Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 73

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Heritage Interpretation and Sustainable Development: A Systematic Literature Review

Nowacki, Marek·2021·Sustainability
DOI 10.3390/su13084383
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Heritage interpretation is an educational activity that provides information on natural and cultural heritage to people visiting heritage sites and objects. The article aims to identify different ways of using heritage interpretation as a tool for managing areas of sustainable development. The study consisted of a systematic literature review (knowledge mapping) in the field of heritage interpretation and sustainable development. Using the most important databases of scientific publications in the world (Scopus, Web of Science, Ebsco, Proquest), publications on the interpretation of heritage and sustainable development were searched. A total of 106 articles and scientific monographs were identified. Then, quantitative and qualitative data analysis was performed (text mining, topic extraction, content analysis). As a result, six thematic areas were identified: opportunities and threats for the area related to the implementation of heritage interpretation programs; the effectiveness of heritage interpretation in the areas of sustainable development; sustainable tourism development planning in heritage areas; the role of a guide-interpreter in the sustainable development of the area; the role of creativity in the heritage interpretation; and strategies for managing the visitor traffic in heritage areas. These thematic areas were discussed by citing examples from the literature on the subject.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/su13084383

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Jafari, J., and Xiao, H. (2014). Interpretation. Encyclopaedia of Tourism, Springer.
  2. Tilden, F. (1957). Interpreting Our Heritage: Principles and Practices for Visitor Services in Parks, Museums, and Historic Places, University of North Carolina Press.
  3. Nowacki, 2020, Interpretacja dziedzictwa w XXI wieku: Kreatywność, ko-kreacja i publiczny dyskurs w ekonomii doświadczeń, Tur. Kult., 3, 12
  4. 2018, La divulgación significativa como estrategia de comunicación educativa, Educ. Temática Digit., 20, 622
  5. Pujol, L., Roussou, M., Poulou, S., Balet, O., Vayanou, M., and Ioannidis, Y. (2012). Personalizing Interactive Digital Storytelling in Archaeological Museums: The CHESS Project. Archaeology in the Digital Era, Proceedings of the 40th Annual Conference of Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, Southampton, UK, 26–29 March 2012, Amsterdam University Press.
  6. Melotti, M. (2011). The Plastic Venuses: Archaeological Tourism in Post-Modern Society, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Metadata

Authors
Nowacki, M.
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-04-14
Volume
13
Issue
8
Pages
4383
ISSN
2071-1050
DOI
10.3390/su13084383
Cited by
73
References
59
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.