4.6 Article

Critical Analysis of a World Heritage Site in Terms of Conservation and Tourism Promotion: The Case of Ibiza, Biodiversity and Culture (Ibiza, Spain)

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 13, Issue 23, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su132313250

Keywords

World Heritage; Ibiza; management; tourism; conservation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

UNESCO World Heritage Sites hold great prestige, but the case of Ibiza has faced challenges in the protection and promotion of its cultural and natural elements, including communication confusion and concentrated tourist visits in the old town.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Sites (WHS) have great prestige. Each year, candidatures are presented by advocates seeking to raise awareness of the importance of certain cultural and natural sites, to achieve better protection and to make them known, which can promote tourism to benefit the surrounding regions. One of these cases is Ibiza, which, after a first rejection in 1986, obtained the inscription of Ibiza, Biodiversity and Culture in 1999. This WHS is made up of various cultural and natural elements of the island, although the best known is the fortified Upper Town of Ibiza (Dalt Vila). Since then, important restoration and musealization actions have been carried out in the old town, and some tourism promotion events have been held, but there have been failures in its conversion into a tourist product: Both residents and tourists see this as complementary to the traditional offer (sun and beach tourism); confusion has been generated in communication, focusing on the old town and forgetting the other elements; tourist visits to the registered elements have not taken off and are concentrated in the summer months (the traditional high season); some decisions have been politicized, among other problems. Finally, different lines of tourism development are proposed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available