Rescue archaeology heritage valuation in Europe’s largest dam – Alqueva: ex‑situ of creative tourism

              © PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. ISSN 1695-7121
Vol. 12 N.o 3. Special Issue. Págs. 623-634. 2014
www .pasosonline.org
Abstract: The study aims to determine how the knowledge obtained from the study of prehistoric heritage
found during the construction of the Alqueva dam and irrigation system (Portugal) can enhance the current
tourist experience of the destination. A new approach is necessary given the inaccessibility of the archaeolog-ical
remains, thus creative tourism and experience economy frame the theoretical basis of this paper. Semi­‑directed
interviews were carried out to 35 tourism stakeholders in order to assess their view of the regional
tourism experience, their interest in ex­‑situ
and virtual products based on the archaeological knowledge and
how these may add to the Alqueva destination. Findings show that stakeholders are still firmly attached
to the conventional approach to archaeology but that, even though unaware of the archaeological findings,
they believe that they could benefit from the introduction of creative products as a way of complementing
the current offer.
Key Words: Alqueva dam, rescue archaeology, creative tourism, experience economy, archaeological tour-ism,
intangible heritage.
Valorização de arqueologia de salvamento na maior barragem da Europa - Alqueva: Produtos ex-situ
enquanto elementos de turismo criativo
Resumo: O estudo tem como objetivo verificar o modo como o conhecimento obtido a partir do estudo do
património pré-histórico encontrado durante a construção da barragem e sistema de irrigação do Alqueva
(Portugal) pode contribuir para a experiência turística do destino. Dada a inacessibilidade do património é
necessária uma nova abordagem, pelo que o enquadramento teórico deste trabalho foca o turismo criativo e
a economia da experiência. Foram realizadas entrevistas semi-dirigidas a 35 entidades ligadas ao turismo,
a fim de avaliar a sua visão da experiência turística regional, o seu interesse em produtos ex-situ e vir-tuais
baseados no conhecimento arqueológico e como estes podem valorizar o destino Alqueva. Os resultados
mostram que os stakeholders estão muito ligados a uma abordagem convencional relativamente à questão
arqueológica mas que, porém, acreditam nos benefícios que poderão advir da introdução de produtos criati-vos,
por forma a complementar a oferta atual.
Palavras-chave: Barragem do Alqueva, arqueologia, turismo criativo, economia da experiência, turismo
arqueológico, património imaterial.
Rescue archaeology heritage valuation in Europe’s
largest dam – Alqueva: ex­‑situ
products as elements
of creative tourism
Idalina Dias­‑Sardinha*
David Ross*
Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro**
University of Lisbon (Portugal)
* SOCIUS Research Centre in Economic and Organizational Sociology, ISEG, University of Lisbon, Portugal;
E-mail: idalinasardinha@iseg.utl.pt
** Department of Marketing, Operations and General Management, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE­‑IUL),
Business
Research Unit (BRU/UNIDE), Lisbon, Portugal
Idalina Dias­‑Sardinha,
David Ross, Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
624 Rescue archaeology heritage valuation in Europe’s largest dam – Alqueva…
1. Introduction
The knowledge produced by archaeological
research provides a window into the past of a
people, helping to understand and to strengthen
their historical and cultural identity. The way that
such knowledge is conveyed, namely by means of
tourism, in this case cultural and creative tourism,
is the theme of this paper.
The practice of archaeology has been changing
during recent decades, turning more and more to
the rescue intervention related to development
expansion and the prevention and mitigation of
impacts of large construction projects. Since the
drafting of the Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) European Directive in 1985 and the 1987
Environmental Law, in Portugal, it is required that
the project for the construction of large building
works include in the EIA the evaluation and recor-ding
of the archaeological heritage to be affected
by the construction before it is destroyed (Ferreiro,
Gonçalves, and Costa, 2013).
This practice is also called commercial or contract
archaeology, for it prompted the rise of businesses
specializing in archaeology whose work currently
represents about 90% of the archaeological research
conducted in Portugal (Bugalhão, 2011).
Similarly, the tourism industry has also undergone
tremendous changes over the last decades. Apart
from basic services, tourism currently aims to provide
a unique experience (Richards and Wilson, 2006;
Stamboulis and Skayannis, 2003; Waitt, 2000), as
is the case of cultural tourism, for instance, where
the tourist seeks above all to “discover, learn and
explore the attractiveness of a region” (Turismo de
Portugal, 2006: 9). In this way, cultural tourism
has become a form of commodification of culture, in
that it manages to transform cultural heritage into
consumable experiences (Pereiro, 2009). The same
applies to creative tourism. Stemming from cultural
tourism, creative tourism seeks to stimulate the
creative streak of the consumer by structuring the
destination and the products in a way that encoura-ges
tourist participation in activities that fuel their
creative expression. This process allows to achieve
an almost uniqueness of the tourist experience that
is difficult, if not impossible, to replicate (Richards,
2011a).
This study is part of the ongoing project Funerary
practices in Alentejo’s Recent Prehistory and socio­‑economic
proceeds of heritage rescue projects (Ref.
PTDC/HIS­‑ARQ/
114077/2009), which focuses on
the study of prehistoric funerary practices in the
low Alentejo region and the creation of knowledge
diffusion models produced over non­‑accessible
(or
totally dismantled) archaeological heritage, while
simultaneously attempting to merge the archaeo-logical
problem and its accessibility by the general
public. The purpose of the present study is to test the
relevance and value of non­‑accessible
archaeological
heritage for the development of ex­‑situ
and virtual
tourism products and services that enable a certain
region (Alqueva, Portugal) to become a destination
of archaeological interest. We aim to understand
specifically how the stakeholders of the regional
tourism sector perceive and value the archaeological
knowledge obtained in the Alqueva region, particu-larly
from two Neolithic necropolises, and what their
expectations are in what concerns the potential use of
this knowledge from a creative tourism perspective.
