Revolutionary heritage tourism resources possess distinctive historical and geographical characteristics, and their spatial distribution is often highly dispersed. Against the background of promoting the sustainable utilization of cultural heritage resources and coordinated regional development, how to integrate fragmented resources and achieve spatial coordination through transport corridors remains insufficiently explored. Taking the G577 Jinghe–Zhaosu highway corridor in Xinjiang, China, as a case study, this research develops a spatial analysis framework for revolutionary heritage tourism resources from a transport corridor perspective. It investigates how transport infrastructure facilitates cultural heritage resource integration, regional functional coordination, and sustainable tourism development in border regions. By integrating multi-source datasets, including revolutionary heritage tourism resources, road networks, tourism resources, and socioeconomic data, this study analyzes the spatial associations between resource nodes and transport corridors, functional differentiation among corridor regions, and disparities in regional development foundations. The results indicate that: (1) revolutionary heritage tourism resources along the G577 corridor exhibit a spatial structure characterized by “limited core integration and extensive peripheral association”; among the seven representative resources identified, only two are located within the 10 km core corridor zone; (2) administrative units along the corridor can be classified into four functional types: revolutionary heritage tourism resource integration zones, tourism service support zones, cultural and frontier linkage zones, and corridor transition zones; and (3) spatial mismatches exist between revolutionary heritage tourism resource advantages and regional development support capacity, highlighting the need to strengthen coordination among resource nodes, service nodes, and regional centers through transport corridors. This study reveals the spatial relationships among cultural heritage resources, transportation networks, and regional functions from a transport corridor perspective, providing insights for sustainable cultural heritage utilization, transport–tourism integration, and coordinated regional planning in border regions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: