Residents’ Participation in the Management and Development of Sustainable Cultural Heritage Tourism: The World and Vietnam’s Perspective.

Residents’ Participation in the Management and Development of Sustainable Cultural Heritage Tourism: The World and Vietnam’s Perspective.

Le Thi Ngoc Anh*, Tran Cam Thi

Faculty of Cultural Industries, Thu Dau Mot University, Vietnam

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.807251

Received: 28 June 2024; Revised: 16 July 2024; Accepted: 20 July 2024; Published: 23 August 2024

ABSTRACT

The residential community has a close relationship and strong interaction with local cultural heritages. However, in the process of preserving and exploiting cultural heritages, the proactive role of residents in participating in heritage management has not been promoted as the main stakeholders. The study was conducted to reconsider the specific roles of local communities in cultural heritage management and participation in developing sustainable cultural heritage tourism. At the same time, the study analyzes several particular cases relating to community participation in cultural heritage development projects around the world. Based on access and analysis of secondary data sources, the findings show that there has been a shift in recognizing the role of residents in heritage management on the government and a sense of proactive participation of residents from the benefits of tourism. However, there are still many problems regarding the level of participation, conflicts in the participation process and participation mechanisms to ensure sustainable management and exploitation of cultural heritage.

Keywords: cultural heritage management, community engagement, sustainable cultural heritage tourism.

INTRODUCTION

Cultural heritage is a valuable asset of the nation (World Heritage Watch, 2020), at the same time, heritage sites have many different development potentials to contribute to the sustainable development of territories (Chauma & Ngwira, 2022). Cultural heritage supports the development of the region in many fields including economics, society, environment, and culture, in which tourism is the sector that benefits greatly from cultural heritage when exploiting it as a major tourism resource. Tangible and intangible cultural heritages become attractive tourist destinations, bringing potential tourism markets. However, the process of over-exploiting heritage, focusing on economic profit, also brings the threat of possible degradation of heritage, thus affecting benefits and creating many negative impacts. for the local community (World Heritage Watch, 2020; Yıldırım Esen & Bilgin Altınöz, 2021). In the process of preserving and exploiting cultural heritage, the local community, as a direct stakeholder with interests and affected by the heritage, has become an important, closely linked factor with cultural heritage.

On the other hand, heritage management practice has affirmed that the basis for developing a symbiotic relationship between tourism and heritage is the need for the participation of all stakeholders in cultural resource development. Heritage resources themselves will hardly give tangible benefits to the community if they are not managed properly, and heritage management will even be a disaster without the participation of residents (Rasoolimanesh et al., 2017). Therefore, the major challenge to achieving heritage sustainability is to implement management in an approach that ensures local people’s participation (Spencer & Sargeant, 2022). In addition, the international research organization on the preservation and restoration of cultural heritage (International Center for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property – ICCROM) has affirmed and aimed for a local community-centered approach in heritage conservation (Court & Wijesuriya, 2015). It can be confirmed that community participation is a necessary condition for effective heritage management (Li et al., 2021).

However, there are still many barriers from local management about the active participation of residents in heritage management, and at the same time, the level of active participation is still largely influenced by various relating to the residents’ awareness and activities (Kozak, 2017; Rasoolimanesh et al., 2017; Rasoolimanesh & Jaafar, 2017; Spencer & Sargeant, 2022). Additionally, some domestic research shows that residents’ participation in local governance in tourism development projects associated with heritage and community culture is still low (Quang, 2020; Quyen, 2017; Thu, 2019). In that context, the Law on Vietnamese Cultural Heritage (2001) indicated that the management of cultural heritage belongs to the entire community, and stipulated the community’s obligation to “Respect, protect and promote the value of cultural heritage” (clause 3, article 14). Regarding to the heritage management, the law stipulates the leading role of state agencies in cultural heritage management (Chapter 3, chapter 5). Thus, although accepting the role of the community in heritage conservation, there have not been official regulations on residents’ participation in management of heritage. For Vietnam’s tourism industry, cultural heritage tourism is still a strong direction for developing tourism products. In the same vein, the future development strategy aims to exploit the country’s sustainable tourism resources, on the basis of preserving and promoting national cultural identity (Viet Nam National Authority of Tourism, 2018). Therefore, finding an effective approach based on the strength of the community is also a requirement for the country to preserve and sustainably exploit cultural heritage resources.

