## 3 Results
### Survey and Inference of the Level of Technological Management
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Blocks** & **Thematic Area** & **Agree (\%)** & **Disagree (\%)** & **No opinion (\%)** \\ \hline Block A & General & 83 & 14 & 3 \\ Block B & Management & 50 & 40 & 10 \\ Block C & Sustainability and accessibility & 73 & 22 & 5 \\ Block D & Connectivity and innovation & 50 & 48 & 2 \\ Block E & ICT & 61 & 21 & 18 \\ _Total_ & & 63 & 29 & 8 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Source: own elaboration. Note: highlighted fields have the highest response percentages.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Summary of the levels of response by survey blocks. smart space in 66% of cases. In any case, it seems that all the measures devised to further promote these strategies in the short and medium term need to be increased. The next block of the survey (Block C) has to do with two basic issues of great importance for the promotion of the preserved assets: sustainability and accessibility. It was found that 73% of the surveyed places already apply sustainable measures, such as energy and water saving, aesthetic conservation of the landscape, and maintenance of available heritage resources. Also worth noting are the site accessibility-related measures. Only 22% disagreed and the remaining 5% had no opinion. In all cases, respondents considered that the industrial heritage building or site is already sustainable in relation to the landscape and available resources. This level of response represents full awareness regarding the aesthetic value of the environment in this type of heritage (especially notable in mining areas). The landscape and architectural or technical resources are always stimulating factors in the cultural promotion of the places and as spaces that are locallybased identity reference points. The levels of responses about energy or water saving measures differed more. In most cases, they are already applied in lighting (86%) with the use of LED technology, and in 14% of cases, there are sensors for regulating lighting in terms of light conditions. Water saving measures are in place in 72% of cases. Physical and digital accessibility is another important aspect in this block. According to 86% of respondents, the industrial heritage building or area is accessible to people with physical disabilities. As regards visual disability, only 57% of the sites have tactile models that can be interpreted by the blind or visually impaired; and when asked about digital accessibility, all the selected places said that they promote web access to all their information. The next block of questions (Block D), penultimate of the whole survey, refers to connectivity and innovation. Broadly speaking, 50% of respondents considered that the level of application is not yet high enough, while 48% agreed and the remaining 2% had no opinion. Internet connectivity is adequate at the destination in 86% of cases, but free Wi-Fi networks are only available at 28% of the sites. This result is especially striking because it is one of the technological measures that is easiest to apply. Similar figures (28% agree) were obtained when asked about the availability of a tourist app for smartphones (Figures 7 and 8). The survey shows that those responsible for the destinations are aware that much remains to be done in terms of bringing in new technologies, despite the recognized advantages that these solutions afford in terms of more efficient and sustainable resource management. In 43% of cases, respondents considered that the sites are already innovative, but the very same percentage thought that they are not yet. Around 57% of the sites have interpretive panels with QR codes and in 43% of cases, these codes are thought to already be included in some type of printed promotional material. These are still low percentages that should increase in the coming years out of necessity. The last block of the survey (Block E) refers to the application of information and communication technologies.