Dokumen - Pub - Reshaping Urban Conservation The Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Action 1st Ed 978 981 10 8886 5 978 981 10 8887 2 PDF

Creativity, Heritage and the City 2
Ana Pereira Roders

Francesco Bandarin Editors
Reshaping Urban
Conservation
The Historic Urban Landscape Approach
in Action
Creativity, Heritage and the City
Volume 2
Editor-in-Chief
Hiroshi Okano
Osaka, Japan
Series Editors
Francesco Bandarin
Paris, France
Marisol García Cabeza
Barcelona, Spain
Xavier Greffe
Paris, France
Lily Kong
Singapore
Klaus Kunzmann
Dortmund, Germany
Edmond Préteceille
Paris, France
Hans Thomsen
Zurich, Switzerland
Minoru Tsukagoshi
Osaka, Japan
Cities are faced with various problems, including terrorism, energy challenges, and
environmental issues, as well as inter-urban competition brought about by expanding
globalization forces. What is required is to gather theoretical insights from various
scientific areas, not only social science– humanities but also natural science, and
connect them to the practical insights already gained through numerous efforts to
deal with these issues on the ground. In this way, paradigms for urban creativity can
be developed and we can start to accrue dependable practice and theoretically based
intelligence that can be used for improved policymaking. The keywords for this
book series are “urban creativity”, “(cultural) heritage”, and “social development”.
Developing cultural and natural resources, including heritage, so as to take the lead
in evaluating, implementing, and suggesting urban or regional designs that
harmonize ecology, society, and people, and to further develop urban and regional
culture is essential. There is a particular focus in this book series on fostering
individuals who can design, manage, and direct models, technologies, and tools for
promoting interfaces between such actors as policymakers, urban planners,
engineers, and residents. The above-stated goals can be implemented through
cooperation with international research communities and networks, international
organizations, and natural history institutions, academies of science, and research
institutes.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13785

Ana Pereira Roders • Francesco Bandarin
Editors
Reshaping Urban
Conservation
in Action
Editors
Ana Pereira Roders Francesco Bandarin
Professor in Heritage and Values UNESCO Advisor
Delft University of Technology Paris, France
Delft, The Netherlands
ISSN 2366-4584 ISSN 2366-4592 (electronic)

Creativity, Heritage and the City
ISBN 978-981-10-8886-5 ISBN 978-981-10-8887-2 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2
Library of Congress Control Number: 2018961391
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
To Ron
The ideas and opinions expressed in this book are those of the authors and do not necessarily rep-
resent the views of UNESCO and do not commit the organization.
Preface
This edited book was first conceptualized by Francesco Bandarin and Ron van Oers
in early 2015. Sadly, Ron passed away, and did not have the opportunity to continue
with this book. To honour his full commitment and key role in the drafting, adoption
and implementation of the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation on the Historic Urban
Landscape, (HUL approach), fostering the integration of heritage management in
regional and urban planning and management and strengthening the role of heritage
in sustainable urban development, Francesco Bandarin and Ana Pereira Roders
decided to carry on the project. This resulted is the present book, certainly an imper-
fect reflection of that ambitious idea. Those exploring the HUL approach, all miss
Ron dearly and wish he was here with us witnessing the boost given to his work by
the many scholars and practitioners who keep joining over the years with their expe-
riences and lessons.
Earlier publications and research looked at the underlying theory of why the
HUL approach was needed and how it was developed and elaborated by UNESCO. A
comprehensive study was carried out in consultation with a multitude of actors in
the twenty-first-century urban scene and with disciplinary approaches that are avail-
able to heritage managers and practitioners to implement the HUL approach.
Instead, this book aims to be empirical, describing, analysing and comparing a sam-
ple of 28 cities taken as case studies to implement the HUL approach. From those
cases, many lessons can be learned and much guidance shared on best practices
concerning what can be done to make the HUL approach work. Whereas the previ-
ous studies served to illustrate issues and challenges, in this volume the studies
point to innovations in regional and urban planning and management that can allow
cities to avoid major conflicts and to further develop their competitiveness. These
accomplishments have been possible by building partnerships, devising financial
strategies and using heritage as a key resource in sustainable urban development, to
name but a few effective strategies. For these reasons, this volume is primarily oper-
ational, linked to the daily work and challenges of practitioners and administrators,
using specific cases to assess what was and is good about current practices and what
can be improved, in accordance with the HUL approach and aims.
vii
viii Preface
This book would not have been possible without the authors, who carefully and
timely prepared the chapters and boxes, as well as reviewed each other’s contribu-
tions. The editors would like to thank Shane Cullen and Nadia Pintossi for their
active and constructive copy editing. Last, we would like to thank the editors of the
series Creativity, Heritage and the City. Their patience and support allowed the
publication to mature and the authors to develop their chapters accordingly.
Unlike other global books, we purposely choose not to cluster the chapters into
regional sections. We wanted to endorse Marshall McLuhan’s analogy of the world
as a “global village”, where cities can smartly use modern technology, to connect
and learn from each other, independent from their political region or country,
exchanging knowledge and experiences on the adoption of innovation on what con-
cerns the reform of heritage planning and its integration with urban and regional
urban planning. Consequently, we decided to present the case studies in alphabeti-
cal order.
This book starts with two introductory chapters. First, Francesco Bandarin’s
policy review on the process that led, throughout over 30 years of policy evolution,
to the integration of culture in the international development agenda, framing the
HUL approach to the new policy framework and major shift in cultural policies that
is reshaping the field of urban conservation, from the Decade for Cultural
Development (1988–1997) to the Agenda 2030 adopted by the United Nations in
2015. Second, the literature review of Ana Pereira Roders on the global dissemina-
tion and implementation of the HUL approach. This chapter discusses the state of
the art, contextualizing the experiences and key lessons of these leaders so far,
active in the global diffusion of heritage planning innovation. This second chapter
also includes smaller contributions of other authors than the ones of the 28 chapters
(boxes), so that an even richer and broader perspective about the implementation of
the HUL approach could be given to the readers of this book.
As in any other process of adoption of innovation, these last eight years have
been as challenging as rewarding; but the greater impact is yet to come, during the
next years. We gladly keep following the processes of these and many more cities.
Cities are the modern global leaders. Together, cities can smartly innovate towards
resource efficiency, co-producing sustainable urban development, inclusive to all,
irrespectively of background, status, gender, age, disability or education. As the
African proverb says, “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go
together”.
Delft, The Netherlands Ana Pereira Roders

Paris, France Francesco Bandarin
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our deepest gratitude to the contributors of chapters and
boxes1 in this volume, as well as Ms. Nadia Pintossi, who integrated these materials
into the final manuscript. It is a great pleasure for us to mention their short profiles
below.
György Alföldi (DLA and habil in architecture) is an urban planner, Professor at
the Department of Urban Planning and Design at BUTE (http://urb.bme.hu) and
Chairman of the Standing Committee of Urban Sciences of the HAS. Between 1999
and 2016, he was responsible for the urban development of District 8# of Budapest,
taking part in the urban regeneration projects, which became well known across
Europe. (Chap. 8)
Hiba Alkhalaf is a postdoctoral research associate at King’s College London.
She is a conservation architect and holds a PhD in architecture and MSc in architec-
tural conservation. She has worked and taught internationally, especially in the UK
and Middle East. Her interdisciplinary research bridges architecture, urban conser-
vation and sustainable development connecting the physical (buildings), meaning
(people and community) and the function. (Box 10)
Sanjarbek Allayarov is culture officer at the UNESCO Office in Tashkent. He
is responsible for the regular programme and projects, particularly within the frame-
work of tangible cultural heritage including World Heritage and the Silk Roads
nomination. He was also project coordinator for preservation and conservation of
the Buddhist temple Fayaz Tepa, Termez, Uzbekistan. (Chap. 9 and Box 6)
Ataa Alsalloum is currently a lecturer in architecture and urban heritage at the
Liverpool School of Architecture. She is also the heritage specialist at the ArCHIAM
Centre. She has a PhD in cultural heritage studies from the Liverpool School of
Architecture. She was a full-time lecturer at Damascus University from 2011 to
2016. (Chap. 3 and Box 1)
Mariarosaria Angrisano is PhD architect in “Evaluation methods for integrated
conservation, management and maintenance of architectural, urban and environ-
mental heritage” (2015). She is ICOMOS member and researcher at the “Laboratory
Box numbers are numbers in Case Study Boxes.

1
ix
x Acknowledgements
of research on creative and sustainable city”, in the field of the port cities regenera-
tion. (Chap. 28 and Box 30)
Salwa Aomorali is an architect, currently working at the School of Architecture,
Planning & Design at the Mohammed VI Polytechnic University in Morocco
(UM6P). She received her degree in architecture from Ecole Nationale d’Architecture
(ENA) in Rabat, where she also obtained her dual degree of specialisation in archi-
tectural heritage from ENA and la Cité de l’Architecture et du Patrimoine de
Chaillot. Her research interests include resilience and sustainability in urban and
architectural heritage. (Chap. 24)
Lazare Eloundou Assomo is currently Director of the Division of Culture in
Emergencies at UNESCO. He is an architect, conservator and town planner special-
ized in earthen architecture and cultural heritage management. He was UNESCO
representative in Mali and coordinator for UNESCO’s actions to rehabilitate Mali’s
cultural heritage damaged during the 2012 armed conflict. He authored the book
African World Heritage: A Remarkable Diversity. (Box 29)
Sebastián Astudillo Cordero is an architect; specialist in valuation and conser-
vation of the historic urban contexts, URB_AL (2003–2004 Vicenza, Italy); master
in Landscape Architecture Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, University of
Cuenca; Professor of the University of Cuenca; consultant in Urban and Cadastre
C+C Consulcentro; and director of the Master in Conservation of Monuments and
Sites and Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, University of Cuenca. He has
developed several projects of urban design, architecture and restoration. (Chap. 11
and Box 8)
Melinda Benkő (PhD and habil in architecture) is an urban designer, associate
Professor and head of the Department of Urban Planning and Design at Budapest,
University of Technology and Economics (http://urb.bme.hu). Her research, teach-
ing and professional activities focus on contemporary urban design theory and prac-
tice related to urban form and space usage. (Chap. 8)
Helma Bokhove was coordinator for the World Heritage Office of the Amsterdam
Canal Ring Area from September 2012 to January 2017. Now she is programme
coordinator for the Central Borough of Amsterdam, which is responsible for the
urban management and conservation of the historic centre of the city. (Chap. 6 and
Box 2)
Kristal Buckley, AM, is lecturer in cultural heritage at Deakin University,
Melbourne (Australia). Kristal Buckley’s teaching and research interests concern
evolving forms of global cultural heritage practice. She is a former ICOMOS
International Vice President and past president of Australia ICOMOS and works
with the ICOMOS World Heritage Program. She is an expert member of the
ICOMOS ISC for intangible cultural heritage and is a board member of the Port
Arthur Historic Site Management Authority. (Chap. 7 and Box 4)
Dinu Bumbaru, CM, is a graduate in architecture and conservation. He is
Fondation Héritage Montréal’s policy director. His Montreal action to protect,
reveal and activate the greater metropolitan area’s built, urban and landscape
heritage through civic processes connects with his international volunteerism, in
particular in ICOMOS of which he was secretary general. (Chap. 20)
Acknowledgements xi
Salim M. Bunu holds a bachelor’s degree in education from Kenyatta University

and a master’s in community development from Pwani University. Salim did many
heritage-related courses at the Research Institute of Swahili Studies in Africa,
worked as a high school teacher and joined National Museums of Kenya as com-
munity education officer and then as a senior curator/manager of Lamu Museum
and World Heritage Site where he is involved in many Conservation programmes.
(Chap. 17 and Box 18)
Meltem Cavdar is a research assistant and PhD candidate in assistant professor-
ship of Recent Building Heritage Conservation at the Technical University of
Munich. She is a specialist in building archaeology, holding degrees from Istanbul
Technical University and Regensburg University of Applied Sciences. In her doc-
toral thesis, she is investigating the development and use of wooden formwork for
concrete construction. (Chap. 25)
Ayşe E. Coşkun Orlandi, PhD, is currently working as an assistant Professor at
the Faculty of Art and Design of the Kadir Has University in Istanbul and is the
chairperson at the Department of Industrial Product Design. She received her BA as
industrial product designer in 1997, received a Master in Design (MD) degree at
Domus Academy, Italy. In 2009, she has got her PhD degree and has been lecturing
and researching in the field of industrial product design since 2000. (Box 13)
Teresa Cunha Ferreira holds a degree in architecture (Faculty of Architecture,
University of Porto, FAUP) and a PhD in architectural conservation (Milan
Polytechnic, 2009); professional experience (DREMN-DGEMN, Portugal;
SBAPMi, Italy), among other projects in heritage management and conservation;
and teaching activity in EAUM (2009–2017) and FAUP (since 2012). Teresa is
member of CEAU-FAUP and of the Direction of ICOMOS-Portugal. (Chap. 23 and
Box 25)
Alaa El-Habashi is an Egyptian Professor of architecture and heritage conserva-
tion and chairs the Department of Architecture in Menoufia University. He received
his MS and PhD from the University of Pennsylvania. He attempts throughout the
last 25 years practicing in many Arab countries to find cultural heritage conserva-
tion frameworks that respect values and local communities. (Boxes 7 and 23)
Rand Eppich is an architect whose work focuses on the role of cultural heritage
in economic and community development at a number of World Heritage proper-
ties. He holds master’s degrees in architecture, urban design and business and is
currently completing his PhD dissertation. He has recently established his own
architectural conservation studio. (Chap. 9)
Yonca Erkan collaborates with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre as the
HUL/World Heritage Cities Programme Coordinator since 2017. She is the
UNESCO chairholder on the management and promotion of World Heritage Sites:
New Media and Community Involvement at the Kadir Has University. She is a con-
servation architect (1996), studied Islamic art and architecture at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT) (1998) and received her PhD degree (2007) from
Istanbul Technical University. (Box 13)
Alberto Escovar Wilson-White is an architect of Universidad de los Andes,
Colombia. He has been a leader in the field of heritage management in Colombia for
xii Acknowledgements
over 20 years. He is currently the heritage director in the Ministry of Culture of
Colombia. As general director of the Escuela Taller Foundation of Bogotá and
Buenaventura, he has led projects directed at generating cultural entrepreneurship
and income for low-income youths. (Chap. 5)
Susan Fayad is coordinator of Heritage and Cultural Landscapes, City of
Ballarat (Australia). Susan Fayad is managing the rollout of UNESCO’s
Recommendation on the historic urban landscape (HUL) pilot programme at the
City of Ballarat. She is an active member of the global HUL programme, contribut-
ing both internationally and locally in Australia. She’s lectured on HUL and co-
authored The HUL Guidebook – a practical guide for managing heritage in dynamic
and constantly changing urban environments with WHITR-AP, China. (Chap. 7 and
Box 4)
Francesca Ferlicca is architect and magister in urban planning, Faculty of
Architecture of the Università degli Studi Roma Tre (Rome). Since 2013, she has
resided permanently in Argentina. She has worked as a consultant at the Government
of Buenos Aires. She currently works at the Urban Digital Laboratory at CIPPEC.
(Box 5)
Andrés Forero is an anthropologist with a master’s degree from the University
of Amsterdam, with experience in the field of qualitative cultural research and the
analysis of heritage policy. As an advisor in ICH for the Ministry of Culture in
Colombia, he has worked in the planning of heritage safeguarding, including the
management of safeguarding plans of cultural heritage elements and the construc-
tion of heritage conservation tools. (Chap. 5)
Juliana Forero is an anthropologist and has PhD in urban studies from Huazhong
University of Science and Technology (HUST) and a master’s in social anthropol-
ogy from Universidad de los Andes. She coordinated the HUL programme at
UNESCO-WHITRAP and currently coordinates ICH at the Ministry of Culture of
Colombia. Her working experience on the social function of heritage has focused on
generating sustainable development through cultural assets. (Chap. 5)
Pablo Fornet is a geographer and urban planner with over 30 years’ experience
in the field of heritage management. He holds a master’s degree in urban studies by
El Colegio de México. His work focuses on environment, demography and informa-
tion systems. Since 2008, he has served as vice director of Old Havana’s Master
Plan Office. (Chap. 13 and Box 12)
Luigi Fusco Girard is emeritus Professor of the University of Naples Federico
II and is associated to several national and international research projects. He is the
director of the International Laboratory on Creative and Sustainable City. (Chap. 28
and Box 30)
Amareswar Galla is currently chief curator at Amaravathi Heritage Centre and
Museum, Amaravathi Heritage Town; visiting Professor at the School of Planning
and Architecture, Vijayawada; previously Professor of museum studies at the
University of Queensland; Professor of sustainable heritage development studies at
the Australian National University; and has an extensive publication record.
(Chap. 4)
Acknowledgements xiii
Manal Ginzarly is an urban planner who graduated from the American

University of Beirut. She is currently a PhD candidate at the University of Liège,
Belgium. Her interests focus on the different natural and sociocultural processes
that construct the urban landscape spatially and experimentally and on urban gover-
nance. Her inquiry is centred on everyday landscapes as an integral part of people’s
cultural heritage and on innovative methods and tools to address these. (Chap. 29
and Box 32)
Rachel Gottesman is head of the research lab at the White City Center Tel Aviv
and a lecturer at Haifa University. Her PhD, awarded at Tel Aviv University, dealt
with spatial perceptions in ancient Greece and her research focuses on the history of
the ancient Mediterranean, spatiality and urbanism. (Chap. 27)
Susanne Hauer is junior heritage manager with a background in political sci-
ences and journalism. She focuses on communicating and facilitating the idea and
values of the UNESCO World Heritage Site “Old Town of Regensburg with
Stadtamhof”. Being a certified interpretive guide, she is passionate about telling
new stories about cultural heritage and to get people personally involved. (Chap. 25)
Sandra Higuera is an architect form the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana,
Colombia, and holds a master’s degree in management of cultural heritage. Sandra
has experience of over 5 years in the coordination of holistic approaches towards the
planning of sustainable management of cultural heritage in Colombia. She has been
an advisor for the Heritage Division of the Ministry of Culture of Colombia for over
5 years. (Chap. 5)
Jeremie Hoffmann is an architect and historian, head of the Conservation
Department of the city of Tel Aviv-Yafo since 2005 and founder of the White City
Center. His latest publication Aforia: Architecture of independence 1948–1977
(Technion, 2017) presents the post-war architecture and urbanism of Tel Aviv as a
representative of brutalistic architecture. (Chap. 27)
Jens Hougaard graduated as Architect-Urban Planner in 1975. He spent most of
his career in Mozambique working on social infrastructure and urban conservation.
Under the Mozambican Ministry of Culture, he coordinated the first urban study of
the Island of Mozambique and compiled the documentation for the candidature of
the island to the UNESCO World Heritage List. (Chap. 14)
Feiran Huang is assistant editor of Built Heritage at Tongji University, Shanghai
(China). His major research interests are urban-rural linkages and urban heritage.
He graduated in urban planning and design at Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University
and holds a MSc in urban planning and policy design from the Politecnico of
Milano, Italy. E-mail: huangfr@tongji.edu.cn. (Chap. 26 and Box 28)
Deniz Ikiz Kaya holds a PhD degree from Oxford Brookes University. She was
trained as an architect specialized in heritage management and sustainable develop-
ment discourses. For almost a decade, she has combined research, teaching and
consultancy practices in Istanbul and Oxford. Her current research project focuses
on the management of historic urban landscapes located within global cities.
She has also widely published on the broader topics of contested heritage, identity
building and heritage protection. (Chap. 19 and Box 21)
xiv Acknowledgements
Shikha Jain led more than 40 conservation and museum projects across India as
founder director of DRONAH. She is recipient of National-Level HUDCO Award
for urban conservation in 2013 and also recognized for Urban Green Growth Best
Practices. Built Heritage Management Plan of Jaipur is accepted as best practice by
the National Institute of Urban Affairs, Ministry of Urban Development in 2015.
She is responsible for World Heritage inscriptions of Jantar Mantar and Amber Fort
in Jaipur and its inclusion as Creative City of Crafts and Folk Arts. (Chap. 15 and
Box 14)
Rohit Jigyasu is a conservation architect and disaster risk management profes-
sional from India currently working as UNESCO chairholder visiting Professor at
the Institute for Disaster Mitigation of Urban Cultural Heritage at Ritsumeikan
University, Kyoto, Japan. He is the elected vice president of the International
Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) since 2017 and president of ICOMOS-
India since 2014 and International Scientific Committee on Risk Preparedness
(ICORP) since 2011. Rohit is also the trustee of the Indian Historic Cities Network
Foundation (IHCN-F). (Chap. 15 and Box 14)
Albino Jopela is the head of programmes at the African World Heritage Fund
(Midrand, South Africa) and researcher at Kaleidoscopio – Research in Public
Policy and Culture (Maputo, Mozambique). He holds a PhD in archaeology from
the University of the Witwatersrand (South Africa), and his research interest includes
heritage and development in Africa. (Chap. 14)
Muhammad Juma is a director of urban and rural planning since 2011. He was
an assistant director general of Stone Town Conservation and Development
Authority (STCDA). From 2009 to 2011, he worked as an in-house consultant at
UNESCO World Heritage Centre in Paris, advising on urban conservation in Africa.
(Chap. 30)
Roha W. Khalaf holds a PhD in environmental design from Université de
Montréal, a master’s of architecture, a bachelor of architectural studies with a minor
in French Literature and a certificate in teaching skills from Carleton University.
Her experience includes architectural and urban design, cultural heritage conserva-
tion and policy-making. ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5779-7079. (Chap. 16
and Box 17)
Elizaveta Levitskaya graduated from Moscow State University with master’s
degree in Asian and African studies. She also studied in South Korea, Norway and
Uganda. Elizaveta was an editor of the Korean newspaper about Russia, worked
with foreign for the Garage Center for Contemporary Art and volunteered for
Transparency International. Since 2012, she worked at Strelka Institute and consul-
tancy managing research including the regional report on culture and sustainable
development, organized by UNESCO. (Box 16)
Solange L. Macamo is assistant Professor of archaeology and heritage manage-
ment at Eduardo Mondlane University, Mozambique. She is PhD trained in archae-
ology at Uppsala University, Sweden, and former national director for cultural
heritage at the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. Her professional experience
includes heritage legislation for the Island of Mozambique. (Chap. 14)
Acknowledgements xv
María del Mar Loren Méndez is architect with a master’s degree from Harvard
University and PhD from Seville University. She is a tenure Professor at Seville
University, Spain, with an international academic background; director of the
Research Group Modern Architectural and Urban Heritage; and member of the
UNITWIN UNESCO Network SBESIDS-HUL. Her research trajectory focuses on
modern heritage, tourism and cross-cultural studies. (Box 20)
Silvio Mendes Zancheti is full Professor of the Federal University of Pernambuco
(Recife, Brazil); founder and general director of the Center of Advanced Studies in
Integrated Conservation; consultant to the World Heritage Center, World Bank, the
Inter-American Development Bank and European Union; and contributed with
ICCROM in the development of the ITUC and LATAM programmes. (Chap. 21 and
Box 24)
Mohammed Ali Mwenje is conservation officer at Lamu World Heritage Site.
His background training is in building engineering, and he has attended courses
such as ITUC 03 at ICCROM and others in Norway, Sweden, Zanzibar, Mauritius,
India and China. He specializes in historic building and urban conservation and has
undertaken research and published in fields such as disaster management and coastal
site management. (Chap. 17 and Box 18)
Patricia M. O’Donnell, FASLA, AICP, F. US/ICOMOS, principal of Heritage
Landscapes LLC, holds master’s degrees in landscape architecture and urban plan-
ning. O’Donnell collaborated with UNESCO Culture and global colleagues in
developing and mainstreaming of HUL and, as senior urban conservation expert,
incorporated the HUL approach into revitalizing heritage cities in the USA and
internationally. In this urban century, she is deeply committed to sustaining and
revitalizing heritage cities and public space assets, our shared commons. (Chap. 22)
Christian Ost is Professor in economics and former dean of ICHEC Brussels
Management School; visiting lecturer at the Raymond Lemaire International Centre
for Conservation (KU Leuven), Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture (Paris-
Belleville) and Burgundy School of Business; and scholar-in-residence at the Getty
Conservation Institute in 2008–2009. He sits on the Advisory Board of Global
Heritage Fund and ICOMOS International Economics Scientific Committee, which
he chaired in 2000–2005. (Chap. 9 and Box 9)
Nadia Pintossi is a PhD candidate at the Eindhoven University of Technology
under the supervision of Prof. Ana Pereira Roders, Prof. Bauke de Vries and Dr.
Gamze Dane. Her research is part of the Horizon 2020 project “Circular models
leveraging in investment for adaptive reuse of cultural heritage”. Her work focuses
on the assessment of cultural heritage adaptive reuse practices to streamline circular
economy using the historic urban landscape approach as analysis framework.
Hassan Radoine is an architecture curator, educator and consultant. He is cur-
rently the director of the School of Architecture, Planning and Design at University
Mohammed VI Polytechnic in Morocco (UM6P). He worked as an expert for
UNESCO, UN-Habitat, MCC and the Aga Khan Award of Architecture. His research
and practice are focused on resilient, sustainable and smart architectural and urban
heritage. (Chap. 24)
xvi Acknowledgements
Julia Rey Pérez holds a PhD in architecture and is an associate researcher at the
Department of History, Theory and Architectural Composition of the University of
Seville. She is assistant to the vice dean of sustainable habitat of the University of
Seville; her main areas of research include conservation, intervention and manage-
ment of urban cultural heritage. (Chap. 11 and Box 8)
Simone Ricca is the vice director of WHITRAP Shanghai, the World Heritage
Institute for Training and Research of the Asia and the Pacific Region. He is a heri-
tage architect specialized in the conservation and management of historic sites and
cities; his researches focus on the link between politics and heritage in the Middle
East and in the UNESCO World Heritage List context. (Box 15)
Matthias Ripp, a senior heritage manager with a background of historical geog-
raphy, is coordinating the “Old Town of Regensburg with Stadtamhof” site and
researching and publishing on integrated heritage management, heritage-based
urban development, heritage communication and urban resilience. He is active in
numerous networks like ICOMOS or the Organisation of World Heritage Cities and
appointed member of the European Heritage Panel. (Chap. 25)
Dennis Rodwell, architect planner, works internationally in the field of cultural
heritage and sustainable urban development. Following a series of missions focused
on the holistic management of historic cities, 1998 onwards for UNESCO and oth-
ers, he has been closely involved in the evolution of the UNESCO historic urban
landscape initiative. He writes and publishes widely on the theme of conservation
and sustainability in historic cities. (Box 3)
Donovan Rypkema is president of Heritage Strategies International. Working at
the nexus of historic preservation and economic development, Rypkema has under-
taken assignments in 49 US states and more than 50 countries. He is the author of
The Economics of Historic Preservation and teaches preservation economics at the
University of Pennsylvania. (Boxes 11 and 26)
Meetu Sharma Saxena is built environment professional with bachelor’s and
master’s degrees in architecture (specialization in architectural conservation) with
20 years of experience of working in India, United Arab Emirates and Australia,
keen urbanist with focus on urban policy and strategy and has worked on a range of
heritage management projects. Currently pursuing PhD (part time) at the Research
School of Humanities and the Arts (RHSA) at Australian National University.
(Chap. 10)
Maria Siguencia Avila, graduated in architecture at Universidad de Cuenca in
Ecuador, holds the advanced “Master on Conservation of Monuments and Sites”
from the RLICC (KU Leuven-Belgium). Her research is focused on cities’ conser-
vation under the HUL approach, and this is the topic of her ongoing PhD carried out
since 2015. (Chap. 11 and Box 8)
Gábor Sonkoly (PhD at EHESS, Paris; doctor of Hungarian Academy of
Sciences) is a Professor of history, dean of the Faculty of Humanities, chair of his-
toriography and social sciences at Eötvös Loránd University of Budapest. He is the
author of Historical Urban Landscape (Palgrave, 2017). He presented at more than
hundred international colloquia and was a guest Professor in eleven countries.
(Chap. 8)
Acknowledgements xvii
Ana Tarrafa Silva is graduated in Cultural Heritage Studies at the University of

Algarve and in Urban and Spatial Planning at Instituto Superior Técnico of the
University of Lisbon (Portugal). Focused in the relation sustainability – cultural
significance, she has been an active promotor of HUL Recommendation in Portugal,
co-reviewer of the Portuguese official version and co-author of several studies at
national and local levels. (Chap. 23 and Box 25)
Ken Taylor AM has had a long association with the study of Canberra’s land-
scape and heritage. He is honorary Professor at ANU Centre for Heritage and
Museum Studies, School of Archaeology and Anthropology; emeritus Professor of
landscape architecture, University of Canberra; and visiting Professor, Silpakom
University, Bangkok. He has published nationally and internationally on changing
global perspectives on cultural heritage management and cultural landscapes.
(Chap. 10)
Jacques Teller is Professor of urban planning in the Urban and Environmental
Engineering Department of the University of Liège. His research combines urban
governance issues with the modelling of urbanization dynamics. He develops an
interest in emerging landscapes, either as new forms of landscapes or new means/
tools to address these. (Chap. 29 and Box 32)
Marie-Noël Tournoux is project director for research at WHITRAP Shanghai,
China. She worked at UNESCO’s World Heritage Centre for 15 years, where she
was involved in many urban conservation projects in Africa and Europe mostly and
in the advocacy and implementation of UNESCO’s Recommendation on the his-
toric urban landscape. Before that, she carried out research on nineteenth- and
twentieth-century architecture and planning for the French Ministry of Culture.
(Box 27)
Michael Turner is a practicing architect, UNESCO chairholder in urban design
and conservation studies at the Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design, Jerusalem. He
has accompanied the UNESCO Recommendation on the historic urban landscape
since its inception. He contributed to the UNESCO Global Report for UN Habitat
III and is an advocate of the UNISDR Resilient Cities Programme. (Chap. 30)
Loes Veldpaus is a postdoctoral researcher at Newcastle University (Global
Urban Research Unit). Her research focuses on the past, present and future of heri-
tage management and local, national and international conservation planning prac-
tices and policies. She aims to innovate understandings of the process of heritage
production and develop reflexive collaborative practices with both global and local
heritage actors. (Chap. 6 and Box 2)
Giulio Verdini is senior lecturer in planning at the University of Westminster,
UK. His research is focused on urban-rural linkages, urban development, heritage
conservation and community involvement, particularly in the context of China. He
graduated in architecture and holds a PhD in economics, urban and regional devel-
opment, from the University of Ferrara in Italy. (Chap. 26 and Box 28)
Ona Vileikis is an architect and heritage specialist, with ample work and research
experience abroad. She currently works as an international consultant in the field of
cultural heritage. Ona holds a PhD in engineering science, KU Leuven, Belgium,
and an MA in world heritage studies, BTU-Cottbus, Germany. Ona is ICOMOS
xviii Acknowledgements
CIPA Heritage Documentation expert member and active advisor to the UNESCO
Silk Roads World Heritage nomination. (Chap. 9 and Box 6)
Tao Wang is the executive director of initiatives in Asia, Pritzker chair of Asian
Art and curator of Chinese Art at the Art Institute of Chicago. Previously, he was
senior vice president and head of Chinese Works of Art at Sotheby’s New York.
He taught Chinese art and archaeology at University College London and at the
School of Oriental and African Studies in London. He received a PhD from SOAS.
(Chap. 18 and Box 19)
Adam Wilkinson, director of Edinburgh World Heritage, is an expert in the sus-
tainable management of historic cities. In Edinburgh, he champions the integrated
approach to heritage management through the EWH team in conservation, learning
and advocacy. Internationally he works with colleagues from other cities to promote
and share experience in relation to UNESCO’s historic urban landscape approach.
Adam has non-executive roles with a wide range of heritage organizations.
(Chap. 12)
Minja Yang is president of Raymond Lemaire International Centre for
Conservation/KU Leuven since 2009, after 30 years at the UN. Her interest in cul-
tural identity and heritage, developed while at UNHCR, was reinforced at UNESCO,
where she headed the Angkor Unit and Asia-Pacific Unit. She then became the
deputy director at WH Centre and coordinator for WH cities and finally director at
the UNESCO Office in New Delhi. (Box 31)
A. Ege Yildirim is an urban planner specializing in heritage conservation and
management, with over 20 years of experience working in Turkey and internation-
ally. Based in Istanbul as an independent consultant/lecturer, she currently serves as
the heritage site manager of the Historic Guild Town of Mudurnu, a UNESCO
World Heritage candidate and the ICOMOS Focal Point for the UN Sustainable
Development Goals. (Box 22)
Luca Zan is active in the field of management/accounting history and the man-
agement of arts/heritage organizations. He carried out fieldwork in China, Turkey,
Peru and Ecuador, in addition to Europe. He is also involved in arts management
education; director of GIOCA, Unibo; adjunct faculty at CMU, Pittsburgh; and
CAFA, Beijing. (Chap. 18 and Box 19)
Ana Pereira Roders
Francesco Bandarin
Contents
Part I Overview
1 Reshaping Urban Conservation�� 3
Francesco Bandarin
2 The Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Action:
Eight Years Later �� 21
Ana Pereira Roders
Part II Case Studies on the Historic Urban Landscape Approach

