Participation in decision making regarding the conservation of heritage resources and conservation attitudes in Kilwa Kisiwani, Tanzania

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of local residents’ participation in decision making regarding the conservation of the built heritage on conservation attitudes. Design/methodology/approach This study borrows ideas from Arnstein’s Model of Citizen Participation and from past research to develop a model, and then testing it using a questionnaire survey with a sample of 209 local residents in Kilwa Kisiwani World Heritage Site in Tanzania. Findings The mean statistics showed that participation in decision making in Kilwa Kisiwani is relatively limited to the level of tokenism. Nevertheless, on the side of attitudes, the study indicates residents’ tendency to favour conservation. Regression results indicate that there is a significantly positive relationship between participation in decision making and attitude towards conservation. Research limitations/implications Although the study did not cover the dynamics inherent in each bloc of resident community that may act as roadblocks in the participation process, it regards “participation in decision making” as a useful tool for heritage managers and conservation authorities for promoting local support for the conservation of heritage resources. Theoretically, the study implies that Arnstein’s Model can be a useful framework for ascertaining residents’ participation in the heritage management context, and for explaining its effect on conservation attitudes. Originality/value This study is the first rigorous confirmation of the relationship between participation in decision making and individual’s attitude towards conservation. The study provides a useful conceptual tool for heritage managers in promoting local support for conservation.

Community participation in cultural heritage management: A systematic literature review comparing Chinese and international practices

“…Meetings are a platform on which communities can express their aspirations and preferences during discussions with different prioritised social sectors (MacRae, 2017;Stenseke, 2009). To share more responsibilities with local communities, committees formed by residents to assume the role of approving management strategies and plans in public meetings are considered important (Bruku, 2015;Chinyele & Lwoga, 2018;Dormaels, 2016;Stenseke, 2009). It is a negotiation process whereby the community aims to protect their rights and benefits while raising awareness and positive attitudes towards local heritage (Mackay & Johnston, 2010;Ntui & Rampedi, 2015).…”

“…In addition, these strategies and plans need to be approved by residents, ensuring their concerns and interests are well considered (Chipangura et al, 2017). In the execution phase, partnerships are generated so that residents can be trained with skills of both heritage conservation and utilisation as local professionals (Chinyele & Lwoga, 2018;Ferreira, 2018). They undertake daily maintenance of heritage structures as well as collaborating with experts to implement management plans (Ferreira, 2018;Poulios, 2014).…”

“…High community participation contributes to a wider mobilisation of residents, thereby favouring local heritage along with positive grassroots initiatives in both decision-making and benefit-sharing (Chinyele & Lwoga, 2018;Lewis, 2015). MacRae (2017) argues that the core of decision-making should be in the hands of local residents.…”

Connecting heritage, vulnerabilities and capacities through a participatory game

“…Recognising this disparity, a growing body of literature points out to the need to engage local and in particular, marginalised, populations in defining meanings as well as possible uses of heritage (Chinyele and Lwoga, 2019). Influenced by the discourse around sustainability, there is also a growing recognition within the heritage conservation policies, to go beyond the nature-culture divides and develop holistic perspectives that seek to achieve balance between development and conservation (Winter and Daly, 2012).…”

Analysing the Contributions and Longevity of Community Archaeology in the Context of Maritime Cultural Heritage Projects

“…Some of these benefits include enhancing community pride, identity, and unity in their heritage and each other (Wright and Kod 2011 : 115; Roberts 2016 : 228). Community archaeology also helps build cultural stewards, nurture public support for heritage, and ensure the longevity of archaeology as a whole (Belford 2014 : 40; Fletcher 2014 : 5; Chinyele and Lwoga 2019 : 184). Despite the benefits attributed to this method, few archaeologists have evaluated the effects and sustainability of their work, determined whether the project is successful for all stakeholders, and established if anyone has been negatively affected.…”