In the heart of Suzhou, where ancient canals weave through bustling markets, a unique study is shedding light on the delicate balance between preserving local life and catering to the burgeoning cultural tourism industry. Led by Mingyuan Liu from Zhejiang University, this research, published in the *Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering* (known in English as the *Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering*), is reshaping how we understand the needs of residents and tourists in traditional markets like Suzhou’s Shuangta Market.
Traditional markets are more than just places to buy and sell goods; they are living museums of local culture and lifestyle. However, as these markets increasingly become cultural tourism hotspots, tensions arise between the needs of long-time residents and visiting tourists. Liu’s study aims to bridge this gap by developing a comprehensive framework to evaluate and understand the diverse needs of these user groups.
The research integrates three key models: the Servicescapes model, which examines the physical and social environments of service settings; the Existence-Relatedness-Growth (ERG) Theory, which categorizes human needs into existence, relatedness, and growth; and the Revised Importance-Performance Analysis (RIPA) method, which assesses user satisfaction. By combining these models, Liu and his team have created a robust tool for evaluating service satisfaction in cultural tourism spaces.
The study collected survey data from 247 residents and 371 tourists at Suzhou’s Shuangta Market. The results revealed striking differences in the priorities and satisfaction levels of the two groups. Residents, deeply rooted in the market’s daily life, exhibited a “high satisfaction-low importance” pattern, focusing on practical needs like convenience and accessibility. Tourists, on the other hand, showed a “low satisfaction-high importance” pattern, prioritizing cultural experiences and unique offerings.
“Residents see the market as an extension of their daily lives, while tourists view it as a cultural experience,” Liu explained. “Both groups value social functions, but their focal points differ significantly.”
This research has profound implications for the cultural tourism industry and the broader service sector. By understanding the nuanced needs of different user groups, market operators and policymakers can tailor their services to enhance satisfaction and foster harmony. For instance, improving the cultural experience for tourists while maintaining the market’s functionality for residents could create a win-win situation.
The study also highlights the importance of social functions in traditional markets. Both residents and tourists value the social aspects of these spaces, albeit for different reasons. This insight could guide future developments in cultural tourism, ensuring that markets remain vibrant hubs of community life while attracting visitors from around the world.
As cultural tourism continues to grow, the need for such comprehensive frameworks will only increase. Liu’s research provides a methodological foundation for improving service quality in traditional markets and similar cultural tourism spaces. By adopting this framework, stakeholders can create more inclusive and satisfying experiences for all users, ultimately driving the success of these vital cultural landmarks.
In a rapidly changing world, where the lines between local life and tourism are increasingly blurred, Liu’s work offers a beacon of clarity. It reminds us that the key to sustainable cultural tourism lies in understanding and respecting the diverse needs of all who call these spaces home—and those who visit them.