UNESCO

Chair on Heritage Futures

Mångårigt SKB-samarbete med viktiga resultat

2022-03-10

När regeringen i januari 2022 sa ja till att bygga ett slutförvar för använt kärnbränsle i Forsmark i Östhammars kommun, lyfte flera aktörer frågan om hur informationsbevarande till framtida generationer ska utformas. Många menade att det nu är dags att växla upp forskningen om hur minnespraktiker och informationsöverföring till framtida generation ska organiseras och ske.

Sedan 2011 har jag och Cornelius Holtorf arbetat med dessa frågor. Det har vi bland annat gjort tillsammans med Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB (SKB). Med anledning av regeringens beslut blev jag nyfiken på vad SKB uppfattar att vårt arbete tillsammans har givit dem. Sofie Tunbrant är en av våra närmaste samarbetspartners på SKB. Under ett kort samtal med henne frågade jag vad hon ser som viktiga resultat från vårt samarbete.

 

Här är Sofie Tunbrants svar:

Under dessa lite mer än tio år har vårt samarbete bidragit på många sätt och jag vill speciellt lyfta fram två aspekter: ni har breddat våra perspektiv och ni har gett oss nya kontakter och därmed möjligheter att introducera frågan i flera sammanhang.

Ni har tagit med SKB in i många nya konstellationer där vi fått tillfälle att arbeta tillsammans inom områden och med personer som vi inte kände sedan tidigare. Ett av många exempel är att ni öppnat upp för oss att brett möta forskarvärlden, så vi har kunnat inleda samarbete med forskare och forskningsmiljöer. Ett fint exempel är vår medverkan i projektet Heritage Futures vid UCL, där vi blev inbjudna som partner. Ett annat exempel är tillfällen då vi kunnat mötas i gränslandet mellan forskning och konstnärlig gestaltning för att diskutera gemensamma frågor, som när ni arrangerade en workshop med rundabordssamtal i samarbete med kuratorn Ele Carpenter och Malmö Konstmuseum i anslutning till utställningen Perpetual Uncertainty.

Sammantaget har detta fått effekter hos oss på SKB. Vi har fått ett omfattande nätverk, som vi inte kunnat få till på egen hand. Det har hjälpt oss att utvecklas i våra sätt att se på och förstå frågan om informationsöverföring. Vi har också kunnat skapa en mer fördjupad kunskap om vad komplexiteten i frågan handlar om. På så sätt har vårt samarbete gett oss många nya insikter, kunskaper och möjligheter.

Ni har också tagit med SKB i nationella och internationella konstellationer som vi inte kunnat delta i utan vårt samarbete. Det gör att SKB har kunnat berätta om sitt arbete med informationsbevarande i nya sammanhang. Ett exempel är konferensen Information and Memory for Future Decision-Making i Stockholm 2019. Här kunde vi under tre dagars seminarier och diskussioner arbeta med frågan tillsammans med representanter från bland annat kommuner, miljöorganisationer och myndigheter.

Genom våra samarbeten har SKB kunnat introducera frågan om informationsbevarande i anslutning till slutförvaren med radioaktivt avfall i en mångfald av sammanhang. Det finns flera aktörer som arbetar med informationsbevarande på lång sikt, men som inte tidigare kopplat sitt arbete till SKB:s slutförvar. Att fler personer och aktörer känner till och reflekterar över frågan gör att den hålls levande. Det är avgörande för att samhället ska kunna arbeta med de lösningar som krävs för att framtiden ska ha de kunskaper och verktyg de behöver.

av Anders Högberg

Prof Anders Högberg UNESCO Chair on Heritage Futures

Professor Anders Högberg UNESCO Chair on Heritage Futures

 

Heritage Futures, webplats HÄR

Perpetual Uncertainty, info HÄR

Information and Memory for Future Decision-Making, rapport HÄR

Strålsäkerhetsmyndigheten har nyligen publicerat en rapport där vårt arbete lyfts fram, den nås HÄR

Cultural Heritage in War: Making Ukraine’s Past and Future

2022-03-03

Recording available here! Cultural Heritage in War: Making Ukraine’s Past and Future youtu.be/CpOwrDecaxI Thursday, March 3, 2022, 1:30 pm – 2:40 pm
Speaker
Sofia Dyak
Kateryna Busol
Cornelius Holtorf

Russia’s ongoing military campaign against Ukraine causes progressively more damage in all walks of life, including cultural heritage. Monuments, archaeological sites, museums, archives, industrial heritage complexes, old and new residential districts, urban spaces, all part of local, national, European, and world heritage, are being destroyed in Ukraine. The Hague Convention and the related protocols contain specific measures on how to deal with cultural property in war, but heritage is so much more: it is how individuals and communities connect to, feel about, and identify with these sites. Heritage is all those assets from the past that people value and care for in the present, to be able to pass it on to their children for generations to come. When heritage is destroyed, the cohesion and future of the communities is destroyed. CEU CHSP invited three experts in various aspects of cultural heritage to discuss how the ongoing war impacts heritage in Ukraine, what role the politics of heritage and memory plays in the present conflict, and how heritage, heritage experts, and heritage organizations can contribute to a peaceful future.

