ABSTRACT
This study examines evaluation regimes across four cultural domains: consumption, production and heritage, administration, and information systems. In consumption, individuals rely on emotional, functional, and identity-based criteria shaped by habitus and context. In production and heritage, evaluation is institutional and collective, often generating tensions—such as preservation versus development—addressed through polarization or integration. Cultural administration employs expert-led, indicator-based, or hybrid approaches, each with specific tensions. Information systems prioritize quantification for policymaking but face challenges in data quality and categorization. Evaluation emerges not as a neutral process but as a socially embedded process, shaped by actors, institutional logics, and conflicting values. Participation and competition help hybridize these regimes: co-production promotes bottom-up inclusion and diverse perspectives, while competition introduces top-down benchmarking and quantification. These logics intersect, blurring the boundaries between regimes and fostering flexible, context-sensitive evaluations that integrate citizen engagement, indicators, and expert judgement.
