RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TOURISM AND CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE SPATIAL PLANNING OF TOURIST DESTINATIONS ON CROATIAN ISLANDS

Full text

A. MRA, B. BOJANI OBAD ŠITAROCI
472
CULTURAL HERITAGE — POSSIBILITIES FOR SPATIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PROSTORNE I RAZVOJNE MOGUNOSTI KULTURNOG NASLIJEA
Zagreb, 2015
Proceedings | Zbornik radova
ANA MRA, University of Zagreb – Faculty of Architecture, Zagreb, Croatia
BOJANA BOJANI OBAD ŠITAROCI, University of Zagreb – Faculty of Architecture, Zagreb, Croatia
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TOURISM AND CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE
SPATIAL PLANNING OF TOURIST DESTINATIONS ON CROATIAN ISLANDS
ODNOS TURIZMA I KULTURNOG NASLIJEĐA U PROSTORNOM PLANIRANJU
TURISTIČKIH ODREDIŠTA HRVATSKIH OTOKA
KEY WORDS
tourism planning
cultural heritage
spatial planning
Croatian islands
KLJUNE RIJEI
planiranje turizma
kulturno naslijee
prostorno planiranje
hrvatski otoci
The paper examines conflicts among the
ideas of heritage and tourism and argues
a sustainable approach to the tourism
planning of heritage places. The research
considers the role of heritage tourism in
local development by stressing that tour-
ism can bring about a positive response
to global competitiveness, regarding its
positive influence on recognition of des-
tination. It investigates the specifi c prob-
lematic context of heritage tourism plan-
ning based on Croatian example, identify-
ing that most of the cultural heritage
resources are still forgotten, unused or
depleted. Finally, the paper explores the
shift from traditional spatial planning to-
ward valorization of heritage in spatial
planning, meant as an evolution of tour-
ism planning directed toward an engaged
and authentic experience.
Složenost odnosa izmeu turizma i kul-
turnog naslijea se istie u dijalogu iz-
meu tradicije i suvremenosti. Središnji
problem koji se istražuje u priopenju jest
odnos izmeu razine ouvanja obilježja
kulturnog naslijea i “promjene”. U suvre-
menom svijetu simbioza turizma i kultur-
nog naslijea postala je glavni cilj u up-
ravljanju i planiranju turistikih podruja.
Meutim, na hrvatskim primjerima raz-
vidno je da se navedeni trendovi još uvijek
ne primjenjuju pri planiranju turizma u
Hrvatskoj, a veina kulturnog naslijea je
zaboravljena, neiskorištena ili iscrpljena.
Stoga je cilj ovog istraživanja prikazati
imbenike identiteta prostora te kriterije
vrjednovanja prostora kao polazišta za
nove zahvate planiranja turizma u pro-
storu naslijea.Istražuju se problemi me-
uodnosa naslijea i turizma te se zalaže
za održivi pristup upravljanju i planiranju
naslijea koji se temelji na održivom pro-
stornom planiranju.

CULTURAL HERITAGE — POSSIBILITIES FOR SPATIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PROSTORNE I RAZVOJNE MOGUNOSTI KULTURNOG NASLIJEA
Zagreb, 2015
Proceedings | Zbornik radova
473
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TOURISM AND CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE SPATIAL PLANNING…
INTRODUCTION - THE ROLE OF HERITAGE TOURISM IN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT
General and inclusive defi nitions of cultural heritage were given by UNESCO and
ICOMOS1, but what is included in heritage varies for different situations and may largely
depend on the specifi c requirements of the local communities2. Heritage tourism has
started to become a specifi c form of tourism, as one of tourism types opposing the
mass tourism3.
However, it also has a destructive potential for its basic resources4. Unfortunately, the
pressure of the tourism development requirements often contradicts the needs of cul-
tural heritage5. In that way heritage and tourism are in conflict and tourism can destroy
and even degrade cultural heritage to the point of illegibility.
