Normative Criteria for Relevant Evaluation
recording best practices
Changes at "protecting multiple heritage values related to an object"
Body
-
-
- Adaptive reuse practices expand the concept of authenticity and integrity of heritage objects to a
variety of sources which include materials and substance, use and function, tradition and
techniques, location and setting. By defining heritage as a "system of values", closely linked to a
bottom-up expression of social values and choice, they foster an inclusive, dynamic and
participative reuse of architectural heritage and sites through a respectful and compatible
adaptation and management process. This acknowledges the need for ongoing maintenance while
it strengthens the capacity and the accountability of local communities to look after their own
heritage. As representative of the culture of society, the legacy of physical artefacts, along with its
no-material attributes, is understood as a long-term investment for society, rather than a mere cost.
-
-
-
- KEY REFERENCES: ICOMS, 2019; HARRISON, 2010; BANDARIN, 2019; FALSER, 2015; SETTIS, 2017; PERKIN,
2010; PENDLEBURY, 2012
-
+
Adaptive reuse practices expand the concept of authenticity and integrity of heritage objects to a variety of sources which include materials and Adaptive reuse practices expand the concept of “authenticity and integrity” of heritage objects to a variety of heritage values which include together “materials and substance, use and function, tradition and techniques, location and setting, spirts and feeling and other internal or external factors” (Nara document on Authenticity 1994).
Hence, the protection of these values implies a shift from the heritage as thing approach to heritage as an ongoing process (Knippenberg 2019). Although the variety of aspects to be considered might create conflicts along the adaptation process (e.g. community needs vs compatible use, continuous access vs physical preservation, etc.) the equal care of -often- opposite elements foster the understanding and integration of existing heritage status, values and conditions into the protecting process, providing the reasons for all proposed interventions (ICOMS 2019). By protecting multiple heritage values as something in flux and adaptable to an ever-changing present (Harrison 2013, Högberg 2016), it acknowledges the need for an ongoing maintenance, participated by local communities and supported by dynamic approaches to respectful and compatible adaptive reuse and management (ICOMS 2019).
Key references
- Harrison, Rodnay. 2013. Heritage: Critical Approaches. London: Routledge.
- Högberg, Anders. 2016. Rodney Harrison: Heritage. Critical Approaches. London: Routledge. Norwegian Archaeological Review, pp. 268.
- ICOMOS. 2019. “European quality principles for EU-funded interventions with potential impact upon cultural heritage.” Paris: Manual. ICOMOS International.
- ICOMS. 1994. “Nara document on authenticity.” Available at: whc.unesco.org/document/116018.
- Karim van. 2019. “Towards an Evolutionary Heritage Approach: Performances, Embodiment, Feelings and Effects.” In AESOP 2019 Conference: Planning for Transition: Book of Abstracts, 166–166. Association of European Schools of Planning (AESOP)
