venice study 10

7/29/2019 Venice Study 10

1/14

1

Papathanassiou-Zuhrt, Dorothea and Sakellaridis, Odysseas: Heavily visited culturaldestinations. Is IT a solution to sustainable visitor management? in: "InternationalCultural Tourism: management, implications and cases". Eds: M. Sigala and D. LesliButterworth Heinemmann, London, 2005

0. INTRODUCTIONThe message character of post-modern society, the awareness of the

interpretive nature of human knowledge and instruction render ITs to powerfulmechanisms which produce, store, interpret, distribute and control messages andmessengers, regulating the manifold hierarchies of communications. TouristDestinations need such effective mechanisms to attract their clientele by

communicating to them visitation benefits. Tourism planning is hence shifting fromsectorial policies and from central to local level considering all stakeholders. Sinceunsustainable tourism uses are usually due to information deficiencies betweenvisitors and providers, heavily visited cultural destinations in Europe need to developsmart systems to transform heritage assets to indispensable components of a newtourism product, to travel incentives and catalysts for destination attachment and toconnect products, providers and consumers through appropriate informationmanagement.

The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the problems mass cultural tourismcauses to heritage cities such as Venice, clarify the reasons and illustrate how industryrelated, enhanced Destination Information, Marketing and Management Systems

(DIMMSs) may reengineer the heritage tourism sector enabling supply and demand tointeract within the framework of sustainable development.

Statistical evaluations in this study reflect tendencies and are based on datawhich were obtained at field work by students who participated at the SocratesIntensive Program (SIP) International Experiences in Tourism Planning andManagement, Venice 2003 under the coordination of Professor Gerda Kearny-Priestley.

1. TOURISM USES OF HERITAGE ASSETS

1. 1. Perception and Valorization of Heritage Assets

There is a significant difference between heritage tourists and tourists atheritage places(Poria at al. 2003:238), mainly because heritage places are at the sametime multiple attractions poles for cultural and non-cultural activities (Jansen-Verbeke, 1998:739-742). Undeniably artifacts per se cannot stimulate to traveling,unless potential visitors attribute to them certain values, signify them with certainmeanings. Apart from economic values heritage assets possess also nonuse values,which allow them to enter the tourism market. People value the existence of heritageitems even if they do not consume its services directly (existence value), whish topreserve the option of possible future consumption (option value) and strive tobequeath the assets to future generations (bequest value) (Serageldin 1999:25-28,Throsby, 2001:11). What may render heritage assets to successful tourism products is


2/14

2

a mix of factors deriving from demand and supply side as well: the visitorsperception of a place, personal interests and beliefs, globally acknowledged values, awell marketed destination image, market and social trends, appropriate heritagemanagement. In this vein heritage tourism may be defined as a social phenomenoninteracting with supply and demand, where visitation incentives are based on the

places distinctive cultural features as well as the visitors perception and evaluationof them.

Successful heritage attractions are visitor-friendly, physically, intellectuallyand economically accessible. They meet visitors needs and markets requirements,create the tourist experience, recoup value for money, while at the same timemaintain authenticity and integrity of the site (Garrod and Fyall 2000:686). In manycases these prerequisites are not met. Heritage managers consider themselvesguardians of regional and national assets, but are external to the tourism business.Their function as providers of public access to heritage attractions is limited. They donot follow policies which render the assets to conveyors of meanings, creating in thisway a places identity, visitor attachment to destinations. Economic matters are not

prior to their considerations, although the future of the attractions as public goodsdepends greatly on financial solvency (Garrod and Fyall, 2000:684), while notionssuch as Carrying and Service Capacity (Masters, Scott and Barrow, 2002:8 ff) arelikely unfamiliar. Should invaluable travel determinants, the heritage resources, beoffered to the tourism market below cost (Serageldin, 1999:23-36), then local andnational tax-payers must carry the burden of sustaining quality (Mourato andMazzanti, 2002:51ff). If heritage assets, the main heritage tourism incentives, remainexternal to markets, they cannot be conserved (Mourato and Mazzanti, 2002:51-54,Throsby, 2001:10-16, 2002:102ff, van der Borg, 2003:1), while tourism pressurescontribute further to their decay.

