THE ROLE OF TOURISM IN THE REGENERATION OF PERIPHERAL NEIGHBOURHOODS: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ALCÂNTARA (LISBON) AND BAGNOLI (NAPLES)

Abstract

The urban geography of tourism destinations is always changing. These changes are part of a process of polarization in which some neighborhoods become increasingly popular, while others start to decline. We may observe these facts in such cities as Lisbon and Naples, two destinations that benefit from a strong tourism dynamism, mainly cultural. Despite the millions of visitors every year, both supply and demand are not homogeneous in these cities, concentrating demand in the Historical centres. It is undeniable that both Lisbon and Naples have more to offer, with a vast and differentiated heritage throughout all parts of the city. Despite being recognized as quality destinations, the polarization of supply and demand must be fought, allowing the sustainable growth of the Historic Centres and other urban areas. This paper aims to contribute to the debate on the way in which peripheral neighborhoods are transformed following the advance of tourism, in the context of the centre-periphery relationship on an urban scale and in the light of the functional rearrangement that accompanies the processes of urban regeneration. A comparison will be made between two former industrial peripheries: Alcântara (Lisbon) and Bagnoli (Naples). In addition to the bibliographic and documentary analysis, the authors have carried out an intense fieldwork, aimed at the census of the tourist facilities and their comparison. The results of the research show that Alcântara has undergone a process of urban regeneration in recent years which fostered tourist development, while Bagnoli seems to be stuck in a state of incapacity to develop a systemic regional planning, which also affects the pace of a possible tourist prospect.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.