Tilblivelsen av setre som automatisk fredete kulturminner

Reconciling the Conservation of Cultural Heritage with Rural Development

The role of the archeological and cultural heritage sites in the process of urban regeneration in UNESCO’s protected areas becomes more and more important for the natural and cultural heritage protection in the touristic cities with urban expansion. However, there is no clear methodological approach for the inclusion of these important natural and cultural heritage sites in the process of urban regeneration of the cities. The purpose of this study is to analyze how two contemporary urban planning tools, sustainable urban mobility plans and heritage impact assessments, contribute to the protection and sustainable use of archeological sites. The methodology that is used in this study is dual, theoretical, through literature review, and empirical, through the appliance of the case study method and expert observation and mapping of the most valuable archeological sites in Boka Bay. The results of this study show that practical usage of the two proposed tools in the process of urban regeneration could help in cultural and natural heritage protection and their inclusion as drivers of sustainable urban planning and cultural heritage management. The results of the study confirm the authors’ hypothesis that the role of the archeological sites in the process of urban regeneration is evident in the touristic cities in the coastal area of Montenegro, concluding that urban mobility principles and heritage impact assessment studies must be considered in the process of urban regeneration while at the same time cultural (archeological) heritage management is an integral part of this process.

I. INTRODUCTION II. CULTURAL & NATURAL HERITAGE: AN OVERVIEW A. Cultural Heritage B. Natural Heritages C. Nature Conservation Strategies Worldwide D. The Links Between Cultural and Natural Heritage E. Characteristics of Sites of Overlapping Cultural & Natural Heritage III. The Present and Future of Integrated Cultural & Natural Heritage Management A. Challenges Posed to Protecting Cultural and Natural Heritage B. Existing Legal/Regulatory Efforts to Protect Cultural and Natural Heritage 1. Developed Countries a. The United States b. The European Union (1) England (a) National Parks (b) Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (c) Conservation Areas (2) Dartmoor National Park (a) The Dartmoor Local Plan (b) Local Plan Aims (c) Local Plan Landscapes c. Canada 2. Developing Countries a. China b. Brazil IV. CONCLUSION A. Why Integrate Cultural and Natural Heritage Protection? B. Bridging Boundaries for Mutual Gain I. INTRODUCTION Formal legal efforts to protect cultural and natural heritage are not a modern phenomenon. In the developed and developing worlds, regional, state, and local governments undertake efforts to protect their cultural heritage and their natural resources. Most cultural and natural resource protection regimes, however, have evolved independently of one another. This is only recently beginning to change. As scholars, regulators, and activists increasingly recognize the links and overlap between areas of cultural and natural heritage, they are beginning to come together to develop new regimes for joint cultural and environmental protection. These early efforts jointly to protect cultural and natural heritage vary significantly in character and success. These variations reflect a still vague and evolving understanding of the interplay between culture and nature, the relationship between public and private land ownership, and significant regional differences in existing legal regimes, economic development, and environmental agendas. Further, there is currently very little comprehensive research examining global efforts to develop heritage protection areas that integrate both cultural and natural resource conservation. There is even less research analyzing how relationships between land ownership and social conceptions of culture and nature impact the development of future cultural and natural heritage programs. The goal of this paper is to contribute to and encourage the development of innovative, interdisciplinary approaches for the protection, preservation, and enhancement of natural and cultural heritage areas. The second section of this paper examines traditional notions and regulatory regimes for cultural and natural heritage protection, and delves into the links between cultural and natural heritage. Section three analyzes existing cultural heritage and environmental/natural protection laws, and provides examples of joint cultural and natural heritage preservation efforts. In particular, section three considers how current and prospective joint cultural and natural heritage protection efforts in developed and developing countries contribute to the social and economic development of communities and regions, and advance the principles of sustainable development by strengthening the historical continuity of a place and its people, and by guiding development in ways consistent with the characteristics of these cultural and natural resources. Additionally, section three examines case studies in the United States, Europe, Canada, Brazil, and China to demonstrate the challenges and critical elements integral to developing innovative and sustainable cultural and natural heritage preservation schemes. …

The main purpose of this paper is to explore how the conceptualisation and management of cultural heritage have been treated in the cultural heritage proclamations of Ethiopia. The analysis of the four cultural heritage proclamations reveals that the notion of cultural heritage improves from the first to the fourth proclamation. In the first two proclamations, the term antiquity was employed, and the latter two employed the term of cultural heritage. The 1966 proclamation included antiquities that were dated prior to 1850 EC, while the 1989 proclamation removed this cutoff date and expounded upon the definition of antiquities. The 2000 proclamation replaced the term antiquity with cultural heritage and introduced the concept of intangible cultural heritage. In terms of the management of cultural heritage, the differences between the 1989 and 2000 proclamations are quite minimal. The 2014 proclamation attempted to classify cultural heritage into national and regional cultural heritage. It also defined important components of intangible cultural heritage. The management of cultural heritage exhibits some evolution from the first to the last proclamation. However, due to the diversified nature of cultural heritage conceptualisation and management, it will be important for additional legislation to be issued separately for movable, immovable and intangible cultural heritage, for example. This study argues that strong legal and institutional frameworks should be established to properly protect, conserve and study cultural heritage.

Pastarasis dešimtmetis paveldo apsaugos srityje yra susijęs su 2005 m. įsigaliojusiu Nekilnojamojo kultūros paveldo apsaugos įstatymu. Ryškiausi pokyčiai vyko archeologinio paveldo apskaitos, apsaugos reikalavimų įteisinimo bei archeologinių tyrimų reglamentavimo srityse. Apskaitos problematika aptariama vertinimo, paveldo objektų gradacijos ir paveldosauginių apribojimų taikymo aspektais. Straipsnyje taip pat nagrinėjamos šios archeologinio paveldo apsaugos priemonės: informavimas apie žemės plotui taikomusarcheologinio paveldo apsaugos apribojimus; galimų veiklų ir sąlygų archeologinio paveldo objekto teritorijoje ir apsaugos zonoje nustatymas; archeologinių tyrimų privalomumo atvejų apibrėžimas. Aptariamas rcheologinių tyrimų reglamentavimas, archeologinio paveldo apsaugos in situ klausimas.

Because of the numerous types of world heritage that currently exist, UNESCO divides them into four categories: cultural heritage, natural heritage, cultural and heritage dual heritage, and cultural landscape heritage. Taiwan’s Cultural Heritage Preservation Act stipulates that tangible cultural heritage include monuments, historic buildings, commemorative buildings, groups of buildings, archaeological sites, historic sites, cultural landscapes, antiquities, and natural landscapes and natural monuments, whereas its intangible cultural heritage include traditional performing arts, traditional craftsmanship, oral traditions and expressions, folklore, and traditional knowledge and practices. Because of continually increasing tasks associated with cultural heritage management, this study adopted research approaches such as compilation of relevant laws and regulations and interviews with managers to identify their needs in managing cultural heritage. This study posited that digital-based information management is highly conductive to managing cultural heritage. Thus, a dynamic cultural heritage management system was developed to help managers perform various heritage preservation and management-related work. The proposed system enables digitalizing related documents to facilitate their preservation, provides diversified functions that allow managers to conduct remote interactive management, and enables establishing various economical monitoring functions. This study used actual cases of cultural heritage preservation and input data collected from various management tasks into the proposed management system. Accordingly, the management functions of the system were verified successfully. The proposed system can help relevant departments manage cultural heritage, diminish the occurrence of problems concerning heritage management, reduce unnecessary waste of resources, and elevate the management quality of monuments and historical buildings.

