tiring way, in addition to having the possi-
bility to answer their questions and solve their
doubts.
• Photo availability: capacity of the attraction to
foster photographs by visitors which point out
elements that value the local cultural produc-
tion, supporting its dissemination. Many visi-
tors are motivated by the possibility of taking
good photos as travel records and later sharing
them in their social circles. In this way, attrac-
tions that encourage the practice and have strate-
gies to value the participation of their visitors
Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023 | 13
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
Table 1 Cultural Sustainability’s Dimensions and Categories
Dimension Final category Preliminary category
Information and Communication Quality of information Lack of information
Time-consuming information
Excessive information
Wrong information
Local information
Information boards
Signboards
Translation
Self-guided tour
Photo availability Photo availability
Technological devices Technological devices
Quality of service Quality of service
Attendance
Cultural Enhancement Uniqueness Uniqueness/Unicity
Unesco
Authenticity Authenticity
Conservation and preservation Conservation
Preserved structure
Cleaning
Vitality of the offer Quality of artworks
Quality of cultural events
Facilities Support structure Support structure
Mobility Mobility/transport access
Accessibility Accessibility
Continued on the next page
with photographic records, help in creating the
image of the destination. The images also help in
valuing cultural aspects and symbols, in addition
to providing information that can be essential in
the choice of travel for prospective visitors and a
form of loyalty during the post-trip period.
• Technological devices: use of electronic equip-
ment as a means to improve the quality of the
information received by tourists before, during
and after their visit to the attraction, in addition
to enabling online shopping and greater inter-
action between the observer and the observed
object. Equipment such as online ticketing sites
or mobile applications can facilitate visitors’ en-
try and assist with prior information. The use of
audio guides and films helps to create narratives
during the visit, passing on reliable information,
clearly and educationally, helping the visitor to
better understand the story behind the object. In
addition, games and other technological means
of interaction make it possible to attract different
profiles of audiences to the space, serving as en-
tertainment and adding value to the product. It is
important to emphasize that visual technologies
such as projection screens and other elements can
14 | Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
Table 1 Continued from the previous page
Dimension Final category Preliminary category
Cultural Integration Local guides Local guides
Value for money Value for money
Networked attractions Networked attractions
Integration of local products Local products
Souvenirs
Local immersion Presence of tourists only
Presence of locals
Local costumes
Cultural restrictions (clothes/religion)
Environmental connection Environmental connection
Water recycling
Respect for minorities Religious diversity
Sexual diversity
Female equality
Organization Visitor capacity Visitor capacity
Waiting time Waiting time
Security Insecurity
Hostile residents
Safety procedures
Annoying sellers
Problem-solving Problem-solving
be used without overlapping the original aspects
of the space.
• Quality of service: how employees and other pro-
fessionals at the attraction meet the needs of vis-
itors in a clear, respectful and friendly manner,
ensuring good hospitality for visitors.
• Uniqueness: a unique feature of the heritage that
distinguishes it from other heritage sites, which
may be the history, cultural values, architecture,
special certifications or other elements that make
the visitor understand that the space is unique.
The visitor is moremotivated to visit spaces whe-
re he can see unprecedented elements that are
difficult to find elsewhere. The space must seek
ways to highlight its peculiar and iconic charac-
teristics, valuing the authentic cultural elements
that can convey the idea of uniqueness to its vis-
itors. Thus, the attraction will be considered an
unmissable tour by people who visit the region.
• Authenticity: the capacity of the attraction to ex-
press its historical and cultural role, creating a
sense of connection for visitors with its intended
purpose. The most important thing is to guar-
antee an emotional experience and less so mate-
rial originality since most of the attractions have
changed over the years. Even so, it is necessary to
transmit to the visitor an experience close to orig-
inality, whether from recreation or in an informa-
tive way, comparing the original differences with
the current historical aspects, and emphasizing
the relevance and cultural identity of the attrac-
tion for society.
Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023 | 15
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
Table 2 Weight of Each Category on the Sample
of Comments
Category Percentage
Quality of the information .
Uniqueness .
Local guides .
Authenticity .
Conservation and Preservation .
Support structure .
Visitor capacity .
Value for money .
Network attractions .
Mobility .
Vitality of the offer .
Photo availability .
Integration of local products .
Waiting time .