Based on domestic and foreign research practices, it is necessary to review the benefits of enhancing the role of residents in heritage management and to find some solutions to promote the participation process towards sustainable cultural heritage tourism. For that reason, the study was conducted to reassess the role of the community, as the main stakeholder in preserving and exploiting cultural heritage tourism. Moreover, the study analyzes several cases of community participation in specific destinations around the world, discusses and offers development suggestions suitable to the Vietnamese context. The findings contribute to the theory of the role of residents in sustainable cultural heritage management.

LITERATURE REVIEW

1) Residents and their participation in cultural heritage management

The concept of residents is associated with the location and territorial space, accordingly, the resident community is considered “a community of people living in the same area” (Law on Environmental Protection, 2020, article 3). A local community is also considered a group of people with common characteristics or interests, geographically or demographically connected (UNESCO, nd). Thus, residents and communities have similar connotations in terms of distribution and a common connection in terms of characteristics and benefits. Therefore, within the scope of research, the concepts of local residents and communities will be consistent. For cultural heritage, the perspective is broadened and separated into groups of people with different levels of interaction in the heritage. These residents may be geographically attached, being communities living in or near the heritage site. Or it could be a community of people who feel connected and have a deep interest in the heritage. Other than that, it could also be a group of heritage practitioners, who are working directly with heritage (Court & Wijesuriya, 2015; Kim et al., 2019). Indigenous communities have consciously established perceived ownership of heritage, demonstrating a close link between people and heritage sites and distinguishing it from legal or economic ownership (Case at the Gumbooya Conservation Heritage Area, Sydney) (Bill Boyd et al., 1996). From the awareness of heritage values, residents have shown a sense of guardianship and proactively taken actions to preserve and conserve the heritage well (Butler et al., 2022).

2) Conflicts in residents’ management participation and developing cultural heritage tourism

Although the central philosophy of heritage management remains a close connection to the community, the gap between policy and management practice, along with the different perspectives of local communities, brings many challenges in the heritage conservation organization (Chauma & Ngwira, 2022; D. T. Hien, 2023). The process of managing and exploiting cultural heritage often tends to preserve and eliminate activities that may reduce the value of heritage. The result tends to separate heritage sites from the experiences of local communities (Carter & Grimwade, 1997; Tuyen, 2023). In addition, the process of preserving cultural heritage is often independent and does not have much connection with other fields. Implemented projects often focus on the research interests of management agencies, with only limited participation by residents even though they have deep cultural and historical connections to the sites that are preserved and researched (Chauma & Ngwira, 2022; Tuyen, 2023). Furthermore, the process of preserving and exploiting heritage also brings conflicts and in some cases, residents are the groups that are hurt and damaged. For residents living in deteriorating heritage buildings, housing renovation activities are hindered by a system of documents aimed at conservation, and therefore, there are sometimes conflicts with rights and guarantees for a better living environment for residents. Conflicts arise when changes in procedures and regulations are too complicated which prevent people from continuing to stay with their heritage (Godbolt et al., 2018). In terms of economics, the benefits that cultural heritage brings during the exploitation process promote a positive view of residents towards heritage, but problems arising in the equitable distribution of benefits within the community also create conflict and affect the sustainable development of cultural heritage exploitation (Lourenço-Gomes et al., 2019).

3) Trends change residents’ participation in cultural heritage tourism management and development

The trend of heritage conservation and management models around the world is shifting from place-based conservation to people-centered conservation. Changes in awareness asserted the role of the community, community acceptance, and support for heritage conservation will improve operational efficiency (Carter & Grimwade, 1997). Projects to develop cultural heritage for tourism as well as carry out conservation work have emphasized residents as direct and necessary stakeholders. Residents can participate in heritage development organizations and get their opinions on projects (Aas et al., 2005). Moreover, research also began to pay attention to residents’ motivations and support for local heritage development (Jeon et al., 2014; Quyên, 2017; Rasoolimanesh et al., 2017; Li et al., 2021). However, the participation role is also limited under the organization of the management agency. Additionally, heritage interests, awareness of heritage value as well as the level of closeness to heritage also contribute to the positivity and initiative participation of residents in cultural heritage management activities.

At the same time, many cultural heritage sites have become important tourist destinations, contributing to the main source of income for localities (Rasoolimanesh & Jaafar, 2017; World Heritage Watch, 2020). The participation of local people in the planning and development of heritage projects is encouraged. Although there are some studies on cultural heritage tourism development, the role of residents in participating in decisions is limited (Aas et al., 2005; Kozak, 2017; Li et al., 2021). However, only when do local people aware the value and benefits of heritage and access to complete information, the local community aware their rights to participate in local heritage management (Stendardi et al., 2020; Oladeji et al., 2022). Cooperation and agreement between local management and residents in preserving and exploiting heritage based on fairness and respect is a condition to ensure the process of exploiting and preserving cultural heritage is sustainable.

METHODOLOGY

The study uses data collection techniques from reliable domestic and foreign publications on the search portal scholar.google.com based on a combination of keywords about cultural heritage management, community participation, sustainability, and cultural heritage tourism in the period 1995 – 2024. The results were 64 publications, based on which the research team selected several studies directly related to the topic. The study went on to find a number of studies directly related to sustainable cultural heritage tourism and resident engagement with 157 publications. Publications and data in Vietnam are collected from scientific journals on the search portal of the Ministry of Science and Technology. Based on the studies surveyed through titles and abstracts to determine relevance. From there, the study selected 29 publications to read and analyze their relevance and applicability in research. Finally, the study used data from 23 domestic and foreign studies to analyze and use in the article. In addition, concepts and models related to the study are taken from organizations such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), the United Nations associations, and state management agencies. Techniques of analyzing and synthesizing secondary documents are applied to discuss content related to research purposes. At the same time, the study also uses a descriptive method to analyze specific cases in cultural heritage management around the world.

FINDINGS

1) The role of residents in sustainable cultural heritage management in the world and Vietnam

Residents are the creators of cultural heritage and contribute every day to help maintain its value. For communities with strong solidarity in cultural heritage sites, contributions will bring better results through the cooperation and joint efforts of groups of people rather than individuals (Rasoolimanesh & Jaafar, 2017). This collaboration comes from three groups of communities living on the site, the community interested in heritage and especially the community of heritage practitioners. At its core, community engagement brings equal benefits to heritage and community. In contrast, the process of disequilibrium management separates the connection between people and heritage (Court & Wijesuriya, 2015). In preserving and exploiting heritage, local communities contribute many different roles to heritage. Oladeji et al (2022) synthesized research to generalize some community contributions. First, community participation helps build a vision for plans, based on contributions and collection of opinions, supporting management agencies have comprehensive information to serve the development of planning projects. Second, community management helps people maintain and protect heritage resources more effectively. Third, participation serves as a tool to empower people, contributing to cooperation and sustainable development. Fourth, participation supports education and the propagation of cultural values ​​to the wider community. Fifth, participating in heritage management also helps people have direct access to local economic benefits and business activities brought about by heritage. Finally, the participation process also helps the community strengthen connections, attachment, cooperation and solidarity. Particularly for local cultural heritage management, residents have a vital specific role at the development planning stage, demonstrated through some contributions such as providing practical experience and knowledge on heritage value during the planning phase; and providing innovative ideas and tools to connect heritage values ​​with local development. In the final stages of planning, residents work with management agencies to jointly implement and realize legacy plans (Li et al., 2021).

For Vietnam, Hien. N.T (2022) has generalized community participation in heritage management and protection expressed through several activities on:

– Group of cultural heritage conservation activities: Individuals represent the community through participation as members in development plans to participate in steps in the conservation and heritage exploitation process. Residents can comment and propose measures to management agencies to protect cultural heritage. The community also participates in activities associated with heritage, especially intangible heritage, as practitioners of heritage, preserving and continuing to carry out activities to help heritage live forever.

– Group of cultural heritage exploitation activities: Communities exploit heritage resources for economic and business development. They take advantage of heritage to develop a sustainable local economy such as tourism and cultural industries. In addition, residents can use heritage to serve community and individual life activities, enriching local social and cultural life.

It can be affirmed that there are similarities between the world and Vietnam in recognizing the management participation role of residents in preserving and exploiting cultural heritage for tourism. The factor that attracts active participation is strongly related to the socio-economic benefits brought about by cultural heritage tourism activities. The close cooperative relationship between the two groups of local heritage management agencies and residents was demonstrated during that participation process. However, specific responsibilities and plans for cultural heritage tourism cooperation between management agencies and residents are still not clear in Vietnam.

