Looking After Cultural and Natural Heritage Resources in Asia ...

Looking After Cultural and Natural
Heritage Resources in Asia:
An Outline of Concepts,
Conditions, Needs, and Desirable Action
H. Detlef Kammeier
Professor (emeritus), Urban and Regional Planning Consultant, Bangkok, Thailand
Visiting Professor, BTU Cottbus (World Heritage Studies, 2002-2005), and
TU Berlin (Urban Management, since 2005), Germany
Previously (1976-2000) Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, AIT Bangkok
“ForUm” – International Seminar on Urban Heritage Management in
Secondary Cities and Towns in Southeast Asia,
Siem Reap and Battambang, Cambodia, January 11-21, 2009
1

1. Introduction: Reflections on the Context
2. World Heritage as a Global Responsibility
3. Locally Based Management
4. Typology of Sites and Site Conditions
5. Principles of Good Heritage Site Management
6. Conclusions
WH 2007 BORDEAUX
2

Reflections on the context of this seminar
The context:
• A good idea to run a
seminar in Cambodia
• “Eye opener” and
exchange of experience
from several countries
• Intention to go for a
second stage as soon as
possible…
The speaker:
• It is an honour and an
obligation to speak here
• In SE Asia since 1972
• Broad academic and
practical experience in
many countries
• Specific interests in
integrated heritage
conservation for decades
We have ten days together
I have been asked to speak several times
So I do not have to say everything up front…
3

Mission and scope of the first presentation
• The purpose of the opening speech is to outline the context of
heritage conservation in Asian countries
• The focus of my talks this week is on the management of
heritage sites (with/without World Heritage status) in
developing countries as well as “transition countries”
• “Complex sites” include (1) historic cities or city cores as
much as (2) cultural landscapes and (3) natural sites – both of
the latter are usually inhabited by people who are capable and
willing of taking care of their areas
• Attention to the specific problems in developing or “transition
countries” where conservation and “revitalization” of historic
cities (or conservation of nature areas) are in a tough
competition with economic growth and the development of
basic social needs
4

A sample of WHS –
Huge differences
in content, type, and size…
Any common characteristics?
5
All pix from WH website

1. Introduction: Reflections on the Context
2. [World] Heritage as a Global Responsibility
3. Locally Based Management
4. Typology of Sites and Site Conditions
5. Principles of Good Heritage Site Management
6. Conclusions
WH 2007 JEJU DO
6

Global responsibility – taken seriously?
• The “global responsibility” may well be referred to in big
UN documents (WH List since 1972!), but it is certainly
not yet a fully developed global movement
• Two very tough tests,
• Taking overall responsibility at national level, and
• Translating global responsibility into local action
• In principle, this is similar to the situation in the globallocal
environmental agenda (LA 21) in the 1980s and 90s
7

Culture and nature intertwined:
The increasing complexity of “heritage sites”
Ecosystem
Cultural landscape, historic city
Heritage site
Monument
Both cultural landscapes and historic cities must facilitate adequate
involvement of the local community as the traditional “site owner”. This
requires special institution-building and social policies at the local level,
but also funding support at all levels of government
8

INTANGIBLE
TANGIBLE
NATURAL MAN-MADE
Phenomena Activities
Natural Objects Artefacts
Cultural / Social
Movable / Immovable
Comprehensive definition of heritage resources:
‘Integrated’ conservation must include the intangible activities
9

historic cities
(170 WHS)
CULTURE
878 WHS (2008) >>> 1000, inflation…?
679 cultural – 25 mixed – 174 natural sites
Protected historic city sites:
50…100,000? (ICOMOS and others)
cultural landscapes
(130 WHS)
NATURE
Protected natural sites: 68,000
(various IUCN categories)
10

The focus of our seminar
Heritage protection in
Southeast Asia
• Great diversity of
countries – relatively rich
and quite poor
• National policy priorities
not on conservation
• But: Important entry
points: Tourism!
Environment!
• Huge new opportunities
from regional cooperation
and exchange
• Secondary cities and
towns
• Urban conservation still
new in Asia (compared
with “the West”)
• Urban conservation less
understood than
monument preservation
• Smaller cities more
neglected that larger
ones
• Local conditions Siem
Reap quite different from
Battambang
11

