The St Kilda CentreA World-Class Idea

JAMES REBANKS, REBANKS CONSULTING LTDJANUARY-APRIL 2015

Table of Contents

Introduction......................................................................4The brief explained............................................................5Background and context to the project...............................6The three driving aspirations.............................................8The Big Story – focusing on the most powerful narrative.....9What visitors will expect…................................................12Aspirations – The 14 things stakeholders are talking about13Exploring the viability and compatibility of the 14 elements.......................................................................................14

1. Exhibition/Storytelling space - The St Kilda remote interpretation centre............................................................142. World-class digital storytelling facilities............................163. Remote Access Wildlife/Seascape/Marine Viewing..............184. Satellite teaching spaces/classrooms/study pods/studios....205. Research facilities – on key issues relating to periphery and St Kilda................................................................................216. Archive facilities for St Kilda and the landscape of Lewis....247. Iconic building/installation in a unique location..................258. Cliff experience/walkways.................................................279. A landscape culture trail – Songlines..................................3010. Walled fank/croft garden.................................................3411. Accommodation..............................................................3612. Shop/Retail facilities.......................................................3813. Restaurant/café..............................................................3914. Service facilities – car parks, WCs....................................40

Options analysis..............................................................43Option 1 – Iconic installation/visitor attraction/Low cost/Largely un-staffed............................................................................44Option 2 – A visitor centre/building........................................47Option 3 – Visitor centre/building + educational/creative spaces...........................................................................................50Option 4 – Visitor Attraction and ‘World Centre for the Edge’..52

Options – Conclusion........................................................56Recommendation - a phased master plan...............................57

Tourism strategic context.................................................58The World Heritage opportunity.......................................60Visitor market – current market........................................63How big is the future audience – provisional conclusions.. .65Cost estimates.................................................................66Reality check – how realistic is this?.................................67Displacement effects........................................................70

Current economic benefit model............................................71Developing economic capacity over time...............................72

The role of technology in the project................................73

The next steps – allocating resources................................79The follow-up briefs.........................................................81

1. Further development of the content/stories/digital interpretation for the facility................................................812. Developing from the content/stories/digital interpretation needs an overarching architectural plan for the site...............813. Developing a business plan and cost analysis for the first stage of the project..............................................................834. Stage Zero - In parallel to those actions, other stakeholders can start to develop a research programme for the site to develop the concept for its future development.....................84

Risks...............................................................................85Feedback on this report...................................................89

Caution – visitor attractions are risky....................................89Quality control.....................................................................90Phasing is essential..............................................................90Robust and transparent business planning (and risk analysis) 90Displacement effects............................................................91Other song lines…................................................................91Powerful story – but need for accuracy and managed expectations........................................................................91Benefitting St Kilda..............................................................92Widening the benefit to other communities of the Hebrides....92Partnership support.............................................................92

Conclusion.......................................................................94Afterword........................................................................95

IntroductionThis report captures the outcomes of 21 days work commissioned from James Rebanks between January to end of March 2015 for the community group working on the St Kilda project.

James Rebanks has worked for more than a decade on the meeting place between cultural and natural heritage and tourism, and the visitor economy. He is one of a handful of expert advisors to the UNESCO World Heritage Centre advising them on sustainable tourism projects. James’s work is used by the World Bank, UNESCO and a range of governments including the UK, German, Mexican, Spanish, Netherlands, Danish, Zambian, South African, Malawian, and Chinese governments. James is the author of two seminal studies used around the world by heritage managers and project developers.

World Heritage Status: Is there opportunity for Economic Gain (2010)The UNESCO Sustainable Tourism Toolkit Guides (2014)

He was chosen through a competitive tendering process in later 2014, and worked with the community and a range of stakeholders to develop the concept for the St Kilda Centre and test it. This was a short period of time and limited resource but enabled him to explore the thinking for the proposed project, start to refine and focus it in critical ways, and to offer some initial professional judgments on whether the ideas are viable, how long they might take to come to fruition, which partners might be involved, and how to go about the following phases of work to make the project a reality.

This paper aims to refine the project so stakeholders are much clearer what it is, to assess whether it has a future worthy of investment, and to help stakeholders to focus their efforts to progress the project towards a viable conclusion.

The brief explainedOur methodology involved an initial community workshop in early January 2015 with the community group and key stakeholders to flush out the long list of aspirations and possibilities for the site. We followed that up with face-to-face meetings with key stakeholders and remote correspondence on key issues. We then reported back on February 26 on the interim findings to a wide range of stakeholders. Our work focused in the following areas:

Developing a credible concept for the remote access product/experience of St Kilda with key stakeholders – capturing in its definitive form the dream for this project, and its constituent elements.

Capturing a narrative thread for the storytelling that could sustain such a facility - because it will necessitate an extremely innovative and creative approach to storytelling

Developing a storytelling concept from Stornoway to the site – a song line – that will make this something that will draw people from around the world.

Gap analysis - Analysis of whether anything vitally important necessary has been missed in thinking to-date. Simple desk based analysis to make the case for what is emerging.

Starting the process of spatial planning for the site – so an architect can take the concepts at the next stage and develop them.

Developing the initial thinking about how this relates to other experiences and products – like local accommodation providers, restaurants and, crucially, boat trips to St Kilda.

Strategic fit desk-based analysis – analyzing how the emerging project fits with the strategies of key organizations and funders.

Capturing all of the above in to the simplest version yet of what this project is – a short document that sets out all of the above (and more) in to something that is investable for the next stage of its life.

Once we have a clear concept with clear ingredients we can then begin to test this for its market viability:

Initial audience development analysis

Show the constraints and risks of the project

Basic analysis of what the potential future visitor will expect in terms of product/experiences

The sections that follow reveal our analysis to date on these key areas, and culminate in an options analysis and some recommendations (and specific briefs) for the next steps.

Background and context to the projectThis isolated archipelago of North Atlantic islands lies 50 kilometres to the west of Scotland’s Outer Hebrides and was known to navigators as The Islands At The Edge Of The World. St Kilda’s islands and sea stacs are what remain of a volcanic eruption many millions of years ago and the towering sea cliffs rise taller than the Eiffel Tower and Empire State Building1.

The St Kildans were famed for their agility on the cliffs where they harvested the seabirds for food, used the bird oil for light and stored their feathers for export. Their story has fascinated travellers for centuries and there are more than 700 publications on the place and its people. It has inspired artists, writers, musicians, poets, feature films, operas, graphic novels and hundreds of academic papers. The main island was inhabited for 3,000 years until the last 36 St Kildans reluctantly agreed to evacuation in 1930.

It is now home to a million birds and one of the world’s greatest seabird sanctuaries. It has its own unique species of wren, mouse and sheep - the last flock of wild sheep in Europe – and it is the focus of a longstanding scientific study on natural selection.

St Kilda is the UK’s only dual status World Heritage Site. It was first inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage list in 1986 for its Natural Heritage - its exceptional natural beauty and the significant natural habitats that it supports. This Natural Heritage designation was extended in July 2004 to include the surrounding marine environment. In July 2005 St Kilda was also recognised for its unique Cultural Heritage making it one

1 This section is constructed of a paper written by Malcolm Maclean for a UNESCO case study in 2015. It has been lightly edited, but is essentially Malcolm’s work – and is used here because it is the best summary of the context that exists to date.

of only 30 places in the world with World Heritage status for both Natural and Cultural Heritage.

Over recent years St Kilda has enjoyed an increasingly high international profile and has become an icon of islands worldwide. This has drawn a growing number of visitors to the Outer Hebrides in hopes of making the 4-hour sea voyage to “the island at the edge of the world”. St Kilda, however, is inaccessible for most of the year. The voyage is only possible between May and September and even then the weather and Atlantic storms can cause delays and cancellations. Despite this relative inaccessibility and inevitable expense the demand continues to grow and several local charter companies now provide boat trips to the archipelago.’

It has become clear over the past half century that there is an undying fascination with St Kilda. It has become apparent that whenever an exhibition or event takes place in the Hebrides, or elsewhere, about the St Kilda or its people it results in large audiences. Examples of this include the highly successful St Kilda Opera which had a global audience and won the Scottish Event of the year award. Without going in to too much detail, stakeholders are aware that the St Kilda story is major, and can drive footfall and eyeballs to things in a way that no other story or place in the Hebrides can.

In 2009 a community group was established in Uig to develop the concept of a visitor centre. In 2009 there was a competition managed by Jura Consulting to select the most appropriate site for the Centre. In 2010 the site near Uig on Lewis was selected. In 2012 the Uig landlord gifted the land to the community group (Ionad Hiort Ltd.)

The three driving aspirationsThis is one of the most exciting, ambitious and important projects I have ever seen. It is driven by three powerful aspirations…

1. Telling the VERY BIG globally significant story of St Kilda to many more people than can access it at present…

2. Using that story to create a future for a community facing similar economic, environmental, and cultural challenges on Lewis…

3. Providing a global best practice example of remote access storytelling – Something world-class that can be a game-changer for the Outer Hebrides

A number of experiences have revealed to stakeholders that the St Kilda story is bigger than the physical access to it. These are excellent and healthy aspirations.

The Big Story – focusing on the most powerful narrativeOne of the biggest conceptual challenges for the project is focus on the story that will have the greatest impact with the public audiences and key stakeholders/partners.

A significant share of our time on this commission has been about identifying what the most useful narrative is to build this project around – and this is vital because everything should be driven by the stories and content. When we started the commission there were simply too many potential stories/narratives. This reflects, of course, the richness of the natural and cultural heritage of St Kilda and Lewis – and it will be a rich mine of material for future exhibitions and research, but there is a pressing need for a project like to have a core narrative focus that everything else revolves around – too many stories dissipate the impact and the key messages and values.

There needs to be a very simple core story from which everything else flows. So what is the most powerful central story/narrative?

The site’s OUV is natural and cultural, but we believe the St Kilda Centre should focus on the meeting place between island people and the natural world.

The BIG story is these island people who lived at the edge of the world and who learned how to survive by adapting to their unique environment – their success, their resilience, their long-enduring culture, their ultimate decline, and the survival of other similar communities in the Hebrides is the frame through which the story should be told.

This narrative is the project’s biggest asset. The story is VERY BIG INDEED. St Kilda has massive power and appeal – and global reach. The story is much bigger than

the access to it – it is one of the world’s great places/stories. People will travel a long way and in considerable numbers to experience this story – it can drive physical and virtual footfall.

We favor this cultural focus for a number of reasons summarized as follows:

- There are other coastal bird focused visitor attractions in UK. And maritime heritage is niche, and difficult to engage a mainstream audience in.

- Nature tourism though important is lower value per trip than cultural tourism – the economic advantage lies in cultural tourism.

- There are a great many RSPB, wildlife trust, national park, or field studies visitor centers – standing out from that crowded marketplace is quite difficult, and many of those attraction are free or low cost so you have to fight a perception that it should be free or minimal cost.

- The ethos behind the project is about using the story of a dead community to create a future for a surviving island community. To ensure that people see Uig as an important cultural landscape it is important to focus on that strand of the St Kilda narrative.

There is no other visitor attraction that tells such a unique cultural story as this one can about the people of St Kilda and the Hebrides. The story of the people is so intertwined that the end result is that the Centre will inevitably explain the site’s natural OUV and share its values, but in a secondary manner, around the core narrative of the people’s lives in the landscape.

The core narrative of the site is this long history of human settlement and this unique human experience at the ‘edge of the world’…

If you try to do ‘nature’ and ‘human’ stories at same time you will dilute your storytelling… and seem like other places, many of which do pure ‘nature’ stories.

Every story told needs to start with these people and their lives… Because everyone can identify with a human story like this, it provides a point of entry for people from around the world to imagine themselves in the shoes of the islanders.

Through that frame the project can explore a range of issues with strong contemporary resonance: Settlement

Survival in a tough environmentChanging relationships with natural worldLiving within environmental constraintsCoping with isolationCommunities shaped by their environmentContact with the wider worldPressures for change/ModernizationAdapting to changeInnovationDiseaseDeclineDepopulationEconomic migrationLoss of young peopleAbandonmentThe cultural value of the peripheryConservation of precious places and propertiesStudying evolution and adaptation

What visitors will expect… A World Heritage site of this quality has a duty to provide visitors with an accessible explanation of its outstanding universal value.

The potential visitor to this site will potentially come a long way to experience elements of the OUV (Outstanding Universal Value) of St Kilda. The OUV of the site is detailed here - http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/387 ) .

The Centre should revolve around a core storytelling mission of communicating to the widest possible physical and virtual audience the special values of St Kilda and the wider Hebridean world that it belongs to. At the risk of over simplification the visitor to the site is going to arrive with a not unreasonable expectation of experiencing the following:

An extremely remote Scottish island location

A dramatic scenic landscape of towering cliffs – the northern seascapeA place where the elements are raw and untamed A place with amazing numbers and variety of seabirdsA place telling the story of St KildaA place that explains the islands – orientates people to what they areThe story of a tough and resourceful people at the ‘edge of the world’A place with ancient farming and gathering practices A place with an amazing indoor, and outdoor, storytelling experience

There are experiences on St Kilda that cannot be replicated at this site:

The sense of isolation is increased significantly by the boat journeyThe cliffs at St Kilda are taller, the stacks incredibly dramaticSt Kilda has a lost world feel to it that cannot be fully recreated The seabird experience at St Kilda/stacs is unlikely to be matchedThe archaeology and village of St Kilda is remarkable to be among The specific story of the people of St Kilda will always be experienced most authentically on the island

There are, in short, things that any keen student of St Kilda will want to experience first hand by visiting the island. This project would do well not to try and replace or recreate those things – better, I believe, to explain them or offer alternative experiences of them on similar themes, or to focus on what this site and project can do that are unique or distinctive.

But there are things that the St Kilda Centre can do which do not exist on St Kilda. These things tend to revolve around creating an experience/performance based on key archive items and displays. The St Kilda Centre is not about replicating the island experience. It is about

creating a new remote access experience that tells the stories, and offers a performance that cannot be had on St Kilda.

The Centre should make people understand and appreciate the island and to want to go there someday, in a responsible and sustainable manner.

Aspirations – The 14 things stakeholders are talking aboutI began this commission with extensive discussions with stakeholders to clarify what the different elements were for the project. The following elements emerged from those discussions:

- Exhibition/Storytelling space - The St Kilda remote interpretation centre- World-class digital storytelling facilities- Remote access wildlife/seascape/marine viewing- Satellite teaching spaces/classrooms/study pods/studios- Research facilities – on key issues relating to periphery and St Kilda- Archive facilities for St Kilda and the landscape of Lewis- Iconic new building in unique location- Cliff experience/walkways- A landscape culture trail - Songlines- A walled ‘fank’ garden/croft- Accommodation- Shop/Retail facilities - Restaurant/café- Service facilities – car parks, WCs etc.

The truth of the matter is that different stakeholders were talking about different versions of what this project might be – and the 14 elements listed above were given different focus and priority depending on whom we spoke to. In fact, even when people were talking about the same thing often there were different versions of what it might

someday be. This is quite common for projects at this stage of development, but meant I focused much of my time on this commission exploring what the project actually was in the most basic and functional terms, and securing buy-in from the stakeholders for a clearer vision of what it does, how it does it, and how it might be realized in a world with finite resources.