1.2. Tourism in historic centers

Historic cities have not been artificially developed to tourist resorts, but haveestablished fame as centers of historic, economic and cultural activities much earlierin time. Their tangible attractions are therefore irreproducible, immovable,remarkably concentrated in small spatial cores and heavily visited because theirreputation renders demand inelastic. When visitor flows exceed Tourism CarryingCapacity (TCC), major attractions are severely congested, followed by thedowngrading of the quality of all services offered. Russo and Caserta (2002:245-260)note that the Butler destination life-cycle model does not really apply to cultural

heritage destinations. Decline there means augmentation of the ratio visitor/resident,banalization of tourism products (Russo 1999:42, Russo and Caserta, 2002:46),excessive use of heritage assets and infrastructure services and deep discouragementof sophisticated high spending visitors, whose incentive to choice a destination lieswithintheir cultural perception of the latter.

1.3. The demand pattern

The jewel of the Adriatic, Venice, receives approximately 7 millionexcursionists and 3 million tourists a year (van der Borg 2003:7). With furtherdeclining tendencies it has lost 2/3 of its local residents since 1951 (Russo, 1999:42).

Russo and Caserta (2002:247) note that the reduction of time budgets generatesinformational gaps resulting in overuse of centrally located cultural assets and non-


3/14

3

use of minor fame attractions. Especially excursionists contribute to thetourismification of historic cities (Jansen-Verbeke 1998:731, van der Borg et al,1996:311, 314). They concentrate at major fame attractions, which are logically theonly ones to be reached with a minimum of information, whereas low quality invadesmarkets when the percentage of visitors rises. The cultural expenditure is less than 3%

of the visitors total budget, which rises to 179.4 for tourists and 68.4 US $ for theexcursionists per capita a day (van der Borg, 2003:7)The problem sharpens further thepolicy of the periphery, which uses its vicinity to the heritage assets to attract itsclients. Without contributing to their conservation, it delegates daily visitor flows tothe small spatial cores of historic centers, causing further pressures on transportation,queues and heritage resources. The periphery becomes the area of benefits because itearns the major part of the tourist expenditure: accommodation, catering, shopping.The heritage city becomes the area of costs because tourists spend a high share oftheir budget outside the central area; it also has to sustain the overused centralattractions and infrastructure from resources other than the tourist revenue, such astaxation and subventions.

Although perceptions build the travel motive and regulate behaviour in situ,informational asymmetries between supply and demand as well as poor heritagemanagement seem to be the main reason for mass cultural tourism occurring now forthe first time in history(Russo, 2001:172). The profile of the SIP sample is perfectlyconcordant with the rules of mass cultural tourism: Their visit is self-organized insmall groups, but in respect to cultural consumption they lost their autonomy andbehaved like mass tourists. They believed at 60-65% that there are manyenvironmental problems in Venice and that tourism is partly to blame, but were notwilling to contribute up to three euros to ameliorate the quality of the heritage assets.

PROFILE OF THE S.I.P. SAMPLE:about 200 valid questionnaires

Male 50% Female 50%

TOURISM GENERATORS

Incoming Tourism 90%

European Other

Domestic Tourism 10%

70% 30%

TRANSPORT MODES TO VENICE

Flight Carriers and Train: 70% Other: 30%

ACCOMMODATION TYPEHotel 70% Hostels, Bed & Breakfast 25%

AVERAGE DURATION STAY Five Days

TRAVEL CHARACTER 80% Self-Organized

GROUP SIZE Not exceeding 5 persons

1.4. Visitation Pattern: Time lack, informational asymmetries, congestion


4/14

4

Spatial features, transport modes, available time and information influencetourist flow patterns. Small time budgets - 8 hours is the average duration of a dailytrip (Russo, 2001:174) - correlating with asymmetric information between visitors andproducers define the visitation pattern, rendering traditional information toolsineffective.

REPEAT VISITATION INCENTIVESExplore Unknown Venice 75%

Special Event or Other Occasion 40%

INFORMATION(on the summative tourism product)

During the planning process 65% though tourist guides and

InternetIn situ Following and asking other non locals

Equipped with poor information they put high pressures on the small spatialentity of the historic center: While San Marcos Square has exceeded its TCC andlocals do not frequent it anymore. Only one out of 4,4 visitors enters in Venice amuseum, 1 out of 55 a church. Cultural expenditure is less than 3% of the visitorstotal budget, which rises to 179.4 for tourists and 68.4 US $ for the excursionists percapita a day (van der Borg, 2003:7).