3 Rebuilding and Reconciliation in Old Aleppo:
The Historic Urban Landscape Perspectives�� 57
Ataa Alsalloum
4 Amaravathi Heritage Town – Reflections on the Historic
Cultural Landscape Approach�� 79
Amareswar Galla
5 Toward a Special Management and Protection Plan of Urban
Heritage in Ambalema, Colombia�� 91
Sandra Higuera, Andrés Forero, Juliana Forero, and Alberto Escovar
6 Integrating Policy: The Historic Urban Landscape Approach
in Amsterdam �� 111
Loes Veldpaus and Helma Bokhove
7 The Transformational Power of the HUL Approach: Lessons
from Ballarat, Australia, 2012–2017�� 123
Susan Fayad and Kristal Buckley
8 Managing Urban Heterogeneity: A Budapest Case Study
of Historical Urban Landscape�� 149
György Alföldi, Melinda Benkő, and Gábor Sonkoly
xix
xx Contents
9 Bukhara: A Living Central Asian Silk Roads City. Application

of the Historic Urban Landscape Approach�� 167
Ona Vileikis, Sanjarbek Allayarov, Christian Ost, and Rand Eppich
10 City as Evolving Process: Case for the Historic Urban Landscape
Approach for Canberra�� 187
Ken Taylor and Meetu Sharma Saxena
11 The HUL Approach to Create Heritage Management Tools
in the Latin American City of Cuenca-Ecuador �� 207
Julia Rey-Pérez, Sebastián Astudillo Cordero,
and María Eugenia Siguencia Ávila
12 The Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Edinburgh’s
Old and New Towns: Implementation of Projects
on the Ground in a Living Capital City �� 223
Adam Wilkinson
13 Havana: From the Walled City to a Historic Urban Landscape �� 235
Pablo Fornet
14 The Implementation of the Historic Urban Landscape
of the Island of Mozambique�� 251
Solange L. Macamo, Jens Hougaard, and Albino Jopela
15 Urban Heritage Conservation and Management in Jaipur �� 277
Shikha Jain and Rohit Jigyasu
16 Roadmap for Implementation of the HUL Approach
in Kuwait City�� 297
Roha W. Khalaf
17 Case Study: Lamu Old Town�� 313
Mohammed Ali Mwenje and Salim Mohammed Bunu
18 Conservation and Exploitation: Governance and Sustainability
Issues: The Case of Lijiang �� 329
Luca Zan and Tao Wang
19 Managing the Global Heritage City of Mexico City: Adapting
the HUL Approach to the Globalised Urban Context�� 341
Deniz Ikiz Kaya
20 At the Confluence of Geography, Society and History: Montreal
and the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation on Historic
Urban Landscape �� 357
Dinu Bumbaru C.M.
21 Urban Heritage Conservation in the Historic Site of Olinda,
Brazil: 1968–2016�� 371
Silvio Mendes Zancheti
Contents xxi
22 Revitalizing Urban Parks to Uplift a Rust Belt City: HUL Applied

to Pittsburgh, PA, USA�� 387
Patricia M. O’Donnell
23 Perspectives for a Historic Urban Landscape Approach
in Porto, Portugal�� 403
Teresa Cunha Ferreira and Ana Tarrafa Silva
24 Rabat, Morocco: Sustaining the Historic Urban Landscape
of Rabat: Strategies and Implementation�� 423
Hassan Radoine and Salwa Aomorali
25 Heritage-Based Urban Development: The Example
of Regensburg�� 435
Matthias Ripp, Susanne Hauer, and Meltem Cavdar
26 Enhancing Rural-Urban Linkages Through the Historic
Urban Landscape Approach: The Case of Shuang Wan Cun
in the Jiangsu Province�� 459
Giulio Verdini and Feiran Huang
27 Actual and Intangible in Tel Aviv: A Reexamination
of Conservation Strategies in a Modern City�� 473
Rachel Gottesman and Jeremie Hoffmann
28 The Circular Economy as a Model to Implement the Historic
Urban Landscape Approach: Which Integrated Evaluation
Method?�� 483
Mariarosaria Angrisano and Luigi Fusco Girard
29 Operationalizing the HUL Recommendation in Urban River
Corridors: Challenges and Perspectives�� 511
Manal Ginzarly and Jacques Teller
30 Zanzibar: The HUL Approach Explored�� 529
Muhammad Juma and Michael Turner
Case Study Boxes: Full Text�� 545
Index�� 567
in Action: Charting the 28 Case Studies
A world map is printed in the next two facing pages. Red dots and corresponding
chapter numbers indicate where those 28 cities are located in the world and in which
chapter each case study is discussed.
xxiii
xxiv The Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Action: Charting the 28 Case Studies
l l
l
l l
l ll
ll l
l
The Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Action: Charting the 28 Case Studies xxv
l l l
l
l l
l l
l
l
About the Editors
Ana Pereira Roders is full Professor of heritage and values at Delft University of

Technology (TU Delft), the Netherlands. She is also currently member of the gov-
erning board of the International Centre on Space Technology for Natural and
Cultural Heritage (HIST), Chinese Academy of Sciences, China. Ana has a wide
range of work experience abroad and interdisciplinary cooperation, spanning the
fields of architecture, urban planning, law, environmental management and com-
puter sciences. Since 2008, Ana cooperates closely with UNESCO and the World
Heritage Centre in particular, concerning primarily the 1972 World Heritage
Convention and the 2011 Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape. She
led the creation of global platforms such as Protected Urban Planet (2011) and the
Global Observatory on the Historic Urban Landscape (GO-HUL, 2015). Ana is the
founding co-editor of the Journal Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable
Development, published by Emerald. She presented in 2015 at TEDxHamburg
“How cities become resource efficient”. Recently, she joined the RegioStars Awards
2018, European Commission, as senior jury member, under the category “Cultural
Heritage”. Her recent publications include: Going Beyond: Perceptions of
Sustainability in Heritage Studies (part 2), co-authored with Marie-Theres Albert
and Francesco Bandarin, also published by Springer in 2017.
Francesco Bandarin is an architect and urban planner, specialized in urban conser-

vation. He holds degrees in Architecture (Venice, IUAV) and City and Regional
Planning, (UC Berkeley). He has been a Professor of Urban Planning and Urban
Conservation at the University IUAV of Venice, Italy (1979-2016). From 2000 to
2018, he worked at UNESCO as Director of the World Heritage Centre and as
Assistant Director-General for Culture. He is currently an Advisor for Urban
Heritage of the UNESCO Director-General. He is a member of the Steering
Committee of the Aga Khan Trust for Culture, and of the Board of the Fondazione
xxvii
xxviii About the Editors
Santagata for the Economics of Culture in Turin. He has served as a President of

several international Juries, including the 2014 Venice Architecture Biennale and of
the Shenzhen Creative Design Award (SCDA). His recent publications include The
Historic Urban Landscape: Managing Heritage in an Urban Century, 2012, and
Reconnecting the City: The Historic Urban Landscape Approach and the Future of
Urban Heritage, 2015, both co-authored with Ron van Oers and published by
Wiley-Blackwell.
Acronyms
ACCRU Área Crítica de Recuperação e Reconversão

Urbanística (The Critical Area for Urban
Recovering and Conversion)
ACT Australian Capital Territory
ACTPLA ACT Planning and Land Authority
ADB Asian Development Bank
ADMA Amber Development and Management
Authority
AHC Australian Heritage Council
AHD Authorized Heritage Discourse
AKTC Aga Khan Trust for Culture
ALGA Australian Local Government Association
APD Authorized Planning Discourse
APDF Administración Pública del Distrito Federal of
Mexico
ARU(s) Urban Rehabilitation Area(s)
ASOPEZAMBA Fishermen of Ambalema Association
BACA Bahrain Authority for Culture and Archaeology
BCE Before Common Era or Current Era
BWE Bureau of World Heritage of Amsterdam
Municipality
BWHU Bukhara World Heritage Unit
CaPE Association of Citizens for the Palace Quarter,
Budapest
CARP Cultural Assets Rehabilitation Project, Asmara,
Eritrea
CBD Central Business District
CCTV Closed Circuit Television
CDS City Development Strategy 2030 Bukhara
xxix
xxx Acronyms
CEDIM Study and Documentation Center (Centro de

Estudos e Documentação da Ilha de
Moçambique)
CeRDI Centre for eResearch and Digital Innovation
CGL County Government of Lamu
CINA Research Center of the Faculty of Architecture
of Cuenca
CIP Public Interest Ensembles
CMM Communauté métropolitaine de Montréal
(Montreal Metropolitan Community)
CMP Câmara Municipal do Porto
COMUS project Community-led Urban Strategies in Historic
Towns project
CRCAH City of Ballarat and Collaborative Research
Centre in Australian History
CRUARB Commissariat for the Urban Renovation of
Ribeira/Barredo Area
CSC Consultants Selection Committee
CSP County Spatial Plan
CTP Country and Town Planning
DGAM Directorate-General of Antiquities and
Museums, Syria
DGEMN Direção Geral dos Monumentos e Edificios
Nacionais (General Directorate of National
Monuments and Buildings), Porto, Portugal
DGPC Directorate-General of Cultural Heritage,
Porto, Portugal
DIUC Research Department of Universidad de
Cuenca
DLB Department of Local Self Government, Jaipur,
India
DMPOT Divisão Municipal de Planeamento e
Ordenamento do Território (Planning Division
of the City of Porto)
DoURP Department of Urban and Rural Planning or
Directorate of Urban and Rural Planning,
Zanzibar
DPW Pittsburgh Public Works Department
DRCN Regional Directorates of Culture of the North
Portugal
DRONAH Development and Research Organization for
Nature, Arts and Heritage of Gurgaon,
Haryana, India
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EU European Union
EWH Edinburgh World Heritage
Acronyms xxxi
FAPF Faculty of Architecture and Physical Planning

of Lúrio University in Nampula
FAUC Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism at
Universidad de Cuenca
FCH Historic Centre Trust, Mexico
GACIM The Island of Mozambique Conservation
Office
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GIS Geospatial Information System
GO-HUL Global Observatory on the Historic Urban
Landscape
GTL Gabinetes Técnicos Locais (technical offices),
Porto, Portugal
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische
Zusammenarbeit
HABITAT (also Habitat) The United Nations Conference on Housing
and Sustainable Urban Development
HCOANZ Heritage Chairs and Officials of Australia and
New Zealand
HIA Heritage Impact Assessment
HSO Historic Site of Olinda
HUL Historic Urban Landscape
HW100 A Hundred-Year Flood
ICCROM International Centre for the Study of the
Preservation and Restoration of Cultural
Property
ICH Intangible Cultural Heritage
ICOMOS International Council On Monument and Sites
IDeP Integrated Spatial Development Plans, Kenya
IHCDP Inclusive Heritage-based City Development
Program, India
IHRU Instituto de Reabilitação Urbana (Housing and
Urban Rehabilitation Institute), Porto, Portugal
IIM Property of Municipal Interest
IIP Imóveis de Interesse Patrimonial (Property of
Public Interest), Porto, Portugal
INAH Mexican National Institute of Anthropology
and History
INBA Mexican National Institute of Fine Arts
INPC National Institute of Cultural Heritage,
Ecuador
INTACH Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural
Heritage
IPAP Inventário do Património Arquitetónico do
Porto (Built Heritage Inventory of Porto)
xxxii Acronyms
IPHAN National Institute of the Historic and Artistic

Heritage, Brazil
JDA Jaipur Development Authority
JHERICO Jaipur Heritage Committee
JMC Jaipur Municipal Corporation
JVF Jaipur Virasat Foundation
KMP Kenya Municipal Program
KMP1 First Kuwait Master Plan
KMP2 Second Kuwait Master Plan
KMP3 Third Kuwait Master Plan
KMP4 Fourth Kuwait Master Plan
KSUP or K-SUP Kenya Slum Upgrading Program
LAP Local Area Plan, Ballarat
LAPPSSET project Lamu Port, South Sudan, Ethiopia Transport
Corridor project
LBPC Lei de Bases do Património Cultural (National
Heritage Law), Portugal
LDA ACT Land Development Agency, Canberra,
Australia
LWHSCO Lamu World Heritage Site and Conservation
Office
M&A Bureau of Monuments and Archaeology of
Amsterdam Municipality
MDG(s) Millennium Development Goal(s)
MEDLIHER Mediterranean Living Heritage
MoUD Indian Ministry of Urban Development
MQP Magdolna Quarter Program
MSS Municipal Strategic Statement, Ballarat,
Australia
NCA National Capital Authority, Canberra, Australia
NCCAL Kuwaiti National Council for Culture, Arts and
Letters
NCDC National Capital Development Commission,
Canberra, Australia
NCOSS National Capital Open Space System,
Canberra, Australia
NCPA National Capital Planning Authority, Canberra,
Australia
NGO(s) Non-Governmental Organization(s)
NIUA National Institute of Urban Affairs, India
NLUP Tanzanian National Land Use Plan
NMK National Museums of Kenya
NUA The New Urban Agenda, HABITAT 3
NUP New Urban Policy
OCH Office of the City Historian, La Havana, Cuba
Acronyms xxxiii
OCPM Office de consultation publique de Montréal

(Montréal Office of Public Consultation)
OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development
OGs Operational Guidelines
OUV Outstanding Universal Value
OWHC Organization of World Heritage Cities
PDM Plano Director Municipal (Municipal Master
Plan), Porto, Portugal
PEMP Special Management and Protection Plan,
Colombia
PES Special Safeguard Plans, Colombia
PMAD Plan métropolitain d’aménagement et de
développement (Metropolitan Development
and Land Use Plan), Quebec, Canada
PMOT Planos Municipais de Ordenamento do
Território (Municipal Spatial Plans), Portugal
Porto Vivo SRU Porto Vivo Sociedade de Reabilitação Urbana
PP Plano de Pormenor (Detailed Plan), Portugal
PPC Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy
PPP Public-Private Partnership
PU Plano de Urbanização (Urban Plan), Portugal
PUH_C Reassessment of the Cultural and Natural
Heritage of the city of Cuenca based on strate-
gies for sustainable development supported by
the Recommendation on Historic Urban
Landscape
R&D Planning Department of Amsterdam
Municipality
RJIGT Regime Jurídico dos Instrumentos de Gestão
Territorial: RJIGT (Legal Framework for
Spatial Planning Tools)
RMB Renminbi (Chinese currency)
ROT system Restore-Operate-Transfer System
SamGASI Samarkand State Architectural and
Construction Institute
SCOT French Territorial Consistency Scheme
SDAU Schéma Directeur d’Aménagement Urbain
(Urban Planning and Development Strategies)
SDC Swiss Agency for Development and
Cooperation
SDG(s) Sustainable Development Goal(s)
SIP Suzhou Industrial Park
SIPA National Inventory, Portugal
SND Suzhou New District
xxxiv Acronyms
SPHSO System for Preserving the Historic Sites of

Olinda
SRU Sociedade de Reabilitação Urbana (Urban
Rehabilitation Society), Portugal
STCDA Stone Town Conservation and Development
Authority
STDP Small Town Development Project, Kenya
SWOT Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities and
Threats Analysis
TACI Tashkent Architectural and Construction
Institute
UCLG United Cities and Local Governments
UK United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland
UN United Nations
UN SDGs UN Sustainable Development Goals 2030
Agenda
UNCHS United Nations Centre for Human Settlements
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNDRIP United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural organization
UNFPA United Nations Fund for Population Activities
UNGCCP United Nations Global Compact Cities
Program
UN-HABITAT (also UN-Habitat) The New Urban Agenda
UNISDR The UN International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction
UNITAR United Nations Institute for Training and
Research
UNOSAT Operational Satellite Applications Program
UOM University of Minnesota
URBACT European Territorial Cooperation Program
URBACT II Project HerO URBACT II Project Heritage as Opportunity
USA United States of America
USD United States Dollar
WH World Heritage
WH Committee World Heritage Committee
WHC World Heritage Centre
WHC SOC Report World Heritage Centre State of Conservation
Report
WHITR-AP World Heritage Institute of Training and
Research for the Asia and the Pacific Region
WHL World Heritage List
Acronyms xxxv
WHS World Heritage Site

WTO World Tourism Organization
WTTC World Tourism and Travel Council
XJTLU Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University
ZMC Zanzibar Municipal Council
Part I
Overview
Chapter 1
Reshaping Urban Conservation
Francesco Bandarin
Abstract The paper examines the process that led, throughout over 30 years of
policy evolution, to the integration of culture in the International Development
Agenda. It also looks at how the Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape
(HUL Recommendation) has reflected the new policy framework and has trans-
ferred it into the field of urban conservation. From the Decade for Cultural
Development (1988–1997) to Agenda 2030 adopted by the United Nations in 2015,
a major shift has occurred in cultural policies. During the 1990s and the 2000s,
several important innovations have come about, ranging from the adoption of two
new international conventions, for intangible heritage (2003) and the diversity of
cultural expressions (2005). Parallel to this shift, the World Heritage Convention
has evolved, with the inclusion of new heritage types such as cultural landscapes.
Within this Convention a debate on the conservation of urban heritage has led to the
Vienna Memorandum of 2005 and later to the adoption by UNESCO of the HUL
Recommendation. This has prompted a broader reflection on the role of cities and
urban heritage in cultural policies, currently under way. The adoption of the New
Urban Agenda in 2016 has opened up new perspectives on urban heritage policies
and on the role of culture in promoting urban regeneration and resilience.
Keywords Urban conservation · Urban policy · Cultural policies · Urban develop-

ment · New Urban Agenda · Cultural landscapes
1.1 Culture and the New Urban Conservation Paradigm
The development dimension of culture, first clearly expressed exactly 20 years ago,
with the 1998 Stockholm Intergovernmental Conference on Cultural Policies for
Development, is now acknowledged within the International Development Agenda
adopted in 2015 by the UN General Assembly, the Agenda 2030.
F. Bandarin (*)
UNESCO Advisor, Paris, France
e-mail: f.bandarin@unesco.org
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 3

A. Pereira Roders, F. Bandarin (eds.), Reshaping Urban Conservation,
Creativity, Heritage and the City 2,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_1
4 F. Bandarin
This is why the title of this book echoes that of an important UNESCO Report,
Re-Shaping Cultural Policies (UNESCO 2015, 2017), a policy study focused on the
relationship between culture – in all its aspects – and sustainable development.
The coming 10 years, thanks to a greater awareness by governments and civil
society on the irreplaceable role culture can play in the strive of communities and
societies to strengthen their identity and to provide new opportunities for present
and future generations, will see major changes in the way in which culture is
reflected in the public policy arena. Within these policies, conservation, regenera-
tion and valuing of urban heritage are an already established reality.
As the recent UNESCO Report Culture: Urban Future, prepared in view of the
Habitat III Conference, shows (UNESCO 2016), urban heritage has acquired an
increasingly important status in all regions of the world not only as a “category” (it
is indeed among the most recognised heritage types) but also as an object of public
policies and of private investment.
Cities are where most of humanity lives and will live in the twenty-first century.
This is where people – old residents and newcomers alike – will build their indi-
vidual and social identity, where they will work and meet, where they will develop
their livelihood and where they will express their culture.
As the growth of cities is dominated by industrial models, the need to give cities
a distinctive character and a “quality” has become a major concern of policy-makers
at national and local levels. Urban heritage can provide an answer to many of these
needs, both as a place that represents history and traditions and as a repository of
long-term social practices in place-making.
Urban historic areas have proven extremely dynamic as areas of economic devel-
opment, with growth rates often twice as high as those in other urban areas. These
areas are often the main scene for the performing and visual arts and the focus of
tourism. Inevitably, they play a role much beyond their limited size and become the
pivots of urban development and urban marketing strategies.
Similarly, investments in cultural initiatives – whether in historic areas or in
more recent development areas – are the basis of urban regeneration processes.
Successful examples are those where a link – a reconnection – has been established
between old and new parts of the city, beyond stereotypical partitions.
Preservation of urban heritage should not be seen as an “alternative” to urban
growth, but, on the contrary, as an integral part of a city development strategy that
requires – to be successful – a full understanding of the cultural values of each
place.
These principles form the basis of the proposals put forward by UNESCO at the
Habitat III Conference and are today reflected in the New Urban Agenda, the text
issued by the Conference after a global consultation process and adopted by the UN
General Assembly in 2016. In front of global transformations, mass migrations and
the technological and economic changes that will accompany the contemporary
urbanisation processes, culture represents an anchorage for urban development in
the twenty-first century.
1 Reshaping Urban Conservation 5
Conservation of urban heritage is no longer simply the “freezing” of a district

with special characteristic, but rather the way in which urban areas strengthen their
identity and become models for the broader process of urban growth.
The HUL Recommendation can be a decisive tool in reshaping of urban con-
servation policies in the spirit defined by Agenda 2030 and the New Urban
Agenda.
This is why the theoretical and practical contributions provided by the authors in
this book focus on the development of the Historic Urban Landscape idea and on the
first few years of its implementation. Out of these experiences, a rich panorama
emerges, one that shows how, while obviously requiring further refinements, the
approach promoted by the HUL Recommendation has already reached the maturity
and complexity needed to address the diversity of situations we encounter in the
different parts of the world.
1.2 T
he Historic Urban Landscape: A Bottom-Up Approach
to Urban Conservation
The 2011 HUL Recommendation constitutes an important point of arrival of the

ongoing international reflection on the role of heritage in sustainable
development.
The HUL approach indeed reflects the developments in heritage philosophy in
the past three decades and the radical changes in the role heritage is called to play
today in society, for society and by society.
Without exception, heritage is an expression of every society. However, the way
heritage has been historically identified and defined; the role it has played in the
construction of social and national identities; the place it has found in the educa-
tional, economic and political spheres; and the very message it presents to an
increasingly global public have been largely influenced by western experiences and
philosophies of the nineteenth century.
This is not per se a negative factor. On the contrary, the richness of the cultural
approach developed in the western world since the nineteenth century has supported
many new ways of interpreting and protecting heritage in different regions of the
world: this is a cultural richness that has been and still is extremely important for
many developed and emerging societies.
However, nowhere as in the field of urban heritage has the drift existing between
the original western approaches and the social perceptions, needs and realities of the
emerging world been greater.
The awareness of the increasing gap between the “doctrinal” approach and the
needs and desires of each society has prompted a very important reflection on the
very nature of urban heritage, even in western contexts.
The Historic Urban Landscape Recommendation is an outcome of this reflec-
tion, a contribution to the definition of a more open, democratic and socially
6 F. Bandarin
s ensitive toolkit for urban conservation. By placing society – and not the physical
results of historical developments – at the core of the process of heritage identifica-
tion and preservation, by putting the rich technical experience developed in the past
century at the service of society and by defining heritage as a social product and as
a social development tool, the HUL Recommendation offers a platform for urban
conservation responding to the needs of societies in the twenty-first century, while
reflecting and respecting the great variety and diversity of cultural and spiritual
dimensions of the world.
While the idea of heritage was born two centuries ago as the result of an enlight-
ened “top-down” vision of an intellectual and political élite, it is now increasingly a
“bottom-up” expression of social values and social choice.
1.3 The Reasons for a New Urban Conservation Approach
Even if developed by a discussion initiated within the World Heritage Convention,

the HUL approach reflects wider heritage and cultural policy ideas that have taken
root in the in the past three decades, in part spearheaded by the international cultural
policies promoted by UNESCO.
The 1972 World Heritage Convention has indeed brought to a conclusion the
long process of development of heritage policies nationally and internationally that
started at the end of the nineteenth century.
Indeed, the very idea that lies at the basis of the World Heritage Convention, that
“some” heritage is so important as to transcend national and cultural boundaries
(the concept of Outstanding Universal Value), finds its roots in the humanistic uni-
versalism promoted by –among others – the works of Ruskin and Morris in the last
part of the nineteenth century and by several other thinkers in the first part of the
twentieth century.
The establishment of a theory and practice of heritage preservation in the course
of the twentieth century has supported the adoption of national legislations for the
protection and safeguarding of heritage in most countries and the development of
international principles and charters that embrace a great variety of regional
situations.
This has been matched by the emergence of heritage preservation as an element
of international concern, policy-making and legal intervention.
The universal ratification and the global success of the World Heritage Convention
is the culmination of this process and as such represents a point of arrival of great
significance. However, since its adoption in 1972, important conceptual develop-
ments have taken place in the field of heritage that have promoted a gradual shift of
attention from the material objects of conservation policies to the system of values
they represent for society.
While this conceptual transition is still underway, it has already reached a point
of no return: heritage is increasingly viewed as a system of values linked to social
perceptions and choices. A cultural revolution has taken place in this field, with
implications not yet fully understood and perceived, that will certainly mark the
nature of heritage in the twenty-first century and its role in human, social and eco-
nomic development.
Nowhere this is more visible and more relevant than in cities. The urban sphere
plays an increasingly important role in our world, due to the massive urbanisation
processes we are witnessing, especially in the emerging countries, to the shift of
power from traditional productive sectors to innovative and creative processes that
typically find their fertile ground in cities, to the attractiveness of the urban scene
for the arts, cultural and educational institutions and for tourism.
Cities are becoming – more than ever – the key drivers of development, creativ-
ity, social change and global politics. Inevitably, they are becoming the greatest
users, promoters and producers of heritage, in the many different forms this can take
today and will take in the future.
The HUL approach is nothing more than the result of these conceptual transfor-
mations, an operational link between the system of knowledge and the experiences
accumulated through two centuries of heritage policy and the needs expressed by
the present and future societies.
1.4 H
istoric Urban Landscape: From Material to Social
Expression
The evolution of urban heritage concepts has been examined in detail in previous
works (Bandarin and van Oers 2012, 2015). However, as we look at the first phase
of the implementation of this approach, it is important to recall the main policy
developments that have sustained its formulation. While this will not be an exhaus-
tive survey of the processes that have intervened in the evolution of our heritage
concept or of its limits, it will help identify the cultural references of the HUL
approach.
Undoubtedly, the 1964 Venice Charter – the keystone of modern heritage pol-
icy – proposed a very tight-fitting shirt for the great variety and diversity of heritage
it intended to address. This was very clear from the beginning to heritage policy-
makers and to the founding fathers of ICOMOS, created the following year.
The first major attempts to address the limitations of the principles enshrined in
the Venice Charter have indeed to do with historic areas. The 1976 Nairobi
Recommendation concerning the Safeguarding and Contemporary Role of Historic
Areas (UNESCO General Conference 1976)1 is a breakthrough in this field, insofar

