CEU eTD Collection T T In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts HE HE E Department of International Relations and European Studies C UROPEAN OF THE ASE OFTHE Supervisor: Supervisor: Professor Littoz-Monnet Annabelle OF “E C Central European University European Central C ULTURAL UROPEAN OMMISSION (W Budapest, Hungary Christoffer Liedtke Christoffer C ORD Submitted to Submitted ULTURE C 2007 OUNT By : H 14.705) S ERITAGE IGNIFICANCE ’ 2000 S U NDERSTANDING P ROGRAMME : ” CEU eTD Collection sphere of sphere of competencies. inCommission integrationpromoting European in policy domains gobeyondthat its usual Finally, I use my findingsidentity-relatedbut of issues,as a by-product cultural policy, asits main than rather goal. to draw some preliminary for room allows still its DGs and Commission of the nature technocratic that the demonstrates conclusions concerninginfluencedagency. byits asa significance, nature thesis expert also technocratic The the role of the Commission’sfocus understanding of European alternative explanation of onan the identity construction as part that the claimonpurposive Iargue andCulture, DGEducation inservants working the of the EU’s cultural policy is projects, interviews identity andpersonal with civil theories, the analysis of construction the difficult to substantiate. drawnfrom insights basistheoretical of Onthe Instead, identity”public. inthegeneral “European I a promote asits heritage to ability of significance cultural European interpretation the of implementation activities. a higha fragmented bureaucraticenjoying institution indegree of policy its discretion In connection with theand as other the integration and aunitary actor, European “driver” as of one Commission: the first view, the thesis the twoperceptions of analysis contrasts analyzesProgramme. question,the this answering In the popular of withinCulture 2000 theframework the heritage projects significance” of cultural “European the of European This thesis Commission’s understanding the examines A BSTRACT ii CEU eTD Collection APPENDICES BIBLIOGRAPHY CONCLUSION AS A TECHNOCRATIC BUREAUCRACY CHAPTER 3 AN ABILITY TO PROMOTE A“EUROPEAN” IDENTITY? CHAPTER 2 TO CONSTRUCT A EUROPEAN IDENTITY? CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 3.2. 3.1. 2.4. 2.3. 2.2. 2.1. 1.3. 1.2. 1.1. 3.2.4. 3.2.3. 3.2.2. 3.2.1. 2.2.3. M 2.2.2. C 2.2.1. A 2.1.4. M 2.1.3. D 2.1.2. R 2.1.1. T 1.2.4. 1.2.3. 1.2.2. 1.2.1. 1.1.2. 1.1.1. A C T C P T C I I DENTITY DENTITY ROJECT HE HE NALYSIS OF NALYSIS OMMISSION AS A ONCLUSIONS OF THE ANALYSIS OMMONALITIES IN OMMONALITIES 2.2.3.4. 2.2.3.4. 2.2.3.2. 2.2.3.1. D E E A A B H E C C -INTERPRETINGTHE COMMISSION EUROPEANSIGNIFICANCE: - EUROPEAN SIGNIFICANCE OFCULTURALHERITAGE: -EUROPEANSIGNIFICANCE -USINGTHENOTION OF“EUROPEANCULTURAL HERITAGE“ THE THE SOCIALIZATION MODEL OF CULTURAL HERITAGE OF CULTURAL OF CULTURAL HERITAGE PROJECTS HERITAGE OF CULTURAL ON THE BASIS OF CULTURAL HERITAGE CULTURAL BASIS OF ONTHE C C UROPEAN SIGNIFICANCE IN TERMS OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL BENEFITS ANDSOCIAL ECONOMIC OF THE TERMS INUROPEAN SIGNIFICANCE UROPEAN SSENTIALISM VERSUS SSENTIALISM ENEDICT ………………………………………………………………………………………………..... ONCEPTOF ONNECTING OBSBAWM EVELOPMENT OF EVELOPMENT DOPTING A MORE TECHNICAL INTERPRETATION OF INTERPRETATION DOPTING AMORETECHNICAL HE PERSUASION MODEL OF IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION OF IDENTITY MODEL HE PERSUASION NTHONY EASONS FOR USING CULTURAL HERITAGE FOR IDENTITY PROMOTION FORIDENTITY HERITAGE USING CULTURAL FOR EASONS ULTURE NALYZING THE NALYZING IFFICULTIES OF USING CULTURE AS A BASIS FOR PROMOTING A PROMOTING A AS FOR USING BASIS CULTURE OF IFFICULTIES ULTI EANS AT THE DISPOSAL OFTHE EANS ATDISPOSAL THE OMMISSION OMMISSION ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. D A “U U …………………………………………………………………………………………….. DDRESSING NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF THE COMMON THE OF ASPECTS NEGATIVE DDRESSING NDERSTANDING OF CULTURAL HERITAGE OFCULTURAL NDERSTANDING A IFFERENT LEVELS OF IDENTITY -A , C NITY IN DIVERSITY NITY …………………………………………………………………………………………... C NALYSIS ONSTRUCTION NNUAL 2000 ULTURE A S - P LEVEL COOPERATION ’ MITH NDERSON S C ROJECTS AND I A ULTURAL DENTITY ANDDENTITY P PPROACH TO PPROACH ’ : C ROGRAMME P ’ B S S E ROJECTS U ULTURAL ……………………………………………………………………………... UREAUCRACY A R A UROPEAN IDENTITY AS A POSSIBLE SIDEPRODUCT ASA POSSIBLE UROPEAN IDENTITY , SING AND PPROACH TO PPROACH ’ PPROACHES OLE IN OLE ”…………………………………………………………………...……. S C T A ………………………………………………………………………… H ONSTRUCTIVISM PPROACH TO PPROACH ERITAGE ABLE OF : : C ……………………………………………………………………... C M T C H : I ULTURAL ULTURAL DENTITY O ULTURES ERITAGE ETHODOLOGY AND HEORETICAL I I …………………………………………………………………. NTERVIEWS VERVIEW DENTITY : C A KEY CRITERION FOR ASSESSING A FOR KEY CRITERION I ……………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………...… OMMISSION IN PROMOTING PROMOTING A IN OMMISSION DENTITY : ……………………………………………………...…… iii T ……………………………………………………….... C I C …………………………………………………………. ……………………………………...………………… P DENTITY HEORETICAL ROJECTS ONSTRUCTION …………………………………………………….... ……………………………………………………… ONTENTS H H B ERITAGE FOR ERITAGE C UILDING E ONSTRUCTION …………………………………………………. A UROPEAN PAST UROPEAN C , PPROACHES C C ONSTRUCTION RITERIA E ULTURE UROPEAN SIGNIFICANCE UROPEAN ………………………………………… ……………………………………… ………………………………………... : S E TRANDS ……………………………………. …………………………………... ……………………..……………. XISTING ………………………………….. 2000 I DENTITY E E ………………………...…… …………………………….. ……………………………... UROPEAN IDENTITY UROPEAN IDENTITY P E ROGRAMME …………………….……. UROPEAN SIGNIFICANCE : ………………………… C ONSTRAINTS P ROMOTION ………………... : A ...... NALYSIS ……… …….. ? …...... 21 10 10 24 21 12 18 16 14 11 26 22 16 23 23 16 19 13 17 29 26 33 35 35 28 4 1 42 41 39 33 4 6 47 4 66 45 CEU eTD Collection for Youthfor Culture, Audiovisual, and Civic Participation,” COM (2004) 154 final, 10. 2 1996),Ltd, 10. Perceptions of Divergence and Unity in Past and Present 1 “the upon somethingbutter.” than lessprosaic of price Community’s leaders political for thatgenuine realized support ECwascontingentthe public the that EC’sexistence of the was already at yetit early stage the success; impressive been an political community,goals extended beyondalong the creation of an economic union and called for the formation of a strongwithambitious Monnet’s such, As all cooperation. international its of promises in the belief and attributes.idealism In economicvisionaries, such Jean anditsas Monnet, original design was deeplyinspired by post-war the terms, European integrationin integration wearereminded, mindsthe project, of originated and TheEuropean directives. has special far of of from kind discourse removedrhetoric, EU regulations routine technocratic the accompanied by countless public events, official speeches, and mediaheadlines, allfeaturing a a special role, since it possesses significant benefits for the economy, society, and the and economy, society, the for benefits significant itpossesses role, since a special identity.” “developmentof a European the to contribute Culture will 2000Programme newly adopted that the states 2004communication instance, Commission’s the For policy space. EU public Union. Asa long by culture, made hasfinally policy-makers, result, in neglected its entry EC the identity and a“European tryingconsciousness,” to“win hearts” the of people European for the EU leadership’s effort tofind uponwhich grounds the promote andto strengthen “European”a EC Communication, “Making Citizenship Work: Fostering European Culture and Diversity through Programmes through Diversity and Culture European Fostering Work: Citizenship “Making Communication, EC in Experience,” Shared Europe: in Identity and Wintle,”Culture Michael This year’s celebrationI of the 50 NTRODUCTION 2 Within the cultural dimension integrationof European the cultural project, heritage has th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome has been , ed. Michael Wintle (Aldershot, Hants: Ashgate Publishing 1 1 This realization lays at the heart of the Culture and Identity in Europe: CEU eTD Collection Graf Strachwitz (Berlin: Maecenata, 2004), 98. Cultural Heritage,” in 3 promote identity acertain heritage of to and andspecifically type culture cultural European national and level.number EUusesscholars practitioners claim the aof while Thirdly, that or local, regional, atthe simply than level, rather EU the at foraction afield creates that artifact acultural or activity cultural of a given “European significance” is the precisely ittreaties, EU’s in the enshrined subsidiarity of principle the given because, omission, significant is a This interchangeably. usedintuitively and inmany are Infact, terms cases these concepts. these meaning of of definitions yet precise itthe arenoaccepted there seems that official discourse, EU appearin frequently the dimension” “European and“European significance” Terms like utilizedin instrumentby policy toreachits EU the goalsorder domain within the culture. of such as Culture 2000,even though latterthe has beenand animportant quite comprehensive supranational institution. leading by EU’s the as perceived “European project” of the foundations non-economic the into insight may help a better gain in heritage one andcultural areaof the culture significance” “European thisFor understandingin reason, Commission’s terms. of exploring clear the yet strengtheningcitizenship, asenseof neither European of twoconceptshas these beendefined identity in focus ontherole many and currentdebates the of culture European of promoting instance, further For for research. aspects of is this certainly policy, room important of there addresses anumber literature over has pastdecade.Whilethe existing the subject beenconducted of of significance.” European cultural heritage andsafeguarding of“conservation importance the 151emphasizes Article same the Section 2 of in “bringing fore” the “common heritage” Community,the the while cultural necessity to of environment. Sneška Quaedvlieg-Mihailovi Also, to date, no analyses concentrate specifically EU-fundedno programs, the on culture analysesto date, concentrate Also, Given the relatively young character of EU cultural policy, most of the research on the 3 For this reason, the so-called “culture” Article 151 of the EC Treaty speaks of the Heritage and theBuilding of Europe, ü , “Enlargement-Enrichment: A Plea for a Europe-wide Mobilisation in Favour of 2 edited by Sneška Quaedvlieg-Mihailovi by Sneška edited ü and Rupert and CEU eTD Collection distributed duringdistributed May 2007. Finally, Iwill analyze the EU’s legal regulations in fieldthe of anda questionnaire Appendix forof their responses text the to questionnaire)the I (see also use the information obtained from interviews with DG Culture and Education civil servants understanding of interpretation Commission’sthe of conceptthe of European significance, Iwill Toenhance my project. of a larger-scale research within be framework only the conducted could projects of range entire analyzing the since entirety; its inbe analyzed could thatsample year multi-annual projects,the limited aremoreprojects innumber (60total) anda thus represent than one-year projects and commanding larger budgets; b) as opposed to the large number of one- more actors involvingaverage on cooperation type of structural a more thoroughgoing, represent from period 2006. Multi-annual2000 to main werechosen forprojects two reasons:a)they the over funding 2000Programme under Culture the thatreceived heritage projects cultural multi-annual of body entire the of consists myresearch of basis empirical The Commission. internal of institutionsdynamics andEU the organizational culture presentwithin the sourcesexploring on identity analysison EU policy the well the literature and construction,on as Culture 2000Programme? my analysis,In drawupon Iwill various theoretical approaches to under the funding significance”is and thus deserves “European indeed a candidateproject of theis, does inmy key How Commission words, the other decidewhether I ask question research heritage. cultural In 151asappliedto inArticle used “European conceptof significance” the Europe, 4 on focusingrather theoretical most approaches with as such, construction identity supranational on theory nocomprehensive exists there present, in 1994, back and byAshworth Larkham nexus wasnoted of heritage-identity the nature under-researched The sound. sufficiently not is claims such for basis theoretical the legitimacy, own its increase Greg Ashworth and Peter Larkham, Preface to Preface Larkham, Peter and Ashworth Greg ed. G.J. Ashworth and P.J. Larkham The goal of this research work isanalyze to the European Commission’s understanding of 4 yet little has changed since that time. In this regard, it is important to note that at (London andNew York: Routledge 1994), xiii. Building a New Heritage: Tourism,Culture and Identity in the New national 3 identity construction. identity CEU eTD Collection understanding of the character of by Commission. policy-making understanding character of the the for adeepened relevance their discusses and theresearch of findings the summarizes conclusion as nature a technocraticexpertagency.influenced The institution’s by significance, this European of understanding of focus Commission’s onanalternativethe view, explanation I Finally, theweaknesses having identified theEuropeanintegration legitimizing such a of project. terms of the ability of the significanceheritage integration, of theEuropean in cultural “driver” understands of European latter the to as capacity its becomein Commission, the that proposition the a analyze basisI Secondly, builder.” “identity for promoting a European identifyidentity theand elementsthus thatcultural can be applicable heritage, to the analysisas well of asthe theEuropean existingthe DG EducationCommission and Culture in its administration of the Culture 2000 Programme.theoretical as an cultural policy,approaches as well as the documents (such application forms and calls for proposal) usedto by identity construction, I also The thesisisin Iexamine structured First, following way.the concepts the identity of and 4 CEU eTD Collection identities. culture is featuresforindividualseen keyfoundational as the one of defining and both collective communicate,perpetuate, anddevelop and their towardlife.” attitudes about knowledge informs bymeans expressed ofwhich men symbols,inheritedof conceptions symbolic asystem meanings, cultureshared as“an describes pattern historically meaningof transmitted in embodied inmany contemporary toGeertz,analyses belongs laying who, emphasis on culture as public how they act on a wide range of matters.” of range a wide on act they how their daily the worlds… basis of social and political identity affects that how people line upand onegiventhe by whereheis“culture Ross, asystem says, managepeoplemeaning of useto that commonness is accentuated by a sense of difference with regard to other communities.” regardtoother with by a senseof difference is accentuated commonness Second, this or communitycomponents. group including evaluative and emotional, affective, writes, ideas“contain,first, describing categorizing and anindividual’smembership in asocial Risse’s definition of social identity seems tobe the most relevant one. “Social identities,” he used by for purposes the identity elites of purposes construction.my of Forthe Thomas analysis, 7 ed. Crothers Lane and Charles Lockhart (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000), 39. 6 Diez andAntje Wiener (Oxford andNew York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 167. 5 Ibid, 42. Mark Howard Ross, “Culture and Identity in Comparative Political Analysis,” in Thomas Risse, “Social Constructivism and European Integration,” in Integration,” European and Constructivism “Social Risse, Thomas The link betweenidentity and culture isin manypresent definitions of latter, the such as 1.1. Identity, Culture, and Cultural Heritage CHAPTER This chapter will analyze the theoretical basis for the idea that cultural heritage can be can heritage cultural theidea that for basis theoretical willthe analyze This chapter 1.1.1. Connecting Identity and Culture 1 - U H ERITAGE SING THE ” 6 N TO Another widely accepted definition of present culture of definition accepted widely Another OTION OF C 5 ONSTRUCT A “E European Integration Theory UROPEAN E UROPEAN Culture and Politics: A Reader C ULTURAL I DENTITY , ed. Thomas , ed. 5 ? 7 Thus , CEU eTD Collection 10 Rupert Graf Strachwitz (Berlin: Maecenata, 2004), 108. the Common European Heritage?,” in Heritage?,” European Common the heritage as comprising “works of art and architecture, cultural achievements, as well as ideas, as aswell achievements, cultural and of architecture, art “works heritage ascomprising 9 Heritage, 8 states in Article 1: UNESCO theProtectionConventionWorldCultural for ofthe1972 and NaturalHeritage of existsthere avariety formal of of definitions The cultural heritage. definition provided inthe questions aboutwhat types of projects for areselected fundingby Commission.the Firstof all, framework within of itask pertinentprojects us allows Culture 2000Programme,since the to the myheritage for ofcultural hasrelevance character analysis of heritage a high cultural contested should it what includeitmeans, andexclude, andshould how and interpreted be protected, presented.conserved, The heritage cultural what on views divergent of multiplicity the mention to and immovable aspects, tangible and intangible ones. intangible and tangible aspects, immovable and movable both include to heritage cultural of concept the enlarging toward atendency been has are reduced to material - built, archaeological, and landscape and material archaeological, to - built, are reduced heritage in cultural included elements the since clear, are definition a such of limits inherent The Jelka Pirkovi David Throsby,“SevenQuestions in Economicsthe of Cultural Heritage”, in Ibid, 110. For the purposes of this convention, the following shall be considered as ‘cultural shall beconsidered as convention, following For thepurposes of the this monuments: it is conceptthe of of necessary Moving heritage, from toward culture cultural concept the groups of buildings: groups of sites: heritage’: 1.1.2. TheConceptof Cultural Heritage value…; outstanding of whichare nature… archaeological of structures an or elements their architecture, their homogeneity or their place in landscape…; their place or the their homogeneity their architecture, ed. Michael Hutter andIlde Rizzo (London: MacMillan Press, 1997), 14. þ , “New Council of Europe’s Framework Convention on Cultural Heritage, or How to Give Value to works manworks of the combinedor nature works and man….of of architectural ofmonumental andsculpture works architectural painting, works, groups of separate or connected buildingsgroups connected becauseof or of which, separate Heritage and the Building of Europe, 6 10 For instance, Koboldt describes cultural describes Koboldt instance, For 9 ed. Sneška Quaedvlieg-Mihailovi - heritage. Since that time, there time, Since that heritage. - EconomicPerspectives on Cultural 8 ü and CEU eTD Collection 15 Cultures and Politics in Europe, 14 13 Politics inEurope, 12 Michael Hutter andIlde Rizzo (London: MacMillan Press, 1997), 52. andvoices experiences.” silence dissenting to designed fabrication has is recently that “state-sponsored heritage thatcultural “invention,” is a currency gained an selective account: selective from excerpt draftConstitutionalthe EUrepresents a Treaty the of tellingillustration such of a of lessyet silencing no pastrisks muchthe instance, important, others?, For less an presentable. events “good” memories andthecelebrated shared of positive, quintessence the as representing past (which are, of course, plenty) remains extremely sensitive. The emphasis on cultural heritage aredisinherited.others Inaddition,how of todeal question the with darkerelementsthe of the while areprivileged, narratives andtheir inis certain groups process, logical It this only that between “remembering forgetting,” and the imposition of “authoritarian readings on past.” the finding of a balance the approach, aselective necessitates heritage cultural past, the celebrating culture and the mobilization of cultural forms of for ideological politicization the ends.” “signifies heritage that claims who Peckham, by explicitly quite up is taken This point onamarkedly character. political heritage, takes cultural “European” and particularly 11 communal experiences.” of by accumulated a “sense inspired memories,” collective and values shared of “set a importantly, as just and also, but interests” generations.” from have norms, that andacommon understandingpassed on environmentbeen earlier of the Peckham, “The Politics of Heritage and Public Culture,” 7, 12. Culture,” Public and ofHeritage Politics “The Peckham, Robert Shannan Peckham, “Mourning Heritage: Memory, Trauma and Restitution,” in Ibid, 2. in Culture”, Public and ofHeritage Politics “The Peckham, Shannan Robert ChristianKoboldt, “Optimizing Usethe of Cultural Heritage,” in philosophical currentsof has Enlightenment, the embedded within the life of by in impulse its heritage and later alwaysthe present by spiritual characterised andRome, which, of firstnourished by Greece Europe, civilisations the (…) drawing from inspiration cultural,the inheritance religious and humanist of 11 Understood this way, cultural heritage comes to mean not only “sites of historical of “sites only not mean to comes heritage cultural way, this Understood ed. Robert Shannan Peckham (London: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd., 2003), 1. ed. Robert ShannanPeckham (London: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd., 2003), 206. 7 Economic Perspectives on Cultural Heritage, 12 In this capacity, cultural heritage, In cultural this capacity, Rethinking Heritage: Cultures and 13 A heritageview of cultural 14 By its very nature of nature very its By Rethinking Heritage: ed. 15 CEU eTD Collection 20 Politics inEurope, 19 18 Heritage: Cultures and Politics in Europe, 18 17 Mihailovi “legitimate”collective of through construction nation the state of authority the the legitimizing nationalism. of characteristic and the processes to political,of cultural, territorial and inclusion exclusion and haswhich been identity among competing ones, aquality which has been central to the process of nation-building andcreate valorize asingle to hashelped heritage cultural notion of the collective amnesia, of as well as memories, collective of institutionalization its In identity. an promote and construct tourist industry, represents an illustration of such a phenomenon. “acts of heritage, consumption,”cultural havingbeen then extensively commercialized within the through constructed increasingly identities argues, are Cosgrove nature. If,its as also commercial negotiated.” are and experiences pasts “different where aplace zone,” “contact a itas defining is cross-cultural, heritage always suggest that of question tothe is related and also this 16 striking the rightbalance that we can be true to our identity as Europeans.” camps, integral and of other bloody Europe’s historical In parts view,“ithis past. is by only concentration acknowledging wars,pogroms, the without ameta-narrative, forward, moving As de rightly out,this Vries rendition Europeanhistory points as acontinuous process of presents Peckham, “The Politics of Heritage and Public Culture,” 6-7. Culture,” Public and ofHeritage Politics “The Peckham, Denis Cosgrove, “Heritage and History: A Venetian Geography Lesson,” in Lesson,” Geography A Venetian History: and “Heritage Cosgrove, Denis 7, 12. Culture,” Public and ofHeritage Politics “The Peckham, in Europe”, ‘New’ the in Multiculturalism ofHeritage: Translation “The Stephanides, Stephanos 6. Culture,” Public and ofHeritage Politics “The Peckham, Gijs de Vries, “Citizenship and Memory,” in Throughout history, cultural heritage has been repeatedly as utilized ina tool helping to Finally, another interesting characteristic of interestingheritage only isnot of but cultural politicized, characteristic its Finally, another a degreeofselectivity, heritage always mentionedAs it denotes cultural before, been has and inalienable rights, and of respect for law.” society its perception of the central role of the human person and his inviolable ü andRupert Graf Strachwitz (Berlin: Maecenata, 2004), 24-25. ed. Robert Shannan Peckham (London: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd., 2003), 113. 20 Cultural heritage has also been seen as an important tool of tool important an as seen been also has heritage Cultural ed. Robert ShannanPeckham (London: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd., 2003), 57. Heritage and the Building of Europe, whose 8 18 heritage to choose. to heritage 19 Rethinking Heritage:Cultures and 17 ed. Sneška Quaedvlieg- Some scholars, however, 16 Rethinking CEU eTD Collection debates about nations and states. nations and about debates unity collective and European andcultural identity are derived from precisely theoretical the European about most debates of the inmind that keep same At should the one time, integration. deal approaches may betransposed newphenomenon to of with European relatively the is meant to be used in a similar way to support European integration Europeanintegration a“European and support be wayto usedin meantto isa similar extensively for purposes the of promoting asolidifying a national identity, since and itseemingly ‘Europeanization.” been no theoretical model for “understanding identity in relation to the process of the development of 25 24 Politics inEurope, 24 1996), 64-65. Construction of European Communities, 23 York: Routledge, 1994), 2. Heritage: Tourism, Culture andIdentity in the New Europe , of emergence the theorizing approaches of is abundance an there while At sametime, the relations. claimed the attention of is phenomenon has that latter amultifaceted identity The construction. for state basis theoretical a range of social sciences,examine the to makes sense it to, testify building nation-state of histories asthe construction, from psychology to history to international the basis for national identity. national for basis the and from becoming thus other the group one differentiating characteristic seen asadistinguishing is sinceit emergence the nation-state, of the and discourse nationalist with intimately connected state-entities.” of particular support in identities successinformulating place- record heritage of has and reinforcing outstanding track a “proven 22 21 remembrance.” “forceful of politics the and memories Wintle, “Culture and Identity in Europe,” 10. 7, 12. Culture,” Public and ofHeritage Politics “The Peckham, in Cultures,” ofEuropean Heritage the and Identities “European Risse, Thomas Siân Jones, “Discourses of Identity in the Interpretation of the Past,” in G.J. Ashworth and P.J. Peckham, “Mourning Heritage,” 208-209. national Since heritage cultural has important roleplayan to in process the identity of identity, there exists no single theory of accountwould nosingleprovideidentity, that acomprehensive exists there theory ed. Robert Shannan Peckham (London: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd., 2003), 74. 24 supranational Certainly, it remains a matter of contention whether the national theoretical national the whether of contention matter a itremains Certainly, Larkham “A Heritage for Europe: The need, the task, the contribution,” in contribution,” the task, the need, The Europe: for “A Heritage Larkham 23 (e.g. European or “EU”) identity. As Risse indicates, there has ed. Paul Graves-Brown, Siân Jones and Clive Gamble (London: Routledge, 25 Additionally, since cultural Additionally,heritage cultural hasbeen since used so 9 22 ed. G.J. Ashworth and P.J. Larkham (London and New In general, culture as such has always been 21 As Ashworth and Larkham put it, put Larkham and AsAshworth Cultural Identity and Archeology: The Rethinking Heritage: Cultures and Building a New CEU eTD Collection 28 112. Divergence and Unity in Past and Present 27 (London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2000), 17. them. influence examining lies in approach constructivist the Thefocus of “constructed.” and are “nurture” resultthe of identities in arguethat rooted not Constructivists are instead,constructivist one. they nature; are 26 has lost much of its appeal, without, however, becoming completely extinct. essentialistthe ideas in andthe alternative theoriessocial of sciences, thisschool rise thought of of abuses historical of the because Largely forth. so and “national temper,” character,” “national like concepts to rise given has identity national of understanding an Such on. so and climate, shared historical experiences, butalsoa combination of environmental factors, such as “land,” The factors forming anidentity,in view of the include essentialists,the language notonly and of self,”andin itsthe transcendence, immutability face of the change andpassing time.social core “stable the as role its emphasizes identity of understanding essentialist The characteristics. an given) mindsetessential people’s shaping andconstitutes both part of “self,” and physical God- alternatively, (or, ingrained naturally is identity (national) that maintains school essentialist as belonging to one of the two major schools of thought: essentialists and constructivists. The myanalysis. of context the within relevant more the consciousness,”link national between the supranational the identity and becomes construction all Ibid., 117. Menno Menno Spiering, “National Identity and EuropeanUnity,” in Cu Stuart Hall, “Who needs ‘Identity’?,” in The more prominent school of thought that has largely replaced the essentialists isthe essentialists the replaced has largely that school of thought prominent The more 1.2. Identity Construction: Theoretical Approaches The vast plethora of existing theoretical approaches to identity identity The vastmayplethora of to be theoretical existing approaches broadly classified 1.2.1. Essentialism versus Constructivism how 28 identities emerge and develop, their major components and the factors that factors the and components major their develop, and emerge identities This school of thought views identity as contested, fluid, contingent on social on contingent fluid, contested, as identity views thought of school This , ed. Michael Wintle (Aldershot, Hants: Ashgate Publishing Ltd, 1996), Identity: A Reader 10 , ed. Paul Du Gay, Jessica Evans and Peter Redman lture and Identity in Europe: Perceptions of 27 26 CEU eTD Collection 30 29 of process transformation and change. inand anddiscourses the constantly practices thus instance, commonsense ofbelonging that goes beyond immediate one’s community virtue (by of sharing, for religious rituals)national identity, “proto-national be exist there can supra-local,ties:” certain they evoking the and nation the of emergence the before that and,argues also theorist this nations, of secondly,construction they inculcatecan beliefs, values, or behaviors. consist or socialize to c) relations; authority and institutions legitimize to b) ofmembership; and cohesion an elite class InHobsbawm’scontexts. traditions main havethree account, functions: a)assymbolsthat of group has attempt to establish an traditions” constitute repetition.” Thus “invented establishpast byquasi-obligatory their own patterns of continuity,novel represent“responses to situations whichtakethe reference toold which situations, or real or imagined,the latter are one inkind of invented traditions. “Invented the traditions,” the term that Hobsbawm uses,facethat and traditions, national examine of to necessary is it transforming nations, understand to in order that posits, social He nation state. a of of thepurposes creating for elites the part the on used as program a political is which and nations the creates which vehicle” ideational “artificial, asan nationalism describes Hobsbawm framework. historical within a certain “invented” identities are argues thatnational field national identity of studies.firstwas The by approach J.developed who Erik Hobsbawm, either. ofidentity notions entirely free identity” from arenot essentialists “European will be EU’s later,promote shown the (andpolicies, although aimed to construct) therefore itas sametime, At the school. this to belonging major theorists on three focus weshall reason, constructivistis approach in identity clearly dominant in studies academic fortoday’s this world; Franke Wilmer,”Identity, Franke Culture, and Historicity,”World Affairs 160, no.1 (1997): 5. Hall, “Who Needs ‘Identity’?,”17. In what follows, this part will focus specifically on the work of three major theorists in the 1.2.2. Hobsbawm’s Approach toIdentityConstruction 30 Importantly, despite his emphasis on the “artificial” the on emphasis his despite Importantly, 11 29 The CEU eTD Collection 33 University Press, 1990), 271. 32 (London: Routledge,1998), 122. 31 nation will never know most of their fellow members, meet them, oreven hear of them, yet in the of smallest members the even the because “imaginedcommunities Anderson, are to according since impressive an then intheacademicgained currency “Nations, popular and circles. has which famous forterm the has“imagined coining community” Anderson become analysis. inlargely latter’s the are disregarded that dimensions cultural subjectiveand the emphasizes Anderson.numberWhile Anderson aof sharing premisestheoretical Hobsbawm, with onCommunities: theOriginNationalism, Reflections andSpread of published, seminal another appeared work in field the national of identity studies. of the globe” islabor yet slowly forcedbeing steadily into retreatdeclining, by “supranationalthe restructuring that the importance of nationalism in today’s era of globalization and international division of people” ordinary of interests and longings fears, “hopes, in of terms below,” “from be analyzed must they that says he also above,” from essentially “constructed be to nations considers Hobsbawm its ideology spread While it its communication, appeal. which popular allows and increase to means of vocabulary,and connections, political a setofinstitutions, ties to access andstrong conducting publicceremonies constructing or publicmonuments. include,traditions,”first and changing foremost, as and these of education, system the well as “invented in of creation the may participate state) the case, (in this authorities which the Hobsbawm, Eric Hobsbawm, Anthony Smith, In 1983, the same yearIn when same 1983, the 1.2.3. Benedict Anderson’s Approach toIdentity Construction 31 In what also may be relevant to our discussion, Hobsbawm mentions several ways in ways several mentions Hobsbawm discussion, our to be relevant may also what In Nations and Nationalism since 1780, 33 Nationalism and Modernism: A critical survey of recent theories of nations and nationalism Nations and nationalism since 1780: programme, myth, reality The Invention of Tradition The Inventionof 182. 12 32 Finally, Hobsbawm maintains Hobsbawm Finally, (Cambridge: Cambridge edited by Hobsbawm was Hobsbawm by edited authored by authored Benedict Imagined CEU eTD Collection 35 34 communion.” their of image the lives each of mind political communities that are imagined as “both inherently limited and sovereign.” and limited inherently “both as imagined are that communities political that the basis of a nation is an maintains Smith interests. economic and political own their of in pursuit elites by “fabricated” even and engineered socially constructions artificial represent they that and phenomena instrumentalismnation-building, approaches whichnationsthat positfairlyrecent areto constructivist“ethnosymbolism” and hasbeen byAnthony developed is who Smith, leastperhaps the of the three. In contrast to Anderson,sovereignty, national flags and anthems, etc.”. Smith republican popular institutions,citizenships, common nation-states, isimagined realities: criticalAmerican model was later exportedof outside the region: “out of the American thewelter came these modernistclaims that it was theand Americasnational through communities their teach ability largeto of numbers people. author Finally,the which became the birthplaceof which both of newspaper, the and thenovel in the manifest nation as capitalism, played print of development the lies pertheory se, and thata crucialthe of AtAnderson’s core the today. functions nationality way similarly the of frames reference, role accepted broadly as functioned which of both realm,” in“dynastic the and community” “imagining”“religious itinto most powerful being.”The came inview, two cultural systems, Anderson’swerethe nations and with “therather largecultural preceded it,systems that of out which as as – – well against which therefore but ideologies” political held “self-consciously with not be aligned to needs nationalism him, For in the developmentaccounting for the origins of nationalism, Anderson emphasizes the cultural roots of nationalism. of Ibid. Benedict Anderson. The third theoretical approach that we will draw on is known under the name of name the under is known on draw will we that approach theoretical third The 1.2.4. Anthony Smith’s Approach toIdentity Construction Imagined Communities ethnie, which he defines as a “named humanpopulation mythswith (London, New York: Verso, 1983), 6. 13 34 Anderson also argues that nations are 35 In CEU eTD Collection 41 40 2000), 16. 39 39. Case,” Test Ultimate the as Membership EU Turkey’s Governance: Democratic 38 http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/gellner/Warwick.html. 37 Nation inHistory 36 use in ouranalysis.all, Firstidentities of threescholarsthe as would agree, are constructed, may we that roots constructivist their from stemming commonalities overarching the identify to asdivisive,rather factors. unifying, than serve descent” ofcommon “myths memories, and historical language, context, European broader supranational identity in on Europe basisthe these of cultural for, as grounds, he says,in the often demonstrates conflict paired history of identitiesfrequently are “forged through opposition to identitiesthe of significant asthe others, elites” the leastamong at solidarity, of a measure and homeland, with a of common ancestry, shared historical memories, one or more elements of shared culture, a link “European :culture-area.” “European as well as their Renaissance and Enlightenment successors” and producing what may be called a elements as“Roman law,Greekphilosophy science, and Hebraic ethicsand theology, Christian Smith alsobelieves in existencethe of “patterns of certain culture,”European uniting such technologies. their communication inadequacythe theirof cultural whichhecomponent, largely attributes to poorconditionthe of mostSmithfailedachieve argues of previousthe oneshave that to theirgoal unification due to of symbols.” and myths values, memories, of role “the emphasizes claimingmore asomewhat substantive basisnation, for a approach, Smith’s in hisownwords, Ibid, 17. Ibid. Cris Shore, Sanem Baykal,“Unity in Diversity? The Challenge of Diversity forthe European Political Identity, Legitimacy and Debates,” Warwick “The Gellner, Ernest and Smith Anthony Anthony Smith, Despite the differences between the theoretical approaches presented above, it is it above,possible presented approaches theoretical between the differences the Despite 1.3. Commonalities in Approaches Building Europe: The Cultural Politics of European Integration (Hanover: University Press of New England, 2000),65. The Ethnic Origins of Nations 40 Nevertheless, Smith is skeptical about the prospects of prospects creatingthe a about isskeptical Nevertheless, Smith 39 Today, however, this is a perfectly surmountable obstacle. surmountable is this aperfectly however, Today, 41 (Oxford: BasilBlackwell, 1986), 22-30; Anthony Smith, 38 14 ” When analyzing pan-nationalist movements, pan-nationalist analyzing ” When (London, New York: Routledge, 37 Jean Monnet Working Paper 09/05 In addition,in Smith’s view, 36 . As such, while The , CEU eTD Collection 42 popularaparticular for the baseof or projects. support regime extend it,as Wilmer be history may by inorder to elites appropriated puts and culture political In any case, is imagined,which debated. degreeto“fabricated” canbeand the manipulated, they changeable, and canbe used for specific purposes, suchas promote anationalto although project, European European polity. a feeling providelegitimizehistorical positioned construction continuity of of a to the to developmentissymbols andof future thusuniquely communities, present the with political of memories of and pastandtheimportance the shared perceived achievements ascombiningthe for integration.increase European namely,heritage,political Cultural purposes, publicsupport to identity Commissionthe promoting for asagroupof European construction elites European analyzing in helpful are insights theoretical These future. and present its with past community’s historical linkingpromote continuity the afeelingof role symbols, to whichserve of common and impacted identities bythe aredeeply shaped ideas. Finally, anddisseminate their popularize can they which through education, system of the and meanscommunication of the access to critical, itis who usually have since groups capacity produce ideologiesthese the andcontrol to Wilmer,”Identity, Culture, and Historicity,” 5. 15 42 Secondly, the role of is role of Secondly, elites the the CEU eTD Collection institutions as “active agents of change” that havea direct role in creating social identities among As such, Iwill rely on so-calledthe model” “persuasion ofidentity-construction, which views angle. this from precisely funding for selected projects heritage cultural of choice Commission’s the of political view heritage andanalyze rather significance cultural of European the “indispensable cohesive factor” in European integration. in European factor” cohesive “indispensable and serveasan citizenship” of European a senseof “development the facilitate will of identities peoplethat including hold, identity. European Inher view, shared cultural heritage number elementof history” anda akey and “visible commonEuropean culture our of expression argues that the European significance of heritage its includes of European the argues that significance cultural part of part of thesis,the Quaedvlieg-Mihailoviwill I use its ability promote “European to consciousness” a“European”and identity. heritages “European interms of interprets the significance”cultural of theCommission project, integration European the of appeal” “emotional and legitimacy increase the to fact the aware of I examine being is following: here that the proposition The integration. of “driver” European 43 Quaedvlieg-Mihailovi The European significance of cultural heritage may be understood in this various ways.In maybe significanceheritage cultural understood of The European 2.1. The Commission: Using Cultural Heritage for Identity Promotion? The starting point of this chapter is the popular view of the European Commission as a CHAPTER 2.1.1. The persuasion model identity constructionof ü , “Enlargement-Enrichment,”, 98. 2 - E A UROPEAN BILITY TO P S ROMOTE A IGNIFICANCE OF IGNIFICANCE 16 ü `s view She onthisasastarting subject point. 43 “E Thus this part of the thesis will take a UROPEAN C ULTURAL political ” I DENTITY H significance as a ERITAGE ? : A N CEU eTD Collection nature of Community cultural policy,” 47 Autonomy Papers EDAP 46 New Series 45 Brewer(Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2004), 15-16. Transnational Identities: Becoming European inthe EU, 44 identity,”national “sense their andof policy own pursue a goals develop to Rachael Smith Craufurd out,states rightly havepoints extensive an experience in using cultural possiblefor ground constructing such a sharedit identity,is definitely important an one. As framework. diversity within a European and embracing tolerance pasts,” nationalist “dark European tothe contrast a positive present consolidate hand, thedemocratic to identity foundations ofthe EU. In addition, aEuropean may help, on the one hand, to demarcate values European would hisset ofcommonly accepted opinion,a problemsthe In listedabove. Europe as a separatelife.” polity in the world, insolidarity everyday oftheEuropean manifestations through “concrete “People’s into Europe” and on the other Europe transform “technocrats” the aim to which would emphasized apolicy needfor state the popular integrationthe Already appeal in European the project. European of the heads of 1974, inweakening factors important being – all citizen” the from “distance the and legitimacy, of lack deficit, democratic perceived the to response identity as a aEuropean promote Community to partof viewdesireon the the the achieveuse cultural its researchers heritage goals. to Most to the Programme, as well as what kind of European identity itis promoting. will ask howthe constructing Commission goes about identity such an within of the framework groups. their constituent Rachael Craufurd Smith,.”From conservationheritage to EuropeanIdentity: Article 151 EC and the multi-faceted inDiversity’?,” ‘United Europe Order: European Post-enlargement Blokker,”The Paul Cris Shore, ”Inventing the 'People's Europe': Critical Approaches to European Community'Cultural Policy',” Community'Cultural European to Approaches Critical Europe': 'People's the ”Inventing Shore, Cris Richard Herrmann Marilynnand B.Brewer, “Identities and Institutions: Becoming European inthe EU,” in 45 Similarly, in Paul Blokker’s analysis, a European identity identity in bemay Similarly, Blokker’s aEuropean a analysis, Paul to suitable response Taking this political view, we first need to elaborate why and how the Commission aims Commission the how and why elaborate to need first we view, political this Taking 2.1.2. Reasonsfor using cultural heritagepromotion foridentity 28, 4 no. (1993): 779. 1 (2006): 6. 44 Applying the theoretical insights from this from insights chapter, part Applying previous the the theoretical European Law Review 46 Secondly, isheritage cultural notonly the while 17 ed. Richard K. Herrmann, Thomas Risse, and Marilynn B. Marilynn and Risse, Thomas Herrmann, K. Richard ed. 32, no.1 (2007): 32,no.1 48. European Diversity and 47 whichwouldmake Man , CEU eTD Collection European cultural identity are Ancient Greece, the Roman Empire, Christianity (especially Christianity Roman Empire, the Greece, Ancient are identity cultural European only partially.” a certain“ out, points asWintle exist, does 51 50 49 48 however,consider beingwithout, themselves EU. European the of citizens many nations, thusexcludingfrom true “Europe,” entire, the definition the people and states, who the representing as itself constructs it union, political (partially) and economic an essentially with based idealsfreedom state on nation of the and equality.” in andwealth, andapolitics as technology, knowledge, “relentless cumulativeprogress concepts such incorporates merely “modernity,” which identity with cultural European Heller, associate toasharedidentity. as conceptualize opposite cultural of itfocusmore viewargue, this cultural usefulto would be on diversity, which they as the proponents lacks infact, in meaningaltogether; identity Europe conceptof the cultural that Kleinsteuberital)hasin define beenby H.J. culture. Firstly,et to trying argued(e.g. European inherent complications several analyzes Wintle Michael Experience,” Shared inEurope: Identity how problem accommodate to of existingthe cultural diversity In hisEurope. of article“Cultural attempts to identify the common list of cultural traditions or foundations inevitably run into the “European and commonly culture” shared a“European identity” cultural In is fact,debated. any problem using culture in of context is, European the of course, very the that existence of a feeling of“Europeanness” andthereby popularincrease for support European integration. the bolster the level in EU atthe order dimension” asimilar“cultural introduce logicalto totry it Ibid, 12. Ibid, 10. Ibid, 11. Wintle,”Culture and Identity in Europe,” 9. While culture represents apotentiallyWhile instrument represents identity-building,culture of powerful the 2.1.3. Difficulties of using culture as a basis for promoting a European identity 51 The key Thethatareusuallymentionedcomponents inthe about key discussions something… 18 which brings Europeans together, even if even together, Europeans brings which 48 Other commentators, such as Agnes as such commentators, Other 49 Secondly, while the EU is EU the while Secondly, 50 Nevertheless, there Nevertheless, CEU eTD Collection 54 53 no.3 (2000): 315-316. 52 has beenlargely by and“enthusiastic bureaucrats, driven politicians, intellectuals,” construction. Accordingbecomes to Wintle, in the EU,important, the theprocess basis of forintegration a European first traditions” and ideologiesand maythat serve as “artificial,ideational vehicles” aimed atproviding politicalidentity of formation all,community, for “invented look the inAnderson’s and terms, community,” as “imagined European people an to toexamine use Hobsbawm’s theapproach. role In this of respect,the elitesit in the process of identity culture. European of conception andunproblematic isnostraightforward there see, can whole, asone easily the in pride Celtic culture.” “mighttake acommon,vaguely Europeans Age,when Bronze wasthe Basques) the of notable exception inthe end(with was selected the epoch that identifycould to a that timeheritage, the asbasis period serve celebrating for a sharedEuropean wereasked participants the conference, where Europe a 1994Council of at examplethat telling cultural the inputminority of and groups of non-European is immigrants origin. It a perhaps as they not only potentially exclude Eastern European (e.g. Orthodox) cultures, but also disregard various reasons, for problematic are, of identity course, of European conceptions same time, such the At Joll). James (see industrialization and Enlightenment, the Christianity), Latin Western/ elites. This view is in line with the general perception of the project of European integration as an a “market-driven,materialistic, functional and conceptualization utilitarian of citizenship.” day, assome Euroskeptics would argue,the identity only European we maybe leftwould with be Wintle,”Culture and Identity in Europe,” 10. Baykal,“Unity in Diversity?,” 39. David Lowenthal,“’European Identity’: An Emerging Concept.” Employing the insightsborrowed from andHobsbawm Anderson,wemay of conceive the Means at the disposal of the Commission in promoting2.1.4. a European identity on the basis of cultural heritage 19 Australian Journal ofPolitics andHistory 52 At the end of the 54 that is, the is, that 46, 53 On CEU eTD Collection Today 56 2005), 55 population, as the resultsmoreEuropean identity,is younger evident among attachmentto in the manifest the stronger of the recent Eurobarometer impact of such policies, The values andbeliefs. “European” of dissemination the facilitate polls greatly all EU the testify. in mobility population increasing the and systems, communications excellent flows, information multidirectional of presence the since aswell, actions institutions’ EU to the ineducation the set by propagating of andvalues maybe beliefs advocated elites applicable the of system the and system communications the of importance the concerning insights Anderson’s anthem, currency and and the promotion “European” cultural of Also,Smith’sheritage. and flag,symbolism include, the the things, creation and symbols amongsuch other of European as of importance the and traditions” “invented of discussion Hobsbawm’s of strongly reminisce achieve have this goal Eurobureaucrats to utilized that instruments general The the population. EUinstitutionsthat have engaged into attempts to instill feelingof“Europeanthe belonging” in logical such itis Thus afoundation. only tocreate be asbeing identity seen able European could a common and its existence, for basis popular broader a required deficit, democratic and legitimacy of lack the of problems mentioned already the faced it when which, enterprise, elitist based identity. European culture which may become the driving force behind consolidationthe of a new type ofbroader- astrong organizational elitist words, language,” (bureaucratic)inother behaviour,a common and of patterns distinctive certain lifestyles, and set of experiences a similar “share staff Commission andBlack observe, the As itself. case the EUbureaucracy not thisShore among isdefinitely the feelingthe identity of amongseem largeEuropean population the doesnot at strong, particularly Cris Shore and Annabel Black, “The European Communities and the Construction of Europe,” Construction the and Communities European “The Black, Annabel and Shore Cris Walter van Gerven, van Walter 8, no. 3 (1992): 11. 49-50. The European Union: A Polity of States and Peoples 56 20 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, University Stanford (Stanford: 55 Finally, even if at present if at even Finally, Anthropology CEU eTD Collection would signify its acceptance of such a goal. Thirdly, it is important to address was to theissue that isit of Thirdly, itswould acceptance such agoal. important signify have identity,explicitof goal promoting an of theCommission’s aEuropean and support them in proclaimed objectivepromotingdiversity.” projectsthe themselves Secondly, may “unity of self- theEU’s of dilemma the approach generally projects the how analyze to important identity,culture and such it European theiras In is on respect,this Hellenic andRoman roots. understanding European focus of ofthe general only onconventional elements projectsthe to groups and communities. If an identity proposed is rather exclusive, however, then we can expect and various heritage would abroadunderstanding recognizecontributions of cultural of rely on it case, former the In exclusive. or inclusive either be may identity European First, mention. beto promoting heritage through projects,cultural the following deserve dimensions aspecial Appendix. in the 1 in Table summarized are projects the of of classification the Theresults isprovided. also each of project budget Information on by the envisionedspecific project). the activities of goals (including range the the focus of the projects, and aims the its meanings,5) reinterpret to tries or heritage asstatic, cultural regards projectthe 6) the target audiences intangible), whether or 4) (tangible its nature heritage and cultural of object organizations, 3)the and the means chosen 2) dimensionby institutions typesthe of cooperation project, the of participating engendered and to achieve the international include 1)the tobeevaluated Thedimensions project projects. the concisely characterizing aimedof at qualitative quantitative parameters asetand myanalysis,projects.I am using In the perceived and importance heritage, the cultural elitesthe of European inaswell anidentity, as constructing need to increase public support for the EU, we shall proceed to analyze the Since my analysis focuses on the kind of European identity that the Commission appears Commission the that identity European of kind the on focuses analysis my Since 2.2. Project Analysis Keeping in mind the contestability of the very notion of what constitutes European European culture of constitutes Keeping very inmind the notion the of what contestability 2.2.1. Analyzing Projects: and the Methodology Criteria 21 CEU eTD Collection at least five countries participating in the programme.” infive least the at countries participating from years); tobe aresupposed by three latter the “designedandimplemented cultural operators exceeding (not multi-annual or length in year one be may Programme the by funded Projects arts. visual and arts; performing reading; and books, literature, creativity; multidisciplined heritage, cultural from aside including, fields, major five into is divided Programme Programmethe was also from augmented, million167 236.5EUR to million EUR. The inyears. Asfundingfor two to readjustment the another a 2004, wasextended allocated result, following reviewand comprehensive the Programme,the 2004), endof funding period (till the 59 58 Culture 2000 Programme. 57 within and outside the Community.” culture organizations,institutions, culture etc. with a view toimplementing culture projects cooperationpromote projects, the Commission “by aims to supporting networks of operators, of culture.” account greater take to Community policies Union”bearin in andtomindneeds needfor “the the European cultural dimension the of pattern. and try to answer the question of whether the Commission seems to be in favor of any particular will try to identify, if possible,compete any tensions with, between replace, thesepast when of heritage. Fourthly,speaking identity since a cultural may European differentpotentially or complement types of identity existing of if European approach thedarkeraspects the is, howto part of –that thesis first the raised inthe present identities such as national and regional ones, I Ibid. European Commission, “Culture 2000: Structured andMultiannual CooperationAgreements (Action 2).” DecisionNo. 508/2000/EC of the EuropeanParliament and of the Council of 14 February 2000 establishing the The Culture 2000Programme was initiated in February 2000 with a view“to meet the 2.2.2. Culture 2000Programme: Overview 59 One of principalthe goals of isCulture 2000 to 22 58 In supporting multiannual cooperation 57 Initially envisioningfour-year a CEU eTD Collection 60 réseau européen d'écomusees » (2003), which concentrates on the conservation of industrial of conservation the on concentrates which (2003), d'écomusees » européen réseau buildings early workers’ restore 20th « century mer:; terre un et entre Patrimoine pour industriel Allemagne et Espagne France, en to siècle aims » which du XXe début du ouvrier de travail heritage etmisevaleur such as “Sauvegarde industrialization and en industrial desites européens focusing on include heritage projects cultural of a broadened understanding pointing to examples interesting other Some group. particular a with it associating terms, national or ethnic in only heritage of cultural limited perception move from the to away one allows handicraftskills such as borders cross thateasily ofheritage intangibleAddressing elements such sites” (2000). Wooden restoration pottery as atransnational handwork/ Carpentry: “Wooden European skill; or focusedprojectsfocusing certain “People skills,suchproject as on on andPotteries” (2005), the the include understanding broader a such of examples some instance, For elements. intangible and tangible including heritage, both understandingcultural by broad of characterized a are many alsothat those of are there sites, and archaeological culture” as “high such heritage, While do manyprojects focus on morethe conventional understandings of cultural European to an easy conclusion that the Commission is trying topromote an exclusive, essentialistidentity. DecisionNo. 508/2000/EC,paragraph 9. Generally,funded projects the under Culture the 2000 Programme donotlend themselves heritage of cultural Understanding 2.2.3.1. 2.2.3. Multi-Annual Cultural Heritage Projects,Culture 2000Programme: Analysis dialogue on interest.dialogue topics on selected of European encourage exchangesand measures specific andinnovative and to measures high having providefor a European profile, support to more implementationsupport joint projects,closelyof targeted to for the cooperationinto agreements enter them to by encouraging activities engagedincultural cooperation greater those with Promote 23 60 CEU eTD Collection 62 Gamble (London: Routledge, 1996), 109. Identity and Archeology: TheConstruction of European Communities, 61 had Overall, avery Programme the counterparts. Western with their connections strong establish hadyet chance the to hadnot countries in these yet, cultural operators andthat circulated been as widely not has Programme the information about the accession, for candidates were still States Member new ten the when 2004), (before Programme the of years first the during that fact this is unlikely beto the result of a conscious policy on the part of the Commission,but rather the However, far the newmemberstates. outnumber from MemberStates participants EU-15 project isit clearthat representation, elements. In of terms two country these balance between a delicate inCommission the role is identity with of an entrusted thus constructor a difficultfinding of task « Since Programme. the of framework indiversity within the unity the motto, EU’s the is» dilemma this addresses Commission the how see to important is it », «Other the of definition the peoplethe belonging of Europe. to forth,landscapes, and, urban so totality spaces,and cultural of public overall,heritage the heritage»,monuments«prestigious andhistorical but alsosites», «minor buildings,rural suchas only heritage“European “should significance include not that the of opinion Mihailovic’s variety of heritage. understandings Thusof such isa position in line with Quaedvlieg- Acropolis, the works of the Renaissance period, and soon; the projects themselves engage witha emphasis on « European heritage of understanding cultural common elitist laying static, »,somewhat a feature indeed may documents and discourses official while therefore, Overall, railways. heritage of whichfocuses promotion on the (2003), SteamRail.Net heritage, or European of dimension the transnational underscore to andaims areas and coastal ports like sites heritage Quaedvlieg-Mihailovi Shore, Cris. “Imagining the New Europe: identity and heritage in European Community discourse.” In Judging from from factJudging any that the identity placeconstruction of has totake process through in diversity” “Unity 2.2.3.2. haute culture ü ,“Enlargement-Enrichment,” 103. 61 and the canon of European culture such as Beethoven’s music, the music, Beethoven’s as such culture European of canon the and 62 24 ed. Paul Graves-Brown, Siân Jones and Clive Cultural CEU eTD Collection transition countries 63 European heritage. contribution to multi-annualno addressesspecifically project history the Moslemof their communities or however, Interestingly enough, inmedieval Europe. communities of history Jewish controversial Culture, Mobility, inand Migration Settlement Medieval (2000),itEurope“) deals with the “Kultur, Migration Mobilität, und Siedlung im vonJuden mittelalterlichen Europa“ (“Jewish discrimination history. European throughout A project of significancein this isregard titled continued Roma’s tothe related issues social and political thesensitive acknowledge this view highlights only one single non-controversial of aspect Romathe culture, whilefailing to At sametime, again, the heritage. musical to European Roma the of contribution the emphasizes Music,”in which the European Presence is“The Romany/Gypsy of projects fewrelevant the One projects. multi-annual in the highlighted sufficiently not is however, minorities, of role The tolerance. foster will communities migrant of increased knowledge that hopes inthe diversity” goal in“contribute Museums” (2000),whose stated is to tothe European on cultural debate cultural dialogue andexchange, “Migration, and or Work Identity: history a European of people of process and diversity the cultural highlight aimsto which specifically (2004), modern times” Movements of peoples and movement of cultures - Changes in the Mediterranean from ancient to such role ofmigrants is for byseveral instance,as, addressed “CROSSINGS: projects, The culture. European with associated traditionally is which Christianity, than other religions of representatives or communities migrant instance, for include, may These heritage. cultural its to emphasis on diversity by the contributionsacknowledging ofless-conventional andgroups actors on newStates the Member impact positive Nina Obuljen, Why we need European cultural policies: the ofimpact EU enlargement oncultural policies in (Amsterdam: European Cultural Foundation, 2005), 66. 63 . An inclusive identity European would alsoput 25 CEU eTD Collection People in Museums;” “Les Universités et l'identité culturelle européenne culturellel'identité européenne et “Les« »,Universités inMuseums;” People which Euroclio,” addressed identity: theidea of “Migration, Work and European Identity: A History of European directly years asignificantpart of projects the in (2000 and2001), two instance, thefirst aimed atpromoting European identity was significantly higher in than subsequent years. For were specifically that projects the of percentage the Programme the years of two first in the that is mind to comes that observation interesting first The on. so and religious, European, national, projectsthese whether examine to interesting be might it then identity, reflectEuropean a promote to meant certain tensions between differentothers. silencing types of identity, while privileging of without some narratives succeedinapproaching sites war coordinators suchthe aims of the projects is promoteto peace and tolerance; this may be possible only asif the project local,identity, since they along symbolize history mutual hostility of among European nations. One of regional,exactly memories,the which, asmanybelieve, preclude the of development a common European are these memories, of shared common part areanintegral in Europe conflicts while armed sites of armed conflicts in ofarmedsites 20 the conflicts the War” of anditexamines is“Landscapes title project’s The heritage. of reinterpretation critical a be to closer to seems that however, project, is one There centuries. the throughout cultures in of various incorporating the achievements understood non-controversial terms, and positive 2000Programme,make isgenerally “heritage” allows one that aconclusion within the Culture to way, which in reflect thisasignificant not dilemma does however, projects, of the selection should address the tragic and bloody events in the European past, and if so, how. The current 2.2.3.4. Different levels of identity One of the debates discussed in the first part of the thesis was whether cultural heritage cultural whether was thesis of the part in thefirst discussed debates One the of European past common ofthe aspects negative Addressing 2.2.3.3. Next, if the cultural heritage projects within the Culture 2000 Programme are indeed are 2000Programme within theCulture heritageif projects Next, cultural the th century. The uniqueness of century. The uniqueness projectliesthis of inthefact that 26 CEU eTD Collection the eastern the (even institutions from Europeanstates Germany Central from participating come the and Eastern history of regionthe at and Europe large,is project the organized andmanaged exclusively by inthe elites European Central of role the of reexamination the Aimed at European countries. Indeterminacyidentity. Someof notablethe projectsthe likelyhave are a focusbeto regional strengtheningand thus appear to aregional Shortexamples in Twentieththis regardProgramme,itis interestingnote to thatwhen dofigurethey prominently among the participants, include theCentury,” project “History afterclearly thepotential. Fall: The gearedexperience toward of cultural may by be This, extensive of course, the explained area. in heritage Mediterranean the maritime Central cooperation andinterpretation of the heritage of the Mediterranean islands Eastern ; and « Mediterraneain », on the issues of this region, vinoy el el aceite pan, del La cultura broad “TRIMED the with dealing »,Architecture,” as well as by fromits highancient economic to Mediterranean inthe - Changes cultures of movement and modern of peoples Movements “CROSSINGS and touristtimes”, “GOTHICmedand within establishing networks region.the Some typical of examples includesuch projects - A Virtual heritage cultural Mediterranean theof valorisation toward aregeared these projects part, most the Museum of Mediterranean of identity.focusesgroup projects ontheofratherregional, promotion that European, For than Gothic virtually Programmeno feature projects directlythat issues. address these years of the the later of By implementation contrast, the andimmigration.” citizenship, focusing on a wide rangeissues, of including “cultural self-definition, cultural identity, European (2001), in of and heritages similarities cultural countries;the “Born of then the Europe” EU-15 identity of in “PatrimonyEurope; and History”(2001),focusing identifying on the differences questions the to in relation their migration of issues the and histories address thediverse aimed to Finally, wehave while lesserthe noted involvementof new EUMemberin States the a is there that note to important be may it identities, of kinds different contrasting for As Länder ). Another). exampleis TACE(Theatre Architecture in Central (2006). Europe) 27 CEU eTD Collection focus and direction. At the same time, the area that lacks emphasis is the search forto ways is search the lacks emphasis that area the sametime, Atthe direction. focus and lack to times seemed at thus and broadly defined were too Commission by the given selection in her mentioned in selection thatthe participated viewfor project the procedure, the guidelines whofact,independent isone of single experts orgroup In excluded. element, the area, no that and large; been extremely has projects candidate of diversity the that agreed interviewees fact – all framework evaluation same of to the the within Programmethe projects the point of in the involved experts and servants civil DG with interviews My substantiate. to difficult seems The claim EUandthe that the Commission promoting identityare European an exclusive thus heritage. cultural European of notion the of interpretation broad a very and diversity significant 1994), 21. Cultureand Identity in the New Europe , 64 levels. national respective the at achieve to difficult more find might with a window of opportunity and aforum to reassert their regional identity – something that they EUmayprovide regions the someidea; inarguethat of fact, Regions” the “Europe behind the EU is promoting not only butalso European regional identities. Thisis the underlying concept politicized. Thus, may one inargue that implementationthe of Culturethe 2000Programme the be appearsto quite thus overall of the Baltic projectformerthe republics, the thrust Soviet and Russia between hostilities of history the Given universities. Russian in Region Baltic the of history the about materials disseminating of necessity the mentions specifically even and identity “Nordic/Baltic” a promotes it that in interesting is region, Baltic the of history the explores which Future,” from tothe Past the Road andCo-operation. “Region - Conflicts The project G.J. Ashworth, “From history to heritage- from heritage to identity,” in Overall, the conclusion that one makes on the basis of the project analysis is that of is that analysis project the of basis the on makes one that conclusion the Overall, 2.3. Conclusions ofthe analysis ed. G.J. Ashworth and P.J. Larkham (London and New York: Routledge, 28 Building a New Heritage: Tourism, 64 CEU eTD Collection 67 Youthfor Culture, Audiovisual, and Civic Participation,” COM (2004) 154 final, 10. 66 citizens. and identity” cultural operators involve actively various will developmentof and aEuropean Communication saying Culture 2007Programme the that tothe“bottom-up contribute will acknowledged in Commission’sthe official as discourses well,for suchas, example, in 2004 the 65 rightfully feel wary beingof seen as promoting anartificial and contrived identity. might Commission the that argue may one bottom, the from support such without Moreover, society. civil from stemming initiatives “bottom-up” or grassroots by be complemented to need “from below,” originating among ordinary people andtheir experiences. Thus, theelites’ efforts solely in hasconstructed fashion; also atop-down there tobe, movement asHobsbawm argues,a elite identity promoting aas isour European theorists that, identities be would concur, canhardly be may chapter applicable not to this institution. a identity,position promote European is,“persuasion”to whythe model in that theused previous best in the be not may Commission the why into insights of anumber gives also construction promote adesireto may other be byconsiderations guided heritage projects, cultural significance” of a certainin “European the examine assessing Commission, becomes ideait thatthe useful the to then identity. Theoretical literatureneed tofind away bringto together different narratives samethe of historical events. asthe aswell past, European sides common the of thenegative and memories address thepainful in the field of EU studies and identity elements in identity construction at the European level. European the at construction identity in elements Wintle,”Culture and Identity in Europe,” 21. Programmes through Diversity and Culture European Fostering Work: Citizenship “Making Communication, EC Miller and Yudice, and Miller First of all, one of the problematic aspects in the view of the Commission as a European chapter, previous inthe projects the of analysis the from drawn conclusions the of light In 2.4. TheCommission’s Role inIdentity Building: Existing Constraints 66 Such initiatives, although they do exist, are, however, judged to be the weakest Cultural Policy, 181. 29 67 65 This point is CEU eTD Collection (1999): 17. complex. In different historical periods and in different nations and localities, the Other has Other the localities, and nations different in and periods historical different In complex. extremely is, too, toEuropeancultures The conceptof related “Other” the as culture. European excludedbe includedfrom or of conception a common practices areto peoples, or cultures, notion it and“European isculture” cultural of easy heritage” notdetermine to which successful. be will identity social of kind certain a promoting institution the whether of determinants important constitute audience” the of receptivity the and transmission of medium Structural the Funds. compared major the EU’sexpenditures areasasAgricultural Common onsuch to the Policy or 71 70 69 andoutsiders. insiders collectivethe determining entity,” boundaries “drawing thatdemarcate the require since the of construction of identities collective “the demarcation of identity cultural inevitably entails processes inclusion of and exclusion,” especially been the case with national identity construction.building a identity.European In the words potential in latter’s further role weaken the andefforts, Commission’s the activities receptivity to of Sasja Tempelman, lowin into andinterest translated Low publicawareness EU, lowthe and visibility. limited thus culturalto policy implementation,it butalso has limited access topopular dissemination channels when itbudget limitedcomes a rather on not itoperate only however, does case, Commission’s 2006) amounts million toonly implementation 2000 to 236.5 (from EUR, implementation. Forinstance, the funding of the Culture 2000 Programme for the entire period of identity limited means the through cultural is budget allotted to cultureof the policy Sasja Tempelmann,”Constructions of Cultural Identity: Multiculturalism and Exclusion,” Hall, “Who Needs ‘Identity’?,”17. 16. EU,” the in European Becoming Institutions: and “Identities Brewer, and Herrmann Thirdly, the persuasive within model building,identity of “effectiveness the the of Fourthly, identities are constructed through the relation to the Other; inconstraint promotingEuropean The second Commission the on important rolethe of 30 71 In view of the contestability of the of contestability the of view In 68 which is insignificant is which Political Studies 70 which has 69 XLVII In the In CEU eTD Collection of anof Annual European Union Prize Scheme in theField of CulturalHeritage, values, topolitical connected inare rather this listed document benefits the As onecan see, all understandingfor each and respect and,other toastronger thus, sense of citizenship.” European mutual an itsintercultural knowledge, to “contribute as partof dialogue, improved, capacity to heritage isdescribed cultural contribution of the Programme, 2007-13 for Culture the Proposals for Call in Conditional clause included the in in factthat Objectives traced the General the also be can identity political of importance The in Europe. “outsiders” cultural as perceived multiculturalismnecessity groups maythat includeand imply integrate be would the to popularly on emphasis official the minorities), the example, (for outsiders and insiders between boundary a drawing require might identity culture-based a where instance, For identity. cultural, “civilian power” in international affairs alsolays an emphasis on the political, rather than TheEU’simage asa andsoon. rights, human freedom, such asdemocracy, values, liberal emphasizes which identity, political embraced strongly EU’s the and identity European based Commission to construct a European identity are unlikely succeed.to the UK. Therefore, in enlargements: after all, perennial the Russia, the for smallOther is hardly Estonia, one for France or absence of the easily therecent after more so andeven State, Member to State from Member vary Other the identifiable Other, of perceptions Certainly, the Americanization. intheform of influence overweening ubiquitous the presumed effortsis it perceived its USand the for others, while Moslems, may bethe it some, For least. the of the say EUisforto the “Other” controversial the as could beidentified problem who of today, the 73 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press,2001), 210. Transforming Europe: Europeanization and Domestic Change 72 Germany. and France of example in the notably other, for each haveserved as certain Other of nations points addition, at European the inhistory, time varied:from Turkduringthe the Ottoman domination to Sovietsthe during the ColdWar; in European Commission, European Thomas Risse,“A European Identity? Europeanization and the Evolution of Nation-State Identities,” in Closely is relatedtothisfor between potential aculture- discussion the conflict quest the Conditional Call forProposals (DG EAC/55/06) for the Organisation and Implementation 31 , ed. M. Green Cowles, J. Caporaso, and T. Risse 72 In defining European identity In cultural European defining 3. 73 CEU eTD Collection 74 in European significance field the of cultural heritage. of concept the understand may Commission the how of interpretations alternative examine this engage institution decide to insuch an For thisendeavor. reason, nextchapter will the inunlikely actor area the identity,buildingof would aEuropean or its diminish should impact, Commission’s role as an identity constructor. EU’s the it mightmake cultural still policy, betoo early conclusions concerning to the strong. sufficiently not Commission’s role inbuilding a supranational identity European using cultural policy a as tool is domain culture. of agreed by Council the basis on a unanimity notenvisionand legal does harmonization in the that actions comprise supportive to is meant policy cultural EU’s The actions. Commission’s the concept. and the ultimate goal is said tobe the promotion of European citizenship, which is also apolitical De Vries, “Citizenship and Memory,” 27. All in all, there are a number of factors and limitations which make the Commission an maketheCommission which and limitations of factors a number All inall, are there history identity-building and of process, Finally,isgiven long-term, complex short the a on limitation a constitutes also Treaties the in enshrined principle subsidiarity the Next, 74 If Member States still have such a great say in this policy area, then the 32 CEU eTD Collection ripped between national interests, concerns, andloyalties national and interests, roles ripped community overarching between may vary widely. dynamics of involved policy the sincethe actors process, initand ofpolicy-making the modes internal the pay to to attention isit important institution, bureaucratic one even within contrary, institution. thisEuropean within policy-making are relevantto number that of aspects well as how these understandings are usedin implementationthe of Culturethe 2000Programme. influenceas withinturn, significanceEuropean understandingsof presentthe Commission, the in factors, These Treaties.” “guard the to need than the other by considerations be guided also may be challenged. The Commission may not be a unitary however, these Evidently,of each assumptions 2000Programme. administration of Culture the actor and it (as well as its parts)in its it may incorporates Commission the then Treaty, EC the of 151 in Article contained is if is, significance” “European of notion that the of as Treaties”; the “guardian mandate the its with accordance in acts Commission the that assumed was it Secondly, analysis. for basis the as European significanceCommission’s 2000Programme usingtheCulture of understanding about the Ispoke therefore, actor: a unitary as Commission treated the assumption The first Cram argues, the Commission “can in no way be characterised as a monolithic unit.” as “cana monolithic innoway be characterised Commission the Cram argues, 77 1997), 162. 76 12. Assessment,” Provisional 75 Ibid, 167. Laura Cram, Hussein Kassim and Anand Menon, “The Principal-Agent Approach and The Study Of The European Union: A First, assuming the unitary character of the Commission may lead one to overlook a In analysisleastunderlying previousthe the chapter, based two on was at assumptions. 3.1. The Commission as a Bureaucracy: Theoretical Strands CHAPTER Policy-making in the EU: Conceptual Lenses andthe integration process 77 In Christiansen’s description the Commission, too, is pictured as “constantly as is pictured too, Commission, the description Christiansen’s In 3 - T I NTERPRETING HE C OMMISSION AS A E 33 UROPEAN T ECHNOCRATIC S IGNIFICANCE (London and New York, B : UREAUCRACY 75 As Laura 76 On the On CEU eTD Collection (2002): 2. of of fordiscretion institutions the areresponsiblefor executingwhich them. degree much interpretation and aconsiderable for leave room intentionally vaguely, they Phrased treaties.” “relational or “incomplete” so-called are the EUtreaties the principal-agent-theory, the 82 www.coleurop.be/file/content/studyprogrammes/pol/docs/wp2_Pollack.pdf. Delegating Sovereignty,on Duke University, Workshop the at 3-4March 2006, p. 12-13,presentation for prepared Paper Disputes,” Empirical and Clarifications, Theoretical Herrings, (London: Ithaca, 2004): 20-25, quoted in Mark Pollack “Principal-Agent Analysis andInternational Delegation: Red 79 Commission and the Council ofEuropean ofthe Ministers Impact “ in Differentiated the and Governance Executive Domestic Hierarchy? “After Trondal, is,comeengage is Commission not in“agencydrift,”the able thatthe that asasurprise to itdoes its existence, yearsof the over by Commission the accumulated expertise sector-specific individual States. of interests Member the large than rather Community interests of at the the represents which Commission the to according impersonal “moral “present of and neutral [itself]rules,” authority,” to creators and objective as whichisbasedonthebureaucracy’s ability authority;”authority,” “rational-legal include “expert which may have a influencestrong on policy-and decision-making within this organization, constitutes only one category of authority role). (epistemic expertise role and professional vested in the Commission. actin likely their with departmental to aremore accordance inlower positions ranked servants Other types civil whereas role), awhole of (asupranational as organization the represent likely to are officials authority, 81 intergovernmental, supranational, departmental, and epistemic dynamics. dynamics, including various between by internal types of governance tensions characterized Johan P. Olsen 80 West European Politics the European Commission,” 78 loyalties. and roles concerns, interests, Angelina Topan, “The resignation of the Santer-Commission: the impact of 'trust' and 'reputation',” EI “" Trondal, Jarle Michael Barnett and Martha Finnemore, Martha and Barnett Michael Renate Mayntz, "Organizations, Agents and Representatives," in Representatives," and Agents "Organizations, Mayntz, Renate Thomas Christiansen, “Tensions of European governance: politicized bureaucracy and multiple accountability in The principal-agent dilemma is also present in the case of the Commission. According to According Commission. the of case in the present also is dilemma principal-agent The Moreover, delegated authority, or the explicit mandate from States, mandate from Member the explicitthe or authority, delegated Moreover, , ed. Morten Egeberg and Per Lægreid (Oslo: Scandinavian (Oslo: Lægreid Per and Egeberg Morten ed. , Governing at the Frontier of the European Commission. The case of seconded national experts," national ofseconded case The Commission. European of the Frontier atthe Governing 29, 1 no (2006):151. Journalof European Public Rules for the World. International Organizations in Global Politics EIoP 78 81 In addition, in Trondal’s words, the Commission is Commission the words, in Trondal’s addition, In 9, no.14 (2005): 4. 80 34 Policy 4 (1997), quoted in TorbjornLarsson andJarle Organizing PoliticalInstitutions. Essays for University Press, 1997), 84. 79 Arguably, top-ranking 82 Given the extensive the Given oP 6, no.14 CEU eTD Collection personal interviews with civil servants working in the DG Education and Culture, it with DGEducation working inthe appeared that personal interviews and Culture, servants civil sincethe identity significance,” itself of concept Duringmy is theoretical and highly contested. individual individual. to This is for especially true identity-basedthe interpretation of “European level, from level department, from may from in to and vary department contained Treaties the are that various concepts impliesa unitary the of that is understanding actor not Commission organization, or of a departmentwithin it,forth. and so improved imageof the alargerbudget, of asincreased scope competencies, understood maybe The latter power. of of maximization the which consists interest, bureaucratic its own has likemost structures, bureaucratic As theCommission, argues, Majone and subdivisions. its freedom with ina substantial of theirdegree carrying out tasks. them leaving relation, principal-agent in their discretion exercise to them for easier it makes this are typically highly educated and possess extensive expertise on issuesthe of their specialization, that Pollack calls “shirking.” calls Pollack that of leadership, onthose their apractice relying than rather theirrepresentational roles choose own agent problem is thateven thewithin Commission, civil may servants with delegated tasks Community,” 84 www.arena.uio.no/events/LondonPapers06/DEHOUSSE.pdf. d’études européennes de Sciences Politiques, Draft (2006), 9. 83 the principal (the Member States who adopt Treaties). process in which the agent (the Commission and its DG’s) pursues a different agenda that that of Mark Pollack, “The engines of European integration: delegation, agency and agenda-setting in the European the in agenda-setting and agency delegation, integration: of European engines “The Pollack, Mark Centre model.” a multi-principals for need The Union. European the in of powers “Delegation Dehousse, Renaud 3.2. Analysis of Projects and Interviews of Commission the nature bureaucratic and technocratic ignore the not should Finally, one The implications of the theoretical insights discussed above are manifold. The fact that that Thefactthe manifold. discussed aboveare insights theoretical of the The implications 3.2.1. Adoptingamore technicalinterpretation of European significance International organization 84 In light of the fact that civil servants working in the Commission in the working servants civil that fact the of light In 51, no.1 (2003): 99. 35 83 Another implication of the principal- the of implication Another CEU eTD Collection For the person working in the policy unit, a cultural heritage project of in For theperson of working project“European significance” policy the heritage acultural unit, aproject view “European technical wouldtheir of of significance.” constitute definition of what amorefavours technical theirunderstanding of tasks. of which their expertise, actwithin the realm thennaturally to prefer experts, DGcivilservants another type of authority of recognition tothe which testifies sector,” the needof the to “cater to foremost and is first of DG civil servants,too subjective. Also, namelyone of the comments received from“expert the interviewees was that the DG’sauthority.” impartial and fairrules,task since theinterpretation of “European may significance” be considered In their Commission’sthe capacity “rational-legalis, authority,” its that ability as abureaucratic entity institute to as wouldundermine evaluation for project “European significance” term the of understandingbroad and may one using theoretical insights, Applying Finnemore’s parameters. argue that a Barnett with more thatcouldand operate beevaluated in assessed concepts technical concrete prefer servants to identity,civil while lower-level European the common high ideals and a of importance the stresses EUoften the of rhetoric flowery official high-level why the explain woulditis belong), more be likely to found top-ranking among officials.This may difference identity a European of promotion the which (to role” “supranational the for as role); (epistemic asexperts their and position role) (departmental department to the attachment bytheir rather characterized are of implementation isdelegated, whom Culture 2000Programme the actual the ranksmay lower-ranking theCommission, within in the servants we civil theDG,to argue that projects. Relying on Trondal’sbecouldjudged unclearusein aconcept astoo and to elusive evaluation cultural the the of analysis of the representation in agency may interpreted why significance” explain “European terms of identity promotion roles of civil servants of different processes. policy-making Commission’s inthe play each of them had his/her own understanding of what European identity is and what role it should In fact, each person interviewed in DG Education more and gaveanarrower, each interviewed inDG Culture In fact, Education person and technocratic asabureaucratic and Culture DG Education of nature Secondly, the 36 CEU eTD Collection form: definition can callforValue,” morebe found updated Its proposals technical a also inthe term. focusing“minor” on heritage. of a European notion heritage cultural narrower “major,” and cultural “important” the value tothe referring of dimension, as understood significance European of notion the between tension be a to seems there Thus which could Poland), understanding thereby “conventional” suggesting amore of heritage.European cultural apply to and rehabilitation oldthe of Teutonicthe of OrderinMarienburg Jerusalem-Hospital (Malbork, a broad range on focusing aGerman-Polish renovation the one having namedwas significance a European as of projects,this servant civil that theof example a project enough, Interestingly “European significance.” includingand “ambitious” funding, itwould receive may notthough even be being considered as of “viable” was that a project thosewords, interviewee’s the In implementation). policy for responsible is which Commission the and Treaties the ratify which States Member the between agent dilemma to-day work of the DG and in the callsfor proposals (perhaps,in what goes back the to principal- andsignificance” in asit maybe appliedappears intheTreaties the day- understood differently “European of concept the that noted person the Commission, in the interchangeably used were significance European andValue Added European dimension, European whether terms the when aquestion asked define However, identity dimension. promotion moreto than difficultthe participating ordifferent countries types of organizations, thenumber locations) or of project of number the for example, as, (such nature a more quantifiable certainly have These criteria tobeconducted. projects the locations of geographical the wellas as breadth cooperation, of inthe of measured terms “European dimension,” having a aproject firstand foremost meant Other interviewees have identified European intervieweessignificanceOther Added European as haveidentified “European the x objectives, methodology and nature of the cooperation involved demonstrate an involved demonstrate methodology of nature cooperation the objectives, and provide where valueThe actions arethose the added European to considered 37 CEU eTD Collection Annual Cooperation Projects), 85 obligatory mention of the EU as a funding body) among the European public does not have to be listedEuropean added value) among awardcriteria. the a special havefill evaluators for eachitem thewithin points (including to out awarding grid, project all bemore specific, criteria. To these against areevaluated projects since their funding, applyingall for project familiar to cultural isoperators made and thus inproposals of the calls included awardcriteria in isthe above provided added value of European The definition detailed significance.” by “European is meant what than assess evaluate and to easier is also dimension, European Commission, European Finally, the stress that the DG puts on project-related dissemination activities (with an like European As oneof can added value,concept the of European concept the see, the x x x x commitment, andgeographical of distribution participatingthe organisations. of nature number, multilateral the proposal: the and the The levelof cooperation in cultures Europe. basislong-term between of tothe developmenta contribute on cooperation in complementary activitiesin or permanent benefits and at European level, and to in cooperation, result sustained continued, action to proposed the of The potential level level. national at European at than achieved bebetter will effect its andin activity objectives haveagreater the which will The valuecultural of from action the a European pointof view: the way in which of shared objectives. achievement the which promotes interaction multilateral of severalthe activities undertaken at national level, producing thus real experiences and should lead to a final result that differs qualitatively from the sum The ofcooperation basedon principle mutual the should exchange be of level; atEuropean-widesynergies develop to interests national even or regional local, beyond goes that outlook Conditional Call forProposals EACEA No.09/2006: Support for Cultural Actions (Multi- 14. 38 85 CEU eTD Collection it will be useful to analyze what kind of cooperation the projects involve. cooperation in the civil servants’ understandings of the European significance of cultural projects, Given“promote cooperation in sector.” of salience the [the] isto department’s activities Education, Agency, Audiovisual stated directly Culture Executiveobjective and the that of the from Manager the aProject myinterviewees, level. of One European place at cooperation takes when synergies of creation the and cooperation of quality the in lies always argument their image, and ina largerpossibly obtaining budget future.the DG’s bureaucratic interest in the increasing visibility its itsof improving institutional actions, mass mediaeducation. using or insights, Instead, Majone’s onemay interpretinthis terms of the aspartinterpreted of Commission’sthe topromote a identity effort grand European the through ------However civil servants choose to interpret “European significance,” the main thrust of thrust main the significance,” “European interpret to choose servants civil However European-level cooperation: a key criterion for 3.2.2. assessing European co-production, area, of cultural a common creation democracy, and accessibility interculturalism, co-funding, practicegood exchange, exchange, multilateral bilateral/ exchange, information diversity, cultural partnership, international networking, Cultural cooperation may take a variety of forms, including, but not limited to: significance of cultural heritage projects significance ofcultural heritage 39 CEU eTD Collection 86 inproduction its fieldchosen (contemporary architecture). co- creative sustainable foster to activities similar and documentation research, conservation, the andpreservation inso forth.Notably, only beyond Europe, (GAUDI) envisions going one project institutions; TAPE,seeking best introduce to technological solutions for audiovisual heritage “Translate,”promoting methods widespread non-destructiveuse of of archaeological investigation; andPresentFuture,” Past, “European Landscapes: heritage; cultural accessibility European of focusingincreasingfinding Archaeology), the common solutionsof tools to and at European aimed on thebest practices. Several examplessuch of professional-oriented projectsinclude ACCU(Archives problems and techniques, exchangetheir know-how, to are supposed andthat are targeted that operators of culturalconferences, and workshops, creation networks; forof many itisof these, andexperts cultural mostwebsite, orof means popularan Oneof educational in are utilized pack. the projects translation or database aninformation media content, of culture-related creation the materials, promotional number include of practices the a manual projects publication of containing good of or in museumstraining,best practice exchange, dissemination of or information. Thetangible end a of products andresearch, aimed at are and professional audiences mostly toward are targeted that those of number othera contain analyzed have I projects the addition, In projects. these of content the of component key art inwith cooperation isa itsvarious forms identity-building.Infact, rather exceptions, than on rare EFAH,Study Culturalon Cooperation in Europe –Interarts and EFAH – June 2003, 29. ------The analysis of The the fully of analysis supports emphasis multi-annual the projects cooperation, on stability. social multilinguism, dissemination, transnational fostering of equal opportunity, actions, anti-discriminatory mobility, 86 40 CEU eTD Collection Heritage,” 98-99. 87 them. of development, socialjob cohesion, educationcreation or and environmental beingprotection some ability provide to challenges responses to of economic andsocial includingnature, sustainable explicitly on the economiccomponent; however, we may valuealso add that the number of ofmulti-annual heritage projects laying emphasiswith was rather the small, Commission’snot activities ininclusion. isin areaof Overall, such the accordance andeducation social an approach exceeding 10% of thefinding novel usestotal for historical architectural sites, exploring their capacityunderstanding to act as sites for aujourd'hui historique l'architecture pour réutilisations “Quelles which envisioned » (2001), it will relyof on forcultural the achievement of “didacticitineraries” tourist and the publication of promotional materials into the listmeans of of its objectives.policyaimedincludes thedesign region,heritage Mediterranean (2004), of cultural atpromoting the the Another interestingas having TRIMED implementation. for project akey of rationale the component constitute budgets local examplethe for is revenues theadditional into a projecttranslated tourists, to social spas of attractiveness increased of terms and in project economicthe of implications economic the it that becomes clear town, Czech spa celebrated Karlovy a Vary,leader beingof municipality the With project spas the cultural centers. as roleof of the its enhancement goals the lists asoneof thermal heritage, on European focusing 2000 Programme (2006), areindeedinformed an bysuch Europae Thermae understanding. from important a tourismview. point heritage of Several financedcultural projects by Culture the also lieit envisions inthe factthat the wouldorganization a cross-national of that event be Quaedvlieg-Mihailovi In addition, the significance of cultural of significance intermsEuropean andsocial of benefits the economic cultural 3.2.3. heritage may also be interpreted in terms of its 87 One of my interviewees mentioned that the European significance of may aproject of significance European the that mentioned One my of interviewees heritage ü , “Enlargement = Enrichment: A Plea for aEurope-wide Mobilisationfavour in of Cultural 41 CEU eTD Collection 90 affair,” artificial of instead process allowing the identity to develop gradually from and bottom the up; includingbuilding, most of onesmentionedthe thelack above: funds,of risk the of launching an on inidentity- role potential many Commission’s awareness the of existence constraints the of clear demonstrated interviewee in the instance, of one For interviews, the of Programme. the whether as itisto all at identity makepossibledesirable orEuropean to promotion maingoal the may have doubts byproduct of they EU cultural policy, and national) consequence asapossible gradual identityemergence of complementEuropean to identitiesother (local, regional, and 89 Identity in the New Europe , 88 called process the aspartof EUandits the institutions” to of from origin countries their of “transfer allegiances DG. For instance, among EU civil their toward attachment of by asense characterized rule asa general are DGofficials contrary, servants Shore identifies identity. Onthe a European to any in have doissues related or not stance the any interest “markedlatter shift of loyalties” and thatthe its or of civil servants, mode thinking of is by technocratic solely Culture the dominated a and DG Education mean that necessarily however, not, does above discussed heritage cultural diversity. with than promoting cultural tourism, preoccupation rather excessive allegedly Commission’s Newby’s incriticism voiced of 1994on European the Commission, of ground the the to bearesponse may 2000Programme Culture the regard, Inthis projects. numberthe of Herrmann and Brewer, “Identities and Institutions: Becoming European in the EU,” 15. EU,” the in European Becoming Institutions: and “Identities Brewer, and Herrmann Cris Shore, P.T. Newby, “Tourism: Support or Threat to Heritage?,” In 90 The importance of the more technical interpretations of the European significance of significance of European the interpretations more technical the of The importance Development of as European identity a possible side product:3.2.4. socialization the at least at this moment of time. However, while DG civil servants may welcome the welcome may servants civil DG while However, time. of moment this at least at 88 Elite Cultures engrenage. model ed. G.J. Ashworth and P.J. Larkham (London and New York: Routledge 1994), 226. (London and New York: Routledge 2002), 8. 89 Thus, onemay argue that “identification with Europe may be anelite 42 Building a New Heritage: Tourism, Culture and CEU eTD Collection 91 model – that alternative an time, same At the of Programme. 2000 Culture the to be applicable not may identity, active, directed effortsthat the persuasion model identityof building used in onthe second chapter, with itsthe is emphasismean does on it the What part development. identity of notion any to of opposed international antithetically necessarily institutionsdimension European the or added value,interpreted mostly in terms of cooperation), they are not to build a certain a more (such asthe European technical significance” “European interpretation to subscribe of kind of social as exchange programs an example. university citing citizens, part of European mobility on the learning and of process active a involve to have would identity European of development the promote would that actions EU that added also person the Interestingly, of andsoon. nature process, the long-term and gradual lowthe interest general the willbepublic have likely to insuch imposed policy from above; the benefits to derivebenefits to in from participating Programmethe andbecoming partof European networks, implementation and individuals; haveare usually educated mobile secondly,they, many too, andinvolved professionals inproject other field ofculture.cultural First, operators then also beseen as todevelopingconducive asimilaridentity kind of among professionals inthe may heritage underthe Culture projects 2000Programme of cultural majority overwhelming the socialization model, theintensive European-level cooperationprofessional envisioned in the if identity appliesthe ofsocialization.developed However, one process the through aEuropean from such supranational institutions. andderivemore ablemore mobile who are benefits individuals to better-educated likely toaffect individuals come toview itas having a real meaning for their lives; own processisthis more institution, interaction the process of with the by institution. represented In this group the and institution the with experiences personal of importance the emphasize change and formation Herrmann and Brewer, “Identities and Institutions: Becoming European in the EU,” 14. EU,” the in European Becoming Institutions: and “Identities Brewer, and Herrmann This point has an important implication for my research. That is, even if DG civil servants civil DG if even is, That my research. for implication important an has point This socialization – is likely to be more relevant. Socialization models of identity of models Socialization relevant. more be to likely is – 91 MostEUcivil aregenerally servants ashaving regarded 43 CEU eTD Collection 92 experiences,which will contribute to identity enhancedthe group of socialization will gobeyond the time scope of the projects and thus provide a basis for shared process the networks, long-term cooperation sustainable insucceed generating Programme does if especially thirdly, the professional such asprospects; mobility and improved increased Herrmann and Brewer, “Identities and Institutions: Becoming European in the EU,” 14. EU,” the in European Becoming Institutions: and “Identities Brewer, and Herrmann 44 92 among these professionals. these among CEU eTD Collection more technical understanding of of heritage, “European more choosingthe significance” to cultural of technical understanding within the Commission. As a result, I found that in their work DG civil servants tend to relyand its DG’s,on thea different representational roles of DG civil servants, and the elite culture present Commission the of nature fragmented and bureaucratic the dilemma, principal-agent the account into taking by question research the answer to attempted thesis the identity-builder, an as role Programme. Havinganalyzed existing and constraints limitations on Commission’s the potential in in identity the of the implementation the making emerged cultural European a projected questions and, judging from the selection of the projects and their extreme diversity,no pattern of identity-related on focusedspecifically few projects relatively as conclusive, not was however, The evidence, purposes. for identity political a certain promote of European type ability to Commission’s understanding of “European the significance” of cultural heritage in its terms of analyzing whether cultural heritage the under projects Culture 2000dobear witness the to to devoted was thisthesis deficit. Therefore, its democratic being for is criticized project which European identity-building, oflegitimization source for anadditional integration the European analysis. EUcultural hasfrequently beenregarded policy as atproviding,by meansaiming of empirical for basis the as Culture, and Education in DG working servants civil with interviews using heritage multi-annual cultural projectsfunded by as Programme, as the well personal of cultural “European projects, significance” of the understanding(s) examine theCommission’s governed that understandings and ideas the theirimplementation, its through achieve to tried Commission actions, and thethe perfect time for takingmeans a closer look at the Programme, at thethey goals the EU and the European utilizedfirst comprehensive instrument used by as policy EU the itspart of cultural Today ispolicy. thus to do so. The goal of this thesis was to CONCLUSION Year 2006 was the final year of the implementation Year 2006wastheof final Culture 2000Programme,the yearimplementation the of the 45 CEU eTD Collection area of area of integration. economic culturally sensitive, and whichgobeyond the Commission’s usual scope of in competencies the and politically contested, new, relatively are that policies to comes it when especially agency, bureaucratic asa its character technocratic integration” and “driverof the as perceived role between Commission’s the the tension highlights Thisdifference terms. cooperation-related technical, more in it interpreting implementation, policy actual for responsible Culture, and andDGEducation people, of European andacommon culture destiny shared European ideashigher-level acommonly of emphasizingpoorly the the rhetoric defined, with official in cultural Europe-wide networks. inculture professionals the involved projects through in experiencestheir participation personal among happen to likely more is This implementation. project of effect side a possible as many by is viewed 2000Programme, perceived identity, Culture notthe aprimary of goal while as bureaucratic responsibilities of these civil servants. At the same time, the emergence of European incorrespond European-level cooperation.seems to Such better an understandingthe to mostly Added expressed Value,” and“European in it terms interpret dimension” a “European of All in all, it appears that the concept of European significance of cultural heritage is cultural significanceof conceptof All inEuropean thatthe it all,appears 46 CEU eTD Collection A Appendix I: Research Questionnaire DG Education and Culture and Education DG Questionnaire I:Research Appendix PPENDICES . In your view, are what the main constraints that cultural ispolicy-making 6. facing today in 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. d) other (please specify) (please d) other c) lack of culture? shareda commonly European understandingof lackb) of public/ media attention a) lack offunds apply)do not those that (delete EU? the type the of of terms projects in they ´priorities´ of list would a have like officials to fund? or experts do projects, selecting While representing in to selectacertain projects historical period/region Europe? To your knowledge, has there been a tendency (from the part of the selection committees) etc.)? asRoma, such minorities ethnic communities, (immigrant in Europe living minorities In what culturalways does inheritage, your view, include cultural the of heritage If yes, what could be the possible ways to increase this diversity? In your view, does the current selection of projects lack diversity/ representative quality? 151 EC)? Art. with accordance (in significance” What are the criteria which,in your view, would classify a project as being of “European 47 CEU eTD Collection 7. In your experience, did the Commission/ DG impose any constraints 6. 5. In the process of project selection, what priorities guided 4. your In what ways does cultural heritage, in your view, include 3. the 2. What are the criteria which, in your view, 1. would classify a project Appendix II:Research Questionnaire Cultural Experts should support creation/the promotion of a European identity? In your view,is it afeasible and desirable goal that the projects choosing projects which wereotherwise quality? of good (such as certain requirements or criteria) which could potentially limityour freedom in heritage"cultural as to solely "European opposed national cultural heritage? qualities What wouldnature? acertain todescribe one allow of piece heritage as cultural Do material you understand "cultural heritage" to be of predominantly material or non- decisions? suchasRoma, etc.)? minorities ethnic communities, (immigrant in Europe living minorities of heritage cultural If yes, what could be the possible ways to increase this diversity? lack selectionprojects diversity/representative of view, current yourthe does In quality? as being of "European significance" (in with accordance 151EC)? Art. 48 Communities Rural European to Common Cultural Area of a Promotion CULT-RURAL Europae Thermae technology through new European culture Connecting Name of Project of Name Multi-annual cultural heritage projects that received funding under Appendix the III Culture: 2000 Programme M ULTI heritage rural European heritage Thermal European ancient societies and Polish German Italian, Object Heritage Cultural - O E S ANNUAL CULTURAL HERITAGE PROJECTS THAT RECEIVED FUNDING IN FUNDING THAT RECEIVED PROJECTS HERITAGE ANNUAL CULTURAL OURCES OF BASIC INFORMATION UROPEAN NLINE DATABASE

