cem occasional paper series sustaining cultural … · a continuum of possibilities 5. conclusions...
TRANSCRIPT
CEM OCCASIONAL PAPER SERIESSuStaining cultural identity and a SenSe of place – new wine in old bottleS or old wine in new bottleS?
1
An information paper by Henry Russell, Adrian Smith and Phil Leverton, The College of Estate Management
IP 1/11
March 2011CEM OCCASIONAL PAPER SERIES
Contents
Abstract1. Introduction2. significance3. thevalueofbuiltheritage–moderndefinitionsofvalue 3.1. Heritagevaluation
3.2. Monetaryvalue
3.3. Economicvalue
3.4. Theevaluationofsocialvalues
3.5. Otherdimensionsofvalue–embodiedenergy
4. Acontinuumofpossibilities5. ConclusionsReferences
ABstRACt
Recentliteraturehasre-emphasisedtherelevanceofa‘senseofplace’toourunderstandingand
appreciationofthehistoricenvironment,andtotheimportanceofthehistoricenvironment‘increating
placeswherepeoplewanttoliveandwork’(EnglishHeritage2009:13).Asenseofplacehasconflicting
qualities:itneedstoprovideacontinuouslinelinkingustothepastwhichgivesusouridentity,yetit
mustberelevanttothechangingperceptionsofsucceedinggenerations.Inshort,itmustrecognise
theintergenerationallegacyofthebuiltenvironment.Acontinuumofoptionsisreviewedinthispaper.
Theaimofthisistoestablishsomebroadprinciplesastohowwebothvalueandmouldthetangible
andintangibleaspectsofheritageintoasenseofplacethat(toparaphraseBrundtland1987)meetsthe
opinionsandaspirationsofthepresentwithoutcompromisingtheabilityoffuturegenerationstoadapt
ittomeettheirownaspirationsandpriorities.
SuStaInIng cultural IdentIty and a SenSe of Place – new wIne In old bottleS or old wIne In new bottleS?
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
2
1. IntRoduCtIon
Theperceivedrelevanceofthehistoric
environmenthasmovedswiftlyinrecentyears,
fromsimplyasetoficonicstructuresselected
forprotectionbyexperts,toplacessignificant
tocommunities,wherethewiderhistoric
environmenthasaresonanceincreatingasense
ofplaceandculturalidentitywhichcontributeto
thequalityoftheenvironmentinwhichpeople
liveandwork.Thishasarguablyinitiatedamove
towardsagreaterdemocratisationofourviewof
thebuiltheritagebecauseasenseofplacemust
haveresonanceandmeaningforeachindividual.
Significancecanbetangible,inthatitrelatesto
thestructureordesignofabuilding,orintangible,
forexamplewhereplaceshavespecialreligiousor
symbolicimportance.
Placesthereforeembodyaseriesofvalueswhich
underpintheirsignificance,someofwhichcan
bemeasured,forexampleinfinancialand/or
economicterms.However,itisthoselesseasily
measuredcomponentsofvalue,forexample
culturalsignificance,whichdefyobjective
measurementinconventionaltermsandwhich
arethemostproblematic.IntheUK,anumberof
policydocumentshaveunderlinedthis,starting
withPower of Place(EnglishHeritage2000)and
Sustainable Communities(OfficeoftheDeputy
PrimeMinister(ODPM)2003).
Thispaperwillexaminethequalitiesthatcomprise
asenseofplace,usingcurrentconceptsof
significanceandvaluetounderstandwhyplaces
areimportantandhowthatimportancecanbe
categorised.
2. sIGnIFICAnCe
Itwasasrecentlyas1995thatEnglishHeritage
wrotethat:
‘theprimarypurposeofrepairistorestrain
theprocessofdecaywithoutdamaging
thecharacterofbuildingsandmonuments,
alteringthefeatureswhichgivethemtheir
historicorarchitecturalimportance,or
unnecessarilydisturbingordestroyinghistoric
fabric’.(Brereton1995:2)
JohnEarl(2003:73)quotesthiswhenhe
referstothenatureandinterestofabuilding.
Whathaschangedsince2000is,arguably,
thedemocratisationoftheheritageand,in
consequence,thetoolsusedtoassessits
significanceandthelanguageusedtoexpress
thatsignificance.
UKlegislationrequiresthatbuildingsare
conventionallylistedfortheirarchitecturaland
historicinterest,andmonumentsarescheduledfor
theirarchaeologicalinterest,butisthissufficient
todealwithmodernnotionsofsignificance?
Thedebateisnotnew,andmaybeseeninthe
respectiveworksofSirNikolausPevsnerandSir
JohnBetjeman.Pevsnerhasthereputationof
adatacollectorandcategoriser–thePenguin
IP 1/11
March 2011
3
Buildings of England seriesisthetestamentto
hisvillage-by-villagedescriptionofeachcounty
inEngland.Theserieswaslatertoextendto
Scotland,WalesandNorthernIreland.Betjeman,
ontheotherhand,wantedtobringoutthespirit
andmeaningofbuildingsandplacesthroughhis
publicationsandtelevisionprogrammes.This
issomethingofanoversimplificationofamore
complexrelationshipwhichisexploredbyMowl
(2000).
Aseminalmomentinthedevelopmentofthis
democratisationofheritageintheUKwasthe
publicationofPower of Place.Theresearch
demonstratedthat‘formostpeople,thehistoric
environmentrepresentstheplaceinwhichthey
live’(EnglishHeritage2000),aswellasbeing
placeswhichtheyvisit.Thehistoricenvironment
hascometobeseenasbeingmuchwiderthan
justtheprotectedelements:peoplevaluetheir
localareasforavarietyofreasons.Placesare
valuednotjustfortheirimportancetoheritage
experts,butbecauseoftheirsignificancetoa
muchwiderrangeofthepopulationintheirsearch
forasenseofculturalidentity,includingthatwhich
canexistatapersonalisedlocallevel(CURDSet
al.2009).
Ontheinternationalcanvas,theUnitedNations
Educational,ScientificandCulturalOrganisation
(UNESCO2005)inscribesWorldHeritageSites.
Thesearerelativelysmallinnumber(679cultural
sitesworldwidein2009)andtendtobeiconic
sitesrepresentingimportantaspectsofnational
historytothestateparty.Thetestforinscription
isoutstandinguniversalvalue(OUV).According
toDenyer(2009),OUVisnotdefinedintheWorld
HeritageConvention,yetitisasimpleconcept
anditallows‘humankindtovaluenaturaland
culturalheritageinsuchawayittranscendsand
crossesinternationalboundaries’.Denyerstresses
thatOUVisnotafixedconceptbut‘willbesubject
toevolutionovertime’(Denyer2009)because
valuesystemschangeandevolve,anddefinitions
ofculturalheritagearebecomingbroader.
Thelanguageusedhasalsochanged.Instead
of‘importance’and‘interest’,thenewheritage
lexiconrefersto‘heritageassets’,‘values’and
‘significance’.Oneoftheprincipalsourcesof
thisnewlexiconistheBurraCharter(Australia
ICOMOS1999)whichintroducedtheconceptof
culturalsignificance:
‘Placesofculturalsignificanceenrich
people’slives,oftenprovidingadeep
andinspirationalsenseofconnectionto
communityandlandscape,tothepastandto
livedexperiences.Theyarehistoricalrecords,
thatareimportantastangibleexpressionsof
Australianidentityandexperience.Placesof
culturalsignificancereflectthediversityofour
communities,tellingusaboutwhoweareand
thepastthathasformedusandtheAustralian
landscape.Theyareirreplaceableand
precious....TheBurraCharteradvocatesa
cautiousapproachtochange:doasmuchas
necessarytocarefortheplaceandtomake
ituseable,butotherwisechangeitaslittle
aspossiblesothatitsculturalsignificanceis
retained.’(AustraliaICOMOS1999:1)
Article1ofthecharterdefines‘cultural
significance’as‘aesthetic,historic,scientific,
socialorspiritualvalueforpast,presentorfuture
generations’.Itreinforcesthenotionthatthe
currentgenerationisthestewardofheritagefor
futuregenerations,butexpandsthereasonsfor
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
4
conservingbeyondtheaestheticandhistorictoa
muchwiderrangeofbothtangibleandintangible
values.
