Background

Lima, also called Ciudad de los Reyes (City of the Kings), capital of Peru, located on the central coast of the country in the Pachacamac valley, and crossed by the Rimac River, was founded on January 18, 1535, with an original layout in the form of a rectangle of 9 by 13 blocks, called the Pizarro checkerboard ^{(Gunther & Lohman, 1992, p. 64)}. By the 19^th century, the Cercado de Lima (Walled Lima), which includes the Historic Center, was already the first district created in the city, which since then has grown in a fragmented manner, and constitutes an urban palimpsest product of different stages of its historical events.

The criteria of exceptionality, integrity, and authenticity were considered for the declaration of the Historic Center as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 1988-although its area was extended in 1991 ^{(UNESCO, 2019, p. 1)}.

According to what was stated by the above-mentioned municipality, the immovable heritage of Lima is made up of 649 buildings declared as monuments and 1 278 of monumental value, as well as 62 public spaces declared as urban-monumental environments. Regarding its state of conservation, 45% is fair, 21% bad and very bad, and 27% good and very good ^{(MML, 2019)}.

Cultural heritage of the historical center of lima and its problems

With the evolution of the concept of cultural heritage throughout history, today the cultural value of immovable heritage is understood by citizens as the heritage where the collective, symbolic, and spiritual memory of the community is embodied, with the commitment to its preservation, which constitutes a pillar of identity, social cohesion, and economic development: “cultural heritage is both a product and a process that provides societies with a wealth of resources that are inherited from the past, created in the present and transmitted to future generations for their benefit”^{1 (UNESCO, 2014, p. 132)}.

The Historic Center of Lima has a population of 125 265 inhabitants ^{(MML, 2019, p. 150)}. The problem of its deterioration has increased because of climate change, pollution, the formation of slums of historic buildings, depopulation, the commercial exploitation of old houses, and the earthquakes registered in the 20^th century ^{(Dammert, 2018, p. 54}; ^{Shimabukuro, 2015, p. 11)}. ^{The Municipality (2019)} recognizes that the foregoing is also due to poor, disjointed coordination, as well as a lack of knowledge of the concept and importance of the OUV by the sub-managements linked to culture and tourism and the non-existence of multidisciplinary teams that work to safeguard heritage.

In this line, and with the purpose of suggesting alternatives to address this complex problem, the question arises about how the appreciation and knowledge of the cultural values associated with immovable heritage are present and would allow the renewal of cultural tourism in the Historic Center as World Heritage. Thus, the object will be to analyze those values among some of the actors involved and establish guidelines for renewal from a cultural tourism approach.

The outstanding universal value (OUV) and cultural values

The concept of OUV has been used to assess and recognize the significance of a heritage site as having “such extraordinary cultural and/or natural significance that it transcends national borders and is of importance to present and future generations of all mankind. Therefore, the permanent protection of this heritage is of supreme importance for the international community as a whole” ^{(UNESCO, 2008, p. 16)}. In other Latin American heritage historical centers, the importance of recognizing the OUV for heritage appreciation, and improvement in the tourist experience has already been underlined ^{(Ruiz & Pérez, 2021, p. 45}; ^{Sizzo, 2013, p. 130)}.

In addition to the OUV, knowledge of cultural values (“products of the human mind, based on parameters found in relevant socio-cultural and physical contexts” ^{[Jokilehto, 2017, p. 26]}) is necessary for the sense that “intangible heritage has the potential to affect the tangible realm” ^{(Vit, 2017, p. 255)}. The inherent values of immovable heritage change over time and generate different ways of relating to it. In order to define them in the context of the ^{Peruvian historical immovable heritage, the Ministry of Culture (2017, pp. 13-21)} prepared a document for their identification and declaration that has served as a guide, which includes definitions by authors such as Alois ^{Riegl (1987)}, Joseph ^{Ballart (1997)}, Françoise ^{Choay (2007)}, ^{Instituto Nacional de Cultura (National Institute of Culture) (INC, 2007)}, ^{Díaz (2016)}, and ^{Mayordomo & Hermosilla (2019)}, as shown in Figure 2.

