Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2,
pp. 147–165, April 2011
ARTICLE
Abstract
Industrial regions across the developed world have experienced a period of steady decline since the
1960s. The regeneration of former industrial sites, particularly for tourism, has become an
expedient strategy for targeting the economic and social deprivation often associated with de-
industrialization. This places significant expectations on heritage not only as a contributor to the
more immediate regeneration process but also as a vehicle for long-term sustainable development.
Using data drawn from a case study of UK industrial World Heritage sites, this article presents
findings that indicate the need for procedural and institutional innovation if industrial heritage
sites are to respond to the challenge of sustainable development. The paper concludes with a
model of sustainable heritage management that is relevant to other complex historic sites.
Introduction
Since the 1960s, many industrial cities and regions in Europe, the Americas and
Australia, have experienced a period of steady de-industrialization. In the UK,
for example, the mineral deposits that supported mining activity at the World
Heritage Listed Cornwall and West Devon Mining Landscape, Blaenavon
Industrial Landscape and Ironbridge Gorge have either been exhausted or
become unviable to extract. At other industrial World Heritage sites, such as the
textile centres of the Derwent Valley, New Lanark and Saltaire, obsolete
technology and global competition ended in closure of the last of the mills in the
mid-20th century. While the extent of the remaining original infrastructure
varies, all these sites, and many like them, have significant cultural value for
local communities. They also contribute, at a broader scale, to a collective
understanding of national identity.
Industrial sites such as these face several unique challenges beyond those
related to their unique scale, complexity and perceived heritage value (see
Figures 1, 2 and 3). The first of these challenges is the recent affirmation by the
Chris Landorf, Senior Lecturer, School of Architecture, The University of Queensland, Brisbane,
QLD 4072, Australia. Email: c.landorf@uq.edu.au
So, what are the issues facing the sustainable use of industrial heritage sites such
as the tin mines of Cornwall and the textile mills of New Lanark, and how can the
conditions for their sustainable use be met? To date, several challenges relating to
sustainable development have been identified, including the inadequacies of
existing procedural and institutional frameworks to deal with the type of non-
linear relationships and multi-organizational collaborations needed to effectively
frame and implement sustainable development policy (Williams, 2006). Another
challenge is the lack of practical strategies for the implementation of sustainable
development, especially strategies that work to balance competing priorities and
vested interests across the economic, environmental and social dimensions of
sustainable development (Simpson 2001; Brandon & Lombardi, 2005). A further
challenge is the complexity of evaluating policy outcomes in such an
interconnected environment where it is difficult to attribute outcomes to specific
interventions (Stubbs, 2004; Roberts, 2006).
Additionally, there is currently a lack of evidence to support a link between
enhanced sustainability and urban and regional regeneration strategies (Colomb,
2007’ Bramley & Power, 2009) and limitations have been noted in relation to the
effectiveness of heritage-led regeneration strategies in industrial regions (Hospers,
2000; Jones & Munday, 2001; Cole, 2004). Studies have also shown limitations in
the effectiveness of inter-organizational collaboration (Wilson & Boyle, 2006),
strategic planning (Rodwell, 2002) and stakeholder participation at World
Heritage sites (Aas et al., 2005), while limitations have been identified in the
strategic management skills of heritage managers (Garrod & Fyall, 2000; Watson
& McCracken, 2002). These are all considered to be desirable operational
characteristics or strategic dimensions of sustainable development. While these
studies contribute to a better understanding, they do not holistically evaluate the
integration of sustainable development principles at heritage sites, nor do they
specifically consider industrial heritage sites.
In the light of these findings, this paper sets out to establish a holistic framework
for the evaluation and management of sustainable development at industrial
heritage sites. The paper starts by identifying two strategic dimensions of
149
Chris Landorf
social capital, which is linked, in turn, to greater economic prosperity and social
inclusion (McLean et al., 2002; Arneil, 2006; Bull & Jones, 2006). Social capital,
therefore, is seen as the foundation of social stability and empowerment, its absence
is thought to be a key factor in neighbourhood decline (Middleton et al., 2005).
Irrespective of the underlying assumptions and political overtones, there is a growing
emphasis on political participation in social policy (Bull & Jones, 2006; Davidson &
Lockwood, 2008). A particularly relevant example is the use of partnerships to
manage World Heritage sites in the UK. The following sections will discuss how
these challenges might be addressed in a model for sustainable heritage management.
