Skip to main content
Log in

Heritage Management and Interpretation: Challenges to Heritage Site-Based Values, Reflections from the Heritage Site of Umm Qais, Jordan

  • Research
  • Published:
Archaeologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

ABSTRACT

The management of archaeological heritage is complex and problematic for site identity and local culture. Inattention to the array of values of heritage sites leads to the supremacy of a number of them and provides a controversy story of the archaeological site in question. Any heritage management and interpretation effort should correctly identify the different values of the site. Indeed, there is a need to manage and interpret the sites in a way to address the connection between the sites-based values and the associated and surrounding features. In current heritage management practice, values and values-based management are considered to be one of the most important approaches for the management of archaeological heritage. This study aims to understand how the values of the archaeological site of Umm Qais in northern Jordan can be adequately managed as both a natural and cultural landscape. At issue are conflicting views over the different values, their meaning and their uses by the different stakeholders. This research focuses on the ways in which these values are managed and interpreted to the public and whether it is done properly and in a fair manner. The fieldwork study led to a more complex understanding of how conflicting perceptions of values of Umm Qais as a national heritage site by the different stakeholders have affected implementation of management and interpretation projects. The results presented here indicate that the heritage management approach from the case study of Umm Qais focuses specifically on values associated with the physical archaeological aspect of the site, while those associated with the historic neighborhood of the site are neglected. The interpretation of the site has frequently focused on certain aspects of values at the expense of others. Information and insights gained from this study and specific suggestions for changing approaches are considered with regard to potential impacts on the management of the archaeological site and with regard to the public in general.

Résumé

La gestion du patrimoine archéologique est complexe et problématique en termes de l’identité du site et de la culture locale. Le manque d’attention portée à la gamme de valeurs des sites patrimoniaux favorise la suprématie d’un certain nombre d’entre eux et fournit un récit controversé sur le site donné. Toute initiative de gestion et d’interprétation du patrimoine doit correctement identifier les différentes valeurs du site. La nécessité de gérer et d’interpréter les sites de façon à étudier les liens qui existent entre leurs valeurs fondamentales et les caractéristiques connexes et environnantes est en effet bien réelle. Dans la pratique de gestion patrimoniale actuelle, la gestion des valeurs et fondée sur les valeurs est jugée une des approches les plus importantes pour la gestion du patrimoine archéologique. Cette étude tente de comprendre comment les valeurs du site archéologique d’Umm Qais au nord de la Jordanie peuvent être adéquatement gérées, à la fois en tant que paysage naturel et paysage culturel. Les points de vue conflictuels des différents intervenants sur les diverses valeurs, leur signification et leurs usages sont ici en cause. Cette recherche se concentre sur les moyens dont lesdites valeurs sont gérées et interprétées au profit du public et si ces façons de faire sont adéquates et équitables. L’étude sur le terrain a permis d’acquérir des connaissances plus poussées sur la façon dont les perceptions conflictuelles exprimées par les différents intervenants sur les valeurs d’Umm Qais, dans sa qualité de site patrimonial national, ont influencé la mise en œuvre des projets de gestion et d’interprétation. Les résultats présentés ici révèlent que l’approche de gestion patrimoniale de l’étude de cas d’Umm Qais se concentre spécifiquement sur les valeurs associées à la nature archéologique physique du site, tandis que celles liées à son quartier historique sont négligées. L’interprétation du site s’est fréquemment concentrée sur certains aspects des valeurs au détriment d’autres. Les données et renseignements acquis dans le cadre de la présente étude et les suggestions précises pour la modification des approches en découlant seront évalués à la lumière de leurs incidences éventuelles sur la gestion du site archéologique et le public en général.

