文化遗产保护和旅游经济外文文献翻译2019中英文

文化遗产保护和旅游经济外文文献翻译中英文2019

英文

The Economy of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Conservation

Patin Valery

1. The economy of cultural heritage, a recent theoretical approach

Awareness of the economic role of cultural heritage is relatively recent. It principally stems from the rapid growth of tourism (roughly 1 billion international tourists worldwide in 2010), which is irrigating this sector intensely. This new approach entails reviewing the traditional status of cultural heritage, which until recently was partly not subject to the usual rules of competition-based economy. Cultural heritage is now considered as a form of enterprise and, especially, is solicited to become a key instrument to increase local development. Beyond direct site revenue (ticketing and ancillary revenue), expenditure on nearby facilities and services provides the most resources. These resources encompass indirect expenditure (purchases to companies working directly with the sites) and induced expenditure (in facilities near the sites, such as restaurants, shops and hotels, on services, and real-estate acquisitions).

2. Financing and managing cultural heritage

2.1 The new trends

The relative economic autonomy that cultural heritage recently acquired, paired with broader megatrends (the economic downturn and globalization), has stretched the financial constraints that weighed on cultural assets. The institutions - the largest ones, principally - have embarked on a wide variety of initiatives to generate new resources. Engineering and franchises are two examples. The Louvre Museum, Guggenheim Foundation and Beau Bourg Centre are supporting the creation of new museums that will use their names in exchange for substantial compensation. Others, which are not creating new institutions, are letting outworks of art on long-term leases, either in existing museums (e.g., leases of works of art from the Louvre Museum to the Atlanta Museum, USA) or in newly-built museumsThe obvious increase in admission prices,

in particular for temporary exhibitions (which sidestep the rule of free admission for people under 18 in France) is another clear sign. The larger business areas in cultural sites are also driving this movement. Large-scale works in Europe's leading museums (the Louvre, British Museum and Prado) led to noticeable extensions in shop, café and restaurant areas. Managing derived rights (image) more efficiently via international photo banks (Corbis) has also opened up new revenue streams. Large-scale temporary exhibitions, which often generate net profits besides encouraging people to visit the permanent collections as well, are now commonplace.

We can also see a concurrent and symmetrical trend as regards the financing practices. French legislation is adjusting itself to promote private-sector financing (laws passed in 2003 and 2008) via patronage and associated management conditions. From this perspective. The use of subsidiary revenue earmarked for cultural heritage is developing, belying the principle that bans allocating tax revenue such as taxes on online gambling (poker), based on a model involving levies in several countries, and in the UK in particular (the Lottery Fund). The para-fiscal option that is already being used to acquire and protect natural areas (Departmental Tax for Sensitive Natural Areas) does not yet seem to be making significant inroads as regards cultural-heritage buildings, in spite of a few attempts (proposition to tax luxury hotels). There are efforts to make old monuments more profitable by building hotels and restaurants. The French Centre des Monuments Nationaux is seriously studying this option. The sacrosanct principle of inalienability is starting to splinter. And, if the market-economy rule takes over, it will not hold for long in current conditions.

In the Anglo-Saxon world, where most sites are free of charge for the visitors, it is the opposite: private-sector management (trustees and foundations) are clearly the majority and are calling on public-sector institutions to protect their balance increasingly often.

Naturally, earmarking cultural heritage as a real option to reinforce local development has kick-started a flurry of efforts to protect and promote the first to support the second. These operations have worked very well in some cases, but failed to deliver the expected results in others. Failures are often due to an overestimation of