Methodology
Sample Frame and Rationale
This section and the following one describe the research methodology adopted in
the paper. World Heritage sites were selected as the most appropriate sample for
this study for two reasons. Firstly, they are considered the pinnacle of international
heritage significance based on universally agreed criteria; and secondly, that
significance is subject to independent evaluation by recognized bodies of
international experts. World Heritage sites are also subject to regular reporting.
For these reasons, World Heritage sites could be expected to provide a best
practice model of heritage management.
Of the 754 sites on the World Heritage List in 2005, the 33 industrial sites
represented an identifiable sub-category and one that most strongly related to the
research question. Limiting the sample to those sites whose significance relates to
the period starting with the Industrial Revolution further increased the relevance.
As protection for heritage sites is dependent on national statutory controls, a
further limitation was that sites should fall under a consistent legal framework.
Finally, multiple sites with similar characteristics were needed to enhance the
research validity through cross-site comparison (Yin, 2003). Six sites conformed
to this sample frame. The sites shared a relatively intact physical state, an
extensive scale, utilitarian physical fabric, complex layers of technical innovation
and industrial processes, a relatively remote location, and an established site
management plan. The selected sites—the Blaenavon Industrial Landscape, the
Cornwall and West Devon Mining Landscape the Derwent Valley Mills,
Ironbridge Gorge, New Lanark and Saltaire—are shown in Figure 4.
Research Methodology
Evidence for the remainder of the paper comes from a content analysis of each
World Heritage site’s management plan, in particular the planning process,
objectives and action plans (Blaenavon Partnership, 1999; City of Bradford
Metropolitan District, 2000; Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site Strategy
Group, 2001; Derwent Valley Mills Partnership, 2003; New Lanark Advisory
Group, 2003; Cornwall and West Devon Mining Landscape World Heritage Site
Bid Team, 2005). As the primary instruments guiding the management of each
World Heritage site (Rodwell, 2002; Wilson & Boyle, 2006), it might be
153
Chris Landorf
. The situation analysis dimension was used to assess the extent that influences
on the management of each World Heritage site boundary were identified as a
starting point in the planning process.
. The strategic orientation dimension was used to evaluate the extent that a
holistic and long-term planning approach had been used.
. The organizational design dimension was used to evaluate the extent that
organizational systems and structures at each site were designed to support
collaborative linkages between organizations and across policy fields.
. The stakeholder identity dimension was used to establish the extent that
stakeholder values, needs and expectations were integrated into a strategic
vision for each site.
154
Model for Sustainable Historic Urban Environments
Results
This section examines the major themes stemming from the content analysis
categorized under each of the coding dimensions described above. The
summarized results together with the final coding instrument are shown in Table 1.
Situation Analysis
All six management plans provided extensive historical backgrounds, inventories
and maps associated with their claim for heritage significance. Natural features
were detailed where they were integral to a site’s significance. All plans identified
site-specific factors as key issues influencing the management of the site. Not
surprisingly, the protection of unique heritage values was identified as a key issue
in all plans. Reference was made in five plans to site-specific risk issues and to
there being pressure on the integrity of the historic fabric as a result of changes in
use and technology. Visitor access and transportation management was identified
in all plans as a key issue, as was research and education. Other key issues
included marketing and promotion in three plans, monitoring and information
management in five plans, resources and funding in two plans and management
structures in four plans.
Two plans also mentioned the economic benefits of heritage and one discussed
the capacity of local infrastructure. All referred to the political and legal
environment in the form of the national planning framework but only one reflected
on how this might evolve as a future influence and no plans considered socio-
economic trends. None of the plans provided detailed local demographic,
economic or visitor data or appeared to integrate this into the decision-making
process. Nor did any of the plans consider the impact of broader national or
international trends, or provide a mechanism for the ongoing evaluation of these
dynamic external factors. This leads to the conclusion that the planning process at
155
Chris Landorf
(continued)
156
Model for Sustainable Historic Urban Environments
TABLE 1. (Continued)
