The 1992 adoption of ‘cultural landscape’ as an additional type of recognition on the World Heritage List was supposed to be a ground-breaking moment for heritage management in Australia and New Zealand, as both countries had pushed for the recognition of continuing and associative landscapes to change the perceptions and practices of heritage. Yet fast-forward to 2015, and one might be left wondering what happened? While there is no longer a need to convince people of the value of cultural landscapes for heritage management, the incorporation of cultural landscape ideas and practices into our property-based ‘heritage frame’ with its preoccupation with land use and development controls appears to have stalled. At the same time, a growing community of heritage studies scholars are critical of heritage practice, and position cultural landscapes as an initiative that the World Heritage system was ‘forced’ to adopt in order ‘to incorporate a broader range of values around heritage’ (Harrison 2013: 115). This critique of the under-theorised heritage field has had some stimulating effects, but falls short of providing guidance for practitioners. To consider the aspirations and directions for the future for cultural landscapes within heritage practices, this paper suggests that we need to look at heritage theory and practice together, focussing on innovation wherever we find it, and develop further theorisation through our experiences. We suggest that innovation can come from local settings away from more formalised heritage processes, where communities, practitioners, managers and researchers are trying new things as a result of their encounters with cultural landscapes, and where they are learning and ‘knowing-by-doing’.

Emerging archaeological evidence from archaeological sites in northern Cape York has the potential to shed light on indigenous cultural practices relating to turtle hunting. This paper explores the nexus between cultural practice and indigenous ecological knowledge and ‘lost’ knowledge which has implications for how Traditional Owners may chose to manage resources today. Often when we hear of Indigenous environmental management techniques the focus is on management ‘practices’ e.g mosaic burning, rather than ‘systems’. While not denying that some practices may be useful or cost effective alternatives to other ‘western science’ based land management practices the question needs to be asked: how effective can these be in ecosystem management if adopted in isolation of the other components of Indigenous management systems? Lines (2006) has challenged the efficacy of Indigenous management systems and questioned their sustainability but provides little evidence that he understands the complexity of such systems and the interrelationship of nature and culture, or indeed that he believes such systems exist. A more valid question is, what happens to these complex systems when key elements are discontinued, lost or destroyed? Perhaps if we, in partnership with Aboriginal communities, explore the changes to such systems over time we can begin to understand the consequences of these changes and the implications for long term species and ecosystem management. This paper provides preliminary outcomes of a current archaeological project which may further this discussion. At the time when European’s were first re cor ding observations along the Cape York Peninsula coastline, Aboriginal people and their Torres Strait Islander neighbours were hunting and consuming turtle and dugong in numbers great enough to be remarked on. Sites comprising heaped turtle and dugong bones were noted and in some cases sketched. Populations of both animals were however extremely healthy, the size of herds of dugong (Thorne 1876; Jack son et al 2001) and the proliferation of turtle were also remarked on. Was this just some kind of coincidence or was there an Indigenous system in place that actively contributed to the sustainability of this resource?

The new developments in historic urban areas in a country frequently make the cities look similar instead of keeping the unique image of the place. Historical image of the city is usually re-created and used to attract tourists from different cultural backgrounds. In some historic urban areas, reproduction works are introduced to re-establish the historical images which have been wiped out due to the previous developments. This paper aims to construct the basic guideline for interpretation and presentation of historic urban areas based on the notion of historic urban landscape and the ICOMOS Ename Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites. Three major issues are identified, which are; 1) the deficiency interpretation and presentation of the intangible value, 2) excessive focus on tourism business purpose, and 3) reproduction work and authenticity in historic urban landscape. This paper proposes two key points, based on the concept of historic urban landscape, which are; 1) interpretation and presentation of historic urban areas should focus on the image of the city in both tangible and intangible aspects  and 2) the tangible and intangible elements of image of the city for interpretation and presentation.

The United States has always been diverse. Now it is more so than ever. Yet historic preservation has done little to address this reality. How should historic preservation present racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse historical experiences? How should it serve diverse constituencies?

Japan’s heritage conservation policy and practice, as deployed through its foreign aid programs, has become one of the main means through which post-World War II Japan has sought to mark its presence in the international arena, both globally and regionally. Heritage conservation has been intimately linked to Japan’s sense of national identity, in addition to its self-portrayal as a responsible global and regional citizen.