CEU eTD Collection intangible And Tangible Tangible intangible and Tangible Intangible Tangible/ C OMMISSION , Sweden Czech Republic Italy Poland Italy Hungary Greece Greece France Bulgaria Belgium Sweden Slovenia Italy Bulgaria - Netherlands The Spain Poland Germany Germany Italy Italy Partners Associate Co-Organizers Lead organizer Countries , http://ec.europa.eu/culture/eac/culture2000/pluriannuel/projects2_en.html http://cupid.culture.info : municipality and museums Academy, Municipalities universities, municipality, institute, communication and media foundations, Cultural Co-organizers + Lead organizer Institutions 49 762.402 618.000 520.467 In Budget € No No Yes Interpretation Re- encourage ethnographic/ encourage rural the heritage; European preserving andenhancing in interest active an share who organisations or private museums andother public ethnographic/rural heritage between networking and Promoting cooperation centres. as cultural thespas enhancing heritage; of thecultural valorisation newmethods for the and heritage architectural preservation ofthe approaches in the Studying common scenarios. the between links artistic economic, cultural and cultural interconnections, andinsocieties, finding ancient Polish and German Italian, on based scenarios, work on providing 3 cultural will experts archaeological operators; cultural between activities cooperation and initiatives technologies; in new participationin culture and and access improving heritage; cultural common the Sharing highlighting and Aims summer school. summer research; comparative Transnational workshops; languages. inpublication 8European travelling exhibition; promotion; culture; andthermal of water theme on the based events ofartistic series magazine; cultural quarterly book; photo reportage; study: Analytical operators. cultural between activities cooperation and initiatives technologies; and innew in culture participation and access improving visible/accessible; more heritage European to make technology State-of-the-art Means 2 0 0 6 Live ArchLive Multimedia for all MM 4 ALL Heritage Underwater Heritage Managing Cultural MACHU European Intangible history in museums Cultural heritage cultural cultural heritage Underwater

