Heritage protection for the 21st century (original) (raw)
Related papers
Equality in heritage protection: an impossible goal?
Journal of Early Career Research in Humanities and Social Sciences (JECRHSS), 2019
In this article, the concept of 'equality' is used to critique the current system of heritage protection in England. It is argued that the current canon of 'nationally significant' heritage is not representative of the English population, but only of an elite section, which excludes and marginalises others. The current legal criteria for heritage selection are identified as a source of this exclusivity, as they prioritise an expert-led and restrictive definition of heritage. A more balanced system to permit communities to identify the heritage which is of value to them and contribute to decision-making regarding its future is suggested.
A new vision for local heritage protection
The legal protection of ‘heritage assets’ in England began with the Scheduling of Ancient Monuments in 1882; and developed to include the listing of buildings of historical or architectural interest as part of comprehensive planning following the second World War. These nationally-focused designation systems have always been based on the premise that the assets included in their lists must be protected so that they can be left, as a legacy, for those who come after us. This legacy of what should be protected, however, is borne out of the essentialist ideas of early conservators such as William Morris and John Ruskin. It is, therefore, a legacy of traditional, mid-18th century values, with a focus on heritage assets which communities do not necessarily feel connected to, or even class as their heritage. For many communities, it is more often the mundane and everyday heritage of their local streetscapes that they value, and which they wish their children to inherit. This a heritage which, due to the legacy of those who developed our protection polices over 100 years ago, is not recognised as ‘special’ enough for national designation systems to protect. Can the 2010 Coalition government’s vision of a Big Society, however, with its focus on localism and community decision-making, inspire us to discover new ways to protect what matters to us? This paper will explore these ideas using research and case studies from England, but hopes inspire those from across Europe to think differently about local heritage protection.
'The Values of Heritage A New Paradigm for the 21st Century', 2017 05 (pp. 99-105)
The traditional 20th century approach to architectural heritage focused on attributed cultural values. In the Postwar era, these were predicated on the hypothesis that only selected, designated examples of our built heritage would survive the drive to adapt and modernise our homes, towns and cities. This assumption conflicts with today’s agendas of sustainable development and climate change, which embrace wider societal, cultural and environmental issues and recognise additional, complementary values: including community, resource, and usefulness. Awareness raising is a critical challenge for the preservation and maintenance of Postwar to Postmodern built cultural heritage in the 21st century. This paper explores the importance of promoting a holistic understanding of the concept of heritage, the range of values which support the protection and conservation of our 20th century built heritage over and above a narrow focus on often non-consensual cultural ones, and the role of this heritage as a driver for sustainable urban development in the 21st century.
On Not Safeguarding the Cultural Heritage
Recent World Bank policy calls culture an 'underdeveloped resource' in many countries, specifying that it 'gives value' to a region's economy, whether through attracting attention to an urban centre or encouraging investment in a heritage hub. 2 Northern Irish culture has been instrumentalised in just this way. It is recruited to do work for a range of communityrelations projects, from multicultural initiatives to schemes encouraging civic participation, while also being asked to foster economic growth and promote urban improvement. According to the World Bank these two aspects of a culture's expediency are intimately related. Improved civic relations are encouraged by, and productive of, multinational capital flows. Northern Ireland fits its model. Its culture is being charged with managing social relationships in a way akin to what George Yú dice argues is unfolding within underdeveloped non-European locales, where governments invest in the notion that 'culture produces the patterns of trust, cooperation, and social interaction that result in a more vigorous economy, more democratic and effective government, and fewer social problems'. As the capitalisation of culture within post-industrial economies is one frame for emerging forms of creativity, Northern Irish writers make an ideal subject for understanding how state and corporate investment in culture's expediency intersects with the selfconsciousness of those working under the aegis of one particular regional brand. Awareness of the status and value of the heritage product is influencing the content of art in the region, and Glenn Patterson's 1995 novel Black Night at Big Thunder Mountain is exemplary in addressing this issue, as it stages and interprets the work involved in making a troubled heritage operative and profitable. In this essay I argue that the novel conflates theme parks as places devoted to entertainment and heritage sites and practices that are ostensibly concerned with commemorating, safeguarding, and transmitting history, in order to distinguish these from some more legitimate record of a given culture's traumatic past. I also map this distinction onto the relationship between the work of the artist and that of the heritage practitioner or 'content creator', imagining what special purchase literature might have in relation to an industry charged with memorialising a dissonant past.
The Dark Side of Cultural Heritage Protection
Journal of Private and Commercial Law
ABSTRACTThis article introduces the concept of the dark side of cultural heritage protection. The existence of strict legal protection with burdensome sanctions is expected to provide a sense of security for a country to protect its cultural heritage from threats from other countries or communities. However, it is an unavoidable fact that the efforts of a country that wants to protect its culture lead to conflict and the threat of war between countries. This article shows how many and most of the excessive efforts of an organization to protect cultural heritage from the dangers of war and conflict contribute and have the potential to make cultural heritage vulnerable or even lead to its destruction. The more we talk about cultural heritage and the values it contains and the importance of protecting it, the more attractive it becomes for some groups, organizations, and even countries to target it because it has extraordinary cultural values. For some, efforts to protect and save cult...
50 Years World Heritage Convention: Shared Responsibility – Conflict & Reconciliation, 2022
The Introduction to the book "50 Years World Heritage Convention: Shared Responsibility-Conflict & Reconciliation" sets the stage by presenting the key message, background and content of the book. The identity-building function of heritage and its sustainable protection assume a central role. Accordingly, the chapter provides an overview of policy tools and academic debates engaging with this matter, while emphasizing the critical issues undertaken with the volume at hand. These are to reflect on whether the goals and content of the World Heritage Convention have been implemented accordingly; on the conflicts that have been affecting it over time and the need for sustainable strategies; and on perspectives for the future. This chapter further emphasises the requirements for diversity, arising from the World Heritage Convention and the variety of heritage properties, and it is reflected in the thematic, geographic and disciplinary diversity of the contributions