In contrast, the “cooperation” side between heritage and tourism contend that resource
sharing creates partnership opportunities between heritage and tourism, achieving
mutually benefi cial outcomes6. Thus, heritage tourism is praised for reintroducing
people to their cultural roots, strengthening people’s interest in history or culture, and
providing powerful arguments in favor of preserving a region’s heritage as tourist at-
tractions. The heritage-tourism relationship can be mutually benefi cial, and cultural
heritage is even being protected and preserved through tourism.
Heritage sustainability can be characterized by ensuring the continuing contribution of
heritage to the present through the thoughtful management of change, which is re-
sponsive to the historic environment and to the social and cultural processes that have
created it7. Furthermore, it is recognized as of great potential for bringing heritage con-
servation, tourism and economic development into a balanced and constructive rela-
tionship, as it is acknowledged that the mistaken neglect of the important economic
and social dimensions of heritage in many cases has led to the irreversible decay and
destruction of heritage assets8.
In the end, the complex relationship between tourism and cultural heritage is revealed
in the tension between the preservation of the character of existing cultural heritage
and change. This tension between “conservation” and “exploitation” has formed the
central argument for this paper.
HERITAGE VS. TOURISM
More recently, heritage has superseded conservation with change, where marketing of
heritage as a product/resource according to the demands of the consumer, mainly
tourists, has resulted in the commercialization of heritage over conservation values.
Today, the symbiosis of both tourism and cultural heritage has become a major object-
ive in the management and planning of tourist areas.
For research purposes were analyzed isolated tourist zones provided in the spatial
plans for the islands of Hvar9 and Vis10. On the island of Hvar is analyzed a total of 38
tourist zones and on the island of Vis is analyzed a total of 13 tourist zones. Tourist
zones which contain any form of cultural heritage are numbered and described in the
Table 1.
Based on Croatian example the standard for implementation and revitalization of her-
itage is not yet applied to tourism planning in Croatia. As the research appoints most of
the cultural heritage resources are still forgotten, unused or depleted. (Figs. 1, 2)
VALORIZATION OF HERITAGE IN SPATIAL PLANNING
Three challenging issues in linking heritage and tourism from the spatial planning point
of view are pointed out: 1) valorization and planning for heritage tourism, 2) the interde-
pendencies between heritage tourism and its revitalization and enhancement, and 3)
spatial planning legislation. Differences in approaches to the three issues indicate that
cultural heritage tourism rises more than tourism planning and management issues for
developing destinations, they are fundamentally the problems of spatial development.
In that way concern about the cultural heritage should be upgraded from basic conser-
vation and protection to a higher level of heritage planning and management. In this
1 UNESCO,1972; ICOMOS, 1978
2 Mydland, Grahn, 2012
3 Picard,1996
4 Timothy, 2011
5 Edson, 2004; Li, Wu, & Cai, 2008
6 Loulanski, 2015: 841
7 Tunbridge & Ashworth, 1996; Matero, 2003:
viii
8 Loulanski, 2015: 843
9 The data used for the catalog are from:
Spatial plan of the town of Hvar which was
adopted in 2007 (amendment in prepara-
tion), Spatial plan of Jelsa municipality
which was adopted in 2008, the Spatial
plan for the town of Stari Grad which was
adopted in 2007 (amendments adopted in
2013), and the Spatial plan of Sucuraj mu-
nicipality which was adopted in 2008
(amendments adopted in 2012). The ana-
lysis is supplemented by the data based
on fi eld research in July 2014.
10 The data used for the catalog are from:
Spatial plan of the town of Komiža which
was adopted in 2006 (amendment in pre-
paration) and Spatial plan of the town of
Vis which was adopted in 2010 (amend-
ment in preparation). The analysis is sup-
plemented by the data based on fi eld re-
search in July 2014.

