Alberta Tahiri
| Armand Krasniqi* | Idriz Kovaçi | Anita Cucović | Thëllëza Latifi Sadrija | Diellza Misini
© 2024 The authors. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
OPEN ACCESS
This paper aims to address the components, role and importance of cultural heritage in the cultural tourism development, analyzing Kosovo and its cultural heritage as a specific case. The favorable geostrategic position and natural resources have made Kosovo, although a small country, stand out with its rich cultural heritage. Currently, Kosovo has (23) cultural heritage assets under permanent protection and about 1590 more under temporary protection. A study has been carried out regarding the impact of Kosovo’s potential for the cultural tourism development and knowledge of cultural heritage on the frequency of tourist visits for cultural purposes. The findings of this study have shown that Kosovo’s potential for the cultural tourism development has an impact on tourist visits for cultural purposes and the higher the level of knowledge about Kosovo’s cultural heritage, the more frequent the tourist visits for cultural purposes. It turned out that Kosovo has sufficient potential for the cultural tourism development and the level of knowledge of the respondents about the cultural heritage of Kosovo is sufficient. Also, it was found that in 70.0% of cases, the frequency of visits to monuments of the cultural and historical heritage of Kosovo is 1-5 times a year.
cultural heritage, Kosovo, preservation and protection, sustainability, tourism, visits
Cultural heritage represents one of the most important drivers for personal development, social cohesion and economic growth in Europe. It is axiomatic that for each age in the course of history experiences differ to a greater or lesser extent. However, in the 21st century, it hardly seems an exaggeration to suggest that the world faces epochal changes that affect every part of society, including the arenas in which cultural heritage is created, held, collected, curated and exhibited or simply exists [1].
It has long been recognized that globalization affects our lives and our communities in both positive and not-so-positive (or perhaps even negative) ways. From a cultural heritage standpoint, we know that globalization has facilitated processes where communities learn more about each other’s cultural heritage through physical and virtual interaction. As a consequence of this is the debate that globalization insinuates hybridization and interferes with our unique identities and our diversity.
Since the dawn of human history, people have left home for a multitude of reasons [2]. One of the earliest forms of heritage tourism was pilgrimage. Early pilgrims, people traveling in search of spiritual experiences or for religious reasons, visited places that were important from a religious or spiritual perspective. Burial sites of famous leaders, places where miracles occurred, or places of mystical significance believed to have healing powers were all seen as prominent destinations for religious travellers. Therefore, the earliest pilgrims visited places of spiritual heritage importance, many with global appeal [2].
Many developing countries have focused on tourism to promote economic growth in economically depressed regions and to improve the socio-economic well-being of their people [3, 4]. Although these countries are economically poor, they are characterized as culturally rich destinations with many ethnic groups, traditions, religions and languages, which constitute a major attraction for millions of tourists. However, when people’s private community and sacred spaces are open to the masses of tourists, these places can experience negative consequences. Most of these consequences or impacts related to heritage tourism are the same in the developed and developing world. However, they tend to be more pronounced in less developed parts of the world [4].
Today, heritage properties and vibrant cultures are among the most popular attractions anywhere. Few countries have tourism industries without cultural heritage products. Even the more ardent sun, sea and sand destinations (e.g., some Caribbean and Pacific islands) also offer elements of cultural heritage for tourist consumption. Almost all package tours include heritage sites and cultural areas are among the most prized destinations among independent travellers as well. It is safe to assume that most tourist attractions and destinations in the world today are based on elements of cultural heritage [2]. In short, heritage tourism encompasses a multitude of motives, resources and experiences and is different for each individual and each place visited [2].
Thus, the purpose of this paper is to address the components, role and importance of cultural heritage in the cultural tourism development. Kosovo is treated as a specific case, respectively its wealth of cultural heritage. In this paper, the necessary information is provided for the readers to become familiar with the cultural heritage assets of Kosovo which are under permanent protection, as well as others which are under temporary protection. So, readers are offered a short and concise profile of Kosovo’s cultural heritage. Likewise, the research model aims to make clear the influence of Kosovo’s potential for the cultural tourism development and the knowledge level about the cultural heritage of persons in the role of tourists on the frequency of tourist visits for cultural purposes.
2.1 Tourism and heritage
People visiting cultural and historical resources is one of the largest, most widespread and fastest growing sectors of the tourism industry today. In fact, heritage tourism appears to be growing much faster than all other forms of tourism, especially in the developing world, and is thus seen as an important potential tool for poverty alleviation and community economic development [4-8]. Heritage is usually claimed to preserve things from the past for future generations. The word “generation” in that phrase reminds us of children so that the phrase becomes analogous to “for our children and our children’s children”. Of course, today’s children are tomorrow’s adults [9]. The model of “future generations” presents heritance as a gift, which we received from our parents and will give to our children [9].