Cultural tourism and immovable heritage

The Organización Mundial del Turismo (OMT, in Spanish, World Tourism Organization, UNWTO) defines cultural tourism as “a type of tourist activity in which the essential motivation of the visitor is to learn, discover, experience, and consume the cultural, tangible, and intangible attractions/products of a tourist destination” ^{(OMT, 2019, p. 31)}.

Rico establishes that from the tourism perspective there is a close relationship between cultural heritage and society, in which the social and recreational use of heritage elements comes into play, where “the visitor acquires a fundamental role” ^{(Rico, 2014, p. 561)}. Immo vable heritage is an unavoidable “input” for tourism, so it is essential that it be protected, preserved, and conserved through a plan which integrates social, cultural, tourism, economic, and environmental policies. The heritage aspects of a city have a privileged place, as stated by ^{Vera (2015, p. 100)} in tourism strategies as a potential booster of the economy, in which tangible and intangible heritage has a specific function, oriented towards cultural consumption.

Likewise, Rico and Baños indicate that for the renewal processes of tourist destinations to be carried out, it is necessary to emphasize that cultural heritage is a relevant element of social value that diversifies the tourist offer, including its own differentiating features ^{(Rico & Baños, 2016, p. 316)}. Even more, Villalba states that immovable heritage has become a special and attractive tourist destination on its own ^{(2016, pp. 345-346)}.

Methodology

As a first step, a building selection was carried out to interpret cultural values in the context of a renewal of cultural tourism in the Historic Center of Lima. Although there are 72 that are a heritage (museums, mansions and churches) considered tourists ^{(MML, 2019, p. 276)}, to carry out a comparative analysis in the same terms, their attributes, location, and access were prioritized according to eight criteria: having been declared Cultural Heritage of the Nation; being located within the perimeter of the area declared as World Heritage by UNESCO; having social and/or cultural, and/or commercial, and/or religious use ^{(García, 1999, p. 33)}; being open to the public; functioning as publicly owned premises; being associated with a historical event or with a historical figure registered in archives or publications; receiving national and international tourists, and having sufficient historical information on the heritage property.

After the selection, a detailed documentary analysis of the properties was carried out, which made it possible to collect data from the primary and secondary written sources available in both public and private libraries and archives. With this analysis, the quality of the historical foundations of the study was guaranteed, through a systematic, integral and sequential process of collection, selection, classification, analysis, and evaluation of the content of the existing material.

The next step consisted of the elaboration of a structured registration form for the determination of the cultural values and the OUV of the buildings, for which the consideration of different publications was used (^{Díaz, 2016, pp. 49-52}; ^{INC, 2007, pp. 183-186}; ^{Junta Deliberante Metropolitana de Monumentos Históricos, Artísticos y Lugares Arqueológicos, 1962-1963}; ^{Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería, 1994)}. The file was validated and signed by four doctors with recognized national experience in cultural heritage of Peru: Alexander Henri Rodríguez Pérez, Bárbara Isabel Ponce Ponce, María Consuelo Albán Solís, and Mónica Elizabeth Regalado Chamorro.

Five other selected specialists, also with extensive experience in the nation’s cultural heritage and in the buildings of the Historic Center of Lima, filled out the form (Figure 3). Each one of the cultural values was qualified based on the authenticity and integrity of the patrimonial property, the similarity of the typology in the Historic downtown, as well as the use and function. The evaluation was high, medium, and low, with a weighting of 3, 2, and 1 respectively, following the criteria of Figure 4.

Figure 3 Structured file for recording immovable cultural heritage. Example of filling and evaluation of Casa Aspíllaga 

Name of the immovable heritage building: Casa Aspíllaga, Centro Cultural Inca Garcilaso (Aspillaga House, Inca Cultural Center Garcilaso) Authenticity Integrity 3: 71-100% 2: 41-70% 1: 0-40%			Location: Jr. Ucayali 391, Cercado de Lima Similar Typology in the Historic Center of Lima High: 3 Medium: 2 Low: 1	Deliberation
				Use and Function High: 3 Medium: 2 Low: 1	Result (Average)
Representative Photograph of the Building:
	Professional Experts: Teresa Elizabeth Vilcapoma Huapaya, Deolinda Villa Esteves, Dina Aguilar Benitez, Juan Eduardo de Orellana Rojas, Antonio Coello Rodríguez
CULTURAL VALUES	Antiquity (Footprint of time)		Footprint of time in materials and stonework	2.80	2.40	2.60	2.60
	Historical (Associated to a historical event or an evolutionary stage of architecture)		Representative building as physical testimony, due to its foundation, evolution, historical event, testimony or evidence, significance, role, or function in its physical, political, social, and economic context	2.80	2.60	2.40	2.60
	Architectural (Period of the monument, generic type, and chronological affiliation)		Architectural representativeness, aesthetic and architectural quality, styles, facades, details, construction technology, materials, ornamentation, and aesthetic aspects	2.60	2.60	2.40	2.53
	Social (Belonging to a human group in relation to the building)		Memory, identity, relationship with intangible cultural manifestations, religion, customs, traditions, meaning of the building which has a symbolic value	2.20	2.20	2.20	2.20
	Technological (Construction technology, materials, degree of innovation, and technological contribution)		Stonework, materials, and techniques	2.80	2.40	2.20	2.47
	Aesthetic (Artistic or design quality)		Composition and construction technology in accordance with the design	2.40	2.20	2.20	2.27
	Artistic (Architectural elements)		Ornamental, sculptural, or pictorial representations in their design and materiality	2	2	2.20	2.07
Result:				2.51	2.34	2.31	2.39

(Registration Form: Ana María Lebrún, 2021; source: ^{Díaz, 2016}).

Finally, a survey aimed at national cultural tourists was designed and applied. Initially it was planned for international visitors, but it was not possible due to the closure of the buildings because of the pandemic and the consequent difficulty of virtually contacting these visitors. It was validated and signed by the same four experts who prepared the structured registration form. This had eleven main, closed questions, from which sub-questions were derived that together yielded fifty answers related to Peruvian heritage and the cultural values of the previously selected buildings. The information was statistically analyzed for its subsequent interpretation. Regarding the reliability of the survey, Cronbach’s Alpha was obtained to determine it in a pilot test with 30 participants, using the IBM^® SPSS^®2 26 version program ^{(Cronbach, 1951, pp. 331-332)}.

Knowing the exact number of national tourists who visit the Historic Center of Lima is complicated, due to the large area and the lack of precise registration by the corresponding entities, such as the Ministerio de Comercio Exterior y Turismo (Mincetur, Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism). In this study, the data from 2019 was weighted, since the following year the pandemic began and, therefore, tourism in Peru fell by 76.8% ^{(Daries, Jaime & Bucaram, 2021, p. 2)}. In 2019, 19’981 404 tourists visited the country, of which 7’880 117 arrived in the region of Lima and Callao ^{(Perucamaras, 2020, p. 1)}. Of these, 56.8% correspond to national tourists (4’475 906). According to a 2019 study by the ^{Dirección General de Investigación y Estudios sobre Turismo y Artesanía (2019)} (General Directorate of Research and Studies on Tourism and Crafts), only 58% of national tourists who arrive in Lima visit the center, that is, 2’596 025 visitors.

To find out the opinion of national tourists regarding the values of immovable heritage buildings, a virtual survey was carried out on 101 people who were considered cultural tourists. The sample had a margin of error of 9.75% and a reliability rate of 95%. At first, it was planned to carry out the surveys in person, but the mobility restrictions resulting from the pandemic in Peru in 2021 forced them to be applied virtually through Google Forms. In this sense, the internet has opened the possibility of accessing new forms of research to specific groups, and it has been shown that the information generated can be very useful in answering research questions ^{(Snee et al., 2016, p. 227)}. The survey was sent through social networks, through Facebook accounts and WhatsApp groups related to heritage, history, architecture, tourism, and culture.

Results

Immovable heritage buildings of the historic center of Lima

Of the 72 tourist heritage buildings of the Historic Center of Lima defined by the ^{MML (2019)}, 17 were selected that meet the 8 criteria mentioned above. Figure 5 lists the buildings, and Figure 6 shows their location in the Historic Center.

Figure 5 List of cultural properties that meet the eight selection criteria. Editorial note: In the first column, the numbers in brackets correspond to the location 

TOURISTIC RESOURCES	LOCATION	DECLARATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE OF THE NATION	DATE	LOCATION WITHIN THE WORLD HERITAGE PERIMETER	IN USE SOCIAL/CULTURAL/RELIGIOUS	OPEN TO PUBLIC	WORKS AS PLACE OF BUSINESS	ASSOCIATED WITH A HISTORICAL CHARACTER OR EVENT	RECEIVES NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL TOURISTS	QUALITY HISTORICAL INFORMATION RELATED WITH THE IMMOVABLE HERITAGE BUILDING	BUILDINGS WHICH COMPLY WITH THE CRITERIA
MUSEUMS*
[6] Lima Cathedral (Museum of Religious Art of the Cathedral of Lima)	Jirón Carabaya Cuadra 2 s/n, Lima	RS 2900-1972-ED	28/12/1972	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[7] Convent of San Francisco de Jesús “El Grande” (Museum and Catacombs of the Convent of San Francisco de Asís)	Esquina Jirón Lampa con Jirón Ancash, Lima	RS 1576-1941-ED	17/09/1941	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[8] Church of Santo Domingo (Museum of the Convent of Santo Domingo)	Jirón Camaná 170, Lima	RS 2900-1972-ED	28/12/1972	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[11] O’Higgins House (Museum of Art and Popular Traditions)	Jirón de la Unión 554, Lima	RJ 009-1989-INC/J	12/01/1989	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[3] House Bodega y Quadra (Museum of Yestio Bodega y Quadra)	Jirón Ancash 213, Lima	RDN 1327-2004-INC	03/12/2004	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[12] Museum of the Central Reserve Bank of Peru (Mucen-Central Museum)	Jirón Ucayali 299 esquina Jirón Lampa, Lima	RS 505-1974-ED	15/10/1974	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[1] Archbishop’s Palace (Museum of the Archbishop’s Palace)	Jirón Carabaya Cuadra 2 s/n, Lima	RS 2900-1972-ED	28/12/1972	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[5] House of Thirteen Coins (Afro-Peruvian National Museum)	Jirón Ancash 536, Lima	RS 2900-1972-ED	28/12/1972	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[13] National Mint (Numismatic Museum of Peru)	Jirón Junín 781, Lima	RS 2900-1972-ED	28/12/1972	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[2] Defenseless Station (House of Peruvian Literature)	Jirón Ancash 207, Lima	RS 2900-1972-ED	28/12/1972	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
HOUSES AND BUILDINGS
[9] House of the Hearer (Museum of Chocolate)	Jirón Carabaya 187-189-193 esquina Jirón Junín 201-203-205, Lima	RS 505-1974-ED	15/10/1974	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[14] Old Novitiate of San Antonio Abad (House of San Marcos)	Parque Universitario esquina Azángaro s/n	RS 2900-1972-ED	28/12/1972	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[4] Aspillaga House (Inca Cultural Center Garcilaso de la Vega)	Jirón Ucayali 391 esquina Jirón Azángaro s/n	RS 2900-1972-ED	28/12/1972	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[15] Congress of the Republic	Jr. Bolívar s/n, Lima	RM 329-1986-ED	30/06/1986	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
CHURCHES
[16] Church of the Nazarenes	Huancavelica 507-515-517-521-537-549-561-573-575 esquina Avenida Abancay, Lima	RS 2900-1972-ED	28/12/1972	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[17] Church of Our Lady of Mercy	Jirón de la Unión cuadra 6, Lima	RS 115-1959-ED	07/04/1959	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies
[10] Saint Peter’s Church	Jirón Azángaro s/n esquina Jirón Ucayali s/n, Lima	RS 577-1959-ED	16/12/ 1959	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Complies

* In this column, the numbers in brackets correspond to the locations and names in Spanish, as shown in Figure 6.

(Table: Ana María Lebrún, 2021).

(Source: Teresa ^{Vilcapoma, 2018})

Figure 6 Location of the 17 selected heritage buildings. 

Structured record form

Figure 7 contains the evaluation made by experts regarding the total weighting related to the integrity and authenticity, typology, use, and function of each immovable heritage building, according to the antiquity, historical, architectural, technological, artistic, social, and aesthetic values.

(Map: Helga Geovannini, 2022)

Figure 7 Evaluation of the value of the 17 heritage buildings by specialists. Results are reported in percentages. The red lines define the intervals of low, medium, and high real estate value. 

From this, 14 of the 17 buildings were evaluated highly for cultural values; three scored mediums; and none low. The buildings with the highest value correspond to the type of religious architecture, such as the church of San Pedro, the church of Santo Domingo, the Convent of San Francisco de Jesús “El Grande”, and the Cathedral of Lima. The churches and convents are considered unique, due to their architecture and artistic works, with various references to the collective appropriation of heritage, maintaining the traditional symbolic components. The Casa O’Higgins, the Casa de las Trece Monedas, and the Casa Bodega y Cuadra represent the buildings with the lowest value.

Regarding the cultural values of the heritage buildings, all of them were in a high range (a value between 2 and 3), where the historical ones stand out (2.7/3), followed by the architectural and technological ones (2.6/3), the aesthetic, artistic, and antiquity ones (2.5/3) and, finally, the social ones (2.4/3).

Survey related to the OUV and heritage values

After the analysis with a pilot test of 30 participants (100% valid, 0 excluded), the Cronbach’s Alpha value of the survey was 0.980, which shows 98% of reliability.

Going back to the virtual survey of 101 people mentioned above, 59% of the respondents identified themselves as women and 41% as men. The highest percentage of respondents is in the 45-54 age group, with 32%, followed by 35-44 with 29%, and 55+ with 25%; the lowest percentage of respondents is in the 18-24 age group, with 2%, and 25-34 with 13%. In terms of educational qualifications, 56% have a postgraduate degree, 38% a bachelor’s degree, 5% a technical level, and 1% a secondary level.

Figure 8 shows the results related to the knowledge of cultural tourists about the heritage of the Historic Center of Lima. Almost one hundred percent state that they know about this immovable cultural heritage and are aware that the Center belongs to World Heritage; 85% say they have prior information on it.

(Graphic: Helga Geovannini, 2022)

Figure 8 Knowledge of the Historical Center of Lima and its heritage. 

Several questions related to the knowledge of the heritage properties of the Center were also asked, the answers to which are presented in a chart in Figure 9. Regarding this, it is observed a marked tendency to the knowledge of the buildings belonging to the Cultural Heritage of the Nation. Eleven buildings are known as heritage by more than 80% of those who made the survey, and the remaining six are known by more than 60% of them (Question 1).

(Graphics: Helga Geovannini, 2022).

Figure 9 Knowledge of the cultural values of the immovable heritage of the Historic Center of Lima  

Regarding the knowledge of the seven cultural values associated with each of the buildings, the people who answered the surveys stated that they knew only between two and three (Figure 10, Question 2), mainly the historical and architectural ones. The social, the aesthetic, and the artistic have low appreciation as a value; while technological and seniority, almost none (Question 3).

(Graphics: Helga Geovannini, 2022).

Figure 10 Knowledge of the OUV and cultural values of the Historic Center of Lima 

Regarding the OUV and the cultural values of the historic center of Lima to belong to the World Heritage (Figure 10, Question 1), more than 70% state that they know it in terms of its integrity, and more than 80% in terms of its age. From the people who answered the surveys, regarding the estimation that the cultural values and the OUV of the immovable heritage could motivate a renovation to increase tourism in the Historic Center of Lima, more than 70% “totally agree” and a little more than 20% “agree”. The percentage that neither agree nor disagree, or frankly disagree, is less than 5. Finally, when asked whether it is necessary to have different tourist routes to visit the immovable heritage of the Historic Center, around 75% state that they totally agree, more than 20% agree, less than 2% neither agree nor disagree, and 1% disagree (Figure 10, Question 3).

