MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2511740271 · doi:10.71781/2789

Tracing change in World Cultural Heritage : the recognition of intangible heritage

2015· dissertation· en· W2511740271 sur OpenAlexfundno aff
Judith Herrmann

Notice bibliographique

RevuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) · 2015
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesFonds de Recherche du Québec-Société et CultureUniversité de Montréal
Mots-clésTracingCultural heritageIntangible cultural heritageWorld heritageGeographyEnvironmental ethicsAnthropologySociologyArchaeologyComputer sciencePhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This thesis investigates the crossover from and intersection between tangible and intangible heritage in the context of World Heritage. Since the start of the twenty-first century, intangible heritage has become increasingly important in international cultural heritage conservation theory and practice. In heritage literature, intangible heritage has been theorized in relation to tangible or built heritage, thereby extending the definition of cultural heritage to consider a holistic perspective. New heritage conservation instruments have been created for the protection of intangible heritage, such as most prominently the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. The changing conception of cultural heritage that goes beyond tangible heritage has also influenced existing instruments like the 1972 UNESCO Convention concerning the protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. The thesis studies how intangible heritage has been recognized and interpreted in implementing the concept of cultural heritage as defined by the World Heritage Convention. It examines the historical development of the concept of World Cultural Heritage with the aim of tracing the construction of intangible heritage in this context. The thesis consists of six chapters. The introduction sets out the research problem and research question. In the literature review, international cultural heritage conservation is portrayed as the research context, the knowledge gap between World Heritage and intangible heritage is identified and an understanding of the research problem deepened, and methods from similar research in the subject area are presented. The methodology in the third chapter describes choices made concerning the research paradigm, research approach and strategy, the use of concepts and illustrative examples, as well as data collection and analysis methods. Knowledge is constructed using primarily a historical approach and related methods. Through the analysis of pertinent documents and heritage discourses, an understanding of the concept of intangible heritage is developed and the concept of World Cultural Heritage is investigated. In the fourth chapter, intangible heritage is studied by looking at specific cultural heritage discourses, that is, a scientific, a UNESCO, and an ICOMOS discourse. Intangible heritage is theorized in relation to the concepts of tangible heritage, heritage value, and cultural heritage. Knowledge gained in this chapter serves as a theoretical lens to trace the recognition of and tease out interpretations of intangible heritage in the context of implementing the concept of World Cultural Heritage. The results are presented in chapter five. A historical development is portrayed in five time periods and for the concepts of cultural heritage, Outstanding Universal Value, the criteria to assess World Heritage value, and authenticity. The conclusion summarizes the main outcomes, assesses the thesis’ contribution to scientific knowledge as well as its limitations, and outlines possible further research. The main results include the identification of the term intangible heritage as an indicator for a paradigm shift and a new approach to conceiving cultural heritage in international cultural heritage conservation. By focusing on processes and the living relationship between people and their environment or place, intangible heritage emphasizes the anthropological. In the context of this conception, intangible heritage takes on two meanings. First, value is attributed by people and hence, is inherently immaterial. Secondly, place is constituted of a tangible-intangible continuum in terms of attributes. A paradigm shift and increasing recognition of an anthropological approach to cultural heritage were identified for all discourses, that is, UNESCO, ICOMOS, the scientific field, and World Heritage. For World Heritage, intangible heritage was recognized indirectly in terms of historical associations during the 1970s and 1980s. The anthropological shift occurred in the early 1990s. The term intangible was introduced and the meaning of intangible heritage was extended to include cultural associations. The subsequent decade is characterized by a process of internalization and implementation of the new approach to cultural heritage. The 2003 Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention created momentum. By the early 2010s, while not explicitly recognizing the immaterial character of values, a holistic approach to cultural heritage was fully endorsed that considers the idea of intangible attributes as carriers of values. An understanding of the recognition of intangible heritage through the implementation of the World Heritage Convention and scientific research in general provide an important knowledge base for implementing the Convention in a more coherent, objective, and well-informed way.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,012
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,038

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0040,006
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,012
Communication savante0,0120,016
Science ouverte0,0010,006
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0070,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,055
Tête enseignante GPT0,213
Écart entre enseignants0,158 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)Même sujetCultural Heritage Management and PreservationTravaux en français237 207