Heritage scholars agree on a basic concept that defines heritage as something we inherit from the past and use in the present. Simply put, history is the past, while heritage is the modern use of the past for tourism and other purposes (e.g., education and community development). In broad terms this includes natural and cultural heritage [2].
2.1.1 Natural and cultural heritage
“The natural and cultural heritage of any nation is a priceless asset, a precious gift that has been inherited from the past and must be kept in trust by the present generation for the generations to come” [10]. Natural heritage includes natural phenomena, such as canyons, rainforests, lakes, rivers, glaciers, mountains, deserts and coastlines. Cultural heritage, on the other hand, is the past created by humanity and its various manifestations [2].
The concept of cultural heritage is subjective and evolves over the years. It is subjective in the sense that cultural heritage consists of the good that the values that prevail in any society at a given time must be sensitive to be protected and preserved as a legacy of the past for future generations [5]. The Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society of 2005 states that “cultural heritage is a group of resources inherited from the past that people identify, regardless of ownership, as a reflection and expression of their constantly evolving values, beliefs, knowledge and traditions” [6].
The cultural heritage we use today includes both tangible and intangible elements. It comes in the form of tangible objects such as buildings, rural landscapes and villages, cities, art collections, objects in museums, historic gardens, handicrafts and antiques, but also includes intangible elements of culture, including music, dance, beliefs, social customs, ceremonies, rituals and folklore. All of these are important heritage components that are used for tourism and other purposes [2]. Figure 1 presents a sample of attractions and types of cultural heritage, respectively, the division of cultural heritage attractions that are part of tangible cultural heritage and those that are part of intangible cultural heritage becomes clear. Often, cultural heritage products developed for tourism promise to provide many socio-economic opportunities for the communities involved, however, tourism can also present a challenge as self-management of the local cultural product and cultural identity can be problematic [7].
In this regard, Salvatore and Lizama [11] state that UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) defines cultural heritage as tangible and intangible. Tangible cultural heritage includes movable items such as paintings, sculptures, coins and manuscripts, and immovable items such as monuments and archaeological sites. It also includes underwater cultural heritage such as shipwrecks, underwater ruins and cities. By its very nature, that is, its physical properties, tangible cultural heritage is visible and easy to discover and distinguish [11]. And as Foote points out, the sustainability of tangible cultural heritage “defines them as communication resources that can be used to transmit information across the boundaries of interpersonal contact” [11, 12].
Also, Salvatore and Lizama [11] refer to UNESCO’s categorization of intangible cultural heritage and say that there are five main areas of intangible cultural heritage, which include: (1) traditions and oral expressions; (2) the performing arts, broadly defined; (3) social practices, rituals and festive events; (4) knowledge and practices related to nature and the universe; and (5) traditional crafts.
Cultural heritage has tremendous potential in terms of its contribution to improving the quality of life for people, understanding the past, helping territorial cohesion, promoting economic growth, opening up employment opportunities and supporting wider developments such as improvements in education and artistic careers [13]. For tangible and intangible cultural heritage to have meaning and power, it must be active, dynamic, used and realized, rather than existing inert and static [14].
The preservation of cultural heritage is as important as the preservation of the natural environment. However, most tourism scholars have focused their discussions of sustainable tourism on the natural world. While some natural areas recover from the impacts of development and regenerate organically, this does not happen with damaged cultural heritage. Built heritage is a non-renewable resource that once destroyed is gone forever. This creates a unique challenge for conservationists and heritage managers, who have long had to deal with hordes of tourists clambering on or vandalizing historically significant sites [4].
Figure 1. A sample of attractions and types of heritage
Source: Timothy [2]. Cultural Heritage and Tourism: An Introduction. Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications, p. 106.
In the report of the General Directorate for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture of the European Commission, published on 05.09.2022, it is stated: “Climate change is directly and indirectly threatening all forms of cultural heritage, whether a World Heritage site or a small pilgrimage chapel in the countryside, an old steel workshop or a historic garden. The most obvious threats stem from extreme climate events, such as heavy rainfall, prolonged heat waves, droughts, strong winds and rising sea levels. As predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, all these threats will increase dramatically in the future. These events have immediate consequences, such as floods, forest fires and erosion, for Europe’s tangible and intangible cultural heritage. Gradual climate change, namely the continuous increase in temperature and fluctuations in temperature and humidity or fluctuations in freeze-thaw cycles, causes degradation and stress in materials, leading to a greater need for restoration and preservation, and as a cause of this, biological degradation caused by microorganisms is more likely to occur” [15]. However, the good news is that more and more countries are beginning to understand the value of sustainable tourism and sustainable development within the context of tourism [4, 16], as well as at local, national and international levels, communities are seeking to manage and preserve their cultural heritage [11].