Discussion

Although there are 72 buildings defined as tourist resources in the Historic Center ^{(MML, 2019)}, the 17 selected heritage buildings stand out because they are unique, special, and known by Peru vians. Many of them have multiple functions, among others, as places of worship, museums, and cultural centers.

The value of these 17 heritage buildings given by the experts in their different aspects is high. This means that, in general, the buildings are in a good state of conservation, that they are unique, special or represent references of collective appropriation. Only around 20% of them were considered to have a medium value (Casa O’Higgins, Casa de las Trece Monedas, and Casa Bodega y Quadra), in the sense that even though their qualities are not recognized as unique, they could be reinforced. These buildings could be targeted to carry out the necessary actions to highlight their importance and improve their state of conservation. In the case of the historical, architectural, artistic, aesthetic, technological, social, and age values of the properties, the specialists considered that they are all high.

The survey was useful both to find out the opinion of national cultural tourists regarding the heritage and value of the Historic Center of Lima and to confirm their degree of interest and know ledge regarding Lima’s immovable heritage. The fact that it was virtual provides some limitations, since it does not represent all potential national tourists interested in culture, and because it asks people with internet access and interest in the cultural field. Nonetheless, it has previously been identified that cultural tourists are highly educated adults seeking a more detailed cultural understanding of the place they are visiting ^{(McKercher, 2002, p. 37)}.

In general, all the respondents know about the Historic Center of Lima: that it is a World Heritage site, about the immovable heritage, have some information about it, and are aware of the cultural values and the OUV. Even when asked about the buildings belonging to cultural heritage, more than 80% of the respondents knew eleven heritage buildings as such, and more than 60% of them knew the remaining six.

Nevertheless, when asked about the seven different values associated with each of the buildings, it was found that the cultural values were largely unknown. Of all of them, only the historical and the architectural ones are recognized, which leaves a potential to highlight the other values that are present and that we know, according to the opinions of the experts.

Regarding whether the respondents believe that the cultural values and OUV of the immovable heritage could generate a renovation and increase tourism in the Historic Center of Lima, about 90% agree that it is possible, while 95% believe that it is necessary to have different tourist routes to visit and learn about the immovable heritage of the Historic Center. Although since 2015 the MML, through the Tourism Sub-Management, has been developing tourist routes and tours specifically for local and national visitors ^{(MML, 2019, pp. 319-333)}, it is necessary to multiply efforts, propose new routes, and offer more options to foreign tourists.

Conclusions

The Historic Center of Lima is a special and attractive destination that has an immovable heritage as a unique tourist focus. The values associated with the heritage of this site are crucial for their full appreciation, which is why studies and research on them are urgent. In addition to this, the fact that the lack of information and knowledge about these associated cultural values, the lack of appreciation, consideration, and understanding of their meanings, and, above all, the absence of concrete actions by public and private institutions have led to a significant deterioration of this remarkable place, threatening its survival, although its essence (intangible) and its appearance (tangible) remain after the passing of the years.

The recognition of cultural values and the OUV by all the stakeholders (inhabitants, visitors, authorities, public and private institutions, to name a few) is a relevant and irreplaceable element for tourism renewal, whose purpose is to visit the immovable heritage of the Historic Center of Lima and identify its differentiating features-which make it more attractive. This will allow the consolidation of the area so that it is known, traveled, and consumed by national and foreign cultural tourists.

In particular, the analysis of cultural values will promote the possible renewal of cultural tourism through the improvement and creation of new circuits, itineraries, or tourist routes that, in turn, reinforce the different values associated with the properties. In this way, the visitors will be able to enjoy a World Heritage Site that belongs to them to be respected, preserved, and passed on to future generations, as a social and cultural reality in a permanent state of evolution.