CEU eTD Collection Tangible Tangible United Kingdom The Netherlands The The Netherlands The (5) Netherlands The Turkey Norway Italy Germany United Kingdom Sweden Norway Latvia Italy Hungary Germany Poland Malta Italy Czech Republic United Kingdom Netherlands The Portugal Poland Germany Belgium universities museums, foundations, Cultural center media foundation, cultural Academy, agency regional museums, institute, Archeological 50 816.213 291.898 886.503 Yes No No practice. best of experience, exchange an museums through quality of living history the to enhance visitors, an presenters between "people to people" dialogues encourage to history, history throughliving of dissemination promotingand improving interest in by history To further pan-European visitors. and museums to their of importance issues about titles multimedia more make and technology to embrace conveyor operators cultural encourage cultural diversity / to as such issues highlight and to promote cultural dialogue / heritage cultural European engage with youngpeople to / initiative multimedia-tool 'Conveyor' expand To people. to the accessible heritage and making it cultural protect underwater industrial era. industrial regions, from the pre- of heritage European rural cultural common andunique highlight and document exhibitions; joint especially activities, joint transnational "open their doors" to to museums heritage rural locate, monitor and to techniques combine and implement develop, To workshops andworkshops web. exhibition, joint exchanges, staff 4 training56 around workshops, activities: Planned knowledge. historic to disseminate onNetwork livingfocusing history exhibitions. tools; authoring Multimedia information. & regional level; dissemination of level at site of threats assessment model; sedimentation-erosion developing measurements; and sampling on-site research; desktop with data collecting public; and policy-makers community, research the use by buildinga GIS with for applications strategy; working and areas of research delineation Spatial in Central Europe architecture Theatre TACE heritage wooden European preserving our for craftsmanship traditional in Specialising Landscapes ofWar Landscapes architecture Theatre wooden heritage European and craftsmanship Traditional 20 conflicts in the of armed sites Historical th century

CEU eTD Collection Tangible Tangible and Intangible Intangible Czech Republic Norway Italy Slovenia Slovakia Poland Hungary Slovakia Poland Lithuania Germany United Kingdom (2) Spain (3) Italy Greece France Museums Institutes, Theatre center training vocational museum, agency, restoration and conservation Academy, center conservation book cultural council, municipal universities, commune, Italian company, Calabria, Italian of region media 51 758.500 102.544 405.815 No No Yes between specialists. between communication of support heritage; cultural European about knowledge Increase perspective. European into andcontext wider individual put regions will be in tendencies development Partial Europe. central in architecture theatre about ofthe development and information knowledge existing Presenting historic buildings). wooden and(restoration work on implementation by practical heritage cultural European our wooden to secure traditional craft skills, to help in themselves educate to want who craftsmen experienced well as as craftsmen young recruit old buildings, to wooden craftsmanship in relation to the offield traditional in of competence high level a with anetwork establish To violence and war confront initiatives, develop tools forlocal of and war landscapes of the thevisibility increase ofconflicts; heritage means of of evaluation the the examine conflicts, armed of of traces rediscovery EU; theguarantee if 20 heritage of the manifestation ofMaking inventory the th century conflictsin the building structures of analyses research; workshops five meetings; two craftsmanship. within fieldof the traditional skills practical and experience of exchange with network and techniques; international craftsmanship materials, traditional of on theuse emphasis strong restorationNew putting guidelines inventory digital of war; landscapes sites, historical of onthe conservation A study website. exhibitions; multimedia CD/DVD, two publications, two seminar, specialist a workshops, architecture two architecture, of theatre Database Archaeology European of Archives AREA north of Alpsthe European towns earliest The OPPIDA Interactivite et Democratie Urbanisme: Architecture Gouvernance GAUDI Empire of Roman Frontiers M ULTI sites Archaeological Celtic culture Celtic Architecture sites Archeological - ANNUAL CULTURALTHATHERITAGERECEIVEDPROJECTS IN FUNDING

CEU eTD Collection Tangible Intangible and Tangible Tangible Tangible France France Belgium United Kingdom Italy (3) Germany (11) France Czech Republic Belgium Austria Luxemburg Hungary Germany France Czech Republic Austria (2) United Kingdom Spain France Finland Netherlands The Spain Slovakia (2) Romania Belgium Poland Hungary Germany Austria Sweden Romania Portugal Poland Germany Czech Republic United Kingdom Spain Italy Greece Germany universities institutes, research museums, municipalities, media foundations, Cultural foundations Architectural municipalities museums, institutions, Research departments archaeology museums, centers, Research 52 318.800 900.000 810.000 900.000 Yes No No Yes and presentation. interpretation conversation, heritage incultural practise differing national good and exchange export Age civilisation; to Iron European for awareness Alps; to create public development ofnorth the on proto-urban research European dispersed and collate consolidate To andstructures tools. cooperative permanent create to field; the production in and exchange cultural promote today, of architecture European To promote of understanding young people. at the public and general targeted projects educational sites, archeological of reconstruction virtual in archeology, practices on best guidelines sites, archeological on creation Database citizens. European all for interest and concern ofdirect are levels, national regional, national and trans- at of identities consolidation construction and the role it has played in the and heritage, archaeological of theEuropean presentation and as thediscovery such Issues documentation. and research heritage; archeological of European presentation and Discovery mediation). and opportunities innovativefor offering high visibility to the project but actions financed are separately events other and (these community promotinglinks the with regional and artists contemporary on-site involving animation cultural ; practises innovative and of good exchange managers; communication network for site a trans-European and of database of a standardized creation The cultural products major for platform production and co-Educational, exchange exhibitions Expert cooperation, etc exhibitions virtual for biographies, bibliographies, informationexhibition, technology of the catalogue illustrated leaflets, information activities, diffusionseveral promotion and Travelling Exhibition - Action F Action C Documentation - Action E - B Action - Research archaeology: of andarchives history the valorise and encompass To 2 0 0 5 Translate Nouveau Network Art Research People and Potteries Pottery Pottery as a People and Potteries translation Art and cultural style Art Nouveau craft cross-national

