4
5
List of Figures
Figure 1.......................................................................................11 Figure 2.......................................................................................23 Figure 3.......................................................................................23 Figure 4.......................................................................................23 Figure 5.......................................................................................23 Figure 6.......................................................................................25 Figure 7.......................................................................................26 Figure 8.......................................................................................29 Figure 9.......................................................................................31 Figure 10.....................................................................................37 Figure 11.....................................................................................47
1. Introduction
Heritage
Tourism
Cities are often keen on possessing a distinctive identity that offers a unique experience to the global world (Smith, Akagawa, 2009, p. 5). One of the main elements that signifies the distinctiveness of cities from one another is the heritage of the city, both built and cultural. However, to conceptualise heritage is not a definitive truth; heritage can be interpreted and perceived differently according to people’s own beliefs, thoughts, feelings and experiences (Timothy, Boyd, 2003, p. 10). Cultural theorist Stuart Hall states “It is by our use of things, and what they say, think and feel about them, how we represent them, that we give them meaning� (Hall, 1997, p. 3). Therefore, according to Hall, there can be different interpretations and definitions to concepts which vary according to personal experiences. To expand on this, in the context of heritage, heritage can be perceived variously by the experiences people have within different historical urban landscapes and their cultures. With that being said, how do cities which are known for their historic urban landscape, aim to retain the heritage in both the built environment and the social and cultural aspect? Heritage is a broad concept that consists of both tangible and intangible elements, but the decision on what kind of elements are considered as valuable parts of the heritage depend on the different contextual aspect. These elements will be further explored throughout the course of this research.
One of the most notible influences on heritage in recent times is Tourism (Smith, 2006).The rapid progression of global tourism in historic urban landscapes drastically influences the preservation of heritage (Timothy, Boyd, 2003, pp. 1-18). What is retained from history is purely based on what the different cities interpret as valuable assets of the past. Contrastingly, preserving the social and cultural heritage of a city is an intangible process that cannot simply be either retained or taken away (Graham, 2002, pp. 1004-1016). Moreover, tourism is considered one of the main driving forces to retain cultural and built heritage as a means of increasing tourist attraction (Timothy, Nyaupane, 2009, p. 20). This poses the question as to whether or not heritage tourism conveys the true authentic heritage of a city or whether it conveys what the international tourists expect to see. In order to explore this further, the study will specifically concentrate on modern tourist public interventions that are developed in the historic city of Muscat. Therefore, this study focuses mainly on how this sector influences both the built and social environment.
8
1.1. Aims and Objectives
1.2. Research Questions
The main aim of this study is to understand the influence tourism has on heritage through an indepth exploration of the tangible and intangible characteristics of the historic city. The research is also aimed at understanding the extent that heritage is taken into consideration in existing and future public developments with the intention of increasing tourist attraction. This introduces the issue of how heritage is being interpreted in modern public interventions. Followed with the second key element which is the role of tourism in perpetuating the heritage in the built and cultural environment. Additionally, aim is to understand the difference between how heritage is implemented in comparison to how it is experienced. This is explored through the comparison of various perspectives on the tangible and intangible components of the historic city. Therefore, this raises the third research topic which focuses on the relationship between the interpretations of heritage and how heritage is perceived. The purpose of this is to compare the extent that the non-physical aspects influence heritage in recent times with how the built environment addresses that.
As mentioned earlier, heritage is a broad concept that cannot simply be defined in the context of the global world. The portrayal of heritage differs according to elements specific to the historic urban landscape being studied. Therefore, in order to achieve the aims of this dissertation, the focus of the study shifts to a specific location through a case study analysis in the capital city of my hometown, the Sultanate of Oman, Muscat. Furthermore, to summarise the research question specific to the geographical context of this dissertation: • To what extent do developers interpret heritage into modern public interventions in Muscat? • What is the role of tourism in the perpetuation of heritage in Muscat’s built and cultural environment? • Do the interpretations of heritage complement or contradict how heritage is perceived by the people of Muscat? In order to further develop the research questions above, several primary and secondary research methodologies will be conducted as a means of having an objective investigation. With the exploration of a specific area of study, the response to the research question will mainly be applicable to the chosen site.
9
1.3.
Context
Muscat is the capital city of Sultanate of Oman, known for its rich history (Walter, 2016, p. 49). Although it carries a rich history and has been continuously progressing throughout time, it still remains a city that is not as widely recognised. It’s transformation into a modern city has been described as, “An entirely different order from that experienced elsewhere in the Gulf.” (El Amrousi, Biln, 2010, p. 254). That period is now referred to as the emergence of Oman’s renaissance, which began in the year 1970 (Valeri, 2009, p. 7). However, the history of the city goes back as early as the 1st century CE, where it was recognised as a successful trading port connecting the East with the West (Al-Belushi, 2013, p. 552). Due to this, the city itself was exposed to a diversity of cultures. To elaborate, the successfulness of the port and Muscat’s strategic location compelled different foreign powers to rule the city, such as the Persian Empire, the Ottoman Empire and the Portuguese (Al-Belushi, 2013, p. 553). Until recent times, one of the most significant historic events that influenced Muscat is the ruling of the Portuguese which occurred from the year 1507 until 1650, “Their control of Muscat have directly shaped the distinct characteristics of the fortifications in Muscat” (Al-Belushi, 2013, p. 553).
Furthermore, two of their most recognised forts in Muscat are known as Al-Mirani and Al-Jalali, located by the surrounding mountains of the city’s harbour, an area presently renamed as “Muttrah” (Valeri, 2009). With the modernisation of Muscat, the city faces pressure to retain its rich history while simultaneously embracing the progression of the renaissance. The preservation of its heritage is what makes Muscat’s tourism successful in the present time, however, due to the persistent economic development, the notion of heritage has been, to an extent, influenced by the latter, specifically in the city’s physical fabric (El Amrousi, Biln, 2010, pp. 254-266).
10
11
2. Literature Review Interpretation versus Perception
There are several aspects to be considered in understanding the relationship between the interpretation of heritage and the perception of heritage. The interpretation of heritage in the context of this dissertation is the understanding of how heritage has been implemented; focusing mainly on the physical aspects. Therefore, one of the main focuses on the interpretation of heritage is the influence tourism has on modern day public interventions. Contrastingly, the perception of heritage focuses on the intangible presence of heritage in the city. In the context of this dissertation, the perception of heritage is focused on the spatial aspect of a place. With that being said, in order to thoroughly comprehend both themes, the structure is broken into subthemes: heritage tourism, standardising and commodifying heritage, the people in the city and lastly, understanding space.
and Gyan P. Nyaupane explore the different approaches to heritage issues and challenges in developing regions (2009). They state that tourism should always be built around cultural heritage as it acts as an “economic saviour” (Timothy, Nyaupane, 2009, p. 20). They also claim that due to the recent effects of modernisation and globalisation, preserving heritage has become more difficult to retain. Additionally, it could be argued that some modernists consider the preservation of the past as an obstacle to modernising the urban landscapes as well as the community; in recent times it is not uncommon for historic buildings to be abolished and replaced by modernist buildings (While, Short, 2011, pp. 4-13). Similarly, with the preservation of the historic built environment is altered through retaining the buildings but renovating its uses and services to cater for the current generation (Al-Ahsan, 2009, p. 2).