1. Introduction: Reflections on the Context
2. World Heritage as a Global Responsibility
3. Locally Based Management
4. Typology of Sites and Site Conditions
5. Principles of Good Heritage Site Management
6. Conclusions
WH 2007 JINJIANGLI
12

Management of (world) heritage:
principal division of responsibilities
Levels: From global to local
(and individual land and
business owners)
Global: UNESCO WHC
(supported by ICOMOS,
ICCROM, IUCN, et al)
National: “State parties”
(federal / national, state)
Regional / local:
“site management authority”
Public bodies’ principal roles Partners
Guidelines, promotion of best
practices, comparative monitoring,
limited seed funding
Policies, guidelines, best practices,
monitoring
Reconciling WH guidelines and
national legislation
Funding support
Local-level planning / management,
Local institution-building, legislation,
and co-funding
Facilitating private-sector co-operation
and co-funding
Global NGO and
special interest
groups
Professional groups,
city associations,
foundations
Local foundations
and associations,
individual property
owners
13

Natural Sites: Better
protection of nature
under threat from
civilization?
• 84% of the national parks (in Latin
America) are inhabited by indigenous
peoples;
• 90% of protected areas in Europe
are seasonally used by pastoral
people grazing their flocks.
• But - Indigenous practices have
proven to be successful,
• they can produce similar results as
Western approaches, they can be
inexpensive, and easier to enforce
14

What exactly is a “management plan” for
(a complex) World Heritage Site (1)?
1. Protecting the site against external influences – need
for developing better cultural impact assessment methods
2. Emphasis on management rather than physical design
• “Management” includes appropriate institutional
arrangements (at the local level and above it)
• This implies an emphasis on implementation, which
• presupposes suitable sharing of the heavy financial
burdens of urban conservation
3. The guidelines of the WH Centre for management plans
encompass all those points
15

What exactly is a “management plan” for a
historic city as a World Heritage Site (2)?
• There are some (but not many) good examples of
management plans to refer to (UK, Australia, e.g.)
• Most historic cities are not World Heritage Sites, but the
WH guidelines are nevertheless always useful to refer to
• “Conservation counts (and it pays)”: If properly done,
public investments usually trigger considerable private
investments >>> Estimated multipliers in urban areas are at
least 1:3 but may reach 1:6!
• Properly managed “revitalization” (which is not so much
the problem in Cambodian towns!) must mean a mix of
economic, social, institutional, and physical improvements
16

Property
ownership
Public sector
Streets
Open spaces
Plots/Buildings
Private sector
Owner-occupied
Plots/Buildings
Fully developed financing system for urban conservation areas
Cost categories Form of funding Sources of funding Remarks
- Acquisition
- Major renovation,
repairs
New infrastructure
construction
Maintenance Recurrent expenses
(of respective public
agency)
Land acquisition - Private investment
- Special low-interest
loans
- No charges for
public infrastructure
improvements
Construction - Private funding
- Low-interest loans
- Public subsidies
- Tax deduction
To be elaborated later in this course
Maintenance - Private
- Tax holidays or
reduced tax
Rented property Rental payments - Public subsidies for
needy residents
Capital investment - Specific national grant
- Annual budget of agency in charge
of heritage sites
- Special lottery proceeds
- Special fund raising measures
Capital investment - Federal, state, municipal cofunding
- Revenues from renting property
- Entrance fees
- Surcharges on hotel taxes
(“Kurtaxe”)
- Preferential tax arrangements for
conservation areas
- National funds earmarked for
conservation areas
- Preferential tax arrangements for
conservation and environmental
projects
- Preferential tax arrangements
within 15-20 years after construction
Legal tool for
acquisition right of
“first refusal” of local
authority
Entrance fees for
foreign tourists, e.g.
After the end of the
conservation
programme (20-25
years), charges for
infrastructure
improvements
17

Awards to private-public projects in
Gilgit (Pakistan), Lijiang (China)
Annual competition since 2000
Book publication 2007
18

