Proposing a New Methodology for Monument Conservation “SCOPE MANAGEMENT” by the Use of an Analytic Hierarchy Process Project Management Institute System and the ICOMOS Burra Charter

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (23) ◽  
pp. 13174
Author(s):  
Nina Almasifar ◽  
Tülay Özdemir Canbolat ◽  
Milad Akhavan ◽  
Roberto Alonso González-Lezcano

Managing the scope of the “Properties” and “Performances” domains plays a fundamental role in the scheduling and controlling of the wide variety of variables and processes involved in any project, for the purpose of increasing the quality of outputs, which leads to time and budget-saving. Notably, in monument conservation projects, “scope management” is a vital factor targeted at maintaining historical parameter values and accuracy in the number of interferences and occupations on sites. Nowadays, as urbanization speeds up unprecedently, the territories of these heritage sites have been demolished or have lost their place on the World Heritage List. Undoubtedly, the existence of such critical conditions makes it increasingly necessary to apply scope management methods to preserve such archaeological and historic sites across the world. The purpose of this article is to propose a “Comprehensive and Regular Systematic Schedule” for the purpose of monument conservation via the use of scope management, based on the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS)—specifically the Burra Charter (1981). The results of this research include hierarchical levels of management processes which consider all the effective variables, both the tangible and intangible elements (independent factors) and the other weaknesses and opportunities of the project in order to determine the scope of the required operations, which must be scheduled based on historical sites’ conservation charters. In this way, in addition to reviving a cultural landscape’s (cultural heritage or site) essential and valuable parts, unnecessary changes can be avoided.

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-82
Author(s):  
А. Belekova ◽  

The article focuses on promoting intercultural cooperation and strengthening international community on the example of UNESCO World Heritage sites, inscribed into the World Heritage List that is being formed on the basis of the World Heritage Convention of 1972. UNESCO is a universal intergovernmental UN structure responsible for international cooperation in the sphere of education, science, culture and communication. One of the main activities of the Organization is the world heritage conservation and intercultural dialogue. The article analyzes the UNESCO role in the geopolitical architectonics of Eurasia in which the World Heritage gains a qualitatively new meaning. In the context of a sustainable development the integration of promoting intercultural interaction and heritage safeguarding becomes particularly urgent. The article deals with several initiatives aimed at enhancing the cultural component of the Eurasian integration, including the goals and perspectives of discussion platforms set up for experience exchange in the sphere of World Heritage sites’ conservation and their management. The article seeks to identify the most important challenges and goals of the cooperation strategy between UNESCO and the institutions concerned in the field of the intercultural dialogue promotion in the Eurasian area that seems to be very important both for Russia and the CIS countries, and for the perspectives of the emerging global civilization of the future


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josh B. Martin

Abstract Despite growing recognition of the global value of underwater cultural heritage (uch), along with intensified international efforts to ensure its protection, the possibility of its inscription on the World Heritage List has never been comprehensively examined. Arguing that the unesco 2001 Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage (uch Convention) is insufficient alone to protect globally outstanding wrecks, such as the Titanic and the Lusitania, this article examines in detail the many legal and practical challenges involved with listing such sites under the World Heritage Convention. By reviewing key international agreements such as the uch Convention, World Heritage Convention, Law of the Sea Convention and the International Titanic Agreement, it draws the conclusion that it is the improved offshore management of uch—through ‘cultural’ marine protected areas operating under the framework of the uch Convention—which would open the possibility of nomination to the World Heritage List.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-77

Since 1972, UNESCO has established a frame of protection for cultural and natural heritage (Convention concerning the protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage) and the “World Heritage List”, which it considers as having an outstanding universal value. In 1994, at the Nara Conference, the Document of Authenticity was adopted, stating that ”the protection and enhancement of cultural and heritage diversity in our world should be actively promoted as an essential aspect of human development”. Since 1997, States Parties have to provide regular reports on the implementation of the World Heritage Convention and the conservation status of each site listed on the World Heritage List. So far, two periodic reports have been made (2000-2006 and 2008-2015), and the third was recently launched (2017-2022).


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Stefania Ferrucci

<p><b>State aspirations to have national properties recognised as belonging to the heritage of humanity with an international significance has increasingly empowered the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in regard to its influence upon international behaviour. In the early 1970s, UNESCO embarked on an ambitious mission to protect and preserve humanity’s most outstanding heritage to guarantee that it will be passed to future generations. It also aimed to recognise people’s interaction with nature and to ensure a balance between them. Towards this end, UNESCO launched a global World Heritage regime to accomplish its noble mandate. Over the past thirty-nine years this regime has become an international success as it has enabled the safeguarding of numerous tangible and intangible goods of exceptional value for the entirety of humanity. The key to its success has been a balanced combination of measures that highlight the regime’s direct and indirect forms of power. Yet, with a growing number of sites inscribed on the World Heritage List and with growing threats to them, the World Heritage system has found itself increasingly facing difficulties in maintaining its “moral power”. These challenges have been exacerbated by a lack of coercive force and sanctioning methods in realistic terms, as well as by rising flows of tourism and, at the same time, decreasing international assistance and funds. The ongoing success of the regime thus come to depend, more than ever, upon the shared involvement and commitment of the States Parties, the international community, and the civil society.</b></p> <p>This thesis proposes to examine the multiple ways in which the World Heritage regime has used its power mechanisms to achieve its current significant international position. It will begin with a definition of the UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention, an international treaty to preserve the world cultural and natural and intangible heritage. UNESCO’ s World Heritage regime is thus chiefly based on the implementation of the World Heritage Convention and the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention through the World Heritage Committee (WHC). A brief diachronic view of the Convention’s work and aims are therefore imperative for understanding the regime’s power mechanisms and its dynamics. Also provided will be definitions of cultural and natural heritage as well as cultural landscapes and the adopted criteria for the nomination of world heritage, which are all key aspects and assessment measures of UNESCO’ s Heritage regime. After a brief synopsis of the differences between this regime and conventional International Organisations (IOs), this research will shed light on the nature of its persuasive forms of power: scientific objectivity, blacklisting, mimicry, and competition - especially regarding the significance of both the States Parties and the regime’s reputation, as well as its legitimacy. It will discuss how vital these forms of power are to success in influencing states to ratify the World Heritage Convention, to ensure compliance, and persuade them to jointly achieve the proposed goals. It will be further shown that the regime’s legitimacy is based on the perception of its procedures and favourable outcomes by its Member States. In addition, this research will theorise on the constructivist IR approach by adapting it to the regime. How Member States follow constructed rules and adopt a ‘logic of appropriateness’ will also be explored. It will in addition involve examination of its political tools, the World Heritage List, the List of World Heritage in Danger and socio-cultural tools, since they represent the conduit for its power mechanisms, and argue the chances of success in each arena. Examples from the Cologne Cathedral in Germany and the Kathmandu Valley in Nepal illustrate how the regime’s tools can be used as a deterrent mechanism to ensure the integrity of World Heritage sites. Moreover, the dichotomy of heritage viewed through the lens of national and international interests will be addressed, as well as what this entails for the States Parties’ sovereignty. International interests may come to the forefront of heritage protection, creating a new form of sovereignty: ‘Disaggregated sovereignty’. The World Heritage regime’s various benefits will also be discussed, its impact on the state’s economies especially in regard to tourism, the granting of international assistance as well as funds, and its influence on the States Parties social life by igniting a sense of prestige and pride about their World Heritage properties and by sensitising entire nations regarding the necessity to jointly protect and conserve this collective treasure. Examples from Cambodia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo illustrate the effectiveness of international assistance provided by the regime, while the example of the Galapagos Islands’ underlines the need to develop sustainable tourism practices to prevent the deterioration of heritage sites. ...</p>


Author(s):  
Lisa Westwood ◽  
Beth Laura O’Leary ◽  
Milford Wayne Donaldson

“Legal Frameworks for Historic Preservation” provides an overview of the various federal and international laws and guidelines for historic preservation of culture, and explains how preservation of space heritage sites like those noted in the book can fit into that system. Particular attention is paid to the World Heritage List, the United Nations, the National Register of Historic Places, and the National Historic Landmark programs, in terms of the criteria for inclusion in them. The authors make the case for the overarching significance of space heritage sites within this context by referring to their integrity and elaborating on the Man in Space Theme Study.


