## 4 Case Studies
### Summary of Case Studies  
Each case study addressed the role of HCI in re-contextualizing CH differently, as well as the HCI-CH relationship. Case study 1 describes a scenario where _CH prefigures HCI_, in the sense that the design of the mobile-technology- and social-media-supported self-organized learning environments (SOLEs) was driven by the dialogue between the cultural lenses of each YRAS participant--more specifically the _\"social and contextual factors influencing their engagement in and experiences with digital tools to learn and develop their learning skills outside of school\"_[78]. In other words, the HCI system is the outcome of the co-design process, whereas CH provides crucial considerations for its effective design. As a result, the HCI researchers embark on a curatorial effort to remove barriers and friction when designing the content of the digital technology platform, thus ensuring it reflects the cultural perspectives of its eventual users. While CH is not the subject matter in this context, it plays a significant role in the background, determining the stances participants may take toward the system and, consequently, its features, design, purpose, and very reason to exist. The success of the HCI system design, within this context, is on the co-design process, ensuring a sufficient level of inclusion for the participants, and thus needs to be grounded on relationship-building and cultural awareness to allow the safe and open sharing of multiple perspectives. Three of the four case studies applied co-design and participatory approaches. Case study 2 describes a similar scenario to the one summarized above, however, from an inverted perspective: here, HCI is brought into the co-design process of a CH exhibition to create space for discussion around how it will be presented and, consequently, interpreted and understood. In other words, in this scenario, _HCI prefigures CH_, facilitating curatorial decisions. Importantly, technology functions here not only as a mediator of cultural expressions but also as an enabler and facilitator of conversations about the potential forms those expressions may take--essentially impacting the communication culture between and within cultural groups. CH is here the subject matter, and technology is a vehicle for ontological decisions about its presentations and dissemination. Like in case study 1, the co-design process relies on relationship building and a shared acceptance of multiperspectivity among participants as a shared value framing the design process. Case study 3 takes this entanglement a step further, using a participative approach to understand and consider local needs and implement the local cultural identity in the XR prototype. Here, digital technologies were explicitly employed to reveal hidden information about CH in the Bamiyan Valley area. This led not only to a greater amount of data but also an objective mapping of what was regarded as CH by some, prompting active checking and consultation with local communities to debate its value. Through a combination of applied technology, cultural outreach, and relationship building, it allowed CH to be problematized and, in the process, have its nature reassessed by those primarily linked to and affected by it in light of competing priorities such as opportunities for social and economic inclusion. In turn, this enabled more informed societal decision- and sensemaking and contributed to community self-determination. Importantly, the digital artifacts generated in the process became themselves CH, not only for documenting sites of heritage significance but also for playing a key role in civic participation and social cohesion. Neither CH nor HCI take clear precedents in the process but are rather inherently linked in continuous _co-constitution_ and mutual influence: one cannot be interpreted without the other.