In Module IV, we make a deliberate pivot: from heritage as something the EU funds and manages, to heritage as a site of insecurity, and, just as importantly, as a potential resource for human security. We begin by distinguishing classic, state-centred “security” from the UNDP human security framework, then translate that distinction into heritage terms: heritage can be a target (violence, looting, sabotage) and a contraband market (organized crime), but it is also lived continuity, social cohesion, livelihoods, and recovery after crisis. From there, we anchor the discussion in the EU’s legal and normative baseline (TEU, TFEU, Charter, plus the Faro Convention as a key reference point) and map three pathways: heritage harmed by insecurity, instrumentalized within insecurity, and supporting human security. We then look at how EU policy clusters actually work (trafficking, conflicts/crises, civil protection) and use Ukraine as a concrete test case for integrated practice.
| Lecture_Module IV_The Heritage-Human Security Nexus in the EU We begin by distinguishing classic, state-centred “security” from the UNDP "human security" framework, then translate that distinction into heritage terms. From there, we anchor the discussion in the EU’s legal and normative baseline (TEU, TFEU, Charter, plus the Faro Convention. We then look at how EU policy clusters actually work—trafficking, conflicts/crises, civil protection—and use Ukraine as a concrete test case for integrated practice. |
||
| Lecture/Practicum_Module IV_Workshopping the heritage-human security "nexus" This practicum is a guided workshop that trains you to model the “heritage–human security nexus” in your term project with analytical discipline. You will move from describing a heritage-security issue to explaining it through a clear chain of reasoning: define the referent object (who/what is being secured), profile vulnerabilities, write 2–3 causal risk mechanisms (X → Y → Z harm), anticipate second-order risks, and then select instruments that plausibly disrupt those mechanisms. You will also define a test of success that distinguishes outputs (what was delivered) from human-security outcomes (what improved in lived conditions). We close by comparing Riverton (shock flood) and Venice (chronic flooding) to show how the same model produces different policy logics and success indicators. |
||
| PPT/Lecture: The Heritage-Security Nexus in the EU Visualizations supporting the lecture on the heritage-security nexus in the EU | ||
| Reading: Christensen - The cross-sectoral linkage between cultural heritage and security: how cultural heritage has developed as a security issue? Christensen explains how cultural heritage gradually came to be treated as a security issue: protection shifted from a mainly cultural-policy domain into peace, security, and foreign-policy agendas, as heritage destruction and looting were increasingly framed as threats to communities, stability, and even international security. Her key point is that this is a securitization process: Actors reframe heritage as urgent and exceptional, thereby mobilizing resources but also justifying hard-edged measures. She ends by urging critical engagement: always ask who is doing the securitising, for what purposes, and with what consequences for communities and rights. | ||
| Reading: Report - The protection of cultural heritage in Conflict and post-conflict settings_EU The University of Trento project report examines cultural heritage protection in conflict settings through complementary analytical lenses. Russo and Piras establish the conceptual foundation, arguing that heritage protection has undergone "securitization" (migrating from cultural policy into security agendas, diplomacy, and military operations). This shift creates both opportunities and risks. Heritage can genuinely catalyze reconciliation, support displaced populations, and contribute to transitional justice. Yet protection is never politically neutral: external interventions may be perceived as appropriation, and designating what counts as "heritage worth protecting" involves contested claims about identity and territorial legitimacy. The authors trace an enduring ethical tension between protecting heritage and protecting human life, noting that while communities cannot survive without material embodiments of their identities, framing heritage protection through Responsibility to Protect doctrines opens troubling pathways for military intervention. Foradori applies EU "actorness" theory to assess the Union's performance as a heritage protector within its Common Security and Defence Policy. His verdict: the EU has achieved genuine policy coherence through the 2021 Concept on Cultural Heritage in Conflicts and Crises, which innovatively frames heritage as a catalyst for peace rather than merely a vulnerable asset. However, an "expectations-capabilities gap" persists, including a thin institutional infrastructure, only one CSDP mission with an explicit heritage mandate, and Member States' reluctance to delegate cultural competences to Brussels. The case study paper by Russo, Piras, and Peirolo grounds these frameworks empirically. Bosnia demonstrates that governance fragmentation and local hostility can undermine the potential of reconstruction to foster reconciliation, as experienced by architects restoring the Aladža Mosque, which required police protection. Ukraine shows unprecedented international mobilization, but also how heritage becomes entangled with contested decolonization narratives. Nagorno-Karabakh presents a stark contrast: despite European Parliament condemnations, UNESCO's proposed assessment mission was never deployed, illustrating how unevenly international attention is distributed, shaping communities' capacity to resist cultural erasure. | ||
| Documentary video: Saving Venice_The MOSE project The documentary video outlines the technological efforts made to save Venice from chronic tidal and storm-induced catastrophic flooding. While the big and expensive MOSE project provides some protection, climate change is almost guaranteeing its obsolescence. |
||
| PPT/Practicum_Workshopping the Heritage-Human Security "Nexus" Visualizations of the step-by-step model application | ||
| Exercise_Module IV practicum template |