The Programme of the Asia
Pacific Awards for Cultural
Heritage Conservation has
attracted entries from all over
Asia (including Australia).
The restoration of this rural wat
in NE Thailand was a 100%
community project.
19

To be elaborated later in this course
Application brochures available
Contrasting APH Awards, 2007: Temple
management by community (Ladakh,
India); architectural integration &
innovation (Hong Kong)
www.unescobkk.org/
20

An independent example from Thailand
Local community action for the traditional landscape in Nonthaburi (Greater Bangkok) 21

1. Introduction: Reflections on the Context
2. World Heritage as a Global Responsibility
3. Locally Based Management
4. Typology of Sites and Site Conditions
5. Principles of Good Heritage Site Management
6. Conclusions
WH 2007 SHI LIN
22

Towards a typology of WHS for facilitating
better management
Purpose: To distinguish groups of sites with comparable
characteristics to facilitate working exchange relations
(example: WH cities, or cultural landscapes – but that is
still too broad)
Helpful criteria of comparability: Cultural region, economic
development of the country, common historical features
Similar places: Population size, physical fabric, ethnicity,
climate, administrative set-up, tourism potential
Based on such criteria, exchange and co-operation
arrangements would be quite promising
All this requires a good database for comparative analysis
>>> refer to the annex (perhaps later in the course)
23

Very diverse “living historic cities” –
How much do they have in common?
Selected WHS in China, Yemen, Uzbekistan, Lithuania, Germany
24
All pix from WH website

Knowing the typical problems associated with
heritage areas – as a basis for remedial action
• Discrepancy of values (economic vs emotional / cultural, e.g.)
• Discrepancies between the public interest and many different
private interests (land owners and their financial ability)
• Local-national clashes on values and development
• Threats (neglect, decay, inconsiderate policies, incompatible
new development)
• Risks (to be prepared for)
25

Distinguishing values and their discrepancies
Emotional Values Wonder
Identity
Continuity
Spiritual and symbolic
Cultural Values
Note: Ecological
Values are of a
comparable nature!
Documentary
Historic
Archaeological, age and scarcity
Aesthetic and symbolic
Architectural
Townscape, landscape, ecological
Technological and scientific
Use Values Functional
Economic
Social
Political and ethnic
To be elaborated later in this course
Source: Feilden
26

Qualitatively /
quantitatively
measured
values
Present point in time
Public view of historic values
Typical problems: Loss of cultural identity (and
loss of appreciation of traditional values) – to
be addressed by conservation efforts
Experts’ views
Re-appreciation
of public views
WH or nat’l
heritage status
Time
27

Qualitatively /
quantitatively
measured
values
Use value
Historic value
The principal problem: Obsolescence
Present point in time
Revitalization,
rehabilitation,
adaptive re-use
Time
Remedial action: Conservation, but not re-development
28

Typical opportunities
• Tourism (various types) as an obvious future for many
heritage sites – but… great dangers of overcrowding and
loss of heritage values
• Cultural events (concerts, theater, other shows) as a
creative solution with considerable employment effects, but
-- seasonal peaks (summer) and troughs
• “Knowledge industries” (special university institutes,
international exchange centres, international schools) with
remarkable potential for sustainable employment effects
• Conference and cultural tourism – as a better solution than
seasonal mass tourism (if conference facilities and
knowledge industries can be put in place)
29

1. Introduction: Reflections on the Context
2. World Heritage as a Global Responsibility
3. Locally Based Management
4. Typology of Sites and Site Conditions
5. Principles of Good Heritage Site Management
6. Conclusions
WH 2007 ATSINANANA
30

The Burra Charter * >> one of
the best internationally
applicable guidelines
The process is adaptable, multidisciplinary,
and
management-focused
Main characteristics of a
strategic approach:
1. Linking science and action
2. Multi-criteria analysis
3. Options for intervention
4. Participation / consultation
5. Iterative processes
_____________________________
* Refer to website of ICOMOS Australia
31

WHS Management Plans
• Good management plans are issues-focused and action
oriented, with strong emphasis on the institutional
framework and implementation
• A typical example of a good management plan from the
UK is the one for…
• Ironbridge Gorge, which is structured much in the same
way as most of the other UK-based management plans
for urban conservation situations or cultural landscapes
• The Australian plan for Uluru (Ayers Rock) is a good one
for a cultural landscape
• IUCN is actively involved in promoting community based
areas with local management
32

Good examples of plans, proven “best practices” –
as in urban environmental planning (ICLEI e.g.), to
enable the heritage manager to develop…
• Strategic planning qualities
• Community involvement and ownership of the plan
• Integration with existing institutional framework and
existing statutory (and other) plans
• Appropriate analytical tools
• Computer-aided tools --- database management, analytical
cartography (GIS) and CAD, but also
• Appropriate communication tools for keeping the
community informed and involved
33

ICT opportunities for the management
of heritage sites
• Internet-based information flows and computing are
universally applicable
• Computer applications in urban and regional planning
and management now very common
• City marketing, internet-based tourism marketing
• Heritage management as an emerging interdisciplinary
specialization
• Existing relevant GIS applications: “Time Map”, ECAI
(electronic cultural atlas initiative)
34

Need for a better WHS database
• Rationale: Wealth of information on WH, but scattered and
not readily accessible…
• Competence in WHS management increasing too slowly
• Need for more exchange among professionals and ”site
managers”
• UNESCO database comprising all 851 sites (as of July
2007): Rich information, regularly maintained, but…
• Extremely limited search capability – hence inadequate
use of the potentially valuable information, and insufficient
exchange among site management officers
• UNESCO copyright on data provided by national agencies
in charge, several imitations of UNESCO internet
database, but…
This might be elaborated later in this course
• Better management support by UNESCO WHC needed
and possible
35

Missing links – management information?!
• There is no shortage of excellent guidelines (Internet!) >>>
but they are not accessible without specific and timeconsuming
search efforts
• Good comparable plans are extremely hard to come by, if
they exist at all…
• Even within the same country, WH management
approaches are not sufficiently co-ordinated to create the
necessary synergies
In view of such difficulties, personal research initiative
(Kammeier at WHS/BTU launched in 2005, continuing):
Electronic database for better management of World
Heritage sites >>> refer to the annex of my paper
36

1. Introduction: Reflections on the Context
2. World Heritage as a Global Responsibility
3. Locally Based Management
4. Typology of Sites and Site Conditions
5. Principles of Good Heritage Site Management
6. Conclusions
WH 2007 SYDNEY37

“State of the art” in the management of
complex heritage sites
• Considerable and often impressive advances –
albeit mostly in affluent countries
• Growing threats but also emerging opportunities in
poorer countries
• The “Hoi An Protocols” of 2001 (UNESCO
Bangkok) provide very good information on
principles � to be discussed in the workshops
• In general, the “conservation world” of 2009 is
distinctly different from that of 40 years ago
(Venice Charter)
• We do have at least some answers to most of the
hard questions, including substantial contributions
from Asian countries
38

Further supporting the management of
complex heritage sites
Much greater international (and national) efforts are
needed:
� Protected nature areas vs indigenous peoples’ rights
and potential roles in managing such resources
� Better integration in main-stream international economic
support programmes
� Developing realistic, adapted, and affordable urban
conservation approaches -- balancing “protection of the
past” with “supporting future development”
Broad scope for targeted exchange of experiences and
regional training programmes
39

Looking at possible follow-up action after
this seminar
Secondary cities in poor countries cannot wait forever…!
� Action to be taken now
� Better integration of their conservation potentials in
main-stream local planning and management
� Potential help with building the main pillars of opportunity
for local programmes:
� Awareness among decision-makers; cooperation by local
property owners; starting with good pilot projects; linking
tourism, environment, and heritage conservation; tapping
international assistance
40

Progress in specialized heritage
management education
• Special academic programmes in several
countries
• Many conferences, academic journals
• UNESCO’s (Asia Pacific) pioneering efforts
• Positive influences from neighbouring
countries
• Asian Academy for Heritage Management
(UNESCO/ICCROM, since 2001)
General conclusion for SE Asia:
The “conservation world” is better than ever before, but
much needs to be done in Asia � SO LET’S DO IT!
41

Thank you for your attention
42