Abstract：Over the last 50 years, the world heritage endeavor has developed and achieved remarkable influence and accomplishments. It has protected the shared heritage of humanity and transformed the way we value and safeguard heritage. However, the world heritage system continues to face numerous questions and challenges from both the academia and society. Critical heritage studies and cultural heritage spatial production researches have provided theoretical tools and insights for addressing these questions and challenges, as well as for understanding and resolving specific issues. This paper attempts to integrate the theoretical tools and research findings of critical heritage studies and cultural heritage spatial production researches, focusing on the overall world cultural heritage system to reveal its development characteristics and patterns.The world cultural heritage system features coexisting cultural and spatial processes, with value interpretation and spatial expression constituting the essence of these two processes. Value interpretation serves as the mainstream discourse and active mechanism, while spatial expression operates as the covert discourse and passive mechanism. Together they form the basic means of reproducing and regenerating the significance and spatiality of world cultural heritage. There are three stages of world cultural heritage practice: tentative listing, nomination, and management and monitoring, each corresponding to different cultural processes. These stages encompass the initial identification of world heritage, subsequent re-identification and integration of rationalization processes, and the enhancement of heritage identity and broadening of its influence through rationalization. A layered evolution from spiritual space to physical and social spaces also occurs in spatial terms.Although value interpretation discourse occupies the mainstream in official expressions, it is inseparable from spatial discourse. This paper examines the driving and restraining factors of the world cultural heritage system’s development from the perspectives of cultural processes and spatial production, constructing a double movement model of value interpretation and spatial expression. This model provides a theoretical framework for studying the genesis and development mechanisms of the world cultural heritage system and offers a comprehensive, dialectical analysis and approaches to addressing various manifest or latent issues within the system.In the double movement model of the world cultural heritage system, the first movement is value interpretation, which promotes the system through identity formation and rationalization mechanisms. The ideal practice of value interpretation is to adjust top-down rules into a shared representational system, achieving inter-subjective meaning-making and pursuing collective achievement to the greatest extent. As a cultural process, it generally presents characteristics of inequality in specific rules, sharing of collective outcomes, coexistence of authority in temporal cross-sections, and negotiation from a diachronic perspective. The second movement is spatial expression, which constrains the direction and speed of the value interpretation movement and keeps the world cultural heritage system dynamic. Compared with the cultural processes driven by value interpretation practice, the spatial processes of world cultural heritage involve more complex relationships and diverse demands among international organizations, states, areas, experts, and other stakeholders. Spatial attributes continuously accumulate as the practice progresses, producing and reproducing world cultural heritage spaces. Due to the presence of the second movement, the gap between “top-down rules” and “shared representational systems” in value interpretation becomes apparent through spatial practice and representations of space, forming multiple tensions in representational spaces.From the perspective of the development mechanisms and dynamics of the world cultural heritage system, when the movements of value interpretation and spatial expression are aligned, they promote the progress of the system and the sustainable development of heritage sites. When these movements are not aligned, they constrain the development of the world cultural heritage system and heritage sites. Overemphasizing the driving role of value interpretation while neglecting the restraining role of spatial expression can provoke resistance from social spatial production to meaning construction, leading to difficulties in the system’s development. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the spatial attributes of world cultural heritage, deepen our understanding of the spatial production of world cultural heritage in different dimensions, and connect value interpretation with spatial expression, promoting their coordination.Based on our understanding of the production and reproduction mechanisms of world cultural heritage, we can engage in this field with a more proactive attitude and aspiration. Building on China’s extensive world cultural heritage practice over the last 40 years, we can conduct in-depth researches into identity and rationalization mechanisms in the value interpretation practice of world cultural heritage, draw on these experiences to form a Chinese discourse system, and incorporate it into international dialogues. Meanwhile, we can construct a compatibility mechanism for world cultural heritage value interpretation and spatial expression as a means to explore new spatial features of world cultural heritage, contributing Chinese solutions to the sustainable development of the world cultural heritage system.
赵云. 世界文化遗产价值阐释与空间表达的建构模式研究[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2024, 54(1): 99-111.
Zhao Yun. A Study of the Construction Models of World Cultural Heritage Value Interpretation and Spatial Expression. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2024, 54(1): 99-111.