2) Resident participation in sustainable cultural heritage tourism development

Table 1: Summarizes previous studies on residents’ involvement in heritage management.

The level of resident participation is related to the connection between residents and heritage. Residents attached to heritage in terms of spirituality, economic interests, or perceived heritage value tend to take part in the heritage management process actively and proactively. However, studies show that there is a large gap between residents’ actual participation in heritage management and their desire to take part. Most barriers come from heritage management mechanisms and the lack of communication between heritage management agencies and local communities. However, a positive sign shows that there is a progressive shift as the role and initiative of residents in heritage management is increasing, and the cooperation between management agencies and residents is also increasing become tighter.

At the same time, studies also confirm that tourism towards sustainable development is a mandatory requirement. In planning and developing sustainable tourism, developing a sense of community ownership of tourism resources and a sense of related responsibility is a crucial issue (World Tourism Organization, 2004). The above process must be carried out long-term from the stage of building awareness, encouraging community participation, and empowering the community so that the local community can promote their ownership role. During that process, UNWTO also emphasized that information is the most significant key for the community to effectively participate in the efficient tourism development planning process. When the community has full information, it will support to make wise decisions in taking part in heritage management (World Tourism Organization, 2004). From the general model of UNWTO, it is proposed that it can be applied to the use of information in sustainable cultural heritage tourism as follows:

Level 1. Preparation and readiness of information: Based on information sources related to sustainable cultural heritage tourism, specific cultural heritage management models are available and complete, and people will increase their ability to access information to learn more.

Level 2. Access to information: Demonstrated through the ease and convenience of accessing and using information about projects to develop cultural heritage and sustainable tourism at the destination, people increase additional attention to that planning process.

Level 3. Information analysis: Detailed information about the cultural heritage development plan is diverse in many different forms to suit each target group, conveyed through easy-to-understand language, and easy to read in accordance with the community’s cognitive level.

Level 4. Information application: The community is supported to understand how to use information in cultural heritage management plans, possibly through the education and training process, to apply it appropriately to their community characteristics.

Level 5. Information mobilization: Capable individuals in the community can help mobilize and inspire people around them about heritage project information, participating in the process of building awareness for the community due to their better understanding and connection.

Level 6. Information-based action: Through practical community action to promote sustainable cultural heritage tourism. This is the highest level of the heritage community’s development transition from awareness to a sense of responsibility to creating specific actions. Thus, the transformation of the role and level of participation of the local community corresponds to the level of application and use of information in sustainable heritage development projects. The above levels of action are also a reference basis for building a set of indicators to measure sustainability in tourism exploitation in general and cultural heritage tourism in particular. The level of participation of residents in sustainable heritage tourism development is only truly proactive and positive when people have easy access to information, are aware of heritage values ​​and the nature of cultural heritage tourism activities at the same time they have the belief that cultural heritage tourism brings benefits to their communities.

3) Some experiences on participation in cultural heritage tourism management of world residents and Vietnam

Case in the ancient town of Luang Prabang (Laos)

The ancient capital of Laos Luang Prabang was recognized by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site in 1995 for its architectural values, cultural and religious significance. Aiming to preserve heritage and develop tourism based on the cooperation of relevant parties, UNESCO and the Norwegian government have implemented a long-term project called “Cultural Heritage Management and Tourism: Models for Cooperation among Stakeholders”, for three years from 1998 – 2001 (Aas et al., 2005). In the project, stakeholders and beneficiaries of the project are identified as (1) residents living in and around the heritage area and the wider community; (2) local management responsible for protecting and preserving cultural heritage; (3) heritage tourists and (4) sustainable tourism. One of the project’s goals is community participation in the decision-making process. In actual implementation, it was found that the community had awareness and motivation to participate in issues in the plan related to their future development. People are involved in contributing ideas to development plans. However, the level of participation is limited when the contribution is mainly giving wishes and advice. Relevance in heritage development management as a secondary stakeholder is the key. There are very few individuals in the community who act as key stakeholders, have a real voice and have direct influence on the operations of the region. In addition, the role of the community has not been highly appreciated by other stakeholders, such as assessments from tourism businesses that it is difficult for the community to contribute or to be involved much in heritage and tourism development due to limited knowledge (Aas et al., 2005). It can be seen that support and participation in heritage management is a new concept for directly managing government along with other stakeholders. However, the project implementation process recognizes the active participation of the local community in heritage tourism activities and this direct benefit is proportional to the level of participation. This is a spontaneous process of the residents themselves and not a development plan from the management board. The results of project implementation indicate the community’s willingness to participate in developing its heritage, but it is necessary to change beliefs about the community’s contributing role from other stakeholders, therefore, raising awareness of the community’s role in preserving and exploiting heritage is a mandatory requirement.

