Evaluating Comparative Research: Mapping and Assessing Current Trends in Built Heritage Studies
The question leading this research is: what are the attributes and scales of comparative research that applies to built heritage studies? The paper begins by recognizing the interrelatedness of built heritage protection and sustainable urban development. While comparative research into built heritag...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Sustainability 2019-01, Vol.11 (3), p.677 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 677 |
container_title | Sustainability |
container_volume | 11 |
creator | Mualam, Nir Barak, Nir |
description | The question leading this research is: what are the attributes and scales of comparative research that applies to built heritage studies? The paper begins by recognizing the interrelatedness of built heritage protection and sustainable urban development. While comparative research into built heritage studies analyses and documents existing practices, policies and impacts, its generalizable capacities are often lacking and therefore less applicable to policy-makers. In an attempt to further the potential contribution of such studies, the paper maps comparative built heritage research based on a critical review of over 100 articles and books. The analysis of these sources relies on an evaluative categorization of comparative built heritage studies. This categorization consists of four criteria: the number of compared cases, their geographic location, the scope of comparison and its degree of structuredness. The findings suggest that heritage studies compare a relatively small number of cases; they are quite structured; focus on local as well as national-level analysis; and lean towards Western-centered comparisons. The paper concludes by suggesting that built heritage studies can contribute to sustainable urban development policies by taking on comparative research that has a large enough N, expanding non-Eurocentric and Anglo-American research, comparing local jurisdictions in more than one country and by utilizing highly structured categories for comparison. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/su11030677 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2548841207</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2548841207</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-fe8e032dd8bf0e619be0cc9849aac8582ab983b82306988dfe259b1d2c42450d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkE9LAzEQxYMoWGovfoKAN2E1f3bbxFst1QoVQet5ySazdUu7u2aSgt_e1Ao6h5kH85jH_Ai55OxGSs1uMXLOJBtPJidkINiEZ5wV7PSfPicjxA1LJSXXfDwg5XxvttGEpl3TWbfrjU96D_QVEIy3H3f02fT9YWtaR6eIgPjjjd5DG-gqdYe0ael9bLaBLsA3wayBvoXoGsALclabLcLodw7J-8N8NVtky5fHp9l0mVmhi5DVoIBJ4ZyqagZjritg1mqVa2OsKpQwlVayUiK9p5VyNYhCV9wJm4u8YE4OydXxbu-7zwgYyk0XfZsiS1HkSuU8QUiu66PL-g7RQ132vtkZ_1VyVh4Yln8M5TddqmPm</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2548841207</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluating Comparative Research: Mapping and Assessing Current Trends in Built Heritage Studies</title><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Mualam, Nir ; Barak, Nir</creator><creatorcontrib>Mualam, Nir ; Barak, Nir</creatorcontrib><description>The question leading this research is: what are the attributes and scales of comparative research that applies to built heritage studies? The paper begins by recognizing the interrelatedness of built heritage protection and sustainable urban development. While comparative research into built heritage studies analyses and documents existing practices, policies and impacts, its generalizable capacities are often lacking and therefore less applicable to policy-makers. In an attempt to further the potential contribution of such studies, the paper maps comparative built heritage research based on a critical review of over 100 articles and books. The analysis of these sources relies on an evaluative categorization of comparative built heritage studies. This categorization consists of four criteria: the number of compared cases, their geographic location, the scope of comparison and its degree of structuredness. The findings suggest that heritage studies compare a relatively small number of cases; they are quite structured; focus on local as well as national-level analysis; and lean towards Western-centered comparisons. The paper concludes by suggesting that built heritage studies can contribute to sustainable urban development policies by taking on comparative research that has a large enough N, expanding non-Eurocentric and Anglo-American research, comparing local jurisdictions in more than one country and by utilizing highly structured categories for comparison.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/su11030677</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Classification ; Comparative analysis ; Consumption ; Cultural heritage ; Development policy ; Evaluation ; Geographical locations ; Planning ; Sustainability ; Sustainable development ; Trends ; Urban development</subject><ispartof>Sustainability, 2019-01, Vol.11 (3), p.677</ispartof><rights>2019 by the authors. 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-fe8e032dd8bf0e619be0cc9849aac8582ab983b82306988dfe259b1d2c42450d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-fe8e032dd8bf0e619be0cc9849aac8582ab983b82306988dfe259b1d2c42450d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-8241-6450</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mualam, Nir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barak, Nir</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluating Comparative Research: Mapping and Assessing Current Trends in Built Heritage Studies</title><title>Sustainability</title><description>The question leading this research is: what are the attributes and scales of comparative research that applies to built heritage studies? The paper begins by recognizing the interrelatedness of built heritage protection and sustainable urban development. While comparative research into built heritage studies analyses and documents existing practices, policies and impacts, its generalizable capacities are often lacking