Аудиовизуальная антропология: культурное наследие как институт памяти
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce findings of comparative analysis and various models based on cultural heritage resources to foster regional development.
Design/methodology/approach – Comparison of operational schemes, market positions and branding of three successful cultural heritage centers in Germany, Great Britain and Russia demonstrates a variety of regional development models based on cultural resources and tourism development, and reveals their advantages and disadvantages.
Findings – The paper evidences the potential of cultural resources and the tourism sector as drivers for regional development, and helps formulate basic recommendations for the Russian situation requiring elaboration of adequate financial and social instruments.
Originality/value – The paper provides a complex analysis of different operational models in three European countries with regard to specific national situations and specificity of heritage operational management.
In present extended abstract cultural heritage, both tangible and intangible, is considered as a facilitator of cultural and event tourism development in rural territories.
Tourism development in St. Petersburg, which is a major cultural centre, has improved in terms of the tourist flow; both tourism types and tourist products have become more diverse. These improvements give ground for a fairly optimistic prognosis for the tourist industry in St. Petersburg. At the same time, there are a number of factors which tend to endanger sustainable development of tourism in St. Petersburg. The current situation calls for a more flexible and innovative approach to industry development. Among these factors we can single out the pronounced seasonal character of tourism, short-term visits of most of the tourists, the rather conservative, academic image of the St. Petersburg culture, which compromises the city’s appeal as a tourist destination for certain tourist segments. Apart from that, the critical limitation imposed on the development of cultural tourism in general and of creative tourism in particular is the low involvement of the population in cultural and tourist events held in the city. All in all this makes it relevant to look for new approaches for creative tourism development in St. Petersburg as an important tool for the sustainable development of the industry.
The article aims at considering the existing and potential competitive advantages of St. Petersburg as a tourist destination on the basis of creative tourism development.
A joint research project carried out by an interdisciplinary group of Russian and Swedish linguists, sociologists and educators-psychologists (the Swedish Institute grant), besides solving pragmatic tasks of finding out relative quantitative-qualitative specificity of national cognitive representations of values, first of all, had methodological goals. They were to check the efficiency of the linguistic methods developed in this study (and, thus, to prove the theoretical ideas that served the basis for it) of getting factual data that allow reconstructing and comparing of the corresponding areas of cognitive representations.
The results of cross-cultural research of implicit theories of innovativeness among students and teachers, representatives of three ethnocultural groups: Russians, the people of the North Caucasus (Chechens and Ingushs) and Tuvinians (N=804) are presented. Intergroup differences in implicit theories of innovativeness are revealed: the ‘individual’ theories of innovativeness prevail among Russians and among the students, the ‘social’ theories of innovativeness are more expressed among respondents from the North Caucasus, Tuva and among the teachers. Using the structural equations modeling the universal model of values impact on implicit theories of innovativeness and attitudes towards innovations is constructed. Values of the Openness to changes and individual theories of innovativeness promote the positive relation to innovations. Results of research have shown that implicit theories of innovativeness differ in different cultures, and values make different impact on the attitudes towards innovations and innovative experience in different cultures.