Public Awareness and Perceptions of Heritage Buildings in Arizona, USA

This study aims to examine public awareness of heritage properties in Arizona, USA. Data for this study were collected from a random sample of 1238 general public in Arizona using a telephone survey. The study proposes a four-cell matrix based on heritage awareness and visitation to historic buildings. The four cells represent: 1) aware/visited, 2) aware/not visited, 3) unaware/visited, and 4) unaware/not visited. When four types of residents were compared on demographic variables, attitudes toward preservation, preservation criteria, and importance of feature and facilities, most of these variables were significant. The findings of this study provide important information for heritage preservation managers and policy makers. Unlike heritage preservationists’ view, opening heritage sites to the public and tourists can help to create awareness. INTRODUCTION There are many uses of heritage and many reasons the past is conserved, but one of the primary aims of heritage conservation is to enhance the historic environment and its continuity, thereby contributing to a desirable place to live and connecting individuals with the place and the culture (Ashworth and Graham 2005; MaGuire, 1982). Heritage and its preservation have become paramount in all parts of the world. In the developing world, the past is preserved primarily as a tool for generating income through tourism; in most cases, saving heritage for other reasons is of little concern to the public or to public agencies and is sometimes seen as the antithesis of development or modernization (Timothy and Nyaupane 2009). In the developed portions of the world, however, the past is preserved and conserved for a variety of reasons, including tourism, esthetic value, enhancing a location’s sense of place, educational and scientific purposes, and creating livable communities (Graham et al. 2000). Despite the importance of heritage, there has not been much research on heritage awareness among community residents, who are the ultimate guardians of the heritage product. A few exceptions include Yan and Morrison’s (2007) study of visitors’ awareness of a site’s World Heritage status. In another study, Poria, Butler and Airey (2003) evaluated heritage tourists based on their awareness of, and motivations for visiting, historic sites. With an increase in knowledge about public empowerment, participatory development, and grassroots planning in all aspects of socioeconomic life, it is well understood that local interests and benefits cannot be ignored while planning and managing heritage sites (Aas et al. 2005; Feilden, 1982; Marc et al. 1994). This study aims to examine public awareness of heritage properties in Arizona, USA. The study proposes a four-cell matrix based on heritage awareness and visitation to historic buildings and other heritage sites. The four cells, representing Arizona residents are: 1) aware/visited, 2) aware/not visited, 3) unaware/visited, and 4) unaware/not visited. In this study, awareness is measured by two criteria: knowledge and behavior. Knowledge is measured by whether or not people know of any historic buildings that have been demolished or otherwise lost, and behavior is defined by whether or not they have visited historic buildings. The four groups of people are compared against several variables, including demographic, attitudes toward historic preservation, functions of historic preservation, their perceived role of government in historic preservation, preservation criteria, and the importance of certain features and facilities. Heritage Awareness Awareness is often defined as having knowledge or cognizance of one’s surrounding environment (Tuan 2001), awareness being influenced and formed cognitively by individual experiences and social environmental conditions (Murphy and Zajonc 1993; Poria et al. 2006). Awareness has received considerable academic attention in the contexts of environment and place, education, emotions, interpersonal relationships, and health care, with an overwhelming suggestion that people have different levels of awareness and that a wide range of stimuli, included personal experience with people, places and events, are critical in the formation of individual, cognitive awareness. Environmental awareness can be viewed from several perspectives. One perspective is cognizance of environmental problems and concerns for a sustainable environment. Another perspective is people’s awareness of the place where they live, their everyday environment and its interactive components (Grob 1995; Heiskanen 2005; Palmer et al. 1999; Tuan 2001). This could certainly be extended into the realm of heritage places—places visited by tourists, local residents, school groups and other heritage consumers. In the context of heritage places, few statements have been made and very little is known about public awareness of the management, importance, or designation of historic sites. Kuijper (2003) notes the growing global awareness of UNESCO’s World Heritage Sites, largely through the educational and informative efforts of UNESCO. Other observers have noted a general lack of awareness of the significance of World Heritage designation among tourists at select sites in the UK (Smith 2002) and heritage site administrators and tourists in the United States (Timothy and Boyd 2006) and New Zealand (Hall and Piggin 2002). Moscardo’s (1996; 1999) work focuses on these issues of unawareness, which she refers to as mindlessness, or lack of awareness and perceptiveness regarding the sites being visited. Despite these examples, there is evidence to suggest that more and more heritage visitors are becoming more cognizant of the heritage value of places they visit and these places’ designation as World Heritage Sites or other protected labels (Fyall and Rakic 2006; Yan and Morrison 2007). Notwithstanding the growing heritage awareness in a general sense but an evident lack of awareness regarding heritage value among individual visitors, the core of heritage identification, listing, and preservation has been and continues to be heritage awareness, or a knowledge and recognition of the value of conservable elements of the past (Bessière 1998; Nora 1997). The heritage identification and protection process cannot succeed without a certain level of heritage awareness and acceptance among visitors and community residents (Munjeri 2004). Likewise, a widespread recognition of the importance of keeping a desired past from disappearing is an essential part of the basis for developing public policies regarding heritage protection (Poirrier 2003). Heritage awareness campaigns, therefore, are not uncommon as a way of garnering community support for the protection of a location’s patrimony (de Camargo 2007; Timothy 2000). Context and Background Arizona lies in the southwestern United States and is home to some 6.3 million people and hundreds of historic sites recognized by national, state, county, and municipal governments. Built and living heritage contribute significantly to the social fabric and economy of Arizona. Living heritage is best demonstrated among the Native Americans, including but not exclusively, the Navajo, Hopi, Apache, Havasupai, Hualapai, Tohono O’odham, Pima, and Paiute tribes. There is also a vibrant Mexican-American culture around Phoenix and Tucson, and along the Mexican border. Most heritage sites in the state commemorate the history of indigenous people, frontier settlement, mining, cattle ranching and agriculture, and Spanish missions. The most common sites are forts, schools, churches, missions, ranches, Indian ruins and archeological sites (including petroglyphs), historic homes, bridges, mines and mining towns, national and state parks, and a host of other structures that have played a salient role in the history of Arizona and the United States. As of April 2009, there were 1,286 places, sites or structures in Arizona listed on the National Register of Historic Places (National Park Service 2009), which is administered by the US National Park Service (NPS) and aims to spotlight and preserve America’s heritage. Some of these historic places are part of the National Park Service system (e.g. National Monuments, National Battlefields, etc), but the majority is comprised of individual buildings or sites that have been nominated and justified by community groups and accepted onto the list by the NPS simply as buildings and places worthy of preservation. As this contextual section demonstrates, heritage sites play an important role in the social and economic milieu of Arizona, and many properties have been designated heritage sites. Therefore, it is important to understand the public’s awareness and perceptions of historic buildings and sites as a way of justifying their designation and preservation. The following sections present the findings from a study conducted in 2008 that aimed to understand Arizona residents’ awareness of historic preservation and its various dynamics. RESEARCH METHODS Data for this study were collected using a state-wide telephone survey with the general public in Arizona, USA, in July and August, 2006. A Random-Digit Dialing (RDD) sample was selected using Genesys. A total of 12,429 calls were made; telephone numbers that remained unanswered, such as calls with no answer, answering machines/voice mail, or hang ups received at least ten attempts. This was done to secure responses but also to assure that the numbers were valid. If a respondent was not available or the time that the person was reached was inconvenient, a callback was scheduled. Respondents 18 years or older were randomly selected asking whose birthday was the most recent in the household. Calls were made Monday through Thursday from 4pm to 8pm, Saturday from 10am to 2pm, and Sunday from 12pm to 4pm. The sample yielded a total of 1,238 completed interviews, or a 32.3% response rate. Respondents were asked about their awareness, attitudes, priorities, and v