Unveiling forms of participation in the governance of UNESCO world heritage sites (original) (raw)
Related papers
ParticiPat: Exploring the Impact of Participatory Governance in the Heritage Field
PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 2018
This Directions piece presents the project ParticiPat: Patrimonio y participación social: propuesta metodológica y revisión crítica (ParticiPat: Heritage and Social Participation: Methodological Proposal and Critical Review). ParticiPat is a multidisciplinary and mul-tisituated research project involving fourteen researchers from different disciplines and institutions that aims to analyze critically the ubiquitous buzzwords and practices of participation—as well as its key institutions and actors—affecting heritage management in Spain, Portugal, or Mexico. This article advances preliminary results derived from the authors' case study of a natural park and biosphere reserve in Spain. In doing so, it contributes to the anthropological examination of what has recently been described by different authors as the emergence of a new form of governance based on discourses and practices of participation. [ethnography, anthropology of policy, natural and cultural heritage, participation] This Directions piece presents the project ParticiPat: Patrimonio y participación social: propuesta metodológica y revisión crítica (ParticiPat: Heritage and Social Participation: Methodological Proposal and Critical Review), 1 and advances preliminary results derived from our particular case study of a natural park and its biosphere reserve in Spain. ParticiPat is a multidisciplinary and multisituated research project involving fourteen researchers from different disciplines and institutions studying heritage management in Spain, Portugal, or Mexico. The project aims to analyze critically how ubiquitous buzzwords and practices of participation, as well as its key institutions and actors, affect heritage management. In doing so, it contributes to the anthropological examination of what Kelty (2017) has recently described as the " grammar of participation " that results in creating " too much democracy in all the wrong places " while constantly shifting " from a language of normative enthusiasm to one of critiques of co-optation and bureaucratization " (S77). Official discourses usually portray participation as a number of sociopolitical practices that allow citizens to influence, monitor, or engage in decision making on public affairs (Parés 2009). If understood as a cultural form, however, participation can also be seen as a state attempt to engender legal regulation, normalize citizenship, and diffuse power and governance throughout extended networks (Shore and Wright 1997). We aim to explore how this emerging governmentality technique affects the field of heritage and how, in turn, this shift reorganizes the bureaucratic and political spectrum as a whole. Following critical heritage scholarship, we understand heritage as a machine or regime of domination intrinsically linked to capitalist and state efforts to control the past and create prospects
Governance of cultural heritage: towards participatory approaches
European Journal of Cultural Management and Policy
This article analyzes participatory governance in relation to heritage. Based on previous studies on the implementation of participation and theoretical discussions considering the participatory governance of cultural heritage, we found four types of cultural heritage governance, with differing weights with regard to public authorities, civil society, markets, and citizens. Governmental, corporatist, service-led, and co-creative cultural heritage governance types were identified, which reflect the shifts in participatory approaches to governance from state-centered activities to the proliferation of civil society, and from professionally dominated to more citizen-based activities. According to our analysis, culture and heritage can be conceptualized as instruments for the transformation of attributes and competencies, and they work as mediums to cultivate recognition between institutions and citizens. This includes not only seeking consensus in decision making but also respecting th...
P o s t - C l a s s i c a l A r c h a e o l o g i e s, 9: 66-77, 2019
This paper stems from a pro-active and pragmatic research perspective, based on experiences in cultural heritage management within the Spanish World Heritage context. It argues the idea of participatory experiences as a way to improve the management of historical urban landscapes or archaeological sites. Firstly, the terminological confusion of the experts needs to be considered. Secondly, participative processes are often confused with diffusion or education. Thirdly, the discourses and the proposals made by the inhabitants are sometimes directed by experts – consciously or unconsciously – and consequently, they do not show the ordinary perception and necessities of the communities. A self-critical position and a good methodology, will allow us to obtain satisfactory results if we really want to introduce changes on a social basis in the discourse/treatment of cultural heritage. Keywords: social perception, mapping stakeholders, community involvement, World Heritage, Spain
Bagh-e Nazar Journal, 2022
Problem statement: The complex and valuable structures of World Heritage Cities, as historical profiles and identities of societies, have emerged and developed throughout history and have been inherited from one generation to another. Due to the physical, social, and cultural significance of these cities, numerous researchers have tried to apply novel approaches to conserving and managing them. Also, over the years, many international institutions have been trying to present guidelines following modern management methods focusing on the active role of local communities. However, considering its specific physical, social, and cultural structure, each of these cities requires a tailored operational management structure, and applying a one-size-fits-all management approach in all societies is not feasible. Research objective: This article mainly aims to examine the efficacy of the international charters’ guidelines in enhancing community participation in the conservation and management of World Heritage Cities and presenting a flexible applied framework for effectively implementing such an approach in these cities. Research method: While applying a content analysis method to rank the guidelines of the international charters that include an approach to increasing community participation in the management of World Heritage Cities, this article examines the process of conservation and management in eight cities. Then, by comparing the findings, it discusses the efficacy of these guidelines in increasing community participation. Conclusion: The results show that the active role of local communities in the conservation and management process of World Heritage Cities is essential. Its implementation requires conformity to the guidelines presented by international organizations in the field of managing historical cities. In implementing this process, the recommendations of the charters must be localized to the structural features of any given context to achieve the highest possible efficacy of the community participation approach.
