http://www.mscapers.com/mediascapes/425Click on the link above for a free media tour o
Sadly my planned programme of summer research with the Tilgher School in Herculaneum had been postponsed due to work commitments in Wales. But Niki Savvides will still be working in Herculaneum this June, so if I find out what she gets up to i’ll post it on here for you all to read about. Good luck Niki!
The new Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development (JCHMSD), is currently considering papers for inclusion in its first issue launching in 2011. The double-blind peer reviewed journal is edited by Ana Pereira Roders, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands, and Ron van Oers, UNESCO World Heritage Centre, France. It stimulates and encourages research devoted to the sustainable development of cultural heritage and to the positive contribution of cultural heritage management towards a sustainable environment. Coverage includes, but is not limited to: Cultural heritage - assessment, management, marketing and publicity, tangible and intangible dimensions Sustainable development - preservation, conservation, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, demolition, best practices, unsustainable development and consequent threats e.g. urban developments, large-scale agriculture, mining activity Cultural heritage and sustainable development - legislation, Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment, effects of climate change, ecological sustainability, social sustainability, economic sustainability The role of research and scholarship Teaching & curriculum development Submission:Submissions should be sent by email to the Editors before August 2010: A Ron van Oers: R.Vanoers@unesco.org Articles should be supplied in Word format. All authors’ details must be printed on a separate sheet and authors should not be identified anywhere else in the article. Submissions will be “concise-paper” articles of around 2,000 - 6,000 words. A title of no more than eight words should be provided. More information can be found at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/jchmsd.htm Website Contacts Original article can be found at UNESCO World Heritage News by following the link below: http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/609
Below is an outline for this June’s collabortative research work between myslef and UCL’s NIkki Savvides. We will be on site at Herculaneum working with local school students carrying out further resarch in to the site, toursits and the local community. The aim of involving the local school group is to view the site from a totally new and different perspective and to hopefully gain a deeper insight into attitudes towards the site…whilst giving back to the students an invaluable real work experience and added awareness of their World Heritage Site Young Researchers at Herculaneum The Herculaneum Conservation project and the Herculanmeum Centre have organised a programme of internships for university students who have used of the archaeological site as a case study for thier theses. The various reserach interns were selected on the basis of thier research proposals and how much this proposal was compatible with the objectives of the HCP, and on what scope there was to obtain a profitable result that would benefit both parties. Two interns will be in Ercolano in Jube 2010 to carry on thier research in to cultural tourism: Niki Savvides (Cyprus; University College London) The management of visitors in the conservation of mosaics Claudine Gerrard (Wales; Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust/Swansea University) The legisation regrading cultural assests that infulence the particiapation of the local communities around archaeoligcal sites Contesto - giovani ricercatori agli scavi di Ercolano: l’Herculaneum Conservation Project e il Centro Herculaneum organizzano degli stage per studenti universitari che usano il sito archeologico di Ercolano come caso di studio per la tesi. I vari stagisti di ricerca sono stati selezionati, sulla base delle proposte di ricerca ricevute e su quanto esse siano compatibili con gli obiettivi dell’HCP, allo scopo di ottenere un risultato proficuo per entrambi le parti. Due stagisti saranno ad Ercolano a giugno 2010 per portare avanti la propria ricerca legata al turismo culturale: Niki Savvides (Cipro; University College London) La gestione dei visitatori per la conservazione dei mosaici Claudine Gerrard (Galles; Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust/Swansea University) Le normative per i beni culturali che influenzano la partecipazione delle comunità locali intorno ai siti archeologici Proposal for the students of Tilgher School: From the moment that Niki Savides and Claudine Gerrard return to Ercolano in June to continue their tourism research and visits to the site, the students of Tilgher could be involved directly in the field work gaining real work experience that would help the students undertaninding of the opportunities tied to tourism, not only as a passive observer but directly as a researcher. The Hercualneum Centre would organise a meeting with Niki and Claudine in which they would illustrate and explain thier work and the contirbutin that this work will make to the future management of visitors to the archaeolgical site. The meeting will be informal but managed in a way in which the value of their contirbution to the interns work would be evident to the Tilgher students. The students would then be involved in one or more tasks; 1. Carrying out questionaires with visitors to the archaeological site 2. Tracking visitors to map their movements around the archaeological site 3. Carrying out questionaires with citizens of Ercolano (parents and friends) 4. Carrying out questionaires of the same type with the younger generation of Ercolano Every student will recieve a certificate from the Herculaneum Centre as acknowleged ment of their pracitcal contirbution to the work. Proposta per degli studenti del Liceo Tilgher: Dal momento che Niki Savvides e