Technological devices .
Local immersion .
Quality of service .
Safety .
Accessibility .
Problem-solving .
Freedom of visitation .
Environmental connection .
Tourist behaviour .
Respect for minorities .
• Conservation and preservation: maintenance of
works and space, in addition to ensuring that the
environment is clean, both for the organization of
the attraction and for the visitors. It also includes
the preservation of the original characteristics
of the cultural elements in restoration processes.
These processes can limit visitor access and vi-
sion in some spaces and works, so visual alterna-
tives that minimize the impact of non-visitation
are essential, such as information panels, digital
visual experiences or the possibility of visualiz-
ing the restoration process itself. It reduces the
visual pollution of the interventions and guar-
antees a satisfactory experience for the visitor.
• Vitality of the offer: offer of quality materials,
works and cultural artefacts, avoiding reproduc-
tions and representing the local diversity for the
visitor. Organizing or supporting rich cultural
presentations and events that value traditional
elements and community participation as part of
the attraction. Adding value to the visit with qual-
ity elements and cultural presentationsmakes the
visitor value the experience more and get closer
to local customs.
• Support structure: provide the attraction with
quality services that help well-being during the
visit, such as spaces for food, bathrooms, a visitor
centre, souvenir shops and parking lots, among
others. The support structure, in addition to en-
suring greater comfort, makes it possible to add
value to the cultural asset and generates possi-
bilities for inclusion into the local culture of the
products and services offered. It is recommended
to ensure that support structures are accessi-
ble to different audiences with different access
needs and consumption profiles. It is also valid
to promote services for visitor use, in addition
to adding value to experiences, especially gastro-
nomic and product purchases.
• Mobility: availability of viable and quality trans-
port access for the arrival of the visitor at the site
and possible displacement within the attraction.
In addition, depending on the type of transport
available, it is possible to add information about
the attraction and the local culture before arrival
or add the means of transport as part of the cul-
tural experience for the visitor. During the visit,
alternative means of transport can be used to
facilitate the mobility of visitors and be offered
as an added product, providing new experiences
such as the use of boats, bicycles or some typical
local means of transport.
• Accessibility: capacity of the attraction to guaran-
tee a quality tourist experience for people who
need special care, such as parents with children,
the elderly and disabled people, among others.
The attraction must have the necessary equip-
16 | Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
ment and be in good condition so that visitation
is facilitated.
• Local guides: the possibility of hiring local tour
guides, to favour the region’s economy in addi-
tion to strengthening knowledge of the culture
on the part of the local community. It can also
strengthen relationships between the community
and tourists, enabling a more authentic visiting
experience. From the local tour guide, tourists
can learn about peculiarities, stories and attrac-
tions that are outside the usual itineraries. There-
fore, the guide must be properly trained, have
an adequate professional attitude, treat visitors
with respect and pass on reliable information.
The good relationship and motivation of these
professionals result in better visitor satisfaction.
It is expected that the professional’s rolewill be le-
galized, guaranteeing security for the tourist and
generating tax collection, favouring new policies
for the sector, and the elaboration of strategies to
encourage the hiring of these professionals must
be developed.
• Value formoney: feeling that the price charged for
services on the site is following what is offered by
the market, fulfilling visitors’ expectations. Pro-
vide more viable forms of access for people in the
community, encouraging them to attend attrac-
tions more constantly.
• Networked attractions: strategies that encourage
and facilitate visitors’ access to other attractions
or services around the attraction, enabling a bet-
ter economic distribution within the territory, in
addition to encouraging the visitor to learn more
about the characteristics of the local culture. In
addition, it gives the possibility of redistributing
the tourist in several places, reducing the chance
of having an excessive number of visitors concen-
trated in one place only. Campaigns to promote
other attractions or the creation of vouchers that
make it possible to purchase tickets from differ-
ent spaces with discounts can be valid initiatives.
• Integration of local products: incentives to sell lo-
cal products, aiming to develop the economy of
the community, in addition to valuing the way of
reproducing the local culture. Enable traditional
elements to be incorporated into the sale of sou-
venirs and for visitors to have information about
the products, encouraging them to discover local
shops and markets, strengthening contact with
the community. Local products add value to the
culture and enhance the visitor experience. It is
necessary to foster actions that encourage the
production and purchase of local products, such
as ways of promoting products, tasting and sup-
porting events and markets in the city.
