Original Scientific Article
CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation
ofCulturalHeritage:TheCaseoftheMunicipality
ofVrsar
KristinaAfrićRakitovac
Juraj Dobrila University of Pula,
Croatia
kafric@unipu.hr
NatašaUrošević
Juraj Dobrila University of Pula,
Croatia
natasa.urosevic@unipu.hr
NikolaVojnović
Juraj Dobrila University of Pula,
Croatia
nvojnov@unipu.hr
Sustainable tourism, as tourism that respects both residents and visitors, cultural
heritage and the environment, can offer appropriate models for sustainable cul-
turalheritagemanagementandlocaleconomydevelopment.Communityparticipa-
tionisoneofthefundamentalprinciplesofsustainabletourism.Itwasintroduced
in tourism studies more than three decades ago and elaborated through different
methodological approaches and research. The purpose of this paper is to elabo-
ratethelocalcommunityperspectivesregardingsustainablevalorisationofcultural
andarchaeologicalheritage.TheresearchwasrealisedwithintheframeworkofAr-
chaeoCulTour, a recent scientific project whose main goal is to analyse the devel-
opment potential of archaeological heritage through sustainable tourism in Istria
County,Croatia.TheresearchhasconsideredtheMunicipalityofVrsarinWestern
Istria, a typical Mediterranean tourist destination, characterised by mass tourism
andhighseasonality,asacasestudy.Theresearchhasshownthattheresidentsin
theMunicipalityofVrsarpartiallysupportthecurrenttourismdevelopmentmodel,
faced with different sustainability challenges and many infrastructural problems.
Residentsareinterestedinbeingbetterinformedandmoreinvolvedinthetourism
planning process and the participatory heritage management models. They agree
thatthemainsustainabilityissuescouldbeimprovedthroughsustainablevalorisa-
tion of local cultural and natural resources by creating innovative tourism experi-
ences,andtheyareinterestedtoparticipateinthisco-creatingprocess.
Keywords:tourismdestinations,culturalheritage,sustainableculturaltourism,
communityparticipation
https://doi.org/10.26493/2335-4194.14.7-22
Introduction
Tourism destinations, as places with complex eco-
nomic,urbanandresidentialfunctions,arenotpassive
locations for tourism activities, but dynamic systems
andproductsofinteractionsbetweenplacesandpeo-
ple,whosetransformationsdependonacombination
of economic, social, political, cultural, historical and
ecological factors. Therefore, tourism development
planning and destination dynamics should consider
allsustainabilitydimensionsandinvolveallkeystake-
AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021 |7

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
holders.Theanalysisofdynamicrelationshipsthatin-
fluencetourismdevelopmentshouldexploretourism
destinationsas relational, intersectoral,collaborative,
networked,hybrid,transnationalandmultiscalarsys-
tems.
The main goal of proper destination governance
shouldbesustainablelocaldevelopment,thequalityof
lifeforthelocalcommunityandahigh-qualityexpe-
riencefortouriststhroughnetworkingandcoordinat-
ingallkeystakeholders.Inorderforadestinationtobe
developed successfully, key stakeholders (public and
privatesectors,localcommunityandtourists)should
communicate, learn together,coordinate their devel-
opment visions and share responsibility. The most
challenging part of integrating all key stakeholders
in destinationgovernanceis their activeinvolvement
in the planning process and implementation (Čorak,
2011). In thispaper,theauthorselaboratedestination
dynamics in heritage tourism through the participa-
tory management model as one of the key principles
of sustainable tourism. The concept is based on the
fourmutuallyinterdependentpillarsofsustainability:
thesocial,economic,environmentalandculturalpil-
lars. Sustainable tourism should involve all relevant
stakeholdersinatourismdestinationtorecogniseand
valoriseitsspecific,distinctivecharacteristics.
Thedynamicsbetweentourismdestinations,natu-
ralandculturalresourcesandlocalstakeholdersisthe
mostimportantissueinsustainabletourismdevelop-
ment. Since sustainable tourism is focused to benefit
localresidents,respectlocalculture,valoriselocalre-
sourcesandeducatetourists,aswellaslocalresidents,
all activities and practices of sustainable tourism are
directlyconnectedtothefourpillarsofsustainablede-
velopment.AccordingtotheunWorldTourismOr-
ganization(2016), tourismcan be a powerfultoolfor
community development and for reducing inequali-
ties if it engages local populations and all key stake-
holders in its development, in the framework of the
17 SustainableDevelopmentGoals (sdg)of the2030
AgendaforSustainableDevelopment.Thelocalcom-
munityshouldbenefitfromtourismandbeactivelyin-
volvedinthetourismplanningandheritagemanage-
mentprocess.Effectiveparticipationoflocalcommu-
nities in heritage management, both in consultation
and decision-making, is the main topic of some key
strategic recommendations and conventions, such as
theFaroConventionandtheEuropeanCulturalHer-
itageStrategyforthe21stcentury,whichworktogether
asguidestosocialinvolvement,communitycollabora-
tion and awareness-raisingto ensure‘heritage for all’
(Picard,2017,p.83).
Destinationcommunitieshavealsocometogether
toresist,negotiateand/orco-createknowledgeoftheir
heritage tourism worlds. Heritage tourism knowl-
edge production and distribution have increasingly
beenconsideredascollaborative,networked,political,
transnationalandmultiscalarprocesses(Hollinshead,
1999;Ongetal.,2014;Winter,2015).
The purpose of this paper is to present changing
dynamicsinatypicalMediterraneandestination,with
anemphasisontheroleandattitudesofthelocalcom-
munity in the collaborative processes of co-creating
knowledgeofthelocalculturalheritage.Theresearch
presented in this paper was conducted in the frame-
work of the current scientific project ‘The Archaeo-
logicalLandscapeinSustainableDevelopmentofCul-
tural Tourism in Vrsar Municipality – ArchaeoCul-
Tour.’ The project is based on the collection, analysis
and systematization of data on archaeological sites,
and their use in strategic development of cultural
tourismintheMunicipalityofVrsar.Itsobjectivesin-
clude the identification andanalysis of archaeologi-
cal heritage on the basis of field research,analysis of
cartography,andaerialphotographs;thepreservation
of archaeological heritage and landscape by continu-
ousmonitoring;thevalorisationofarchaeologicalher-
itageinthesustainabledevelopmentcontext;anopin-
ion survey among local residents, professionals and
tourists on cultural, and in particular archaeological,
heritage; the dissemination of the results for raising
awareness of cultural tourism by creating new ways
ofpresentingheritage;andthepreparationofselected
sitesforpresentation.Themainaimoftheprojectisto
developasuccessfulstrategyforsustainablegrowthof
culturaltourisminIstriaasthemostdevelopedCroa-
tian tourist region,characterisedby an abundance of
archaeologicalsites, which are unfortunatelystill not
adequatelypresented,interpretedandvalorised.