Inartandobjectconservation,thisistermed
‘value-led’conservation.AccordingtoViňas(2005:
79):
‘Thecorenotionbehindvalue-led
conservationisthatconservationdecision
makingshouldbebasedontheanalysisof
thevaluesanobjectpossessesfordifferent
peopletoreachanequilibriumamongallthe
partiesinvolved.’
IntheUK,EnglishHeritage’sConservation
Principles (2008)echoesthewiderandmore
democraticdefinitionofheritagefoundinPower
of Place: ‘[Thehistoricenvironment]gives
distinctiveness,meaningandqualitytotheplaces
inwhichwelive.…Heritagevaluesrepresenta
publicinterestinplaces,regardlessofownership.’
(EnglishHeritage2008a).EnglishHeritage
proposesasetofvalues:evidential,historical,
aestheticandcommunal.Eachofthesecategories
canbeexpandedintofurthersubsets.For
instance,evidentialvaluederivesfromtheability
oftheplacetoprovideinformation,whichmaybe
archaeological,constructional,ecological,etc.
Thissenseofplaceisdevelopedbyanearlier
document,theNara Document on Authenticity
(ICOMOS1994),whereArticle12states:‘…the
respectduetoallculturesrequiresthatheritage
propertiesmustbeconsideredandjudgedwithin
theculturalcontextstowhichtheybelong.’
Characterisationisatoolwhichisbeingused
increasinglytolookatareas,andmuchofthe
methodologyderivesfromthecharacterisationof
landscapes.Lookingatthehistoricenvironment
intermsoflandscapesreinforcesthisarea-based
viewofheritage,whichchimeswiththewider
conceptsofheritagepromotedbyPower of Place
andtheBurraCharter,forinstance.
Themethodologyforhistoricareaassessments
isdescribedinEnglishHeritage’sUnderstanding
Place – Historic Area Assessments: Principles and
Practice,whichalsosummarisesthenewrationale
forviewingheritageintermsofareas:
‘Thereiswidespreadacceptancethatthe
historicenvironmentisubiquitous,not
confinedtoaseriesofdiscrete“monuments”,
andtheGovernment’sratificationofthe
EuropeanLandscapeConventionin2007has
entrenchedthisrecognitionmorefirmlyin
Governmentpolicy.’(2010:4)
AnothertoolwhichisbeingdevelopedbyEnglish
Heritage(2008b)istheassessmentofviews.
Viewsrelatetocontextandsetting,andthe
conceptemergesfromtheprotectedviewsof
particularpartsofLondon,andisbeingdeveloped
forwiderapplication.
IP 1/11
March 2011
5
3. tHeVALueoFBuILtHeRItAGe– ModeRndeFInItIonsoFVALue
3.1HeritagevaluationThecontributionsmadebyourbuiltheritagetoour
cultureandoursocietyhavelongbeenrecognised,
andhavealreadybeenmentionedinthispaper.
Atonelevel,andtoborrowBenMacIntyre’s
phrase(MacIntyre2010),‘Buildingsarewherewe
storeourmemories’,andcollectivememoryis,
ofcourse,important.Itis,however,essentially
backwardlooking,andanumberofstudies(for
example,EnglishHeritage2000;Putnam2000;
UrbanPractitioners2005;Blauget al.2006;Ela
PalmerHeritage2008;Rypkema2009a)have
concludedthatourbuiltheritageshouldalsobe
valuedinaforward-facingroleinthedevelopment
ofmodernsustainablecommunities,definedbythe
UKOfficeoftheDeputyPrimeMinisterin2003as
communitiesoffering:
• asenseofcommunityandbelonging;
• tolerance,respectandengagementwith
peoplefromdifferentcultures,backgrounds
andbeliefs;
• friendly,co-operativeandhelpfulbehaviourin
neighbourhoods;
• opportunitiesforcultural,leisure,community,
sportandotheractivities,includingfor
childrenandyoungpeople;
• lowlevelsofcrime,drugsandanti-social
behaviourwithvisible,effectiveand
community-friendlypolicing;
• socialinclusionandgoodlifechancesforall.
(ODPM2003)
Thesegoals,essentiallydevelopmentaland
societalinnature,areusuallypredicated
uponchangesinindicatorssuchasincome,
employmentstatistics,housingprovision,crime
statistics,instancesofanti-socialbehaviour,
physicalandmentalhealth,andeducational
attainment,andanumberofstudieshave
concludedthatthereisadirectlinkbetweenthese
measurableindicatorsandthe‘senseofplace’
whichanovertappreciationandinterpretationof
ourbuiltheritagecanhelptofoster(ElaPalmer
Heritage2008;ODPM2004).Othercommentators
(forexample,Putnam(2000)intheUSAandthe
OfficeofNationalStatistics(2001)intheUK)have
identifiedadditional‘socialcapital’indicatorssuch
ascommunitycohesion,socialinclusion,civic
virtue,socialbondsandcommunitynetworksas
beingequallyimportant.
ElaPalmerHeritage,inareportpreparedfor
theAgenciesCo-ordinatingGroup(ElaPalmer
Heritage2008)presentsarangeofcasestudies
indicatingvariouswaysinwhichheritage-led
regenerationprojectshaveattempted,with
varyingdegreesofsuccess,toaddressthese
developmentalgoals;andPlimmeret al.(2008),
inaresearchreportsponsoredbytheBRETrust,
addressarangeofsimilarissuesinthecontextof
heritage-ledsocialhousingregeneration.
Theseoftenintangibleandfrequentlydifficult
toquantifyvaluesformamajorplankinthe
UKgovernment’srecentlypublishedplanning
strategyfordealingwiththehistoricenvironment
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
6
inEngland,PlanningPolicyStatement(PPS)
5(DepartmentforCommunitiesandLocal
Government(DCLG)2010),whichstatesthat
oneofthegovernment’soverarchingaimsisto
conserveEngland’sheritagesuchthat‘…the
positivecontribution…[ofheritage]…tolocal
characterandsenseofplaceisrecognisedand
valued’(Clause7),andthat,whereproposed
developmentthreatensheritageassets,then
consentshouldberefusedunless‘…the
substantialharmtoorlossofsignificanceis
necessarytodeliversubstantialpublicbenefits
thatoutweighthatharmorloss…’or ‘…theharm
toorlossoftheheritageassetisoutweighedby
thebenefitsofbringingthesitebackintouse…’
(PolicyHE9.2).Planningauthoritiesfacedwith
suchproposalsarethereforerequiredtomakea
valuejudgementastowhetherornotthepublic
benefitsdeliveredbytheschemearegreater
orlessthanthevalueoftheheritageassets
compromisedordestroyed.
Crucially,however,PPS5includesnoguidance
whatsoeverastohow,orevenonwhatbasis,
thisvaluejudgementshouldbemade,andthe
absenceofanyworkablemethodologymustsurely
leadtothedangeroflegalchallengesinwhichthe
oldargumentsbetweenheritageconserverson
theonehandandcommercialbusinessinterests
ontheotherwillonceagainberehearsed.Almost
inevitablytherewillbesomeattempttoreducethe
argumentstosomeeasilyrecognisablemediumof
exchange,leadingtouncomfortableparallelswith
theviewsexpressedbyProfessorRandallMason
oftheUniversityofPennsylvaniain2006when,in
thecourseofadiscussiononcapturingthepublic
valueofheritagereportedverbatiminClark(2006:
62),hesuggestedthat:
‘IntheUSyouhavetoprovethatheritage
pays;thattoprotectsomethingwillbemore
profitablethanneglectingit.Butyoualsohave
torealisethatinthecaseoftheheritagevs.
Walmarttheheritagewillneverwin.’
3.2MonetaryvalueWithProfessorMason’scommentsinmind,Smith
(2010)positsthat,inrecentyears,thejustification
ofschemestopreservehistoricbuildingsby
makingthempaytheirwayand,perhapstoa
lesserextent,thedilemmafacingcentralfunders
ofhowmuchofouravailablelimitedresources
shouldbespentonwhichofabewildering
multiplicityofapparentlyworthwhileconservation
schemesisseekingfundingatanyparticularpoint
intime,hasdrivenusintoapreoccupationwith
definingthe‘value’ofheritageassetsintermsof
money,anditisthereforenecessarytoreviewthis
issueinsomedepth.