A 70% of the SIP sample considered the performance of centrally locatedcultural institutions good. An 80% ignored the significant advantages of the VeniceCard (van der Borg, 2003:22-23), which is the main tool of the local government toreengineer the cultural sector. The fact that cardholders do not queue does notinfluence the purchase decision at all. Visitors assume that the card will not benefitthem: only 20% of the sample would have bought it, if they had known about it.

SIP sample visitors moved around the city using mainly vaporetti or went onfoot, finding their way around using at 70% a map or a tourist guide and at 30% thesignposting tables. Signage in Venice City is remarkable poor recycling informationto and from major attractions. The distance of less famous attractions from the centralprimary ones determines the visitation pattern, while distance decay affects drastically

visitation incentives. Lack of information gives birth to the congestion effect: I dontgo to places I dont know of.


5/14

5

Fig. 1: Venice. Centrally located Heritage Attractions

Fig. 2: Venice Heritage Core. Visitation Pattern

98%

91% 89%

76%

49% 44%

42% 42%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

SAN MARCO

SQUARE

ACADEMIA RIALTO

BRIDGE

PALAZZO

DUCALE

GUGGENHEIM BIENNALE THE OTHER

SIDE OF THE

GC

JEWISH

DISTRICT

LOCATION-INFORMATION GRADIENT


6/14

6

Fig. 3: Venice periphery and islands.

Fig.43: Venices proximate islands. Visitation Pattern.


7/14

7

3.3. The Consumption pattern: invasion of low quality

Unaware of quality SIP visitors were unable to retrieve appropriateinformation also about complementary products. Almost 40% of the sample judgescomplementary products as of low or average quality. Complementary tourist goods

(accommodation, services, catering, souvenirs, etc.) in immediate vicinity to majorattractions are produced monopolistically because they do not underlie anycompetition. Quality depends on the price-setters profit strategies, -who, asmonopolists are the main adversaries of symmetrical information-, while taxpayersare obliged to sustain heritage assets. But the quality of the tourist experience is beingbuilt by supply and the surrounding context quality: all elements of the tourismproduct should recoup value for money, especially in a heritage tourism context,where the heritage experience is the basic component of the tourism product. Lowquality invades the market because excessive tourism pressure by uniformed visitorsincreases the load of TCC. Lack of time does not allow inspection before purchase(Matzler und Pechlaner, 2000:13). Flows join other flows causing the bandwagon

effect (Towse, 1991 in: Russo and Caserta, 2002:250): I go, where others go.

2. DIMMS : TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE HERITAGE TOURISMDEVELOPMENT

2.1. Tourism Uses and the DIMMSsNew Tourism, including re-emerging urban tourism, is the innovative

framework concerning all players: undifferentiated conservative and economizingmass customers have given way to sophisticated seekers of qualitative travelexperiences (Weiermair 2001:5). Besides demand for classic services New Touristsexercise pressure upon the tourism industry towards the development of newproducts, services and experiences. Experienced travellers with strong environmentalconscience and respect for local cultures, enter en masse the phase ofself-designingthe travel process. Since travelling is no longer the mere bridge of time in betweenarrival and departure, tourism organisations are exploiting ICT features andcapabilities to meet the sophisticated requirements of the New Tourists (Rachman andBuchanan, 1999a:12-15).

Destination Information Management and Marketing Systems(DIMMSs)are computerized systems specifically designed to facilitate information about a

destinations tourism product (Chen and Sheldon, 1997:151-176, Inkpen, 1998:44,Ritchie and Ritchie, 2000) through integrated data bases. Spatially equally distributedDIMMSs represent rich data and process models, bridge temporal and spatialdistance, store data independently of the programs runtime; facilitate communicationthrough qualitative and quantitative execution guarantees, combine enhanced dataprocessing in order to satisfy a growing visitor potential in each destination (Aberer2003:12). Permanent quality control concerning information is especially vital toDIMMSs, because it guarantees its credibility (Ebner, 1992:1), whereas itsdistribution depends on the successful representation of the destinations assets.

Demand and supply sides dictate the structure of DIMMSs as a national,regional or local operating system. National DIMMSs usually consist of a Data Base

Management System (DBMS), which covers the tourism product nationwide. Thisstructure allows Local Tourism Offices to access information through


8/14

8

telecommunication connections. National Tourism Offices control this way all itssubdivisions, providing access to CRSs-GDSs. All regions access nationwideinformation about the tourism product. This is essential to multidestinational trips,where at each destination information is crucial to plan the next step. NationalDIMMSs facilitate channelling of customer flows to regional and local ones,

otherwise suppliers depend on foreigner Travel Agencies and Tour Operators, who donot share the same interests with local producers.

Local DIMMSs provide on-line information distribution within the boarders ofevery region. Lacking standardization is a strong disadvantage, whereas thecomplexity to get connected with other systems outside the country is difficult toovercome. Interconnections within other regions require synergies and consensus:players with competitive mentality are not eager to share information sources(Haimeyer, 1995:105).

Resources for development and functioning of DIMMSs grantcentral/federal/local governments or the private sector. If CRSs/GDSs are included,fees are required to enter the participants list, or a percentage is set up, as a provision

corresponding to the reservations made. Interconnections with CRSs/GDSs enablemarket widening through proper channelling. DIMMSs create communicationenvironments with CRSs/GDSs and connect suppliers globally with travel agenciesand autonomous travellers. Should suppliers share costs, then DIMMSs could createstrong similarities to CRSs/GDSs. In this case the tourism product cannot bediversified on a market segmentation basis. If no fees are required suppliers enter theparticipants list and DIMMs build an integrated system covering niche markets,alternative tourism activities, accessibility networks, accommodation and transport,political, cultural and environmental affairs, event marketing, weather forecast,online-shopping, etc.

2.2. Tourism Benefits and the Smart DIMMSs

Information is crucial to primary andsecondary tourist goods. Industry relatedDIMMSs (Ritchie and Ritchie, 2002:439-454), interconnected with variousinformation sources in situ, at entry points or distant locations guarantee appropriateinformation distribution. Since the Web solves partially the problem of the intangiblenature of the tourism product, DIMMSs fill informational gaps concerning a placessummative tourism product, exporting at the same time the places brand image.

Still evolving, DIMMSs constantly take into account the latest developmentsin technology and market demands, acting as tourism counselors, who reduce the timeand money budget needed to acquire information, enabling a vast customer pool to

detect the desirable choices. Smart DIMMSs offer a complex source of informationconcerning a holistic tourism product and the expected real benefits (Rachman andBuchanan, 1999b:14-21), serving at the same time visitors and producers throughexchange and processing of information about tailor- and ready-made products atlocal, regional and national level. They guide existing and potential markets todiscover the unique features and attractions of a destination, rather than presentingexchangeable commodities as these usually appear in the catalogues of tour-operators.24 hours accessible, DIMMSs prepare visitors upon arrival, mitigate languagedifficulties, generate bookings / sales, offer edutainment, overview of accessibilitynetworks including public transport schedules, traffic and weather forecast, regulatetourist flows through multicriterial networks of tourism resources within a region, and

decongest major attractions through appropriate information and visitor flowmanagement.


9/14

9

The use of multimedia technology in the Web signal brand new ways ofcommunication and promotion. Smart DIMMSs (Aberer, 2000:11) should be able tohandle semantics in Information Systems (Data mining, Information retrieval andIntelligent Information agents), Cooperative Information Systems (pragmatics,autonomy and Self-interested Agents // Steiner, 2000:33ff.), the use of other media in

Information Systems (Multimedia data management and multimedia retrieval); also torealize new forms of distribution (connectivity, processing caps) and software agents.Future DIMMSs will include Mobile Computing, Intelligent Agents and Self-organizing Information Systems (Aberer, 2000, pp. 13).

Smart DIMMSs benefit visitors through immediate connection of products and providers monitoring quality and validity of the information simplifications of the procedures that save time and money such as integration of

o Multimedia Info Points, Kiosks and Touch Screens, Maxi-Screens, WebPhone, Line @ and other terminals,

o informative sign-boardso Newsletter Management via Mail and/or SMS,o management of submitted demand via telephone, fax, and e-mail serviceso integration of intelligent geographic maps with functionality of routing,

interactive maps,o accessibility and communication networks, intra regional connections

Interfaces witho CRSs-GDSs and other systems of online bookingo software for the hotel management

24 hours real time management of accommodation types (modalities, availability,rates, special offers, reservations immediate confirmation)

Reservation of additional services (guided excursions, heritage trails, car rentals,Fitness and Spa Reservations, Restaurants, Beach- and Ski Passes, Theatre,Cinema, etc.)

Weather and Traffic Forecast Users guidance in the regions assets: social, aesthetic, historic, scientific, special

values, ecosystems, bio- and geodiversity along with a thematic glossary for thelocal culture aiming to forge customers loyalty

Thematic Browsing Multicriterial Tourist Nets: highly interactive networked tailor-made packages Information structuring based on the principles of Human- Computer Interaction On-line edutainment, prizewinning games

Smart DIMMSs also benefit destinations: Local economies through strategic alliances of the public and private sector. Regional platforms offer to public administration and private sector the know-how

required to develop spreading and commercialisation of their products Inclusion of SMEs initiates their independence from the Tour Operators. On-line-Shopping of strictly locally produced traditional items create brands in

multiple ways Monitoring quality and validity of the information Destination Branding based on the icon value of the tourism product Management of Tourist Demand and Tourist Flows through information policies


10/14

10

o Decongestion of tourist pressure at major fame locations, coastal zones,mature locations by the creation of a holistic destination product

o Spatial Diffusion of the tourist flows based on diversified products(promotion of complementary, additional and alternative emerginglocations and destinations offering a wide range of activities)

o Enhancement of seasonality through product differentiation (culturalroads, special events)o Raise of the expenditure per capita and redistribution of the tourist revenue

through virtual destination guidance Destination representation based on heritage interpretation3.2. DIMMSs as a tool for Heritage Interpretation

Heritage Interpretation is a multidisciplinary process of messagecommunication, aiming to reveal effectively to visitors a places natural and culturalwealth. Meanings and relationships of a given culture approached through guidance

and personal participation whether in situ or in virtual environments, is the goal ofany interpretation.Information is definitely not interpretation, although it constitutes the back

bone of the latter. Interpretation translates an experts technical account into acommunication message in the language of the visitor, relating the context to hiseveryday life and experiences. An interactive framework between resources,interpreters and visitors renders learning into a pleasure generating process: throughfirst hand experiences interpretation involves visitors in the explorative learning andentertainment process (Papathanassiou-Zuhrt and Sakellaridis, 2003:6).

In order to adapt natural and cultural phenomena of given heritage tourismcontexts to the needs of specific target groups, interpretation interlinks various

disciplines from natural, cognitive and human sciences (Moscardo, 1996:376-397,Beck and Cable, 2002:14-20). Key issues in the interpretive process are the plannersability to master human cognitive mechanisms of acquiring and retaining informationand to adapt through hermeneutical information processing scientific context andterminology to a recreational learning environment in favour of the visitor in givenheritage tourism contexts: sites, collections, trails etc.

Interpretation enables visitors to receive, understand and remember messagesencouraging them to use and evaluate the information in certain ways. It bondssustainable development policies, public awareness-raising, environmental educationand communication. Visitors learn to understand, appreciate, value and care for thecultural and natural heritage resources interpreted to them. The benefits of

interpretation are multiple for the economy, ecology and society. Interpretation: meets the increasing demand for educational visitor experiences creates visitor satisfaction, positive word-of-mouth, high revenue, visit elongation,

repeat visitation enhances civic pride, environmental conscience, respect for local communities reduces environmental and cultural damage by explaining the impacts of various

behaviours and suggesting appropriate alternatives substitutes experience for places that are very fragile and/or difficult to visit (e.g.

caves, sacred temples), or topics that are impossible to experience directly (e.g.disease, prehistoric, cosmic conditions)

Web-Interpretation exports globally a resources image bridging the spatial andtemporal distance between web-navigators and cultural operators


11/14

11

provides visitors with relevance and makes them a part of the experienceITs enable (re)presentation, exploration, celebration and dissemination of heritage

assets. While the linearity of printed texts constrains the readers imagination,hypermedia environments mark the Web as medium. Disruption of linear sequences,

autonomy of reading and learning processes are the distinctive features of thehypertext compared to the written word. In hypermedia environments decisions areunavoidable: readers establish a heuristic, non- sequential autonomy. Hyper-textualenvironment link formerly separate entities in a meaningful way to one another andby presenting facts and reasons in one format they become the new narrative medium.This medium enhances visitors participation, the ability to explore and move backand forth in given settings, so that learning becomes a pleasure generating process.