1
UNESCO General Conference 1976. Recommendation concerning the Safeguarding and
Contemporary Role of Historic Areas, Nairobi, UNESCO.
II. General principles
3. Every historic area and its surroundings should be considered in their totality as a coherent
whole whose balance and specific nature depend on the fusion of the parts of which it is
8 F. Bandarin
as it stresses the relevance of historic “areas” (not just monuments) for society and
the need to consider them as coherent heritage systems, beyond the artistic or monu-
mental value of the individual parts.
For the first time, the role of human activities – cultural, economic, social, etc. –
is given full attention in the identification and preservation of heritage values. These
principles are quite significant and are indeed at the core of modern approaches to
urban heritage conservation.
In 1987, ICOMOS adopted the Charter for the conservation of historic towns and
urban areas, the so-called Washington Charter (ICOMOS General Assembly 1987),2
an important revisitation of heritage conservation principles issued by the profes-
sional community.
The Charter presents a very thorough set of principles focused on the environ-
ment of historic cities. The Charter is relevant – and largely still valid in its applica-
tions – for several reasons: first, it is the recognition of the importance of “urban
heritage” as a category and as an object for preservation, in a context that was, until
then, dominated by other types of heritage “objects”, monuments and archaeologi-
cal areas.
The emergence of the city as an object of historic preservation reflects not only
the advancements of the planning discipline of the time but also the growing interest
of policy-makers, local and national, towards the role of urban heritage in social and
economic development processes.
As the Charter deals with cities which are living organisms, societal needs take a
principal role, something that was not the case for monuments or archaeological
areas, that can be managed by specialised bodies of technicians in relative isolation
from the societal context.
Cities are by definition not confined inside a closed and controllable perimeter
and are used by residents, workers and visitors. This means that changes in the
composed and which include human activities as much as the buildings, the spatial organiza-
tion and the surroundings. All valid elements, including human activities, however modest,
thus have a significance in relation to the whole which must not be disregarded.
4. Historic areas and their surroundings should be actively protected, against damage of all
kinds, particularly that resulting from unsuitable use, unnecessary additions and misguided
or insensitive changes such as will impair their authenticity, and from damage due to any
form of pollution. Any restoration work undertaken should be based on scientific principles.
Similarly, great attention should be paid to the harmony and aesthetic feeling produced by
the linking or the contrasting of the various parts which make up the groups of buildings and
which give to each group its particular character.
5. In the conditions of modern urbanization, which leads to a considerable increase in the scale
and density of buildings, apart from the danger of direct destruction of historic areas, there
is a real danger that newly developed areas can ruin the environment and character of adjoin-
ing historic areas. Architects and town-planners should be careful to ensure that views from
and to monuments and historic areas are not spoilt and that historic areas are integrated
harmoniously into contemporary life
2
ICOMOS General Assembly 1987. Charter for the Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban
Areas (Washington Charter). Washington DC, ICOMOS.
physical structure of the city happen all throughout time and are necessary to ensure
its viability and liveability.
While the Washington Charter maintains a fundamental “top-down” and pre-
scriptive approach – typical of the state of the urban conservation culture of the
time – it certainly constitutes an important conceptual advancement that was duly
recognised in the years that followed.
In the same period, however, a more powerful change took place in heritage
policy-making, with the acceptance of the concept of cultural landscapes as a heri-
tage type by the World Heritage Convention (World Heritage Center 2017).3
This important passage was completed in 1992, when the Convention introduced
the category in its Operational Guidelines. While the definition of “combined works
of nature and man” was essentially conceptualised for and referred to “rural” areas,
it nevertheless made much more explicit the “social” nature of heritage “objects”
and the strict interrelationship between “living society” and “heritage” areas.
As changes are an intrinsic process in the life of landscapes, the conservation
principles had to incorporate them as part of the value system. In these situations,
the “management of change” becomes a process intrinsically linked to
conservation.
Similarly, the living communities are the makers and users of the “landscape”
and often derive their livelihood from the land. They are the true protagonists of the
conservation strategy, which, in this way, becomes essentially a collective and par-
ticipatory process.
Why are cities not considered “cultural landscapes”? After all, they are “com-
bined works of nature and man”, and for many scholars, they fit the definition.
Today’s “ecological planning” and “landscape planning” are based on scholarly
views and professional practices based on a vision of the city as a “landscape”.
This concept, however, has not been formalised yet in international charters and
principles, and the predominant position is that cultural landscapes remain linked to
the rural/natural dimension, or, at the most, to urban gardens and parks.
In spite of these limitations, the introduction of this category has brought about
very important new ideas and has contributed to innovate the traditional approaches
and the classical heritage concepts.
A further step in the revisitation of the classical heritage concepts has certainly
been the Nara Conference of 1994 (UNESCO World Heritage Center 1995). This
Conference was convened in Japan to address a conflicting view of heritage values
between the western and eastern traditions, as the former had been built on the prin-
ciples of conservation of the material substance of monuments and sites, while the
latter had given relevance to the intangible dimension of heritage. In this sense, the
World Heritage Centre 2017. Operational Guidelines of the World Heritage Convention, para 47:
3
Cultural landscapes are cultural properties and represent the “combined works of nature
and of man” designated in Article 1 of the Convention. They are illustrative of the evolution
of human society and settlement over time, under the influence of the physical constraints
and/or opportunities presented by their natural environment and of successive social, eco-
nomic and cultural forces, both external and internal
10 F. Bandarin
Nara Conference was a way to adapt the original principles of the Charter of Venice
to broader cultural contexts.
The establishment of the global approach to heritage conservation spearheaded
by the World Heritage Convention had to find ways to encompass this extreme
diversity of views, and the Nara Document on Authenticity is the tool that addresses
this theoretical and practical conundrum.
Essentially, the Nara Document expands the concept of authenticity – originally
focused essentially on the material substance of heritage – to what is defined as a
“variety of sources”, including “form and design, materials and substance, use and
function, tradition and techniques, location and setting, and spirit and feeling, and
other internal or external factors”.
This broad definition allows inclusion of a vast diversity of heritage management
practices and is at the basis of fundamental discussions on the approaches to heri-
tage conservation that have prompted important innovations in the field, including
the HUL Recommendation.
If we consider the global expansion of heritage concepts and heritage policies, it
is not by chance that the most important innovations in heritage principles have
come from non-western Charters, of which certainly the most important is the Burra
Charter (Australia ICOMOS 2013, for its latest revision).4
Originally imagined as a response to national issues, and in particular to meet the
needs of the Aboriginal people, the Burra Charter in reality addresses an important
Australia ICOMOS 2013 The Burra Charter. The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of
4
Cultural Significance.
For the purposes of this Charter:
1.1 Place means a geographically defined area. It may include elements, objects, spaces and
views. Place may have tangible and intangible dimensions.
1.2 Cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past,
present or future generations. Cultural significance is embodied in the place itself, its
fabric, setting, use, associations, meanings, records, related places and related objects.
Places may have a range of values for different individuals or groups
1.3 Fabric means all the physical material of the place including elements, fixtures, contents
and objects.
1.4 Conservation means all the processes of looking after a place so as to retain its cultural
significance
1.5 Maintenance means the continuous protective care of a place, and its setting
Maintenance is to be distinguished from repair which involves restoration or
reconstruction.
1.6 Preservation means maintaining a place in its existing state and retarding deterioration.
1.7 Restoration means returning a place to a known earlier state by removing accretions or by
reassembling existing elements without the introduction of new material.
1.8 Reconstruction means returning a place to a known earlier state and is distinguished from
restoration by the introduction of new material.
1.9 Adaptation means changing a place to suit the existing use or a proposed use
1.10 Use means the functions of a place, including the activities and traditional and customary
practices that may occur at the place or are dependent on the place
general theoretical point, by introducing the idea of “cultural significance” for phys-
ical places, as the aim of the conservation process.
Cultural significance is also linked to continuous use of a place. This idea –
which is indeed in line with the principles put forward by the Nara Document – has
shown great potential in contexts where the built environment is not overwhelm-
ingly representative of a community’s culture. However, nothing prevents these
principles being adapted to built areas, as the focus is not on the physical environ-
ment but rather on living communities.
These examples – as well as others that we could find in different charters and
documents elaborated in the past decades – indicate the gradual emergence of a new
vision of heritage, focused on the acknowledgment and respect for the diversity of
cultural expressions on the greater role attributed to the social dimension in the
construction of the heritage values. This new vision of heritage combines with a
greater importance given to the broader physical contexts in which heritage is
defined and in its association to the new values system.
This is a shift from the monumental to the territorial dimension of heritage that
not only provides new meaning to the individual achievements but also explores the
complex – and essential – interactions between the organisation of power, the social
systems of production, the spiritual life, the environmental framework and the realm
of artistic expression.
Heritage values systems have – albeit with different accents and articulations –
moved from the individual towards the collective dimension, from the punctual
expression of human genius to the social sphere. This is the cultural dimension
where heritage indeed belongs, as an expression of shared values, history and past
and present lives.
This thinking has given life, in the course of the first 10 years of the new century,
to two international policy documents based on the principle of respect of cultural
diversity, the 2001 Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (UNESCO 2001)5
and the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage
(UNESCO 2003).6
UNESCO 2001. Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. Paris, UNESCO.

5
Article 1 – Cultural diversity: the common heritage of humanity
Culture takes diverse forms across time and space. This diversity is embodied in the uniqueness
and plurality of the identities of the groups and societies making up humankind. As a source of
exchange, innovation and creativity, cultural diversity is as necessary for humankind as biodi-
versity is for nature. In this sense, it is the common heritage of humanity and should be recog-
nized and affirmed for the benefit of present and future generations
6
UNESCO 2003. Convention for the safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage. Paris,
UNESCO.
Preamble:
Considering the deep-seated interdependence between the intangible cultural heritage and the
tangible cultural and natural heritage,
Recognizing that the processes of globalization and social transformation, alongside the conditions
they create for renewed dialogue among communities, also give rise, as does the phenomenon of
12 F. Bandarin
The first document – a “soft law” in terms of its binding powers for the member
states – brings to completion a long discussion on the role of culture in social devel-
opment that goes back to the very origins of UNESCO’s approach, largely influ-
enced by the modern humanistic philosophy embodied in a document published in
1946 by the first Director General of UNESCO (Huxley 1946), Sir Julian Huxley,
and in the contributions of the masters of modern anthropology, and in particular of
Claude Lévi-Strauss.
In this approach, the respect of cultural diversity is seen as a goal of international
cultural policies in all their articulations: in fact, it is defined in itself as a heritage
to be recognised and protected.
The second normative tool, the Intangible Heritage Convention, is aimed at safe-
guarding elements of intangible cultural heritage, mainly traditional expressions, or
aspects of traditional knowledge that have great significance in the formation of the
identity or in the well-being of communities and societies.
The specific focus of the Convention – the inscription of intangible heritage ele-
ments – should not conceal the important theoretical advancement brought about by
its approval, insofar as it enhances the values of “nonmaterial” aspects of heritage
in a practice traditionally marked by a greater emphasis on the material substance.
Secondly, the Convention brings upfront the community as the main agent of
production and safeguarding of heritage, a dimension that – as we have seen – was
not originally to be found in heritage conservation approaches.
The “classical” heritage conservation approach has largely benefitted from these
advancements. Not only the intangible dimension of cultural heritage has received
increasing attention and recognition, but also its social and collective nature has
become the centrepiece of new heritage interpretation efforts.
Needless to say, the approach to urban heritage and cultural landscapes conserva-
tion is linked to this evolution. Urban heritage is by definition a collective creation,
and its evolution along time is reflected in the layering process that history brings
about: different expressions, different societies and often different civilisations
leave the expression of their culture in a shared space that becomes gradually mod-
elled and reshaped according to the visions and needs of the successive societies.
It would be impossible to interpret these forms of heritage today, without an
understanding of their physical, territorial and social contexts, their evolution
through time, and without a perception of the values recognised and shared by con-
temporary societies.
The main assumption of the Intangible Heritage Convention, that heritage can
only exist in relation to a community, also helps defining some of the fundamental
intolerance, to grave threats of deterioration, disappearance and destruction of the intangible cul-
tural heritage, in particular owing to a lack of resources for safeguarding such heritage,
Being aware of the universal will and the common concern to safeguard the intangible cultural
heritage of humanity,
Recognizing that communities, in particular indigenous communities, groups and, in some
cases, individuals, play an important role in the production, safeguarding, maintenance and
re-creation of the intangible cultural heritage, thus helping to enrich cultural diversity and
human creativity
aspects of the modern heritage conservation approach: (1) heritage, to be recognised

as such, must play a central role in the life of a community and (2) no heritage can
be effectively conserved without the participation of the community.
Viewed under this perspective, the 2011 HUL Recommendation is an offspring
of the new approach to heritage that has taken shape in the long period of time fol-
lowing the establishment of the World Heritage Convention.
1.5 Urban Conservation and Sustainable Development
The modern vision of heritage allows us to better integrate culture in the social and
human development policy frameworks. This role of culture, cultural and natural
heritage, cultural institutions, cultural products and cultural industries, has indeed
long been promoted in the sustainable development process.
Back in the 1980s, following the World Conference on Cultural Policies
(MONDIACULT), held in Mexico City in 1982 (UNESCO 1982), and the UN
Decade of Culture for Development 1988–1997, important initiatives had already
discussed the key role of culture in the sustainable development framework (World
Commission on Culture and Development 1996). However, the keystone of this
global reflection was certainly represented by the 1998 Stockholm Intergovernmental
Conference on Cultural Policies for Development (UNESCO 1998).
The main purpose of this Conference was to contribute to the integration of cul-
tural policies in human development strategies at international and national levels
and to help strengthen UNESCO’s contributions to cultural policy formulation and
international cultural cooperation.7 The Action Plan issued by the Conference rep-
resented a major policy guidance document for over a decade (UNESCO 1990).
The efforts of UNESCO were at that time matched by an important initiative
spearheaded by the World Bank that culminated in the international conference
“Culture Counts” held in Florence in 1999 (World Bank 2000).
This conference addressed the importance of the economics of culture in sustain-
able development and provided methodologies aimed to integrate culture into the
development process. And, most of all, it indicated the interest of the main global
development bank for the role of culture in development, an interest that has been
kept alive to this day, in spite of the many changes of the past 20 years.
7
The two main themes which served as the basic framework for the conference were (1) the chal-
lenges of cultural diversity and (2) the challenges of recasting cultural policies. Under the first
theme, the challenges of cultural diversity, the following issues were discussed: (1.1) a commit-
ment to pluralism, (1.2) cultural rights, (1.3a) cultural heritage for development, (1.3b) cultural
creativity and cultural industries and (1.4) culture for children and young people. Under the second
theme, the challenges of recasting cultural policies, the following issues were discussed: (2.1)
improving research and international cooperation for cultural policy, (2.2) mobilising resources for
cultural activities, (2.3) the media in cultural policy and (2.4) culture and the new media
technologies.
14 F. Bandarin
While the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), launched in 2000 by the

United Nations, did not include explicitly culture as a dimension of development,
the seeds planted by the work done in the 1990s have continued generating new
approaches, methodologies and international legal tools (UN 2000).
The MDG Fund,8 for instance, allowed a large-scale experimentation of the
interlink between cultural investments and sustainable development, showing the
great potential of culture as an enabler of sustainable development processes and as
a driver of economic growth, when seen as a sector in itself.
A total of 18 projects worth 95 million US$ dealing with different types of cul-
ture and heritage were developed and implemented by UNESCO,9 thus allowing an
important demonstration of the role of heritage and culture in local development.
Needless to say, urban heritage areas are at the core of these processes, as this is
where investments in capacity building and in basic infrastructure can generate high
returns in terms of employment and enterprise development. This is also where
investment in community participatory processes, in the role of women, in innova-
tive tools for exchange and communication can generate important results and
address the key issues of poverty and social integration.
Gradually, the idea that culture and heritage are expenditures that you can afford
after development goals have been achieved has been replaced by a vision where –
on the contrary – culture is the driver of fast and innovative development processes,
be these based on an increase of attractiveness of a place for tourists or visitors or
on an increase of social stability that curbs negative social processes such as vio-
lence or unemployment.
These ideas are also at the core of a new UNESCO international normative
instrument, adopted in 2005, the Convention for the Protection and Promotion of
the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (UNESCO General Conference 2005).
Born out of the idea that the diversity of cultural expressions is a value for societ-
ies worldwide and that contemporary global market and economic processes are
threatening it, the Convention focuses on the promotion of a system of public poli-
cies aimed to support the efforts of the states and local communities.
At the moment, the key strategy for the development of the Convention is based
on the creation of capacities to value local cultural assets and use them as anchors
8
The Millennium Development Goals Achievement Fund (MDG-F) was an international coopera-
tion mechanism committed to eradicating poverty and inequality and to accelerating progress
towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Established in 2007 through an agreement
between the Government of Spain and the United Nations Development Programme on behalf of
the UN system, the MDG-F operated in 50 countries, working through more than 27 United
Nations agencies. With a total contribution of approximately US$900 million, the MDG-F has
financed 130 joint programmes around the world.
9
The countries involved were Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, China, Costa Rica,
Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mauritania, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nicaragua,
Palestine, Senegal, Turkey and Uruguay. The programmes under the culture and development the-
matic window followed a wide range of approaches, due in part to the different contexts in which
activities have been implemented (e.g. regional diversity, income diversity) and the range of needs
and priorities identified.
of the local development process. The main focus of the Convention is the creative
industry as this is where the cultural expressions of the communities can be made
operational or even turned into market outputs that can benefit the communities.
And, clearly, the creative economy has a direct connection with the urban condition.
It is in the city – and often in its old core – that the creative industries find their best
breeding ground.
These ideas are not unique to the 2005 Convention, and they are also reflected in
many other texts and policy documents. However, the fact of being enshrined in an
international treaty confers them the status of internationally agreed policy
frameworks.
The long and complex process that has led to the approval of Agenda 2030 has
brought together all the forces in support of the idea that culture is a fundamental
pillar of sustainable development processes (at some point it was even proposed to
have culture as a “fourth pillar” next to the social, economic and environmental
ones).
Governments, local governments and civil society formed an alliance that man-
aged to achieve some interesting results, insofar as culture has been included –
mostly as a transversal dimension – in the system of Sustainable Development
Goals (UN 2015a, b) adopted by the General Assembly.
Several of the Sustainable Development Goals refer to the cultural dimension of
development, such as Goal 4 on Quality Education, Goal 8 on the promotion of
sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth or Goal 16 on the promotion
of peaceful and inclusive societies.
One of the goals of Agenda 2030, Goal 11, concerns cities (UN 2015a, b).10 In
this part of the Agenda, the role of culture and heritage has been more explicitly and
10
Agenda 2030, Goal 11.
TARGETS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOAL 11: MAKE CITIES
INCLUSIVE, SAFE, RESILIENT AND SUSTAINABLE
1. By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services,
and upgrade slums
2. By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems
for all, improving road safety, notably by expanding public transport, with special atten-
tion to the needs of those in vulnerable situations, women, children, persons with disabili-
ties and older persons
3. By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory,
integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries
4. Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage
5. By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and
substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product
caused by disasters, including water-related disasters, with a focus on protecting the poor
and people in vulnerable situations
6. By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by pay-
ing special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management
7. By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public
spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilities
8. Support positive economic, social and environmental links between urban, peri-urban and
rural areas by strengthening national and regional development planning
16 F. Bandarin
fully recognised, and clearly not only in target 11.4, but in the overall system of
policies aimed to achieve a sustainable and liveable city.
As cities are the centre of cultural life, that is where innovation is produced,
together with creativity and economic development. Cities are already and will
increasingly be the centre of economic development. It is in the cities that the fight
against poverty can be won in the next decades, and culture can contribute to this
goal by generating income and creating employment and by generating the condi-
tions that facilitate economic and social development. It is in cities that people can
access services and resources that can improve their quality of life.
1.6 T
he Historic Urban Landscape Approach and the New
Urban Agenda
Shortly after the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015, an oppor-
tunity for policy implementation was offered by the organisation of the 3rd Habitat
Conference (Quito, October 2016), certainly the most relevant policy event in the
urban field, as it takes place every 20 years (UN 2016).
The previous Habitat Conferences (Vancouver 1976 and Istanbul 1996) were
instrumental in assessing the urban situation of the planet and in driving interna-
tional policies in key sectors, such as in the area of slum upgrading, infrastructure
development and the promotion of adequate planning systems.
Habitat III had a different task. This was the first high-level policy meeting tak-
ing place after humanity had reached the urbanisation threshold of 50%. The current
figure is 54% and is expected to reach 66% in 2050; it is obvious that the struggle
for a sustainable planet will largely happen in the urban areas.11 The Conference
was largely devoted to the discussion of the policies needed to cope with these
global transformations.
This explains why the culture policy framework supported by UNESCO for sus-
tainable development has been largely based on cities. It is on the occasion of the
Habitat III Conference that UNESCO issued the report Culture: Urban Future that
9. By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and
implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitiga-
tion and adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and implement,
in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, holistic disas-
ter risk management at all levels
10. Support least developed countries, including through financial and technical assistance, in
building sustainable and resilient buildings utilizing local materials
11
“Managing urban areas has become one of the most important development challenges of the
21st century. Our success or failure in building sustainable cities will be a major factor in the suc-
cess of the post-2015 UN development agenda”, said John Wilmoth, Director of UN DESA’s
Population Division.
deals with the full range of policy issues related to urban sustainable development,
trying to spell out the role culture can play in the effective implementation of that
strategy.
The Report presents – as a basis for the definition of urban conservation poli-
cies – the first ever survey on the development process of urban heritage in the dif-
ferent regions of the world.
This effort has allowed us to have a complete picture of the global situation, and
to identify the key differences existing in the perception of urban heritage in the
different parts of the world, as well as in the conservation policies and practices.
The results of the survey clearly support the approach expressed by the HUL
Recommendation, insofar as the respect of the cultural diversity and of the diversity
of perceptions and conservation practices is concerned.
However, it also confirmed the great relevance attained by urban areas in the
cultural and heritage policies of most of the areas surveyed. Urban heritage is cer-
tainly diverse, but it is globally recognised as a prime object of public policies,
public investment and public interest.
The UNESCO Report, prepared through a long global consultation process, pro-
vides an integrated policy platform for the promotion of cultural policies in the
urban sphere, projected in the 20 years’ time span of the Habitat Conferences. This
policy platform deals with three areas of intervention, summarised by the three
terms: PEOPLE, PLACES (environment) and POLICIES.
The first term, PEOPLE, refers to the key orientation of cultural policies for cit-
ies, the enhancement of their liveability and the preservation of their identities.
Conservation policies are fundamental in a world still dominated by massive migra-
tions processes and by transformative pressures that do not value historic environ-
ments. Cultural policies need to be based on an inclusive approach, in order to give
voice to the communities and to fight spatial and social fragmentation. The pursuit
of a social equilibrium and of tolerant approaches to social changes is a condition to
achieve a peaceful society, a precondition for the preservation of social-cultural
frameworks and for any development initiative.
Creativity and innovation, which find their nurturing ground in cities and often in
their historic cores, can lead to rapid development processes based on the cultural
resources of the communities, as shown in many situations worldwide.12
The second term, PLACES (or environment), refers to the need to promote
human-scale cities and to the models that the historic city can offer to promote sus-
tainable, quality environments. The historic urban landscapes are the result of
knowledge accumulated through the long-term sustainable use of space, natural
resources and the territorial network of cities. A culture-based approach can offer
solutions for density planning, for energy sustainability, for the quality of public
spaces and for urban resilience in the face of natural disasters.
Finally, the third term, POLICIES, refers to the need to promote a participatory
approach to urban conservation and urban development, in order to ensure a full
The Creative Cities Programme of UNESCO encompasses today 180 cities in all regions of the
12
world, that have invested in creative industries as a core tool for their development policies.
18 F. Bandarin
support to culture-based polices, based on the traditions and identities of the local
population. A culture-based policy needs also to consider the territorial links with
the smaller settlements network that has historically been in relation with the larger
centres.
Culture is a sustainable resource that can support key policy frameworks aimed
at improving liveability, strengthening social identity and attracting visitors, with
significant economic benefits.
Urban historic centres can easily become high-density employment hubs, as they
host valuable and quality services, cultural and art institutions and attractive public
spaces. In this sense, they can be engines of development across the entire urban
scale.
Policies should address this potential and provide innovative financial solutions
able to ensure the long-term preservation of the physical and social environment and
its sustainable development process.
The policy framework proposed by the New Urban Agenda provides an exten-
sive scrutiny of the various facets of city development strategies for the “urban
planet”. Cultural policies have been considered, both directly and indirectly, and
form part of the broader policy scenario proposed by the United Nations to address
the key issues of the coming decades: how to provide a decent habitat to the new
urban dwellers, while delivering sustainable services, and how to ensure that urban
spaces, old and new, retain high qualities and support inclusive and peaceful societ-
ies (UN 2016).13
United Nations 2016. The New Urban Agenda. Quito, October 2016. The New Urban Agenda
13
was adopted at the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development
(Habitat III) in Quito, Ecuador, on 20 October 2016. It was endorsed by the United Nations General
Assembly at its sixty-eighth plenary meeting of the seventy-first session on 23 December 2016.
…..“124. We will include culture as a priority component of urban plans and strategies in
the adoption of planning instruments, including master plans, zoning guidelines, building
codes, coastal management policies and strategic development policies that safeguard a
diverse range of tangible and intangible cultural heritage and landscapes, and will protect
them from potential disruptive impacts of urban development.
125. We will support the leveraging of cultural heritage for sustainable urban develop-
ment and recognize its role in stimulating participation and responsibility. We will promote
innovative and sustainable use of architectural monuments and sites, with the intention of
value creation, through respectful restoration and adaptation. We will engage indigenous
peoples and local communities in the promotion and dissemination of knowledge of tangi-
ble and intangible cultural heritage and protection of traditional expressions and languages,
including through the use of new technologies and techniques”.
1.7 T
he Historic Urban Landscape Approach
and the International Policy Framework
The process that led to the adoption of the HUL Recommendation was linked to the
radical evolution of the notion of heritage that has taken place in the past decades
and to the consolidation of the sustainable development framework that forms the
background of the contemporary international agendas.
Furthermore, this new dimension of heritage reflects a major change in the role
culture plays in the public arena, from a small area restricted to the interest of a
circle of enlightened specialists and humanists to a major component of our social
and collective life. Indeed, culture has now firmly taken its place among the basic
needs of modern society and is fully included in the sphere of human rights.
The greater role played by the local communities in defining the role culture
plays in their life has led to a radical change in the way culture and heritage are
perceived and managed. This new approach is today at the core of the international
policy frameworks for culture, like the World Heritage Convention or the Intangible
Heritage Convention.
The HUL Recommendation reflects these changes and proposes an approach to
urban heritage conservation that is and will remain in line with the broader interna-
tional policy frameworks.
The analysis and the experiences conducted in the past 8 years show clearly that
much still needs to be done in the years to come. It shows, however, how this inter-
national “soft law” has helped many cities and many communities in reinterpreting
their own cultural assets and in establishing management frameworks that integrate
the different layers of history and the different environmental, economic and social
dimensions into a new vision of urban heritage as a collective resource for today and
for the future.
References
Australia ICOMOS. (2013). The Burra Charter. The Australia ICOMOS charter for places of
cultural significance. http://portal.iphan.gov.br/uploads/ckfinder/arquivos/The-Burra-Charter-
2013-Adopted-31_10_2013.pdf. Accessed 9 July 2018.
Bandarin, F., & van Oers, R. (2012). The historic urban landscape. Managing heritage in an urban
century. London: Wiley-Blackwell.
Bandarin, F., & van Oers, R. (2015). Reconnecting the city. The historic urban landscape approach
and the future of urban heritage. London: Wiley-Blackwell.
Huxley, J. (1946). UNESCO: Its purpose and philosophy. London. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0006/000681/068197eo.pdf
ICOMOS General Assembly. (1987). Charter for the conservation of historic towns and urban
areas (Washington Charter). Washington, DC: ICOMOS. https://www.icomos.org/charters/
towns_e.pdf. Accessed 9 July 2018.
UN. (2000). United Nations Millennium Declaration. New York: United Nations. http://www.
un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.htm. Accessed 9 July 2018.
20 F. Bandarin
UN. (2015a). Transforming our World: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. New York,
United Nations. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/70/L.1. Accessed 9 Jul
2018
UN. (2015b). Agenda 2030, goal 11.“Targets of sustainable development goal 11: make cities inclu-
sive, safe, resilient and sustainable. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/
RES/70/1&Lang=E. Accessed 9 July 2018.
UN. (2016). Habitat III: The United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban
Development. Quito, 17–20 October 2016. https://unhabitat.org/habitat-iii/. Accessed 9 July
2018.
UNESCO. (1982). World conference on cultural policies. Mexico City, 26 July–6 August 1982.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0005/000525/052505eo.pdf. Accessed 9 July 2018.
UNESCO. (1990). World decade for cultural development 1988–1997 – Plan of Action, Paris,
UNESCO (CC-89/WS-20). http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0008/000852/085291EB.pdf.
Accessed 9 July 2018.
UNESCO. (1998). World conference on cultural policies for development. Stockholm, March/
April 1998. http://www.wwcd.org/policy/Stockholm.html. Accessed 9 July 2018.
UNESCO. (2001). Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. Paris, UNESCO. http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0012/001271/127162e.pdf. Accessed 9 July 2018.
UNESCO. (2003). Convention for the safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage. Paris:
UNESCO. https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention?raw_uri=%2Ffr%2Fconvention
UNESCO. (2015). Re|Shaping cultural policies. Advancing creativity for development. 2005 con-
vention global report. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2016). Culture: Urban future. Global report on culture for sustainable urban devel-
opment. Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002459/245999e.pdf.
Accessed 9 July 2018.
UNESCO. (2017). Re|Shaping cultural policies. Advancing creativity for development. 2005 con-
vention global report. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO General Conference. (1976). Recommendation concerning the safeguarding and con-
temporary role of historic areas. Nairobi: UNESCO. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_
ID=13133&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html. Accessed 9 July 2018.
UNESCO General Conference. (2005). Convention on the protection and promotion of the
diversity of cultural expressions. October 2005. Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0014/001429/142919e.pdf. Accessed 9 July 2018.
UNESCO World Heritage Centre. (1995). The Nara Conference on Authenticity, Nara, Japan,
1–6 November 1994. Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. https://whc.unesco.org/docu-
ment/116018. Accessed 9 July 2018.
World Bank. (2000). Culture counts: Financing, resources, and the economics of culture in
sustainable development. Proceedings of the Conference held in Florence, Italy (October
4–7, 1999). Washington, DC: World Bank. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/
en/302131468739317900/pdf/multi-page.pdf. Accessed 9 July 2018.
World Commission on Culture and Development. (1996). Our creative diversity. Paris, UNESCO.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0010/001055/105586e.pdf. Accessed 9 July 2018.
World Heritage Centre. (2017). Operational guidelines of the World Heritage Convention.
UNESCO. https://whc.unesco.org/document/163852. Accessed 9 July 2018.
Chapter 2
in Action: Eight Years Later
Ana Pereira Roders
Abstract Eight years after the adoption of the Recommendation on the Historic
Urban Landscape (HUL approach) by UNESCO member states, governments
worldwide no longer doubt their sustainable development is dependent on heritage,
cultural and natural, and are united to strengthen the efforts to protect and safeguard
this heritage. What are governments doing? What resources are they listing as heri-
tage? Who is involved? How? What are the results? These are questions that are
fuelling the curiosity of many, in science and society, but only a few, leading innova-
tive practices in heritage planning, including those exploring the implementation of
the HUL approach, have started to answer them. This chapter discusses the state of
the art, based on a literature review, contextualizing the experiences and key lessons
of these leaders so far, active in the global diffusion of heritage planning innovation.
Results revealed that even though there has been great progress in exploring the
broadness in scope, which is still expected to escalate in the upcoming years, there
is a strong difference between goals and actions when it comes to the implementa-
tion of the HUL approach.
Keywords UNESCO · HUL approach · Innovation · Heritage planning · Urban

development
2.1 From Reality to Theory
For centuries, heritage and its management have been strongly led by the aim to
conserve resources for future generations, mostly tangible and immovable, which
were key to define national identities and values, constructed based on authorized
discourses, shaped by a partial understanding of past achievements and events,
sometimes crucial to a single place and people, sometimes intertwining nations,
A. Pereira Roders (*)
Professor in Heritage and Values, Delft University of Technology,
Delft, The Netherlands
e-mail: a.r.pereira-roders@tue.nl