The case of Buenavista del Norte town (Spain)

The town of Buenavista del Norte was built in the 16th century and became a place to preserve traditional values ​​blending with the beauty of the sea and islands. The town is in an isolated location. It has the lowest population size on Tenerife island and a high capacity for self-organization and commitment (Stendardi et al., 2020). Project “Society and Archaeological Heritage Recovery of Buenavista del Norte (Tenerife, Canary Islands), in rural and urban areas (PARQ_BVISTA) ” is carried out to create networks of people’s participation in cultural management. The relationship is based on residents’ perceptions in the following aspects: cultural identity, resident participation, cultural heritage management and tourism activities. The process of collecting residents’ opinions indicated that the townspeople expressed a positive vision and perception of tourism, for example through their actions in agreeing on the provision of available resources for tourists. Residents agree that tourism is an opportunity to promote and preserve local heritage. About one-third of local people think that the management process should be a combination of public and private, but support for the public model still prevails. However, people expressed dissatisfaction with the actions of management agencies in conservation and they had high demands for active participation in heritage conservation. The survey also found that in the town, there have been successful demonstrations of the combination between cultural management agencies and community participation in organizing local celebrations. These events are aimed directly at the people and are mainly attended by residents (Stendardi et al., 2020). The case of Buenavista del Norte town demonstrates that residents’ participation in heritage management is at a medium-high level. People take part in local governance activities in many areas such as politics, economics, and culture. Nevertheless, the practice also shows that the new community-based heritage management mechanism is a complex process involving many aspects. In that process, conflicts, although not obvious, are inevitable. The consensus in heritage management between the community and the government is the result of a continuous negotiation process between bottom-up pressure (the community) and top-down decisions (the government). However, the town’s reality also indicates that tourism is a useful factor to adjust this relationship. The recognized role and benefits of tourism encourage participation while promoting community cooperation with local management in local heritage development and conservation plans.

The case of Lijiang ancient town (China)

Lijiang Old Town has unique architecture from a mixture of many cultures and is a famous heritage site in Yunnan, China. This heritage was recognized by UNESCO in 1997 based on criteria (ii), (iv), and (v) (UNESCO World Heritage Centre, n.d.). In the process of developing Lijiang Old Town, it encountered challenges in terms of heritage goods, tourism, and urbanization. In that context, the perspective of the old town authorities recognizes the participation of the local community in the heritage management process, however, in reality, a widely accepted process has not yet been established. Authorized by the local government, the Department of Heritage Management and Conservation in the old town is mainly responsible. This is also the agency which is responsible for organizing community meetings in the area, creating conditions for activities to participate in community heritage management. However, the level of resident participation is still minimal, and community consultation procedures have not yet been formed during the heritage identification phase. In addition, the planning and implementation stages do not include local people’s benefits. As a result, local authorities benefit from tourism more than any other stakeholder, including residents. Heritage management needs to adjust the process to better meet residents’ expectations, thereby encouraging broader participation instead of just restricting it to a typical group of local people. In this way, the local community’s needs are also included in the heritage management strategy and plan while contributing their traditional knowledge and skills to the overall development of the old town (Li et al., 2021). Therefore, creating a process that balances the direction of the government with the interests and demands of the local people involved in protecting local heritage and socio-economic development is extremely necessary. Previous pioneering projects demonstrate the significance and successful outcomes of reaching an agreement between conservation and local development strategies based on broad community input. Dialogues are conducted with imaginary questions for residents of the heritage area such as what they liked, what they wanted to keep, and what they wanted to change (Buckley et al., 2015). Based on that idea, an experiment in Lijiang old town was formed through workshops with residents to collect residents’ opinions on determining the local context, willingness to participate, and how to approach it which approach to heritage management according to the country’s context. From residents’ perspectives, it has been shown that top-down governance is still supported and appropriate to the local context; residents do not believe that they should be the sole decision-makers. People want to be provided with a favorable policy and institutional environment for activities under the leadership and sponsorship of local governments. Although the governance process is led by the government, extensive dialogue with the community needs to take place right from the initial identification stage to fully discuss the rights and interests of the community. Furthermore, local elite groups and community organizations, as representatives of the local people, can play an intermediary role in exchanging ideas between the government and the people (Li et al., 2021). Thus, in the practical context of Lijiang Old Town, traditional heritage management methods are still supported by residents, but there needs to be a mechanism and process for the community to have the opportunity to participate in the process of management to ensure the rights of all residents.

