Presentation short abstract

This presentation probes the question if pollution can be considered as heritage through the example of former military training grounds in Germany.

Presentation long abstract

Whereas heritage is commonly associated with what is deemed worthy of preservation, the material remains of pollution have long been excluded from cultural memory. In recent years, debates on toxic commons have raised the question of how to reintegrate these “unwanted” remains into collective understandings of heritage. This presentation probes the question if pollution can be considered as heritage through the example of former military training grounds in Germany. Following the withdrawal of Soviet troops in the early 1990s, militarized landscapes predominantly located in Eastern Germany were entrusted to nature conservation organizations under the Naturerbe (Natural Heritage) initiative. These sites bear a distinctive landscape profile marked by decades of tank manoeuvres, bombing, and live ammunition. Yet, some of these sites are considered highly biodiverse. Today, conservation organizations aim to preserve them in their “original” state—a concept that is inherently ambiguous and subject to interpretation. Conservation practices involve mimicking former military activities with controlled burning, conservation tanks, and the help of grazing animals, whilst navigating around explosive shells buried beneath the surface. As cleaning-up and remediating these vast polluted landscapes is often too costly, somewhat paradoxically, their toxic legacies have allowed militarized landscapes to be reframed as “natural heritage.” But which material reckonings with the past are embedded in this idea of heritage and which ones are excluded?