Perishing Heritage:

With conceptual roots going back to the first half of the 20th century, the public interpretation and presentation of cultural and archaeological heritage have become essential components in the conservation and protection of cultural heritage values and sites. By the early 21st century, the mechanisms and processes of public interpretation had reached a heightened level of sophistication and effectiveness. In the international arena, many leading organizations have emerged that are carrying the banner of interpretation principles for access, inclusion, and respect for multiple points of view. These principles emphasize the importance of dialogue facilitated by community engagement experts / laypersons, and participation in all phases of program planning, development, and delivery. Conventions and charters have been two of the most used categories of international documents to frame standards and guidelines for cultural and archaeological heritage management and presentation. International documents that specifically addressed the presentation and interpretation of archaeological heritage did not take shape until the late 20th century. The most important international document, to date, relating to interpretation and presentation of archaeological heritage sites is the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) Charter on the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites (2008). The charter lays out seven principles of interpretation and presentation about the conservation, education, and stewardship messages that represent the transcendent humanistic values of the resource. The concept of authenticity has become a central concern in the conservation and interpretation of cultural heritage. The Nara Document of 1994 (ICOMOS 1994, cited under Guidelines and Charters) built on the Venice Charter (ICOMOS 1965, cited under Guidelines and Charters), considering an expanding scope of cultural heritage concerns. It addresses the need for a broader understanding of cultural diversity and cultural heritage and underscores the importance of considering the cultural and social values of all societies. It emphasizes respect for other cultures, other values, and the tangible and intangible expressions that form part of the heritage of every culture. The Nara+20 text identifies five key interrelated issues highlighting prioritized actions to be developed and expanded within global, national, and local contexts by wider community and stakeholder involvement: (1) diversity of heritage processes, (2) implications of the evolution of cultural values, (3) involvement of multiple stakeholders, (4) conflicting claims and interpretations, and (5) the role of cultural heritage in sustainable development. The goal of more-inclusive interpretations requires an acceptance of divergent definitions of authenticity that depend on a level of tolerance of multiple definitions of significance with concomitant, objectively derived, assigned, and ascribed heritage values. We can hope that these efforts lead to the recognition of humanistic values that are reflected in cultural heritage narratives and heritage tourism practices as well as site commemoration and protection decisions by controlling authorities.

Western Norway is one of the regions with the most precipitation in Europe. Average amounts are about 3500 mm per year around and in the mountains near the coast, with up to 5000 mm in peak years. The wet climate is mainly caused by the North Atlantic Current, which also gives this region a milder winter than other parts of Norway, with rain being more frequent than snow.  Enhancement of rainfall (intensity, frequency, duration) and attendant flooding is the main physical climate risk for Western Norway.  As such, we focus on changes in frequency and magnitude of daily and sub-daily precipitation and discuss the added value resulting from convection permitting regional climate models at basin scale.  Concomitantly, the Norwegian Centre for Climate Services and the Impetus4Change project aim to overcome the barrier of providing (only) gridded data from climate simulations on a data portal. Thus, we focus on the development of accessible, user-friendly climate information relevant for the local planning authorities (i.e., municipalities). In alignment with Norway’s Planning and Building Act, we aim to promote the integration of tailored climate data into municipal planning strategies. These inform the so-called “master plan” of the municipality which is the most important management document of the municipal council. Tailoring climate information in this way, rather than exclusively through the conventional methods of climate report writing and data dissemination via web portal, ensures that climate information are fit for purpose (i.e., municipal planning) and will enhance the uptake, usefulness and impact of climate services. 

The pine-dominated forests of Western Norway have been found to harbour viable populations of woodpeckers, including the highly specialized White-backed Woodpecker Dendrocopos leucotos. The aim of this study was to investigate to what extent there were any changes in frequencies of woodpeckers, in particular the White-backed Woodpecker and the Grey-headed Woodpecker Picus canus, by resurveying 60 plots (each 1 km2) originally surveyed during 1994/1995. The resurvey was performed in 2013/2014. The White-backed Woodpecker was found to be the most common woodpecker species in both time periods. The Grey-headed Woodpecker was found to have a statistically significant decline from 27% of the 60 plots in 1994/95 to only 12% in 2013/14. The other four species all increased in frequency; although none of those increased frequencies were found to be statistically significant. We discuss possible explanations to why pine forests in Western Norway constitute a valuable habitat for the White-backed Woodpecker at the same time as it has drastically declined in other parts of Norway and Western Europe. In general, the reduced frequency of Grey-headed Woodpecker is not fully understood, although we suggest that cold winters during the years prior to the surveys in 2013/14 may be an important factor.

Since 2008, the Qatar Museums Authority (QMA) and the University of Birmingham have collaborated on a cutting-edge research programme called the Qatar National Historic Environment Record (QNHER). This has made a significant contribution to our understanding of Qatar's diverse cultural heritage resource. Commencing with the analysis of terrestrial and marine remotely sensed data, the project expanded to undertake detailed terrestrial and marine survey across large parts of the country, recording archaeological sites and palaeoenvironmental remains ranging from the Palaeolithic to modern times. The project was not simply concerned with the collection of heritage data, but how that data is then stored and accessed. After consultation with Qatar's Centre for GIS, the project team designed and developed a custom geospatial web application which integrated a large variety of heritage-related information, including locations, detailed categorisations, descriptions, photographs and survey reports. The system architecture is based around a set of REST and OGC compliant web services which can be consumed by various applications. Day-to-day access for all stakeholders is provided via the QNHER Web App client, a fully bilingual Arabic and English HTML5 web application. The system accesses internet resources such as base mapping provided by Google Maps and Bing Maps and has become an invaluable resource for cultural heritage research, management and mitigation and currently holds over 6,000 cultural heritage records. Future development will see modules for survey, underwater cultural heritage, translation and web access for educational institutions. The QNHER geospatial web application has become pivotal in providing evidence-based development control advice for the QMA, in the face of rapid urbanisation, highlighting the importance of research, protection and conservation for Qatar's cultural heritage. However, this application has a much wider potential than simply heritage management within Qatar. Many other countries around the globe lack this kind of geospatial database that would enable them to manage their heritage. Clearly the diversity of cultural heritage, site types and chronologies means that simply attempting to transplant a system directly is inappropriate. However, with the input of regional heritage managers, particularly with regard to language and thesauri, the system could be customised to address the needs of cultural resource managers around the world. Most antiquities departments around the globe do not have country-wide, georeferenced base mapping or access to geospatial inventories. Access to internet resources has major cost-saving benefits, while providing improved mapping and data visualisation. More importantly this offers the opportunity for cultural heritage management tools to be established with minimal outlay and training. The broad approach the project has taken and the technological and methodological innovations it introduced make the QNHER a leader in this field - not only in the Gulf, but also in the wider world.

Recently, there are various threats encountering
 the cultural heritage worldwide. Indeed, these threats make conservation and
 management of cultural heritage a complex process to deal with. Since the
 1970s, the UNESCO started to issue many guidelines and charters related to the
 management and conservation of the cultural heritage. Meanwhile, the Cultural
 Heritage Management (CHM) including sustainability has become a significant
 concept especially in the European countries. Turkey and Egypt are famous for
 their diversified cultural and natural heritage attractions which give an
 opportunity for both countries to be appealing tourist destinations
 Nevertheless, cultural heritage of Turkey and Egypt suffers from several major
 problems at present. All of these require a selective policy, urgent
 conservation, constant monitoring, protection, and maintenance. This paper aims
 to examine and compare cultural heritage management in both countries according
 to specific criteria which will evaluate the current situation of the cultural
 heritage management in Turkey and Egypt from different aspects (legal
 framework, institutional/administrational framework, resources, and current
 challenges). Also, this paper shows how the cultural heritage management has
 been developed in both countries. Generally, it highlights the increasing
 importance of cultural heritage management. Furthermore; it will emphasize the
 significance of sustainability practices in managing world heritage sites.