2.1. Interpretation of Heritage Contrastingly, Protecting the past goes beyond maintaining the built environment, but it also concerns perpetuating the intangible components of heritage, such as the essence of the culture, tradition, language, and conserving the distinctive features that differ from the rest of the world (Timothy, Nyaupane, 2009, p. 29). Timothy and Nyaypane argue that modernisation does not necessarily affect the latter, as the two are not mutually exclusive, as in recent times, modernisation may be seen as a drive or a program made to embrace heritage through encouraging nationalism and the ethnic cultural and social identities (2009, p. 29).
2.1.1. Heritage Tourism: Tourism is undeniably one of the principal forces that drives cities to embrace and encourage cultural and traditional heritage within modern day and future developments. According to the World Tourism Organisation, tourism is defined as “the activities of person travelling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than consecutive one year leisure, business and other purposes” (WTO, 1998). In the book “Cultural Heritage and Tourism in the Developing World: Regional Perspective” Dallen J. Timothy 14
Similarly, a study by Luna Khirfan focuses on the relationship between heritage, planning and tourism in her work “World Heritage, Urban Design and Tourism” (2016). The first chapter of the book, “Historic Urban Landscapes: World Heritage and the Contradictions of Tourism”, aims to investigate the historic urban landscapes and its contradiction to tourism. She claims that the drastic increase in global tourism tends to be problematic for historic cities due to the rapid global development that affects the preservation of the historic sites’ distinctive local identity. Since heritage acts as one of the main resources that increases international attraction, and tourism is a major economic activity, it is essential to retain a city’s history, however the influence of tourism has also complicated the ability to do so (Khirfan, 2016, p. 5).
of products and services as a result of homogenisation. Researcher Daniele Conversi defines homogenisation as the concept of cultural standardisation and unifying a community (2010, p. 2). The concept of standardising erodes the authenticity that differentiates the distinctiveness of the different heritages, which brings the question, to what extent do historic urban landscape actually remain timeless and distinctive? Khirfan argues “Historic urban landscapes in developing countries with their distinctively local aura, are perceived as timeless and static in past times in a typical manifestation of the myth of the unchanged.” (Khirfan, 2016, p. 6). To elaborate, she claims that the idea of timelessness in heritage sites is an untrue “myth” due to the action of standardising the several elements in the urban landscapes as a means of catering international standards.
According to Khirfan, although tourists are attracted by cultural and urban heritage, the increase in international tourism demands urban developments in these destinations; the developments and services are expected to meet international standards. She states, “Planning must integrate, and cater for, the expectations and needs of the international tourists.” (Khirfan, 2016, p. 6). This entails that the recent developments and implementation of the international standards strips away the distinctiveness of historic landscapes. This is due to the fact that meeting international standards would mean quality control must occur as well as the standardisation
2.1.2. International Standardisation Commodification of Heritage Tourism
and
In recent times, the developmental changes have progressed rapidly through the occurrences of modern urban interventions in public spaces; these interventions result in affecting the heritage “physically, morphologically and socioculturally” (Khirfan, 2016, p. 4). The main reason for this, aside from standardisation, is the idea that developers alter the urban landscapes in order to achieve a higher number of both international and local tourists; ; in doing so, this generates more income and acts as an essential source to the 15
economy. Therefore, the author implies that heritage is treated as a commodity in recent times. To treat something as a good that can be bought or sold is to commodify, in this context, heritage is handled as an economic product (Halewood, Hannam, 2001, p. 568).
international tourists’ expectations rather than the local needs and reality drives it away from its authenticity; it begins to lack the legitimacy of the local heritage experience. Contrastingly, ethnologist Sharon MacDonald suggests that to some tourists, the idea of commercialising history may also be deemed as a legitimate product of the past (MacDonald, 1997, pp. 155-176). She addresses commercialism as both a strength and weakness to historic urban landscapes; she claims that alterations can strengthen the cultural heritage and its authenticity. The modification process is not necessarily a threat as it can be aimed to embrace and enhance the cultural heritage (MacDonald, 1997, pp. 155176). Therefore, although standardisation and commodification can be considered as stripping away legitimacy, Halewood and Hannam state that authenticity in heritage is not a definite measure; it is negotiable (2001). Therefore, as opposed to the built environment, the cultural identity, essence and social aspects of heritage are intangible; the effects of modernist ideologies and developments on the latter cannot be physically proven as a fact but are rather assumed.
Additionally, in the article “Viking heritage tourism authenticity and commodification” Researchers Chris Halewood and Kevin Hannam explore the re-enhancement of heritage describing it as the current living history (2001). They argue that inauthenticity in heritage tourist destinations arises as a result of commodification; they also connect commodification with the action of standardisation, similar to Khirfan’s argument. The article also implies that the commodity lies in the concept of having an authentic experience and the actions of selling souvenirs as a product of heritage. Although heritage is treated as a product, it does not necessarily mean that the legitimacy or distinctiveness is completely stripped away (Sørensen, Carman, 2009, pp. 319-325). Using heritage tourism as an advantage to the economy is not the issue, but the idea of modifying the urban scenarios is; the commodification and international standardisation of the urban heritage erases what makes it unique to other historic landscapes (Halewood, Hannam, 2001, p. 570). This results in, “producing similar outcomes across different historic urban landscapes” which obliterates the main purpose of heritage tourism as a distinctive experience (Khirfan, 2016, p. 7). To elaborate, the developments and modifications aimed at meeting
Furthermore, the distinctiveness of different heritages is influenced beyond interventions and urban rehabilitation, but simultaneously through the life of the local inhabitants and their strong connection to their heritage (Khirfan, 2016, p. 6). The collective diversification of cultural identities, influenced by their heritage, are a representation 16
is when the development process contradicts the reality of the local inhabitants’ heritage, she describes this process as “[Alienating] the local inhabitants of these historic urban landscapes especially when their socio-economic and cultural realities differ significantly from the objectives of the economically driven planning process” (Khirfan, 2016, p. 7). To abridge, although economically driven interventions and the built environment can be strikingly influenced by the concept of international standardisation and legitimisation, the local inhabitants frame the heritage of the historic urban landscape with their will to hold on to their roots.
of the national identity. Even with commercialising heritage, Khirfan states that the locals are considered as a significant in the tourism product (2016). Therefore, although the standardisation of the built heritage jeopardises the unique identity of the landscape, the local inhabitants’ cultural identities often remain distinctive. Moreover, the local community play a substantial role in shaping the city and forming and maintaining the heritage and therefore are considered as an asset in the local experience of a place (Graham, 2002, p. 1005).
2.2. Perception of Heritage 2.2.1. How people shape the city
It is essential to understand the relevance of how people shape the city; the way heritage is perceived is based on people’s own thoughts, beliefs, feelings and experiences. One of the most influential figures in understanding city-building is Jane Jacobs, an activist who changed the way urban planning is perceived in her work “The Death and Life of Great American Cities” (1961). Although Jacobs’s research was focused on American cities, her theories, ideologies and critical thinking can be applicable to many different contexts. This is specifically in terms of how developers build the city with a vision that differs from the reality of what actually shapes the city (Jacobs, 1961, pp. 13-39). Additionally, her work conveys how the life of the city is beyond simply the physical structures (buildings) as she looks into the gaps in the city, the in-between spaces. One of Jacobs’s most influential concepts is the eyes on the street, “There must be eyes upon the street, eyes
Although local cultures may be influenced by globalisation, they are still a representation of the true local identity, whereas the development of the built environment, sometimes made to fit international standards, can sometimes strip away the reality of the local identity. Hall (1997) states “It is us in society, within human culture, who make things mean, who signify. Meanings, consequently, will always change, from one culture or period to another “ (Hall, 1997, p. 61). Therefore, it is essential to acknowledge the value of the local communities as a part of the city; the people in the city are what makes a city unique, and it could be argued that their impact on how heritage is viewed could be considered more influential than the actual built environment (Smith, 2006, p. 19). ). Khirfan’s argument states that the issue with developing historic urban landscapes 17
belonging to those we might call the natural proprietors of the street” (Jacobs, 1961, p. 45). To elaborate, the eyes on the street are the people in the street, and the natural proprietors could imply that it’s the local inhabitants of the urban landscape. In recent times, this quote, and Jacobs’ work in general, has been interpreted differently according to the diverse contexts in which her concepts apply. In the context of this dissertation, with the modern developments of the historic urban landscapes it is important to consider the people as a part of the place-making process. What is a place without its people? As mentioned earlier, with the progression of heritage tourism, developments have been, to an extent, governed by meeting international standards in order to attract a larger number of international tourists. It is also essential to consider increasing the number of “the natural proprietors” of the historic urban landscapes as they are an essential tool in the heritage experience.
private-fashion” (Jacobs, 1961, 65), and in the case of historic urban landscapes, its beings together both tourists and locals, which creates an experience on its own. However, in order to further understand how to incorporate the people’s perceptions in the development of an urban space, it is imperative to interpret what a ‘space’ is and how it effects the human behaviour, perception and actions (Rendell, 2017, p. 66). 2.2.2. Understanding space Jane Rendell, an architecture historian, studies the relationship between architectural space and people’s unconscious thoughts and feelings in her work “The Architecture of Psychoanalysis: Spaces of Transition” (2017). She looks at architecture beyond the physical boundaries but also considers the empty gaps and the intangible aura of a space. Additionally, she describes the effects a space has on a person as “inducing social behaviour” (Rendell, 2017, p.46). She describes the movement of a person from one space to another as a “transitional object”, whereas a “transitional space” is what takes a person from one space to another, which is also known as “the in-between spaces” (Rendell, 2017, p. 47). Therefore, if the architecture of the transitional space is neglected, the ‘transitional object’ (the person) is a lost object and hence, “the transitional phenomena have become diffused” (Rendell, 2017, p. 47). To simplify, according to this theory, the individual is connected to the space they are in, whether it is bounded by walls or not. Therefore, with regards
There is no definitive answer as to how heritage can be perceived however, there are several elements that determine one’s perception based on their experience (Graham, 2002, p. 1005). With modern developments being focused on preserving or developing the built environment, it is crucial that the individual and collective human experiences are taken into account as an important factor in place-making (Jacobs, 1961, 65). ). Jacobs describes the public space human experience as, “bringing together people who do not know each other in an intimate, 18
to the development of historic urban landscapes, in order to create an experience and a connection between the individual and the space, it is important to simultaneously consider the people, the gaps between structures and the indoor and outdoor experiences equally. Rendell also states, “[There is an] unconscious relationship that exists between a subject and his/her objects, both internal and external”, where in this case is a tangible and intangible connection between a person and a place (Rendell, 2017, p. 67). The different experiences a person has with a space, whether it is through the physical elements or the psychological aspects, create a perception for a person about that particular space (Rendell, 2017, pp. 68-79). The external environment influences the internal thoughts.
contexts of the developments. Furthermore, the analysis of the different themes disclosed key issues to explore: • Heritage as a comodity • International standardisation • Tangible and intangible heritage
2.3. Interpretation versus perception Based on the different literary studies, through the understanding of tourism, commodifying spaces and understanding the relationship between a person and a space, it is evident that the many different characteristics impact how heritage can be perceived or interpreted. The interpretation of heritage focuses mainly on how heritage is incorporated in developments whereas the perception of heritage is aimed at focusing on the human experience within the developments. Therefore, rather than seeing them as two individual fields, it is apparent that both are intertwined and either complement each other or contradict each other and this depends on the different 19
3. Methodology Case Study Review
Case Study
A case study approach has been considered as the main method of exploring the relationship between the perception and interpretation of heritage. As stated earlier, Muscat is a city that carries one of the richest historical elements in Sultanate of Oman as well as the gulf region. One of the main sites in Muscat that is a representation of its rich history is the district of Muttrah (Walter, 2016). In recent years, developers took this as an opportunity to expand the heritage tourism within the city and the latest development plan being by two companies called ‘DAMAC’ and ‘OMRAN’. The project is called “Sultan Qaboos Waterfront” and is described the project objective as “[transforming] the historical centre to an economic hub” with the goal of increasing the number of tourism in the city by 2040 (DAMAC, 2018).
The future of Muttrah’s development, according to the developers’ masterplan, is to create a mixeduse development project offering residential, commercial and public spaces to the public realm. Therefore, I was keen on exploring the extent that Muttrah’s heritage was implemented in the physical and non-physical aspects of the future development. Figures 2 and 3 are images of the develpment’s masterplan, showing the future potential of Muttrah. Figures 4 and 5 show historic Muttrah and its community during the 20th Century.
22
23
3.1. Qualitative Research
3.2.1. Walk-along interview
The research methods involved in exploring the research questions throughout this study all involve a qualitative approach rather than a quantitative one. This implies that the investigation and analysis rely purely on the social aspect rather than quantified data (Bryman, 2012, p. 380). Therefore, the study emphasises on an interpretive process of exploring the key themes of this research. The reason for choosing a qualitative approach is because the main purpose of the methodology is to get involved with the participants in order to establish a clearer analysis of the interpretations and perceptions. Furthermore, the research methods were categorised according to the two main themes which are the interpretation of heritage and the perception of heritage, in order to compare and contrast the data. Figure 6 indicates the stakeholders involved in the project, and some of which engaged in this research. (Refer to appendix 1 for timetable of data collection).