2.1.2 Cultural heritage tourism
The terms “cultural tourism” and “heritage tourism” are often used in the industry and in scientific writings as two separate but related or overlapping phenomena. Cultural tourism is sometimes used to refer to people visiting or participating in living cultures, contemporary art and music, or other elements of modern culture [2, 17] definition of cultural tourism states: “Cultural tourism is a type of tourism activity in which the primary motivation of the visitor is to learn about, discover, experience and consume the tangible and intangible cultural attractions/products in a tourist destination” (p. 30). These attractions/products relate to a range of distinctive material, intellectual, spiritual and emotional features of a society which include art and architecture, historical and cultural heritage, culinary heritage, literature, music, creative industries and living cultures with the styles of their livelihoods, value systems, beliefs and traditions [17]. On the other hand, some observers suggest that heritage tourism is based on old relics; it tends to occur in rural areas and is more tied to the country, while cultural tourism is dominant in urban areas and is less country-bound. Other researchers have suggested that cultural tourism is more about people trying to build their cultural selves and satisfy their cultural needs by visiting places and observing built heritage, contemporary arts, performances and living cultures [2].
According to McNulty and Koff [18], cultural heritage tourism involves visiting places that are important to the past or present cultural identity of a particular group of people [18]. Cultural heritage tourism provides an opportunity for people to experience their culture in depth, either by visiting attractions, historical or cultural sites, or by participating in cultural activities. As strictly defined by the National Association of State Arts Agencies, “cultural heritage tourism is based on the mosaic of places, traditions, art forms, celebrations and experiences that portray this nation and its people” [18]. The National Trust for Historic Preservation defines heritage tourism as “travel to experience places, artifacts, and activities that authentically represent the stories and people of the past and present, including cultural, historical, and natural resources” [18, 19].
In summary, cultural heritage tourism includes built heritage, lifestyle, ancient artefacts and modern art and culture. While some authors prefer to distinguish between cultural tourism and heritage tourism, the differences are quite subtle and the two terms will be used interchangeably [2].
The case study in Kosovo combines elements of quantitative methodology to understand and evaluate the role and importance of cultural heritage in the development of sustainable tourism in the specific case of Kosovo. This quantitative methodology will help to improve the deep understanding of the impact of cultural heritage on sustainable tourism in Kosovo. By combining interviews, surveys, observations and analysis of documentation, we will be able to obtain a wide range of data that will give us a complete and holistic view of cultural heritage and its role in the development of tourism.
Through this methodology, we aim to understand the role and importance of cultural heritage and the development of cultural tourism in Kosovo. The results of the study will contribute to the improvement of policies and strategies for cultural tourism in the region, promoting the preservation of cultural heritage and quality of the development of tourism in social, economic and environmental terms.
This paper has been compiled based on the review of existing foreign and local literature sources related to cultural heritage and its importance for the tourism development. Literature sources include books, scientific works, reports and decisions that provide accurate information regarding the cultural heritage assets of Kosovo that are under permanent protection and others under temporary protection, analyses and studies that speak about the importance of protection and preservation of monuments and other cultural heritage assets of a country.
For the purpose of the research, primary data were also collected through the questionnaire. The measurement instrument is a structured questionnaire with open and closed questions, with 5 evaluation scales that aim to measure the impact of cultural heritage on cultural tourism in Kosovo. The sample of the research was 100 respondents in the role of people who follow studies in the field of tourism (who are at the beginning or at the end of these studies), connoisseurs of the tourism field and those who have information about the development of this industry in Kosovo, as well as persons in the role of tourists. The purpose of the questionnaire was to see how, according to the respondents, Kosovo's potential for the development of cultural tourism is evaluated, how much information they have about Kosovo's cultural heritage, and how these two affect the tourist visits they undertake for cultural purposes or in other words how often they make such visits. In this way, we have raised two hypotheses as:
H1: Kosovo’s potentials for the cultural tourism development have an impact on tourist visits for cultural purposes.
H2: The higher the knowledge level about the cultural heritage of Kosovo, the more frequent are the tourist visits for cultural purposes.
To test the above hypotheses, the research model was built as follows:
CPV=β₀+β₁ CTP+β₂ KCH+ε (1)
where, CPV: Cultural Purpose Visits; CTP: Cultural Tourism Potentials; KCH: Knowledge about Cultural Heritage; β₀: a constant coefficient that shows what the value of CPV will be when CTP and KCH=0; β₁: the coefficient that shows what the value of CPV will be when CTP changes by 1 unit, keeping KCH constant; β₂: the coefficient that shows what the value of CPV will be when KCH changes by 1 unit, keeping CTP constant; ε: the error term (stochastic variable) where all other factors that may have an impact on CPV, but which were not taken into account in the research model, are summed up.
