UNESCO culturele landschappen en management uitdagingen

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 139-148
Author(s):  
CAROL WESTRIK

UNESCO cultural landscapes and management challenges In 1992 UNESCO adopted guidelines to include cultural landscapes in the World Heritage List. Cultural Landscapes are defined as ‘combined works of nature and of man’. It is this interaction that has to be of outstanding universal value. It should also be the focus concerning the management of such World Heritage sites. It requires an interdisciplinary approach as it covers different disciplines and in some cases different management systems. The management system is a living document that looks ahead. A holistic approach and monitoring are essential in order to be able to identify possible threats to the OUV early on and to act upon them.

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):  
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 ◽  
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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 227-242

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 outstanding universal value. In 1994, at the Nara Conference, the Document on Authenticity was established, 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”. Today, many factors affect the authenticity and integrity of cultural heritage: intensive tourism, excessive restoration works, new inappropriate investments or uncorrelated private interventions, etc. The debates on cultural heritage research, preservation and management have increased in recent years as the effect of UNESCO standards, namely to establish “an effective system of collective protection of the cultural and natural heritage of outstanding universal value, organized on a permanent basis and in accordance with modern scientific methods”. The problem of preservation, management, and promotion of heritage is of crucial importance from many points of views: scientific, technologic, socio-economic, and cultural.


Author(s):  
Ken Nicolson

Cultural landscapes are the combined works of man and nature and it is only by studying this dynamic interaction that the essence of the resulting cultural landscapes can be fully appreciated and valued. Differences and similarities between western and eastern perceptions and artistic expressions of landscape are discussed to establish the cultural values that underpin our understanding and interpretation of the natural and built world. The way by which the cultural landscape concept attained international recognition as a more holistic approach to define and interpret heritage sites is outlined. World Heritage definitions of the different categories of cultural landscape, namely, designed, organically evolved, and associative, are described using examples inscribed on the World Heritage List. Examples of equivalent categories of cultural landscapes in Hong Kong are then presented to introduce the concept and, for the first time, highlight their heritage value.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 168-184
Author(s):  
HANS RENES

Continuing landscapes as World Heritage The World Heritage Convention was adopted by UNESCO in 1972, in a period of growing awareness of the international dimensions of environment and heritage. However, it was also a period in which European visions of heritage were still dominant, for example on themes such as authenticity and the distinction between nature and culture. The World Heritage List, resulting from the Convention, put the initiative for inscriptions by state parties, leading to a bias towards unproblematic and tourism-oriented objects. In all these aspects, almost half a century of discussions brought changing ideas. The European emphasis on material authenticity and the division between nature and culture were challenged by practices from Asia and Africa. The role of the nation state became less important by global exchanges of ideas and by local and regional initiatives. The protection of cultural landscapes, particularly that of ‘living’ or ‘continuing’ landscapes, was only possible by a movement from protection towards ‘management of change’. The problem of management of such landscapes is illustrated in five case studies of cultural landscapes that are, or prepare to be, World Heritage Sites: Dresden, the rice terraces of the Cordilleras, the Beemster polder, the Altes Land near Hamburg and the Dutch/Belgian Colonies of Benevolence. The conclusion is that change within World Heritage Sites is possible but needs to be done with caution and with a sense of quality, preferably by involving landscape architects. Rather than the authentic remains of an original situation, the argument should be based on ideas such as layeredness of landscapes and path dependency in developments.


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


Author(s):  
Judith Herrmann ◽  
Christina Cameron

Purpose – This paper is based on a presentation given at the international World Heritage expert meeting on criterion (vi) held in Warsaw, Poland, in March 2012. Results were updated and adapted to scientific standards. The purpose of this paper is to understand the associative dimension in World Heritage by looking at the evolution and application of criterion (vi). Design/methodology/approach – For this paper, historical and qualitative approaches were combined. An understanding of the evolution of the criterion (vi) wording was gained through historical analysis and the consultation of relevant World Heritage statutory documents. A selected number of criterion (vi) statements were analyzed in qualitative terms. Results were then discussed in relation to the evolution of criterion (vi) wording and the understanding of pertinent World Heritage concepts. Findings – Criterion (vi) holds a special position. It addresses an associative dimension of cultural World Heritage sites. Due to its special character, its wording was subject to several changes. While its wording became ever more flexible, this development has not fostered the inscription of exceptional cases or the equal use of cultural associations. An inconsistent interpretation has also weakened the concept of Outstanding Universal Value. Research limitations/implications – Only inscriptions were taken into consideration. They usually have a World Heritage Committee approved criterion (vi) statement. Limitations to this research result from this restriction. Originality/value – The paper represents a comprehensive study of the application and interpretation of criterion (vi) that combines the understanding of the evolution of the criterion’s wording with the analysis of a large number of World Heritage inscriptions. It is of interest to the World Heritage community and contributes to the World Heritage discourse.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document