Moreover, we analyse how stakeholders view these
creative products with regard to the overall tourism
experience of the Alqueva destination.
To meet these goals, and in order to get a deeper
understanding of the stakeholders’ view (Albarello
et al., 1997), we used a qualitative method based on
semi­‑directed
interviews held with representatives
of public authorities and tourism promoters of the
study area.
The paper first presents a brief summary of
the literature that contextualizes the study in its
theoretical framework of the concepts, namely
creative tourism and experience economy. Secondly,
the Alqueva dam and the archaeological findings
are presented, followed by a description of the
applied methodology. We then present and discuss
the results, followed by the conclusion.
2. Rescue archaeology and creative tourism
One of the primary peculiarities of rescue ar-chaeology
is the fact that in most cases only the
knowledge of the past obtained from archaeological
research is kept, according to the so­‑called
“prin-ciple
of conservation by scientific record.” Prior to
the execution of a construction project, the archa-eological
remains unearthed at the construction
site are studied and documented and afterwards,
except for a few specific cases, they are destroyed
in order to give rise to the proposed building work.
As a result, only the archaeological knowledge of
the studied site remains for future reference (Silva,
2005). The valuation of this knowledge through
its use for tourism purposes is not possible by
conventional means (i.e. visit to archaeological
sites); hence a different approach is necessary.
Creative tourism has the potential to provide an
innovative approach to intangible assets that result
from rescue archaeology intervention.
The huge growth in cultural tourism in recent
years has led to the search for new ways of designing
tourism products (Richards, 2011b). Thus, there has
been a growing interest in creative tourism with the
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Idalina Dias­‑Sardinha,
David Ross, Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro 625
intention of differentiating products in the over-crowded
marketplace (Richards and Wilson, 2006;
Stamboulis and Skayannis, 2003). UNESCO defines
this type of tourism as “travel directed toward an
engaged and authentic experience, with participative
learning in the arts, heritage, or special character
of a place, and it provides a connection with those
who reside in this place and create this living cul-ture”
(UNESCO, 2006: 3). Rather than providing a
product for passive consumption, creative tourism
encourages the active involvement of the tourists
with local people in local activities, thus enabling
them to develop their creative skills. Creative tou-rism,
therefore, seeks to differentiate itself from
mainstream tourism by offering greater freedom for
the consumers to create their own product which,
by reflecting their own interests, makes the overall
experience more personal, authentic and impossible
to be duplicated by someone else (Richards, 2011a).
Creative tourism products frequently provide
the opportunity to participate in day­‑to­‑day
acti-vities,
e.g., the production of local crafts, cooking
workshops for local cuisine or other typical ac-tivities
that represent the region’s uniqueness
(Richards and Wilson, 2006; Tan, Kung and Luh,
2013). What distinguishes creative tourism is the
fact that tourists can interact, develop and express
their creative sides and participate in creating their
own product. One of the reasons for the success
of this kind of product is the fact that all of us are
creative to some degree, each person in his/her
own way (Tan et al., 2013).
3. Experience economy
The development of creative tourism from cul-tural
tourism can be traced back to the experience
economy (Richards, 2011a). According to Pine and
Gilmore (1998), after a first economic stage es-sentially
based on transactions of primary goods,
followed by a phase of industrial production and
another dedicated to the production of services,
the experience economy emerged as the fourth
stage in economic development. In the latter, the
aim is to stimulate the senses and emotional and
rational aspects of the consumer in order to ensure
a memorable experience of unique contours (Oh,
Fiore and Jeoung, 2007; Pine and Gilmore, 1998).
Creative tourism has like no other tourism form
embedded this experiential perspective. Whereas
tourism activity was previously limited to providing
the opportunity to visit and enjoy other places and
cultures, today we witness a great demand for “au-thentic
experiences” and products which, more than
allowing the visit, encourage as much as possible the
participation and involvement of the tourist in the
destinations activities in an attempt to devise an
experience of total cultural immersion (Hayes and
MacLeod, 2007; Richards, 2011b; Stamboulis and
Skayannis, 2003).
This experience is far more dependent on the
irrational and emotional side of the consumer, since
it goes against the conventional business logic that
takes the consumer as a rational thinker (Schmitt,
1999; Gentile, Spiller and Noci, 2007). The important
thing here is to capitalize on and profit from the
emotive aspects that a product stirs in the consumer.
Gentile et al. (2007) go further and state that it is
not only about selling an experience, but rather a
way of understanding the consumers as individuals
and trying to create a holistic relationship between
them and the brand, offering items and contexts
so that they may craft the experience on their own
(even if unconsciously) thus developing an emotional
relationship with the firm.
To clarify this level of consumer involvement, Pine
and Gilmore (1998) suggested a conceptual framework
that structures the experience into four realms.
Therefore, depending on its degree of participation,
immersion and absorption, the consumer experience
can be classified in the realms of Entertainment,
Education, Esthetic and Escapism (4E Model) (Figure
1). An experience may combine the dimensions and
simultaneously stand in one or more realms. Indeed,
according to Pine and Gilmore (1998) and Gentile et
al. (2007), an optimal experience will be that which
evenly combines all realms. However, this concept
is debatable, as the value of the experience depends
mainly on each person’s expectations and desires and
the transformation that it can effect in the individual
(Morgan, Elbe and Curiel, 2009).
Figure 1. 4E Model
Source: Pine and Gilmore, 1998.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
626 Rescue archaeology heritage valuation in Europe’s largest dam – Alqueva…
Nevertheless, despite the utility of
Pine and Gilmore’s (1998) 4E Model to
conceptualize the experience as a ma-rketable
product, be it touristic or not,
there are few empirical instruments
that allow for an effective evaluation
and operationalization of the experience
(Morgan et al., 2009; Oh et al., 2007).
Hence, some authors have carried out
exploratory studies and sought to build
scales that make it possible to assess
the tourism experience based on this
conceptual model.
Oh et al. (2007) applied a Likert
response survey to guests and owners
of Bed & Breakfast units in order to
measure their perception of the expe-rience
in light of each of the four realms
and understand which ones were most
valued in the consumption/planning
of the accommodation experience. The study also
sought to create theoretical variables to assist
promoters in interpreting the experience of tourists
so as to better plan their products.
In addition to the planning of products, likewise
a destination should be arranged strategically
and can gain if there is an understanding of the
current trends in the tourism industry. Thus, some
authors, such as Morgan et al. (2009), analysed
the perception of tourism promoters from three
localities concerning the transition from a service
economy to an experience economy, as well as the
implication that this concept has in destination
management and the strategic planning of their
products. For this purpose, the authors led inter-views
in order to identify what kind of experience
the promoters aimed to provide to their customers,
whether this process was done consciously or
unconsciously, and their opinion about this new
management approach. In these interviews, in
addition to questions, cards with sentences were
handed out that gave the promoters the opportunity
to reflect and comment directly on the ideas present
in the literature on the subject, particularly if they
thought the current economy was, in fact, directed
toward the transaction of experiences.
In sum, the 4E model has been a helpful tool
for strategic planning of touristic products and
destination management.
4. The Alqueva dam and archaeological fin-dings
The Alentejo is a region with low rainfall and
low population density. The history of the Multi­‑Purpose
Alqueva Dam (EFMA) dates back to
1957, the year the Alentejo Irrigation Plan was
developed with the aim of improving conditions
for agricultural development in the region. After
several decades of advances and setbacks, concre-ting
the dam began in 1998 and was completed in
2002, giving birth to the largest artificial lake in
Europe. However, the EFMA, which also includes
the primary and secondary irrigation system in
addition to the lake, directly affects a much larger
area that spans about 10,000 km² (EDIA, n.d.a).
The Alqueva dam is located between the munici-palities
of Vidigueira, Moura and Portel and the
Great Lake stretches towards north, covering an
area of 250 km² (Figure 2).
During these years several environmental im-pact
studies and many archaeological interventions
were conducted, intensified from 1995 onwards by
the outbreak of the Foz Côa dam case (Silva, 2002).
The huge expanse of land affected by the EFMA
and the resulting archaeological interventions in
the region ­‑
one of the most intensely excavated
territories in Portugal ­‑
revealed empirical data
that allow to know with particular detail the com-munities
that lived in this territory for centuries
and trace the history of the region over the last
8000 years (Fabião, 2002; Oliveira, 2002).
Some of the most significant findings in the
area are Neolithic necropolises. For this study,
two funerary complexes of particular relevance
are used as references: the necropolis of hypogea
Outeiro Alto 2 (located in Serpa municipality)
and the funerary complex of Sobreira de Cima
(Vidigueira municipality). Both reflect in exemplary
manner the possible outcome of rescue archaeology
intervention: the first because it has been closed off
on an artificial island in the middle of an irrigation
tank, preventing easy access to the site; the second
Figure 2. Map of Alqueva Great Lake and Location of
sample municipalities
Source: adapted from EDIA, n.d.b.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Idalina Dias­‑Sardinha,
David Ross, Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro 627
because it was found during the construction of an
electrical substation, so consequently the safety
measures due to high­‑voltage
are incompatible
with the presence of visitors or tourists.
5. Methodology
In order to meet the goals proposed in this
study, data collection was conducted through semi­‑structured
interviews with local and regional
stakeholders connected to the tourism industry.
5.1. Sample selection
The geographical area covered by this project
is the Alentejo, specifically the region south of the
Alqueva dam, and includes the following munici-palities:
Beja, Serpa, Ferreira do Alentejo, Alvito,
Cuba, Vidigueira, Moura, Barrancos, Aljustrel,
Castro Verde, Mértola (in Portugal); and part of
the province of Huelva, in particular Rosal de la
Frontera and Aroche (in Spain). Due to the large
extent of the area covered, we restricted this study
to a sample of three municipalities, namely Serpa,
Moura and Vidigueira, the area where the two
main archaeological sites of this project were found
(Serpa and Vidigueira). Moreover, the municipality
of Moura was also included in the sample because,
despite the fact that the Sobreira de Cima necro-polis
is located within the boundaries of Vidigueira
municipality, it is geographically closer to the city
of Moura.
Stakeholder selection was based on the An-dalusian
tourism cluster map (Lastra­‑Anadón
et al., 2011) assuming a similar framework for a
possible tourism cluster in this area of Portugal
and Spain. Stakeholders of the sample were cate-gorized
according to the scope of action taking into
account the classification suggested by Grimble
and Wellard (1997) namely: regional, local on­‑site
and local off­‑site.
The regional stakeholders included the insti-tutional
organizations responsible for the mana-gement,
coordination and tourism promotion in
the Alentejo, as well as archaeological experts of
the region.
The main inclusion criterion on the local scale
was the geographical distance to the archaeological
sites of reference. Thus in Serpa priority was given
to stakeholders in the parish of Brinches; or Pias
if there were none, since the Outeiro Alto 2 site
is located between the two villages. In Vidigueira
priority was given to stakeholders in the village
of Marmelar, near Sobreira de Cima; or Pedrógão
do Alentejo, the seat of the parish, if there were
none. In Moura priority was given to stakeholders
of the city, as it is the urban center closest to the
Sobreira de Cima graves. The local on­‑site
scope
refers to the villages of Brinches and Marmelar
and the off­‑site
refers to interviewees from Pias,
Pedrógão, Serpa, Vidigueira and Moura. Interviews
were held with representatives of governing bodies
(town halls and parish councils), museums and
cultural associations, producers of local products
and handicraft and owners of private sector com-panies:
tour operators, hotels and restaurants.