CEU eTD Collection Intangible Tangible Intangible and Tangible Austria Belgium Germany Poland Lithuania Latvia Hungary France Austria (3) Netherlands The Spain Germany Estonia, Austria Switzerland (2) Spain Poland Italy Latvia Germany Georgia France Finland (3) Cuba Belgium Austria United Kingdom Spain Slovenia Norway Italy France United Kingdom Italy Hungary France United Kingdom Switzerland (2) Spain Slovakia Luxemburg (2) institutes research foundations, cultural galleries, and Art museums bodies government museums, foundations, cultural Municipalities, center design Museums, 53 900.000 827.000 884.000 No Yes Yes (professional networking) (professional and cultural translation heritage cultural between connection the Research field of cultural translation; in the practices museum contemporary exemplary To network and develop issue. day-relevance amodern it make audience Nouveau to broader Art present heritage; of cultural awareness Europeans’ Increase innovatively. potters’ lifestyles; do it and on pottery sources document information and traditions, heritage;preserve cultural ashared Present professionals for art historians and other networking andmobility projects ofart, accessibility improving inmuseums, space exhibition with symposiums; working workshops, through research, To improve cultural translation beneficial. economically and as interpretationsocially presenting of methods innovative Digitizing, exhibitions. database; biographical in thefield, research Educational atmuseums; projects Heritage to Cultural Access ACCU Future and Present Past, Landscapes: European times modern from ancient to the Mediterranean in - Changes cultures of movement peoples and of Movements CROSSINGS Sciences Archeological for Network Alpine AlpiNet M ULTI accessibility cultural social and of sites – issues Cultural heritage landscapes archaeological European region Mediterranean cultures in the of movements peoples and of Movements Alps History of the - ANNUAL CULTURALTHATHERITAGERECEIVEDPROJECTS IN FUNDING

CEU eTD Collection Tangible Tangible Intangible Intangible Finland United Kingdom Cyprus Italy Italy Germany Finland Estonia Czech Republic Bulgaria Austria (2) Italy Hungary (2) Germany Belgium Malta Italy Greece France Switzerland (3) Italy (2) France Switzerland Slovenia Italy Italy Germany France Austria Austria United Kingdom Romania (2) Norway Finland (3) United Kingdom Norway Greece Germany heritage cultural for agencies governmental universities, Museums, at university center research heritage, e of cultural superintendenc foundations, Historical institutes and Universities foundation cultural of education, board national bureau, federal sub- galleries, Museums and 54 883,055 896,773 588,116 424,102 No Yes No No information. and ofskills the exchange for Europe across networks Enhance professional landscapes; these conserve landscapes; archaeological European within heritage cultural of importance of the awareness Increase public and official investigation; of archaeological of non-destructive methods use widespread promote To peoples. ofMediterranean heritage diversity and common ofunderstanding the cultural and knowledge ofmutual advancement dialogue and the of cultural and maintenance Establishment, promotion the Alps. of of the history knowledge the of quality and quantity disseminate and increase To issues. access-related about information spread to network a European use accessibility, influencing on factors research plans, heritage; To produce action of cultural accessibility increase tools to new find operators, management heritage cultural between cooperation promote To and travelingexhibitions. packs education programs, radio and TV sites, web conservation; and survey of aerial Center European of a small Creation research. Exhibitions, techniques. training and research dissemination, comparing different webmuseum; a and schools summer of archaeological Organization and networking. cooperation professional Stresses traveling exhibition of pilot actions. DVD, conferences, Website, 2 0 0 4 with Internetwith Sharing System Archiving OASIS-Open européen patrimoine La place, un Century Twentieth Short the of Indeterminacy The History After the Fall: aceite yelvino aceite el pan, dek La cultura TRIMED Gothic Architecture Mediterranean of Museum A Virtual GOTHICmed – Electronic Arts Electronic squares European city Europe) of Central that (especially European history region Mediterranean of the Cultural heritage Mediterranean inthe landscape architectural and art Gothic

