Rethinking conservation: Managing cultural heritage as an inhabited cultural landscape

Vakhitova, T V (2015) Rethinking conservation: Managing cultural heritage as an inhabited cultural landscape. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 5(2), pp. 217-228. ISSN 2044-124X

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to suggest an approach to cultural heritage management as an inhabited cultural landscape in a context of urban planning. Design/methodology/approach - The paper provides a review of academic literature on the topic of cultural heritage conservation. Findings - This paper supports an approach to management of cultural heritage as a cultural landscape, defining it as a multivalent social phenomenon with tangible and intangible dimensions, spatial, and temporal scales. The cultural landscape approach continues the discourse on heritage values and emphasises the importance of recognition of social value and hence a wider stakeholder participation in the process of heritage management. This approach allows enhancing both intangible and tangible dimensions of cultural heritage and, therefore, encourages a more inclusive consideration of diverse cultural heritage values (encompassing social and environmental categories, e.g. well-being, health). Originality/value - The proposed cultural landscape approach to heritage management, as a culturally significant, inhabited, and changing landscape, enables a more comprehensive view on the interrelations of cultural heritage with other social and environmental categories and enhances the understanding of different values of cultural heritage. This approach could be particularly useful for strategic development at city planning level and in large construction or infrastructural projects.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: heritage; sustainability; values; conservation; cultural landscape; cultural significance; heritage management
Index terms: cultural landscape, conservation, heritage management, city planning, stakeholder participation, dimension, urban planning, social value, methodology, well-being, cultural significance, infrastructural project
Subjects: health monitoring assessment and metrics, environmental policy, urban planning, community and social dimensions, mental health and wellbeing, heritage and conservation, cross-cultural studies, sociology, urban design, infrastructure engineering, research methods
Topics: Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Governance, Sustainability, Urban Studies, Design Practice, International Construction
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here