A. MRA, B. BOJANI OBAD ŠITAROCI
474
CULTURAL HERITAGE — POSSIBILITIES FOR SPATIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PROSTORNE I RAZVOJNE MOGUNOSTI KULTURNOG NASLIJEA
Zagreb, 2015
Proceedings | Zbornik radova
Fig. 2 Tourist zone – eška Villa, Island Vis
(photo: A. Mra)
Fig. 1 Tourist zone – Carkvica, Island Hvar
(photo: A. Mra)

CULTURAL HERITAGE — POSSIBILITIES FOR SPATIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PROSTORNE I RAZVOJNE MOGUNOSTI KULTURNOG NASLIJEA
Zagreb, 2015
Proceedings | Zbornik radova
475
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TOURISM AND CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE SPATIAL PLANNING…
Tab. I List of analyzed tourist zones on the islands of Hvar and Vis containing cultural heritage
No. Island City /
Municipality
Name of the tourist zone
(in spatial plan)
State of the tourist zone
(site condition) Cultural heritage (in spatial plan) State of the implementation
(site condition)
1 Hvar Hvar Jagodni bad active – camping cultivated landscape -
2 Hvar Hvar Plaža 1 not active cultivated landscape -
3 Hvar Hvar Plaža 2 not active cultivated landscape -
4 Hvar Hvar Vira active – camping archaeological site -
5 Hvar Hvar Križna luka active – hotel cultivated landscape -
6 Hvar Hvar Gradska luka – Majerovica active – hotel cultivated landscape +
7 Hvar Hvar Mala Garška active – hotel cultivated landscape +
8 Hvar Hvar Pokonji Dol active – beach cultivated landscape -
9 Hvar Hvar Milna active – hotel historic assembly +
10 Hvar Hvar Sv. Nedilja not active cultivated landscape -
11 Hvar Jelsa Zarae not active - -
12 Hvar Jelsa Raskovica not active - -
13 Hvar Jelsa Makarac not active - -
14 Hvar Jelsa Carkvica not active archaeological site -
15 Hvar Jelsa Zeniše not active
hotel – modernistic assembly
--
16 Hvar Jelsa Soline active – hotel - -
17 Hvar Jelsa Soline active – camping cultivated landscape -
18 Hvar Jelsa Gromin Dolac not active cultivated landscape -
19 Hvar Jelsa Žutica not active cultivated landscape -
20 Hvar Jelsa Petrovac not active cultivated landscape -
21 Hvar Jelsa Ivankovinot active ethno zone
cultivated landscape
-
22 Hvar Jelsa Mina - kamp active – camping - -
23 Hvar Jelsa Mina - kamp active – camping archaeological site -
24 Hvar Jelsa Mina – turistiko naselje not active - -
25 Hvar Jelsa Mina – turistiko naselje not active - -
26 Hvar Jelsa Mina – hotel active – hotel - -
27 Hvar Jelsa Fontana - hotel active – hotel - -
28 Hvar Jelsa Fontana – turistiko naselje not active - -
29 Hvar Jelsa Vrboska - hotel not active
hotel – modernistic assembly
--
30 Hvar Stari Grad Jurjevac active – camping urban settlement -
31 Hvar Stari Grad Helios active – hotel - -
32 Hvar Stari Grad Stari Grad 1 – Zogonke not active - -
33 Hvar Stari Grad Stari Grad 2 – Široki rat not active - -
34 Hvar Stari Grad Stari Grad 3 – Brizenica not active - -
35 Hvar Stari Grad Borova 1 not active - -
36 Hvar Suuraj Maak not active - -
37 Hvar Suuraj Mlaska active – camping archaeological site cultivated landscape -
38 Hvar Suuraj Mrtinovik not active - -
1Vis Komiža Biševo active – hotel - -
2Vis Komiža Rogai not active military site cultivated landscape -
3Vis Komiža Neptun not active industrial site -
4Vis Komiža Kamenice not active - -
5Vis Komiža Barjoška not active military assembly cultivated landscape -
6Vis Vis Issa active – hotel historical site
cultivated landscape
-
7Vis Vis eška vila not active military assembly historical site
cultivated landscape
-
8Vis Vis Stonca not active industrial assembly archaeological site cultivated landscape -
9Vis Vis Milna not active – hotel historical building -
10 Vis Vis Zaravnie not active historical site
cultivated landscape
-
11 Vis Vis Parja not active historical site
archaeological site
cultivated landscape
-
12 Vis Vis Zaglav not active historical site
cultivated landscape
-
13 Vis Vis Samogor not active military site cultivated landscape -

A. MRA, B. BOJANI OBAD ŠITAROCI
