Conclusion：A Second Industrial Heritage Revolution...
The valuable and successful work of local communities,enthusiasts and industrial heritage specialists is displayed through the extensive and diverse number of former industrial plants,buildings,artefacts and settlements that have been preserved and protected throughout the world.This,the first industrial heritage revolution,involved drawing attention to the value of the industrial past amongst the wider heritage sector,politicians and societies at large and effectively rescuing—physically,financially and emotionally—sites from unconscious demolition.While there are still many industrial heritage sites under threat of destruction and abandonment,nevertheless,today we are able to enjoy an unprecedented number of museums,attractions and monuments as reminders of the industrial culture that has shaped the world.But now the agenda is shifting towards maintaining what has already been achieved and this will involve developing new approaches in order to meet the challenges that I have briefly identified.In reality this is part of the wider process of re-framing the role that the whole of heritage plays in societies with a shift to its increasing valorisation,sustainable management and policy main-streaming(Council of Europe,2014a,2014b;European Commission,2015).
Three key,inter-related challenges underpin the second industrial heritage revolution.The first,as identified,is the need for more innovative approaches to industrial heritage to bypass the issue of finite public sector funding and increasing competition within the ever-expanding heritage sector.This works at a number of levels.In part it relates to site-based management approaches with creative and more commercial uses of sites and collections while still upholding the integrity of the heritage.This speaks to a need for increased levels of professionalism and management competencies and a requirement to widen partnerships often beyond the heritage sector itself.It also relates to wider policy making that will begin to recognise the wider value of industrial heritage in terms of regeneration,economic development,scientific research,education,health and quality of life measures and,of course,in terms of tourism.More controversially and in keeping with looking toward more effective utilisation of industrial(or indeed other)heritage sites,the decisionmaking processes regarding which future sites are worthy of protection and which are not,requires further examination.Accepting that there are clearly some important sites that demonstrate exceptional qualities and that can and should be funded(at least in part)through the public purse,asking other“less exceptional”sites to bring forward business cases for investment and related management plans would focus attention on who would be willing to be responsible for funding and management of these sites in the long term.In such a way,focus would be placed not only on the capital expenditure required to preserve a site but also on the revenue generation from industrial heritage to ensure its sustainable conservation and management.[2]
The second challenge follows and interrogates how industrial heritage can be made relevant in an ostensibly post-industrial world.Again there are several layers to this concept of relevance.It refers to the changing profile of visitors for industrial heritage;visitors that have already shifted a generation and are increasingly distant from the industrialised culture that the pioneers of industrial heritage were able to make reference,too.It also refers to the more heterogeneous audiences for heritage that now exist in terms of gender,culture and ethnicity.Furthermore,it refers to making industrial heritage relevant to other sectors of the economy who may well be in a position to assist in offering support and funding.Some of these issues of relevance can be addressed through more effective site interpretation,while others may require more substantive changes to the overall narratives.Engaging with younger generations and cross-cultural audiences is a useful way of exploring just how relevant the remains of the industrial past are in a service sector dominated,technologically driven,closely connected mobile world.
Third and over-arching these challenges,is the issue of governance.A snap-shot of how industrial heritage sites are currently governed would likely reveal a very wide spectrum indeed,ranging from total state ownership and management to wholly community owned sites,managed by volunteers.There is no single model applicable to all industrial heritage but finding a structure that can address the connected issues of funding and communication/relevance is something that needs to be explored.
Revolutions are about asking questions and challenging questions that have previously been answered.This was the very foundation of the Industrial Revolution,“how can we do things differently?”“how can we make a better world?”and“how can we change societies and economies?”In the context of industrial heritage,as in the wider heritage-scape,it is important that we ask some searching questions about its future as well as its past.These are questions of principle and value and how values change with time.But they are also important questions of praxis and in the spirit of the Industrial Revolution,they need to focus on the challenges of today and tomorrow and the changes that need to be made.(https://www.daowen.com)
附中文译文
【注释】
[1]Mike Robinson is professor of cultural heritage at the University of Birmingham and Director of the Ironbridge International Institute for Cultural Heritage—a longstanding and unique partnership between the University and the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust and World Heritage Site.Mike is a founding member of UNESCO/UNITWIN Network on Tourism,Culture and Development,a specialist advisor to the UNESCO World Heritage Programme in Sustainable Tourism and to the UK's National Commission for UNESCO.Mike has worked on heritage and tourism related projects in over 40 countries and has organized nearly 30 international conferences on themes relating to heritage,culture and tourism.He is currently working with UNESCO's World Heritage Centre on the relations between world heritage and the sustainable development goals and the valorization of European World Heritage themed routes.
[2]Original:“Accepting that there are sites that can demonstrate exceptional qualities and can be at least partly funded through the public purse,asking other sites to bring together investment cases and management plans would,at the very least address the question of‘whose heritage’?”