Western hegemony in archaeological heritage management

Byrne, Denis

doi:10.1080/02757206.1991.9960815

Cited by 176 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Scholars argue that this authorised heritage discourse (AHD) privileges the grand, material aspects of heritage value, whilst simultaneously excluding all conflicted or non-core accounts of heritage (Smith, 2006;Waterton, 2010). Indeed, there have been mounting criticisms that Western heritage is imagined as being inherently locked within the physical fabric of built forms (Byrne, 1991;Graham, 2002) and that instead, heritage should be understood 'within the discourses we construct about itʼ (Smith, 2006, p. 11). Smith goes on to state that there is, 'no such thing as heritageʼ, arguing that the subject of our heritage 'gaze' (Urry, 1990), is, 'not so much a "thing" as a set of values and meaningsʼ (Smith, 2006, p. 11).…”

Section: Mounting Criticisms Of English 'Heritage'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining and Managing the Historic Urban Landscape: Reflections on the English Experience and Some Stories from Liverpool

Sykes

Ludwig

2015

ESR&P

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The period since the 1960s has been characterised by growing societal concern with urban heritage protection and the development of legislative, fiscal and urban planning instruments that seek to ensure the protection and enhancement of historic buildings and environments. International organisations such as UNESCO and European level documents such as the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) have stressed the cultural and economic value of the ‘wise management of natural and cultural heritage’. Since the 1970s many cities have sought to redefine and regenerate themselves through a revalorisation of their past and the protection and enhancement of their historic urban landscapes. Urban heritage has thus often come to be seen as a component of the territorial capital of places, and often had a symbiotic relationship with the objective of urban regeneration. However, urban heritage is not a static concept and ideas about what constitutes heritage, the value of different historic urban environments, and the contribution they can make to city development and regeneration continue to evolve. This paper reflects on this evolution in the context of the English planning system and illustrates some key trends and issues surrounding urban heritage through a consideration of recent and ongoing heritage related planning episodes in the northern English city of Liverpool.

show abstract

Section: Mounting Criticisms Of English 'Heritage'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining and Managing the Historic Urban Landscape: Reflections on the English Experience and Some Stories from Liverpool

Sykes

Ludwig

2015

ESR&P

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It evolved first as a Christian rendering of the imperial Roman law through the Middle Ages and later as a secularized concept that is common and universal to all humans in the age of Enlightenment. Contemporary concern for global ideals, as in the case of World Heritage, is based upon this Western universalism, propagated through projects of global domination, including colonialism, neocolonialism, and achievements in science and technology (Byrne, 1991;Pohl 2003;Headley, 2007).…”

Section: The Universality Of Heritagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Neither assumption is necessarily proven, however (Byrne, 1991). The universal ethos of heritage might also be based on the premise that there are no alternative ways of understanding what constitutes cultural heritage (as well as of protecting it), other than one ideal model that transcends the plurality of cultural heritage and of approaches to its protection worldwide.…”

Section: The Universality Of Heritagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such an argument could be misleading. Nations with immense global power impose their own kinds of knowledge over countries under their cultural spheres of influence (Trigger, 1984;Byrne, 1991). Therefore, approaches to cultural heritage protection cannot be free of imperial connotations unless the local heritage practitioners consciously address the ideological impositions in their borrowed knowledge.…”

Section: The Universality Of Heritagementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Paradigm Shifts in Global Heritage Discourse

Silva¹

2015

JSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay narrates the evolution of the UNESCO doctrine on cultural heritage, its Eurocentric underpinnings, the concerns of its doctrinal authority, and the course of its decolonization. Three principal themes in current heritage doctrine -universality, significance, and material originality of heritage -clearly represent the occidental thought that primarily frames contemporary conception of heritage. Based on literature review, the essay examines these themes showing (a) their European patrimony and the problems they pose in managing heritage of a diverse geo-cultural context; and (b) how debates within and beyond UNESCO challenged this persistent representation of heritage sites as original, static, and frozen in time and the resultant changes that redefined the discourse and attempted to address the geo-cultural imbalance in the World Heritage List. The essay argues that achieving geo-cultural balance in the World Heritage List does not necessarily promote further paradigm shifts in the heritage discourse. Yet, the List becomes a powerful catalyst to evoke the debate of decolonization globally and, most importantly, locally, by bringing the coloniality of heritage thinking, governance, and practice at the regional, national and local levels of the Global South into focus.

show abstract

“…Many observers have understandably criticized heritage tourism as either a profit-making tool of the tourism (or heritage) industry; a means of identity construction and self-aggrandizement for nation-states that reflects elite interests [18][19][20]; or a Eurocentric imposition by Western countries and international agencies [21][22][23]. Among other things, such efforts to commoditize, politicize, or universalize heritage are seen as a threat to the authenticity of cultural and natural properties [24][25][26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tourism and Sustainability in the Evaluation of World Heritage Sites, 1980–2010

Schmutz

Elliott

2016

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At present, there are myriad concerns about tourism and sustainability at cultural and natural world heritage sites. Based on an analysis of 811 evaluations written between 1980 and 2010 by two official advisory bodies to the World Heritage Committee, this paper charts the timing and extent to which such concerns have become central to assessing the value of heritage sites. We find that, over time, issues related to tourism and sustainability expanded considerably in quantity and variety, and recommendations for managing and developing sustainable tourism became a routine feature of site evaluations. Despite the growing prevalence of such concerns, the conceptualization of sustainable tourism and related recommendations provided by the advisory experts remain somewhat ambiguous. Furthermore, our findings reveal regional disparities in the degree to which tourism is seen as a threat to the sustainability of heritage sites and in the likelihood that a state is considered a model of sustainable tourism.

show abstract

Western hegemony in archaeological heritage management

Cited by 176 publications

References 3 publications

Defining and Managing the Historic Urban Landscape: Reflections on the English Experience and Some Stories from Liverpool

Defining and Managing the Historic Urban Landscape: Reflections on the English Experience and Some Stories from Liverpool

Paradigm Shifts in Global Heritage Discourse

Tourism and Sustainability in the Evaluation of World Heritage Sites, 1980–2010

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About