CC BY
14
СОЦИОЛОГИЯ ГОРОДА
URBAN MAPPING OF WORLD CULTURAL HERITAGE TERRITORIES (THE CASE OF STRALSUND, GERMANY)
Iuliia Eremenko
Sociological Institute of the RAS — Branch of the FCTAS RAS, Saint Petersburg, Russia; Saint Petersburg State University, Russia;
University of Bamberg, Germany.
Citation: Eremenko I. Urban mapping of World Cultural Heritage territories (the case of Stralsund, Germany). Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 22(3): 141-154. https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2019.22.3.6
Abstract. Mapping in modern sociology is considered one of the main methods for marking and promoting the geopolitical picture of the world and maps of cities are no exception. The purpose of this paper is to identify the boundaries of the World Cultural Heritage (WCH) represented on various maps as well as the specifics of their use in urban change practices. The city of Stralsund (Germany), which has been a World Heritage city since 2002, was chosen as the model object for analysis. This study is based on an understanding of the map as a power resource that conveys the worldview needed by the city administration as the map client. As materials for the study, two main sources of information were used: maps presented in official documents, official media, on the information stands of the city, and data from expert interviews with representatives of the city administration, local businesses, employees of the tourist center and local activists. The study showed three main sociological aspects in urban mapping of World Cultural Heritage sites: 1. Multiplicity and targeting of WCH mapping. Urban mapping is a tool for local authorities to zone the urban environment to demonstrate the boundaries of cultural to different categories of consumers: experts, tourists, and residents. The city authorities create city maps with a focus on various interest groups in view of cultural and political communication in Stralsund. 2. Maps as a symbolic resource. The city administration is the only actor that forms and transmits the borders of the WCH, which gives its representatives a special expert status within the WCH. Urban mapping is a policy tool for implementing a symbolic resource to demonstrate the boundaries of the World Cultural Heritage. 3. Maps as arguments in conflicts around changes in urban areas. Urban maps serve as a powerful resource for conflict management by the city administration. In situations of conflict between the local government and the city's residents, including different local communities, city maps are converted into political capital for the city government in order to approve the correctness of the chosen program of action for changing the urban environment. Thus, urban mapping is
an essential part of the city administration's strategies for both locals and tourists. The pragmatic meaning of the sociology of urban mapping is in the definition and public discussion of the strategies for the use of World Heritage sites by all city actors. Keywords: urban mapping, urban conflicts, World Heritage sites, World Heritage cities, cultural heritage.
Introduction
Today, a kind of "war of maps" is underway: some areas are marked as the territory of one state, others as the territory of another (e.g., Crampton 2003). A map is an essential unifying tool, showing what is "ours" and what is "foreign", for example, within the scope of national identity building (Anderson 1983). Maps of a city serve to legitimize ideas about how a city should develop; which page in history is the most valuable (see, for example, Harvey 1989; Barnes, Duncan 2013).
This work will examine the case of Stralsund, a World Heritage site. The purpose of this article is to identify the boundaries of the World Cultural Heritage (hereafter, WCH) represented on various maps and the specificities of their use in urban change practices.
In order to achieve this goal, the theoretical approach to the map as a source of influence will first be considered, therefore the specifics of Stralsund as a World Heritage City will be examined. Having described the design of the empirical study, this paper will proceed to the results of another study based on such materials as (1) an analysis of two types of maps, both published in official documents and brochures for tourists and located on information stands in different parts of the city, (2) expert interviews, and (3) an analysis of materials in the social network "Facebook" related to the case of tree removal in January 2019.
Theoretical approach
Typical school geography lessons teach that a map is an objective reflection of reality. But over time, the understanding comes that a map does not always reflect objective reality. It is not an objective imprint of nature and what is real, but a social construct (Harley 1989) and a source of influence (Latour 1990). When a map is drawn up and the location of shops, schools and administration buildings are marked on it, the imprint of the natural landscape is not being captured, but rather the fact that nature does not belong to it at all.