Exploring the viability and compatibility of the 14 elementsEach of these aspirational elements needs to be understood, scoped, explored, and tested for viability and for how it adds value to the project. So we developed a system for assessing each of these things… For each of the proposed elements we have done a simple analysis as follows:

1. Exhibition/Storytelling space - The St Kilda remote interpretation centre

What is it?A place where visitors and researchers can come to learn about St Kilda in ways that will always be impossible on the island itself. A place where the BIG story can be made more accessible than it ever can be on St Kilda itself.

What is it like?The idea being to create something like a National Park visitor centre or a museum for a World Heritage Site – the place where people visit to see key artefacts and to explore narratives in some depth. We are aware of some excellent comparable examples for other World Heritage Sites – places that cater for visitors and do excellent storytelling for the sites, sharing and communicating their values to a wide audience:

Trollsteigen visitor centre in Norway - http://www.reiulframstadarchitects.com/trollstigen-visitor-centre/

The Pont du Gard visitor facilities in France – http://www.pontdugard.fr/en and http://www.pontdugard.fr/en/espace-culturel/museum

The visitor facilities/museum at Vega in Norway - http://www.verdensarvvega.no/index.php/en/

The visitor centre and research facility at Mogao Grottoes, China - http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/la-et-cm-mogao-grottoes-buddhist-caves-dunhuang-20140928-story.html#page=2

The Fjord Center at Geirangerfjord, Norway – http://www.verdsarvfjord.no/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=201&Itemid=137&lang=en

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?This is a key element of the project because it tells the key part of the story that will drive visitor footfall to the site. It also potentially generates a large share if the income through ticket sales.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?The community wants more than a ‘visitor attraction’ but are totally focused on their Centre being focused on the stories of St Kilda and being a place of unique cultural experiences driven by the historic narratives of St Kilda and the surrounding islands.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?Detailed business planning will need to follow (see below) but it is possible to imagine a business model that is about ticket sales to an exhibition space in a building on this site – it is a tried and tested model, and whilst it is not an easy

business model it could generate significant revenue to cover costs from tens of thousands of visitors. Further work is needed to be clear whether capital investment can be secured for this, but it significant elements of it should be eligible for capital funding if it provides significant socio-economic benefits, doesn’t simply displace other visitors, and if its benefit can be demonstrated to the wider Hebrides. It is sufficiently sensible to be further explored.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?Potentially, yes. The key to this will be the quality of the design, the quality of storytelling, and the quality if the staff of such a facility. Other European locations with similar geographical challenges (see links above) have developed such facilities and sustained them.

Initial judgmentAll the key analyses of the Hebrides have highlighted the importance of doing more with the St Kilda brand and story. This seems like a very sensible way to bring that about.

2. World-class digital storytelling facilities

What is it?A place where the best digital technologies are utilised to tell the stories of St Kilda both to an online audience and to an audience on Lewis. The aspiration is to make elements of the St Kilda World Heritage Site visible and intellectually accessible for the first time. This might include CCTV cameras of the bird nesting colonies, cliff faces, stacs, and underwater environment - as well as being used to showcase the archival materials about the St Kildans and their history and archaeology. The digital mapping undertaken by the Scottish Ten project means that St Kilda is one of the most digitally advanced World Heritage Sites in the world already.

One of the biggest challenges of interpretation in the digital age is that the standard interpretation panels in a museum or visitor centre are difficult to pitch correctly –

they tend to have to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the audience. New technologies at the St Kilda centre would need to allow visitors to get something from short visit and superficial glance (because that it what many visitors will do), but to also make it easy for visitors who have more time and more commitment to the issues to delve in to the archival materials and learn more. The building should have spaces where people can make themselves comfortable and be able to delve in to the history of St Kilda in more depth, using technology in the centre or their own tablets or smart-phones.

What is it like?A number of site museums around the world (e.g. see Pont du Gard or Mogao Grottoes links in previous section) use digital technologies to make difficult to access heritage more accessible and in some cases more entertaining. There are also many examples of visitor attractions that live stream from nesting birds or bird colonies (e.g. Scottish Sea Bird Centre). There was a precedent for this for St Kilda at the Remote Access conference event in Edinburgh – with a temporary gallery created using new media to display archival footage of the evacuation of St Kilda – this exhibition, though small, was excellent.

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?This would be a key part of the content of the museum/exhibition space described above.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?Yes. The community wants any interpretation they offer in their facility to be world-class and cutting edge, and from its earliest days have seen this project as being credible because of the ways that St Kilda can now be brought to a wider audience by utilizing new media/technologies. The hope is that this facility can be so cutting edge that it grows a local capacity and knowledge in this field that has market value in the future.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?

There is a lot more work needed on this (see ‘Content Development brief’ at end of this report) before the costs of this are put in to a more robust business plan. The project has some world-class partners in this field – including Historic Scotland, the Centre for Digital Documentation and Visualisation and Glasgow School of Arts. These partners have expressed a strong interest in partnering with the community to make this a cutting edge facility that showcases their work. These partners will need, in the next phase of the project to help identify exactly which technologies would be included and how these would be made to be financially viable, and future proofed (though the Content Brief – see below)

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?The Project has a huge head start because of the work already done on St Kilda as part of the Scottish Ten digital mapping project. This digital element is the key to making St Kilda accessible to a mass audience for the first time – online and at Ionad Hiort. Technology is the key bridge between the Word Heritage Site and Lewis, and between archival material and a major live or virtual audience.

Initial judgmentThis part of the project is exciting and offers a lot of scope for lifting the project out of the realm of a basic visitor centre in to something of much wider impact. But it should also be approached with caution because using new technologies is inherently risky, carries costs, can result in risks of failure or ongoing maintenance costs, or even the risk of dating very quickly. Needs careful thought, considerable tech. partner input at the next stage of business planning, and some tough and objective analysis in the business plan about costs and risks.

3. Remote Access Wildlife/Seascape/Marine Viewing

What is it?The aspiration is to make the St Kilda Centre a place where people come to experience the bird life, seascape

and underwater marine environment – through utilising digital/remote technologies and CCTV to bring those things to the Centre for pubic viewing.

What is it like?Perhaps the most obvious comparator is the Scottish Seabird Centre in North Berwick – which lets visitors control the live cameras in an interactive manner - http://www.seabird.org/index.php. The Centre also coordinates Firth of Forth boat cruises to the seabird sites at Bass Rock.

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?This fits very well with the aspiration to be world class at digital storytelling, and fits well with the desire to be the place that tells the St Kilda story. It adds to the exhibition/visitor attraction elements.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?The community perhaps aspires to do this slightly more than I think they should. See reasons below for why we would make it a secondary theme and not a headline.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?We understand that there have been cost estimates prepared for the Scottish Seabird Centre to install and manage remote access cameras on St Kilda and the Stacs. These estimates can be obtained for the next phase of business planning.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?The new technologies can make it feel cutting-edge and interesting – but once something is on a screen in Uig it might as well be on a screen in people’s own homes. I don’t think this would be a world-class visitor attraction in its own right (though it could be quite dramatic on a big screen in the Centre), but can contribute to the digital storytelling about the people who lived on the island/s. However, it can be part of the storytelling for the Centre is through the key narrative of the people.

Initial judgmentThe OUV of St Kilda is part natural and part cultural, so there is much of international significance in the natural sphere that can be shown, and which many people will be interested in (and it is a duty of being a World Heritage Site that you communicate the values of the site). However, I have concerns about too much focus on this element of the project – it needs to be thought through carefully. Firstly, there are several other places where you can visit to view seabirds in amazing seascape locations - it doesn’t feel unique enough to be the headline attraction for this Centre. Secondly, the natural environment of Lewis is so special that in a sense the visitor centre would have to compete with simply standing on a cliff top with a good pair of binoculars. Thirdly, nature tourism is usually lower value than cultural tourism – nature visitors spend less per day, they know how to entertain themselves at minimal expense admiring the natural world. Fourthly, there is a risk of trying to spread the storytelling focus too thinly over too many narratives and simply confusing people or lacking a strong central purpose. Fifthly, the story of the people in this landscape has more box office appeal – it simply reaches further and catches people’ imaginations more easily. So we think that this should be part of the Centre but a strand that is shared through the cultural frame, through the lives of the people in this story. This isn’t going to be a headline activity for the Centre.

4. Satellite teaching spaces/classrooms/study pods/studios

What is it?At one end of the scale this was simply to have physical (indoor and outdoor) spaces where students or academics could work in a safe and sheltered space in response to the project/community/site – something akin to the classrooms you might find at a Field Studies Centre. Partners like Glasgow School of Arts have expressed serious interest in flexible studio spaces where students could work at the site. At the other end of the scale of

aspiration, some stakeholders aspire to create, over time, something much more ambitious that would begin to be like a small satellite campus for academic partners with the facilities that would require. A place where students or post-graduates can base themselves temporarily to undertake research or complete their work if it relates peripheral areas or the key themes of the project.

What is it like?At the simple end of the scale this would be some rooms/spaces that can be utilised as classrooms, at the more ambitious end of the scale it begins to be something like the research organization created at Mogao Grottoes which, off the back of their OUV, is creating a global expertise in that location which has much wider commercial and academic value.

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?There is potentially a risk of this site being half academic and half visitor attraction and not quite doing either properly. The fit for classrooms and studios appears to be a good one, and these could be flexible spaces used for other functions at other times. If the technology and storytelling side of this project is world-class then a lot of schools and HE/FE providers will want to come and learn from it. This is potentially a source of revenue for the project.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?Yes. The community wishes that the site be a place where people not only consume the story and landscape, but learn from it, and generate new ideas from it. The ability to work or study on the site also helps create a demand for accommodation and other services locally which can help support the local economy.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?As we will see in the options appraisal (see below), this aspiration needs more work before it can be considered viable. The simpler kind of facilities are probably quite

sensible, in that they add only modest costs to the building, can be utilized for other functions if needed, and can help generate footfall and revenue from schools etc. There are opportunities for research monies to develop this element of the project (with the support of GSA these might be accessed), there may be a way to develop such facilities with other partners with their revenue support (Though this needs to be developed and commitments made before it can be considered investable), and it may be possible to secure capital for the building of these facilities over time either from the education sector, other donors/investors, or from partners - but all of these requires development and greater partner commitment before it can be judged properly.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?It depends. A couple of classrooms or studios would not be particularly ambitious or groundbreaking, but can be valuable nevertheless. The value here is that once people can work and create at the site it starts to generate its own future life and stories.

Initial judgmentThis aspiration was perhaps the least well thought through in our discussions with stakeholders – with a great deal of variance between stakeholders as to what was desires or viable. There is a great deal of potential for learning facilities at the site to be a valuable part of its mix of functions – but what the scale and focus of this would be requires more work to be a credible element of the project.

The longer-term goal of the community is to develop this site as a research facility as well as a tourism attraction, they see the real long-term community gain in that direction

5. Research facilities – on key issues relating to periphery and St Kilda

What is it?

A year-round and staffed research facility that provides a physical and intellectual space for the study of the key issues raised by St Kilda and life at the periphery. This aspiration has been described as being ‘the World Centre for the Edge’. It would bring together in a partnership a range of organisations interested in those issues to form a new research and knowledge organisation. In practice this would mean that the site hosted a small community of its own specialists, and hosted on a shorter-term basis other researchers and groups who need to work on those issues. The reason this is an aspiration is that it offers an opportunity for the edge to be turned to the community’s advantage, by making this edge the place in the world that leads on the study of that issue. This would make the site the home for an organization dedicated to the study of these issues - and the centre of a global dialogue on issues of living at the periphery/edge. It would also generate new ideas and support the creative and cultural activities that would animate the site.

What is it like?The best comparator is possible the Mogao Grottoes project and the research programme there – where they have taken an issue of local importance (cave painting conservation and visitor management) and made it their area of expertise. The UNESCO category 2 centres around the world also provide interesting comparators, in their focus on some key issues in their locality. An interesting comparator would be The Wordsworth Trust in the Lake District which has developed a library, archive and research base which is one of the best in the world for studying romanticism and Wordsworth, but located in a remote rural location in Grasmere in the Lake District - https://www.wordsworth.org.uk/home.html

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?Such a research facility would provide a core management staff for the whole facility and would widen the portfolio of activities undertaken at the site considerably. The research focus would mean that the ongoing fascination with St Kilda and other remote and peripheral island

communities would find a physical home on Lewis and some of the economic and cultural benefit of that would be captured to help sustain a living economic community on Lewis. The research programme would interact with the digital storytelling in the visitor centre meaning that it would not become stale or outdated. Such a research programme would also bring the archive materials to life.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?This is the community’s Plan A. The heart of what they aspire to deliver on this site. The potential benefits to the communities of Lewis are substantial because this would bring high quality research jobs to Uig/Lewis.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?It looks difficult at present, for the simple reason that the research partnership, organization and programme as simply aspirations, they don’t exist yet. The moment this project moves beyond a simple visitor attraction to a staffed research space it becomes a more complex and expensive capital build. Because of that complexity it will take longer to develop the project and to business plan it so that it is investable. It is more difficult and time consuming than simply building a visitor centre. The good news is that this kind of activity opens up new and different sources of capital and revenue funding, and some of the key stakeholder organizations are interested in developing this concept because it fits with their objectives.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?There is a risk of this falling back to being a glorified field studies centre, offering rather uninspired educational content to school groups. But the aspiration is for something more valuable and internationally significant than that.

Initial judgmentThis is an exciting and highly aspirational idea. It looks some distance from being ready for capital investment as things stand. However, interviews with some of the

stakeholder organizations suggest that this is an idea that has support and which can and should be developed in the coming months. Although ambitious this would be an inspired way to secure a key part of the benefit of the St Kilda story for the communities of Lewis and to build out of that intellectual capital a lasting cultural, social and economic asset.

6. Archive facilities for St Kilda and the landscape of Lewis

What is it?Quite simply, this would be a physical and virtual archive facility for St Kilda and issues relating to living at the periphery. There is a growing mass of research relating to the island, which is only likely to grow in the future. Some will argue, with justification, that archives are perhaps better held in places with easy access for scholars, but there is also an intellectual logic to having archives in places where you can also physically experience the landscape in question. The Wordsworth Trust, mentioned above, holds an internationally significant connection of Wordsworth literature and art in rural Cumbria because for many scholars the connection of Wordsworth that landscape justifies the archive being held there (but it should also be noted that other key Wordsworth collections exist in universities elsewhere).

What is it like?Hosting an archive can be technically challenging (depending on the content type) and can involve climate controls and other expensive infrastructure. But what this is in practice is likely to be a collection partly donated or held on behalf of other partners of books, other literature, archive film footage, and some objects and audio and film footage. This archive would grow over time to reflect the research focus of the St Kilda Centre, and would also collect the amazing amount of social, economic and cultural analysis that has been done on island communities like Uig in the pat two hundred years. This

will grow to drive academic footfall to the research facility as described above.

