by Ms. Micaela Mikhy Neveu
HeritageForAll Heritage Intern (Call 2018) from Paris, France
In France, the heritage site was developed mainly in the political and institutional context of the French Revolution. The evolution of the concept of heritage has since followed the many changes in society, particularly with the relatively new appearance of the notion of “Patrimonialization”. By studying the history of heritage, from its beginning to the most recent strategies proposed by UNESCO for the defense of heritage (tangible and intangible, natural and living), the concept is established as a product of the modernity accompanying the construction of modern nations and states, post-colonialism, the evolution of democracies and the transformations of industrial societies, ecological and environmental consciousness, or the protection of cultural diversity in the context of globalization.
The notion of heritage has been produced many impacts, both in terms of disciplines, such as art history, ethnology and museology, and on the transformation of the territory and the environment, as well as on the renewal of political history and the building of nations. With the era of multimedia and the Internet, heritage continues to grow as a social and cultural phenomenon, particularly through its staging with audiences and tourists, its scenography and its amazing narration in the service of attractiveness.
Heritage marketing and its strategies for the widest audiences is a central political and economic issue at the heart of cultural debates as an important driver of country development. But heritage and mass tourism are also sources of imbalance and destruction for the sites themselves, for the environment and the quality of life. A dynamic prospective would make it possible to envisage an innovative marketing able to integrate the concepts of sustainable development applied to the heritage and tourism domains based on the concepts proposed by Ignacy Sachs O. Cardettini in his “Ecodevelopment strategies” appeared in the 1970s.
Many sites in the world are victims of their tourist overcrowding, as is the case for the city of Venice in Italy, for example, which receives 59,000 visitors per day, while its capabilities should not go beyond 33,000, according to the NGO Italia Nostra; this finding shows that a growth of aquatic transport due to overpopulation causes the destruction of the lagoon ecosystem.
In Peru, the case is the same for the site of Machu Picchu, the busiest in Latin America; in 1992 the number of visitors per year was 10,000, a number that has multiplied by ten today, revealing the flaws of the heritage marketing version. UNESCO, in 2008, issued a warning against destructive mass tourism that causes deforestation and landslides near the site.
The Mediterranean, in the south of France, is suffering the irreparable damage of the degradation of its coasts and the marine ecosystem, due to overabundant tourism threatening natural areas. 220 million visitors visit the Mediterranean every year; and in twenty years from now, according to the World Wildlife Fun, they will be 350 million.
Could Sachs ecodevelopment lead to a better management of heritage sites and a promotion of a smarter tourism that would open doors for marketing possibilities to the notions of a more responsible heritage and tourism, minimizing the negative effects of the dominant development policies used so far?
While some heritage sites continue to be overvalued in advertising and the collective imagination, others on the contrary, are left behind or even hidden to the benefit of other “superstar sites” that are more attractive and better staged. A balance must therefore be found between the economic and the cultural in order to produce an equation capable of solving critical issues related to the environment, resources and the social ecosystem. The Agenda 21 for culture, adopted by the UCLG in 2015, incorporates fundamental ideas, initiated by Ignacy Sachs in the Ecodevelopment Strategies, putting respect for nature and the environment at the heart of our systems in symbiosis with man and his activities according to the diversity of contexts. Finally, we will talk about an exceptional Parisian heritage that has been overlooked in silence despite the regular promotion campaigns, which we have entitled the “Shimmering Heritage of Paris”.