Case of participating in cultural heritage tourism management of the Cham community in Ninh Thuan province, Vietnam

Temple and tower relics have become vital symbols and are closely linked to the cultural life of the Cham people. Cham temples are important spiritual assets in the religious activities of the local community and continue to remain in the context of modern society. Research by Quang Dai Tuyen (2023) pointed out the difficulties that heritage practitioners are facing in conservation activities and the disadvantages in enjoying benefits from heritage tourism activities around the case of Po Klaong Garai temple (Ninh Thuan). This is a heritage site of worship and a place to organize many spiritual activities of residents, contributing to the vitality of the heritage and turning this place into a famous tourist destination of Ninh Thuan. The government recognizes the role of the community by inviting monks to be advisors related to culture and religion in preserving and exploiting Cham heritage. There has been cooperation between management agencies and the community in preserving and developing living heritages. However, the socio-economic conditions of the community, especially the monks, who preserve and practice the heritage, have not received adequate attention. Monks do not receive economic benefits from heritage exploitation activities, their livelihoods are difficult, and social security such as health insurance is lacking. Therefore, economic difficulties reduce their participation in resource conservation and the spirit of effective cooperation with local authorities. From a management perspective, the Cham community is the guardian who organizes activities to bring vitality to the heritage and is also the traditional owner. However, profits from entrance fees are only used to pay staff salaries, repairs, and remittances to the budget. Thus, people do not benefit directly from tourism, leading to a lack of capital to organize traditional festivals and activities to preserve community culture. Therefore, conflicts began to arise about how to distribute income from heritage exploitation activities between management levels and communities. People believe that if benefits are shared, the community’s heritage conservation activities will be better. Research has shown the difficulties and disagreements of residents with local authorities in managing and exploiting heritage (Tuyen, 2023).

DISCUSSION

From theories about the role and participation of residents in heritage management to some practical cases showing that residents’ participation in heritage management is a mandatory job. However, this is an action based on the residents’ voluntary and proactive awareness, so it is necessary to find motivation to promote the active participation of residents. Research has shown that tourism is a good solution, the benefits the tourism industry brings are recognized by residents and bring positive evaluation to the role of cultural heritage for local development. However, the exploitation of cultural heritage for tourism development must be based on the principle of sustainability, ensuring harmony of interests between the community government management and other stakeholders while not going against it. principles of heritage conservation. The process of attracting active participation in heritage management also depends on internal factors of the community itself, which is awarded of heritage value, close connection, and interest in heritage as well as awareness of personal responsibility for cultural heritage. Therefore, positive changes in the community are proportional to the level of proactive participation in local heritage management.

Traditional heritage management mechanisms are applied according to a top-down model, with residents tending to overlook and sideline participation in conservation and development orientations, plans, or projects. However, the trend of preserving and exploiting heritage sustainably has affirmed the role of the community and is conscious of empowering and giving the community opportunities to participate in heritage management. However, reality shows that building a community-based cultural heritage management mechanism is a complex process and involves many aspects and also rises many conflicts. Therefore, creating mechanisms such as dialogues between local managers and residents and maximizing the intermediary role of elite groups in the community will provide good support for collecting and listening to opinions from the bottom up. In addition, the level of resident participation in heritage management depends on access, information sharing, and legal framework. The levels of information show that when people have full information about heritage and the more convenient the access is, the more opportunities they have to play their role. In addition, there needs to be a legal mechanism to collect people’s opinions from the initial steps of deciding on the heritage plan until the implementation step. At that time, local people have the opportunity to voice their rights, wishes, and comments and make decisions that are most beneficial for the sustainable development of heritage.

