1、 外文翻译 原文 Managing for sustainable tourism:a review of six cultural World Heritage Sites Material Source： Author： Journal of Sustainable Tourism Christine Landorf Vol.17,No.1,January2009,5370 School of Architecture and Built Environment,University of Newcastle,Australia (Received 12 June 2007;final v
2、ersion received 8 February 2008) This paper considers the relationship between heritage tourism and sustainable development,with special reference to World Heritage Sites(WHSs).It notes that while WHS status is not necessarily linked to tourism growth,all WHSs must now develop and implement a manage
3、ment plan to mitigate tourism impacts and sustain site significance.The paper explores the concept of sustainable heritage tourism and identifies two key principles of sustainable practicea planning process that is long term and holistic,and multiple stakeholder participation in that planning proces
4、s.Qualitative content analysis is used to determine the extent to which these principles have been integrated into the tourism planning process at six WHSs.The study found that a formal goal-oriented planning process was in evidence at all six sites.However,the process lacked a comprehensive and hol
5、istic approach to the wider issues of sustainable development,and genuine engagement with local community stakeholders. Keywords:heritage tourism;heritage; management;stakeholder;collaboration; sustain-able development Introduction： There has been an increasing interest in the impact of tourism on W
6、orld Heritage Sites(WHSs)over the past 20 years.This is motivated in part by the commonly held view that World Heritage Listing increases visitor numbers.While the reality of this view is still subject to debate(Buckley,2005),an expectation of substantial growth in tourist interest has been noted as
7、 a driving factor in recent World Heritage nominations(JonesRodwell,2002).The pressure that tourism might place on a WHS,irrespective of growth,is compounded by the somewhat contradictory principle at the core of the World Heritage Conventionthat is,WHSs should retain a function in current community
8、 life while being conserved for transmission to future generations(UNESCO,1972).So,if the significance that allowed a site to gain World Heritage status is to be maintained,and WHSs are to remain accessible to current and future generations,managing tourism activity sustainably should be a critical
9、issue(GarrodPedersen,2002). This paper tests the validity of the expectation that the management of sustainable tourism at WHSs should,therefore,feature significantly in their site management plans.It reports on a study that analysed the management plans of six UK WHSs to identify their approach to
10、the management of sustainable tourism.Evidence of two key principles was assessedthe use of a long term and holistic approach to tourism planning,and the extent of stakeholder participation in that planning process.The study assumes that sustainable? tourism is a desirable goal,strategic planning is
11、 an appropriate framework within which sustainable tourism can occur,and extensive and empowering stakeholder participation in the planning process is essential for tourism to be sustainable over the long term. The next section of the paper provides an examination of how the theoretical foundations
12、of sustainable development might be applied to heritage tourism.This is followed by a discussion of the methodology used in the study and an analysis of the study findings.The planning process and stakeholder participation practices at six WHSs are then discussed, and conclusions are drawn concernin
13、g the extent to which they represent an appropriate model for the management of sustainable heritage tourism. Sustainable heritage tourism Sustainable development and tourism Most models of sustainable development can be traced back to two key publications,the 1987 World Commission on Environment an
14、d Developments Brundtland Commission Report,Our Common Future(WCED,1987),and Agenda 21,the international agreement on sustainable development framed at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development(or“Earth Summit”)(Johnson,1993).The Brundtland Report defined“sustainable developm
15、ent”as“development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.The Report outlined a further four sustainability principles:(1)holistic planning and strategic decision-making;(2)preservation of essential ecological processes;(3)
16、protection of human heritage and biodiversity;and(4)growth that can be sustained over the long term.Though debate continues in regards to its detailed interpretation and practical application(Hunter, 1997;Sharpley,2000),this remains the most widely circulated definition of sustainable development(Ba
17、siago,1999).If the Brundtland Report provided a conceptual definition of sustainable development,Agenda 21 proposed a number of tangible strategies for its implementation.Critical to this was the need to balance the economic,environmental and social dimensions of sustainable development over time(Br
18、amwellMowforthHunter,1997).Likewise,the sustainability strategies outlined in Agenda 21 have seen limited application because of the complexity of achieving a truly integrated economic,environmental and social system(Basiago,1998).While there is aJournal of Sustainable Tourism 55 lack of consensus i
19、n relation to how a balance is to be achieved,there is at least growing acceptance that a strategic approach can contribute positively to the sustainable developmentdecision-makingandplanningprocess(Hall,Jenkins,Simpson,2001). Originating in the management literature(Mintzberg,1994),strategic planni
20、ng is described as a means of guiding resource allocation to enhance long term organisational performance(ViljoenSimpson,2001). Most models of sustainable development also include stakeholder collaboration,and in particular community empowerment,as a cornerstone of the development process.Academic i
21、nterest in collaboration theory and stakeholder participation can be traced back to the social reform movements of the 1960s.Critical to the field was Arnsteins(1969) influential typology of citizen participation developed to better understand power imbalances evident in urban planning initiatives o
22、f the time.Arnsteins typology ranged from involvement that gave an impression of participation through to complete citizen control of the decision-making process.Similar typologies have been developed for sustainable development.Hunter(1997),for example,has described a typology of sustainable develo
23、pment that ranged from strong resource exploitation through to strong resource preservation. While the extreme ends of the spectrum in both cases can be rejected as inequitable for one key group or another,such typologies do centre debate on acceptance of a flexible middle ground that can be adapted
24、 to a given context.As Hunter(1997)has noted,the concept of sustainable development is malleable,it should be shaped to fit a range of world views and location-specific factors.Stakeholder collaboration has been advocated as one way of achieving this(Aas,Ladkin,JamalSelin,1999;Simpson,2001).Indeed,G
25、rays(1989,p.11)influential definition of collaboration as“a process of joint decision-making among key stakeholders of a problem domain about the future of that domain”has been adapted by many studying inter-organisational relationships in tourism settings,and community participation in decision-mak
26、ing in particular(Aas et al.,2005;JamalSelin,1999). As an idealistic concept,the meaningful engagement of a range of stakeholder groups throughout the decision-making process is widely accepted as pivotal in achieving a collective sense of responsibility for the sustainable development of any resour
27、ce.A critical assumption is that local stakeholder groups,in particular,have a direct need to reduce the intergenerational impacts of any resource use.There is also an assumption that local stakeholders have a greater understanding of the economic,environmental and social needs and resources of a co
28、mmunity,and how these might be integrated into more extensive regional and national systems(MilneWelford, Ytterhus,Getz（ 2） 基本生态过程的保护 ;（ 3） 保护人权遗产和生物多样性 ;（ 4） 能够 长期持续的增长 。讨论会上做出了 详细的解释和实际应用 (Hunter,1997;Sharpley,2000),这仍然是最广为流传的可持续发展的定义 。 （ Basiago， 1999）。 如果布伦特兰报告提供了可持续发展概念的定义， 21世纪议程则是提出了实施这一战略应该具
29、体实施的策略。关键是随着时间的发展，能够 平衡经济效益、环境效益和社会维度的 可持续性。 （ BramwellMowforthHunter,1997).同样， 21世纪议程提到的可持续发展的应用将被限制由于真正 实现综合经济效益、环境效益和社会制度 的复杂性。 (Basiago,1998).虽然 在 有关如何实现平衡上还 缺乏共识 ，但是 人们越来越认同，一个战略方针能够积极地促进可持续发展决策和规划过程 。 (Hall,Jenkins,Simpson,2001). 在早期的管理文献中（明茨伯格， 1994年），战略规划被认为是一种利用引导资源配置的方法来提高长期的组织性能。（维尔乔恩与达恩，
30、 2000） 。这意味着一个正式的，具有明确目标的进程受多个情境影响，重要利益相关者的价值观和态度影响和长期决定的影响。当应用于旅游时，这意味着在战略目标引导下，始终从事着一个反应当地影响和利益相关需求战略的过程，需要基于一个因果关系的循环模型。然而在应用的过程中有一些相关的问题，这些问题将会在以后再考虑， 策略规划体现的许多原则与上文中提到的可持续标准一至 .(Hall et al.,2000;Simpson,2001). 许多可持续发展的典范也包含了利益相关者合作 , 尤其是社区营造 ,作为发展进程的基石。学术理论与利益相关者参与合作的兴趣可以追溯到到 60年代社会改革运动。对这个领域至关
31、重要的是 阿恩斯坦 （ 1969） 具有影响力的公民参与的发展，以便更好的了解类型学在城市规划中的明显性。 阿恩斯坦的类型学从 参与给人 的 一种印象 到完整的公民控制决策的过程，可持续发展中相似的类型学已经得到发展。 Hunter (1997)，例如，介绍了可持续性发展的其中一种类型从强大的资源开发到强大的资源保护。 然而两种极端情况下因对一个或另一团体的不公平而被拒绝 , 这种类型学作为一个复杂环境中能被接受的灵活中间者，能适应于给定的环境。正如Hunter 所说 , 可持续发展的概念具有延展性 , 它应被塑造成能适应世界的观点和具体地点的各种因素。利益相关者的合作一直被倡导为实现目标的一
32、种方法 .(Aas,Ladkin,JamalSelin,1999;Simpson,2001). 事实上，格雷对合 作具有影响力的定义为主要利益相关者对未来主要问题共同决策的过程。已经被旅游业的内部研究组织采用，尤其是社区社区参与决策。 (Aas et al.,2005;JamalSelin,1999). 作为一个理想的概念，一个在整个决策过程中利益相关者群体有意义的接触范围广泛接受的关键是在实现任何资源的可持续发展的责任的集体意识。 一个关键的假设是，当地利益相关者群体，特别是减少资源 的使用对两代人的影响的 直接需要 。还有一种假设，即当地的利益相关方非常懂得经济，环境和社会需要 ,以及社会资源，以及他们如何融入更广泛的地区和国民体系。 旅游行业的高度分散性进一步强调了在 当前 规划过程中 要有 较正式的协调和 更广泛的合作的需要。然而，界定利益相关群体，特别是，“当地社区” 对于大多数 WHSs是一个特殊问题。 (RichardsGetz&Jamel,1994).