Theauthorsanalysedthesituationandthepoten-
8|AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
tials for the sustainable valorisation of cultural and
archaeologicalheritageintheMunicipalityofVrsarin
Western Istria, a typical Mediterranean tourist desti-
nationcharacterisedbyhighseasonality,masstourism
concentratedonthecoast,andinadequatelyvalorised
cultural heritage which is still not recognised as an
importantandvaluabletourismresource.Theauthors
combined qualitative and quantitative methodology
which have involved all interested stakeholders (ex-
perts,thelocalcommunityandvisitors).Theresearch
was organised in three phases. The first phase, con-
ductedin March2018, includedinterviewsandfocus
groups with 15 experts, with the aim of defining key
issuesandcollectinginformationforsituationalanal-
ysis.Thelocalcommunitysurveywasconductedfrom
March to May 2018, involving 200 inhabitantsof Vr-
sar(with182properlycompletedquestionnaires).The
third phase of the research, conducted from May to
September 2018, involved 820 tourists. In this paper,
theauthorspresenttheresultsofthesecondphasere-
latedtoattitudesandexpectationsofthelocalcommu-
nity regarding valorisation of local cultural heritage
throughsustainableculturaltourism.
Inthenextsection,theauthorselaboratethetheo-
reticalframeworkandliteraturereviewconcerningthe
importanceofcommunityparticipationinsustainable
valorisationoflocalculturalheritage.Thisisfollowed
by a presentation of the results of empirical research
related to the attitudes and expectations of the resi-
dents of the Municipality of Vrsar regarding the po-
tentialsofsustainablevalorisationoflocalculturalher-
itage.Theresultsarediscussedintheconcludingpart
ofthepaper.
ConceptualFrameworkandLiteratureReview
Sustainabletourism,astourismthatrespectsbothlo-
calresidentsandvisitors,theculturalheritageandthe
environment, can offer appropriate models for sus-
tainable management of cultural heritage and local
economydevelopmentatthesametime.AsGoodwin
(2011) argues,thereisnotauniqueblueprintforsus-
tainable tourism. The challenges,priorities and solu-
tionsvaryfromplacetoplace,dependingonthelevel
ofeconomicdevelopment,socialconditions,localcul-
tureandculturalheritage,environmentalfactors,nat-
uralheritage,etc.Fromadestinationperspective,the
planning and implementation of sustainable tourism
should involveandrespectthelong-terminterestsof
allrelevantstakeholders.
As Richardsand Hall (2003) noted, sustaining lo-
cal communities has become an essential element of
sustainabletourism.Iftheresourcesofthehostcom-
munityarenotmanagedinaresponsibleway,tourism
development cannot be expected to be sustainable.
Ontheotherhand,sustainabilityofheritageresources
cannotbeachievedwithoutthedirectinvolvementof
thelocalcommunity:ifheritageisrespected,usedand
managedbythelocals,ithasbetterchancestobeprop-
erly valorised. The rationale of sustainable tourism
usually rests on providing long-term economic, so-
cial and cultural benefits to the community and its
environment.Aholisticapproachtosustainabilityre-
quires the continuing/improved social, cultural and
economicwell-beingofhumancommunitiestobean
integral component of environmental renewal. The
balance between tourism development, sustainable
valorisation of unique and valuable local resources
andcommunitywell-beingbecomesachallengeinthe
modernworld.
Theconceptofcommunityparticipationwasintro-
ducedtotourismstudiesmorethanthreedecadesago
(Murphy,1985inŠegotaetal.,2017).Informedstake-
holders’participationandcooperationaresomeofthe
mostimportantrequirementsfortheimplementation
of sustainable tourism development (Mihalic, 2014).
The advocates of participatory governance suggest
that community participation can increase reliance
andpublicconsensus,leadtotourismstrategiesthat
correspond to local needs and contribute to destina-
tionsustainability(Byrd,BosleyandDronberer,2009;
Currie,SeatonandWesley,2009).AccordingtoGunn
(1994) and supported by several studies (Ioannides,
1995; Robson & Robson, 1996 in Šegota et al., 2017),
sustainable tourism development cannot be success-
fulwithoutthesupportofcitizens.
Inthispaper,theauthorsassumedthatsustainable
tourism,astourismthatrespectsbothlocalresidents
and their visitors, the cultural heritage and the envi-
ronment,could offer appropriate models for the sus-
tainablemanagementofculturalheritageandcommu-
AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021 |9

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
nitydevelopmentatthesametime.Itissupposedthat
cultural tourism, which ‘cares for the culture it con-
sumeswhileculturingtheconsumer’(Richards,2007,
p.1),asasustainablealternativetomasstourism,could
strengthentheidentityandeconomyofthelocalcom-
munity,createnewjobs,andincreasethequalityoflife
oflocalresidentsandavisitor’senjoyment,preserving
thenaturalenvironmentatthesametime(AfrićRak-
itovac&Urošević,2017).
Community participation in the development of
sustainableculturaltourismisthemaintopicofmany
studies in the tourism field, which focus on the dy-
namics between tourism development, (un)sustain-
ableuseofkeyresourcesandlocalcommunities’reac-
tions to its consequences (Zolfani et al., 2015). Terzić
et al. (2014) have presented a methodology of cul-
tural tourism sustainability indicators (including 30
indicatorsrelatedtosustainabilityofheritageresource
conservation, sustainability of tourism and tourism-
related sustainability of local community), elaborat-
ing studies (Xiang and Wall, 2005) which examined
residents’ attitudes towards tourism and the impacts
tourismcanhaveonacommunity(Perdue,Longand
Allen, 1990; Ap, 1992; Lankford, 1994; Andereck &
Vogt,2000;Gursoy,JurowskiandUysal,2002;McGe-
hee&Andereck,2004;Anderecketal.,2005;Dyeret
al., 2007; Wang & Pfister, 2008; Anderleck & Nyau-
pane,2011).Accordingtotheseauthors,opinionsand
attitudes of local residents on the key values of cul-
turalheritageandtheirtouristvalorisationareimpor-
tantsincetheycreatealocalperspectiveforevaluating
possibilities to involve geographicallylimited territo-
riesintowidersocial,culturalandtourismflows.
Models of sustainable tourism development con-
sider not only the aspects of the natural (physical)
environment and economic impacts, but the socio-
culturaldimensionsofdestinationsaswell.Themost
importantsocioculturaleffectsofsustainabletourism
are the mutual influences and impacts between local
residents(community)andthebroadestspectrumof
tourismactivitiesofadestination.Therearenumerous
positiveimpactsinthatrelationship,suchasincreased
localparticipationindestinationactivitiesandevents,
thestrengtheningofcommunityvaluesandtherevival
oftraditions,greatersecuritypresence,thecreationof
newcommunityspace,exposuretonewideasthrough
globalisationandtransnationalism,etc. On theother
hand, there are negative impacts such as changes in
community structure, loss of authenticity, exceeding
social carrying capacity, increases in criminal activ-
ity, etc.(Wall & Mathieson,2005;Hall & Page, 2006;
Hall, 2007). Despite the positive sociocultural effects
oftourismdevelopment,theroleofthelocalcommu-
nity in the sustainable tourism of destinations is ne-
glected (Klarin, 2018). Furthermore, the satisfaction
of local inhabitants with tourism development is as-
sociated with their involvement in tourism planning
(Nunkoo&Ramkissoon,2010;Choi&Murray,2010).
Although scholars suggest and use various terms
and phrases in order to explain participatory devel-
opment strategies, in this research we used the con-
cept of community participation in the tourism de-
velopment process (cptdp) which is defined as an
adaptive and categorical (flexible) paradigm that al-
lowslocalcommunitiesinvarioustouristdestinations
atdifferentlevelsofdevelopmenttoparticipateinthe
decision-makingprocessoftourismdevelopment,in-
cludingsharingthebenefitsoftourismdevelopment,
anddeterminingthetypeandscaleoftourismdevel-
opmentintheirlocalities(Tosun,2000;2005).