Confused with the notion of communication, heritage marketing, like that of museums, remains unclear in France. The rise of marketing took place in America during the years 1950-1960; in the world of culture, marketing suggests that it is now necessary to focus on the consumer’s point of view by placing it in the middle of prerogatives. It was in the year 1969 that marketing expanded to other areas, services, people and non-profit organizations such as museums. In post-war American society, particularly with the rise of non-profit organizations, the transfer of marketing innovations had become imperative. In the 1970s, Philip Kotler supported the theory that the concept of this transfer must be done at the level of relations between organizations and the general public, and no longer only with consumers. Today, marketing is conceived as a pedagogical model that allows the viability of a long-term organization. In the cultural context, its purpose is not only to make a profit, but enable the organization to fulfill its mission. However, let us underline the problematic related to the marketing of the heritage which opposes two concepts; that of the sacralization of the representations of the patrimony, to the more pragmatic of the world of the “performativity” and the commercial relations typical to the societies of consumption. This “performative dynamic” conceives more of the heritage as part of the market than outside it, and is therefore likely to be marketed like any other product. In this sense, heritage marketing would participate in the commercialization of culture; its “Disneyisation”, “MacDonaldisation” or “McDisneyization”, neologisms borrowed from the works of sociologists Alan Bryman and George Ritzer accusing “the hyper-reality of heritage”, a reflection of postmodern society.
Criticism against the development of the heritage industry, which is dedicated to transforming the past into attractive events and heritage into a commodity object, was formulated in 1987 by English historian Robert Hewison. In France, a strong skepticism has taken place against the development of the heritage notably through the scientific literature in the Heritage interviews conducted since 1988 by the Heritage Department of the Ministry of Culture which highlighted the heritage academy. The economic perspective has developed rather slowly in places like in the Puys du Fou, but has continued its progress through the development of marketing and the promotion of events organized by heritage sites and museums aiming at the uprising of funds. At the Versailles museum, in Ile-de-France, for example, there are marketing concepts related to landscape and architecture with “Les Grandes eaux et les Jardins Musicaux”. Another example is the “Fête de la Musique” organized in the various museums of France, as in Orsay, which is also, like the event at Versailles, carried out in order to attract a varied public which in turn invigorates the spaces of the art, by having several activities within the same place.
Cultural organizations are trying to meet the demand of its “cultural clientele” by diversifying its offers through attractions of all kinds as much as possible, but also by setting up fun, interactive and meeting spaces, like concert halls, cinema, conferences, shops, restaurants and cafes. The G. Pompidou Center in the heart of Paris is an excellent example of heritage marketing initiatives over the last 40 years. Beyond its original architecture, which was the subject of much publicity in the 1970s, the museum offers a living space open to the city and renewed thematic exhibitions regularly linked to conferences and round tables and other events.
The global innovation of the Art Center has thus attracted more than 2 million visitors in the Paris region in partnership with 40 cities, 75 partner venues, 50 exhibitions, 15 shows, concerts and performances in 2017. In Paris, the record attendance in one weekend was exceeded during the big festive birthday weekend with 87,000 visitors. For its 40th anniversary, in December 2017, the Pompidou Center adopted its first “objectives and performance contract” for 2017-2019, a strategic management tool between the institution and its supervisors defining the axes of the cultural policy and activities of the center based essentially on three main priorities: cultivate innovation and originality, reach out to the public and networks and to make the debate live and invest in the openness to the creative approach within the society. The marketing concept of heritage focuses on the idea of living unique experiences within sites or museums offering exhibitions and related activities. Its foundation lies in what the “visitor-client” desires and the means employed to respond to his/her requests. It is a matter of getting to know him/her better and evaluating him/her better in order to allow the implementation of the necessary strategies to meet the ambitions of cultural heritage projects. Examples of marketing are numerous, they pass through an attractive and fun staging of the heritage towards the youngest public including the creation of workshops, but also towards young adults, by organizing themed evening exhibitions, such as at the Quai Branly J. Chirac museum with the “Before”, or at the Guimet museum, offering thematic concerts and thematic activities.
These marketing projects are due to several factors, indeed. In France, as in many other European countries, we can observe the decline in public funding in the cultural sector after the economic crisis as the supply progresses. Cultural organizations find themselves obliged to develop their own resources through the public, “the clients”, by increasing the frequentation, the sales, the subscriptions, the turnover, the products derivatives and related services, as well as their private partnerships, corporate and individual sponsorships and through crowdfunding. The 2013 report of the Ministries of Economy and Culture in France underlines the importance of the contribution of culture to the economic activity of the country. The results of this study show that it plays a big role in the French GDP with 57.8 billion euros of added value per year. The overall contribution of culture in total national economic activity stands for 105 billion euros, or nearly 6%, of the GDP. When evaluating a cultural settlement in a territory, the study highlighted the positive effects on the creation of businesses, the evolution of the price per square meter and also on the part of the occupied assets as well as the average hourly net salary. The activities of culture represent a major economic stake allowing the living conditions to improve and increasing the attractiveness of the regions.
