Overtourism management competencies in Asian urban heritage areas
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose Urban heritage areas are under significant pressure as a result of increasing populations and significant visitor growth. The growth in visitor numbers is of particular concern as this is leading to the phenomenon of overtourism. In Asia, although the issue of overtourism requires immediate attention in order to avoid the loss of tangible and intangible heritage, many of those responsible for managing urban heritage areas lack the skills and competencies to prevent it or mitigate its effects. The purpose of this paper is to present an exploratory competency framework for managing urban heritage areas sustainably, for thereby preventing and/or mitigating overtourism. Design/methodology/approach In developing this framework, the authors examined how the context needs to change in order to implement sustainable urban heritage management, and they identified the particular competencies and associated skills and knowledge that are required of the stakeholders responsible for urban heritage areas to manage, prevent and/or mitigate overtourism. This analysis was based on a series of case studies examining the planning and management of urban heritage areas in Asia. Findings It was found that meeting three key objectives was essential in improving the competencies of stakeholder heritage area planners and developers as it relates to overtourism: integrated team approach, a mindset change on the part of key stakeholders and a common vision guiding the development process. Research limitations/implications It was found that in order for urban heritage managers to sustainably manage the heritage under their responsibility and prevent and/or mitigate overtourism, a fundamental shift in mindset is required on the part of key stakeholders, moving away from a “silo” approach and towards an integrated approach to urban heritage management, in which the team leaders and management teams have an interdisciplinary set of competencies and are supported in the planning and management process by subject/discipline specialists. The authors found that the set of competencies that are required by heritage management teams lie at the intersection of the four key areas of policy and planning intervention in urban heritage areas, which are: community economic development, urban planning and design, urban heritage area planning, and tourism planning and management. The competencies can be categorized under three headings: interdisciplinary perspective, soft management competencies and technical competencies. Originality/value This paper was developed based on the authors’ experience in planning and tourism initiatives throughout Asia and on a long history of urban heritage tourism and planning work around the world. Most of the discussion focusses on how urban destinations can prevent and/or address the issues associated with overtourism by enhancing the competencies of the teams and practitioners who are responsible for managing urban heritage areas.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».