part 1 - Iccrom

MEASURING HERITAGE CONSERVATION PERFORMANCE
6th International Seminar on Urban Conservation
arguments set out in the historical survey. It should
be noted that the sequence of conducting the surveys,
with the exception of that relating to prior
knowledge, can be defined on a case-by-case basis.
And there may be situations where some can be
conducted in parallel, e.g. the historical survey and
the reading of the urban layout.
Interpretation, founded on the notions of spatialities
and temporalities, should result:
• In definition of uniqueness on the basis
of characteristics such as figures, legends,
natural environment, choice of location,
socio-economic factors, occupation and
use of land and architecture as well as
identifying what is similar to other places.
• In choosing a key idea or a representation
of the asset which may guide the construction
of the narrative.
• In defining the authenticity and integrity
of the cultural heritage asset. For this
definition there is a need to ensure that
the historical survey and the reading of
the urban layout and/or the landscape
and urban-architectural has been completed.
It is also essential to define the
time-frame that enables the evaluation
of past and present in the elements comprising
the cultural heritage asset under
study. That is, this evaluation requires a
comparative analysis to be made between
the situation today and in the past. But
which past? The one that has documentation
(dossiers, inventories, photographs,
etc.) that enables consistent comparison
of the design, function, building material
and surroundings, as set out by UNESCO.
The above-discussed conceptual and methodological
study conducted on the historical method, the
method of oral history, and the procedures adopted
by the institutions responsible for the classification
and listing of cultural heritage assets have enabled a
methodological framework to be formed that guides
the identification of the asset in question. However,
certain prerequisites and precautions for the correct
and fruitful implementation of the steps proposed
and tested have yet to be set out:
• Prior knowledge of cultural heritage
asset must be identified so that adjustments
and implementation strategies of
the study are carried out satisfactorily.
The historical method, therefore, should
be started before the others, but there may
be situations where it is more appropriate
to start with one of the other methods.
This situation may be that of a cultural
heritage asset that does not have enough
documentary historical records or which
are consistent. The method of oral history,
the reading of the urban layout and the
landscape and urban-architectural survey
may also be suitable for the study of each
asset.
• The application of at least three of the
four procedures that make up the methodology
is needed to ensure consistency of
identification of the asset.
• A clear and precise definition of the
study must be conducted and its product,
which means determining the level of
detail, size and profile of the team and the
equipment and time required to conduct
the study. It should be remembered that
this definition is directly linked to financial
resources available.
• The team must be brought to the same
level and its members integrated, given
that the four procedures need to be interactive
to define authenticity, integrity and
value.
The proposed methodology for the identification
process of cultural heritage assets emphasizes the
connection between intellectual processes and the
process of social construction and material aspects
and aspects of memory, meanings and values. It
could be said that the methodological procedures
established take account of identifying a cultural
heritage asset, and should be enhanced by keeping
in step with the studies on the authentication process
and systems for monitoring and control that are
being developed and tested.
It is worth remembering that this enhancement can
also happen at any time throughout the process of
constructing ‘Cultural Significance’. This is embodied
in the Declaration of Significance, which, since
1990, has become a UNESCO and World Heritage
Centre requirement for applications for inclusion of
a heritage item on the World Heritage List. Cultural
Significance “has a decisive role regarding conservation
activities. It is used as an analytical instrument
and as a guide to interventions on heritage objects,
monuments and sites, especially for conservation
Ribeiro, C.; Lira, F.; Piccolo, R. & V. Pontual. 2012. Conserving and identifying heritage: A methodological contribution. In Zancheti,
S. M. & K. Similä, eds. Measuring heritage conservation performance, pp. 15-25. Rome, ICCROM.
23