The analysis of consumer behavior patterns in the cultural sector has shown an evolution from the sociological determinism of consumption evoked by the study of Pierre Bourdieu in 1979, to culminate in Eric Arnould and Craig J.Thompson’s 2005 Cultural Consumption Theory (CCT) that suggests it is the people who participate that contribute to the production of the cultural environment through their behaviors. On the other hand, the desecration of heritage, original cultural works and projects and the critique of mass culture are the founding ideas of the Frankfurt School which highlights the authentic experience against a culture influenced by entertainment. The development of heritage marketing is characterized by the transformation of heritage into cultural industries, places of production and reproduction and cultural experiences.
PATRIMONIALIZATION IN MOTION
According to André Micoud, patrimonial policies are above all a matter of the policies of safeguarding and transmitting what is important for future generations. This notion comes from cultural policies and administrations but also from social developments and the involvement of citizens or local populations. Thus, the concept of heritage encompasses everything that a nation, a society or a group wishes to transmit in order to safeguard it; it can be tangible or intangible, inert or living, human or non-human, local or universal.
France has been one of the important vectors in terms of heritage policy. From the French Revolution a form of official patrimonialization emerges that will eventually help structure its own public policy in the second third of the 19th century. With regard to heritage policies, the adoption of cultural heritage protection regulations by national administrations shows the differences and the different methods adopted by the European and North American institutions. The first regulations emerged on Italian territory during the 15th century. It was in the Pontifical States that, from the beginning of the 19th, installed a system of protection that extended into all other States, even before the Italian unity. In the United States, the model of private initiative developed. In 1850, the first legislative measures appeared in the State of New York and more followed up to the 1930s with the development of a patrimonial will, through the associative commitments, the foundations and policies of the States, based on public and private partnerships and patronage.
In the last quarter of the 20th century, the Western world participated in the government’s policy of reconstructing the past in a context where the welfare state was questioned. In the 1980s, France considerably expanded the legal, political and cultural framework of the past with the Heritage Year and the creation of the Ethnological Heritage Mission. The generalization of the concept of heritage is beginning to develop, notably at UNESCO in 1993 with the organization of World Heritage Cities, or in England where industrial archeology is in full swing. Under Margaret Thatcher, state interventionism in heritage policies was striking with the creation of a national agency whose objective was to encourage the conversion of former industrial sites into tourist sites.
In France, the notion of “patrimonialization” developed within the social sciences, underlining the mission of the associations or the oppositions between the public authorities and the social partners. Heritage is the result of collective mobilizations and cultural claims rather than the product of a choice and selection of objects based on conventional administrative or academic rules. Patrimonialization, however, becomes the product of a fixed process. It is defined, by Michel Rautenberg and Cécile Tardy, as a “process of re-appropriation of collective time, of social symbolization around entities linked by common representations, be it a landscape, the environment, popular festivals or world music that spreads the message of a shared and multiple world”.
The crossroads with other disciplines, such as Heritage Studies, developed in the Anglo-Saxon world in the 1990s opening doors to multiple innovative experiences around the world: aesthetic, mythical or traditional. This patrimonial movement became a major source for the economic and social sector to the detriment of the state. However, although heritage has given rise to new forms of action that are sometimes opposed to institutions or public authorities, the strong competition between cities and regions or communities in France shows that the state administrations are still decisive, making heritage an issue of development policies, particularly in rich urban centers, the popular suburbs, the countryside linking agricultural production, landscape preservation and tourism. Patrimonialization is a major agent of the tourist economy, particularly through the staging of the authentic and local so dear to tourists from around the world. However, these issues weigh heavily on the environment, raising many questions about cultural practices. How to re-connect the practice of cultural heritage activities with respect for nature and the environment? How to re-balance tourism and mass culture with an innovative action that would benefit the planet?
