Context 155 - July 2018

C O N T E X T 1 5 5 : J U L Y 2 0 1 8 29 Theory and practice later political symbols and slogans, to colourful, painted tags and throw ups (types of graffiti). In 2012, the forms of value associated with these varied activities created tensions when, at the request of a local councillor, Historic Scotland initiated a campaign to clean the painted graffiti. 2 In response, a number of the climbers, including two of the authors of this paper (JH and JSW), expressed concern about loss of the graffiti and the potential impact of the cleaning process on climbing routes. Subsequent consultation resulted in a selective cleaning cam- paign that left certain pieces of graffiti of special significance to climbers intact (Hale et al, 2017). Graffitigate, as it is humorously referred to by some of the climbers, highlights changes in how heritage bodies respond to community concerns, in this case with rapid consultation and modification of the conservation strategy. Likewise, increasing recognition of (some forms of) graffiti marks a shift in the scope of authorised heritage. The situation at Dumbarton Rock also highlights the ongoing difficulties that heritage bodies face in dealing with the complexities of cultural significance, particularly in the realm of social and communal values. Initially the site’s significance in terms of Scottish climbing heritage appears to have gone undetected, or at least been underestimated.This raises questions about how heritage organisations can better understand the fluid and often contested ‘social values’ of heritage places, defined here as the significance of heritage to contemporary communities, including people’s sense of identity, belonging, attachment and place (Jones, 2016). The ACCORD project provides an example of how community participatory methods can shed light on the social values of heritage places. The project examined the opportunities and implica- tions of collaborative, community-based, digital recording and modelling, using the techniques of photogrammetry and reflectance transforma- tion imaging, with occasional use of laser scan- ning (Jeffrey et al, 2015). Using co-design and co-production, the project team worked with 10 community heritage groups across Scotland to create 3D records and models of heritage places of significance to them. Popular in a range of design, planning and healthcare environments, these methodologies are intended to decentre traditional relationships of power, control and expertise between researchers and volunteers, or ‘professionals’ and ‘non-professionals’. A distinctive aspect of the ACCORD project is that ‘co-design’ encouraged community partici- pants to take an active role in selecting record- ing ‘targets’, with particular attention to the significance of heritage places, and the social and communal values associated with them. At the same time, the project team explored the impact of community co-design and co-production on the value and authenticity of both the digital models and their original counterparts. For this purpose, we used qualitative research methods associated with rapid or focused ethnography. Our work with each group started and finished with focused group interviews, which acted as points of intensive discursive enquiry where background knowledge could be obtained, and concepts and experiences relevant to the project explored. We also used participant observation during the co-design and co-production of the digital records and models, which facilitated intensive observation of these practices and the values that mediated them. Bouldering at Dumbarton Rock (‘Dumby’) (Photo: John Stewart Watson) Diagram showing stages in the ACCORD methodology (Photo: ACCORD, CC-BY)