Structure · dataset · 2026
Table 5_Practiced but not articulated: a multi-stakeholder assessment of sustainability communication at the World Heritage city of Bukhara, Uzbekistan.xlsx
Listed in Loughborough Research Repository
<p>Research on sustainability communication in heritage tourism has concentrated overwhelmingly on tourists, leaving residents and tour guides comparatively unexamined, and studies that survey all three groups within a single design remain rare.
Description
This study presents a descriptive quantitative multi-stakeholder assessment of sustainability communication at a single World Heritage destination. Structured cross-sectional surveys were administered between June and November 2024 to tourists (n = 408, recruited face-to-face), local residents (n = 410, recruited online), and local guides (n = 42, recruited online) in the Historic Center of Bukhara, Uzbekistan; key proportions are reported with 95% confidence intervals.
Tourists reported high self-assessed adherence to responsible tourism principles (88.5%, 95% CI 85.0 to 91.2) and strong support for heritage-preservation charity (78.2%, 95% CI 73.9 to 81.9), yet rated sustainability information, interpretive tools and digital services among the weakest destination attributes and made minimal use of official channels, with only 3.2% (95% CI 1.9 to 5.4) consulting the official destination website.
Read the rest (3 more)
Residents demonstrated strong living-heritage practice, with 296 of 410 (72.2%) maintaining national clothing, music and traditions, but fewer than half (46.3%) were familiar with the concept of sustainable tourism and fewer than one third (32.9%) had ever attended a tourism planning meeting. Guides practiced sustainability operationally through low-emission transport and local purchasing (78.6%), yet only 16.7% explicitly communicated carbon reduction and 19.0% collaborated with environmental organizations, citing financial constraints and the absence of institutional frameworks.
Within each group considered separately, indicators of enacted practice stood higher than indicators of explicit articulation and participation, a within-group asymmetry consistent with an informational rather than a participatory communication model. The three groups are described side by side and are not ranked against one another. Because the design is cross-sectional and the three instruments were thematically parallel rather than identical, cross-group results are presented descriptively as baseline evidence.
The study contributes multi-stakeholder descriptive evidence from tourists, residents and local guides at one World Heritage destination, and identifies institutional voice, resident inclusion and guide capacity building as candidate priorities for destination management.</p>
Links
Where it is published
- DOI doi.org/10.3389/frsut.2026.1946804 ↗
DOI / persistent id · from repository lboro ac uk
Catalogue records · 1
- OAI-PMH record api.figshare.com/v2/oai?verb=GetRecord&metadataPrefix=oai_dc&identifier=oai%3Af… ↗
metadata API · from repository lboro ac uk
Topics
- From keywords
- Chemistry · Computer Science & AI · Cultural heritage management · Earth & Environmental Science · Economics & Finance · Engineering · Humanities · Impacts of tourism · Life Sciences · Materials Science · Mathematics & Statistics · Medicine & Health · Psychology & Behavioral Science · Social Science
- Inferred from text
- Tabular 65%
Related
- Possibly the same asTable 5_Practiced but not articulated: a multi-stakeholder assessment of sustainability communication at the World Heritage city of Bukhara, Uzbekistan.xlsx
- Possibly the same asTable 5_Practiced but not articulated: a multi-stakeholder assessment of sustainability communication at the World Heritage city of Bukhara, Uzbekistan.xlsx
- Possibly the same asTable 4_Practiced but not articulated: a multi-stakeholder assessment of sustainability communication at the World Heritage city of Bukhara, Uzbekistan.xlsx
- Possibly the same asTable 4_Practiced but not articulated: a multi-stakeholder assessment of sustainability communication at the World Heritage city of Bukhara, Uzbekistan.xlsx
- Possibly the same asTable 4_Practiced but not articulated: a multi-stakeholder assessment of sustainability communication at the World Heritage city of Bukhara, Uzbekistan.xlsx
Provenance · 1 source records, 20 field assertions
| Source | Key | Last seen | Raw |
|---|---|---|---|
| Loughborough Research Repository | oai:figshare.com:article/34009995 | 4 d ago | JSON v1 |
| Field | Assertion | Extractor | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| access_level | source · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].anzsrc:field:350801 | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | vocabulary-mapper@1.0.0 | keywords['Impacts of Tourism'] |
| concepts[field].anzsrc:field:430203 | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | vocabulary-mapper@1.0.0 | keywords['World Heritage'] |
| concepts[field].local:field:chemistry | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:computer-science-ai | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:earth-environmental | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:economics-finance | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:engineering | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:humanities | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:life-sciences | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:materials-science | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:mathematics-statistics | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:medicine-health | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:psychology-behavioral | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:social-science | mapping · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[modality].local:modality:tabular | enrichment · repository lboro ac uk | keyword-concept-rules@1.0.0 | title+description (65%) |
| description | source · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | /metadata/dc/description |
| license | source · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | /metadata/dc/rights |
| publication_date | source · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| title | source · repository lboro ac uk | connector:repository_lboro_ac_uk@1.0.0 | /metadata/dc/title |