1 澳］罗德尼·哈里森： 《文化和自然遗产：批判性思路》，范佳翎、王思渝、莫嘉靖等译，上海：上海古籍出版社，2021年。 2 景峰： 《世界遗产50年：近期趋势与挑战——“UN-HAP亚太高校遗产网络”系列讲座第四讲纪要》，《自然与文化遗产研究》2022年第5期，第71-78页。 3 澳］林恩·梅斯克尔： 《废墟上的未来：联合国教科文组织、世界遗产与和平之梦》，王丹阳、胡牧译，南京：译林出版社，2021年。 4 UNESCO World Heritage Centre， “Draft updated Policy Document on the impacts of climate change on World Heritage properties，” https：//whc.unesco.org/archive/2021/whc21-44com-7C-en.pdf， 2023-04-17. 5 张朝枝、蒋钦宇： 《批判遗产研究的回顾与反思》，《自然与文化遗产研究》2021年第1期，第81-91页。 6 车志晖、张沛： 《城市大遗址地区的空间生产研究述评》，《西部人居环境学刊》2022年第4期，第139-146页。 7 李凌霞： 《人类学空间视角下“申遗”实践的反思——以永顺老司城为例》，《吉首大学学报（社会科学版）》2015年第1期，第98-102页。 8 国际古迹遗址理事会： 《文化遗产阐释与展示宪章》，2008年10月4日，https：//www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/interpretation_cn.pdf， 2023年7月8日。 9 Wijesuriya G.， Thompson J. ＆ Young C.： 《世界文化遗产管理》，中国古迹遗址保护协会译，http：//www.icomoschina.org.cn/Upload/File/202207/20220708143034_3023.pdf，2023年7月8日。 10 UNESCO World Heritage Centre， “Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention，” 2005-02-02， https：//whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide05-en.pdf， 2023-07-07. 11 UNESCO， “World Heritage Policy Compendium，” https：//whc.unesco.org/en/compendium/， 2023-07-07. 12 UNESCO， “Nara Document on Authenticity，” 1994-11-21， https：//whc.unesco.org/archive/1994/whc-94-conf003-inf8e.pdf， 2023-07-08. 13 ICOMOS New Zealand， “ICOMOS New Zealand Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Heritage Value，” 2010-09-04， https：//www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/ICOMOS_NZ_Charter_2010_FINAL_11_Oct_2010.pdf， 2023-07-08. 14 Merode E.， Smeets R. & Westrik C.， “Linking universal and local values： managing a sustainable future for world heritage，” https：//whc.unesco.org/document/4969， 2023-07-08. 15 澳］劳拉·简·史密斯： 《遗产利用》，苏小燕、张朝枝译，北京：科学出版社，2020年。 16 Lamont M.， Beljean S. & Clair M.， “What is missing？ cultural processes and causal pathways to inequality，” Socio-Economic Review， Vol. 12， No. 3 （2014）， pp. 573-608. 17 ICOMOS， “Filling the gaps—an action plan for the future，” 2011-11-15， https：//www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/World_Heritage/ICOMOS_Filling_the_Gaps_Study.pdf， 2023-07-08. 18 联合国教育、科学及文化组织： 《世界遗产申报筹备》（2011年第二版），中国古迹遗址保护协会译，https：//whc.unesco.org/document/139798，2023年1月8日。 19 国际古迹遗址理事会： 《世界文化遗产影响评估指南》，2017年3月9日，http：//icomoschina.org.cn/Upload/file/20210625/20210625151220_8494.pdf， 2023年6月22日。 20 UNESCO， ICCROM & ICOMOS et al.， “Guidance and toolkit for impact assessment in a world heritage context，” https：//www.iccrom.org/sites/default/files/publications/2022-07/en_0_ia_guidance_world_heritage_iccrom_2022_web_0.pdf， 2023-07-26. 21 赵云： 《中国世界文化遗产监测》，北京：中国建筑工业出版社，2017年。 22 UNESCO （ed.）， “Policy Document for the Integration of a Sustainable Development Perspective into the Processes of the World Heritage Convention，” https：//whc.unesco.org/document/139747， 2023-07-26. 23 Jokilehto J.， The World Heritage List： What is OUV？ Defining the Outstanding Universal Value of Cultural World Heritage Properties， Berlin： Hendrik B??ler Verlag， 2008. 24 德］威廉·文德尔班： 《哲学史教程》，罗达仁译，北京：商务印书馆，1997年。 25 日］荻野昌弘、韦雪霁： 《社会学视角下的文化遗产问题——以负面历史遗产为例》，《遗产》2020年第1期，第125-133页。 26 澳］戴维·思罗斯比： 《经济学与文化》，王志标、张峥嵘译，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年。 27 Mason R.， “Assessing values in conservation planning： methodological issues and choices，” in de la Torre M. （ed.）， Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage： Research Report， Los Angeles： The Getty Conservation Institute， 2002， pp. 5-30. 28 童强： 《空间哲学》，北京：北京大学出版社，2011年。 29 联合国教育、科学及文化组织： 《保护世界文化和自然遗产公约》，http：//whc.unesco.org/archive/convention-ch.pdf，2023年6月22日。 30 ICOMOS， “Xi’an Declaration on the Conservation of the Setting of Heritage Structures， Sites and Areas，” 2005-10-22， https：//www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/xian-declaration.pdf， 2023-07-08. 31 法］亨利·列斐伏尔： 《空间的生产》，刘怀玉等译，北京：商务印书馆，2022年。 32 张颖岚、刘骋： 《空间正义视域下城市建成区文化遗产保护利用研究》，《浙江大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2023年第4期，第16-27页。 33 安传艳、李同昇、翟洲燕： 《话语、资本与遗址区空间的生产——以安阳市殷墟为例》，《旅游学刊》2021年第7期，第13-26页。 34 美］戴维·哈维： 《正义、自然和差异地理学》，胡大平译，上海：上海人民出版社，2010年。 35 美］爱德华·苏贾： 《第三空间》，陆扬等译，上海：上海教育出版社，2005年。 36 美］大卫·哈维： 《希望的空间》，胡大平译，南京：南京大学出版社，2006年。 37 赵荣、吴铮争： 《文化遗产保护与城市更新策略研究——以西安为例》，《浙江大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2023年第4期，第5-15页。 38 美］爱德华·苏贾： 《后现代地理学——重申批判社会理论中的空间》，王文斌译，北京：商务印书馆，2007年。 39 李雪、赵云： 《可持续发展视野下的国家文化公园主体功能区研究——以大运河为例》，《中国文化遗产》2021年第5期，第37-43页。
2024, Vol. 54 
