Heritagisation Process of Algerian Medinas: Bouna El Haditha Case Study

(2026) 10:22
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
https://doi.org/10.1186/s43238-026-00255-x
Built Heritage
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Open Access
Evaluation of the heritagisation process
of Algerian medinas from the perspectives
of stakeholders and residents: the case of Bouna
El Haditha, Annaba, Algeria
Sihem Rouaissia1* and Khedidja Boufenara1,2
Abstract
The objective of this article is to evaluate the heritagisation process and the degree of integration of the Annaba
medina, Bouna El Haditha, by analysing the divergences and convergences between the viewpoints of various stakeholders and residents. Located in northeastern Algeria, Bouna was built in the 11th century by the Zirid dynasty. This
medina underwent profound transformations during the French colonial period and continues to suffer the effects
of time and human interventions, which altered its heritage values. An expert assessment of the sector’s buildings
in 2013 revealed that 71.54% of them were in a very advanced state of decay. In the same year, this heritage was classified as a protected area, despite the state of conservation of its architectural and urban heritage, raising a debate
about the uncertain preservation of its value and numerous questions about its heritagisation process. Our methodology integrates an analysis of the literature related to the concept of heritagisation, combined with qualitative
and quantitative approaches. The evaluation grid we designed is inspired by the MATEA model (Models for Architectural Analysis, Theory, and Experimentation). It is structured around three dimensions—a change in status, condition,
and use—and six key subdimensions—awareness, selection, justification, conservation, valorisation, and exposure.
These elements, defined in our literature review, are at the heart of the heritagisation process. The study reveals
that the steps of the heritagisation process have not been followed and that this medina has undergone a de-heritagisation process, despite its status as a national heritage site.
Keywords Medina, Urban heritage, Architectural heritage, Heritagisation process, Protected areas
*Correspondence:
Sihem Rouaissia
[email protected]
1
Department of Architecture, Faculty of Earth Sciences, Badji MokhtarAnnaba University P.O. Box 12, Annaba 23000, Algeria
2
Research Laboratoy: ‘villes Et Santé’, Faculty of Architecture
and Urbanism, University of Constantine 3 Salah Boubnider,
Constantine 25000, Algeria
1 Introduction
The concepts of heritage and modernity are often
viewed as opposing forces. However, facing globalisation, the notion of heritage has expanded, fragmented,
and become a social issue (Veschambre 2007; Pendlebury
2013) and, more specifically, an ideological and political
one (Youssef 2022). Its polysemy and complexity have
grown over the centuries.
Originally, heritage was often seen as a set of material
assets passed down from generation to generation. However, with the emergence of new reflections on culture
and identity, this concept is now recognised as an essential vehicle for intangible assets and has become a trend.
© The Author(s) 2026. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which
permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the
original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or
other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line
to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory
regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this
licence, visit http://​creat​iveco​mmons.​org/​licen​ses/​by/4.​0/.
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Heritagisation is a consequence of this ‘heritagial frenzy’
(Skounti 2010). It is a process that takes various forms
across time and space (Skounti 2010) and involves complex choices and negotiations between different actors,
from cultural institutions to local communities, while
being framed by laws (Youssef 2017). This explains the
complexity of its evaluation.
In Algeria, heritagisation is aligned with international
charters and is part of a context marked by a desire to
preserve and enhance cultural and historical richness
through the promulgation of Law 98–04 on the protection of cultural heritage. We note seven sites classified as
international heritage and approximately 1087 historical sites and monuments classified at the national level,
including twenty-two protected areas/medinas (culture.
gov). These are ‘characterised by their predominance of
residential areas, and owing to their homogeneity and
historical and aesthetic unity, present a historical, architectural, artistic, or traditional interest justifying their
protection, restoration, rehabilitation, and enhancement’
(Law 98/04 1998, art. 41).
Despite their status as protected areas, these medinas face numerous challenges. These dynamic entities are characterised by a blend of multiple values:
aesthetic, architectural, historical, etc. (Shahim
et al. 2024, ICCROM) that are crucial for defining their
context and establishing a preservation policy. This raises
fundamental questions about how the actors that are
responsible for this heritage define what deserves to be
Page 2 of 16
preserved and how their choices reflect the values of the
selected asset/object/site.
In this context, the medina of Annaba had its status
changed to a protected area in 2013. That same year, the
collapse of a building that caused the death of a resident
led the wali (governor) of Annaba to dispatch a commission of experts for an in-depth diagnosis of this sector.
The assessment identified 111 badly damaged buildings,
289 buildings classified as a threat of collapse requiring
urgent demolition, 79 slightly damaged buildings, and 39
buildings in good condition (Fig. 1), (Copy of the report
addressed to Mr. the Governor in 2020, drawn up by Mr.
Khelifa K., Chief Architect of Local Authorities, former
Director of OCRAVA).
So, the heritagisation of this sector triggered a debate
within the city about its preservation and heritage value,
raising numerous questions and concerns:
• Even though this medina has national heritage status, has its heritagisation process completed all the
required steps as defined by theorists?
• How far is this heritage integrated into this process?
Today, heritagisation has become a major research
topic. Many studies now focus on its definition and
stages (Di-Méo 2007; Veschambre 2007; Davallon
2014), on the analysis of heritage policies, and on their
impacts on local and regional identities (Gravari-Barbas
and Guichard-Anguis 2003). A portion of the literature
Fig. 1 State of the built environment of the safeguarded sector of Bouna El haditha (Source: Copy of the report addressed to Mr. the Governor
in 2020, draw up by Mr.khelifa K, chief Architect of Local Authorities, fomer Director of OCRAVA, treated by Authors)
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
highlights the role of stakeholders, as well as the mobilisation and engagement of citizens in this process
(Oulebsir 2004; Skounti 2010; Aiche et al. 2006; Youssef
2017; Benaidja 2018; Zereka and Messaoudene 2019;
Chennaoui 2024; Hadjilah 2025). However, in this abundant literature, few works have focused specifically on
the evaluation and quantification of the heritagisation
process. Zeineb Youssef (2017), in her doctoral thesis,
reconstructed the heritagisation process of the medinas
of Sousse and Mahdia in Tunisia from an evaluative and
comparative perspective. Similarly, Samia Bouaziz and
Imen Guechi (2023) proposed a methodology to evaluate
the reuse potential of industrial heritage in Algeria. Our
work falls within this perspective. It focuses on the evaluation of the heritagisation process of Bouna El Haditha
and aims to contribute to the scientific discussion on the
quantification of this process. To this end, we analyse
the convergence and divergence of opinions between the
stakeholders and residents of this entity. We propose the
construction of an evaluation grid based on the Models
for Architectural Analysis, Theory and Experimentation (MATEA) model, developed by Professor Stéphane
Hanrot (1999), for the relative evaluation of architectural
quality. This method, which works towards the qualitative evaluation of architectural objects, has been adapted
to the field of urban and architectural heritage through
the works of Laoui (2017) and Youssef (2017). This article
is structured into four parts. After a literature review, we
present the methodology, followed by the results and discussion. Our main contributions are summarised in the
conclusion.
