Proposals for a Practical System of Significance Evaluation in Archaeological Heritage Management

Unification of Archaeological Sites in Greece: A Design Approach Based on Public Participation and Sustainability Criteria

“…According to them, the main reason why they did not visit the sites was lack of time, followed by lack of interest; the fact that visiting the monuments required hard walking was an additional deterrent (see Appendix C). These findings indicate that 1) the residents' perception of landscapes might be assessed on the grounds of "aesthetic" value which relates to their visibility and distinctive presence in the town's fabric and in the living memories the monuments represent rather than to knowledge of local history and biodiversity (Deeben, Groenewoudt, Hallewas, & Willems, 1999;Loures, Vargues, & Horta, 2008); 2) the need for the town's landscapes to attract the residents' interest without competing with any other social interests. Tourist activity, apart from its contribution to local economy, could raise awareness of cultural and natural heritage among local community (Carbone, Oosterbeek, & Costa, 2012); 3) the importance of designing a mea-ningful space where stories could be heard (Mehta, 2014;Sandercock, 2003).…”

Archive value: measuring the palaeo-information content of peatlands in a conservation and compensation perspective

“…Future studies should address this unequal appreciation of archive attributes, its backgrounds, and its consequences for the overall archive value. An alternative way for aggregation would be the step-by-step evaluation (decision tree), as suggested by Deeben (1999).…”

“…depth, substrate types, and age, cf. Deeben (1999)), but would introduce extra subjectivity in the analysis.…”

“…Ratcliffe (1977) provided general criteria for assessing nature conservation value, including 'diversity', 'naturalness', 'rarity', 'typicalness' and 'recorded history'. For archaeological sites, Deeben (1999) suggested among others the criteria 'degree of disturbance', 'rarity' and 'representativity ' Lantzsch (2005) used the criteria 'rarity', 'naturalness', 'age', 'type and specificity' and 'scientific documentation' to arrive at a tripartition (not valuable, valuable, very valuable) in assessing the archive value of soils. Although some of these criteria may serve well for that purpose, a specific evaluation of peatland archives has not been done yet.…”

Conflict Resolution in the Management of In-Situ Museums

“…The main focus has been placed on the value-led approach to heritage management (see section 1.3) which emphasises the importance of assessing the divergent values that different parties attach to heritage sites (Aplin 2002;Avrami et al 2000;Darvill 1995;Deeben et al 1999;De la Torre 2002;Demas 2002;Hall and McArthur 1996;Klamer and Zuidhof 1999;Mason and Avrami 2002;National Trust 2002;Pearson and Sullivan 1995;Skeates 2000;Tunbridge and Ashworth 1996). Despite the existing theoretical discourse on the dissonant nature of heritage and the necessity to manage conflicting values and recognise different power relationships there is a gap in existing literature regarding the development of management techniques and tools that are required for the effective management of conflicts that occur in the heritage sector.…”