The walk-along interview was the first phase of gathering data to explore the research questions. I began with a semi-structured interview with the project development manager (D1), as he guided me in the areas affected by the future development. Figure 7 indicates the route taken through the course of this interview. Moreover, the intention was to carry an interview while simultaneously getting a tour around the proposed site. One of the main advantages of a walk-along semi-structured interview is the flexibility of it which allowed me to experience the site and concurrently visualise the project development process. Firstly, the walkalong began from the first part of the development site and ended at the same point. The first half of the interview was a walk from the beginning point to the end point of the site. This consisted of prepared questions which focused on the project aims and objectives. (Refer to appendix 2). As he explained to me the relationship of the project with the city heritage, I noted down the key elements which I was particularly keen on exploring further. Following this was the walk back to the starting point where I asked him to elaborate on the key elements using clarifying questions. As a result, I was able to envision the development in the context. This resulted in more participant engagment, it “helps reduce typical power dynamics between the interviewer and interviewee (as subject)� (Carpiano, 2008, p. 267).
3.2. Interpretation of Heritage The interpretation of heritage focuses mainly on how heritage has been implemented in modern public tourist interventions in Muscat. In order to explore this further, a walk-along and semistructured interviews were carried out with the developers, architects and urban planners involved in the project. Through this phase all the participants agreed on the interviews being recorded. 24
25
26
of this was to examine whether this influenced their own interpretations and perceptions of heritage. Following this was questions directly focused on the project aims and objectives and its relationship to the heritage of Muttrah. In order to elaborate further on their responses, there were specifying questions as well as probing questions based on the different feedbacks (Bryman, 2012, pp. 467499). Moreover, I ensured that all the questions were focused on the issue in order to explore the main theme in more depth in the limited amount of time I was given for the interviews, due to their tight schedules. Bryman states that in order to have a detailed interview with the aim of getting as much information on the selected subject, there should be a variety of different types of questions (Bryman, 2012, 478). I found that this allowed me to explore the various aspects which influenced the interpretation of heritage in Muttrah’s development.
I found that this form of interview followed more of a conversational nature rather than a typical interview. Moreover, it was a combination of an ethnographic approach and interviews. This method is described as “fusing the two traditional methodological techniques of field observations and qualitative interviewing… [taking] advantage of each method’s strengths, while employing both to compensate for each other’s limitations.” (Carpiano, 2008, p. 265). 3.2.2. Semi-structured interviews This phase involved three semi-structured interviews that were held in the offices of a developer (D2), urban designer (D3) and landscape architect (D4). All the participants are under one company (IMRAN) and involved in the project. Based on the data gathered from the walk-along, I prepared questions for all three interviews concerning the extent that heritage was implemented in the intervention. (Refer to appendix 3) However, as it was a semi-structured interview, based on the responses of the developers, new questions came up to elaborate on certain elements. This allowed for access to different views of the participants but still addressing the main research issue (Bryman, 2012, p. 472). Each interview went on for approximately ten to fifteen minutes and was carried in the span of two working days.
3.3. Perception of Heritage This phase focuses mainly on how heritage is perceived by the public in Muttrah. This was based on the information gained through the previous interviews with the aim of comparing the interpretation of heritage with how it is perceived in reality. In order to explore this topic further, an ethnographic approach was considered as well as on-site spontaneous interviews with members of the public. . All the data collected were recorded through field notes due to the spontaneity of it as well as ensuring that no ethical factors were disregarded.
The interviews began with open-ended introducing questions regarding their roles in the project and their interest in the subject. The main purpose 27
3.3.1. An Ethnographic Approach An ethnographic approach was carried through the form of fieldnotes, indicated in Figure 8, in order to record anything that grabbed my attention on the site instantaneously. This phase began with a site visit around the area which will undergo the future development within Muttrah. The reason for carrying an ethnographic study is due to the idea that the perception of heritage focuses mainly on the social aspects of a site and therefore, this approach was the most appropriate in engaging with the research questions (Sørensen, Carman, 2009, pp. 319-325). This method focuses particularly on the day-to-day life of the city, “The ethnographer participates, overtly or covertly in people’s daily lives, watching what happens, listening to what is said, asking questions; in fact, collecting whatever data are available to throw light on the issues with which he or she is concerned” (Hammersley, Atkinson, 1983, p. 2).
at looking at the tangible and intangible heritage elements in Muttrah. I recorded all my observations that I felt were relevant to my research in addition to sketches of the surrounding people and activities at that instant. Following this method, based on the knowledge gained from this research, I used this to indicate which areas were a potential to speak to the general public. I also ensured that I recorded videos of areas with the highest human activity as well as take photographs of the historical elements in the site that represent the city’s rich history. This has been represented in the form of a map in Figure 9, indicated the key elements and landmarks located in the site. 3.3.2. On-site interviews with the public This method was the last phase of data collection, which involved interviewing the general public about their experiences with heritage in the space. The aim for this phase was to get their own perceptions on the space, with the intention of complementing the ethnographic study that was conducted prior to this.
The aim of the ethnographic method was to get a clearer vision of the developers’ interpretation of heritage based on the perceptions of the users. This method allowed me to become a user of the site myself, blending in with the people and allow me to have my own perception of heritage in the site. I was particularly paying closer attention to which aspects of the site attracted most people, perceiving how the uses of the site differ between the locals and the tourists and finally, experiencing the different historic elements that the site has to offer, physically and culturally. It was an attempt
Based on the site visit and site study, I based the semi-structured interviews in areas with both the most concentrated number of people as well as the least concentrated number of people. The reason for doing so was to compare the different areas within the public realm to find out if there is a relationship between the space, heritage and the people. 28
Figure 8: Field Notes taken during ethnographic study (Author’s own, 2019). 29
3.5. Limitations:
Throughout this phase, I managed to interview fourteen people, with the attempt of interviewing a variety of occupiers in site who happened to be there for different intentions. The questions were very specific to the main research topic due to the fact that many people were not particularly keen on being stopped for a long period of time. The aim was to hold a spontaneous conversationlike semi-structured interview in order to ensure people were comfortable enough to share their thoughts, feelings and experiences rather than be intimidated by the typical interviewer-interviewee relationship. I found that with this method, people felt more interested in engaging with the research. Due to the spontaneous approach and the comfort of the public, the interview was recorded through field-notes, as a form of confidentiality, noting down the key points that were shared by the people rather than a voice recording of the interview. Finally, this method was based on a short interview concerning with the heritage experience within Muttrah, as well as their personal opinions on the idea of Muttrah’s potential future development.
All the phases for conducting the research were successful however I faced a number of obstacles during the course of the data collection. The main limitation was the time-scale for conducting all the interviews and site visits; due to the developers’ tight schedules I faced some difficulties interviewing a larger number of people which was my initial aim. Another issue faced was the amount of time I was given in order to hold each interview and therefore resulted in narrowing down the questions to be very specific to the research topic. However, I found that the interviews I managed to conduct were successful in terms of collecting the relevant data required to answer my initial research question. Lastly, another limitation faced was the difficulty in interesting the general public in engaging with the research through the interviews and therefore, resulted in the number of interviews which I managed to conduct.