2 Literature review
2.1 Heritagisation
Heritage, whether tangible or intangible, is much more
than a simple legacy from the past. It constitutes a
stake of power and identity, a tool for social and spatial construction, which can be defined only by its
appropriation and designation by a social group. This
appropriation is motivated by various stakes: economic, territorial, symbolic, political, or social (Gravari-Barbas 2003; Pendlebury 2013). This process is
defined by heritagisation (Davallon 2014). Intimately
linked to heritage, this concept takes diverse and protean forms across time and space. From archaeological
sites and historical monuments, heritagisation is now
entering urban heritage with both material and intangible dimensions (Peng and Marinos 2022). This specific form of cultural transmission operates through
heritagisation, by tradition, by memory, or by inheritance (Davallon 2014). While the latter is characterised
by the absence of choice for the recipient (Davallon
2014), transmission through heritagisation is based on
Page 3 of 16
the recognition of values that certain actors attribute to
an object/building/monument/song, etc. (Chennaoui
2024). It is a social construction and an identity affirmation (Gravari-Barbas 2003; Davallon 2014), which
public authorities can, to varying degrees, guide. Heritagisation is a fundamental notion in any process of
controlling development operations and enhancing the
constituent elements of a territory or city. The actions
that take place offer the city the opportunity to measure
the degree of attachment of residents to their territory,
their histories, their sites, and their landscapes (Billor 2021; Zerarka and Messaoudene 2019; Chennaoui
2024; Hadjilah 2025; Routh et al. 2025). Indeed, while
the concept of heritage has long been dominated by a
‘top-down’ approach (Gravari-Barbas 2003), imposed
by elites and institutions, contemporary debates insist
on the importance of a ‘bottom-up’ approach, a participatory, citizen-driven approach (Man and Lu 2025).
The absence of this participatory dimension is often
seen as a factor in the failure of heritage policies, leading to potential de-heritagisation (Youssef 2017; Zerarka and Messaoudene 2019).
In Algeria, heritage policies that frame urban heritage
partly reflect the continuation of colonial doctrine. After
independence, the Algerian state first extended French
law on the protection of historical monuments and sites
in 1967 (Khelifa-Rouaissia 2017). To protect its urban
heritage (medinas, Ksours), Algeria then enacted Law
98/04, which was inspired by French Malraux Law. While
the latter protects historical centres for their historical,
architectural, and artistic values (Law No. 62–903 1962,
art. 2), Law 98/04 is distinguished by the addition of the
notion of traditional value and recognises all heritage,
including that of French civilisation, as Algerian heritage (Law 98/04 1998, art. 1). Since then, much research
on the decolonisation of French colonial heritage has
emerged, attesting to the evolution of Algerians’ relationships with this important component of the Algerian urban landscape (Aiche et al. 2015; Benaidja 2018;
Benhamouche 2020; Hadjilah 2025; Rouaissia 2017). The
population has reappropriated the spaces of colonial cities in their daily social practices (Benaidja 2018). Their
imagination attributes values to this heritage, including
utilitarian (of use), architectural, and aesthetic interest
(Benaidja 2018), and many monuments and historical
sites from this period have been classified as national
heritage.
In line with the literature review on this subject and
given that our case study is a classified heritage site, the
values we recognise in this work are those established
by the legislature to define a protected sector. These are
summarised as historical, architectural, artistic, or traditional values (Law 98/04 1998, art. 41).
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Page 4 of 16
2.2 Stages of heritagisation
Understanding this singular form of transmission specific
to heritage requires a step-by-step description of the process by which an object is heritagised. For heritagisation
to occur, the selected object must arouse interest and go
through several stages. Many researchers agree that heritage does not exist; it is created (Di Méo 2007; Davallon
2014; Skounti 2010; Youssef 2017; Zerarka and Messaoudene 2019). ‘For a legacy to be heritagised, a triggering event is necessary’ (Di Méo 2007), which Di Méo
(2007) calls awareness.
The recognition of a heritage thus presupposes the
existence of a group of actors with a heritage awareness
(Zerarka and Messaoudene 2019). The identification of
the heritage good places awareness at the centre of its
development (Youssef 2022). For Laura Verdelli (2010),
this phase establishes the heritage interest of the object
in question and determines ‘what makes a legacy worthy
of being elevated to the rank of heritage’ (Verdelli 2010).
Heritage construction thus begins with the selection of
heritage objects (Di Méo 2007).
The justification for this selection is based on a system of values (ICCROM 2024; Choay 1992; Chennaoui
2024), such as historical, aesthetic, and architectural values. These are mobilised by various actors throughout
the heritagisation process. During this phase, the object
is constructed and evolves under the effect of exchanges
and the confrontation of the representations of these
actors. This phase is essential. It marks the transition of a
simple object to a recognised element and contributes to
the change in the object’s status (Di Méo 2007).
Heritage fulfils a double function: it allows for the
acquisition of a status, recognition, and legitimacy
while revaluing a space by giving it an added symbolic,
economic, and cultural value (Gravari-Barbas 2003).
Hence, the usefulness of conserving and valuing it to be
able to pass it on to future generations. Conservation is
undoubtedly the foundation of all heritage actions. It is
not enough to select an object to call it heritage; it must
be conserved. The conservation of the heritage object
is an active phase that includes valorisation methods
such as rehabilitation and restoration (Sunena Abdul
Huq 2024). Such operations contribute to the change in
the condition of heritage assets.
To make this heritage visible, we must expose it and
open it to the public to foster a sense of belonging and a
better understanding of urban dynamics. This phase corresponds to a change in use (Fig. 2).
The crossing of these bibliographic sources allows us
to advance that the heritagisation process is articulated
around three main phases, namely, changes in status,
condition, and function, which are broken down into six
stages: awareness, selection, justification, conservation,
Fig. 2 Dimensions and subdimensions of the patrimonialisation
process (Source: the authors)
enhancement and exposition (Di Méo 2007) (Fig. 2). In
the context of this research, these phases and stages of
the heritagisation process are designated by dimensions
and subdimensions, respectively.
