The Heritage Diplomacy Spectrum: A Multidimensional Typology of Strategic, Ethical, and Symbolic Engagements
Abstract
1. Introduction
1.1. Background and Rationale
1.2. Literature Review: Framing the Concept and Contours of Heritage Diplomacy
1.3. Research Questions and Objectives
- What types of heritage diplomacy are currently practiced in global politics?
- How do states’ historical experiences and geopolitical conditions shape their proactive or reactive stance?
- What are the broader implications of this typology for international cultural relations?
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
3.1. Analytical Dimensions of Heritage Diplomacy
- Proactive vs. Reactive Engagement;
- Cultural vs. Historical Framing;
- Tangible vs. Intangible Heritage Focus;
- Top-down vs. Bottom-up Governance;
- Strategic Calculation vs. Emotional/Moral Investment;
- Heritage Amplification vs. Heritage Erasure.
3.1.1. Proactive vs. Reactive Engagement
3.1.2. Alignment with Cultural vs. Historical Diplomacy
3.1.3. Tangible vs. Intangible Heritage Focus
3.1.4. Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up Orientation
3.1.5. Strategic Calculation vs. Emotional/Moral Investment
3.1.6. Heritage Amplification vs. Heritage Erausre
3.2. Ideal Types of Heritage Diplomacy
- soft power heritage diplomacy
- reconciliation diplomacy
- memory diplomacy
- restorative and repatriation diplomacy
- post dependence heritage diplomacy
- defensive heritage diplomacy
- corrective heritage diplomacy
3.2.1. Soft Power Heritage Diplomacy
3.2.2. Reconciliation Diplomacy
3.2.3. Memory Diplomacy
3.2.4. Restorative and Repatriation Diplomacy
3.2.5. Post-Dependency Heritage Diplomacy
3.2.6. Defensive Heritage Diplomacy
3.2.7. Corrective Heritage Diplomacy
3.3. Heritage Diplomacy Matrix
3.4. Typological Logics and Strategic Orientations: A Narrative Analysis
3.4.1. Soft Power Heritage Diplomacy
3.4.2. Reconciliation Diplomacy
3.4.3. Memory Diplomacy
3.4.4. Restorative and Repatriation Diplomacy
3.4.5. Post-Dependency Heritage Diplomacy
3.4.6. Defensive Heritage Diplomacy
3.4.7. Corrective Heritage Diplomacy
3.4.8. Overall Interpretation
4. Discussion
4.1. Rethinking Heritage Diplomacy Through a Multidimensional Lens
4.2. Tensions and Hybrids Across the Spectrum
4.3. Heritage Diplomacy Within the Field of Heritage Governance
4.4. Diagnostic and Comparative Utility of the Framework
4.5. Policy Implications: Symbolic Capital and Ethical Responsibility
4.6. Limitations and Scope
4.7. Directions for Future Research
5. Conclusions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Winter, T. Heritage Diplomacy. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2015, 21, 997–1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McClelland, A.G. Heritage Diplomacy. In International Encyclopedia of Human Geography; Kobayashi, A., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 381–385. [Google Scholar]
- Ashworth, G.J.; Graham, B.; Tunbridge, J.E. Pluralising Pasts: Heritage, Identity and Place in Multicultural Societies; Pluto Press: London, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Tunbridge, J.E.; Ashworth, G.J. Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Kisić, V. Governing Heritage Dissonance: Promises and Realities of Selected Cultural Policies; European Cultural Foundation: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Graham, B.; Howard, P. Heritage and Identity. In The Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity; Graham, B., Howard, P., Eds.; Ashgate Publishing: Aldershot, UK, 2008; pp. 1–15. [Google Scholar]
- Harrison, R. Heritage: Critical Approaches; Routledge: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Lähdesmäki, T. Heritage Diplomacy Discourses in the EU: Notions on Cultural Diplomacy, Cultural Heritage, and Intercultural Dialogue among EU Officials and Heritage Practitioners. Ethnol. Eur. 2021, 51, 48–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, L. Uses of Heritage; Routledge: London, UK, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Nisbett, M. New Perspectives on Instrumentalism: An Empirical Study of Cultural Diplomacy. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2012, 19, 557–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carter, D. Living with Instrumentalism: The Academic Commitment to Cultural Diplomacy. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2015, 21, 478–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gamble, A. Conclusion: The Meaning of Global Governance. In Global Governance and Japan: The Institutional Architecture; Hook, G., Dobson, H., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2007; pp. 232–244. [Google Scholar]
- Čeginskas, V.L.A.; Lähdesmäki, T. Introduction: Reflecting on Heritage Diplomacy. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2022, 29, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Black, J. A History of Diplomacy; Reaction Books: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- James, L. The Symbolic Value of Expertise in International Heritage Diplomacy. Future Anterior 2016, 13, 83–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clarke, A. Heritage Diplomacy. In Handbook of Cultural Security; Watanabe, Y., Ed.; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2018; pp. 417–436. [Google Scholar]
- Rivera, T. Distinguishing Cultural Relations from Cultural Diplomacy: The British Council’s Relationship with Her Majesty’s Government; Figueroa Press: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Groth, S. Mainstreaming Heritages: Abstract Heritage Values as Strategic Resources in EU External Relations. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2022, 29, 23–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vandesande, A. ILUCIDARE D2.5 Report on CH-Led Innovation and Diplomacy; University of Leuven: Leuven, Belgium, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Swenson, A. The First Heritage International(s): Conceptualising Global Networks before UNESCO. Future Anterior 2016, 13, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
- Winter, T. Geocultural Power: China’s Quest to Revive the Silk Roads for the Twenty-First Century; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, S.; Yang, Y.; Alff, H.; Frost, M.R.; Kaneti, M.; Oakes, T.; Rigg, J.; Rippa, A.; Wang, J.; Winter, T. Review Forum Reading Tim Winter’s Geocultural Power: China’s Quest to Revive the Silk Roads for the Twenty-First Century. Political Geogr. 2021, 84, 102297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sciorati, G. ‘Constructing’ Heritage Diplomacy in Central Asia: China’s Sinocentric Historicisation of Transnational World Heritage Sites. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2022, 29, 94–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zamorano, M.M. Reframing Cultural Diplomacy: The Instrumentalization of Culture under the Soft Power Theory. Cult. Unbound J. Curr. Cult. Res. 2016, 8, 165–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grincheva, N. Museum Diplomacy in the Digital Age; Routledge: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Clarke, D. Theorising the Role of Cultural Products in Cultural Diplomacy from a Cultural Studies Perspective. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2014, 22, 147–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, S.; Lee, H. Difficult Heritage Diplomacy? Re-Articulating Places of Pain and Shame as World Heritage in Northeast Asia. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2019, 25, 143–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chalcraft, J. Into the Contact Zones of Heritage Diplomacy: Local Realities, Transnational Themes and International Expectations. Int. J. Politics Cult. Soc. 2021, 34, 487–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turunen, J.; Kaasik-Krogerus, S. Debating Structural Violence in European Heritage Diplomacy. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2022, 29, 51–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rothberg, M. Multidirectional Memory: Remembering the Holocaust in the Age of Decolonization; Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Kersel, M.M.; Luke, C. Civil Societies? Heritage Diplomacy and Neo-Imperialism. In Global Heritage: A Reader; Meskell, L., Ed.; Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 2015; pp. 70–93. [Google Scholar]
- Nakano, R.; Zhu, Y. Heritage as Soft Power: Japan and China in International Politics. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2020, 26, 869–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cummings, M.C. Cultural Diplomacy and the United States Government: A Survey; Center for Arts and Culture: Washington, DC, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Perchoc, P. History as a Tool for Foreign Policy in the Baltic States after Independence. In History, Memory and Politics in Central and Eastern Europe; Mink, G., Neumayer, L., Eds.; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Weber, M. Max Weber on the Methodology of the Social Sciences, 1st ed.; Free Press: Glencoe, IL, USA, 1949. [Google Scholar]
- Yapp, L. Define Mutual: Heritage Diplomacy in the Postcolonial Netherlands. Future Anterior 2016, 13, 66–81. [Google Scholar]
- Taman, D. Heritage Diplomacy as a Tool for Protecting Cultural Heritage. J. Fac. Tour. Hotels Univ. Sadat City 2023, 7, 214–232. [Google Scholar]
- Goryunova, O.; Wei, Q. Cultural Heritage as a Pathway to Sustainable Development in Cyprus: The Case of the Technical Committee on Cultural Heritage. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Todorović, M. Heritage in and as Diplomacy: A Practice-Based Study. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2022, 28, 849–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lähdesmäki, T.; Čeginskas, V.L.A. Conceptualisation of Heritage Diplomacy in Scholarship. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2022, 28, 635–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mozaffari, A.; Akbar, A. Heritage Diplomacy and Soft Power Competition between Iran and Turkey: Competing Claims over Rumi and Nowruz. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2024, 30, 597–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baba, G. The Waves of Turkey’s Proactive Foreign Policy Hitting South-Asian Coasts: Turkey–Bangladesh Relations. Yönetim Bilim. Derg./J. Adm. Sci. 2017, 15, 573–584. [Google Scholar]
- U.S. Department of State. International Educational Exchange Service, Bureau of International Cultural Relations; Cultural Diplomacy; U.S. Department of State: Washington, DC, USA, 1959. [Google Scholar]
- Gienow-Hecht, J.C.E.; Donfried, M.C. The Model of Cultural Diplomacy: Power, Distance, and the Promise of Civil Society. In Searching for a Cultural Diplomacy; Gienow-Hecht, J.C.E., Donfried, M.C., Eds.; Berghahn Books: New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 13–29. [Google Scholar]
- Williams, R. State Culture and Beyond. In Culture and the State; Apignanesi, L., Ed.; Institute of Contemporary Arts: London, UK, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Papaioannou, K. Cultural Diplomacy in International Relations. Int. E-J. Adv. Soc. Sci. 2017, 3, 942–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Briggs, R.; Holden, J.; Jones, S.; Bound, K. Cultural Diplomacy. Ethical Hum. Psychol. Psychiatry 2018, 20, 125–126. [Google Scholar]
- Cull, N.J. Public Diplomacy: Taxonomies and Histories. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 2008, 616, 31–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beattie, A. The Politics of Remembering the GDR: Official and State-Mandated Memory since 1989. In Remembering the German Democratic Republic: Divided Memory in a United Germany; Clarke, D., Wölfel, U., Eds.; Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke, UK, 2011; pp. 23–34. [Google Scholar]
- Meyer, E. Memory and Politics. In Cultural Memory Studies: An International and Interdisciplinary Handbook; Erll, A., Nünning, A., Eds.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 2008; pp. 173–180. [Google Scholar]
- Ratajczak, M.; Ryniejska-Kiełdanowicz, M. Pamięć Historyczna Miast: Koncepcje City Diplomacy. Politeja 2021, 18, 7–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nijakowski, L.M. Polska Polityka Pamięci: Esej Socjologiczny; Wydawnictwo Akademickie i Profesjonalne: Warszawa, Poland, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Szułdrzyński, M. Więcej Dialogu z Nowym Pokoleniem [Interview with Karol Nawrocki, President of the Institute of National Remembrance]. Plus Minus Rzeczposp. 2021, 31, 16–18. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, S.-M. Indigenous Heritage in Diplomacy: Repositioning Taiwan in the Austronesian Network and Its Cultural Implications. J. Cult. Herit. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 12, 72–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Billore, S. Cultural Consumption and Citizen Engagement—Strategies for Built Heritage Conservation and Sustainable Development: A Case Study of Indore City, India. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woolfork, L. Embodying American Slavery in Contemporary Culture; University of Illinois Press: Urbana, IL, USA; Chicago, IL, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Rozenfeld, E.; Podoler, G. Heritage for Identity and as Diplomacy: The Case of Korean Martial Arts. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2022, 29, 828–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, H.M. Contemporary Cultural Diplomacy in South Korea: Explicit and Implicit Approaches. Int. J. Cult. Policy 2015, 21, 433–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Payne, G.; Sevin, E.; Bruya, S. Grassroots 2.0: Public Diplomacy in the Digital Age. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, Perugia, Italy, 12–16 September 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Bond, L.; Hensby, A. Community Heritage Activism in the American South: Black Counter-Reenactments as Mnemonic Restitution. Mem. Stud. 2025, 18, 475–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prantl, J. Reuniting Strategy and Diplomacy for 21st Century Statecraft. Contemp. Politics 2022, 28, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manheim, J.B. Strategic Public Diplomacy and American Foreign Policy: The Evolution of Influence; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Bendix, R. Heritage between Economy and Politics: An Assessment from the Perspective of Cultural Anthropology. In Intangible Heritage; Smith, L., Akagawa, N., Eds.; Routledge Falmer: London, UK, 2009; pp. 253–269. [Google Scholar]
