World Heritage and/as placemaking: Learning from the Honghe Hani Rice Terraces in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines how Unesco’s World Heritage Program creates the official heritage narrative and what role tourism plays in constructing the narrative. It is based on the hypothesis that touristic considerations are built into the heritage-making process. Theoretically, it confronts Di Giovine’s (2008) ritual process. Instead of seeing heritage-making as producing heritage-scape, we frame this process as placemaking. We revisit his model by focusing on what constitutes a site’s official heritage narrative, and the procedures for creating it. An alternative model of “locate the idea of heritage – idealize heritage narrative – reproduce heritage narrative” is proposed. The model is used to examine the Cultural Landscape of Honghe Hani Rice Terraces (HHRTs) in Yunnan in China. The empirical results 1) reveal the factors and process of defining heritage boundaries and selecting heritage elements; 2) present the methods and strategies the member state uses to idealize the narrative in this text-based communication; 3) identify two means by which the official narrative continues to reproduce after designation. The empirical observation also substantiates our hypothesis of tourism as a co-producer of heritage due to accessibility and management issues. It helps to understand that the very construction of a place as a World Heritage site (WHS) also entails tactics and compromises – that it is not simply about “pure” Outstanding Universal Value, but also about touristic meaning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".