3 The heritagisation of the medina of Bouna El
Haditha
3.1 1Historical evolution and urban transformation
The city of Annaba is one of the oldest cities in Algeria.
It is a port city located in the northeast of the country.
An ancient Phoenician trading post, the city, was named
Ubon and housed a Punic settlement. In the third century B.C., it was integrated into the Numidian kingdom
and became a royal city called Hippo Regius. It was later
annexed in 46 B.C. by the Romans to the new province of
Africa, Nova, before being invaded by the Vandals (Côte
and Camps 1988). In 533, Hippo Regius was annexed by
the Byzantine Empire, which was subsequently restored
in 666 by the Arabs and renamed Madinet Seybouse
(Côte and Camps 1988).
At the beginning of the 11th century, following
repeated floods, the ancient city was abandoned for a
new site 2 km to the north (Fig. 3). The new city, Bouna
El Haditha, was built by the Zirid dynasty on a 40-m-high
hill, unlike the ancient city, which was located near the
sea (Fig. 3).
This settlement became a coveted trading hub for the
Catalans, Genoese, and Maltese, followed by the Ottomans, before being colonised by the French in 1832.
During this period, Bouna’s urban structure underwent
notable transformations (Fig. 4).
In 2013, Bouna El Haditha was designated as a protected area. It is located east of the city, covers an area of
18 ha, and includes zones dating from its foundation as
well as from the French colonial period (Fig. 5).
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Page 5 of 16
Fig. 3 Locations of the city of Annaba during the ancient and Zirid periods (Source: la cooperative Agricole de Bône treated by the authors)
3.2 Institutional protection of protected areas
In accordance with the regulations in force (Law
98/04, 1998, art. 42), ancient centres designated as protected areas are covered by a heritage management plan,
specifically the Permanent Plan for the Safeguarding and
Enhancement of Protected Areas (PPSMVSS).
On 15 December 2007, the Ministry of Habitat and
Urban Planning authorised a program to inspect old
buildings across the Algerian territory, including the old
city of Annaba. A selective operation 1was launched on
10 September 2008 and conducted by the Technical Control of Construction (CTC). In 2010, thirty-three municipal prohibition orders were issued by the Municipal
1
Program Authorisation number NF: 5.711.2.123.225.44, with a value of
56,600,000 DA.
Office for the Restoration of Ancient Fabrics of Annaba
(OCRAVA).
An expert assessment of the buildings in this sector,
carried out in 2013 by the commission appointed by
wali, revealed that 71.54% (Fig. 2) of them were in a very
advanced state of decay (culture director). An update of
the map of collapsed buildings, conducted in 2018 by
the OCRAVA services, included new empty plots resulting from the collapse of fifty (50) residences classified
in 2013 as threatening to collapse (OCRAVA, Culture
Directorate).
In 2015, in accordance with Ministerial Note no.
532 of 21 October 2015, and given the country’s critical financial situation, all preservation projects were
frozen. It was not until 28 October 2024, that a call for
tenders was finally launched for the development of
the Permanent Plan for the Safeguarding and Enhancement of the Protected Area (PPSMVSS) of the old city
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Page 6 of 16
Fig. 4 Impacts of French military engineering transformations on the urban fabric of Bouna El Haditha (Source: La cooperative Agricole de Bône,
the Vincennes archives)
of Annaba. On 15 May 2025, the selected design office
presented a development proposal for the old city’s
central square.
This initiative, which followed the instructions,
was carried out at the expense of the directives of the
administrative authority developing and launching the
first phase of the project, namely, the diagnostic and
emergency measures.
This cumulative delay poses a threat to the survival
of this heritage and paves the way for land speculation
(Zerarka and Messaoudene 2019). Like other degraded
historic neighbourhoods, Bouna El Haditha benefits
from a strategic location that makes it highly sought
after for its real estate potential.
As proof, a three-hectare ‘shopping mall’ project
was registered in 2017 on the site of the former colonial barracks. This project presented significant threats
to this protected area, as it involved the demolition of
parts of ancient ramparts and antiaircraft shelters dating from the Second World War. After a freeze of more
than four years, the project was relaunched in 2021 and
2023, before finally moved to another site. Currently,
the wilaya (prefecture) remains the main actor in urban
regeneration projects, both as a project developer and
as a funder (Zerarka and Messaoudene 2019).
4 Methodology
To quantify and evaluate the heritagisation of Bouna
El Haditha through the convergence and divergence of
opinions between stakeholders and residents, we relied
on an in-depth analysis of published literature to define
the dimensions, subdimensions, and indicators. We
approached our target actors through a questionnairebased survey consisting of two parts: the first part with
open-ended questions and the second with closed-ended
questions.
4.1 Target actors
As we highlight above, there are two types of heritagisation: ‘top-down’ (by stakeholders) and ‘bottomup’ (by users/citizens) (Gravari-Barbas 2003; Man and
Lou 2025).
4.1.1 Stakeholders
These actors were selected via convenience sampling, in
accordance with Law 98–04 on the protection of cultural
heritage. We targeted local actors who have decisionmaking power and who played a role in changing the
status of Bouna El Haditha: the decentralised state services, namely, the Culture Directorate, the Wali (governor)/member of the Wilaya People’s Assembly, and the
President of the Municipal People’s Assembly (mayor)
(Law 98/04 1998, art. 41). We also approached other
public actors who did not have decision-making power
but were consulted in an advisory capacity. These actors
supervise the execution of rehabilitation works and studies, prepare diagnostics and reports, and plan various
forms of exposure and enhancement for these ancient
centres. They include the director of the Municipal Office
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Page 7 of 16
Fig. 5 Geographical location and boundaries of the Bouna El Haditha protected area (Source: The Annaba Master Plan for Development
and Urbanism (PDAU) as treated by the author)
for the Restoration of Old Tissues of Annaba (OCRAVA),
the head of the old buildings department of the municipality of Annaba, and the representative of the Urban
Planning and Architecture Directorate, as well as the
director of the Office for the Management and Exploitation of Cultural Properties (who did not respond to
our questionnaire). We also called upon the historical
monuments architect, who was consulted for an opinion by the Culture Directorate. Heritage-related associations were notably absent during the preparation of the
Bouna El Haditha classification file; thus, they were not
interviewed.
4.1.2 Medina residents
The population targeted by this article consists of all the
inhabitants of the Bouna El Haditha medina, namely,
7063 individuals (according to the unit in charge of
population census and statistics of the Annaba). The purposive sample is 384 individuals2, from which we exclude
children and young people under 20 years old. We define
three categories of inhabitants based on their tenure
status: private owners, tenants, and illegal occupants
(Table 1). The first category consists of owners originally
from the neighbourhood who settled long ago and lived
as a minority alongside European colonists. The second
category represents the population that arrived in the
neighbourhood after independence (1962), consisting of
2
For a confidence level of 95% and a margin of error of 5%, which corresponds to a sample of 385 individuals, we distributed the questionnaire to
120 people. This number was adjusted due to the refusal of certain unauthorised occupants and tenants to participate in the survey, as well as the
exclusion of children, adolescents and adults under 20 years of age. Adult
responses are more likely to be relevant for questions related to heritage
management, urban planning, and public policies.
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Page 8 of 16
Table 1 Status of target actors; source: the author
98/04, Article 41, namely, historical, architectural, artistic, or traditional values. The combination of these theoretical approaches served as the foundation for defining
the indicators and constructing our questionnaire, ensuring its consistency with the study’s conceptual framework
(Table 2).
Property status
Frequency
Percentage
Private owners
14
12%
Tenants
34
28%
Squatters
72
60%
4.3 Data collection protocols
rural people who came from all wilayas in search of work
and affordable rent (POS of the old town). The ‘black decade’ that the country went through exacerbated only this
migratory flow, which quickly saturated the housing stock
of Bouna. With their often degraded and vacant buildings, medinas then became de facto refuges for a new
category of people, ‘illegal occupants,’ who settled there
illegally out of necessity (POS of the old town), while
waiting for new housing. We opted for snowball sampling
(Goodman 1961), a technique developed by Goodman
in 1961. Our methodological choice is justified by the
absence of official lists and the need to establish a climate
of trust with the participants, some of whom are illegal
occupants. The latter contribute to both the heritagisation or, conversely, the de-heritagisation of this heritage.
We believe that primary information regarding property
status can be provided only by the residents themselves.
Guided by the OCRAVA technician, we initially interviewed people she knew who lived in the old city. These
first contacts then guided us to other residents.
Once the corpus of target actors was defined,
we approached them with a two-part structured
questionnaire:
4.2 Evaluation matrix
4.4 Interpretation of the results
The review of the scientific literature cited above allowed
us to establish that the heritagisation process is structured around three main changes: in status, in condition,
and in use. These phases are divided into six sequential
stages: awareness, selection, justification, conservation,
valorisation, and exposure. In the context of this research,
these phases and stages are referred to as dimensions and
subdimensions, respectively. As a classified heritage site,
the identification of the values in our case study began
with the recognition of the main values defined by Law
– The first part consisted of open-ended questions to
allow our actors a certain degree of freedom. The
themes addressed arose from the intersection of the
definitions of the dimensions and subdimensions of
the heritagisation process and the values established
by the legislature. We abstracted from the cognitive
and administrative dimensions of heritage because
they pertain to expert discourse. The objective was
to ensure fair evaluation and comparability between
the two groups of respondents by focusing on shared
perceptions rather than on specialised knowledge.
– The second part was based on closed-ended questions, which were targeted (Tremblay et al. 2006),
grouped by theme, reduced in number, and made
clear and precise.
After the questionnaires were completed, we analysed
the responses from the first part, considering the participants’ syntax and vocabulary. The goal was to identify
specific markers (Seignour 2011) that could reveal how
these actors perceive and position themselves in relation to the heritagisation process. We opted for manual
semantic analysis, believing that it offers an in-depth
understanding of the discourse and allows for the detection of complex nuances. Indeed, the complexity of the
subject and the need to establish a climate of trust made
Table 2 Subdivision of subdimensions into indicators; Source: the author
N°
Subdimensions
Indicators/Variables
01
Awareness
Architectural, aesthetic, historical, and traditional values; Heritage recognition
Sense of heritage; Demolition of existing buildings (degree of attachment)
02
Selection
Protected area status/classification; Sense of belonging, psychological ties to this legacy
03
Justification
Historical, aesthetic, architectural, and traditional values; Decision-making power; Heritage policies;
Current state of the medina
04
Conservation
Degree of conservation; Expertise, financial means, non-involvement of the state/citizens; PPSMVSS
05
Valorisation
Rehabilitation, renovation, maintenance; Degree of authenticity; Loss of heritage values; Economic
value; new construction (e.g., mall)
06
Exhibition
Touristic and economic development; Integration into the urban dynamics of the city
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
our interviews more interactive. It proved difficult to
talk about and explain values to our respondents. This is
because cultural values can be subjective and vary among
communities. We sometimes had to clarify the meaning
of certain terms, and respondents often used expressions
in the Annaba dialect of Algerian Arabic, whose meaning could be fully grasped only in context. After the faithful transcription of the discourse, we read and reread
the texts to identify emerging themes and keywords. We
assigned codes to text excerpts sharing a common idea,
considering enunciative, organisational, and referential
cues (Seignour 2011). Following this, we grouped them
by themes, which we then quantified.
An example of a raw resident response: ‘Before, it was
better. Now, the old city is left to rot; it has become a transit camp.’ This is an example of a raw resident response
that we processed as follows: Before/now: adverbs of
time, indicating an opposition. Before is associated with
a positive connotation, reflecting a nostalgic longing for a
bygone era. In contrast, now is linked to a negative state.
Left to rot: This suggests institutional negligence, even
the absence of the state. Transit camp: the use of this
term reflects a sense of rootlessness, a loss of the place’s
essential function, and a loss of authenticity (formal) and
identity.
For the second part of the analysis, a detailed Excel
database was used to synthesise all the measured dimensions, subdimensions, and indicators under ordered
headings for our case study. The columns list the numbered target actors, and the rows show the evaluation
values assigned to the indicators. To compare our actors’
viewpoints, an evaluation was conducted on a scale of
one to five (1–5), ranging from ‘not at all’ to ‘very well’3
(Likert 1932; Hanrot 1999, 2004; Shahim 2024).
In the second-to-last column of these tables, we mentioned the average of each actor’s interpretations, which
allowed us to obtain an average of the actors’ opinions
for each indicator (Table 3). No weighting was applied to
the calculation of the averages. All dimensions and subdimensions are not only of equal importance but are crucial for accomplishing the heritagisation process.
The arithmetic means of the judgement values for these
actors for each indicator and the standard deviations
listed in the last column of this table, which are measures
of the dispersion of values around their arithmetic mean,
provide important insights into the trends of the judgements of the target actors for each indicator (Hanrot
1999; Shahim 2024).
