Heritage values and legal rules

Abstract

Purpose Existing regulatory frameworks for identifying and treating historic buildings and places reflect deference to expert rule, which privilege the values of a small number of heritage experts over the values of the majority of people who visit, work, and reside in historic environments. To address this problem, the purpose of this paper is to explore a fundamental shift in how US federal and local preservation laws address built heritage by suggesting a dynamic, adaptive regulatory framework that incorporates heterodox approaches to heritage and therefore is capable of accommodating contemporary sociocultural values. Design/methodology/approach The overall approach the authors use is a comparative literature review from the fields of heterodox/orthodox heritage, heterodox/orthodox law, adaptive management, and participatory methods to inform the creation of a dynamic, adaptive regulatory framework. Findings Heterodox heritage emphasizes the need for a bottom-up, stakeholder-driven process, where everyday people’s values have the opportunity to be considered as being as valid as those of conventional experts. Orthodox law cannot accommodate this pluralistic approach, so heterodox law is required because, like heterodox heritage, it deconstructs power, values participation, and community involvement. Practical implications Orthodox heritage conservation practice disempowers most stakeholders and empowers conventional experts; this power differential is maintained by orthodox law. Originality/value To date, there have been few, if any, attempts to address critical heritage studies theory in the context of the regulatory environment. This paper appears to be the first such investigation in the literature.

Heritage Values and Community Perception: A Look Into the Historic Ruins of Dinajpur Rajbari

“…However, to reach a conservation decision it is possible not to attain a complete understanding of heritage values from a specific value assessment method (Mason, 2002). Opposing the orthodox value system where values are believed to be permanent, the heterodox heritage system views them as dynamic and constantly evolving (Wells & Lixinski, 2016).…”

Signs of Invisibility: Nonrecognition of Natural Environments as Persons in International and Domestic Law

“…It is common for national, provincial or municipal governments to place restrictions on how real property may be used, for example through industrial zoning codes, prohibitions on tree clearing and built heritage codes [68]. Those restrictions might reflect international agreements regarding built and natural environments, for example the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage [106]. Rights regarding intellectual property are similarly not exhaustive, with copyright for example being subject to statutory exceptions such as fair use.…”