Summary
In 1999 the Dutch government introduced the policy of the "cultural biography" in which not only experts such as curators, but also citizens would have a say in which artifacts should be made part of the collective memory of The Netherlands. The city of Maastricht was one of the first local governments to implement this policy together with cultural heritage institutions and the University Maastricht. The purpose of this project is to address theoretical questions relating to the digital production and storage of material contributing to the biography of a city, and the co-construction of digital representations of the city and the city itself. Moreover, it studies the web-based participation of experts and non-experts in the future policies, planning and cultural heritage of cities from an international perspective.
Timeframe
1 April 2008-31 March 2012
Researchers/institutions
Maastricht VKS: Bas van Heur (beginning 1 April 2008); Pieter Caljé; Jack Post and Sally Wyatt
VKS: Charles van den Heuvel
Description
In 1999 the Dutch government introduced a policy in which cultural
heritage was no longer the exclusive domain of curators, but in which
citizens would have a say what artifacts should be made part of the
collective memory of The Netherlands. This policy was translated into a
dynamic "cultural biography" in which objects no longer dictated but
served a story of cultural traces left by people in their environment.
If cultural objects no longer fitted that story they could be erased
from the collective memory. The city of Maastricht was one of the first
local governments to implement this policy together with cultural
heritage institutions and the University Maastricht. Moreover, its
scope was extended from material artifacts in museums to the city as a
whole. Experts (urban planners, curators architects, historians and lay
experts ("citizens")) were invited to describe and to assess the
qualities and identities of the historical city and its future urban
extensions. This dynamic "cultural biography" is written in two ways,
in the form of a website and in the form of events on location in which
cultural expressions add stories and give meaning to the chosen sites.
The Flemish Government adopted in 2002 the concept of the cultural
biography in a specific way for its cultural heritage policy, followed
recently by the province of Limburg. Therefore the cultural biography
is represented both in The Netherlands and internationally, and on
several administrative levels ranging from local to national
governmental policies.
The purpose of this post-doc project is to address theoretical
questions relating to the digital production and storage of material
contributing to the biography of a city. Moreover it studies the
web-based participation of expert and lay-experts in the urban planning
and cultural heritage of cities from an international perspective.
It explores boundaries between material and virtual cities, cultural
heritage and future planning, local history and international
"collective" memory. It follows four possible lines of inquiry. These
lines are interrelated but, depending on the background of the
researcher involved, there might be more emphasis on some lines of
inquiry than on others.
1. Cities and citizens as narrators: What does 'biography' actually mean when referring to a city?
2. Cities and citizens as historians:
What is the role of the historian in the changing landscape of the city
and what is status of the lay-expert writing local history?
3. Cities and citizens as curators and as planners:
What is the role of experts and lay-experts in dynamic cultural
heritage in relation to future policies of urban planning of cities? Is
this a local matter or does the collective memory go beyond the city
limits?
4. Cities and citizens as writers on the web: What is the status of user-generated content in an historical project?
Cities and citizens as narrators
What does 'biography' actually mean when referring to a city? At the
beginning of the 20th Century members of the Annales school argued that
history can not be separated from the geography of the landscape,
agriculture and the city. Since then scholars in historical,
philosophical, sociological and anthropological traditions (Nora,
Halbwachs, Bourdieu, Geertz, Douglas, Turner) have studied the "urban
rituals" of citizens in the landscape of the city. The concept of lieux
de mémoires that Nora studied in the 1980s was adopted recently by H.L.
Wesseling in the series Plaatsen van herinnering in de twintigste eeuw.
Memory places are creations of personal and collective experiences.
They are stored in photographs, videos and weblogs. Since collective
memory in our society is determined by such media the question rises,
how are (digital) representations and narratives of the city and of its
history constructed?
Cities and citizens as historians
The invitation of city administrations to citizens to participate in
writing their history of the city stands in various traditions within
the historical disciplines like political history (organization of
participation and democratization), local history and oral history
(codification of experiences over time). What is the role of the
historian in the changing landscape of the city (compare The Landscape
of History: How Historians Map the Past (2004): by John Lewis Gaddis)
and what is status of the lay-expert writing local history Is the story
of the expert such as the historian or urban planner more credible than
the one of the citizen? What happens when there is a conflict of
interests?
Cities and Citizens as curators and as urban developers
The cultural biography is seen as a form of dynamic cultural heritage
in which individuals and groups both (re)-define and create the
identity and quality of (the memory of) the city. Maastricht sees its
cultural heritage as a way of branding the city and of attracting both
new inhabitants and "culture" tourists.