4.1 The cultural heritage of Kosovo
Cultural heritage is one of the most important and widespread tourism resources in the world, and heritage tourism is one of the most prominent forms of tourism today. Many countries look to the built environment or other forms of heritage for their socio-economic development through tourism [20]. Tourism is recognized as a tool that can help preserve tangible and intangible elements of indigenous cultural heritage, including languages, stories, song, art, dance, hunting methods, rituals and customs [21].
Every country on the globe has heritage and many regions have used the cultural past as a tool for economic development through tourism [20] The same can be said for Kosovo, which, although a small country, with an area of 10,905.25 km² [22] and with a population of 1,798,186 inhabitants, according to the 2021 population estimate [23] is quite rich in cultural heritage. The favourable geostrategic position as well as the rich natural resources were ideal for the development of life since prehistoric times, evidenced by the traces of hundreds of archaeological sites discovered and identified throughout Kosovo, which proudly present its rich archaeological heritage [24]. In the introductory part of the Archaeological Guide of Kosovo (2012) it is stated that the earliest traces documented in the territory of Kosovo belong to the Stone Age.
The cultural heritage of Kosovo is the expression and creativity of life realities developed over a period of more than eight thousand years, from prehistory to the present day. This wealth inherited with unique artistic, aesthetic, historical values and traditional characteristics is illustrated by the rich diversity of architectural, archaeological, movable and spiritual heritage, as well as the rich cultural landscape [25, 26]. The “List of Cultural Heritage Assets for Permanent Protection” and the “List of Cultural Heritage for Temporary Protection” are published on the MCYS (Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport) official website. In the decision dated 10.10.2016, through which the List of Cultural Heritage assets for Permanent Protection was approved, according to the proposals reviewed by the KCCH (Kosovo Council for Cultural Heritage), twenty-three (23) cultural heritage assets are included, respectively [27].
On the other hand, the List of Cultural Heritage for Temporary Protection was approved by the decision dated 08.10.2021. This is quite a long list that includes a large number of cultural heritage assets divided into several categories such as [28].
Cultural heritage was defined as one of the priority sectors of the Government of the Republic of Kosovo in the Program of the Government of the Republic of Kosovo 2015-2018 and in the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework 2015-2018 [25]. The MCYS from 2008-2018 has planned more than 100 capital projects which are reflected in the Budget Laws of the Republic of Kosovo for each year. The total value of these projects is €20,429,242.00 (euro), which are intended for conservation and restoration interventions, archaeological excavations, emergency interventions, marking of cultural heritage, promotion of cultural heritage, return of archaeological and ethnological treasures from Serbia, spiritual heritage, etc. The MCYS for cultural heritage for the period 2008-2018 has planned different capital projects for each year specifying the allocation of the budget according to the destination in separate budget lines [29]. According to Bowitz and Ibenholt [30], investments in cultural heritage (and other forms of culture) are often claimed to be beneficial to a local economy, not only in terms of cultural consumption, but also in the form of increased employment and income.
Table 1 presents the budget for Kosovo’s cultural heritage projects over the period of 2008-2018. Based on the graphic presentation of this budget in Figure 2, we see that from 2008-2010 there was an increase in the budget invested in cultural heritage, in the years 2011-2013 a decrease in the budget is observed, which is followed by a slight increase in 2014 and again a decrease in 2015. The period of the last three years, namely 2016-2018, is characterized by a significant increase in the budget invested in the cultural heritage projects of Kosovo, an increase through which in 2018 the budget reached the amount €4,020,000.00.
Table 1. Budget for cultural heritage projects by year (2008-2018)
|
Year |
Amount € |
|
2008 |
1,128,801.00 |
|
2009 |
1,636,530.00 |
|
2010 |
1,706,604.00 |
|
2011 |
1,586,604.00 |
|
2012 |
1,445,293.00 |
|
2013 |
1,217,683.00 |
|
2014 |
1,452,683.00 |
|
2015 |
1,172,000.00 |
|
2016 |
1,937,360.00 |
|
2017 |
3,125,684.00 |
|
2018 |
4,020,000.00 |
|
Total |
20,429,242.00 |
Source: KCCH (2018). Report on Projects Invested in Cultural Heritage by MCYS 2008-2018 (Analysis of the current state of cultural heritage). Prishtina: Kosovo Council for the Cultural Heritage, p. 5.
Figure 2. Budget for cultural heritage projects by year (2008-2018)
Source: KCCH (2018). Report on Projects Invested in Cultural Heritage by MCYS 2008-2018 (Analysis of the current state of cultural heritage). Prishtina: Kosovo Council for the Cultural Heritage, p. 5.
