Protection and Promotion — Striking a Balance
Heritage and Tourism Symposium, November 8, 2019
by Rebecca Otowa
This past November 8, Writers in Kyoto hosted the Heritage and Tourism Symposium with four guest speakers. Over 80 people attended the event, including WiK members and concerned members of the general public, and many interesting points were raised.
The first to speak was the founder of WiK, John Dougill, author of Japan’s World Heritage Sites. He spoke about the sites (WHS) in Japan, which now number 23. The reason so many sites have been designated, especially in recent years, is thought to be that Japan recognizes the importance of the WHS system and wishes to be seen as a player of the world stage. (Also, WHS strictures were loosened to allow the inclusion of sites of the original design but not comprised of the original materials — a change which allowed wood-intensive Japan to put forward buildings that have been rebuilt after fire.)
John Dougill spent a couple of years researching his book, visiting and photographing all the sites from Shiretoko Peninsula in the north to Okinawa in the south, and mentioned as his favorite the Ogasawara Islands, also known as “the Galapagos of the Far East”, with many species of unusual flora and fauna. His conclusions were:
1) Japan is 80% mountain land with much spectacular scenery. This natural heritage should be more widely publicized. Besides Ogasawara Islands in this context he mentioned Yakushima, also Mt. Fuji and three sites on Kii Peninsula, which could be described as both natural and cultural sites.
2) The regional impact of having a location designated as a WHS can be both positive and negative. On the plus side, one can cite local prestige, increased revenue and increased visibility and tourist flow. Negatives include the lack of flexibility to modernize (WHS are expected to be kept in their original condition) and the transformation of the entire area into a tourist destination, with all the accompanying upsets for residents and environment. In this connection it was mentioned that WHS could benefit from some sort of ranking system based on the size and accessibility of the sites.
3) Tourist Potential — The upcoming designation of Ancient Kamakura as a WHS raises the question, does this area really need more tourist promotion, access or visibility? The resulting increase in “inbound” tourism doesn’t necessarily benefit the locals. Amami-Oshima, indeed, is planning construction of a Marine Park and even the incursion of huge cruise ships into a fragile ecosystem with endangered species. How to strike a balance between protection and promotion? This emerged as a key issue in the symposium.
The second speaker was Amy Chavez, longtime resident of Shiraishi Island in the Inland Sea and author of Best Behavior in Japan. The emphasis of her talk was on understanding and action. She pointed out that manners are not the same as sensitivity to the mores of another culture, though they may be related. Tourists need to be taught about the differences in how things are done — they can’t be expected to know that some of the things they do unconsciously are resulting in bad feeling among the locals. In the primarily Muslim country of Indonesia, which she cited as an example, people are very sensitive about the importance of the head, so that no one ever touches the head of a child, motorcycle helmets are never placed on the ground, and there is a resistance to multilevel dwellings because someone’s feet are walking around above one’s head. Such things are important to a culture. A similar situation in Japan might be that in the West, people usually expect someone else to take care of their personal trash, whereas Japanese people learn from an early age to manage it themselves. On the ground in tourist areas, Amy suggested there is more need for hands-on control. She mentioned three ideas for this.
1) “Tourist Aides”, people in uniform who patrol crowded tourist areas and gently remind people to follow the (posted) rules.
2) Stricter checking of tour guide licenses and making sure the guides understand that they are responsible for the behavior of their group (people in groups are much more likely to misbehave than people who travel alone).
3) “Parking lot” systems which prevent more than a certain number of people entering a tourist site at one time. If others want to enter, some people must leave. To this last I would like to add that a “buffer” number is a good idea, and that the capacity number be chosen carefully to preserve the ambience of the site. This kind of restriction is already being practiced in tourist venues in Europe.