According to the analysed literature (Richards &
Munsters, 2010), the most appropriate methodologi-
caltoolsofscientificresearchofthe cptdp areques-
tionnaires, participatory observation, focus groups
and interviews. Recognising the geographical, devel-
opmental and economic specificities of the destina-
tionofVrsarduringthesituationalanalysisatthebe-
ginning of the research, and the results of previous
researches, the authors decided to use survey (ques-
tionnaire)methodstomeasurespecificlocaldestina-
tiondynamics.Inscientificandprofessionalpublica-
tions in Croatia and abroad, there are numerous re-
searchesonlocalresidents-tourismrelationshipsand
connections. The most important are those in which
surveys, participatory observation, focus groups and
interviewswereusedinordertoconsidertheintercon-
nectionsbetweenlocalpopulations,includingpartic-
ipatory models and the broadest aspects of tourism
activities, especially in regions similar to the Mu-
nicipality of Vrsar. Such researches consider the so-
10 | AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
cioeconomicandsociocultural impactsand transfor-
mations of tourism regions: Cape Cod (usa), Costa
Blanca(Spain),Crete(Greece),Arizona(usa),Victo-
ria(Australia),theSlovenianCoast(Slovenia),Inland
Istria, and the cities of Pula, Bjelovar and Čakovec
(Croatia).
Among the earliest research on the interconnec-
tion of the local population and tourism activities
and development was a study conducted in an at-
tempt to empirically examine the existence of nega-
tive impacts of tourism. The local residents and the
entrepreneurs of Cape Cod, Massachusetts, were in-
terviewedtomeasuretheirperceptionofhowtourism
impactsthedifferentdomainsoflivelihood.Compar-
isons were made between the respondents’ attitudes
towardstourismandtheirdependenceontourismfor
alivelihood(Pizam,1978).ResearchbySelwyn(1992)
wastoidentifysomeofthereasonswhytourismneeds
to be taken seriously by those concerned with com-
munity developmentboth in the ThirdWorld and in
Europe.Thelocalpolitical-economicissuesandques-
tionsof tourismandthe sociocultural changeof des-
tinationswereconsidered.
Numerous researchers and scholars of tourism in
the last two decades have considered the short- and
long-termviabilityofthetourismbusinessinreceptive
touristregions.RebolloandBaidal(2003) useanop-
erativedefinitionofsustainabletourismdevelopment
thatmakespossibletheeffectiveapplicationofitsprin-
ciples.Fromthisbasis,asystemofsustainabilityindi-
cators is developed thatcan be applied to Torrevieja,
a Spanish Mediterranean destination that is notable
for the size of its tourism industry and for its supply
of holiday homes. The territorial and socioeconomic
transformations that have resulted from Torrevieja’s
tourismdevelopment,alongwith thenewlocal poli-
cies in response to these transformations, highlight
both the contradictions and the chances of reconcil-
ing economic growth with sustainable development.
A similar research by Andriotis and Vaughan (2007)
focusedontheidentificationandexplanationoftheat-
titudesofasampleofurbanresidentstowardtourism
development on Crete and their grouping with re-
specttotheseattitudes.Educationandemploymentin
tourismwerefound to be the majorsinglefactors af-
fectingtheattitudesofresidentsoftheislandofCrete.
Anderecketal.(2007)investigatedthedifferencesbe-
tween Hispanic and Anglo residents of the State of
Arizona (usa) with respect to their perceptions of
tourism and quality of life in terms of their ethnic-
ity, framed with the context of ethnicity marginality
theory.
Avaluablecontributionintermsofspatialplan-
ningoftourismactivitiesofadestinationwasprovided
by the study in which researchers compare attitudes
oflocalstowardstourismdevelopmentintheOtways
region of Victoria, Australia, using traditionalsurvey
research questions and a contemporary method for
measuring spatialpreferencesfordevelopment(Ray-
mond & Brown, 2007). The results from the survey
data showed conditional support for tourism growth
and development in the Otway Hinterland and along
theOtwayCoast,irrespectiveofresidencegeographi-
caldistancefromthecentreoftouristactivities.
Scientific research in the neighbouring regions
similartotheMunicipalityofVrsararesignificant,too.
NemecRudežandVodeb(2010)consideredtheSlove-
nian coastal destinationsof Koper and Piran using a
questionnaire. The findings reveal that the residents’
perceptions of tourism differ between municipalities
which have different tourism concentrations. In fact,
residentsinthemunicipalitywiththehighertourism
concentration perceive more negative tourism im-
pacts,whilst,ontheotherhand,theydonotperceive
morepositivetourismimpacts.Vojnović(2013)exam-
ined the selected sociocultural characteristics of sus-
tainabletourisminthenearestvicinityofVrsar:inland
Istria. The following sociocultural indicators of sus-
tainabletourismwereselected:thedensityoftheregis-
teredandprotectedculturalandhistoricalheritagerel-
ativetoareasizeoftownsandvillages,theproportion
of tourists who understand the language of the local
population,theoverallsecuritymeasuredastheratio
ofcriminalconductsandoffensesofdisturbingpublic
ordercommittedbytouristsagainstthetotalnumber
ofsuchviolations,theattitudesofthelocalpopulation
andaccommodationownerstowardstourism,aswell
astheattitudesofthemunicipalrepresentatives.The
attitudes of the local population and accommodation
owners towards tourism were examined by adminis-
AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021 |11

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
tering the questionnaire which showed that tourism
is an acceptable and desirable activity. In her analy-
sis of the cultural tourism development potential of
thecityofPula,Urošević(2012)analysedthepercep-
tionsandattitudesofthekeystakeholders,including
local residents, related to sustainable valorisation of
the keylocal culturalresources,using questionnaires
and interviews. The focus of Marković and Fuerst-
Bjeliš’sresearch(2015)istheidentificationofanindi-
vidualwiththespatialidentityofaregionandinvesti-
gationoftheeffectsonthesustainabledevelopmentof
tourism,basedonacasestudyofthecitiesofBjelovar
and Čakovec in the Croatian Hinterland. The effects
oftourismonthelocalcommunity’squalityoflifeare
significant,whichdependsonthequalityofadestina-
tionitselfandonitssustainabledevelopment.
Šegota et al. (2017) considered the impact of resi-
dents’ informedness and involvement on perception
of tourism impact, taking the case of the destina-
tion Bled. The main research instrument was a self-
administeredquestionnaire.Thefindingoftheirstudy
has shown that highly informed and highly involved
residents had better perceptions of tourism’s positive
impactsthanallothergroups,whereasthoseresidents
who are poorly informed and weakly involved had
more negative perceptions of tourism impacts than
others.
Thesustainabilityaspectswhichconcernthelocal
community,andwhichcouldbeanalysedinclude:de-
centlivelihoodopportunities;thenumberoftourism
businesses owned and operated by the locals; local
communities’ share of profits from tourism; training
of locals to acquire the competencies and skills for
participatinginheritagetourism;respectforlocalin-
tellectualproperty;locals’accessibilitytoheritageasa
tourismresourceanduseoftourismfacilities;andthe
localcommunity’sparticipationindecision-makingin
relation to tourism development of heritage resource
(involvementin theplanning,researchanddecision-
makingprocess,communitysatisfactionwithtourism
practice and heritage conservation, etc.) (Xiang and
Wall,2005;Terzićatal.,2014).
Inthenextsection,theauthorspresenttheresults
of empirical research related to the attitudes and ex-
pectationsoftheresidentsoftheMunicipalityofVrsar
regardingthepotentialsofsustainablevalorisationof
localculturalheritage.
AnalysisofLocalPopulationAttitudes
andExpectations
ResearchMethodology
Destination dynamics of Istria County, as Croatia’s
mostdevelopedtouristregion,andtheMunicipalityof
Vrsar,asatypicalMediterraneandestination,includ-
ingacomparativeanalysisoftheEuropeanandCroa-
tian best practices regarding archaeological tourism,
aswellastheanalysisofthefirstphaseoftheresearch
which involved 15 experts through focus groups and
interviews,areelaboratedinpreviousresearch(Afrić
Rakitovacetal.,2018).
Theaimofthesecondphaseoftheconductedem-
piricalresearchwastoanalysetheattitudesofthelo-
calpopulationintheMunicipalityofVrsarregarding
sustainablevalorisationofculturalandarchaeological
heritage.
The research involved the local community and
was carried out on a sample of 182 inhabitants, i.e.
8.5 of the total population in Vrsar (in 2015, there
were2,149inhabitants).Theresearchinstrumentwas
aquestionnaireconsistingof15questions,outofwhich
threewereclosedquestions,whiletwelvewereopen-
ended questions. The questionnaire was previously
tested on a sample of 30 inhabitants involved in a
workshop organised as part of the project in April
2018.Thefinalsamplehasembraceddifferentgroups
ofinhabitantsfromthelocalcommunity(personsem-
ployedinthepublicsectorandprivatecompanies,and
membersofcivilorganisations).Therespondents’an-
swerswerecollectedbystudentsaspartoftheirprac-
ticaleducation.Thestudentsweretrainedbytheau-
thors.TheresearchwasconductedinMay2018.
Theresearchhypothesesoftheempiricalresearch
were: (1): the local population supports tourism de-
velopmentintheMunicipalityofVrsar;(2): thelocal
population recognises potentials of cultural tourism
development as a sustainable alternative to the cur-
rentmodel of masstourism;(3): the local population
isnotwellinformedaboutthearchaeologicalheritage
inthemunicipalityasapotentialforsustainabledevel-
opmentorculturaltourism.
12 | AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
Table 1 SampleStructurebyGender,Age,Level
ofEducation,andActualPositionintheLabour
Market
Category Item ff ()
Gender Male  .
Female  .
Total  .
Age –  .
–  .
–  .
–  .
>  .
Total  .
Levelofeducation Elementaryschool  .
Secondaryschool  .
University  .
Masterstudy  .
Total  .
Actualpositionin
thelabourmarket
Employed  .
Entrepreneur  .
Student  .
Retiree  .
Unemployed  .
Total  .
Thepaperpresentsselectedquestionsandanswers.
Thedatahavebeenanalysedbymethodsofdescriptive
analysisandthe one-way anova analysis,processed
bymeansofthe spss programme24.0.
SampleCharacteristics
ThecharacteristicsofthesamplearepresentedinTa-
bles 1 and 2. There were 59.9 male and 40.1 fe-
male participants. Concerning the age structure, the
largest was the age group from 40–49, followed by
thosefrom30–39,andtheagegroupfrom50–59.Re-
garding the levels of education, the largest group of
respondents were those with a secondary school de-
gree, followed by those with a university degree; to-
gethertheycomprise88.5ofthesample.Concerning
theactualpositioninthelabourmarket,themajority
of respondents (69.8) are currently employed, 17
Table 2 SampleStructurebatheImpactofTourism
EarningsonHouseholdIncome
Options ff ()
Largerpartofthehouseholdincomeis
realisedthroughtourism-relatedactivities
 .
Smallerpartofthehouseholdincomeis
realisedthroughtourism-relatedactivities
 .
Householdincomeisindependentof
tourism-relatedactivities
 .
Total  .
areentrepreneurs,6.6areunemployed,4.9arere-
tired and 1.6 are students. Regarding the impact of
tourism earnings on the respondents’ household in-
come,themajorityofthem(56.0)reportthatalarge
part of their household income is related to tourism
activities,for28.6ofthemsuchimpactissmall,while
for15.4ofrespondentstheirhouseholdincomeisnot
affectedbytourismactivities.Wecanconcludethatthe
majorityofthelocalpopulationisengagedintourism
anddependentontourism-relatedactivities.
ResearchResults
The first part of the questionnaire explored the lo-
cal population’s attitudes towardsthe proposed state-
ments related to the impacts of tourism on the local
community. As indicated in Table 3, the local popu-
lationwasmainlysatisfiedwithtourismdevelopment
inthemunicipality(arithmeticmeanonLikert’sscale
higher than 4). The respondents expressed the high-
estlevelsofagreementwiththefollowingstatements:
touristsarewelcomeregardlessoftheircountryofori-
gin(4.68),tourismcontributestohigherlevelsofem-
ploymentintheMunicipalityofVrsar(4.59),tourism
isthemostimportanteconomicactivityinthemunici-
pality(4.47),tourismdevelopmentbenefitsthemajor-
ityofthepopulationinVrsar(4.47),andtourists’lan-
guage(s) are not a barrier for communication (4.14).
Therespondentsexpressedthelowestlevelsofagree-
ment regarding the possibilities of active participa-
tion of the local population in the tourism planning
process(3.32),thecontributionoftourismtoenviron-
mentalprotection(3.45),andlevelsofsatisfactionwith
culturalattractivenessinthemunicipality(3.24).
AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021 |13

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
Table 3 LocalPopulation’sAttitudesRegardingtheProposedStatements
Statements Frequencies () () ()

TourismcontributestohigheremploymentinVrsar      . . –.
TourismisthemostimportanteconomicactivityinVrsar      . . –.
Tourismdevelop.benefitsthemajorityofthepopulationinVrsar      . . –.
T o u r i s t s d o n o t h i n d e r d a i l y l i f e a n d w o r k i n V r s a r      .   .   –  .   
IactivelyparticipateinthetourismplanningprocessinVrsar      . . –.
T o u r i s m c o n t r i b u t e s t o e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n i n V r s a r      .   .   –  .   
Tourists’language(s)arenotabarrierforcommunication      . . –.
Touristsarewelcomeregardlessofthecountryoforigin      . . –.
Touristscontributetothepres.ofcustomsandcult.heritage      . . –.
EstimatethelevelofsatisfactionwiththeculturalofferinVrsar      . . –.
Notes Columnheadingsareasfollows:(1)arithmeticmean,(2)standarddeviation,(3)skewness.
Table 4 StatisticalDifferencesRelatedtotheLocalPopulation’sAttitudesRegardingtheProposedStatements:
GenderandAge(MeanValues)
Statements Gender Age
() () Pp – – – – > Pp
Tourismcontributestohigher
employmentinVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Tourismisthemostimportant
economicactivityinVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Tourism development benefits the
majorityofthepopulation
inVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Touristsdonothinderdailylife
andworkinVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Iactivelyparticipateinthetourism
planningprocessinVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Tourismcontributestoenviron-
mentalprotectioninVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Tourists’languagesarenotabar-
rierforcommunication
. . . . . . . . . . .
Touristsarewelcomeregardlessof
thecountryoforigin
. . . . . . . . . . .
Touristscontributetothepreser-
vationofcustomsandcultural
heritage
. . . . . . . . . . .