The idea that a cartographer or a mapmaker shapes people's understanding of the world around them, creating an image of a territory or place, emerged quite late: at the end of the 20th century. The British geographer, John Brian Harley,
says that when people see a map, they look at it "on a daily basis" and do not try to think critically about it (Harley 1989). No matter how much mapmakers want to convey an image of objective reality, they are still the translators of a particular culture of their time (Harley 1992). Thanks to Harley and his colleagues, the map was discussed as a social construct, as "the interest of the owner, the state and the insurance company in it becomes evident" (Wood 1992: 19).
Bruno Latour promotes Harley's argument that maps are a social construct and shapes the idea of maps as a political resource (Latour 1990). Latour, based on Foucault's ideas, argues that maps are "permeated by power." They are created and delivered to "accumulation centers," for example, in the metropolis, and then used to manage subject territories at a distance. The map itself is an ordinary paper or tablet that can be easily torn or otherwise destroyed. However, the map is surrounded by a network of actors who are interested in it. For example, the representation of the territory of one state more than another one on a map may serve as a basis for the start of hostilities or the emergence of new trade routes (Scott 1998).
The form of the image of an object on the map is a choice, which is related to the limitations and possibilities of the map as a form of information transfer. When cartographers choose a projection, they use techniques that already exist, in order to be understood, but all these techniques, in turn, reproduce some discourse. Historically, cartographers have endowed maps with different symbolic objects that were "readable" by their contemporaries, and these elements dynamically changed. Conventional signs find application in the ways of decoration of the map, and they are a reference within these historical communities. Along with individual signs, in the course of cultural development, various systems of conventional signs appeared. Thus, not only the "legend" but also comments appeared in the maps. As Jacques Derrida notes, this is namely the influence of the comments or "basement" of a map (Derrida 1976). However, to be understood in a certain way by those who look at the map created, not all the information, the entire "cultural code", can be put in a stitched line, in comments or other "marginal elements" of the map. Knowing what is not reflected on the map or has been transformed in a certain way creates a special power resource.
The specificity of Stralsund as a World Heritage City
World Heritage cities have several special features in comparison to other cities in general, and cities with one or more World Heritage architectural structures in particular (Evans 2002; Russeil 2016; Gravari-Barbas 2018).
Stralsund stands out from a number of World Heritage Cities because it shares the status with the city of Wismar, with which it shares no borders, but
has a common architectural structure. According to paragraph 26 COM 23.7 of the World Heritage Committee, the cities have been granted the joint status of "Historic Centres of Stralsund and Wismar, Germany" in 2002. The total area included is 168 ha, with a buffer zone of 448 ha (UNESCO 2002). The next point was the Committee's recommendation to the German authorities to "pay particular attention to regulations of design of modern details and proper use of materials and technologies for restoration of historic buildings. The height and design of any new building or extension which are considered to be necessary in and around the historic center should match the traditional horizon and character of the historic city" (UNESCO 2002).
Methods and materials
This study is based on three types of data. First, a qualitative analysis of maps containing information on the boundaries of the WCH was carried out. Since there are various maps reflecting the boundaries of the World Heritage area, the following types of maps created by the city administration representing the boundaries of the WCH were chosen in Stralsund: (1) maps published in official documents; (2) maps from information stands in the historic center of the city; (3) maps from information stands in the residential areas of the city; (4) maps published in tourist booklets produced by the city of Stralsund. The maps from the official documents date from 2000 to 2018, i.e., they cover the entire period from the submission of the application for WCH status to the present. The maps on the information stands were received on 31 January 2019. The Stralsund administration has not changed the map of historic cities of Stralsund and Wismar in the official magazine ("Weltkulturerbe Historische Altstädte Stralsund und Wismar"). Stralsund produces this magazine in cooperation with the Wismar administration, and therefore the map from the latest volume about the European Year of Cultural Heritage (Schwesig 2018) was taken for the study. Materials from books on the history of Stralsund were also used, both those published before and after the WCH. This was done in order to exclude the impact of the official map recorded in the nomination on the form of the city's image.
Second, a series of semi-structured expert interviews (n=20) were conducted in January and February 2019, with informants from the city administration, local business, tourism center staff, and local activists.
Third, an analysis of two groups' entries in the social network "Facebook" was employed as additional materials: (1) Stralsund City ("Stadt Stralsund"), organized by the Stralsund Press Service and which publishes the official position of the city administration; (2) Green Stralsund Faction ("Grüne Fraktion Stralsund").