Table 2 presents the budget for cultural heritage projects by category, where we see that there are four categories of invested projects, namely projects for architectural cultural heritage, projects for archaeological cultural heritage, other projects and projects for spiritual cultural heritage.
Table 2. Budget for cultural heritage projects by category (2008-2018)
|
Category |
Amount € |
|
Architectural |
9,739,868.00 |
|
Archaeological |
5,510,000.00 |
|
Other projects |
4,299,374.00 |
|
Spiritual heritance |
880,000.00 |
|
Total |
20,429,242.00 |
Source: KCCH (2018). Report on Projects Invested in Cultural Heritage by MCYS 2008-2018 (Analysis of the current state of cultural heritage). Prishtina: Kosovo Council for the Cultural Heritage, p. 6.
To see the percentage (%) of the budget invested in the projects in question, we refer to Figure 3. From the graph we see that the largest part of the budget, 48% of the total budget, is invested in projects for architectural heritage, 27% of the budget is invested in archaeological heritage projects, 21% of the total budget is invested in other cultural heritage projects, and 4% of the budget is invested in spiritual heritage projects.
Figure 3. Budget for cultural heritage projects by category (2008-2018)
Source: KCCH (2018). Report on Projects Invested in Cultural Heritage by MCYS 2008-2018 (Analysis of the current state of cultural heritage). Pristina: Kosovo Council for the Cultural Heritage, p. 6.
Regarding the preservation and protection of the cultural heritage of the Republic of Kosovo, in the document “National Strategy for Cultural Heritage 2017-2027” it is stated that: “Above all, the Republic of Kosovo ensures the preservation and protection of the cultural and religious heritage, as is defined in article 9 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo. Moreover, it is obliged to promote the preservation of the cultural and religious heritage of all communities, as well as having special obligations to ensure the effective protection of all objects and monuments of cultural and religious importance for the communities, as defined in the article 58, paragraph 5 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo” (p. 15).
4.2 Results of the research model
A). The impact of the cultural tourism potentials and the knowledge of tourists about the cultural heritage of Kosovo on tourist visits for cultural purposes
This part presents the results from the primary data and the results of the research model which is about the impact of the potentials that Kosovo has for the cultural tourism development and the knowledge of tourists about cultural heritage in tourist visits for cultural purposes, in other words in the frequency of these visits.
Table 3 presents the demographic data for the respondents, such as: gender, age, level of education and economic status.
Based on the results of Table 4, we note that the correlation coefficient (R) has a value of 0.251, which means that the variables included in the research model have a correlation of 25.1%, the coefficient of determination (R²) turned out to be 0.063 and it means that the independent variables (CTP and KCH) explain the dependent variable (CPV) at a level of 6.3%. The remaining part, namely the error term or the stochastic variable, includes all other factors that exert influence on CPV, but which were not taken into account in this research model since the focus was on analysing the impact of CTP and KHC on CPV. The results show that the research model is statistically reliable and acceptable since Sig. F Change=0.042, because this value is lower than the standard p value of 0.05, and in the research model there is no autocorrelation or interdependence between independent variables based on the resulting value of the Durbin-Watson coefficient, which is 2.166, so it is within the preferable range of 1.5 - 2.5. Also, the fact that the research model is reliable is proven by the result in Table 5 where Sig.=0.042.
Table 6 shows the results of the model coefficients and their significance. According to the obtained results we say that: CTP has a negative impact on CPV, but such a statement is incorrect because p = 0.434 > 0.05, and KCH has a negative impact on CPV, but again such a thing is incorrect because p = 0.099 > 0.05. So, in both cases the opposite is proven, which means that CTP and KCH have a positive impact on CPV. More broadly, the potential that Kosovo has for the development of cultural tourism and the knowledge that tourists have about Kosovo’s cultural heritage influence the organization of visits for cultural purposes.
So, the high touristic potential that Kosovo has for the cultural tourism development means that it is visited by local and foreign tourists, as well as the higher the knowledge of tourists about the cultural heritage of Kosovo, the more frequent are the visits for cultural purposes. From here we can say that the two hypotheses raised, respectively H1: “Kosovo’s potentials for the cultural tourism development have an impact on tourist visits for cultural purposes” and H2: “The higher the level of knowledge about the cultural heritage of Kosovo, the most frequent are tourist visits for cultural purposes”, are proven to be correct.