Finally, there are still gaps in policy development and stakeholder responsibilities for sustainable cultural heritage tourism development. Heritage tourism is considered an open door for solutions to maintain and continue to preserve the community’s heritage. People also began to have a positive view and put more effort into activities associated with heritage thanks to the economic benefits brought by tourism. However, have tourism activities at cultural heritage sites been guaranteed to be based on sustainable governance among stakeholders? What are the principles for sustainable cultural heritage tourism? What are the responsibilities of stakeholders to ensure the sustainable exploitation of cultural heritage tourism? These are issues that need to be addressed for territories and destinations that are exploiting cultural heritage as an important tourism resource.

CONCLUSION

Development trends require that the conservation and exploitation of cultural heritage tourism must be sustainable. In particular, the participation of residents in that process has been affirmed and has a great influence on cultural heritage. From heritage sites that have just begun to be exploited tourism to heritage sites with a long history of exploitation, all show the community’s desire to participate in development plans. However, local cultural heritage management is a complex job and involves many factors. Local government management agencies still play a proactive role in planning, developing strategies, and organizing implementation. In that process, the local community, as the people directly affected by heritage and also the custodians of heritage, needs to prove their crucial role in heritage management. It is necessary to create a mechanism for people to participate in all stages of heritage management, ensuring full and convenient access to resident information. For the heritage community, people need to actively assert their role in the decision-making process of local management through specific contributions such as helping to provide knowledge and experience about heritage, speaking up about the needs and relevant interests of the community; providing ideas and ways to exploit heritage value for community development; actively working and supporting management agencies to implement projects.

