RMF Poster
•Download as PPT, PDF•
1 like•267 views
The document discusses a research project examining public perceptions of heritage and the need for reforms to heritage protection in England. It describes the methodology used, including an online survey and case studies. The survey asked people what heritage means to them and what they value protecting. Preliminary results found that responses varied depending on whether people saw an informational poster first. The research aims to better understand if policy definitions of heritage match public definitions to help inform further reforms.
![WHAT DOES HERITAGE MEAN TO YOU? Most Common Words: Poster Most Common Words: Friends & Family Poster Survey: Ethnic Origin Survey Feedback (scale 1-5, 1 being lowest) RESEARCH OVERVIEW Following the publication of ‘Power of Place’ by English Heritage in 2000, there has been a move towards the reform of the Heritage Protection system in England, which culminated in the publication of the White Paper ‘Heritage Protection of for the 21st Century’ in March 2007, and a Draft Heritage Protection Bill for England and Wales in April 2008. My research is looking at why it was felt that reform was needed, as well as documenting and analysing how it came about. As well as documentary research of published policy documents and consultations, I will also be researching the views of the general public to assess whether the perceived confusion due to the current legislation and consents procedures exists in reality. In addition, research will be undertaken to look at what heritage means to the general public, and how this relates to both the current research literature and the definitions of heritage contained in the White Paper. METHODOLOGY I intend to run an internet-based survey, which will ask questions to assess whether the perceived public confusion exists, as well as ascertaining general views of what the public would wish to see protected, and what they define as heritage. Internet survey pros and cons: Answers not biased by location Responses can be cryptic and less in-depth Responses can be more detailed Respondents can manufacture fictional realities Inexpensive and distributed quickly Analysis can therefore be more time-consuming Two location-based case studies will also be investigated. One will focus on Whitby, on the NE coast, which has a considerable amount of normative heritage. The other will look at an area where there is none or very little normative heritage. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted in these two areas, and the groups will also be asked to fill in the e-survey for comparison with the overall results. ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],PILOT STUDY A poster showing a number of normative and other, less ‘traditional’, pictures of heritage was shown at a poster competition on 24 th April 2010. People who viewed the poster, entitled ‘ what is heritage?’ were asked to answer the question on a feedback form. An online survey engine, SurveyMonkey.com, was used to manually input the responses to test the functionality of the engine. For comparison, friends and family were asked to answer the same question via a different survey engine, Smart-survey.co.uk. RESULTS 14 responses were received during the poster competition. Of these, it is estimated that 28.6% of the answers were influenced by the poster and associated discussion. 22 responses were received from the friends and family survey, none of whom saw the poster. A list of words/phrases used to describe heritage in both surveys was drawn up, and the % of respondents who used each word were calculated . The most common words used in the poster survey were culture, history and traditions. For the friends and family survey, the most commonly used words were history, past, buildings, and where we have come from. Both are similar, although history is the only word common to both, and the friends and family survey is closer to the normative view which focuses on material heritage, and an idealised past. In the poster survey, culture was the most commonly used word, compared to 28.8% of friends and family respondents. However, the poster may have influenced this response rate. The relatively low number of respondents also has an effect on the statistics. EVALUATION The online survey engines were relatively easy to use, however, greater functionality will require a subscription. The SurveyMonkey site provided a better range of question styles and themes, although feedback suggests that the smart-survey engine was easy to use, with the majority scoring the survey at 3 or above on a scale of 1-5 (1 = lowest). The surveys completed without sight of the poster are assumed to represent a more genuine response, however, the respondents may have provided answers that they believed I wished to see, despite being told not to do this. Although the words used in both surveys were similar, there were some significant differences, which may be explained the origin of respondents - 30% of respondents to the poster survey were non-British, whereas 100% of the friends and family respondents were of white, British origin. The ‘type’ of respondents may also have had an effect on answers, although this is difficult to tell with such limited numbers. In the poster survey, 71.4% of respondents were female, and the majority were PhD students, with 92.8% having a post-graduate level of education. In the friends and family survey, although it is broadly similar, the difference is lower, with only 59% of respondents being female, and although most had a university education, this was at postgraduate level for only 40% of respondents. ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],Hypothesis: Perceived public confusion and misunderstanding has been used to legitimize and push though the reforms. However, the general public would see very little difference as the reforms are characterized by continuity rather than change. Heritage Protection Reform (HPR) therefore, serves the proponents of the reforms, and not the general public as suggested in the policy documents. Stella Jackson [email_address] 1 st Year MPhil/PhD Student: Departments of Archaeology & Politics](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/rmfpostercompressed-13121507367438-phpapp02-110731172027-phpapp02/85/RMF-Poster-1-320.jpg)
