Diverging Antarctic heritage discourses: The geopolitical ramifications of non‐state actor engagement with the ‘state‐sanctioned’ version of Antarctic heritage
Abstract The governance of heritage in Antarctica has always been centred on the nation‐state and the dissemination of its Antarctic narrative both within the state and between states. However, non‐state actors outside of the state offer alternative conceptions of Antarctic heritage. What are the ge...
| Published in: | The Geographical Journal |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12383 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/geoj.12383 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full-xml/10.1111/geoj.12383 https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/am-pdf/10.1111/geoj.12383 https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/geoj.12383 |
| Summary: | Abstract The governance of heritage in Antarctica has always been centred on the nation‐state and the dissemination of its Antarctic narrative both within the state and between states. However, non‐state actors outside of the state offer alternative conceptions of Antarctic heritage. What are the geopolitical consequences of their engagement with objects and places of heritage on and around the frozen continent? Are non‐state actors accounted for within the current, official, and dominant discourse on heritage under the Antarctic Treaty System? These questions align with a broader enquiry into the System’s capacity to adequately account for non‐state actors and their increasing presence in the polar region 60 years on from the signing of the 1959 Antarctic Treaty. To better understand the nature of non‐state actors’ interaction with Antarctic heritage and the conditions under which it occurs, this paper will investigate how three non‐state actors conceive of and engage with Antarctic heritage: the tourism industry, environmental activists, and individuals. It will then consider the implications of their engagement with Antarctic heritage under the current framework for heritage management, before considering the potential obstacles the System may encounter within this governing space in the future. |
|---|