Digging Up Jericho: Past, Present and Future

Bergama'da 1878 de Carl Humann tarafindan arkeolojik kazilarin baslatilmasi ve her gecen gun onemli buluntularin ortaya cikmasi kentin baskin olarak arkeolojik ozellikleriyle anilmasi­ni saglamis ve saglamaktadir. Ornegin 1968 yilina ait imar planinda arkeolo­jik alan uzerinde yer alan geleneksel kent do­kusunun dondurularak gelismesinin kisitlan­masi ve zamanla bu alanlarin bosaltilarak arke­olojik kazilara terk edilmesi ongorulmustur. Antikcag yapilarina verilen onem, diger taraf­tan geleneksel konutlarin muhafazasina do­layli olarak katkida bulunmus; geleneksel ko­nut dokusu altindaki antik kentin zarar gorme­mesi icin, var olan yapilasma dondurulmus; yeni yapilasmalar icin bu alanlar disinda, gele­neksel dokunun guneyinde yeni iskân alanlari acilmistir. 1976 tarihinde Bergama'nin alanlari ve sinirlari Gayrimenkul Eski Eserler ve Anitlar Yuksek Kurulunca (GEEAYK) tescil edilmistir. ilani kararini takiben, Berga­ma'nin antik Pergamon kentinin kalintilari uze­rinde gelismis belli alanlari, korunmasi gerekli kentsel dokuya sahip olmasi nedeniyle ve Arkeolojik olarak 1983 yilin­da tescil edilmis ve 1984'te tekrar degerlendi­rilmistir, Bergama gibi cok katmanli kentlerde, tanimi konana kadar gecen surede, kurullari tarafindan yanlis ka­rarlarin alinmasinin yani sira tereddutler, dola­yisiyla karar uretememe durumlari soz konu­su olmustur. Bu tikaniklik, SIT tanimindan 20 yil sonra 1993'te Kultur ve Tabiat Varliklari Koruma Yuksek Kurulunun ilke kararindaki tanimi ve ko­sullarinin belirlenmesiyle asilmistir. Bergama'da da koruma amacli imar planina kadar gecerli olacak gecis donemi yapilas­ma kosullari m belirleyen karar, ilanindan 18 yil sonra, 2001 yilinda kentin bu alanlarinin, Izmir 2 numarali Kultur ve Tabiat Varliklari Koruma Kurulunca Kentsel Arkeolo­jik olarak ilan edilmesiyle alinmistir. Bu karara gore Bergama kenti alanlari. Kent­sel SIT, 1. derece SIT, 2. derece ve 3. derece olarak tanimlanmistir. Bu kararlar sonucunda, alani icinde yer atan evler, onarim dahi yapilamayan, harap an­cak ozgun yapilar olarak gunumuze ulasmistir. Kentin guneyinde yeni yapilasma alanlarinin olusturulmasindan sonra, alani icindeki geleneksel dokuda, evlerini birakmak isteme­yen, apartman yasamina uyum saglayamayan ve eski komsuluk iliskilerini surdurmek iste­yen yasli nufus kalmistir. Bu geleneksel doku­nun diger kullanicilari ise civar koylerden gelip buraya yerlesen dusuk gelir grubuna ait kulla­nicilardir. kultur varliklari envanter calismasiyla kentte harap fakat ozgun olarak gunumuze ulasmis onemli sayida konut oldugu, pek cok konutun enderlik degeri tasidigi ortaya kon­mustur. Bergama (izmir) Kultur Varliklari En­vanter Projesinin ucuncu ve son donem calis­masi 6-17 Eylul 2005 tarihlerinde Bergama da gerceklestirilen alan calismasiyla tamamlan­mistir. Pek cok uygarligi iceren, cok katmanli bir kent olan Bergama'da, sinirlan ve tanimi, bu envanter calismasi­nin basladigi 2003 yilindaki degisiklikler disin­da, Mart 2004 te izmir 2 numarali Kultur ve Ta­biat Varliklari Koruma Kurulunda alinan kararla, Kentsel + 3. derece olarak degistirilmis ve sinin guneye, Gazipasa Mahal­lesine dogru genisletilmistir (lev. 1: sek. 1). Kultur Varliklarinin yer aldigi mahalle­ler, Bergama Cayinin kuzeyindeki alanda Ulu-cami, Talatpasa, Kurtulus mahalleleri, Berga­ma Cayinin guneyinde ise Selcuk, Barbaros, Atmaca, Islamsaray, Turabey, Inkilâp, Gazipa­sa, Ertugrul ve Zafer mahalleleridir. 2005 yilin­da, Bergama Cayinin kuzeyinde Talatpasa ve Kurtulus mahallelerinde, Bergama Cayinin gu­neyinde ise Selcuk, Atmaca, islamsaray, Tu­rabey, Inkilâp, Gazipasa, Ertugrul ve Zafer ma­hallelerinde envanter calismasi gerceklestiril­mistir (lev. 2: sek. 2). Bergama Kuttur Varliktan Envanteri yapilirken calisma alanimizin sinirlan (lev. 1: sek. 1), Kultur ve Tabiat Varliklari Koruma Ku­rulu tarafindan onaylanmis sinirlari disinda, eski yerlesim dokusunu gosteren belgelerden de yararlanilarak belir­lenmistir. Bergama'da 2005 yilinda. 2003 ve 2004 yilla­rinda gerceklestirilen alan calismalarinda oldu­gu gibi Bergama Cayinin iki yakasinda, iki ayri grup tarafindan catisma gerceklestirilmistir. 6-17 Eylul 2005 tarihleri arasinda 7 kisilik ekip­le toplam 100 yapi adasinda calisilmis, 713'u anit olmak uzere, 814 adet envanter formu hazirlanmistir. 102 yapinin plan krokisi yapil­mis, 4440 adet dijital fotograf cekilmistir. Boy­lece 2003 yilindan itibaren, uc yillik envanter calismasi sonucunda 160'i yerlesme, 1501'i anit envanteri olmak uzere, toplam 1661 adet envanter formu hazirlanmis, 390 adet plan krokisi yapilmis ve 9718 adet dijital fotograf cekilmistir. kultur varliktan envanter calismasin­da, konutlarin yapim tarihleri ve mimari ozel­likleri bir arada degerlendirildiginde Berga­ma'daki konut mimarisinin gelisim sureci or­taya cikmaktadir. 2005 yilina ait alan calisma­sinda, nitelikli ve korunmaya deger Cumhuri­yet devri konut yapilarinin, onceki yillarda cali­silan alanlardakinden daha yogun olarak yer aldigi saptanmistir. Geleneksel kent dokusunun yeni yapilasma alanlariyla birlestigi yerdeki yogun yok edilisi­ne bagli olarak, kultur varligi sayisi azaldigin­dan, Bergama kentsel kultur varliklari evanteri ongorulenden daha once tamamlanmis bu­lunmaktadir. Envanteri yapilan kultur varliklari sayisi, mevcut tescilli yapi sayisinin yaklasik uc katidir. Bergama kentsel kultur varliklari envanteri dogrultusunda, alanlarinin bo­yutlarinda ve niteliklerinde degisiklikler yapil­masi gerekecektir. 2003 yilinda baslayan Bergama kentsel kultur varliklari envanter calismasi 2004 yilinda de­vam etmis ve 2005 yilinda sonuclanmistir. En­vanterlerin Kultur-Kitap veritabanina aktaril­masi ise 2006 yilinda tamamlanmistir.

The present research illustrates the methodological approach and the results achieved so far concerning the risk assessment of cultural heritage towards climate change impact in the framework of the “Extraordinary National plan for monitoring and conservation of Italian cultural heritage”. This initiative, coordinated by the Italian Ministry of Culture - General Directorate for the Safety of Cultural Heritage, aims at the safeguarding of cultural and natural heritage from diverse natural and human-made hazard, including climate-induced extreme events (heavy rain, floods and drought). The methodological approach implemented foresees:- Identification of climate and pollution parameters with priority in causing impacts on cultural heritage.- Selection and application of appropriate damage functions and climate extreme indices.- Development of projections of hazard at territorial level by using regional and climate models from the EURO-CORDEX experiment.- Hazard analysis by exploiting the Copernicus services CAMS (Atmosphere Monitoring) and C3S (Climate Change) and purposely elaborated data form air quality monitoring stations. - Application of the methodology for vulnerability assessment of cultural and natural heritage set up in the framework of the Interreg Central EU Project STRENCH.- Testing and validation of the methods and approaches at selected Italian case studies, among them the historic center of Florence and the terraced landscape in the Archipelago of Aeolian Islands. - Integration of the obtained data and results in the existing territorial information systems and repositories of the Ministry (e.g. Carta del Rischio and SecurArt projects).The final aim of the research is to support the Public Authorities at National and local level in the management of cultural heritage at risk, by also supporting them in putting forward recommendations for the integration of measures dedicated of the protection of cultural heritage in the national plans of disaster risk reduction and climate change mitigation.