Usage Strategies to Increase the Socioeconomic Sustainability of Monumental Structures: The Example of the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath

Abstract

This study aims to identify tourism usage strategies for the protection and socioeconomic sustainable development of monumental structures that maintain their functional continuity. The results revealed that some strategies provide significant opportunities in socioeconomic terms if they maintain a structure’s original function; however, some uses pose a significant threat in the case of functional continuity. The main contribution of this work is the definition of monumental structures in relation to adaptive reuse and strategic planning tools (SWOT). The spatial and functional change of the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath was examined chronologically in the first stage. An external expert group determined 41 factors consisting of functional, social, and economic return concepts revealed by the literature review in the second stage. These factors were then evaluated by internal experts using SWOT analyses. The structure’s formation since 2006 was revealed through analysis. The cultural heritage significance of the hammam culture is the function determined as the strength, whereas the functional changes were determined as the weakness. The building became idle due to the pandemic, thus bringing this situation to light. The importance of the original function was placed on the agenda by the general administration, which is regarded as a prominent opportunity to conduct an assessment. The inability of all functions to establish a relationship with tourism has been recognized as a significant threat. Strong opportunities, strong threats, and usage strategies are provided for monumental structures that maintain their functional continuity.

1. Introduction

Cultural tourism is a branch of tourism that aims to share and acknowledge all artifacts of tangible and intangible cultural heritage, such as urban, rural, natural, archaeological, historical, mixed sites, art items, monumental or civil architectural structures, collections, cultural identities, traditions, and languages [1]. The cultural heritage of a community, which includes the historical, artistic, scientific, or lifestyle of the region, is recognized as a means of development that promotes economic growth by luring visitors [2]. Tourism as a form of entertainment has experienced significant transformation in recent years because of more demanding lifestyles as well as higher levels of living. This tourism growth is produced not only by the increase in tourist locations, but also by activities related to tourism, social elements, environmental organizations, and numerous economic forces [3].

Cultural heritage and tourism are in a symbiotic relationship. While cultural heritage contributes to the development of tourism, tourism creates financial resources for the preservation of cultural heritage [4]. In fact, according to the World Tourism Organization [5], cultural tourism accounts for more than 39% of international tourism revenues [6]. Tourism brings new investment and employment opportunities to historic cities, activities that boost economic development and competitiveness and, in turn, preserve and sustain cultural heritage [1]. This emphasis on the economic factor portrays culture as having a large economic influence on society, justifying public spending on culture based on the benefits it may offer to a nation. The importance of cultural heritage in heritage tourism and sustainable development is well acknowledged. Tourism promotion has an economic impact as well as a positive influence on the well-being of local communities. In recent years, valuing heritage has become a popular strategy of preserving both tangible and intangible heritage [7].

One of the best ways to preserve the authenticity of architectural structures, which are among the most important components of historical cities and are sources of cultural tourism, is to establish a relationship with tourism. The most cost-effective and sustainable approach in this scenario is to equip structures that have lost their original function or cannot be used in their original function with a new function focused on cultural tourism. The “re-functioning method” [8,9,10,11,12] is a strategy occasionally incorporated into the revitalization plan for an individual building or an entire historic city center; this method is the most popular strategy for enhancing a building’s economic, environmental, and social performance [13,14]. Adaptive reuse is an important conservation strategy to reuse the resources of the past and create new experiences for the present. However, the most important point to be considered here is that the structure’s current purpose can adapt to the changing demands of society in the years to come. Consequently, it should not be forgotten that what needs to be preserved is the historical building, and what will be presented to tourism is the function.

The adaptive reuse process comprises the preservation of functionally outmoded or disused old historical buildings for new and more appropriate functions [15,16]. Furthermore, the adaptive reuse strategy focuses on reusing an existing building to allow it to function as a modern building while retaining its beneficial qualities [11,17]. Buildings that have become inactive over time for technological, economic, or political reasons are precautionary in terms of preserving the traces of historical developments and transformations and ensuring the cultural continuity of these structures. To the extent that these structures and future generations can meet, cultural transfer will be possible. The concept of “refunctioning” becomes important at this point [18]. If the method is followed correctly, adaptive reuse has numerous advantages. It not only allows for the most efficient use of the structure to satisfy present demands and functions, but it also keeps the facility from becoming overcrowded or redundant. At the same time, it gives historical structures new life and helps to prevent them from demolition due to uncontrolled construction. These adaptively reused structures preserve the country’s history in a way that will be appreciated not just by current and future generations but also by tourists visiting the country [19].

As a result of changing lifestyles, demands, and needs in society, many historical structures that must be preserved can be rearranged to serve a new function that is diametrically opposed to the original purpose of construction. However, the reuse process should be approached holistically by combining social, economic, environmental, urban, and political policies [20]. Even if social variables dominate in shaping regional identity, cohesion is only realized when economic and infrastructure components are integrated into everyday life [21].

On the other hand, it is obvious that each new function will result in some changes and innovations to historical structures. As a result, the new function must be designed to meet the needs of the community for as long as possible. In other words, historical buildings’ functions should not be changed frequently. Changes in the social and cultural structure must be carefully and thoroughly planned to provide a long-term and economically efficient function. Therefore, the family structures, beliefs, and political values of the people living in the surrounding area, as well as their socioeconomic status, should be carefully evaluated. The functional transformation of monumental structures requires careful planning due to the architectural character and public use of the building. It is also necessary to consider the limitations of monumental structures such as the unchangeable plan schemes which differ from civil architectural elements.

Monumental structures, which are defined as cultural assets and oversee upholding continuity between the past, present, and future through the traces they leave behind, help to shape the character and identity of the place they belong to by connecting people to the past. Therefore, monumental structures need to be protected [22]. The aging of monumental structures can be interpreted from a structural, environmental, and economic point of view. Economic and environmental obsolescence are frequently caused by functional obsolescence [23]. For this reason, the conservation approach is also impacted by whether its functional continuity exists or not.

All structures, especially monumental ones that shape history, can be made more sustainable through adaptive reuse. Monumental structures are cultural treasures that connect us to the past. They serve as a bridge between the past and the present by evoking the traits of the era in which they were constructed. Losses will continue to occur daily if the understanding of protection of the structures that are significant for urban memory is not sufficiently established [24]. Considering recent urban, social, and economic developments, monumental structures that no longer accurately reflect the social structures of the societies in which they once existed are being renovated. Making these buildings viable for reuse is crucial for sustainability, as opposed to demolition or idling them [22]. There is agreement in the culture-oriented discourse concerning economic development’s transformative role in its economic, social, and environmental dimensions; however, it is not yet completely apparent and perceptible in broader sustainability discourses [7]. Sustainable development has become a key criterion in attracting tourists, and it can only be sustained in tourism if all stakeholders apply the concept and practices of sustainability [25]. According to Kahraman and Arpacıoğlu [26], when a settlement becomes a center of attraction, it can manage its economic cycles.