• Local immersion: provide integration between
visitors and the local culture, encouraging the
presence of the community in everyday life and
also as visitors to the attraction. Ensure that the
tourist experiences the attraction from the per-
spective of traditions and cultural values of the
community during the visit, be it the gastron-
omy, way of life, or typical clothes, among other
cultural elements. Provide strategies that make
tourists interested to experience local life. Ensure
that the visitor has enough information before
visiting, e.g. if the space has any cultural restric-
tions for visitation, such as the wearing of appro-
priate clothing.
• Environmental connection: possibility of synergy
between the material elements of the heritage
with the scenic elements of the landscape, such as
local fauna and flora, encouraging environmen-
tal sustainability and helping the contact between
visitors and territory. The existence of these ele-
ments enriches the experience at the site, in addi-
tion to enabling educational actions that generate
quality of life for the community.
• Respect for minorities:means allowing access and
non-discrimination of visitors by gender, race or
colour, in addition to ensuring diversity in the
employability of the population in tourist attrac-
tions. In addition, it is possible to encourage cul-
tural programmes that foster debates and the par-
ticipation of minority groups.
• Visitor capacity: ensuring that the visitation space
is sufficient for the visitor’s experience, without
the feeling of being overwhelmed. An excessive
Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023 | 17
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
number of people can cause problems in con-
servation, in addition to making it difficult for
the visitor to understand information. It can also
favour behaviour conflicts among visitors, resi-
dents and attraction staff. Therefore, it is neces-
sary to establish ways to avoid excess demand,
such as coordinating groups of visitors, monitor-
ing the flow in and out of spaces or using reser-
vations in advance.
• Waiting time: capacity of the attraction to reduce
the waiting time of visitors at the entrance and
in its possible visitation spaces. Develop strate-
gies that can minimize waiting time, such as en-
couraging reservations in advance, and favouring
entries with local tour guides, in addition to pro-
viding adequate structure for waiting in lines, es-
pecially for visitors with mobility needs or health
problems. The strategies prevent the visitor from
entering the attraction in a harsh manner and
minimize conflicts between visitors and staff dur-
ing the visit.
• Security: ensure that the visitor is not embar-
rassed by harsh approaches from residents such
as street vendors, who approach with initial good
intentions to apply future scams. Make sure that
the security procedures for entering the attrac-
tions are explained clearly, avoiding problems
and doubts for visitors to the spaces.
• Problem-solving: Ensuring that the steps before,
during and after the visit occur smoothly and
clearly for the visitor. Ensuring that the services
provided are of high quality and that the visi-
tor does not have the feeling of being helpless or
without solutions in the event of problemswithin
the site, especially unforeseen ones. This makes
visitors have a good experience and share it with
acquaintances.
• Freedom of visitation: guarantee that the visi-
tor has enough time and freedom of movement
within the space so that they can learn from it
and feel close to the cultural aspects offered. In
the case of guided tours, organize them so that
some contemplation by the visitor is possible and
explain to the visitor in advance the places where
access is prohibited so that expectations are met.
• Tourist behaviour: tourist awareness of their be-
havior during the visit, avoiding situations such
as lack of respect for employees, the community
and other tourists, in addition to the depredation
of goods, accumulation of garbage and noise pol-
lution. Manage spaces in a way that the flow of
people does not induce predatory behaviour, oc-
curring calmly.
The Perception of Swiss WCHSManagers
Method
A face-to-face semi-structured interview was carried
out with 8 managers and specialists of Swiss wchss,
to check if their perception of cultural sustainability
corresponded to the classification proposed on the ba-
sis of visitors’ comments. Switzerland was chosen be-
cause it was easy for researchers to access themanagers
of these heritage sites, based on ongoing projects dur-
ing this research.
The choice of the interviewees was based on man-
agers and specialists thatworkwith tourism in wchss.
Data collection was carried out in October 2021. The
interviews lasted, on average, one hour and were con-
ducted in two languages: English and Italian.
The questions were asked using themethod known
as card sorting. This method allows the interviewer to
better understand how the interviewees classify cer-
tain concepts and categories, using cards (Spencer,
2009). The card classification method was based on a
hybrid format where the interviewee received 24 cards
with the categories of cultural sustainability and was
asked to classify them according to 5 cards represent-
ing the dimensions in Table 1. If the interviewee did
not find a dimension inwhich they believed they could
classify a category, they could create new dimensions.