476
CULTURAL HERITAGE — POSSIBILITIES FOR SPATIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PROSTORNE I RAZVOJNE MOGUNOSTI KULTURNOG NASLIJEA
Zagreb, 2015
Proceedings | Zbornik radova
process, from the spatial planning point of view, it is highly important to integrate pos-
sible scenarios of recognition, evaluation and protection of heritage places identity into
the planning process, so as to create a new valorization model which will trigger a new
method of specifi c planning approach.
The process of valorization should consist of three basic steps: 1) recognition and
mapping, 2) classifi cation or categorization and 3) evaluation of factors of heritage
identity. Recognizing the heritage is based on the mapping process to be able to de-
termine its further potential for tourism development. The second step, categorization
determines the capabilities and limitations of preserving heritage characteristics and
placing them in the role of tourism resources. Third step is based on a value judgment
of any recognized and classifi ed physical characteristic – creation of a tourism re-
source to further determination of spatial attraction.
The rating step is set according to certain criteria in order to determine the possibilities
for integration in the tourism plan and the optimal level of resource use. Mapped and
described resources are compared with each other11, with the aim of determining the
permissible development interventions in the tourist area, and the needed level of
preservation.
The evaluation procedure is divided into the professional part and the transparent
part12, (to establish a framework for taking public opinion - visitors, local community,
city government, tourism associations, etc.), pursuant to which the given objective
evaluation conclusions for heritage as tourism resource are taken. Therefore, the role
of spatial planning is to identify and classify specifi c heritage characteristics, which are
then placed in relation to the evaluation criteria. On the basis of professional criteria set
- qualitative and quantitative methods - respondents give their statements about her-
itage values13 in order to control and coordinate the profession opinion and make data
tribunal.
Based on the planning assessment it determines the level of spatial planning of protec-
tion and conservation and most important the level of activation and use of resources
- identifying existing and new attraction. It follows that further description is in hands
of the professionalism and the possibility of activating the identifi ed values (spatial
planning rules for usage of resources) and in dialogue with the government which in-
stitutions should these values / resources / attractions systematize and control. With
an aim to valorize the resources of certain areas which form now or in the future signi-
fi cant tourist attractions.
The valorization of cultural heritage requires comprehensive scientifi c process and a
good technical preparation of the database. Therefore, the objective of this study is
only to set the starting point and the initial criteria that must be upgraded, as well as
interdisciplinary and integrated process to reach conclusions that could be legally
binding.
CONCLUSION
Valorization of heritage resources is necessary for defi ning the factors of heritage iden-
tity. Heritage recognizability, authenticity and uniqueness is essential in deciding on
potential tourist destination areas are capable of. Also, as these resources are studied,
the spatial planning teams and local government should be encouraged to identify
solutions to existing problems of tourism.
As presented the heritage is not adequately taken care of in means of protection, but
also in means of its potential for enhancement. Appointed valorization model helps to
locate the area of interest with suitable competitive context. In fact it directly provides
criteria for new interventions and usage of heritage.
