Abstract
The Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention stipulate that local communities and indigenous peoples are an intrinsic part of the identification, nomination, management and protection of World Heritage sites (UNESCO 2019, art. 12). This paper explores the role of local communities in the World Heritage system by critically assessing the implementation of the Convention in a European context through the case study of the Ironbridge Gorge WHS. The case study is contextualised in the representation of indigenous peoples in World Heritage policies negotiating their intellectual and legal authority in the World Heritage process facilitated through heritage bureaucracy. This paper will address the internationally important issue of power relations when it comes to the inclusion of local communities and indigenous peoples in the World Heritage Convention and in heritage practice.
Highlights
This paper explores the role of local communities in the World Heritage system by critically assessing the implementation of the Convention in a European context through the case study of the Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site (WHS)
The case study is contextualised in the representation of indigenous peoples in World Heritage policies negotiating their intellectual and legal authority in the World Heritage process facilitated through heritage bureaucracy
Communities defined by UNESCO (2007, 2) as non-state actors are often discussed in the growing body of heritage studies literature as those subjected to the authority of experts (Smith 2006), those empowered in the heritage process (Jameson and Eogan 2013; Jameson 2014, 2016) or as those who manage to negotiate authority in archaeological projects and the formulation of research questions, as well as in interpretation and governance of heritage sites (Schmidt 2014; Atalay 2006)
Summary
Communities defined by UNESCO (2007, 2) as non-state actors are often discussed in the growing body of heritage studies literature as those subjected to the authority of experts (Smith 2006), those empowered in the heritage process (Jameson and Eogan 2013; Jameson 2014, 2016) or as those who manage to negotiate authority in archaeological projects and the formulation of research questions, as well as in interpretation and governance of heritage sites (Schmidt 2014; Atalay 2006).The legal heritage protection system in a European context is based on the premise of universal value concerned with physical attributes of those values and is implemented through a complex machinery of heritage bureaucracy. This paper explores the role of local communities in the World Heritage system by critically assessing the implementation of the Convention in a European context through the case study of the Ironbridge Gorge WHS.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