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_2
22 A. Pereira Roders
their people and culture. A selective group of resources would be conserved, while
the rest could be neglected or destroyed without further accountability.
Through the lenses of the past, these were very noble efforts, with conservation
restricted to selected resources, otherwise surely destroyed. Through the lenses
of the present, these efforts could be understood as insufficient and exclusive, the
product of an unsustainable model of consumption and production – making con-
servation dependent on something as biased as values and cultural identity, which
can change over time and place or be restrained to the position of minority – while
all other resources are open for neglect and/or destruction, as if resources were for-
ever renewable and as if the planet earth and people were forever resilient. Today,
we are facing unprecedented societal challenges and environmental destruction, e.g.
the loss and degradation of resources, pollution and climate change (Henderson-
Sellers and McGuffie 2012), as a result of a strong drive for development, quality of
life, health and wealth (UN 2016), which fail to balance the impact, in gains and
losses of such models. While some countries and cities still see it as the model to
follow, eager to be as prosperous as others once were, a few countries and cities
have started to question, assess and reform towards more sustainable models of
urban development, where resource efficiency and therefore heritage listings and
urban conservation play a key role.
The greatest advances and broadening have been in the categories and natures of
what resources should be conserved; today, every resource could become listed as
heritage, as long as they are held in common and deemed valuable by their com-
munities and, therefore, they are willing to conserve them (Pereira Roders 2018).
There is no limit to their attributes (what is valuable in such resources) and/or values
(why are these resources and attributes valuable), only the common aim to conserve
them for future generations. Heritage can refer to a variety of heritage resources,
such as tangible, intangible, movable, immovable, natural, cultural, digital, ana-
logue, urban or rural (Pereira Roders 2018). Heritage can refer to a variety of values,
such as social, political, historic, aesthetical, scientific, age, ecological or economic
(Pereira Roders 2007; Tarrafa and Pereira Roders 2012; Veldpaus 2015). Heritage
can be of outstanding universal value for mankind, listed as UNESCO World
Heritage, but heritage can also be national, regional or local. Heritage can even be
purposely left unlisted, as communities prefer to keep them open for development.
Who should select, manage and conserve the resources listed as heritage, tradi-
tionally led by the public sector, is going through a similar process of broadening,
parallel to alike processes fostered by neoliberalism and decentralization, where
co-production and participatory practices shape decisions in urban and regional
planning. Even if the public sector still plays a leading role, over time, it is notice-
ably moving into more of a facilitator role, involving stakeholders as experts, citi-
zens and tourists. The level of participation is also evolving, though at a slower
pace, ranging from being informed or consulted to actually influencing and leading
decision-making processes. The range of disciplines and their experts grew parallel
to the different categories of heritage resources, with, e.g. geographers, landscape
architects, biologists and planners involved in cultural landscapes, anthropologists
and sociologists in intangible heritage and architects, historians, archaeologists and
2 The Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Action: Eight Years Later 23
engineers in tangible heritage, just to name a few. Moreover, disciplines such as law,
management, economics and tourism further our understanding of the role (and
models) in which heritage can enable sustainable development.
How heritage should be managed and conserved has followed a similar pattern
of broadening, where today more and more approaches and methods are accepted in
order to enable the conservation of heritage resources, without any of them being
necessarily wrong or right. What matters the most is that they can be proven effec-
tive in a specific context, which might or might not be applicable to similar heritage
resources in different contexts. Moreover, what might work in a certain period of
time might not work later in time. Therefore, rather than finding the one perfect
approach suitable for eternity, the best practices are moving into dynamic processes
where approaches are expected to change over time.
Just because everything is possible in theory does not necessarily mean that
everything becomes possible in practice. Shaped by character, education and cul-
ture, people can’t be truly unbiased; we are hardwired with bias and create bias
constantly as part of the natural neurological process of learning (Van Overwalle
2011). So, while heritage remains a selective group of resources to be conserved,
and all resources could be someone’s heritage, then, one can argue that heritage list-
ings will never become inclusive. As such, the group of resources listed as heritage
reflect more the people enrolled in their nomination, rather than the resources avail-
able for conservation and/or their vulnerability. Moreover, the conservation of
resources is seldom integrated as a whole, crossing practices and sharing resources,
with different stakeholders and processes for each category of resources, from
museums to natural parks and from supranational to subnational status. Science and
society keep advocating for the conservation of a selection of resources they deem
valuable, unaware that when one selects a group of resources to be listed as heritage
and be conserved, in the present model of consumption and production, the other
resources, even if related, are being selected to be excused from conservation.
Though this is not often intentional, this can result into a competition and rivalry,
among the different categories of resources and their stakeholders, for better identi-
fication and conservation.
When a city needs to grow, conserving the surrounding natural areas can lead to
its densification and, consequently, the redevelopment of the consolidated areas,
resulting into higher skylines and/or smaller public areas. In turn, conserving the
consolidated areas can lead to urban sprawl and, consequently, the redevelopment
of the surrounding natural areas, resulting in larger surfaces of urban areas and/or
rural areas. When regenerating a neighbourhood, intangible heritage resources can
be put at risk, as the local communities conserving them might be relocated else-
where, where such traditions are no longer possible or welcome. When focusing on
intangible heritage alone, alienated from their location, buildings and open spaces
can get neglected and destroyed. Even the regional strategy to locate a new shop-
ping centre in a specific location, most accessible to transportation facilities as high-
ways and public transportation, can affect the sustainable development and dynamics
of the villages and towns in the region, resulting into the closing of traditional com-
mercial areas, which cannot compete with the facilities and offers provided by the
shopping centre. Without a lively community and uses, these villages and towns can
fall into obsolescence, while investing in their renewal instead could have helped
maximize resources, honour their products and services and spread the overflow of
people, in modes of human-powered transportation far healthier than cars and pub-
lic transportation, such as walking or cycling.
Rather than a case-by-case approach, cities and their key stakeholders are com-
ing to realize that heritage planning and urban conservation can no longer be han-
dled in isolation. Instead, they are cross-sectoral to all fields related to urbanization.
However, today, most approaches, methods and tools are still tailored to the model
where urbanization takes exception to the rule when conserving and reusing
resources; where instead, the rule is to demolish and build new, even when targeting
sustainable development goals, with little control or accountability for their long-
term impact, social, cultural, economic and environmental. As such, this unbalance
shall not dissipate easily, at least until this model of resource consumption and pro-
duction is questioned and reformed. Consequently, heritage as a concept also
requires redefinition with the further enhancement and adoption of more sustainable
models of resource consumption and production. A global challenge requires supra-
national goals.
2.2 From Theory to Supranational Governance
In times where supranational governance is put in question by more nationalistic

narratives, it is most important to recall the reasons why countries and their repre-
sentatives decide to support this system in the first place. In the post-war period,
where the world, and Europe in particular, had to recover from two world wars,
which had massive impact at all levels, economic, environmental, social and cul-
tural, and where human rights were propelled onto the global stage and into the
global conscience. As Einstein (1954) claimed, “there is only one path to peace and
security: the path of supranational organization”. A model of global co-production
matters that countries could not solve alone and/or would prefer to solve together,
benefiting from the exchange in practices beyond their own territory and culture. A
motto for diversity, diplomacy and tolerance still presents in these intergovernmen-
tal institution’s goals, strategies and plans, despite later discredit and being hindered
by the behaviour of individuals and countries, represented as states parties, rather
than the institution as a whole. Still, it seems easier for countries to use such institu-
tions as the scapegoat than to admit their own failures.
With a track record of almost 70 years, since the “Agreement for Facilitating the
International Circulation of Visual and Auditory Materials of an Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Character” was adopted in Beirut, on 10 December 1948,
states parties worldwide have been using UNESCO as a global platform to cocreate
best practices and goals on domains crossing education, science and/or culture,
including heritage planning and sustainable urban development, through various
official documents, e.g. conventions, recommendations and declarations, as well as

special projects and programmes, funded by states parties and their extra funds, e.g.
African World Heritage Fund and Netherlands Funds-in-Trust.
Adopted on 10 November 2011 by the UNESCO member states, the
Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (UNESCO 2011a) is best known
as the HUL Recommendation and its approach. Essentially, the HUL Recommendation
did little less than acknowledge long-standing academic and societal pleas for inno-
vation in heritage planning, in all levels considered partial and/or inefficient (Smith
2006; Bandarin and Van Oers 2012; UNESCO 2016; Skrede and Holleland 2018).
Though the fact that such acknowledgement was made official and adopted by nearly
every country in the world, it was hoped to make the difference.
States parties adopting the HUL Recommendation agreed to initiate and diffuse a
process of innovation in heritage planning throughout their territories, for all heritage
properties and not to World Heritage alone (UNESCO 2011a). Accordingly, states
parties were to “adopt the appropriate legislative institutional framework and mea-
sures, with a view to applying the principles and norms set out in this Recommendation
in the territories under their jurisdiction”, as well as “bring this Recommendation to
the attention of the local, national and regional authorities, and of institutions, ser-
vices or bodies and associations concerned with the safeguarding, conservation and
management of historic urban areas and their wider geographical settings” (UNESCO
2011a). Innovation is ought to be defined and implemented differently, adaptable to
the resources and context, concerning process, methods and tools but also on the
strategies concerning heritage resources and their values, as well as stakeholders and
their roles.
Eight years after the adoption of the HUL approach, governments worldwide
no longer doubt their sustainable development is dependent on heritage, cultural
and natural, and are united to strengthen the efforts to protect and safeguard that
heritage, through various international frameworks such as the Sustainable
Development Goals and New Urban Agenda (UN 2015, 2017). What are govern-
ments doing? What resources are they listing as heritage? Who is involved? How?
What are the results? These are questions that are fuelling the curiosity of many,
in science and society, but that only few, leading innovative practices in heritage
planning, including those exploring the implementation of the HUL approach,
have started answering.
2.3 From Supranational Governance to Practices
Local practices are key to the HUL Recommendation and, consequently, also to the
successful implementation of the HUL approach. For this reason, cities and
their key stakeholders have been involved in the varied workshops, interlinking
international, national and local partners, organized to discuss the aims and objec-
tives set forward by the HUL Recommendation, e.g. the series of three workshops
in Eastern Africa during July–August 2011, fostering the cooperation between key
stakeholders in Lamu (Kenya), Zanzibar (Tanzania) and the Island of Mozambique
(Mozambique).
When depicting the implementation of the HUL approach as the diffusion of
innovation (Rogers 1962), five groups of cities can be defined according to the
stages of the innovation diffusion process, ranging from “innovators” to “laggards”,
from cities contributing to the HUL Recommendation before 2011 to cities who will
inevitably foster a governance reform by the time the Sustainable Development
Goals (2030) and goals set by HABITAT3 and the New Urban Agenda (2016–2036)
are to be met worldwide (see Table 2.1). According to Rogers (1962), “diffusion is
a kind of social change, defined as the process by which alteration occurs in the
structure and function of a social system. When new ideas are invented, diffused,
and adopted or rejected, leading to certain consequences, social change occurs”.
About 160 cities were so far found participating and/or hosting near 350 activi-
ties fostering the implementation of the HUL Recommendation (see Table 2.2;
Fig. 2.2). Activities ranged from organizing meetings, e.g. workshops and trainings
to becoming case studies in research, applied and fundamental, which is conse-
quently reported in reports and publications (Siguencia Ávila 2018; Rey Perez and
Pereira Roders 2018). Twenty-eight cities were taken as a sample to report their
experiences and views on the HUL for the purpose of this book; 32 were asked to
prepare a case study boxes (see Appendix), from which 14 have been integrated in
this introductory chapter. As expected, most are early adopters, though there are key
innovators that deserve to be highlighted for their pioneer contributions to the HUL
Recommendation, as well as cities which start now exploring its potentials, during
the early majority step.
Innovators are generally willing to take risks, have access to financial resources
and have contact with scientific sources and/or interaction with other innovators.
The risk tolerance enables them to adopt technologies that can ultimately fail
Table 2.1 Diffusion of innovation applied to the implementation of the HUL Recommendation
Steps, market HUL
share (%) Diffusion of innovation (Rogers 2003) recommendation
1. Innovators Risk takers, who have the resources and desire to try new Before 2011
(2.5%) things, even if they fail
2. Early Selective about which innovation they start adopting. They Between 2012 and
adopters are considered the “one to check in with” for new 2017
(13.5%) information and reduce others’ uncertainty
3. Early Take their time before adopting the innovation. They are Between 2018 and
majority (34%) willing to adopt the innovation, as long as, fit to their lives 2023
4. Late Adopters in reaction to peer pressure, emerging norms or Between 2024 and
majority (34%) economic necessity. Most of the uncertainty is to be 2029
resolved before they adopt the innovation
5. Laggards Traditional and making decisions based on past After 2030
(16%) experience, adverse to change, often economically unable
to take risks and, thus, the last to adopt innovations
Adapted from Rogers (1962)
Table 2.2 List of cities, hosting/organizing activities for HUL Recommendation

ID City Country Region Innovation - Steps
1 2 3 4 5
42 Ajmer-Pushkar India Asia and the Pacific

110 Al-Salt Jordan Arab States
103 Aleppo Syrian Arab Republic Arab States
43 Alwar India Asia and the Pacific
44 Amaravathi India Asia and the Pacific
20 Ambalema Colombia L.A. and the Caribbean
93 Amsterdam Netherlands Europe and N. America
111 Asmara Eritrea Africa
74 Assisi Italy Europe and N. America
61 Baku Azerbaijan Europe and N. America
30 Ballarat Australia Asia and the Pacific
56 Bangkok Thailand Asia and the Pacific
94 Beemster Netherlands Europe and N. America
112 Beijing China Asia and the Pacific
11 Beirut Lebanon Arab States
59 Berat Albania Europe and N. America
113 Bergamo Italy Europe and N. America
21 Bogota Colombia L.A. and the Caribbean
114 Bologna Italy Europe and N. America
66 Bordeaux France Europe and N. America
15 Brasilia Brazil L.A. and the Caribbean
62 Brugge Belgium Europe and N. America
104 Budapest Hungary Europe and N. America
115 Buenos Aires Argentina L.A. and the Caribbean
57 Bukhara Uzbekistan Asia and the Pacific
75 Cagliari Italy Europe and N. America
8 Cairo Egypt Arab States
31 Canberra Australia Asia and the Pacific
45 Chandigarh India Asia and the Pacific
116 Chester United Kingdom Europe and N. America
100 Chicago U.S.A. Europe and N. America
(continued)
Table 2.2 (continued)

1 2 3 4 5
89 Cordoba Spain Europe and N. America

23 Cuenca Ecuador L.A. and the Caribbean
1 Dakar Senegal Africa
117 Dhaka Bangladesh Asia and the Pacific
118 Djenné Mali Africa
119 Dresden Germany Europe and N. America
32 Dujiangyan China Asia and the Pacific
97 Durham United Kingdom Europe and N. America
99 Edinburgh Ireland Europe and N. America
64 Edmonton Canada Europe and N. America
84 Evora Portugal Europe and N. America
76 Ferrara Italy Europe and N. America
159 Florence Italy Europe and N. America
54 Galle Sri Lanka Asia and the Pacific
73 Galway Ireland Europe and N. America
120 Genoa Italy Europe and N. America
121 George To wn United Kingdom Europe and N. America
122 Granada Spain Europe and N. America
60 Graz Austria Europe and N. America
33 Guangzhou China Asia and the Pacific
85 Guimarães Portugal Europe and N. America
123 Hamilton Canada Europe and N. America
34 Hangzhou China Asia and the Pacific
58 Hanoi Vietnam Asia and the Pacific
22 Havana Cuba L.A. and the Caribbean
124 Ho Chi Minh Vietnam Asia and the Pacific
125 Hong Kong China Asia and the Pacific
46 Hyderabad India Asia and the Pacific
126 Islamabad Pakistan Asia and the Pacific
3 Island of M. Mozambique Africa
96 Istanbul Turkey Europe and N. America
47 Jaipur India Asia and the Pacific
(continued)

1 2 3 4 5
49 Jakarta Indonesia Asia and the Pacific

127 Jeddah Saudi Arabia Arab States
9 Jerusalem Jerusalem Arab States
52 Kathmandu Nepal Asia and the Pacific
128 Kimberley South Africa Africa
88 Kolomna Russian Federation Europe and N. America
10 Kuwait City Kuwait Arab States
14 La Plata Argentina L.A. and the Caribbean
2 Lamu Kenya Africa
67 Le Havre France Europe and N. America
41 Levuka Fiji Asia and the Pacific
129 Lhasa China Asia and the Pacific
105 Lijiang China Asia and the Pacific
130 Ling Lu China Asia and the Pacific
98 Liverpool United Kingdom Europe and N. America
51 Luang Prabang Lao People's D.R. Asia and the Pacific
83 Lublin Poland Europe and N. America
68 Lyon France Europe and N. America
35 Macau China Asia and the Pacific
131 Machu Picchu Peru L.A. and the Caribbean
90 Madrid Spain Europe and N. America
132 Malaga Spain Europe and N. America
133 Manama Bahrain Arab States
4 Maputo Mozambique Africa
134 Meldola Italy Europe and N. America
27 Mexico City Mexico L.A. and the Caribbean
106 Montreal Canada Europe and N. America
63 Mostar Bosnia Europe and N. America
71 Mtskheta Georgia Europe and N. America
135 Mudurnu Turkey Europe and N. America
7 Muharraq Bahrain Arab States
136 Namwon Republic of Korea Asia and the Pacific
(continued)

1 2 3 4 5
77 Naples Italy Europe and N. America

101 New Brunswick U.S.A. Europe and N. America
137 New Jersey U.S.A. Europe and N. America
25 Old Guatemala Guatemala L.A. and the Caribbean
16 Olinda Brazil L.A. and the Caribbean
138 Orongo Chile L.A. and the Caribbean
139 Orvieto Italy Europe and N. America
78 Palestrina Italy Europe and N. America
69 Paris France Europe and N. America
107 Pittsburgh U.S.A. Europe and N. America
70 Poitiers France Europe and N. America
79 Pompeii Italy Europe and N. America
86 Porto Portugal Europe and N. America
80 Priverno Italy Europe and N. America
28 Puebla Mexico L.A. and the Caribbean
65 Québec Canada Europe and N. America
29 Querétaro Mexico L.A. and the Caribbean
24 Quito Ecuador L.A. and the Caribbean
12 Rabat Morocco Arab States
140 Raleigh U.S.A. Europe and N. America
53 Rawalpindi Pakistan Asia and the Pacific
17 Recife Brazil L.A. and the Caribbean
72 Regensburg Germany Europe and N. America
18 Rio de Janeiro Brazil L.A. and the Caribbean
141 Rome Italy Europe and N. America
5 Saint Louis Senegal Africa
91 Salamanca Spain Europe and N. America
142 Samarkand Uzbekistan Asia and the Pacific
143 San Sebastian Spain Europe and N. America
144 S.C. de MompoxColombia L.A. and the Caribbean
92 Seville Spain Europe and N. America
13 Sfax Tunisia Arab States
(continued)

1 2 3 4 5
145 Shahr-e Zuhak Afghanistan Asia and the Pacific

36 Shanghai China Asia and the Pacific
146 Shenyang China Asia and the Pacific
37 Shuang Wan China Asia and the Pacific
87 Sighişoara Romania Europe and N. America
147 Singapore Singapore Asia and the Pacific
148 Suakin Sudan Arab States
38 Suzhou China Asia and the Pacific
55 Taipei Taiwan Asia and the Pacific
26 Tegucigalpa Honduras L.A. and the Caribbean
108 Tel Aviv Israel Europe and N. America
149 Tesanj Bosn Bosnia Europe and N. America
150 Texas U.S.A. Europe and N. America
151 Timbuktu Mali Africa
152 Tiwanaku Bolivia L.A. and the Caribbean
39 Tongli China Asia and the Pacific
153 Toronto Canada Europe and N. America
154 T. Annunziata Italy Europe and N. America
109 Tripoli Lebanon Arab States
155 Turin Italy Europe and N. America
81 Urbino Italy Europe and N. America
82 Valletta Malta Europe and N. America
19 Valparaiso Chile L.A. and the Caribbean
48 Varanasi India Asia and the Pacific
156 Venice Italy Europe and N. America
102 Vilnius Lithuania Europe and N. America
157 Vranduk Bosnia Europe and N. America
158 Wai India Asia and the Pacific
95 Willemstad Netherlands Europe and N. America
40 Yangzhou China Asia and the Pacific
50 Yogyakarta Indonesia Asia and the Pacific
6 Zanzibar Tanzania Africa
Adapted from Siguencia Ávila (2018), Rey Perez and Pereira Roders (2018)
(Rogers 1962). Concerning the HUL Recommendation, these cities were involved
in the drafting of the Recommendation, before 2011; being one of the first innova-
tors, the city of Vienna, Austria, and its contribution, the Vienna Memorandum, the
result of an international conference on the subject of “World Heritage and
Contemporary Architecture”, held in 2005, under the patronage of UNESCO and
attended by more than 600 experts and professionals from 55 countries (UNESCO
2005a, b).
Box 2.1 Over-arching Urban Planning Guidelines for the Historic

Perimeter of Asmara, Eritrea (Rodwell 2004)
Dennis Rodwell
The objective of this mission was to prepare over-arching guidelines for
the historic perimeter of Asmara in the context of the city as a whole, coordi-
nating specialist studies already prepared and in hand, all to promote a holistic
approach to heritage protection and sustainable urban development. The mis-
sion was undertaken within the framework of the Cultural Assets Rehabilitation
Project (CARP), an initiative of the Eritrean government and people sup-
ported by the World Bank; the mission coincided with the UNESCO World
Heritage Centre’s Regional Meeting on Modern Heritage held in March 2004.
A major determinant was understanding and respect for Asmara’s multilay-
ered, interactive and evolving tangible and intangible cultural heritage tradi-
tions, embracing indigenous cultures, the colonial and modernist era and
today’s status as the capital city of a re-emerging nation.
The factors embraced by this mission included:
• Basic needs, including water supply and sanitation, housing supply and
quality, food supply and markets
• Land and building uses, urban morphology and design issues
• The use of vacant land and underused buildings, including for community
uses and public art
• Traffic and transportation
• Over-arching historic building conservation guidelines
• Identification of subjects for ongoing detailed studies, including data col-
lection, review of regulatory and administrative systems and the city’s
tourism potential
This mission animated ongoing reflections by the Eritrean government and
the Municipality of Asmara. It was followed by the drafting of the Tentative
List submission and informed the nomination and management plan for the
inscription of “Asmara: a Modernist City of Africa” as a World Heritage prop-
erty in 2017. Its holistic approach anticipated the UNESCO Historic Urban
Landscape initiative.
Several meetings followed, such as the workshops on the Management of

Historic Urban Landscapes of the twentieth century, in Le Havre, France (UNESCO
2007a), and in Chandigarh, India (UNESCO 2007b); the seven European cities,
partnering in the project HerO (Heritage as Opportunity), funded by URBACT,
coordinated by Regensburg, Germany, during 2008–2011; the 13 cities joining the
Protected Urban Planet initiative during 2009–2014, e.g. Willemstad, Curacao;
Valparaiso, Chile; and Amsterdam, the Netherlands; and the Inclusive Heritage-
based City Development Programme (IHCDP) implemented in India, in collabora-
tion with UNESCO, the World Bank and the Cities Alliance. There was a balance
between international-cooperative activities and between cities sharing similar con-
texts and/or challenges and local tailored activities, where the cities and key stake-
holders would focus on the integration of heritage planning and sustainable urban
development within the specificity of its own city.
Box 2.2 Technical Cooperation for the Enhancement, Development and

Protection of the Town of Luang Prabang, Lao People’s Democratic
Republic (UNESCO 2015a)
Minja Yang
The town of Luang Prabang, inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1995, is
the former royal capital of one of the kingdoms of Laos, located in the moun-
tainous north, at the confluence of the Mekong River and the Khan River. The
conservation and enhancement of the OUV of this World Heritage property was
a key process in the management of spatial planning and territorial development
in a period of rapid change brought about by the liberalization of the economy
after decades of war followed by a period of centralized planned economy.
Enhancement of the cultural, environmental and social resources of the site has
been the key strategy for the development of the town and the surrounding
region. The town of Luang Prabang project took place before the HUL
recommendation was adopted in 2011 and can be considered as an upstream
experience. The programme, so far composed of six multi-year projects, was
initially launched in 1996 by the Lao authorities, with the support of the city of
Chinon and the Région Centre (France), under a decentralized cooperation
framework. This long-term and inter-sectorial programme has focused from the
onset on institutional and local capacity building, with training of an operational
team in every project, starting from mapping and inventories of architectural,
urban and landscape features to the development of regulatory tools covering
not only for the town but also the wider-scale landscape of the riverbanks and
the surrounding hills resulting in the Safeguarding and Enhancement Plan
(SEP) and Territorial Consistency Scheme (SCOT) but also in sewage and road
upgrading as well as in the conservation of urban wetlands and restoration of
heritage buildings.
Early adopters are similar to the innovators, in the access to financial resources,
but more cautious in adoption choices. They can learn from the experience of the
innovators and move faster, adjusting their implementation to the models that best
suit the context of their city and resources. Concerning the HUL Recommendation,
these cities were involved in the early implementation of the UNESCO
Recommendation, between 2012 and 2017, the first 6-year cycle. There are two
leading cities in this step – Ballarat, Australia, and Cuenca, Ecuador – committed to
the exploration of the HUL approach. These two cities, also chapters in this book,
have been crucial in the maturing of the theoretical framework and for the develop-
ment of methods and tools to endorse the HUL Recommendation.
Many of these cities include World Heritage properties within their urban areas,
such as Aleppo, Syria Arab Republic, Paris, France, and Dakar, Senegal. A few cit-
ies aim to soon include World Heritage properties within their urban areas, being
part of the Tentative List, though there are other cities such as Shanghai, China, and
Galway, Ireland. These cities are better informed about international recommenda-
tions and the HUL Recommendation in particular. The World Heritage Committee
actively promotes the implementation of the HUL approach through its reference in
the decision texts, e.g. the revision of the operational guidelines (UNESCO 2012a,
2013), and advises its practice in the management of World Heritage properties, as
well as in the preparation of new World Heritage nominations.
Box 2.3 Living Human Treasures of Grand Bazaar: Istanbul Jewellery

Making as an Intangible Urban Activity (Erkan and Orlandi 2017)
Yonca Erkan
The jewellery making in Grand Bazaar, Istanbul, is a tradition that goes
back to early Byzantine times. In the 2000s, Turkey began to attain a leading
position among countries that process gold and sell it as jewellery. The most
important force behind the success of the jewellery sector was the mastery of
precious metal processing, an extension and consequence of the multilayered
cultural heritage Turkey possesses. Today, the traditional practice is under
threat of mass production and social transformations. The interdisciplinary
research approach bringing together cultural heritage and design innovation
allowed studying the role of intangible heritage in urban areas. Through field
research extending over 2 years, 57 traditional jewellery masters were docu-
mented. The impacts of continuation of this tradition were scrutinized for its
role in the community, contribution to space, capacity of innovation as well as
transmission to future generations. To communicate the findings of the
research, this data was then transformed into an exhibition, Gem and Craft: In
Pursuit of the Artisans of Grand Bazaar, at the Rezan Has Museum (February–
November 2017). The exhibition gave recognition to jewellery making as an
urban art and those who produce it.
Box 2.4 Mediterranean Network of South European Cities, Malaga as

Case Study (Loren-Méndez et al. 2016)
María del Mar Loren Méndez
This case study presents a research undertaken in the Mediterranean net-
work of South European cities, focusing on Malaga. Malaga is a historic city
on the Andalusian Mediterranean littoral, at the edge of the Atlantic Ocean,
between Europe and Africa. Unlike the centralizing condition of cities such as
Seville or Cordoba, Malaga consisted of a node in a decentralized territory, a
city within a littoral urban network, a characteristic feature of the Mediterranean
territory. This interdisciplinary research, which has been grant-aided by the
European Regional Development fund, has looked at the city as part of the
littoral Mediterranean roadway corridor, proposing the infrastructure as its
main argument for urban heritage characterization. The integral historical lay-
ering of natural and cultural values, the study of their legal protection within
urban and regional planning and the identifying areas of heritage sensitivity
corroborate the study’s contribution to the HUL discussion and new strategies
to contemplate the singularities of each city, of each landscape.
Early majority have just started; late majority and laggards are steps still to come
in the process of diffusion of innovation. Early majority are now considering and/or
are still to engage the implementation of the HUL approach. These cities take their
time before adopting the innovation. They are willing to adopt the innovation as
long as it fits into their lives. Florence, Italy, and Raleigh, USA, are case studies that
have been exploring the implementation of the HUL approach most recently. In
particular, Florence has been compared with the city of Edinburgh, Scotland (an
innovator), in the inherent implementation of the HUL approach, respective pro-
cesses, tools and stakeholders (Giliberto 2018). Late majority follow all adopters in
a reaction to peer pressure, emerging norms or economic necessity. Most of the
uncertainty must be resolved before they adopt the innovation. Laggards, traditional
and adverse to change, make decisions based on past experience, often economi-
cally unable to take risks, and, thus, are the last to adopt the HUL approach, such as
before results are to be presented concerning the New Urban Agenda and Sustainable
Development Goals.
Box 2.5 Kolomna: Cultural Memory as a Resource for Developing a

