Including the excluded: involving citizens in heritage policy

7 December 2006

If the government really wants to involve more citizens in policy making then they must also open that policy for citizens, says Dutch researcher Martijn Duineveld about cultural-historical policy in the Netherlands. He describes that as a closed policy area on which non-experts can exert little influence. Yet the cultural-historical knowledge of citizens (individuals and groups) and the value they place on cultural heritage could mean a lot for the preservation of that heritage.

According to Duineveld, in the Netherlands professional archaeologists, civil servants, commercial archaeological bodies, provinces and the Monuments Act determine what archaeology is. For example, the archaeological treasure maps of the Netherlands are compiled by historical geographers, a landscape architect, an official from the regional water board and other experts. As a result of bureaucracy and commercialisation, the archaeological policy area has developed into a 'system world'. Private organisations and interested parties are excluded and exert no influence on the political decision-making process.

Objective and subjective knowledge

The archaeological policy area analysed by Duineveld in his thesis, is he believes illustrative for cultural-historical policy in the Netherlands. That policy is based on a number of assumptions and Duineveld tries to demonstrate the falseness of these using philosophical and cultural-sociological theories. For example, he believes that it is not right that only the scientific knowledge of experts is considered to be 'objective' and 'universal'. The knowledge of non-experts such as amateur archaeologists, local historians, historical societies and other interested citizens is, therefore, wrongly considered to be subjective.

Moreover Duineveld believes that the identification and preservation of cultural heritage is a far more random and dynamic process than government policy assumes. There are no concrete definitions as to what constitutes (valuable) cultural heritage, he argues. Definitions of cultural heritage are continuously influenced by social, cultural, political and scientific motives, objectives and ambitions.

Participative decision making

A more democratic policy must, in Duineveld's view, be focused on an increased and better participation of citizens. Examples are interactive planning approaches, participative decision making and new forms of governance. The success of the IJssel Line in Olst proves, in his opinion, that citizens can contribute to how cultural heritage is dealt with. As this line of defence from the Cold War was not on the list of national monuments and historic buildings, the ruins were neglected. Thanks to the efforts of private individuals and non-governmental organisations these remains have recently been preserved and restored. These efforts have resulted in a museum with a hospital and commando bunker, where volunteers regularly give guided tours. Duineveld thinks that his research results are also relevant for other policy areas where the government seeks greater involvement from citizens.

Duineveld’s research was funded by NWO.

..............................

For further information please contact:

• Martijn Duineveld (Wageningen University and Research Center)
• t: +31 317 485770, martijn.duineveld@wur.nl, www.martijnduineveld.nl 
• The doctoral thesis will be defended on 22 December 2006.
• Supervisor Prof. J. Lengkeek (Wageningen University and Research Center)