Thetrue‘monetaryvalue’ofabuildingis
notoriouslydifficulttodefineinanobjectiveway.
Forexample,aprofessionalvaluer’sopinionof
thevalueofabuildingwillbedifferentdepending
uponthepurposeforwhichthevaluationisto
bemade(forexampleavaluationforinsurance
purposesmaybeverydifferentfromavaluation
forsale,andevenavaluationforsalemayvary
dependinguponthereasonsforthesale,the
financialcircumstancesoftheseller,etc.).Scarrett
(2003)discussesindetailthestandardrealestate
valuationtechniqueswhichmaybeused,andthe
RICS Valuation Standards–theRedBook–(RICS
2010)setsouttherulesofgoodpracticewhich
governthewayinwhichsuchvaluationsshould
bemade.
IP 1/11
March 2011
7
Itmightbethoughtthattheclearestindication
oftheobservable‘monetaryvalue’ofahistoric
buildingcouldbegainedfromofferingthe
buildingforsaleontheopenmarket,eitherfor
refurbishment,asanoperationalbusinessasset,
orforconversiontoanalternativeuse.Inthis
case,theobservable‘marketvalue’willbethe
priceaprospectivepurchaserispreparedto
pay,oftenatauction,buteventhismaybea
poorindicatorofthebuilding’strueworth.The
auctionpriceis,afterall,simplyarepresentation
ofthepotentialworth(theeconomicutility?)of
thebuildingtothehighestbidderatthatpointin
time,subjecttofactorslikethebehaviourofany
competingparticipatingbidders,thecostofany
otheropportunitiesavailableatthetime(inother
wordstheopportunitycostofthepurchase),and
perhapstheseller’sopinionoftheworthofthe
buildingasreflectedinanyreservepriceset.
Inlightoftheabove,itmightappearthat‘market
value’islargelyuselessinassessingthevalueof
aheritageasset,butthereareotherfacetsofthe
propertymarketwhichcanprovidesomeuseful
pointerstothepossiblevalueofbuiltheritage,at
leastincomparisonwithothertypesofproperty.
Forexample,initsseminalPower of Placestudy,
EnglishHeritagewritesthat:
‘In1998theinvestmentreturnonlistedoffice
propertywas11.9%,comparedwith11.4%
forunlistedproperty.Over18years,listedand
unlistedofficepropertyhasachievednear
identicalreturns(8.8%asagainst8.9%).The
intangiblevalueofusingwell-lovedbuildings
whichaddcharactertoanareaisdifficultto
measure,butisrecognisedbybusinessesthat
givehighprioritytoemployeeandcustomer
satisfaction.’(Section18)
Thesefiguresaresupportedbytheinvestment
analystsInvestmentPropertyDatabank(2002rev.
2006);andbypropertyconsultancy,DriversJonas,
initsHeritage WorksstudyconductedforEnglish
Heritage:
‘Inresidentialuse,well-convertedorrestored
historicbuildingsareoftenmuchmore
valuablepersquarefootthannewbuildings.
Blackheathisagoodexampleofanarea
whereolderhousesareworthalotmorethan
thenewerones,partlyonaesthetics,partly
onqualityofbuild.Itishardtothinkofmany
examplesofgoodresidentialconversions
beinglessvaluablepersquarefootthannew
buildresidential.’(DriversJonas2006:8)
Finally,itshouldbenotedthatSayceet al.
(2009)(inastudyonbehalfofRICSandHM
Treasury)proposeyetanothermethodologyfor
themonetaryvaluationofhistoricassets,this
timefromanaccountingandfinancialreporting
perspective.
Alltheaboveareindicatorsofthemonetaryvalue
ofheritageassetsinparticularcircumstances,
andare,ofcourse,usefulinthespecificcontexts
towhichtheydirectlyapply,butitisclearthat
monetaryvaluealoneisapoorindicatorofthe
holisticworthofahistoricbuilding,andthata
purelyfinancialevaluationwillnotreflectthe
truevalueoftheassetintermsofthoseother
dimensionsofsocialsignificanceoutlinedearlier.
Wearethereforeleftwiththeproblemofhowsuch
issuesmightbeobjectivelyassessed.
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
8
3.3economicvalueAnalternative,andperhapsmoreappropriate,
approachtotheevaluationofthetrueworthofa
historicbuildingmaybetotakeawiderviewofthe
impactofthemonetarycontributionofahistoric
buildingbaseduponitscontributiontothelocalor
nationaleconomy–indeedsomecommentators
suggestthataneconomicevaluationshould
underpinanyjustificationfordevelopment
proposalsaffectingahistoricbuilding:
‘…thedesiretopreservemustultimatelybe
arationaleconomicandcommercialchoice;
problemswillarisewherebuildingsare
preservedonlyasaconsequenceoflegaland
landuseplanningcontrols’.(Tiesdellet al.
1996:11)
Awidevarietyoftechniquesforassessing
economicvaluehavebeendeveloped,including
economicimpactstudies(ListokinandLahr1997),
cost/benefitanalysis(Nas1996),andthevarious
substitutionpricingmechanisms(e.g.contingent
valuation(BatemanandTurner1995)andrevealed
preferencetechniques(Bateman1995;Bateman
et al.2002)).Thesetechniquesarereviewedin
summaryinSmith(2010);andanexcellentreview
oftheearlyliterature,togetherwithsomeworked
examples,ispresentedinAllisonet al.(1996).
Ofthese,economicimpactstudieshaveprobably
beenthemostwidelyused,mostlyemploying
surveytechniquesofonekindoranotherand
providingvaryingdegreesofdetail.Atanational
level,forexample,itwasreportedthat:
‘In2006,9.8million(30%)ofoverseas
visitorstotheUKvisitedcastles,churches,
monumentsorhistorichouses,spending
£5.4bn(34%ofalloverseasspend)while
theywereintheUK.’(DCLG/Departmentfor
CultureMediaandSport2009:30)
DriversJonasreportedthatattheMuseumof
ScienceandIndustryinManchester:
‘…forevery£1spentbyvisitorsatthe
museum,£12isspentelsewhereinthe
economy.With300,000visitorsspending
£1.5min2000,thecontributiontothe
prosperityoftheregionwas£18m.Tothis
canbeaddedthegoodsandservices
purchasedbythemuseumfromlocal
businesses,theemploymentof120people,
andtheinvestmentinnewexhibitionsand
buildingwork.’(DriversJonas2006:8),citing
commentsmadebyPatrickGreen,Directorof
theMuseum,inhisLecturetotheEuropean
MuseumForumdeliveredinGdanskin2001)
Muchmoredetailed,butessentiallylocal,
economicimpactassessmentswouldbeexpected
toformamajorplankinaprojectconservation
plan.
Anumberofresearchersinheritageconservation
havereportedstudiesusingtheeconomic
techniquesoutlinedaboveinvariouspartsofthe
world(forexample,OstandvanDroogenbroeck
1998;NavrudandReady2002;Mason2005;eftec
2005b).IntheUK,itwasreportedthat:
‘CasestudiesacrossBritainhavebeen
evaluated,andhaveprovedthatregeneration
ofalltypescanreviveareasofeconomic
slump,attractingbusinessandtourism
IP 1/11
March 2011
9
andraisingpropertyvalues.Aprocesswill
thenoccurwherebyphysicalandfunctional
revitalisationleadstoeconomicrevitalisation.’
(ElaPalmerHeritage2008:4)
Examplesofsuchstudies,citedinThe Heritage
Dividend Methodology(UrbanPractitioners2005)
andbaseduponresearchcarriedoutforEnglish
Heritage,includestudiesontheeconomicimpact
ofwaterwaysrestoration(Ecotec2001and2003)
andtownscaperegeneration(GroverandReeve
2003),butUrbanPractitionersmakethepointthat
thereis,asyet,‘…noagreedmethodforreliably
transferringvaluesbetweendifferentsites’.(Urban
Practitioners2005:8)
eftec(2005a),however,inanextremelydetailed
reviewofthepotentialuseofthesetechniques
inaheritagecontext,questionstheirvalidity
and,whilestoppingshortofconcludingthat
theyarevalueless,makesthepointthatthereis
usuallyalackofsufficientreliabledatatoenable
suchappraisalstobemadewithanydegreeof
accuracy.