Historic City
Elizaveta Levitskaya
In Soviet times Kolomna was excluded from popular tourist routes, as
there was a secret military construction bureau based there and the access to
the city was limited. In the 2000s, the revitalization process started in the
historic city, where the centre comprises of 35 HA of urban fabric untouched
since the nineteenth century. The restoration of the Kremlin served as an
impulse for the development of local creative industries. It was followed by
several projects: land-art project “Ice House” (reconstruction of ice slides
from the nineteenth century), museum and reconstruction of the factory of the
Kolomna pastille, museum of the kalach (Russian bread) and museum of the
Kolomna coin, art-residence “Artkommunalka” – all concentrated in the his-
toric part of the city. Over 8 years the revitalization of the centre together with
creative industries yielded a threefold increase in tourists visiting and activa-
tion of the local business. However, the city lacks a holistic and integrated
cultural strategy, and the development needs to be brought from the sporadic
to a systematic level to attract investment and at the same time to preserve
vulnerable historic urban landscape of Kolomna. As for the HUL approach,
Kolomna has great potential as it engages community and benefits from the
regulatory systems (historic cities are relatively well protected and supported).
It gets financial support from diversified sources. However, it lacks planning
tools to provide a comprehensive framework for its sustainable development.
2.4 From Practices to Theory
A total of 108 scientific publications (at Scopus) were identified using the HUL
Recommendation as a reference document. The earliest study is from 2011 and the
latest from 2019. Figure 2.1 shows the yearly distribution of the studies, indicating
Fig. 2.1 The yearly distribution of the reviewed publications, using the HUL approach as
reference
an increase of popularity in 2016–2017. The figure shows that the number of publi-
cations in the last 2 years constitutes more than half of all the publications (58 out
of 108). The present book is expected to boost this yearly distribution further with
30 book chapters, reporting the results of 28 case studies soon to be released in late
2018 (Figs. 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4).
A large share of these publications, mostly journal articles and book chapters,
discuss the implementation of the related HUL approach through case studies,
Fig. 2.2 Map of case studies in North America, Latin America and the Caribbean regions (Nadia
Pintossi)
Fig. 2.3 Map of case studies in Africa, Arab States, Europe and Asia regions (Nadia Pintossi)
mostly in the UNESCO regions Europe and North America, in cities such as Naples,
George Town, Granada, Bergamo, San Sebastián and Liverpool in Europe (Bonadei
et al. 2017; Carone et al. 2017; Fernández Adarve 2015; García-Hernández et al.
2017; Shamsuddin et al. 2012; Sykes and Ludwig 2015) and Vieux-Québec or Texas
in North America (Doganer 2017; Dormaels 2016) and in the UNESCO regions
Asia and the Pacific, in cities such as Shuang Wan Cun, En Ling Lu, Namwon,
Singapore, Bangladesh and Pakistan in Asia (Ferdous 2016; Karim 2016; Sil Shin
et al. 2015; Taylor 2016; Verdini et al. 2017; Widodo et al. 2017) and Ballarat or
Fig. 2.4 Map of case studies in Asia and the Pacific regions (Nadia Pintossi)
Cuenca in the Pacific (Buckley et al. 2016; Rey-Pérez and Siguencia Ávila 2017).
There are also literature reviews as (Caterina 2016; Pereira Roders and Van Oers
2014) framing the HUL approach to the state of the art, findings and gaps (Angrisano
et al. 2016; Bandarin and Van Oers 2015; Rey-Pérez and Pereira Roders 2018).
Moreover, there is a growing wealth of books (e.g. Bandarin and Van Oers 2012;
Porfyriou and Sepe 2017; Sonkoly 2017), edited books (e.g. Bandarin and Van Oers
2015; Taylor et al. 2015; Labadi and Logan 2015; Rey-Pérez et al. 2017) and doc-
toral theses (Angrisano 2015; Veldpaus 2015; Ikiz 2017; Alkhalaf 2018; Giliberto
2018; Siguencia Ávila 2018), which have been published since the seminal work of
Bandarin and Van Oers (2012). These publications offer solutions and deeper under-
standing of the intellectual developments in urban conservation, embedded in the
HUL Recommendation and advocate for innovation and reform in processes and
tools to engage with a broader group of stakeholders, categories of heritage and
changing contexts. Even if not part of the final texts of the HUL Recommendation
(UNESCO 2011a, b), the six-step HUL approach has been used as theoretical
framework in practice (UNESCO 2012b; WHITRAP 2016), as well as by scholars
(Veldpaus et al. 2013; Giliberto 2018), to guide, evaluate and monitor the progress
and implementation of the HUL approach. Bandarin and Van Oers (2015), as
Veldpaus (2015) explains, review the six-step HUL approach recommended for its
implementation, e.g. the cultural mapping (Turner and Singer 2015), the impact
analysis (Jigyasu 2015) and the development of an urban framework (Siravo 2015),
as well as the four HUL tools which include citizen engagement (Smith 2015),
financial questions (Rypkema 2015), regulatory systems (O’Donnell 2015) and
knowledge and planning tools (Hosagrahar 2015).
2.4.1 The Six-Step HUL Approach
The HUL approach recommends that cities define the processes, methods and tools
that best fit their city and context. However, a common base was identified and pro-
posed as the six-step HUL approach, six steps familiar to most of the cities, even if
not followed by all or in the same order. Most cities are familiar with the six-step
HUL approach. From the sample of chapters and boxes, about one-third was famil-
iar and applied the six-step HUL approach, ranging from innovators such as Asmara,
Eritrea; Jaipur, India; and Luang Prabang, Laos, to early adopters such as Amsterdam,
the Netherlands; Ballarat, Australia; and Istanbul, Turkey, and to early majority as
Havana, Cuba.
The Six Critical Steps:
1. To undertake comprehensive surveys and mapping of the city’s natural, cultural
and human resources
2. To reach consensus using participatory planning and stakeholder consultations
on what values to protect for transmission to future generations and to determine
the attributes that carry these values
3. To assess vulnerability of these attributes to socio-economic stresses and impacts
of climate change
4. To integrate urban heritage values and their vulnerability status into a wider
framework of city development, which shall provide indications of areas of heri-
tage sensitivity that require careful attention to planning, design and implemen-
tation of development projects
5. To prioritize actions for conservation and development
6. To establish the appropriate partnerships and local management frameworks for
each of the identified projects for conservation and development, as well as to
develop mechanisms for the coordination of the various activities between dif-
ferent actors, both public and private (UNESCO 2011b)
Box 2.6 Mapping Economic Landscape for the UNESCO World

Heritage City, Old Towns of Djenné (Ost 2009)
Christian Ost
In March–April 2009, a short survey was conducted (prepared by Kathleen
Louw, Getty Conservation Institute), in collaboration with the Cultural
Mission of Djenné, Mali. The questions were structured to roughly capture
the direct and indirect use values of Djenné’s built heritage for the year 2008.
The survey covered 13 neighbourhoods (for rental values, conservation proj-
ects), 11 visited cultural sites (for conservation and visitor fee values) and 16
heritage-related businesses (hotels, restaurants, punt transport, art and crafts,
masons, guides). The Djenné test case was aimed to collect data to test the
digital mapping in order to measure use values of the city’s heritage. Non-
market benefits were not addressed in the survey. Ymoussa Fané, Chief of the
Cultural Mission of Djenné, coordinated the survey completion with the local
tourism, urbanism and other authorities and provided data on which of the
neighbourhoods, historic buildings and business were identified. Final map-
ping provided a tentative rendering of historic economic landscape of the
place, which was included in a report on heritage economics for historic cit-
ies, by Christian Ost, by the time, in-residence scholar at the Getty Conservation
Institute, United States, in 2008–2009.
Box 2.7 Adopting HUL Toolkits in Muharraq: The Bahrain Authority

for Culture and Archaeology (BACA)
Alaa El-Habashi
Historic Muharraq gained substantial recognition after listing a series of its
cultural properties as World Heritage representing the city’s historic economy
once based on the pearling industry. The registration has paved the way for
conservation frameworks, concepts and techniques to be introduced into
Bahrain. Despite BACA’s continuous efforts to integrate it, there was limited
participation from the local community with its mixed backgrounds, both the
natives who continued residing in the city and the foreign labourers who
moved in for affordability. The natives felt deprived of their rights to develop
their properties, and the foreigners realized that development would boost the
real estate cost to unaffordable limits. A ROT system, restore-operate-transfer,
was proposed by BACA as one means to encourage the community to explore
the potentiality in investing in heritage buildings. The government acquired a
number of those about to be demolished due to their bad state of conservation,
repaired them and undertook minimum restoration works to reveal their heri-
tage values. The buildings were then auctioned for rentals to potential tenants
willing to continue the rehabilitation works. In return, the selected tenants
would have the right to use the heritage buildings for durations of time calculated
(continued)
Box 2.7 (continued)

against the investments made. In parallel, BACA leads media campaigns,
community awareness programmes and a large urban regeneration project in
selected areas in the historic centre. Most of the HUL toolkit has been explored
in that Bahraini experience to engage the local community quickly enough to
prevent disregards to heritage buildings and to assure sustainability for accom-
plished results. If this experience, whose initial evaluation is set by the end of
2019, achieves its goals, it will certainly offer a pioneering experience in the
Arab Region.
Box 2.8 Preparatory Assistance and Technical Support for the

Inscription, Conservation and Management of the Île de Saint-Louis,
Senegal (UNESCO 2011c)
Marie-Noel Tournoux
The Île Saint-Louis, inscribed on the World Heritage List in 2000, is one of
the flagship cities of colonial history in West Africa. It presents a complete
architectural, urban and rural landscape, which is remarkable and highly varied.
At the request of Senegal, the World Heritage Centre, with the support of
France, embarked on a long process of support to both national and municipal
authorities for the protection, management and enhancement of the site, as well
as the development of tools and management mechanisms. This assistance was
also technical support through decentralized city-to-city cooperation between
Saint-Louis and Lille Métropole, France. The challenges were to develop mech-
anisms for management, monitoring and oversight to protect heritage and to
promote the sustainable development of Saint-Louis, by considering heritage,
culture and local projects. Hence, a set of tools were developed; to improve
knowledge of the site, a full inventory of built heritage and its setting was car-
ried out; to protect and manage the site, a full protection and enhancement urban
master plan was developed; and to address governance issues, an institutional
management framework (Heritage House) was developed. The social concerns
of the island’s residents were addressed, with a pilot microcredit scheme for
families, with projects bringing together economic activity and care for the
heritage and its environment. Subsequently, the emphasis was placed on the
riverine nature of the town and on large-scale environmental issues and urban
planning. Given the challenges of providing further training and ensuring long-
term collaboration through effective coordination between the different partici-
pants and particularly international aid consistency, the challenge was to
associate a positive conservation status, as part of this broader approach to the
area, in 2010, with sustainable support for the restoration of heritage in Saint-
Louis, both private and public. Today the challenge remains to ensure political
commitment for managing change and including culture and heritage as core
assets for ensuring quality of life for the inhabitants.
The remaining applied between 2 and 5 steps. The first and fourth steps are the
most applied, respectively, to (1) undertake comprehensive surveys and mapping
of the city’s natural, cultural and human resources and to (4) integrate urban heri-
tage values and their vulnerability status into a wider framework of city develop-
ment, which shall provide indications of areas of heritage sensitivity that require
careful attention to planning, design and implementation of development projects.
Steps 2 and 5 seem to be applied by one-third, respectively, (step 2) to reach con-
sensus using participatory planning and stakeholder consultations on what values to
protect for transmission to future generations and to determine the attributes that
carry these values and (step 5) to prioritize actions for conservation and develop-
ment. The least applied are steps 3 and step 6, respectively, (3) to assess vulnerability
of these attributes to socio-economic stresses and impacts of climate change and (6)
to establish the appropriate partnerships and local management frameworks for each
of the identified projects for conservation and development, as well as to develop
mechanisms for the coordination of the various activities between different actors,
both public and private.
2.4.2 The Tools
There are four key tools referenced in the HUL Recommendation. They are (1)
community engagement tools, (2) knowledge and planning tools, (3) regulatory sys-
tems and (4) financial tools (UNESCO 2011a).
2.4.2.1 HUL Tools
1. Civic engagement tools should involve a diverse cross-section of stakeholders

and empower them to identify key values in their urban areas, develop visions
that reflect their diversity, set goals and agree on actions to safeguard their heri-
tage and promote sustainable development. These tools, which constitute an
integral part of urban governance dynamics, should facilitate intercultural dia-
logue by learning from communities about their histories, traditions, values,
needs and aspirations and by facilitating mediation and negotiation between
groups with conflicting interests.
2. Knowledge and planning tools should help protect the integrity and authentic-
ity of the attributes of urban heritage. They should also allow for the recognition
of cultural significance and diversity and provide for the monitoring and man-
agement of change to improve the quality of life and of urban space. These tools
would include documentation and mapping of cultural and natural characteris-
tics. Heritage, social and environmental impact assessments should be used to
support and facilitate decision-making processes within a framework of sustain-
able development.
3. Regulatory systems should reflect local conditions and may include legislative
and regulatory measures aimed at the conservation and management of the tan-
gible and intangible attributes of the urban heritage, including their social, envi-
ronmental and cultural values. Traditional and customary systems should be
recognized and reinforced as necessary.
4. Financial tools should be aimed at building capacities and supporting innovative
income-generating development, rooted in tradition. In addition to government
and global funds from international agencies, financial tools should be effec-
tively employed to foster private investment at the local level. Micro-credit and
other flexible financing to support local enterprise, as well as a variety of models
of partnerships, are also central to making the historic urban landscape approach
financially sustainable.
These tools are very familiar to the sample cities, with nearly one-third applying
all four of them, with as many innovators, e.g. Jaipur, India, and as early adopters,
e.g. Edinburgh, Scotland, and another one-third applying three of them, but these
being mainly early adopters, e.g. Shuang Wan, China, and Buenos Aires, Argentina.
The most used tools during the implementation of the HUL approach are, respec-
tively, (1) community engagement tools and (2) knowledge and planning tools with
(3) regulatory systems and (4) financial tools being the least used.
Box 2.9 Centro Cultural Kirchner (CCK)

Francesca Ferlicca
The Centro Cultural Kirchner is a cultural centre located in downtown
Buenos Aires, Argentina. It is a modern space, dedicated to fine, perform-
ing, visual and digital arts, education, conferences and exhibitions, com-
pletely open and free to the public. It was opened in May 2015 and is located
in the former Central Post Office, declared National Historic Monument in
1997. By 2009, the last-century building has been converted into the fourth-
largest cultural centre in the world. Among its main attractions are La
Ballena Azul, a symphonic music hall, a chamber music room, a hanging
glass structure that emulates a great lamp and La Cupula, the illuminated
dome. Since its inauguration, it represents an important landmark that
enhances community engagement, participation and valorization of local
heritage. According to the HUL Recommendation, the project involves
communities, decision-makers and professionals, in order to foster under-
standing of the historic urban landscape.
Box 2.10 Historic Preservation Toolkit

Donovan Rypkema
The City of Raleigh, North Carolina, USA, issued a request for proposals
for a “historic preservation toolkit” that specifically stated “The contractor will
consider tools that fall into several project areas, which may include financial
tools, policy tools, regulatory tools and organizational tools”. The firm Heritage
Strategies International responded and were ultimately selected for the assign-
ment and explicitly redefined the city’s framework into the HUL group of
tools. Twelve policies/strategies/tools were recommended, including two or
three in each of the HUL tool categories. Examples of recommendations were
conditional use permit (regulatory), property tax exemptions for long-term
heritage district residents (economic), systematic surveying/documentation
(knowledge and planning) and matching grants to neighbourhood-based orga-
nizations (community engagement). Prior to making recommendations, exten-
sive stakeholder focus groups were conducted. For each of the recommendations
examples of other US cities and whenever possible international examples of
the successful use of the recommended tool were utilized.
Box 2.11 Mudurnu Cultural Heritage Site Management Plan – Phase I

Ege Yildirim
This project covers the preparation of the Mudurnu Cultural Heritage Site
Management Plan and the first phase of its implementation (2014 to 2018),
which evolved from an academic project into a professional plan commissioned
by Mudurnu Municipality, with funding from the East Marmara Regional
Development Agency. Mudurnu is a small but historically strategic Silk Road
town, inscribed by the states party Turkey at the UNESCO World Heritage
Tentative List in 2015 as “The Historic Guild Town of Mudurnu”, its Outstanding
Universal Value proposed as the best urban manifestation of Akhism, the
Anatolian merchant guilds tradition, both through its rich and diverse built heri-
tage and the ritual practices. During the management plan, this diversity of heri-
tage was recognized as a historic urban landscape, beyond a conventional urban
conservation site, which the town centre was legally categorized as. The identi-
fication of management plan boundaries took into account this multiplicity of
heritage layers, which was proposed jointly by community members and the
planning team. Another innovative aspect is the application of the national site
management legislation to a small settlement, not necessarily for a World
Heritage nomination but to help the local community embrace a strategy for
tourism-led sustainable development. The implementation of the plan involved
collaborative efforts of different stakeholders using diverse types of resources,
not just financial but in kind and logistical support, blending civic engagement
and financial tools.
Table 2.3 Types of stakeholders

Main
category Stakeholders Definitions, examples
Public Politicians National, regional and local politicians, the administration, the
governors, alderman
Policy makers Those developing the plans and tools to manage local resources
Officers Those carrying out the implementation of policies applied to the
local context and specific projects
Private Professional/ Experts working both in academia, e.g. researchers, and in practice,
experts as in consultancy and advice, e.g. technician, advice, designer or
volunteer/amateur experts, e.g. local experts, pressure groups,
knowledge groups
Daily users Those in contact with the heritage resources on daily basis, e.g.
owners, residents, users. These also include the developers/private
sector, with an (economic) stake in the heritage resource, e.g.
selling, develop, exploit, etc.
Occasional Community in general, e.g. local, regional and national population,
users tourists, educators
Adapted from Veldpaus (2015), Rosetti, I. and Pereira Roders, A. (2018)
2.4.3 The Stakeholders
There are several stakeholders that can participate in the implementation of the HUL
approach, depending on the cultural context. For the purpose of this research, stake-
holders who can participate in urban heritage management have been classified in six
categories: three as public, (1) politicians, (2) policy makers and (3) public officers
and three as private, (4) professionals/experts, (5) daily users and (6) occasional users
(Table 2.3).
2.4.3.1 Types of Stakeholders
The sample cities confirmed the participation of all categories of stakeholders, where
the extremes, involving all categories of stakeholders, e.g. Edinburgh, Scotland;
Cuenca, Ecuador; and Luang Prabang, Laos, or only two, e.g. Amsterdam, the
Netherlands; Aleppo, Syria; and Bukhara, Uzbekistan, are the least usual, when
applying the HUL approach. Instead, most sample cities involved 3–5 types of stake-
holders in their activities; where experts, public and private remain the most involved,
followed by the policy makers and the daily users, being the politicians and the occa-
sional users the least involved (Table 2.4).
Table 2.4 List of sample cities, reported in the chapters and boxes

1 2 3 4 5
103 Aleppo Syria Arab States
93 Amsterdam The Netherlands Europe and N. America
111 Asmara Eritrea Africa
30 Ballarat Australia Asia and the Pacific
115 Buenos Aires Argentina L.A. and the Caribbean
57 Bukhara Uzbekistan Asia and the Pacific
8 Cairo Egypt Arab States
23 Cuenca Equator L.A. and the Caribbean
118 Djenné Mali Africa
99 Edinburgh United Kingdom Europe and N. America
73 Galway Ireland Europe and N. America
22 Havana Cuba L.A. and the Caribbean
96 Istanbul Turkey Europe and N. America
47 Jaipur India Asia and the Pacific
127 Jeddah Saudi Arabia Arab States
10 Kuwait City Kuwait Arab States
2 Lamu Kenya Africa
105 Lijiang China Asia and the Pacific
132 Malaga Spain Europe and N. America
27 Mexico City Mexico L.A. and the Caribbean
135 Mudurnu Turkey Europe and N. America
7 Muharraq Bahrain Arab States
16 Olinda Brazil L.A. and the Caribbean
86 Porto Portugal Europe and N. America
140 Raleigh United States Europe and N. America
5 Saint Louis Senegal Africa
37 Shuang Wan China Asia and the Pacific
151 Timbuktu Mali Africa
154 T. Annunziata Italy Europe and N. America
51 Luang Prabang Lao People's D.R. Asia and the Pacific
109 Tripoli Lebanon Arab States
,QQRYDWLRQ6WHSVė ,QQRYDWRUV (DUO\$GRSWHUV (DUO\0DMRULW\ /DWHPDMRULW\ /DJJDUGV
VWHSV+8/DSSURDFKė 5HVRXUFHVė9DOXHV 9XOQHUDELOLW\ė 3ROLF\ė 3ULRULW\ė 3DUWQHUVKLSV
Box 2.12 The Revitalization of the Historic City of Jeddah

Simone Ricca
The Old City has been included in the metropolis strategic planning
and given relevance in the new master plan being designed. Historic
Jeddah has become, for the first time, part of the overall economic strate-
gic thinking for the future of the city and of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
While the earlier conservation strategies aimed at “preserving” heritage as
the memory of the past, setting it apart from urban development, the new
plans aim at including heritage in the urban and economic dynamics. The
new vision tackles the complex issue of the revitalization of historic
Jeddah at different levels, involving a large number of stakeholders,
among which are Jeddah Chamber of Commerce, Old City Owners
Associations and local NGOs. For the first time, also the AWAQF, the
administration of religious Islamic endowments, is actively participating
in the revitalization process.
Box 2.13 Reconstruction of World Heritage Mausoleums of Timbuktu

(UNESCO 2015b)
Lazare Eloundou Assomo
The reconstruction of the mausoleums of Timbuktu project follows the
armed conflict that occurred in 2012 in Mali, during which 14 of the 16 mau-
soleums inscribed on the World Heritage List were destroyed. This devasta-
tion seriously affected the urban fabric of the Old City. Considered as the
main cultural identity of Timbuktu, the mausoleums reflect both the city his-
tory and its development. Timbuktu’s cultural identity and local communities
were vital factors for the mausoleum reconstruction: both of these factors
contributed to the city’s development and cultural heritage preservation since
the eleventh century. The reconstruction, undertaken between March 2014
and September 2015 involving local masons and artisans, not only allowed
the safeguarding of Timbuktu World Heritage site but also demonstrated the
role of culture as an important enabler of peace reconciliation and social cohe-
sion. Activities that took place for this process followed the incentives of his-
toric urban landscape approach concerning policies, tools, capacity building
activities and international cooperation. Furthermore, it contributed to the
revitalization of traditional conservation methods, to improve the living con-
ditions of affected communities through job creation, thus restoring their cul-
tural and socio-economic conditions while taking part in the recovery of
Timbuktu.
Box 2.14 Sense of Place: Towards Integrated Conservation and

Sustainable Urban Development Practice in Edinburgh (Alkhalaf 2018)
Hiba Alkhalaf
This research initiates a critical dialogue to understand the possible roles
of sense of place within heritage conservation and sustainable urban develop-
ment. It proposes that sense of place-based approach can be used as a tool to
analyse development projects within its wider cultural and natural landscape.
This tool unpacks the complexity of local values and global narratives that
contribute to the construction of sense of place. By effectively engaging vari-
ous users and stakeholders, it redefines heritage management to achieve more
efficient integration within the planning system. Through applying this
approach to the case of Edinburgh, Scotland, it shows that the role of sense of
place in the historic urban landscape can be channelled into three main dimen-
sions: the place itself (value assessment and designations), the people (stake-
holders and public participation) and the process (planning system and
policies). It concludes that sustaining sense of place entails balancing three
main goals: conserving the physical structure, the suitability of new use and
community development.
2.5 From Theory to Reality
The adoption of innovations such as those set forward by the HUL Recommendation
and the related HUL approach is not easy to achieve every change is easier to be
refused. For the more conservative-driven, it will feel like one is giving away all control
earned by previous approaches and tools. For the more development-driven, it will feel
like one is freezing the city beyond monuments and conservation areas. Though, in
truth, it is merely creating bridges between them, allowing both to co-operate and
decide together what sustainable urban development means in their context.
Cooperation means different stakeholders working together, despite background
or character, with the goal to exchange knowledge and reach consensus, which is
challenging per se and even more challenging when the subject of study is heritage
planning and urban conservation, where values affect what is perceived as valuable
and not, to be conserved or not. Results revealed that even though there has been
great progress in exploring the broadness in scope, which is still expected to esca-
late in the coming years, there is a strong difference between goals and actions when
it comes to the implementation of the HUL approach.
With the exception of a small group of cities, most of those exploring the HUL
approach undertake 1–2 activities or at least are found referencing the HUL
Recommendation. With this book, the editors hope to foster the role of case studies
and comparative studies to distinguish practices on their effectiveness, which can

range over time and place, as well as to deduce the theoretical framework and key
trends. More cities should explore the HUL approach, but, above all, those that have
already started should continue as what works today might not work in the future
and vice versa. So, the dynamic process of adaptation, implementation, evaluation
and review is key to ensure the methods and tools that best suit a certain city and its
management model remain updated.
The role of the government as facilitator remains vital, even in activities orga-
nized by other key stakeholders, as they are the ones to ensure the rule of law and
the representativeness expected from the context in which the HUL Recommendation
is applied. There is not one HUL approach but as many approaches as different
contexts demand. The HUL Recommendation provides such flexibility, which some
might see as positive, while others might see as negative. Regardless, what is most
important is that cities can find the model that best suits their sustainable urban
development and, consequently, the management of resources, where heritage plan-
ning and urban conservation are key indicators. After all, sustainable development
is not possible without resource efficiency. And resource efficiency is not possible
without heritage planning and urban conservation. However, practices need to keep
being updated to better match the local context and challenges. Otherwise, it will
fail, no matter how assumingly sustainable they are. Therefore, rather than asking
what and why, science and society are to start asking how and when. This integra-
tion is not expected to come perfect right from the start, just like a baby is not
expected to run a marathon when just started walking. Effectiveness and efficiency
take time and dedication. But by daring to try and fail, by learning from each other,
cities can evolve much further than alone. The HUL approach and the platforms
created to identify, promote and disseminate its implementation, as GO-HUL, are
just the beginning.
References
Alkhalaf, H. (2018). Sense of place: Towards integrated conservation and sustainable urban
development practice. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh (unpublished doctoral thesis)
Angrisano, M. (2015). Il paesaggio storico urbano delle città costiere: sfide e opportunità. Il caso
Torre. Annunziata: University of Napoli Federico II.
Angrisano, M., Biancamano, P. F., Bosone, M., Carone, P., Daldanise, G., De Rosa, F., &, Fusco
Girard, L. F. (2016). Aestimum. Towards operationalizing UNESCO recommendations on
“Historic Urban Landscape”: A position paper 1, 69, 165–210. https://doi.org/10.13128/
Aestimum-20454
Bandarin, F., & Van Oers, R. (2012). The historic urban landscape: Managing heritage in an
urban century. Oxford: John Wiley and Sons.
Bandarin, F., & Van Oers, R. (Eds.). (2015). Reconnecting the City: The historic urban landscape
approach and the future of urban heritage. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Bonadei, R., Cisani, M., & Viani, E. (2017). City walls as historic urban landscape: A case
study on participatory education. Almatourism. Journal of Tourism, Culture and Territorial
Development, 8(7), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.2036-5195/6756.
Buckley, K., Cooke, S., & Fayad, S. (2016). Using the historic urban landscape to re-imagine
Ballarat. The local context. In S. Labadi & W. Logan (Eds.), Urban heritage, development
and sustainability. International frameworks, National and Local Governance (pp. 93–113).
London and New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
Carone, P., De Toro, P., & Franciosa, A. (2017). Evaluation of urban processes on health in historic
urban landscape approach: Experimentation in the metropolitan area of Naples (Italy). Quality
Innovation Prosperity, 21(1), 202–222. https://doi.org/10.12776/QIP.V21I1.793.
Caterina, G. (2016). Innovative strategies for the recovering of historical cities, TECHNE, No. 12,
pp. 33–35, Available at: https://doi.org/10.13128/Techne-19330 Accessed 12 Jan 2018.
Doganer, S. (2017). Architectural design studio on sustainable tourism alternatives in the San
Antonio Missions Historic District. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 17(3), 298–313. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1467358415602955.
Dormaels, M. (2016). Participatory management of an urban world heritage site: The Table de
Concertation du Vieux-Québec. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable
Development, 6(1), 14–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-11-2014-0038.
Einstein, A. (1954) Ideas and opinions. New York: Crown/Bonanza, p. 147 (emphasis in original);
cf. pp. 118–161. See also Walter Isaacson, Einstein: His life and universe. New York: Simon
and Schuster, 2007, ch. 22, pp. 487–500.
Erkan, Y. K., & Orlandi, A. E. C. (2017). Gem and craft: In pursuit of the artisans of Grand
Bazaar. Istanbul: Istanbul Books.
Ferdous, F. (2016). The historic urban landscape of Old Dhaka, Bangladesh. In Cultural land-
scapes of South Asia: Studies in heritage conservation and management (pp. 76–91). https://
doi.org/10.4324/9781315670041.
Fernández Adarve, G. J. (2015). Historic ensemble and environment, instruments for the pro-
tection of urban and territorial dimension of historic cities. The case of Alhama de Granada.
E-RPH-REVISTA ELECTRONICA DE PATRIMONIO HISTÓRICO, 17, 29–65.
García-Hernández, M., de la Calle-Vaquero, M., & Yubero, C. (2017). Cultural heritage and urban
tourism: Historic city centres under pressure. Sustainability (Switzerland), 9(8), art. no. 1346.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081346
Giliberto, F. (2018). Comparing urban management strategies in World Heritage cities in Italy and
in the UK. Turin/Kent: Polytechnic University of Turin/Kent University. (unpublished doctoral
thesis).
Henderson-Sellers, A., & McGuffie, H.-S. (2012). The future of the world’s climate. Amsterdam:
Elsevier.
Hosagrahar, J. (2015). Knowledge and planning tools. In F. Bandarín & R. van Oers (Eds.),
Reconnecting the city. The historic urban landscape approach and the future of urban heritage
(pp. 249–260). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
Ikiz, D. (2017). Global heritage cities: Managing complexity of World Heritage sites in global cit-
ies. Oxford: Oxford-Brookes University. (unpublished doctoral thesis).
Jigyasu, R. (2015). The intangible dimension of urban heritage. In Reconnecting the city: The
historic urban landscape approach and the future of urban heritage (pp. 129–159). https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781118383940.ch5.
Karim, F. (2016). The modernist historic urban landscape of Islamabad, Pakistan. In Cultural land-
scapes of South Asia: Studies in heritage conservation and management (pp. 111–126). https://
doi.org/10.4324/9781315670041.
Labadi, S., & Logan, W. (2015). Urban heritage, development and sustainability. London:
Routledge.
Loren-Méndez, M., Mata-Olmo, R., Ruiz, R., & Pinzón-Ayala, D. (2016). An interdisciplinary
methodology for the characterization and visualization of the heritage of roadway corridors.
Geographical Review, 106(4), 489–515.
O’Donnell, P. M. (2015). The role of Regulatory Systems. In Reconnecting the city: The his-
toric urban landscape approach and the future of urban heritage (pp. 269–281). https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781118383940.ch11.
Ost, C. (2009). A guide for heritage economics in historic cities: Values, indicators, maps and poli-
cies. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute.
Pereira Roders, A. (2007). RE-ARCHITECTURE: Lifespan rehabilitation of built heritage.
Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology.
Pereira Roders. (2018). Urban heritage. In A. Orum (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell encyclopedia of
urban and regional studies. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell (accepted/in press).
Pereira Roders, A., & Van Oers, R. (2014). Wedding cultural heritage and sustainable development:
three years after. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development,
4(1), 2–15.
Porfyriou, H., & Sepe, M. (2017). Waterfront revisited: European ports in a historic and global
perspective. London: Routledge.
Rey-Pérez, J., & Pereira Roders, A. (2018). Historic Urban Landscape: A systematic review, six
years after the adoption of the HUL approach. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and
Sustainable Development (submitted/under review).
Rey-Pérez, J., & Siguencia Ávila, M. E. (2017). Historic Urban Landscape, an approach
for sustainable management in Cuenca (Ecuador). Journal of Cultural Heritage
Management and Sustainable Development, 7(3), 308–327. https://doi.org/10.1108/
JCHMSD-12-2016-0064.
Rey-Pérez, J., Astudillo, S., Siguencia Ávila, M. E., Forero, J., & Auquilla, S. (2017). La aplicación
de la Recomendación sobre el Paisaje Urbano Histórico (PUH) en Cuenca – Ecuador. Una
nueva aproximación al patrimonio cultural y natural/The application of the Recommendation
on Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) in Cuenca – ecuador. A new app. In: J. Rey Pérez (Ed.),
Cuenca: Universidad de Cuenca. Retrieved from http://historicurbanlandscape.com/index.
php?classid=5356
Rodwell, D. (2004). Asmara: Conservation and development in a historic city. Journal of
Architectural Conservation, 10(3), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/13556207.2004.10784925.
Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusions of innovations (6th ed.). New York: Free Press of Glencoe.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusions of innovation (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Rosetti, I. and Pereira Roders, A. (2018). Global Survey: Participatory practices in heritage man-
agement of world heritage cities: Unveiling the city representatives’ perceptions, eindhoven:
Eindhoven University of Technology (working paper).
Rypkema, D. (2015). Devising financial tools for urban conservation. In Reconnecting the city:
The historic urban landscape approach and the future of urban heritage (pp. 283–300). https://
doi.org/10.1002/9781118383940.ch12.
Shamsuddin, S., Sulaiman, A. B., & Amat, R. C. (2012). Urban landscape factors that influenced
the character of George Town, Penang Unesco World Heritage Site. Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 50, 238–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.031.
Siguencia Ávila, M. E. (2018). The Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) approach for the conserva-
tion of the Historic Centre of Cuenca – Ecuador. Leuven: KULeuven (unpublished doctoral
thesis).
Sil Shin, H., Chen, Y., Ho Lee, W., & Hyun Kim, D. (2015). Sustainability of historical landscape
to Gwanghalluwon Garden in Namwon City, Korea. Sustainability, 7, 8565–8586. https://doi.
org/10.3390/su7078565.
Siravo, F. (2015). Planning and managing historic urban landscapes. In Reconnecting the city: The
historic urban Landscape approach and the future of urban heritage (pp. 161–202). https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781118383940.ch6.
Skrede, J., & Holleland, H. (2018). Uses of heritage and beyond: heritage studies viewed through
the lens of critical discourse analysis and critical realism. Journal of Social Archaeology, 18(1),
77–96.
Smith, L. (2006). Uses of heritage. Oxford: Routledge.
Smith, J. (2015). Civic engagement tools for urban conservation. In Reconnecting the cty: The
historic urban landscape approach and the future of urban heritage (pp. 221–248). https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781118383940.ch9.
Sonkoly, G. (2017). Historic urban landscape. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sykes, O., & Ludwig, C. (2015). Defining and managing the historic urban landscape: Reflections
on the English experience and some stories from Liverpool. European Spatial Research and
Policy, 22(2), 9–35. https://doi.org/10.1515/esrp-2015-0023.
Tarrafa Silva, A., & Pereira Roders, A. (2012). Cultural heritage management and heritage (impact)
assessments. In Proceedings of the Joint CIB W070, W092 and TG International Conference:
Delivering Value to the Community (pp. 23–25).
Taylor, K. (2016). The Historic Urban Landscape paradigm and cities as cultural landscapes.
Challenging orthodoxy in urban conservation. Landscape Research, 41(4), 471–480. https://
doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2016.1156066.
Taylor, K., St. Clair, A., & Mitchell, N. J. (2015). Conserving cultural landscapes: Challenges and
new directions, Routledge studies in heritage. New York: Routledge.
Turner, M., & Singer, R. (2015). Researching and mapping the historic urban landscape. In
Reconnecting the city: The historic urban landscape approach and the future of urban heritage
(pp. 301–315). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118383940.ch9.
UN. (2015). Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/
RES/70/1). New York. (Available via United Nations, 2018). https://sustainabledevelopment.
un.org/post2015/transformingourworld/publication
UN. (2016). Global sustainable development report: 2016 edition. New York. https://sustain-
abledevelopment.un.org/globalsdreport/2016. Cited in 12 June 2018.
UN. (2017). The new urban agenda. United Nations, New York (Available via HABITAT3, 2017).
http://habitat3.org/wp-content/uploads/NUA-English.pdf. Cited in 12 June 2018.
UNESCO. (2005a). Technical cooperation for the enhancement, development and protection of the
Town of Luang Prabang, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Paris: UNESCO (Available via
UNESCO, 2018). https://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/29. Cited in 2 August 2018.
UNESCO. (2005b). VIENNA MEMORANDUM on “World Heritage and Contemporary
Architecture – Managing the Historic Urban Landscape.” India (Available via UNESCO,
2018). http://whc.unesco.org/document/6814
UNESCO. (2007a). International Conference on four modern cities: Brasilia – Chandigarh – Le
Havre – Tel Aviv (Available via UNESCO, 2018). https://whc.unesco.org/en/events/409/
UNESCO (2007b). International workshop on the “Management of Historic Urban Landscapes
of the XXth Century”, 18–21 December 2007, Chandigarh UT, India (Available via UNESCO,
2018). https://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/762/
UNESCO. (2011a). Recommendation on historic urban landscapes (Recommendation text). Paris:
UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2011b). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape (Background). Paris:
UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2011c). Preparatory assistance and technical support for the inscription, conservation
and management of the Île de Saint-Louis, Senegal. (Available via UNESCO, 2018). https://
whc.unesco.org/en/activities/33/
UNESCO. (2012a). The operational guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage
Convention. Paris. (Available via UNESCO, 2018). https://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide12-
en.pdf
UNESCO. (2012b). Report of the historic urban landscape workshops and field activities on the
Swahili Coast in East Africa 2011–2012. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2013). Summary of the reflection meeting on the implementation of the Recommendation
on the Historic Urban Landscape two years after its adoption (HUL+2). París. (Available via
UNESCO, 2018). http://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-47-11.pdf
UNESCO. (2015a). Technical cooperation for the enhancement, development and protection of the
Town of Luang Prabang, Lao People’s Democratic Republic. (Available via UNESCO, 2018).
https://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/29
UNESCO. (2015b). Reconstruction of Timbuktu mausoleums nears completion. (Available via
UNESCO, 2018). https://whc.unesco.org/en/news/1307/
UNESCO. (2016). Culture urban future: Global report on cultural for sustainable development.
Paris: UNESCO.
Van Overwalle, F. (2011). Social learning and connectionism. In T. R. Schachtman & S. S. Relly
(Eds.), Associative learning and conditioning theory: Human and non-human applications.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Veldpaus, L. (2015). Historic urban landscapes. Framing the integration of urban and heri-
tage planning in multilevel governance (Taalcentru). Eindhoven University of Technology,
Eindhoven, the Netherlands, Eindhoven.
Veldpaus, L., Pereira Roders, A., & Colenbrander, B. J. F. (2013). Urban heritage: Putting the past
into the future. The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, 4(1), 3–18 https://doi.org/10.117
9/1756750513Z.00000000022 Accessed 8 Mar 2018.
Verdini, G., Frassoldati, F., & Nolf, C. (2017). Reframing China’s heritage conservation discourse.
Learning by testing civic engagement tools in a historic rural village. International Journal of
Heritage Studies, 23(4), 317–334 Retrieved from 10.1080/13527258.2016.1269358.
WHITRAP. (2016). The HUL guidebook. Managing heritage in dynamic and constantly changing
urban environments. Retrieved from http://www.historicurbanlandscape.com/index.php?classi
d=5355andid=170andt=show
Widodo, J., Wong, Y. C., & Ismail, F. (2017). Digital historic urban landscape methodology for heritage
impact assessment of Singapore. PRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial
Information Sciences, 4(2w2), 327–334. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-annals-IV-2-W2-327-2017.
Part II
Case Studies on the Historic Urban
Landscape Approach
Chapter 3
Rebuilding and Reconciliation in Old
Aleppo: The Historic Urban Landscape
Perspectives
Ataa Alsalloum
Abstract In this chapter, the historical development of Old Aleppo is briefly pre-
sented, noting its designation values as a World Heritage Cultural Site in 1986. The
significance of Old Aleppo goes beyond such values. Therefore, the sociocultural,
historic, economic, identity and intangible values of Old Aleppo, along with its
authenticity, integrity, and outstanding universal values, are questioned as the driv-
ers for post-conflict reconciliation. Accordingly, the Historic Urban Landscape
approach, as a leading heritage policy document, is adopted and tested on a pilot
area inside the intra-muros city of Aleppo. The aim is to propose an agenda for an
inclusive reconciliation in Old Aleppo and maybe elsewhere in Syria.
Keywords Old Aleppo · Historic Urban Landscape · Reconstruction · Heritage