Claudine Gerrard torneranno ad Ercolano a giugno per continuare con la loro ricerca sul turismo e le visite agli scavi, si potrebbero coinvolgere gli studenti del Tilgher nel lavoro sul campo fornendogli al contempo delle esperienze lavorative reali che aiuterebbero a capire l’ampiezza delle opportunità legate al turismo, non solo come hostess ma anche come ricercatori. Il Centro Herculaneum organizzerebbe un incontro nel quale Niki e Claudine illustrerebbero il proprio progetto e il contributo che esso avrà nella gestione dei visitatori agli scavi di Ercolano. L’incontro sarebbe informale ma gestito in modo che gli studenti Tilgher capiscano l’importanza del loro contributo. Gli studenti sarebbero poi coinvolti in uno o più compiti: 1. Questionari con i visitatori che vengono agli scavi di Ercolano 2. Tracking (inseguimento) dei visitatori per mappare i percorsi della visita all’interno degli scavi 3. Questionari con cittadini di Ercolano (parenti ed amici) 4. Questionari con se stessi in qualità di nuova generazione di Ercolanesi Ogni studente che partecipa riceverà un certificato di stage dal Centro Herculaneum come riconoscimento del contributo e della pratica svolta. (the outline was prepared by Sarah Court of the HCP and translated by me)
Recently there have been a number of occassions when I have been told by other people just what should constitute World Heritage, in most cases it appears to be that people have a vested interest in the particular site or area they are suggesting should be world heritage. But just what should World Heritage be? We have a clear set of guidelines available to us to refer to, those of the 1972 World Heritage Convention, so why do people ask the same question again and again, and why do they firmly believe ‘thier site’ should be on the ‘list’ of World Heritage sites when quite frankly it probably shouldn’t? Is there an underlying problem with peoples understanding of what the World Heritage Convention was and is all about, or is there a problem with the Convention?
Wouldn’t it be good if heritage sites could be more or less self sufficient? Entrance fees, profits from souvenirs, etc, all monies should go towards the upkeep of the site and staffing costs. Is it fair to charge visitors to see what is their own heritage? How many visitors are locals or even nationals of the site? It would be naive to suggest that I should be able to go to the cinema without paying for a ticket - after all the film had to be made, the actors paid, the cinema has bills to pay to enable it to run and it also has to make a profit or it will close down. Is it the responsibility of the local taxpayer to subsidise my visit to the cinema? I’ve chosen to go there. If I choose to visit an ancient site, why should the local taxpayer subsidise my visit there? It must be possible to charge a fair entrance fee to a site that doesn’t result in a burden on people who happen to live nearby and, of course, the site doesn’t actually have to turn in a profit, it only needs to break even.
Following the episode of BBC2 series Saving Britain’s Past on the Blaenavon World Heritage Site, my colleagues and I have once again been debating the usabilty of a heritage site as a tool for community and economic regeneration. We’ve been asking questions like is it really the job of the site, landscape or monument to regenerate a community? And with a growing trend for local government departments, community groups amongst others to see heritage as a ‘cash cow’ should we be getting worried that the heritage we are so keen to protect and conserve is just another commodity? Is tourism really the best option and only option for the securing the long term future of sites? Or conversely are we (the profession) simply being a little too precious about our heritage? Tourism featured heavily in Tom Dyckhoff’s recent visit to Blaenavon in Saving Britain’s Past, it appeared from the programme that the only hope for the Big Pit, Ironworks and town of Blaenavon was to turn to tourism to save their struggling economy and community. But was this really the case? The programme suggested that Big Pit and the Blaenavon World Heritage landscape were somehow an odd choice, or at least initially seen to be an odd choice for inscription onto the World Heritage List, but in a world with changing attitudes to heritage and the growing recognition of the importance of industry in the development of our modern world this seems a little short sighted. The programme went on to interview a series of local government officials and individuals involved in the early management of the sites along with residents of the town and local businesses. Interestingly ,no one currently involved in the management of the World Heritage Site or Big Pit mining museum were included in the programme, I was left wondering why, it seemed a missed opportunity. Focusing back on heritage tourism, in particular to World Heritage sites, would it be fair to say do you suppose that applications for World Heritage Site status are made on a twofold basis, that of conservation and also tourism? I would say that this is becoming more often the case than not. It is important to remember that world heritage tourism brings with it great costs as well as benefits, whilst increased ticket sales and visitor spending are evident there is also often an accompanying added strain on the fabric of a destination and the community therein. Many of the residents of Blaenavon were seen to note in Saving Britain’s Past that the world heritage label has brought increased tourism but they’ve still lost facilities for themselves as a local community. It is a difficult line for the heritage promoter/professional to walk, between protecting and promoting a world heritage site and managing the hopes of the local community who are occasionally left expecting miracle transformations. Is there a need for a refocusing on the heritage and its benefits to enriching local life rather than it being seem as a cash generator which somehow becomes detached from those whose heritage it truly is?