The globalization of the welfare market has also influenced cultural marketing strategies, both globally and locally, creating a symbiosis of both trends. In the economic sense, patrimonialization has become a globalizing process. Their strategies are materialized by major investments: The Louvre-Lens, Louvre Abu-Dhabi, etc. These “superstar museums” have entered a new phase, where they’re establishing their presence in emerging tourism countries, and creating an unproductive black monopoly for world heritage in terms of ecology and environment.
In 2017, France received 87 million tourists, whereas that number was 75 million, fifteen years ago. This growth is due to the stronger attendance of visitors from Asia, Central Europe, Africa and Latin America. The most visited places are the city of Paris, the castle of Chambord, the Mont Saint-Michel or the villages of Provence and Alsace. These places are still threatened by massive and unbalanced tourism. However, the French government still wants to increase the number of tourists for the year 2020 to 100 million. One of the solutions by the local states, that was later deemed insufficient by the same authorities, was to try to dissuade tour operators by increasing different rates, such as parking for example, or even to impose an entry fee to villages. Another solution is the balancing of visitor flow throughout the year in order to boost daily life during periods of low attendance. In Paris, with 30 million visitors a year, the method is to offer reservations online and at defined times in order to regulate the queues. Thus, the Louvre museum has set up ticket sales for three years “timestamped” allowing access to collections within thirty minutes after the schedule. The same method has been used for the monument of the Eiffel Tower since July 2 with a relatively average success.
IS THE GLOBAL AGENDA 21 OF CULTURE GOOD ENOUGH?
Between the 18th and 20th of March 2015, representatives of the cities and local governments of the world, convened by the World Organization of United Cities and Local Governments at the Culture Summit, adopted the Agenda 21 for Culture. This Agenda follows the Agenda 21, adopted by UN in 1992 in Brazil, on sustainable development that preceded the Agenda 30, called “Transforming Our World, the , called “Transforming Our World, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable development”.
Among the many actions at the heart of this document, the promotion of the integration of the relationship between citizenship, culture and sustainable development, as well as the essential role given to the world of culture in the Post-2015 Agenda, remain crucial. Thus, according to this document, no development can be defined as “sustainable” without taking into account the major importance of cultural factors, among them cultural diversity, memory, creativity and knowledge. In the prospective of transformation of the world, the reference contexts of sustainable development include the cultural dimension as well as the dimensions, environmental, economic or social. Also, “culture is constituted by the values, beliefs, languages, knowledge, arts and knowledge by which a person, individually or collectively, expresses all his humanity as the meaning it confers on its existence and his development”. Culture is a “common heritage that expands the capacity of everyone to create their own future”, “each person is a cultural bearer involved in the development of universal wealth”. Finally, another important notion is that culture is a process that makes it possible to understand, interpret and transform reality. Cultural rights are an integral part of human rights, so cultural citizenship encompasses rights, freedoms and responsibilities, giving everyone access to and participation in the cultural and symbolic world at all times of life with the aim of developing the capacities of sensitivity, choice and critical thinking that enable harmonious interaction, as well as the building of citizenship and peace in societies. The cultural factors of sustainable development are taken into account by all the interconnected cultural, environmental, social and economic factors. Cultural goods and services are not considered goods because they carry meaning, meaning and identity.
The text adds that “reducing the culture to the market value of its expressions limits or cancels its dimension of common good and, consequently, its transformative capacity”. 21st century business models should “enable a more coherent articulation between the public, private and civil economy and ensure respect and dignity of people, social justice and the environment”. To be sustainable the economy should analyze the values that feed it and consider the cultural resources of the environment in which it develops. Cultural activities are essential factors for an integrated and sustainable economic development, they allow the renewal and the creation of new economic activities, reinforce the entrepreneurship, the access to employment and the insertion being a determining factor of attractiveness of the territories and promote tourism development. Also, the territory is the result of the interaction between the environment and human activities whose impact should be studied. Cultural governance is also considered from the point of view of the balance with local cultural policies: governance, multi-actors, cross-cutting or horizontal and multi-level or vertical. For example, “over-institutionalization” can unbalance the local cultural ecosystem as well as excessive privatization. The establishment of these prerogatives involves international networking and the realization of cooperation scenarios between cities and local governments in different regions of the world. Out comes the dual dimension of local and international work by promoting the concept of sustainable development.
