Monuments need tourism, experts explain

The Culture Ministry’s head ephor for Cycladic antiquities hits the nail on the head when he points to one of the most popular islands in Greece to describe the imbalance between culture and tourism. “Some 2.5 million foreign visitors choose Mykonos every year, yet just 185,000 of them make the short boat trip to Delos,” says Dimitris Athanasoulis, referring to the protected archaeological site of what was once the Aegean’s most sacred destination.

It’s a massive disparity – even considering that Delos is a seasonal site – that it is closed when the weather is adverse for sailing, and visitors must pay the cost of the boat trip as well as admission.

It’s not just Mykonos though. There are enough examples of this divide to have prompted the archaeologist responsible for protecting, investigating and promoting the island cluster’s antiquities, along with Ioanna Dretta, the president of Marketing Greece, a private initiative aimed at promoting Greek tourism, and CEO of REDS, an Ellaktor Group member, to examine how the two worlds – culture and tourism – can be brought closer together, to the benefit of both. Ahead of what is expected to be another boom tourism season, Kathimerini reached out to Athanasoulis and Dretta to hear about their plans and learn how they’re progressing.

The facts

Dretta puts things into perspective, outlining certain facts. “According to the most recent research, Greek tourism is among the world’s top five brands, is the third biggest force in terms of the sun-sea product, and eighth in marine tourism, but when it comes to culture, it is not even among the top 10,” she says.

“It is, therefore, clear that there’s a problem and a lot of missed opportunities, as cultural experience seekers are highly educated individuals who travel frequently, immerse themselves in the places they choose, and are discerning visitors. These opportunities are the responsibility of both sectors,” she adds.

“Ioanna and I started working together because we recognized the problem. We are indeed talking about two parallel worlds that are hard to bring together even though we know that one depends on the other. The people responsible for tourism and those responsible for monuments come from completely different points of departure and it is not in their purview to understand the relationship between the two, the connection, at least at first glance,” says Athanasoulis.

“To speak for the archaeologists, the overexploitation in certain parts of the country is essentially interpreted as demonstrating that tourism is a threat to the cultural environment, causing a defensive reaction. Let me give you an example, that again has to do with Delos. I have colleagues who’ll say, ‘Why on Earth would Delos need promotion?’ Believing that ours is the most beautiful country in the world is at the root of the problem, because it leads us to believe that we don’t need to do anything. But monuments and antiquities are there because there are people who visit them – and tourism is the main vehicle for a site to acquire visitors. For archaeologists, therefore, tourism is not a necessary evil but an essential goal. Public archaeology showcases our cultural heritage, and this can only be achieved through tourism. The problem each time is how to strike a balance: to have visitors who are essential to the continued survival of our monuments on the one hand, and, on the other, not to let overtourism devour the cultural resource, which is non-renewable, and where much intervention is irreversible,” adds the archaeologist.

‘The people responsible for tourism and those responsible for monuments come from completely different points of departure’

Sustainability

So what is it that makes this relationship between tourism and culture so fraught if, as Dretta admits, “when we sit down at the same table, there is so much in common, so much uniting us”? When does skepticism overshadow the spirit of cooperation? “The relationship between the two worlds becomes toxic mainly as a result of the public’s experience vis-a-vis the protection of monuments,” she says. “It becomes negatively charged as a result of red tape, staff shortages and delays. I have to say, however, that at events, actions and conferences, whenever the people of culture and tourism come together, we see how much there is in common and there is a sincere effort at self-criticism.”

We ask Athanasoulis what he has to say on the subject of self-criticism and where the people of culture may be at fault. “It’s in the approach toward the comment, in the failure to see that tourism is the primary target,” he says without hesitation. “The second thing I’d like to mention is that there are indeed delays that create a negative bias with regard to investments, but we should not forget that the archaeological service is not just a mechanism for managing and promoting cultural heritage; it is also an oversight mechanism and one dedicated to preventing violations. The situation has improved over the past few years, but I agree that more needs to be done. That said, this is not something that is entirely under the control of the archaeological service, because departments are understaffed, so delays are inevitable when interest rises. I don’t know how these problems can be fixed, but they are the job of the ministries. What we want is to bring the two worlds closer together – and the conditions are ripe for such a thing.”

The archaeological services often take the fall and are the easiest targets to blame for problems, but they are also the ones that protect islands, traditional settlements and cultural sites from rampant tourism exploitation and construction, by imposing limits and making sure – to the best of their abilities – that laws are being upheld.

There is also the question of whether tourism, which has been doing so well these past few years, has done its part for the protection of the country’s cultural heritage too.

Dretta doesn’t beat around the bush. “Tourism has not given the financial support it could to cultural initiatives. It does not pursue cooperation as staunchly as it should so as to find common ground, areas of convergence. It has not embraced monuments, archaeological sites and museums with any fervor. It is to blame because it does not incorporate the cultural experiences Greece has to offer in the tourism product organically. An archaeological site is a resource and in order to become a product it needs to be incorporated into the tourism ‘package.’ If those of us who are in tourism don’t include all of these activities in our offers in an organic and natural way, then that is a problem,” she says.

The challenge

Both experts agree that the biggest challenge for Greece right now has to do with sustainability. “For tourism, sustainability is the big bet that needs to be won so that we can move forward. We need to manage the product in such a way that it is beneficial to both society and the economy, but also in a way that is sustainable from a social, economic and environmental perspective,” notes Dretta.

“We can’t shoot ourselves in the foot. We saw what happened on Mykonos and elsewhere last year. Healthy tourism business needs to recalibrate and those who do not uphold standards need to be ejected because they’re undermining the product,” says Athanasoulis, referring to an attack on an archaeologist who took on powerful interests on the island whose business activities violated numerous cultural and environmental protection laws.

Athanasoulis points to Italy as a successful example of cooperation between the fields of tourism and cultural heritage. “Studies have shown that Greece’s cultural product is viewed as being too one-dimensional: just ancient relics; columns in Delphi and columns at Knossos. But Greece’s history is unbelievably rich and what can be done is infinite, if all the different stakeholders work together in the right way,” he adds.