Frontiers in Sustainable Cities
The topic of participatory governance of cultural heritage (hereinafter PGCH) is increasingly at the core of the debate on the policy approach to cultural heritage in Europe. This paper aims at offering an innovative approach to this topic by bringing a multi-actor, commons-based governance model, whereby it is often stated that PGCH may well be implemented by entrusting local communities with the restoration and valorization of cultural heritage. We argue that this model is best realized through a public-private-community partnership (PPCP) employing a diversity of legal tools. The article sketches out the legal background underpinning PGCH, provides an overview of its conceptualization in the academic debate and looks at the main policy initiatives adopted at the European and Italian domestic level. The article goes on focusing on commons-oriented case-studies of PGCH, adopting a qualitative methodology: the experimental process of the Co-Roma social partnership (Rome); the Faro H...
Makuvaza S. (eds) Aspects of Management Planning for Cultural World Heritage Sites. Springer, Cham, 2017
The term integrated conservation first entered the lexicon of the cultural heritage community in the 1975 European Charter of the Architectural Heritage (Council of Europe 1975) recognising that the future of that component of our heritage depends on the weight attached to it within the framework of urban and regional planning. Since then, formal recognition within the heritage community has expanded to include intangible cultural heritage and diversity of cultural expressions, the agendas of sustainability, sustainable development and climate change have re-framed the overarching context, and the role of today’s communities as both custodians and beneficiaries of the broad spectrum of cultural and natural heritage has assumed a central position in the heritage discourse alongside management, a term with diverse interpretations in practice. Expanding on the tripartite encapsulation of sustainable development in the Brundtland Report (Brundtland Commission 1987), the 2010 Toledo Declaration on Urban Development defined the multiple dimensions of sustainability as “economic, social, environmental, cultural and governance” (European Union 2010) “Good governance,” it reads, “based on the principles of openness, participation, accountability, effectiveness, coherence and subsidiarity is required in order to assure the successful implementation of public policies, a more efficient and effective allocation of public resources and to increase citizen’s direct participation, involvement, engagement and empowerment.” This concluding chapter seeks to extract key findings on multilevel governance as the key to sound management and to reframe the role of management plans in so doing.
Exploring participatory heritage governance after the EU Faro Convention
Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 2021
This paper aims to analyse the key Faro notions of “heritage community” and “democratic participation” as defined in the Faro Convention, and how they challenge core notions of authority and expertise in the discipline and professional practice of cultural heritage. Design/methodology/approach This paper examines notions of “heritage community” and “democratic participation” as they are framed in the Faro Convention, and it briefly introduces two cases (Finland and Marseille) to explore their application. It then focusses on the implications of these two notions for heritage administration (expertise) in terms of citizen agency, co-creation of knowledge and forms of decision-making processes. Findings The Faro Convention favours an innovative approach to social, politic and economic problems using cultural heritage. To accomplish this, it empowers citizens as actors in developing heritage-based approaches. This model transforms heritage into a means for achieving socioeconomic goals and attributes to the public the ability to undertake heritage initiatives, leaving the administration and expert bodies as mediators in this process. To bring about this shift, Faro institutes the notion of “heritage communities” and fosters participative governance. However, how heritage communities practise participation may follow different paths and result in different experiences due to local and national political circumstances. Originality/value The Faro Convention opens up a window by framing cultural heritage within the realm of social and democratic instrumentality, above and beyond the heritage per se. But it also poses some questions regarding the rationale of heritage management (authority in governability), at least as understood traditionally under official heritage management discourses.
Living (World) Heritage Cities. Opportunities, challenges, and future perspectives of people-centered approaches in dynamic historic urban landscapes, 2022
The participation of multiple stakeholders, communities, groups, and individuals in heritage processes is considered an important component of good heritage governance, which presents diverse challenges and opportunities. Much research has explored the communities, researchers, and practitioners' perceptions of these challenges and opportunities, offering insights into current practices. However, little research has investigated governmental actors' perceptions, mainly focusing on specific cases, without comparing their perspectives across regions. To address this gap, during the 2017 OWHC XIV World Congress, a Mayors' workshop was organized to unveil the perceptions that WH cities' representatives have of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) of participatory heritage practices in their World Heritage cities. Results revealed strong interconnections among the different SWOT elements, as well as commonalities and differences among cities worldwide. Participation itself emerged as the most mentioned element across the SWOT, highlighting the strong influence that the factors affecting it have over the positive or negative outcomes of participatory heritage practices.
LSE Dissertation, 2020
This dissertation investigates how urban heritage can be conceived in a more “democratic” way. It does so by framing current heritage management systems within their socio-political context. It draws on Critical Heritage Theory to look at how urban heritage is designated and managed, and questioning who benefits from it in the historic city of San Cristóbal de La Laguna, a UNESCO World Heritage Site in the Canary Islands, Spain. Building on the local “culture” of citizen participation, and existing formal and informal collaboration mechanisms, the dissertation proposes a strategy to strengthen urban heritage management through partnerships between public and civil society actors. By becoming relevant stakeholders in decisionmaking, civil society organisations can ensure urban heritage´s contribution to society as a public good.