A total of 35 interviews were carried out from
February through May 2013.
5.2. Analytical tools
The interview was structured in two parts. The
first part consisted of a set of questions grouped
under the following goals: (i) to examine the Alqueva
tourism destination in light of the experience eco-nomy;
(ii) to understand the stakeholders’ perception
of the archaeological works undertaken in Alqueva
and the touristic value of the knowledge obtained;
(iii) to understand their views on the operation and
benefits of archaeological knowledge of Alqueva and
associated products for the regional tourism market.
In the second part of the interview we handed
out four cards with selected sentences to unders-tand
how the stakeholders perceive the four realms
of experience and place the archaeological tourism
products within Pine and Gilmore’s (1998) 4E
model. Unlike Oh et al. (2007), the interview script
used by Morgan et al. (2009) does not address direc-tly
Pine and Gilmore’s (1998) 4E model. Therefore,
and given that the size of our stakeholder sample
was not adequate for the use of surveys, we took
some of the questions raised in Oh et al.’s (2007)
survey and adapted them to the form of cards used
by Morgan et al. (2009). A single sentence that best
represents the nature of each realm was drawn
from Oh et al.’s (2007) questionnaire for each card,
and in some cases two items were combined in the
same card for clarification purposes. The following
sentences were used:
1) Archaeological tourism should provide the chance
for tourists to learn something new and increase
their knowledge. (Educational realm)
2) Archaeological tourism should be attractive and
stimulate the senses of the tourist. (Esthetic
realm)
3) Archaeological tourism should allow the visitor to
relax whilst watching recreational activities and
events for his/her entertainment. (Entertainment
realm)
4) Archaeological tourism should allow visitors to
forget about their daily routine and encourage
their participation in different activities. (Es‑capist
realm)
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
628 Rescue archaeology heritage valuation in Europe’s largest dam – Alqueva…
5.3. Data processing and content analysis
The interview script was tested on the first five
interviews and then subject to minor adjustments. All
interviews were recorded on audio, each lasting on
average 45 minutes (total of 26 hours and 50 minutes),
and were later transcribed by the researchers. Con-tent
analysis of the interviews was performed with
the assistance of MAXQDA 11 computer software,
and the resulting categories obtained by axial coding
(Saldaña, 2009). These categories are:
Group 1. Perception of tourism in Alqueva: The
first category reflects the stakeholders’ perception
of the Alqueva tourism market, the most relevant
tourism products and resources, description of the
destination before and after construction of the
dam including product diversification, and the
potential of the Great Lake for tourism. It also
includes thoughts on a few other issues, such as
expectations about the future of the destination
and problems that affect tourism development.
Group 2. Perception of rescue archaeology inter-vention:
This includes the stakeholders’ knowledge
about the archaeological works that took place during
the construction of the Alqueva dam and irrigation
system as well as their opinion on the value of the
archaeological heritage for local communities and for
tourism. Some examples of current tourism projects
that benefit from archaeology are also referred.
Group 3. Operationalization of archaeological
knowledge: This category covers the opinions of
stakeholders on the possibility of developing tourism
products based on the archaeological knowledge,
plus their comments on how these products can be
combined with their current business. It also relates
to issues concerning the promotion and marketing
of these products and the need to assess the market
before product development can take place.
Group 4. Experience realms of archaeological
tourism: The final group comprises the results on
the relevance of each realm of experience defined
by Pine and Gilmore (1998) for archaeological tou-rism.
Stakeholders received four cards, each with a
different sentence describing one realm, and ranked
the cards according to what they believed was more
important in an archaeological tourism experience.
Their comments about the realms were also collected.
6. Results
Group 1. Perception of tourism in Alqueva
•• Tourism in Alqueva
Four participants (n=4) stated that prior to the
dam there was no significant tourism activity in
the Alqueva region and that it was similar to the
rest of the inner Alentejo. Currently, the region’s
most popular tourism products and resources are
food and wine (and related products: food festivals,
wine routes, etc.) (n=12), its architectural/historical
heritage and museums (cultural tourism) (n=9),
with handcrafts (n=4), house­‑boats
and nautical
recreation (n=3), landscape (n=2), the rural set-ting
(n=2) also mentioned. Less significant are,
according to the stakeholders interviewed, hunting
tourism (n=1), birdwatching (n=1), nature and
active tourism (n=1), despite the region’s potential.
Five respondents mentioned that the dam has
the potential to become a structural element for
tourism in the Alentejo, although others (n=3) are
doubtful about its tourism potential, justifying their
opinion with similar tourism projects related to
dams in the past that have failed. An entrepreneur
said the Great Lake has created the conditions for it
to become a “tourism destination” in the definition
of WTO, although the regional tourism authorities
are more cautious, acknowledging that the region
has gained visibility and an important resource but
which is still not significant in terms of market.
•• Impact of the dam
Regarding the impact of the dam on tourism,
some stakeholders (n=8) stated that there was an
increase in demand after the construction of the
dam. Ten others said there was a great movement of
people visiting to see the dam finally built, although
these contribute little to the tourism sector (n=4).
However, most interviewees (n=12) stated that,
apart from this sightseeing activity, there was
no increase in tourists visiting the region after
the inauguration of the dam in 2002. Similarly,
although there is a new feature – the Great Lake
– few new tourism products have been developed
which are associated with it (n=5). An exception
is the example, several times mentioned (n=7),
of the Amieira Marina, a local tour operator that
rents boat­‑houses
to tourists who wish to cruise
the lake, a product which has become pivotal in
the region. There is also the Dark Sky Alqueva, an
astro­‑tourism
project, although it is still in an early
stage and therefore its acceptance as a full “tourism
product” is arguable, as two respondents stated.
This lack of demand is attributed by stakehol-ders
to several limitations, such as the absence
of infrastructure (n=10) (low accommodation
capacity or lack of piers to support nautical and
beach leisure activities), desertification (n=6) and
aged population (n=3), poor quality of the water
(n=3), a fragile business environment (n=2) and
the current economic crisis (n=2).
A tourism entrepreneur summed up the sense
of dashed expectations regarding the impact of the
dam: “There was so much talk about Alqueva, as
a great national hope, not only for the irrigation,
but in what concerns tourism it came to nothing.
All people spoke of were projections”.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Idalina Dias­‑Sardinha,
David Ross, Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro 629
Group 2. Perception of rescue archaeology
intervention
•• Archaeological works
Apart from the experts, who follow the archaeo-logical
research done in Alqueva and its results, and
are aware of its scientific and empirical relevance,
there is general lack of knowledge on the part of
the local and regional tourism promoters (n=15)
in regard to the archaeological intervention held
during the EIA of the Alqueva dam. There is a
widespread notion that the building works involved
teams of archaeologists, but very few stakeholders
actually know what was found. Only five of the
respondents, namely public authorities, said to
have followed the excavations but still do not know
their scientific relevance.
However ignorant, still stakeholders argued
that archaeology is an important part of regional
tourism, as there are plenty of archaeological sites
in the region, mostly megalithic monuments (a
reference in tourism), and many (n=10) showed
great interest to know the results, unable to un-derstand
the reason why this information has not
been disclosed to the tourism stakeholders and
local communities beyond academia.
•• Touristic value of archaeology
With regard to the touristic value of archaeology
four experts revealed that the archaeological heri-tage
in general is not a feature that attracts many
tourists compared to other resources. Moreover, two
experts and those who are aware of the findings in
Alqueva recognized that, despite their great scientific
value, most of the pieces found are not sufficiently
attractive for the conventional tourist market.
On the other hand, despite the widespread
ignorance about the results, many stakeholders
(n=19), both private and public, believe that the
archaeological knowledge of the region can be
a feature of great value to the tourist market,
e.g., as a differentiating factor of the destination
(n=1). Nonetheless, some respondents (n=6) noted
that it is a resource and not a product, a resource
which they believe is currently under exploited
and which may become an important element for
tourism development in the region, although this
will depend on the sensitivity towards archaeology
of the people in decision­‑making
positions (n=3),
the investment made (n=2) and the use of this
knowledge according to the tourism demand rather
than scientific interest, i.e., archaeological tourism
products should not be “too scientific” (n=3). Five
respondents stated that the archaeological know-ledge
may come to leverage future developments,
namely in cultural tourism.
However, nearly half of the stakeholders (n=15)
argued that archaeological knowledge should not
be used for the development of tourism products
per se, rather it should be used to supplement
other products existent in the region. As a matter
of fact, tourists who come looking for archaeology
also have other interests (n=4), so it is a matter of
interweaving the knowledge into these products
and services. The stakeholders’ interest in the
valuation of archaeological knowledge is based
on their concern in enhancing their own business
or activity. Thus, archaeology is seen as a way to
supplement what already exists, creating new
business opportunities and expanding current
activity. Some relevant examples of archaeologi-cal
heritage in the complementary context were
mentioned, such as the Archaeological Complex of
Perdigões (which is used as a complement to wine
tourism), the Dark Sky Alqueva (which uses some
megalithic monuments for star gazing sessions),
or the S. Cucufate ruins in Vidigueira.
•• Value of archaeology for local people
Nearly one third of the stakeholders (n=9) said
that there is a general “feeling” that archaeolo-gy
is an important part of the regional cultural
heritage and identity. However, some warned of
conflicts that frequently take place and the need
for awareness and dissemination of archaeological
practice and results. The most common case is
that of farmers which come across archaeological
remains on their land, destroying them without
notifying the authorities so as to not lose the piece
of land for cultivation. Some resentment towards
archaeologists was identified, based on the lack of
knowledge and understanding about archaeology’s
value and working methods, and these conflicts
may hinder tourism development based on the
archaeological heritage.
Group 3. Operationalization of archaeological
knowledge
•• Ex­‑situ
archaeological tourism
With regard to the use of archaeological kno-wledge
for the development of creative tourism
products, some stakeholders (n=4) seemed confused
by the fact that the archaeological remains found
were made inaccessible. Nevertheless, the need to
develop innovative products with a strong emphasis
on creativity was referred (n=2), as was done for
example in the Dark Sky Alqueva project.
Several suggestions were made concerning the
kind of product that could use this archaeological
knowledge in theme development. These were:
musealization and exhibitions (n=14), ICT and
digital restitution of the findings (n=8), creation of
related labels for regional products (e.g., olive oil,
wine, cheese) (n=8), arts and handcrafts inspired
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
630 Rescue archaeology heritage valuation in Europe’s largest dam – Alqueva…
by the findings (n=5), touristic routes that convey
the new archaeological knowledge at other sites
which remain visitable (n=5), themed events (i.e.,
Neolithic/Archaeological festival) (n=5), nautical
themed activities (i.e., archaeological regatta) (n=2),
projects for children (i.e., archaeological games)
(n=2), theatre plays (n=1) and a theme park (n=1).
•• Promotion of archaeological tourism
Several suggestions were made for promoting
this kind of product, namely through the internet
and social networks, which are free, newspapers
and local radio stations, or through flyers and
posters, or word­‑of­‑mouth.
