experiences that are as enjoyable and transformative as they are memorable and extraordinary, even in a dematerialized version,51 it remains established that whichever form of tourism is favored this will in any case be sufficient both to foster a good experience for the tourist and to ensure that the surrounding society benefits from many positive externalities.52 Innovation must, therefore, be tenaciously supported, and there is no doubt about it. Innovation requires resources, of course, but these cannot be the only and valid reason for neglecting it, especially on the part of a public administration that is moving under the banner of a strong digital transition and that is precisely why it is well aware that the implementation of a strategy of digitization of cultural heritage, far from undermining the tourism offer, can, instead, reflect an innovative conceptualization of the information capital of the heritage itself as an expanded tourism compass.53 In fact, from a different, albeit related, angle of view, the digitization of heritage can undoubtedly come in handy from an educational standpoint, in that it fosters, the understanding of cultural objects in a systematically more widespread manner, bringing, as a result, that greater accessibility54 that has been rightly associated with the coeval increase in the intellectual capital of the average consumer and the potential territorial strength especially of the domestic airs.55 Apps, touch-screen panels, wearable technology, and more personalized designs from Bluetooth technology are just some of the examples through which this virtuous understanding is being facilitated to a far greater extent than the traditional on-site visit. That said, as is always the case when confronted with new and complex phenomena, not all that glitters is gold, so one certainly cannot naively 51 On the protection, also legal, of intangible cultural goods, among many, see in particular G. Morbidelli, The intangible value of cultural heritage in A. Bartolini, D. Brunelli, G. Caforio, Intangible assets between private and public rules. Proceedings of the Assisi conference. October 25-27, 2012, Naples, 2014. 52 P. Forte, The digitized public cultural asset: first notes for a legal study, in Person Administration, 2020. 53 E. Cavalieri, Measures to support culture and tourism in the second phase of the health emergency, in Giorn. dir. amm., 2021. 54 On these aspects see G.M. Greco, Cultural accessibility as a tool for human rights for all, in G. Cetorelli, M.R. Guido (eds.), Cultural heritage for all. Fruibility, recognizability, accessibility, Quaderni della Valorizzazione, Rome, 2017; F. Dell’Aversana, F. Cesarano, Cultural goods and activities as a tool for inclusion for people with disabilities, in Dir. fam. Pers. 2022. 55 R. Martelloni Cultural tourism: state of the art, constraints and opportunities, in Econ. Cult. To which add the concurring works of C. Vitale, Reuse of cultural heritage and development of inland areas. The norms and practices, in Dir. amm., 2022; Id. Reuse and development of cultural heritage in inland areas. Legal profiles, Turin, 2024. 177 SMART CITIES AND TOURISM
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==