Resumen

La gestión del patrimonio arqueológico es compleja y problemática para la identidad del emplazamiento y la cultura local. La falta de atención a la variedad de valores de los lugares patrimonio lleva a la supremacía de un número de ellos y proporciona una historia controvertida del emplazamiento arqueológico en cuestión. Cualquier esfuerzo de interpretación y gestión del patrimonio debe identificar correctamente los diferentes valores del emplazamiento. Realmente, existe la necesidad de gestionar e interpretar los emplazamientos de forma que se aborde la conexión entre los valores basados en el emplazamiento con las características asociadas y circundantes. En la práctica actual de la gestión del patrimonio, se considera que los valores y la gestión basada en valores es uno de los enfoques más importantes para la gestión del patrimonio arqueológico. El presente estudio tiene como objetivo comprender cómo los valores del emplazamiento arqueológico de Umm Qais en el norte de Jordania pueden ser gestionados de manera adecuada tanto como paisaje natural y como paisaje cultural. Están en cuestión opiniones opuestas sobre los diferentes valores, su significado y sus usos por las diferentes partes interesadas. Esta investigación se centra en las formas en las que estos valores son gestionados e interpretados para el público y si se hace de manera apropiada y justa. El estudio del trabajo de campo llevó a una comprensión más compleja de cómo las percepciones opuestas de los valores de Umm Qais como lugar patrimonio nacional por parte de las diferentes partes interesadas han afectado la implementación de proyectos de gestión e interpretación. Los resultados presentados aquí indican que el enfoque de gestión del patrimonio del estudio de caso de Umm Qais se centra específicamente en valores asociados al aspecto arqueológico físico del emplazamiento mientras que se pasan por alto aquellos asociados al barrio histórico del emplazamiento. La interpretación del emplazamiento se ha centrado frecuentemente en determinados aspectos de valores a expensas de otros. La información y las percepciones obtenidas gracias a este estudio y las sugerencias específicas para cambiar los enfoques serán consideradas después con respecto a los impactos potenciales sobre la gestión del emplazamiento arqueológico y al público en general.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ababneh, A. 2015. Qusair Amra (Jordan) World Heritage Site: A Review of Current Status of Presentation and Protection Approaches. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry 15(2):27–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ababneh, A., Darabseh, F., White, R. 2014. Assessment of Visitor Management at the Archaeological Site of Umm Qais: Condition and Problems. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 16(4):322–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abu-Khafajah, S. 2007. Meaning and Use of Cultural Heritage in Jordan: Towards a Sustainable Approach. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Newcastle Upon Tyne

  • Alobiedat, A. A. (2014) The Impacts of Heritage Tourism on Gadara, Northern Jordan, Arkansas State UniversityJonesboro.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Aplin, G. 2002. Heritage Identification, Conservation and Management. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  • Ashworth, G. 2007. 1848 and All That. International Journal of Heritage Studies 13(6):511–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Australia ICOMOS. 2000. The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance 1999: with Associated Guidelines and Code on the Ethics of Co-existence

  • Battaini-Dragoni, G. (ed.) (2005) Guidance on Heritage Assessment, Council of EuropeStrasbourg.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Brand, L. A. 2000. Resettling, Reconstructing and Restor(y)ing: Archaeology and Tourism in Umm Qays. Middle East Report 216:28–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brand, L. A. 2001. Displacement for Development? The Impact of Changing State-Society Relations. World Development 29(6):961–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockington, D., Igoe, J. 2006. Eviction for Conservation: A Global Overview. Conservation and Society 4(3):424–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butland, R. (2009) Scaling Angkor: Perceptions of Scale in the Interpretation and Management of Cultural Heritage, University of SydneyNew South Wales.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Carman, J. (2005) Against Cultural Property: Archaeology, Heritage and Ownership, Bristol Classical PressLondon.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, R. W., Bramley, R. 2002. Defining Heritage Values and Significance for Improved Resource Management: An Application to Australian Tourism. International Journal of Heritage Studies 8(3):175–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. (2003) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methodsapproaches, Sage PublicationsThousand Oaks, California.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2007) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches, Sage PublicationsThousand Oaks, CA.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Daher, R. F. 1999. Gentrification and the Politics of Power, Capital and Culture in an Emerging Jordanian Heritage Industry. Traditional Dwellings and Settlements Review 10:33–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, Y. P. 1996. Tourism Dance Performance: Authenticity and Creativity. Annals of Tourism Research 23(4):780–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darvill, T. C. (1995) Value systems in archaeology. In Managing Archaeologypp. 40–50, edited by MA Cooper, A Firth, J Carmanand D Wheatley, RoutledgeLondon.,