values · Heritage policy documents · Post-conflict reconciliation
3.1 Introduction
According to the last progress reports by the state party of the Syrian Arab Republic,
presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2017 and 2018, the six Syrian World
Heritage Cultural properties are damaged as a result of major escalations of armed
conflict in the country, started in 2011; but the levels are varied. Old Damascus is
fortunate to be the least harmed site, while the ancient city of Aleppo and Palmyra
sites have experienced large-scale destruction. The ancient city of Bosra, Crac Des
Chevaliers, and Qal’at Salah El-Din and the ancient villages in Northern Syria are
moderately damaged (Abdulkarim and Kutiefan 2017).
A. Alsalloum (*)
School of Architecture, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
e-mail: ataa2@liverpool.ac.uk; https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/architecture/staff/
ataa-alsalloum-2/

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_3
58 A. Alsalloum
For centuries, Aleppo was one of the most important cultural and commercial
centers of the Middle East (Antoun 1991). Today, Aleppo is considered as one of the
most devastated World Heritage cities. However, could Aleppo rise from the ashes
again and reclaim its cultural and economic importance? Indeed, the question con-
fronting the optimum ideology for a holistic reconciliation in Old Aleppo is how
could the tangible and intangible heritage (elements and values) drive post-conflict
reconciliation?
In order to propose answers for these questions and in view of the destruction of
Old Aleppo and the displacement of most of its community, the Historic Urban
Landscape (HUL) approach seems to be a perfect strategy. HUL embraces both
tangible elements, including cityscape, natural features, urban morphology, func-
tionality, authenticity, integrity, as well as intangible-associated values, counting
social, cultural, and identity (Bandarin and van Oers 2012). Also, the implementa-
tion of the HUL was recommended by the recent Committee meeting in Krakow
2017 for the particular case of Old Aleppo. Therefore, the HUL is adopted as a key
tool to suggest an inclusive reconstruction. Moreover, the term reconciliation is uti-
lized here as it is widely agreed that “postwar reconciliation” might be physical,
whether by reconstructing a structure to its previous form, preserving or commemo-
rating its ruins, or introducing new structures; additionally, it may be intangible by
restoring the shared “memories and identities” that have been displaced (Morel
2013; Kalman 2017). Reconciliation, as a term, is also accentuated by a few recent
heritage policy documents, such as the UNESCO Hangzhou Declaration of 2013.
Accordingly and in the light of the huge destruction of Old Aleppo, reconciliation,
in all its shapes, is urgently needed.
This chapter, hence, begins with a historical development brief of Old Aleppo
addressing its designation as a World Heritage Site (WHS) in 1986. The devastating
destruction, started in 2011, is then concisely underlined. Understanding Old
Aleppo as a Historic Urban Landscape site is presented through an interpretation of
a number of the old city’s key values. The definitions of these values are based on
extractions from leading heritage policy documents, presented in Table 3.3. A holis-
tic reconciliation is then concluded after the examination of possible integration of
the Historic Urban Landscape strategy in selected historical zones in Old Aleppo.
Accordingly, the findings proposed possible answers to the questions raised in this
chapter.
3.2 Aleppo World Heritage Site: A Brief History
Aleppo is situated in Northern Syria, about 100 kilometers east of the Mediterranean

Coast and around 50 kilometers from the Turkish border in the north. It was the
largest city in Syria in terms of population (GTZ 2008). Some historians claim that
3 Rebuilding and Reconciliation in Old Aleppo: The Historic Urban Landscape… 59
Aleppo is one of the oldest continuously occupied cities in the world, with 7000 years
of known settlement history (Khirfan 2014). Aleppo exhibits evidence of the civili-
zations that inhabited it through multilayers of architectural heritage and intangible
traditions, knowledge, and skills. Many trade routes passed through Aleppo includ-
ing the famous Silk Road (Burns 2016).
The urban fabric of Old Aleppo is home to various sixteenth- and seventeenth-
century buildings including, madrasas, khans, palaces, caravanserais, hammams,
souks, diverse places of worship (synagogues, churches, and mosques), and residen-
tial buildings, which encircle the central Citadel and twelfth-century Great Mosque
(Fischer and Gangler 2012). This outstanding context is merged in an authentic way
with modernity. Before 2011, the old city was mostly safeguarded, but large demoli-
tions of historical monuments have been undertaken in favor of traffic networks
and/or new developments (GTZ 2001). In order to suggest reconciliation for Old
Aleppo, it is essential to understand how the historic city has evolved. Table 3.1
provides a chronological summary of the key management plans and relative events,
starting with the first urban plan of Old Aleppo drawn in 1766.
From Table 3.1, it is clear that destruction is not a new issue in Aleppo, but previ-
ously it has not been so devastating. Thus, the surviving collection of major build-
ings, the coherence urban fabric, and the sociocultural solidity of communities have
previously contributed to the continuity of the city. Moreover, as early as 1979, the
voices of communities and interested architects were heard and resulted in safe-
guarding the city at the national level and eventually nominating the ancient city of
Aleppo as a World Heritage Site (Soufan 2015). Thus, these could participate once
again in post-conflict mitigation. Furthermore, in order to facilitate the management
of the heritage site, the city was divided into districts according to historical criteria
in 1974 and then in relation to the use and function indicators in 2005. Accordingly,
and in light of this historical brief, tangible and intangible characteristics and values
are collectively investigated in the following study according to the perspective of
the HUL. The consideration of the districts’ division established in the management
plan of 2005 is adopted in this chapter where a pilot case study was selected.
3.3 World Heritage Designation Values
The current Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of Old Aleppo,

Criteria III and IV, was adopted by the UNESCO World Heritage Committee at their
10th session in November 1986. It was subsequently updated to add sections on
authenticity and integrity. In order to understand the rich outstanding attributes of
Old Aleppo, Table 3.2 was produced in line with the definition of OUV indicated in
the Operation Guidelines of 2016 (UNESCO 2016a) and in compliance with the
UNESCO World Heritage inscription criteria of the ancient city of Aleppo.
The Statement of OUV and the attributes are key indicators for effective future
site management of Old Aleppo. These, therefore, confirm what it is that makes the
city special in World Heritage terms and where the focus of World Heritage
60 A. Alsalloum
Table 3.1 Historical development and management plans: Old Aleppoa

Date Event Consequences
1766 Explorer Carsten Niebuhr The first known map was produced
1818 Ottoman-French mandate First topographical plan
1925 French forces reaction against the Destructions of several historical monuments
Syrian revolt valued by the communities
1930 Master plan of Aleppo by Rene Did not understand heritage as urban-social
Danger and Michel Écochard structure; destructions of historic zones
1934 General survey plan for Aleppo Scales 1/5000–1/2000, still in use to date
1954 Master plan of Aleppo by André Destructions of 10% of historical monuments;
Gutton creation of two ring roads
1974 Master plan by C. Benchoya and Divided the city into districts; avoided streets
Aleppo municipality cutting historical areas
1978 Demolition of Bab al-Faraj district Tall new buildings and widened roads; objected
at the northwestern corner by national and international communities
1979 National designation of the old city Prevention of further destructions
1986 Inscription on the World Heritage International protection
List; Criteria (iii) (iv)
1992 Project for the rehabilitation of Old Management plan for 25 years; suggested
Aleppo touristic areas; relocating traditional workshops
1999 The Directorate of the Old City was Guidance for public participation and
established infrastructure management
2005 Management plan of Aleppo; Management for each zone recognizing national
Sustainable Urban Development and international policy
2013 Inscription on the List of World Endangered World Heritage Site
Heritage in Danger
2016 Report by United Nations Institute 35,722 sites in Aleppo were affected
for Training and Research
Feb. A state of conservation report by Detailed statements of the destructions and
2017 the state party measures taken
July 41 session of the World Heritage Recommended implementation of several actions
2017 Committee including HUL approach
This table is based on many resources including Burns (2016), Khirfan (2014), and Soufan (2015)
a
anagement should be. Moreover, the key purpose for identifying attributes is to
m
protect, manage, and monitor these attributes which are needed when assessing
future reconstructions, restorations, or interventions. For deeper understanding of
the context of the old city, it is also important to highlight some challenges the city
was facing before 2011, such as the lack of integrated conservation, restoration,
repair, and/or maintenance of building fabric; absence of planning rules for heights
and density of new developments in or adjacent the World Heritage Site; and defi-
ciency of policies for the protection of uncovered archaeological remains
(Abdulkarim and Kutiefan 2017). The current challenges facing post-conflict recon-
ciliation in Old Aleppo are enormous, including the returning of inhabitants,
destruction of around 80% of the city’s infrastructure, a shortage of skilled heritage
experts, and various levels of damage to all districts (UNESCO 2017a).
Table 3.2 World Heritage designation values of Old Aleppo (UNESCO designation criteria and
values’ interpretation by authora)
Criterion (iii) Associated values/aspects
Aleppo reflects rich and diverse cultures of its successive Intangible; cultural and
occupants social
Many periods of history have left their influence in the Form and design; materials
architectural fabric of the city and substance
Remains of Hittite, Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine, and Ayyubid Form and design; settings;
structures and elements are incorporated in the Citadel materials and substance
Diverse mixture of buildings including the Umayyad Great Form and design; settings
Mosque; other mosques, madrasas, souks, and khans represent an materials and substance and
exceptional reflection of social, cultural, and economic aspects intangible values
Criterion (iv)
Outstanding example of an Ayyubid twelfth-century city with its Form and design; settings
military fortifications and use and function
Encircling ditch and defensive wall above a great glacis, and the Form and design and settings
gateway comprise an ensemble of military Arab architecture
Works of the thirteenth–fourteenth centuries; the great towers Form and design; settings
and the stone entry bridge reinforce the architectural quality and materials and substance
Numerous mosques surrounding the Citadel including the Settings
Madrasah al Firdows, constructed 1235
Authenticity and integrity
The boundary follows the line of the walls of the old city and Settings
three extra-muros areas: north, northeast, and east suburbs
Historic and traditional handicraft and commercial activities Traditions and techniques;
sustaining the city’s traditional urban life. skills and intangible values
a
The interpretation of values is based on definitions presented in heritage documents, as explained
later and on several studies, for example, Mason (2002), Punekar (2006), Gibson and Pendlebury
(2009), and Jokilehto (2010)
3.4 Destruction of Aleppo
A full detailed report regarding the destruction of Old Aleppo was prepared in 2014
by UNITAR’s Operational Satellite Applications Programme (UNOSAT), and an
updated declaration was followed up in 2016 stating that the damage in Aleppo was
increased by 20%. The reports define four levels of destruction to the historic and
heritage sites of Syria (UNITAR 2014; 2016). The recent report indicates that
around 3,232 structures are damaged in the country; it claims that 16% of the prop-
erties in Old Aleppo are destroyed such as the old souks; 18% are severely dam-
aged, the Umayyad Mosque is an example; 26% are moderately demolished, such
as the Citadel; and possible damages have occurred to 40% of the properties.
The local authorities in Syria reclaimed the old city of Aleppo and a large part of
the city’s governance in 2016. Accordingly, a wide range of measures has been
undertaken, since then, and the first steps of reconciliation have been established.
The Directorate-General of Antiquities and Museums (DGAM) has launched an
assessment of the damages through photographic documentation using advanced
62 A. Alsalloum
technology and 3D photogrammetry. The reconstruction works have been operated

in the Umayyad Mosque as a sociocultural symbolic structure in Aleppo. This strat-
egy of starting post-conflict recovery process by rebuilding iconic monuments,
which have cultural, social, identity, and religious values to the Syrians, has been
recently implemented in a number of Syrian cities by the local authorities. Another
example can be found in Homs city, where two important religious buildings are
reconstructed, St Mary’s Church of the Holy Belt and Khalid ibn al-Walid Mosque.
This step encouraged a large part of the local communities in Homs to go back and
rebuild their homes (Alsalloum and Jackson 2017).
In Aleppo, additional steps have commenced, for example, official committees
are nominated to supervise the rehabilitation process. Activities for raising aware-
ness among local communities in relation to safeguarding their heritage in order to
prevent harmful interventions have also been in process. Moreover, cleaning and
clearing the ruins and recycling building materials have started in several safe areas
(UNESCO 2017a).
It is difficult to explain the details of the devastating damages that occurred in the
old city in this chapter; however, an ample study of the central zone including the
Citadel and the souks is presented later as a pilot case study. Before going into that,
it is important to look at heritage policy documents at the national and international
levels and understand Old Aleppo as a Historic Urban Landscape site.
3.5 Heritage Policy Documents
The main governmental body responsible for heritage management and interna-
tional relations in Syria is the Ministry of Culture. Among its several duties, it
supervises the works of the DGAM. The key local regulations guiding the manage-
ment of cultural heritage properties in Syria are based on two particular standards:
the 1963 Antiquities Law No. 222, amended in 1999 and again in 2012, and the 2006
Law No. 38. Although the new document, issued in 2012, provides instructions and
definitions of various heritage properties’ architectural details, it advises to restore
the historic buildings to their former state and it overlooks other recovery options. It
also fails to observe the heritage as an urban form (Brodie 2015; Lostal 2017).
Syria, as a state party of UNESCO, approved the 1972 UNESCO Convention
Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage and its rela-
tive Operational Guidelines (OGs), updated regularly. In addition to recognizing
other key documents such as the Hague Convention with its two protocols
1954/1999, accordingly, a wide range of activities including awareness raising,
workshops, training courses, exhibitions, and other attempts have been in progress
for safeguarding the heritage of Syria by international and national bodies (Perini
and Cunliffe 2015).
Recently, among the main outcomes of the decisions adopted at the 41st session
of the World Heritage Committee (WHC) in July 2017, held in Krakow, was the
decision to urge the state party of Syria “to allow sufficient time for the development
of integrated strategic plans for the rehabilitation and revitalization of the property
in its broader urban context, in line with the Recommendation on the Historic Urban
Landscape and in this regard, underlines the need for UNESCO to ensure its coor-
dinating role” (UNESCO 2017a:60). Moreover, the committee underlined the
importance of following the Table of Actions for the Recovery of the Ancient City of
Aleppo (UNESCO and DGAM 2017) which was agreed upon in March 2017, in a
meeting hosted by UNESCO, and was held in Beirut, Lebanon. Also, one of the key
outcomes was the establishment of a specific UNESCO unit in Aleppo to assist and
consult the ongoing safeguarding process.
Since its promulgation by the UNESCO in 2011, HUL has been a key guide to
the safeguarding process of World Heritage Sites. The HUL perceives the complex-
ity of the urban environment as a dynamic system of cultural and natural values and
aspects. It recognizes historic cities as multiple active layers “deposited over time”
by their accommodated communities in various settings (Bandarin and van Oers
2012). The HUL, as a tool, values previous and contemporary communities’ engage-
ment with the place. It is true that post-conflict situations need careful reconstruc-
tion and mitigation approaches, but the fact of changing values and communities,
though slow, is an inevitable issue in the context of historic and heritage cities. A
confirming statement by Taylor is that “in the urban landscape, it is critical that we
are able to manage change so that historic cities, as they change in response to
changing values, reflect their human history but do not become merely designated
historic zones with a tight boundary around them devoid of a sense of lived-in
places” (Taylor 2016:472).
HUL does not stand alone, “it is an additional tool to integrate policies and prac-
tices of the conservation of the built environment into the wider goals of urban
development in respect of the inherited values and traditions of different cultural
contexts” (UNESCO 2017b). Indeed, HUL opens up a context for a much-needed
dialogue for the management of cultural heritage properties in general and in the
case of post-conflict reconciliation in particular. This perception was subsequently
followed by later standard-setting documents. For example, the recently promul-
gated ICOMOS Guidance on Post-Trauma Recovery of 2017 aims “to help relevant
stakeholders affected by traumatic heritage destruction to assess damage to the
explicit or implicit attributes supporting Outstanding Universal Values (OUV)”
(ICOMOS 2017, 6). It echoes the HUL by accentuating the importance of intangi-
ble heritage values in relation to safeguarding OUV. ICOMOS Guidance 2017, also,
shifts the position of heritage documents from prohibiting the reconstruction in
heritage zones to allowing it. However, the document focuses on regaining OUV
even through identifying new attributes “documentation and recording of surviving
and lost tangible and intangible attributes of OUV, establishing their post-trauma
status and identifying potential new attributes that support OUV.” ICOMOS 2017
could be considered as an opportunity for the damaged properties to regain the WH
status in Old Aleppo, for instance, “the interpretation or revision of OUV may be a
key to generate a recovery or reconstruction vision for a property” (ICOMOS
2017:8). In the same vein, the UNESCO Document for the Integration of a
Sustainable Development Perspective of 2015 encourages promoting intangible
64 A. Alsalloum
heritage traditions and practice in the post-conflict recovery process, and it calls for
sociocultural equalities. It provides general guidance for the state parties to imple-
ment sustainable development criteria along with the UNESCO Convention of 1972
and other leading documents, in peace and conflict times. The list of heritage policy
documents is long and extensive; the HUL is adopted in this chapter keeping in
mind a number of other related heritage policy documents which were identified in
the HUL’s text, in addition to the recent relevant standard-setting documents. These
doctrines were the sources of collective definitions of values extracted from their
texts. The definitions are presented in Table 3.3 and cited, respectively.
3.6 Old Aleppo as a Historic Urban Landscape Site
The Historic Urban Landscape approach is “based on the recognition and identifica-
tion of a layering and interconnection of natural and cultural, tangible and intangi-
ble, international and local values present in any city. According to the HUL
approach, these values should be taken as a point of departure in the overall man-
agement and development of the city” (UNESCO 2016b). In line with this definition
and with respect to the historical brief presented earlier, Old Aleppo is an exem-
plar Historic Urban Landscape Site with its rich and coherent sociocultural context.
Its society has diverse backgrounds including Jewish, Christians, and Muslims. It
exhibits evidence of structures built by the communities that inhabited it through
various ancient and current layers of history. Therefore, the total tangible and intan-
gible values of Aleppo should be clearly defined and integrated with any reconcili-
ation process, including reconstruction, rehabilitation, and/or intervention. Involving
as much as possible the stakeholders, particularly local communities and private
actors, in the urban development process, is also vital. Additionally, building capac-
ity on the ground at the local level is explicitly urged by the recommendation of
Table of Actions 2017 (UNESCO and DGAM 2017). Therefore, understanding the
heritage context of Old Aleppo before 2011 is vital in order to be able to suggest
possible integration in line with the HUL approach, which is the best practical solu-
tion, hitherto, for an inclusive reconciliation in Old Aleppo.
3.6.1 Old Aleppo and the Values of Heritage
The identification of the broad values of Old Aleppo is a complicated task; there-
fore, in order to develop legal and logistic understanding of the heritage combina-
tion of the old city, the definitions stated in the HUL document and other heritage
policy guidance are considered; see Table 3.3. Accordingly, the following sections
address the reflections of heritage values within the heritage context of Old Aleppo
as a Historic Urban Landscape site.
Table 3.3 Definitions of heritage values according to heritage policy documents