The interviewee could also associate the same cate-
gory tomore than one dimension or exclude categories
from the classification, giving them the freedom to in-
terpret all the elements of the card in a non-induced
way.
Results
The Organization dimension had the highest num-
ber of classified categories among all the other dimen-
18 | Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
Table 3 Cultural Sustainability Categories by Dimensions
According to Swiss wchs Managers
Dimensions Categories
Information and
Communication
Quality of information
Photo availability
Technological devices
Networked attractions
Cultural Enhancement Uniqueness
Authenticity
Conservation and preservation
Vitality of the offer
Environmental connection
Facilities Accessibility
Mobility
Visitor capacity
Cultural Integration Local immersion
Integration of local products
Respect for minorities
Local guides
Tourist behaviour
Organization Problem-solving
Waiting time
Quality of service
Support structures
Freedom of visitation
Security
Value for money
sions, followed by Information and Communication,
Facilities, Cultural Integration and Cultural Enhance-
ment. The classification of categories into dimensions
made by wchs managers mostly corresponded to
that proposed by the authors; in particular, the cat-
egories classified in the dimensions Facilities, Cultural
Integration and Cultural Enhancement. The final divi-
sion of categories by dimensions based on the inter-
view with Swiss managers is presented in Table 3.
The following question of the card sorting activ-
ity asked to create a ranking with the 10 most relevant
categories. The ranking was free-form, which resulted
in rankings with fewer than 10 categories or rankings
with categories ranked in the same position. To calcu-
late the final result, 10 points were given to each inter-
viewee for the category classified in 1st place, 9 points
for the category classified in 2nd place, and so on up to
1 point given for the category classified in 10th place.
In the case of categories classified in the same position,
they were given the same point value. The points re-
ceived by each category were added up and divided by
the number of respondents. The categories Conserva-
tion and preservation, Authenticity, Uniqueness, Qual-
ity of information, Network attractions, Vitality of the
offer, Accessibility, Environmental connection, Quality
of service and Technological devices resulted in being
the top 10.
Then, interviewees were asked to create a ranking
of the 5 categories they believed to be least relevant in
terms of cultural sustainability of the site. The cate-
goriesWaiting time, Freedom of visitation, Photo avail-
ability, Visitor capacity andValue for money resulted in
being the least relevant to cultural sustainability.
Finally, interviewees were asked to point out if
there was any category on the list that they believed
could not be managed directly by managers. In this
case, they were not asked to score the categories. Re-
spondents pointed out that Tourist behaviour is not a
manager’s responsibility. However, some of them did
not specifically mention any category, thereby rein-
forcing the notion that managers are involved in vari-
ous tasks, including partnerships, collaborations, and
monitoring, as integral aspects of their roles.
Discussion
The analysis of visitors’ comments and the interviews
with wchs managers aimed at identifying categories
of elements of the sites that are related to cultural sus-
tainability.Havingmade clearwhich are such elements
and which of them are the most important to ensure
that the culture of a site is acknowledged, valued and
respected by visitors, can support managers in devel-
oping sustainable management strategies. Some cate-
gories – such as those grouped in the dimensions Cul-
tural integration, Cultural enhancement and Informa-
tion and communication – directly refer to cultural el-
ements, while others – such as those grouped in the
dimensions Facilities andOrganization – are indirectly
Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023 | 19
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
Ba
la
nc
e
D
iv
er
si
ty
In
te
rg
en
.
eq
ui
ty
In
te
rg
en
.
eq
ui
ty
In
te
rd
e-
p
en
de
nc
e
C
on
ti
nu
it
y
Cultural
exchange
Well-being Quality of life
Cultural
perception
Ethical
relationship
+ + + +
Cultural enhancement Facilities Cultural integration
Information & communic. Visitor experience Organization
Cultural heritage
Future generation
Current generation
Figure 2 Cultural Sustainability Framework for Cultural Heritage Sites Based on Visitor Experience
related to a site’s culture; even so, access to facilities and
services as well as a good organization of the site, facil-
itate visitors’ experience and helps to integrate culture
into material and logistic elements of the site.