    Google Scholar 

  • De la Torre, M. (2013). Values and Heritage Conservation. Heritage & Society 6(2):155–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De la Torre, M., Mason, R. (2002) Introduction. In Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage. Research Reportpp. 3–4, edited by M De la Torre, The Getty Conservation InstituteLos Angeles.,

    Google Scholar 

  • De la Torre, M., Throsby, D. (2002) Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage: Research Report, Getty Conservation InstituteLos Angeles.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Demas, M. (2002) Planning for Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites: A Values Based Approach. In Management Planning for Archaeological Sitespp. 27–54, edited by JMY Teutonicoand G Palumbo, EEUU, Getty Conservation InstituteLos Angeles.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Doumas, C. G. 2013. Managing the Archaeological Heritage: The Case of Akrotiri, Thera (Santorini). Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 15(1):109–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • English Heritage (2006) Conservation Principles for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment. First Stage Consultation, English HeritageLondon.,

    Google Scholar 

  • English Heritage 2008. Conservation Principles: Policies and Guidelines. English Heritage, London. http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/conservationprinciples-sustainablemanagement-historicenvironment/conservationprinciplespoliciesguidanceapr08web.pdf/. Accessed 21 April 2015

  • English Heritage 2010. Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment Practice Guide. English Heritage, London. http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/pps-practice-guide/pps5practiceguide.pdf. Accessed 16 Feb 2015

  • Evans, G. (2001). World Heritage and the World Bank: Culture and Sustainable Development? Tourism Recreation Research 26(1):81–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feilden, B. M., Jokilehto, J. (1993) Management Guidelines for World Cultural Heritage Sites, ICCROMRome.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B. S. (1997) The Evaluation of Cultural Heritage: Some Critical Issues. Economic Perspectives on Cultural Heritagepp. 31–49, MacmillanLondon.,

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gultekin, N. 2012. Cultural Heritage Management: The Case of Historical Peninsula in İstanbul. Gazi University Journal of Science 25(1):235–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, S. (1997) Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices, Sage/Open UniversityLondon.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, C. M., McArthur, S. (1998) Integrating Stakeholders into Heritage Management, Involving the Community. Integrated Heritage Management: Principles and Practicespp. 41–85, The Stationery OfficeLondon.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, L. (1967) The Antiquities of Jordan, Butterworth PressLondon.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R. (1994) Manual of Heritage Management, Butterworth-Heinemann LtdOxford.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Heras, C. V., Wijffels, A., Cardoso, F., Vandesande, A., Santana, M., Van Orshoven, J., van Balen, K. 2013. A Value-Based Monitoring System to Support Heritage Conservation Planning. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 3(2):130–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horton, T. W. (2004) Writing Ethnographic History: Historic Preservation, Cultural Landscapes, and Traditional Cultural Properties. Northern Ethnographic Landscapes: Perspectives from Circumpolar Nationspp. 65–80, Smithsonian Institution PressWashington, DC.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, C., Cairnes, L., Eyles, K., Johnston, C. (2006) An Integrated Approach to Environment and Heritage Issues. Prepared for the Australian State of the Environment Committee, Department of Environment and HeritageCanberra.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan Tourism Board (2015) History and Culture Brochure, Jordan Tourism BoardAmman.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchin, R., and Tate, N. J. 2000. Planning a Research Project & Producing Data for Qualitative Analysis. Conducting Research in Human Geography: Theory, Methodology and Practice, Chaps. 2 & 7. Prentice Hall, Harlow, England, pp. 28–44 & 211–228

  • Labadi, S. 2006. Questioning the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention: A Value-Based Analysis of Purposefully Sampled Nomination Dossiers. Doctoral dissertation, University of London