Documents’
Values Definitions references
Outstanding Means cultural and/or natural significance, which is as ICOMOS (2011,
Universal exceptional as to transcend national boundaries and to be 2017) and
Value (OUV) of common importance for present and future generations UNESCO (2016a)
of all humanity
Threats that have the potential to impact adversely on the
appearance, skyline, key views, and other different
attributes that contribute to OUV. It includes all aspects of
authenticity as well as beliefs, stories, festivals, and rituals
Authenticity Authenticity judgments may be linked to form and design, ICOMOS (1994,
materials and substance, use and function, traditions and 1996), ICCROM
techniques, location and setting, spirit and feeling, and and UNESCO
other internal and external factors. Proofs of authenticity (2000), and
could be indicated in reflection of the true value, integrity, UNESCO (2016a)
context, identity, use and function, physical fabric, sense
of place and understanding of the history and significance
of a heritage setting over time
Integrity Integrity is evidenced by the survival of physical ICOMOS (2003)
characteristics that existed over time. It is relevant to the and UNESCO
definition of archaeological sites, materials, workmanship, (2016a)
setting, and relationship to the setting
Cultural Cultural value can be understood through both tangible UNESCO (1992,
and intangible heritage features including historical, 2005), and
archaeological, architectural, fabric and material, ICOMOS (2013)
technological, aesthetic, scientific, spiritual, religious,
social, traditional, political, identity, relative artistic or
technical, rarity values, and aspects associated with human
activities
Social Social value generates a concern for safeguarding heritage UNESCO (2005)
properties; it is related to traditional social activities, and ICOMOS
compatible present-day use, contemporary social (2013)
interaction, and social and cultural identity
Historic Historic value includes the knowledge of what has ICOMOS (2003,
occurred in the past. It also encompasses the history of 2013)
aesthetics, science, and society. A place may have historic
value because it has influenced, or has been influenced by,
a historic figure, event, phase, or activity
Identity Identity is reflected in the continuous evolution of cultural ICOMOS (1996),
heritage properties, in their historical character, in both Krakow (2000),
present and past values, and in their material fabric. It can and UNESCO
also include age, tradition, continuity, memorial, (2005)
legendary, wonder, sentiment, spiritual, religious,
symbolic, political, patriotic, and nationalistic. In terms of
architectural features, townscapes, roofscapes, main visual
axes, and building plots.
Cultural identity might include languages, societal
structures, economic means, and spiritual beliefs
(continued)
66 A. Alsalloum
Documents’
Values Definitions references
Aesthetic Aesthetic includes aspects of sensory perception of the ICOMOS (1966,
form, scale, color, texture and material of the fabric, the 2013)
smells and sounds associated with the place, and its use
The beauty of an urban site includes the sights of the town
itself, as well as of its squares, streets, and districts
Intangible Intangible values are memory, beliefs, traditional ICOMOS (2008)
knowledge, and attachment to a place
Spiritual The spirit of a place is defined as the tangible (buildings, ICOMOS (1996,
sites, landscapes, routes, objects, settlement patterns, land 2008)
use practices) and the intangible elements (memories,
narratives, religious beliefs, written documents, rituals,
festivals, traditional knowledge, values, textures, colors)
Economic Economic value may be understood as a value generated UNESCO (2005,
by the heritage resource or by a conservation action 2015)
Economic values are use (market) values and nonuse
values
3.6.1.1 Outstanding Universal Value
According to the designation indicators stated in Table 3.2 and in view of the
destruction, Old Aleppo prevails as a home to the remaining monuments, such as
the Citadel and Great Mosque. The historical layers are also still recognizable,
though the armed conflict has left its mark as well. Interestingly, recent documents,
namely, the ICOMOS Guidance of 2017, combined exceptional intangible heritage
traditions and skills, comprising “beliefs, stories, festivals, and rituals,” with tangi-
ble predefined ones (Table 3.3). This would be an opportunity for Old Aleppo to
redefine its OUV. Therefore, the OUV of Old Aleppo has partially survived in its
tangible forms, and its intangible dimensions would reform the old city reconcilia-
tion. Key intangible heritage elements of Old Aleppo are presented in the following
sections. Furthermore, moveable heritage is not included under the World Heritage
inscription at the moment; nevertheless, the saved museums and archive collections
are essential in providing an interpretation as to how previous civilizations lived in
Aleppo; these would also subsidize its rich OUV.
3.6.1.2 Authenticity and Integrity Values
Old Aleppo is characterized by a distinct urban character that is clearly manifested

through the use of stones which are brought from different quarries around the city.
These stones would be the basic materials for rebuilding the city and partially
regaining its tangible authenticity and integrity. Despite the scale of the destruc-
tions, there are several surviving structures and a large body of information about
the origins and previous alterations, townscape and landscape, that would support
the authenticity of Old Aleppo. These might be based on previous studies; see (GTZ
2001, 2008; Gonnella 2008), for example. Moreover, what has survived from the
key monuments, such as the Citadel and the Great Mosque, would recontribute to
the authenticity and integrity significance.
Furthermore, in line with the definitions in Table 3.3, the authenticity value is
linked to “spiritual believes and sense of place.” Old Aleppo was an exemplar icon
of Arabic city as “a living and inhabited organism” (GTZ 2001). Traditional habits,
techniques, and ways of life were still being applied through thousands of years.
One of these might be the coexistence of religious places and practices in the old
city, which were well respected and shared in a unique way. Thus, the implication
of authenticity as a collective attribute including other values, which are certainly
still accommodated in Old Aleppo and valued by its communities, would enhance
the reconciliation practice if Aleppo is understood as a HUL site.
3.6.1.3 Cultural and Social Values
The cultural values of heritage are defined by heritage policy documents as collec-
tive attributes including all aspects of outstanding aspects of tangible and intangible
elements (Table 3.3). Thus, these along with authenticity would be considered
together with the total values when visualizing Old Aleppo as a HUL site. Aleppo
has a unique social history and significant social traditions and knowledge, which
led to building independent “cell-like quarters and districts” (GTZ 2010). Each
“city quarter” has a distinct role and value that contributed to building the sociocul-
tural identity of Old Aleppo as a diverse city with unique homogeneous topology.
For example, Al Khalidiya district was known as the most-visited “food center” of
the city, and the Christian quarter of Al Azizieh was popular for its cafeterias (GTZ
2010). Therefore, from a HUL perspective, if these “city quarters” would be recalled
in the postwar reconciliation process in a way that satisfies the unique ethnic, social
character of each neighborhood and at the same time remains as a part of the collec-
tive consistent sociocultural identity, the communities would be encouraged to
return, and the sociocultural identity of Old Aleppo would be moderately
reconciliated.
Moreover, Aleppo used to have the largest population in the country with rich
associations with prominent people from all periods. Famous traders, politicians,
aristocrats, artists, writers, and musicians were among the many prestigious visitors
and residents (Wikipedia 2018). The city played a long-term role as a national and
international place for large-scale social interaction and the shaping of social values
(Antoun 1991). This was reinforced by its exclusive collection of buildings, madra-
sas, hammams, khans and old bazaars, and traditional hotels and restaurants, which
were merged with public spaces for gathering and socializing. Therefore, if the
functions of these buildings would be retained in postwar reconciliation, Old Aleppo
would rise from the ashes through, inter alia, its intrinsic sociocultural values and
relative structures.
68 A. Alsalloum
3.6.1.4 Intangible Heritage and Values
What makes Aleppo so special is its remarkable intangible collection of particular

type of traditional music, songs, and dances. The intangible traditions and knowl-
edge contributed to Aleppo’s significance since its creation, in addition to being a
city with high religious values (GTZ 2010). For example, Al-Samah dance, a Sufi
ecstatic dance specially performed in Aleppo, used to be performed at religious-
related buildings accompanied by a few traditional instruments such as Oud and
Tablah (Ibn-Dhurayl 1996). This dance is associated with special songs that might
be performed at secular, public, or religious events at particular places such as
madrasas and mosques (MEDLIHER 2010). These, along with many other prac-
tices, are identified as intangible heritage traditions by the state party of Syria
(DGAM 2014).
Aleppo is also famous for its particular types of crafts, in terms of design and
material. Textile products including rugs, silk fabrics, dyed and printed fabrics, and
embroidered textiles used to be traditionally manufactured in Aleppo and were very
popular at national and international levels (Khirfan 2014). Additionally, two impor-
tant national annual festivals used to be performed in the old city, Syrian Song
Festival and Cotton Festival. These could be encouraged to be held again as a sym-
bolic act of recovery. Accordingly, planning for the recovery of Old Aleppo through
building on its previous/continuous intangible values, traditions, and knowledge
integrated with the city as an inclusive HUL site would be one of the leading ways
for reconciliation.
3.6.1.5 Historic and Identity Values
The archaeological excavation provides evidence that Aleppo has been an inhabited
city since at least the Bronze Age (Burns 2016). The conflict in Syria is an inevitable
part of the “recent” history, including positive and negative memories and feelings.
The key historical events occurred in Aleppo are important as symbols and lessons
to come for future generation. Thus, from this study’s point of view, it would be
wise to consider that a new, though devastating, historical layer has been added to
Aleppo.
Corresponding to the long-standing age of Old Aleppo and bearing in mind the
definitions extracted and presented in Table 3.3, Old Aleppo generates collective
identities, including personal and common identities through tangible and intangi-
ble elements. Several cultural activities and practices are identified, nationally and
internationally, as being generated from Aleppo, such as the dances, music (exam-
ples are disclosed above), and particular types of cuisines (DGAM 2014). Hence,
maintaining tangible, intangible, and collective identities of Aleppo in order to
achieve an inclusive “urban identity’ is possible.
3.6.1.6 Economic Values
Located on the famous trade Silk Road, as well as being home to various essential
materials for food industry and other traditional objects, Aleppo used to be the
driver of trading and economic growth in Syria. A report in 2008 stated that “esti-
mates indicate that the City of Aleppo contains 40% of Syrian industry and textile
industry in particular, which constitutes 2/3 of textile industry in Syria. Other indus-
tries in the City of Aleppo include gold, silver, soap, leatherwork, and food process-
ing (dried fruits and nuts)” (GTZ 2008). Most of these were related to trading
businesses inherited through generations among several families in Aleppo and
were operated in the unique traditional bazaars and caravansaries (khans). These
used to mark the commercial and economic roles of the city throughout its history.
Also, cultural tourism used to be one of the major economic sources in the city since
1986 when the ancient city of Aleppo was designated as a WHS. These along with
several world-class tourist attractions around the city, such as the Dead Cities and
St. Simon Citadel, manifested an established tourism infrastructure (GTZ 2008). As
a result, regenerating the economic values of the heritage of the Old City through
the reconstruction of old souks, besides revitalizing traditional small workshops,
would be a key economic rebirth of the city and its local handicrafts. This would
contribute to both individual and collective economic reform of the communities, in
addition to regaining civic pride, if integrated properly with the HUL strategies.
3.7 A
pplying the Recommendation on Historic Urban
Landscape: Post-conflict Reconciliation
In order to test the conceptual investigation presented in previous sections of this

chapter, a pilot case study is selected. As concluded by the brief history explored at
the beginning of this chapter, the Ancient City of Aleppo grew in circles with the
Citadel at its center, and the districts were basically defined by their historic impor-
tance, use, and functions. According to the management plan for Aleppo developed
in 2005, seven strategic areas were identified (Fig. 3.1).
The reconstruction works have already started in the Citadel and Great Mosque.
Therefore, zone X, including the Citadel, souks, and other monuments, is selected.
The three sections of zone X are investigated as part of the old city’s Historic Urban
Landscape site before 2011. The methodology is based on understanding the
strength, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) of these areas in light of
previous values of the Old City (as discussed above) and current destructions,
reported by (UNITAR 2014; 2016). Consequently, a possible strategy for reconcili-
ation is suggested.
70 A. Alsalloum
Fig. 3.1 The World Heritage Site of Aleppo as divided into zones by the 2005 development plan
(GTZ 2008)
3.7.1 Zone X1
This area forms the direct enclosure of the Citadel; it used to be devoted to tourism
activities with various traditional cafes and restaurants facing the main entrance of
the Citadel. These are neighbored by the traditional handicrafts bazaar as part of
Khan Al-shuna and by a small residential area to the northeast of the Citadel. This
zone embraces cultural, social, and historical values in respect to its use and func-
tion activities and the historical layers embodied in it. It is also home to significant
monuments including mosques, madrasas, khans, and hammams. The economic
value of this zone comes from its touristic attractions and activities.
According to the recent report by the DGAM 2017, moderate- to huge-scale
destructions are identified. For example, al-Sultaniyeh Mosque was built around
800 years ago during the Ayyubid era. It is a distinctive mosque and modest in scale.
Besides its historical, cultural, and religious values, this mosque is an example of
Fig. 3.2 al-Sultaniyeh Mosque Before (right). (Source: Daniel Demeter). After (left). (Source:
DGAM)
Arabic Islamic architectural structures with its open courtyard, prayer hall, a single
dome, and an impressive stonework, particularly the design of its Mehrab. The
mosque was also part of a religious school known as al-Madrasa al-Zahariyeh.
Unfortunately, the prayer hall and tomb were destroyed in 2014 (Fig. 3.2).
The question of architectural intervention in a single structure is a debated issue.
But, partial reconstruction might be a solution, as advocated in Guidance on Post
Trauma Recovery (ICOMOS 2017). Contemporary architecture intervention, how-
ever, could be a solution for rebuilding al-Madrasa al-Zahariyeh, which would be
employed as a handicraft workshop for small traditional objects, laurel soap, and
copper crafts in order to open work opportunities for local skilled workers and to
reinforce the economic value.
3.7.2 Zone X2
This area is home to the Great Umayyad Mosque and other mosques, Shebani
Church, main bazaars, khans, hammams, madrasas, and the historic library. Thus,
besides its outstanding mixed urban fabric, this area includes a substantial combina-
tion of functions. The main souks were considered exceptional structures in terms
of their traditional goods and architectural style (Soufan 2015). Unfortunately, these
have been largely damaged. The level of destructions in the Great Mosque is mainly
in the minaret and general structure, wooden pulpit, and partial collapse of the east-
ern wall (Fig. 3.3).
The reconciliation of this area has already been initiated by local authorities. The
reconstruction process was started by rebuilding the damaged parts of the Great
Umayyad Mosque in view that it is a religious symbolic structure that would rein-
force civic pride, as well as generating a sign of the end of the conflict. The values
of this zone are derived from the outstanding significant of the Great Mosque and
72 A. Alsalloum
Fig. 3.3 Great Mosque Before (right). (Source: Daniel Demeter). After (left). (Source: DGAM)
the bazaars, in addition to the sociocultural and economical values generated from
the souks, khans, and other traditional commercial structures. Therefore, despite the
huge destruction in the bazaars, these should be rebuilt by introducing contempo-
rary structures that respect the previous cohesion of the urban fabric, as well as by
utilizing local building materials in the reconstruction process. This area is full of
memories and recollections thought thousands of years; rebuilding the souks and
safeguarding their continuity of functions would encourage the people to come back
to the city and would also create work opportunities. Additionally, small traditional
workshops would be encouraged to re-operate again by local skilled workers.
In line with this analysis of zone X (1 and 2), Table 3.4 summarizes the current
situation and possible opportunities for recovery in both zones through the identifi-
cation of the strengths of the site, its previous and current weaknesses, possible
opportunities, and current threats. These are based on the arguments demonstrated
earlier in this chapter.
3.7.3 Zone X3
The Citadel occupies the central of this zone, in addition to other governmental and
administrative buildings. The Citadel is an exceptional example of the twelfth-
century military Arab architecture, as well as it is an outstanding landmark of
Aleppo and a crucial symbol of civic pride and identity. The destructions in the
Citadel are at a moderate scale (Fig. 3.4). In 2003, the Aga Khan Trust for Culture
Table 3.4 SWOT analysis for zones X1 and X2 in Old Aleppo
Zone X1 SWOT analysis
Strengths (S) Weaknesses (S) Opportunities (O) Threats (T)
Location at the Previous Reconstruction by Lack of funding
center of the city inadequate recycling old building
and adjacent the infrastructure materials in the site
Citadel
Multi-use functions Total values to lead the Political conflict that may
identified by the reconstruction of affect sociocultural
variety of buildings mitigation
monuments
Cultural, social, Previous Architectural Development plans that
historical, unorganized interventions in a don’t understand the
economic, and touristic activities positive memorable way intangible and tangible,
tourism values as a new layer of history diversity, and values
Authenticity, Current Reconstructions based on Misunderstanding of the
integrity, and OUV moderate- to heritage policy guidance collective values of the city
(designation huge-scale and the HUL and each zone
criteria) destructions
Encourage the local
skilled workers to return
to the city by job
opportunities
Fig. 3.4 The Citadel Before (right). (Source: Daniel Demeter). After (left). (Source: DGAM)
(AKTC) proposed a regeneration project for zone X3 in collaboration with DGAM
and GTZ, titled “Citadel Perimeter” (Jodidio 2011). One of the main objectives of
this project was “to open new cultural development opportunities through the reuse
of existing historic buildings and to steer tourist and commercial functions into a
direction that is beneficial to the particular areas involved and the old city in gen-
eral.” The archival study and the documentations by this project could be used as a
basis for a rehabilitation proposal.
74 A. Alsalloum
Accordingly, the reconciliation process would be based on the total tangible and
intangible values of Aleppo, and the works might be implemented through several
phases starting with the reconstruction of the Citadel and the Great Mosque, inter-
vention and partial reconstruction in the main historical monuments, and ending up
by the rehabilitation of the residential areas. All these should be integrated with a
full participation of stakeholders including local communities.
3.8 Conclusions
In 2011, the Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) was offi-
cially adopted by UNESCO. It has been widely cited as the main guidance for
managing urban heritage areas since then. Interestingly, the armed conflict in Syria
began the same year, which has resulted in huge destruction, among other devastat-
ing humanitarian losses. Identifying potential, and officially accepted, solutions for
a reconciliation process in Old Aleppo has been the intent of this present chapter.
Considering the HUL as a key strategy for reconciliation, the values/aspects of
Old Aleppo were investigated through international heritage policy documents and
consequently provided an answer to the questions raised earlier. Indeed, Old Aleppo
is able to rise from the ashes again and regain its sociocultural and economic impor-
tance through its deep-rooted collective heritage and associated values. However, a
practical governance reform in heritage policies is needed, which should be based
on a number of international standard-setting documents, such as the
Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape of 2011 (UNESCO 2011), the
UNESCO Operational Guidelines of 2016 (UNESCO 2016a), the ICOMOS
Guidance on Post Trauma Recovery of 2017 (ICOMOS 2017), and the Actions for
the Recovery of 2017 (UNESCO and DGAM 2017). Additionally, understanding
the total heritage values of Old Aleppo, as well as addressing the particular signifi-
cance of each zone and consequence destructions, is vital in order to advance a
practical decision for sustainable peace.
The investigation of Old Aleppo values demonstrates that despite the huge dam-
age to the physical structures, there is an ample chance to redefine the authenticity,
integrity, and OUV based on the remaining structures, past and current historical
layers; consequently, appropriate reconstruction and/or intervention actions would
be achieved. These are reinforced with its sociocultural and economic diversity, col-
lective identity, and knowledge and traditions. Therefore, Old Aleppo could regain
its World Heritage status.
Moreover, Old Aleppo as a Historic Urban Landscape has strong opportunities
for recovery and mitigation. This was proved when implementing the conceptual
understanding of the city on the central zone, including a rich mix of monuments
such as the Citadel, Great Mosque, khans, souks, churches, and hammams. The
strengths of this area are based on its location, diversity in structures and functions,
as well as on its long-standing values. The weaknesses and threats would be over-
come through careful implementation of reformed local heritage guidance.
Additionally, previous studies conducted by GTZ, AKTC, and Aleppo municipality

would be useful assets for understanding the old city as previously documented.
Finally, the investigations implied above would help to establish a reconciliation
framework on the ground based on understanding Old Aleppo as an inclusive
Historic Urban Landscape. Also, a renomination dossier could evolve from the stud-
ies conducted in this chapter.
References
Abdulkarim, M., & Kutiefan, L. (2017). State Party report on the state of conservation of the
Syrian Cultural Heritage Sites. Syrian Arab Republic: Ministry of Culture, Directorate General
of Antiquities & Museums (DGAM).
Antoun, R. (1991). Syria: Society, culture, and polity. New York: SUNY Press.
Alsalloum, A., & Jackson, I. (2017). Rebuilding and reconciliation in Homs. Context 150
(pp. 27–30). Institute of Historic Building Conservation (IHBC): UK. http://ihbconline.co.uk/
context/150/index.html#28.
Bandarin, F., & van Oers, R. (2012). The Historic Urban Landscape. Managing heritage in an
urban century. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.
Brodie, N. (2015). Syria and its regional neighbours: A case of cultural property protection policy
failure? International Journal of Cultural Property, 22, 317–335. USA.
Burns, R. (2016). Aleppo: A history (cities of the Ancient World). London: Routledge.
DGAM. (2014). Directorate-General of Antiquities and Museums. Intangible Cultural Heritage of
Syria. V1. The Syrian Trust for Development- Ministry of Culture. (Arabic).
Fischer, M., & Gangler, A. (2012). The Aleppo archive: A place for the memory of urban history.
Eschborn: Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH.
Gibson, L., & Pendlebury, J. (2009). Valuing historic environments. Surrey: Burlington Ashgate.
Gonnella, J. (2008). The Citadel of Aleppo: Description, history, site plan and visitor tour. Geneva:
The Aga Khan Trust for Culture.
GTZ [Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit]. (2001). The rehabilitation of the
Old City of Aleppo: Development plan. The City of Aleppo, Syria.
GTZ. (2008). Program for sustainable urban development in Syria. State of Cities Report. Report
on the City of Aleppo Syria-Germany Technical Cooperation.
GTZ. (2010). Program for sustainable urban development in Syria. Report on Local Economic
Development in Aleppo. In B. von Rabenau (Ed.).
Ibn-Dhurayl, A. (1996). Raqs al-Sham and dabke. National government publication, Ministry of
Culture, Damascus. (Arabic).
ICCROM, & UNESCO. (2000). Riga Charter on authenticity & historical reconstruction in
relationship to cultural heritage. Available at: http://www.vilagorokseg.hu/_upload/editor/
UNESCO_hatteranyagok/Riga_Charter_2000.pdf. Cited 15 Aug 2017.
ICOMOS. (1966). Resolutions on the regeneration of historic urban sites. Available at: https://
www.icomos.org/publications/93towns7b.pdf. Cited 15 Aug 2017.
ICOMOS. (1994). Nara document on authenticity. Available at: whc.unesco.org/document/116018.
Cited 15 Aug 2017.
ICOMOS. (1996). Declaration of San Antonio: Authenticity in the conservation and management
of the cultural heritage. Available at: https://www.icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts/179-arti-
cles-en-francais/ressources/charters-and-standards/188-the-declaration-of-san-antonio. Cited
15 Aug 2017.
ICOMOS. (2003). Charter-Principles; analysis, conservation & restoration of architectural heri-
tage. Available at: https://www.icomos.org/charters/structures_e.pdf. Cited 15 Aug 2017.
76 A. Alsalloum
ICOMOS. (2008). Québec declaration on the preservation of the spirit of place. Available at:
http://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-646-2.pdf. Cited 15 Aug 2017.
ICOMOS. (2011). Guidance on heritage impact assessments for cultural World Heritage proper-
ties. Available at: https://www.icomos.org/world_heritage/HIA_20110201.pdf. Cited 15 Aug
2017.
ICOMOS. (2013). Burra Charter for the conservation of places of cultural significance. Burwood:
ICOMOS.
ICOMOS. (2017). Guidance on post trauma recovery and reconstruction for World Heritage
Cultural Properties. Paris: ICOMOS. Available at: http://openarchive.icomos.org/1763/19/
ICOMOS%20Guidance%20on%20Post%20Trauma%20Recovery%20.pdf. Cited 15 Aug
2017.
Jodidio, P. (2011). The Aga Khan historic cities programme: Strategies for urban regeneration.
Munich: Prestel.
Jokilehto, J. (2010). Reflection on Historic Urban Landscapes as a tool for conservation. In R.
van Oers & S. Haraguchi (Eds.), UNESCO World Heritage papers 27 managing historic cities
(pp. 7–17). Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Kalman, H. (2017). Destruction, mitigation, and reconciliation of cultural heritage. International
Journal of Heritage Studies, 23(6), 538–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2017.1289475.
Khirfan, L. (2014). World heritage, urban design and tourism: three cities in the Middle East.
Surrey: Ashgate.
Krakow. (2000). Charter of Krakow: Principles for conservation and restoration of built her-
itage. Available at: http://smartheritage.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/KRAKOV-
CHARTER-2000.pdf. Cited 15 Aug 2017.
Lostal, M. (2017). International Cultural Heritage Law in Armed Conflict: Case-Studies of Syria,
Libya, Mali, the Invasion of Iraq, and the Buddhas of Bamiyan. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Mason, R. (2002). Assessing values in conservation planning: Methodological issues and choices.
In M. Torre (Ed.), Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation
Institute.
MEDLIHER. (2010). Mediterranean Living Heritage. Phase I. Assessment of the state of safe-
guarding intangible cultural heritage in the Syrian Arab Republic. Contribution to implement-
ing the convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage in Mediterranean
partner States.
Morel, A.-F. (2013). Identity and conflict: Cultural heritage, reconstruction and national iden-
tity in Kosovo. Architecture – media – politics – society (Amps), 3(1), 1–20. https://doi.
org/10.14324/111.444.amps.2013v3i1.001.
Perini, S., & Cunliffe, E. (2015). Towards a protection of the Syrian cultural heritage: A summary
of the national and international responses VIII. Girona: Heritage for Peace.
Punekar, A. (2006). Value-led heritage and sustainable development: The case of Bijapur, India. In
R. Zetter & G. Watson (Eds.), Designing sustainable cities in the developing world (pp. 103–
120). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Soufan, A. (2015). Historiographical overview on the post conflict reconstruction in Syria:
From the mid-19th century to the 2011 crisis. Paris: UNESCO. https://whc.unesco.org/en/
events/1286/.
Taylor, K. (2016). The Historic Urban Landscape paradigm and cities as cultural landscapes.
Challenging orthodoxy in urban conservation. Landscape Research, 41(4), 471–480. https://
doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2016.1156066.
UNESCO. (1992). Charter of Courmayeur: Protection of artistic and cultural patrimony. Available
at: http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/Charter_Courmayeur_
en.pdf. Cited 17 Aug 2017.
UNESCO. (2005). Vienna Memorandum on world heritage and contemporary architecture.
Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2005/whc05-15ga-inf7e.pdf. Cited 15 Aug 2017.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendations on the Historic Urban Landscape. Available at: http://whc.
unesco.org/en/activities/638. Cited 15 Aug 2017.
UNESCO. (2013). The Hangzhou Declaration placing culture at the heart of sustainable develop-
ment policies. Hangzhou: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2015). Document for the integration of a sustainable development perspective.
Available at: whc.unesco.org/document/139146. Cited 17 Aug 2017.
UNESCO. (2016a). Operational guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage
Convention. Available at: 2017. http://whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines/. Cited 15 Aug 2017.
UNESCO. (2016b). The HUL Guidebook. Managing heritage in dynamic and constantly changing
urban environments. a practical Guide to UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Historic Urban
Landscape. Austria.
UNESCO. (2017a). Convention concerning the protection of the World Cultural and Natural
Heritage. World Heritage Committee, 41 session, Krakow, Poland July, 2017. Available via:
http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2017/whc17-41com-7BAdd-en.pdf. Cited 15 Aug 2017.
UNESCO. (2017b). World Heritage Centre. http://whc.unesco.org/en/hul/#history. Cited 15 Oct
2017.
UNESCO & DGAM. (2017). Table of actions for the recovery of the Ancient City of Aleppo fol-
lowing the technical and coordination meeting for the Ancient City of Aleppo. Beirut. http://
whc.unesco.org/en/news/1639/. Cited 15 Aug 2017.
UNITAR [United Nations Institute for Training and Research]. (2014). Satellite-based damage
assessment to cultural heritage sites in Syria. Geneva, Switzerland.
UNITAR. (2016). Satellite-based damage assessment of Cultural Heritage Sites. Summary report
of Iraq, Nepal, Syria & Yemen. Switzerland/Paris: UNITAR/UNESCO.
Wikipedia. (2018). Aleppo – Notable natives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleppo. Cited 15 Aug
2017.
Chapter 4
Amaravathi Heritage Town – Reflections
on the Historic Cultural Landscape
Approach
Amareswar Galla
Abstract Amaravathi Heritage Town in Andhra Pradesh, birthplace of Mahayana

Buddhism, has 2900 years of tangible heritage with distinct layers of significance.
It is one of the longest continuously inhabited landscapes in South India. After
nearly 1500 years of neglect and degradation, some of the sites are being rehabili-
tated for tourism. It is part of the Buddhist tourist circuit promoted by the Government
of India. Understanding the complex layering of historical landscapes and water-
scapes, and their conservation and interpretation has just begun. How well the his-
torical cultural landscapes could be safeguarded will depend on the extent to which
negative impacts of rabid tourism are minimised. The Historic Urban Landscape
(HUL) Recommendation provides an aspirational standard. Lessons learnt from Ha
Long Bay and Hoi An World Heritage sites in Vietnam are useful.
Keywords Ecomuseum · Integrated local area planning · Sustainable heritage

development · Buddhism · Village goddesses · Cultural landscapes
4.1 Introduction
Cultural landscapes could be ethnocentric constructs. If interrogated appropriately,

they would enable multiple understandings and interpretations, the emic and etic.
The diachronic iterations are informed by layers of significant research and presen-
tations, often deduced from tangible resources. The synchronic portrayals are
informed by contemporary ideologies, politics and conceptual frameworks and
importantly the intangible heritage. While the first voice(s) of local primary stake-
holders are often documented through the emic-collective memories, it is the
A. Galla (*)
Amaravathi Heritage Town, Amaravathi, Andhra Pradesh, India
International Institute for the Inclusive Museum, Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA
Global Change Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
e-mail: director@inclusivemuseum.org

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_4
80 A. Galla
etic-selective memories by facilitators that often gain circulation (Galla 2008).

Integrated local area planning as envisaged in the HUL recommendation is a critical
tool to redress this imbalance.
World Heritage inscriptions have resulted in the production of localities in
diverse contexts based on the shared discourse of outstanding universal value. The
local neighbourhoods have been transformed into ‘ethnoscapes’. The relationship of
localities to their contexts or ‘environmentality’ is historical and dialectical
(Appadurai 1996). The production of localities through the inscription process in
the contemporary globalising world and the disjuncture with the traditional neigh-
bourhoods needs to be researched and understood as an integral part of both impacts
and benefits from inscription. In this context of cultural reproduction with the new
parameters of conservation measures, the agency of various stakeholders needs to
be embedded in all forms of research and understanding (Agrawal and Gibson
2001). Reading the past is a critical journey and framed from the contemporary and
needs to be constantly interrogated (Thapar 2017).
A new way of achieving culturally sustainable development involves preserving
not just tangibles but also intangibles – traditions, communities and ways of life.
What is sustainable development needs to be chalked out in each context. Appropriate
governance modalities need to be established through local communities.1 An entire
community can be a dynamic living museum. This model of heritage conservation
and responsible tourism can generate the momentum to address the UN Sustainable
Development Goals. Initiatives in Asia have demonstrated the potential benefits of
this approach, for example, in the World Heritage sites of Ha Long Bay and Hoi An
in Vietnam and Hahoe Village in Korea.
In India, protection of the cultural resource base is significantly undermined by
unplanned rural-urban migration and poor town planning. Physical heritage
resources are threatened by encroachments and demands for redevelopment, includ-
ing land speculation. Social structures are disrupted. Gentrification and tourism
development are displacing historical communities. Cultural differences caused by
the juxtaposition of immigrant groups with different lifestyles and values, as well as
different levels of access to resources, are inflaming tensions resulting in social
dysfunction. In the face of such challenges, the Government of India has started
resourcing demonstration projects under the HRIDAY and PRASAD schemes.
The HUL Recommendation provides a framework that could provide for assess-
ing current work or developing methods for new work. It needs to be grounded in
practical experience and bottom-up praxis driving the momentum complementing
the standardisation process of the instruments, which can also become another form
of globalisation with unwanted impacts. There are lessons to be learnt from Asian
countries that have provided demonstrated models for safeguarding their diverse
heritage against the backdrop of rapid economic growth. The historical cultural
landscapes of Amaravathi Heritage Town are being safeguarded through the appli-
cation of two concepts: ecomuseology and integrated local area planning. Lessons
learnt from their application in Vietnam are proving useful.
Twenty-six case studies are presented (Galla 2012).

