Responsibility For Heritage Research Articles

Authenticity, identity, self-improvement, and responsibility at heritage sites: The local residents’ perspective

Although heritage tourism receives increasing attention, researchers have not yet considered heritage residents' cultural self-improvement and heritage responsibility. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the mechanism of perceived authenticity, localized identity, cultural self-improvement, and heritage responsibility. With empirical evidence from two well-known world cultural heritage sites (i.e., Kaiping and Yongding in China), the study identifies that local residents’ localized identity and cultural self-improvement, activated by perceived authenticity of the cultural heritage, significantly stimulate their heritage responsibility. Results further reveal the positive impact of localized identity on cultural self-improvement. The mediating effect of localized identity and cultural self-improvement and the moderation effect of two heritage sites are also confirmed. Important theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Heterogeneity of residents’ heritage responsibilities in the process of cultural communication: the case of the Genglubu heritage site in Tanmen, China

ABSTRACT Heritage responsibility in cultural communication has gotten minimal scholarly study and may face additional challenges as a result of discourses of heritage dissonance. Through the lens of the combination of critical heritage studies and communication science on a sample of residents in the heritage site of Genglubu, Tanmen, China, this study critically analyses the heterogeneity of residents’ heritage responsibilities in the process of heritage cultural communication (divided into two dimensions: environmental and psychological), under the interaction between the official discourse and vernacular discourse. Combined with 284 respondents’ questionnaires and 65 in-depth interviews, this study has shown that: (a) residents were exposed to Genglubu heritage culture primarily through communication space, followed by media space and physical space; (b) four groups of residents were identified using two-step cluster analysis. In order of numbers, they were heritage value approvers, indifferents, qualified heritage protectors, and active heritage protectors. We argue that heritage practices dominated by authorised heritage discourse (AHD) suppress community voices. Although most Tanmen residents recognise heritage value, they fail to benefit from it, resulting in a lack of heritage responsibility. The findings of this study may provide some insights into how to ensure effective community involvement in heritage conservation.

Examining cultural intelligence, heritage responsibility, and entrepreneurship performance of migrant homestay inn entrepreneurs: A case study of Hongcun village in China

The ability to handle cross-cultural affairs efficiently has become critical to migrant tourism entrepreneurs in establishing business and surviving in a culturally distinct environment, especially in a cultural heritage site. Using a sample of homestay inn entrepreneurs in Hongcun Village, this study examines how cultural intelligence (CQ) affects the migrant tourism entrepreneurs’ subjective performance (SP) and heritage responsibility (HR) and whether HR plays a mediating effect on the relationship of CQ to SP. Applying the PLS-SEM approach to a sample of 142 homestay inn entrepreneurs, this study finds that CQ promotes HR and SP. However, only the Motivational CQ and Cognitive CQ dimensions positively influence HR and SP separately. The mediating effects of HR are also validated on the overall path from CQ to SP and the Motivational CQ to SP. The findings confirm the validation of the assumption “With great ability, comes greater responsibility and greater results in business” in tourism entrepreneurship. Finally, some theoretical and managerial implications of the findings are discussed.

A Reply to "Should the UK Be Nominating More World Heritage Sites?"

Norman has sensitively and sensibly opened a can of very squirmy worms. Her question, “Should the UK Be Nominating More World Heritage Sites?” resonates with fundamental issues that will plague archaeology and heritage management with increasing virulence in the future. How are the trade-offs between economic impact and outstanding universal cultural value (OUV) to be managed? How are equities to be balanced within countries, continents or, most profoundly, between North/South nation states. What heritage is of universal value, and how is recognition of OUV to be apportioned between natural endowments and human-made locations? And what should be the essential goals of the World Heritage Sites (WHS) process—protection and conservation as absolute priorities, or economic development and cost/benefit effectiveness? Norman’s analysis brings to these questions the sensitivity of a committed heritage manager and the cautious realism of a practitioner fresh from the trenches. Her article at least touches on all of these issues, and my comment does not attempt to offer a perspective on every one. Rather, I choose to take issue with Norman’s conclusion that “Ultimately, the argument seems to be an ethical one” (Norman, 2011: 77). Without disputing the ethical issues she raises, nor the importance of ethical considerations in this matter, I argue that her article and the underlying research to which she refers make a much stronger case for considering the economic consequences of the World Heritage inscription process than perhaps she herself recognizes. There are four points to consider: First, the reality is that the UK, like the rest of the world, is entering into an era of constrained economic resources that will disproportionately affect heritage-related activities in favor of social services. Second, a paucity of hard data and sound evaluation has rendered impossible up-or-down judgments on the value, economic or otherwise, of WHS status. Third, Norman’s paper and related materials raise the specter that WHS “branding” may have diminishing or even negligible returns to the investment made in achieving WHS status. Fourth, therefore, the increasing need for sponsors of potential World Heritage Sites need to give far greater weight to their opportunity costs and the potential returns to investment. I would like to consider each of these matters in order. No regular reader of the daily newspapers could fail to be aware that the present UK government’s budget has severely slashed support for heritage-related matters. English Heritage has suffered draconian budget reductions, and UK universities that underwrite so much heritagerelated work are under profound pressure to demonstrate their “impact,” prominently to include economic value. And of course, the UK is not alone. Most of the world is under severe economic pressure. Greece is wrestling with a profound crisis of government financing. Facing lesser pressures, Italy has placed responsibility for heritage, museums and antiquities in the hands of a former McDonalds Corporation executive who is actively evaluating privatizing iconic sites such as the Colosseum. The United States is on a budget trajectory to reduce funding for its vast system of parks and for other forms of heritage. Japan is recovering from a natural disaster. These economic pressures are global in nature, with only a few fortunate nations in Asia seemingly immune from pressures on national budget priorities. In this environment, any actions to preserve heritage or

Preservation of electronic documents in the private sector: Business imperative and heritage responsibility

The long-term preservation of and access to electronic documents have become increasingly important for organizations. This article addresses the enormous increase in electronic documents, their vulnerability, the importance of preserving them for business, legal and heritage purposes, the preservation challenges they pose, and the role and responsibilities of the knowledge manager in ensuring the long-term preservation and access of electronic documents.