The Concept[s] of Heritage | The Thirteenth International Conference of Young Researchers in Heritage

In spite of their similar goals (heritage discourses or processes) and of their astronomical rise in the last number of years, critical heritage studies and les études de la patrimonialisation mostly evolved in separate silos. Centred around distinct paradigms (critical theory/constructivism), these two lines of inquiry have also remained on the margins of the civil society on which their effect is still marginal. The inadaptability of the processes of the production of heritage that they each denounce, thus remains in effect, specifically when taking into account the hegemonic shortcomings to the hierarchic approach, and to the underlying exclusion, of heritage politics. This situation has recently led to the proposal of a theoretical stepping back that permits the identification, in multiple cases, of transversal problem areas that are prone to structure and redeploy research and its academic and social benefits.

On the other hand, precisely within such problem areas, knowledge and the awareness of what signifies heritage in a given environment is an increasing challenge. While the “idea” of heritage, as it appeared in the 18^th century, was doomed to replicate concepts and practices originating in western Europe in the world of ideological systems, it was also asked, like any number of concepts, to gear itself, at the minimum, to different languages and to the times. In a postcolonial context, the manifestations (if not the recognition) of such cultural differences, paired with the growing engagement of local communities, fostered an impasse between systems of management that sees those in charge of policies questioning the validity of principals previously considered as universal. Inspired by emerging conceptual histories, researchers are thus noticing that “Heritage studies would do well to engage with some of [heritage] key concepts in a comparative conceptual way” (Berger et al. 2019).

It is to this invitation that we respond, by proposing to unite and mobilize the knowledge scattered around the all-encompassing problem of the identification and the legitimization of the varied and changing notions of heritage, among other notions currently marginalized given the hegemony of Eurocentric and dated conceptions, practices, and policies. It is a matter of, in one way or another, reversing the consolidated and widely circulated approach of the 1980s, to which the foundational work of Babelon and Chastel gave the explicit title, La notion de patrimoine, which transposes itself notably in the schematic hierarchy of heritage recognition, according to which what is recognized at the national level is more important than that which is recognized at the state level (and so on): in this way, all manner of local specificities that would see one form of heritage governed over another are completely eclipsed. How might public policies, in caring for witnesses of memory or collective experience, surpass this principle of exclusion? How can research contribute to the identification of what, in a given community or environment, constitutes heritage (whatever the name that it is given) and the implications of this notion on the heritage practices of conservation and valuation? How do we manage conflicts of values, representations and uses to which this awareness of multiple notions of heritage open the door?

With participants from seven countries, this Thirteenth International Conference of Young Researchers in Heritage probes these questions in order to examine the concept(s) of heritage, its various meanings, interpretations and uses of across the globe. This conference primarily seeks to examine the ontologies of heritage; that is, how the concept of heritage has changed over time, how is it changing presently, and what this might bring for the future.

Since 2005, the International Conference of Young Researchers in Heritage has invited young scholars to present their research on various aspects of heritage, and has been held in Canada, Europe and South America. The conferences are organized under the scientific supervision of the Canada Research Chair on Urban Heritage (Prof. Lucie K. Morisset and Prof. Luc Noppen, Université du Québec à Montréal and its partners. This Thirteenth edition is hosted by the Center for Heritage and Museum Studies at the Australian National University (Prof. Laurajane Smith), under the scientific direction of Dr Jessica Mace (UQAM) and Dr Yujie Zhu (ANU).

In spite of their similar goals (heritage discourses
or processes) and of their astronomical rise in the last number of years, critical
heritage studies and les études de la
patrimonialisation mostly evolved in separate silos. Centred around distinct
paradigms (critical theory/constructivism), these two lines of inquiry have
also remained on the margins of the civil society on which their effect is
still marginal. The inadaptability of the processes of the production of
heritage that they each denounce, thus remains in effect, specifically when taking
into account the hegemonic shortcomings to the hierarchic approach, and to the underlying
exclusion, of heritage politics. This situation has recently led to the
proposal of a theoretical stepping back that permits the identification, in
multiple cases, of transversal problem areas that are prone to structure and
redeploy research and its academic and social benefits.On the other hand, precisely within such problem
areas, knowledge and the awareness of what signifies heritage in a given
environment is an increasing challenge. While the “idea” of heritage, as it
appeared in the 18th century, was doomed to replicate concepts and practices
originating in western Europe in the world of ideological systems, it was also asked,
like any number of concepts, to gear itself, at the minimum, to different
languages and to the times. In a postcolonial context, the manifestations (if
not the recognition) of such cultural differences, paired with the growing
engagement of local communities, fostered an impasse between systems of
management that sees those in charge of policies questioning the validity of
principals previously considered as universal. Inspired by emerging conceptual
histories, researchers are thus noticing that “Heritage studies would do well
to engage with some of [heritage] key concepts in a comparative conceptual way”
(Berger et al. 2019).

It is to this invitation that we respond,
by proposing to unite and mobilize the knowledge scattered around the all-encompassing
problem of the identification and the legitimization of the varied and changing
notions of heritage, among other notions currently marginalized given the
hegemony of Eurocentric and dated conceptions, practices, and policies. It is a
matter of, in one way or another, reversing the consolidated and widely circulated
approach of the 1980s, to which the foundational work of Babelon and Chastel
gave the explicit title, La notion de
patrimoine, which transposes itself notably in the schematic hierarchy of
heritage recognition, according to which what is recognized at the national
level is more important than that which is recognized at the state level (and
so on): in this way, all manner of local specificities that would see one form
of heritage governed over another are completely eclipsed. How might public
policies, in caring for witnesses of memory or collective experience, surpass
this principle of exclusion? How can research contribute to the identification
of what, in a given community or environment, constitutes heritage (whatever
the name that it is given) and the implications of this notion on the heritage
practices of conservation and valuation? How do we manage conflicts of values,
representations and uses to which this awareness of multiple notions of
heritage open the door?With participants from seven countries, this Thirteenth International Conference of Young Researchers in Heritage probes these questions in order to examine the concept(s) of heritage, its various meanings, interpretations and uses of across the globe. This conference primarily seeks to examine the ontologies of heritage; that is, how the concept of heritage has changed over time, how is it changing presently, and what this might bring for the future.Since 2005, the International Conference of Young Researchers in Heritage has invited young scholars to present their research on various aspects of heritage, and has been held in Canada, Europe and South America. The conferences are organized under the scientific supervision of the Canada Research Chair on Urban Heritage (Prof. Lucie K. Morisset and Prof. Luc Noppen, Université du Québec à Montréal and its partners. This Thirteenth edition is hosted by the Center for Heritage and Museum Studies at the Australian National University (Prof. Laurajane Smith), under the scientific direction of Dr Jessica Mace (UQAM) and Dr Yujie Zhu (ANU).

En dépit de leur objet similaire (discours ou processus du patrimoine) et de leur croissance phénoménale ces dernières années, les critical heritage studies (CHS) et les études de la patrimonialisation (EP) ont plutôt évolué en vase clos. Campées autour de paradigmes distincts (théorie critique / constructivisme) ces deux lignées restent aussi en marge de la société civile sur laquelle leur effet est encore marginal. L’inadaptation des procédés de production du patrimoine, qu’elles dénoncent toutes deux, demeure donc, notamment eu égard aux travers hégémoniques, à l’approche hiérarchique et à l’exclusion sous-jacente des politiques patrimoniales. Cette situation a récemment conduit à proposer un recul théorique qui permettrait d’identifier, par-delà les cas démultipliés, des champs problématiques transversaux susceptibles de structurer et de redéployer la recherche et ses retombées scientifiques et sociales.D’autre part, précisément parmi de tels champs problématiques, la connaissance et la prise en compte effective de ce que signifie le patrimoine dans un milieu donné interpelle de manière grandissante. Bien que « l’idée » de patrimoine, telle qu’elle est apparue au XVIIIe siècle, ait été vouée à transposer dans le monde des systèmes idéologiques, des concepts et des pratiques originaires d’Europe occidentale, elle était aussi appelée, comme tous les concepts, à se moduler ad minima selon les langues et avec le temps. Dans un contexte postcolonial, les manifestations (sinon la reconnaissance) de telles différences culturelles, de pair avec l’engagement croissant de communautés locales, a engendré une impasse des systèmes de gestion qui voit les responsables des politiques questionner la validité de principes auparavant considérés comme universelle. Inspirés par l’histoire conceptuelle émergente, des chercheurs remarquent ainsi que “Heritage studies would do well to engage with some of [heritage] key concepts in a comparative conceptual way” (Berger et al. 2019).C’est à cette invitation que nous voulons répondre en proposant de mobiliser les savoirs dispersés autour de la problématique fédératrice de l’identification et de la légitimation des notions variées et changeantes du patrimoine, entre autres des notions présentement marginalisées du fait de l’hégémonie d’une conception, de pratiques et d’orientations politiques européanocentrées et datées. Il s’agit en quelque sorte de renverser l’approche consolidée et diffusée dans les années 1980, à laquelle l’ouvrage fondateur de Babelon et Chastel avait donné ce titre explicite, La notion de patrimoine, et qui se transpose notamment dans la hiérarchisation systématique des reconnaissances patrimoniales, selon laquelle ce qui est reconnu à l’échelon national est plus important que ce qui est reconnu à l’échelle locale (et ainsi de suite) : ainsi éclipse-t-on toute forme de spécificité locale qui présiderait à un patrimoine plutôt qu’un autre. Comment les politiques publiques, dans la prise en charge de témoins de la mémoire ou de l’expérience collective, peuvent-elles surpasser ce principe d’exclusion ? Comment la recherche peut-elle contribuer à l’identification de ce qui, dans une communauté ou un milieu donné, constitue du patrimoine (quel que soit le nom qu’on lui donne) et des implications de cette notion sur les pratiques patrimoniales de conservation et de mise en valeur ? Comment gérer les conflits des valeurs, des représentations et des usagesà laquelle cette prise en compte de notions plurielles de patrimoine ouvre la voie? Thanks to its participants from seven countries, this Thirteenth International Conference of Young Researchers in Heritage probes these questions in order to examine the concept(s) of heritage, its various meanings, interpretations and uses of across the globe. This conference primarily seeks to examine the ontologies of heritage; that is, how the concept of heritage has changed over time, how is it changing presently, and what this might bring for the future.Since 2005, the International Conference of Young Researchers in Heritage has invited young scholars to present their research on various aspects of heritage, and has been held in Canada, Europe and South America. The conferences are organized under the scientific supervision of the Canada Research Chair on Urban Heritage (Prof. Lucie K. Morisset and Prof. Luc Noppen, Université du Québec à Montréal and its partners. This Thirteenth edition is hosted by the Center for Heritage and Museum Studies at the Australian National University (Prof. Laurajane Smith), under the scientific direction of Dr Jessica Mace (UQAM) and Dr Yujie Zhu (ANU).

The theme