The main criteria of using the set of valorization model are: 1) the long-term protection
of the area in the form of the cultural values, 2) the preservation of value, specifi cs and
identity of the area by identifying, evaluating and preserving the heritage resources /
attractions, and 3) the creation of socio-cultural and experiential aesthetic worthy and
11 Mutual evaluation identifi ed and classifi ed
resources within the study area.
12 Owens, Cowell, 2002: 74
13 Setting social scientifi c method of testing
stakeholders, such as questionnaires, in-
terviews, participation by wise and others.

CULTURAL HERITAGE — POSSIBILITIES FOR SPATIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PROSTORNE I RAZVOJNE MOGUNOSTI KULTURNOG NASLIJEA
Zagreb, 2015
Proceedings | Zbornik radova
477
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TOURISM AND CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE SPATIAL PLANNING…
globally competitive tourism environment with positive effects on the state of the local
community and local recognition.
The data derived for heritage resources are crucial for the creation of new and im-
proved attractions, and therefore for growth and development of tourism. This research
also identifi es heritage resources and its current degradation threats, as well as
guidelines for the future expansion of tourist activities and construction.
The purpose of this paper is to point out the importance of the factors and the evalu-
ation criteria of space identity as a starting point for new tourism planning method in
the area of heritage. According to that the aim of moving towards sustainability is not
passive stagnation within the “fairly certain” limits, or doing what the market demands,
the goal is a dynamic, integrated and, most important, a democratic and collaborative
planning process of socio-environmental changes.
AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES
Ana Mra, Ph.D, architect, postdoctoral
researcher at the Faculty of Architecture,
University of Zagreb. She is the author/
co-author of several scientifi c papers,
numerous architectural and urbanistic
competitions, studies and projects. She
participated in several international sci-
entifi c and professional conferences.
Prof. Bojana Bojani Obad itaroci, Ph.D,
architect, associate professor at the Fac-
ulty of Architecture, University of Zagreb.
She is the author/coauthor of several sci-
entifi c books and numerous scientifi c art-
icles, master plans, studies and projects.
She has participated in numerous sci-
entifi c conferences on topics in the fi eld of
traditional architecture and landscape ar-
chitecture.
bbojanic@arhitekt.hr, www.scitaroci.hr
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Loulanski, T.; Loulanski, V. (2015), The sustainable integration of cultural heritage
and tourism: a meta-study, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, vol. 19,
no. 7, pp. 837-862
2. Tunbridge, J.; Ashworth, G. (1996), Dissonant heritage: The management
of the past as a resource in conflict, John Wiley, London
3. UNESCO (1972), Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural
and natural heritage, Paris, whc.unesco.org/archive/convention-en.pdf
4. ICOMOS (1978), ICOMOS Statutes, as amended by the fi fth General Assembly,
regarding The Protection of Historical Cities and Historical Quarters in the
Framework of Urban Development, Moscow, www.icomos.org
5. Mydland, L.; Grahn, W. (2012), Identifying heritage values in local communities,
International Journal of Heritage Studies, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 564–587
6. Owens, S.; Cowell, R. (2002), Land and Limits: Interpreting Sustainability
in the Planning Process, RTPI, Routhledge, NY
7. Picard, M. (1996), Bali: Cultural tourism and touristic culture, Archipelago Press,
Singapore
8. Timothy, D. J. (2011), Cultural heritage and tourism – An introduction,
Channel View Publications, Bristol
9. Edson, G. (2004), Heritage: Pride or passion, product or service, International
Journal of Heritage Studies, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 333–348
10. Li, M.; Wu, B.; Cai, L. (2008) Tourism development in world heritage sites
in China: A geographic perspective, Tourism Management, vol. 29, no. 2,
pp. 308–319
This research was conducted as part of
the research project “Heritage Urbanism
– Urban and Spatial Planning Models for
Revival and Enhancement of Cultural
Heritage” (HERU), funded by the Croatian
Science Foundation (HRZZ) under the
reference number 2032. The project is
carried out at the University of Zagreb,
Faculty of Architecture.