Estimatethelevelofsatisfaction
withtheculturalofferinVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Notes Columnheadingsareasfollows:(1)female,(2)male.Testedbyone-way anova.
14 | AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
Table 5 StatisticalDifferencesRelatedtotheLocalPopulation’sAttitudesRegardingtheProposedStatements:
LevelofEducationandImpactonHouseholdIncome(MeanValues)
Statements Levelofeducation Impactonhouseholdincome
() () () () Pp Large Small No Pp
Tourismcontributestohigher
employmentinVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Tourismisthemostimportant
economicactivityinVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Tourism development benefits the
majorityofthepopulation
inVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Touristsdonothinderdailylife
andworkinVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Iactivelyparticipateinthetourism
planningprocessinVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Tourismcontributestoenviron-
mentalprotectioninVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Tourists’languagesarenotabar-
rierforcommunication
. . . . . . . . . . .
Tourists are welcome regardless of
thecountryoforigin
. . . . . . . . . . .
Touristscontributetothepreser-
vationofcustomsandcultural
heritage
. . . . . . . . . . .
Estimatethelevelofsatisfaction
withtheculturalofferinVrsar
. . . . . . . . . . .
Notes Columnheadingsareasfollows:(1)elementary,(2)secondary,(3)university,(4)master.Testedbyone-way anova.
TheresultspresentedinTable3werefurtheranal-
ysedusingtheone-way anova analysis,aspresented
inTables4and5.AsindicatedinTable4,itcanbecon-
cludedthattherewerenotstatisticallysignificantdif-
ferencesintherespondents’answersaccordingtogen-
der,sincealllevelsofsignificancearehigherthan5
(p<0.05).However,therewerestatisticallysignificant
differences according to the respondents’ ages found
forfivestatements:regardingtourismcontributionto
environmentalprotection(p = 0.001 < 0.05), regard-
ing tourism as the most important economic activ-
ity in the municipality (p = 0.009 < 0.05), regarding
the statementthat tourists are welcome regardlessof
the country of origin (p = 0.021 < 0.05) and regard-
ingtourists’language(s)notrepresentingabarrierfor
communication (p = 0.034 < 0.05). Younger respon-
dentsaremorescepticalregardingthepositiveimpact
of tourism on environmental protection and the im-
pact of tourism on preservation of customs and cul-
turalheritage.
AsindicatedinTable5,therewerestatisticallysig-
nificantdifferencesinrelationtotherespondents’lev-
els of education found for five statements: regard-
ing the contribution of tourism to higher employ-
mentratesinthemunicipality(p<0.0,05),regarding
tourism as the most important economic activity in
Vrsar (p<0,05),regardingthestatementthattourists
are welcome regardless of the country of origin (p <
0.05), regarding the statement that tourism develop-
mentbenefitsthemajorityofthepopulation( p=0.001
< 0.05), and regarding the statement that tourists do
not hinder daily life and work in the municipality. It
AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021 |15

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
Table 6 TheImportanceofProposedAttractionsofVrsarasaTourismDestination
Statements Frequencies () () ()

ThevicinityoftheAdriaticsea      . . –.
Theweatherandtheclimate      . . –.
Thecoastandislands      . . –.
N a t u r a l a n d r a r e l a n d c o v e r t y p e     .   .   –  .   
TheLimChannel      . . –.
P a r k s     .   .   –  .   
TheKontijaForest      . . –.
S t . M i c h a e l ’ s c h u r c h      .   .   –  .   
MonteRiccoarchaeologicalsite      . . –.
V r s a r ’ s m o s a i c s      .   .   –  .   
S t . M a r y ’ s o f t h e S e a c h u r c h     .   .   –  .   
Vrsar’soldcitycentre      . . –.
DušanDžamonja’sParkofSculptures      . . –.
Theculinarytradition      . . –.
Cultural,sportsandentertainmentmanifestations      . . –.
Notes Columnheadingsareasfollows:(1)arithmeticmean,(2)standarddeviation,(3)skewness.
can be observed that the respondents with a higher
level of education valuated tourism as an important
economic and social phenomenon more frequently
thanthosewithalowerlevelofeducation.
As indicated in the same table, there were statis-
tically significant differences regarding the impact of
tourismonhouseholdincomeforfourstatements:re-
garding tourism contribution to higher employment
ratesintheVrsarmunicipality(p<0.0,05),regarding
tourism as the most important economic activity in
Vrsar (p<0,05),regardingthestatementthattourism
development benefits the majority of the population
in Vrsar (p = 0.001 < 0.05)and regardingactive par-
ticipationinthetourismplanningprocessinVrsar.It
can be observed that tourism is considered as more
important for respondents who have a larger impact
oftourismontheirhouseholdincome.Consequently,
thoserespondentsaremoreinterestedinactivepartic-
ipationinthetourismplanningprocess.
Table6indicatesthelocalpopulation’sperceptions
oftheproposedattractionsofVrsarasatourismdesti-
nation.Asexpected,consideringthearithmeticmean
scoresonLikert’sscalehigherthan4,thelocalpopu-
lationhasrecognisedthefollowingasthemostsignif-
icantattributes:theAdriaticcoastandnearbyislands,
the pleasant weather and climate, the Lim Channel,
Vrsar’sold city centre,etc.The local population con-
sidersthefollowingaslessattractive:Vrsar’smosaics,
St.Michael’sChurchandtheMonteRiccoarchaeolog-
icalsite.
The followingquestionwasrelatedtothepercep-
tion of the local population about the most common
tourist activities of tourists when visiting Vrsar (Ta-
ble7).Asexpected,consideringthearithmeticmean
scoresonLikert’sscalehigherthan4,thelocalpopu-
lationhasrecognisedswimmingandotherseasideac-
tivities,visitingrestaurants,walkingtrailsandcycling
asthemostattractiveactivitiesfortourists.Lessrecog-
nisedwereparticipationinthelocalcommunity’sac-
tivities, acquiring new experiences, visiting cultural
and historical monuments, visiting cultural manifes-
tations,visitingprotectednatureareas,andparticipa-
tioninsportsandentertainmentmanifestations.
Wecanconcludethat,accordingtothelocalpopu-
16 | AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
Table 7 LocalPopulation’sPerceptionoftheMostFrequentActivitiesofTouristsVisitingVrsar
Statements Frequencies () () ()

S w i m m i n g a n d o t h e r s e a s i d e a c t i v i t i e s     .   .   –  .   
Visitingprotectednatureareas      . . –.
C y c l i n g     .   .   –  .   
V i s i t i n g r e s t a u r a n t s     .   .   –  .   
V i s i t i n g c u l t u r a l a n d h i s t o r i c a l m o n u m e n t s      .   .   –  .   
V i s i t i n g c u l t u r a l m a n i f e s t a t i o n s      .   .   –  .   
Participationinsportsandentertainmentmanifestations      . . –.
P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e l o c a l c o m m u n i t y ’ s a c t i v i t i e s      .   .   –  .   
W a l k i n g t r a i l s     .   .   –  .   
N e w e x p e r i e n c e s      .   .   –  .   
Notes Columnheadingsareasfollows:(1)arithmeticmean,(2)standarddeviation,(3)skewness.
lationattitudes,touristsstillperceiveVrsarasthesun-
and-seadestinationforrelaxingactiveholidays,com-
plementedwithenjoyingthelocalfoodandrecreation
(swimming,cycling,walking)inbeautifulnature.