  • Labadi, S. 2007. Representations of the Nation and Cultural Diversity in Discourses on World Heritage. Journal of Social Archaeology 7(2):147–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. S. F., DuCros, H., DiStefano, L., Logan, W. (2007) Introduction. In Cultural Heritage Management in China: Preserving the Cities of the Pearl River Delta, edited by YSF Leeand H DuCros, RoutledgeLondon.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Libsekal, Y. 2008. Multiplying and Sharing Heritage Values: Planning Conservation and Site Management at the Acheulean Sites of Buya, Eritrea. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 10(3):251–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichrou, M., O’Malley, L., Patterson, M. 2008. Place-Product or Place Narrative(s)? Perspectives in the Marketing of Tourism Destinations. Journal of Strategic Marketing 16(1):27–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lung, D. P. Y., DiStefano, L., Lee, H. Y., Wong, D. T. Y. (2007) Interpreting the Significance of Heritage sites. In Asia Conserved: Lessons Learned from the UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Awards for Cultural Heritage Conservation (2000–2004)pp. 21–27, edited by R Englehardt, UNESCOBangkok.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Luzinda, H. 2008. Mobile Boundary and Mobile People: Involuntary Resettlement of the Benet People in Mt. Elgon National Park, Uganda. Unpublished Masters thesis

  • Maffi, I. 2009. The Emergence of Cultural Heritage in Jordan The Itinerary of a Colonial Invention. Journal of Social Archaeology 9(1):5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, R. (1999) Economics and Heritage Conservation: Concepts Values and Agendas for Research: A Meeting Organized by the Getty Conservation Institute Economics and Heritage Conservationpp. 2–18, J. Paul Getty TrustLos Angeles.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, R. 2002. Assessing Values in Conservation Planning: Methodological Issues and Choices. In Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage. Research Report, edited by M. De la Torre, pp. 5–30. The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, CA

  • Mason, R. 2006. Theoretical and Practical Arguments for Values-Centered Preservation. CRM-Washington 3(2):21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, R. (2008) Assessing Values in Conservation Planning. In The Heritage Readerpp. 99–124, edited by G Fairclough, R Harrison, JH Jamesonand J Schofield, RoutledgeNew York.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, R., and E. Avrami 2002. Heritage Values and Challenges of Conservation Planning. In Management Planning for Archaeological Sites, An International Workshop organised by the Getty Conservation Institute and Loyola Marymount University, May 2000, edited by J. M. Teutonico and G. Palumbo, pp. 13–26. The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles

  • Mason, P., Cheyne, J. 2000. Residents’ Attitudes to Proposed Tourism Development. Annals of Tourism Research 27(2):391–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, R., M. Maclean, and M. De La Torre 2003a. Hadrian’s Wall World Heritage Site: A Case Study. Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles

  • Mason, R., D. Myers, and M. De La Torre 2003b. Port Arthur Historic Site. The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles

  • Matarasso, F. (1997) Use or Ornament? The Social Impact of Participation in the Arts, Comedia Publishing GroupGreat Britain.,

    Google Scholar 

  • McKercher, B., Cros, H. D., McKercher, R. B. (2002) Cultural Tourism: The Partnership Between Tourism and Cultural Heritage Management, Haworth Hospitality PressNew York.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Mershen, B., Knauf, E. A. 1988. From Ǧadar to Umm Qais. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 104:128–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities 2006. Project of Rehabilitation and Re-use of Umm Qais Village Through Community Participation and Increase of Economic Opportunities, Amman

