12 C O N T E X T 1 3 3 : M A R C H 2 0 1 4 Valuing heritage: plural, selective and transitory Value is a loaded, subjective term that has been subjected to investigation across time and space. At the heart of the conservation movement is a desire to identify and explain why something is so valuable that it should be retained for future generations. However, as many of the articles in this issue of Context recognise, identifying, locating, recognising and agreeing what is value, and thus what is valuable, is suffused with conflict and controversy. Values are not singular, objective and fixed, but rather are plural, selective and transitory. This presents a conundrum for a legislative system and policy environment in which decisions about the type, nature and extent of continuity within change have to be made and justified. The criteria on which value is determined are increasingly challenged in a plural world of localism, multiculturalism and globalisation that has produced policy instruments such as neighbourhood plans and funding initiatives such as those offered by the Heritage Lottery Fund. We interrogate this issue through a range of articles on both the theoretical and practical dimensions of ascribing and managing value in the historic environment. A number of the articles address a central concern of the IHBC Annual School in 2012 (see Context 126, September 2012) over the move away from issues of fabric to more artistic and cultural values. Siân Jones (page 13), in particular, questions the methodologies for measuring social value and examines whether the scarcity of evidence is preventing us from fully understanding the role of heritage in the present and future. Gareth Hoskins (page 15) uses a UK/USA comparison to examine how heritage decisions are politically determined and judged against a set of linked criteria which serve to exclude as many values as they include. This is taken up by Katy Layton-Jones (page 18), who investigates why Britain’s parks have been habitually undervalued, and public opinion split on their retention and redevelopment. Jenny Timothy (page 22) demonstrates how an understanding of a range of values, emotional, social and economic, can be used to drive forward a sustained, long-term heritage policy that is already showing significant improvements. Timothy’s article, along with Chloe Oswald’s about Derby (page 24), supports Hoskins’ and Jones’ point that research can help to deliver improvements to the historic environment that are funded by a range of different organisations. The European Regional Development Fund, the Heritage Lottery Fund, English Heritage, the private sector and the academic sector such as the Art and Humanities Research Council are just some of the funders mentioned in these articles. Duncan Melville (page 26) builds on this to outline the economic case for conservation, bringing in a range of recently published research that demonstrates the varied contribution that heritage makes to the British economy. Sophie Norton (page 28) extends this in exploring the ways in which heritage can be seen as a generator of social and communal value. She concludes that, echoing Siân Jones, a reinterpretation of the concept of value might be needed to advance our understanding. This fluidity in the nature of ‘value’ is also addressed by Clare Smith, Christine Manly and James Webb (page 30) in their article on the designation of Lakeside View as a conservation area. The authors bring in interesting questions about the role of the community and professionals in assessing the value of post1945 architecture, providing a counterpoint to the contentious decision to demolish Robin Hood Gardens. Running through each of the articles is a desire to rethink how we construct, ascribe and manage value, and to ask the prescient questions: who values, why value, and how we can continue to make judgements and thus decisions on the future for the past. Rebecca Madgin, guest commissioning editor VALUING HERITAGE
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=