This book explores the concepts of heritage, nationalism and Japanese national identity in the context of Japanese and international history since the second half of the nineteenth century. In doing so, it shows how Japan has built on its distinctive approach to conservation to develop a heritage-based strategy, which has been used as part of its cultural diplomacy designed to increase its ‘soft power’ both globally and within the Asian region. More broadly, Natsuko Akagawa underlines the theoretical nexus between the politics of heritage conservation, cultural diplomacy and national interest, and in turn highlights how issues of heritage conservation practice and policy are crucial to a comprehensive understanding of geo-politics. Heritage Conservation and Japan’s Cultural Diplomacy will be of great interest to students, scholars and professionals working in the fields of heritage and museum studies, heritage conservation, international relations and Asian/Japanese studies.

Kaufman, Ned. 1998. Heritage and the Cultural Politics of Preservation. Places 11(3): pp. 58-65.

Since the signing of the 1992 European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Council of Europe) (henceforth the Valetta Convention), the Netherlands have been experimenting with the manner in which to implement its contents. The eventual choices that have been made came straight from an essential body of thought from the Valletta Convention: the archaeological record must be protected in situ as much as possible and should be an integrated and weighted part of spatial development (Willems, Kars, and Hallewas 1997). When the legislation (the revised Historic Buildings and Ancient Monuments Act [Wet op de Archeologische Monumentenzorg]) was finally enacted in 2007, archaeological sites became legislatively protected in zoning plans. Before a building permit is issued, archaeological research needs to be conducted. This integration of archaeology in spatial planning creates tension between the quality and quantity of archaeological academic research and spatial quality, which is strived for in the spatial planning and design process. This desire to improve spatial quality in the spatial planning process implies that archaeology, which is considered by law to be a condition in this spatial planning process, is to be one of the providers of that quality.

I’m here to talk about celebrating mountain heritage, its Facts and Fantasies – its Myths and Legends – its associations and meanings, or rather one legend in particular and its expression today. In doing so I shall touch briefly on such expressions elsewhere and possible tensions or conflicts that may arise in the management of such associations and meanings.

La prise en compte du patrimoine culturel immatériel occupe une position centrale dans les nouveaux défis auxquels sont confrontées aujourd’hui les diverses communautés culturelles. Françoise Lempereur resitue brièvement la mondialisation et la diversité culturelle et montre que, face à ces deux orientations de base, les réactions des communautés peuvent être radicalement opposées : acceptation ou refus des métissages et, dans le cas de refus, approche essentialiste ou évolutionniste. Cette dernière sacrifie le patrimoine au profit de modes, sous-tendues par de nouvelles technologies ; la première privilégie le recours au passé idéalisé, dans ce que l’auteur nomme une politique de « folklorisation ». Fort heureusement, certaines communautés réussissent un métissage positif et rajeunissent leur patrimoine grâce à de nouvelles formes de communication. C’est le cas de la municipalité de Clare en Nouvelle-Écosse, porte-drapeau d’une identité acadienne en plein essor. Facing the new cultural challenges: the Acadians of Nova Scotia Taking into consideration the intangible cultural heritage holds a central position in the new challenges confronting today’s various cultural communities. Françoise Lempereur briefly repositions globalization and cultural diversity and shows that, faced with these two basic guidelines, communities’ reactions can be radically opposed: acceptance or refusal of the fusion and in the case of refusal, an essentialist or evolutionary approach. The latter sacrifices heritage for the benefit of trends, supported by new technologies; the first emphasizes the use of an idealised past in what the author identifies as a policy of “folklorisation”. Fortunately, some communities accomplish a positive combination and revitalize their heritage through new forms of communication. This is the case of the municipality of Clare in Nova Scotia, the flag-bearer of a growing Acadian identity.

Deacon, Harriet J. 2012. Examples of community-based ICH transmission and practice needs being met by research and documentation projects. Report of the First Intensive Researchers meeting on Communities and the 2003 Convention. IRCI (International Research Centre for ICH in the Asia-Pacific Region), Tokyo: pp.28-31.