Freeman [27] describes a stakeholder as “any group or individual who can influence or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s goal”. The Council of the European Union [28] describes a stakeholder as follows: “a stakeholder is an individual, group of persons or organisation that can affect or is affected by the decisions of another organisation. This definition also includes interest groups related to the organisation. A stakeholder’s relationship with the focal organisation is generally determined by three main attributes: the power to influence the organisation; a legitimate relationship with the organisation; and an urgent claim on the organisation”. Stakeholder groups are more visible in sustainable projects since such plans frequently have an economic, social, and environmental influence on the general population [29]. Takim [30] and Winch [31] classify construction-related stakeholders into two major categories: internal stakeholders and external stakeholders. These include internal stakeholders (workers, customers, end users, financiers, architects, engineers, contractors, trade contractors, materials suppliers, etc.) as well as external stakeholders (local people, landowners, environmentalists, archaeologists, regulators, local and national governments, etc.). Identifying and analyzing stakeholders in a decision-making problem is about architectural choices because different perspectives allow us to imagine different possible solutions and different avenues of intervention, to satisfy not only the most powerful actors but everyone involved in the process. Stakeholders clearly have quite varied motives, interests, and ambitions, and their reasons for investing in a specific project may also change over time: expectations of stakeholders may differ based on whether they desire to receive future advantages or not [32].

While researchers have suggested that the impacted communities should be acknowledged as major stakeholders because they are most likely to gain from a development program, many recent papers have highlighted that the affected community is viewed as a low-power stakeholder [33,34,35,36]. Low-power stakeholders are also known as “vulnerable” stakeholders due to their limited ability to influence decision-making patterns, which frequently leads to their interests being manipulated [37]. Therefore, it is critical to have a stakeholder group that understands sustainability difficulties and provides solutions without being influenced, so that the opinion of professionals who detect problems can be sought. As a result, a value appraisal that indicates the socioeconomic development of the area or building can be established.

Value is an important concept in the field of strategy [38]. Harrison and Wicks [39] expand on the traditional approach that considers value creation to be limited to the economic dimension by emphasizing different types of value creation and arguing that corporate performance measures should consider multiple stakeholder perspectives and that value should include both tangible and intangible factors that are important to stakeholders. It includes anything that has the potential to be helpful to stakeholders, such as community service initiatives, employee engagement in decision making, better payment terms for suppliers, reduced costs for customers, and so on [40]. Stakeholders are unique information sources, and many stakeholder groups can contribute a variety of information that can be integrated to produce value [41].

The management may be able to influence local people involved in the process for the stakeholders to create value. Instead of involving locals, who appear to be low-powered and vulnerable stakeholders whose opinions and statements can be swayed by individual, economic, and social promises, the goal is to form stakeholder partnerships with experts who have extensive knowledge of the region and to assess the value of experts.

In this regard, this study’s goal is to determine the tourism usage strategies that can be used for the protection and socioeconomic sustainable development of monumental structures with functional continuity, and to identify which factors provide strong opportunities if the functional usage of a structure continues in socioeconomic terms; and if functional continuity cannot be achieved, the assessment process reveals which factors pose a strong threat. Thus, the goal is to define historical buildings in reference to strategic planning instruments’ adaptive reuse. This hypothesis discusses the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath, which is located in the middle of Sille, inside the borders of Konya province, and has names such as Sille Aşağı Hamam, Çarşı Hamamı, Aşağı Hamam, and Ak Hamam. It is in the bazaar on the north side of Sille Stream, across from the Sille entry from Konya. The bath was restored after 2005 and re-functionalized between 2011–2022 with a museum and sales function. However, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a decrease in tourism activities and affected the usage of the structure resulting in closure. The structure is currently idle and not in use.

When an existing building is stripped of its prior function and a museum is constructed within it, the impact of the installation on the structure can be questioned. Although adaptive reuse of a building has many benefits, there are certain factors to consider when investigating the influence of adaptive reuse on a museum, such as whether the structure has lost its meaning and memory, and the potential impact on museum displays [42]. A transition will necessitate virtually concurrent institutional innovation on both the demand and supply sides, which is uncommon [43]. Tourism joins together in this new light to explore new ideas, innovations, and experience packaging for tourists and visitors. The supply side is prepared to build and offer something novel, and demanding customers are keen to try it [44].

To investigate the potential of adaptive reuse of a monumental structure, the spatial and functional evolution of the structure over time is examined. Moreover, three fundamental values that define socioeconomic sustainability are examined: functional, social, and economic gains. Thus, SWOT analyses were conducted by determining the strengths/weaknesses and opportunities/threats in terms of the socioeconomic gains of monumental structures, as well as the experts’ collective opinions on the extent to which various factors affect usage potential. Strategies for tourism were determined for monumental structures that can maintain their operational continuity for public and local governments.

2. Current Methods and Approaches for Ensuring the Socioeconomic Sustainability of Monumental Structures

Currently, cultural tourism and re-functioning methods are used to ensure the socio-economic sustainability of monumental structures.

2.1. Refunctioning and Conservation Concepts as a Sustainable Strategy

Sustainability aims to ensure continuity by protecting resources while also protecting the historical environment and structures and ensuring cultural sustainability. On the other hand, sustainable conservation is an application that aims to pass on these two elements’ original values to future generations. Sustainable conservation, on the other hand, is an application that attempts to pass on these two elements’ original values to future generations.

A sustainable way of life can be defined as the transfer of natural resources to future generations while keeping the protection–use balance in mind. In its broadest sense, sustainability is a strategy-turned-concept of the question of how it can be adapted to social, economic, and political factors, as well as worldviews [45]. Within the framework of the principle of sustainability, preservation of the historical environment necessitates the active use of the old texture and the planning of environmental changes in a way that responds to the needs of modern life with planned changes [46]. Although many historical structures have ecological features, it is widely acknowledged that they are insufficient in terms of sustainability principles to meet the needs of modern comfort conditions. Therefore, historical structures should be restored and made suitable for re-use while considering the economic, cultural, and social dimensions of the sustainability concept, as well as aesthetic values.

Cultural and natural heritage sustainability includes the preservation of cultural integrity with the proper management of resources to meet economic, social, aesthetic, and ecological needs [47,48]. Traditional architecture is one of the most basic examples of sustainable architectural understanding among cultural heritage resources. This architecture is shaped by environmental and local data. On the other hand, the problem of transferring traditional architecture inherited from the past to future generations maintains its currency with new strategies and methods every day. In the process, sustainability has emerged as an important means of protecting these structures [49].

The use of historical structures for purposes other than their original functions for protection is a conservation method that has been used since ancient times. The importance of “determining the most suitable function for the building without damaging the social pattern, applying the right renovation techniques, and paying attention to the protection of those living in the physical environment of historical buildings” was emphasized in the Council of Europe’s Amsterdam Declaration. It is recommended that historical buildings with monumental characteristics be “used” for regular maintenance and protection. On the contrary, monasteries, dervish lodges, caravanserais, palaces, industrial buildings, and religious structures without a community must be re-functionalized for modern use. Instead of demolishing structures, effective energy use should be implemented by providing comfortable conditions in accordance with time requirements, producing necessary energy by utilizing the building, recycling wastewater, heating and cooling systems, lighting, and ventilation systems. It should also be aimed at restoring and reusing buildings while preserving their architectural characteristics and original identities. Applications that do not preserve the original architectural values when re-functioning will not only destroy the historical document value of monumental structures but will also result in insufficient and incorrect information transfer to future generations [50].