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?An archive at face value has little crossover with the visitor centre, but this is perhaps a mistake view as the materials held in the archive inform and become raw material for the exhibitions and storytelling. The fit is closer with the research elements of the project, with an archive being a key part of the research programme or a result of it.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?The community’s attitude to this is fairly prosaic: that the landscape/seascape they inhabit has been studied for many decades in great depth, and that they are one of the nearest living communities to St Kilda, so an obvious place to have an archive.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?An archive in isolation on the Ionad Hiort site is probably impossible. The degree to which is makes sense is entirely set by whether it compliments the research facility and whether that can be made viable through the next stages of project development that will need to detail partner commitments to capital investment and revenue costs.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?An archive is as significant as the items in the collection – a key next step should be a listing of the content for the archive so the space and management requirements can be properly understood. This will also enable the costs to be understood and objective judgments be made about the most appropriate place to archive different kinds of material

Initial judgmentAn archive on its own is not a viable project for the Ionad Hiort location. It may well be that certain kinds of media are most sensibly stored elsewhere where the appropriate

conditions and audience may exist. The aspirations for this site should remain ambitious, but tempered by pragmatism – some things may not be sensible on that site. On a more positive note, and archive would very sensibly be part of a future research facility, so this idea is not dismissed, but rolled in to that longer-term aspiration.

7. Iconic building/installation in a unique location

What is it?The driver for this project is the content/story not the desire simply to build some kind of flagship building for its own sake. But everyone who has visited the site at Ionad Hiort also recognises that the drama of the site demands an exceptional building, and that a great building design would work well for the project because it would attract international attention and become part of the appeal and allure of the project.

What is it like?The inspiration should be projects like the Norway Tourist Routes - http://www.nasjonaleturistveger.no/en. That route and its inspired mixture of great design and remote but beautiful and dramatic landscapes sets the benchmark.

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?The building is, of course, the critical coming together of the different elements of the project, and will determine how effective the project will be. The stakeholders are in agreement that the building in a matter of major importance and needs to bring together in some kind of modular form the different functions in a way that works.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?With the greatest of respect, this is a fairly traditional community, but there is also a sense of adventure in their thinking about what will be built at the site. The architect will need to work with the community to find a design that they feel is appropriate.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?This is entirely dependent upon the functions within the building. However the capital cost of the building is a matter of critical importance because it has to be achievable in terms of attracting investment and in terms of its running costs when completed. The development of the designs needs to be a iterative process with business planning, the final design will need to reflect the realities of the capital funding that might be available, and possibly be delivered in phases to make it possible.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?It has to be. There is a significant risk of this being downgraded to something more mundane to make it easier to fund, but this would be a mistake, the remote location requires a building that makes its own impact and becomes part of the reason for making a long journey.

Initial judgmentForm should follow function – and function on this project is all about the story. The design of the building has to be a key element in the project – it will set the tone, and define in visual terms the quality of the project. This might be well served by an architectural competition – and a sensible fist step might be finding the support of some of the key architectural and design organizations.

8. Cliff experience/walkways

What is it?The story of the St Kildans was very much about their ability to cope with not only isolation but also to harvest the seabird colonies of the cliffs. One of the physical experiences that the site at Ionad Hiort shares with St Kilda is the cliffs – so one of the aspirations is to give visitors to the site an experience of the cliffs, either through the building including a viewing platform, or overhang, or through some other physical structure. The idea being that the site is remarkable in terms of its

geology and experiencing this can be a key part of what makes it a ‘must see’ attraction.

What is it like?The best comparison, again, is the Norway Tourist Route - http://www.nasjonaleturistveger.no/en - where the rugged nature of the landscape is utilised through inspired design to make the landscape be seen again, and experienced in a way that it cannot be anywhere else in the world. Such platforms can attract international attention, because people see a great image of it and think, ‘I want to go there and do that’. There are seven potential approaches to the cliff experience:

a. The overhanging visitor centreA dramatic way to experience the cliffs would be to have a visitor centre that actually protruded out over the cliffs, giving visitors the feeling of being perched hundreds of feet above the rocks of the shore and crashing waves. The extent to which this might be possible should be, and will be, determined by architects, and engineers, but an iconic piece of architecture that did this would attract global recognition and attention.

b. Viewing platformThe same effect might be achieved by an overhanging viewing platform. Several of these have been developed in Norway and have become some of the most iconic and visited sites in the whole of Norway.

c. The cliff top walksAny outdoors experience at the site will be heavily affected by the weather – and winter may restrict what is possible in different places – but there must be as part of the project the opportunity for the visitor to walk along the tops of the cliffs safely, but with a chance to experience the grandeur, drama and power of the natural environment that people on St Kilda and Lewis have always faced. I would suggest that this ranges from a short walk accessible to everyone even on wintry days, through to a loner walk potentially to the headlands that sweep round to the right in front of the site towards st

Kilda (this might require over time some light touch interpretation, potentially some form of public art on the headland and serious consideration of the risks a walker might take and mitigation measure for those risks that keep people alive without taking away from its wild nature.

d. The cliff top seatsThe comparable sites in Norway have done some very simple, low-cost interventions in the landscape help the visitor to be able to experience it in new ways. This can be as simple as some really well designed seats and contemplation areas, which are situated to give visitors a particular view or frame for their cliff top experience. The benefit of these is milder weather is that they spread the visitors across the site and give them a higher quality experience because they have the space to experience the natural world in an uncluttered way.

The above options are valuable but I would suggest that this project should go further, with some kind of experience of the cliffs themselves. There are perhaps three ways this might be achieved:

e. Permanent engineered walkways on the cliff faceThe Forth Bridge is currently installing metal walkways that enable visitors to traverse the bridge and experience what engineers have long experienced in harnesses. A similar thing might be possible on this site with the visitor able to descend down steps behind safety barriers, to a solid walkway across the cliff face for perhaps 20-50 meters.

f. Via Ferrata – climb the cliffs (almost) like a St KildanThere are now several companies in the UK that have erected rope walkways in forests, or mines, or quarries, that enable visitors to connect to a series of rope walkways. The technology now is so good and the practices so safe that children or the elderly can enabled to experience these places in ways previously impossible. The visitor is connected to the safety rope at all times, but gets the experience of height and risk. Given the

extraordinary climbing feats of the people of St Kilda this seems particularly appropriate for this project. But this would depend entirely on the willingness of a suitable commercial operator to bring their infrastructure to this site and operate it. This needs to be explored to see whether it has any chance of being a reality in the future.

g. The swinging cliff bridge – walk out over the AtlanticA final option for a dramatic cliff experience would be to have an aerial walkway from the visitor centre across the rocks and open sea to the cliff that juts out to the right, this would enable the visitor to walk out above the Atlantic, the rocks, and the crashing waves for a few moments, experiencing all its drama, before reaching the cliffs again, and walking back on a circular loop back to the centre. Clearly this, and other cliff options entail serious risks that need to be managed, but all of which would seem to utilize existing technologies.

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?The cliff experience can be part of the building design, a key element of the storytelling, and central to it being a visitor attraction – so that when people ask themselves why they should make the journey to the Centre a key reason for doing so is the experience of the cliffs.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?The community very intelligently made the case for his site in the selection competition based on the fact that it enabled elements of the St Kilda story to be experienced in another comparable (but by no means identical) site. The dramatic, wild and rugged cliff top location is a key element of this, and needs to be brought to life in the project.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?Same issue as with the building (see above). Though potentially the cliff experience could be revenue earning

as well, something that should be explored at the next stage.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?Potentially.

Initial judgmentThis site is all about the cliffs, the sea and the rugged beauty of North Lewis – the project has to utilize this, in similar ways to the Norwegian examples. The landscape isn’t just the setting or the view, it is a key part of the experience and the building and cliff experience (which may or may not be the same thing) need to reflect that.

9. A landscape culture trail – Songlines

What is it?The length of journey/s (Particularly from Stornoway) to what remains a fairly isolated rural area with modest services is a problem and a significant challenge – not least because it means that the site needs to communicate to potential visitors that this journey is not a chore. Every further mile you ask visitors to navigate to an attraction reduces the % of potential visitors who will make that journey – cost, time, nuisance, logistics, and simple effort all count against distance. So this project needs to be highly innovative in turning this disadvantage on its head and making it an advantage.

The narrative for this project (as communicated to potential visitors in the future through the brand and marketing) needs to make this journey an exciting, dynamic and unique experience. The journey actually needs to become part of the attraction – a journey through a landscape, and a culture.

The uniqueness and sense of place of Lewis should be used to full effect… The key stories that can be told through that journey are:

1. Sense of isolation and distance – navigation by a sea-based people2. Understanding the crofting way of life – in the landscape3. Understanding peat cutting for fuel 4. Understanding black houses – both ruins/fully restored and working5. Understanding the fanks/fields – the livestock/crops/traditions6.Understanding land ownership/struggle – how it made the people

It would be a grave mistake to think of the St Kilda centre existing in isolation. It should be the end point, and start point, of a physical and intellectual journey… Just as the journey to St Kilda adds to the mystique and wonder of the site, this journey should be made an event in itself. That journey, or journeys (because this should link the site to other communities across the Hebrides to encourage footfall in both directions) should be thought of as being the sum total of the existing attractions, plus some new interventions/interpretation, plus new orientation through storytelling and maps.

The songlines should utilize and link with a range of other attractions – including Callanish, Gearranan Blackhouse Village, etc. so the island ‘tour’ culminates at the St Kilda Centre the ‘must see’ element. This is important for the St Kilda Centre, because it enriches it, but also important to those other attractions, and communities, because it spreads the benefits of this flagship project to them. The songlines are a key way to ensure it is about additionality not displacement.

What is it like?This project would be inspired by the Norway Tourist Routes – which combine architectural/design installations with new itineraries based on food, culture or adventure experiences - http://www.nasjonaleturistveger.no/en - to overcome distance being perceived as a negative. The Norway Tourist Routes faced the same challenge of requiring people to navigate significant distances through beautiful but often unexplained landscape.

The Tourist Route model is relatively simple, in addition to the journey by road and ferry the visitor also experiences a series of artistic and architectural interventions in the landscape. These have been developed over a period of some years through design competitions, and are unique in providing functional objects (like bus shelters, or litter bins) through to new places to experience the star attraction itself, namely the landscape and the stunning mountainous views (so a series of iconic viewing platforms or seating areas have been built over cliffs, or beside waterfalls etc.). The guiding principle is one of design excellence and creativity, so that the visitor still experiences overwhelmingly a wild and mountainous natural landscape, but periodically experiences these amazing contemporary objects that are world-class in their quality and conception.

Interestingly, there is a history of such creative activities on the route from Stornoway to Uig. This project would be about investing in some new interventions and packaging of existing attractions and landscape features to ensure that the key stories are brought to life using the landscape of Lewis because it is a great storyboard to tell the story of island life.

A Lewis version of the Norway Tourist Routes could be similar in conception, but quite different and iconic in practice. The route breaks down in to a series of steps or stages – each of which can tell an important part of the St Kilda story. So visitors travelling through the landscape are invited to think about the narrative themes – with reference to the peat cutting, or runriggs they are passing etc.

The songline would utilize a series of stopping points where your sense of wonder grows – and you learn about elements of the people of these islands… It should be a project to showcase the best of Scottish/UK design, with a handful of small-medium interventions to functional objects like bus shelters, fanks, postboxes, croft signposts etc. to tell its stories:

Sense of isolation and distance – navigation by a sea-based people – This would be a series of moments/places where you are invited to look outwards and understand the way that island people read the landscape/seascape, how they navigated, and their sense of the world (facing the front of the navigable world not being on its edge?)

Understanding the crofting way of life – This would create a series of moments/places where you are invited to stop and learn/see the man-made landscape and how it differs from other landscapes. To see both the ancient and modern peopled landscape.

Understanding peat cutting for fuel – The peat cutting activities on the journey are ‘normal’ to islanders, but to visitors they are potentially very interesting of explained. Such prosaic elements of island life become ways to tell the story of the island people’s historic innovation to generate heat and cooking fuel etc., and how this shaped the landscape.

Understanding black houses – The Hebrides has a particular charm because the deep past and the present exist alongside each other, and one of the most evident examples of that is in the blackhouses passed on the route. This strand of the story requires the identification of the best examples to blackhouses that are ruined, fully restored, or still working houses or sheds and making a story of them for visitors. So a visitor can stand in, or look at, an authentic old one, a funky new one, a ruin, or an alternative-use of one, and understand the structures that evolved to make life possible on St Kilda and the islands as a whole.

Understanding the ‘fanks’ – Take these functional places for sheep and make some of them places for interpretation and explaining the traditions they represent, perhaps with some that are no longer used turned in to gardens (see below).

Understanding land ownership/struggle – Part of the unique sense of place and a key ingredient in what makes the island people is the way land was owned/farmed/lived on and struggled for here – visitors need to get a sense of this and how to ‘read’ the landscape and its past struggles.

The point is that the St Kilda project should develop an amazing story trail (or series of trails, because Stornoway is not the only community linked to Uig). The storytrail would create c.6-10 places to stop on the way to Ionad Hiort that will enhance the visit and people’s understanding of Hebridean/St Kildan life, linking with a range of other attractions – including Callanish, Gearranan Blackhouse Village, etc. so the island ‘tour’ culminates at the St Kilda Centre - the ‘must see’ element

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?The songline/s are critical to the visitor attraction elements of the project because they pull visitors through the landscape. They are critical to the interpretation in the exhibition/museum space because the story is actually embedded across the island not just in a display in the building. And the songlines can be a key project for the research programme because they offer an opportunity to work with other communities to tell their stories.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?The community has always understood that the journey is critical to the project.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?A songline is a great way to spread benefit across wider pieces of geography, particularly as it makes possible other initiatives like a food trail or arts trail which can focus on other activities on the island. Such songlines generally mean installations that are too small or isolated to charge for entrance – so they are attractors to drive secondary spend. But in terms of capital investment this would be eligible for a range of different funders. In

Norway, and other countries, they have been very successful in accessing arts, design, transport and community funding for interventions.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?The Norway Tourist Routes are a global success story – but all of that has been driven by the insistence on excellence in the design of the installations. Excellence doesn’t have to mean huge interventions, but it does mean that the quality of each of them needs to be very high indeed.

Initial judgmentThis is such an important element of the overall project that it would be worth doing even if the actual visitor centre itself did not happen. It would be a grave mistake to think of the St Kilda Centre simply being the attraction on the cliff top, it needs to be a flagship for the whole Hebrides, and a genuine story hub for songlines that link it to several other communities. The songlines are a key economic regeneration tool because they spread the benefits of the St Kilda Centre and open up a range of opportunities for people to offer products, services and experiences from their crofts.

10. Walled fank/croft garden

What is it?Developing an iconic garden/croft as part of the St Kida Centre, or a trail of small garden/crofts between other locations and the site at Ionad Hiort that visitors would experience to learn about how hard it is to grow crops in this landscape.

What is it like?The inspiration might be the Gertrude Jekyll garden on Holy Island in Northumberland that attracts many tens of thousands of visitors each year. That garden is actually very small (roughly the size of a traditional walled fank on Lewis), but adds significantly to the experience of Holy Island, because it has a story behind it that relates to the castle and its occupants. It also offers a place, an outside

room if you like, where people can pause amidst some beauty and contemplate the castle and surrounding landscape.

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?Because the key narrative of the St Kilda Centre is about how people adapt to live in such harsh environments there is a need to ground this in the realities of a place like Uig. One way to do that is to demonstrate through this garden, or chain of small gardens, how difficult growing food is in such thin soil in such exposed and windy places. Key parts of the island story can be shared with visitors through this garden. It can demonstrate key local skills and walling, and how people have shaped the landscape with things like rigs. The site is, of course, a desperate place to try and create a garden that would be typical in the South of England, but that is the point, it can be managed like a croft, and showcase plants that can stand the extreme climate. It should, in short be a little like the Derek Jarman garden at Dungeness, which makes a virtue of its unlikely location and beach ecosystem.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?

The original idea came from the community and has been evolved a little by us because it is potentially such a good idea.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?Such a garden/croft could be constructed as part of the project for minimal cost, it would not in itself generate income, but would be part of what visitors would experience as part of their ticket price.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?It needs to be world-class and it can be through partnering with a great garden/landscape designer to make a modest sized area work, and have a much wider impact.

Initial judgmentThe story of the St Kildans was partly about harvesting the wild, but it was also about cultivation and land management, about yielding from tough exposed ground food. The walled garden/fank idea should be rolled in to the master planning work because it can add real value.

11. Accommodation

What is it?A number of stakeholders particularly those running private businesses servicing visitors have highlighted the fact that accommodation is limited on rural Lewis. There may well be a need for accommodation for staff at the facilities – the numbers of beds being set by the staffing requirements of the business plan brief that will follow. There is also an aspiration to make the St Kilda Centre a place that, over time, can accommodate researchers and students, albeit for short periods during which they are working or creating. Stakeholders speaking of ‘PHD pods’ or ‘studios’ for art students on short-term placements from other organisations like Glasgow School of Art. And finally, in the architectural master plan there should be thought given to whether the site can offer accommodation as a revenue earner for some visitors. The aspiration is not to displace the existing provision by private businesses, but to compliment it and add to it over time if there is a demand.

What is it like?As described above, the Wordsworth Trust in the English Lake District has made their site a research base for anyone working on romanticism or Wordsworth and as part of that offer accommodation for scholars. Accommodating students or study groups would be more like a field studies centre approach, with fairly basic accommodation offered. The final option would be to copy something like the New Lanark World Heritage Site and have a hotel on the site (it should be stressed that this is not a current aspiration, but in terms of long term aspirations to generate revenue it should perhaps be considered over time.

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?The visitor attraction elements of the project can happen without visitor accommodation, but there may well be a need for some staff accommodation. The research side of

the project would probably require a more complex site with accommodation.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?The community, perhaps, see this as a practicality of making the site work, rather than a core aspiration in itself.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?There will be challenges in finding public sector investment for this as it would need to demonstrate that it did not displace private sector accommodation providers.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?The architect should be tasked with folding this functional need in to an overall masterplan so that is not a bolt on.

Initial judgmentThere are strong arguments for the visitor accommodation being provided by the local community and existing suppliers initially rather than creating new accommodation stock. As the project evolves this may change and accommodation and living space linked to the research elements of the project may be necessary. For the foreseeable future

12. Shop/Retail facilities

What is it?The stakeholders believe that the St Kilda centre should a) showcase the best in local crafts and products, b) perhaps develop products specifically linked to the values of St Kilda and intellectual property of the centre and its research, and c) selling things to visitors may be a valuable part of the business model.

What is it like?This is comparable to a good quality museum shop.

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?Island people have long been makers and artisans, not least through weaving Tweed. In this context the St Kilda centre shop should be more than a craft shop, it should be a way of showcasing skills and the products that island people have developed to survive and prosper. There is the potential for the Centre to forge partnerships with some of the commercial businesses on Lewis – perhaps with Harris Tweed, so that the centre becomes a showcase of local skills and commercial creativity, and in turn benefits from bespoke products that cannot be bought elsewhere, providing another reason to visit.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?Yes. This is seen pragmatically as part of how you make a visitor attraction pay.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?This should be seen a profit-seeking part of the project.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?The Centre should collaborate with commercial businesses and creative artisans to develop products of a high quality that help to communicate the values of the project.

Initial judgmentThe project needs to earn money from visitors to cover its running costs – although ticket prices are likely to cover some of that, other avenues should be pursued as well to increase spend per head.

13. Restaurant/café

What is it?There is a clear need to provide food and drink for the visitors or research participants – made more pressing by the isolated nature of the site. It is a basic fact of life for any kind of visitor attraction or research facility that it needs to provide food and drink. There is perhaps a simple

approach of a small tea room/café/canteen, and a more ambitious idea that this site might be the location of a restaurant.

What is it like?This might be comparable to Callanish Visitor centre, or might be more akin to some of the Norwegian examples like the one at Trollsteigen visitor centre restaurant/café (see link above).

How does it fit with the other elements of the project?Island life has always revolved around the catching, growing, and making food in a hostile and sometimes harsh environment. The provision of food on the site should be used to communicate key stories through the products of the islands. The food provided should be local, authentic and distinctive, and the eating areas should tell these stories on the tables, plates and cutlery. It might also be possible to utilize the fank garden/croft for some products. We would suggest, again, that partnerships with local private businesses might make this flexible, with a tearoom/café run most for the time, but perhaps a pop-up restaurant at peak season times created by a local restaurant.

Does it meet the community’s aspirations?The community have no burning desire to run a restaurant, but understand that a visitor centre or research facility needs to provide sustenance.

Is it (based on what we know now) viable in terms of capital investment and revenue generation?Finding public funding for a restaurant may be impossible, but a café that can be flexible enough to do other things, as part of a wider project may be fundable. The Callanish Visitor centre experience suggests that visitors travelling around the island want and need good food provision, and that can generate income to sustain a visitor centre and create local employment.

Is it good enough? Is it world-class?

The food and drink provision at the St Kilda Centre needs to be more ambitious than a simple tea room – it needs to provide a public space that visitors and researchers can enjoy, regardless of the weather outside. The British Museum has been extremely successful in creating new public spaces where people eat, drink and relax – and it has driven repeat footfall because people want to meet to be in those places. The St Kilda Centre should learn from this, and in a different context, and on a smaller scale create a place that people want to be in.

Initial judgmentFood and drink have to be provided, so these things should be seen as an opportunity to create a valued public space, and another place where the stories and values can be shared. Given the isolated site, seasonal nature of tourism, and existing restaurant nearby we would suggest that the centre focus on a modest café type facility initially with some flexible space for a pop-up restaurant for special events, with more consideration given to a full restaurant in the future.

14. Service facilities – car parks, WCs

The need for car parking and toilets is self-explanatory. At the next stage of the project it will be possible to make quite accurate estimates of the number of car parking spaces and the scale of other facilities.

Making sense of the aspirationsAs I explored these aspirations with the stakeholders it became apparent that the project was, a) driven by some inspired thinking about doing something genuinely world-class, and b) that this range of aspirations needs careful thought to work out how these elements sit together within it, and what the priorities are. How these elements might be packaged together in a way that is coherent and compelling, and which elements are given great prominence than others,

- Exhibition/Storytelling space - The St Kilda remote interpretation centre- World-class digital storytelling facilities- Remote access wildlife/seascape/marine viewing- Satellite teaching spaces/classrooms/study pods/studios- Research facilities – on key issues relating to periphery and St Kilda- Archive facilities for St Kilda and the landscape of Lewis- Iconic new building in unique location- Cliff experience/walkways- A landscape culture trail - Songlines- A walled ‘fank’ garden/croft- Accommodation- Shop/Retail facilities - Restaurant/café- Service facilities – car parks, WCs etc.

My conclusions about prioritization between these aspirations is fairly simple,

The exhibition/museum space is critical – it is after all about the key driving narratives, and securing the benefit from the St Kilda story. This is a key ingredient in the project. It could actually be developed quite quickly.

That exhibition/museum space should utilize the best available digital storytelling skills and technologies to make St Kilda’s cultural and natural history accessible and exciting.

The wildlife/seascape/marine viewing aspirations are very worthy, and potentially valuable, but run the risk of being just another CCTV screened wildlife site of the kind that are proliferating because of CCTV technology becoming ever cheaper. I believe that the project should share the nature of St Kilda, the cliffs, and the marine environment, but that it needs to be done cleverly, creatively and through the more unique frame of the lives of the people of St Kilda and the Hebrides.

I am less convinced by the viability and reality of the more ambitious educational ambitions – we can foresee the site having an important educational role, but less as a fully fledged campus in the foreseeable future, and more as a satellite facilities for field research or flexible spaces for creative or research endeavors.

I admire the aspiration for the site to become a world-centre for research on issues raised by St Kilda, island life/the edge/periphery, and think this has real potential – but would stress that this looks like a longer term aspiration that something that can be built in the next two years. There is 2-5 year development work needed to make this happen.

The viability of an archive looks troublesome to me, if it is divorced from the research aspirations – so should be rolled in to the development of that project over the next 2-5 years.

The aspiration for the building to be ‘iconic’ (apologies for the over-used word, but it is justified on this location) is 100% correct. Form should follow function, but this site demands and desperately needs a building that makes a statement about the project, and which becomes ‘must see’ in its own right.

The cliff experience/walkway is a key reason why people will come to this site. The architectural designs need to make the most of this cliff top/seascape landscape. The project cannot simply sit on those cliffs, it

has to become part of them and make them come to life in all weathers for the visitor/audience.

The landscape culture trail/s – song lines – should be thought of as one of the key elements of the project. They would even be worth developing if this project ever failed to be a viable proposal in the future. The Norwegian examples have shown that they can breathe new life in to remote rural areas, and change the profile of those places.

The walled/fank garden/croft aspiration is a good one, but again needs to feel like an essential part of the design of the site and the song lines culminating at Ionad Hiort. The outside experience at Ionad Hiort is as important as the inside experience, visitors won’t understand island life if they don’t learn to see how its landscape was shaped. This probably needs a garden/landscape designer to work with the architect on the masterplan.

It was important that we looked at some different options for how these things can be packaged together in to something credible and viable:

Options analysisWe think that there are four serious options for the site at Ionad Hiort:

This requires explanation…

Option 1 – Iconic installation/visitor attraction/Low cost/Largely un-staffed

The first serious option is to build an iconic installation on the cliff tops at Ionad Hiort. This would include some kind of architectural structure like those in the Norway Tourist Route – a cliff top viewing platform, or some structure that would frame the views. This would not be a building as such, but something remarkable that would draw footfall to the site and make a statement about St Kilda and island life.

This is a serious option because the evidence around Europe shows that this is the solution that many other amazing but remote communities find to the challenge of attracting people to their locations. Installations like this drive significant footfall to other comparable locations in North West Europe. If the quality of the design is good enough in such locations then these structures can put places on the map.

This option would include the following elements (Discussed individually above)

- Iconic new structure (not building) in unique location- Cliff experience/walkways- A landscape culture trail across Lewis from Stornoway to Ionad Hiort- Wildlife, seascape and marine viewing facilities – remote access ICT- A walled ‘fank’ garden/croft - Service facilities – car parks, WCs

It would not include:

- Exhibition/Museum space - The St Kilda remote interpretation centre- World-class digital storytelling facilities- Satellite teaching spaces/classrooms/study pods/studios- Research facilities – on key issues relating to periphery and St Kilda- Archive facilities for St Kilda and the landscape of Lewis- Iconic new building in unique location- Accommodation- Retail facilities, restaurant/café

The advantage of such an approach is that it reduces the running costs of a visitor centre, and can be more appropriate for a community with limited capacity for managing a larger and more ambitious facility. There is a certain hard logic to such an approach, and other educational and commercial activities can be developed off the back of such an ‘attractor’ – like the food and cultural routes developed for the Norway Tourist Routes. It is by far the lowest cost option in terms of capital investment and ongoing revenue support. At its simplest it would not generate revenue directly, or would do this through a simple mechanism like events, or car parking fees (which could be considerable even at a modest level – c.50,000 x £2 per car = £100,000).

Three viability tests for elements of this project:

COMMUNITYThe community wants something more substantive than this – something peopled and multi-functional. This fails this test utterly.

VIABILITYSuch a facility might generate income from ticket sales or car parking in peak season – but generally these installations are used as free attractions to drive footfall to remote locations, with the private sector/existing businesses deriving the benefit from the passing footfall.

WORLD CLASSSuch an installation might be world-class – but it simply does not fit the aspirations of the community or the potential funders because its power to drive socio-economic regeneration is limited by its lack of staff and its inability to offer in-depth interpretation of St Kilda.

MY JUDGMENTA case might be made for an iconic architectural installation in such a location to generate significant footfall and PR for the Outer Hebrides and to change perceptions of the islands. Its biggest weakness is that it only enables the most basic of interpretation for St Kilda – and for that reason it is not considered a live option. It is considered because it involves the lowest capital investment and is the kind of solution arrived at elsewhere.

Option 2 – A visitor centre/building

This option is a step up in terms of aspiration and capital investment because requires a building-based approach. It also requires a more complex and cost-heavy business plan because it will require staff and more facilities. This option would be about building an iconic visitor centre building on the cliff tops at Ionad Hiort.

This is a classic solution to storytelling and attracting visitors to a site, used by most National Parks and historic places around the world. It would be, we provisionally estimate, approximately c.800 square meters of floor space and would revolve around being the visitor centre for St Kilda and the key stories about life at the edge of the world.

This option would include the following elements (Discussed individually above)

- Exhibition/Museum space - The St Kilda remote interpretation centre

- World-class digital storytelling facilities- Iconic new building in unique location- Cliff experience/walkways- A landscape culture trail across Lewis from Stornoway to Ionad Hiort- Wildlife, seascape and marine viewing facilities – remote access ICT- A walled ‘fank’ garden/croft - Service facilities – car parks, WCs- Retail facilities, restaurant/café

It would not include:

- Accommodation- Satellite teaching spaces/classrooms/study pods/studios- Research facilities – on key issues relating to periphery and St Kilda- Archive facilities for St Kilda and the landscape of Lewis

The business plan for such a visitor attraction is fairly simple – it would attract X number of visitor paying Y amount for a ticket each which would generates Z amount

of revenue, which would cover (along with the car parking, retail and café elements of the project) the staffing and running costs of the centre. It is too early to be precise on the numbers but provisionally we would estimate that perhaps 70,000-100,000 visitors a year might be attracted to the site. Ticket price for entry might be £6-10 (more than competing attractions but justifiable because of the quality of the exhibition). The site and content proposals would, we believe, generate significant footfall and spend and it is possible to imagine a business model that is viable for this that would cover the likely staffing and running costs. Visitor flows to the Hebrides are heavily seasonal, so this centre would need to expand and contract to reduce costs in the winter months – it would be seasonal. Similar facilities require at least 2-5 FTE staff and incur significant running cost.

Three viability tests for elements of this project:

COMMUNITYThe community accepts that a visitor centre is a central part of what they need to offer visitors – but they want this site to be more than simply a visitor attraction.

VIABILITYBased on what is known now, this could be viable. The next stage of the project will flesh this out with a more comprehensive business plan based on actual running costs and revenue generation targets. Of all the building-based options this is the one that a business plan could be created for most quickly, the more aspirational options need more work and time to be investment credible. This counts in the favor of this option.

WORLD CLASSVisitor centers can be world-class, but it all depends on the quality of the building and its content. The digital storytelling element will be critical. There is always a risk of these things losing their edge and appeal over time (which is why the research element of the project – see below – is important, keeping this fresh and cutting edge.

MY JUDGMENTThe biggest problem with this option is that it doesn’t on its own meet the aspirations of the community – they see the St Kilda story as being more than simply a tourism product/experience and desire this site to generate ideas/research/and other outcomes that drive community renewal. On a simple business viability perspective this is a strong option. Has to be carefully considered as a live option – or a first stage scenario.

Option 3 – Visitor centre/building + educational/creative spaces

This option is like the preceding one (so requires less explanation), i.e. largely a visitor attraction in terms of its business model, but adds in to the site some other educational and creative activities.

It would be largely as Option 2 but also a kind of education/field studies/art facility. So in addition to the facilities visitor would require it would also have a series of facilities for academics/students and artists to work in. This means the buildings would be more complex, and would need to include the facilities of a field studies centre – plus some studio spaces where artists can develop new creative work on the site. The USP being that this is an amazing place to study or create if you are working on issues relating to St Kilda, island life/life at the edge.

The benefit of this is that the academic calendar tends to be the opposite of the tourism calendar and this would

enable more year-round activities on the site. It would also require more staff (c. 4-8 FTEs) and have additional running costs. The visitor attraction elements would still need to expand and contract with the seasons, but the additional non-tourism elements would sustain more on site activity through the winter months.

This option would include the following elements (Discussed individually above)

- Exhibition/Museum space - The St Kilda remote interpretation centre- World-class digital storytelling facilities- Iconic new building in unique location- Cliff experience/walkways- A landscape culture trail across Lewis from Stornoway to Ionad Hiort- Wildlife, seascape and marine viewing facilities – remote access ICT- A walled ‘fank’ garden/croft - Service facilities – car parks, WCs- Accommodation – basic for students/artists- Retail facilities, restaurant/café- Satellite teaching spaces/classrooms/study pods/studios

It would not include:

- Research facilities – on key issues relating to periphery and St Kilda- Archive facilities for St Kilda and the landscape of Lewis

COMMUNITYThis is much more in line with the community aspirations because it is less seasonal, generates more activity and jobs, and has more depth than simply a visitor attraction.

VIABILITYThis would retain the revenue streams of the visitor attraction but injects some new costs and risks because it necessitates more investment and other partner commitments. Those additional activities might generate

their own revenue to cover costs, but more business planning work is required to demonstrate this.

WORLD CLASSSuch a facility could be world-class but would need inspired design and the do something very interesting in its study spaces – which it potentially could. There is a risk of this being a fairly conventional field studies centre if education activities not sufficiently cutting edge.

MY JUDGMENTOnce this project moves beyond being simply a visitor attraction it will require the commitment of different funders for capital costs, and different active partners in the daily running of the site. The potential partners like Glasgow School of Art want to develop this concept, but as it stands the commitments need to be developed and made to make this ready for capital investment.

Option 4 – Visitor Attraction and ‘World Centre for the Edge’

This would involve the creation over time of both a visitor centre as in Option 2 but also a world-class research facility focusing on St Kilda and issues of life at the edge of the world. This is the long-term complete aspiration of the community - The development of the St Kilda Centre to be part world-class visitor attraction and part world-leading research facility on issues relating to island life.

This is a very aspirational project and would require significant capital investment, revenue and in-kind support from a range of partner several years to become a reality. This would probably require a long-term phased approach to developing the site to a masterplan.

NB: A very useful comparator would be the Wordsworth Trust, which is a globally significant centre for the study of Wordsworth and the romantic and picturesque movements – but based in rural Cumbria. The Trust have over time developed a rage of facilities, including museum, gallery and exhibition spaces, shop, restaurant, library, archive, study areas, accommodation for visiting scholars and a high quality and distinctive contemporary building.

It is a future for the site that is beyond the current capacity of the community alone, and would actually have to be delivered through collaboration between the community and other partners like Glasgow School of Art, National Trust for Scotland, Historic Scotland and the Centre for Digital Documentation and Visualization. The good news is that those partners have expressed support for at the very least developing this concept further, and in some cases that they would wish to be involved in the way that would be required to make this possible (including in securing funding for the development of this concept).

The aspiration is to develop with partners an organization that would become the leading authority on St Kilda and on the issues raised by living at the edge of the world – A ‘Global Research Centre for the Edge’. This does not exist at present, but there is interest from stakeholders in establishing it In the coming months.

This option is a step up again in terms of aspiration and capital investment over a visitor attraction because

requires a more complex building-based approach. It also requires a more complex and cost-heavy business plan because it will require more staff and more facilities (including potentially accommodation for staff, scholars and students). This option would be about building an iconic visitor centre building on the cliff tops at Ionad Hiort and a research hub.

NB: Another useful comparator to this aspiration is the Dunhuang Research Academy, which manages the caves but also has used the expertise gained from their heritage site to become world leaders in the specialist conservation skills it requires and in research on caves and related conservation issues.

It is not clear yet, how big this would be in terms of floor space and exactly what facilities would be required and at what cost – but the next stage of architectural and business plan development can begin to answer those queries. What can be said is that it would require more than the c.800 square meters of floor space needed for a visitor centre and would therefore take the costs significantly higher (which might be countered by the fact the education spaces would be eligible for other sources of funding and investment – but this remains to be demonstrated).

The business plan for such a facility would be complex – the visitor attraction part being similar to Option 2, but the

research facility being more complex. The next phase of development can work out the viability of those elements when it becomes clearer what they are.

This option would include the following elements (Discussed individually above)

- Exhibition/Museum space - The St Kilda remote interpretation centre- World-class digital storytelling facilities- Iconic new building in unique location- Cliff experience/walkways- A landscape culture trail across Lewis from Stornoway to Ionad Hiort- Wildlife, seascape and marine viewing facilities – remote access ICT- A walled ‘fank’ garden/croft - Service facilities – car parks, WCs- Accommodation – advanced for students/artists/staff- Retail facilities, restaurant/café- Satellite teaching spaces/classrooms/study pods/studios- Research facilities – on key issues relating to periphery and St Kilda- Archive facilities for St Kilda and the landscape of Lewis

It would not include:

- This is the full aspiration – with all the aspirations met.

COMMUNITYThis is the big aspirational end point that the community wishes to try and create. There is an acceptance that it may take years to achieve in full, and they may need to phase the delivery to minimize their risks an grow their capacity.

VIABILITYThis would retain the revenue streams of the visitor attraction but injects major new costs and risks because it necessitates more investment and other partner commitments. Not clear now whether this is realistic –

might take 2-5 years to develop concept and attract funding.

WORLD CLASSSuch a facility could be world-class because it would be about global issues, and would have to be (to be viable) an exemplar of how creativity and research can drive the renewal of a community.

MY JUDGMENTThis is an amazing concept. A tough, objective and financial analysis would (based on current evidence) have to say it is some way off a viable proposition. The potential partners like GSA want to develop this concept, but as it stands the commitments need to be developed. Time may make this possible and investable – but that might take 2-5 years.

Options – ConclusionWe have discussed these four options with the stakeholders and the following judgments have emerged.

Option 1 is not desired by any of the stakeholders. It simply does not meet the aspirations of the community for a year round employment generating facility, or the other stakeholders for a facility that can tell the stories of St Kilda with real depth, insight and creativity.

Option 1 – is rejected.

Timescale – might have been possible in the next 18 months.

Option 2 is does not meet the full aspirations of the community or some of the educational partners, but is perhaps a sensible first phase for the project. The content can be developed, the architectural designs undertaken, and the business plan can be developed in much greater detail.

Option 2 – is a sensible first phase.

Timescale – 1 year to develop content, develop architectural design, and develop a robust business plan and 1 year to fundraise – potentially ready for site works in Spring 2017.

Option 3 needs more work than Option 2 to be investment ready, it might take an additional 2-5 years t be ready for capital investment. We recommend that this concept is developed as a parallel process to the implementation of Option 2. Delaying the development of Option 2 may mean that capital funding available now is lost due to the delay, and I don’t think capital investors/funders will invest in Option 3 until it is developed further with more commitments from potential partners and a more robust business plan than is possible in the next few months.

Option 3 – has the potential to be implemented, but will take longer than Option 2 to be investment ready. It should sensible be seen as a phase 2 element of the project.

Timescale - These elements would take 2-5 years to be capital investment ready. 2017-2020.

Option 4 is the long-term aspiration. The World Centre for the Edge doesn’t exist yet and the viability of these aspirational research elements is unproven. There is a long road to take before it becomes a reality, but the concept at this stage looks powerful and imaginative and it is sufficiently inspired and promises such a significant impact for the Hebrides that it should be supported to be developed further.

Option 4 – This should form the basis of the masterplan for the site, and elements within that masterplan can be delivered in phases over time. Each element should have its own business plan and should be viable regardless of whether the following elements happen or not to minimize the risk to the community.

Timescale – 5-10 years. 2020-2025.

Recommendation - a phased master plan

I recommend that the solution to get this project started is Option 2 as a first phase with four actions to make that happen (see below). As discussions with funders evolve it may be possible to add in elements of Option 3 but the extent of capital funding available (and the things that eligible for it) should determine that. The key thing is to grab the opportunity to get the project started, and up and running with a revenue generating model based on being a visitor attraction.

Tourism strategic contextThe St Kilda Centre needs to be considered carefully in its tourism context. It will not exist in isolation, but will be part of an existing destination. Best practice in tourism management around the world is now focused on destinations, not sites, for the simple reason that tourism is wider than a single site or attraction, and communicating with visitors or shaping their experience requires stakeholders to work collaboratively at a destination scale. In the next phase of the project the St Kilda Centre needs to be particularly sophisticated in its relationships with the tourism sector, and to think about its role as a flagship part of a destination.

The Outer Hebrides is the destination used currently, and it has an existing vision to achieve by 2020:

“To be a destination of first choice for a world class experience on aunique and diverse chain of inter-connected islands on the edge of the Atlantic Ocean offering a vibrant activity, food, music, art, craft and Gaelic culture in an outstanding environmental setting and appealing to those who are seeking peace and tranquility and those looking for active adventure with a taste for a different way of life”.

The mission for the Destination Management Partnership (DMO) is as follows:“To harness and focus the passion, energy and drive on the islands to do what we do better and by turning more of our unique, natural and cultural assets into high quality authentic experiences that will grow tourism sustainably - and in so doing help stimulate population growth and enhance economic performance.”

The aim being: “To grow tourism in The Outer Hebrides from £53m to £64m-£67m by 2020 by increasing transport

capacity/integration, lengthening the season, offering additional authentic experiences and appealing to new markets”.

The logic of the St Kilda clearly fits with this strategic framework – something reflected in the project being listed as one of the key ‘investments’ to achieve the strategy. The project needs to be the flagship attraction for that world-class experience at the edge of the Atlantic Ocean. A ‘must see’ attraction capable of attracting visitors to the islands who currently do not come, helping to grow the marketThe St Kilda Centre needs to be developed with an awareness of the tourism challenges and threats. The current inhibitors for tourism growth in the Outer Hebrides are transport capacity and integration, short season (and its effects on business viability), misconceptions on distance and price, coordination and packaging of the products and experiences for visitors.The key strengths and opportunities in that strategy are experiencing the landscape/seascape by walking and cycling, the local culture and Gaelic language, the chance of adventure and wildlife experiences, marine tourism and tours and trails. The strategy lists some of the key investment projects on the islands that can collectively change the destination: the new Stornoway Ferry, The Hebridean Way, Lews Castle, the Harris Distillery and the St Kilda Centre. And it is worth noting that the Scottish national marketing focus in 2016 is on ‘Architecture and design’, and in 2017 is ‘Heritage and Archaeology’. Both of these should be seen as opportunities for this project to showcase its development.The bottom line is that this project is needed by the Outer Hebrides if it is to achieve its strategic objectives and has been highlighted as critical in the key documents for that reason.

The World Heritage opportunity2

There are some powerful new trends that stakeholders need to be aware of, identified by Visit Britain in their recent Culture and Heritage report:

Overseas visitors want to see the ‘key sites’ or ‘must see’ destinations in the UK

57% of visitors (from 20 countries) agree that history and culture strong influences on choice of destination (only 15% disagreed)

The mix of themes (heritage and non-heritage) within a destination is critical – there needs to be a sense of vibrancy in destination to compliment its heritage. The great destinations bring together great heritage, contemporary culture, quality accommodation, great food and drink, good quality retail experiences and other leisure activities

The global evidence suggests that there is a growing market for World Heritage tourism. Practically this means that visitors seek out World Heritage sites or

2 The following studies and projects provide information that has informed the analysis in tis section:The Wider Value of UNESCO to the UK – 2012-13, UK National Commission for UNESCOHeritage Counts, English Heritage – 2011World Heritage for the Nation: Identifying, Protecting and Promoting our World Heritage, A consultation paper, DCMS, UK Government, December 2008World Heritage Status: Is there opportunity for Economic Gain? Rebanks Consulting/Trends Business Research – 2009Tourism statistics and analysis, United Nations World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) – 2010-14The Power of Destinations, Communications Group Plc., 2008Value of Culture and Heritage to tourism, Visit Britain, 2013-14Sustainable Tourism Toolkit, World Heritage Sustainable Tourism Programme, World Heritage Centre, UNESCO – 2012-15

combinations of them (this is particularly true of growing long-haul markets like the Chinese or Indian middle classes). World Heritage status is increasingly used by the most affluent and well-educated tourists to differentiate between potential tourism destinations based on quality – a kind of hot list of the world’s most special places (tying in the Visit Britain research which shows the importance of ‘must see’ status). The evidence suggests that World Heritage visitors are more likely to be international, to be affluent, to spend more in the destination, to stay longer, and more interested in the values and the ‘OUV’ of the destination (including how they can contribute to conservation or sustainability). Given that cultural tourism is the fastest growing and most valuable tourism segment in Europe this is a crucial area of focus for places like the Outer Hebrides.

The evidence from around the world suggests that international tourism is set to almost double by 2030 (UNWTO)

The challenge is that World Heritage visitors expect to be able to access and understand the OUV narrative across the site – they expect a unified identity, a coherent

narrative of the place and accessible interpretation. World Heritage tourists are also probably more discerning, and more demanding of higher quality standards. Quite simply, they expect a world-class destination to match their World Heritage credentials. They also expect to find a destination that cares about conserving its Outstanding Universal Value.

Research like that carried out by Visit Britain has repeatedly highlighted that high value visitors want to experience the ‘authentic’, to be immersed in the local culture, and to have a series of unique placed-related cultural experiences. It should also be noted that ‘cultural tourism’ is the fastest growing type of tourism in the developed world with 40% of European visitors now fitting that category. Cultural visitors are widely regarded as amongst the highest spending visitors in the tourism marketplace; being prepared to travel further, stay longer, spend more, and to visit a wider range of activities, and to visit places out of the traditional season if the historic narrative is strong enough. The quid pro quo is that they expect quality levels that are high. Much of the growth in the international tourism market in the next 20 years will be in new markets where brand recognition for many traditional destinations will be very low or non-existent. Many established British tourism destinations, probably including the Hebrides, have limited or no profile in the emerging markets like China and India.

International cultural tourists (and World Heritage tourists in particular) visitors want to visit the world’s extraordinary ‘must see’ places.

The World Heritage and UNESCO brands are growing in value rapidly in the tourism marketplace as a kind of indicator of exceptionalism – the smart world heritage sites are utilizing this emerging brand to drive footfall.

The desire to access some of the most difficult to visit ‘must see’ places is only likely to grow in the next few decades.

The less accessible places are, the more prestigious and desirable visiting them becomes.

St Kilda has a mystique that has vast appeal – The Outer Hebrides rightly recognizes that this is perhaps its biggest untapped story, and that the story will always exceed the ability to access it. This project is based on a sound principle that the story can be turned in to socio-economic benefit for the rest of the Outer Hebrides.

Visitor market – current marketThe obvious starting point for any estimate of the numbers of visitors the St Kilda Centre might attract is to look at the total visitor market for the destination (the Outer Hebrides).

So the existing market it 218,000 visitors per annum (2012-13). 59% of which are holiday visitors, 19% business visitors, and 22% visiting friends and relatives. It would be reasonable to assume that the majority of business visitors do very little sightseeing, because their travel is functional not for leisure. Likewise, people visiting their friends and relatives, might mostly not do visiting tourism attractions on their visit (though come would for an exceptional attraction). So there are basically 128,316 visitors, and these are spread across the Outer Hebrides.

These visitors (all categories) are in total worth an estimated £53 million to the area’s economy – the visitors worth c. £35 million. Over 78% of visitors used a ferry to get to the island – this being overwhelmingly the way that visitors arrive. 19% come by plane. The mode of transport for arrival and departure are the same 98% of the time. More than 80% of visitors are car-based for their visits to the islands. The average spend is per trip for visitors is £273 for holiday visitors. 9% of visitor expenditure is on local products and produce.54% of visitors on a holiday/short break – highly seasonal – half the visitors between October and March are business visitors. The main holiday season is form April to September.The proportion of holiday visitors that are on repeat visits is quite modest at 48%, which suggests that the islands are a place that many people want to visit, but perhaps feel they do not need to see twice, or come back to regularlyScottish visitors – 58%, Rest of UK – 29%, Europe – 8%, Rest of the world – 4%38% of visits to the Outer Hebrides are part of a longer trip including other places. The average length of stay on the Outer Hebrides is 5.7 nights out of a total of 8.8 nights away from homeA significant share of the holiday visitors are in the older age categories and travel with their partners. The social status of visitors is heavily focused on the higher income brackets, with 61% classified as Abs, and only 4% classified as Des. Why do people go the Hebrides? The main driver for a visit is the scenery and landscapes that the islands offer. Family connections, and archaeology and history are other powerful drivers of visits. A significant share of the holiday visitors plan and book their holidays more than 3 months

in advance. People learn about the Outer Hebrides pre-visit overwhelmingly from the internet (but also to a lesser extend by word-of-mouth, guide books and marketing materials).

How big is the future audience – provisional conclusionsIt is early in the life of this project to have accurate visitor numbers for the facility – but some tentative conclusions can be drawn about the ability of Option 2 to attract visitors.

We know that approximately 160,000 people a year visit Lewis (74% of the Outer Hebrides total).

We know that exponential growth beyond that is unlikely (in the near future) because of bottleneck issues with ferries and planes in the peak season.

We know that 77% of these visitors come for scenery, landscape and culture and would seem to be a natural audience for this project – 77% of the visitors to Lewis = 123,000 visitors.

We know that approximately 100,000 people a year do the route around the island, leaving Stornoway at present – because the nearest comparator visitor attraction, the Callanish Visitor Centre, attracts c.100,000 visitors per year.

It is a tourism of visitor attraction footfall analysis that distance is attritional to visitor numbers – the further you ask people to travel the greater the drop off rate. So if the St Kilda Centre offered something comparable to the Callanish Centre, but required a further drive and a detour, you would expect the visitor numbers to be lower – it might be estimated to be 70% of the Callanish numbers.

But, and this is crucial, the St Kilda Centre brand, experience and story is not comparable to that of Callanish (with all due respect) it is actually bigger in many ways. St Kilda is arguably a bigger draw, and capable of driving footfall in a way that existing attractions on Lewis aren’t. As we have seen, above, ‘must see’ visitor attractions linked to World Heritage sites are capable of opening up entirely new markets for international visitors – over a period of years this can be considerable.

My provisional judgment is that the likely visitor numbers for the St Kilda project, if done as well as it aims to, are likely to be in the range of 70,000-120,000 a year when the project is completed. As a rule of thumb I think the drop off you might expect from the Callanish numbers is likely to be made up for by the extra draw of the St Kilda story so the

project should aim to be a 100,000 a year attraction.

There is a lot more work to be done on the business planning – but what can be said is that a visitor center at Ionad Hiort can generate significant revenue from ticket sales if it is sufficiently good enough. Even crude analysis of what it might generate shows that a facility could potentially be staffed and sustained from that revenue…

If 80k pay £8 each that is £640,000 (@£4 = £320k)If 50k pay £8 each that is £400,000If 20k pay £8 each that is £160,000

Cost estimatesAs will be clear already from previous sections of this report any kind of accurate cost analysis for the St Kilda Centre is impossible until the next stage of development has taken place to define the content more accurately (and the technologies to be used), until a building is designed, and until this has been tested in a business plan against the likely revenue that can be generated by the facility.

The provisional suggestion in the Jura report was of a centre that might have either 1) a footprint of 500m square, or b) a footprint of 800m square. Jura estimated that this would result in a build and fit-out cost of £4 or £6 million depending on the scale of the two options. These estimates provide a basic idea of what such a facility might cost, with the caveat that since 2010 these costs may have risen. We believe that the digital storytelling element requires good spaces to be done well and that this probably means a center of c. 800m square. We would also highlight the Callanish Visitor Centre as a local example of how big such a space needs to be to cope with c.100k visitors. The existing Callanish buildings have limited space for exhibitions and interpretation and are, we believe, planning to expand. The combination of the more ambitious storytelling focus, the new media

elements and the likely audience for a St Kilda story suggest to us that even the first phase of the St Kilda Centre needs to be bigger than the existing facility at Callanish. It looks to us, as if Option 2 could realistically be a £4-8 million project.

Reality check – how realistic is this? Since the financial crisis of 2007-8 public and third sector funding for major capital projects (and revenue costs) like this has become increasingly rare. What was once possible is now often impossible. We have extensive experience of projects like this that simply cannot secure the capital investment to make them a reality. So we approach such aspirations with a degree of professional skepticism.

This will be an extremely difficult project to make happen, and if the goal is to achieve the full aspiration for the site in one phase then it is probably impossible.

At face value the project is deeply challenging. It is in an extremely remote rural island location (not as remote as St Kilda, but still distant from source markets of visitors), the local community to sustain it is vibrant but very small and already sustains other facilities with their existing capacity), the site is exposed to the elements and potentially dangerous for visitors, the community has little, or no resources to build anything, and the aspirations for what is desired range across a number of themes and until recently lacked discipline and focus. So the easy snap judgment is that this is a fantasy and best abandoned by all concerned. However, looking for reasons not to do things is relatively easy… too easy, sometimes the potential gain requires a second look.

There are actually some powerful empirical reasons for giving this further consideration…

The story of St Kilda is extremely powerful. It has global reach and is likely to have even greater reach in the future

(the interest in World Heritage Sites is growing rapidly around the world because of tourism growth in the developing world, where the UNESCO status is often seen as defining the world’s most special places to visit). The core narrative is rightly identified in the tourism documents and strategies as perhaps the biggest opportunity for growth in the Hebrides if it can be made more accessible than simply travelling over rough seas to the islands themselves. The power of this central story means that usually impossible things may be possible with the St Kilda Centre. People will travel a very long way and spend a lot of money to do things relating to St Kilda if it is packaged and presented intelligently. There is a significant existing and future market out there for something like this project.

If this is done well it is about more than an additional small visitor attraction on the island, simply displacing existing facilities or adding another small thing to the itinerary, done well it becomes potentially a game changer for the whole of the Hebrides.

The interest of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and other industry leading partners like Glasgow School of Art reflects the fact that the project is of much wider significance. It is trying to solve issues that many people and places around the world are trying to address. There are c.1000 World Heritage sites, and many thousands of other historic places, and many of them are grappling with access to sensitive or remote heritage locations. Solutions that work will attract global interest and will open up commercial opportunities to take best practice and models to other places. If a community like Uig wanted to find a global niche to drive its renewal then being (with partners) world leaders on this subject would be an intelligent way to turn their challenges in to an opportunity.

In fact, in the eyes of UNESCO and others, this project is a flagship for remote access of sensitive historic sites and creative research and development. If the project can meet its own aspirations then it will receive global attention, with all the PR benefits for the Hebrides that

entails. And will and create commercial and intellectual opportunities for the project. The research undertaken on this project can, and should, be turned in to experience and specialist knowledge that can be sold elsewhere in the future. The bottom line is that unique projects like this are challenging to make happen, but ultimately have the chance to work when less aspirational and globally relevant initiatives would fail.

We have consulted widely for this commission and almost all stakeholders think that something great is possible at Ionad Hiort. But the consensus is that to work it has to be executed remarkably well. The feeling is that something excellent or ‘world-class’ could work in this location, but anything less would probably fail. We share that judgment. This adds to the difficulty of the project – The more aspirational the option chosen, the longer the lead-in time to properly establish the commitments needed, to design it, cost it, to business plan robustly, and to attract investment…There is no quick and cheap solution to developing something world class. Phased delivery is needed to an overall masterplan and vision (and not all investors/partners will be interested in all elements of it).

The bar has been set very high indeed, and the next phase of project development work needs to explore how it can meet that challenge. World-class, or excellent, is more difficult, and expensive and developing it takes longer. The project needed focusing by me before the next steps could be taken. So my work has been heavily focused on the analysis of the different aspirations and on narrowing this down to some key options. For a project here to be viable there will need to be extensive project planning work in the coming months to a) get the project right, and b) to phase it cleverly to be viable at each stage.

This can be an amazing project that captures the imagination of the world. BUT, we should be clear that it is still taking its first steps. Some parts of it are better thought through than others – and more funder-ready than others, and some funders ready to move quicker than

others. The potential gain for the Hebrides means that further development work should be invested in, my professional judgment is that many of the challenges can be met, and there is a fighting chance of this being not just possible but a powerful success story. The truth is that the devil will be in the detail of the business planning that follows and informs the content development and architectural planning.

Q. Is the project realistic?A. Yes, potentially, but it needs a lot specialist work in the coming months to further develop opportunities and to business plan before a definitive judgment can be made. The potential benefit of the project means that such exploration and project development work is a sensible investment.

Displacement effectsOne of the sensible considerations of some of the key stakeholders will be whether the St Kilda Centre adds value to the tourism offer on Lewis, or whether it simply displaces existing spend and footfall from existing attractions and communities. In terms of economic development on Lewis this is important because it serves the island badly if the project doesn’t add significant new value, and in a competitive funding environment where choices have to be made, it makes sense to think strategically about where the best place to invest is.

The first thing to be said, is that this project aims to provide the flagship ‘must see’ visitor attraction for Lewis that doesn’t really exist at present (with all due respect to the range of other good attractions). The key element in this is the potential global reach of the St Kilda Centre capitalizing on its UNESCO World Heritage status. As we have seen elsewhere in this report the key advantage of World Heritage status is it gives a global endorsement of uniqueness or specialness, that is increasingly leading to long-distance footfall from high value cultural visitors. The St Kilda centre won’t be working properly if it doesn’t generate significant new footfall to Lewis. This is about realizing some of the latent demand for accessing and experiencing St Kilda’s story – sending out a message that there is something world-class and globally significant on this site that makes exploring the island a ‘must see’ experience. We envisage that this adds significant new footfall to Lewis and the route around the island over time.

There are constraints on this, including the ferry and airline capacity in peak season, but there is every reason to think that this project raises the profile of the Hebrides and drives a growth in overall numbers.

Of course, the reality is that at least initially this will be another attraction competing for attention, footfall and spend – but our initial investigations suggest that far from feeling threatened by the St Kilda centre other attractions

understand that this adds to the overall island experience and can potentially benefit them as well. The visitor attractions on Lewis are actually quite limited in number and of modest scale – and direct comparators are not easy to identify because the St Kilda centre seeks to do something quite different to existing facilities and add another element to the island experience that makes it all more compelling. Perhaps the nearest comparator is the visitor at Callanish. Initial consultation suggests this visitor centre is already running at or beyond capacity in the peak season, and indeed needs to grow just to cope with its own footfall. The reality of the geography of Lewis is that the visitor attractions have a shared interest in anything that makes visiting the island more attractive. They have a shared interest in anything that encourages visitors to leave Stornoway and do the circuit of the island. And private sector businesses around the island have a major interest in these things too, especially if it creates new market potential and spreads the footfall to lessen the seasonality of tourism.

A key element of the project is, and should always be, a place where the visitor orientates themselves – not just to St Kilda and Lewis but to the rest of the Hebrides. This can be done intelligently and creatively through the stories in the Centre and through the song lines to and from the Centre. The aspiration to make the St Kilda Centre a living place that generates research and creative outcomes is essential – not least because it will generate outcomes and experiences that will drive footfall and interest outside the traditional tourism peak season.

Current economic benefit modelMy work for the past five years has been about how the economics of heritage tourism work in practice, and how this can be shaped to secure greater benefit for local communities or for conservation goals. The benefits of tourism are defined by the scale, quality, location and capacity of the tourism infrastructure. The ‘infrastructure’ we are talking about here is fairly simple – the places and businesses that provide transport, accommodation, food and drink, retail, leisure experiences, and the heritage

attractions themselves. The harsh truth is that heritage attractions secure only a very small % of the tourism spend they help generate. They serve as ‘attractors’ – providing the reason that people go to places, and the core rationale for their visit – but most of their money, often as much as 95% of the trip expenditure will be spent on transport, accommodation, food and drink, retail and other leisure experiences. So the location, scale, quality, and capacity of those providers determines where the benefit from the St Kilda Centre will be realized. Because these providers are heavily concentrated in Stornoway it is likely that initially much of the financial benefit generated by this project will be secured in Stornoway. The smaller businesses located on the tourism circuit of Lewis will benefit from increased footfall, and new opportunities can emerge from the song lines, but the truth is that for the remoter rural communities to benefit will take time and will result from private sector development to cater for the demand.