Page 9 of 16
Next, we interpret the results of this evaluation using
a radar chart. This specific figure is composed of six
axes representing the six subdimensions of the heritagisation process and incorporates an appreciation scale
ranging from one to five. It determines the positivity/
negativity of the process through the following interpretations (Hanrot 1999, 2004): very strong synthesis: excellent + balanced; strong synthesis: excellent + unbalanced
or good + balance; partial synthesis: good + unbalanced
towards the low end, average + unbalanced towards the
high end; ordinary synthesis: average + balanced; poor
synthesis: average + unbalanced towards the low end or
mediocre + balanced; weak synthesis: mediocre + unbalanced towards the high end or zero + unbalanced towards
the high end; and very weak synthesis: zero + balanced
(Hanrot 1999, 2004; Merad et al. 2013).
The homogeneity or divergence of these actors’ opinions is verified by calculating the standard deviation4
(Hanrot 2004), which is reported in the second-to-last
column of the table. If the standard deviation is significant, this may indicate the presence of outliers that deviate strongly from the majority opinion. In this case, we
evaluate the process based on each actor’s opinion. Otherwise, the evaluation is performed by calculating the
average of the evaluations (Hanrot 1999, 2004).
This average allows evaluation of the stages of the process, as well as the degree of Bouna El Haditha’s integration into the process (Youssef 2017, 2022). If this medina
has completed all the heritagisation stages, it has finished
the process and thus acquired its heritage value. Otherwise, it is considered marginalised (Youssef 2017, 2022;
Oulebsir 2004). This average is calculated based on the
intervals of the value scale: 1 = 10%, 2 = 25%, 3 = 50%,
4 = 75%, and 5 = 100% (Hanrot 1999, 2004; Youssef 2017).
5 Results and discussion
5.1 Evaluation of stakeholder and resident opinions:
applying syntactic analysis to the first part
of the questionnaire
To better understand the perceptions of the stakeholders
involved, a detailed syntactic analysis of the vocabulary
was conducted. This study reveals a questioning of the
formal authenticity of the medina (10.42% of citations),
despite its status as a protected heritage site. A total of
8.46% of our respondents expressed their disagreement
with the protection of the entire medina. Their responses
convey the image of a true heritage tragedy, where this
medina is gradually disappearing (Table 4).
3
The correspondence between the assessments and the scores is expressed
by the following relation: not at all/nil: 0, very little: 1, little: 2, average: 3,
good: 4, very good: 5.
4
The standard deviation is a statistical function that is calculated in Excel
as: √(∑(xᵢ - μ)²/N).
Change of status
The patrimonialisation
of Bouna El Haditha
Change of use
Change of state
Dimensions
Phases
Concept
Exhibition
Enhancement
Conservation
Justification
Selection
Awareness
Sub-dimensions
Steps
1
5
Have the few rehabilitation operationsarried out by the
inhabitants altered the values of architectural, aesthetic
and tradional of this medina?
Have these rehabiliation operations had a positive impact
on the economic development of this medina?
1
3
In your opinion, has it retained its authencity?
Do you think that this medina can be integrated into a tourist development process?
1
Has Bouna El Haditha been rehabilitated?
2
0
0
0
0
5
0
Is the state of this heritage due to the inaction of the govern- 3
ment and the absence of preservation strategies?
3
In its current state of conservation, do you believe that this
medina is worthy of being passed down to future generations?
0
5
2
Do you think that the current laws protect this medina?
0
5
5
0
0
5
3
2
4
3
Do you have the power to decide on the status of this
medina?
Do you think that this medina is in a state of alarming
degradation?
5
Do you think that this medina holds values that justify its
classification?
5
Do you identify with the architecture of this medina?
4
Do you believe that is possible to demolish the old medina’s
buildings and replace them with new ones?
5
1
Do you think that this medina is a heritage of Annaba to be
protected?
Does Bouna El Haditha deserve the status of protected area?
4
1
2
5
4
1
0
5
5
5
0
3
5
5
5
1
5
3
3
Form number
Do you know the history of Bouna El Haditha?
Table 3 Evaluation grid application: example analysis of seven actor opinions
1
5
1
1
1
5
5
1
0
1
5
5
5
0
5
4
4
0
5
4
2
0
2
3
5
2
3
5
4
5
0
5
1
5
1
2
0
1
0
3
4
2
2
1
3
4
3
2
3
0
6
1
3
2
0
5
4
5
4
4
3
5
4
5
0
5
4
7
1.14
3.57
1.71
1.14
1.00
3.86
4.43
2.86
1.43
2.00
4.71
4.57
4.00
1.00
4.14
2.71
0.63
1.84
1.57
0.98
1.69
1.12
0.72
1.80
1.39
1.19
0.69
0.49
1.77
1.41
1.45
1.48
Average Standard
per
deviation
indicator
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Page 10 of 16
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Page 11 of 16
Table 4 Analysis of the lexical frequency of actors’ responses related to the heritagisation process; source: the author, 2025
Lexical frequency
Number of citations
%
Lexical frequency
Number of
citations
%
Authenticity
101
10.42%
Traditional value/Patio, ‘zellige’, arches,
and columns
90
9.28%
Our heritage/our roots/our identity
85
8.77%
Absence of the state heritage associations
123
12.69%
Declassification of the old city/its
classification is a mistake
82
8.46%
Construct new buildings
111
11.45%
Historical value
56
5.77%
Favourable location of the old city
in the city centre
117
12.07%
Aesthetic value
60
6.19%
Shopping centre (mall)
96
9.90%
identification with this architecture
55
5.67%
Transit camp
110
11.35%
Total citations 969 = 100%. Percentages are calculated in relation to the number
of citations
This entity, which has been rehabilitated symbolically,
has not been rehabilitated in fact. There are few, if any,
structural effects on Bouna El Haditha, despite its heritage
recognition by public authorities. The declassification of
the medina, the inaction of heritage associations and the
state, the appropriation of properties by illegal occupants,
and the anarchic and uncontrolled rehabilitation operations undertaken by some residents, particularly illegal
occupants, are frequently mentioned (12.69% of citations).
Even if a feeling of discomfort was expressed by some residential owners regarding the French colonial period, they
expressed a nostalgia related to the memory of a lost urban
atmosphere and a bygone past and an emotional appropriation that transcends the functional value and spatial
qualities of their homes. Their attachment to the places
and their refusal to leave them may have their origin in the
strategic location of the old city in relation to the city centre (12.07%). The difficulties related to the distance of new
residential areas, notably the lack of transportation, local
facilities, and health services; the absence of various amenities; and the feeling of displacement experienced by some
owners and former tenants explain their refusal to move5.
This viewpoint is shared by illegal occupants, even if they
have expressed no attachment to the medina and consider
it a transit camp (11.35% of citations).