World Heritage site
Coding item 1 2 3 4 5 6
38 Do businesses and residents influence strategic directions?
39 Do relevant visitor groups participate in the process?
40 Do relevant visitor groups influence strategic directions?
Participation continuity
41 Is participation in the prioritisation of objectives evident?
42 Are responsibilities assigned across stakeholders?
43 Is participation in the evaluation and review process evident?
44 Are stakeholder relationships evaluated and reviewed?
Note: shaded, evident; unshaded, not evident. Site 1: Blaenavon Industrial Landscape; Site 2:
Cornwall and West Devon Mining Landscape; Site 3: Derwent Valley Mills; Site 4: Ironbridge
Gorge; Site 5: New Lanark; Site 6: Saltaire
Strategic Orientation
A linear planning process was evident in all six management plans, although
differences were apparent in the extent of long-term and expansive strategic
thinking. Aims generally referred to the distinctiveness of the site and provided a
broad commitment to stakeholders. Four plans referred to protecting and
enhancing the ‘character’ or ‘values’ of the site, and a fifth plan used the phrase
‘safeguarding the outstanding universal value’. Social and community goals were
primarily evident in the economic goals and aims related to enhancing public
awareness. Reference was made to promoting a ‘sustainable’ or a ‘holistic and
integrated approach’ and ‘enhancing public awareness’. How aims and objectives
were established was never clearly described, however, giving the impression that
each plan was trying to generate, rather than having been generated by, any
community commitment to a vision. Only one plan described the methodology
used, and that consisted of a description of the organizations who prepared the
plan and the data sources used. One plan included an opportunities and threats
analysis but this was confined to the site rather than the broader strategic
environment. There was no evidence in any of the plans that a range of strategic
alternatives had been evaluated. The need to manage information and develop
indicators to monitor progress was mentioned as a key management issue in five of
the six plans. However, strategies to develop quantifiable measures for less
tangible issues, such as social well-being and equity, were not evident.
Organizational Design
It was evident that all six management plans sought to establish a framework for
long-term inter-organizational collaboration. Collaboration was facilitated through
157
Chris Landorf
Stakeholder Identity
All six management plans referred to some form of stakeholder consultation. How
the process was conducted, what understanding came from it and how it was
integrated into the planning process was unclear in four plans. The vagueness of
statements such as ‘consultations with public and private bodies and with the
general public have taken place’ or this management plan follows ‘consultation
with the local community and relevant organisations and agencies’ indicated an
assumed authority in relation to the process and suggested it did not require a more
explicit description. There was limited evidence of the systematic assessment of
contemporary community values and attitudes, lifestyle features or quality of life
characteristics, and no evidence of their integration into the planning process.
There was also minimal evidence that the vision for each World Heritage site
aligned with community values leading to an assumption that, however vague the
process of consultation was, it equated to having a common understanding
regarding the heritage value of a site.
Participation Scope
All six management plans detailed a partnership structure between varying
numbers of key stakeholders. Local government agencies dominated the
membership and the implementation of objectives in all six plans. An organization
or individual was deemed to have participated in the planning process if they had
an active role in the implementation of objectives. The generic ‘public
consultation’ process noted in four management plans was not deemed
participation because of the lack of evident influence over the planning outcomes.
Objective implementation responsibilities were spread across government and
158
Model for Sustainable Historic Urban Environments
Participation Continuity
Stakeholder participation in the prioritization of objectives was considered integral
to the development of joint responsibility for the planning process outcomes. None
of the plans showed evidence of broad stakeholder participation in the
prioritization of objectives. This was due to the fact that it was difficult to gauge
whether broad stakeholder participation did in fact contribute to the final chosen
strategic direction. All plans listed a series of action plans or projects derived from
an analysis of the key management issues. However, many of the projects were
assigned to only one implementer and all of the plans lacking a comprehensive set
of collaborative performance indicators. Also difficult to gauge was the extent that
stakeholder relationships were subject review. Although one plan did include an
action plan to ‘develop and strengthen new and existing partnerships’, none of the
plans clearly addressed the issue of ongoing partnership membership and
legitimacy.
the sites in the study but collaboration appeared to be limited to providing comment
on solutions developed by a small number of key stakeholders.
A model of sustainable heritage management has been developed that addresses
these weaknesses. The lack of integration between heritage site management and
broader decision-making frameworks is seen as a major problem. The model
suggests a framework that can bring together the diversity of local, national and
international interests necessary to develop a long-term and holistic strategic plan
for a heritage site. The framework is based on conceptualizing sustainable
development as a social problem and then understanding any intervention in that
problem from a systems perspective. Joseph McCann (1983) identified three
aspects of a social problem. Firstly, social problems are dynamic and unbounded.
