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.
Subject
Urban Studies,General Business, Management and Accounting,Geography, Planning and Development,Conservation
Reference87 articles.
1. Alanen, A.R. and Melnick, R.Z. (2000), “Why cultural landscape preservation?”, in Melnick, R. (Ed.), Preserving Cultural Landscapes in America, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, pp. 1-21.
2. Goodbye justice, hello happiness: welcoming positive psychology to the law;Deakin Law Review,2005
3. Performance and performativity at heritage sites;Museum and Society,2003
4. Bendix, R. (2011), “Héritage et patrimoine: de leurs proximités sémantiques et de leurs implications”, in Bortolotto, C. (Ed.), Le patrimoine culturel immatériel, Éditions de la Maison des sciences de l’homme, Paris, pp. 99-121.
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献