## 5 Conclusions
However, the integration of physgital tools poses challenges in maintaining cultural authenticity. [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2024) [119] highlighted how digitization often oversimplifies complex cultural elements, risking the loss of meaningful details in the pursuit of user-friendly experiences. Future research must focus on reconciling authenticity with technological innovation. * Broader Accessibility  
Physgital tourism makes cultural heritage accessible to diverse audiences by eliminating physical and geographical barriers. [PERSON] (2024) [138] found that virtual tours expanded participation among global visitors and individuals with disabilities, promoting inclusivity and equity in cultural engagement. Accessibility remains incomplete, as many physgital systems rely on high-speed internet and advanced devices, which are not universally available. [PERSON] et al. (2025) [139] called for research into cost-effective solutions and simpler technologies to ensure equitable access across diverse populations, particularly in underserved regions. * Economic Benefits for Local Communities  
Physgital tourism generates economic opportunities for local businesses by connecting virtual economies with physical commerce. [PERSON] et al. (2024) [125] reported that NFTs and blockchain-enabled physgital souvenirs supported artisans and small businesses, creating innovative revenue streams while promoting cultural preservation. Despite the potential for economic growth, [PERSON] et al. also noted technical and logistical challenges in implementing blockchain solutions, such as high development costs and low adoption rates among local businesses. Research should explore scalable and user-friendly blockchain frameworks tailored for small enterprises. * Preservation and Promotion of Cultural Heritage  
Physgital tools facilitate the preservation of cultural heritage by creating digital replicas of artifacts and endangered sites. [PERSON] et al. (2025) [139] emphasized the role of AR and VR in safeguarding and promoting heritage that is otherwise inaccessible or at risk of physical degradation. [PERSON] (2012) [140] observed that, while digital replicas are valuable for preservation, they often lack the emotional and sensory depth of physical artifacts, potentially reducing their cultural impact. Future designs should integrate multisensory technologies to bridge the gap between digital and physical experiences. * Educational Impact  
Gamified physgital experiences have shown remarkable success in promoting educational outcomes. [PERSON] (2024) [138] demonstrated that embedding quizzes, puzzles, and interactive storytelling into cultural heritage tours engaged younger audiences and enhanced their historical knowledge retention. However, [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2024) [119] noted that designing age-appropriate and culturally sensitive gamified content remains a significant challenge. Content often risks oversimplification or misrepresentation of cultural narratives. Further research is needed to develop frameworks for creating meaningful, accurate, and inclusive educational tools. * Strengthened Sustainability Efforts  
Physgital tourism supports sustainability by reducing the need for physical travel through virtual exploration. [PERSON] (2012) [140] highlighted how virtual-first approaches aligned with SDG 13 (Climate Action) by lowering environmental footprints and promoting awareness of sustainable practices. Sustainability efforts are often undermined by the energy-intensive nature of blockchain and XR technologies. [PERSON] et al. (2024) [141] called for the development of low-energy platforms and green technologies to minimize the environmental costs of physgital implementations. The exploration of standard and new design methodologies tailored to the unique challenges and opportunities of XR in CH preservation and sharing is crucial for future development.