Author(s):  
Barry Louis Stiefel

Purpose Having more than 1,000 sites on the World Heritage List raises questions regarding what world heritage means. The re-evaluation of heritage sites within the USA will be conducted as a case study, where similar issues of historical designation has taken place. Within recent decades there has emerged a policy of revisiting designations that occurred prior to 1990, when the nomination process was less rigorous. These re-evaluations do not necessarily remove the property from heritage designation, but the process has been valuable from a qualitative standpoint because a better understanding of significance has been achieved. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach Within recent decades there has emerged a policy of revisiting designations that occurred prior to 1990 in the USA, when the nomination process was less rigorous. Should a similar approach or policy be made to the properties placed on the World Heritage List during the first decades, since the expectations for demonstrating outstanding universal value have since increased? The result could be that we end up with a more robust World Heritage List that provides a better definition of what the common heritage of humanity is. Findings The way we approach and conceptualize World Heritage needs to evolve accordingly, considering how much it has evolved since the Convention in 1972. The experiences of re-evaluating historic places in the USA since the 1990s has much to offer. Research limitations/implications Only the perspective of the USA is given, as a case study. Contributions from practitioners in other countries experienced in heritage site re-evaluation best practices would be meaningful. Practical implications Re-evaluating World Heritage Sites is something to consider as a management prospect for places on or under consideration for the World Heritage List since it could bring a more comprehensive understanding of outstanding universal value. This type of re-evaluation may help in addressing the meaning of place(s), contextualization of multiple locations of common heritage, and the political elitism of the World Heritage List, where some countries are over represented due to sites listed through a less-experienced process from earlier decades. Social implications Revisiting the World Heritage List in respect to policy and the meaning of world heritage may be in order. For example, should every nation be entitled to list at least one property to the list regardless of its heritage value? Originality/value Since the 1970s, coinciding with the establishment of the World Heritage List through the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, the USA has dealt with dynamic and complex logistical problems regarding the recognition and interpretation of its cultural heritage.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-176
Author(s):  
M. Cotte

The article examines the existing relationship between two important concepts, but which are different a priori. First is the heritage of astronomy, generally associated with modern European science and its development through the construction of aseries of famous observatories with large fixedinstruments, all along lgth - 20th centuries. Second is the successful implementation  of the World Heritage convention  from around 50 years, with its famous List of heritage sites, monuments, ancient cities and landscapes.The article shows the relatively limited number, but already notable, of places nowadays registered on the World Heritage List or even sometime places aiming to be nominated for next years. Additional questions raise, asked by a partnership between Astronomy and World Heritage List; e.g.: the existing astronomical heritage from ancient civilizaions or indigenous societies; astronomy as associated value of broader nominations including classical heritage as palaces, monuments, historical cities and etc. In conclusion, we shortly examine the perspectives of the joint field of Astronomy and World Heritage.


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 1265-1270
Author(s):  
Darko Majhoshev ◽  
Cane Koteski

UNESCO was founded in 1946 as a UN specialized organization for the protection of the world's natural and cultural heritage, whose main mission is to protect, promote and promote education, science and culture at the global level, ie to promote and respect human freedoms and rights. UNESCO has 195 member states and 8 associate members. UNESCO operates in five major programs: education, natural sciences, sociology, culture and communications. UNESCO, in its activities related to the protection of the world natural and cultural heritage, maintains separate Lists for specific areas. The most famous lists run by this organization are: World Heritage List; List of World Heritage in Danger; World Heritage List Nominations; List of UNESCO Global Geoparks; List of Creative Cities; List of Intangible Cultural Heritage; UNESCO Atlas of the Worlds Languages in Danger (Atlas Map). These lists are important for the protection of the world's natural and cultural heritage, but they also have some impact on the sustainable development of tourism in the world. The Republic of Northern Macedonia, a member of UNESCO since 1993 with its natural beauties and cultural and historical heritage, is on some of the lists listed. The Ohrid region has been on the World Heritage List since 1979 and 1980 with its universal values, and in 2017 was nominated by the World Heritage Committee on the World Heritage List in danger of uncontrolled expansion. tourism, unplanned urban development and environmental destruction in the Ohrid region. The basic research question to be answered in the paper is "Are there natural or cultural heritage sites originating in the Republic of Northern Macedonia on the UNESCO Lists and does this affect the protection of the world's natural and cultural heritage and the development of sustainable tourism?".


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Stefania Ferrucci

<p><b>State aspirations to have national properties recognised as belonging to the heritage of humanity with an international significance has increasingly empowered the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in regard to its influence upon international behaviour. In the early 1970s, UNESCO embarked on an ambitious mission to protect and preserve humanity’s most outstanding heritage to guarantee that it will be passed to future generations. It also aimed to recognise people’s interaction with nature and to ensure a balance between them. Towards this end, UNESCO launched a global World Heritage regime to accomplish its noble mandate. Over the past thirty-nine years this regime has become an international success as it has enabled the safeguarding of numerous tangible and intangible goods of exceptional value for the entirety of humanity. The key to its success has been a balanced combination of measures that highlight the regime’s direct and indirect forms of power. Yet, with a growing number of sites inscribed on the World Heritage List and with growing threats to them, the World Heritage system has found itself increasingly facing difficulties in maintaining its “moral power”. These challenges have been exacerbated by a lack of coercive force and sanctioning methods in realistic terms, as well as by rising flows of tourism and, at the same time, decreasing international assistance and funds. The ongoing success of the regime thus come to depend, more than ever, upon the shared involvement and commitment of the States Parties, the international community, and the civil society.</b></p> <p>This thesis proposes to examine the multiple ways in which the World Heritage regime has used its power mechanisms to achieve its current significant international position. It will begin with a definition of the UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention, an international treaty to preserve the world cultural and natural and intangible heritage. UNESCO’ s World Heritage regime is thus chiefly based on the implementation of the World Heritage Convention and the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention through the World Heritage Committee (WHC). A brief diachronic view of the Convention’s work and aims are therefore imperative for understanding the regime’s power mechanisms and its dynamics. Also provided will be definitions of cultural and natural heritage as well as cultural landscapes and the adopted criteria for the nomination of world heritage, which are all key aspects and assessment measures of UNESCO’ s Heritage regime. After a brief synopsis of the differences between this regime and conventional International Organisations (IOs), this research will shed light on the nature of its persuasive forms of power: scientific objectivity, blacklisting, mimicry, and competition - especially regarding the significance of both the States Parties and the regime’s reputation, as well as its legitimacy. It will discuss how vital these forms of power are to success in influencing states to ratify the World Heritage Convention, to ensure compliance, and persuade them to jointly achieve the proposed goals. It will be further shown that the regime’s legitimacy is based on the perception of its procedures and favourable outcomes by its Member States. In addition, this research will theorise on the constructivist IR approach by adapting it to the regime. How Member States follow constructed rules and adopt a ‘logic of appropriateness’ will also be explored. It will in addition involve examination of its political tools, the World Heritage List, the List of World Heritage in Danger and socio-cultural tools, since they represent the conduit for its power mechanisms, and argue the chances of success in each arena. Examples from the Cologne Cathedral in Germany and the Kathmandu Valley in Nepal illustrate how the regime’s tools can be used as a deterrent mechanism to ensure the integrity of World Heritage sites. Moreover, the dichotomy of heritage viewed through the lens of national and international interests will be addressed, as well as what this entails for the States Parties’ sovereignty. International interests may come to the forefront of heritage protection, creating a new form of sovereignty: ‘Disaggregated sovereignty’. The World Heritage regime’s various benefits will also be discussed, its impact on the state’s economies especially in regard to tourism, the granting of international assistance as well as funds, and its influence on the States Parties social life by igniting a sense of prestige and pride about their World Heritage properties and by sensitising entire nations regarding the necessity to jointly protect and conserve this collective treasure. Examples from Cambodia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo illustrate the effectiveness of international assistance provided by the regime, while the example of the Galapagos Islands’ underlines the need to develop sustainable tourism practices to prevent the deterioration of heritage sites. ...</p>


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 149-160
Author(s):  
DRÉ VAN MARREWIJK

Urban World Heritage and the Historic Urban Landscape approach in the Netherlands Within the category of cultural landscapes on the UNESCO World Heritage List the ‘continuing urban landscapes’ are a small but interesting group of sites. This group consists of urban and suburban areas (‘urban landscapes’) with outstanding historical and heritage values, while at the same time they are characterized by a high degree of spatial dynamics. Many developments take place that lead to change of the environment. Rio de Janeiro, the mining landscape of Nord-Pas de Calais and the Italian Amalfi coast near Naples are examples of these urban cultural landscapes on the World Heritage List. Next to these sites, there are urban World Heritage sites that formally are no cultural landscapes, but have similar characteristics. Historical city centers of Rome or Bruges, the Amsterdam canal ring or Speicherstadt in Hamburg are comparably stretched out and have comparable values. These sites are confronted with similar challenges with respect to conservation and management of change. The obligation to preserve the outstanding universal value of the site could become under pressure. This surely is the case in some urban and suburban World Heritage sites in the Kingdom of the Netherlands: Amsterdam Canal Ring, Defence Line of Amsterdam and Willemstad, Curaçao. The World Heritage status requires a strict management of the site. UNESCO’S Historic Urban Landscape approach can be helpful to make preservation and development compatible. In this article the opportunities and dilemmas of the HUL and ICOMOS’S role in it are discussed. A stronger emphasize on HUL when reviewing developments in urban World Heritage sites is advocated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document