To πρώτο άρθρο της καθηγήτριας μας στο ΕΑΠ κυρίας Ευγενίας Μπιτσάνη (από μία σειρά άρθρων που θα αναδημοσιευσουμε) από την ιταλική ιστοσελίδα www.nelfuturo.com.
Having ‘globalization’ as an excuse, nowadays populations encounter a catalysis of the social capital and not only the state’s freedom and independence is aimed to be limited -even in Europe which gave birth to it as a concept, and to which, has long before indisputably offered proof of economic success and performace).
In the other side economic globalization has brought significant changes in the city of the 21st century, arguing for a different model of development and sustainability which is based on the city’s cultural development and socioeconomic as well.
Cities are firstly defined as alternative position settings of global capital which results in a competition of one with the other-cities all over the world that compete to attract tourists. Their sustainability mainly depends on their economic activity on the tertiary/service sector -within this horizon, contemporary cities aim to raise their attractiveness; such attractiveness, is mainly based on economic factors but also territorial ones and is associated with the capital market -with the influx of tourists and the increase of visitors’ numbers- or the economic/investing one -with the location of enterprises and multinational branches, thus, the influx of the new residents -employees of these businesses. The social structure of cities incorporates contemporary citizens as potential consumers who move between urban centers which strive to attract them with the form of new cultural industries, consumer goods, services and entertainment.
To this new reality where the capitalist logic of the offer and demand prevails, the city is no longer managed in the traditional way oriented in local problem solving issues for the improvement of the quality of residents’ life. Local and regional authorities function under entrepreneural standards where the ‘product’ city, should sell in order to be sustainable; at the same time, it should preserve its internal social cohesion and its identity bringing visitors, residents, stakeholders together (in other words, all its people) via collective memory and social intercultural dialogue.
Traditionally, a variety of people of different background and of professional orientation are associated with cultural tourism, such as officers of museums, picture galleries, local government, tourist information centers, advertisers, guides, archaeologists and architects. The local income is reinforced since the local cultural capital attracts more affluent tourists who choose longer vacations, another source of tax income is created and there is raise of the foreign exchange, not to mention the reinforcement of the local pride of the local community.
Furthermore, through cultural tourism new services develop and the already existing ones are improved substantially contributing to the quality of life of the inhabitants. Special care is provided to the health sector and districts are patrolled.
In this horizon, we suggest the balance between the social and business profile of the modern cities and regions reconstructing its profile and focusing on the most contemporary intercultural identity on the basis of which cultural tourism planning is created.