Developing economic capacity over timeThe transformative economic impact of the St Kilda will take time. It is likely that tourism accommodation and food and drink providers will react to the new markets that emerge by providing new beds and covers, but this can take some time. Although this will always be only a share of the total economic benefit of the centre (most remaining where the accommodation is concentrated in Stornoway) its effects on a small community like Uig can be profound and transformative. The community and businesses, need to plan ahead, identifying the opportunities that can emerge from this project and as the project becomes a reality need to step up to have the capacity to be able to offer visitors transport options, accommodation that meets their expectations, unique and locally distinctive food and drink, authentic and creative things to buy, and a range of other experiences that they are willing to spend their money on.

The role of technology in the projectDigital storytelling is a key part of the concept for the St Kilda Centre. There is huge potential to do new and exciting things relating to St Kilda at one geographical step removed because of the changes to digital technologies. Key partners in the development of the project have been Historic Scotland’s ‘Centre for Digital Documentation and Visualization’ and Glasgow School of Art, both of whom have extensive experience in this field and both of whom are interested in this project as being a potentially world-leading facility showcasing such technologies and the best in digital storytelling.

It is perhaps worth summarizing why digital technology is such an important element in the project:

Creating new ways to see St KildaDigital mapping and 3d displays mean previously inaccessible sites like St Kilda can be experienced in new ways that will entertain and enlighten audiences – the world just changed, and new technologies enable people to explore virtually the island in ways that are not even possible on foot on the island itself. The combination of research programme and digital display technology aspired to by the project means that it will not be static.

Making inaccessible things accessibleUntil now very few people, even those who have visited St Kilda, have experienced the drama of the sea bird colonies on the cliffs or stacks, the amazing biodiversity beneath the waves, or understood or explored the island’s archaeology. New technologies mean that these elements of the site can be seen and this opens up exciting new opportunities.

Turning OUV in to creative performance and theatreUntil recently interpretation of a place like St Kilda was necessarily a second best option to seeing and

experiencing the real thing – but some of the new technologies mean that genuinely stunning things can be experienced without going to the site in a bespoke visitor centre. The idea for this project is to take the amazing archival materials and stories and create a place which is genuinely WOW, not replacing the allure of the island, but offering such a rich, creative and novel cultural experience that it is felt to be as ‘must see’ as the island itself.

Building a mass audience for an island storySocial media makes it possible to share the island/s with massive audiences online through images and intelligent/creative – and drive footfall to the island or virtual footfall to the archive materials and products of the Hebrides. A key element of the project should be about making the centre the physical hub from which stories and media ripple outwards. The days when a museum or visitor centre had static stories on some panels, and this constituted the storytelling are long gone. The museum of now requires people throughout the communities to become storytellers, and champions of the values of the site and project.

Sharing the site’s archive and valuesDigital technologies available to most people in affluent countries mean that the archive materials available about St Kilda and the Hebrides can be made accessible for the first time, for a range of experiences from casual glance through to deep engagement

St Kilda has been the subject of extensive, and groundbreaking digital mapping already, and making some of this more readily available to the wider audience is a key opportunity.

Digital Documentation of St Kilda: The Scottish Ten Initiative3

The Scottish Ten (www.scottishten.org) is a five year 3 This section is created from text and ideas provided by the ‘Centre for Digital Documentation and Visualization’ in February 2015 – some words have been changed to make this flow and feel consistent with the rest of the report, but the content and intellectual property is not mine – James Rebanks.

project using advanced 3D survey technologies to digitally document Scotland’s five UNESCO designated World Heritage Sites and five international heritage sites in order to better conserve and manage them. The project is a partnership between Historic Scotland and the Digital Design Studio at The Glasgow School of Art. Scottish Ten imagery will be shared online via our US partner CyArk’s digital archive (www.cyark.org).

In July 2011, the Scottish Ten team spent two weeks on Hirta carrying out an accurate 3D survey of the cultural heritage and the topography using a range of terrestrial laser scanners, GNSS equipment and high-end digital SLR cameras. Over 500 individual scans were undertaken, generating a registered georeferenced 3D point cloud with an accuracy of ±8 mm, an average spatial resolution of 6-8 mm and a raw file size of approx 1 TB. All structures within the Head Dyke area in Village Bay were recorded including the Military Base, plus the structures at An Lag, and the Amazon’s House in Gleann Mor. The main Radar Base was also digitally surveyed in 3D. To set the site in context, a long-range laser scanner, typically used in mining applications, was employed to document the environmental setting of Village Bay.

However, the World Heritage zone covers the entirety of St Kilda, including all islands and stacs. The Scottish Ten therefore commissioned an airborne LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) survey from a fixed-wing aircraft to capture 3D geometry and ortho-rectified photography at a spatial resolution of approximately 50 cm in X and Y coordinates and 15 cm in Z coordinates. This has generated an unsurpassed digital terrain model of the islands. At this resolution, heritage structures are visible, and the data may be interrogated for archaeological features as yet unknown. The LiDAR survey has provided excellent data for the sea cliffs and stacs, and will facilitate research on their morphology and topography.

The airborne LiDAR model will be integrated with the terrestrially captured survey to create a comprehensive dataset, which will feature high-resolution spatial

geometry within the contextual setting of the island chain. Working with the British Geological Survey and Scottish Natural Heritage, the Scottish Ten survey data will be integrated with their bathymetric sub-surface multi-beam sonar data from the waters surrounding St Kilda’s islands to generate a holistic model of the entire archipelago.

The 3D digital documentation record has numerous potential uses in the ongoing conservation and management of St Kilda. With advanced visualisation techniques, the Scottish Ten data can be combined with high-resolution digital photography to develop virtual and remote access tools to bring the spectacular islands of St Kilda to a much wider audience and offer exciting interpretation opportunities. The data will also provide a base line survey of the condition of the built heritage and landscape features of the archipelago and so be a valuable monitoring tool and enhance our understanding and knowledge of the more remote and inaccessible areas.

To watch a brief documentary on the project please see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgEa-O7ojJs and for more information: http://www.scottishten.org/property5

The digital assets collected by CDDV of St Kilda through the Scottish Ten project are a rich and valuable resource, which can be re-purposed in many different ways to deliver rich and fully interactive content for Ionad Hiort. Examples include:

1)A wealth of rich and unique HD images – there are amazing photos dating back over a century of St Kilda and Lewis which tell an amazing visual story, so a key challenge is to turn these in to something that can be experienced in a unique setting and building.

2)3D 4K animations/films to bring the island and it’s habitats to life – E.g. One of the key historical artifacts is the evacuation footage showing the resistance and the tensions of that process, there are now ways to bring that to life by projecting it on the a

3D structure as done experimentally at the Remote Access event in Edinburgh.

3)The creation of remote access virtual tours – These can show phases of occupation and development and an entry sequence to the key elements of the island and its dwellings, serving as a kind of entry point for either people who will never go to the site or a primer for those that plan to make the journey.

4)Fully immersive 3D visitor experiences, via Head-mounted displays or Projection domes – Visitors might experience the drama of the stacs, or walking in to a blackhouse, or perhaps looking out from St Kilda back to the mainland, or have an enhanced view out to sea to enhance this to help a visitor see the sea as an islander would have, a place of navigation and work.

5)Real-time fully explorable models to create unique island experiences without physically being there – The 3D digital mapping of the island can create models of the islands and stacs that can be overlaid with photo data, and time-lapsed to give visitors a unique sense of the island/s and the challenges of life on them. This is potentially a key exhibit in the St Kilda centre, because it brings the islands to life in front of the visitor and makes the islands tactile.

6)Educational games – Visitors can find out what life on St Kilda was really like with quizzes and other tasks that illuminate the challenges of day to day life on the island

7)Resource – e.g. digitally explore the cleits of St Kilda.

8)Physical 3D prints of artefacts from St Kilda – handling kits can be created.

9)Physical 3D models of St Kilda terrain from airborne LiDAR data – projections can be made

onto these to show the phasing of occupation. On St Kilda itself there is only modest interpretation and unless you have a NT guide with you in the landscape you have to try and read the landscape un-aided. At the St Kilda Centre you will get a time-lapse 3D model showing you what exists and when it dates from, as well as access to the best available analysis for the more enquiring visitor to delve in to.

10) Mobile apps/website content for information and education, using state of the art augmented reality technologies – it is crucial that the project offers not just remote access for visitors to Lewis, but also takes advantage of the internet to create a global audience for the stories and activities.

11) Digital character stations – These can be created to feature St Kilda residents telling their stories of life on the island when it was fully populated and perhaps telling how the inhabitants felt when they finally had to leave.

12) Integration of digital data with historic and archival footage/photos/oral histories

13) Interactive touch screen displays to investigate the history of St Kilda.14) Virtual reconstructions for interpretation.

The next steps – allocating resourcesOne of the key challenges for the project is to use, to optimum effect, the finite resources available to it to move effectively through the necessary developmental steps to become a reality.

Step 1Stakeholders need to agree that the findings of this report are correct, and that its core propositions about what this project should be, and how it might be phased are acceptable to the stakeholder group. The interim reporting presentation led to feedback that suggests this is likely to be the case, but is important to take that formal step of agreement and joint endeavor as this moves forwards.

Step 2Identify available cash and non-cash resources available and develop a simple action plan for the next year. The key resource we would suggest is the time-limited development funding from HIE. So the critical decision is how to spend that money to move the project most effectively and most prudently to the critical next phase. We would suggest that our work has highlighted how that money might be best spent to make this happen, this is captured in the following steps.

There is a need for four activities in the weeks and months following this commission ending in April 2015:

1) Further development of the content/stories/digital interpretation for the facility – developing a clear plan of what will be experienced within the centre

2) Developing from the content/stories/digital interpretation needs an overarching architectural plan for the site – this is an essential step to enable the final step

3) Developing a business plan and cost analysis for the first stage of the project (Option 2 in this analysis) – this needs to interact with the architectural design work to ensure that the designs are viable and achievable

4) In parallel to those actions, other stakeholders can start to develop a research program for the site to develop the concept for its future development – This will be about working with the community and other potential partners to develop the case for the other research elements of the project.

There is a clear chain of logic through these actions. Content and stories should drive the architectural thinking, architectural expertise and specific plans should drive the costing analysis, business planning becomes possible when there is a design and clear cost analysis, and developing the research programme and more aspirational elements of the project can begin with other partners with a 3-5 year time frame.

Is this project ready for capital investment right now? No.

The first three actions outlined above are necessary before stakeholders will have the answers to their key questions about costs and viability. The next stage for the project is to move through those three key actions so that the first phase of the project is investable by late 2015, early 2016. By then the project should be ready to present to funders and donors, a process that would likely take a several months to secure investment. So sensibly there is 1-2 years worth of work required before works should start on site.

That would mean (subject to the project meeting the tests set of it by stakeholders in the next few months through actions 1-3) that works potentially starting in early 2017.

The follow-up briefsBecause the next steps are critical it may help to elaborate on the follow-on briefs for the development of the project:

1. Further development of the content/stories/digital interpretation for the facility Developing a clear plan of what will be experienced within the visitor centre

This piece of work could commence very soon after the current phase. The task is to further refine and turn in to some kind of spatial design the content and stories illuminated in our work. This requires specialist museum curatorial skills and possibly architectural knowledge to provide a layout and spatial sized and requirements for the architects to follow. This stage is often missed in similar projects (the interpretation and storytelling can be compromised by a building that is not for fit-for-purpose). It is essential to get the right team, with the right skills. Companies like Metaphor Ltd – do amazing specialist work in this field and would provide a content-driven plan for all that follows.Potential cost - £15-20kOutcomes – A storytelling spatial masterplan to include the songlines for the key journeys, a script for the key narratives, a plan for the right technologies in the centre and how they could be used (with future-proofing for later additions) and some flexible gallery designs for the visitor centre to be incorporated in to the architectural plans.Timescale – 2 monthsPotential contractors – Metaphor Ltd etc.

2. Developing from the content/stories/digital interpretation needs an overarching architectural plan for the site This is an essential step to enable greater understanding of costs and the business plan

Architectural design work should not commence until near to the end of the content work described above. Ideally the two commissions would overlap by about 2-3 weeks (and the architect would be briefed by the content team in the storytelling needs of the project). These should be two different commissions, because the skills are different, but it might be healthy to have collaboration between content developers and architect, so this should be written in to the briefs as an obligation. A key risk to manage is of the two teams not having the same vision and understanding. The architectural plan should engage with the natural splendor of the site, and the cliffs, and answer through an iconic piece of design how to incorporate the aspirations of the project in a building that must relate to the land, sea and cliffs. The design is everything. The brief should ask for three different initial designs for the community and stakeholders to scrutinize – so that stakeholders can explore the most appropriate option. Each design should come with an approximate capital cost for build, and indications of potential running costs. The architect should be tasked with looking for modular and low-cost solutions for running a facility that may ultimately be seasonally flexible. The chosen design might be contemporary or paying homage to the landscape or cultural narratives, but needs to be realistic in terms of capital cost (and in particular for the first phase of the project). The specialist knowledge of the architect needs to be utilized to answer some key engineering questions, like how possible is it to create a cliff top viewing platform or walkways. The architect also needs to consider how different functions proposed for the site can be separated from each other, so that the visitor experience is not compromised by research or academic activities and vice versa. The choice of the architect is a matter of great importance. It has been discussed whether this should be an architectural competition for international focus. We would recommend

that the project utilize the support of a specialist architectural organization like RIBA or the Saltaire Society to identify suitably skilled architects and to help manage this process. The brief should be in two halves; the first part being about understanding the needs of the community, stories and site and developing at least three designs for discussion, and the second half should be about developing the preferred option so that strategic decisions and business planning can be undertaken quickly thereafter. Potential cost - £15-20kOutcomes – Minimum of three concept designs for the site, each with approximate capital and running costs, an overarching architectural masterplan for the full project with a design that can be delivered in stages that can each stand alone, liase with community and key stakeholders to identify one architectural design, development of that design to enable detailed costingsTimescale – 4-5 months (one month overlap with above brief)Potential contractors – be advised by RIBA or Saltaire Society

3. Developing a business plan and cost analysis for the first stage of the project (Option 2 in our analysis) This needs to interact with the architectural design work to ensure that the designs are viable and achievable

Our work suggests that superficially the St Kilda centre is capable of attracting a significant number of visitors per annum, at a ticket price similar to comparable attractions elsewhere this would generate a significant revenue. The unknown parts of the business plan at present are related to the management of the content/interpretation, and the running costs of whatever is designed, built and managed. Once the content/storytelling/digital content is further developed, and the building is designed, a more robust staffing and business model can be developed. This is the crucial third step in the process of bringing this project to life. The complex reality is that all three commissions have

to inform each other and the preceding actions need to be flexible to making changes if the business plan reveals excessive costs or other issues. One sensible option would be to run this commission from the moment the first design options and costs emerge from the architect, so that the options can be judged against some business planning scenarios. This might involve pausing the architect whilst the different cost options are business planned, with reporting back from the business planning team informing the choice of design/scale etc. The business plan will either show that the project is viable or it will not. At present this ultimate judgment is not possible because there are too many unknown areas.Potential cost - £10-13kOutcomes – Business modeling of the architectural options, then a robust business plan for the chosen option. Mentoring of project to ensure other commissions are focused on a viable option and have costs beneath the likely revenue generating potential of the site. Timescale – 1 month at interim stage, 2 months for final optionPotential contractors – Various (less specialist than other briefs)

4. Stage Zero - In parallel to those actions, other stakeholders can start to develop a research programme for the site to develop the concept for its future development This will be about working with the community and other potential partners to develop the case for the other research elements of the project.The phased approach means that Option 2 would be developed quite rapidly, but it is not in itself the full aspiration for the site. Some of the more ambitious elements of the project require a longer time frame, and a different range of partners. The fourth action is about coordinating and developing those elements that might take as long as 3-5 years to make a reality. Key partners in this include the Glasgow School of Art. Potential cost – In-kind staff time initially + secured research funding

Outcomes – Initially this would be about meeting and establishing a programme of work, potentially establishing a partnership committed to the research programme, and over time developing a research programme specific to Lewis that would invest significant funds in a programme to further develop the St Kilda Centre and its future functions.Timescale – 2-3 years Potential contractors – NA, undertake by partners

RisksCommunity capacity being insufficient to carry the project to completion or to sustain the facility This is a significant risk because Uig is a small community and it already has a number of community facilities and commitments. It is actually a remarkable community in that for all its remoteness and apparent isolation from the modern world, the community is full of remarkable people with remarkable levels of experience, specialist knowledge and wide ranging professional experience. This relates to the flow of people in and out of the Hebrides, and long history of economic migration that means these communities are surprisingly well connected. But the risk remains that this small community has limited capacity to make this project happen, or sustain what it results in. A key strand of the project should be developing the capacity of the local community, to minimize this future risk.

Breaking up of the project partnership The development of the project has been to date a model of joined-up thinking and communication and is supported by a range of key organizations in the field of economic development, conservation, digital storytelling and heritage. But a key risk to manage is that this partnership continues because it adds real value to the project. As the project focuses in on a more detailed final version it may be more, or less, relevant to different partners and their own objectives – some partners may become much more heavily involved, others perhaps less. The key issue to manage here is communication. The project should update stakeholders regularly (perhaps every two months) and include those key stakeholders in the commissioning of, and management of the next stage briefs.

Insufficient capital funding for chosen optionDeveloping ambitious capital projects is a bit chicken-and-egg – you are never sure whether to develop the project to fit seemingly available funding, or whether to develop a

great project and let the fundraising and investment needs follow. The truth is you need to juggle both of these things – there is little purpose in designing a center that has zero chance of attracting the capital needed to build it. And there is little merit in constraining the inspiration that this project needs, by the level of capital funding that can be proven to be ready for it now. A great project tends to find the investment it requires – but within reason. The way to manage this risk is to take small steps (through the next four briefs) and to test the aspiration and emerging project with funders and potential investors at each stage for their input and a sense of how credible it is. This process needs to be iterative and two-way so that if the emerging design is not remotely credible then it can be amended and changed, and the costs reduced to reflect that feedback. The phasing approach is another mechanism we have suggested in this report to enable the project to be fitted against current capital availability.

Business model failureA key risk is that once the project is built it failing to be economically viable. This cannot be allowed to happen. This is why the four key actions from this report are critical – the business planning needs to be robust, transparent and conservative in its assumptions. Stakeholders are aware of this risk, and stress the need to plan robustly and test this against empirical evidence.

Optimism biasAn enthusiastic and passionate community is a critical ingredient in successful projects of this nature. Passion and enthusiasm is infectious and helps sell a project to others to make it become real. But with such enthusiasm and passion can come a blindness and lack of objectivity in terms of looking at things like a business plan and risks, and potential revenue earning potential. The technical name is, of course, optimism bias. To avoid this it is crucial that the contractor for the business plan brief brings to that work both a high level of professional objectivity but also a healthy skepticism about the revenue generating side of the project. Their work should model some risk and sensitivity scenarios so that the ‘worst case scenarios’ are

thought through properly and the business model is robust to shocks and future proofed.

Displacement effectsThese have been discussed in more detail above. In conclusion, the project is so different to any existing comparators and potentially adds so much value to the existing offer for Lewis that this doesn’t displace benefit, but creates additional benefit for Uig and other Hebridean communities.

CompetitionThere is always a risk that a facility will be outcompeted by another facility of a similar nature, or lose its market edge. There are a number of ways this risk can be managed for the St Kilda center: 1) Through building innovation and creativity in to the project from the start, making it more than a visitor center (hence the bigger aspiration), 2) Through having a board for the St Kilda center that contains people from outside the community with high level experience of innovation, creativity and visitor attractions and tasking them with challenging the Centre to be at the cutting edge, not falling backward in to more mediocre and less inspired ways, 3) Protecting its position as the center for the St Kilda story, and as stakeholders chose this site and this community through an objective competitive process all should support measures to prevent it being duplicated or replicated, 4) Working with other technology, creative and heritage partners around the world to ensure that this center is working at the cutting edge of change.

Partners failing to deliver/investThe big aspiration for the site relies upon the evolving partnerships with other organizations like Glasgow School of Art and the National Trust for Scotland. These relationships are in the early stages, and key issues are being explored and developed. The risk is that at some point in the future for whatever reason, these relationship do not deliver project development support, capital investment, revenue support for shared activities, or in kind benefits. This can happen for external reasons like

political change, or organizational change of direction. The way to manage this risk is to work closely with those partners through the next four actions and explore their commitment. This is another reason for our phased approach to the project, because that allows the project to move faster, or slower, or in different directions depending on the partners and investment available.

Loss of goodwillAlthough this site and community was chosen through an objective and competitive process supported by all the key stakeholder organizations, there were other communities that wished to win the right to develop this project on their sites. This project will require, in part, capital investment targeted at the Hebrides, so the value of this project to the other communities needs to be communicated or resentment can grow and that can become more difficult. This risk can be managed by the community of Uig reaching out to those other communities and telling them about the project and what it can do for the Hebrides and their own communities. The development of the song lines is critical for this purpose.

External shocksThe business plan should include fallback position if unexpected external shocks are experienced – the global financial crisis of 2007-8 and the Icelandic volcano of 2010 are reminders that there are factors beyond the control of the community that can adversely affect its ability to be viable. Ideally the business plan should model a fall back position in which visitor numbers are at their worst-case scenario.

Feedback on this reportThis commission was to tease out of the range of aspirations and opportunities a potentially viable project for this site that could deliver something of major value both to the local Uig community, but also to the rest of the communities in the Hebrides. As we have explained throughout this report the project and the location mean that this is a difficult project to get right. Stakeholders will, quite naturally, be wary of the risks and challenges. In this section we want to be present honestly and openly how stakeholders have reacted. Awareness of their thoughts and concerns will be critical to the next phase of development.

Caution – visitor attractions are riskyEveryone involved in this proposal understands that it is potentially an amazing location and concept – but also an extremely difficult and challenging one to business plan for. The location in particular requires a powerfully compelling narrative and USP if it is to transcend its isolation and distance from major tourism footfall. We accept fully that a month’s work by me will not, and has not, addressed all of the questions and challenges that need to be worked through – that will require additional work in the coming months.

Research hub? Visitor attraction? Or both?Stakeholders are somewhat divided between a visitor attraction focus and a research focus. Those looking for something that would be investable early, and which could generate revenue quite quickly see the visitor attraction and a ticket model as being the obvious route (the risk of which are mentioned above). Those who want to do something genuinely world-class that generates new year-round employment and interest want the centre to be more research based and be a meeting place of art and science to regenerate a peripheral community. I think these aspirations are not mutually exclusive – they can compliment each other. But they do have different

timescales and partners. The visitor centre could be developed more quickly, and is appropriate for different funders, with a longer term project aimed at widening this to be a research facility/hub.

Quality controlThere is a strong feeling amongst the key stakeholders that this site and this important global story deserve, no, demand, a level of quality and integrity that is often hard to achieve, and which requires more thought and investment often than a simpler and less ambitious facility. Stakeholders like the National Trust for Scotland would have a vested interest in ensuring that storytelling/messaging/design/installation and management were of a high quality. The counterpoint to this is that stakeholders have to support the community to reach these levels of aspiration and quality, or it is an unbalanced expectation.

Phasing is essentialPerhaps the most valuable part of this work has been to identify and get stakeholder support for the idea of phasing this project – with some elements more achievable in the shorter-term and others taking considerably longer. Attitudes to how viable different elements of the project are differ between stakeholders – and different potential investors/funders have different criteria and timescales that would need to be met for investment to take place. Although the community would prefer the project to happen in one step, they accept the logic demanded by other stakeholders that each phase be viable in its own right, and be based on a strong business case. This work has suggested what those phases might be, but further work is needed on their concept development, costing and business planning. Stakeholder feedback stresses the need to keep capital investment modest initially, and to minimize viability risks with running costs. There is some consensus between stakeholders that Option 2 is the sensible first step.

Robust and transparent business planning (and risk analysis)Stakeholder’s faith in this project being achievable rests upon their seeing robust and transparent business plans for any activities undertaken. This is to avoid optimism bias on behalf of the community, but also to ensure that the knowledge of other organizations about things like staff costs or visitor spend is taken in to account to create a believable business plan for the project. An ambitious failure is not in anyone’s interests – everyone concerned has a stake in ensuring that this is based on sound foundations. There is a need for very objective risk analysis work on the final options to ensure sustainability and an exit strategy from any developmental investment. Displacement effectsThere is a risk with any such project that it would simply displace visitors or visitor benefits from existing facilities and communities. For some of the funders and investors this is an issue that requires analysis and mitigation. There are a range of visitor attractions on Lewis – including the Lews Castle College new museum display, Taigh Chearsabagh Art Gallery and Museum in North Uist, the Aros Centre on Skye – but as we have explored above, this is about something quite different to the existing attractions that adds value rather than stealing market share.

Other song lines…Stakeholders noticed that in our interim report we had focused on the journey from Stornoway to Ionad Hiort, and suggested, quite correctly, that other journeys throughout the Hebrides could be developed to culminate at, or pass through the St Kilda Centre.

Powerful story – but need for accuracy and managed expectationsKey stakeholders like the National Trust for Scotland support the potential for bringing this powerful story to a wider audience than can ever be achieved on St Kilda itself. It is important that the project communicate clearly

to potential visitors what can be experienced there so that visitors understand the nature of the site and what it offers (and doesn’t offer). There is a risk to be managed, if the site was clumsy in it presentation, of visitors expecting more contact or sight of St Kilda than will normally be available because of distance and visibility. Because of the location and nature of the site one of the key storytelling challenges is to communicate its own USP and values to potential visitors, not those of St Kilda, which are actually physically different. This challenge can, and must, be met, but stakeholders are keen that it is properly thought through.

The Trust in particular hopes strongly that the conservation message it represents is showcased in the facility.

Benefitting St Kilda The National Trust for Scotland has a daunting and expensive responsibility to conserve and manage St Kilda. Something that should be explored very seriously is how the Centre at Ionad Hiort can build relationships with visitors that can result in donations, fundraising, and volunteering on St Kilda (or remotely) to help with its future management. The UNESCO People Protecting Places programme provides a model for this, as do the UNESCO Sustainable Tourism Guides – the St Kilda Centre should look to be more than a visitor ‘attraction’ it should aim to be a hub that converts people from bystander and passive consumer in to active supporters and donors.

Widening the benefit to other communities of the HebridesStakeholders are keen that the St Kilda Centre project benefits more than one community. Although this site was arrived at through a competitive and objective process, a residue of negativity perhaps exists in other communities that lost out in that process. But widening benefit is more than dealing with that issue, it will actually be essential for funders to justify investment in this project at the scale that would be required to make it the world-class facility

that is required. So in the next stage, and particularly when looking at song lines and journeys to the Centre, work needs to be done to identify the linkages and potential benefits to other communities. Over time the project needs to persuade other communities that this is actually a flagship project for the whole Hebrides that its positive effects ripple outwards to benefit them as well.

Partnership supportThe overriding reaction from partners to the Interim Presentation was one of excitement and encouragement, and respect for the clear and logical way that we, and the community, have explored and tested the potential aspirations for the site.

The next phase of the project will more clearly identify the capital and revenue costs and opportunities than is possible now (due to having a design and some credible costs). But initial indications are that some stakeholders can contribute capital, revenue or in-kind contributions to either the build, management of, or project development stages – either from their own resources or by securing funding for a range of activities. For example, the National Trust for Scotland have suggested that their personel might be able to play a role in the facility.

ConclusionThe conclusion to our report is relatively simple. The first question our work needed to answer is,

Q. Is this project a good idea?A. It is an excellent idea (or in truth, a body of ideas), of global significance, in an awe-inspiring setting, but an idea that will be very difficult to execute because of the level of aspiration coupled with the logistical challenges that come from such a remote site.

Q. Should the stakeholders stop work and do something else?A. No. The tourism evidence we have seen suggests that this has a potential impact for the Hebrides that no alternative project offers, because it utilizes and widens access to the biggest story that exists in the Hebrides, the global World Heritage story of St Kilda.

Q. Is it ready to be invested in now?A. No. Not for major capital investment in a building. There is a considerable amount of developmental work required to meet the business planning and conceptual challenges of the site and stories. The project was less developed than I imagined at inception (which limited my ability to answer all the questions posed within the resources). But the potential for something great to be delivered over time means it is a good investment of project development funding.

Q. What needs to happen to make it a viable capital investment?A. The four actions (see above)

Q. What is the project?A. Initially the project will be focused on a visitor attraction telling the story of St Kilda and particularly the human experience of the Hebridean islands, this is because this is the most deliverable short-term element of the project. But, and this is critical, the ultimate project is much more

than a visitor attraction, it is about developing a range of research and cultural activities around peripheral areas that make this a world centre for the study of communities at ‘the edge’.

AfterwordThis is one of the most exciting, ambitious and important projects I have ever seen…

Exciting because it revolves around a story that needs to be told to a bigger audience than geography currently allows. Exciting because it addresses one of the most pressing problems faced by the world’s most important historic places – that of how people can experience them without physically visiting the site.

Ambitious because the project seeks to do something extremely admirable which is to take a story of a place and make it the engine of social and economic renewal for a living community at the ‘edge of the world’.

Important because St Kilda is a UNESCO World Heritage site and sharing it with the wider world is a responsibility of managing such a special place.

Important because the communities of the Hebrides (and elsewhere) need new solutions to the challenges they face, and this is one of the most daring and brilliant concepts for the renewal of a peripheral and remote community from anywhere in the world.

Doing something exciting, ambitious and important isn’t easy, so much of this report has been a realistic and objective look at how viable this concept is, or what it needs to do to become a viable proposal. But the alternative to bold new thinking like this is the steady decline of such remote communities and a loss of the cultural power of the edge and periphery.

Places like St Kilda matter. Places like Uig matter. There has to be a future as well as a past for such places. To create such a future requires risk taking and imagination.

James Rebanks, Rebanks Consulting Ltd – April 2015