These many good ideas are still waiting to be achieved today. Could they be to “global”, even if more responsibilities are given to local governments on the planet? Is a global solution a solution for each different context? The Ecodevelopment Strategies initiated by Ignacy Sachs could be more centered on the urgent problems. Can we find the foundations of a renewal for the promotion and management of heritage?
ECODEVELOPMENT, A NEW PATH TOWARD THE HARMONIZATION CHALLENGE?
It is a general strategy based on a global analysis of the current development crisis, and it’s proposing a global civilization project aimed at Third World countries and industrialized countries. Current policies lead to a double waste of natural and human resources, by the rich and the poor, by the North and by the South, and this waste is closely linked to the inequalities of economic and political power. Better resource management is therefore inseparable from a civilization project which, in economic terms, would act jointly on social demand, particularly for the benefit of non-market goods and services, and on social supply, particularly through the choice of technologies. The location of activities, while political, promotes the creative participation of all human groups and culturally it would take into account the diversity of their legacies and aspirations. Ecodevelopment makes it possible to choose the most appropriate solution for each natural, social and cultural ecosystem, to guarantee the improvement of living conditions in all social groups, in solidarity with future generations: self-creation of housing, new industrial civilization of the tropics, regional planning in the Peruvian Amazon and the organization of a different tourism.
The term “ecodevelopment” was initiated by the controversial Maurice Strong in 1972 at the Stockholm conference, dethroning that of “eco-eco” for “ecology and economics” proposed by participants at one of the parallel forums at the official conference. Initially, ecodevelopment was defined as a development strategy based on the enlightened use of local resources and peasant know-how applicable to isolated rural areas of the Third World. It was with the Cocoyoc Declaration of 1974 that a richer concept of the concept of ecodevelopment was formulated. The text focuses on the need to help people get education and to organize themselves in order to develop specific resources of each ecosystem for the satisfaction of their basic needs. The ethics of this concept on development proposes an egalitarian application as well to the poor countries as rich, in rural, urban or in the industry. It is a tool for prospective and exploration of development options challenging current practices without opposing growth. The challenge is to find ways and means of growth that make social progress compatible with the sound management of resources and the environment. This concept proposes to rethink the development strategies of rich and poor countries and their modes of cooperation. The development crisis is a global phenomenon. In order to remedy the poor distribution of wealth and the waste of resources in both poor and rich countries, it is necessary to undertake a large-scale action at the global level. For this, it is necessary to denounce the bad development of the so-called developed countries and the consequences that it causes on the rest of the world by domination and by effect of training and by imitation of the model. One of the goals of ecodevelopment is to use natural resources rationally and to improve the living and working conditions of the population. This operational strategy combines growth and protection of the environment. Man is considered to be the most precious resource, as such, eco-development must contribute to its realization through employment, safety, the quality of human relationships and respect for cultural diversity. The approach is to avoid waste and to use renewable resources as much as possible; it involves the technological transition, a central element in the implementation of planning. Also, ecodevelopment requires the establishment of a horizontal authority able to overcome sectoral particularisms in collaboration with the complementarity of the various actions carried out. The Strategy tries to react to the prevailing fashion for so-called universalist solutions and global formulas. Its scope covers food production, housing, energy production and consumption, the industrialization of renewable resources, conservations of natural resources and social services. Ecodevelopment believes in the ability of human societies to identify their problems and provide them with original solutions while inspiring others and highlighting self-reliance.
Applied on culture and heritage and tourism marketing and management, the Strategy would give other perspectives in better harmony with environmental issues for each different context.