After we also saw the resulting values of the research model coefficients, our model takes the form:
$\mathrm{C P V}=2.792-0.133 \mathrm{CTP}-0.194 \mathrm{KCH}+\varepsilon$ (2)
Table 3. Demographic data for respondents
|
Variable |
Categories |
Frequency |
Per cent |
|
Gender |
M |
43 |
43.0 |
|
F |
57 |
57.0 |
|
|
Total |
100 |
100.0 |
|
|
Age |
Less than 20 years old |
8 |
8.0 |
|
20-30 years old |
46 |
46.0 |
|
|
31-40 years old |
20 |
20.0 |
|
|
41-50 years old |
15 |
15.0 |
|
|
61-65 years old |
9 |
9.0 |
|
|
Over 65 years old |
2 |
2.0 |
|
|
Total |
100 |
100.0 |
|
|
Education Level |
Bachelor Degree |
53 |
53.0 |
|
Master Degree |
33 |
33.0 |
|
|
PhD Studies |
14 |
14.0 |
|
|
Total |
100 |
100.0 |
|
|
Economic Status |
Student |
22 |
22.0 |
|
Unemployed |
17 |
17.0 |
|
|
Employed |
56 |
56.0 |
|
|
Self-employed |
5 |
5.0 |
|
|
Total |
100 |
100.0 |
Source: Authors (2022)
Table 4. Model summary
|
Model Summaryb |
||||||||||
|
Model |
R |
R Square |
Adjusted R Square |
Std. Error of the Estimate |
Change Statistics |
Durbin-Watson |
||||
|
R Square Change |
F Change |
df1 |
df2 |
Sig. F Change |
||||||
|
1 |
.251a |
.063 |
.044 |
1.021 |
.063 |
3.266 |
2 |
97 |
.042 |
2.166 |
|
a. Predictors: (Constant), KCH, CTP |
||||||||||
|
b. Dependent Variable: CPV |
||||||||||
Source: Authors’ calculations in SPSS software (2022)
Table 5. ANOVA
|
ANOVAa |
||||||
|
Model |
Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Square |
F |
Sig. |
|
|
1 |
Regression |
6.815 |
2 |
3.407 |
3.266 |
.042b |
|
Residual |
101.185 |
97 |
1.043 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
108.000 |
99 |
|
|
|
|
|
a. Dependent Variable: CPV |
||||||
|
b. Predictors: (Constant), KCH, CTP |
||||||
Source: Authors’ calculations in SPSS software (2022)
Table 6. Research model coefficients
|
Coefficientsa |
||||||||
|
Model |
Unstandardized Coefficients |
Standardized Coefficients |
t |
Sig. |
Collinearity Statistics |
|||
|
B |
Std. Error |
Beta |
Tolerance |
VIF |
||||
|
1 |
(Constant) |
2.792 |
.588 |
|
4.745 |
.000 |
|
|
|
CTP |
-.133 |
.169 |
-.090 |
-.785 |
.434 |
.728 |
1.374 |
|
|
KCH |
-.194 |
.116 |
-.192 |
-1.666 |
.099 |
.728 |
1.374 |
|
|
a. Dependent Variable: CPV |
||||||||
Source: Authors’ calculations in SPSS software (2022)
The values of the Tolerance and VIF (Variance Inflation Factor) coefficients, in the last column of Table 6, test the presence or absence of autocorrelation in the research model. In the model, there is no autocorrelation if the value of the Tolerance coefficient is lower than 5 and the value of the VIF coefficient is higher than 0.2, and based on the results it is proven that there is no autocorrelation in this research model.
Figure 4 presents the results related to the statement that “tourism is one of the sectors with a high impact on the economic growth of the country”, for which it was found that in 2.0% of cases the respondents disagreed with such a statement, in 9.0% of cases they had a neutral attitude, in 50% of cases they agreed and in 39% of cases they expressed that they strongly agree.
Figure 5 shows the results obtained from the expression of the opinions of the respondents regarding the impact of the tourism industry development on employment and we say that 2.0% of the respondents stated that the development of the tourism industry does not affect employment at all, 7.0% of the respondents said that tourism has a little effect on the increase in employment, 19.0% of the respondents stated that tourism has an average impact on the creation of new jobs, 39.0% agreed that the development of tourism has a sufficient impact on the increase in employment and 33.0% of them agreed that the impact of tourism on employment is high.
When the respondents were asked to give their opinion regarding the fact that “the tourism sector development will bring benefit to the country in the future”, according to the results of Figure 6, 3.0% of them disagreed with such a thing, 11.0% had a neutral attitude towards this issue, 37.0% agreed and 49.0% strongly agreed with this statement (see Figure 6).
Figure 4. Tourism and economic growth
Figure 5. Tourism and employment
Figure 6. Tourism and the future
From the respondents point of view, who were persons in the role of tourists or even those who were familiar with the field of tourism, it was found that 34.0% of them think that cultural tourism in Kosovo is developed at a satisfactory level, while 66.0% of think the opposite (see Figure 7). When they were asked how much they know about the cultural heritage of Kosovo (Figure 8), 4.0% of them said that they have no knowledge at all about such an aspect, 13.0% said that they know some main aspects of the cultural heritage of Kosovo, 37.0 % declared that they know the cultural heritage on average, 30.0% had sufficient knowledge and 16.0% knew the cultural heritage of Kosovo very well, so the latter were interested and had researched and found more detailed information about the cultural heritage of Kosovo and the cultural tourism development.
