Abstract
Using heritage as a cultural artifact in city development is not new, but little has been explored about how urban heritage can be utilized as new generative value and a new planning instrument for the revival of cities. The purpose of this paper is to show the creative and the generative use of urban heritage, both for the extension of cultural and tourist offer of the city and for the improvement of the quality of life in physical, social and economic terms for the community. The case study method was used for the adaptive reuse of projects for heritage buildings and urban revival in Kikinda. We argue that urban heritage has to be used, bearing in mind its spatial, economic and social sustainability aspects, and become a generator of urban revival. We go beyond recognition of the value of heritage as a cultural artifact that should solely be preserved and used as a static element in urban development, and view it more as a dynamic asset for city revival processes. We found that for the heritage nodes to be utilized as the new generative value for the revival of cities, they have to be perceived from the network perspective, thus influencing the urban environment in a sustainable way.
Highlights
It seems that throughout the majority of the 20th century, heritage protection and spatial planning, to say the least, were conflicting concepts
We found that for the heritage nodes to be utilized as new generative value and as the new planning and design instrument for the revival and regeneration of cities in a sustainable way, they must be perceived from the network perspective, influencing the urban environment
For the nodes of heritage to be utilized as the new generative value and as the new governance, planning and design instrument for the revival and regeneration of cities, they have to be perceived from the network perspective
Summary
It seems that throughout the majority of the 20th century, heritage protection and spatial planning, to say the least, were conflicting concepts. Fainstein [4] has a contrasting view, noticing that even when all stakeholders are not involved in participatory processes in the conceptualization phase of the projects, autocratic and bureaucratic ways of project creation can bring desired positive and just outcomes, with a precondition that none of the interests, except for the interests concerning the benefit of the community, are present These shifts in urban governance generated a need for building new networks between independent organizations and development of their capacity to act outside of their formal competencies to adapt to each specific situation [5]. The strategic approach in networking underlines the complementary element to the formal administrative structures regarding informal relations which could have a decisive role in achieving all actors’ objectives and reaching favorable solutions [6]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