This limits the development of a shared understanding of their causes and effects,
and a coordinated approach to their solution. Secondly, the resources needed to
affect social problems are diffuse. This means that any intervention will need to be
undertaken incrementally and negotiated amongst multiple actors who share
complex and non-linear relationships. Finally, no one entity has sole responsibility
for a social problem. This means that new procedural and institutional frameworks
are needed to coordinate any intervention.
McCann (1983) proposed a social problem-solving process consisting of three
interconnected stages—problem setting, direction setting and structuring. Problem
setting describes the events and interactions needed to reach agreement amongst
stakeholders about the definition and membership of the problem domain. The
success of this stage can be constrained by limited or illegitimate stakeholder
participation, politicization of the process and differences in opinions amongst
stakeholders as to the nature of the problem. A lack of awareness of the larger
context is a further constraint on the quality of this stage.
The second stage, direction setting, is the process of agreeing on a direction for
action by stakeholders. Not only does a ‘desirable state’ need to be agreed but what
must be done to achieve that state needs to be determined. This involves setting
goals, developing actions plans and enacting legislation. The process also attempts
to resolve the end state legitimacy. Without this, sufficient resources may not be
allocated and any proposed direction for action can lack the necessary feasibility to
have a lasting impact. Finally, the structuring stage relates to the functional viability
of any problem-solving intervention. This concerns who assumes the roles and
responsibilities defined by the direction for action. It also concerns the design of the
institutional mechanisms used to manage relationships amongst stakeholders.
Factors that might impact on the quality of the structuring stage include an over-
reliance on inflexible bureaucratic structures and the inequitable allocation of roles
and responsibilities.
Viewing a social problem from a systems perspective strengthens McCann’s
approach in two ways. Firstly, a systems approach assumes any intervention will
take into consideration the multitude of interacting systems surrounding a given
problem situation (Checkland, 1999). Recognizing that a social problem has
flexible and inter-connected boundaries that need constant re-assessment resolves
the stakeholder definition and contextual awareness problems identified in the
problem-setting stage. Secondly, a systems approach assumes any intervention to
be an organized process of inquiry and learning (Checkland & Winter, 2006).
160
Model for Sustainable Historic Urban Environments
This provides a mechanism for continuous evaluation and improvement not evident
in McCann’s linear process. The systems model for social problem-solving is
shown in Figure 5.
However, for such a model to be implemented effectively it needs to be
integrated into a long-term and holistic strategic planning process and it should
FIGURE 6. A systems model for sustainable heritage management. Note: WHS, World Heritage Site.
161
Chris Landorf
Conclusions
This paper set out to explore the issues facing the sustainable management of
industrial heritage sites. These sites often include economic, political, scientific
and socio-cultural heritage values beyond what remains of their physical fabric. In
doing so, it revealed widespread consensus about the fundamental objective of
sustainable development, but little agreement in relation to the practical strategies
for its implementation, and even less agreement about its validity for heritage sites.
Even so, the literature did indicate support for the use of a long-term and holistic
planning process, and the participation and empowerment of multiple stakeholders
in that process. The paper also considered the increasing utilization of the link
between sustainable development and heritage in public policy. A content analysis
of six World Heritage site management plans then indicated that, despite moves
toward a more sustainable approach at the policy level, there were evident
problems associated with the application of those principles in practice.
The paper identified four key weaknesses—a limited engagement with broader
local, national and global trends, a narrow definition of objectives and weak
development of performance indicators, an inadequate integration of local values
and attitudes into a strategic vision for the site, and stakeholder collaboration
limited to major government and non-government agencies. A model of
sustainable heritage management has been proposed to address these weaknesses.
The model integrates a conventional strategic planning process with the process of
joint decision-making amongst stakeholders found in stakeholder collaboration
and inter-organizational theory.
The study can be criticized as one-dimensional, it is indeed one part of a larger
multi-method case study. However, the findings do provide some insight into the
problems associated with the implementing of sustainable development at heritage
sites. Perhaps the most important lesson from this is that the management process
should be viewed as dynamic, evolving in response to internal and external forces
162
Model for Sustainable Historic Urban Environments
Acknowledgements
The author would like to gratefully acknowledge the two anonymous referees for
their insightful and constructive comments on the initial draft of this article.
References
Aas, C., Ladkin, A. & Fletcher, J. (2005) Stakeholder collaboration and heritage management, Annals of Tourism
Research, 32(1), pp. 28–48.
Agyeman, J. & Evans, T. (2003) Toward sustainability in urban communities: Building equal rights with
sustainable solutions, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 590, pp. 35–53.
Arneil, B. (2006) Diverse Communities: The Problem with Social Capital (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press).
Basiago, A. (1999) Economic, social and environmental sustainability in development theory and urban planning
practice, The Environmentalist, 19(2), pp. 145–161.
Blaenavon Partnership (1999) Management Plan for the Nominated World Heritage Site of Blaenavon Industrial
Landscape (Cwmbran: Blaenavon Partnership).
Bramley, G. & Power, S. (2009) Urban form and social sustainability: The role of density and housing type,
Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 36(1), pp. 30–48.
Brandon, P. & Lombardi, P. (2005) Evaluating Sustainable Development in the Built Environment (Oxford:
Blackwell Science).
Bull, A. C. & Jones, B. (2006) Governance and social capital in urban regeneration: A comparison between
Bristol and Naples, Urban Studies, 43(4), pp. 767–786.
Checkland, P. (1999) Soft Systems Methodology: A 30 Year Retrospective (Chichester: John Wiley).
Checkland, P. & Winter, M. (2006) Process and content: Two ways of using SSM, Journal of the Operational
Research Society, 57(12), pp. 1435–1441.
Chhotray, V. & Stoker, G. (2009) Governance Theory and Practice: A Cross-disciplinary Approach
(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).
City of Bradford Metropolitan District (2000) Saltaire: Draft Management Plan (Bradford: City of Bradford
Metropolitan District).
Cole, D. (2004) Exploring the sustainability of mining heritage tourism, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(6),
pp. 480–494.
Colomb, C. (2007) Unpacking New Labour’s ‘Urban Renaissance’ agenda: Towards a socially sustainable
reurbanization of British cities? Planning, Practice and Research, 22(1), pp. 1–24.
Cornwall and West Devon Mining Landscape World Heritage Site Bid Team (2005) Cornwall and West Devon
Mining Landscape: World Heritage Site Management Plan 2005–2010 (Truro: World Heritage Site Office).
Davidson, J. & Lockwood, M. (2008) Partnerships as instruments of good regional governance: Innovation for
sustainability in Tasmania?, Regional Studies, 42(5), pp. 641–656.
163
Chris Landorf
Davies, J. (2002) The governance of urban regeneration: A critique of the ‘governing without government’ thesis,
Public Administration, 80(2), pp. 301–322.
Derwent Valley Mills Partnership (2003) The Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site Management Plan
(Matlock: Derwent Valley Mills Partnership).
Forrest, R. & Kearns, A. (2001) Social cohesion, social capital and the neighbourhood, Urban Studies, 38(12),
pp. 2125–2143.
Garrod, B. & Fyall, A. (2000) Managing heritage tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, 27(3), pp. 682–708.
Ghobadian, A. & O’Regan, N. (2008) Where do we fit in the swings and roundabouts of strategy?, Journal of
Strategy and Management, 1(1), pp. 5–14.
Hall, D. & Richards, G. (2003) The community: A sustainable concept in tourism development?, in D. Hall &
G. Richards (Eds) Tourism and Sustainable Community Development, pp. 1–13 (London: Routledge).
Hospers, G.-J. (2000) Industrial heritage tourism and regional restructuring in the European Union, European
Planning Studies, 10(3), pp. 397–404.
Hsieh, H.-F. & Shannon, S. (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis, Qualitative Health Research,
15(9), pp. 1277–1288.
Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site Strategy Group (2001) Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site
Management Plan (Telford: Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site Strategy Group).
Johnson, S. (Ed.) (1993) The Earth Summit: The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(London: Graham and Trotman).
Johnson, G., Scholes, K. & Whittington, R. (2008) Exploring Corporate Strategy (Harlow: Pearson).
Jones, C. & Munday, M. (2001) Blaenavon and United Nations World Heritage Site Status: Is conservation of
industrial heritage a road to local economic development?, Regional Studies, 35(6), pp. 585–590.
Kearns, A. & Forrest, R. (2000) Social cohesion and multilevel urban governance, Urban Studies, 37(5),
pp. 995–1017.
