Heritage

This article examines the concepts, definitions, policies, and practices of heritage in a contemporary context. Within recent years, there have been significant shifts in our understandings and applications of heritage concepts and policies in the modern world. ‘Heritage’ emerged as a buzz word in international policy arenas in the 1980s and early 1990s, and has since weathered the vagaries of turbulent definitional and governance–nomenclature storms, as traditional debates about ‘what it is and what it is not’ reverberate around academia and state agencies alike. Policy and funding structures for heritage are determined by the classifications used to define them in various countries. Typically, reference is made to ‘built heritage’, ‘natural heritage’, and ‘intangible heritage’, loosely reflecting buildings, landscapes, and culture. Aspects of heritage are used by the cultural and tourism industries to add economic value, through heritage tourism sites, museums, and other activities. The cultural tourism product is often anchored around notions of heritage, and in postmodern, post-tourist societies, boundaries between culture, (travel) space, and identities are increasingly blurred. Issues of authenticity become important in the representation of heritage, and questions are asked about the validity of nostalgia versus realism. The role of heritage is examined in the context of identity formulation at individual and nation-state levels, and the political aspects of this are also discussed. Finally, heritage conservation is assessed through an examination of UNESCO’s World Heritage Site listing and protection strategy. In a changing world, new constructs of heritage, identity, authenticity, and representation will continue to emerge as meanings are constantly renegotiated over time and space.

New public management of Higher education, Foucault and power

The theory of New Public Management (NPM) suggest that one of the features of advanced liberal rule is the tendency to define social, economic and political issues as problems to be solved through management. This paper argues that the restructuring of Higher Education (HE) in many Western countries since the 1980s has involved a shift from an emphasis on administration and policy to one of its efficient management. Utilising Foucault’s concept of governmentality rather than the liberal discourse of management as a politically neutral technology, managerialism can be seen as a newly emergent and increasingly rationalised disciplinary regime of governmentalising practices in advanced liberalism. As such the contemporary University as an institution governed by NPM can be demonstrated to have emerged not as the direct outcome of democratic policies that have rationalised its activities (so that the emancipatory aims of personal development, an educated workforce and of true research can be fully realised), nor can it be understood as the instrument through which individuals or self-realising classes are defeated through the calculations of the state acting on behalf of economic interests, rather it can be seen as the contingent and intractable outcome of the complex power/knowledge relations of advanced liberalism. I analyse the interlocking of the ‘tutor-subject’ and ‘student-subject’ as a local enacting of policy discourse informed by the NPM of HE that reshapes subjectivity and retunes the relationship between tutor and student. I put forward suggestions for how resistance to these new modes of disciplinary subjectification can be enacted.