ALTERNATIVES FOR HERITAGE MARKETING & TOURISM
“Shimmering Heritage”: Secret underground waters of Paris
“Eau de Paris” is the municipal authority responsible for producing, distributing and ensuring the quality of tap water distributed in Paris. Custodian of a unique industrial and hydraulic heritage, but poorly known, “Eau de Paris” manages 6 water treatment plants, 470 km of aqueduct, 5 drinking water tanks located at the gates of Paris and 1200 fountains and spots for drinking water. “Eau de Paris” is responsible for letting the public discover an exceptional heritage through different cultural events over the years, such as the festival “Paris Face Cachée”, the “European Heritage Days” or the “Vendanges de Montmartre”.
Fountains of pure water in Albien
A true heritage of water, the Parisian geological basin contains a vast body of groundwater, known as the Albien. Located at a maximum depth of 900 meters, it represents about 700 billion cubic meters of water. The Albien constitutes a strategic water reserve composed of an interwoven series of sands, sands of Frécambault, sands of Drillons and green sands in relation to the underlying nappe of the Neocomian. These drinking water reserves were the subject of a drilling of artesian wells between 1833 and 1848 under the administration of Rambuteau. The Grenelle well is the first well drilled in Paris to supply the districts of the left bank. The drilling was done in the slaughterhouses of Grenelle. In February 1841, the drilling tools reached the water table at the depth of 547 meters spilling 40 liters per second and flooding the entire site.
Numerous other wells were dug between the 19th- and the beginning of the 20th century. Five of them have been renovated and three are equipped with drinking fountains: the fountain of the place Paul Verlaine in the 13th district of Paris, that of the Square Lamartine in the 16th, and finally, the fountain of the Square of the Madonna in the district of La Chapelle located in the 18th arrondissement. This water of excellent quality is weakly mineralized and contains less calcium and magnesium than the water of the network, but it remains well charged with iron which requires a fountain equipment with a system to reduce it since the amount of iron is higher than the levels of the public health standard.
Turquoise waters of the Montsouris reservoir
The reservoir Montsouris is a mythical work of the 19th century, built by engineer Eugène Belgrand, in the south in one of the highest points of the Parisian capital to collect underground water from the region of Sens and conveyed on more than 150 km through the aqueduct of the Vanne. The work was completed after the Commune and the war against Prussia in 1874.
The reservoir Montsouris was for a long time the largest reserve of drinking water in Paris but also in the world. It consists of two superimposed floors with an area of 60,000m2 offering a maximum storage capacity of more than 200,000 cubic meters of water. In our time, the reservoir still supplies water to the French capital using the Loing aqueduct, which carries groundwater for more than 100 km. The two-storey building has 4 compartments, each being 254 meters long and 127 wide. 1800 pillars support the vaults and arcades on both levels of the building. In 2010, “Eau de Paris” initiated a project to renovate the tank, respecting the original shapes and colors of the period, which required a real craft work where 940 meters of new railings were installed for this sole purpose.
The “Aquatic Cathedral”, is connected to a command center classified as Vigipirateand is therefore kept under surveillance 24/7, and since 2001 it is closed to the public, following the attacks of the World Trade Center. It can be visited, however, during events such as Heritage Day.
The main lantern of the reservoir of Montsouris has a ceiling of the early twentieth century, made by the ceramics factory Janin Frères and Guérineau, where the coat of arms of the city of Paris is visible, with the mention of sources that have fueled the reservoir through time: Vanne in 1874, Loing and Lunain in 1900 and Voulzie in 1925.
In a Second Empire style architecture, the Montsouris reservoir, with a decorative cave atmosphere, is composed of water compartments made up of old aquariums built into a wall of false rocks. In the past, aquariums were used to test the quality of the water, thanks to the presence of fish, called the “trouts of Montsouris” which gave birth to the legend. But since 1996 the analyzes have been carried out in laboratories and have definitively replaced the “truitometers”.
