From Culture for the People to Culture with the People

The key message: cultural narratives serve the public interest when they challenge society — and themselves

When approached collectively, cultural heritage can spark conversations not only about what has been, but about how that past shapes us — and how today’s choices will define generations to come. If these institutions are to help society navigate turbulent times, they must first become places where the future is imagined together.

“Cultural heritage, if correctly and collectively, has indeed the power to trigger discussions not only on what’s already come, but how we are shaped by that past and consequently what impact our current actions can have on future generations,” Mara D’Andrea argues.

Mara D’Andrea, who recently graduated in Cultural Heritage and Sustainability at Uppsala University in Sweden, has worked across cultural networks and centers, and volunteered for projects at the intersection of culture and sustainability. Her conviction is clear: museums, archives and cultural environments are not only repositories of memory, but laboratories for democratic life.

Mara D’Andrea

In an era of disinformation and fractured public debate, such spaces for shared reflection are increasingly rare. Yet Mara D’Andrea believes heritage institutions can help rebuild trust — if they are willing to rethink how they innovate.

Beyond technology

As discussed within the European innovation platform ekip, innovation in the sector must go beyond digital tools and immersive technologies.

“Innovation doesn’t solely reside in the use of new technologies,” she says, “but foremost in new methodologies, for example, those that rely on co-creation and community engagement.”

That shift, however, requires resources that many institutions lack. Time, trained staff and sustained capacity-building programs are essential to develop meaningful participation.

“If we focus on this kind of innovation,” Mara D´Andrea notes, “it becomes clear that cultural heritage institutions need time and human resources, often already lacking, as well as specific training to ensure effective and long-lasting community engagement.”

Trust takes time

The constraints of short-term funding make this even harder. Trust cannot be built on a project cycle.

“If we think about innovation based on involving and engaging the community, this requires a continued and constant effort to gain trust,” Mara D’Andrea says. “It is complex to realize this within strict funding structures that cannot plan for more than four years at best.”

Without long-term investment, institutions struggle to guarantee that their innovative methodologies remain relevant and effective.

There is also a skills gap. To respond to challenges such as climate change, digitalization, migration and gender equality, heritage organizations need cross-sectoral and transdisciplinary expertise. But just as crucial are mediating skills — the ability to translate institutional goals into meaningful dialogue with communities.

“In other words,” Mara D’Andrea concludes, “we need to create well-functioning communication channels, spaces where institutions and communities can truly listen to each other.”

Integrate local communities

Do you have any examples where CHIs have already driven system-changing innovation?

” I recently had the opportunity to speak with the organizations involved in the AHEAD project. Within the framework of Creative Europe, a team of experienced mediators thoughtfully integrated local communities into the management of their heritage sites.”

Many residents felt excluded from heritage sites that overlooked their histories and voices, creating distance from places that were, in essence, their own. Through meetings and intergenerational activities, the project helped rebuild dialogue and a sense of shared ownership. Though it has ended, organizers hope it marks the beginning of lasting openness between site managers and local communities.

” I was sincerely touched by this initiative and hope that many more actions of the same spirit can develop elsewhere.”

Competitiveness prioritized

Technical and commercial innovation continue to dominate EU policy, even as today’s biggest challenges are social and cultural. Competitiveness has become the overriding priority, increasingly monopolizing the debate. The shift reflects a tense geopolitical and economic climate, with the EU under pressure to assert its own identity and strengthen technological independence.

” The EU’s short-sightedness lies in its failure to understand that economic competitiveness is a pillar which, if left alone, will cause the entire system to falter: with a view to the identity that the Union is seeking, democratic, cultural, and social justice values should instead be raised to the same level as economic competitiveness,” emphasizes Marco Fiore, Policy and Project Manager at  Michael Culture Association, a pan-European network for digital culture communities.

Marco Fiore

He’s active at the crossroads of digital, research and culture policies, with a growing feeling that “human-centered”, “ethical” and “bottom-up” should not be the buzz-words they became. In a political context where economical competitiveness is the go-to engine for humanity, he advocates for reclaiming the space for democratic and humanistic values: in this framework, he argues, cultural heritage and culture are key sectors to shift the conversation.

Essential values disappear

When innovation is reduced to technology and the market, entire worlds of value risk disappearing from view.

“If we don’t connect social innovation to technological innovation, we lose sight of what really holds our societies together.” Marco Fiore points to the breadth of themes within Horizon Europe’s Cluster 2.

When innovation is stripped of its social and cultural dimensions, issues from gender-based violence to heritage protection and democratic resilience are pushed aside, along with access to culture for minorities, young people and people with disabilities.

“Society is much more than technological solutions to be sold on the market. Most of these challenges are cultural before they are societal. When innovation policy narrows its lens to competitiveness alone, it risks rendering invisible the very values it claims to protect.”

Citizens as active agents

The shift, he argues, must be from a culture delivered to people to a culture created with them. It means recognizing citizens not as passive audiences but as active agents, capable of reshaping cultural spaces and civic life. Such a transformation would not only redefine how communities produce and share cultural knowledge but also influence how society rethinks the way it lives together.

Cultural citizen science projects demonstrate how heritage can foster civic responsibility and belonging. By transcribing archives or mapping sites of memory, participants build deeper ties to their communities and help restore trust between citizens and institutions.

”The DE-BIAS project demonstrated this by working with Congolese partners to revisit missionary photographs – by adding names, practices, and meanings that had been absent, achieving “epistemic justice.” says Marco Fiore.

Digital platforms can act as interfaces of negotiation, where heritage is continually reinterpreted, contested and co-owned. In this space, archives become arenas of conversation rather than static repositories.

For instance, the MuseIT project  shows that accessibility can drive creativity. By developing multisensory tools for people with disabilities, it not only broadens participation but also enriches cultural experiences for all.

“The key message is this: cultural narratives serve the public interest when they challenge society — and themselves. Heritage must become a true common good, part of a living dialogue that empowers communities to question meaning, reshape narratives and strengthen civic participation.”