3.4theevaluationofsocialvaluesTheproblemsinvolvedinmeasuringthesocial
valueofthehistoricenvironmentwereconsidered
atsomelengthinaninitialstudycarriedout
bytheInstituteofFieldArchaeologists(IFA)
andAtkinsHeritagefortheNationalTrust(IFA
2004),andapreliminarysetofindicatorswhich
mightbeusedtoevidencesocialvaluewas
identified.AsubsequentstudybyElaPalmer
Heritage(2008)reviewedtheevaluationof
heritage-ledregenerationprojectsandtheir
impactonsocialcapital.Asubstantialbodyof
evidenceispresentedtoshowthat,provided
theprojectconcernedhasthebroadsupportof
thecommunity,thereisastronglikelihoodthat
successfulcompletionwilldeliversignificant
improvementsincommunitycohesionandsocial
inclusion.Conversely,itisarguedthatwherethe
builtheritagebecomesderelictorhasnoobvious
use,thenproblemsoflowcommunitycohesion
andsocialexclusionaremagnified.
Ithasalsobeenproposedbysomeobservers(see
Clark2006foragoodgeneralsummaryofviews)
thatthesenumericallyindeterminatequalities
couldbetakentorepresentthe‘publicvalue’
(Moore1995)ofheritage,butsofarthesequalities
haveprovenextremelydifficulttomeasurein
practice.ThishasledcommentatorslikeBlauget
al.toconcludethat‘publicvalueisnotastandard
unit’(2006:25).Theythereforeproposethat
‘publicvalue=publicresponsivenesstorefined
preferences’,andthataseriesofperformance
indicatorscouldperhapsbedevelopedto
providesomesortofobjectivemeasure(2006:
24).Avariationonthisapproachistheuseof
typologiestodescribedifferentaspectsofcultural
significance,atechniqueaddressedatlengthin
WorthingtonandBond(2008).
Theissueof‘culturalvalue’isalsotakenup
byeconomistDavidThrosby(Throsby2001
and2006),whoarguesthattheculturalvalue
ofheritage,definedasthesumofauthenticity,
aesthetic,spiritual,historical,symbolicandsocial
valuesintermsofasenseofidentityandplace,
maywellexceedtheireconomicorfinancialvalue,
aviewsupportedby,amongothers,Randall
Mason,whowritesthat:
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
10
‘Thevalueofhistoricpreservationneed
notbeexpressedandanalyzedonlyin
quantitativeterms.Qualitativeexpressions
ofthevalueofpreservationoftenare
dismissedbyeconomistssimplybecause
theyarenotsusceptibletostandardeconomic
(mathematicallydriven)methodsofanalysis.
Buttheseculturalvalues–resistingeasy
quantificationandmathematicaltreatment
–areessentialtothenatureofhistoric
preservationandtheymustsomehowremain
partofthediscourseondecision-makingand
othereconomicdiscoursesonpreservation.In
otherwords,applyingstandardquantitative,
market-derivedmeasuresofhistoric
preservationwillnotsuffice–apriori–to
expressthefullvalueofpreservationas
culturalexpressionandpublicgood.’(Mason
2005:3)
HewisonandHolden(2006)alsoexploretheissue
ofculturalvalue,andpresentananalysisinwhich
itisseenascomprisingthesumof:
• theindividualintellectual,emotionaland
spiritualexperienceoftheheritage(termed
the‘intrinsicvalue’);
• theancillaryeconomiceffectssuchasurban
regenerationwhichmayderivefromtheasset
(termedthe‘instrumentalvalue’);
• thevaluewhichiscreatedinthepublicmind
bythewayinwhichtheassetispresented
(termedthe‘institutionalvalue’).
HewisonandHoldenalsoidentifythreegroups
towhomthesevaluesareimportant:thepublic,
politiciansandpolicymakers,andtheheritage
professionals.Tothesewemightalsousefullyadd
owner-occupiers.
Clark(2001)pointsoutthat,inanationaloran
internationalcontext,recognitionoftheasset
throughlistingorschedulingprovidessome
indicationofthemeasureofitsimportance,
the‘value’,butwhataboutassetswherethe
significancemaybegeographicallylocal,ormay
applyonlytosomeparticular,perhapsminority,
communitygroup?Theseissuesaremuchmore
difficulttoresolvesatisfactorily,particularly
whendifferentstakeholdersholddifferentviews
oftherelativeimportanceofanasset,eachof
whichisperhapsequallyworthyinitsownway,
yettheymayallbediametricallyopposed.Clark
alsostressesthatthe‘overallvalue’shouldbe
madeexplicitthroughconservationplansbased
uponevidence,andtheprovisionofevidenceis
animportantplankintheplanningprocessas
setoutinPPS5.Thisviewisplainlysound,but
thereisadangerthatwhere‘evidence-based’
documentationsuchasthisisusedtosupport
eithercompetitiveapplicationsforfundingor
planningapplications,thenthoseschemeswhich
willsucceedmaynotinfactbethemost‘valuable’
butthoseusingthemostpersuasiveadvocacy.
Theevaluationofsocialimpactsisplainlymuch
moredifficultand,byitsnature,moresubjective
thanfinancialoreconomicanalysis.Further,
asElaPalmerHeritage(2008)pointsout,the
dataavailableinthiscontextaregenerally
survey-based,sometimesofquestionable
quality,qualitativeandanecdotalratherthan
quantitativeandfactual.Lastingsocialchangeis
alsofrequentlyaveryslowprocess.Observable
IP 1/11
March 2011
11
changesinfactorssuchascivicvirtue,community
cohesionandsocialinclusionthereforetendtobe
incrementalinnature,andfrequentlytakealong
timetobecomeobvioustoanexternalobserver.
Whilesuchdevelopmentmayeventuallygive
risetoeconomicbenefits,itislikelythatthey
maynotbemeasurableintheshortormedium
term.Theperformanceindicatorsadvocatedby
Blauget al.(2006)maythereforebebothdifficult
andtimeconsumingtoconstructandtest.While
thedevelopmentofrobusttoolstomeasure
developmentsinsocialvaluesarisingfrom
heritage-ledregenerationisplainlyapriority,there
isalsoaveryrealdangerthatthecurrentfinancial
climatewillresultinlipserviceonlybeingpaidto
theproblem–inessencetheissueisindangerof
being‘kickedintothelonggrass’.
3.5otherdimensionsofvalue– embodiedenergyTheenergyembodiedwithinexistingbuildings
(thatis,theamountofenergyinvolvedin
constructingthebuildinginthefirstplace,
includingnotonlytheenergyembodiedinthe
constructionprocessbutalsothatrequiredfor
thepreparationandmanufactureofcomponents,
transportationofmaterialstothesite,any
alterations,andrepairsandmaintenancecarried
outinitslifetime)isconsiderableandhaslong
beenchampionedbyheritageconserversasa
factorforconsiderationinthe‘renovate/adaptor
rebuild’debate,buthasusuallybeenconsidered
bydeveloperstobeofrelativelyminorimportance.
EnglishHeritage(2003:8),however,concluded
that:
‘Thetotalenergythathasalreadybeenusedin
theconstructionofatypicalVictorianterrace
isequivalenttotheamountofenergy(infuel
terms)thatcoulddriveacarfivetimesround
theearth,orhalfthedistancefromtheearthto
themoon.Retainingandreusingtheexisting
buildingstockpreventsthatenergyfrombeing
wastedandincreasesresourceproductivity.’
Moreover,currentconcernswithclimatechange
andgovernmentcommitmentstoreducefuture
‘greenhousegas’emissionshavecausedtheissue
toattainanewlevelofimportance.Significant
researchhasbeencarriedoutinthisareain
thepast(see,forexample,theHeritage Counts
studies(EnglishHeritage2003and2004)),and
anumberofresearchprojectsareknowntobe
inprogressatthetimeofwriting,buthaveyetto
publishtheirfindings.
Thevalueofheritagebuildingsiscertainto
becomeamuchmoresignificantelementinthe
adaptivereusedebateinthenearfuture,anditis
plainlyimportantthatclearbaselinesandarobust
andgenerallyacceptedcalculationmethodology
shouldbedevelopedasamatterofurgency.
