Search results

Cultural heritage destruction, acts that are carried out by both state and non-state actors, have accompanied violence towards people in all types of wars throughout human history. Used as a means to cause terror and to directly perpetuate harm on a particular group of people, heritage destruction ultimately erases the history of the people and denies them a future at the same time. Heritage destruction, as such, is a topic that is directly relevant for conflict and peace economics. Yet, economics literature on heritage destruction, especially during epochs of violence is scant at best. Presenting some examples of heritage destruction during mass atrocities, this chapter discusses how heritage destruction is related to causes, conduct, and consequences of violence. Doing so illustrates how heritage destruction could be incorporated in extant conflict and peace economics studies and their relevance for post-conflict reconstruction and violence prevention.

Development needs of a country like India are extremely disparate, and therefore a unifocus of financial and government agencies on investment considering economic returns shall fail to achieve overall development of the country. The gradual trickle of impact investing in India should begin to look beyond the traditional sectors like manufacturing and agriculture towards nontraditional sectors like culture and heritage which involves the affective and cognitive attributes of the community while being a part of its daily chores. If funds are judiciously channelized towards this sector, then a holistic impact on social and environmental growth can be expected along with the economic returns. Tourism and allied industries would be a direct economic beneficiary which would help generate employment, preserve tangible and intangible heritage manifestations and inculcate a sense of pride in the self and social cohesion. The current article presents two conceptual models arguing the higher efficacy of the impact investing model over traditional financing model.

The overall aim of this chapter is to investigate whether the notion of cultural value can have utility as a context for urban and regional development strategies. It does this by proposing a conceptualisation of ‘cultural assets’ that encompasses both tangible and intangible resources, as well as resources existing and yet to be created. The purpose of the conceptualisation is to establish a framework within which we can better understand how cultural value might be activated or generated in urban and regional areas and so become a context for developmental strategies. Importantly, this paper also sets out to provide further insight into the notion of cultural value itself, particularly in relation to matters of definition, and the notion's utility in other areas of theory and practice.

Charles Arcodia <c.arcodia@griffith.edu.au> is Associate Professor in the Department of Tourism, Sport and Hotel Management, Griffith University, Australia. He has held leadership positions in a variety of educational and business service contexts. An experienced educator having taught and researched in the tertiary sector for over 15 years, he has broad research interests working primarily within the fields of event management, tourism education, and intangible heritage. He is on the editorial board of a number of journals and serves as the Editor of the International Journal of Event Management Research.