With the significance of linking given, the new task for DIMMS should be toextract the semantics from the knowledge implicit to the media, associate betweenmedia representations and semantics without a heavy manual input (Lewis et al. 1999:4). DIMMSs can and should develop narrative tools to support the conceptual

framework of heritage interpretation, so that heritage assets can be made attractivethrough provocative, coherent collocations and accessible to a wider public. In orderto design effective web-narrative structures interpretors exploit the semantic andepisodic memory potential (Mulholland and Collins, 2002:2). DIMMSs-Interpretationshould consider the following keystones: Interactive Interpretation Framework: Smart digital narratives, giving up

chronological arrays and terminology, incorporate typical exhibits. They constructa plot, an array which allows any cultural and natural setting to be viewed fromdifferent perspectives. Heritage objects are autonomous narrative elementsbelonging to larger narrative structures. As visualized culture narratives they

become storytellers who validate other elements and structures as long as they are(re)presented in the prevailing historical and socioeconomic context that createdthem (Pletinxc et al., 2003:225-231).

Interpretive Representation through Processual Information Management:Computational ontologies arrange, present and classify heritage representationsaccording to various taxonomy principles. They demonstrate how a work of art isthe inspiration source of a series of cultural products (Throsby, 2002:10) andsecure the contextualized learning process. Conceptual models reveal temporaland causal relationships between the tangible heritage resources and may presentthe steps taken to their completion, so that visitors familiarize with severalprocedures. Web-based tools as the Resource Annotation Tools (Mullholland and

Collins, 2002) enable visitors to create their own collection, their own livingheritage-spaces. Edutainment: Computational Techniques may turn unfamiliar notions, themes,

areas and topics into joyful experiences. Interpretation as communication processis based on exploratory learning techniques. The dual character of edutainmentconsists of entertainment and exploratory learning as well, a combination thatgenerates the pleasure of being (self) instructed. The prerequisite for edutainmentto be effective is that structure and management of information results inmeaningful messages for the recipients. Communicating a message effectivelymeans that visitors receive, understand, react, remember and use its content.Edutainment is a powerful tool that benefits visitors through virtual or first hand

experiences, spiritual enrichment; it benefits places by educating and sensitizing abroad public to their needs and problems.


12/14

12

ConclusionHeritage attractions in qualitative environmental settings create a destinations distinctprofile and generate tourism. In order to impede tourism from becoming monoculture,protect the heritage assets and the local peoples quality of life, Tourism Planning has

to restructure the cultural sector and manage tourist flows effectively. Valorisation,interpretive management and constant monitoring of heritage assets should be majortasks for heritage managers. DIMMSs represent a valuable tool to implementsustainable tourism uses. Through visitor care and orientation they help touristsbehave responsibly, create a heritage assets market value mix by globally exportingits image as a tourism component, achieve satisfaction of tourism professionalsthrough immediate connection of demand and supply side and impact positively onthe local economy and the environment.

Aberer, K. (2000), Information Systems Architecture. EPFL-DSC, Laboratoire de systmesd'informations repartis, PART I. Available :

http://lsirwww.epfl.ch/courses/fds/20002001ws/Overview_handout.PDF

Aberer, K. (2002), Scalable Data Access in P2P Systems. Ecole PolytechniqueFedrale de Lausanne, CERN.

Beck, L. and Cable, T. (2002), Interpretation for the 21st Century. SagamorePublishing, Champaign Illinois.

Chen, H.M. and Sheldon, P. (1997), Destination Information Systems: Design Issuesand Directions.J ournal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 14 No. 2, Fall

1997 pp. 151 176.Ebner, A. (1992), TIS - Das Tirol Information System. Alt, Rainer; Schmid, Beat F.;Zbornik, Stefan, EM - Electronic Markets, Vol. 2 , No. 1. Available:http://www.electronicmarkets.org/modules/pub/view.php/electronicmarkets-408

Garrod, B. and Fyall, A. (2000), Managing Heritage Tourism. Annals of TourismResearch, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 682-708.

Jansen-Verbeke, M. (1998), Tourismification of Historic Cities. Annals of TourismReearch, Vol. 25 No 3, pp. 739-769.

Haimeyer, P. (1995), Ist nachchaltige Regionalentwicklung mit Tourismus realistisch.Arbeitskreis Freizeit und Fremdenverkehrsgeographie, Institut fr Tourismus der FU-Berlin, Berichte und Materialien Nr. 14, Berlin.

