More than Memory: Can Memory Spaces Really Prevent Mass Atrocities?

As transitional justice has grown as a field and as an international mandate in post-atrocity contexts over the past several decades, the memorialization of past atrocities through the construction of physical spaces of memory has increasingly been recognized as an essential aspect of this complex process. Often, these spaces of memory are touted not only as honoring past victims, but also as important tools for preventing future violence. To date, there has yet to emerge a clear way to measure exactly how sites of memory contribute to atrocity prevention. Can a site of memory really help prevent further acts of atrocity violence? If so, when and how are sites of memory a preventive force? This article describes the findings of three years of research into more than 400 memory sites around the world, with a focus on the programming and activities undertaken by various sites not only to engage with the past, but to respond to contemporary risks of large-scale, identity-based violence. This article posits that memory sites can be identified as preventive when they succeed at mitigating or eliminating any of the identifiable risk factors that lead to atrocity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Genocide Studies and Prevention
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5038/1911-9933.18.1.1954
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Memory, Trauma, and Commemoration
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.93
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

More than Memory: Can Memory Spaces Really Prevent Mass Atrocities?

Kerry Whigham
3 citations
Genocide Studies and Prevention
Memory, Trauma, and Commemoration
1.93
article

More than Memory: Can Memory Spaces Really Prevent Mass Atrocities?

Kerry Whigham
article en
3 citations

Abstract

As transitional justice has grown as a field and as an international mandate in post-atrocity contexts over the past several decades, the memorialization of past atrocities through the construction of physical spaces of memory has increasingly been recognized as an essential aspect of this complex process. Often, these spaces of memory are touted not only as honoring past victims, but also as important tools for preventing future violence. To date, there has yet to emerge a clear way to measure exactly how sites of memory contribute to atrocity prevention. Can a site of memory really help prevent further acts of atrocity violence? If so, when and how are sites of memory a preventive force? This article describes the findings of three years of research into more than 400 memory sites around the world, with a focus on the programming and activities undertaken by various sites not only to engage with the past, but to respond to contemporary risks of large-scale, identity-based violence. This article posits that memory sites can be identified as preventive when they succeed at mitigating or eliminating any of the identifiable risk factors that lead to atrocity.

Genocide Studies and PreventionVol. 18(1)
Binghamton University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Memory, Trauma, and Commemoration
1.93
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

More than Memory: Can Memory Spaces Really Prevent Mass Atrocities? — Kerry Whigham · Genocide Studies and Prevention (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS