Transnationalizing industrial heritage valorizations in Germany and China – and addressing inherent dark sides

Industrial heritage valorizations are usually characterized by two pervasive trends: Firstly, there is an understandable, but extremely narrow, focus on national histories of industrialization, thus excluding what has always been a constitutive element of any industrialization path after the initial industrial revolution in England: transboundary flows of hardware, capital, knowledge, people or power. Secondly, there is an almost exclusive concentration on the individual achievements of entrepreneurs, engineers and architects in times of peace and industrial progress. Current industrial heritage valorizations only rarely adequately reflect the other side of industrialization phases or patterns, that is, their disquieting stories of war, occupation, other forms of imposed foreign influence, disasters, social unrest and the suffering of individuals or groups triggered by, or leading to, crises, failures, relocations and destruction. Taking these blind spots as its starting point, this paper explores more inclusive ways of representing industrial heritage. Based on the concept of geo-historically entangled processes of transnationalization and case studies from Germany and China, the authors argue that the industrial landscapes reflect both former and current transboundary industrialization processes representing two or more nations’ painful and dissonant, but common, heritage. This should be mirrored more appropriately and consistently in industrial heritage tourism approaches and interpretation strategies.