Democratising world heritage: The policies and practices of community involvement in Turkey

Abstract

This article analyses Turkey’s efforts to institutionalise community involvement in the management of sites on the World Heritage List of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). Drawing upon Sally Merry’s idea of ‘vernacularization’, it traces the strategic and contentious process by which Turkish politicians and bureaucrats interpret and implement UNESCO's best practice standard of community involvement in the management of heritage sites. It examines how global notions of cultural heritage preservation become entangled with local politics, resulting in competing claims about ethical norms and governance. Through an in-depth ethnographic exploration, the article looks at the effects of the resulting policies and social practices at the Neolithic Site of Çatalhöyük, inscribed on the World Heritage List in 2012. The transnational World Heritage arena challenges state and public awareness; but it also has the unintended consequence of corroborating the existing hierarchies upon which governmental authority rests.

Subjective Well-Being in World Heritage Sites: Localization and Thematic Integration of the Happiness Index for Turkey

“…As of the end of 2018, there are 18 WHSs and 77 areas in the tentative list (UNESCO 2018a, b). Despite the profound engagement of the national government to introducing the cultural heritage in Turkey to an international audience, heritage designation and management in Turkey is more connected to politics than to the communities inhabiting them (Human 2015). Being a WHS does not necessarily inflict an increase in tourism (Poria et al 2013;Jimura 2011).…”

“…In Turkey's centralized governance structure, the strategic planning and its implementation follow a hierarchical trajectoryfrom the national government to its local representatives. However, residents are commonly excluded in the heritage governance in Turkey (Human 2015), although they are most affected by the outcome of strategic initiatives. In this regard, the WHS of Cappadocia and the context of Turkey represent a relevant setting to develop and demonstrate a methodological approach for local adaptation and thematic integration of the HI.…”

Reflecting on evaluation in public archaeology

“…Although there are only a handful of publications that specifically address approaches and methods for evaluating public archaeology projects (for example Apaydin 2016 ;Human 2015;King 2016;Nevell 2015), archaeologists have been undertaking this work in order to improve their ongoing outreach activities for many years, but these are much less frequently published as formal case studies in scholarly journals. Several dissertations (McDavid 2002;Morgan 2012;Richardson 2014;Stottman 2016) and conference presentations (Gibb and McDavid 2008;Gidusko 2017;Jeppson 2003Jeppson , 2004Jeppson , 2011Jeppson , 2012Jeppson and Brauer 2008;Malloy et al 2009;McDavid 2011) have explored evaluation in more depth, although these have not yet been the focus of subsequent journal articles and these may not be universally available in the public realm.…”

Attitudes toward Environmental Democracy among Urban Communities

“…The rights of citizens and other members of civil society in relation to environmental matters to information, public participation, and access to justice are indispensable if any nation is to foster sustainable development (Damon & Sterner, 2012;den Uyl & Driessen, 2015;Human, 2015). The goal of promotion of sustainable development is one that calls for co-operation of the government, private individuals, non-governmental organizations, businesses and others sectors of the society (Mukherjee & Chakraborty, 2013).…”