The results of the empirical study
This section will look at the impact of the maps on changes in the urban environment, as exemplified by the January 2019 conflict between the city administration and a joint group of local activists represented by members of the Green Stralsund Faction, a German non-profit environmental organization and BUND (German Environment and Nature Society), but not by members of any official associations of urban activists.
The reason for the conflict was the decision of the city administration to remove trees in an area called "White Bridges" (Fig. 1). This place is close to the area with the status of WCH, but as we can see from the nomination map (Fig. 2), the White Bridges are located in the "buffer zone", i.e., it is an area with special regulation regarding construction and restoration works, however, it does not belong directly to the area with the WCH status, and the entire scope of the rules, as in the case of the WCH, does not apply to it (Russeil 2016).
According to local activists, the conflict situation began with the fact that the city administration decided to cut down trees in autumn 2018 without presenting the decision at public hearings. The publication of the administration's decision caused discussion on Facebook, but no action by the city administration was taken to change the decision. The administration refused demands of the Stralsund Green Faction to plant an equal number of new trees in the area.
ür^r" /
/• SJfc- - ' t' siV , -
, r:. v-' H - .
—4 ....... jnunL. n V^r*. -
-Alt 7 ■ r , '
> o
Fig. 1. Stralsund. Bird's-eye view of the historic center. The area of the White Bridges is outlined in white. Source: Home Website Hanseatic City of Stralsund https://www.wismar-stralsund.de/das_welterbe/ (accessed 10.08.2019). Adapted by Iuliia Eremenko.
In January 2019, when special equipment arrived at the White Bridges to implement the tree-cutting project, local activists held a series of pickets demanding that the administration justify its actions. In response to this, the city administration expressed its position that the removal took place here for three reasons. Firstly, some of the trees were sick or already dry, as experts had ascertained. Secondly, there had been no trees at this place historically, and since this area was a zone of the WCH, it was necessary to return it to its original form. Thirdly, the trees on the White Bridges prevented tourists from taking pictures of the city panorama.
The interview data showed that the city press service insisted on only two arguments as the official position of the administration: "Some of the trees on the White Bridges are sick, as the experts had ascertained. Historically, there were no trees there at all" [Representative of the Administration's Press Service 1]. To clarify the period to which this historical reference relates, the press service was unable to express the official position of the city administration. Interviews with representatives of various departments of the administration showed that there were other arguments as well. For example, the representatives of the Planning and Development Department cite as an argument a map from 1647 (Fig. 4), where not only the island, but also the bridge as a whole, is missing, as well as information that the island formed during the GDR: "The islands that could have been connected by the bridge initially did not exist, they appeared in the GDR period, when there was a ban on tree removal. [Administration Representative 1]. Other experts said that the growth of trees in the area was an expression of the GDR's misguided action: "Trees should not be there. No one has ever taken care of this place, and we are correcting that. We are going back to the historical view [Administration representative 2].
There is also an argument that tries to link the status of WCH with this territory: "This is a World Heritage site. We should take care of it and keep it in its original form, if possible. [Administration Representative 3]. This argument is incorrect because, as noted earlier, the area is in the buffer zone but outside the WCH. However, this argument is correct if we base our argument on maps located outside the central area of the city.
The third argument, voiced by the city administration, suggests that tourism is of paramount importance and that the urban environment can be changed in order to attract the attention of tourists, without taking into account the opinion of residents. "We need to show the WCH in all its glory so that tourists can come back to us. The trees are preventing us from taking photographs now [Representative of tourist center 1].
The study showed that by creating and publishing maps of the WCH, the Stralsund administration is the only actor that shapes and transmits
the boundaries of the WCH, which gives its representatives a special expert status concerning the WCH. This approach of excluding other actors from broadcasting information about the WCH creates a relationship of inequality. The city administration focuses on three different groups of actors to produce maps. The first group, expert organizations, is represented primarily by ICOMOS (the International Council on Monuments and Sites). These maps are published in official documents and are based on the very first map of the city (Fig. 2) which was included in the application for WCH status published in 2000 (Thomas et al. 2000).
Fig. 2. World Heritage Site Map of Stralsund. The black circle indicates the area of the White Bridges.