According to Latham [51], adaptive reuse protects architectural, social, cultural, and historical qualities. Historical settlements and local architecture connect individuals to their roots, embed collective memories, and reflect both their cultural and personal identities. Social sustainability highlights the value of diversity by addressing society’s lifestyle, spirituality, family, and sociocultural structure. The preservation of cultural and natural heritage entails addressing economic, social, and aesthetic requirements, as well as preserving cultural integrity and managing resources [52].

One of the primary goals of architectural heritage preservation is to preserve historical structures with all their original architectural features. Functional changes should not be made to structures that can still be used with their original functions for arbitrary or unfounded reasons. The cultural characteristics of such structures should not be ignored solely for economic reasons. It should be remembered that while the structures or values to be maintained in historical environments are restored and arranged, the road, infrastructure, and similar physical features will evolve as a result of the new purpose that the region has obtained over time. Revitalizing old buildings with modern functions is a significant step toward cultural heritage preservation, but it also provides economic benefits [53].

The functional, environmental, and economic requirements of transformation should be thoroughly researched in terms of scientific and practical applications. Furthermore, the original functions of these structures should always be considered, and practices that significantly degrade their original architecture should be avoided. Even after the re-functioning application, the building should be capable of reverting to its original architecture with minor interventions.

2.2. Functional, Social, and Economic Returns in the Context of Sustainable Cultural Tourism

Sustainability is an important component of tourism since it is regarded as a means of meeting the requirements of stakeholders while considering present and future social and environmental situations, as well as economic impact [54,55]. Sustainable tourism is a new approach to tourism development that promotes environmental protection, cultural heritage preservation, community economic development, and social development [56]. Sustainable cultural tourism promotes well-protected activities with authentic interpretations that benefit local economies [57].

Many social and environmental issues related to sustainable tourism development in tourist locations must be addressed to resolve significant economic sustainability challenges or to increase the competitiveness of the sustainable tourism sector. All these economic, social, and environmental challenges must be addressed concurrently: local community well-being and needs, tourism destination sustainable development priorities, changing demographic profiles of tourists, and their changing needs for tourism services and goods. Tourism products and services should be designed to solve environmental sustainability challenges, and sustainable consumption issues should be prioritized. Social issues of sustainability in tourist development are linked to contributing to local community development and meeting the requirements of the elderly community and people with disabilities for tourism products and services [58].

The World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) published a report titled “Global Impact & Issues” in 2017 that detailed the global impact of the tourism sector. The most striking aspect of this report is the emphasis on tourism as the sector that contributes the most to the economy after technology [59].

There have been significant changes in supply and demand in the tourism industry in the first years of the 21st century. Low-cost airline transportation, the spread of the Internet, and the ability to travel more frequently, along with the desire to travel to new and unexplored destinations, have all resulted in significant changes in the structure of the tourism industry and tourist destinations [60,61]. Individuals have now shifted away from mass tourism, which consists of sea–sand–sun destinations, and this shift has resulted in the emergence of alternative tourism types. Nature-based, educational, hobby-based, and culture-based tourism types have emerged in the context of alternative tourism. The cultural aspect of travel has become increasingly important in recent years. According to the World Tourism Organization data, cultural tourism is one of the most developed types of tourism and is expected to grow rapidly. In this regard, the development of cultural tourism, which is an important alternative tourism type, is critical because of the social and cultural returns it will provide [62]. Being a service industry, tourism heavily relies on the cooperation and goodwill of the host communities, and many academics and practitioners agree that sustainable tourism must be developed based on community engagement [63].

From these premises, there is a need to rethink the interaction between economy, society, and area in a flexible and transdisciplinary approach by calling into question the specific usage of urban planning tools or resource management tools [64,65]. According to Kavaratzis [66], the process begins with the development of a local vision, which is then open to conversation with local inhabitants, place branding managers, and potential partners. This leads to the identification of actions related to landscape interventions, functional-infrastructure projects, and economic opportunities for the various audiences, which must be communicated in the end.

Repurposed monumental structures can only be socially sustainable if they continue to pass on their historical values to future generations. To maintain the social sustainability of buildings with distinctive historical, cultural, and architectural elements, it should be ensured that they are appropriate for the region in which they are located and that these structures have a special role in society [22,67]. To ensure social sustainability in the re-use of historical buildings, it is critical to conserve the cultural, social, artistic, and creative influences of the societies that once held these structures [47,51,68]. One of the goals of economic sustainability is to reuse resources without damaging the environment [69,70].

According to Wang et al. [71], people’s desire to visit different and more authentic places is now leading to an increase in visits to cultural sites. Tourists visiting cultural assets can provide a wide range of returns to local people and governments. Cultural tourism generates new job opportunities, strengthens the economy, raises local people’s living standards, and helps in the preservation of the city’s heritage and culture [72]. Another important consideration is the economic potential of culturally significant places. Regarding this issue, Pekin states that “cultural tourism is the only tool for a country gain a real and lasting competitive power in the economy in general and especially in tourism, contribute to local and regional economies, and make its natural, historical, and cultural heritage sustainable. Furthermore, cultural tourism is the most important component in fostering intercultural dialogue, preserving, and sharing natural, historical, and cultural heritage, gaining access to a multicultural environment, developing cultural awareness, passing on natural and historical heritage to future generations, and achieving a sustainable economy’ [73]. Cultural tourism ensures the sustainability of cultural resources, provides economic development for local people, and is regarded as the protection of sociocultural values. It is a tourism activity responsible for the preservation of cultural heritage and its transmission to future generations [74,75].

However, to identify and open areas with cultural tourism potential, countries must first develop a “cultural tourism management plan” at the higher and lower scales. Cultural tourism management plans are tools that will help in the planning of subjects such as reducing the negative effects of tourism, increasing earnings, organizing tourism organizations, and providing visitor and environmental management [76]. With increased interest in cultural tourism, management plans are required to respond to the increased rate of growth and change, as well as infrastructure demands. Long-term planning initiatives are critical tools for managing historic urban centers and cities. According to the principles determined in the study of ICOMOS on the management of historical environments, the first stage of management planning includes the definition of the area. Then, the status of the area and the level of implementation of the work to be carried out are determined. This stage is followed by the process of explaining conservation policies and emphasizing the necessity of conservation and development. It is necessary to develop action plans based on the identified threats and opportunities. It addresses who will implement the management plan and the existing requirements for implementation supervision. The completion of the monitoring and review phases is another critical process for management plans [76,77]. Unplanned practices can have a negative impact on the process of protecting cultural assets and transforming them into products [78]. Because some conservation theorists see tourism as a threat to the preservation of cultural assets, it has been observed that sometimes tourism causes serious damage, particularly to architectural heritage [79]. Consequently, before opening cultural assets to tourism, the strengths/weaknesses and opportunities/threats that tourism will bring should be determined in advance. The cultural tourism management plan should be prepared based on these determinations and then implemented gradually and without haste.

In a 2003 UNESCO report, “cultural tourism” was defined as a concept that has positive economic and social impacts including establishing and strengthening identity. Cultural tourism contributes to the creation of an image, the preservation of cultural and historical heritage, the development of harmony and understanding between people as a tool in conjunction with culture, and the support of culture [80,81]. Various issues that should be considered are mentioned in academic studies that deal with the tourism sector and the science of architectural preservation. For example, Hetzer [82] identified four major considerations for more responsible tourism. These are identified as minimal environmental impact, maximum respect for local culture, maximum return to the local economy, and maximum tourist experience [74]. On the other hand, Nasser [83] mentioned that marketing policies of traditional settlements were affected by the change in tourism purposes. He explained how traditional settlements should be protected while also being included in tourism activities to meet consumer demands. In terms of energy efficiency, there are significant differences between re-functioning an old building and constructing a new building for that function. According to the information obtained from academic sources, it can be said that the negative effects of tourism can be minimized, and the returns can be increased with good strategic planning in the protection of historical cultural heritage. In this regard, the three basic returns, social, economic, and functional, that define socioeconomic sustainability in terms of historical structures can be stated to increase economic development for tourists (

Table 1. Basic Concepts for Increasing the Socioeconomic Sustainability of Tourism for Historical Structures.

Basic Concepts for Increasing Socioeconomic Sustainability
Functional Returns	(Wilkinson et al., 2009) [11], (Douglas, 2006) [17], (Yaldız and Asatekin, 2016) [22], (Dinçer, 1998) [23], (Pedersen, 2002) [47], (Murzyn-Kupisz, 2012) [48], (Durukan et al., 2021) [52], (Lussetyowati, 2015) [72], (Gülcan, 2010) [78], (Ahunhay, 2009) [79]
Social Returns	(Langston et al., 2007) [13], (Yung and Chan, 2012) [20], (Bizzari et al., 2021) [21], (Pedersen, 2002) [47], (Murzyn-Kupisz, 2012) [48], (Durukan et al., 2021) [52], (Liu, 2018) [54], (Leon-Gomez, 2021) [55], (Chang et al., 2020) [56], (Baykan, 2007) [62], (Lussetyowati, 2015) [72]
Economic Returns	(ÇEKÜL, 2012) [1], (Bullen, 2007) [14], (Yung and Chan, 2012) [20], (Bizzari et al., 2021) [21], (Dinçer, 1998) [23], (Kahraman and Arpacıoğlu, 2022) [26], (Pedersen, 2002) [47], (Murzyn-Kupisz, 2012) [48], (Durukan et al., 2021) [52], (Yıldırım, 2021) [53], (Liu, 2018) [54], (Leon-Gomez, 2021) [55], (Chang et al., 2020) [56], (Gao, 2021) [57], (Baykan, 2007) [62], (Lussetyowati, 2015) [72], (Pekin, 2011) [73], (Çelem and Kılıç Benzer, 2007) [74], (Abacılar, 2008) [76]

).

The relationship between socioeconomic sustainability and tourism can be determined using three key principles because of the literature review. The cultural and social aspects of heritage sites, according to the Leeuwarden Statement [84], are the spatial and social markers that frequently describe the area. While responding to the needs of multi-ethnic and multicultural societies, adaptive reuse can help conserve our past, protect and strengthen people’s ideas of their own traditions and history, and future perspectives. The economic elements, on the other hand, are closely tied to functional changes in both directions, as shown in job creation and growth, particularly in the tourism sector, by correlating with the reuse of our built heritage. However, functional changes should be undertaken while keeping in mind the sociological aspects of the region and the building’s distinctive personality.

In this regard, alterations in monumental structures that maintain their functional continuity may not have a favorable impact on the region’s planned tourism activity. The building’s shift from its original role may result in the loss of sociocultural traits, as well as a negative impact on the expected economic development in terms of tourism. As a result, with proper strategic planning in the protection of historical heritage, the negative effects of tourism can be limited while the positives can be increased.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Material

Sille is located between the Takkeli and Karabuğa Mountains in the form of a valley to the north of Sille Stream which is 8 km from Konya’s city center and located in the central Anatolia region of Turkey (Figure 1). Sille, with its location and historical significance, is an important node point for the province of Konya’s tourism corridor with its location and historical background. This region, which bridges the past and the future, is still attempting to preserve its current urban identity with its socioeconomic and cultural values [85,86].

Churches made of rock carvings, chapels and houses, the Aya Elenia Museum, the Hill chapel, mosques, baths, fountains, laundries, public buildings, waterways, and examples of civil architecture can be seen in Sille, which hosts many structures from the Roman period to the Republican period.

Sille and Selçuklu were joined as two neighborhoods in 1989. The Konya Cultural and Natural Heritage Preservation Board labeled the southern slopes, which house churches, monasteries, and cemeteries, as a first-class archaeological site in 1995. The main settlement area has been labeled as a protected urban area. Many works have been repaired and preserved because of the restoration projects carried out by the Selçuklu Municipality in recent years. Sille is now a significant cultural and tourism center in Konya [88].

Sille, which had a large population in the 18th and 19th centuries, has a rich water architecture. The settlement now has 2 baths, 17 fountains, 1 laundry, and 1 aqueduct. The first bath, known as the Hacı Ali Ağa (Ak) Bath, is in the bazaar to the east of the city, and the second bath called Subaşı Bath is located to the west of the settlement. Both structures were built in the 19th century and arranged as double baths. They are significant examples of Sille’s rich water culture. Other examples of water architecture attest to Sille’s cultural wealth through their designs, decorations, and inscriptions.

The bath is known as Sille Aşağı Bath, Aşağı Bath, Çarşı Bath, Ak Bath, and Hacı Ali Ağa Bath. It is located in the bazaar on the northern shore of Sille Creek, at the entrance of Sille from the Konya direction. The bath was built as a double bath. The inscription of the bath is located on the eastern entrance of the men’s section. According to this inscription, the bath was made by Hacı Ali Ağa. The bath was built in 1884 and has 3 iwans [89]. According to Çaycı [90], this bath is a descendant of the Hasbey Bath in Meram, which is one of the structures from the Karaman period. Hacı Ali Ağa Hamam is a type of architectural group of double baths with male and female sections. The eastern part belongs to the men and the western part belongs to the women. There is an Ottoman inscription at the entrance of the bath, which has a water tank on the side (Figure 2).

Sille is an urban protected area that has been restored with Sille structures because it serves as a significant tourism route for Konya city. It has developed into an important alternative tourism center for the city. There are numerous monumental and traditional dwelling structures, as well as religious, water, and public structures. Since 2010, many structures in the community have changed their functions to accommodate cultural tourism. The majority of these monumental structures were either employed for their own purposes or shown as a museum [88]. Even though various proposals for the bath construction in the settlement were prepared, it remained idle. As a result, this study explores whether the functional continuity of the bath structure can be maintained.

The building was registered by the Konya Cultural and Natural Heritage Preservation Board in a decision dated 26 July 1991 and numbered 1086. The Selçuklu Municipality restored the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath in 2005 and it reopened in 2006. After the landscaping and parking areas were completed, the bath, which belongs to the Selçuklu Municipality, was opened in 2011 as a museum exhibition hall. It was closed in 2022 because the business could not make a profit due to the pandemic. The structure is currently idle.

In this context, the Hamam structure, which is positioned on the major artery of the community and has a symbolic feature, could not offer the projected economic contribution due to functional instabilities, and the building became obsolete. Instead, converting the structure into a bath structure where its spatial qualities can be more clearly recognized, like other monumental structures in the community, and making it available for use will provide a more authentic feature in terms of cultural tourism.

3.2. Method

3.2.1. Research Model

A qualitative case study was carried out to determine the usage strategies for increasing the socioeconomic sustainability of a monumental structure while maintaining its functional continuity for cultural tourism. In the first stage, a comprehensive literature review with qualitative research was conducted and criterion sampling—one of the purposive sampling techniques—was used to determine the monumental structure’s chronological use. In the second stage, the expert group’s opinions were sought for analysis and synthesis.

In the first stage of the research, the spatial and functional change experienced by Hacı Ali Ağa Hamam between 1185–2005, 2005–2006, 2006–2011, 2011–2022, and 2022 was examined by conducting evaluations on the survey and restoration project. The aim of this study was to determine the continuous function changes of the building.

The second stage is divided into two parts. The historic environment’s sustainability necessitates flexible and transparent decision making that recognizes its complex and dynamic character, different knowledge, and values. Therefore, aside from the local stakeholders, who are considered vulnerable stakeholders [37], the opinions of unbiased experts are equally significant. At this point in the research, it is based on the opinions of two separate expert groups: the group that conducted scientific investigations in the field (external expert) and the group that conducted studies on the Sille settlement and still resides in Konya and its surrounds (internal experts).

In the first part, sub-parameters were determined by 5 external experts who participated in the TUBITAK project no. 114K599 and BAP01 project no. 5350, which has conducted many scientific studies in Sille since 2014, within the scope of the three basic criteria specified in Figure 3 that define socioeconomic sustainability [85,86,88,92,93,94,95,96,97]. Considering the sub-parameters, the socioeconomic sustainability of the Hacı Ali Ağa Hamam was disclosed in terms of “functional—social—economic returns”, a total of 41 factors, including 9 strengths, 11 weaknesses, 10 opportunities, and 11 threats. All identified criteria were examined by 33 internal experts.

The second part included a SWOT analysis to assess the functional and socioeconomic viability of the building, whose purpose was continually changing following restoration. Learned et al. [98] define SWOT analysis as a strategic planning method for gathering enormous amounts of information to simplify decision-making processes. SWOT analysis is intended to collect all strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.

Strengths and weaknesses are the system’s internal elements or the factors that must be modified, improved, or eliminated. Opportunities and threats are external factors, or variables, that can affect the entire process of the business and must be regulated to restrict the negative aspects and capitalize on the favorable aspects [32]. The strengths and weaknesses and opportunities and threats were established in this context based on the opinions of 33 experts, and solutions were developed based on the weaknesses and threats.

3.2.2. Research Procedure

Data on the evolution of historical bath structures from their construction to the present day, as well as research on the cultural tourism-oriented use of these bath structures, were gathered and presented in two stages. The first stage of the research examined the spatial and functional change experienced by the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath between the years 1185–2005, 2005–2006, 2006–2011, 2011–2022, and 2022 by evaluating the survey and restoration project. In the second stage, “functional, social and economic returns” and “opportunities and threats created by its strengths and weaknesses”, which define socioeconomic sustainability, were evaluated with SWOT analyses through a call conference attended by 33 experts consisting of academicians and practitioners.

3.2.3. Research Group

Stakeholder participation is a vital principle for comprehending and addressing environmental issues. Given the present stakeholder knowledge base and practitioners’ emphasis on engaging high-powered and prominent stakeholders, the interests of low-power and vulnerable stakeholders are frequently influenced. The research group is divided into two groups: internal experts and external experts. The external expert group is made up of five experts that have undertaken scientific research in the Sille region. The internal expert group consists of 33 people who have worked in the Sille settlement and currently live there, including architects, interior architects, art historians, professors, and practitioners. The reason for including 33 experts was to consult with 11 experts from three areas of expertise (interior architect, landscape architect, and architect) (a third expert opinion is needed to reach a consensus when there are two different opinions).

3.2.4. Data Collection Tools

The criteria in the form developed by the researcher include a total of 41 factors, including 9 strengths, 11 weaknesses, 10 opportunities, and 11 threats, as well as functional, social, and economic returns. Field studies, interviews, and other sources of information were used to develop the factors (literature, tourism master plan, strategic plan, development agency regional plan, and various official indicators). The prepared questionnaire was then given to a group of 33 experts. According to the ranking (1–3–5–7–9) method, the answers for each factor are rated as “strongly agree = 9”, “agree = 7”, “neutral = 5”, “disagree = 3”, and “strongly disagree = 1” [93,99,100].

3.2.5. Data Collection and Analysis

During the first stage of the research, the plan schemes of the site before and after restoration, furniture and material information, and photographs of the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath were gathered.

In the second stage, a SWOT analysis was conducted to reveal the usage strategies for the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath located in Sille, which is an important component for Konya due to cultural tourism. SWOT analysis is a general method of evaluation. It enables researchers to assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. A SWOT analysis is a tool for identifying, analyzing, and judging the current state of an organization [48,49,50].

The SWOT factors were scored on a “nine-grade scale”, and the average effect values were calculated by dividing the scores by the number of expert groups to compare the evaluation criteria among themselves.

Average effect value calculation:

$$\times 1\dots =point\times nine grade scale\left(\mathrm{1,3},\mathrm{5,7},9\right)$$

$$total effect value=\times 1$$

$$average effect value=\times 1$$

$$average effect value=\frac{total effect value\left(\times 1\right)}{number of expert groups}$$

Furthermore, the total impact value was averaged by dividing the total impact value by the number of experts and the number of evaluation criteria. Thus, strengths and weaknesses and opportunities and threats were compared within themselves.

Average total impact value calculation:

$$total impact value total=\times 1+\times 2+\times 3\dots .(evaluation criterias\left(E.C.\right))$$

$$average impact value total=\frac{total impact value total}{expert group}÷E.C. number$$

The SWOT analysis information should demonstrate how it will fit into the strategic plan, and interpretations based on this information should articulate the magnitude of the threats and vulnerabilities. However, this information may or may not support the region’s current strategy [51]. The usage strategies for increasing the socioeconomic sustainability of monumental structures were developed in this direction based on the identified strengths and weaknesses and opportunities and threats.

4. Findings

4.1. Findings on Architectural and Historical Development

The Hacı Ali Ağa Bath, located in the settlement’s center, has a symmetrical layout with coldness, warmness, and hotness sections. The sections of coldness (undressing) rooms are planned parallel to the land boundaries. It was constructed with two platforms separated by a row of support carried by two rectangular cross-section legs in the center. Round vaults covered the platforms’ tops, and round arches connected the masonry feet to each other and to the walls. The men’s section entrance door is located on the side of the men’s section where the dressing room is located. This door, which also carries the bath’s inscription, leads down to a landing with several steps. A five-step staircase descends from there to the dressing room floor, which is covered in Sille stone. There is a hexagonal planned pool in the middle of this section. The men’s dressing room has three windows to the south and two to the east, while the women’s section landing has two doors to the south and one to the west. From the outside, the windows are rectangular and are in niches with round arches that expand inward. One of the doors leading to the dressing room leads to the toilet and shaving area, while the other leads to the warmness room [101].

The warmness room has a square plan and is covered with a pendentive dome with plenty of skylights. The room was extended to the east in the men’s section and to the west in the women’s section, with an iwan covered with a deep round arch. It shifts from the warmness room to the hotness room through a door. A door behind the toilets leads to the private bathing areas. In addition, there is a transition to the hotness room through the door opening to the north. The hotness rooms have a square plan and are expanded with an iwan in three directions except for the warmness direction, while the private rooms are in the northern corners and are covered with a skylight dome. The iwans are covered with a round vault. There are five elephant eyes at the top of the vaults that provide lighting and ventilation [101].

• The hotness room’s dome has been destroyed, but it can be seen in old photographs that it was covered by a lighted dome. Its restoration was carried out in accordance with the original architecture. The men’s section has an octagonal-shaped marble platform in the middle; the women’s section does not have one. The structure’s floor is entirely covered in stone. The water tank and furnace (külhan) in the north were destroyed, but it was discovered in previous years that there was a small-sized water tank covered by a barrel vault. The facades of the bath have striped joints in the traditional Sille texture. The domes of the bath are also covered with small Sille stones [101].
• The bath structure has undergone five chronological processes: 1185–2005, 2005–2006, 2006–2011, 2011–2022, and after 2022 (Table 2).

Table 2. Spatial change of the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath over the years [91,102].

	Facade Layout	Interior Layout
1884–2005
2005–2006
2006
2006–2011
2011–2022
2022–

Table 2. Spatial change of the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath over the years [91,102].

	Facade Layout	Interior Layout
1884–2005
2005–2006
2006
2006–2011
2011–2022
2022–

The Hacı Ali Ağa Bath was used as a bath until the beginning of 1884–1900 when it became idle and unusable. The building was registered in 1991, and the first steps toward renovation were taken. Between 2005 and 2006, the structure underwent restoration for the museum and sales function, as well as changes to the facade and space layout. It served as a museum and a sales function from 2006 to 2011. The products displayed in the building were removed in 2011 and placed in the Selçuklu Municipality’s warehouse. These products were selected by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Muzaffer Yılmaz and Erdal Tomar (architecture and art history specialist) and exhibited in the city museum. The Selçuklu Municipality rented the building to a private enterprise for the years 2011–2022, and only the changing rooms were used. Other areas were not used. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which emerged in 2020 and affected the whole world, the number of domestic and foreign visitors, as well as tourism activities, decreased in 2022. Traditional historical tourism is constrained by time, space, and management expenses that no longer satisfy the demands of operations management in normalized epidemic prevention and control circumstances [103]. The Hacı Ali Ağa Bath was closed due to its inability to generate sufficient economic income. The monumental structure, which was only transformed due to tourism activities, is no longer in use.

Through drawings and visual documents, the change, transformation, and usage situations of the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath from 1884 to 2022 are schematized. Along with the changing function, there have been changes and deteriorations such as the opening of doors or gaps between spaces, the removal of walls, and the closing of windows.

The bath’s original spaces such as changing rooms, dressing rooms, warmness rooms, hotness rooms, private cells, shaving facilities, and toilets, were converted into special exhibition areas such as the large cubes pottery exhibition hall/administrative unit, authentic material exhibition hall, WC, photography exhibition hall, carpet/rug benches exhibition hall, warehouse, and exhibition platform. It is currently awaiting use, pending a decision by the local government (

Table 3. Functional change of the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath over the years.

	1884–2005–2006	2006–2011	2011–2021	2022–
	Men’s dressing room	Large cubes pottery exhibition hall/ administrative unit	Large cubes pottery exhibition hall	Not in use
	Women’s dressing room	Authentic material exhibition	Large cubes pottery exhibition hall	Not in use
	Toilet/shaving room	WC	Not in use	Not in use
	Men’s warmness room (extended with iwan)	Photography exhibition	Not in use	Not in use
	Women’s warmness room (extended with iwan)	Carpet/rug benches exhibition	Not in use	Not in use
	Private bathing area	Warehouse	Not in use	Not in use
	Men’s hotness room/marble platform	Exhibition platform	Not in use	Not in use
	Women’s hotness room/middle area	Special exhibition area	Not in use	Not in use
	Private cells	Special exhibition area	Not in use	Not in use

).

As shown in Table 3, it is difficult to preserve and maintain monumental structures in small towns such as Sille. Monuments can be used to bring life back to these areas with the help of the tourism industry. It is a more appropriate approach to ensure the sustainability of traditional baths by preserving their original function, special interior fixtures, and installation systems. However, functional change can only be made if it is carefully planned by experts.

Wet areas, as well as the numerous technical infrastructure and interior equipment (pipes, basins, benches, marble platforms, and water pipes) that accompany them, are the most affected parts of the baths throughout their new function. When these components are removed because of the newly assigned function, the structure loses its original identity. This original plan pattern of the bath should not be disturbed as the spatial scheme is interpreted in the function to be given. Most of the time, these details are changed in some way during the implementation of the function to be provided. This results in an incomplete transmission of an important part of the bath’s historical identity to future generations.

In this context, because the building is concerned with sustainability, the local community is not involved in the planning process or stakeholder participation in the evaluation, and only local governments have decision-making authority. Consequently, it should be comprehended that re-functioning is not an end but a temporary tool. It should be carried out with the understanding that re-functioning is a form of protection and survival. Every intervention should be reversible so that the given function does not cause permanent damage.

4.2. Findings on the Structure’s Socioeconomic Sustainability

It is a tricky situation to begin restoration work by deciding on a new function of the baths, which are one of the most important unmovable cultural assets in the world. As a result of the pandemic, the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath, which was assumed to provide socioeconomic return to Sille settlement by being re-functionalized for cultural tourism, was closed in 2022 and is currently inactive. The functional, social, and economic returns of the re-functioning and non-functionality of Hacı Ali Ağa Bath, which is a monumental structure, were evaluated by 33 experts, considering the strengths and weaknesses of the new function, and the opportunities and threats it creates for tourism.

When the results were analyzed, “social value (7606)” was identified as the most important factor; the most important reason was demonstrated to be “arousing the curiosity of the visitors with the bath structure (monumental structures)” (7606). It demonstrates that the architectural identity of the bath structures draws visitors’ attention. Another strength is functional value (6859). However, rather than the value added by the changing function, the necessary maintenance, and repairs (8121) of the building in accordance with conservation principles, as well as the contribution of the building’s location to the new function for cultural tourism (7636), emerged as the primary factors. The strongest aspect in terms of functional value was determined as using less energy (7848) with the new function (

Table 4. Strengths.

	Evaluation Criteria			Total Effect Value	Average Effect Value	Average Total Effect Value (%)
Strengths	Functional Return	S1	The contribution of the building’s location to the new function for cultural tourism	252	7636	6859
		S2	The contribution of the new function of Sille to the touristic activities	159	4818
		S3	Operating necessary building maintenance and repairs in accordance with conservation principles	268	8121
	Subtotal			679
	Social Return	S4	Arousing the curiosity of the visitors with the bath structure (monumental structures)	251	7606	7606
	Subtotal			251
	Economic Return	S5	Being always open to domestic and foreign visitors due to its museum and sales function	187	5667	6570
		S6	Having visitors as a result of its original function	231	7000
		S7	Using less energy with the new function	259	7848
		S8	Reproducing local products such as jugs and candles due to its new function, thus increasing additional regional income	212	6424
		S9	Opening of various businesses to support the functions of the building	205	6212
	Subtotal			1084
	Grand TOTAL			2014		6781

). Because of the excessive use of water in baths, it is believed that the decrease in energy use as a result of its new function is seen as a precaution against climatic change—the threat of drought. However, accepting this evaluation criterion as a strength reveals that the building’s functional change does not provide an economic return.