REFERENCES

1. Aas, C., Ladkin, A., & Fletcher, J. (2005). Stakeholder collaboration and heritage management. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 28–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2004.04.005
2. Bill Boyd, Maria Cotter, Wave O’Connor, & Dana Sattler. (1996). Cognitive ownership of heritage places: Social construction and cultural heritage management. Tempus-ST Lucia Queensland, 6, 123–140.
3. Buckley, K., Cooke, S., & Fayad, S. (2015). Using the Historic Urban Landscape to re-imagine Ballarat. In S. Labadi & W. Logan (Eds.), Urban Heritage, Development and Sustainability (1st ed., pp. 93–113). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315728018-6
4. Butler, G., Szili, G., & Huang, H. (2022). Cultural heritage tourism development in Panyu District, Guangzhou: Community perspectives on pride and preservation, and concerns for the future. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 17(1), 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2021.1881524
5. Carter, B., & Grimwade, G. (1997). Balancing use and preservation in cultural heritage management. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 3(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527259708722186
6. Chauma, E. C., & Ngwira, C. (2022). Managing a World Heritage Site in Malawi: Do residents’ sentiments matter? Journal of Heritage Tourism, 17(2), 142–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2021.1889571
7. Court, S., & Wijesuriya, G. (2015). People-Centred Approaches to the Conservation of Cultural Heritage: Living Heritage. ICCROM, Italy. https://www.iccrom.org/sites/default/files/PCA_Annexe-2.pdf
8. Godbolt, Å. L., Flyen, C., Hauge, Å. L., Flyen, A.-C., & Moen, L. L. (2018). Future resilience of cultural heritage buildings – how do residents make sense of public authorities’ sustainability measures? International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 9(1), 18–30. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJDRBE-10-2016-0041
9. Hien, D. T. (2023). Nghiên cứu xung đột giữa cư dân và các bên liên quan tại điểm đến du lịch cộng đồng khu vực miền núi Thanh Hoá.
10. Hien, N. T. (2022). Nhận diện và vai trò của cộng đồng đối với di sản. Tạp Chí Dân Tộc Học, 1. https://sti.vista.gov.vn/tw/Lists/TaiLieuKHCN/Attachments/336251/CVv208S012022073.pdf
11. Jeon, M. M., Kang, M. (Michelle), & Desmarais, E. (2014). Residents’ Perceived Quality Of Life in a Cultural-Heritage Tourism Destination. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 11(1), 105–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-014-9357-8
12. Kim, S., Whitford, M., & Arcodia, C. (2019). Development of intangible cultural heritage as a sustainable tourism resource: The intangible cultural heritage practitioners’ perspectives. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 14(5–6), 422–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2018.1561703
13. Kozak, A. S. & M. (2017). Sustainable cultural heritage tourism at Ban Wangka Village, Thailand. Anatolia. https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2017.1414435
14. Law of Cultural Heritage, Pub. L. No. 28/2001/QH10, 28/2001/QH10 28 (2001). https://vanban.chinhphu.vn/default.aspx?pageid=27160&docid=80239
15. Law on Environmental Protection, Pub. L. No. 72/QH14, 72/QH14 72/QH14 (2020). https://moit.gov.vn/upload/2005517/20221209/72_signed_06bd3.pdf
16. Li, J., Krishnamurthy, S., Pereira Roders, A., & Van Wesemael, P. (2021). Imagine the Old Town of Lijiang: Contextualising community participation for urban heritage management in China. Habitat International, 108, 102321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2021.102321
17. Lourenço-Gomes, L., Rebelo, J. F., & Ribeiro, C. (2019). Residents’ perceptions of a World Heritage property: A multivariate analysis. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 9(2), 212–226. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-03-2017-0010
18. Oladeji, S. O., Grace, O., & Ayodeji, A. A. (2022). Community Participation in Conservation and Management of Cultural Heritage Resources in Yoruba Ethnic Group of South Western Nigeria. SAGE Open, 12(4), 215824402211309. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221130987
19. Quang, L. T. B. (2020). Vai trò các bên liên quan trong quy hoạch phát triển du lịch bền vững: Nghiên cứu trường hợp tại Tà Xùa, huyện Bắc Yên, tỉnh Sơn La. Tạp Chí Kinh Tế & Phát Triển, 281, 92–100.
20. Quyen, M. L. (2017). Các nhân tố tác động đến sự tham gia của người dân trong phát triển dịch vụ du lịch bổ sung tại các điểm di tích lịch sử văn hóa tỉnh Quảng Trị. Hue University Journal of Science: Economics and Development, 126(5D), 95. https://doi.org/10.26459/hueuni-jed.v126i5D.4497
21. Rasoolimanesh, S. M., & Jaafar, M. (2017). Sustainable tourism development and residents’ perceptions in World Heritage Site destinations. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 22(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2016.1175491
22. Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Jaafar, M., Ahmad, A. G., & Barghi, R. (2017). Community participation in World Heritage Site conservation and tourism development. Tourism Management, 58, 142–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.10.016
23. Spencer, D. M., & Sargeant, E. L. (2022). The use of indicators to measure the sustainability of tourism at cultural heritage sites: A critical review. Tourism Recreation Research, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2022.2069454
24. Stendardi, D., Perez, E., Castillo, A., & Garcia, J. I. (2020). Isolated identity, tourism and heritage: Social perception and participation in cultural heritage management for the transformation of tourism governance in Buenavista del Norte (Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain). Revista ESPACIOS, 41(17). https://www.revistaespacios.com/a20v41n17/20411724.html
25. Thu, N. B. A. (2019). Nghiên cứu sự tham gia của người dân địa phương trong phát triển du lịch sinh thái cộng đồng tại rừng dừa Bảy Mẫu Cẩm Thanh – Hội An. Hue University Journal of Science: Social Sciences and Humanities, 128(6D), 53–70. https://doi.org/10.26459/hueuni-jssh.v128i6D.5417
26. Tuyen, Q. D. (2023). Heritage Conservation and Tourism Development at Cham Sacred Sites in Vietnam: Living Heritage Has A Heart. Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-3350-1
27. UNESCO. (nd). Community. https://uis.unesco.org/en/glossary-term/community
28. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. (n.d.). Old Town of Lijiang. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Retrieved 11 April 2024, from https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/811/
29. Viet Nam National Authority of Tourism. (2018). Strategy on Viet Nam’s tourism development until 2020, vision to 2030.
30. World Heritage Watch. (2020). World Heritage Watch Report 2020.
31. World Tourism Organization (Ed.). (2004). Indicators of sustainable development for tourism destinations: A guidebook. WTO.
32. Yıldırım Esen, S., & Bilgin Altınöz, A. G. (2021). The Heritage Resilience Scorecard: Performance Measurement in Risk Governance of Cultural Heritage. Historic Environment: Policy and Practice, 12(2), 222–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/17567505.2020.1864117