This article examines how European-level heritage instruments translate the passage from Cold War division to free movement into repeatable practices of rights education. It compares three governance carriers that operate through different technologies of authority: the European Heritage Label, the Council of Europe’s Cultural Routes programme, and the House of European History. Treating policy and curatorial documentation as discourse that organises practice rather than merely describing it, the analysis follows the critical insight that institutional texts create problems, allocate agency, and stabilise normative assumptions through recurring vocabularies and evaluative criteria. Across the three instruments, mobility becomes teachable through three mechanisms: enforceable obligations and monitoring, spatial sequencing and renewal rules, and modular pedagogy with multilingual accessibility. The comparison also identifies failure conditions that are legible within institutional evaluation cultures themselves: European dimension language may substitute for curricular depth, multilingual provision may be treated as symbolic compliance rather than access justice, and network governance may concentrate recognition in emblematic hubs while peripheral nodes remain thinly resourced.
Yi-De Liu (Tue,) studied this question.