Speaker
Description
The field of heritage faces growing pressures to demonstrate its benefits or contributions as funding declines and the sector is required to conform to results-oriented systems. In this context, arguments suggesting that urban heritage fosters social cohesion gain prominence. However, these arguments often do not specify how urban heritage can enhance social cohesion, which is further complicated by the fact that the concept of social cohesion is versatile and can encompass multiple notions. The Ph.D. project overarching this paper uses discursive institutionalism as a theoretical basis and combines policy analysis methods and interviews with experts to examine how ideas linked to social cohesion are (re)produced in and around key documents for the nomination and management of World Heritage (WH) cities. My paper for the AESOP conference focuses on the results of the interviews with experts to identify possible uses of urban WH to promote social cohesion. It discusses how expert advisors and authors of guidelines from the WH system largely focus on participation and promoting shared responsibility for the care of the heritage sites; meanwhile, managers working on the nomination and management of the sites emphasize the need and ongoing efforts to preserve traditional economic activities and spaces that enable and support the continuity of social structures. The paper also discusses how mobilisations of heritage under the banner of social cohesion may work towards contrasting objectives, ranging from reinforcing established power structures to promoting social justice. Finally, the paper reflects on the role of documents and actors in the process of identifying and constructing the narratives that justify the Outstanding Universal Value of WH Cities, pointing out the decision-making role of expert advisors from the WH System.
| Keywords | Social Cohesion; Urban Heritage; World Heritage, Heritage Management |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
