Abstract
“Sustainability” is a multifaceted concept, but archaeologists generally focus efforts on the sustainability of the site itself. This paper argues that we should instead actively engage with locals to approach sustainability more broadly in a multidimensional, participatory way. The ethnographic research described here thus examines the community’s vision for a sustainable future via participant observation and interviews conducted with over 70 residents in Akçalar, Bursa, Turkey, the local context of Neolithic-Chalcolithic Aktopraklık Höyük. Results indicate that rapid urbanization and industrialization have heightened locals’ awareness of the loss of traditional lifeways and values, such as agricultural practices. Many also lament the concurrent decline of neighbourliness and community cohesion. Moreover, participants noted the previous lack of adequate dialogue between archaeologists and community residents. With this robust foundation of community perspectives, we can now move forward in practice with new locally focused programs at the Aktopraklık open-air museum and in town, including displays of family heirlooms and educational workshops. Though community understandings and goals for sustainability may not exactly match those of archaeologists, by fully understanding the whole picture, this paper aims to demonstrate how heritage practitioners can better synergize their approaches to sustainability with the local fabric to yield greater benefits for all.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
UNESCO’s recently developed World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme has highlighted “broad stakeholder engagement” that “focuses on empowering local communities” and is “based on the local context and needs” (UNESCO 2015). Ron Van Oers’ also calls for a shift to “culturally-contextualized, community-driven, and development-oriented approaches” (Albert 2015b: 7).
- 2.
“AP” stands for Akçalar participant. Each participant was assigned a random number for reporting purposes. Age groups, as opposed to a specific age, and the month and year of each interview, as opposed to a specific date, are provided to protect the confidentiality of participant information. All interviews were conducted by the author.
References
Albert, M. (2015a). Mission and vision of sustainability discourses in heritage studies. In M. Albert (Ed.), Perceptions of sustainability in heritage studies, Heritage studies 4 (pp. 11–20). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Albert, M. (2015b). Perceptions of the contributors. In M. Albert (Ed.), Perceptions of sustainability in heritage studies, Heritage studies 4 (pp. 3–8). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Akçalar Participants (AP). (2015). Interviews by the author. Akçalar, Turkey. May–October 2015.
Atalay, S. (2010). We don’t talk about Çatalhöyük, we live it: Sustainable archaeological practicethrough community-based participatory research. World Archaeology, 42, 418–429.
Atalay, S. (2012). Community-based archaeology: Research with, by, and for indigenous and local communities. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Bernard, H. R. (2011). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Lanham: AltaMira.
Escobar, A. (1991). Anthropology and the development encounter : The making and marketing of development Anthropology. American Ethnologist, 18(4), 658–682.
Escobar, A. (1998). Whose knowledge, whose nature? Biodiversity, Conservation, and the Political Ecology of Social Movements, 5, 53–82.
Garrod, B., & Fyall, A. (1998). Beyond the rhetoric of sustainable Tourism ? Tourism Management, 19(3), 199–212.
Hall, C. M. (1994). Tourism, culture, and the presentation of social reality. In Tourism and politics: Policy, power and place. New York: Wiley.
Herzfeld, M. (1991). A place in history: Social and monumental time in a Cretan town. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP.
Karkiner, N. (2012). “The unity of statement” as the interpretation of space: The case of Archaeo-park in Turkey. Human Geographies, 2, 23–32.
Karul, N., Bertan Avcı, M., Deveci, A., & Karkıner, N. (2010). Developing the cultural sector at the Bursa Aktopraklık mound: A multifaceted project. In M. Özdoğan, N. Akın, A. Debold-Kritter, L. Oosterbeek, N. Tuna, & N. Yalçın (Eds.), TÜBA-KED (Vol. 8, pp. 241–262). Ankara: TÜBA.
McKercher, B., & du Cros, H. (2002). Cultural tourism: The partnership between tourism and cultural heritage management. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Hospitality Press.
Meskell, L. (2012). The nature of heritage: The new South Africa. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
Nilüfer Municipality. (2015). Akçalar TUİK Veri. Bursa, Turkey: Nilufer.
Robinson, J. (2004). Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 48, 369–384.
Silberman, N. A. (2013). Discourses of development: Narratives of cultural heritage as an economic resource. In R. Staiff, R. Bushell, & S. Watson (Eds.), Heritage and tourism: Place, encounter, engagement (pp. 213–226). London/New York: Routledge.
Smith, L. (2006). Uses of heritage. London/New York: Routledge.
Ulutaş, O. (2014). Nilüfer’in Hikayesi. Bursa, Turkey: Nilüfer Belediyesi.
UNESCO. (2013). Operational guidelines for the implementation of the world heritage convention. Intergovernmental Committee for the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Centre, Paris, France.
UNESCO. (2015). UNESCO world heritage and sustainable tourism programme. http://whc.unesco.org/en/tourism/. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Centre, Paris, France.
United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development Rio+20 (United Nations). (2012). The future we want. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 20–22 June 2012.
van Oers, R. (2015). Cultural heritage management and sustainability. In M. Albert (Ed.), Perceptions of sustainability in heritage studies, Heritage studies 4 (pp. 189–202). Berlin: de Gruyter.
World Commission on Environment and Development (World Commission). (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Acknowledgements
This research would not have been possible without the support of the Research Center for Anatolian Civilizations (ANAMED), the British Institute at Ankara, the Mark Diamond Research Fund of the Graduate Student Association at the University at Buffalo, the Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism, Dr. Necmi Karul and Dr. Peter Biehl.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Curtis, C.L. (2017). Contextual Sustainability in Heritage Practice: Urbanization, Neighbourliness, and Community Dialogue in Akçalar, Turkey. In: Albert, MT., Bandarin, F., Pereira Roders, A. (eds) Going Beyond. Heritage Studies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57165-2_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57165-2_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-57164-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-57165-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)