The crowding out of social values in heritage custodianship

In policy and practice it is often assumed that communities hold a uniform view on what it is that constitutes their heritage and that they share social values. This assumption on the homogenous character of heritage communities is to be questioned. We contend that heritage as a public value is constituted by a host of other values which do not have to be shared amongst all relevant actors. These values can be mutually dependent and reinforcing. Yet, in many cases, they are often conflicting or even incommensurable. As values are arguments for social action, this often result in discursive struggles over the meaning and value of heritage. Proponents of so-called social values frequently lose such battles. This raises the question why their arguments are so vulnerable. To answer these, it is illuminating to look at discursive struggles from the perspective of Gottweis’ Rhetorical Policy Analysis. As he shows, the strength or weakness of an argument depends partly on the way it is constructed. Using his approach, in our paper we will demonstrate why it is that precisely social values are so difficult to defend.