CEU eTD Collection Intangible Tangible Intangible Tangible Tangible Germany Greece Hungary Spain Spain France Germany Czech Republic Spain Poland Italy France Malta France Greece Italy Cyprus Portugal (2) Italy Greece Spain Slovenia Portugal Italy Greece United Kingdom Latvia Hungary (2) Hungary Germany Romania Romania Poland Germany Czech Republic (CEU) cultural centers, cultural universities, centers, art academy, Design communes) (Italian municipalities institutions, research and University agencies governmental and Municipalities enterprise aprivate Cervantes, institutes bodies, governmental other autonomy, an in secretariat Cultural council institutions, city research other and Universities 55 713,315 697,500 886,685 567,304 221,900 No Yes No No Yes sustainable availability of availability sustainable the ensure to order in system presentation) enhanced (preservation, acomplex establish To awareness. network, to raise public aco-operative develop current conditions, to of the overview critical a toestablish problems, of set different define within European cities, to and to theirrole establish squares the by represented oftheheritage quality and importance the evaluate and interpret examine, To on activities. promotingand co-operating investigating, restoring, by Mediterranean inthe islands six on Trio ofMediterranean the cultural promote the heritage and save, interpret To architecture. gothic Mediterranean of Network Co-operation Creation of a Translational issues without conflict. without issues Work on politically sensitive recent European history; of points turning at the elite Central European political of role of the reexamination Involve studentsin the Technological solutions. brochure. information illustrated work, multilingual website and international colloquium, reference exhibition, atraveling squares, city of European charter paper; white squares; city European on study comparative and Research itineraries. tourist of didactic design materials, explanatory andpromotional exhibitions, productionof practice, of good manuals and cultural restoration, landscapes of selection database, graphic and text interviews; Conduct conference. a and exhibition Traveling program. analytical and research, Collection, Heritage New Heritage ARChaeological Towards T.ARC.H.N.A. Agencies News European of Archives Photographic Historical theSafeguarding SHPAENA PHAROS Population locale Mémoire, Patrimoine, Landscape Landscape Heritage European Cultural Common Our Etruscan Etruscan Intangible culture agencies news European in archives photographic Lighthouses Masonry Monuments heritage Landscape

CEU eTD Collection Tangible Tangble Tangible Tangible Italy Greece France Italy Norway France Denmark (2) Italy Portugal Poland Hungary Belgium United Kingdom Spain Norway Cyprus (3) Spain Poland (2) (2) Germany (3) France Belgium Poland Hungary Spain France Germany Belgium Sweden Spain Portugal Italy Ireland Austria Netherlands The Poland (2) France Hungary (3) Rep. Czech Netherlands The Poland Universities Museums, Municipalities Universities Municipalities, federal regions bodies ,sub- government museums, foundations, cultural Municipalities, company media Universities, achive media art museums, 56 584,200 874,573 718,650 389,110 747,677 Yes No No No No creation of the database and of thedatabase creation through culture Etruscan the to access by facilitating Linking to past the the future agencies news European infive archives of photographic existence the andSafeguard highlight Lighthouses European Masonry the of Oldmodern societies and Integration in the lifeof Restoration Preservation, monuments inrepresented the as ofcommunities past local of thehistorical knowledge better promote monuments; local and populations between links the Promote local populations; and territories monuments, between therelation Study heritage landscape common cultural European and ofdocumentation Transnational dissemination the field of electronic arts. of electronic the field in heritage cultural European Database; website Exhibition; Filing; Inventory; digitalization; catalogue; CD-ROM work; laboratory Report; website; Research; visits) (site mobility exposition;professional multimedia a documentation network; howand of good practices; creation know- of professional Exchange web-site; documents; TV of partners; a network as andpromoters operators cultural scientists, between Cooperation Transformation Europe, TAPE preservation in audiovisual Training for European Music in the Presence Romany/Gypsy The Accessibility characteristics and regional cultural sphere European Shared heritage the audiovisual preservation of s in Europe Romanis'/Gypsie Sinti and pertaining to the music and music Gypsy-inspired

CEU eTD Collection Intangible Intangible Intangible Germany Netherlands The Spain Italy (3) Italy (2) France Denmark Poland (2) Ireland Greece Germany Spain & Montenegro Serbia Romania Poland Hungary France Bulgaria Netherlands The United Kingdom Slovakia Hungary Czech Republic Austria Poland Italy Finland Austria Sweden (5) Spain Portugal Italy (2) Hungary Germany (2) France Bulgaria Romania Belgium Universities Museums, archives agencies, public and Private University, Library organization, Political institutions, Research Foundations, Cultural Associations, 57 817,340 468,977 522,000 Yes No No regional characteristics regional eradicate automatically that integration does not propose shall project The history; European being for the first time in into Seacame Black the to Ocean theAtlantic from sphere cultural one how Designed to showin detail on other the solutions hand and inR&D technology cultural onsector the one reduce the thegap between audiovisual heritage; of the for preservation Contribute to plans actions inRomanis'/Gypsies Europe pertaining Sinti to the and inspired musicand of Gypsy- and dissemination coding, evaluation archiving, conservation, cataloguing, inventory Recovery, dialogue throughcultures cultural European of different knowledge promote cultural to and students and scholars of and specialisation team, to improve the mobility professional type of new the creation of a model of a the virtual museum; exhibition and of thedatabase presentation Internet andan understandable the through as possible audience an broad to as appeal aims to project; language of memberof each the in national exhibition presented the texts illustrations and and a touring explanatory by supported database; development of a multi-lingual and oftraining non specialists awareness-raising for programme laying for ground the work a documentation Musicology; Research; Acculturation Integration - Migration – Medieval early Foreigners in the d'écomusees européen pour unréseau etmer: entre terre Patrimoine industriel Ubi erat Lupa -2003 SteamRail.Net M M ULTI ULTI Railways European history heritage Industrial Roman heritage - - ANNUAL CULTURALTHATHERITAGERECEIVEDPROJECTS IN FUNDING ANNUAL CULTURALTHATHERITAGERECEIVEDPROJECTS IN FUNDING

CEU eTD Collection Intangible Tangible Tangible Tangible Germany France Austria Greece Slovakia Slovenia Italy Hungary Greece Germany Slovakia Hungary Netherlands The (2) Sweden (2) Spain Slovakia United Kingdom Hungary (2) Greece (2) France (2) Denmark United Kingdom Netherlands The Spain France Romania Italy Greece Universities museums, foundations, research institution, research Archaeological Universities. foundations national museums, institutes Archaeological Ltd Trust Railway Midland Universities, Ministries Organizations, Cultural 58 538,050 822.071 897.000 896.428 No Yes No No insights into insights into the and history a broad scaleandgain new on sources primary compare knowledge expert exchange to to; and transnationally and systematically era Roman on the research To interlink archaeological lessons. learning and commonheritage cultural present, highlighting howthe past has formed the the by with present showing past the link to researchers; to the andpublic available it make and history concerning of this period Europe across data from Collecting archaeological Europe, as we knowit. important in the formation of this period that was This project aims to explore railways. and promotion of heritage on restoration experience and ofinformation Exchange professionals. to training provide of experiences; foropportunity anexchange the countries; provide of different realities geographical and cultural different compare heritage; dimension of industrial transnational the emphasize enhancement; and of conservation and methods To work out and test models Roman era. Roman of the heritage to thecultural access improve will which platform internet innovative an create will many European countries from experts IT and Archaeologists internet. registered inadatabaseonthe as the interpretation shall be aswell sources archaeological The public. the products multimedia general for multilingual and audiovisual books, and Production of Spain. UK in Greece, and methods results on the restoration and preservation ofCoproduction touring exhibitions heritage. of therailway parts of conservationtrains other and and Restoration museums. railway of steam Network and training. exhibition, organisation of seminars itinerant CD-Rom, website, publications, dissemination include of Means areas). coastal ports, (e.g. sea" and land "between dissemination of industrial heritage and enhancement preservation, cooperation forthe network of a Constitution anddevelopment 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 3 Archaeology European of Archives Progress Art in Nouveau ARENA M ULTI archives Archaeological Art nouveau archives Archaeological - ANNUAL CULTURALTHATHERITAGERECEIVEDPROJECTS IN FUNDING

CEU eTD Collection Tangible Tangible Tangible France Belgium United Kingdom Belgium Austria (2) United Kingdom (2) United Kingdom Romania Poland Norway Iceland Denmark (2) United Kingdom Poland Spain Germany Belgium Sweden Spain Ireland Greece (3) Spain Museum, Province, architecture, Centre for authorities regional universities, museums, institutes, Cultural universities Culture, of Ministry institutions, Cultural 59 788,037 598,730 900,000 No No No "Art Nouveau" heritage, as heritage, Nouveau" "Art conservationof European and study the promote to intended is network The partners. of several archives the cross-search to users searching which will allow map-based interoperable to develop a system of ; protocols communications and standards metadata and format ; to develop archival file promotionof digital archives in and the protection expertise share and develop To allowthe partners to institutional network. ; to consolidate an of archaeology of history the thesignificance demonstrate ;to history European for sources as essential archives these to research and document ;to archives promotionof archaeological and encourage he protection To undertake and to public. the to available sources make to co-operation; the project; intensifyto the standard to by be improved according toa uniform it preserve to and memory stones in the form of digital Roman the from information the save to era; Roman ofthe heritage the cultural activities, while at the same time thesame at while activities, involve general in pubic its Art Nouveau Network, which will of andmaintenance Establishment knowledge. and disseminate awareness public raise to projects maps; clickable web-delivered and searches map-based public; general the and profession to the available data and archives archaeological of key a number make protocols; each co-organiser will of digital data, guidelines and preservation on the and workshops seminars of European a programme significance.; of European archives and promote digital cultural protect to aframework develop To publication of leaflets, CD-ROM. international conference, and an It proposes atrisk. archives of asurvey and launch database existing already the expand archaeology. The project will also of history on the research archives-based stimulating on beplaced will emphasis special AREA in which of stage third the represents proposal This entries. 3000 over with the database designed they 2000 Culture year by last IIfinanced AREA phase then in and in 1999 archaeology European of onarchives the Laboratory as out a Heritage started AREA 2 0 0 1 Innovation - –Culture Ceramics Born in Europe Future the to Past the operation. Road from andConflicts Co- Baltic Region - Ceramics and culture history, society, European Baltic region History of the

CEU eTD Collection Tangible Intangible Intangible Germany Germany Estonia (3) United Kingdom Portugal Italy (2) Hungary France Sweden Portugal Poland (2) Germany (2) Denmark Austria Sweden Lithuania Latvia Finland Estonia United Kingdom Netherlands The (3) Spain Norway Italy Hungary (2) France Finland Museums Museums company Publishing Universities, agency municipal 60 816,700 216,525 576,666 No Yes Yes research and creation. and research to impulses ;to give experts amongthe and public among on ceramics knowledge heritage ; to promote cultural accentuate To subjects. above on the research scientific public;further promote amongquestions awide discussionof these and reflection provoke To presented. the Baltic region is poorly of thehistory where learning Institutions of higher in Russian available information the will make culture of nations European study ofthe history and dialogue the andstimulate across-cultural develop cultural integration will to opportunities advance basis for better finding a providing common past; ofunderstanding their and neighbouring nations' participant Improving the this heritage. this in authorities the respective of and atlarge of public the interest the arise to intended is It also concerned. actors European various the between experience of exchange and the cooperation for active basis dissemination, the bylaying and promotion its as well Creationof a virtual museum tour. Exhibition,publication. multilingual work. scientific and research different media. Platform for of publicationwide bymeans of Documentationthe findings and ofceramics. development ofdimension the cultural European the on Research subjects. of these historical and Europe-wide analysis behaviour immigration; and reproductive structures, family society, intoday’s of role women identity, European citizenship, the cultural self-definition, cultural focussedon such subjects as involvement of the public) are debate, and research scientific (exhibitions, of the project activities various the sense; metaphorical birthin and the in practical the Project deals with the subject of form andon CD ROM. written be disseminated through will research gathered The Europe. foundenvironment inof region this the outlook of history, culture and in differences of the explanations and analyses scientists' hopeto share They themes. agreed fordeveloped presentations on the conferences International will be history of the Baltic region. of the overview cultural historical comparative, multi-lingual, a Affairs", States' Sea to Baltic Guide "the entitled work reference encyclopaedic an produce The goal of this project is to of the network. of the members of the 3 meetings training, education, forpublication children), catalogue for exhibition + + (website publications research, Activities: approach. exhibition, taking a rigorously scientific History and Patrimony Management Cultural Resource Challenges for – Heritage Cultural Underwater European Common Sites: European Shipwreck Visualising North- and Safeguarding Monitoring, interaction et democratie urbanisme, et architecture Governance, GAUDI Heritage Network Heritage Acritic European ACRINET patrimonies 15 European sites Shipwreck Architecture Acritic heritage Acritic

CEU eTD Collection Tangible Tangible intangible and Tangible intangible and Tangible France Finland France Greece United Kingdom Netherlands The United Kingdom Sweden Germany Denmark United Kingdom United Kingdom (2) Netherlands The (2) Spain France Finland Germany Denmark Belgium Austria Spain Italy (3) Greece France Bulgaria Versailles, National de Domaine Musee du et Public du Etablissement university museums, municipality, institute, Archaeological foundations cultural Museums, institutions, cultural Architecture, Institutes for municipalities Culture, of ministry Universities, 61 459,142 690,682 891,791 756,398 No No Yes Yes common history. common people discover their countries orderin to make andEuropean patrimonies 15 between similarities and differences the both show To underwaterheritage. cultural for and respect knowledge systems andof promotion management and practices of good ; development underwaterheritage cultural illustration of the European ; sites of wreck assessment andrisk- variables individual environmental of the ofsignificance the theimprove understanding ;to sites wreck historic forEuropean standard protocols that will set a methodology and monitoring Pilot the development of a culture architectural of development European the promote - to andcultures backgrounds. differentwith religions, operation people between heritage that ison based co- Highlight a European Virtual access to the sites. the to access Virtual site. internet posters, publications and on the folders, exhibitions, local meetings, seminars, inthe information project of the in thedissemination beused will drawings and Images sites). theshipwreck of models or drawings ofimages, types and ofthe production different collection andof processingdata visualisation (methods for the of anddevelopment good practices and systems Management website. creating anddeveloping acommon organizations; of European network 3.Architecture, the strengthening Day of fora European preparing citizenin participation projects, activities, dissemination public and education ;2. spaces of public base ;adata professionals young for workshops urbanism, and of architecture archives developing : 1.research, phases Three performances. art 5 popular and conferences, 2 international workshops, exhibitions centre, documentation film etc. "virtual museum", form ofmanuscripts, publications, and from popular culture in the archives from materials collect To languages. Concluding symposium. languages. Concluding 6 in of terminology database and of Creationdesigners. a of artists of a database Creation Palimpsestforschung Virtuale - Digitale Rinascimento aujourd'hui historique pour l'architecture Quelles réutilisations manuscripts Palimpsest Architecture

CEU eTD Collection intangible and Tangible Tangible Germany Finland Netherlands Spain Greece Finland Italy Austria Portugal Poland (3) Italy Germany (3) France Finland Belgium Foundations Research Universities, Libraries, centres photography contemporary museums, institutes, cultural authorities, Municipal Schoenbrunn Schloß Copenhagen, Castle Rosenborg Palaces, Royal Historical Convention, Tourism and – International Brussels 62 846,220 201,000 Yes No lasting developments. future ; to set a model course for ofrelevance its aware public generations andthe make for future heritage cultural this preserve To memorial sites. the to related landscapes as such spaces natural of an asparks such spaces ofmanagement public on projects aimed at the cooperate insertion; social purposes ofeducation and memorial sites for the finding newuses for at workaimed experimental good conduct practices, and experiences share To at large. public interested the and archives and oflibraries to users the work of theresults convey to will be used conferences and exhibitions media, conventional and New specialists. and of researchers generation new ofa training andpractical Academic of documentation the findings. Scientific manuscripts. hiddeninheritage palimpsest bringing again European to light the in involved are 30 partners than and elaboration technology. More imaging digital innovative highly and research of textual methods Using ofa combination established hiddenheritage. cultural European of a records of written Rediscovery cooperation. future for basis the ;creating sites memorial for uses new finding to related creativity contemporary and research promoting practices, Sharing diffusionof and good religious paintings Study of European 'diARTgnosis' europeenne culturelle l'identite et Les Universites Europa im mittelalterlichen Siedlung von Juden Migration und Kultur, Mobilität, Euroclio de l'Europe Celtique les chemins sur mer, et entre terre l'autre, à D'un finistère M ULTI paintings religious European identity European culture Jewish European Intangible history culture Celtic - ANNUAL CULTURALTHATHERITAGERECEIVEDPROJECTS IN FUNDING

