single-dr.php

JDR Vol.16 No.2 pp. 194-200
(2021)
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2021.p0194

Paper:

Role of Heritage Activism in Post-Disaster Reconstruction

Sanjaya Uprety and Barsha Shrestha

Department of Architecture, Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan University
Lalitpur, Nepal

Corresponding author

Received:
July 31, 2020
Accepted:
November 12, 2020
Published:
February 1, 2021
Keywords:
heritage activism, reconstruction, heritage value, event analysis
Abstract

In Nepal, heritage conservation is inherently political, as can be observed from the several heritage activisms in the various forms of protests, demonstrations, and criticisms of post-disaster reconstruction efforts of heritage structures of Kathmandu, which were heavily damaged by the Gorkha Earthquake of 2015. The politicization of heritage reconstruction is conspicuous in the government’s approach to defining heritage objects and places for conservation, the methods by which it interprets the relics of the past, and the cultural history and the opposition it receives from local communities and civil society. This has led to the emergence of heritage activism to protect cultural heritage from the threat of loss. This paper aims at highlighting heritage activism and its role in the post-disaster context by discussing the politicization of the conservation agenda by the government (state actors) and activists (stakeholders). Specifically, it focuses the role of heritage activism using secondary sources of information to assess the heritage value, its significance, and the “event analysis method” to analyze the events of the protest against the government’s reconstruction plan of Ranipokhari (Queen’s Pond), located in the heart of the city of Kathmandu. The paper discusses the contributory factors for the emergence of heritage activism and its potential role in sensitizing state actors and stakeholders about the conservation agenda to safeguard conservation prerequisites. It concludes that heritage activism can serve as an important means of indirect public participation to influence the post-disaster conservation policies of heritage sites in developing countries like Nepal.

Cite this article as:
Sanjaya Uprety and Barsha Shrestha, “Role of Heritage Activism in Post-Disaster Reconstruction,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.16, No.2, pp. 194-200, 2021.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] National Planning Commission, Government of Nepal, “Nepal Earthquake 2015: Post Disaster Needs Assessment Vol.A: Key Findings,” 2015.
  2. [2] B. Banskota, “Resurrecting heritage,” Rebuilding Nepal, Vol.2019, Issue July-August, pp. 4-10, 2019.
  3. [3] R. Langenbach, “A Rich Heritage Lost: The Bhuj, India, Earthquake,” Cultural Resource Management, Vol.24, No.8, pp. 33-34, 2001.
  4. [4] R. Maio, T. M. Ferreira, and R. Vicente, “A critical discussion on the earthquake risk mitigation of urban cultural heritage assets,” Int. J. of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol.27, pp. 239-247, 2018.
  5. [5] P. A. Thornburg, J. D. Knottnerus, and G. R. Webb, “Disaster and deritualization: A re-interpretation of findings from early disaster research,” The Social Science J., Vol.44, Issue 1, pp. 161-166, 2007.
  6. [6] D. H. R. Spennemann and K. Graham, “The importance of heritage preservation in natural disaster situations,” Int. J. of Risk Assessment Management, Vol.7, Nos.6-7, pp. 993-1001, 2007.
  7. [7] T. O’Brien, “Using Event Analysis to Examine Environmental Protest,” SAGE Research Method Cases Part 1, doi: 10.4135/9781526407023, 2017.
  8. [8] R. Behra, “Newspapers as a research tool,” The University of Utah, https://campusguides.lib.utah.edu/newspapers [accessed July 5, 2020]
  9. [9] J. Earl, A. Martin, J. D. McCarthy, and S. A. Soule, “The Use of Newspaper Data in the Study of Collective Action,” Annual Review of Sociology, Vol.30, pp. 65-80, 2004.
  10. [10] G. M. Maney and P. E. Oliver, “Finding Collective Events: Sources, Searches, Timing,” Sociological Methods & Research, Vol.30, Issue 2, pp. 131-169, 2001.
  11. [11] A. Mozaffari, “The heritage ’NGO’: a case study on the role of grass roots heritage societies in Iran and their perception of cultural heritage,” Int. J. of Heritage Studies, Vol.21, Issue 9, pp. 845-861, 2015.
  12. [12] K. Fouseki and M. Shehade, “Heritage Activism and Cultural Rights: The Case of the New Acropolis Museum,” H. Silverman, E. Waterton, and S. Watson (Eds.), “Heritage in Action: Making the Past in the Present,” pp. 137-150, Springer, 2017.
  13. [13] K. Toki, “Protection of Cultural Heritage from Post-Earthquake Fire,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.6, No.1, pp. 4-10, 2011.
  14. [14] C. Whitehead and G. Bozoğlu, “Protest, Bodies and the Grounds of Memory: Taksim Square as ‘heritage site’ and the 2013 Gezi protests,” Heritage & Society, Vol.9, Issue 2, pp. 111-136, 2016.
  15. [15] K. Tamura, I. Rafliana, and P. Kovacs, “Formalizing the Concept of “Build Back Better” Based on the Global Forum on Science and Technology for Disaster Resilience 2017 WG4,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.13, No.7, pp. 1187-1192, 2018.
  16. [16] Australia ICOMOS, “The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance,” 2013.
  17. [17] National Reconstruction Authority, Government of Nepal, “Nepal Earthquake 2015: Post Disaster Recovery Framework 2016-2020,” 2016.
  18. [18] National Reconstruction Authority, Government of Nepal, “Laying of basement and construction of inner wall complete in Ranipokhari,” 2020, http://www.nra.gov.np/en/news/details/R75BOZh-yxNMCWdePetJ1g1xrxCeuABsYy-z8Lp4ldo# [accessed July 5, 2020]

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Sep. 19, 2021