The second part of the questionnaire consisted of
tenopen-endedquestionsaimedtodeterminethere-
spondents’attitudesregardingtheuniquefeaturesand
developmentpotentialsofVrsarasaculturaltourism
destination,aswellasitsgreatestadvantagesanddis-
advantages. The respondents were asked about the
most attractive cultural attractions and manifesta-
tions and about their habits when it comes to visit-
ingculturalattractionsandmanifestations.Theywere
also asked to propose ways for improving presenta-
tionofculturalandarchaeologicalattractions,aswell
as the cultural tourism offer in general. In conclu-
sion,theywereaskedabouttheresultsoftheprevious
cultural tourism projects and expected results of the
projectArchaeoCulTour.Theresultsarepresentedin
the swot matrix(Table8).
Whenaskedaboutthemostrecognisableandun-
ique characteristics/attractions of Vrsar, the respon-
dents emphasized the beauty of nature/archipelago/
sea (24.7 of respondents), and the unique cultural
heritagesymbolised by the romantic/picturesqueold
city core (10.9), as well as the importance of the
first and biggest naturist camp in Europe – Kover-
sada (10.9). The participants also mentioned the
Montrakerquarry/sculptureschool(5.5),thefamous
lover, Giacomo Casanova, who visited Vrsar twice
(5.5), and the Lim Fjord (5.5) as important local
brands.
Themostfrequentanswers,regardingthefivemost
attractiveculturalandarchaeologicalsitesinthearea
of Vrsar, were: churches – St. Mary’s (35.7), Dušan
Džamonja’s Park (27.4), the old castle with the city
core (24.7), the Montraker quarry (16,5), Monte
Ricco(10.9),themosaics(8.2),etc.
Themostfrequentanswers,regardingthefivemost
attractiveculturalandtouristmanifestationsinVrsar,
were:thefishermenfest(33.5)Casanovafest(26.4),
the Old Fair(stari samanj) (19.8), concerts (16.5),
theguitarfestival(11.5),andtheMontrakersculpture
school(8.2).
When asked how Vrsar could present its cultural
and archaeological attractions in a better way, the
respondents offered the following answers: through
massmediapromotion/advertising/onlinemarketing
(16.5),manifestations(9.9),innovativeinterpreta-
tion models/guided tours (8.2), investment in in-
frastructure,foundinganew culturalinstitution,and
educatingcitizens(2.7),presentationthroughstory-
tellingandthemedproducts/routes(5.5),interactive
interpretation centres (2.7), cooperation/inclusion
of the local community (8.2), destination branding
(2.7),etc.
AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021 |17

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
Table 8 swot MatrixontheSustainableDevelopmentPotentialofCulturalHeritageintheMunicipalityofVrsar:
LocalCommunityPerspective
Strengths Weakness
• Favourablegeographicalposition
• Proximitytoemitivemarkets
• Favourablemicro-climate
•Small,safeandquietplace
•Beautifulandpreservednatureandenvironment
•Cleanseaandnicebeaches
•Bestautocamps
• Proximityofthelimechannel(protectednaturalarea)andislands
• Preservedandrichculturalheritage(oldcitycentre,churches,mosaics,
sculpturegarden,traditionalgastronomy,archaeologicalsites,etc.)
• Activetourism(bikes,trailandtrekking,climbing,kayaking,diving)
• ProximityofMarinaVrsar,oneofthebestnauticalportsincroatia
• Sunandseatourismmodel
• Insufficientinvolvementofthelocal
communityintourismplanningand
realisationofprojects
• Insufficientvalorisationofculturalheritage
•Culturalheritageisnotrecognisedasa
motiveforchoosingVrsarasatourism
destination
• Lackofaninstitutionforculturalandnatural
heritagemanagement
• Insufficientsportfacilities
• Insufficiententertainmentfacilities
Opportunities Threats
• Connecting/networkingtheexistingattractionsintonewroutesand
culturalitineraries
• Adequatepresentationandinterpretationoftherichculturalheritage
• Adequatepresentationandinterpretationoftherichculturalheritage
• Investmentinthekeyculturalandnaturalresources(theoldcitycore,
Kontija,infrastructure),newfestivalsandmanifestations
• Gastronomy
• Somespecificculturalresourcessuchasthemosaics
• Monterico,theMontrakerquarry
•Džamonja’sparkandmuseum
•Churches
• Newmuseumsandinterpretationcentres,creativeworkshops,open-air
theatre(Montraker),
• Divingatarchaeologicalsites
• Competitionofneighbouringtourism
destinationswithsimilartourismconcept
basedonsunandsea
• Decreasedinterestfromtouristsforthesea
andsuntourismdevelopmentmodel
•Climatechanges
Regardingtheirusualvisitingofculturalmanifes-
tations in Vrsar, 50 of participants answered nega-
tively,whileanother50saidtheyvisitthefollowing
manifestations:thefishermenfest(15.9),theOldFair
(stari samanj)(12.6),Casanovafest(12.6),concerts
(12.1),theguitarfestival(4.9),thesculptureschool
(3.3),etc.
When asked if they have suggestions for improv-
ingtheculturaltourismofferinVrsar,therespondents
mentioned the following: providing better informa-
tionandpromotion,reducingfishermenfestsandcre-
ating events related to the most specific elements of
thelocalidentity,open-airmuseums,investinginthe
mostimportantculturalresources(theoldcitycore),
improving signalisationandinterpretation,aswellas
thequality oftheculturaltourismoffer,creatingnew
culturalitineraries,educatingtouristguidesaboutlo-
calattractions,networkingwithsimilarEuropeandes-
tinations, involving the local community in heritage
valorisation and interpretation, applying for the eu
projectsandfunds,etc.
Regardingtheirawarenessaboutpastculturaltour-
ism projects in Vrsar, most of our respondents an-
swered negatively, while only 20.9 of them men-
tionedsomerecentprojectsrelatedtothenewcycling
routes,workshopsandmanifestations.Aspositiveef-
fectsofsuchprojects,theymentionedinvestmentsand
better valorisation of cultural resources, a better im-
ageofVrsarasaculturaltourismdestination,raising
awareness of local citizens about their heritage, the
18 | AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
preservation of monuments and old traditions, ex-
tendedtouristseason,newsegmentsoftourists,etc.
Concerning their awareness about the Archaeo-
CulTourproject,only22.5ofrespondentsanswered
positively,whilemostofthemwereuninformed.What
theyexpectfromtheprojectisbetternetworkingand
coordinationofkeystakeholders,bettermediacover-
age, more satisfied tourists, better quality of cultural
tourismoffer,thepreservationofcultural,naturaland
archaeologicalheritage,betterpresentationandinno-
vativeinterpretation,extendedtouristseason,etc.
Whenaskediftheyhadfurthersuggestions,there
were only 17 (9.3) positive answers, mostly related
toinnovationsintheculturaltourismoffer(newand
more inclusive manifestations; new cultural infras-
tructure, suggestions related to the local infrastruc-
ture, signalisationand the role of the municipality in
theproject,givingachancetoyoungpeopleandex-
perts,etc).
Discussion
Theresearchhasshownthatthelocalpopulationin
Vrsar is partially satisfied with the development of
tourism in the municipality. The respondents have
recognised the importance of tourism for the devel-
opmentofthelocaleconomyandincreasingtheliving
standards of the majority of the population. The re-
searchhasshownthatyoungerrespondentsaremore
scepticalregardingthepositiveimpactoftourismon
environmental protection and the impact of tourism
onpreservationofcustomsandculturalheritage.The
respondentswithahigherlevelofeducationvaluated
tourism as an important economic and social phe-
nomenon more frequently than those with a lower
level of education. In addition,tourism is considered
asmoreimportantforrespondentswhohavealarger
impact of tourism on their household income. Al-
though most of the local population is professionally
engagedintourism,theyarenotsatisfiedwiththelevel
of inclusion of residents in tourism planning and in
heritagemanagement.
According to local population attitudes, tourists
stillperceiveVrsarasthesun-and-seadestinationfor
relaxing active holidays, complemented with enjoy-
ingthelocalfoodandrecreation(swimming,cycling,
walking) in beautiful nature. Although aware of the
uniquecharacteristicsofthelocalnaturalandcultural
heritage,aswellasthegoodgeographicalpositionand
proximitytoemissivemarketsasthemostvaluableat-
tractiveness factors, the respondents emphasized the
neglect of the infrastructure, lack of quality cultural
manifestations(whichalsoexplainsthefactthatonly
halfofrespondentsvisitthemanifestationsorganised
mostly during the summer season) and the need for
better presented and interpreted cultural attractions
as the main problems in the planning of sustainable
cultural tourism. The research has shown that local
residentsarewellinformedaboutthemainculturalre-
sourcesandthepossibilitiesoftheirsustainablevalori-
sationthroughinnovativeinterpretationmodels,such
as cultural routes, living history, workshops which
would include the local community, and interpreta-
tioncentres.However,onlyafifthofthemwerefamil-
iar with past cultural tourism projects implemented
inthecommunity,whichindicatestheneedforbetter
visibilityandmoreactiveparticipationofthecommu-
nityinexistingandfutureprojects.
The results of the community survey are in line
with the results of interviews and focus groups with
expertsorganisedinthefirstphaseoftheresearch.The
authorsexpecttheresultsofthetouristsurveyin the
next stage would confirm some of the most impor-
tant issues related to heritage management and sus-
tainable cultural tourism development, as well as the
needofcapacitybuildingandawarenessraisingabout
thelocalculturalheritageintheprocessofknowledge
(co)creation.
Conclusion
Theconductedresearchconfirmedthemainhypothe-
ses: (1) the local population supports tourism devel-
opment in the Municipality of Vrsar; (2) the local
population recognises potentials of cultural tourism
development as a sustainable alternative to the cur-
rentmodelofmasstourism;(3)thelocalpopulationis
notwellinformedaboutthearchaeologicalheritagein
theMunicipalityasapotentialforsustainablecultural
tourismdevelopment.
Althoughthemajorityofthelocalresidents(56of
the sample) are directly employed in tourism, which
AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021 |19

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
would imply they mostly support tourism develop-
ment, it is obvious that the community is saturated
with the still prevailing model of mass sun-and-sea
summertourism,andthattheyarelookingforamore
sustainable model which would involve the locals in
the tourism development and heritage management
processes.Thelocal residentsarealsoveryinterested
in presenting their local culture, traditions and her-
itage to their visitors, and they are actively engaged
in proposing certain innovative models of sustain-
able preservation, valorisation and interpretation of
themostrecognizableculturalresources,suchasher-
itageinterpretationtraining.
Unlike the most recognisable cultural resources
in the Municipality of Vrsar, the local community is
still not awareof andadequatelyinformedabout the
valueofthelocalarchaeologicalheritageanditspoten-
tialfortourismvalorisation,whichindicatestheneed
forinnovativecampaignsofawarenessraisingandca-
pacitybuilding.Ontheotherhand,whenasked,they
suggestedorganisingeducativeinteractiveworkshops
for thelocal community, networkingand connecting
heritagesitesthroughculturalroutesandeducational
paths,andinterpretationcentresforvisitors.Theyalso
emphasizedthelackofculturalmanifestationsanden-
tertainmentfacilities,bothforthelocalsandtheirvis-
itors,aswellastheneedforinvestmentsinthecultural
infrastructure.
The conducted research indicated that the local
stakeholdersareveryinterestedinthesustainablede-
velopment of cultural tourism as a sustainable alter-
nativetothecurrentmodelofmasstourism,andthat
theywanttobeinvolvedinthetourismplanningpro-
cess, better informed and included in the participa-
tory heritage management models. They agree that
the main sustainability issues in the Municipality of
Vrsar:highseasonality,masstourismandinfrastruc-
ture problems,could be resolvedthroughsustainable
valorisationoflocalculturalandnaturalresourcesby
creatinginnovativetourismexperiences,andtheyare
interestedinparticipatinginthisco-creatingprocess.
The authors are aware of some limitations of the
chosenmethodology,whichcouldnotincludeormea-
sure all dimensions of sustainability of cultural and
tourism development. The comparative perspective
would also be useful. Therefore, the authors expect
that the results of the third and last phase of the re-
search–thetouristsurvey,wouldallowabetterinsight
intodestinationdynamicsandmoreconcretepropos-
als for innovations in the cultural tourism offer, and
anadequatepresentationandinterpretationofthene-
glectedarchaeologicalheritage.
SinceVrsarrepresentsthemodelofatypicalcoastal
tourist destination in the Mediterranean, character-
isedbymasstourismandaremarkableseasonality,as
wellashugepotentialforsustainableculturaltourism
development through community involvement, the
authors believe the final results and recommenda-
tions will be useful and applicable in the broader
Euro-Mediterranean context. Research results con-
firm the need for capacity building and awareness
raisingamongthekeystakeholdersaboutthelocalcul-
turalheritageintheprocessofknowledge(co)creation
anddistributionindocumenteddynamicdestination
changes.
Acknowledgments
This work has been supported in part by the Croatian
ScienceFoundationundertheproject par-2017-02-1.
References
AfrićRakitovac,K.,&Urošević,N.(Eds.).(2017). Models of
valorisation of cultural heritage in sustainable tourism.Ju-
rajDobrilaUniversityofPula.
Afrić Rakitovac, K., Urošević, N., & Vojnović, N. (2018).
Project ArchaeoCulTour: Innovative valorization of ar-
chaeologicalheritageinIstriaCounty through sustain-
able cultural and creative tourism. In V. Katsoni & M.
Segarra-Oña(Eds.), Smart tourism as a driver for culture
and sustainability(pp.61–77).Springer.
Andereck,K.,&Nyaupane,G.(2011).Exploringthenatureof
tourismandqualityoflifeperceptionsamongresidents.
JournalofT ravelResearch,50(3),248–260.
Andereck,K.,&Vogt,C.(2000).Therelationshipbetween
residents’ attitudes toward tourism and tourism devel-
opment options.J ournalofT ra velResearch,39(August),
27–36.
Andereck, K., Valentine, K., Knopf, R., & Vogt, C. (2005).
Residents’ perceptions of community tourism impacts.
Annals of Tourism Research, 32(4),1056–1076.
Andereck,K.,Valentine,K.,Vogt,C.,&Knopf,R.(2007).
A cross-cultural analysis of tourism and quality of life
20 | AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
perceptions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(5), 483–
502.
Andriotis, K., & Vaughan, R. (2003). Urban residents’ atti-
tudes toward tourism development: The case of Crete.
JournalofT ravelResearch,42(2),172–185.
Ap,J.(1992).Residents’perceptionsoftourismimpacts. An-
nals of Tourism Research, 19(4),665–690.
