Research Rationale

The central idea of this study is to explore how do a cultural flagship and the urban regeneration process works together, which the heritagisation process has been seen as the bridge to connect. Moreover, to discuss how this relationship can be used in cities that have ideological contradictions and therefrom evaluate the influence and practice of this establishment with the case study of the Titanic Belfast. In order to focus on the research objectives for better subsequent investigation, the questions have been formulated on relevant theories extracted from the literature review in previous paragraphs. To lay out a clear picture of this research, a more accurate particular has been listed below for further discussion:

 Why did the decision makers select Titanic as their primary culture and established the Titanic Belfast to regenerate Belfast, Northern Ireland?

Table 2.9 The Exploration of the First Research Objective

Findings on Discussing Point Theoretical References

Cultural-led 2. The three models of culture and

regeneration (Evans, 2001, 2005) 4. The two models of culture-led

regeneration (Bianchini, 1993,

1. The concept of a cultural flagship project (Bianchini, 1992; Bowen-Jones

1. The concept of a heritagisation process (Ashley, 2014; Bendix, 2009; Di Meo, 2008; Gillot et al., 2013; Harison, 2013; Margart, 2011; Poria, 2010; Roige

& Foige, 2010; Salemink, 2016; Sanchez-Carretero, 2015; Walsh, 1992)

2. The economic value and impacts of a heritagisation (Ashley, 2014; Binns,

2005; Di Méo, 2008; Gillot et al, 2013;

Hall & Arthur, 1993; Harrison, 2013) 3. The social value and impacts of a

heritagisation (Ashley, 2014; Carnegie

& Norris, 2015; Di Méo, 2008; Hall &

Arthur, 1993)

4. The political value and impacts of a heritagisation (Ashley, 2014; Di Méo, 2008; Gillot et al, 2013; Hall & Arthur, 1993; Littler, 2005; Park, 2014)

5. The cultural value and impacts of a heritagisation (Ashley, 2014; Davallon, 2014; Di Méo, 2008; Hall & Arthur, 1993;

Park, 2014)

Source: Arranged by the author (2017)

Before digging into the major issue of a cultural-led regeneration, to understand the relationship and practice between culture and urban regeneration by Evans (2004, 2005), García (2004), and Smith (2006, 2009) is significant. Evans also classified three models of a cultural planning process that brought out a brief presentation of a cultural-led regeneration. Since a concise understanding of the above concepts has been elaborated, the affections of a cultural-led regeneration have also been expanded with the backup of several scholars such as Bianchini & Parkinson (1993), Binns (2005), Keating & De Frantz (2003), Miles (2005) and Smith (2006, 2007, 2009). To draw out a more precise notion of this theory, Vickery (2007) sorted out four major points of a cultural-led regeneration should contain: to create, to inspire, to express, and to reconstruct. With these factors, it could be easier to comprehend the effect of this process in various dimensions, for example, to create closeness and social cohesion in communities and to demonstrate the uniqueness of the place to fascinate new opportunities (Binns, 2005; Carnegie &

Norris, 2015; Jones & Wilks-Heeg, 2004).

In the frame of the cultural-led regeneration, Bianchini (1993) (applauded with Binns (2005)) identified two models (cultural production and cultural consumption) and three productions (cultural quarters, mega-events, and cultural flagships). The three productions have their own pros and cons in different angles. However, to discuss the reason and effect of establishing a cultural flagship is rather the main objective of this study. The cultural flagship project may overturn a cities’ image if properly and carefully planned with the whole area regeneration programme, which is one of the questions that this study is willing to discover. On the contrary, the high paid cost and unsuitable culture may lead to failure with notoriety ‘another white elephant’.

On the other hand, the bridge of connecting a flagship project and a culture-led regeneration together is by a heritagisation process. There has recently been much discussion about the use of a heritagisation process. Some scholars considered that the process is a destruction of culture produced by tourism (Walsh, 1992; Sanchez-Carretero, 2015; Smith, 2009); others would rather take the view that the process is for achieving social goods and for re-telling heritages from various perspectives (Ashley, 2014; Poria, 2010). As this study is to explore how does the Titanic culture been heritagisated by the cultural planners and become an element for Belfast’s cultural planning use, to understand the original notion of this term is necessary.

It is true that the term of ‘heritagisation’ has dumbly transformed during recent years, but the concept has not been clearly articulated, especially the influence of the process.

Nevertheless, the author marshalled many literature from different scholars of this topic and classified it into four values for further discussing including economic, social, political, and cultural. From these points, the possible affections of a heritagisation process would be more clear-out to discuss with this study. Moreover, it might also become a valuable method for further use. Hence, even though the heritagisation process seems to be quite merit to attempt in reality, it should be noticed that it is still a complex issue—the balance between the heritagised product and its original cultural heritage value needs to be carefully planned.

 To what extent does the Titanic Belfast fit the criterion for a beneficial cultural flagship project?

Table 2.10 The Exploration of the Second Research Objective Findings on Discussing Point Theoretical References

Cultural Flagship

1. The evaluation criterion for a cultural flagship (Hayes, 2009;

Grodach, 2010)

2. The vision (Doucet, 2007; Hayes, 2009;

Smith, 2005)

3. The design (Evans, 2003; Fainstein, 2013; Grodach, 2008; Hayes, 2009;

Ponzini, 2013; Sklair, 2006)

4. The visitor attractiveness (Aticheson

& Evans, 2003; Comunian & Mould, 2014; Grodach, 2008, 2010; Hayes, 2009;

Smith, 2009)

5. The location and community fit

(Bowen-Jones & Entwistle, 2002; Evans, 2003; Grodach, 2008, 2010; Hayes, 2009;

Kent, 2009; Smith, 2009; Sudjic, 1999) 6. The planning process (Evans, 2003;

Hayes, 2009; Grodach, 2010)

Source: Arranged by the author (2017)

The evaluation of a cultural flagship project becomes important in these recent years.

Hayes (2009) analysed a criterion for these cultural flagship projects with four main factors: the vision, the design, the visitor attractiveness, and the location and community fit. The criterion could also become the checkpoint for the case study of the Titanic Belfast because it has considered various levels that it could study from different angles of a cultural flagship project. While Hayes (2009) mostly focused on the establishment itself,

Grodoch (2008, 2010) stood in another point of view regarding that the importance of re-examining the planning process of a cultural flagship project should also pay attention.

In consequence, a simplified evaluation criterion will be conducted in this study to elaborate the effect and sustainability of a cultural flagship and its disadvantages with the case study of the Titanic Belfast.