Figure 7. Cultural tourism development level
Figure 8. Knowledge about heritance
Among other things, the respondents were asked what they think about the factors that have the greatest impact on the cultural tourism development in Kosovo, among the alternatives presented, it was found that in such an aspect there is an impact of:
• Cultural heritage, in 11.0% of cases;
• Monuments and historical values, in 14.0% of cases;
• Various archaeological discoveries, in 4.0% of cases;
• All three factors above, in 44.0% of cases;
• Cultural heritage and historical monuments and values, in 20.0% of cases;
• Cultural heritage and various archaeological discoveries, in 2.0% of cases;
• Historical monuments and values and various archaeological discoveries, in 5.0% of cases.
For the statement that “Kosovo has sufficient potential for the cultural tourism development”, the results are given in Figure 9. Regarding this, 2.0% of respondents disagreed, 19.0% had a neutral opinion, 56.0% agreed and 23.0% strongly agreed. Whereas, regarding the frequency of visits to monuments of the cultural and historical heritage of Kosovo, i.e. visits for cultural purposes, it was found that 12.0% of the respondents never make such visits (they are tourists who visit tourist places for the purpose of entertainment, recreation, health and so on, but do not make visits for cultural purposes), 70.0% of respondents make visits for cultural purposes 1-5 times a year, 12.0% of them make such visits 6-10 times a year and the rest 6.0% visit monuments of the cultural and historical heritage of Kosovo more than 10 times a year (see Figure 10).
Figure 9. Potentials of cultural tourism
Figure 10. Visits for cultural purposes
In this paper, the components, role and importance of cultural heritage in the cultural tourism development were discussed. In addition to the theoretical treatment of the topic, the case of Kosovo was treated in more detail, respectively its wealth of cultural heritage. From what we saw, we understood that based on the report of the Kosovo Council for the Cultural Heritage, the total budget allocated for cultural heritage projects for the period 2008-2018 was €20,429,242.00, which includes several categories such as: projects for architectural, archaeological cultural heritage, other projects and projects for spiritual heritage. Kosovo, although a small country, stands out for its rich cultural heritage. This wealth has been provided by the favourable geostrategic position and the natural resources which have enabled life development in different areas since the early periods which have left their mark on the cultural heritage of Kosovo. The Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sports publishes the “List of Cultural Heritage Assets for Permanent Protection” and the “List of Cultural Heritage for Temporary Protection” with the decisions it makes. Thus, the “List of Cultural Heritage Assets for Permanent Protection” contains twenty-three (23) assets and the “List of Cultural Heritage for Temporary Protection” contains a total of about 1590 assets divided according to the categories we saw above.
Another important aspect that was addressed in this paper was the influence of the potential that Kosovo has for the cultural tourism development and the knowledge of tourists about cultural heritage on tourist visits for cultural purposes or in other words on the frequency of these visits. In this regard, it has been found that Kosovo’s potential for the development of cultural tourism has an impact on tourist visits for cultural purposes and the higher the level of knowledge about the cultural heritage of Kosovo, the more frequent the tourist visits for cultural purposes.
Also, it is worth mentioning that from the respondents point of view, it was found that Kosovo has sufficient potential for the cultural tourism development, as most of them agreed with such a statement. On the other hand, the respondents level of knowledge about the cultural heritage of Kosovo, taken as a whole, is estimated to be above average, or in other words, sufficient to have the necessary information when they want to make tourist visits for cultural purposes. As for the frequency of visits to monuments of the cultural and historical heritage of Kosovo, i.e. visits for cultural purposes, it was found that the majority (70.0%) of them make such visits 1-5 times a year.
[1] Borowiecki, K.J., Forbes, N., Fresa, A. (2016). Cultural Heritage in a Changing World. Switzerland: Springer.
[2] Timothy, D.J. (2011). Cultural Heritage and Tourism: An Introduction. Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.
[3] Nyaupane, G.P., Morais, D.B., Dowler, L. (2006). The role of community involvement and number/type of visitors on tourism impacts: A controlled comparison of Annapurna, Nepal and Northwest Yunnan, China. Tourism Management, 27(6): 1373-1385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2005.12.013
[4] Timothy, D.J., Nyaupane, G.P. (2009). Cultural Heritage and Tourism in the Developing World: A Regional Perspective. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
[5] Álvarez-García, J., Maldonado-Erazo, C.P., Del Río-Rama, M.D.L.C., Castellano-Álvarez, F.J. (2019). Cultural heritage and tourism basis for regional development: Mapping of scientific coverage. Sustainability, 11(21): 6034. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216034
[6] Messenger, P.M., Smith, G.S. (2010). Cultural Heritage Management: A Global Perspective. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
[7] Ruhanen, L., Whitford, M. (2019). Cultural heritage and indigenous tourism. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 14(3): 179-191. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2019.1581788
[8] UNWTO. (2005). Cultural tourism and poverty alleviation: The asia-pacific perspective. Madrid: World Tourism Organization.
[9] May, S. (2020). Heritage, thrift, and our children’s children. In Cultural Heritage and the Future, pp. 46-58.
[10] Droste zu Hülshoff, B. (2006). A gift from the past to the future: Natural and cultural world heritage. In Sixty Years of Science at UNESCO 1945-2005. UNESCO: Paris, France, pp. 389-400.
[11] Salvatore, C.L., Lizama, J.T. (2018). Cultural heritage components. In Cultural Heritage Care and Management: Theory and Practice. USA: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 3-16.
[12] Foote, K.E. (1990). To remember and forget: Archives, memory, and culture. The American Archivist, 53(3): 378-392. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40293469
[13] Borowiecki, K.J., Forbes, N., Fresa, A. (2016). Cultural Heritage in a Changing World. Switzerland: Springer.
[14] Silverman, H., Ruggles, D.F. (2007). Cultural heritage and human rights. In Cultural Heritage and Human Rights. New York, USA: Springer, pp. 3-22.
[15] European Commission. (2022). Strengthening cultural heritage resilience for climate change: Where the european green deal meets cultural heritage. publications office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/44688, accessed on Nov. 9, 2022.
[16] Butler, R.W. (1999). Sustainable tourism: A state‐of‐the‐art review. Tourism Geographies, 1(1): 7-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616689908721291
[17] UNWTO. (2019). UNWTO tourism definitions. UNWTO: Madrid. https://doi.org/10.18111/9789284420858
[18] McNulty, R., Koff, R. (2014). Cultural Heritage Tourism. Partners for Livable Communities: Washington, DC.
[19] Hargrove, C. (2020). What is the difference between cultural tourism and heritage tourism? Hargrove International. https://hargroveinternational.com/faqs/what-is-the-difference-between-cultural-tourism-and-heritage-tourism/, accessed on Nov. 30, 2022.
[20] Timothy, D.J. (2014). Contemporary cultural heritage and tourism: Development issues and emerging trends. Public Archaeology, 13(1-3): 30-47. https://doi.org/10.1179/1465518714Z.00000000052
[21] Ruhanen, L., Whitford, M. (2019). Cultural heritage and Indigenous tourism. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 14(3): 179-191.
[22] KAS. (2022). Series 1: General Statistics - Kosovo in Figures 2021. KAS: Prishtina. https://ask.rks-gov.net/media/6933/kosova-n%C3%AB-shifra-2021.pdf.
[23] KAS. (2022). Series 5: Social Statistics - Assessment: Population of Kosovo 2021. KAS: Prishtina. https://ask.rks-gov.net/media/6873/vlersimi-i-popullesise-ne-kosove-2021-final.pdf.
[24] Berisha, M. (2012). Archaeological guide of Kosovo. Prishtina: Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport, Archaeological Institute of Kosovo. https://www.mkrs-ks.org/repository/docs/drafti_i_guides_-anglisht_final.pdf.
[25] Jerliu, F. (2016). National strategy for cultural heritage 2017-2027. Prishtina: Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport. https://www.mkrs-ks.org/repository/docs/eng_strategy_for_heritage.pdf.
[26] MCYS. (2022). Department of heritage. https://www.mkrs-ks.org/?page=2,10, accessed on Sep. 9, 2022.
[27] MCYS. (2016). Cultural heritage assets list for permanent protection. https://www.mkrs-ks.org/repository/docs/Mbrojtja_e_perhershme.pdf, accessed on Sep. 9, 2022.
[28] MCYS. (2021). Cultural heritage list for temporary protection 2021-2022. Retrieved from: https://www.mkrs-ks.org/repository/docs/Vendimi_me_regjister_2021-2022.pdf, accessed on Sep. 6, 2022.
[29] KCCH. (2018). Report on Projects Invested in Cultural Heritage by MCYS 2008-2018 (Analysis of the current state of cultural heritage). Pristina: Kosovo Council for the Cultural Heritage. https://kktk.rks-gov.net/UserFiles/PublishedDocuments/3/c6193bca-3064-4d55-be5b-b3ea26861ba5636935253623245412Raporti_18.03.2019.pdf.
[30] Bowitz, E., Ibenholt, K. (2009). Economic impacts of cultural heritage - Research and perspectives. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 10(1): 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2008.09.002
