Disabled access and heritage attractions

In a UK context, the importance of heritage tourism, the potential of the disabled market, and government policies concerning tourism, social inclusion, and the historic environment provide the setting within which access improvements at heritage attractions for disabled visitors are studied. At issue is how disabled access and conservation can be reconciled. The stakeholders range from the central actors, the disabled tourists and the heritage tourism service providers, through to the gatekeeper and lobby players in the conservation, disability, and tourism contexts. The critical power structures are identified. Changes to the historic environment are managed through the conservation planning system in which disability interests are not formally represented. Recent disability discrimination legislation has not altered this balance of power, and is a source of uncertainty over the access standards that should apply to heritage attractions. An evaluation of progress in implementing access improvements at heritage attractions reveals the limited extent of improvements undertaken to date. Consideration is given not only to physical access but also to alternative methods (intellectual access) of providing the heritage tourism service. In conclusion, the situation is examined from three perspectives. From the disabled tourists' perspective, choice of heritage attractions to visit remains restricted compared to that of nondisabled tourists. The lack of consultation with disabled stakeholders in the access improvements decision-making process is discussed, including the acceptability of alternative methods of service delivery to disabled tourists. The uncertainties facing heritage tourism service providers arising from the disability discrimination legislation are considered but, to ensure a more balanced recognition of disability interests, both conservation planning and disability discrimination legislation need to be amended, adjusting the roles of the legislative gatekeepers.

Heritage property, tourism and the UK Disability Discrimination Act

Heritage tourism depends on a physical resource based primarily on listed buildings and scheduled monuments. Visiting or staying in a historic building provides a rich tourism experience, but historic environments date from eras when access for disabled people was not a consideration. Current UK Government policy now promotes social inclusion via an array of equal opportunities, widening participation and anti-discrimination policies. Historic environments enjoy considerable legislative protection from adverse change, but now need to balance conservation with public access for all. This paper discusses the basis of research being undertaken by The College of Estate Management funded by the Mercers Company of London and the Harold Samuel Trust. It assesses how the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act has changed the legal obligations of owners/operators in managing access to listed buildings in tourism use. It also examines the key stakeholders and power structures in the management of historic buildings and distinguishes other important players in the management process.

Conservation and sustainable use of wild species as sources of new ornamentals

While only about 1-200 species are used intensively in commercial floriculture (e.g. carnations, chrysanthemums, gerbera, narcissus, orchids, tulips, lilies, roses, pansies and violas, saintpaulias, etc.) and 4-500 as house plants, several thousand species of herbs, shrubs and trees are traded commercially by nurseries and garden centres as ornamentals or amenity species. Most of these have been introduced from the wild with little selection or breeding. In Europe alone, 12 000 species are found in cultivation in general garden collections (i.e. excluding specialist collections and botanic gardens). In addition, specialist collections (often very large) of many other species and/or cultivars of groups such as orchids, bromeliads, cacti and succulents, primulas, rhododendrons, conifers and cycads are maintained in several centres such as botanic gardens and specialist nurseries, as are 'national collections' of cultivated species and cultivars in some countries. Specialist growers, both professional and amateur, also maintain collections of plants for cultivation, including, increasingly, native plants. The trade in ornamental and amenity horticulture cannot be fully estimated but runs into many billions of dollars annually and there is considerable potential for further development and the introduction of many new species into the trade. Despite this, most of the collections are ad hoc and no co-ordinated efforts have been made to ensure that adequate germplasm samples of these species are maintained for conservation purposes and few of them are represented at all adequately in seed banks. Few countries have paid much attention to germplasm needs of ornamentals and the Ornamental Plant Germplasm Center in conjunction with the USDA National Plant Germplasm System at The Ohio State University is an exception. Generally there is a serious gap in national and international germplasm strategies, which have tended to focus primarily on food plants and some forage and industrial crops. Adequate arrangements need to be put in place to ensure the long- and medium-term conservation of representative samples of the genetic diversity of ornamental species. The problems of achieving this will be discussed. In addition, a policy for the conservation of old cultivars or 'heritage' varieties of ornamentals needs to be formulated. The considerable potential for introduction of new ornamental species needs to be assessed. Consideration needs to be given to setting up a co-ordinating structure with overall responsibility for the conservation of germplasm of ornamental and amenity plants.