The classification of categories into dimensions
proposed by the authors on the basis of visitors’ com-
ments was mostly validated by managers, with only
some adjustments which made it more coherent with
their perspective. As for categories that were consid-
ered less relevant, the possibility of integrating them
with other categories should be considered in future
studies, so to acknowledge the relevance ascribed to
them by visitors.
Visitors’ experiences at heritage sites might be en-
hanced by management strategies developed accord-
ing to the five dimensions that this study pointed out.
According to the dimension Information and com-
munication, the understanding and transmission of
knowledge of the local culture to visitors should be
fostered, and greater interaction with the space should
be guaranteed. The Cultural enhancement dimension
stresses elements that add value to the heritage, such
as authenticity and uniqueness, representing the lo-
cal culture in a trustworthy and representative way.
The dimension Facilities stresses that fact that struc-
tures and services should help to widen access and
enable the inclusion of cultural elements in basic ac-
tivities of the attraction, such as the connection of
culture by means of transport and space for selling
souvenirs, among others. The Cultural enhancement
dimension aims at guaranteeing the visitor’s integra-
tion in the local community, stimulating them to get
to know other attractions in the territory, in this way
broadening their connection with the spaces. Finally,
management interventions that take into account the
Organization dimension should help to make the vis-
itors experience pleasant, minimizing conflicts that
may occur between visitors and residents or encour-
aging good visitor behaviour. In addition, they should
favour the application of fair prices, allowing visitation
by a wider public.
Enacting these dimensions in management strate-
gies should bring benefits to the local society, both
present and future generations. As described in the
literature review, the benefits generated by sustainable
management that is based on cultural dimensions,
include cultural exchange (Aydin & Alvarez, 2016),
well-being (Hawkes, 2001; Throsby, 2016), quality of
life (Murzyn-Kupisz, 2012; Yeniasir & Gökbulut, 2018;
Maggiore &Vellecco, 2012), cultural perception (Yeni-
20 | Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
asir &Gökbulut, 2018) and ethical relationships (Jamal
et al., 2010). Finally, all these elements in turn, will
make, cultural heritage strengthen the principles of
sustainability, as described by Throsby (2016), from
the elements of continuity, intergenerational and in-
tragenerational equity, diversity, a balance between
natural and cultural ecosystems and interdependence
between the cultural, social, ecological and economic
dimensions. This dynamic is illustrated in the frame-
work in Figure 2.
The framework, togetherwith the categorization of
cultural sustainability elements, can help managers to
understand the issue of cultural sustainability and sug-
gest the main actions that should be carried out to im-
prove the visitation experience to enhance culture as
an element of sustainability.
Conclusion
The procedure used and the results obtained by the
study presented in this paper can inform future re-
search aimed at developing indicators for cultural sus-
tainability in heritage sites, as well as the elaboration
of a concept of cultural sustainability for the sector. It
needs to be noted that this work only considered com-
ments made about tangible assets, but since culture is
a mix of tangible and intangible elements, future re-
search should analyse comments on non-tangible as-
sets, so as to validate, refine and integrate definitions,
categories and dimensions. Finally, the perception of
managers from different countries or heritage types
should be considered, so to build a more robust con-
ceptual framework that can be used in different con-
texts.
References
Aydin, B., &Alvarez,M.D. (2016). English-speaking tourists’
evaluation of sustainability attributes in cultural tourism
destinations: The case of Cusco. Teorija in praksa, 4(53),
942–958
Castells, M. (2005). A sociedade em rede. Paz e terra.
Chew, M. M. (2009). Cultural sustainability and heritage
tourism: Problems in developing bun festival tourism
in Hong Kong. Journal of Sustainable Development, 2(3),
34–42.
Dessein, J., Soini, K., Fairclough, G., & Horlings, L. (2015).
Culture in, for and as sustainable development: Conclu-
sions from the cost Action is1007 Investigating Cultural
Sustainability.University of Jyväskylä.
Eversole, R. (2006). Heritage and regional development: A
process-and-outcomes tipology. Australasian Journal of
Regional Studies, 12(3), 303–312.
García-Hernández, M., de la Calle-Vaquero, M., & Yubero,
C. (2017). Cultural heritage and urban tourism: His-
toric city centres under pressure. Sustainability, 9(8).
https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081346
Haarstad, H. (2017). Constructing the sustainable city: Ex-
amining the role of sustainability in the ‘smart city’
discourse. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning,
19(4), 423–437.
Hawkes, J. (2001). The Fourth Pillar of Sustainability: Cul-
ture’s essential role in public planning. Cultural Develop-
ment Network.
Höjer, M., &Wangel, J. (2015). Smart sustainable cities: Def-
inition and challenges. In L. M. Hilty & B. Aebischer
(Eds.), ict innovations for sustainability (pp. 333-349).
Springer.
Jamal, T., Camargo, B., Sandlin, J., & Segrado, R. (2010).
Tourism and cultural sustainability: Towards an eco-
cultural justice for place and people. Tourism Recreation
Research, 35(3), 269–279.
Maggiore, G., & Vellecco, I. (2012). Cultural districts, tour-
ism and sustainability. In A. H. Kasimoglu M. (Ed.),
Strategies for tourism industry-micro and macro perspec-
tives (pp. 241–266). IntechOpen.
Marres, N., & Weltevrede, E. (2013). Scraping the social?
Journal of Cultural Economy, 6(3), 313–335.
Murzyn-Kupisz, M. (2012). Cultural, economic and social
sustainability of heritage tourism: Issues and challenges.
Economic and Environmental Studies, 12(2), 113–133.
Oliveira, R. A., Baracho, R. M. A., & Cantoni, L. (2022). The
perception of unesco World Heritage Sites’ managers
about concepts and elements of cultural sustainability in
tourism. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and
Sustainable Development. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-03-2021-0058
Ranasinghe, R. (2018). Cultural and heritage tourism devel-
opment in postwar regions: Concerns for sustainabil-
ity from northern Sri Lankan capital Jaffna. Journal of
Tourism and Recreation, 4(1), 1–18.
Soini, K., & Birkeland, I. (2014). Exploring the scientific dis-
course on cultural sustainability. Geoforum, 51, 213–223.
Sonuç, N. (2020). Culture, tourism and sustainability (cul-
tural heritage and sustainable tourism, social sustain-
ability of tourism, socio-cultural sustainability of tour-
ism). In S. Idowu, R. Schmidpeter, N. Capaldi, L. Zu, M.
Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023 | 21
Almeida de Oliveira et al. A Proposal to Categorize Cultural Sustainability Elements
Del Baldo, & R. Abreu (Eds.), Encyclopedia of sustainable
management (pp. 1–7). Springer.
Spencer, D. (2009).Card sorting: Designing usable categories.
Rosenfeld Media.
Suntikul, W. (2018). Cultural sustainability and fluidity in
Bhutan’s traditional festivals. Journalof Sustainable Tour-
ism, 26(12), 2102–2116.
Tan, S.-K., Lim,H.-H., Tan, S.-H., &Kok, Y.-S. (2020). A cul-
tural creativity framework for the sustainability of intan-
gible cultural heritage. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research, 44(3), 439–471.
Terkenli, T. S., & Georgoula, V. (2021). Tourism and cul-
tural sustainability: Views and prospects from Cyclades,
Greece. Sustainability, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.3390
/su14010307
Throsby,D. (2003). Cultural sustainability. InR. Towse (Ed.),
A handbook of cultural economics (pp. 183–186). Edward
Elgar.
Throsby, D. (2016). Tourism, heritage and cultural sustain-
ability: Three ‘golden rules.’ In P. N. Luigi Fusco Girard
(Ed.),Cultural tourism and sustainable local development
(pp. 31–48). Routledge.
Torres, J. L. X. de S. (2013). Analisis cuantitativo de los hote-
les en Tripadvisor: Destinos costeros en España y Portugal
[Master thesis]. University of Malaga.
Weng, L., He, B. J., Liu, L., Li, C., & Zhang, X. (2019). Sus-
tainability assessment of cultural heritage tourism: Case
study of Pingyao ancient city in China. Sustainability,
11(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11051392
Yeniasir, M., & Gökbulut, B. (2018). Perception and atti-
tudes of local people on sustainable cultural tourism on
the Islands: The case of Nicosia. Sustainability, 10(6).
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061892
22 | Academica Turistica, Year 16, No. 1, April 2023