The reservoir remains by its architectural qualities and its mysteries, one of the best known in Paris among the 5 tanks of the capital: Ménilmontant dating from 1869, Montsouris from 1874, Saint-Cloud 1899, The Lilacs 1963 and finally, L’Haÿ-les- Roses of 1969.
The Pavillon de la Porte d’Arcueil was built in 1930 as a water chlorination station before being stored in the Montsouris reservoir. Today it is used as a place for observing groundwater, the only place in Paris where it is possible to enter an aqueduct. Since 2007, the building is decorated by a sculpture by Claude Lévêque, titled “Tchaikovsky”. Reminiscent of a liquid surface, due to its corrugated metal, it looks like the open doors to an underground universe little known to the mysterious Paris.
The heritage of water, industrial and hydraulic, includes rich Roman constructions, buildings of the 19th century and of our period, offers of discovery through the “Parcours de l’eau” and various themes around biodiversity that are essential to the Eau de Paris -missions to help improve the quality of life of individuals and to share a little-known heritage of its kind.
Prospective in the field of heritage marketing and tourism foresees the increase of cultural sites all together, like museums, villages, archaeological sites, beaches, etc., but also the change in behavior of visitors looking for more authenticity in their cultural activities and the sharing of multiple experiences in the same space-time; the “shortbursts” and “time oasis leisure”. Heritage tourism will continue to grow as more people become interested in past cultures coupled with the increasing competition between the cities and the countries that encourage heritage visits all over the world. An alternative solution should be given through eco-development within heritage and cultural activities and their marketing.
 See the UN site « Transforming our world: the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable development » : https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld
- BOURGEON-RENAULT Dominique, DEBENEDETTI Stéphane, GOMBAULT Anne, PTR Christine (2014), Le marketing de l’art et de la culture, Paris : Dunod.
- CHHABRA Deepak (2010), Sustainable Marketing of Cultural and Heritage Tourism, Canada & USA: Routlege.
- GOTTESDIENER Hana, DAVALLON Jean (2013), « La muséologie : 20 ans de recherches », Culture et Musées, Paris : Actes Sud.
- PETR Christine (1997), « Le marketing du patrimoine », « Marketing et musée », Publics & Musées, N°11-12, Lyon : Presses universitaires de Lyon.
- SACHS Ignacy O. C. (1980) Stratégies de l’écodéveloppement, Paris, les éditions Ouvrières.
Online Articles and Sites :
- « A la découverte du Réservoir de Montsouris » (2014), Eau de Paris, www.eaudeparis.fr
- « Bilan d’activité du Centre George Pompidou » (2018), Site du musée : http://bilan-activite-2017.centrepompidou.fr
- « Culture 21. Agenda 21 de la culture » (2015), CGLU, Barcelone. http://www.agenda21culture.net/sites/default/files/files/documents/multi/c21_015_fr.pdf
- « Les finances du Centre Pompidou » (2018) Site du Centre Pompidou, http://bilan-activite-2017.centrepompidou.fr/content/8-les-ressources-humaines-au-service-de-art-et-de-la-culture
- « Les fontaines à l’Albien. Sous les pavés de l’eau », Eau de paris, voir : http://www.eaudeparis.fr/fileadmin/contribution/culture/patrimoine/Albien.pdf
- « Les 10 sites menacés par le tourisme de masse » (2018), Vacances Pratiques. https://www.vacancespratiques.com/Les-10-sites-menaces-par-le-tourisme-de-masse_a14880.html
- MARIVAL Julien, « Décryptage : les enjeux du tourisme de masse en France » (2018), Le Parisien, http://www.leparisien.fr/voyage/decryptage-les-enjeux-du-tourisme-de-masse-en-france-13-08-2018-7851975.php
- SACHS Ignacy O. C. (1975) « Stratégies d’écodéveloppement dans le Tiers-Monde », Aménagement et Nature, n°37, pp. 4-6 : http://documents.irevues.inist.fr/bitstream/handle/2042/50400/AetN_1975_37_4.pdf?sequence=1
- “Transforming our world: Agenda 2030 for sustainable development”, U. N Site: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld