ABSTRACT
In the Danish planning context as in many Western countries the experience economy approach appeals to planners and politicians, as it opens up new possibilities and exiting ways of dealing with local development (Therkildsen et al. 2012). Place-bound experiential qualities, which can be exploited economically, create a direct link from the experience economy to spatial planning strategies at the city or municipal level as well as at the regional and national levels (Lorentzen 2012; Therkildsen et al. 2012). In that respect, cultural heritage plays a distinct role as economic as well as cultural resource (Graham et al. 2000). The other way around, place-bound experiences including cultural heritage seem to possess an interesting potential, when it comes to creating awareness and facilitating collaboration among stakeholders in the field of spatial planning (Jensen 2009; Delman and Nielsen 2009; Delman 2011; Landry 2008). For instance, Landry (2008: 119) emphasizes the role of local identity and distinctiveness as a means of cooperation for the common good, as it creates ‘a bond between people with different institutional interests’. In that regard physical cultural heritage can be understood in terms of a ‘tangible trace of collective memory’, as expressed by Kerr (2000: 71). Kerr refers to the specific role of public monuments, but he points out that ‘the fabric of the city itself represents a visible aide-mémoire’. As argued by Graham et al. (2000: 169) ‘the heritage of the conserved built environment, like culture more widely, is called upon to play a number of different roles in neighbourhood regeneration’. From that point of departure, this chapter focuses on how cultural heritage as part of the urban matter can function as an experiential resource in spatial planning.