Source: Thomas F., Volksdorf D., Kuhlow L., Markfort U., Richter C. (2000) The historic center of Stralsund and Wismar: World Heritage nomination. Adapted by Iuliia Eremenko.
The second group of actors are the residents, for whom the maps placed in different parts of the city are intended. These include, first of all, information stands located outside the historical city center, where fewer people live than in other districts (Statistical Office... 2017). The third group of actors are the tourists, for whom special maps are created (Fig. 3) in which the main focus is on the WCH zone, while the territory outside it is represented with less precision. Thus, the White Bridges, where one of the arguments for cutting down trees was the need to create better conditions for tourists to take pictures, are not marked as an island or a place to visit.
Thus, we see that the objects are represented differently depending on the audience to which the map is addressed. Depending on whether the map shows a bridge or an island, there is a change in the way the trees in the area can be treated. Maps depicting the area on information stands in the historic center of
Fig. 3. Stralsund. Map from the World Heritage magazine of Wismar and Stralsund, published by the City of Stralsund. The area of the White Bridges is outlined in black. Source: Behrendt S., Huschner N. (2018) European Year of Cultural Heritage. Welt-Kultur-Erbe Historische Altstädte Stralsund und Wismar. S. 68. Adapted by Iuliia Eremenko.
the city, which has the status of WCH, and outside the WCH, show that the area is an island. The maps published in the tourist booklets of the Stralsund city administration state that it is a bridge, not an island, and therefore should be free of trees. However, the argument of local activists that there may be trees on such bridges is disputed by the administration in two ways. The first affirms that experts have established that some of the trees are sick and need to be cut down. The second argument is that trees have historically been absent in the area, citing maps from the 17th century (Fig. 4).
If books on the history of Stralsund published in different periods are taken into consideration, it can be noted that a number of books on Stralsund, published after 2000 (e.g., an official book with the map for nomination) publish maps depicting the White Bridges area as an island (e.g., Hirsch 2003), while
Fig. 4. «Sciagrapiha civitatis Stralsundensis Pomerania 1647», a map of the
Hanseatic city of Stralsund. The area of the White Bridges is outlined in white.
Source: Rieck K. (2009) Zwischen zwei Urkunden. Welt-Kultur-Erbe Historische Altstädte Stralsund und Wismar. S. 5. Adapted by Iuliia Eremenko.
books published before 2000 depict the area as a bridge (e.g., Ewe 1969: 2-3).
On the maps located in the territory outside the WCH zone, the WCH zone is "consolidated" and expanded to the boundaries of the buffer zone (Fig. 2). This effect is observed on various information stands in different parts of the city, except the central area. This fact, in turn, may be associated with economic benefits, as housing in the WCH zone is more expensive than in the suburbs. Also, the creation of such an "enlarged" zone allows for attaching a more extensive list of real estate to the WCH.
The probable purpose of the "narrowing" of the zone for tourists to visit outside the territory of the WCH, which we observe, for example, on the maps published for tourists (Fig. 3), is a pragmatic approach to the creation of specific tourist routes, the creation of a conventional set of attractions to be seen. This is necessary if the city administration fears that tourists will move to the peripheral area, become disappointed and not come back to the city and not advise their friends to visit the city.
This approach to the narrowing of the WCH zone can facilitate the city administration's navigation in the city center and determines the order of implementing restoration works in a particular part of the WCH and the approach to it from the side of certain bridges and roads. This, in turn, reduces the costs of maintaining the urban environment in those WCH areas not marked on tourist maps.
Limitations of the study
There are a number of limitations to this study, the most important of which is the fact that theories can be built on only some of the strategies of the local administration, as in addition to the analysis of the maps, the materials of expert interviews provide only an idea regarding official rhetoric of the administration, local activists and representatives of tourism centers. However, they do not give us an idea about the hidden motives that guide the local administration of Stralsund in creating various maps.
Also, this study does not show how maps change over time in an urban space, and only displays maps published in tourist booklets between 2016 and 2018, but the maps on the information boards were recorded in January 2019. It cannot be said whether there are situations when some maps are actively replicated in some conflicts, while others are "forgotten" during the conflict in order to be used after the conflict is over.
Conclusion
Urban mapping is simultaneously a channel for the transmission of power relations, a means of representing these power relations and a means of producing relations of inequality and exclusion. That is, maps not only replicate,
but also produce these inequalities. The city administration becomes the only expert on the WCH issue and can manipulate public opinion. The case study of Stralsund showed that the boundaries of the World Heritage area are different, as well as how objects are represented, depending on the audience of the map and the objectives of the city administration in creating it.
The following sociological aspects of urban mapping were highlighted. First, the study revealed the multiplicity of urban mapping. Various maps are produced and circulated: those located in the WCH area for tourists, those outside the city center and the WCH area for residents, and in tourist booklets and historical maps. Second, urban mapping is becoming a form of symbolic capital. The city administration is the only actor that forms and transmits the boundaries of the WCH, which gives its representatives a special expert status concerning the WCH. Third, city maps can serve as a resource for conflict management by the city administration. In situations of conflict between the local administration and the city's residents, including different local communities, city maps are converted into the political capital of the city government to validate the chosen agenda for changing the urban environment. The example of conflict over tree removal on the White Bridges shows that World Cultural Heritage mapping can be one of the bases for implementing singular decisions to change urban areas.
The analysis showed that there are three primary map audiences: the expert community (represented primarily by ICOMOS), residents and tourists. The following strategies for representing the boundaries of the WCH were identified. The first concerns the symbolic "enlargement" of the WCH zone by including a buffer zone around the territory of the WCH, as we observe in the maps located on the periphery of the city. This may give the impression to residents that there is a larger area with UNESCO status.
The strategy for tourists is different. The boundaries of the WCH on official maps and maps published in the tourist booklets coincide. However, we observe that not all sites outside the WCH are marked. This "focuses" tourists in a particular, more ennobled part of the historic center.
The reason why it is important to consider WCH in this kind of map research is that in World Heritage Cities the city administration is tempted to use manipulation of World Heritage maps to implement its political decisions. This article examines the case of only one city, requiring research in other World Heritage Cities to confirm whether this is a common practice or not. This kind of manipulation of public opinion may have an impact on the leveling of the value of the WCH area, as society will not believe that a particular building is of value. This can lead to the careless treatment of WCH objects, which can be followed by their destruction.
In the future, it seems necessary to conduct a more detailed review of the maps published by city administrations of World Heritage Cities and to compare strategies of the positioning of World Heritage sites in other cities of Germany and the world in order to identify strategies for using the mapping of World Heritage sites in cities.
Acknowledgments
The paper has benefited from the support of the Centre for German and European Studies (St. Petersburg State University and Bielefeld University) supported by the DAAD with funds from the German Foreign Office.
References
Anderson B. (1983) Imagined communities. London: Verso.
Barnes T.J., Duncan J.S. (eds.) (2013) Writing worlds: discourse, text and metaphor in the representation of landscape. London: Routledge.
Crampton J.W. (2003) Cartographic rationality and the politics of geosurveillance and security. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 30(2): 135-148.
Derrida J. (1976) Of Grammatology (trans. G. Spivak). Baltimore. MD: Johns Hopkins University.
Evans G. (2002) Living in a World heritage City: stakeholders in the dialectic of the universal and particular. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 8(2): 117-135.
Gravari-Barbas M. (2018). Tourism as a heritage-producing machine. Tourism Management Perspectives. 26, 5-8.
Harley J.B. (1989) Deconstructing the map. Cartographica: The international journal for geographic information and geovisualization, 26(2): 1-20.
Harley J.B. (1992) Deconstructing the map. In: Barnes T.J., Duncan S. (eds.) Writing Worlds: Discourse, Text and Metaphor in the Representation of Landscape. London: Routledge: 231-247.
Harvey D. (1989) The condition of postmodernity. Basil Blackwell.
Latour B. (1990) Drawing things together. Representation in scientific practice. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.
Russeil S. (2016) Les villes du patrimoine mondial: un réseau international, des intérêts divers, des usages multiples. Métropoles, 18. http://journals.openedition.org/ metropoles/5278
Scott J. (1998) Seeing Like a State: Why Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Yale University Press, New Haven CT.
Wood D. (1992) The Power of Maps. Guilford, New York.