When the weak aspects of the bath structures in terms of socioeconomic sustainability are examined, the functional changes experienced by the building have affected the social value of the building (7803). The weakness is the decision makers being unaware of the socioeconomic potential of the original function of the baths (monumental structures) (7939). Among other weaknesses, the functional value (7295) appeared as “Failure of the function to work because the building was closed due to the pandemic “(8303), and economic value appeared as “Not having functional visitors because of the pandemic” (8212). Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the function of the bath is an important component of cultural tourism, but that decision makers harm the structure by making functional changes. Furthermore, the results of both functional and economic evaluation criteria show that short-term visits had no significant economic impact due to the museum’s function prior to the pandemic. The sustainability of the building, which was restored and re-functioned with the pandemic, could not be maintained (

Table 5. Weaknesses.

	EVALUATION CRITERIA			Total Effect Value	Average Effect Value	Average Total Effect Value (%)
Weaknesses	Functional Return	W1	Having functional problems because of the spatial characteristics of the baths (monumental structures)	222	6727	7295
		W2	Threatening the original interior items with extinction due to the new function	266	8060
		W3	Not having enough products for the museum function	201	6.090
		W4	Failure of the function to work because the building was closed due to the pandemic	274	8303
	Subtotal			963
	Social Return	W5	Not being aware of the socioeconomic potential of the original function of the baths (monumental structures) by the decision makers	262	7939	7803
		W6	Running out of intangible cultural heritage production such as clogs, copper bowls, and loincloths specific to baths	253	7666
	Subtotal			515	1.000
	Economic Return	W7	Having short-term visits because of the museum function	244	7393	6836
		W8	Serving for one-time use because of the museum function	207	6272
		W9	Growing competition from nearby structures that have similar functions	211	6393
		W10	Insufficient sales of local products sold in the structure	204	6181
		W11	Not having functional visitors because of the pandemic	271	8212
	Subtotal			1128
	Grand TOTAL			2606	7179

).

The expert group identified the functional returns (7616) of the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath’s functional transformation for the Sille settlement as an opportunity.

However, when the factors are examined, “The closure of the building because of the pandemic and the importance of its original function on the agenda by the local government” (8151) stated that the pandemic is seen as a chance for the structure to return to its original function. Besides as an economic value (6454) “Controlling monumental structure use by local governments in the planning of tourism activities” was seen as an opportunity (8090). Another opportunity in terms of social value (6141) is “raising awareness of local resource use such as materials, builders, etc. with tourism” (

Table 6. Opportunities.

	EVALUATION CRITERIA			Total Effect Value	Average Effect Value	Average Total Effect Value (%)
OPPORTUNITIES	Functional Return	O1	Attracting the attention and contributing to touristic activities by the original function of the bath structure (monumental structures) for cultural tourism	233	7060	7616
		O2	Using the original function which serves as a source for cultural tourism	252	7636
		O3	The closure of the building because of the pandemic and the importance of its original function on the agenda by the local government	269	8151
	Subtotal			754
	Social Return	O4	Keeping immigration under control with the increase in employment with tourism	188	5696	6141
		O5	Re-evaluating the traditional structures with tourism	209	6333
		O6	Raising awareness of local resource use such as materials, builders, etc., with tourism	211	6393
	Subtotal			608
	Economic Return	O7	Contributing to the workforce in tourism	193	5848	6454
		O8	Controlling monumental structure use by local governments in the planning of tourism activities	267	8090
		O9	Increasing employment opportunities for locals with tourism	164	4969
		O10	Contributing to the promotion of Sille	223	7060
	Subtotal			852
	Grand TOTAL			1674		5072

).

Considering the socioeconomic sustainability created by the change in the bath structure for the Sille settlement by “changing more than one function of the bath structure (monumental structure) due to tourism (8121)”, the functional returns are seen as threats (8010). Furthermore, “losing its original architectural features by being re-functionalized with tourism” (7969) also supports the argument. Another threat in terms of social value (7939) is “decreasing bath culture (functional culture of monumental structure)” (7969). It is possible to discuss a tradition’s decreasing sustainability. Traditions such as bridal baths and soldier baths will gradually disappear as baths are transformed into other uses, and the production of intangible cultural heritage items such as clogs, copper bowls, and bath-specific loincloths may decrease or even vanish. Another threat in terms of economic return (7051) that supports the idea is “Decreasing tourism activities because of the pandemic” (8090) (

Table 7. Threats.

	EVALUATION CRITERIA			Total Effect Value	Average Effect Value	Average Total Effect Value (%)
THREATS	Functional Return	T1	Changing more than one function of the bath structure (monumental structure) due to tourism	268	8121	8010
		T2	Losing its original architectural features by being re-functionalized with tourism	263	7969
		T3	Obsolescence of the structures’ functions that have been re-functioned because of the pandemic	262	7939
	Subtotal			793
	Social Return	T4	Decreasing bath culture (functional culture of monumental structure) in Sille with tourism	262	7939	7939
	Subtotal			262
	Economic Return	T5	Rising prices of energy and local resources with the increase in re-functioning efforts	234	7090	7051
		T6	Having a low-quality tourism service in Sille	223	6757
		T7	Difficulties in accessing Sille	217	6575
		T8	Having a small number of foreign tourists visiting Sille	201	6090
		T9	Having insufficient or irregular strategic planning	257	7787
		T10	Prioritizing touristic profit purposes	230	6969
		T11	Decreasing tourism activities because of the pandemic	267	8090
	Subtotal			1629
	Grand TOTAL			2684		7393

).

The SWOT analysis of the Hac Ali Ağa Bath’s socioeconomic sustainability identified its weaknesses and strengths, and it also looked at the opportunities and threats it faces in terms of its functional, social, and economic values (

Table 8. Socioeconomic sustainability of the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath.

	Evaluation Criteria
	Functional Return	Social Return	Economic Return
Strengths	6859	7606	6570
Weaknesses	7295	7803	6836
Opportunities	7616	6454	6141
Threats	8010	7939	7051

).

As can be seen in Table 8, the bath structure’s social value has been identified as both an opportunity and a threat to socioeconomic sustainability, while its functional value has been identified as both a strength and a weakness. While re-functioning efforts are expected to create a strong direction in terms of economic return, it can be said that the bath structure does not receive enough economic return.

When the factors are examined, the original function’s significance in terms of social value is recognized as a strength, while its weakness is that the decision makers are unaware of the socioeconomic potential. On the other hand, it has been acknowledged that the returns of the settlement, local government, or environmental activities are prioritized when it comes to the functional returns that are presented as opportunities and threats, compared with the returns of the building’s functional transformation. The prevailing opinion is that sustainability is now threatened by the anticipated functional transformation. These aspects, which are based on the advantages and disadvantages in the context of new information about socioeconomic sustainability, also offer information about usage strategies for monumental structures that maintain their functional continuity.

