Figure 3 - uploaded by Lynn Meskell
Content may be subject to copyright.
States Parties' verbal interventions supporting upgrade for properties recommended as Not Inscribed, Deferred and Referred-2003-2013 (nodes with 15 or more ties displayed).
Source publication
This article analyzes whether emerging nations are extending their influence across the UNESCO World Heritage Committee and, if so, how this affects decision-making processes concerning the inscription of sites on the World Heritage List. We use both quantitative and qualitative approaches to identify patterns in decision-making processes regarding...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... illustrate, Figures 3 and 4 provide a graphic visualization of how verbal interventions expressed by Committee members during the formal discussion have been framed for this category of nominations in the period of 2003-2013. Con- sidering verbal interventions as ties between Committee members and nominating countries, Figure 3 shows which members of the World Heritage Committee (dark gray squared nodes) have supported upgrading the evaluation of other nations' Deferred andReferred -2003-2013 (nodes with 5 or more ties displayed). nominations (light gray rounded nodes) that were initially recommended for Not Inscription, Deferral, and Referral. 3 Similarly, Figure 4 displays the network of Committee members' verbal inter- ventions that have opposed an upgrade of the Advisory Body recommendation. 4 The size of the nodes is proportional to the number of ties a Committee member has developed or a nominating country has ...
Context 2
... illustrate, Figures 3 and 4 provide a graphic visualization of how verbal interventions expressed by Committee members during the formal discussion have been framed for this category of nominations in the period of 2003-2013. Con- sidering verbal interventions as ties between Committee members and nominating countries, Figure 3 shows which members of the World Heritage Committee (dark gray squared nodes) have supported upgrading the evaluation of other nations' Deferred andReferred -2003-2013 (nodes with 5 or more ties displayed). nominations (light gray rounded nodes) that were initially recommended for Not Inscription, Deferral, and Referral. 3 Similarly, Figure 4 displays the network of Committee members' verbal inter- ventions that have opposed an upgrade of the Advisory Body recommendation. 4 The size of the nodes is proportional to the number of ties a Committee member has developed or a nominating country has ...
Similar publications
Citations
... They argue that this trajectory threatens to undermine the cooperative vision of UNESCO's World Heritage List, and indeed the authenticity and veridicality of listed properties. And paradoxically, while fuelled by state parties who are seeking redress by challenging the dominant European nations, the purely political nature of listing has further served to marginalise local communities and cultural values from landscape listing (Bertacchini, Liuzza, & Meskell, 2017;Jokilehto, 2011Jokilehto, , 2012Meskell, 2012Meskell, , 2013Meskell, Liuzza, Bertacchini, & Saccone, 2015;Pocock & Lilley, 2018). This runs counter to recent attempts by UNESCO and the World Heritage Centre to be more inclusive and to work more closely with local communities (Pocock & Lilley, 2018, p. 3-4;World Heritage Committee, 2007). ...
This paper explores how the imagined landscapes that act as a catalyst for World Heritage listing, are unable to be reconciled with formal heritage assessments. We explore this tension through two Australian World Heritage landscapes: the Great Barrier Reef and the Tasmanian Wilderness. The history of these listings suggests a teleological process driven by a desire to create authentic utopias. While utopias are imagined spaces, Paradise at the Reef and the Tasmanian Wilderness are realised through hyperreal landscapes (fakes). However, these wholistic landscapes dissolve into a series of inventories of species and numbers in official listing. We suggest the failure to recognise the hyperreal is a form of false consciousness that creates a tension between managing for formally recognised values and managing the unmanageable utopia, and that a broader use of cultural landscapes might be useful in addressing this divide.
... Each of these Conventions has been studied by the following researchers in relation to their main international policy agendas and relevant issues. For instance, the practical influences of the Hague Convention on heritage protection in armed conflict (Van der Auwera 2013), the legal efficacy of the Illicit Trafficking Convention to prevent illicit trades of artistic objects (Veres 2014), the politicisation of the World Heritage List system (Meskell 2013;Bertacchini, Liuzza, and Meskell 2017) and the commodification of World Heritage sites (Bertacchini, Saccone, and Santagata 2011), the paradigm shift from tangible culture to intangible and viable culture with the Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention (Bortolotto 2007) and the culture-development nexus in the Cultural Diversity Convention (Hahn 2006;Wiktor-Mach 2020). ...
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) has adopted cultural Conventions since the 1950s, specifying aspects of culture that its Member States should protect and promote as the ‘Common Heritage of Mankind (CHM)’. This article argues that UNESCO has accumulated the concepts of the CHM in four cultural Conventions into the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (Cultural Diversity Convention), making UNESCO’s cultural policy remit ‘ambiguous’. This article further posits that the accumulation of the concepts of the CHM into the Cultural Diversity Convention lies in a rhetorical structure; The rhetorical structure allows the Convention to set ambivalent policy agendas encompassing the protection of past culture and the promotion of contemporary cultural industries. A historical analysis of UNESCO’s five cultural Conventions demonstrates that UNESCO has developed its description of the CHM and the following policy ambit to respond to social changes in the cultural sector as well as the political relationships of its Member States and other international organisations. The discussion about the use of cultural description to extend UNESCO’s cultural policy ambit sheds new light on the ambiguity of cultural policy in the context of how to use historical knowledge of culture.
... As noted above, WHSs are used as place-branding tools to promote cities to inward investors and global tourists (Bertacchini et al., 2016;Birendra, 2021;Ripp & Rodwell, 2015;Short, 2007). In Liverpool, the WHS was part of broader objectives to recover its 'global city' moniker (Boland, 2013;Liverpool City Council, 2018;Team Liverpool, 2020 The WHS inscription process is heavily politicized, involving both highformal diplomacyand lowinformal chatterpolitics (Bertacchini et al., 2017;Brown et al., 2019;Hølleland et al., 2019), raising concern that State Party influence over WHC decisions 'diverge from considerations of heritage significance and conservation' (Bertacchini et al., 2016, p. 124). Meskell (2012) mentions the mobilization of 'national pride' and 'aggressive lobbying' by government representatives, and a 'lack of transparency' into how the selection and monitoring processes of WHSs operate. ...
... In this journal, Liuzza and Meskell (2021) identify 'political manipulation' tactics that are employed within WHC discussions, that is, 'threats and assurances' are mobilized to influence other states' and UNESCO experts' thinking to affect decision-making. Relatedly, others discuss the 'growing politicization' and 'polarization of discussion' at WHC meetings (Bertacchini et al., 2017;Rao, 2010) regarding WHS selection, monitoring and the 'in Danger' list. Today, 52 properties are on UNESCO's 'in Danger' list. ...
... 10 A second point is the 'distribution is not, however, evenly spread across world regions or site categories' (Brown et al., 2019, p. 289). Evidence of this 'regional imbalance' is that African and Arab states have the highest number of sites on the 'in Danger' list (Arab states sites are mostly cultural, in Africa natural sites dominate) compared with Europe and North America (Bertacchini et al., 2017). A third point, following the above discussion, is the process of inclusion on the 'in Danger' list and (potential) de-listing is heavily politicized Hølleland et al., 2019). ...
Liverpool holds the unenviable distinction to be the first UK city to lose its United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Site status. It was inscribed in 2004, placed on the ‘in Danger’ list in 2012 and de-listed in 2021 due to the perceived negative impact of extensive waterfront regeneration. Planning permission for the £5.5 billion Liverpool Waters project and Everton Football Club's £500 million stadium sealed the city's fate. This is both interesting and unusual. First, very few properties appear on the ‘in Danger’ list, and before Liverpool, only two other sites had been de-listed since the mid-1970s. Second, extant knowledge indicates that European states enjoy ‘impunity’ from World Heritage Committee decisions. However, this was not the case with regards to the UK State Party and Liverpool. Through an analysis of city planning and the ‘politics at the site’, this article problematizes how and why Liverpool was controversially de-listed as a World Heritage Site. Beyond the case study, this article contributes to, and drives forward, international debates on World Heritage Sites.
... Esto nos sugiere un "desequilibrio con respecto a las zonas geográficas del mundo que están No parece equitativo ni éticamente justificable que el 9.81% de la población aglutine el 49% del PIB, la mayoría de los bienes inscritos en la Lista Representativa y el control del Comité. Además, se pone de manifiesto que la mayor parte del patrimonio mundial se encuentra en regiones desarrolladas, en particular en Europa (Bertacchini et al, 2015). Se suscitan otros debates que iremos afrontando en próximos estudios en los que utilizaremos modelos estadísticos para interrelacionar las variables cuantitativas de las inscripciones con otras cualitativas como las nacionalidades de los miembros del Comité y las procedencias de las inscripciones durante esos mandatos. ...
The chapter explains the functioning of the listing system included in the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. To this end, it describes the composition of the most relevant governing bodies involved in the listing system and, in turn, analyses the management processes that take place in the lists.
... Esto nos sugiere un "desequilibrio con respecto a las zonas geográficas del mundo que están No parece equitativo ni éticamente justificable que el 9.81% de la población aglutine el 49% del PIB, la mayoría de los bienes inscritos en la Lista Representativa y el control del Comité. Además, se pone de manifiesto que la mayor parte del patrimonio mundial se encuentra en regiones desarrolladas, en particular en Europa (Bertacchini et al, 2015). Se suscitan otros debates que iremos afrontando en próximos estudios en los que utilizaremos modelos estadísticos para interrelacionar las variables cuantitativas de las inscripciones con otras cualitativas como las nacionalidades de los miembros del Comité y las procedencias de las inscripciones durante esos mandatos. ...
... Desde nuestro punto de vista, la redacción de la Convención del 2003 fue exquisita en lo formal, o si se prefiere políticamente correcta, en cuanto al cuidado de los valores, la titularidad y los beneficiarios, intentando responder, de este modo, a un aluvión de críticas que venían tanto de dentro como de fuera del organismo (Bertacchini et al., 2017). El problemático 'valor universal excepcional' fue sustituido por 'prácticas ejemplares' (Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura, 2003). ...
Resumen En este artículo planteamos una reflexión teórica sobre los cambios en las políticas patrimoniales de la UNESCO y su incidencia en el imaginario y constructo patrimonial. En un contexto de nuevas aspiraciones, aparece el lema #somospatrimonio. El cambio es considerable: no sólo se tiene patrimonio, sino que se puede llegar a ser patrimonio como un todo metonímico. El patrimonio puede ser (en su versión autorizada) o llegar a ser (en su versión democrática). En ese juego de ficciones se desvelan y se ocultan, se silencian o se proclaman las asimetrías y disfunciones de los capitales puestos en movimiento. En ese juego hemos pasado de ‘tener’ patrimonio, como contenedor de un tesoro ilustrado, a ‘ser’ patrimonio como fetiche de un mercado emergente. Aquí analizaremos el #somospatrimonio como expresión que encapsula los nuevos tiempos patrimoniales, observando los contextos en los que se utiliza como una nueva marca identificativa al servicio del mercado o como una estrategia de reivindicación.
... Tradicionalmente, disciplinas como la historia, arqueología, derecho, economía, sociología y, más recientemente, los estudios de mercadotecnia, organizativos y de gestión, así como los estudios del patrimonio, se han centrado en este debate (Timothy, 2018, Alonso González, 2017, Parga Dans y Alonso González, 2020), adquiriendo mayor complejidad en elementos declarados Sitios Patrimonio de la Humanidad (en adelante SPH) por la UNESCO (Tucker y Carnegie, 2014). Los SPH se designan siguiendo una serie de directrices establecidas por la Convención del Patrimonio Mundial de la UNESCO, que atienden a diversos factores determinantes de la declaración de su valor universal excepcional mediante la evaluación de especialistas (Bertacchini, Liuzza, y Meskell, 2017). Tal reconocimiento funciona de manera similar a una marca de destino turístico, suponiendo un reclamo o atractivo turístico a nivel internacional (Ryan y Silvanto, 2010) y transformando el valor simbólico de estos espacios (Michelson y Paadam, 2016). ...
La dimensión social del valor se ha convertido en una piedra angular del debate sobre conservación, gestión y sostenibilidad turísticas en relación al patrimonio cultural. El presente artículo examina el papel del valor social en la gestión patrimonial y promoción turística a través del caso de la Cueva de Altamira como lugar Patrimonio de la Humanidad UNESCO mediante el análisis de las perspectivas de colectivos no expertos en la gestión del patrimonio. Para ello, se realizaron dos encuestas, una dirigida a visitantes (1047 cuestionarios válidos), y otra a la población española como comunidad anfitriona (1000 cuestionarios válidos). Los resultados muestran cómo estos agentes interpretan el valor de existencia, estético, económico y de legado de formas divergentes a la de los expertos, profundizando en la compleja relación entre la promoción y preservación patrimonial, y ampliando el debate sobre cómo el valor social puede contribuir a fortalecer la imagen internacional y nacional de los destinos patrimoniales ante el futuro incierto del mercado turístico global.
... It seems neither equitable nor ethically justifiable that 9.81% of the world population accounting for 49% of the GDP has the majority of the assets inscribed on the Representative List and control of the Committee. In addition, it can be seen that the majority of world heritage is located in developed regions, particularly in Europe (Bertacchini, Liuzza, and Meskell 2015). These matters raise further issues to be addressed in future articles, in which we will use statistical models to interrelate the quantitative data of the inscriptions with other qualitative variables such as the nationalities of the members of the Committee and the origin of the inscriptions during those mandates. ...
This article presents a critical analysis of the actions carried out by United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to safeguard what is considered to be ‘intangible cultural heritage of humanity’. These actions have been implemented under the aegis of its international convention adopted in 2003: the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. However, there have been significant difficulties in implementing the principles set out in this document and the objectives they were intended to achieve. We have examined the effectiveness of UNESCO’s policies and management by way of a qualitative and quantitative study of the functioning of the Convention’s management bodies and the intangible heritage inscribed on the Lists (number and distribution by lists, countries and economic and demographic weight). The main focus of our analysis is to assess the democratic functioning of the Convention and the universality of the intangible heritage inscribed by UNESCO.
... An increasing number of studies have shown that unbalanced objects need to fall on the national scale [20][21][22]. To ensure the diversity of heritage, higher requirements have been put forward regarding heritage property characteristics [23]. ...
Depicting the temporal and spatial evolution pattern of global world cultural heritage systematically and finely is the basis of heritage recognition and protection. In this study, 869 world cultural heritage inscriptions (through 2019) were selected as the research objects, and the times and types of each World Heritage site were manually annotated from more than 5000 pieces of data. Through time series modelling, the advantages of and changes in heritage declarations in different regions and periods were analysed, and the impact of heritage strategy on the number of heritage sites included in each region was evaluated. The results showed that the implementation of heritage policy greatly impacted each region, especially on the number of heritage sites in Asia and the Pacific region. Using the heritage era to carry out modelling analysis, from the perspective of the integrity of historical heritage cultural types, it is considered that there may be cultural heritage sites in the Caribbean and Latin America that have not been given enough attention. The modelling analysis results of era attributes can support the fairness of heritage determination. By calculating the frequency and peak value of heritage sites at the national scale, the frequency and peak value of each country in the top 10 list are used to characterize the ability of national declarations of cultural heritage and reveal the differences in the ability of each member country to declare heritage sites and the heritage era. By calculating the distribution density of the heritage era, this study finds that the world’s cultural heritage is not concentrated in the Middle Ages (600–1450) but the periods of Reformation and Exploration (1450–1700) and Progress and Empire (1850–1914). The above analysis shows that there are imbalances and strategic adjustment effects concerning regions, countries, eras and types in World Heritage list development. The composition types of heritage are complex, and the combination types have obvious changes in different periods. It is suggested that the strategy of world cultural heritage collection should be further optimized to fully guarantee the balance of regions, countries and types, and the heritage value should be fully considered in heritage protection with more diversity and complexity of types.
... Moreover, it should be taken into account that, while we identified a growing recognition of local communities both in the operational guidelines and decisions papers, incidental observation suggests that associated practices at the heritage sites themselves do not seem to adhere to the guidelines. In this regard, local people and communities neglected in heritage conservation may exemplify a continued mismatch between the practical reality and the administrative ideal [101] regarding the role of local communities and well-being in heritage conservation. These challenges raise questions about the capability of UNESCO to address the interests of local communities, even though the issue receives greater attention in the operational guidelines, as the operational guidelines serve primarily as recommendations and do not carry any regulatory consequences. ...
UNESCO’s world heritage program aims to protect sites of cultural and natural heritage worldwide. Issues of local communities and well-being have been given increasing attention by heritage conservation scholars, but a systemic review of UNESCO guidelines has not been performed. Here, we examine the evolution of the ‘Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention’, documents representing the heritage conservation policies of UNESCO over the period 1994–2019. Using keyword analysis and document analysis, the findings show evidence of an increasing emphasis on local communities, growing primarily since 2005. However, the theme of well-being only first emerged in the operational guidelines in 2019. Political, economic, and environmental challenges idiosyncratic to specific places often complicate the role of local communities and well-being in heritage conservation priorities. Future research should investigate the potential implementation and implications of these changes for the guidelines at specific UNESCO world heritage sites.