13 new sites have been added to UNESCO’s World Heritage List which lost one site while three were placed on the ‘In Danger’ List. The World Heritage Committee held its 33rd session last month, the session was chaired by María Jesús San Segundo, the Ambassador and Permanent Delegate of Spain to UNESCO. The Committee inscribed two new natural sites and 11 cultural sites on UNESCO’s World Heritage List and withdrew one site from the List, Dresden Elbe Valley (Germany)- the decision to remove the Dresden Elbe Valley is sited as due to the ongoing construction of a four lane highway through the cultural landscape. A further three sites were inscribed on UNESCO’s List of World Heritage in Danger (apparently in an attempt to help raise international support for their preservation) and one site removed from the ‘In Danger’ list. Burkina Faso, Cape Verde and Kyrgyzstan all had sites inscribed into the World Heritage List for the first time in this session. A list of sites and their relative inscriptions as decided by the 33rd session of the WH Committee follows; Natural sites inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage List: The Wadden Sea (Germany / The Netherlands) The Dolomites (Italy) Cultural sites inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage List: Stoclet House (Belgium) The Ruins of Loropéni (Burkina Faso) Cidade Velha, Historic Centre of Ribeira Grande (Cape Verde) Mount Wutai (China) Shushtar, Historical Hydraulic System (Iran) Sulamain-Too Sacred Mountain (Kyrgyzstan) The Sacred City of Caral-Supe (Peru) The Royal Tombs of the Joseon Dynasty (Republic of Korea) The Tower of Hercules (Spain) La Chaux-de-Fonds / Le Locle watchmaking town-planning (Switzerland) Pontcysyllte Aqueduct and Canal (United Kingdom) Extensions added to World Heritage properties: The Great Saltworks of Salins-les-Bains (France) Levoca (in Slovakia) Tubbataha Reefs Natural Park (Philippines) Sites removed from UNESCO’s World Heritage List: Germany’s Dresden Elbe Valley Sites removed from UNESCO’s List of World Heritage in Danger: The walled City of Baku with the Shirvanshah’s Palace and Maiden Tower (Azerbaijan) Sites added to UNESCO’s List of World Heritage in Danger: Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System (Belize) Los Katios National Park (Colombia) The Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Georgia)
This news has sparked some debate in my office regarding the validity of some World Heritage Sites, there have been some questions asked of the relative importance of sites added to the list compared to those already on it and other sites which aren’t ‘world heritage’. Following the UK’s DCMS consultation on World Heritage Sites status and its suggestion of a European Heritage List or equivalent have left some question marks regarding the levels of importance assigned to sites. Personally I’m not too keen on further division and labelling, it seems likely to only to add to the confusion….
The presentation, interpretation and use of heritage in the community can be seen to be limited by the legal framework within which archaeology and hertage protection exits. It can be difficult to see how connections between the community and the rigid framework of policies,laws and designations governing heritage can exist especially when that framework appears at first to pay little regard to the modern community and benefits they can draw from a heritage ‘resource’. We have to ask ourselves are the systems we are working in serving only to protect the heritage or are they protecting the heritage to serve the communities in which that heritage exists? If the answer is that the system only serves to protect the heritage then is that really a problem, is it really the job of an archaeological site, listed building or artefact to rejuvenate and regenerate a failing community? Perhaps the question is actually should there ever be a mutually beneficial relationship between heritage, law and the community, and if so how far can that relationship go before one part suffers at the expense of another?
|