Aesthetic and architectural values seem to be confined
to Arab-Muslim homes, which are strongly linked to
the presence of oust el dar6: the patio, columns, arches,
and zellige7 (9.28% of citations). In contrast, the historical value of this medina is recognised and known by
5
Feedback from beneficiaries of the relocation programmes to the new city
‘Drâa el Erich’, ‘el Kalitoussa’...
6
‘Oust el dar’ is an Arabic term referring to the inner courtyard or patio of
a traditional house.
The zellige refers to a traditional North African tilework technique, consisting of hand-cut glazed terra cotta tiles set into a plaster base to create
intricate geometric mosaics.
7
residential owners, some former tenants, and certain
stakeholders (5.77% of citations). Notably, some residents
see no inconvenience in the construction of new buildings within the medina (11.45% of citations) and express
their agreement with the construction of a shopping mall
(9.90% of citations). A large portion of our respondents
see it as a beneficial solution for the valorisation and
exposure of their medina. This viewpoint is shared by
stakeholders (11.35%).
5.2 Evaluation of stakeholder and resident opinions:
applying the MATEA model to the second part
of the questionnaire
After the numerical transcription of the questionnaires
from stakeholders and residents (Table 3), the respective
averages of their opinions per subdimension were calculated (Table 5). For better understanding, these data were
visualised in the form of a radar chart 1 (Fig. 6).
The two graphs related to the evaluation of the opinions of stakeholders and residents (Fig. 6) overlap in
awareness, with very close scores (2.61/2.57). This finding indicates a consensus on the heritage value of this
medina. Conservation is judged as weak by both groups
(2.21 and 2.19), confirming the state of decay of the site.
The divergence is strongest in terms of selection. With a
score of 4.28, stakeholders seem to have a clear and welldefined vision of the elements to be selected. In contrast,
residents have a much weaker perception (2.28), indicating a lack of decision-making power, a lack of knowledge
of selection criteria, and disagreement over priorities (the
viewpoints of the illegal occupants).
This results in a score of 2.75 for justification for the
stakeholders, as against a score of 1.75 from residents.
For valorisation and exposure, both groups assign low
scores. The low score of 1.85 given by stakeholders for
valorisation can be explained by a lack of institutional and
economic initiatives (such as the shopping mall project).
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Page 12 of 16
Table 5 Average stakeholder and resident evaluations by subdimension, standard deviation, and average of all the actors by
subdimension; source: the author
Subdimension
Average evaluation by
public actors
Average evaluation by
residents
Standard deviation
Average evaluation
by all actors
1-Awareness
2.61
2.57
0.02
2.59
2-Selection
4.28
2.58
1.2
3.43
3-Justification
2.75
1.57
0.83
2.16
4-Conservation
2.21
2.19
0.014
2.2
5-Enhancement
1.85
0.67
0.83
1.26
6-Exhibition
1.14
1.72
0.41
1.43
Average evaluation of all subdimensions by all actors
2.17
Fig. 6 Radar chart 1: evaluation of opinions by subdimensions for stakeholders and residents (Source: the authors)
This explains the score of 1.14 assigned to exposure. The
very low valorisation score (0.62) for residents reflects
feelings of neglect and abandonment. Although their
exposure score (1.72) is higher than that of the stakeholders, this does not reflect a positive enhancement of the
heritage but rather a logic of survival and profitability.
Indeed, many informal transformations have taken place:
patio houses have been divided into small rental units,
and commercial spaces have been created on the ground
floors. These developments have helped animate certain
parts of the medina and attract more people, as has the
practice of informal commerce on public streets.
According to the MATEA architectural synthesis,
the evaluation for stakeholders shows a partial synthesis: excellent (4.28) + unbalanced towards the low end
(1.14). In contrast, the residents’ evaluation is poor: average (2.58) + unbalanced towards the low end (0.67). This
chart demonstrates a negative evaluation of the heritagisation process of Bouna El Haditha by all our actors.
In the penultimate column of Table 5, we included
the average of the opinions of all our respondents and
recorded them in a radar chart 2 (Fig. 7) to evaluate their
adherence to the stages of heritagisation (Hanrot 1999,
2004; Youssef 2017). Despite the observed differences
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Page 13 of 16
Fig. 7 Radar chart 2: average opinion of all actors regarding all subdimensions (Source: the authors)
between the means (1.26 and 3.34) of all the actors’ opinions per subdimension, the calculation of the standard
deviation reveals very low values, ranging from 0.014 to
0.83. These values tend towards zero and confirm the
homogeneity and convergence of the opinions of all our
respondents (Hanrot 1999, 2004; Youssef 2017).
The data analysis from Tables 6 and 7, supported by
Radar Chart 2 (Fig. 7), highlights a deficient, interrupted,
and blocked heritagisation process. After initial heritage awareness and the identification and justification of
heritage interest, the path towards exposure, conservation, and valorisation is blocked. Bouna El Haditha has
completed only the first phase of the heritagisation process, a change in status, without reaching the last two
phases, namely, the change in condition and use. This
accentuates the degradation of its urban and architectural heritage and even its marginalisation.
Based on the responses from our survey participants,
as discussed in the first part of the questionnaire, we can
confirm that Bouna El Haditha is currently undergoing
a de-heritagisation process caused by exogenous constraints. These include rare state interventions, a lack of
effective safeguarding and enhancement strategies (such
as a permanent plan for safeguarding and enhancing
Table 6 Evaluation of the opinions of public actors; source: the author
Subdimension
Average evaluation CS
IS
1-Awareness
2.61
X
2-Selection
4.28
X
3-Justification
2.75
X
4-Conservation
2.21
X
5-Enhancement
1.85
X
6-Exposition
1.14
X
CS completed step, IS incomplete step, CP completed phase, IP incomplete phase
Dimension
Average evaluation CP
IP
Change of status
3.21
Change of state
2.03
X
Change of use
1.14
X
X
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Page 14 of 16
Table 7 Evaluation of the opinions of the medina residents; source: the author
Subdimension
Average evaluation CS
IS
1-Awareness
2.57
X
2-Selection
2.58
X
3-Justification
1.57
X
4-Conservation
2.19
X
5-Enhancement
0.67
X
6-Exposition
1.72
X
Dimension
Average evaluation CP
IP
Change of status
2.14
Change of state
1.43
X
Change of use
1.72
X
X
CS completed step, IS incomplete step, CP completed phase, IP incomplete phase
protected areas), anarchic transformations, and de-heritagising practices by the local population, particularly the
illegal occupants. As a result, this heritage is no longer a
well-preserved and valued asset, despite its national recognition as having heritage potential. In contrast, some
owners and former tenants expressed a strong sense of
nostalgia and emotional attachment, which contrasts
with the opinion of most residents. Mr. S.A (75 years
old), a carpenter, spoke to us with pride about the old
city, praising its architectural and aesthetic qualities: ‘This
neighbourhood is our history, our identity. This medina
gave birth to “lions.” Look at the beauty of its houses,
its buildings, its mosques. There was an extraordinary
atmosphere. What beautiful memories! I will only leave
this place feet first’.