CEU eTD Collection Tangible Intangible Intangible Greece Belgium Germany France France Spain Italy Germany France United Kingdom Spain Italy France Netherlands The United Kingdom Sweden Spain Portugal Luxemburg Italy Ireland Greece Germany Finland Denmark Belgium Austria (5) France (2) United Kingdom (2) Spain United Kingdom Spain Italy Greece Germany Universities institutions research universities, institutes, Historical Museums councils borough county/ organizations, cultural universities academy, Institutes, 63 614,450 299,730 852,387 68,602 518,782 Yes Yes Yes No No Building identity aEuropean national boundaries hitherto restricted by been historical that have traditions integrationThe ofvarious -- in Europe areas Celtic other and Brittany between strengtheninglinks cultural and establishing This project is aimed at paintings. religious of development European of the study a comparative purposeThe ofthe project is living environment in Mediterranean in environment living and "Culture », Europe « Imagined identity», andstructures European « Urban », inEurope nature towards : the "Attitudes themes following on centered ;activities Research of history. students and professionals amongst practice of exchange foster to organised conference are intendedto be meetings and aninternational Regular research. historical novel basic fostering thus fellowships, research provides and students for school asummer It funds somewhere is a stranger “Everybody European on manifest tolerance history ourand and history” a colloquium “See the other”, “Your Internet form this project: a the via visible activities Three deCompostelle). Jacques (St inSpain Galicia with exchange cooperationorganised; and be will 2001 August in Wales tourists into the region. A walk in international status and to bring Breiz inorder to reach for Pilgrimage will be made to Tro- methods. and approaches conservationand restoration other and analysis chemical asphysico- aswell paintings historical ofstudy religious and conservation. It will cover the documentation of research, terms in ofaffairs state the contemporary of overview aninclusive provide To 2 0 0 0 Safeguarding Allemagne et Espagne enFrance, siècle XXe ouvrier du début du travail de européens desites en valeur mise et Sauvegarde Masterpieces inEuropean Plants Museums in People European of A History Identity: Migration, Work and Mediterrania Photography buildings. workers' century Early XXth art in flora European heritage Maritime

CEU eTD Collection Tangible Tangible intangible and Tangible Tangible The Netherlands The France Portugal Denmark Spain Spain (3) Spain Germany (3) France United Kingdom Netherlands The Spain Italy United Kingdom Sweden (2) Germany Austria United Kingdom Italy Greece (2) France forum a habitat arts, school of fine institutions, a Cultural gardens botanical foundations, Cultural Museums UNESCO municipalities, Museums, Libraries, 64 147,997 311,400 898,971 761,279 715,963 No Yes Yes No No buildings workers' century XXth early is to restore aim The Masterpieces. inEuropean plants To promote the of study tolerance. understandingimprove and will community the European migrant communities within of thedifferent knowledge greater that expectation thediversity with on cultural debate European To to contribute the Heritage ofMaritime Preservation To safeguard To photographic Training courses, make information make courses, Training European heritage. European of awareness to raise public general the for an exhibition will be project of the stage final The video). (DT,be published internet and will and ataseminar shared will be of theresearch results The devised. will be andstructures solutions new and history its and site Each city will write a report on the of plants. expression artistic the and history botany, and print),on which focusses (CD-ROM publications multimedia of in a form 2002 by to visitors and audience awide to presented plants. The final results will be history ofthese and propagation know-how identification,for the willAjuda and their Kew) contribute botanical institutions (Leiden, three itself, Monastery Jeronimos of the expertise the Besides, offer. can of Lisbon Monastery Jeronimos the that illustrations and tiles tapestry, painting, in sculpture, representation plant selected from the rich collectionof A set ofaround 200plantswill be seminars. adults, a web site, publications and andprogrammes for children travelling exhibitions, education of means by bedisseminated will of theproject work collaborative of and identity. The migration theme onthe perspective European educational workshop. Develop a an and exhibitions Research, Preservation. Heritage Maritime of field in the area Mediterranean in the operation andinternational permanent co- ofconstitution a of network on the focuses project The of European culture" of European "Globalisation and regionalisation "and Ages Middle in the Europe landscapes cultural to Pathways sites restoration European Carpentry: handwork/Wooden Wooden Vektor Photographic Images European landscapes cultural European Wooden Tangible heritage art Contemporary

CEU eTD Collection Tangible intangible and Tangible Germany Italy Austria The Netherlands The United Kingdom Sweden Spain Finland Denmark (2) United Kingdom Sweden Italy Ireland Finland (2) Sweden Portugal Norway Greece France Finland (4) Belgium United Kingdom Italy (2) Germany France centre. restoration office, a photo public record museums, management heritage and archaeology concerned with associations and museums universities, academies, institutes, scientific management, heritage state institute research technical Laboratory, Universities, Administration, County university museum, institutions, Archival 65 858.427 355,604 817,693 No No no heritage Development. European Planning Spatial Convention andthe draft Landscape European inthe asstated management and ofneed and protection account their vulnerability andEurope in taking of diversity of cultural the aspart landscapes cultural and of communication management sustainable study, the with Deals handworking countries onthe different the from acquired woodworking knowledge traditional of Comparison technological foundation. and ascientific develop to order in art contemporary of materials Uses collections can be appreciated. be can collections of photographic the value artistic and/or thewhich documentary in context a European-wide provide andwill heritage, photographic contact with their own indirect countries European bring the public in several will exhibitions The copies. digital to access for technology of new photographs and on the application conservationof originals on expertise to the contribute public. The training events will the general for events related and exhibitions, virtual as well as real organize and electronically available, in print as well as landscapes. cultural different representing selected, been have landscapes sample 12 countries. European different Cooperation between and research Internet GIS, complexity. operational in with compared practice and put be will experiences theoretical ongoing where the working-sites on of workshops realisation withpractical the approach guidelines on conservation; and recommendations diagnosis, characterisation, Material 70. 60 – years are the period diffusion Thematic in Europe. the context of a newform of develop techniques in digitilisation Aimed at cultural institutes it will CEU eTD Collection I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd., 2003. Heritage:Cultures andPolitics inEurope, Lesson.” In Geography A andHistory: Venetian Denis. “Heritage Cosgrove, on Civic and Cultural European Identity.” Bruter, Michael.“Winning the Hearts and Minds for Europe: The Impact of News and Symbols Diversity andAutonomyPapers EDAP ‘UnitedEuropean Europe inPaul.”The Order: Blokker, Post-enlargement Diversity’?.” accountability in the European Commission.” in European the accountability Christiansen, Thomas. “Tensions of governance:European politicized bureaucracy multipleand 1179. Case.” Test as theUltimate Turkey’s EU Membership Governance: andDemocratic Identity, Legitimacy Baykal, Sanem. “Unity in Diversity? The Challenge of Diversity for the European Political Global London:Ithaca,Politics. 2004. Barnett, Michael, and Martha Finnemore. Rules for the World. International Organizations in Larkham, London and 13-30. NewYork:Routledge, 1994. Heritage: Tourism, CultureandIdentity in the New Europe , Ashworth, Greg. “From history to heritage - from heritage to identity.” In Larkham, London and 1-12. NewYork:Routledge,1994. Heritage: Tourism, CultureandIdentity in the New Europe, ______. “A for Europe:Heritage The need, task, the contribution.” the In RoutledgeYork: 1994. Identity intheNew Europe , Ashworth, Greg, and Peter Larkham. Preface to Anderson, Benedict. Anderson, B IBLIOGRAPHY Jean MonnetWorkingPaper Imagined Communities edited by Greg Ashworth and Peter Larkham 9 (2005): 1-78. 9(2005): 1(2006):1-32. Comparative Political Studies edited by Robert Shannan Peckham,London: 113-123. . London, New York: Verso, 1983. Journal ofEuropean Public Journal 66 Building aNew Heritage: Tourism, Cultureand edited by Greg Ashworth and Peter by edited andAshworth Peter Greg . 36, no.10 (2003): 1148- Building aNew Policy London and New Building aNew Rethinking 4(1997):73-90. European CEU eTD Collection Cambridge University 1990. Press, Hobsbawm, Eric J. Publishers, 2004. Herrmann, Thomas Risse, and Marilynn B. Brewer, 15-16. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield the EU.” In Herrmann, Richard and Marilynn B.Brewer,“Identities and Institutions: in Becoming European and Redman, Peter London: SAGE 15-30. Publications 2000. Ltd, Hall, Stuart. “Who needs ‘Identity’?.” In Identity: areader, edited by Paul Du Gay, Jessica Evans Cultural Actions (Multi-Annual Cooperation Projects). European Commission, Conditional Call for Proposals EACEA 09/2006:SupportNo. for Implementation of an Annual European Union Prize Scheme in the Field of Cultural Heritage. European Commission, Conditional Call for Proposals (DG EAC/55/06) for the Organisation and (Action 2).” European Commission, and “Culture 2000:Structured Multiannual Cooperation Agreements COM (2004). and Diversity through Programmes for Youth Culture, Audiovisual, and Civic Participation,” European Commission Communication,“Making Citizenship Work: Fostering European Culture www.efah.org/pdfcount.php?fln=gov_part1_context.pdf. EFAH. Study on Cultural Cooperation in and – Interarts Europe EFAH –June 2003. Sneška Quaedvlieg-Mihailovi De Vries, Gijs “Citizenship and Memory.” In www.arena.uio.no/events/LondonPapers06/DEHOUSSE.pdf. principals model.” d’études européennes Centre de Sciences Politiques,(2006): 1-10. Draft Dehousse, Renaud. “Delegation of powers in the European Union. The need for amulti- 48-69. of nature multi-faceted Community the cultural policy.” Craufurd Smith, Rachael. ”From heritage conservation to European Identity: Article 151 EC and and Routledge NewYork: ,1997. Cram, Laura. Transnational Identities: BecomingEuropeanEU, Transnational Identities: inthe Policy-making intheEU:Conceptual process. Lenses and theintegration Nations andnationalism since 1780: programme, myth,reality. ü and Rupert Graf 2004. Berlin: and Maecenata, Strachwitz, 24-25. Rupert Heritage andtheBuildingofHeritage Europe, 67 European Law European Law Review edited by K.Richard 32, no.1 (2007): 32, no.1 Cambridge: edited by London CEU eTD Collection the European the Community.” Pollack, Mark.“The engines integration:of delegation,European agency and agenda-settingin 2004. Maecenata, edited by Sneška Quaedvlieg-Mihailovi to Give Value to the Common European Heritage?.” In Pirkovi Tauris & 2003. Co Ltd., Cultures and Politics in Europe, ______. “Mourning Memory, Heritage: and Trauma Restitution.” In I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd., 2003. Heritage: Cultures andPolitics inEurope, Peckham, Robert Shannan. “The Politics of Heritage and Public Culture.” In cultural policies in transition Amsterdam:countries. European Cultural Foundation, 2005. Obuljen, Nina. Why we need European cultural policies: the impact of EU enlargement on London and Routledge, NewYork: 1994. Culture and Identityinthe New Europe , Newby, Peter. “Tourism: Support or Threat to Heritage?.” In Miller, Toby Yúdice.and George Scandinavian PoliticalInstitutions. Essays forJohan P. Olsen Mayntz, Renate. 1999. "Organizations, Agents and Representatives". In and History Lowenthal, David. “’European Identity’: An Emerging Concept.” Cultural Heritage, Koboldt, Christian. “Optimizing the Use of Cultural Heritage”, in 1-20.(2002): European European Union: A Provisional Assessment.” Kassim, Hussein and Anand Menon, “The Principal-Agent Approach and The Study Of The Jones and CliveLondon: Gamble,62-80. Routledge, 1996. Archeology: TheConstruction ofEuropeanCommunities, Jones, Siân. “Discourses of Identity in the Interpretation of the Past.” In þ , Jelka. “New Council of Europe’s Framework Convention on Cultural Heritage, orHow 46, no.3(2000):314-321. University University 81-91 Press. ed. Michael and IldeHutter MacMillan Rizzo(London: 52. Press, 1997), International organization edited by Shannan Robert Peckham, London:I.B. 205-215. Cultural Policy ü edited byGregAshworth and Peter Larkham, 206-228. and Rupert Graf and Rupert 108-115.Berlin:Strachwitz, edited by ShannanRobert Peckham, 1-13.London: The EuropeanResearchInstitute, , ed. Morten Egeberg and Per Lægreid. Oslo: 68 . London: SAGEPublications 2002. Ltd, , 51no.1 (2003): 99-134. Heritage andtheBuildingof Europe, edited by Paul Graves-Brown, Siân Building aNew Heritage: Tourism, Economic Perspectives on Australian Journal of Politics Rethinking Heritage: Rethinking Organizing Cultural Identityand Rethinking Working Paper CEU eTD Collection edited by Graves-Brown, Siân Paul Jones, andCliveLondon: Gamble,96-115. Routledge, 1996. In discourse.” ______. “Imagining identity NewEurope: the and in heritage Community European ______. Routledge,York: 2000. Shore, Cris. Building Anthropology Today Shore, Cris, and Annabel Black. ”The European Communities: And the Construction of Europe.” Press, 2000. Politics: AReader in Analysis,” Political in Comparative Identity and “Culture Howard, Mark Ross, Hants:Aldershot, Ashgate Publishing 1996. Ltd, Divergence andUnityinPast andPresent Perceptions of Spiering, Menno. “National Identity and European Unity.” In Cu Press, 2004. edited by DiezThomas andAntjeOxford Wiener,159-176. und New York: Oxford University ______.“Social Constructivism Integration.”and European In & 2003. Co Ltd., Cultures and Politics in Europe, ______,“European Identities and Heritage the ofEuropeanCultures,” in Cowles, and J.Caporaso, T.Risse,198-215.Ithaca: Cornell University 2001. Press, Identities.” In Identities.” Nation-State of Evolution the and Europeanization Identity? European “A Thomas. Risse, Sneška Quaedvlieg-Mihailovi Quaedvlieg-Mihailovi 497-504.(2005): Preston, Peter.“Reading Ongoing the Changes: European Identity.” Mobilisation in Favour of Cultural Heritage.” In Elite Cultures. Transforming Europe:EuropeanizationandDomestic Change Cultural Identity and Archeology: The Construction ofEuropeanCommunities, , edited by Lane Crothers and Charles Lockhart, 39. New York: St. Martin’s 8, no.3 (1992):10-11. Europe: TheCultural Politics of European Integration ü , Sneška. “Enlargement-Enrichment: A Plea for aEurope-wide “Enlargement-Enrichment: , Sneška. London and NewYork: Routledge 2002. ü and Rupert Graf Strachwitz, 96-107. Berlin:Graf 2004. and Maecenata, Strachwitz, 96-107. Rupert edited by ShannanPeckham,London: I.B. Robert Tauris 74-89. 69 Heritage andthe Building of Europe, , edited by , edited Michael Wintle, 98-132. lture andIdentityinEurope: European IntegrationTheory The Political Quarterly Rethinking Heritage: . London, New , edited by M. Green Culture and Culture edited by , CEU eTD Collection ______. ______. 55-76.(1992): ______.”National andIdentity Ideaof the European Unity.” and nationalism. London:Routledge, 1998. Smith,Anthony D. Nationalism and Modernism: A critical survey of recent theories of nations http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/gellner/Warwick.html. Smith,Anthony D., and Ernest Gellner.“The Warwick Debates.” Commission.” EI in European the representation Ambiguous Representation. on Perspective “AnInstitutional Trondal, Jarle. national experts.” national ______. “Governing at the Frontier of the European Commission. The case of seconded Diversities: Transversal Studyonthe Theme of Cultural Policy andCultural Diversity ______. “The Cultural Policies of European the Union and Cultural Diversity.” In 'reputation'.” 1-14EI Topan, Angelina. “The resignation of the Santer-Commission: the impact of 'trust' and Political Studies Tempelmann, Sasja. ”Constructions of Cultural Identity: Multiculturalism and Exclusion.” 60. London: I.B. Tauris & 2003. Co Ltd., Rethinking Heritage: Cultures and Politics in Europe, Stephanides, Stephanos. “The Translation of Heritage: Multiculturalism in the ‘New’ Europe”, in 107-122.Tony Bennet, 'Cultural Policy’.” ______. “Inventing the 'People's Critical Europe: EuropeanApproaches to Community The Nation in History The Ethnic OriginsofNations XLVII (1999):17-31. West European Politics Man oP 28, no. 4 28, (1993): 779-800. 6,no.14 (2002): 1-14. Strasbourg: Council Europe Publishing,of 2001. . Hanover: University Press of New England, 2000. . Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986. 29, no.1 (2006): 147-160. 70 oP 10, no.4 edited by Shannan Robert Peckham, 45- (2006): 1-18. International Affairs 68, no. 1 Differing , edited by edited CEU eTD Collection Sociology Stephen.”BuildingWood, Culture, History ‘Europe’: and Politics.” Hants:32. Aldershot, Ashgate Publishing 1996. Ltd, Divergence andUnityin Europe: Perceptionsof Past andPresent, Wintle, Michael. ”Culture and Identity in Europe: Shared Experience.” In Wilmer, Franke.”Identity, Culture, and Historicity.” University Press, 2005. Van Gerven, Walter. Van Gerven, MacMillan Press, 1997. Perspectives onCulturalHeritage, Throsby, David. “Seven Questions in the Economics of Cultural Heritage.” In Political Studies Tempelmann, Sasja.”Constructions of Cultural MulticulturalismIdentity: andExclusion.” Hants:Aldershot, Ashgate Publishing 1996. Ltd, Divergence andUnityinPast andPresent, Perceptions of Spiering, Menno.”National Identity and European Unity.” In 11, no.311, (1998):397-416. XLVII (1999):17-39. The EuropeanUnion: A Polity of Statesand Peoples. edited by Michael andHutter Ilde Rizzo, 13-30.London: 71 World Affairs edited by Michael Wintle, 98-132. Culture andIdentityinEurope: 160, no.1 160, (1997):3-16. edited by edited Michael Wintle, 9- Journal ofHistorical Culture andIdentityin Stanford: Stanford Economic