Many museums and historical sites are mainly visited by tourists but not local people. Why it is the case?. What can be done to attract more local people to visit these places.
Higher foreign attendances over local ones in museums and historical destinations have been capturing public attention in many nations, especially in those with developed tourism industry. Given that local attendances appear to be record low, identifying the reasons behind this trend could be the key to addressing the issue.
There are many reasons behind this pattern. First, since local individuals are already well-acquainted with the historical destinations and the story lines behind, those tourism spots could only be purposed for curious foreign visitors. If local people visit these historical sites, it could be deemed unnecessary physical efforts and a waste of money. Second, the access fees are sometimes proved prohibitively expensive, which are beyond the affordability of local people and exclusively for foreign ones with higher purchasing power. For example, sought-after sites with historically wartime-related significance in the mountainous regions in Vietnam offer tickets exorbitant prices, which could never be brought by local citizens, who are living on subsistence agriculture for survival.
However, official authorities could undertake some initiatives to combat this issue. First, because historical sites and museums’ main objective is high visitor attraction, but they only provide sightseeing option instead of practical interaction, which are the deterrent for local attendences. In fact, many museums and other historical spots now are equipped with augmented reality and virtual reality teachnologies, enabling visitors to do interactive actions with historical events, which fascinates a hugh number of both foreign and local visitors. In addition, the managers of the sites could lower the prices of access or offer free entrance in some events, thereby incentivising local citizens to visit more frequently.
In conclusion, high attendance fees and destination familarity are the two main factors behind this pattern. By reducing prices and increasing practical interactive services in historical sites, the number of local visitors would certainly be on the rise.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-10-16 | grahamoneil | 78 | view |
- Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology can replace their functions Do you agree or disagree 61
- The graph below shows the amount of money spent on books in Germany, France, Italy and Austria between 1995 and 2005. 90
- The diagram below shows the average hours of unpaid work per week done by people in different categories. 56
- The chart shows the division of household tasks by gender in Great Britain.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.» Write at least 150 words. 11
- Some people do not go directly to college but travel or work for a short time. Do you think it has more advantages or disadvantages? 11
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...l citizens to visit more frequently. In conclusion, high attendance fees and de...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, well, for example, in addition, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 10.0 24.0651302605 42% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1817.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 306.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.93790849673 5.12529762239 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18244613648 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04808776015 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.571895424837 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 576.0 506.74238477 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.1297001194 49.4020404114 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.769230769 106.682146367 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5384615385 20.7667163134 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06120827912 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.281772060609 0.244688304435 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104257088032 0.084324248473 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0644429469771 0.0667982634062 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171542032311 0.151304729494 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0444802158956 0.056905535591 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 13.0946893788 140% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 22.75 50.2224549098 45% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.3001002004 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.47 12.4159519038 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.04 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.