5.3 Degree of integration of Bouna El Haditha
in the heritage‑making process
The average opinion of all stakeholders across all subdimensions, as shown in the last column of Table 5, is 2.17.
This value falls within the range of 2 to 3, corresponding
to 25% to 50%. The degree of integration for Bouna El
Haditha is calculated as follows: [(2.17 * 0.25/2) + (2.17
* 0.50/3)]/2, which is 0.31, or 31% (Fig. 8). This figure is
below the average, once again confirming the marginalisation and de-heritagisation of this legacy.
6 Conclusion
This study aims to evaluate the heritage-making process of the classified medina of Bouna El Haditha and its
degree of integration into this process. By analysing the
convergence and divergence in the opinions of stakeholders and residents, we seek to understand the factors that influence the path of this process. To do this,
we designed an evaluation grid inspired by the MATEA
method, which is structured around three dimensions:
changes in status, condition, and use, and six subdimensions: awareness, selection, justification, conservation,
valorisation, and exhibition. By combining qualitative
and quantitative approaches, we used a questionnaire
with open and closed questions to survey our respondents. The data collected were transcribed into a table
Fig. 8 Scale of values and degree of integration of Bouna El Haditha in the heritage-making process (Source: the authors, 2023)
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
with numerical values from 0 to 5. Their graphical representation in the form of a radar chart highlights the
negativity of the heritage-making process. The standard deviation confirmed the homogeneity of the actors’
viewpoints. Despite its national heritage status, Bouna El
Haditha has not completed all the heritage-making steps
required by the literature. This legacy is in a state of deheritagisation, tending toward urban marginalisation
and increased dilapidation. In this context of governance
and in the absence of a permanent safeguard plan, ‘urban
action is solely the responsibility of local public authorities, excluding citizens’ (Zerarka and Messaoudene 2019).
This situation leads us to question the implications of the
medina’s new status: what positive impact has its heritage-making had? Is this process likely, in the long term,
to lead to ruin? We believe that our approach, when
applied to a broader context, can be an important tool
for decision-making regarding the heritage recognition
of an urban or architectural asset. It makes it possible to
identify the key factors that contribute to the success or
failure of heritage-making, thus informing the choices of
decision-makers.
This study has several limitations. The inherent subjectivity of qualitative data may not fully represent the
feelings of stakeholders and residents. Furthermore,
snowball sampling, while justified by the absence of official lists, does not guarantee the statistical representativeness of the entire resident population. To mitigate
this risk, we were careful to simplify the language of the
questionnaire and not to weight the responses. We recognise that response biases in surveys and interviews
could influence the results, which may affect the comprehensiveness of our conclusions. The latter are specific
to the sociocultural context of the medina of Bouna El
Haditha and cannot be generalised to other medinas. For
example, in Sidi El Houri, the involvement of civil society was a decisive factor in its classification, unlike the
medina of Bouna El Haditha, which has distinct governance dynamics. We recognise that stakeholder representation remains limited and that the one-time nature of
our survey does not capture the evolution of perceptions
and impacts of the heritage-making process over the long
term. This limitation is exacerbated by the limited representation of stakeholders, their turnover, and the displacement of residents, particularly informal occupants.
These limitations highlight areas for future research and
cautious interpretation of the conclusions.
Abbreviations
MATEAModel of Analysis, Theory and Architectural Experimentation
PPSMVSSSafeguarding and Development Plan for Protected Sectors
OCRAVA Communal Office for the Restoration of Old Buildings
CTC​Technical Control of Construction
POSLand Use Plan
PDAUMaster Plan for Development and Urbanism
Page 15 of 16
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Mrs. Zeineb Youssef, Mrs. Sabrina Rouaissia, Mr. Mohamed
El Heidi Banani, Miss Yasmina Khroufi and Mr. Karim Khelifa for their help.
Authors’ contributions
All authors read and approved of the final manuscript.
Funding
Not applicable.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from
the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Permission to conduct the interviews for the purposes of this research was
obtained from all respondents, who were fully informed about the purposes
of this research and how their responses would be used and stored. All interviewees have been anonymised.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Received: 17 March 2025 Revised: 6 February 2026 Accepted: 13 February 2026
References
Abdul Huq, S., and B. Puthuvayi. 2024. Assessing the performance of urban
heritage conservation projects – influencing factors, aspects and priority
weights. Built Heritage 8: 4. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s43238-​024-​00116-5.
Abdurahiman, S., A.K. Kasthurba, and A. Nuzhat. 2024. Assessing the socio-cultural impact of urban revitalisation using Relative Positive Impact Index
(RPII). Built Heritage 8: 8. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s43238-​024-​00118-3.
Aiche, Boussad, Farida Cherbi, and Leila Oubouzar. 2006. Architectural and
urban heritage of the 19th and 20th centuries in Algeria. Euromed Heritage II Project. Shared Heritage. Campus 3: 34–45.
Benaidja, Idir. 2018. The ordinary relationship with the built heritage from
the French colonial era in Algeria: The example of the Kherrata City Hall
(Béjaïa). L’année Du Maghreb 18: 133–154. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4000/​annee​
maghr​eb.​3830.
Benhamouche, Mustapha. 2020. Colonial architectural heritage. Contested
ownership and heritagization. The case of Algeria. PhD diss., Université
Gustave Eiffel. Paris.
Billore, Soniya. 2021. Cultural consumption and citizen engagement. Strategies
for built heritage conservation and sustainable development. A case
study of Indore City, India. Sustainability 13 (5) : 2878. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
3390/​su130​52878.
Bouaziz, Samia, and Imen Guechi. 2023. Assessing the ruse potential of industrial heritage using GIS-AHP: a case study of El Hamma’s industrial district,
Algiers, Algeria. Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research 24. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​11594/​ijssr.​05.​02.​13.
Chennaoui, Youcef. 2024. The Importance of Stakeholder Involvement in
Promoting the Cherchell Aqueducts as Tourist Attractions: Current Situation and Prospects. In Archive scientific research. Proceedings of Academic
Research Community, Issue 2, Volume 8, 1–11. Berlin: IEREK Press. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​21625/​archi​ve-​sr.​v8i2.​1095.