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
12
4. AContInuuMoFPossIBILItIes
Article2oftheCouncilofEuropeConventionon
theValueofCulturalHeritageforSociety(the‘Faro
Convention’)definesculturalheritageas:
‘agroupofresourcesinheritedfromthe
pastwhichpeopleidentify,independentlyof
ownership,asareflectionandexpression
oftheirconstantlyevolvingvalues,beliefs,
knowledgeandtraditions.Itincludesall
aspectsoftheenvironmentresultingfrom
theinteractionbetweenpeopleandplaces
throughtime.’(CouncilofEurope2005)
Thesamearticledefinesa‘heritagecommunity’
asconsistingof‘peoplewhovaluespecific
aspectsofculturalheritagewhichtheywish,
withintheframeworkofpublicaction,tosustain
andtransmittofuturegenerations’.Smith(2006)
alsohaspointedtothevalueofthe‘culturaltool’
ofheritagetoexpressacommunity’ssenseof
identity.
Thethemethatemergeshereisthesignificanceof
the‘senseofplace’anditsinterrelationshipwith
sustainability.ThepublicationbyEnglishHeritage
ofthe2009Heritage Countssurveyhasreminded
usoftherelevanceofasenseofplacetoour
understandingandappreciationofthehistoric
environment,andtotheimportanceofthehistoric
environment‘increatingplaceswherepeoplewant
toliveandwork’.ThisechoesthevisioninEnglish
Heritage’searlierstudyPower of Place(2000),
andoftheUKgovernmentinits2003Sustainable
Communitiesplan:‘Placeswherepeoplewantto
liveandwillcontinuetowanttolive’.
Asenseofplacehasconflictingqualities:itneeds
toprovideacontinuouslinelinkingustothepast
whichgivesusouridentity,yetmustberelevant
tothechangingperceptionsofsucceeding
generations.Inshort,itmustrecognisethe
intergenerationallegacyofthebuiltenvironment.
Doweneedtore-examinethesignificanceand
valuesthatcompriseculturalheritage?Wecanall
agreethatolderelementsshouldbeprotected,
butdonotnecessarilyagreeonthevalueofmore
recentheritage.IntheUK,thevirtuesof18th-
and19th-centurybuildingsbecamegenerally
recognisedonlyinthemid-tolate20thcentury.
Twentieth-centurybuildingsarestillamatter
ofdebate.Thefactthattheseperceptionsare
subjecttochangeovertimeisareminderthat
sustainabilityrequiressomehumilityonthe
partofeachindividualgenerationasweactas
thestewardsoftheheritageassetsinquestion
untilsuchtimeastheyarepassedontoour
successors.
BenMacIntyrehascommentedthat‘placeisa
portaltohistorymorepowerfulthananytextbook’.
(MacIntyre2010).However,criticssuchasMullin
(1971),Wright(1985),Hewison(1987and1989)and
Pawley(2005)havearguedovermanyyearsthat
theprotectionoftoomanyheritageassetsinhibits
therhythmofchangeinourbuiltenvironmentin
thefaceofconcernsabouteconomicevolution
andenergysecurity,anduncertaintyaboutclimate
stability.Theysuggestthatthisissymptomaticofa
viewofthepastthatisinvaryingdegreessanitised,
sentimentalisedanddistortedattheexpenseof
innovation,thuspreventingthefutureneedsofthe
populationbeingaccommodated.
IP 1/11
March 2011
13
TheUKgovernment’sStatement on the Historic
Environment for England 2010recognisesthat‘no-
onewouldclaimthatretainingexistingbuildings
isautomaticallythebestchoice’(HMGovernment
2010:9). However,itgoesontostatethat:
‘thereshouldnotbeapresumptionthat
newbuildwillbebetter.Researchhas
demonstratedthatitispossibletomakecost
effectiveimprovementstohistoricbuildings
whichsaveenergywithoutdamagingtheir
appearanceandcontributiontothequalityof
thelocalenvironment.Theoptionsavailable
ineachcaseshouldbeexaminedthoroughly
andwiththefullrangeofrelevantprofessional
advice.’
Ifwearetoexaminetheseoptionsasaprelude
toconservingthetangibleassetsthatreflectour
currentviewofwhatourheritagerepresents,a
fundamentalquestionwhichwehavetoanswer
iswhethertheprotectionofourheritageis
synonymouswithmaintainingthesameuses
inthesamestructures,orwhetherweneedto
bealerttoacontinuumofpossibilitiesthatalso
embracesbothsecuringnewusesfortheold
structures(theprovisionof‘newwine’inthe‘old
bottles’ofourbuiltheritage)andhousingcultural
assetswithinnewstructures(where‘newbottles’
arebeingcreatedforthe‘oldwine’ofcultural
heritage).
Inundertakingsuchanexploration,wealready
haveagrowingbodyofevidenceofthe
preservation,reconstructionandreuseofhistoric
structureswithintheEuropeancontext.Ifwe
focusonthemid/late19thcenturyonwards,
theconversionofthebuildingsconstructed
between1830and1904occupiedbytheformer
fruit,vegetableandflowermarketatCovent
Garden,Londonintoaspecialityretailcentre
inthelate1970sisacaseinpoint.Herzogand
deMeuron’sequallywell-documentedworkin
designingtherebirthoftheformerBankside
powerstation(constructedonLondon’sSouth
Bankbetween1947and1963)asTateModernin
the1990sdemonstratesthat,asnotedpreviously,
ourattitudetowardsmoremodernstructuresis
becomingmorereceptiveasthedistanceoftime
facilitatesagrowingsenseofappreciation,andit
ispossibletoidentifyexamplesoneachpointof
thiscontinuum.
Thus,ifwecommencewiththeoptionofonly
limitedexternalorinternalchange,wecan
recognisethatthisisanambitionthathasdriven
theconservationofthemostarchitecturally,
historicallyand/orculturallysignificantexamples
ofglobalbuiltheritagestretchingbackovermany
centuries.However,evenwithinthecontextof
theprotectionoflate-19th-and20th-century
structures,afiercedebateiscurrentlybeing
wagedregardingtheproposalsbytheUKNational
HealthService(NHS)todisposeoftheGrade
IlistedFinsburyHealthCentredesignedby
BertholdLubetkininthemid-1930s.
FINSBURyHEALTHCENTRE
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
14
Thisbuildinghasbeendescribedbythearchitect
currentlyundertakingafeasibilitystudyforits
repairas‘stillavitalanddeeply-lovedresourcefor
itslocalcommunity–manyofthecurrentpatients
arechildrenorgrandchildrenoftheoriginalones’
(Williams2010).TheNHSPrimaryCareTrust,
whileacknowledgingitsresponsibilityforfinding
anappropriatefutureuse,hascommentedthat
‘ourjobistoprovidequalityhealthcareservicesin
modernandsuitablepremisesthatareaccessible
toalllocalresidents.We’renotheretolookafter
historicbuildings’(Williams2010).AsaGrade
Ilistedstructure,theHealthCentreisregarded
asbeingofthehighestarchitecturalquality,but
clearlyinthisinstancethebalancebetweenthe
socialandeconomicdimensionsofasustainable
futureisprovingelusive.
Ifwemovealongthecontinuumalittletoconsider
anexampleofhowwemightintroducesome
‘newwine’intoan‘oldbottle’,therestorationand
conversionoftheMidlandHotelatMorecambe,
Lancashiredemonstrateshowsustainablereuse
canbesecured.ContemporarywiththeFinsbury
HealthCentre,thisGradeII*listedartdeco
buildingwasaniconicexampleofflamboyant
interwarseasideresortconstruction,buthadfallen
intoeconomicandphysicaldeclinebytheend
ofthe20thcentury.Thedevelopmentcompany,
UrbanSplash,acquiredthepropertyin2003and
undertookaschemecombiningrestorationand
theintroductionofnewelementsintotheinternal
andexternalfabricwiththehotelbusinessin2008
(EnglishHeritage2009).
However,inthisinstancethecontributionof
thebuildingtothelocalsenseofplacemay
beaffectedbyproposalsfornewmixed-use
developmentonadjacentland;weshouldnot
losesightofthefactthatsustainableconservation
mayneedtobebalancedbyfinanciallymore
productive,enablingdevelopment.
MIDLANDHOTEL,MORECAMBE
IP 1/11
March 2011
15
Anexampleofmoreradicalchangeisthe
conversionandrestorationofthelistedlate-19th-
centuryMarinePoliceHeadquartersinHong
Kong.Thissuperbgroupofbuildings(pictured
before1907,topright),wasconstructedin1884
andisscheduledasamonument.Itoccupiesa
prominentpositionatopasmallhillinTsimSha
Tsuiandwasoneofthefouroldestsurviving
governmentbuildingsinHongKong.Thegroup
comprisesthemainbuildingwiththestableblock
totherear,andtheRoundHouse,HongKong’s
originaltime-balltower,seenontheextremeright
ofthepicture.Thecomplexalsoincludesanow
redundantGradeIIIlistedfirestationbuilding
datingfromthe1920s,situatedatthesouth-
easterncornerofthesite.
Thecomplexbecameredundantin1996,and
wassubsequentlysoldbygovernmenttenderfor
conversionasaboutiquehotel.Thecompleted
scheme(picturedrightcentre)hasmetwithmixed
reviews!
Asafinalexample,whatifthesignificance
associatedwithaplaceliesnotinbuildingsbut
intheassociationofthatlocationwithparticular
figuresorsomeotherculturallegacy?Here,
opportunitiesexistforsustainingthevalue
ofthe‘oldwine’ofculturalheritagewithina
‘newbottle’representedbyanentirelymodern
(andsometimesradicallydesigned)building.
StructuresintheUKsuchastheTateGallery,
StIves,Cornwall;theLowryinSalford,Greater
Manchester;theRocketHouseinCromer,Norfolk;
andtheproposedTurnerCentreinMargate,Kent
capitaliseuponsignificantculturalconnectionsto
provideastimulusfortheregenerationoffading
localeconomies.
MARINEPOLICEHEADQUARTERS,KOWLOON
MARINEPOLICEHEADQUARTERS,KOWLOON
THELOWRy,SALFORD
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
16
Notallstructureslendthemselvestoready
solutionsiftheirconfigurationprovidesaserious
challengetosecuringchange,astheongoing
attemptstoimplementaviableconversion
schemefortheGradeII*listedBatterseapower
stationdemonstrate.DesignedbyGilesGilbert
Scott(whoalsowasresponsibleforBankside
powerstation)andbuiltinphasesbetween1929
andthemid-1950s,electricitygenerationceased
in1983.Sincethen,aseriesofmajorproposals,
primarilyorientatedtowardsleisureandretailuses,
havesofarfailedtomakesufficientprogress,
despiteEnglishHeritagehavingnoobjectionin
principletotheredevelopmentofthesiteorthe
conversionandreuseoftheexistingbuilding
(Donatantonio2010).
Nonetheless,thefactthatabuildingmaybe
unusualdoesnotautomaticallyrenderitincapable
ofviablereuse;theTateModernscheme
mentionedaboveisonesuchexample;another
istheconversionoftheformerOxfordprisoninto
modernhotelaccommodationfortheMalmaison
chain,aspartofawider-rangingscheme
associatedwiththemedievalcastlesiteinthe
cityundertakenbyTrevorOsbourneandOxford
CastleLtdwithaconsortiumoffundingpartners.
The19th-centuryprisonstructureislinkedtonew
buildingsaspartofamixed-usescheme(see
Dowden2006)thatreceivedtheRICSProjectof
theyearawardin2007.
Similarly,‘newwine’intheformofentirelymodern
structures(whetherfree-standingorextensions
toexistingbuildings)designedtohousenew
functionsinhighlysensitivesurroundingsto
complementestablishedusescanbeconsistent
withthewishtorespectthesenseofplace.
OxFORDCASTLE
IP 1/11
March 2011
17
AnimportantinfluencehereisBS7913,Guide
to the Principles of the Conservation of Historic
Buildings,whichsetsoutcriteriaforadditions
andfornewbuildingsinhistoricsettings.The
documentobserves:‘Inmuchthesamewaythat
successfulartistshaveregardtothesettingsin
whichtheirworksaretobeplacedandrespond
positivelytotheconstraintswhichthesecontexts
impose,sogoodbuildingsinhistoricsettings
dependultimatelyontheknowledge,abilityand
intellectualambitionofthearchitect.’(British
StandardsInstitute1998:13).Examplesthatmay
besaidtoreflectthisadviceareatrioofsignificant
projectsconstructedinNorwich.Thesecomprise
CastleMall(designedbyLambertScottInnes
nexttothe11th-centurycastleandwinnerofthe
RTPISilverJubileeCupforPlanningAchievement
in1994);andtwoschemesdesignedbyHopkins
Architects–theForum(2001)adjacenttothe
marketplace:theGradeIlistedStPeterMancroft
churchandtheGradeIIlistedCityHall;andthe
refectoryatNorwichCathedral(2004),bothof
whichhavewonRIBAawardsforarchitecture.
Thevarietyoftheseexamplessupports
Thèrond’sassertion(2010:32)thattheframework
representedbytheFaroConventionisnota
straitjacketforitssignatorystates,butratherthat
‘itisalong-termprocesspromptingafreshviewof
heritageinordertomakethemostofitspotential
notonlyintermsofshort-termcommercial
benefitsbutalsointermsofimprovedqualityof
lifeforcommunities.’
THEFORUM,NORWICH
CASTLEMALL,NORWICH
THEREFECTORy,NORWICHCATHEDRAL
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
18
5. ConCLusIons
Ifconservationisregardedas‘thecareful
managementofchange’,inreviewingthis
continuumofopportunitieswesuggesttwokey
principlesareembeddedinourapproachto
securingthemostappropriateandsustainable
outcomeforanyproject.
First,inseekingtosecureaviableoutcome,all
stakeholdersmustbeclearattheoutsetasto
thevalueandsignificanceoftheheritageassets
withwhichtheyaredealing.Thiswillinfluencethe
necessaryattentiontodetailindesign,careand
skillinthechoiceofmaterialsandfinishesandin
theirapplicationandawarenessoftheconstraints
presentedtobothprojectandpost-completion
management.
Secondly,wemustappreciatethevalueof
compromise–thespiritofhumilityreferredto
earlier.Wehavetorecognisethatthereisabalance
betweenwhatwemightloseandwhatwemight
gainfromundertakingtheschemeandtosatisfy
ourselvesthatwhatemergeswillbeworththat
compromise.
TheAmericaneconomistDonovanRypkema
haswrittenextensivelyinrecentyearsabout
theroleofheritageconservationinsustainable
development(Rypkema2005,2008,2009aand
2009b).Hesuggeststhat‘ifwegobacktothe
graphicrepresentationofsustainabledevelopment
…heritageconservationis,infact,theonly
strategythatissimultaneouslyenvironmental
responsibility,economicresponsibilityandsocial/
culturalresponsibility’(2009b:4).Thechallenge
wefaceishowtomouldboththetangibleand
intangibleaspectsofheritageintoasenseofplace
that(toparaphraseBrundtland1987)meetsthe
opinionsandaspirationsofthepresentwithout
compromisingtheabilityoffuturegenerationsto
adaptittomeettheirownaspirationsandpriorities.
ThisoccasionalpaperisanextendedversionofapaperpresentedbytheauthorsattheGreenLinesInstituteconference‘HeritageandSustainableDevelopment’,heldatEvora,PortugalinJune2010(andpublishedinvol.2oftheproceedingsatpp.1159–1168).Theco-operationoftheGreenLinesInstituteisacknowledged.
PHotoGRAPHs–ACknowLedGeMentsFinsburyHealthCentre(Source:PhilLeverton)
MidlandHotel,Morecambe(Source:UrbanSplash)
MarinePoliceHeadquarters,Kowloon(Source:AdrianSmith)
MarinePoliceHeadquarters,Kowloon(Source:unknown)
TheLowry,Salford(Source:PhilLeverton)
OxfordCastle(Source:WilliamRussell)
CastleMall,Norwich(Source:PhilLeverton)
TheForum,Norwich(Source:PhilLeverton)
TheRefectory,NorwichCathedral(Source:PhilLeverton)
IP 1/11
March 2011
19
ReFeRenCes
AllisonG,BallS,CheshireP,EvansAandStablerM(1996)The Value of Conservation: A Literature Review of the Economic and Social Value of the Cultural Built Environment,TheDepartmentofNationalHeritage,EnglishHeritageandtheRoyalInstitutionofCharteredSurveyors.
AustraliaICOMOS(1999)Burra Charter,http://australia.icomos.org/wp-content/uploads/BURRA_CHARTER.pdf[Accessed25November2010].
BatemanI(1995)‘Valuationoftheenvironment,methodsandtechniques:Revealedpreferencemethods’,inRKTurner(ed.)Sustainable Environmental Techniques and Management, London: JohnWiley&Sons,192–265.
BatemanIJandTurnerRK(1995)‘Valuationoftheenvironment,methodsandtechniques:Thecontingentvaluationmethod’,inRKTurner(ed.)Sustainable Environmental Techniques and Management,London: JohnWiley&Sons,120–191.
BatemanI,CarsonRT,DayB,HanemannM,HettT,Jones-LeeM,LoomesG,MouratoS,OzdemirogluE,PearceDW,SugdenRandSwansonJ(2002)Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques; A Manual, Cheltenham,UK:EdwardElgar.
BlaugR,HornerLandLekhiR(2006)‘Heritage,democracyandpublicvalue’,inKClark(ed.)Capturing the Public Value of Heritage: The Proceedings of the London Conference 25–26 January 2006,London:EnglishHeritage,23–27.
BreretonC(1995)The Repair of Historic Buildings: Advice on Principles and Methods,2ndedn,London:EnglishHeritage.
BritishStandardsInstitute(1998)BS 7913: Guide to the Principles of the Conservation of Historic Buildings,London:BSI.
BrundtlandReport(1987)Our Common Future,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
ClarkK(2001)Informed Conservation: Understanding Buildings and their Landscapes for Conservation,London: EnglishHeritage.
ClarkK(2006)Capturing the Public Value of Heritage: The Proceedings of the London Conference 25–26 January 2006,London:EnglishHeritage.
CouncilofEurope(2005)Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society, Strasbourg: CouncilofEurope.
CentreforUrbanandRegionalDevelopmentStudies(CURDS),NewcastleUniversity;InternationalCentreforCulturalandHeritageStudies,NewcastleUniversity;andBradleyResearchandConsulting(2009)Sense of Place and Social Capital and the Historic Built Environment: Report of Research for English Heritage,NewcastleuponTyne:Authors.
DenyerS(2009)‘AcknowledgingscientificideasassociatedwithWorldHeritageSites’,lecturedeliveredatICOMOSWorldHeritageandScienceWorkshop21May2009,www.scribd.com/doc/17609066/SDenyer-Acknowledging-Scientific-Ideas-Associated-With-WHSs-Susan-Denyer[Accessed22April2010].
DepartmentforCommunitiesandLocalGovernment/DepartmentforCultureMediaandSport(2009)Planning Policy Statement 15: Planning for the Historic Environment Consultation Document, London:DCLG.
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
20
DepartmentforCommunitiesandLocalGovernment(2010)Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment,London:TheStationeryOffice.
DonatantonioD(2010)‘HeritagebodyairsBatterseasupport’,Planning,16April,3.
DowdenM(2006)‘Thebravenewworldofurbanism’,Estates Gazette,14January,102–104.
DriversJonas(2006)Heritage Works,London:DriversJonas.
Ecotec(2001)Economic Impacts of Waterway Development Schemes,3: A Final Report to British Waterways,London:BritishWaterways.
Ecotec(2003)The Economic Impact of the Restoration of the Kennet and Avon Canal,London:BritishWaterways.
EarlJ(2003)Building Conservation Philosophy, Shaftesbury,UK:Donhead.
eftec(2005a) Valuation of the Historic Environment. The Scope for Using Results of Valuation Studies in the Appraisal and Assessment of Heritage-related Projects and Programmes, ReporttoEnglishHeritage,London:TheHeritageLotteryFund,TheDepartmentforCultureMediaandSportandtheDepartmentforTransport.
eftec(2005b)Valuation of the Historic Environment. The Scope for Using Results of Valuation Studies in the Appraisal and Assessment of Heritage-related Projects and Programmes. Annex: Annotated Bibliography of Heritage Valuation Studies, ReporttoEnglishHeritage,London:TheHeritageLotteryFund,TheDepartmentforCultureMediaandSportandtheDepartmentforTransport.
ElaPalmerHeritage(2008)The Social Impacts of Heritage-led Regeneration,ReportpreparedfortheAgenciesCo-ordinatingGroup,London:ArchitecturalHeritageFund.
EnglishHeritage(2000)Power of Place: The Future of the Historic Environment,London:EnglishHeritage.Availableat:www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.001002005002001[Accessed26April2010].
EnglishHeritage(2003)Heritage Counts,London:EnglishHeritage.
EnglishHeritage(2004)Heritage Counts,London:EnglishHeritage.
EnglishHeritage(2008a)Conservation Principles: Policy and Guidance for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment,London:EnglishHeritage.Availableat:www.english-hertage.org.uk/upload/pdf/Conservation_Principles_Policies_and_Guidance_April08_Web.pdf?1272276379[Accessed26April2010].
EnglishHeritage(2008b)Constructive Conservation in Practice,London:EnglishHeritage.
EnglishHeritage(2009)Heritage Counts 2009, London:EnglishHeritage.Availableat:http://hc.english-heritage.org.uk/content/pub/HC09_England_Acc.pdf[Accessed26April2010].
EnglishHeritage(2010)Understanding Place – Historic Area Assessments: Principles and Practice,London:EnglishHeritage.
GroverPandReeveA(2003)Townscape Heritage Initiative Schemes Evaluation,ReportpreparedfortheHeritageLotteryFund,Oxford:OxfordBrookesUniversity.
HewisonR(1987)The Heritage Industry,London:Methuen.
IP 1/11
March 2011
21
HewisonR(1989)‘Heritage:Aninterpretation’,inDUzzell(ed.)(1995)Heritage Interpretation,1,London:Belhaven,15–23.
HewisonRandHoldenJ(2006)‘Publicvalueasaframeworkforanalysingthevalueofheritage:Theideas’,inKClark(ed.)Capturing the Public Value of Heritage: The Proceedings of the London Conference 25–26 January 2006,London:EnglishHeritage,14–18.
HMGovernment(2010)The Government’s Statement on the Historic Environment for England 2010,London:DCMS.
ICOMOS(1994)Nara Document on Authenticity, Japan:UNESCO/ICCROM/ICOMOS Nara.Availableat:www.international.icomos.org/charters/nara_e.htm[Accessed23May2010].
IFAandAtkinsHeritage(2004)Measuring the Social Contribution of the Historic Environment,unpublishedprojectreportfortheNationalTrust.
InvestmentPropertyDatabank(2002,revisedandupdated2006)The Investment Performance of Listed Office Buildings,London:IPD.
ListokinDandLahrML(1997)Economic Impacts of Historic Preservation, Trenton,NJ:NewJerseyHistoricTrust.
MacIntyreB(2010)‘Buildingsarewherewestoreourmemories’,The Times,14January.Availableat:www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/ben_macintyre/article6987063.ece[Accessed26January2010].
MasonR(2005)Economics and Historic Preservation: A Guide and Review of the Literature,Washington,DC:TheBrookingsInstitution.
MooreM(1995)Creating Public Value: Strategic Value in Government,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.
MullinS(1971)‘Change,conservationandthetouristtrade’,inJHillman(ed.)Planning for London,Harmondsworth:Penguin,112–123.
MowlT(2000)Stylistic Cold Wars: Betjeman versus Pevsner, London:JohnMurray.
NasTF(1996)Cost–Benefit Analysis: Theory and Application,ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
NavrudSandReadyRC(eds)(2002)Valuing Cultural Heritage: Applying Environmental Valuation Techniques to Historic Buildings, Monuments and Artifacts,Cheltenham,UK:EdwardElgar.
OfficeoftheDeputyPrimeMinister(2003)Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future, London:ODPM.Availableat:www.communities.gov.uk/documents/communities/pdf/146289.pdf[Accessed26April2010].
OfficeoftheDeputyPrimeMinister(2004)Indices of Multiple Deprivation,London:ODPM.
OfficeofNationalStatistics(2001)Social Capital. A Review of the Literature,ONSSocialAnalysisandReportingDivision,London:ONS.
OstCandvanDroogenbroeckN(1998)Report on Economics of Conservation: An Appraisal of Theories, Principles and Methods.Availableat:www.international.icomos.org/publications/eco4.pdf[Accessed1July2008].
PawleyM(2005)‘Heritageconservationshouldbeaboutmorethanjustbeingold’,The Architects’ Journal,3February,24.
PlimmerF,PottingerG,HarrisS,WatersMandPococky(2008)Knock It Down or Do It Up? Sustainable House Building: New Build and Refurbishment in the Sustainable Communities Plan,Reading:CollegeofEstateManagement.
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
22
PutnamR(2000)Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community,Newyork:SimonandSchuster.
RICS(2010)Valuation Standards,7thedn,London:RICS.
RypkemaD(2005)‘Economics,sustainabilityandhistoricpreservation’,paperdeliveredatUSNationalTrustConference,Portland,OR,1October.Availableat:www.ptvermont.org/rypkema.htm[Accessed14October2010].
RypkemaD(2008)‘Historicpreservationandsustainabledevelopment’,paperdeliveredat‘LandmarksnotLandfill’HeritageConservationconference,Collingwood,Ontario,30May.Availableat:www.heritagecollingwood.ca/Rypkematranscript.pdf[Accessed14October2010].
RypkemaD(2009a)‘Theroleofheritageconservationinasustainableeconomy’,paperdeliveredatNationalTrustconference‘HeritageInvestment’,London,26May.
RypkemaD(2009b)‘Heritageconservationassustainableeconomicdevelopment’,paperdeliveredtolaunchthepublicationofHeritage and Beyond(Strasbourg:CouncilofEurope)relatingtothecontributionoftheFaroConvention,Lisbon,20November.Availableat:www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/heritage/identities/SpeechesLisbon/LisbonpresentationRypkema_EN.pdf[Accessed21April2010].
SayceS,BrittonP,MorrisA,SundbergAandWatkinD(2009) Valuing Historic Assets – Final Report of a Research Project Examining the Case for the Valuation of Historic Assets,London:KingstonUniversity/RICS.
ScarrettD(2003)Property Valuation: The Five Methods,London: TaylorandFrancis.
SmithAJ(2010)The Value of Built Heritage,CEMOccasionalPaperSeries,IP2/10,Reading:CollegeofEstateManagement.
SmithL(2006)Uses of Heritage,Abingdon:Routledge.
TiesdellS,OcTandHeathT(1996)Revitalising Historic Urban Quarters,Boston,MA:ButterworthArchitecture.
ThrosbyD(2001)Economics and Culture, Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
ThrosbyD(2006)‘Thevalueofculturalheritage:Whatcaneconomicstellus?’,inKClark(ed.)Capturing the Public Value of Heritage: The Proceedings of the London Conference 25–26 January 2006,London:EnglishHeritage.40–43.
ThèrondD(2010)‘Heritageandbeyond’,Conservation Bulletin63,30–32.
UNESCO(2005)Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention,Paris:UNESCO.
UrbanPractitioners(2005)The Heritage Dividend Methodology: Measuring the Impact of Heritage Project,London:EnglishHeritage.Availableat:www.helm.org.uk/upload/pdf/Heritage-Dividend-Methodology.pdf [Accessed16September2010].
ViňasSM(2005)Contemporary Theory of Conservation,Oxford:ElsevierButterworth-Heinemann.
WilliamsR(2010)‘Battletosaveradicalbuildingthatgavefreehealthservice10yearsbeforeNHS’,The Guardian,13April,17.
WorthingtonDandBondS(2008)Managing Built Heritage: The Role of Cultural Significance,Oxford:Blackwell.
WrightP(1985)On Living in an Old Country,London:Verso.
IP 1/11
March 2011
23
CuRRentReseARCHPRoPosALsCeM’sproposed2011researchprogrammeconsistsoffourprojectscoveringtheareasofRegeneration,Publicsectorknowledgetransference,technologyandRealestate,andsustainableHousing.
BONFIREOFTHERDAS:
PHOENIxFROMTHEASHES?
DELIVERINGTHECODEFOR
SUSTAINABLEHOMES
THEVALUEOFTHEVIRTUALESTATE
WHATFUTUREFORTHEURBAN
DEVELOPMENTCORPORATION?
Foreachoftheseproposals,theCollegeisseekingindustry-basedsupportthroughfunding
partnershipsorsponsorship-pleaseseebelowtodownloadthefullspecificationdocumentforeach
subject,whichillustratestheopportunitiesandbenefitsavailabletoparticipatingpartners.
Individualresearchproposalsareavailabletodownloadfromwww.cem.ac.uk/ourresearch,orforaninformaldiscussionpleasecall01189214688oremailresearch@cem.ac.uk.
IP 1/11
Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in new bottles?
24
RePoRtsAndPuBLICAtIonsReflectingthenatureofCeM’scoursesandtheinterestsofouracademicstaff,ourresearchencompassesawiderangeofsubjectareasinthecommercialandresidentialrealestateandconstructionmarketsacrosstheukandeurope.
youcanfindourmostrecentresearchreportsatwww.cem.ac.uk/ourresearch
Previousreportsinclude:
INCLUSIVEACCESS,
SUSTAINABILITyAND
THEBUILTENVIRONMENT
ETHICALISSUESINSURVEyING
FIRMS-DOESSIzEMATTER?
THEFUTUREOFRDAS
BesPokeReseARCHoutsouRCInG
Ourresearchoutsourcingfacilitieshaveastrongtrackrecordforinnovationanddelivery,having
successfullycompletedarangeofresearchprojectsforclientsinboththeprivateandpublicsectors.
Weofferacompetitiveandefficientresearchservice,utilisingthecoreskillsofbothourresearchteam
andthewiderCEMcommunityofindustrypractitionersandacademics.
todiscussbespokecommissionspleasecall01189214688oremailresearch@cem.ac.uk
THEVALUEOFBUILTHERITAGE
BENCHMARKING–ENSURING
SUCCESSWHENPLANNING
FORTHEDEVELOPMENTOF
SHOPPINGCENTRESINPOLAND
TAxINCREMENTALFINANCING
© college of estate Management 2010 All rights reserved by the College of Estate Management. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written permission from the College of Estate Management. CEM warrants that reasonable skill and care has been used in preparing this report. Notwithstanding this warranty, CEM shall not be under liability for any loss of profit, business, revenues or any special indirect or consequential damage of any nature whatsoever or loss of anticipated saving or for any increased costs sustained by the client or his or her servants or agents arising in any way, whether directly or indirectly, as a result of reliance on this publication or of any error or defect in this publication. CEM makes no warranty, either express or implied, as to the accuracy of any data used by CEM in preparing this report nor as to any projections contained in this report which are necessarily of any subjective nature and subject to uncertainty and which constitute only CEM’s opinion as to likely future trends or events based on information known to CEM at the date of this publication. CEM shall not in any circumstances be under any liability whatsoever to any other person for any loss or damage arising in any way as a result of reliance on this publication.
ceM is the leading provider of education, training and research for the real estate and construction industries. no other institution offers the same range and quality of specialist expertise to the property profession.
Over the past 90 years, we have helped more than 150,000 people, at all levels of the profession, with a wide range of business and academic backgrounds, to gain the skills they need to enhance their careers.
While we are an independent organisation, we have a close relationship with the University of Reading, strong links with a range of professional bodies and with major property firms. The College is increasingly global in outlook.
Drawing on our extensive knowledge base, professional contacts and independent standpoint, research is a core area of CEM’s activities, both to ensure the quality and relevance of our education programme and to offer a vital service to the property profession.
the college of estate Management Whiteknights, Reading, RG6 6AW, United KingdomTel: +44 (0) 118 921 4696Email: [email protected]
the logo is intended to bleed off the top left hand corner of the page. the dots should line up withthe page edge, allow 3mm bleed and pull in the picture box to hide the dots.
Patron: HRH The Prince of Wales