< Previous | Contents | Next >

Asset mapping

Asset mapping shows what assets are where, put succinctly in the Canadian municipal toolkit as follows:

“Cultural Resource Mapping is a systematic approach to identifying, recording and classifying a community’s cultural resources in order to describe and visualize them” (Municipal Cultural Planning Incorporated,

2010, p.7)

Here the terminology of cultural resources rather than assets is used, however this still applies to the cultural asset mapping, as carried out in this study. Cultural asset mapping has been used in academic research worldwide (Brennan-Horley and Gibson, 2009, Gibson, Brennan- Horley and Warren, 2010, Lee and Gilmore, 2012), and to support city of culture bids (Bullen, 2010, Valletta 2018 Foundation, 2012, BOP Consulting, 2013). Mapping can also be carried out thematically, for instance to explore the musical life and assets of an area (Shobe and Banis, 2010, Cohen, 2012a, Long, 2013).

Pendlebury (2014) argues that the use of the term “heritage asset” came into being in England with a change in focus and structure of national planning policy in 2010’s; heritage asset mapping is a recognised technique encouraged by Historic England (2017a) particularly in connection with landscape characterisation. Computerised digital asset mapping using GIS has been recognised as a way to identify “less obvious but nonetheless significant spaces” (Brennan-Horley et al., 2010, p.101). Designated heritage assets which are recognised as part of the Authorised Heritage Discourse, (Smith, 2011, p.11) such as listed buildings are included as assets, but this research invites further discussion as to what the meaning of these is to the community, as well as mapping what could be viewed as alternative heritage. This includes more “mundane” assets and activities of importance to everyday life (Miles and Sullivan, 2012).