Choay, Françoise. 1992. The allegory of heritage. Paris: Le Seuil.
Côte, Marc, and Gabriel Camps. 1988. Encyclopédie Berbère. Open edition.
Davallon, Jean. 2014. Regarding heritage-making regimes: stakes and questions.
Lisbon: Hal Open Science. https://​shs.​hal.​scien​ce/​halshs-​01123​906v1.
Accessed 27 Nov 2025.
Rouaissia and Boufenara Built Heritage
(2026) 10:22
Di Méo, Guy. 2007. Processus de patrimonialisation et construction des territoires [Heritage-making processes and territory construction. Heritage
and industry]. HAL Open Access. http://​www.​resea​rchga​te.​net/​publi​
cation/​32226​121. Accessed 7 Nov 2025.
Goodman, Leo A. 1961. Snowball Sampling. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 32 (1): 148–170. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1214/​aoms/​11777​05148.
Gravari-Barbas, Maria, and Sylvie Guichard-Anguis. 2003. Crossed perspectives
on heritage in the world. Paris: Paris-Sorbonne University Press.
Hadjilah, Asma. 2025. The Colonial Legacy of the Casbah of Algiers: Erasure
or reappropriation? Les Cahiers De La Recherche Architecturale Urbaine Et
Paysagère 23. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4000/​144tt.
Hanrot, Stéphane. 1999. On research in architecture: epistemology, pedagogical
theories, analytical model for theory and experimentation in architecture:
MATEA. Habilitation thesis to direct research in architecture. Louis Pasteur
University.
Hanrot, Stephane. 2004. An Evaluation of Architectural Quality from the
Perspectives of Stakeholders. Cahier RAMAU. Journal of the Activities in
Architecture and Urban Planning and Professions Network 5: 111–126.
http://​cahie​rs-​ramau.​edinum.​org/​427#​ftn5. Accessed 27 Nov 2025.
ICCROM. 2024. Participatory approaches to World Heritage for a more inclusive
future. ICCROM. https://​www.​iccrom.​org/​news/​parti​cipat​ory-​appro​aches-​
world-​herit​age-​more-​inclu​sive-​future.
Khelifa-Rouaissia, Sihem, and Boulkroun Heddya. 2017. The architecture of the
town halls of the French colonial period in Algeria the first half of nineteenth century. International journal of historical archeology 21: 420–432.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10761-​016-​0352-7.
Laroui, Abdelbasset. 2017. The Architectural Quality of Public Buildings in
Ghardaïa Case Study: Headquarters Building of the Office for the Promotion and Management of Real Estate - OPGI. Master’s thesis or PhD diss.,
Mohamed Khider University, Biskra.
Law 98/04. 1998. Concerning the protection of cultural heritage. Journal
Officiel de la République Algérienne, No. 44, June 15, 1998.
Law No. 62–903. 1962. Supplementing the legislation on the protection of
France’s historical and aesthetic heritage (Malraux Law). Paris: Journal
Officiel de la République Française.
Likert, Rensis. 1932. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of
Psychology 140: 1–55. https://​legacy.​votev​iew.​com/​pdf/​Likert_​1932.​pdf.
Accessed 27 Nov 2025.
Man, Shutong, and Ning Lu. 2025. Heritage exclusivism of the colonial past:
The dilemma of choosing what to recall or bury in the context of Qingdao’s urban regeneration. Built Heritage 9: 58. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​
s43238-​025-​00227-7.
Merad, Yacine, Abdallah Frahi, and Hanrot Stephane. 2013. Evaluative objectivity absence of architectural quality: the case of outdoor spaces in collective housing in Biskra. Algeria. Courrier du savoir 15: 74. http://​archi​ves.​
univ-​biskra.​dz/​handle/​12345​6789/​169. Accessed 27 Nov 2025.
Oulebsir, Nabila. 2004. The uses of heritage: Monuments, museums and colonial
policies in Algeria 1830-1930. Paris: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme
editions.
Pendlebury, John. 2013. Conservation values, the authorised heritage discourse and the conservation-planning assemblage. International Journal
of Heritage Studies 19 (7): 709–727. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​13527​258.​
2012.​700282.
Peng, Liang, and Alain Marinos. 2022. Exploration of cooperative management
system of transregional cultural landscape heritage: A case study of Loire
Valley between Sully-sur-Loire and Chalonnes. Built Heritage 6: 8. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s43238-​022-​00053-1.
Routh, Rajdeep. 2025. Exploring participatory governance in Indian cultural
heritage: Perceptions, practices, and challenges. Built Heritage 9: 55.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s43238-​025-​00224-w.
Seignour, Amélie. 2011. Discourse analysis method: The example of a speech
by a public company leader. French Management Review 211: 17.
Skounti, Ahmed. 2010. On heritage-making. How and when do things
become heritage? Hesperis-Tamuda XLV 1: 19–34.
Tremblay, R., J. Kotkin, S. Priestnall, and H. Chicoine. 2006. Quality of Life in
Laval. Research Team on Knowledge Cities, Canada Research Chair on
Knowledge Cities, Document 1: 107. http://​www.​newge​ograp​hy.​com/​
files/​Laval_​Techn​opole.​pdf. Consulté le 27 novembre 2025.
Verdelli, Laura. 2010. Heritage-making processes and evolving living cultural
landscapes. In Heritage Awareness, eds. Emilie Destaing and Anna Trazzi,
Vol. 2, 27–39. Bologne: Bononia University Presse.
Page 16 of 16
Veschambre, Vincent. 2007. The process of heritage-making: revaluation,
appropriation, and marking of space. Vox Geographica 2: 1–6. https://​
www.​cafe-​geo.​net/​wp-​conte​nt/​uploa​ds/​proce​ssus-​patri​monia​lisat​ion.
Accessed 27 Nov 2025.
Youssef, Zeineb. 2017. Reconstruction of the heritage-making process of the
medina cores in the contemporary era: case of Sousse, Monastir, and
Mahdia. In conference Proceedings, "Heritage in Peril": Public action and
preservation policy in the Maghreb, 13–14 October, Tunis, 3. Tunis: Institut de
Recherche sur le Maghreb Contemporain.
Youssef, Zeineb. 2022. The heritage-making of traditional dwellings in the
Medina of Mahdia confronted with resident transformations. Territory in
Motion 19: 53–54.
Zerarka, Ibtissem, and Maha Messaoudene. 2019. The Sidi El Houari quarter in
Oran: Citizen mobilization for the safeguarding of an endangered urban
heritage. Cahiers De Géographie Du Québec 63 (178): 79–89. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​7202/​10757​79ar.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.