3.4. Ethical Considerations Before conducting any of the methods, ensured that all the participants were aware of the research by explaining to them that I am a student at Newcastle University, the course I study, my proposed research outcome. I also explained that all participants were free to withdraw from engaging in this research at any time.
30
31
4. Results and Findings A Thematic Analysis
Within this chapter, a thematic approach is disclosed to indicate the various influences of each issue or element on the historic urban landscape, physically and non-physically.
residential hotels, family parks, a yacht quay, destination shopping centres and multiple entertainment facilities. When the D1 was asked about the extent that heritage has been preserved within the future development plans as well as the main aim for this development he responded with:
4.1. Interpretation of Heritage 4.1.1. Walk-along interview
“Oman is recognised for being hospitable in its nature, geographically and historically; welcoming people from different backgrounds. Our company focuses mainly on encouraging this identity through the tourism. We aim to embrace these elements within the future development of the city. Architecturally, we design a product that suits all segments, whether it is different age groups or different nationalities. We want to ensure that we create an inclusive space through the provision of different opportunities through knowledge, education and entertainment provided within these facilities.”
Through the exploration of the development site and an in-depth conversation-like interview with the developer, a firm understanding of the influence heritage has on the site was established, along with additional external forces which drove the progression of the development in many several aspects. Based on the data collected within this interview, a coherent analysis has been determined and represented. Firstly, based on the walk-along tour around the site, a map of the affected areas of the site was produced as a means of separating the different facilities and future potential uses of Muttrah as a heritage destination. The main facilities provided in the current Muttrah is the traditional market, concentrated with many locals and tourists, a fish market, local traditional stores and restaurants, all surrounding Oman’s main port. Surrounding this site is the Sultan’s palace, and two of the most recognised forts in Muscat that date back to the 1500’s, as indicated in Figure 9. D1 stated that the potential development for Muttrah would complement these elements, with the addition to a large mixed-use site which consists of luxury
To elaborate on this, the development of Muttrah aims to retain the city’s heritage and embrace it by virtue of expanding heritage tourism in the city. However, using tourism as a drive to retain the heritage also results in introducing changes to the historic urban landscape in order to cater for the international expectations. The modern development aims to include all social segments and thus, to an extent, drifts away from the distinctiveness of solely embracing the local heritage. This relates back to the literature review 34
when Khirfan (2016) states that in recent times, the international tourists’ needs are expected to be a significant factor that integrates in city planning (Khirfan, 2016, p. 6). To expand on this, Muscat’s development, similar to many cities recently, depends on meeting the global expectations as opposed to focusing on solely catering the needs of the local culture. Therefore, this indicates that although the Sultan Qaboos Waterfront project is aimed at increasing heritage tourism in the city, it also reflects on the international global development and standardised elements which Khirfan describes as losing the authenticity of the historic urban landscape’s heritage. Contrastingly, it could be argued that the drive to increase international tourism is used to embrace the city’s heritage to offer the local experience to the global world. This similar argument was stated by MacDonald (1997) where he states that modifying the city can be aimed at embracing and enhancing the urban landscape’s cultural heritage (MacDonald, 1997, pp. 155-176).
in terms of diversifying the city however, the heritage experience is mainly implemented in terms of the physical aspects such as the architectural features and the retail. Therefore, it could be argued that the social aspects of the city’s heritage are not integrated in the concepts as equally as the physical elements. However, the developer also stated that the modern public intervention is not aimed at taking the local heritage experience away, but it is intended to expand on the experience to attract a larger audience. 4.1.2. Standardising the City The semi-structured interviews consisted of similar questions and I found that their responses to the issue were also similar to one another in terms of the interpretation of heritage and the development of the city. When the topic of developing and modernising the historic city was brought up, the D3 responded with: “Many ingredients that go into the project make it successful in diverse aspects. We encourage the progression of smart cities and renewable energy, introducing technologies and green communities as a way of diversifying the existing state of Muttrah. This however, is not made with the aim of replacing Muttrah’s existing state, but we aim to further develop the facilities to meet international standards. This is the future of urban design and we want to introduce this generation to this progression.”
Moreover, during the walk-along interview, the developer also stated that even without developing Muttrah, heritage can already be experienced, felt and touched. Which raises the question as to why large developments and interventions are necessary in making the experience more successful and appealing to the international standards. These alterations are evident in Figure 10, a map indicating the affected areas of the site and their future potential uses. The variety of new facilities and the expansion of the area succeeds 35
Based on this response it is evident that although the heritage is retained to a certain extent such as preserving the traditional market, the development aims to modernise the city and introduce an altered reality of what the historic landscape actually is. This follows Graham’s argument when he states that even with the preservation of historic buildings and retaining the city’s historical elements, renovated their uses and changing elements to cater for latest generations, it goes against the main purpose of preserving the historic built environment (Graham, 2002, p. 1007).
Therefore, the development implements these modern features and technologies as a means of increasing the international audience, however, it also makes it difficult for the historic city to maintain and embrace its recognised identity that differs it from other cities. Muscat as a city has already began to progress into the modern urban landscape through implementing smart city technologies and modern standards within the city. However, Muttrah remains a district that carries some of the richest history of the city. 4.1.3. Heritage as a Tangible Experience
The issue with modernising a city to meet certain standards, in the context of this project, meeting international standards, is that the distinctive experience of the unique city becomes lost. The city’s identity becomes indistinguishable in context of the rest of the global cities. The latter is based on Khirfan’s argument that standardising heritage to meet international expectations results in promoting common outcomes throughout various historic urban landscapes (Khirfan, 2016, p. 7). This contradicts the principal purpose of heritage tourism as a unique experience across different landscapes. Furthermore, according to Graham (2002), cities are progressing and therefore it is understandable that modernisation and standardisation undeniably influence urban regeneration today. This determines the successfulness of cities in meeting public expectations as well as the ability to cater for a larger audience.
Based on the previous statement, I asked about the concern that modernising Muttrah and what it would mean to its distinctive historic identity that differentiates it from the rest of Muscat. The D2 responded to this issue with: “Although the development aims to create new modern urban landscape, the project still focuses on implementing the historic urban landscape and the cultures and traditions within the interventions. Heritage is explored through the traditional architectural features, the local food as cultural experience, the local retail components, the site is surrounded and reflected by elements of the city’s past. We blend this heritage with the modernisation of the city with the intention of complementing the heritage rather than compete with it.”
36
37
factor influenced the project, the D4 responded with:
This response in particular grabbed my attention due to the fact that, heritage is unquestionably being preserved within Muttrah, however, this is mainly explored through tangible elements. The project aims to complement the city’s rich history by creating a new experience surrounding the existing historical elements of the site that remain untouched. Examples of these elements are the market which is one of the main areas in the site with concentrated tourist activities, the historic forts that are at the highest points of the site, the main port which consists of ships coming in and out of the country, museums and lastly the Sultan’s palace. The city’s heritage is also explored through the traditional architectural features of the proposed developments. Although all these elements play a significant role in shaping a city’s heritage and embracing Muttrah’s historic urban landscape, the physical components complement the heritage whereas the intangible components, to an extent, are neglected. Therefore, it could be argued that the tangible heritage is preserved however, the intangible heritage is replaced by the modern smart city experience.
“It is undeniable that one of the main drives for this project as a whole is generating income. Toursim being one of the main sources of income for our economy, we take this as an advantage to benefit the economy. However, although money is one of the main driving forces for the project, what large development and public intervention is not? It is not a matter of creating something for the sole purpose of generating income, but it is definitely a large factor to be considered, and by the end of it, this is what determines the successfulness of the interventions.” ‘Money’ being a driving factor to the project development does not necessarily imply that all the changes in the urban landscape are based on the sole purpose that the project aims to generate income. However, based on Halewood and Hannam (2001), they claim that using heritage as a source of income implies that heritage is being treated as a commodity (Halewood, Hannam, 2001, p. 568). To elaborate in the context of Muttrah’s development, the heritage in the site is the main purpose tourists are concentrated in that district, therefore, heritage in this tourist intervention is a product that attracts the global world. However, this does not imply that the value of the city’s heritage is being taken for granted. In fact, it could be argued that using heritage as the main product of this development proves how valuable the heritage is and the project aims to embrace that.
4.1.4. Commodifying Heritage Furthermore, as stated in the literature review, tourism acts as one of the main sources of income for the economy, described as an “economic saviour” (Timothy, Nyaupane, 2009, p. 20). Therefore, it is inevitable to consider the income as a driving force for modern tourist interventions. When asked about the extent that the economic 38
Following some of the outcomes of the interviews, due to the heritage’s value, it is the main product that generates the economy’s income and therefore, the development aims to expand this element. Referring back to the literature review, commodifying heritage could obliterate the authenticity of the experience. Contrastingly, Halewood and Hannam (2001) argue that authenticity is not a standard measure and therefore, the interpretations of the distinctive experience could differ from one another. Based on the interviews held, the developers interpret heritage as the physical historic elements that represent the rich history through the built environment and through its ‘touched’ experience.
4.2.
the most concentrated number of people, locals and tourists due to its rich cultural representation. The experience of the market involves local retail, many local proprietors and both tangible and intangible experiences of the historic culture. This goes back to Jane Jacob’s concept of the eyes on the street (Jacobs, 1961). Additionally, through the site visit, what grabbed my attention was the lack of pedestrianised routes in an area heavily comprised of pedestrian movements. This is especially with regards to reaching from one main historic elements of the site to the other, for example, the market to the port, or the fort to the palace. Following the roam around the site, the ethnographic study was based purely on exploring the public’s experience of the site. The areas with the most concentrated number of people were simultaneously the areas that consisted of different activities. There were people eating, photographing, walking, there were individuals, couples, families, there were people working, people exploring and people simply using the space as a pathway to get to another destination. It was intriguing to see the diversity of human activity in the space, and being the ethnographer, I myself was experiencing the space. Personally, as a user of the space, I experienced the authenticity of the city’s history, and the lack of pedestrianised streets and routes created a journey of trying to find my way myself. This intrigued my interest in getting to know other people’s own experiences and perceptions of the space, hence the on-site interviews with the general public.
Perception of heritage:
Through this phase, the focus was concentrated more towards the intangible elements that represent the heritage experience of current Muttrah. The two main methodologies explored were ethnography which occurred during a site visit, following with the conversations with the public. 4.2.1. Understanding Space. During the site visit, photographs of the city’s famous historic elements were taken, as a means of indicating their position in the site, with relation to the human activity. In addition to that videos of the areas with the highest human activities were taken. Based on this I found that the market had 39
4.2.2. The People of the City
Lastly, the tourists had similar claims about how much heritage is embraced in the market place in particular due to the various experiences offered within the space such as the foods, the local shops and the people. One of them described the experience as heritage being explored visually and as a feeling. The diversity of the people and the local’s follows Jacob’s concepts of the eyes on the street, claiming that the street belongs to the diversity of people in which that creates a community (Jacobs, 1961).
There was a diversity of users in the space, many being tourists and local retail workers and some being local visitors. Throughout the multiple interviews, I received different responses about how heritage is perceived and experienced in Muttrah. It was also evident that based on where the interviews were held, the perceptions of that particular space were similar. Firstly, the market place was the most crowded and diverse space in terms of human activity and therefore, managed to interview seven people. Due to the crowdedness of the space it was somewhat difficult to have people engage in the research. However, within the seven people interviewed, three were tourists, two were local visitors and two were local retailers. Based on their responses, the retailers stated that the experience of working in Muttrah feels like an opportunity to get to know the city more by the day. They claim that daily activity of people in the market space in particular is always at a high number, creating a community of people from different nationalities and different backgrounds. This goes back to what the developer (D1) claimed about Oman’s hospitality welcoming people of all nationalities and cultural backgrounds. Similarly, the local visitors claimed that, although they live in Muscat and experience the culture within their day-to-day lives, Muttrah will always be a place that brings back the history of Oman, therefore they often enjoy visiting as a way of exploring their culture.
Following the market place was interviews held by the corniche surrounding the port. Within this area, interviews with two tourists and two locals were carried. They described the openness of the space as a relaxing atmosphere, where looking around that particular spot, a glimpse of the heritage is represented, through the people, the historical forts, the ships, the sceneries, the noice and the aura. The locals describe it as a vision of Oman’s culture and tradition, stating that no area in the city is as accurate of a representation of the past as Muttrah is and hence the intense concentration of people in that area. The tourists describe Muttrah as a beautiful experience in learning about the local culture, without having to talk to anyone, the experience is simply embraced in its nature. This follows Rendell’s theory about the importance of spaces in relation to emotions. The corniche is an area that does not consist of any intriguing physical element to enforce human activity however, the responses from the people indicate how the oppenness of the space creates an experience 40
Lastly, the last set of interviews were held in an area within the centre of Muttrah, however, consisted of little to no human activity. The area was surrounded by neglected historic buildings however, is located in between the port and the market and therefore, is occasionally used as a pathway to connect the two. Within that area I interviewed three locals who were passing by. One of them claimed to live in Muttrah, close by to the centre. He described the current Muttrah as a much different experience than it was in the past, claiming that although it visually embraces the heritage of the city, many residents used to live within the area. He followed with stating that there was a much apparent sense of community where everyone knew everyone. However, due to the developments that occurred in the district and continue to occur, many families moved away from the area, and scattered around Muscat. This goes back to Khirfan’s argument about how modernising historic urban landscapes can abolish the reality of the local inhabitants and the true identity of the environment’s heritage (2016).
4.3.
Firstly, heritage is interpreted through the preservation of the existing built environment; the modern developments surround what already exists in the city as a means of complementing the city’s existing heritage and using that to increase tourism. Additionally, Heritage is interpreted as a tangible experience, in terms of the retail, food, physical activities and architectural features. Furthermore, they aim to use heritage as a way of bringing the community together; the use of heritage as a product of tourism and improving the services to meet international standards, aims to attract people from all over the globe. They perceive the developments as creating a community rather than separating modernisation from heritage. One of the responses from the developers stated that the project vision is to build horizontally rather than vertically; building horizontally creates a sense of community whereas building vertically is a representation of isolation. Therefore, although the project takes up a large space within the historic urban landscape, they claim that the purpose of it is to enrich the community and create an experience for all segments by providing more facilities and services surrounding the historical elements that offer the unique local experience.
