{"id":6945,"date":"2025-04-24T06:50:18","date_gmt":"2025-04-24T06:50:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/?page_id=6945"},"modified":"2025-04-25T00:59:04","modified_gmt":"2025-04-25T00:59:04","slug":"t14-s08-papers","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/t14-s08-papers\/","title":{"rendered":"T14\/S08: My Practice and Your Practice: Critical Reflections on Doing \u2018Heritage\u2019 Between Professionals and Publics"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Format: Paper presentations with discussion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Convenors:\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Neel Kamal Chapagain, Professor of Heritage Management, Ahmedabad University, Nepal\/India,\u00a0neelkamal.chapagain@gmail.com<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kamani Perera, Manager, Research and Development, Chartered Institute of Personnel Management, Colombo, Sri Lanka, kamani@cipmlk.org<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kylie Lower, Director and Principal Consultant, Blackwood Heritage Consulting, Adelaide, Australia, kylielower@blackwoodheritage.com<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This session aims to adopt a reflexive approach to heritage practices, calling upon both formal heritage professionals like archaeologists, architects, and others, as well as Indigenous communities and general public who may not recognise themselves as heritage professionals but do heritage anyway in their everyday lives. The term heritage is used here in the broadest sense \u2013 from the making of \u2018heritage\u2019, like craftsmanship, performance, and campaigns or activism to get something recognised as heritage, to \u2018managing\u2019 heritage as architects, archaeologists and others do. Across such a broad spectrum, we can see practitioners as \u2018heritage professionals\u2014those who are formally trained or recognised as such\u2014and others as public stakeholders who do heritage for their own interest. The intention of this session is to reflect, question and re-frame the modalities of heritage practice to bridge the gaps between professional and public perceptions of heritage and heritage practice. It is highly recommended that interested presenters\/speakers reflect on their own work rather than comment on others\u2019 work, as the session wishes to be reflexive in methodology and nature. However, a professional\u2019s work or discourse is encouraged to compare and contrast with the public\u2019s discourse and work in the same context, and vice versa. The conclusions ought to offer some thoughts or experiences on enhancing heritage practice by way of connecting to each other (professionals and publics).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Papers:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Digital Preservation of Cultural Heritage in India: With Special Reference to Institutional Repositories in Karnataka State<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Meeramani N., Librarian, JAIN (Deemed-to-be University), Bangalore, India<\/em>
Kamani Perera, Manager – Research and Development, Chartered Institute of Personnel Management, Sri Lanka<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The preservation of India\u2019s vast and diverse cultural heritage is vital for safeguarding the country\u2019s rich historical, cultural, and intellectual legacy. Digital technology plays a transformative role in this preservation effort, offering innovative solutions to address challenges related to physical deterioration, accessibility, and long-term conservation. Institutional libraries play a pivotal role in this modernisation process, focusing on the collection, display, editing, and publication of rare manuscripts written in a variety of scripts. The present study investigates the impact of digital technology on preserving India\u2019s cultural heritage. It explores the collections of various institutional repositories and the methods adopted for preservation, particularly digital preservation of cultural heritage resources. Interviews and observations were conducted in selected institutional repositories to examine the collection, digitisation and preservation method used in India to gather insights. The findings of the study reveal that institutional libraries house a vast repository of cultural heritage resources, including photographs, digital images, and other valuable materials. A significant portion of these collections has been digitised to ensure their preservation and enhance accessibility. This study highlights the digitisation and digital preservation practices undertaken by selected institutions and underscores their critical role in preserving India\u2019s cultural heritage for the present and future generations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The History of Conservation and Exploration of New Ways of Working: A Case Study from Old Dongola, Sudan<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tomomi Fushiya, Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A mosque in Old Dongola is the oldest preserved mosque in Sudan. The building was first established as a church or royal throne hall in the late ninth century. After its conversion in the fourteenth century, it served as a mosque until 1964. Among the ruined structures in the archaeological site, the building stands out; it is the only one that has kept most of its shape. A major reason that it was preserved to this date was that local communities used and