Kennett, P. & Forrest, R. (2006) The neighbourhood in a European context, Urban Studies, 43(4), pp. 713–718.
Landorf, C. (2009a) Managing for sustainable tourism: A review of six cultural World Heritage sites, Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 17(1), pp. 53–70.
Landorf, C. (2009b) Developing a framework for sustainable heritage management: A study of UK Industrial
heritage sites, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 15(6), pp. 494–510.
Littig, B. & Griessler, E. (2005) Social sustainability: A catchword between political pragmatism and social
theory, International Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(1/2), pp. 65–79.
Lowndes, V. & Sullivan, H. (2007) How long can you go? Rationales and challenges for neighbourhood
governance, Public Administration, 86(10), pp. 53–74.
McCann, J. (1983) Design guidelines for social problem-solving interventions, The Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 19(2), pp. 177–192.
McLean, S. L., Schultz, D. A. & Steger, M. B. (Eds) (2002) Social Capital: Critical Perspectives on Community
and ‘Bowling Alone’ (New York: New York University Press).
Middleton, A., Murie, A. & Groves, R. (2005) Social capital and neighbourhoods that work, Urban Studies,
42(10), pp. 1711–1738.
Milne, S. & Ateljevic, I. (2001) Tourism, economic development and the global–local nexus, Tourism
Geographies, 3(4), pp. 369–393.
Mintzberg, H. (1994) The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning (New York: Free Press).
Mowforth, M. & Munt, I. (2003) Tourism and Sustainability: New Tourism in the Third World (London:
Routledge).
New Lanark Advisory Group (2003) New Lanark World Heritage Site Management Plan: 2003–2008
Consultation Draft (Edinburgh: Historic Scotland).
Pendlebury, J. (2009) Conservation in the Age of Consensus (London: Routledge).
Roberts, P. (2006) Evaluating regional sustainable development: Approaches, methods and the politics of
analysis, Journal of Environment, Planning and Management, 49(4), pp. 515–532.
Robinson, D. (2005) The search for community cohesion: Key themes and dominant concepts of the public policy
agenda, Urban Studies, 42(8), pp. 1411–1427.
Rodwell, D. (2002) The World Heritage Convention and the exemplary management of complex heritage sites,
Journal of Architectural Conservation, 8(3), pp. 40–60.
Ruhanen, L. (2004) Strategic planning for local tourism destinations: An analysis of tourism plans, Tourism and
Hospitality Planning & Development, 1(3), pp. 239–253.
Rydin, Y., Holman, N. & Wolff, E. (2003) Local sustainability indicators, Local Environment, 8(6), pp. 581–589.
164
Model for Sustainable Historic Urban Environments
Saunders, P., Naidoo, Y. & Griffiths, M. (2007) Towards New Indicators of Disadvantage: Deprivation and
Social Exclusion in Australia (Sydney: Social Science Research Centre).
Simpson, K. (2001) Strategic planning and community involvement as contributors to sustainable tourism
development, Current Issues in Tourism, 4(1), pp. 3–41.
Stubbs, M. (2004) Heritage sustainability: Developing a methodology for the sustainable appraisal of the historic
environment, Planning, Practice & Research, 19(3), pp. 285–305.
Sullivan, S. (2004) Local involvement and traditional practices in the World Heritage system, in: E. de Merode,
R. Smeets & C. Westrik (Eds) World Heritage Papers 13 Linking Universal and Local Values: Managing a
Sustainable Future for World Heritage, pp. 49–55 (Paris: UNESCO).
UNESCO (2005) Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (Paris:
UNESCO).
Viljoen, J. & Dann, S. (2003) Strategic Management: Planning and Implementing Corporate Strategies (Frenchs
Forest: Prentice Hall).
Watson, S. & McCracken, M. (2002) No attraction in strategic thinking: Perceptions on current and future skills
needs for visitor attraction managers, International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(5), pp. 367–378.
Williams, P. (2006) The governance of sustainable development in Wales, Local Environment, 11(3),
pp. 253–267.
Wilson, L. & Boyle, E. (2006) Interorganisational collaboration at UK World Heritage Sites, Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 27(6), pp. 501–523.
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our Common Future (Oxford: Oxford University
Press).
Yin, R. (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage).
165
Copyright of Planning Practice & Research is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or
emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.