Panelists:
Sofia Dyak is a historian and sociologist, director of the Center for Urban History in Lviv, Ukraine. Her research focuses on post-war urban recovery and transformation in Eastern Europe, heritage infrastructures and practices in socialist cities, and their legacies.
Kateryna Busol is a Ukrainian lawyer specialising in international human rights, humanitarian, criminal law, transitional justice, gender and cultural heritage protection.
Cornelius Holtorf is Professor of Archaeology and holds a UNESCO Chair on Heritage Futures at Linnaeus University in Kalmar, Sweden.

Moderators:

Dóra Mérai and Volodymyr Kulikov, CEU, Cultural Heritage Studies Program

https://events.ceu.edu/2022-03-03/cultural-heritage-war-making-ukraines-past-and-future

Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies

2022-02-23

Nicklas Larsen at Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies did an interview with me exploring the concepts of heritage futures and futures literacy, about decolonisation, and about digitalisation.

My conclusion at the end:

The point is to promote and provoke thinking in different ways. That we become aware of our baggage, the things we take for granted because we were born at a particular time and place. Many people have difficulties with that, as they feel passionate about certain traditions that are considered so important that they seemingly need to continue forever. But they might not, at least not in the way they are perceived today, and another strategy may be asked for in the future. To me, futures literacy is that kind of liberating skill where you increasingly become aware of these limitations in your thinking.

 

Heritage as Reuse

2022-02-21

For two days in February 2022, I contributed to a workshop at the Italian Politecnico di Torino, entitled “Designing the future of the past” and discussing contemporary theories of conservation. The participants were some 15 PhD students in Architecture and Design. The responsible organizer was Matteo Robiglio, founding director in 2017 of the University’s Future Urban Legacy Lab. Robiglio is an architect interested in adaptive reuse. Among others, he authored the book, RE-USA: 20 American Stories of Adaptive Reuse. A Toolkit for Post-Industrial Cities (Jovis, 2017).

This is a topic close to my own interests. For one thing, my own Doctoral research project was about reuse of megalithic architecture in the distant past (adaptive or not). For another, I would be inclined to argue that designated cultural heritage constitutes in itself a form of creative reuse of objects inherited from the past. And this is where Robiglio disagrees – why?

In RE-USA (pp. 177-8, 192-3, 203, 214-5, 219), Robiglio contrasts people creatively re-using inherited structures in any suitable way with others who are carefully documenting and meticulously conserving a fragmented heritage of the historic past. Whereas the former, for Robiglio (inspired, among others, by Viollet-Le-Duc and Halbwachs and in contrast to Ruskin and Morris), is an expression of living traditions pragmatically creating something for their own time, the latter is an ever-growing aberration that led to the sanitization and commodification of the ‘heritage industry’. He goes on to state that whereas in heritage preservation, locality is inherited and must be preserved, in adaptive reuse, a new form of locality is being produced within the same spatial frame. Overall, Robiglio ends up with a dichotomy that looks about like this:


I would argue that the left column becomes nothing but a caricature as soon as heritage is recognised for what it is: a particular response to older structures that emerged at a certain time in modern history and is connected with a body of creative ideas linked to notions such as National Romanticism. Since then, the authorised heritage discourse has been changing continuously, incorporating ideals of education, development, and community engagement, among others. Indeed, there is a discernible transition from an initial focus in heritage management on safeguarding tangible remains to one on negotiating multiple societal values and now increasingly to ensuring important uses for communities. Heritage, too, constitutes a creative change from how the remains of the past were seen before, and it has brought about various hybrids between past and present, incorporating new ideas and meanings, often fairly pragmatically, and with a noticeable agenda for a future to come.

I suspect that Robiglio presented a different analysis in RE-USA first and foremost as a pragmatic move to establish a creative contrast between conservation and reuse, benefitting his agenda of promoting adaptive reuse. The concept of heritage futures recognizes that heritage, too, contributes to future-making. This is now increasingly becoming explicit, e.g. in the Foresight Initiative of the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM) exploring how to apply strategic foresight for thinking about cultural heritage and the contribution it can make to people’s lives in the decades to come.

Indeed, the past is becoming an active force for shaping the future – which is what Robiglio’s PhD workshop in Torino explored. I am looking forward to more collaboration!

Designing the Future of the Past

2022-02-17

Cornelius Holtorf was invited as a keynote speaker and presented on “Futures Literacy: How to Bring World Heritage Up To Date” for more than 20 participants in the international Doctoral student seminar entitled Designing the Future of the Past held at the Politecnico di Torino, Italy (17-18 February 2022). – His first trip after the pandemic to meet colleagues and students abroad!

The agenda of the seminar was very exciting indeed. It involved to present

the contemporary discourse in the conservation field across the emerging theories of Critical Heritage Studies, Counterpreservation, Curated Decay, Negative Legacies, and Ruination. Such novel theories challenge an unquestioned relationship between design practice and preservation, considering the past as an active force for shaping the future, and opening new options for intervention (or not) on preexistences.

Heritage and Foresight

2022-02-03

Since 2021, I have been advising the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM) in their Heritage Foresight initiative.

This is why foresight matters to ICCROM:

The events of the last few years have demonstrated time and again that the world is rapidly changing, and with it, the cultural heritage sector. Out of mounting global uncertainties rises an urgent need to reconsider how strategic planning can help us better prepare for the future. Within this context, we explore the concept of strategic foresight and highlight ICCROM’s recent investigation into the future of cultural heritage.

We see enormous value in applying strategic foresight to how we think about cultural heritage and the contribution it can make to people’s lives in the decades to come if properly safeguarded. As an organization charged with promoting conservation in all corners of the globe, we have an obligation to proactively identify external forces and address their potential impacts, and also put forward a compelling vision for a future in which the benefits of cultural heritage are fully harnessed. Through foresight, we can begin to form this bigger picture.

Here is ICCROM’s short explanation of strategic foresight (on youtube):

 

Where Heritage Meets Violence

2022-02-02

An essay series curated by UNESCO Chair Postdoctoral Fellow Annalisa Bolin, “Where Heritage Meets Violence“, has recently launched at Items: Insights from the Social Sciences, a publication of the Social Science Research Council (New York). Each week during February and March 2022, this series publishes an essay by scholars around the world focusing on how cultural heritage and violence intersect and what we can learn from the dynamics between heritage and different forms of violence, both past and present. The series opens with Bolin’s introduction, “Violent Encounters: Cultural Heritage and Contemporary Dynamics of Violence“, which examines contemporary discussions and recent research on the connection between cultural heritage and violence—physical, symbolic, and structural.

Kärnavfallsfrågan i media

2022-01-27

Idag tar den Svenska regeringen beslutet om slutförvar för kärnavfall.

I det sammanhanget blev Cornelius Holtorf flera gånger de senaste dagarna intervjuat om långtidsminne av slutförvaret och kärnavfall. Anders Högberg intervjuades i Svenska Dagbladet.

Radio P4 Kalmar (27 jan 22): Så ska man kommunicera med svenskarna 100 000 år i framtiden

Radio P1 Studio Ett (26 jan 22): Hur ska slutförvaringen kommuniceras till eftervärlden?

TT 24 & 29 jan 22: Minibladet, Norrländska Socialdemokraten, Södermanlands Nyheter, Mariestads-Tidningen (2 feb 2022), Ny Teknik, Nya Wermlands-Tidningen, Nerikes Allehanda, Katrineholms Kuriren, Motala & Vadstena Tidning, Enköpings-Posten (31 jan 22), Aftonbladet, Dagens Näringsliv, E55, Helsingborgs Dagblad Premium, MSN, Sydsvenskan Premium, Göteborgs-Posten, Norran, Piteå-Tidningen, Vestmanlands Läs Tidning, Barometern (29 jan 22), Gefle Dagblad (27 jan 22), Västerbottens kuriren, Folkbladet Västerbotten (26 jan 22), Sydsvenska dagbladet (25 & 29 jan 22), Skånska dagbladet (24 jan 22), Nyheter 24 (24 & 29 jan 22). Hur pratar vi kärnavfall med framtiden?

Svenska Dagbladet (29 jan 22): Frågan om slutförvaret: Ska framtiden varnas?

Upsala Nya Tidning (3 feb 22)

Sveriges radio (5 Feb 2022), Juniornyheterna Special: Hur pratar man med framtiden?

The Heritage-Climate Paradox

2022-01-26

In my presentation on “Risks for Peace Due to Promotion of Heritage”, given on 26 January 2022 at the global ICCROM conference Climate.Culture.Peace in a session on Culture, Climate and Drivers of Conflict, I introduced the Heritage-Climate Paradox in its two dimensions:

  1. Whereas heritage is often about conservation and timeless values, the climate crisis is about change and the transformation of our lives and many people’s livelihoods.
  2. Whereas heritage is about making cultural distinctions in space, contrasting US with THEM (often in terms of nations or ethnic groups), the climate crisis requires us to find global solutions and to promote global solidarity.

Here is the full abstract of my paper:

As the significance of culture and cultural heritage is gradually entering high-level discussions concerning sustainable development, I am cautioning against generalizing the view that culture and heritage necessarily benefit mitigation and adaptation related to climate change. Promoting seemingly timeless heritage derived from the past can make necessary transformations of inherited ways of life and livelihoods more difficult. At the same time, perceptions of exclusive cultural heritage may support ethnic pride and social exclusion. Both recent and historical examples show how perceptions and uses of cultural heritage can inflame violent conflicts between different cultural groups over power and territory. Promoting heritage can thus threaten peace and human rights, reduce socio-cultural cohesion and resilience, and effectively become a hinder for global human adaptation.