Byrd,E.T.,Bosley,H.E.,&Dronberger,M.G.(2009).Com-
parison of stakeholder perceptions of tourism in rural
eastern North Carolina. Tourism Management, 30(5),
693–703.
Choi, H.C.,&Murray, I.(2010).Residentattitudestoward
sustainable community tourism. Journal of Sustainable
Tour i sm 18(4),575–594.
Currie,R.R.,Seaton,S.,&Wesley,F.(2009).Determining
stakeholders for feasibility analysis. Annals of Tourism
Research, 36(1),41–63.
Čorak,S.(Ed.).(2011). Izazovi upravljanja turizmom.Insti-
tuteforTourism.
Dyer,P., Gursoy, D., Sharma,B., &Carter, J. (2007). Struc-
tural modelling of resident perceptions of tourism and
associated development on the Sunshine Coast, Aus-
tralia. Tourism Management, 28(2),409–422.
Goodwin,H.(2011). Taking responsibility for tourism.Good-
fellowPublishers.
Gunn,C.A.(1994). Tourism planning: Basics, concepts, cases
(3rded.).Taylor&Francis.
Gursoy,D.,Jurowski,C.,&Uysal,M.(2002).Residentatti-
tudes:Astructuralmodellingapproach. Annals of Tour-
ism Research, 29(1),79–105.
Hall,C.M.(2007).Tourism planning: Policies, processes and
relationships.Pearson PrenticeHall.
Hall,C.M.,&Page,S.(2006). The geography of tourism and
recreation: Space, place and environment.Routledge.
Hollinshead,K.(1999).Surveillanceoftheworldsoftourism:
Foucault and the eye-of-power. Tourism Management,
20(1),7–23.
Ioannides,D.(1995).Aflawedimplementationofsustainable
tourism: The experienceofAkamas,Cyprus.Tour i sm
Management, 16(8),583–592.
Klarin,T.(2018).Assumptionsforasuccessfulimplementa-
tionoftheconceptofsustainabletourismdevelopment:
ExampleofurbandestinationsoftheRepublicofCroa-
tia. Acta Turistica, 30(1),43–85.
Lankford,S.V .(1994).Attitudesandperceptionstoward
tourismandruralregionaldevelopment. Journal of Travel
Research, 32(2),35–43.
Marković, I., & Fuerst-Bjeliš, B. (2015). Spatial identity as
a driving force in tourism development: Comparative
analysis of the Bjelovar and Čakovec regions. Hrvatski
geografski glasnik, 77(1),71–80.
McGehee,N.G.,&Andereck,K.L.(2004).Factorspredict-
ingruralresidents’support oftourism. Journal of Travel
Research, 43(2),131–140.
Mihalic,T.(2014).Sustainable-responsibletourismdiscour-
se: Towards ‘response-sustainable’ tourism. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 111(PartB),461–470.
Murphy,P.E.(1985).Tourism: A community approach. Me-
thuen.
NemecRudež,H.,&Vodeb,K.(2010).Perceivedtourism
impactsinmunicipalitieswithdifferenttourismconcen-
tration. Turizam, 58(2),161–172.
Nunkoo, R., & Ramkissoon, H. (2010). Small island ur-
bantourism: A residents’perspective. Current Issues in
Tour i sm, 13(1),37–60.
Ong,C.E.,Ryan,C.,&McIntosh,A.(2014).Power-knowl-
edge and tour-guide training: Capitalistic domination,
utopian visions and the creation of unesco’s Homo-
TurismosinMacao. Annals of Tourism Research, 48,221–
234.
Perdue,R.R.,Long,P.T.,&Allen,L.(1990).Residentsup-
port for tourism development. Annals of Tourism Re-
search, 17(4),586–599.
Picard,R.(2017).Heritageforall:TheCouncilofEurope
approach.Cartaditalia 1(2018EuropeanYearofCultural
Heritage),71–90.
Pizam,A.(1978).Tourism’simpacts:Thesocialcoststothe
destination community as perceived by its residents.
Journal of Travel Research, 16(8),8–12.
Raymond, C., & Brown, G. (2007). A spatial method for
assessingresidentandvisitorattitudestowardstourism
growthanddevelopment.Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
15(5),520–540.
Rebollo,J.F.V.,&Baidal,J.A.I.(2003).Measuringsustain-
ability in a mass tourist destination: Pressures, percep-
tions and policy responses in Torrevieja, Spain. Journal
of Sustainable Tourism, 11(2–3),181–203.
Richards,G.(Ed.)(2007). Cultural tourism: Global and local
perspectives.TheHaworthHospitalityPress.
Richards,G.,&Hall,D.(Eds.).(2003). Tourism and sustain-
able community development.Routledge.
Richards,G.,&Munster,W.(Eds.).(2010).Cultural tourism
research methods. cabi.
Robson,J.,&Robson,I.(1996).Fromshareholderstostake-
holders: Critical issues for tourism marketers. Tour i sm
Management, 17(7),533–540.
Selwyn, T. (1992).Tourism society and development. Com-
munity Development Journal, 27(4),353–360.
AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021 |21

KristinaAfriRakitovacetal. CommunityParticipationinSustainableValorisation...
Šegota,T.,Mihalič,T.,&Kuščer,K.(2017).Theimpactofres-
idents’informednessandinvolvementonperceptionsof
tourismimpacts:ThecaseofthedestinationBled.Jour-
nal of Destination Marketing and Management, 6(3),196–
206.
Terzić,A.,Jovičić,A.,&Simeunović-Bajić,N.(2014).Com-
munity role in heritage management and sustainable
tourismdevelopment:CasestudyoftheDanubeRegion
in Serbia. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sci-
ences(SpecialIssue),183–201.
Tosun,C.(2000).Limitstocommunityparticipationinthe
tourism development process in developing countries.
Tourism Management, 21(6),613–633.
Tosun,C.(2005).Stagesintheemergenceofaparticipatory
tourismdevelopmentapproachinthedevelopingworld.
Geoforum, 36(3),333–352.
Urošević,N.(2012).Culturalidentityandculturaltourism:
Betweenthelocalandtheglobal(AcasestudyofPula,
Croatia). Singidunum Journal, 9(1),67–76.
Vojnović,N.(2013).Socio-culturalcharacteristicsofsustain-
able tourism in inland Istria. Socijalna ekologija, 22(2),
85–106.
Wall,G.,&Mathieson,A.(2005).Tour i sm: Change, impacts,
opportunities.Pearson Education.
Wang,Y.A.,&Pfister,R.E.(2008).Residents’attitudesto-
wardtourismandperceivedpersonalbenefitsinarural
community.JournalofT ravelResearch,47(1),84–93.
Winter, T. (2015). Heritage diplomacy. International Journal
of Heritage Studies, 21(10),997–1015.
World Tourism Organization. (2016). Ar o a dm a pf o rc e l e -
brating together[Brochure].
Xiang,Y.,&Wall,G.(2005,August).Heritage conservation
and local communities: Pressing issues in the developing
countries[Paperpresentation].3rdSino-KoreaInterna-
tionalTourismConference,Weihai,China.
Zolfani, S., Sedaghat, M., Maknoon, R., & Zavadskas, E.
(2015). Sustainable tourism: A comprehensive litera-
ture review on frameworks and applications. Economic
Research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 28(1),1–30.
22 | AcademicaTuristica,Year14,No.1,June2021