‘…to exercise in all loyalty, discretion and conscience’: on insider research and the World Heritage Convention

Hølleland, Herdis; Johansson, Marit

doi:10.1080/10286632.2017.1301933

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When conducting research from within, critique has to take a more moderate form, often structured around "improving practice" (e.g. Rao 2010;Hølleland and Johansson 2019 for further examples). When approaching the institution from outside, less favorable findings risk feeding into public critique.…”

Section: Burning or Building Bridgesthe Challenge Of Negotiating Research Receptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How (Not) to “Study Up”: Points and Pitfalls When Studying International Heritage Regimes

Hølleland

Niklasson

2020

Journal of Field Archaeology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Archaeological fieldwork is no longer what it used to be. Over the last decades archaeologists have begun to "study up". Approaching regional, national and international heritage regimes, they have empirically scrutinized how institutions and people in positions of influence shape what will count as "our common past" tomorrow. This has paved the way for a deeper and more nuanced understanding of contemporary heritage governance. It has also meant stepping onto a minefield of ethical and methodological challenges that archaeologists are often unprepared for. In this article we address some of the points and pitfalls of investigating international heritage regimes, starting from our own experiences studying UNESCO and the EU and putting them in conversation with the experiences of other scholars studying up. By reflecting on the reasons for studying up, and discussing the hands-on challenges of access, anonymity, and research reception, we aim to promote a stronger and more transparent tradition of studying up in archaeology.

show abstract

Section: Burning or Building Bridgesthe Challenge Of Negotiating Research Receptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How (Not) to “Study Up”: Points and Pitfalls When Studying International Heritage Regimes

Hølleland

Niklasson

2020

Journal of Field Archaeology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some experts believe, "the strength of the World Heritage List is that it is composed of both celebratory places and sites with negative associations" [33] (p. 50), because this composition may enhance the inclusive, diverse and universal nature of the WH Convention [34]. "Sites with negative associations" are also known as "dissonant heritage", "difficult heritage", "heritage that hurts", "places of pain and shame", "uncomfortable heritage" and "dark heritage" in scholarly literature [35] (p. 509).…”

Section: Overview Of Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Inscription on the basis of this criterion means that the property is recognized for its associations [8] (pp. [32][33][34][35]. The cultural significance that underpins its OUV, therefore, necessarily encapsulates values associated primarily with intangible attributes.…”

Section: Criteria Values and Cultural Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Roadmap for the Nomination of Reconstructed Cultural Properties for Inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage List

Khalaf¹

2018

Heritage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guidance on reconstruction is being prepared to implement recent decisions of the World Heritage (WH) Committee. Special attention is given to reconstruction post-inscription within the framework of the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of destroyed cultural WH properties. However, guidance must also cover reconstruction pre-inscription because destroyed properties on the Tentative Lists of States Parties may be reconstructed and nominated for inscription on the WH List in the future. This article shifts the attention towards the latter. It revisits the pillars of OUV and elucidates the relation between key concepts to develop a roadmap for new nominations in line with the WH Convention and the growing understanding of heritage as dynamic process in scholarly literature. It explains that States Parties must provide a statement of cultural significance (SCS) to meet the qualifying condition of continuity, and a heritage impact report (HIR) to meet the qualifying conditions of compatibility and distinction. Cultural criteria (i)–(vi) form a reminder list rather than a selection list in the roadmap. The SCS and HIR are, instead, the criteria on the basis of which reconstructed cultural properties may be inscribed. Moreover, authenticity and integrity are rendered redundant by the three qualifying conditions. As a result, this article makes a timely, original, academic and operational contribution to the ongoing preparation of guidance at the international level.

show abstract

“…8 Harper 1998Riles 2010;Hull 2012;Müller 2013b. 9 Cleere 1996Cleere , 2011Turtinen 2000;Musitelli 2002;Fowler 2003;Francioni and Lenzerini 2008;Schmitt 2009;Rao 2010;Fejérdy 2010;Araoz 2011;Bertacchini, Saccone, and Santagata 2011;Hall 2011;Jokilehto 2011;Meskell , 2012Meskell , 2013bMeskell , 2014Meskell , 2015aStott 2011;von Droste 2011;Vrdoljak 2011;Brumann 2012Brumann , 2014Brumann , 2016Cameron and Rössler 2013;Labadi 2013;Gfeller 2013;James and Winter 2015;Logan and Wijesuriya 2015;Meskell and Brumann 2015;Hølleland and Johansson 2019; I. Bokova, Address by Ms Irina Bokova, UNESCO Director-General, on the Occasion of the Opening of the 36th Session of the World Heritage Committee, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation, 24 June 2012, unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0021/002167/216700e.pdf (accessed 12 June 2020). 10 Star and Griesemer 1989. to the World Heritage Convention's Operational Guidelines, and, in the final two sections, I turn to the revisions to paragraphs 40, 61, and 123 respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 9 Cleere 1996, 2011; Turtinen 2000; Musitelli 2002; Fowler 2003; Francioni and Lenzerini 2008; Schmitt 2009; Rao 2010; Fejérdy 2010; Araoz 2011; Bertacchini, Saccone, and Santagata 2011; Frey, Pamini, and Steiner 2011; Hall 2011; Jokilehto 2011; Meskell 2011, 2012, 2013b, 2014, 2015a, 2018; Stott 2011; von Droste 2011; Vrdoljak 2011; Brumann 2012, 2014, 2016; Cameron and Rössler 2013; Labadi 2013; Gfeller 2013; James and Winter 2015; Logan and Wijesuriya 2015; Meskell and Brumann 2015; Meskell et al 2015; Meskell, Liuzza, and Brown 2015; Hølleland and Johansson 2019; I. Bokova, Address by Ms Irina Bokova, UNESCO Director-General, on the Occasion of the Opening of the 36th Session of the World Heritage Committee, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation, 24 June 2012, (accessed 12 June 2020). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The making and UN-making of consensus: Institutional inertia in the UNESCO World Heritage Committee

Liuzza

2021

Int J Cult Prop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the process of text-based negotiations surrounding the documents of the 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. It focuses on revisions to the Operational Guidelines of the Convention and utilizes ethnographic observation and textual examination to show how alternative, and often the most controversial, proposals are silenced through the practice of consensus. It expands anthropological perspectives on the inner workings of intergovernmental institutions and adds to the literature on heritage regimes by providing examples from United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) most prestigious intergovernmental committee. Ultimately, the article enhances our understanding of the political tensions and practical limitations of policymaking within intergovernmental organizations in the United Nations, including UNESCO.

show abstract

‘…to exercise in all loyalty, discretion and conscience’: on insider research and the World Heritage Convention

Cited by 10 publications

References 40 publications

How (Not) to “Study Up”: Points and Pitfalls When Studying International Heritage Regimes

How (Not) to “Study Up”: Points and Pitfalls When Studying International Heritage Regimes

Roadmap for the Nomination of Reconstructed Cultural Properties for Inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage List

The making and UN-making of consensus: Institutional inertia in the UNESCO World Heritage Committee

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About