The third speaker, Murakami Kayo, from the Kyoto office of the Agency for Cultural Affairs, was substituting at short notice for Hoshino Akie who was unfortunately unable to attend. She said that since 2003 there has been a push for the country to become tourism-oriented in order to “Raise Up the Country”, and mentioned the importance of regional promotion, with the recent shift in emphasis from regions being told what to do by the central government to regions being responsible for their own tourism promotion. This would include regions deciding for themselves what would be attractive to tourists and figuring out how to draw tourists who like diversity, both to improve the economic situation of regions and to take pressure off the heavily visited central sites. The creative use of regional characteristics like food and the rediscovery of interesting places both natural and cultural can be instrumental in this. She talked about the need for balance between overseas tourists and Japanese tourists, who may dislike sharing the tourist sites with foreigners, resulting in cancellations. Also she spoke of “carrying capacity” which is the number of tourists that can safely be admitted to a site in a given time, in order to ensure the site is not damaged by the sheer physical pressure of the numbers. For example, the Tomioka Silk Mill, opened since its designation as a WHS since 2014, has been used for impact studies including deterioration of buildings resulting from changes in air quality etc. In a word, cultural properties are as fragile as natural environments, and it is necessary to set up reasonable capacity restrictions in order to protect the sites from damage.
The final speaker was Alex Kerr, award-winning author of books about changes in Japan such as Lost Japan, Dogs and Demons and Another Kyoto, and expert on the effects of tourism and suggestions for management. Coiner of the term “UNESCO-cide”, he nevertheless opines that tourism is the last hope for many areas of Japan. He cites the village of Iya Valley in Shikoku, which he has worked to revivify by remodeling old houses and turning them into guest houses. There are now about 20 million abandoned houses in Japan, most of them in outlying regional areas, and he has initiated some projects to restore old houses in this way, adding the caveat that the regions themselves must be comfortable with the renovations. Alex emphasized that in tourism, management is key, and that the quality of the experience both for tourists and locals depends on systems of management and the desirability of a shift, now, from promotion to management especially in heavily touristed areas. In the Nishiki shopping arcade of Kyoto, for instance, locals have stopped going there to shop because the wares sold have largely changed to suit the tastes and demands of the tourists who flock through there. Thus the very things the tourists have come to see are disappearing. The vendors themselves need to control their products as is done in many markets etc. in Europe. Management of numbers also needs to be carried out, prior reservations which limit numbers being one of the tested methods for this. Alex cited several adverse effects and characteristics now being observed as tourist numbers soar:
1) Zero Dollar Tourism wherein all amenities and services are provided by the tour companies of the country of origin, with the result that many tourists arrive but don’t spend much money at the site.
2) False advertising — tourists may complain that the situation at tourist sites isn’t the same as the image they visualized with the help of promotional material, e.g. Mt. Fuji, whose climbing path is overcrowded and choked with refuse.
3) The myth of convenience, seen in places where large parking lots are built, intended to be more convenient for the tourist site itself, while the nearby shopping street, formerly an integral part of the site experience, languishes unvisited.
4) Poorly designed and placed signage, and oversignage. He showed slides of various tourist sites sporting forests of signs telling people to do this or that, the attachment of signs to ancient pillars which are part of National Treasure sites, and signs which repeat the same message over and over. He pointed out that the look of the site is spoiled by the signage which may send the message that visitors don’t have to respect the site, resulting in litter and bad behavior.
In conclusion Alex spoke of the need for management with emphasis on the quality of the experience, which does not necessarily arise by itself from a day-tripper mentality. This is the result of counting the simple numbers of tourists in and out, and not allowing them the time and room to feel respect and forge their own personal experience from the visit.
The event concluded with a lively question-and-answer period, some of the main points raised being the importance of liaison between the central government and local communities, establishment of proper consultants for regional tourism, and management of heavily visited sites to respect the reality of the carrying capacity.
It is to be hoped that a follow-up event will be organized to discuss further this complex and multi-faceted topic, and that the conclusions reached and the constructive suggestions made will slowly but surely trickle out into the general society.