cared for it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conservation of archaeological sites came under the responsibility of the Anglo-Egyptian government in the early 20th century in Sudan, and conservation of the mosque has been managed by the national government and professionals since then. Yet, the local communities’ skills and resources are involved in the maintenance of the building. The communities remember past maintenance works and their contributions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A new rehabilitation project, led by international and Sudanese professionals, closely works with the communities. This paper considers the history of the mosque’s conservation and the roles of communities and professionals and self-critically reflects on the recent project’s efforts to work together with the communities. The paper also draws attention to the ongoing conflict and heritage conservation in the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bridging the Gap: Collaborative Heritage Practices Between Professionals and Local Communities in South Asia: Special Reference to Bangladesh and Sri Lanka<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Md. Zillur Rahman, Ahsanullah University of Science & Technology, Bangladesh<\/em>
Anushka Earskin, Chartered Institute of Personnel Management, Colombo, Sri Lanka<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Heritage conservation in South Asia requires effective collaboration between professionals and local communities to preserve cultural identity and foster sustainable development. This study reveals collaborative heritage practices in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, focusing on how integrating local knowledge with professional expertise can enhance conservation outcomes. It explores case studies in architectural restoration, preservation of intangible cultural heritage, and adaptive reuse of historic sites, highlighting initiatives that prioritise community participation and ownership. In Bangladesh, the restoration of ancient mosques and the revival of traditional crafts demonstrate the role of local engagement in achieving authenticity and continuity. In Sri Lanka, community-driven projects such as the restoration of Dutch-era buildings and the management of archaeological heritage sites illustrate the value of combining grassroots insights with expert methodologies. The study identifies critical facilitators, including capacity-building, trust, and cultural sensitivity, while addressing challenges such as resource constraints and power dynamics. In the same vein, this research highlights the value of equitable collaborations that respect local traditions and empower communities, advocating for policy frameworks that support inclusive heritage management. By bridging the gap between professionals and communities, the study illustrates methods to preserve cultural heritage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Practice Commotion Contentions: Reflections from Cultural Heritage Research and Practice<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yashaswini Jayadevaiah, Dept of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this paper, the author reflexively discusses three archaeological and heritage commotions (each from different sites) from her research and practice engagements with three different sites. The first commotion discusses the point of contested history and heritage, noting the selective remembering and forgetting promoted by the state and embraced by the public without acknowledging historical contexts, narratives and impending sufferings in an attempt to promote nationhood and national identities. The second point discusses the convoluted knowledge involving mythology and archaeology and the necessity and challenge of deconstructing such knowledge claims about an excavated archaeological site. The third component for discussion brings in the non-alignment of the stakeholders’ expectations and heritage concerns vis-a-vis professional pedagogy and the challenges and dilemmas that the heritage practitioners deal with on a day-to-day basis from her practice at a temple restoration project. The paper concludes by outlining the author’s viewpoint on the issues raised and the courses of action the author has taken\u2014or plans to take\u2014to resolve these issues to the degree possible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is Your Heritage My Heritage? Urbanising Kandy\u2019s Urban Heritage<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Uditha Jinadasa, Dept of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka<\/em>
S. Subasinghe, Dept of Geography, Faculty of Arts, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka<\/em>
D.M.L.D. Dissanayaka, Dept of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka<\/em>
M.L.V. Mihiravi, Dept of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka<\/em>
S.A.N.N.T. Senarath, Dept of Geography, Faculty of Arts, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Based in the Sacred City of Kandy\u2014the capital of the last kingdom of Sri Lanka and a UNESCO World Heritage city\u2014this study evaluates the outcomes of over 35 years of urban heritage preservation efforts, led by professionals and managed by state heritage institutions. Using ArcGIS Survey123, we conducted a survey of 488 monuments listed by the Central Cultural Fund of Sri Lanka to assess their preservation standards. Our survey revealed that 87% of these monuments are privately owned, with 67% functioning as shops, 15% as houses, and 5% as shophouses. We found that 86% of the monuments have been modernised due to rapid urbanisation and commercialisation, which has adversely impacted the traditional streetscapes of the historic city. In contrast, the religious monuments\u2014comprising 4% of the total conserved buildings\u2014owned by chief incumbents, custodians, or religious institutions (and thus not privately owned)\u2014are generally in good preservation status. Our findings raise an important question: Does an old building identified as \u2018heritage\u2019 by professionals also hold heritage value for its owners? In conclusion, we highlight the need for a sustainable and inclusive approach to urban heritage preservation in historic cities of South Asia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Make the Past Visible to Empower the Present<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Birgitta Fossum, Saemien Sijte, Norway<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As an Indigenous Sami myself, and as the curator of an Indigenous museum, we are working in close co-operation with the south Sami society. I want to reflect on the work, both to see what it has meant for Sami society, but also to gauge whether our work has begun to have an influence on the Norwegian narrative about Sami history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Saemien Sijte, a South Sami Museum, Norway, has, since the beginning, been surveying and documenting Sami archaeological sites. This work has always been in close cooperation with the custodians of tradition, and together we have registered over 3000 archaeological sites.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This work has two aims. The first is to strengthen the knowledge of both the administrative authorities and the research institutions, so that the remains of past Sami life are protected by law and made available for research. In the past, research on south Sami prehistory and history has been almost invisible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second aim has been to strengthen South Sami identity and self-esteem. The cultural heritage sites pass on traditions and knowledge, but also create historical and cultural continuity that strengthens the sense of belonging to the homeland and the cultural landscape.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Towards a Possible Dialogue: Rethinking Detectorism and Heritage Management in Argentina<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Micaela Grzegorczyk and Virginia M. Salerno, CONICET. Instituto de Arqueolog\u00eda, Facultad de Filosof\u00eda y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Argentina, metal detecting has gained public visibility in the last decade, largely due to social media and mass communication. Metal detectorists sometimes recover archaeological objects protected under national heritage laws, leading to tensions with archaeological research groups. This situation has escalated through media reports, social media controversies, and academic debates on heritage legislation and archaeology\u2019s role in heritage management. We understand these actors as cultural agents\u2014non-professionals who, through their knowledge and interests, engage in projects to preserve archaeological heritage. For them, searching for objects is not just a hobby but a way to connect with the past and reclaim local narratives often excluded from official history. These actors claim local histories from a position of legal marginality, contrasting with archaeologists\u2019 perspectives. The conflicts involved, expressed in legal terms, highlight a gap between professional knowledge and non-institutional appropriations of the past. Rather than reducing the debate to a binary opposition between legal and illegal, professional and amateur, we stress the need for new forms of dialogue to redirect regulations and build bridges instead of deepening divisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Artefacts\u2019 or \u2018Belongings\u2019: How We Talk about Things<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Anna Wessman, Dept of Cultural History, University Museum of Bergen, University of Bergen, Norway<\/em>
Suzie Thomas, Dept of Heritage, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium<\/em>
Sophie Woodward, Dept of Sociology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK<\/em>
Bonnie Pitblado, Dept of Anthropology, University of Oklahoma, USA<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Terms like \u2018prehistory\u2019 and \u2018artefact\u2019 reinforce settler-colonialist perspectives, privileging Western scientific jargon above terminology that others may find more respectful. In our recent Archaeologies<\/em> (2025) paper, we propose using \u2018belongings\u2019 to acknowledge the diverse meanings of archaeological objects and their cultural significance. This shift aligns with a broader movement toward more culturally informed, respectful practices in archaeology and museums.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this debate presentation, we highlight the importance of incorporating Indigenous perspectives and those of other communities with personal connections to material culture. Expanding how we interpret archaeological collections allows for a more nuanced understanding, particularly through worldviews that see objects as having agency or even life forces. By examining the lives of objects as \u2018belongings,\u2019 we recognise their integral role in shaping people\u2019s lives and histories. This approach challenges the limitations of conventional terminology and promotes more inclusive ways of thinking about material culture. Words shape how we value and interact with the past, and shifting language is a step toward more ethical engagement with archaeological materials. Through this reframing, we encourage a dialogue that respects the diverse relationships people have with the material traces of history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Facilitating Citizen-Led Heritage Governance: Reflections on the \u2018Save Vetal Tekdi\u2019 Movement in Pune<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prajakta Divekar, Research Fellow, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research, Pune, India<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The citizen movement to save Vetal Tekdi in Pune exemplifies grassroots activism to protect urban natural and cultural heritage amidst rapid urbanisation. This paper critically examines the movement through environmental heritage governance, participatory democracy, and urban policy contradictions. The movement challenges proposed development projects, including the Bal Bharti-Paud Phata Road, High Capacity Mass Transit Route (HCMTR), and twin tunnels, which threaten Vetal Tekdi\u2019s ecology and cultural significance. Initiatives such as the \u2018Yellow Ribbon Campaign\u2019, birding marathons, and citizen manifestos highlighted the community’s deep attachment with the hill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This paper analyses how this citizen-led movement mobilised expertise and participatory governance- public protests, petitions, and election manifestos, to challenge state-led development priorities. It critiques the tension between top-down urban planning and bottom-up environmental heritage advocacy, reflecting broader debates about sustainable development in Indian cities. While the movement influenced public discourse, it faced challenges navigating legal frameworks and institutional inertia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By situating the movement within the India\u2019s urban environmentalism, this paper highlights its role as a model for citizen-led heritage governance, while addressing limitations such as fragmented coalitions and political co-optation. The paper concludes by reflecting on the implications for reimagining urban development that prioritises ecological sustainability and cultural preservation over unchecked modernisation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Archaeologists as Facilitators: Archaeological Heritage and Social Cohesion in Lima, Peru<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Daniel Dante Saucedo Segami, College of Policy Science, Ritsumeikan University, Japan<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Archaeological remains in urban areas face a diversity of problems related to their management and preservation. On one hand, most stakeholders recognise their value as \u2018heritage\u2019 and the importance of preserving history. On the other hand, legislation and management rules limit the possibilities for adapting new ways to connect these sites with modern populations. In the case of urban areas, this problem is enhanced by the demand for free land to be used for development projects and public infrastructure, as well as green-open spaces. Particularly in districts that are far from the tourist areas, the question on how to manage and use archaeological remains becomes a conflict issue between government institutions, neighbours and archaeologists. Since 2015, the Public Archaeology Program \u201cHuacas de La Molina\u201d has been developing different strategies to solve this problem in the residential district of La Molina (Lima, Peru) by identifying key stakeholders and their interests in archaeological remains as heritage. In this paper, an idea of which role archaeologists may take in these situations will be introduced by analysing the results of these strategies.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Format: Paper presentations with discussion Convenors:\u00a0 Neel Kamal Chapagain, Professor of Heritage Management, Ahmedabad University, Nepal\/India,\u00a0neelkamal.chapagain@gmail.com Kamani Perera, Manager, Research and Development, Chartered Institute of Personnel Management, Colombo, Sri Lanka, kamani@cipmlk.org Kylie Lower, Director and Principal Consultant, Blackwood Heritage Consulting, Adelaide, Australia, kylielower@blackwoodheritage.com This session aims to adopt a reflexive approach to heritage practices, calling upon both […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1157,"featured_media":276,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"pmpro_default_level":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":{"0":"post-6945","1":"page","2":"type-page","3":"status-publish","4":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"pmpro-has-access","7":"czr-hentry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/6945","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1157"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6945"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/6945\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7404,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/6945\/revisions\/7404"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/276"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6945"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}