**3. Discussion**

The development of archaeological sites for public use, be it community-based, educational, commercial, tourism-oriented, or still in the scope of a multipurpose transversal strategy, depends heavily on the ability to ensure the conservation of the resource. This equation is theoretically straightforward, but, in practice, one always detects a collision between cultural usufruct and physical deterioration, and the metrics of sustainability become progressively social instead of academic. Visitors are entitled to a reasonable return on their expectations, which depends not only on the site itself but on the integrated experience, including the enveloping cultural landscapes of the emirates (De Man 2020). Leaving aside the detailed stratigraphic specificities of a site such as Sir Bani Yas, what matters to consumer satisfaction is the production of uniqueness, which starts with conservation planning. Following the initial excavations mentioned above, 2009 marked the beginning

of renewed fieldwork, articulated with the development of a tourism project on the island. As part of a hiking trail, the fully excavated monastery is to serve as part of a natural and archaeological heritage product. In addition to stabilization of mortars, removal of vegetation, and reburial of selected areas, the construction of a shelter covering the site constitutes a preventive action to cope with severe environmental conditions (Goodburn-Brown et al. 2012; see Figure 4). Indeed, the unforgiving local climate often dictates conservation options that heavily restrict visitor engagement. In the case of the Shamash temple at ed-Dur, the building was not reburied and suffered greatly from three decades of exposure to the elements (Hellyer 2019). A recent conservation project carried out by ICCROM's ATHAR (Architectural and Archaeological Tangible Heritage in the Arab Region) program and the Umm Al Quwain Department of Tourism and Antiquities dealt with the rehabilitation of plasters, and the site now requires a long-term solution for its preservation.

**Figure 4.** Current perspective on the site, incl. shelter and walkway.

The commodification procedures put in place at both sites integrate tendencies explored by a vast body of literature, ranging from theory to case studies (see Timothy 2011 or Bhowmik 2021, for general synopses, and Baillie et al. 2010, for constructive practicalities). Given the purpose of this paper, the following ideas may provide a supporting background. One mainstream notion is that religious sites may function as embodiments of the past, through leisure and education activities, and therefore lose, or have already lost, part of their original meaning (Olsen 2003). This directly connects with a second fundamental concept (Ashworth 2000) that insists on the need for considering the place as a primordial element in the creation of heritage tourism. It is, of course, impossible to disentangle ed-Dur and Sir Bani Yas from their territories without losing basic layers of authenticity. But it is the very perception of sacredness, as coined by Levi and Kocher (2013) that, even in purely staged contexts, stimulates consumer interest. A third key notion is socioeconomic, as impacts of religious heritage commodification come over as encouraging in circumscribed or niche destinations (Shepherd 2018; Aldyan 2020) as well as in major archaeological attractions, where temples or sacred spaces are fully desacralized features. In such cases, managing levels of authenticity is massively important to the commodification effort, in

parallel with the notion of public heritage ownership (Gill-Robinson 2007), to be treated in a reasonably similar manner in the optics of consumer participation.

The use of heritage tourism has become central to UAE policy, producing a number of challenges to the sector, from promotion to preservation (Seraphim and Haq 2019). They emerge in a national leisure market that counts on significant investment in tourism infrastructures and events and that selectively taps into segments such as heritage (Bodolica et al. 2020). Archaeology, in particular, has been a vigorous accelerator to the sector, with emirates heavily increasing the conservation of heritage tangibles, keeping tourism growth in sight. This effort is, however, not exclusively concentrated on sites and is part of larger ecosystems that integrate museums, creative arts, and cultural landscapes. The precise forms through which the past is to be amalgamated with the present are, however, wrapped in some ambiguity, not only practical but also substantial. On the one hand, the importance of UAE archaeology has a long-lasting specificity (Blau 1995) that shares conflicting levels of interest with other countries. On the other, the associations between archaeological heritage and tourism often produce pressures on the sense of identity, particularly in a nation with a majority of expat residents, and with pervasive monetization of traditions for tourism consumption. Institutional support for heritage preservation as an end in itself (Szuchman 2012), not specifically as an ingredient for the tourism industry, does promote meaningful social awareness of tangible heritage. Two correlated dimensions further uphold commodification from a pedagogical standpoint. First, the association between historical forts and archaeological sites or museums as places of convergence, innovation, and social entrepreneurship (Eid 2019); second, the capitalization on archaeology-based UNESCO World Heritage, unequivocally understood as beneficial, promoted as such by tourism agencies and companies (e.g., Bidaa Bint Saud, Hili, Jebel Hafeet). Both realities provide society with cognitive references on heritage. The recent work on the Sir Bani Yas monastery constitutes a visible offshoot of this strategic cultural model, of which archaeological tourism is a quintessential component.