  • Mydland, L., Grahn, W. 2012. Identifying Heritage Values in Local Communities. International Journal of Heritage Studies 18(6):564–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W. L. (2009) Understanding Research, Allyn & BaconBoston.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, C. 2005. An Ethnography of Englishness: Experiencing Identity Through Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 32(1):7–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, S. (2002) Neighbourhood Renewal and Social Inclusion: The Role of Museums, Libraries and Archives, Museums, Libraries and Archives CouncilLondon.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, M., Sullivan, S. (1995) Looking After Heritage Places: The Basics of Heritage Planning for Managers, Landowners and Administrators, Melbourne University PressCarlton.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, A. (2002) Managing Tourism at World Heritage Sites: A Practical Manual for World Heritage Site Managers, UNESCO World Heritage CenterParis.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Perring, D., van der Linde, S. 2009. The Politics and Practice of Archaeology in Conflict. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 11:197–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, P. E. 2000. Community Impact of Science Centers: Is There Any? Curator: The Museum Journal 43(1):9–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poulios, I. 2010. Moving Beyond a ‘Values-Based Approach’ to Heritage Conservation. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 12(2):170–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pye, E. (2000) Caring for the Past: Issues in Conservation for Archaeology and Museums, James & JamesLondon.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter, L. K., Smith, V. L., Brent, M. (2001) Where Asia Wore a Smile: Lessons of Philippine Tourism Development. In Hosts and Guests Revisited: Tourism Issues of the 21st Centurypp. 283–297, edited by VL Smithand M Brent, Cognizant PublicationsNew York.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Riegl, A. 1996 [1903]. The Modern Cult of Monuments: Its Essence and Its Development. In Historical an Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage, edited by N. Stanley-Price et al., pp. 69–83. The J. Paul Getty Trust, Los Angeles

  • Russell, R., Winkworth, K. (2001) Significance: A Guide to Assessing the Significance of Cultural Heritage Objects and Collections, Heritage Collections CouncilCanberra.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Sakellariadi, A. 2013. Strategic Participatory Planning in Archaeological Management in Greece: The Philippi Management Plan for Nomination to UNESCO’s World Heritage List. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 15(1):13–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandell, R. 1998. Museums as Agents of Social Inclusion. Museum Management and Curatorship 17(4):63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, B. 2000. Do Museums Make a difference? Evaluating Programs for Social Change. Curator 43(1):63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivan, R. (1997) The Presentation of Archaeological Sites. In The Conservation of Archaeological Sites in the Mediterranean Region: An International Conference Organised by the Getty Conservation Institute and the J. Paul Getty Museum, 6–12 May 1995pp. 51–59, edited by M De la Torre, Getty Conservation InstituteLos Angeles.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, L. (2004) Archaeological Theory and the Politics of Cultural Heritage, RoutledgeLondon.,

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • South African National Parks (SANParks) 2006. Heritage Significance and Vulnerability Assessment of Tokai and Cecilia. Report downloaded from www.sanparks.org/parks/tablemountain/library/documents.php. Accessed 2 Feb 2014

  • Stedman, R. C. 2003. Is It Really Just a Social Construction? The Contribution of the Physical Environment to Sense of Place. Society & Natural Resources 16(8):671–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson, J. 2008. The Cultural Values Model: An Integrated Approach to Values in Landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 84(2):127–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, S. 2004. Aboriginal Sites and the Burra Charter: [Paper in: Burra 25-Special Birthday Issue. The Australia ICOMOS Charter of Places of Cultural Significance (The Burra Charter) is 25 Years Old.]. Historic Environment 18(1), 37

  • Taylor, K. 2004. Cultural Heritage Management: A Possible Role for Charters and Principles in Asia. International Journal of Heritage Studies 10(5):417–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Throsby, D. 1995. Culture, Economics and Sustainability. Journal of Cultural Economics 19(3):199–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (1972) Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage: Adopted by the General Conference at its Seventeenth Session, UNESCOParis.,

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2011) The Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)Paris.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Verschuuren, B. 2006, October. An Overview of Cultural and Spiritual Values in Ecosystem Management and Conservation Strategies. In Paper Contributed to the International Conference on Endogenous Development and Biocultural Diversity

  • Williams, D. (1997) How the Arts Measure Up: Australian Research into Social Impact, ComediaStroud.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage PublicationsThousand Oaks.,

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdelkader Ababneh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ababneh, A. Heritage Management and Interpretation: Challenges to Heritage Site-Based Values, Reflections from the Heritage Site of Umm Qais, Jordan. Arch 12, 38–72 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-016-9290-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-016-9290-6

KEY WORDS

Navigation