Genealogy of the Concept of Heritage in the European Commission’s Policy Discourse

Abstract

Th is article investigates the genealogy of the concept of heritage in the European Commission’s (EC) policy discourse from 1973 to 2016. Based on conceptual analysis of 2,412 documents gathered from the EUR-Lex database, the uses of the concept in the EC’s policy discourse were categorized into seven thematic areas: nature, environment, and biodiversity; human habitats; economy and employment; agricultural products and foodstuffs; promotion of societal development and stability; audiovisuality and digitalization; and European identity and integration. In the EC’s discourse, heritage develops in the context of intertwined phases of EU integration and cultural Europeanization. The study indicates how the EC governs heritage mostly through implicit cultural policies included in diverse policy sectors other than culture.

‘Being’, ‘Becoming’ and ‘Challenging’ European: Subject Positions in the European Heritage Label

“…'Being', 'becoming' and 'challenging' European 'Being' European During the EU accession process, 'being' European was used to show the communist past as a rupture in the candidate countries' centuries-long continuity of 'belonging to Europe'. 'Being' strengthened the idea of a common European heritage and the CEE countries as part of it (Lähdesmäki et al 2019). Substantially, 'being' European was formed by combining supposed static 'European' characteristics, such as a common history and culture.…”

“…Since the 1970s, the policy documents of the EU and its precursor organisations have discussed heritage in detail, and it has become highly topical in recent decades. The quantity of EU documents that mention and/or elaborate on 'heritage' has increased in particular since the 1990s (Lähdesmäki et al 2019) when the EU sought to construct and use a supposed European heritage to form common identity narratives. The most recent example of this is the European Heritage Label (EHL), a flagship heritage action of the European Commission (EC).…”

Politics of Mobility and Stability in Authorizing European Heritage: Estonia’s Great Guild Hall

“…Apart from explicitly/concretely emphasized representations of mobility and stability, both also appear implicitly/abstractly in the exhibitions (cf. Palonen 2014; see also Lähdesmäki et al 2019). Since the explicit and implicit layers are intertwined, I make no further distinction between them in the analysis.…”

“…References to a common past were used by both the EU and the candidate countries to legitimize EU membership as simultaneously a suitable scenario for the future and a "return to Europe" (Feldman 2001, 9) to which the countries had supposedly truly belonged to since at least the Middle Ages (see also Kaasik-Krogerus 2016). While this politics aimed to paint the Communist past as a rupture in a centuries-long continuity of belonging to Europe, it also strengthened the idea of a common European heritage and of CEE countries as part of that (see also Lähdesmäki et al 2019). Since the assumption of such a centuries-long continuity that is embedded in European identity narratives is often legitimized with reference to a shared Christian background, on a European scale the argument strengthens the importance of Christian religions as a key part of this common heritage.…”

Challenges for Creating Visibility of European Cultural Heritage

“…The concept of heritage has also been central to the EU cultural and integration policies since the late 1970s (see Lähdesmäki, Kaasik-Krogerus & Mäkinen, 2019;Peckham 2003). One of the central concerns of the EU politics is to influence positively the public perception of the EU and to add value to belonging to Europe by communicating a sense of a 'shared community of values' that may strengthen cultural identity and a sense of belonging to Europe among European citizens (Lähdesmäki 2014, 409).…”