5. Conclusions

Baths are cultural houses that support the human body and play a significant role in global architecture. Especially in terms of wet spaces, which have technical features such as heating and installation, bath structures demonstrate the continuity of technology in terms of construction and operation. It is very difficult to install new functions in a structure with such unique features without destroying its identity. Numerous issues may arise during the process of re-functioning, and because of the issues, poor decisions and structural damage are frequently made. Based on a similar assumption in the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath in Sille, which is discussed in this study, the changes caused by the re-functioning of a monumental structure with a function to serve cultural tourism were discussed. Opinions from the expert group were obtained for the structure, which has undergone more than one function change since 2010, and it was determined that the strengths were insufficient in terms of the expected socioeconomic returns. It has come to light that there is a weak correlation between functionalization and economic return. In addition to this, it has been stated that a more notable aspect of bathing culture, which can be seen as a distinct activity for cultural tourism, can be more impressive. However, the decline in Sille’s bath culture also becomes a significant threat because of the changing function. In addition, with the change in tourism activities that occurred with the pandemic as of 2020, it has been suggested that the best course of action might be to return monumental structures to their original uses rather than using them for commercial or visitor-oriented exhibitions. For all these reasons, accurate planning should be conducted for monumental structures such as baths that can contribute significantly to cultural tourism with their current function. The most important consideration is to protect the existing monumental structures in the best possible way, integrate them with technological advancements, and maintain them.

This research article presents the findings from the two-pronged approach. The first is an assessment of the bath’s structure by determining the functional changes that “Hacı Ali Ağa Hamam” underwent after 2006, beginning with a theoretical foundation and progressing to an observational–interpretive level to provide socioeconomic growth. Following that, 41 factors that show the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the structure that are expected to provide functional, social, and economic returns in the socioeconomic context were revealed, in accordance with the opinions of external experts who have been examining the change since 2013. As a result, this study serves as a framework for monumental structures whose functional continuity should be maintained. At a second level, the managers’ and policymakers’ decisions on the functional change of the building over the years were discussed by taking the opinion of an internal expert group of stakeholders in the region, who were not influences, and strong opportunities in the planning of the building’s use strategy and strong threats that would be created by similar functional changes were determined. As a result, the paper’s key contribution is to define the relationship between the adaptive reuse of historical structures and strategic planning tools (SWOT).

The stakeholder group, known as internal and external experts, were chosen in this definition. Conflicts of interest within the project network are frequently raised by stakeholders. According to Li et al.’s empirical results [104], the general population is most concerned with land use and environmental issues, while governments are primarily concerned with economic growth [105]. However, these do not always imply the ability to achieve goals. According to Bryde and Robinson [106], there are some inequalities between stakeholder interests and actual actions. The reason for this is that locals are more easily misled by administrators. Vulnerable stakeholders may have a valid claim and gain the greatest benefit, but they lack the ability to influence decision-making processes and other stakeholders [37]. In this context, the expert group’s stakeholder value was stressed, but the impact value of vulnerable and easily influenced stakeholders was ignored; opinions were sought from both external and internal experts with significant ties to the settlement.

In this respect, the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath’s strengths in terms of socioeconomic sustainability are the original function, which is a bath function due to its cultural features; its weaknesses are demonstrated by ongoing functional alteration after restoration. The pandemic has worsened these losses, and the fact that the recently renovated structure has been idle has been cited as the cause.

The most important prospects for Hac Ali Ağa Hamam’s socioeconomic sustainability are that the importance of its original role is being prioritized by the local administration, as the transition experienced prior to the pandemic damaged the building. As a result, it might be viewed as a chance for local governments to gain control over the usage of monumental structures in tourism development. The fact that the recently renovated structure is still dysfunctional and that all the new operations have nothing to do with tourism has been identified as a major concern. If the process continues in this manner, the sociocultural aspects that tourists regard as authentic may bring economic benefits, while the most qualified bath structure in the settlement risks losing these characteristics.

Considering the information obtained about the Hacı Ali Ağa Bath regarding strengths and weaknesses and opportunities and threats for monumental structures with functional continuity, usage strategies are recommended in

Table 9. Usage strategies for cultural tourism of monumental structures which continue to function.

	Internal Factor	STRENGTHS	WEAKNESSES
External Factor		S1. S2. S3. S4. S5. S6. S7. S8. S9.	W1. W2. W3. W.4. W5. W6. W7. W8. W9. W10. W11.
OPPORTUNITIES		SO Strategies	WO Strategies
O1. O2. O3. O4. O5. O6. O7. O8. O9. O10		SO1. Prioritizing the use of the original function that can serve as a source of cultural tourism SO2. Implementing and keeping track of interventions in accordance with protection principles SO3. Inclusion, supervision, and tracking using the status of monumental structures by local governments in the creation of tourism programs	WO1. Enabling the use of local resources and the production of intangible cultural heritage WO2. Bringing the importance of the original function of the monumental buildings, whose function has been changed due to the pandemic by the local government, to the agenda WO3. Increasing employment opportunities with tourism and keeping immigration under control
THREATS		ST Strategies	WT Strategies
T1. T2. T3. T4. T5. T6. T7. T8. T9. T.10 T.11		ST1. Not having a sufficient regularity of strategic planning ST2. Experiencing functional obsolescence with tourism decline caused by the pandemic ST3. Losing the sociocultural characteristics ST4. Changing multiple functions and deteriorating the original architectural identity of a monumental structure because of tourism	WT1. Not having a sufficient strategic planning WT2. Not having sufficient foreign visitors WT3. Not having sufficient sales of local products WT4. Increasing competition with nearby structures that have similar functions

.

In this study, the most important strategy to be applied for the protection and socioeconomic sustainable development of monumental structures that continue their functional continuity is “SO1. Prioritizing the use of the original function that can serve as a source of cultural tourism; SO2. Implementing and keeping track of interventions in accordance with protection principles; and SO3. Inclusion, supervision, and tracking using the status of monumental structures by local governments in the creation of tourism programs”.

The most important threats to be aware of are “ST1. Not having sufficient regularity of strategic planning; ST2. Experiencing functional obsolescence with tourism decline caused by the pandemic; ST3. Losing the sociocultural characteristics; and ST4. Changing multiple functions and deteriorating the original architectural identity of a monumental structure because of tourism”.

These aspects demonstrate that, while monumental structures are being integrated into modern life, their original function is also seen as an attraction for certain tourist destinations, which is an important social driving force; therefore, not only can promoting the qualities of monumental structures provide a source of added value to the local economy, but also sociocultural characteristics can be preserved. Therefore, the best course of action for public institutions and local government to take is to make sure that monumental structures, whose current functions are still in place, can always fulfill their original purposes. It should be ensured that distinctive historical and cultural values can maintain their validity even in extraordinary circumstances, such as a pandemic, by avoiding poor functional decisions regarding the protection of structures. The necessity of being ready for all types of functional, social, and economic threats was stated among the Usage Strategies for Monumental Structures, and the significance of being aware of all aspects of this issue was emphasized.