The focus of heritage studies has convincingly shifted from material culture to a more sophisticated focus on heritage subjects. This term is selected intentionally to take into consideration several meanings of the word: subject as a field of study (heritage preservation; heritage studies) and subject as a person, a citizen or a member of a group (heritage actors or agents). In line with the latter, Paola Filippucci proposes that

the object of preservation practices, “heritage”, has been convincingly redefined as a field concerned first and foremost with people, shaped by a diverse range of social practices, processes and experiences.

(Filippucci 2009: 320) Therefore, as anthropological concerns and methods play a more central role in heritage studies in order to tackle the centrality of people, the complex relationship between people and heritage value takes center stage. Contemporary concerns in heritage theory and practice are not simply about how people use heritage but also about how we create the subjects of study in geographically, historically and politically situated ways. The concept of the “stakeholder” as a vehicle was incorporated in heritage management precisely for the purpose of “peopling” heritage, with positive implications for the way in which heritage is defined, constructed and managed. However, when applied, the concept presents clear challenges that are seldom, if ever, considered.