and therefore less applicable to policy-makers. In an attempt to further the potential contribution of such studies, the paper maps comparative built heritage research based on a critical review of over 100 articles and books. The analysis of these sources relies on an evaluative categorization of comparative built heritage studies. This categorization consists of four criteria: the number of compared cases, their geographic location, the scope of comparison and its degree of structuredness. The findings suggest that heritage studies compare a relatively small number of cases; they are quite structured; focus on local as well as national-level analysis; and lean towards Western-centered comparisons. The paper concludes by suggesting that built heritage studies can contribute to sustainable urban development policies by taking on comparative research that has a large enough N, expanding non-Eurocentric and Anglo-American research, comparing local jurisdictions in more than one country and by utilizing highly structured categories for comparison.</description><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Consumption</subject><subject>Cultural heritage</subject><subject>Development policy</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Geographical locations</subject><subject>Planning</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable development</subject><subject>Trends</subject><subject>Urban development</subject><issn>2071-1050</issn><issn>2071-1050</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkE9LAzEQxYMoWGovfoKAN2E1f3bbxFst1QoVQet5ySazdUu7u2aSgt_e1Ao6h5kH85jH_Ai55OxGSs1uMXLOJBtPJidkINiEZ5wV7PSfPicjxA1LJSXXfDwg5XxvttGEpl3TWbfrjU96D_QVEIy3H3f02fT9YWtaR6eIgPjjjd5DG-gqdYe0ael9bLaBLsA3wayBvoXoGsALclabLcLodw7J-8N8NVtky5fHp9l0mVmhi5DVoIBJ4ZyqagZjritg1mqVa2OsKpQwlVayUiK9p5VyNYhCV9wJm4u8YE4OydXxbu-7zwgYyk0XfZsiS1HkSuU8QUiu66PL-g7RQ132vtkZ_1VyVh4Yln8M5TddqmPm</recordid><startdate>20190128</startdate><enddate>20190128</enddate><creator>Mualam, Nir</creator><creator>Barak, Nir</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8241-6450</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190128</creationdate><title>Evaluating Comparative Research: Mapping and Assessing Current Trends in Built Heritage Studies</title><author>Mualam, Nir ; Barak, Nir</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-fe8e032dd8bf0e619be0cc9849aac8582ab983b82306988dfe259b1d2c42450d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Consumption</topic><topic>Cultural heritage</topic><topic>Development policy</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Geographical locations</topic><topic>Planning</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable development</topic><topic>Trends</topic><topic>Urban development</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mualam, Nir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barak, Nir</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mualam, Nir</au><au>Barak, Nir</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluating Comparative Research: Mapping and Assessing Current Trends in Built Heritage Studies</atitle><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle><date>2019-01-28</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>677</spage><pages>677-</pages><issn>2071-1050</issn><eissn>2071-1050</eissn><abstract>The question leading this research is: what are the attributes and scales of comparative research that applies to built heritage studies? The paper begins by recognizing the interrelatedness of built heritage protection and sustainable urban development. While comparative research into built heritage studies analyses and documents existing practices, policies and impacts, its generalizable capacities are often lacking and therefore less applicable to policy-makers. In an attempt to further the potential contribution of such studies, the paper maps comparative built heritage research based on a critical review of over 100 articles and books. The analysis of these sources relies on an evaluative categorization of comparative built heritage studies. This categorization consists of four criteria: the number of compared cases, their geographic location, the scope of comparison and its degree of structuredness. The findings suggest that heritage studies compare a relatively small number of cases; they are quite structured; focus on local as well as national-level analysis; and lean towards Western-centered comparisons. The paper concludes by suggesting that built heritage studies can contribute to sustainable urban development policies by taking on comparative research that has a large enough N, expanding non-Eurocentric and Anglo-American research, comparing local jurisdictions in more than one country and by utilizing highly structured categories for comparison.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/su11030677</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8241-6450</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2071-1050 |
ispartof | Sustainability, 2019-01, Vol.11 (3), p.677 |
issn | 2071-1050 2071-1050 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2548841207 |
source | MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | Classification Comparative analysis Consumption Cultural heritage Development policy Evaluation Geographical locations Planning Sustainability Sustainable development Trends Urban development |
title | Evaluating Comparative Research: Mapping and Assessing Current Trends in Built Heritage Studies |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T02%3A32%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluating%20Comparative%20Research:%20Mapping%20and%20Assessing%20Current%20Trends%20in%20Built%20Heritage%20Studies&rft.jtitle=Sustainability&rft.au=Mualam,%20Nir&rft.date=2019-01-28&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=677&rft.pages=677-&rft.issn=2071-1050&rft.eissn=2071-1050&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/su11030677&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2548841207%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2548841207&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |