Following the episode of BBC2 series Saving Britain’s Past on the Blaenavon World Heritage Site, my colleagues and I have once again been debating the usabilty of a heritage site as a tool for community and economic regeneration. We’ve been asking questions like is it really the job of the site, landscape or  monument to regenerate a community? And with a growing trend for local government departments, community groups amongst others to see heritage as a ‘cash cow’ should we be getting worried that the heritage we are so keen to protect and conserve is just another commodity? Is tourism really the best option and only option for the securing the long term future of sites? Or conversely are we (the profession) simply being a little too precious about our heritage?

Tourism featured heavily in Tom Dyckhoff’s recent visit to Blaenavon in Saving Britain’s Past, it appeared from the programme that the only hope for the Big Pit, Ironworks and  town of Blaenavon was to turn to tourism to save their struggling economy and community. But was this really the case? The programme suggested that Big Pit and the Blaenavon World Heritage landscape were somehow an odd choice, or at least initially seen to be an odd choice for inscription onto the World Heritage List, but in a world with changing attitudes to heritage and the growing recognition of the importance of industry in the development of our modern world this seems a little short sighted.

The programme went on to interview a series of local government officials and individuals involved in the early management of the sites along with residents of the town and local businesses. Interestingly ,no one currently involved in the management of the World Heritage Site or Big Pit mining museum were included in the programme, I was left wondering why, it seemed a missed opportunity.

Focusing back on heritage tourism, in particular to World Heritage sites, would it be fair to say do you suppose that applications for World Heritage Site status are made on a twofold basis, that of conservation and also tourism? I would say that this is becoming more often the case than not. It is important to remember that world heritage tourism brings with it great costs as well as benefits, whilst increased ticket sales and visitor spending are evident there is also often an accompanying added strain on the fabric of a destination and the community therein. Many of the residents of Blaenavon were seen to note in Saving Britain’s Past that the world heritage label has brought increased tourism but they’ve still lost facilities for themselves as a local community. It is a difficult line for the heritage promoter/professional to walk, between protecting and promoting a world heritage site and managing the hopes of the local community who are occasionally left expecting miracle transformations.

Is there a need for a refocusing on the heritage and its benefits to enriching local life rather than it being seem as a cash generator which somehow becomes detached from those whose heritage it truly is?