- Duncombe, C. Emotional Diplomacy: Official Emotion on the International Stage. Int. Aff. 2016, 92, 198–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barder, B. Diplomacy, Ethics and the National Interest: What Are Diplomats For? Hague J. Diplom. 2010, 5, 289–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- James-Williamson, S.A.; Dolphy, J.E.; Parker, S.Y. Absence Heritage: A Critical Analysis for Awareness, Preservation and Resilience. Int. J. Geoheritage Parks 2023, 12, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meier, L.; Frers, L.; Sigvardsdotter, E. The Importance of Absence in the Present: Practices of Remembrance and the Contestation of Absences. Cult. Geogr. 2013, 20, 423–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holtorf, C.; Kristensen, S. Heritage Erasure: Rethinking ‘Protection’ and ‘Preservation’. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2015, 21, 313–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Landzelius, M. Commemorative Dis(Re)Membering: Erasing Heritage, Spatializing Disinheritance. Environ. Plan. D Soc. Space 2003, 21, 195–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Law, A.; Chen, X. Absent–Present’ Heritage: The Cultural Heritage of Dwelling on the Chang Jiang (Yangtze) River. In Adaptive Strategies for Water Heritage: Past, Present and Future; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 272–289. [Google Scholar]
- Harrison, R. Forgetting to Remember, Remembering to Forget: Late Modern Heritage Practices, Sustainability and the ‘Crisis’ of Accumulation of the Past. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2013, 19, 579–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Newman, G.D.; Saginor, J.D. Four Imperatives for Preventing Demolition by Neglect. J. Urban Des. 2014, 19, 622–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nye, J.S. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics; PublicAffairs: New York, NY, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Nye, J.S., Jr. Public Diplomacy and Soft Power. Ann. Am. Acad. Political Soc. Sci. 2008, 616, 94–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luke, C. The Science Behind the United States Smart Power in Honduras: Archaeological Heritage Diplomacy. Dipl. Statecraft 2012, 23, 110–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luke, C.; Kersel, M.M. US Cultural Diplomacy and Archaeology: Soft Power, Hard Heritage; Taylor & Francis: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Cai, Y. The Art of Museum Diplomacy: The Singapore–France Cultural Collaboration in Perspective. Int. J. Politics Cult. Soc. 2013, 26, 127–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moody, P. Evolving Strategies at Reconciliation: Inter-Korean Sports and Music Diplomacy in Historical Perspective (1985–2017). Cult. Empathy 2019, 2, 251–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lusaka, M. David Livingstone and Heritage Diplomacy in Malawi–Scotland Relations. J. South. Afr. Stud. 2023, 49, 265–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Graves, M. Memorial Diplomacy in Franco-Australian Relations. In Nation, Memory and Great War Commemoration: Mobilizing the Past in Europe, Australia and New Zealand; Sumartojo, S., Wellings, B., Eds.; Peter Lang: Oxford, UK, 2014; pp. 169–188. [Google Scholar]
- Giblin, J.D. The Performance of International Diplomacy at Kigali Memorial Centre, Rwanda. J. Afr. Cult. Herit. Stud. 2017, 1, 49–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolin, A. The Strategic Internationalism of Rwandan Heritage. J. East. Afr. Stud. 2021, 15, 485–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarr, F.; Savoy, B. The Restitution of African Cultural Heritage: Toward a New Relational Ethics. Available online: https://www.about-africa.de/images/sonstiges/2018/sarr_savoy_en.pdf (accessed on 5 July 2025).
- Subotic, J. Scholars and the Politics of International Art Restitution. Contemp. Eur. Hist. 2023, 32, 33–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bimasatria, N.; Nuraeni, N. Namibian–German Diplomacy in Colonial Reparations (2011–2021). Masy. Kebud. Dan Polit. 2024, 37, 390–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andersen, C.; Clopot, C.; Ifversen, J. Heritage and Interculturality in EU Science Diplomacy. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 2020, 7, 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hill, E.C.; Nic Craith, M.; Clopot, C. At the Limits of Cultural Heritage Rights? The Glasgow Bajuni Campaign and the UK Immigration System: A Case Study. Int. J. Cult. Prop. 2018, 25, 35–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Logan, W. Cultural Diversity, Cultural Heritage and Human Rights: Towards Heritage Management as Human Rights-Based Cultural Practice. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2012, 18, 231–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tillet, S. Sites of Slavery: Citizenship and Racial Democracy in the Post-Civil Rights Imagination; Duke University Press: Durham, NC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Pérez-Fernández, I.; Fresno-Calleja, P.; García-Fernández, A. Casting Stones with Intent: Transnational Interventions towards Ethical and Reparative Memorialisation. Alicante J. Engl. Stud./Rev. Alicant. de Estud. Ingl. 2024, 40, 157–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Instytut Pamięci Narodowej Komunikat w Sprawie Usuwania z Przestrzeni Publicznej Pomników Propagujących Komunizm Lub Inny Ustrój Totalitarny. Available online: https://ipn.gov.pl/pl/upamietnianie-i-identyfikacje/upamietnianie-walk-i-meczenstw/dekomunizacja/dekomunizacja-pomnikow/45390,Komunikat-w-sprawie-usuwania-z-przestrzeni-publicznej-pomnikow-propagujacych-kom.html (accessed on 4 July 2025).
- Çevik, S.B.; Sancar Demren, G.A.; Şekerci, Y. Where Places of Worship Have No Congregation: Heritage Restoration in Turkey as Public Diplomacy. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2025, 31, 898–917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalbarczyk, S. In the Name of Historical Truth. Available online: https://en.truthaboutcamps.eu/thn/our-mission/15561,Our-mission.html (accessed on 8 July 2025).
- Stec, P.; Pavličić Šarić, J.; Capote Pérez, L.J.; Parowicz, I. Residual Heritage as a Global Governance Challenge: Toward a Conceptual Framework. In The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Cultural Heritage and Conflict; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2025. [Google Scholar]
- Gammon, T.; Phan, A.N.Q. Strategic Remembering in Vietnam–US Relations: How a Monument of War Turns Into a Marker of Peace. Asia-Pac. J. 2024, 22, e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bloemendal, A. “To Ensure That These Emotions Are Passed to the Next Generation”: The Netherlands–American Military Cemetery in Margraten as a Site of Transatlantic Memory Diplomacy During George W. Bush’s ‘War on Terror.’ Eur. J. Am. Stud. 2023, 18, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eyssette, J. Restitution vs. Retention: Reassessing Discourses on the African Cultural Heritage. Afr. Stud. Rev. 2023, 66, 101–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akagawa, N. Japan and the Rise of Heritage in Cultural Diplomacy: Where Are We Heading? Future Anterior 2016, 13, 125–139. [Google Scholar]
- Dixon, J.M. Defending the Nation? Maintaining Turkey’s Narrative of the Armenian Genocide. South Eur. Soc. Polit. 2010, 15, 467–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosendorf, N.M. A Cultural Public Diplomacy Strategy. In Toward a New Public Diplomacy; Seib, P., Ed.; Palgrave Macmillan: New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 71–93. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, H.-K. Review of the Book Returning Southeast Asia’s Past: Objects, Museums, and Restitution, Ed. by Louise Tythacott and Panggah Ardiyansyah. J. Malays. Branch R. Asiat. Soc. 2022, 95, 151–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beaumont, J. The Diplomacy of Extra-Territorial Heritage: The Kokoda Track, Papua New Guinea. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2016, 22, 355–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hajura, S. Shared Heritage Diplomacy of Indonesia and Malaysia as Soft Power in the Southeast Asia Region. J. Hub. Int. 2022, 10, 84–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madubuko, C.C. The Swinging Pendulum of the Game Nations Play in International Relations: A Duplicity Diplomacy. Am. J. Int. Relat. 2024, 9, 115–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Type of Heritage Diplomacy | Core Aim | Primary Driver | Diplomatic Posture | Primary Actor(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Soft Power Heritage Diplomacy | Enhance international attractiveness, prestige, and influence without coercion | Nation branding, cultural prestige, geocultural influence | Proactive, curated, competitive | Predominantly state actors: ministries of culture/foreign affairs, cultural institutes; occasionally large cultural NGOs with state sponsorship; mostly former and established powers |
Reconciliation Diplomacy | Repair fractured relations, rebuild trust, foster mutual recognition | Moral-political commitment, post-conflict healing | Affective, dialogic, relational | State actors (heads of state, special envoys, ministries), sometimes supported by truth commissions, memorial foundations, and intergovernmental organizations; can involve NGOs and faith-based mediators |
Memory Diplomacy | Circulate and project identity-defining historical narratives | Narrative sovereignty, moral legitimacy | Narrative-focused, symbolic, emotive | State actors (ministries, embassies, cultural diplomacy offices), memory institutions, diaspora networks, advocacy NGOs; mix of established and post-dependency states |
Restorative and Repatriation Diplomacy | Redress historical cultural dispossession through return/restoration | Legal-ethical compliance, sovereignty claims, reputational repair | Transactional, ceremonial, sometimes reconciliatory | Former powers (as restitution providers), post-dependency countries (as claimants), intergovernmental mediators (UNESCO, ICC), heritage NGOs, indigenous communities |
Post-Dependency Heritage Diplomacy | Reclaim heritage narratives and identity after colonial or ideological subordination | Decolonization, narrative reclamation, mnemonic restitution | Assertive, identity-affirming | Post-dependency states (post-colonial, post-Soviet, post-protectorate), often both state-led and grassroots; municipal actors; cultural movements |
Defensive Heritage Diplomacy | Protect national narratives from perceived distortion or revisionism | Sovereignty defense, discrediting allegations of past wrongdoing | Reactive, protective, sometimes combative | State actors (government spokespersons, ministries, national historical institutes), diplomatic missions; sometimes civil society actors mobilized in coordinated campaigns |
Corrective Heritage Diplomacy | Confront misrepresentation or distortion of heritage narratives | Interpretive legitimacy, cultural sovereignty | Reflective, reformist, educational, sometimes adversarial | State actors (foreign affairs, culture ministries, heritage boards), museums, academic institutions; occasionally diaspora advocacy groups |
Type of Heritage Diplomacy ↓/Analytical Dimension of Heritage Diplomacy ⟶ | 1. Proactive/Reactive | 2. Cultural/Historical Framing | 3. Tangible/Intangible Focus | 4. Top-Down/Bottom-Up Orientation | 5. Strategic Calculation/Emotional–Moral Investment | 6. Heritage Amplification/Erasure |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Soft Power Diplomacy | Primarily Proactive | Leans Cultural | Emphasis on Tangible (sites, objects, exhibitions) | Strongly Top-Down | Heavily Strategic, but may include symbolic pride | Strongly Amplification—showcasing “best” heritage while omitting contested pasts |
Reconciliation Diplomacy | Mixed, often Proactive with Reactive roots | Balanced, often Historical–Cultural hybrid | Both Tangible and Intangible | Usually Top-Down, with Bottom-Up inputs | Often Emotionally/Morally driven, with strategic overlap | Leans Amplification of shared/bridging heritage; Erasure of divisive narratives |
Memory Diplomacy | Typically Reactive, tied to historical trauma | Strongly Historical | Leans Intangible (commemoration, recognition) | Often Bottom-Up, sometimes state-integrated | Strongly Emotive/Moral, potentially strategic in effect | Amplification of victimhood/heroism; may implicitly erase rival memories |
Restorative/Repatriation Diplomacy | Usually Reactive, may become Proactive | Predominantly Historical | Tangible (artifacts, monuments) with symbolic intangibles | Often Bottom-Up, but executed Top-Down | Ethical/moral obligation driven, with strategic implications | Amplification of dispossessed heritage; Erasure of colonial possession claims |
Post-Dependency Heritage Diplomacy | Often Proactive, sometimes Reactive | Strongly Historical | Mixed: Tangible (monuments, documents) and Intangible (colonial memory, identity) | Often Bottom-Up, gradually co-opted Top-Down | Mixture of Identity-based moral drive and assertive strategy | Combines Erasure of imposed/colonial heritage with Amplification of reclaimed traditions |
Defensive Heritage Diplomacy | Typically Reactive | Leans Historical, with Nationalist tones | Often Tangible, but infused with symbolic meaning | Strongly Top-Down | Dominantly Strategic, with identity-based undercurrent | Often Erasure of critical narratives; selective Amplification of national pride |
Corrective Heritage Diplomacy | Highly Reactive | Strongly Historical, in opposition to imposed narratives | Mixed: Tangible reinterpretation and Intangible narratives | Frequently Top-Down, but sometimes informed by grassroots pressure | Tensioned: strong Moral/Identity defence with strategic delivery | Erasure of distortions and misattributions while amplifying authentic interpretations and cultural sovereignty |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Parowicz, I. The Heritage Diplomacy Spectrum: A Multidimensional Typology of Strategic, Ethical, and Symbolic Engagements. Heritage 2025, 8, 409. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage8100409
Parowicz I. The Heritage Diplomacy Spectrum: A Multidimensional Typology of Strategic, Ethical, and Symbolic Engagements. Heritage. 2025; 8(10):409. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage8100409
Chicago/Turabian StyleParowicz, Izabella. 2025. "The Heritage Diplomacy Spectrum: A Multidimensional Typology of Strategic, Ethical, and Symbolic Engagements" Heritage 8, no. 10: 409. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage8100409
APA StyleParowicz, I. (2025). The Heritage Diplomacy Spectrum: A Multidimensional Typology of Strategic, Ethical, and Symbolic Engagements. Heritage, 8(10), 409. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage8100409