Inkpen, G. (1998), Information Technology for Travel and Tourism. 2th Edition,Longman, Essex UK.

Masters, D. Scott, P. Barrow, G. (2002), Sustainable Visitor management System. Adiscussion Paper.

Matzler, K. Pechlaner, H. (2000), Customer Value Management fr touristischeDestinationen - eine kritische Betrachtung. Available:


13/14

13

http://www3.tiscover.com/destinationsm/vermarktung

Moscardo, G. (1996), Mindful visitors: heritage and tourism. Annals of TourismResearch, 23, 2, pp. 376-97.

Mourato, S. Mazzanti, M. (2002), Economic Valuation of Cultural Heritage: Evidenceand Prospects. De la Torre, Marta (Ed.) Assessing the Values of cultural HeritageResearch Report, the Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles.

Mullholland, P. Collins, T. (2002), Using Digital Narratives to Support theCollaborative Learning and Exploration of Cultural Heritage. Proceedings of the 13thInternational Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA02),1529-4188/02.

Papathanasiou-Zuhrt, D. Sakellaridis, Od. (2003), Scio, urbs Nobilissima. Tourismuses of the fortified city. Euromed Heritage II International Conference, Mytilene 6-8

November.

Poria, Y. Butler, R. Airey, D. (2003), The Core of Heritage Tourism. Annals ofTourism Research, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 238254.

Pletinckx, D. Silberman, N. Callebaut, D. (2003), Heritage presentation throughinteractive storytelling: a new multimedia database approach. The J ournal ofVisualization and Computer animation, No. 14, pp. 225-231.

Rachman, Z.M. Buchanan, J . (1999)a: Effective Tourism Web Sites, Part 1:Literature Review and Features Survey.Department of Management SystemsUniversity of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealandb: Effective Tourism Web Sites, Part 2:Expectation versus Delivery of Tourism WebSites. Department of Management Systems, University of Waikato, Hamilton, NewZealand. Available: http://www.mngt.waikato.ac.nz/depts/mnss/john

Ritchie, R.J .B. Ritchie, J .R.B. (2002), A framework for an industry supporteddestination marketing information system,Tourism Management, Vol. 23, pp. 439-454.

Russo, A.P. (1999), Venice: coping with culture vultures.The Unesco Courier, Vol.

56.

Russo, A.P. Caserta, S. (2002), More Means Worse: Assymetric Information, SpatialDisplacement and Sustainable Heritage Tourism.J ournal of Cultural EconomicsVol.26, pp. 245-260, Kluwer Academic Publishers, the Netherlands.

Russo, A.P. (2003), The socioeconomic impacts of tourism in heritage cities. SocratesIntensive Program, Venice.

Russo, A.P. (2001), The vicious circle of tourism development in heritage cities.Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 29, No 1, pp. 165-182.


14/14

14

Russo, A.P. Van der Borg, J. (2002), Planning considerations for cultural tourism: acase study of four European cities.J ournal of Tourism Management, Vol. 23, pp. 631-637.

Serageldin, I. (1999), Very Special Places: The Architecture and Economics of

Intervening in Historic Cities. The International Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment/ THE WORLD BANK, No 19255.

Steiner, T. (2000), Software Agents in Tourism Industry Prototypes and Prospects.Zeitschrift der Schweizerischen Informatik Organisation / Revue des organisationssuisses dinformatique, No 1, pp. 33-38.

Throsby, D. (2002), Cultural Capital and Sustainability Concepts in the Economics ofCultural Heritage. De la Torre, Marta (Ed.) Assessing the Values of culturalHeritage Research Report, the Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles.

Throsby, D. (2001), Conceptualizing Heritage as Cultural Capital. HeritageEconomics Challenges for Heritage Conservation and sustainable Development inthe 21st Century. Conference Proceedings 2000, Australian National University ofCanberra, 07/2000, Australian Heritage Commission, ISBN 0642 547 408.

Van der Borg, J. (2003), The Heritage of Venice. Economic and Social Issues.Socrates Intensive Program, Venice.

Van der Borg, J. Costa P. Gotti G. (1996), Tourism in European Heritage cities.Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 306-321.

Weiermair, K. (2001), Improvements in competitiveness for tourism enterprisesthrough new forms and regimes of governance. OECD, Seminar on Tourism Policyand Economic Growth, Berlin, 6-7 March, p.4. Available:http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/57/20/1867993.pdf

venice study 10

Documents