Práctica 3: Sistema masa-resorte con movimiento libre

Through studying the case study sites, the differences between a tourism-oriented and a conservation-oriented management approach is revealed; and some conflicts

between various stakeholders of Chinese heritage sites have been discovered. For example, the differences between the management approach of Shantytown, a commercial tourist attraction, and the Arrowtown Chinese settlement, a conserved historical site, are obvious. The marketing and interpretation of the two places is therefore focused on different objectives. The primary objective of Shantytown is to be profitable through attracting more visitors and providing them with a quality experience. This gives them the motive to learn about visitor experience through conducting marketing research, constantly extending and renewing their product base and actively promoting all activities available, including the Chinatown. The

interpretation of Chinatown also reflects the primary objective of Shantytown as it attempts to provide an easy and interesting experience through focusing on individual stories, with less emphasis on the hardship of the Chinese miners. In contrast,

Arrowtown Chinese settlement is managed by the Department of Conservation whose objective is to conserve New Zealand‟s heritage and protect it from inappropriate usage. This explains why the Department of Conservation does not actively promote any of the sites that it manages. In the case of the Arrowtown Chinese settlement, the Department of Conservation informs visitors about what is available for them, but are rather cautious about visitors‟ activities on site and have little interest in

understanding and improving visitors‟ experience of the site. This is also reflected in their emphasis in simply informing visitors of some facts about the history of the site in their on-site interpretation, even if some of these facts are dark and depressing (see section 8.4 below).

Appropriately balancing tourism development and heritage conservation is not problematic in the case of Shantytown as its Chinatown is a complete re-creation. There are, however, some contradictions between the Shantytown researcher and managers when it comes to whether to further develop the Chinese component of Shantytown. The managers, from a tourism prospective, have to consider whether

further developing the Chinatown will generate financial return. The researcher, working partly from a „heritage conservation‟ point of view and partly also from a „history conservation‟ point of view, hopes to extend the Chinese story of the West Coast because she feels these stories should be told. This demonstrates how tourism- oriented professionals differ from historically oriented professionals.

At Arrowtown Chinese settlement, the research results show that there are no serious conflicts between the conservation and tourism development of the site at this stage, because the site is not physically as fragile as some heritage sites can be. It is easily accessible by motorised vehicles and capable of hosting large groups of visitors and the Department of Conservation is willing to work with tourism sectors as partners, as long as the planned activity is not conflicting with the conservation policies.

Furthermore, the site is unlikely to undergo extensive physical redevelopment in the near future; the Department of Conservation has no further plans for development of the site due to limited resources and its conservation focus. This decision is supported by many tourism stakeholders who believe that the site should be kept low key so the wild flavour can remain as it is a nice contrast to the more „touristy‟ flavour of

Arrowtown‟s main street. There are, however, some tensions between the Department of Conservation and other local stakeholders in terms of the site‟s maintenance and interpretation. With regard to interpretation, local stakeholders, such as the Museum and Arrowtown Promotion and Business Association, look at the site from the perspective of the visitor experience. They want the site to be well looked after and well interpreted because their concern is about how visiting the site will positively add on to visitors‟ overall Arrowtown experience. This conflicts with the Department of Conservation‟s limited interest in the visitor experience, with protection of the site and faithful preservation of the built artefacts and accurate re-telling of the site‟s history.

The discussion above highlights the ways that the objectives of tourism development and heritage conservation often conflict, because tourism industry professionals value heritage as products that can generate tourism activity and wealth, and their primary objective is to increase visitor numbers and maximise profit through ensuring a positive experience; while heritage conservation professionals value the same assets for their intrinsic merits and aim at controlling their usage for conservation purposes.

interpret a heritage site. When the interests of these two groups clash, often the objectives and activities of one are compromised by the needs of the other (e.g. McKercher & du Cros, 2002; Warren & Taylor, 2001).

The Lawrence Chinese Camp, is being developed as a tourism attraction in order to serve preservation purposes. This gives the site the advantage of being initiated on the basis of „sustainable heritage management‟ which sets a common ground for both heritage conservation and tourism development professionals to work as partners for their mutual benefits (McKercher & du Cros, 2002). It is noteworthy that

increasingly, it is realised that it is no longer sufficient to manage heritage sites in isolation from the people who come to experience them. The heritage managers and developers need to understand visitor experience, thereby adjust their activities based on visitors‟ needs and want (Hall & McArthur, 1996).