Sources
Behrendt S., Huschner N. (2018) European Year of Cultural Heritage. In: Weltkulturerbe Historische Altstädte Stralsund und Wismar. UNESCO: 68.
Ewe H. (1989) Stralsund. Rostok: Hinstorff Verlag.
Hacker H., Herdenberg H. (2009) Stralsund. Stralsund: Hinstorff Verlag GmbH. Hirsch S. (2003) Stralsund — Bilderaus der Luft. Rostock: Reich. Lehm K., Lehm R. (2003) Stralsund: Welterbe der UNESCO. Weiland. Rieck K. (2009) Zwischen zwei Urkunden. In: Weltkulturerbe Historische Altstädte Stralsund und Wismar. UNESCO: 4-7.
Statistical Office Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (2017) Analytischer Bericht. Stralsund.
Thomas F., Volksdorf D., Kuhlow L., Markfort U., Richter C. (2000) The historic centres of Stralsund and Wismar: World Heritage nomination.
UNESCO (2002) Report of the 26th Session of the Committee. Zwei Städte - Ein Welterbe Stralsund und Wismar (2017) https://www.wismar-stralsund.de/das_welterbe/_(accessed: 23.06.2019).
ГОРОДСКОЕ КАРТИРОВАНИЕ ТЕРРИТОРИЙ ВСЕМИРНОГО КУЛЬТУРНОГО НАСЛЕДИЯ (на примере г. Штральзунда, Германия)
Юлия Андреевна Еременко
Социологический Институт РАН — филиал ФНИСЦ РАН, Санкт-Петербург, Россия;
Санкт-Петербургский государственный университет, Россия;
Университет Бамберга, Германия.
Цитирование: Eremenko I. Urban mapping of World Cultural Heritage territories (the case of Stralsund, Germany). Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии, 22(3): 141-154. https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2019.22.3.6
Аннотация. Картирование в современной социологии рассматривается как один из основных способов обозначения и продвижения геополитической картины мира. Не стали исключением и карты городов. Цель статьи — выявить репрезентируемые на различных картах границы Всемирного культурного наследия (ВКН) и особенности их использования в практиках городских изменений. В качестве площадки для анализа выбран город Штральзунд (Германия), обладающий статусом города Всемирного наследия с 2002 г. Теоретически исследование базируется на понимании карты как властного ресурса, транслирующего картину мира, нужную для городской администрации как заказчика карты. Материалами для исследования послужили, во-первых, карты, представленные в официальных документах и медиа на информационных стендах города, во-вторых, данные экспертных интервью с представителями городской администрации, локального бизнеса, сотрудниками туристического центра и местными активистами. Социологические
аспекты городского картирования территорий Всемирного культурного наследия включают: 1. Множественность и адресность картирования ВКН. Городское картирование является инструментом зонирования городской среды для демонстрации местной властью границ культурного наследия разным категориям потребителей: экспертам, туристам и местным жителям. Городские карты создаются городскими властями с ориентацией на разные группы интересов в рамках культурно-политической коммуникации в г. Штральзунде. 2. Карты как символический капитал. Городская администрация является единственным актором, формирующим и транслирующим границы ВКН, что наделяет ее представителей особым экспертным статусом в отношении ВКН. Городское картирование становится инструментом политики в целях реализации символического ресурса для демонстрации границ Всемирного культурного наследия. 3. Аргументы в конфликтах по изменению городской территории. Городские карты служат властный ресурсом ведения конфликта со стороны городской администрации. В ситуации конфликтов местной администрации и жителей города, включая разные местные сообщества, городские карты конвертируются в политический капитал городской власти для утверждения правильности избранной программы действий по поводу изменения городской среды. Таким образом, городское картирование является важной частью стратегий городской администрации, направленных как на местных жителей, так и на туристов. Прагматический смысл социологии городского картирования состоит в определении и публичном обсуждении всеми участниками стратегий использования объектов Всемирного культурного наследия в городах. Ключевые слова: городское картирование, городская карта, городские конфликты, объекты Всемирного наследия, города Всемирного наследия, культурное наследие.
Благодарности
Работа выполнена при поддержке Центра изучения Германии и Европы (Санкт-Петербургский государственный университет и Университет Билефельда) при поддержке DAAD за счет средств Министерства иностранных дел Германии.
