The environmental impacts of World Heritage Site designation on local communities.

Author(s):  
T. Jimura
2015 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 2022-2062 ◽  
Author(s):  
REINER BUERGIN

AbstractThe conceptualization of interrelations between biological and cultural diversity since the 1980s indicates a biocultural turn in discourses and policies regarding nature conservation, sustainable development, and indigenous peoples. These interrelations frequently manifest as conflicts between local communities who derive their livelihoods and identity from their lands and resources, and external actors and institutions who claim control over these areas, invoking superior interests in nature conservation, development, and modernization. In these asymmetric conflicts over biocultural diversity, framed in discourses that demand the preservation of both biological and cultural diversity, the opportunities for local communities to assert their claims crucially depend on external discursive and legal frameworks.Based on a study of the Karen ethnic minority groups in the Thung Yai World Heritage Site in Thailand, this article explores challenges and chances for local communities to assert claims and rights to lands, resources, and self-determination in the context of the biocultural turn in environment and development discourses as well as heterogeneous legal frameworks. Human rights as individual rights are widely recognized, but may be difficult to enforce and of limited suitability in conflicts over biocultural diversity. Group rights like indigenous rights are increasingly devised to protect ethnic minorities and perpetuate cultural diversity, but are often disputed on the national level and may be ambiguous regarding heterogeneous communities. In Thailand and globally, community rights provide another promising framework with regard to conflicts over biocultural diversity if the claims of communities to livelihoods and self-determination are respected.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vithaya Arporn ◽  

This paper studied the management of three World Heritage sites in 3 countries of Southeast Asia : Malaysia, Laos, and Thailand. The results of this research show that a decentralized form of government in Southeast Asia provides opportunities for local communities to develop better participation in the World Heritage site management than the centralized forms of government. For local communities to contribute to the World Heritage philosophy, it is necessary to improve both the conceptual and practical aspects of the World Heritage Committee, Advisory organizations, and State Parties. They have to learn lessons and agree to work closely together. บทความนี้เลือกศึกษาการจัดการแหล่งมรดกโลกจำานวน 3 แหล่งในประเทศมาเลเซีย ลาว และไทย โดยใช้วิธีการ สำารวจเอกสาร ผลการศึกษาพบว่า รูปแบบของรัฐในเอเชียตะวันออกเฉียงใต้ที่กระจายอำานาจจะเปิดโอกาสให้ ชุมชนท้องถิ่นสามารถพัฒนาการมีส่วนร่วมในการจัดการแหล่งมรดกโลกได้ดีกว่ารูปแบบรัฐที่รวบอำานาจ การที่จะ ให้ชุมชนท้องถิ่นมีส่วนร่วมตามปรัชญาของมรดกโลกจึงจะต้องปรับปรุงทั้งในส่วนของกรอบคิดและการปฏิบัติทั้งใน ส่วนของคณะกรรมการมรดกโลก องค์กรที่ปรึกษา และรัฐภาคี โดยต้องสรุปบทเรียนและยอมรับร่วมกันอย่างใกล้ ชิด


Author(s):  
Mavis Thokozile Macheka

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to assess the extent to which Great Zimbabwe World Heritage Site has contributed to the sustainable development of the local people who live in its vicinity. What is critically important to underscore is the value of the site to society. Design/methodology/approach The relevant data were collected through questionnaires, personal interviews and site visits. Findings The paper reveals that cultural heritage has affected sustainable development of local communities living in its vicinity in social and cultural terms. There is promotion of Shona traditions through exhibitions and selling of curios by local people at community projects such as the Shona Village and the Great Zimbabwe Nemanwa Craft Centre. The two projects also generate revenue to the local communities. However it was established that a number of benefits from the site such as employment creation are temporary and unsustainable. The main challenge for effecting sustainable development to local communities is lack of community participation. Originality/value Most researchers are arguing that sustainability of cultural heritage is much more difficult compared to natural heritage but the findings reflect that cultural heritage through Great Zimbabwe World Heritage Site could be an essential engine and valuable resource for sustainable development.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Imanaly Akbar ◽  
Zhaoping Yang ◽  
Fang Han ◽  
Gulnar Kanat

The political environment of a tourism destination is the most important element in planning, implementing, and controlling sustainable tourism development. The political environment refers to the coordination and cooperation among many participants to formulate and apply tourism policies. In our study the term political environment refers to political power, leadership, structures, mechanisms, and strategies, or policies for the implementation of sustainable tourism development. The main purpose of this article is to, through the example of Aksu-Jabagly natural heritage site in Kazakhstan, study how the negative political environment (NPE) of a tourism destination inhibits the implementation of sustainable tourism development in Kazakhstan. This study draws on in-depth interviews with local residents who are considered as one of the key stakeholders in the tourism industry. In our research, we conducted a questionnaire survey of 222 representative households from the neighboring village of Aksu-Jabagly, a natural world heritage site. Results show that because of negative political environments, the residents highly perceive the negative economic and environmental impacts of tourism development. Although the residents highly evaluated tourism’s positive sociocultural impacts, its relevance to other indicators was relatively weak. The residents are dissatisfied with tourism development, and their participation level in tourism was low. The results also reveal that highly perceived negative economic and negative environmental impacts of tourism are the main cause of residents’ dissatisfaction with tourism development and residents’ lack of participation in tourism.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 100841
Author(s):  
Moayad Mohammad Alrwajfah ◽  
Fernando Almeida-García ◽  
Rafael Cortés-Macías

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document