‘Showing it off’: The Potential for the use of Underwater Heritage Parks to Present In-situ Underwater Cultural Heritage in the Netherlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the public, underwater heritage parks amalgamate the thrill of sports diving with the\neducational enjoyment of a museum. Consequently, underwater heritage parks have been a\npopular medium to present in-situ underwater cultural heritage (UCH) in countries, such as\nAustralia, the UK, Finland, Sweden, Canada and the US. However, this method to present insitu UCH is not used in the Netherlands. Within the context of the Dutch government’s\nrecent decision to ratify the Faro Convention (Council of Europe 2005) and the growing blue\ntourism economy and diving community within the country, this thesis assesses the\neffectiveness of underwater heritage parks and explores the plausibility of utilising this\napproach within the Netherlands. Through an analysis of literature and case studies\npertaining to the global use of underwater heritage parks, this thesis first analyses the\nchallenges and opportunities that underwater heritage parks present for heritage\nmanagement and determines that the challenges can be mitigated. This makes underwater\nheritage parks an effective tool for heritage management. However, this also highlights a\nneed to explore the challenges and opportunities that underwater heritage parks potentially\nbring nearby residents. Through an analysis of the case study of the Museum of Underwater\nArt, Australia, this thesis found that underwater heritage parks can bring societal,\nenvironmental, and economic benefits to the communities that they are located nearby.\nThis can be achieved sustainably when mitigating the harmful impacts of heritage tourism\nthrough working with the ongoing consent of nearby residents, providing honest and\npositive experiences for tourists, and competitiveness cluster strategies. However, all of this\ncan only be accomplished when the sustainability of the UCH resources of an underwater\nheritage park can be ensured. Through an analysis of case studies in Croatia, Sweden and\nFinland, this thesis determines that sustainable diver access can be achieved through\nprotective methods of site protection, which use prohibitive equipment or create tour\nguides through commercial dive operators. However, sustainable access can also be\nachieved through admissive methods of site protection, which allow unrestricted access but\nprotect UCH through community stewardship, legislation, or initiatives that have\nsuccessfully changed attitudes towards UCH. However, changing attitudes towards UCH also\nnecessitates reaching the non-diving community. This thesis explores how underwater\nheritage parks have accomplished this and through the case study of Fathom Five Marine\nParks, Canada, states that a multi-faceted approach that provides a broad range of ways to\ninteract with UCH is most effective. Having established the effectiveness of underwater\nheritage parks and the best methods to provide access to UCH and ensure the sustainability\nof the resource, this thesis then assesses where this approach could be utilised within the\nNetherlands. Through building on O’Brien and colleagues (2011, 87) matrices of activities\nthat contradict cultural heritage conservation, based from Ehler and Douvere (2009, 58-59),\nthis thesis found that underwater heritage parks could present in-situ UCH at Cuijk,\nEuropoort, Grevelingen, Hellevoetsluis, IJsselmeer, Maasdriel, Oostvoornse Meer, and the\nWadden Sea.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".