Heritage is not automatically recognised as heritage simply because it is old or historically significant. Research by scientist Jeroen Rodenberg shows that social and political debates ultimately determine what is recognised as heritage. Narratives, interests and the power of persuasion prove to be at least as influential as historical facts.
Rodenberg explains: 'Many people see heritage as something self-evident. A historic building, landscape or tradition is considered heritage because of its history. In practice, however, the reality is quite different. There are frequent debates about which places, buildings or traditions should be preserved, which histories should be told and who has the authority to decide.'
Rodenberg's research examines how these processes of meaning-making and decision-making unfold within heritage policy. At its core is the question of how different actors seek to establish what counts as heritage and why.
UNESCO World Heritage and Batavialand as case studies
The research analyses two heritage policy processes in the Dutch province of Flevoland: the proposed nomination of the Noordoostpolder for the UNESCO World Heritage List and the establishment of the Batavialand Heritage Park. These case studies reveal how governments, heritage organisations, politicians and other stakeholders influence heritage decision-making through competing arguments and interests.
Historical facts alone are not enough
'My research shows that heritage does not emerge naturally. A building, landscape or tradition does not automatically become heritage simply because it is old or remarkable. It only acquires that status once people reach agreement about its significance,' says Rodenberg.
He continues: 'Historical facts are only one part of the decision-making process. Economic interests, political choices, emotions and persuasive narratives also shape which places, buildings and traditions are ultimately recognised as heritage. Heritage is therefore primarily constructed through social and political debate.'
His research also demonstrates that these debates can take very different forms. 'Sometimes they take place openly in politics and the media, while at other times they remain largely confined to the heritage sector itself,' Rodenberg adds.
Relevant to heritage policy and public debate
The findings offer new insights for governments, heritage organisations and other parties involved in heritage policy and political decision-making.
'Conflicts over heritage are rarely about the past alone. They often involve competing economic interests, social identities and administrative preferences. Recognising these interests at an early stage enables policymakers to organise dialogue more effectively and helps prevent debates from reaching an unnecessary impasse,' Rodenberg says.
According to him these insights are relevant to public debates on issues including the conservation of historic monuments, area development, World Heritage, museums, and other heritage projects where a range of interests converge.
Rodenberg: 'My research shows how policymakers, heritage organisations, civil society groups, businesses and members of the public attribute different meanings to heritage, and why decision-making in this area sometimes reaches an impasse. These insights could help policymakers develop more effective and inclusive heritage policies.'
Research methodology
For this research, Rodenberg analysed policy documents, council proposals, minutes of meetings, reports, newspaper articles and other publicly available sources. 'By comparing these different sources, I was able to reconstruct how stakeholders assign meaning to heritage, which arguments they use and why some perspectives ultimately become more influential than others,' he concludes.