The organization responsible for the tourism
promotion of the Alentejo argued that marketing
of the Alentejo destination should be taken as a
whole, and that it cannot be done for the Alqueva
alone because the larger the destination, the more
visibility it has. This promotion should be done
in an integrated way, that is, cross­‑marketing
distinct businesses and products. According to this
organization, isolated marketing has no impact,
rather it must be massive in order to effectively
reach the consumer. This interviewee supported
the use of opinion­‑makers
as an inexpensive way to
advertise, with great impact, although journalists
do not typically write about the archaeological
heritage, and that opinion­‑makers
for this kind of
heritage should therefore be academics.
Two stakeholders indicated the need to assess
and be aware of current market trends in order
to understand what kind of product may have
the highest value. The tourism authorities did
point out that tourism is a business which requires
the commodification of a resource in order for it
to become a tourism product. In the process of
product structuring ­‑
an activity that is the “most
alluring but at the same time extremely frustra-ting”
(regional tourism business association) – it
is critical to keep in mind that the quality, success
and sustainability of the tourism product depends
on its consumption and demand by tourists.
These tourist expectations were commented
in several interviews. Some (n=6) reported that
it is essential to provide good content to tourists,
who have made an investment in their holidays,
in order to meet their expectations, because their
satisfaction will determine the quality of their
experience and their potential return in the future.
A tour operator maintains that it is his duty to tell
a good story to tourists and offer them something
that allows them to understand the territory in
an amusing way, even if this means he has to
romanticize or “put a frill here or there that didn’t
even happen exactly like that but that strikes the
tourist” (local tour operator).
Group 4. Realms of the experience in archa-eological
tourism (4E)
This question was made to ascertain the respon-dents’
point of view about the kind of experience
that an archaeological tourism product should
provide. Of the 35 stakeholders interviewed, three
did not answer this question. In Table 1 we can
see the number of times each realm was graded
in position 1, 2, 3 or 4 in the order of significance
(where 1=most relevant and 4=least relevant).
The results show a clear gap between the first
two realms (Educational and Esthetic) and the
latter two (Escapist and Entertainment).
The Educational and Esthetic realms were the
most chosen in the first place by the stakeholders.
Those who chose the Educational realm first (n=16)
stated that archaeological tourism products should
primarily provide a chance to acquire new know-ledge,
regardless of the depth, and that the search
for new knowledge is part of the expectations of
those who are interested in these kinds of products.
Figure 1. Ranking of the
realms of experience
Source: by the stakeholders
On the other hand, those who chose the Esthetic
realm first (n=11) argued that stimulation of the
senses has to be part of the product – any tourism
product – be it in the way it is structured and
marketed or e.g. in the adrenalin it can create,
because only then will it be able to stand out from
the remaining offer and attract tourists regardless
of their expectations or, for instance, their age.
The Escapist and Entertainment realms were
more often placed in the 3rd and 4th places.
Those who mentioned the Escapist realm in first
(n=5) argued that archaeological tourism should
give people a different experience from their normal
daily routine, and that “if the tourist is looking
to feel the destination we should not give them
too much information” (tourism entrepreneur).
Others commented that archaeology is a door to
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Idalina Dias­‑Sardinha,
David Ross, Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro 631
the past that has potential to provide an immersive
experience that transports tourists into another
era, allowing them to escape from their own. Two
stakeholders rejected the idea of tourism as a
way to escape the daily routine, arguing that the
knowledge obtained in these activities should be
useful in their day­‑to­‑day
life.
No interviewee chose the Entertainment realm
first. Those who commented on this realm men-tioned
archaeology’s potential for performances
and shows, i.e. theatre plays, although it is clear
from the results that this kind of event done only
as entertainment is less important, in the view
of local stakeholders, and more difficult to link to
archaeological heritage.
7. Discussion
The results from the interviews show that,
contrary to expectations (Marujo, 2005; Turismo de
Portugal, 2007), the Alqueva dam has not brought
major changes to the regional tourism industry.
While it is clear that the dam has altered the
landscape, and that the dam and the Great Lake
have become indisputable elements of interest to
anyone visiting the region, however, according to
stakeholders, it is far from being a destination
ready for tourist consumption (Brandia Central,
2009). The increase in the number of people who
visit the region is understandable given the ex-tensive
media coverage involving the dam project
and construction, but, as stakeholders argue, these
excursionists do not effectively contribute to short
term tourism development.
Low tourism demand is directly related to the
lack of supply of products and services. The emer-gence
of the Amieira Marina is very relevant, and
their supply of houseboats has become an important
product for the region. However, considering the
potential of the Great Lake and the expectations
surrounding the dam, it falls short. Nonetheless,
the success of this project indicates that it is pos-sible
to bring vigour to the region’s economic fabric
with small business projects more adequate to
the local needs and reality, while simultaneously
addressing a tourist needs.
The knowledge obtained from rescue archaeology
intervention is, alongside the Great Lake, one of
the main resources that the Alqueva dam project
made available in the region. However, the results
indicate that this knowledge, scientifically relevant as
it may be, is not acknowledged as a valuable resource
for tourism development because stakeholders are
unaware of its existence and potential. To make
it available for tourism purposes, a dissemination
platform is required that can go beyond academic
circles and inform local communities and tourism
stakeholders, thus allowing them to acknowledge its
potential and find the best way to convey this kno-wledge
to tourists through the provision of products
and services. Moreover, this platform should involve
both the archaeological experts and the promoters
of construction works responsible for environmental
impact studies in order to stimulate communication
and knowledge transfer between all the players
allowing collaborative and well­‑targeted
action.
One should note, however, that the archaeologi-cal
knowledge in itself is not a tourism product. It
is a resource, and as such requires some breaking
down before it can be developed as business (Pe-reiro,
2009). The use of this knowledge for tourism
purposes should take into account, among other
aspects, the particular needs of the industry and the
expectations of tourists looking to visit the region.
In this case, it is up to the tourism stakeholders to
convert this scientific knowledge into something
that can be assimilated and interpreted by someone
who is not an expert in archaeology – the tourist,
who is on leisure and holiday – keeping in mind
that the value of the tourism experience depends
not only on the scientific accuracy of the facts but,
most importantly, in the emotions that this expe-rience
stirs in the tourist (Holtorf, 2007; Richards,
2011a; Waitt, 2000). Furthermore a great deal of
creativity and innovation in the planning, product
engineering and marketing is necessary in order
to differentiate these products from conventional
archaeological tourism, frequently associated with
a small niche of archaeologists on their holidays
(Holtorf, 2007). It may be useful to start a pilot
project showing how a collaborative development
can evolve and offer adequate results.
Archaeological tourism in the Alentejo is pri-marily
associated with the Megalithic period and
activities that have as a central element the mega-lithic
monuments. In a creative tourism framework,
we propose to go beyond these monuments, this
tangibility, taking archaeology to other contexts and
transmitting this knowledge through innovative and
unusual formats. This will enable the creation of an
entirely distinct tourism offer in the region which
may also benefit from and support the existing
megalithic tourism products and services.
According to the results of this study, the deve-lopment
of tourism products and experiences based
on archaeological knowledge should provide an
experience of personal transformation by means
of learning and/or stimulation of the senses of
tourists. This is supported by Pine and Gilmore
(1998) for whom products that involve a greater
degree of participation should focus on learning and
transmitting knowledge. For example, in a replica
of a Neolithic burial chamber, the opportunity for
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
632 Rescue archaeology heritage valuation in Europe’s largest dam – Alqueva…
tourists to engage in seemingly real archaeological
excavations allows them to instruct themselves
on the method and techniques of archaeological
practice while simultaneously discovering the
lifestyle and culture of Neolithic communities.
The more passive product can, e.g., provide
an opportunity for the vacationer to simply feel
to the place. A cromlech visitor who appreciates
immerging in the spirituality of the place can see
this experience enriched with knowledge about the
value or the social function of the monument to Ne-olithic
populations. In another case, the experience
of contemplating the night sky among menhirs
can be enriched if you understand the worldview
of the Neolithic communities and how their lives
were governed by the stars. Moreover, replication
by digital means, e.g. by installing a “digital cave”,
enables a highly immersive experience.
However, the key issue is the product customi-zation
and personalization by the tourists, i.e., the
experience should be tailored as to correspond to
their expectations. In this sense, tourists must feel
that they can choose between an experience that
transmits the knowledge in an academic way or
in an imaginative way, for example. In the case
of a Neolithic burial chamber replica that allows
tourists to excavate and keep as souvenirs some
artefacts placed there beforehand, the veracity and
authenticity of the findings are not as important,
rather the value of the experience is placed on the
chance to dig immersed in the environment of an
archaeological site. This makes it possible to use the
acquired knowledge concerning the funerary practices
to provide an immersive experience of archaeology
without the need to actually present the real human
remains unearthed during the salvage excavations.
Finally, it should be stressed that in creative
tourism it is easier to create a supply of products
and services than it is to ensure demand (Tan
et al., 2013), a fact also stressed by the tourism
authorities of the Alentejo. The introduction of
creative archaeological tourism products in the
market must happen gradually, respecting regional
dynamics and complementing existing products and
resources with the new archaeological knowledge.
In this sense, we believe the findings of this study
may assist in the strategic management of the
Alqueva tourism destination and product planning
in light of the new trends of creative tourism and
experience economy (Coccossis, 2009; Morgan et
al., 2009; Oh et al., 2007).
8. Conclusion
It is generally agreed that never in the history
of Portuguese archaeology have there been such
important empirical findings in terms of volume,
geographical area studied and scientific knowledge
generated as the venture carried out in the Alqueva
region (Fabião, 2002).
This study shows that not much has changed
in relation to the tourism experience in the region
since the construction of the Alqueva dam and
the filling of the reservoir. However, it is shown
that the knowledge obtained from the rescue
archaeology intervention can add to the current
tourist experience. Since some of the existing
tourism products already deal with archaeological
sites, namely megalithic monuments, it is likely
that the Alqueva’s new archaeological knowledge
will have to be progressively integrated into
the market through selected products, bringing
gradual change in the overall tourism experience
and also convincing local entrepreneurs and
institutional stakeholders of the potential of
creative archaeological tourism in the region.
Nevertheless, given the fact that the archaeo-logical
excavations are recent and most of the
findings remain unpublished and unknown to the
general public, including the local communities
and tourism stakeholders, one cannot expect that
the regional tourism industry will benefit from
this heritage in the short term, as understandable
also from the information collected in the here
presented exploratory study.
Acknowledgements
This project was co-funded by the Funda-ção
para a Ciência e Tecnologia (ref. PTDC/
HIS-ARQ/114077/2009 and PEst-OE/SADG/
UI0428/2013) and the Operational Competiti-veness
Programme - COMPETE. The authors
would like to thank all the stakeholders that
contributed for this study. We also give thanks
to António Carlos Valera for the coordination of
the project necessary to the success of this task
and Elizabeth Kastenholz for her comments
on the text. All mistakes are of the authors’
responsibility.
Bibliography
Albarello, L, Digneffe, F., Hiernaux, J.P., Maroy,
C., Ruquoy, D. and Saint­‑Georges,
P.
1997 Práticas e métodos de investigação em ciências
sociais. Lisboa: Gradiva.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Idalina Dias­‑Sardinha,
David Ross, Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro 633
Brandia Central
2009 Estudo de avaliação da atratividade dos des-tinos
turísticos de Portugal – Alqueva. Retrieved
October 24, 2013, from http://www.turismode-portugal.
pt/Portugu%C3%AAs/ProTurismo/
destinos/destinostur%C3%ADsticos/
Bugalhão, J.
2011 “A arqueologia portuguesa nas últimas dé-cadas”.
Arqueologia e História, 60­‑61:
19­‑43.
Coccossis, H.
2009 “Sustainable development and tourism:
opportunities and threats to cultural heritage
from tourism”. In Girard, L. F. and Nijkamp, P.
(Eds), Cultural tourism and sustainable local
development (pp. 47­‑56).
Surrey: Ashgate.
EDIA, S.A.
n.d.a Histórico. Retrieved May 28, 2013, from http://
www.edia.pt/edia/index.php/o­‑empreendimento/
historico.
n.d.b Mapa de localização. Retrieved May 28,
2013, from http://www.edia.pt/edia/index.php/o­-
‑empreendimento/mapa­‑de­‑localizacao.
Fabião, C.
2002 “Intervenções arqueológicas no regolfo da
barragem de Alqueva”. Al­‑Madan,
11 (2): 88­‑90.
Ferreiro, M. F., Gonçalves, M. E. and Costa, A.
2013 “Conflicting values and public decision: the
Foz Côa case”. Ecological Economics, 86: 129­‑135.
Gentile, C., Spiller, N. and Noci, G.
2007 “How to sustain the customer experience:
an overview of experience components that
co­‑create
value with the customer”. European
Management Journal, 25 (5): 395­‑410.
Grimble, R. and Wellard, K.
1997 “Stakeholder methodologies in natural resour-ce
management: a review of principles, contexts,
experiences and opportunities”. Agricultural
Systems, 55 (2): 173­‑193.
Hayes, D. and MacLeod, N.
2007 “Packaging places: designing heritage trails
using an experience economy perspective to
maximize visitor engagement”. Journal of
Vacation Marketing, 13 (1): 45­‑58.
Holtorf, C.
2007 “Learning from Las Vegas: archaeology in the
experience economy”. The SAA Archaeological
Record, 7 (3): 6­‑10.
Lastra­‑Anadón,
C., Dias, J. N., Toribio, M. D.,
Minguela, R. and Aguilera, R. F.
2011 The Andalucía tourism cluster. Retrieved
January 8, 2013, from http://www.isc.hbs.edu/
pdf/Student_Projects/Spain_%28Andalucia%29_
Tourism_2011.pdf
Marujo, M.
2005 “Alqueva e a nova paisagem turística”. Revista
Turismo and Desenvolvimento, II (2): 145­‑148.
Morgan, M., Elbe, J. and Curiel, J. E.
2009 “Has the experience economy arrived? The
views of destination managers in three visitor­‑dependent
areas”. International Journal of
Tourism Research, 11: 201­‑216.
Oh, H., Fiore, A. M. and Jeoung, M.
2007 “Measuring experience economy concepts:
tourism applications”. Journal of Travel Rese-arch,
46: 119­‑132.
Oliveira, J.
2002 “Megalitismo e ‘arqueo­‑etnografia’”.
Al­‑Madan,
11 (2): 165­‑171.
Pereiro, X.
2009 Turismo cultural: uma visão antropológica.
Retrieved December 15, 2013, from http://
www.pasosonline.org/Publicados/pasosoedita/
PSEdita2.pdf.
Pine, B. J. and Gilmore J. H.
1998 “Welcome to the experience economy”. Har-vard
Business Review, 76 (4): 97­‑105.
Richards, G.
2011a “Creativity and tourism: the state of the art”.
Annals of Tourism Research, 38 (4): 1225–1253.
2011b “Cultural tourism trends in Europe: a con-text
for the development of cultural routes”.
In Khovanova­‑Rubicondo,
K. (Ed.), Impact of
European cultural routes on SMEs’ innovation
and competitiveness (p. 21­‑39).
Strasbourg:
Council of Europe Publishing.
Richards, G. and Wilson, J.
2006 “Developing creativity in tourist experiences:
a solution to the serial reproduction of culture?”.
Tourism Management, 27: 1209­‑1223.
Saldaña, J.
2009 The coding manual for qualitative researchers.
London: Sage.
Schmitt, B.
1999 “Experiential marketing”. Journal of Marke-ting
Management, 15 (1­‑3):
53­‑67.
Silva, A. C.
2002 “Avaliação dos impactes arqueológicos em
Alqueva: a formação do Quadro Geral de Refe-rência”.
Al­‑Madan,
11 (2): 56­‑62.
Silva, A. M.
2005 “O acompanhamento arqueológico de obras:
uma intervenção muito própria”. Revista Por-tuguesa
de Arqueologia, 8 (1): 459­‑469.
Stamboulis, Y. and Skayannis, P.
2003 “Innovation strategies and technology for
experience­‑based
tourism”. Tourism Manage-ment,
24: 35­‑43.
Tan, S., Kung, S. and Luh, D.
2013 “A model of creative experience in creative
tourism”. Annals of Tourism Research, 41:
153­‑174.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
634 Rescue archaeology heritage valuation in Europe’s largest dam – Alqueva…
Turismo de Portugal
2006 Touring cultural e paisagístico. Lisboa: Tu-rismo
de Portugal I.P.
2007 Plano estratégico nacional do turismo. Lisboa:
Turismo de Portugal I.P.
UNESCO
2006 Towards sustainable strategies for creative tou-rism:
discussion report of the planning meeting for
2008 international conference on creative tourism
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA October 25–27, 2006.
Retrieved January 8, 2013, from http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0015/001598/159811e.pdf
Waitt, G.
2000 “Consuming heritage: perceived historical
authenticity”. Annals of Tourism Research, 27
(4): 835­‑862.
Recibido: 04/11/2013
Reenviado: 16/12/2013
Aceptado: 28/01/2014
Sometido a evaluación por pares anónimos