What does it mean for the role of the expert like a historian when the
city initiates and subsidizes a new way of describing history ands
participating in cultural heritage and at the same time is the most
powerful actor in the urban planning and cultural heritage of the city?
Is the decision about which objects are relevant for the story of the
city where the European Treaty was signed, a matter only for the
inhabitants of Maastricht or do national and international keepers of
its collective memory a say in this as well?
Cities and Citizens as writers on the web
In 1993 the Balie and the Hacktic-Network decided to create an
electronic platform for discussions between citizens, politicians and
the government which resulted in De Digitale Stad Amsterdam (DDS). It
was formalized on the 15th January 1994 by the alderman of Amsterdam,
F. De Grave as an experiment for 10 weeks. However within a couple of
weeks ten thousands of people registered and occupied the 20 telephone
lines of DDS for 24 hours. With the support of The City of Amsterdam,
the Ministries of Economic Affairs and Internal Affairs and several
sponsors, DDS became a permanent website that still exists today. Since
the creation of DDS, many (international) examples followed. Moreover
several alternative digital media are developed in which citizens can
share experiences and actively participate in the policy making of
their city. Ubiquitous computing, gps and annotation tools allow
citizens to map and to write their (experiences of) the city in an
active way. The ability of lay-experts to participate with a home
computer means that on the one hand decisions about the collective
memory and future of the city are passing out of the control of
experts. On the other hand, global access to the collective memory and
future plans of the city ask for additional expertise. How can the
citizen best be facilitated to participate actively on the web in
policy making on cultural heritage and future urban planning? What is
the status of user-generated content in an historical project? How can
archives of user-generated content be created, used and shared
effectively? What are the implications of technical choices about
storing and representing digital data for the biography? Who
participates in such an endeavour, and who are the gatekeepers? What
are the relationships between different groups of experts, who assesses
quality, how is the editing organized and what constitutes expertise? A
comparative analysis of (inter)national computer-assisted projects,
websites and web 2.0 research initiatives in which lay-expert citizens,
alone or together with experts, write about history and participate
in/react to cultural heritage policies can provide valuable input to
the cultural biography.
Summary
The key issue in this PhD project is the role of ICT-based simulations and models in the development of technological cultures. Increasingly, the functioning and reliability of technological systems crucial to the conduct of everyday life rely on information and knowledge generated by computer models and simulations. What does this mean for the vulnerability of technological systems? The project will be based on a comparative design (across fields and/or countries). The empirical material will provide the basis for reflection on the epistemological issues raised by the use of models and simulations, and on the nature of vulnerability in technological cultures.
Timeframe
1 January 2008-31 December 2011
Researchers/institutions
Maastricht VKS: Matthijs Kouw, Wiebe Bijker and Sally Wyatt
Description
Within both the VKS and Maastricht University, there is considerable
expertise about the role of simulation in knowledge production in the
natural and social sciences as well as the humanities. In this project,
we will apply that knowledge to understanding the role of simulations
(in transport or water management, for example) in the development of
technological cultures. We live in a technological culture: the
production and distribution of goods, services and cultural products is
technologically mediated. The creation and maintenance of systems for
human survival is deeply technological. Very few aspects of daily life
can be conceptualised without reference to the technological means of
their functioning. This is generally true, but receives an extra twist
and impetus through the introduction of ICTs: technological cultures
are increasingly becoming digitised. Another key feature of
technological cultures is that they are vulnerable. Technology plays a
double role here: in part this is an important cause of new forms of
vulnerability (such as the risks associated with genetic engineering
and nanotechnology), and partially this is the main component in
strategies to counter this vulnerability (e.g. by medical,
communication, or surveillance technologies). Also, vulnerability is
not an exclusively negative characteristic: some measure of
vulnerability is crucial in order to maintain a certain level of
flexibility, innovation, and social learning in society.
The key issue to be addressed in this PhD project is the role of
simulation and modelling to handle this double nature of the
vulnerability of technological cultures. How is a technological
culture's vulnerability mapped and monitored, and how are systems
designed to cope with vulnerability without stifling all flexibility
and innovation? The project will use a comparative design, comparing
different fields and comparing a 'north' and 'south' context. The
empirical material generated by the case studies will also provide the
basis for reflection on the epistemological issues raised by the use of
new (combinations of) data sources as they arise in the use of
simulations. In order to strengthen the links between the two research
lines, this project will not only examine the use of simulations
themselves in relation to the vulnerability of technological culture,
but also study the ways in which different disciplines and social
actors develop and use knowledge generated by simulations.
