Considerations on Governing Heritage as a Commons Resource

Gould, Peter G.

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44515-1_12

Cited by 8 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…"Commons", in an economic sense are defined as resources that are non-rivalrous (one person's use does not detract from another's) and non-excludable (it is impossible restrain others from using the resource). Commons in this sense are "public goods" [8]. Interest and scholarship in understanding common goods and collective action dilemma has markedly grown since 2009, when late Ostrom was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics for her analysis of common goods(ibid.).…”

Section: Cultural Heritage As "Common Goods"mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, as laione et al [17] argue a commons understanding of heritage management emphasizes the need for the development of a community around heritage regardless of the different legal statuses of the concerned resources. The commons solutions then present a sustainable solution for "controlling, protecting, and developing tangible and intangible heritage that simultaneously will be both ethical and practically effective" [8], p. 171. This, however, is easier said than done and the effectiveness of the best tools to manage a cultural commons depend on multiple factors.…”

Section: Cultural Heritage As "Common Goods"mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Decoding Collective Action Dilemmas in Historical Precincts of Delhi

Chauhan

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing understanding that cultural heritage needs to be understood as a “common good”, pivotal to the sustainable development of communities. Cultural goods create multiple value streams for stakeholder groups whose interests and objectives often collide, leading to governance failures. The management of cultural goods can be seen as a collective action problem arising from the interaction of numerous actors. In the first part, the article highlights the importance of analyzing cultural heritage sites and areas as common goods. Within this context, I highlight why collaborative processes of decision-making and planning are crucial for the sustainable conservation of heritage resources and tourism management. In the second section, the paper applies the Institutional Analysis and Development—Network of Adjacent Action Situations (IAD-NAAS) framework to explore collective action dilemmas at Nizamuddin Basti in New Delhi. Application of the framework allows one to explore interrelated governance dilemmas by understanding stakeholder dynamics within governance action situations with interdependent outcomes. The paper concludes with a suggestive framework for a cultural collaborative process keeping the cultural identity of residents as the focal point. While the IAD-NAAS framework is useful in diagnosing the contending interests and their consequences, the IAD framework could also be considered a starting point to define a framework for a collaborative process.

show abstract

Section: Cultural Heritage As "Common Goods"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cultural Heritage As "Common Goods"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Decoding Collective Action Dilemmas in Historical Precincts of Delhi

Chauhan

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Notwithstanding this article's environmental focus, it is clear that social equity and social inclusion are relevant to ARCH in Europe because of the need to democratize access to cultural heritage as a common good [10,11]. Further, rehabilitation of underused buildings is often accompanied by an increase in housing cost and gentrification.…”

Section: "Circular Economy Is a Production And Consumption Process Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

The future of circular environmental impact indicators for cultural heritage buildings in Europe

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The European building and construction sector is extremely resource-intensive. This makes the renovation of existing buildings, including the adaptive reuse of cultural heritage buildings (ARCH), important for reducing the materials and energy intensity of the sector. Currently, Europe is embarking on a Circular Economy (CE) strategy that directly affects the environmental indicators for buildings and landscapes, including ARCH. However, there is a misalignment between macro-level European CE policy goals and micro-level renovation and management of existing buildings and ARCH. The analysis shows that macro European Union-level indicators are too narrowly defined to effectively guide the implementation of CE at the micro-project level for ARCH. Results This policy study develops a comprehensive ARCH Circular Environmental Impact Indicator Framework to close this gap by: (1) defining the research question; (2) identifying the causal network; and (3) selecting the best indicators. The study compares Circular Environmental Indicators for ARCH projects to current and developing European management schemes. Best practices in environmental impact assessment at the project level are highlighted for the building and construction sector in Europe. Conclusions The proposed new framework is a comprehensive and suitable list of explicitly circular environmental indicators for ARCH. The framework has immediate practical applications for practitioners and policymakers interested in the CE regime for buildings in Europe.

show abstract

“…L'ambiguità concettuale legata ai commons, cui ci si riferiva in apertura di questo paragrafo, fa sì che anche nell'ambito degli studi legati al patrimonio culturale il concetto presenti spesso confini confusi (Gould 2017). In Italia alcuni se ne servono per dimostrare che mercato e cultura sono elementi da tenere Francesca Benetti separati, nella convinzione che il capitalismo porti alla "tragedia dei beni comuni" (v. nota 266) (Montanari 2014, pp.…”

Section: Non Rivalitàunclassified

Detecting and Understanding Historic Landscapes

Davidson¹

2016

Medieval Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

la partecipazione sociale nel contesto legislativo internazionale 2.1. i documenti unesco 2.2. i lavori del council of europe 2.2.1. Primo periodo: la protezione dei beni culturali tangibili e la Convenzione di La Valletta 2.2.2. Secondo periodo: diversità e Convenzione Europea del Paesaggio 2.2.3. Terzo periodo: il patrimonio culturale come strumento di democrazia e la Convenzione di Faro 2.3. La partecipazione pubblica nelle politiche dell'Unione Europea sul patrimonio culturale Il contesto normativo italiano 3.8. La partecipazione dei privati nella fruizione e nella valorizzazione 3.8.1. Uso individuale e riproduzione di beni culturali 3.8.2. Donazioni, sponsorizzazioni e altre modalità di finanziamento privato ai beni culturali 3.8.3. La partecipazione nella gestione 3.9. La proposta di ratifica della Convenzione di Faro da parte dell'Italia 3.10. Beni culturali come beni comuni? Il contesto normativo inglese 4.1. Gli attori 4.1.1. Stato, enti territoriali e organi esecutivi non dipartimentali 4.1.2. Il settore indipendente 4.1.3. I professionisti: le units, le ditte e gli independent consultants 4.2. L'individuazione dei beni da sottoporre a tutela 4.2.1. Gli scheduled monuments e la partecipazione pubblica nella loro individuazione 4.2.2. Le Areas of Archaeological Importance 4.2.3. Il listing, le conservation areas e le forme di partecipazione nei procedimenti riguardanti i beni "listati" 4.3. La regolamentazione degli scavi "di ricerca" 4.4. La ricerca archeologica nell' ambito dei processi di pianificazione (commercial archaeology) 4.4.1. La protezione del patrimonio archeologico nel processo di pianificazione 4.4.2. La partecipazione pubblica nella pianificazione e nella commercial archaeology 4.5. La gestione dei ritrovamenti fortuiti 4.5.1. Il Treasure Act 1996 4.5.2. Il Portable Antiquities Scheme 4.6. Altri ambiti di partecipazione pubblica La partecipazione pubblica nell'amministrazione del patrimonio culturale. Spunti comparativi Conclusioni 6.1. Le agende internazionali e nazionali 6.2. Il modello italiano 6.2. Il modello inglese 6.3. Un bilancio complessivo: archaeology (f)or the people? 6.4. Alcune proposte per un sistema italiano maggiormente partecipativo 6.

show abstract

Considerations on Governing Heritage as a Commons Resource

Cited by 8 publications

References 31 publications

Decoding Collective Action Dilemmas in Historical Precincts of Delhi

Decoding Collective Action Dilemmas in Historical Precincts of Delhi

The future of circular environmental impact indicators for cultural heritage buildings in Europe

Detecting and Understanding Historic Landscapes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About