Discussion
4.3.1. To what extent do developers interpret heritage into modern public interventions in Muscat?
4.3.2. What is the role of tourism in the perpetuation of heritage in Muscat’s built and cultural environment?
Based on the analysis, it is evident that the developers interpret heritage into the modern interventions through the physical elements that represent the historic urban landscape.
Tourism in the city is interpreted as a driving force to preserve Muscat’s heritage. Similar to the 41
literature review mentioned earlier about commodifying heritage, the interpretation of heritage in the city is, to an extent, is deemed as a product aimed at increasing the city’s tourist activity. Researchers argue that commodification of the historic urban landscape demolishes the authentic experience that heritage is meant to offer (Halewood, Hannam, 2001, p. 570). Contrastingly, it could be argued that tourism is seen as a motive to preserve the heritage as a means of embracing it. Therefore, commodifying Muttrah does not necessarily imply losing its heritage, it could simply be interpreted as an element that encourages an authentic experience through heritage tourism.
Contrastingly, the perception of heritage is based on the social understanding towards heritage.The intangible elements of heritage include the feelings towards the space, the local communities, the cultures and traditions and the human activity. The existence of the physical elements create a sense of place and identity for the city. Similarly, the aim to increase the diversity of human activity in the space, results in creating a collective community in the historic urban landscape, between the new and the old. The spatial and social aspects of a place significantly shape the city’s identity. Rendell (2017) states that the spatial analysis influences how people experience and behave in a space, which was evident in the case study. Similarly, Khirfan (2016) argues that diversifying the community creates a cultural identity that complements the heritage of a city. D1 stated that Muscat is a city known for its hospitality and its exposure to different cultural identities throughout history. Therefore, increasing international tourism embraces what the city is already recognised for.
However, since tourism is a significantly important economic factor, it demands urban developments and standardisation of services to meet international expectations. This argument was stated in both the interviews and literary researches. Therefore, standardising heritage results in producing similar outcomes in the historic urban landscapes globally and thus loses the concept of having an authentic experience (Timothy, Nyaupane, 2009, p. 20). To conclude this point, tourism can be interpreted as both an opportunity and a threat to the preservation of heritage.
To reiterate, the built environment, complements the intangible experiences to a certain extent, but also contradicts the concept of heritage being authentic and untouched. This could represent a fragmanted reality of how heritage is perceived in the modern era. Arguably, commercialising the historic city, may drive the the local inhabitants away, as stated by one of the on-site interviews. This contradicts the reality Muttrah’s historic identity and hence, it could be argued that this goes against the social heritage of the city.
4.3.3. Do the interpretations of heritage complement or contradict how heritage is perceived by the people of Muscat? The interpretation of heritage in Muscat is mainly based on the tangible elements as stated earlier. 42
5. Conclusion
5.1. Interpretation of Heritage
5.1.2. Commodifying heritage
5.1.1. International standardisation of the space
Through incorporating smart city technologies, luxury hotels, shopping centres and retail, the historical urban landscape transforms into a commercial centre with historical elements implemented rather than completely embraced. Although this analysis is deemed to be critical against commercialising the urban landscape, it is also arguably perceived as a motive to embrace heritage differently. The case study research indicates that the modernised district is aimed at complementing the heritage by increasing human activity in the area. This forces the city to retain the historical elements while simultaneously improving the services to cater for the community as a whole, both local and international.
One of the main texts explored throughout this dissertation is the work of Luna Khirfan “World Heritage, Urban Design and Tourism” (2016). She addresses many issues that were investigated throughout the process of this research. The main elements explored was the international standardisation and its influence on the city’s historical identity. Similarly, this was evident in the case study research in which the developers claimed that one of the main motives of the project is to meet international standards. According to Khirfan, standardising elements of historic nature loses its authentic identity, therefore, with the international standardisation of Muttrah, the district gains an identity similar to many standardised cities.
Halewood and Hannam’s main concern is that commodifying the urban landscape results in the heritage being neglected in terms of its authenticity (Halewood, Hannam, 2001, p. 570). Therefore, the analysis indicates that commercialising Muttrah could result in the district’s identity being replaced by a false image of what the city’s history truly is. Although the developers argue that the project does not intend on competing with the heritage, the local inhabitant claimed otherwise. The implication voices that Muttrah recently contradicts what Muttrah was historically. The district gradually loses the sense of community that Muttrah previously embraced due to the constant development of commodifying the Heritage. . The research indicates that Muttrah carries the richest
Although there were different issues explored throughout this research, it also became evident that all the elements being explored were intertwined rather than being individual features of heritage tourism. To elaborate on this, the international standardisation of the historic city as a means of increasing global tourism indicates that the city is considered a commodity to the tourist sector (Halewood, Hannam, 2001, p. 570). Therefore, standardising Muttrah implies that heritage is a product used to attract international tourists.
44
history of the country as a whole and consequently was portrayed as an opportunity to expand on the tourism sector to support the local economy. Therefore, it is inevitable to conclude that to a certain extent, a city’s heritage transforms into a product in the context of heritage tourism.
5.2.
5.2.2. Spatial analysis Through the study of Jane Rendell’s “The Architecture of Psychoanalysis: Spaces of Transition” (2017), this guided the focus for the elements to consider through the spatial analysis of the case study. Firstly, through the on-site interviews, it was important to consider how people felt about the different spaces. It was evident that the spaces with the highest human activity and heritage identity were consequently the spaces people felt most comfortable being in. Similarly, the openness of the spaces allows for more freedom in terms of the journey of the different occupiers in addition to the accessibility of visually acknowledging the different heritage experiences. Contrastingly, the neglected spaces only consisted of locals who appreciated the space due to the sense of historical identity that the place reflects. Therefore, it is important to consider space as more than just an area of physical boundaries or constant development, but to also consider the aura of the space.
Perception of Heritage
5.2.1. The Occupiers An apparent conclusion to developing cities is that the main goal is to cater for and increase the occupiers of the space. Jane Jacobs’s “The Death and Life of Great American Cities” (2016) is one of the most famous literary pieces on the street life and the value of people in the urban landscape, which is why it was analysed throughout the course of this research. One of the most evident concepts of Jacobs within the case study of Muttrah was the eyes on the street. She claims that successfulness of a space is based on the number of eyes on the street, which is the number of human activities. Therefore, it could be argued that in terms of the successfulness of the city, the development aims at increasing human activity and therefore, is a public space that caters for everyone. Contrastingly, in term of the heritage, as it drives the local inhabitants away, the new community that the space creates opposes the identity of the local community that it has prior to the developments.
