5. Heritage

Please be aware that the below is not a definite statement of intent – please think of it as a word document or googledoc which is open for you and us to comment on. That way we can all see what the ideas up for discussion are, write down new ones and debate whether or not they’re good ideas.


We commit to celebrating and preserving the estate’s heritage whilst recognising that change and adaptation may be required for future resilience.


[su_section background=”#2060a5″ background_position=”center top” parallax=”no” cover=”no” max_width=”1600″ padding=”20px 0px 20px 0px” border=”0px solid #2b786f” color=”#ffffff” text_shadow=”0px 0px 0px #000000″]

Now have your say

Leave your comment underneath, or reply to someone else. You don’t have to provide an email address if you don’t want to, but you’ll be alerted to any replies to your comments if you do.

Or click here to return to all topics

[/su_section]

One thought on “5. Heritage

  1. Think the heritage frame is well set out and also quite coy interms of being explicit about what change and adaptation is required for future resilience – published target visitor numbers would support LURII’s development.

    In the US the term “creative placemaking” is in more active use, to the point the conversation is evolving to evaluate the need for “creative placekeeping” (See Bedoya, Roberto. 2013. “Creative Placemaking and the Politics of Belonging and Dis-Belonging.”). The conversation is about `the field-wide code of ethics, statement of values and related mechanisms to ensure that vulnerable populations benefit from Creative Placemaking initiatives and are not harmed.’ e.g. there is a social justice driver at work and I wonder if the same doesn’t apply here ?

    If its about equitable outcomes and if we accept that there is a tourism commons e.g. that “The tourism commons are very vulnerable to crowding and degrading by tourism pressure” and, also, that “The industry enjoys free access to the public goods which are very often its core product”, then it might be good to articulate all the LUR II frames (particularly heritage, people, conservation and energy) in the context of significantly increased visitor numbers, particularly where this relates to international visitors, and how LUR II plans to support `Responsible Tourism’ (http://responsibletourismpartnership.org/overtourism/) through a process of participation / engagement with the community.

    Christian Laesser, a tourism professor at the University of St. Gallen in Switzerland, talks about tourism as a `phenomenon that creates many private profits but also many socialised losses’ – as a charity and because of the history of the Dartington experiment, Dartington has the legacy and therefore the opportunity to do some leading edge work in this space, particularly in relation to cultural tourism. The approach you are taking to LUR II opens the door to this opportunity.

    Some links enc here for review.

    Amsterdam Seeks To Rein in Tourists – August 21, 2018
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/amsterdam-tries-to-limit-impact-of-tourism-a-1223505.html

    How Tourists Are Destroying the Places They Love
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/paradise-lost-tourists-are-destroying-the-places-they-love-a-1223502-2.html

    Crowded Out: an Overtourism documentary
    https://www.responsibletravel.com/copy/overtourism-documentary

    See also NECsTour 2018 Declaration – `BARCELONA DECLARATION OF TOURISM AND CULTURAL HERITAGE: “BETTER PLACES TO LIVE BETTER PLACES TO VISIT”

Comment on this article

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *