Participation in the Eighth World Archaeological Congress Kyoto, 28 August-2 September 2016

By 11 August, 2016Uncategorized

 

wac6

 

HESIOD team is organasing a session in the Eighth World Archaeological Congress (Kyoto, 28 August-2 September 2016).

Title: Cultural Heritage and Social Innovation

Theme: (T08) The Public, Heritage and Museums

Organiser(s): Jesús Fernández Fernández (UCL and La Ponte-Ecomuseum)
Alexander Herrera Wassilowsky (Universidad de los Andes/Colombia)
Carmen Pérez Maestro (La Ponte-Ecomuseum/Spain)

The session has been scheduled for August 30th at 14.20 to 16.20.

Session Abstract

The main consequence of the current global economical and social crisis is a progressive erosion of the welfare state. In this context, ‘social innovation’ as a concept takes on increasing importance worldwide as it is fundamental to achieve a systematic and integral social amelioration. The aim of this session is to bring together practical experiences of socially innovative persons or organisations in order to introduce an academic debate on the importance that social innovation represents in the field of cultural heritage and also to measure its scope.

In the field of cultural heritage, we use the term ‘social innovation’ when the following conditions are met:

  1. New solutions – e.g. products, services, models, methodologies, processes – are created complying best with the objectives of cultural heritagemanagement.
  2. Certain social needs (e.g. access to education, knowledge, culture, quality employment, new technologies, participation and democracy, environmental conservation, sustainable development, social inclusion, integration and gender equality) are met.
  3. New types of relationships and/or synergies are created between citizens or between citizens and institutions in relation to cultural heritage management.

The questions we propose for discussion are: Does cultural heritage contribute to create social innovations? Are the organisations in charge of cultural heritage management socially innovative? To which extent? How could they become more innovative? Who innovates and where?

Presentation 1: 

By Jesús Fernández Fernández (UCL/UK)

Title: Cultural heritage and social innovation: an introduction

Abstract: ‘Social innovation’ as a concept takes on increasing importance worldwide as it is fundamental to achieve a systematic and integral social amelioration. The aim of this paper is to introduce the discussion on the application of this concept in the field of cultural heritage. To this end, It is proposed to use the term ‘social innovation’ when the following conditions are met:
1. New solutions – e.g. products, services, models, methodologies, processes – are created complying best with the objectives of cultural  heritage management.
2. Certain social needs (e.g. access to education, knowledge, culture, quality employment, new technologies, participation and democracy,  environmental conservation, sustainable  development, social inclusion, integration and gender equality) are met.
3. New types of relationships and/or synergies are created between citizens or between citizens and institutions in relation to cultural heritage management.
Keywords: cultural heritage, social innovation, social change.

Presentation 2:

By Scott Gorringe, Diane Smith, Cressida Fforde (Australian National University).

Title: Indigenous knowledge governance in a post native title era: harnessing the past to shape the future.

Abstract: In 2015, the Federal Court recognised the Native Title of the Mithaka people of SW Queensland. The area is a nationally significant region yet despite the recent NT determination, Mithaka knowledge resources are poorly mapped and unintegrated. Knowledge about the Mithaka past is scattered across five data sets and includes information about cultural heritage, history, governance and language. For Mithaka to use this knowledge presents a complex challenge, particularly as information recorded by Europeans has been subject to interpretation processes
separate from those of its original practitioners and keepers. Using documentation about Mithaka cultural heritage made in the 1900s, this presentation examines the complexities & opportunities presented by discourses about the past and related Indigenous knowledge governance in a post-Native Title (& peri-colonial) era. What can be learned about Indigenous knowledge at the cultural interface, and how can people harness this for social good?
Keywords: Indigenous knowledge, cultural heritage.

Presentation 3:

By Leif Harald Fredheim (University of York)

Title: Sustaining Stewardship Communities by Digital Co-Creation

Abstract: In response to continued cuts to local government culture budgets, in the UK, and the resulting reduction of internal professional heritage capacity, the Council for British Archaeology and Department of Archaeology (University of York) have enacted a series of projects investigating and raising the capacity of community groups to take responsibility for stewarding local heritage. One of these involves developing a series of digital tools by co-creation with and for existing groups. This paper discusses the rationale for co-creation and reflects on the first stage of implementation: community-sourcing interpretations of heritage and its significance for collaboratively writing statements of significance.
Keywords: Inclusion, co-creation, heritage management.

Presentation 4:

By Jiahong Peng

Title: Archaeology and environmental education in museum

Abstract: We can find a lot of evidence about ecological resource use, and the interactive relationship between humans and the environment in archaeological research. Today, environmental change is an important issue. When seen together archaeology and environmental change can attract more peoples’ attention. For the promotion of knowledge and research results in archaeology, these should be connected to people´s everyday experiences with nature. The exhibition must be storytelling. Artifact displays, graphical explanations, and hands-on activities, can attract more attention, interest more people and promote more learning efficiency.
Keywords: Environmental changes, Environmental education, Archaeological exhibition, Archaeological hands-on activities.

Presentation 5:

By Carmen Pérez maestro (La Ponte Ecomuseum- Punku, centro de investigación andina).

Title: Social innovation ecosystems of cultural heritage: a definition and a study case (La Ponte-Ecomuséu, Spain)

Abstract: This paper proposes a theoretical framework for the creation of social innovation ecosystems of cultural heritage. The main vectors of these ecosystems would be cultural heritage and social needs, both integrated in an environment of equitable relations between public, private and
nonprofitable sectors. Our proposal is complemented by the preliminary results of an ongoing experimental process called La Ponte- Ecomuséu (Asturias, Spain). Agreements with other public and private entities -“owners” of heritage (church, state administration and individuals) were established in order to create a new model of heritage management that intended to open up possibilities and opportunities of sociocultural and economic development in a rural area. Thanks to this prototype, we can make a preliminary diagnosis of conditions that limit or favor the creation of cultural heritage social innovation ecosystems in a particular environment.
Keywords: social innovation ecosystems, cultural heritage management.

Other contributions

We will participate at the WAC Forum “Alternative Heritage Futures”.  This session has been scheduled for August 29th at 16.40 and our contribution is:

 

By Jesus Fernandez Fernandez (UCL and La Ponte-Ecomuseum) 

Title: Tout pour le peuple, rien par le peuple? Cultural heritage as a tool for social empowerment and innovation in a context of crisis and political change (Spain)

Abstract: The cultural heritage sector has not been a central part of the anti-austerity social movements activated in Spain since 15 May 2011. Museums and cultural heritage institutions respond to the state agendas and are often coopted by public administration, remaining distanced from radical social demands. Discourses about social benefits of heritage activations are simply administrative propaganda in Spain. Beyond the heritage frontier, there is a civil society that is beginning to demand more empowerment: this paper asks how we can break down this dividing wall between heritage and real social demands? It is possible for a real social use – not administrative abuse -of cultural heritage to beled by society and social organisations?

Leave a Reply

www.000webhost.com