To conclude on these key elements, it is clear that all of the different factors and issues are intertwines, each change leads to a reaction. Although the analysis was based on a case study research of Muttrah, its relation to the different literary studies within the research indicates that the different theories explored can be implied to many historical urban landscapes and tourist developments globally. The case study was explored a as means of further investigating the 45
extent that the theories relate to one another in addition to the influence they have on the distinctiveness of the historic urban landscapes. Lastly, the concept of international standardisation implies that many global cities apply the different requirements to cater for the global world and hence it is argued that the global built environment in general faces similar consequences of these issues.
5.3. Recommendations It is understandable that heritage tourism is developed as a means of saving the local economy however, there are several aspects that could be considered as an alternative to creating a completely brand-new environment. In addition to creating new experiencing, the project could possibly focus on improving the current experience of heritage in the site. This could be done through enhancing the journey between the different existing historical elements of the site. Therefore, this could result in having. Amore authentic experience of the city’s local heritage. Figure 11 indicates the possible solutions to preserve heritage in the modern city, the expected outcomes and how it can be achieved.
46
47
Cartier, C.L., 1996. Conserving the built environment and generating heritage tourism in Peninsular Malaysia. Tourism Recreation Research, 21(1), pp.45-53.
Bibliography
Al-Belushi, M.A.K., 2013. The heritage prospective and urban expansion in capital cities: old defense sites in Muscat, Oman. WIT Transactions on The Built Environment, 131, pp.551-562.
Conversi, D., 2010. Cultural homogenization, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies.
Ashworth, G., 2011. Preservation, conservation and heritage: Approaches to the past in the present through the built environment. Asian anthropology, 10(1), pp.1-18.
DAMAC. (2018). Mina Al Sultan Qaboos Waterfront Project. [online] Design Build Network. Available at: https://www.designbuildnetwork.com/projects/mina-al-sultanqabooswaterfront-project/ [Accessed 14 Dec 2019].
Aziz-al-Ahsan, S., 1998. Muslim political culture, colonial heritage, and regime transformation: South Asia and the Arab Middle East. Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, 21(2).
El Amrousi, M., & Biln, J. (2010). Muscat emerging: tourism and cultural space. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 8(4), 254-266. DOI: 10.1080/14766825.2010.521246
Bidwells. (2018). What Is Heritage Architecture? [online] Available at: https://www.bidwells.co.uk/ faqs/what-is-heritage-architecture/ [Accessed 15 Feb 2020]
ENNEN, E. (1999) Heritage in Fragments: The Meaning of the Past for City Centre Residents. Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
Bryman, A., 2016. Social research methods. Oxford university press.
Goodall, B., 1993. Industrial heritage and tourism. Built environment, 19(2), p.93.
Carpiano, R.M., 2009. Come take a walk with me: The “Go-Along� interview as a novel method for studying the implications of place for health and well-being. Health & place, 15(1), pp.263-272.
Goulding, C., 2000. The commodification of the past, postmodern pastiche, and the search for authentic experiences at contemporary heritage attractions. European Journal of Marketing.
48
Graburn, N., 2001. Learning to consume: What is heritage and when is it traditional. Consuming tradition, manufacturing heritage: Global norms and urban forms in the age of tourism, pp.68-90
Macdonald, S., 1997. A people’s story: heritage, identity and authenticity. In Touring cultures (pp. 165-185). Routledge. Newby, P.T., 2013. Support or threat to heritage?. Tourism, culture and identity in the new Europe. London: Routledge, pp.206-228.
Graham, B., 2002. Heritage as knowledge: capital or culture?. Urban studies, 39(5-6), pp.1003-1017. Grenville, J., 2007. Conservation as psychology: ontological security and the built environment. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 13(6), pp.447-461.
Nuryanti, W., 1996. Heritage and postmodern tourism. Annals of tourism research, 23(2), pp.249-260. Rendell, J., 2017. The Architecture of Psychoanalysis: Spaces of Transition. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Halewood, C. and Hannam, K., 2001. Viking heritage tourism: Authenticity and commodification. Annals of tourism research, 28(3), pp.565-580.
Rodzi, N.I.M., Zaki, S.A. and Subli, S.M.H.S., 2013. Between tourism and intangible cultural heritage. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 85, pp.411-420
Hall, S., 1997. Representation: cultural representations and signifying practices. London: Sage/Open University.
Smith, L., & Akagawa, N. (2009). Intangible Heritage. London: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.
Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1983). Ethnography: Principles in practice. London: Tavistock.
Smith, L., 2006. Uses of heritage. Routledge, pp. 1-30.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House.
Sørensen, M.L.S. and Carman, J. eds., 2009. Heritage studies: Methods and approaches. Routledge.
Khirfan, L. (2016). Historic Urban Landscapes: World Heritage and Contraditions of Tourism. In: World Heritage, Urban Design and Tourism: Three Cities in the Middle East. NY: Routeldge, pp.3-11.
Stovel, H., 1998. Risk preparedness: a management manual for world cultural heritage 49
List of Figures:
Timothy, D. J., & Boyd, S. W. (2003). Heritage Tourism. Essex: Pearson Education Limited
Figure 1: Hinai, R. (2020). Map of Oman. [Image] Valeri, M., 2015. Oman : politics and society in the Qaboos state. London: Hurst & Company
Figure 2: DAMAC. (2018). Muttrah Masterplan. [Image]
Vogt, C. A. and Fesenmaier, D. R. (1995) ‘Tourists and retailers’ perceptions of services’, Annals of Tourism Research, 22(4): 763-780
Figure 3: DAMAC. (2018). Mina Al Sultan Qaboos Waterfront Project. [Image]
Walter, B., 2016. History of Oman : history, government, politics, economy, society, religion, tourism Createspace., S.l.: Digital Light Publishin
Figure 4: Butt, C. (1972). Muttrah Market. [Image]
While, A. and Short, M., 2011. Place narratives and heritage management: the modernist legacy in Manchester. Area, 43(1), pp.4-13.
Figure 6: Hinai, R. (2020). Stakeholder Map of Muttrah development project. [Image]
Figure 5: Butt, C. (1980). Oman Port. [Image]
Figure 7: Hinai, R. (2020). Map of walk-along route. [Image]
Wood, L. (1995) The conservation and management of historic urban space, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 1: 111 - 125.
Figure 8: Hinai, R. (2020). Field notes of ethnographic study [Image]
WTO. (1995). Charter for Sustainable Tourism. WorldTourism Organisation: Madrid
Figure 9:Hinai, R. (2020). Map of Muttrah’s heritage sites [Image]
WTO. (1998). Yearbook of tourism statistics (Vol.1). (50th ed.). Madrid: World Tourism Organisation.
Figure 10: Hinai, R. (2020). Map of development site and potential uses [Image].
Yale, P. (1991). From Tourist Attractions to HeritageTourism. ELM Publications: London.
Figure 11: Hinai, R (2020). Action plan diagram.
Zhu, Y., & Salazar, N. B. (2015). Heritage and Tourism. Global Heritage: A Reader. 50
51
52