1
4 Amaravathi Heritage Town – Reflections on the Historic Cultural Landscape… 81
4.2 Conceptual Framework
(i) Ecomuseology
Ha Long Bay is sometimes referred to as a microcosm of Vietnam. This is cer-
tainly so in as much as it clearly shows the conflict between conserving a rich, but
fragile, heritage and simultaneously promoting the industrial, economic and tour-
ism development that is essential to alleviate impoverishment of large sections of
the community. Traditionally, this has been treated as an ‘either/or’ issue and there-
fore frequently results in an impasse. The greatest challenge has been to bring
together the Ha Long Bay World Heritage area and all the stakeholder groups into a
participatory framework through the Ha Long ecomuseum, a national demonstra-
tion project. The partnership identifies the aims, interests and values that inform
interpretations of community, local history and environmental values, including
intangible heritage (Galla 2002a).
The Ha Long Ecomuseum is a methodology that seeks to establish a mutuality of
interest and a sense of common ownership through the establishment of a far broader
stakeholder base, involving communities, groups and organisations, in the manage-
ment of the World Heritage area and its hinterland. Through interpretation it raises
awareness and understanding of both the outstanding universal value and the contri-
bution of industrial and commercial development to address the then Millennium
Development Goals until 2015. Better understanding of the critical importance of
both conservation and development softens the polarisation of the debate and
enables the two issues to be addressed together, an approach taken in addressing the
new UN Agenda 2030 and Sustainable Development Goals.
(ii) Integrated local area planning
Hoi An is a Vietnamese town which has significant cultural heritage resources,
recognised through its World Heritage designation. It is relatively small, with a
population of around 80,000 within a district area of around 60km2, a series of cul-
tural landscapes and waterscapes that include the Cu Lao Cham-Hoi An, a bio-
sphere reserve. The mobilisation of cultural resources for economic benefits has
been impressive, driven by community engagement as well as public-private part-
nerships. This has involved the public sector (local government and conservation
agencies), the business sector and the community sector working productively
together (Galla 2002b, 2012).
While Hoi An’s heritage extends over many centuries, the remaining urban forms
largely date from the nineteenth century. The built form is reflected by the social
structure, as buildings have been occupied by the same families over several genera-
tions, keeping their cultural practices intact. This is manifested in economic activi-
ties (such as crafts) and lifestyle practices (cuisine, customs) and activities which
provide both cultural and economic outcomes (such as festivals). The density and
richness of living heritage within the ancient town constitute a grassroots commu-
nity resource, and this has received regulatory protection from incompatible
development.
82 A. Galla
Surrounding villages which traditionally functioned as a base for various crafts

were at risk of losing their skills base but have received support for reviving exper-
tise and contributing to conservation efforts. Buffer areas have protected the integ-
rity of different enclaves. The archaeological remains found in the hinterland of Hoi
An have been mapped and interpreted to promote their preservation and enrich the
visitor experience. Through a systematic cultural mapping process, an integrated
local area plan with 5-year windows for review and development is implemented
(iii) Amaravathi Heritage Town
The application of ecomuseology and integrated local area planning requires the
understanding of HUL values from the contextual standpoint and locating culture in
development. The planning process includes the identification of heritage assets
while also developing the skills and supporting infrastructure necessary to maintain
businesses and launch new enterprises.
These approaches involve full participation by the local community, drawing on
local skills and expertise and providing for empowerment of the local community
groups through the plan’s development and implementation. In developing a
community-based plan, the opportunities to include strategies that empower local
communities are prioritised, making them better able to provide for their own needs.
The goal is to contribute to more effective community building, by strengthening
local capacity for action. Amaravathi Heritage Society, a civic agency drawn from
all the local community groups, has become the driving force for heritage action to
safeguard and revitalise the historical cultural landscapes.
4.3 Amaravathi Heritage Town
Amaravathi Heritage Town is a historical cultural landscape of about 300 acres of

land. It is an aggregation of a few conserved sites and mostly neglected historical
remains that are encroached upon by an expanding population. Most of the world-
famous Amaravathi Buddhist sculptures from the Maha Stupa were removed or sto-
len. It is one of the biggest Buddhist stupas in South Asia. Its sculptural tradition is
celebrated as the world-famous Amaravathi School of Art. The best collection is in
the British Museum. Others are in the Chennai Museum and Indian Museum,
Kolkata and several museums across the world. Now the Indian Government has
launched a major project to revitalise the Amaravathi Heritage Town at the end of
2015. Conservation of Amaravathi has many possibilities. HUL Recommendation
frame is being applied using ecomuseology and integrated local area planning as
tools (Figs. 4.1 and 4.2).
Amaravathi Heritage Town includes the twin villages of Dharanikota and
Amaravathi. The former is the ancient Dhanyakataka, the flourishing capital centre
in the formation of early Andhra Pradesh. The local area is the birthplace of Acharya
Nagarjuna who propounded the Madhyamika philosophy. It is the basis for
Mahayana Buddhism. Well-known Chinese Buddhist pilgrims, such as Xuanzang
Fig. 4.1 Gudi or Temple for Balusulamma Thalli. Village patron goddess who has been the focal
point for the revitalisation of intangible heritage elements of Amaravathi/Dharanikota and the 23
surrounding villages. It is an exemplar case study for the integration of tangible and intangible
heritage in HUL
Fig. 4.2 Preparation of the first ever cultural map of the Amaravathi Heritage Town in partnership
with the local community groups has been vital for making conservation and developmental inter-
ventions within the HUL frame
84 A. Galla
(Hsüan-tsang. c. 602 – 664) , came to Amaravathi to collect sacred texts in the first
millennium. Now increasing numbers of Korean, Japanese and Tibetan pilgrims are
visiting.
There are layers of history in Amaravathi from as early as the megalithic times,
some 2900 years ago. These layers need to be unravelled, creating a contemporary
understanding among both locals and outsiders, developing educational program-
ming and promoting experiential tourism. The methods of ecomuseology and inte-
grated local area planning from Ha Long Bay and Hoi An are being translated into
locally developed pathways. The organic historical linkages and relationships
between the Heritage Town and the surrounding stakeholder communities and vil-
lages are being addressed as a priority.
Investment of resources by the Government of India would hopefully assist con-
servation of monuments and heritage houses and promote heritage-sensitive urban
infrastructure development. Apart from the Maha Stupa and the 2000-year old his-
torical fortification, the old ginning mill, historic houses in the temple’s Pujari
Street, zamindar/local raja’s bungalow and other buildings from the past 200 years
in Amaravathi Heritage Town also need urgent protection (Figs. 4.3 and 4.4).
Understanding and safeguarding intangible heritage elements as living and
dynamic resources are being prioritised by the state’s Creativity and Culture
Commission. A range of living heritage festivals are being facilitated throughout the
year. Affirmative action programmes are enabling the participation of disadvantaged
women and young people from the Heritage Town and surrounding villages.
Fig. 4.3 The Amaravathi Maha Stupa, the largest of its kind in South Asia, yielded corporeal rel-
ics of the Buddha. It is a major pilgrimage site as the birthplace and evolution of Mahayana
Buddhism through the Madhyamika philosophy enunciated by Acharya Nagarjuna
Fig. 4.4 Ma Vuuru Ma Kodaḷḷu Our Village Our Daughters-in-Law is the major project that is
driving change and safeguarding the intangible heritage values in the Amaravathi Heritage Town.
It is a seminal project integrating and mainstreaming gender within the frame of HUL, UNESCO
Gender Policy and UN SDG 5 on women and girls
International Women’s Day for the past 2 years has become seminal to raise heritage
consciousness led by the Amaravathi Mahila or Women’s Society and the newly
established Amaravathi Heritage Centre and Museum. Professional and quality-
assured development of interpretive materials and heritage experiences are proposed
as integral to responsible heritage tourism growth. New attractions are planned in the
hinterland to diversify heritage experiences for dispersing potential growth in visita-
tion and ensuring income redistribution to surrounding communities and villages.
Environmental impacts need to be monitored with the future growth of visitation
and increased resident and business activities. Amaravathi Heritage Town is on the
River Krishna. The rapid degradation of the Krishna riverine system needs to be
addressed through improving infrastructure to deal with commercial waste, sewage
from the town and villages and storm water run-off. Integrated local area planning,
both short term and long term, by the government must be promoted to continue to
enhance the urban infrastructure to cope with development pressures. At last, a town
plan is in the offing.
(i) Participatory democracy
A local Amaravathi Heritage Society is facilitating community engagement and
benefit sharing. Amaravathi as an ecomuseum, open-air spatial or landscape
approach to all forms of heritage, including the heritage town and its hinterland, will
ensure sustainable conservation and growth. An understanding of the past through
critical scholarship, professional engagement and safeguarding intangible heritage
elements by the carrier and transmitter communities will enable a comprehensive
appreciation of the present and hence experiential visitation. In the past 2 years,
tangible and intangible assets of the Amaravathi Heritage Town are being mapped
(Galla 2018). These include various Buddhist remains and 23 Hindu temples. The
largest is the Amaralingeswara Temple that attracts most pilgrims and visitors to
86 A. Galla
Amaravathi. Across the historical cultural landscape of Amaravathi, a range of new

heritage resources are located, including several mother goddess temples that often
date back to the mediaeval times.
The basic unit of administration in Amaravathi Heritage Town is the Village
Panchayat. In old days the elders sat under banyan or neem/margosa trees to dis-
cuss, make decisions and arbitrate conflicts of all kinds. These are called
Rachchabandalu in Telugu, the local Dravidian language. In the mapping exercise,
29 such meeting places with old trees were identified. Some of them are once again
being used as community meeting spaces, enabling participatory democracy. These
are civic spaces for stakeholder mapping, stakeholder ethics and stakeholder partici-
pation frameworks. This approach is helping to resolve several conflicts between
conservation and developmental issues. It is broadening the possibilities for com-
munity cultural action in promoting local area planning and developmental out-
comes benefitting all relevant stakeholders. Civil society engagement through
Rachchabandalu moderates impacts of bureaucratic processes providing for trans-
parent discussions. Stakeholder conceptualisation is an essential element in eco-
museology and culture in development processes. One of the outcomes of such
community engagement led to rethinking outside consultants’ ideas and their
imposing tourism that would have diminished local heritage values.
(ii) Balusulamma Thalli Gudi (temple)
One of the promising developments is the beginning of conserving valuable heri-
tage that is not necessarily monumental and visible. In November 2017, a govern-
ment order by the state has been given for the protection of the Balusulamma Thalli
Gudi as a protected monument for its archaeological and historical importance. This
temple is the village patron goddess of Dharanikota in Amaravathi Heritage Town.
It dates to the Kakatiya times some 700 years ago. So far, all the protected monu-
ments in Amaravathi Heritage Town are under the Archaeological Survey of
Government of India. Balusulamma Thalli Gudi is the first monument protected by
the state government, an outcome of the ecomuseum process. The area of the temple
is 0.52 acres. It is on major archaeological deposits with pottery showing continu-
ous cultures from 2900 years ago. More than 200 years ago, local king Zamindar
Raja Vasi Reddy Venkatadri Naidu used to dismount his elephant on his journeys
back from other villages and make offerings to Balusulamma.
As a result of the cultural mapping exercise, Balusulamma Thalli Gudi and its
heritage landscape have been enhanced through the PRASAD Scheme of the
Government of India. The historical cultural landscape has been carefully fenced.
Five solar lamps, a water tank and boring pump have been installed. The surround-
ing area has been carefully landscaped. A gateway has been constructed. Access
road to the temple along with drainage has been completed. The Rachchabanda at
the large banyan tree in the protected landscape has been renovated with smooth
granite. A slate area has been created all around at a lower level for community and
school educational programming by the Amaravathi Heritage Centre and Museum.
Heritage awareness and Swachh Bharat or cleanliness classes were inaugurated
under the tree in partnership with the Village/Grama Panchayat and the District
Educational Office for 80 students, villagers and tourists. Village atmosphere or

Grama Vathavaranam at the Balusulamma Thalli Gudi has been revitalised. The
descendants of the Raja’s family have visited the temple recently and offered to
assist in conservation and enhance the site with appropriate infrastructure. A tradi-
tional Chuttillu or tradtional round house has been built to accommodate a site
specific educational resource centre.
Interventions and conservation at the Balusulamma Thalli Gudi led to commu-
nity groups identifying more village goddesses that illustrate historical and heritage
values in the Amaravathi Heritage Town. Several of them date back to the mediaeval
period. It is planned to connect them through the Amaravathi Mother Goddess
Heritage Tourism Route. Extensive consultations and community engagement are
taking place. Ankallamma Gudi Complex is on the old Krosuru Road built more
than two centuries ago. Muthyalamma Gudi, Mother Goddess or Grama Devata of
Amaravathi, predates the Zamindar’s times of the 1790s. It was maintained since
then by the Kapulu caste, and the officiating was done by the Yadava community.
Muthyalamma has the same significance for Amaravathi as Balusulamma for
Dharanikota/Dhanyakataka. Two other neighbouring historical mother goddess
temples are dedicated to Chintayya and Tirupatamma and Ankalamma Thalli. One
of the outstanding revelations is the Peddaintiamma Thalli Temple on the outskirts
of Amaravathi Heritage Town along the old road that was probably used by Emperor
Sri Krishnadevaraya of the Vijayanagar Empire in 1515 AD when he came to
Amaravathi. There is a very significant mother goddess temple here with a large
banyan tree. It has a Rachchabanda that is sacred and several 100 years old. It has
two historical inscriptions that are yet to be deciphered and studied. Other mother
goddess temples are in Chakalipeta of the washer women’s/men’s community,
Padmasali of the weaver’s community and Gajulapalem of the bangle merchants.
There is a clear nexus of the caste system and use of the mother goddess temples
across the historical cultural landscapes of Amaravathi Heritage Town.
(iii) Muslim heritage
Dharanikota has been under the Qutub Shahi and Nizams rule during the recent
historical period. The local Raja or Zamindar in shifting his centre of operations
from Chintapalli to Amaravathi brought with him in the 1790s – 2000 Muslims to
Amaravathi and 1000 Muslims to Dharanikota. There is significant heritage belong-
ing to the local Muslim communities which constitute over 30% of the local popula-
tion. Through extensive community consultation, the following has been identified:
Eidgah Wall with the only historical inscription in Amaravathi in Urdu. The associ-
ated square will be rehabilitated with minimal interventions. Several Masjids have
been identified: Omar Al-Farooq Masjid; Madina Masjid; Masjid-e-Bilal, next to
Kabristan or cemetery; Jamia Masjid, old one during the Zamindar’s time; Masjid-
e-Ansari, on the way to Vijayawada; and Masjid-e-Bilal, with the oldest Urdu
School. These places of Muslim heritage are significant but neglected by the heri-
tage and tourism officials until now. Interventions anticipated include conservation
of architectural elements, restoring the flooring for prayers, Wazoo khana renova-
tion for pre-prayer washing facilities, toilets, plantations, railings on the compound
walls, RO plants for drinking water and consolidation of entrance arches.
88 A. Galla
(iv) Boat jetties on the river Krishna

A new barrage across the River Krishna at Vaikuntapuram, 9 kilometres down-
stream, will bring higher levels of water to the Amaravathi Heritage Town. It pro-
vides opportunities in the recreational spectrum. Conservation measures identified
include rehabilitation of the original boat ramp and boat building area from the
Satavahana times nearly 2000 years ago. It is to the west of the recent cement
Buddha project built in 2007. Similarly, a second historical jetty should be rehabili-
tated just before the cremation ground to the east of the Amaralingeswara Swamy
Temple. Given the future works by state’s irrigation departments, these two jetties
could be rehabilitated. The project has reached an impasse due to the lack of appre-
ciation by officials. Local people hope that tourism officials would appreciate the
significance of the two sites to the historical cultural landscapes and waterscapes of
the Amaravathi Heritage Town.
4.4 Conclusion
Drawing on the HUL Recommendation and other UNESCO standard-setting instru-

ments, Amaravathi Heritage Centre and Museum drafted the following guidelines
for the gradual rehabilitation of Amaravathi Heritage Town and its historical cul-
tural landscapes. These are framed within the New Urban Agenda, and several of
them were discussed in Habitat III in Quito, Ecuador in October 2016.
1. Engage the public, private and community sectors: A trisector approach can be
most effective in developing a framework for heritage protection and cultural
industry development. It is important that this is an inclusive and respectful
process that is measured for its benefits to all stakeholders through quantitative
and qualitative indicators.
2. Identify cultural resources: Rethinking cultural mapping and cultural planning
that should include tangible and intangible heritage as well as contemporary
cultural resources. Equitable community participation in the mapping process
should be encouraged and enabled through appropriate upskilling and facilitat-
ing first voice of primary stakeholders.
3. Build local capacity for conservation and interpretation: An inclusive approach
requires that cultural and heritage conservation agencies work with local/pri-
mary stakeholder communities, the private sector and government agencies to
develop new skills and appreciation.
4. Develop an asset management regime: Requirements for protecting physical
and social heritage resources in the short and long term need to be identified,
within a clear budgetary framework.
5. Establish an economic development regime: This should encompass mobilising
resources for economic benefit without diminishing heritage values, distribut-
ing benefits within the community and investing in the protection of the asset
base.
6. Provide incentives for consistent development: This can be a powerful way of

implementing the economic development framework, for example, by way of
tax concessions and enterprise licences and permission for creative or adaptive
reuse of built heritage and other infrastructure.
7. Develop promotional materials and interpretive programmes: This is an essen-
tial infrastructure for cultural development, and it may include establishing
interpretive hubs (exhibitions, galleries, museums) as well as guided tours for
the benefit of all creative, cultural, heritage and tourism industry partici-
pants and audiences.
8. Protect cultural freedom: Development needs to respect the cultural values of
all participants. Strategies should prevent commercial exploitation of cultural
and heritage industry practitioners, for example, by misuse of cultural property,
and empower local communities to control how culture is presented within
their own precincts.
9. Reinvest in social wellbeing: It is vitally important to ensure that communities
that are carriers and transmitters of living heritage are not held in a state of
impoverishment, while their cultural resources are mobilised for economic
gain, and that there are clear benefits in terms of contemporary infrastructure
and services.
10. Monitor and mitigate impacts: The flow on effects from development needs to
be well managed, including urban traffic congestion, wear and tear on the phys-
ical environment and the safety of residents.
The HUL Recommendation is useful provided it is considered with comparative
case studies and demonstration projects from different parts of the world and assess-
ment of critical success factors and pitfalls to be avoided, and recommended strate-
gies are pursued in all jurisdictions. Toolkits with affordable adjunct mentoring and
facilitation services should be available through the affordances of the digital
domain. Amaravathi Heritage Town development can access these facilities and also
contribute to the broader knowledge communities of the HUL domains.
References
Agrawal, A., & Gibson, C. C. (Eds.). (2001). Communities and the environment: Ethnicity, gender
and the state in community-based conservation. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large, cultural dimension of globalisation. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Galla, A. (2002a). Culture and heritage in development: Ha Long Ecomuseum, a case study from
Vietnam. Humanities Research, IX(1), 63–76.
Galla, A. (2002b). Hoi An: Five year developmental plan, Hoi An Centre for Monuments
Management and Preservation and UNESCO Office Hanoi, 2002.
Galla, A. (2008). The first voice in heritage conservation. International Journal of Intangible
Heritage, 3, 1–17.
Galla, A. (Ed.) (2012). World heritage: Benefits beyond borders. Cambridge University Press and
UNESCO Publishing. (2013) French and Korean translations.
90 A. Galla
Galla, A. (2018). Amaravathi Heritage Town: Narratives from an Indian ecomuseum develop-
ment. In M. Chiba, S. Jain, S. Ghosh, & V. B. Mathur (Eds.), Cultural landscapes of Asia:
Understanding and managing heritage values (pp. 195–203). New Delhi: Aryan Books
International.
Galla, A. World heritage in poverty alleviation: Hoi An ancient town, Vietnam. In World heritage:
Benefits beyond borders, (Ed)., op. cit. pp. 107–120.
Thapar, R. (2017). Talking history. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Chapter 5
Toward a Special Management
and Protection Plan of Urban Heritage
in Ambalema, Colombia
Sandra Higuera, Andrés Forero, Juliana Forero, and Alberto Escovar
Abstract Since 2009, the Special Management and Protection Plan (PEMP in
Spanish) has been the instrument adopted by the Colombian government to plan,
manage, and disseminate the cultural heritage of historic city centers. Based on the
acquired experience, the Cultural Heritage Office of the Ministry of Culture identi-
fied the need to develop a more holistic and participatory approach to revitalize
these areas of cultural significance. To achieve this, the Cultural Heritage Office led
a pilot scheme in Ambalema, Tolima, throughout 2016. The development of the
Special Management and Protection Plan of Ambalema was based on an interdisci-
plinary approach aimed at recognizing the intersection of multiple values that char-
acterize the historic city center and form the basis of social identification with the
urban landscape and cultural ecosystem. Moreover, the PEMP was an opportunity
for enhancing citizen participation in urban heritage conservation in Colombia. This
paper describes the methodology used and the results obtained, as a contribution to
develop more comprehensive tactics toward heritage sustainability, which has been
done in harmony with Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) approaches to the conser-
vation of urban values that shape the city’s life.
Keywords Special Management and Protection Plan · Historic city centers ·

Cultural heritage · Urban heritage conservation · Citizen participation · Heritage
values · Historic Urban Landscape
S. Higuera (*) · A. Forero · J. Forero · A. Escovar

Ministry of Culture of Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia
e-mail: sjhiguera@mincultura.gov.co; aforeror@mincultura.gov.co;
jforerob@mincultura.gov.co; aescovar@mincultura.gov.co

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_5
92 S. Higuera et al.
5.1 Introduction
This article presents a route to a more participatory and holistic approach toward
guaranteeing the sustainability of cultural heritage values of historic city centers
and the different living cultural experiences that shape a city’s life, based on the case
study of Ambalema in Colombia.
Based on the experience of the Ministry of Culture in the formulation, monitor-
ing, and implementation of Special Management and Protection Plan (PEMP, for its
abbreviation in Spanish)1 for the historical city centers, which have declared
Property of Cultural Interest on a national level, and the critical revision of the cur-
rent regulations in force for such cultural properties, throughout 2015, it was evi-
dent that there needed to be more analysis on the following aspects:
1. The need for PEMPs to be appropriated both by the municipal administrations
and by the communities that inhabit the historical city centers.
2. The importance of formulating and implementing actions that favor the social
appropriation of the cultural heritage of historic city centers, in order to assess its
values and protect them more effectively.
3. The formulation and implementation of actions directed at the improvement of
habitability of the spaces (buildings and public spaces) that make up the historic
city centers.
4. The formulation and implementation of tools that tend to guarantee the sustain-
ability of historic city centers.
5. The importance of integrating intangible cultural heritage (ICH) as a fundamen-
tal component of the PEMP.
PEMP approach represents an example of how HUL methodology has been
implemented by national and local governments through their own urban and cul-
tural heritage planning system. Both look for an integral and comprehensive per-
spective on how to integrate cultural heritage management into an overall sustainable
development framework.
Within this context, in 2016, the Ministry of Culture prioritized the preparation
of the Special Management and Protection Plan (PEMP) for Ambalema, the historic
city center of which was declared a Site of Cultural Interest in 1980. It was pro-
jected as a pilot project through which the community; the public sector, at the
municipal, departmental, and national levels; and the academy could work together
toward identifying the heritage value of the place, determining its current problems
and proposing actions that promote the protection and safeguarding of cultural heri-
tage in a holistic manner.
1
PEMP: In accordance with Article 2.4.1.1.1. (Decree 763 of 2009, Article 14) of Decree 1080 of
2015 by which the Single Regulatory Decree Sector Culture is issued, “Special Management and
Protection Plans are a management tool of Cultural Heritage of the Nation, that establishes actions
necessary in order to ensure the protection, conservation and sustainability of Properties of Cultural
Interest or property in process of being declared as such, whenever the competent authority requi-
eres it.”
5 Toward a Special Management and Protection Plan of Urban Heritage in Ambalema… 93
To undertake this challenge, it was important to review the definitions that inter-
national organizations such as UNESCO have established in terms of cultural heri-
tage, or in the Colombian case, the General Law of Culture (Law 397 of 1997, as
amended by Law 1185 of 2008 and its regulatory decrees). In these documents,
cultural heritage is defined as the sum of movable and immovable properties and
cultural expressions that are the basis of particular group or community identity
(Ministerio de Cultura 2011). This means that heritage must function as a resource
for the development of communities and, at the same time, for their sustainable
preservation because of its integration with how identity is expressed (Colantonio
and Dixon 2011).
The central problem lies in how to make this premise effective, taking into
account that cultural expressions cannot be understood through the idea of monu-
ment that is more associated with the cultural heritage of a tangible nature (which
for the Colombian case is primarily of colonial origin). From a legislative stand-
point, the response to this problem is the development of PEMPs in the case of
tangible assets and Special Safeguard Plans (PES, for its abbreviation in Spanish) in
the case of the intangible cultural heritage.
The separation that exists between the tangible assets and the intangible expres-
sions begs the following questions: How can we understand the interactions of dif-
ferent social, cultural, economic, political, environmental, and other elements and
their effect on the various historical processes that configure historical city centers?
What happens when these planning tools in the heritage domain address their analy-
sis in a disjointed way, depending exclusively on studying tangible immovable, or
movable cultural assets or cultural expressions, without understanding their close
interrelation? Moreover, how can effective mechanisms that allow opening the dia-
logue to a holistic analysis be established, without these tools going beyond the
scope established in the legal framework?
The HUL approach brought some tools to solve these questions. They were
approached by understanding territory as the space where resources and assets,
which are charged with meaning and significance built and shaped by a dialogue,
come together and are assorted among the physical characteristics of the place and
the cultures settled in it. In this understanding, the physical characteristics and
intangible culture must be understood and valued together (Duarnd 2002). Therefore,
the focus of the PEMP was shifted to understanding territory through a cultural lens,
which would also encompass human activity as a central component of such
territory.
In this sense, the problem of undertaking practical research focused on two main
fronts. First, the scope of the territory to be studied needed to be defined, including
more extensive areas than those established for the historic city center, and a holistic
concept of cultural heritage, including resources and cultural dynamics. Second, an
approximate framework had to be constructed, which provided guidelines for
understanding the existing relationships between cultural, human, and natural com-
ponents and proposes effective management measures for its sustainability and use
as a territorial resource.
Considering the above, a methodology was constructed that adhering to the pro-
visions of Decree 1080 of 2015 “by means of which the Single Regulatory Decree
of the Culture Sector is issued,” as far as the PEMP is concerned, could offer an
integrating perspective of its components in order to provide the local institutions
with an alternative development strategy (Decreto 1080 2015). This alternative
would be based on the assets, expressions, and cultural resources existing in their
territory and a mechanism for the preservation of cultural heritage. A shift was then
proposed from interpreting the PEMP as an obligation to presenting it as an oppor-
tunity to direct a shift in how development is thought of in Ambalema.
The construction of a methodology for heritage urban planning in historic city
centers emphasized engagement and cultural appropriation, in which territory was
addressed in the context of the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) approach. Although
this was not the central application tool for the creation of PEMP, it is an expression
of local territorial realities around the conservation of historic city centers based on
a more holistic approach that recognizes the different layers of interaction in the
territory landscape.
5.2 S
pecial Management and Protection Plan (PEMP):
Beyond Managing “Historic City Centers”
Despite Colombia’s long legal and regulatory history regarding cultural heritage,
there is no precise definition of the historic city center in its laws and regulations.
However, regarding the relevance of protecting historical city centers, the definition
of the Quito Colloquium of 1977 is very accurate when affirming that they are tes-
timonies of “all those living human settlements, strongly conditioned by a physical
structure coming from the past, recognizable as representative of the evolution of a
town” (Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas 1990, pg. 13).
Therefore, the recognition of a settlement as a historical city center and its inclu-
sion in the representative list of the national cultural heritage acquires a special
condition in relation to the construction and representation of the Colombian nation.
This is one of the attributes conferred to Ambalema, whose historic city center, as
well as the other 44 historic city centers in Colombia that have been recognized,
currently makes up the repertoire of the historic and cultural heritage of settlements
that have shaped the territory of Colombia. Ambalema is particularly linked to the
tobacco boom of the late nineteenth and twentieth century, a factor that shaped the
distribution and construction of infrastructure in the town and made it an epicenter
of agro-industry and trade.
Also, because they are testimonies of the national historic and cultural life, these
historic city centers “belong in a particular way to all those social sectors that inhabit
them” (Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas 1990, pg. 13). Therefore,
the inhabitants are partly responsible for the sustainable management of these his-
toric centers. It is in this scenario, requiring an instrument that ensures the future
inheritance of cultural heritage, that the PEMP becomes meaningful. Realizing such
a strategy depends on formulating strategies of citizen engagement, as will be pre-
sented later. The problems currently afflicting the historical city centers and in par-
ticular those of Ambalema made it essential to run a study of its current conditions,
with particular consideration to already existing data found in reports, obtained
from local, regional, and territorial development plans, but primarily focusing on
the daily experience of its inhabitants. This last approach of promoting citizen
engagement became a fundamental tool for one of the central strategies of the cul-
tural policy in Colombia: the social appropriation of cultural heritage. The joint act
of recognizing historic city centers as heritage and, from there, identifying the
stakeholders that intervene in its management allows the population to become
aware of their situation and to acquire responsibilities toward it.
5.3 A
mbalema’s Landscape: Between the River
and the Snow Peaks
Addressing the analysis of the historic city center of Ambalema required seeing the
study area not as an isolated entity but as part of a complex set of elements that, over
time, develop in a territory at different scales.
The territory is a dynamic reality; it is the result of the superposition of the vari-
ous historical moments that have occurred in it – which are permanently rewritten.
It is also a complex reality, because it is composed of natural and cultural, tangible
and intangible components. Its morphological aspects – roads, rivers, houses, and
infrastructure – become essential because they express the relationship between the
natural environment and the community that inhabits such space, and it is of special
importance to decode it.
The municipality of Ambalema belongs to the department of Tolima and is part
of the Andean Region of Colombia, a natural region that crosses the country from
south to north, where the departments of greater economic productivity in the coun-
try are concentrated. This region is conformed by the three branches into which the
Andes mountain range (central, eastern, and western ranges) is divided, in the mid-
dle of which the Magdalena and Cauca rivers are born, two of the most important in
the country (Fig. 5.1).
The Magdalena River is “the most important axis of national development, from
a geographic-spatial, environmental, cultural, social, economic, demographic,
urban, historical and, of course, hydrographic standpoint” (Bernal Duffo 2013, page
10), becoming a “factor of union of a country with geographies as diverse as the
Andes and the Caribbean, the páramos, and the jungle” (Museo Nacional de
Colombia 2010, page 6). This is how each of the towns that are located on the banks
of the Magdalena, as is the case of Ambalema, can be understood as part of the his-
tory and development of Colombia (Fig. 5.2).
Fig. 5.1 Location of Ambalema. Elaborated for the PEMP of Ambalema 2016
On the other hand, the Nevado (Snow Peak) del Ruiz, located on the border
between the departments of Tolima and Caldas, has been a determining geographi-
cal marker of the cultural and economic relations in the region because of the mas-
sive volcanic eruptions that generate lahares (flows of mud and debris) that, when
dragged by the tributaries of the Magdalena River, pose a threat to human life, but
also generate nutrient-rich volcanic ash that scatters on the ground. Thus, the area
known as “Ambalema tobacco district” throughout the nineteenth century was pre-
cisely the area of influence of the eruptions of the volcano.
The location of Ambalema between the mountain ranges has caused the town’s
geographical isolation, positioning the Magdalena River as the main and constant
Fig. 5.2 Location of Ambalema. Geographical location map of Ambalema. Elaborated for the
PEMP of Ambalema 2016
communication channel over time. “When the navigation of the Alto Magdalena
River disappeared, the city began a process of regional isolation that is reflected in
the economic hardships it faced” (Mendoza 2010, page 62). The river was, thus, one
of the main assets that had to be protected and engaged through the PEMP, as a
building block of Ambalema’s heritage and history.
These geographical and geological conditions have guaranteed that, throughout
history, Ambalema has been linked to the primary sector of the economy, mainly the
agricultural industry, from the tobacco production to sugarcane production and later
to the cotton and rice fields. However, due to a historic and continued process of
privatization, land has been concentrated in a few large estates after “a broad and
complex process of expropriation of the majority of independent and community
workers” (Novelio 1984, p. 45).
Therefore, the identity of the Ambalemuno2 is associated with a culture tied to
labor. Its identity is based on the relationships woven between workers/partners and
employers, their work tools, and the products resulting from their work, converting
physical and mental energy into capital. This can explain the scarce presence of
traditional crafts and a weak capacity for community organization, as most of the
Ambalemuno is the demonym of the city of Ambalema in Spanish.

2
workforce is concentrated in agro-industrial activities, leaving little space for the

development of other activities. The dynamics of economic boom and decline and
the connectivity of the municipality are a fundamental determinant to frame the cur-
rent situation of this historic city center from a heritage perspective.
At present, many of the cultural elements are threatened by various problems
such as scarce community organization, limited sources of economic activity, lack
of knowledge of the territory and its resources, as well as a fracturing of municipal
institutions.
5.4 I dentifying Heritage Values: A Holistic and Participative

Within the HUL Framework
For the elaboration of the PEMP of the historical city center of Ambalema, a general
methodology was followed, which was divided in three stages. The first one was
based on the recognition of the territory and its main problem divided in turn into
three different steps that have been called characterization, assessment, and
diagnosis.
The second stage consisted of developing a structure that would allow the analy-
sis of the information gathered for the formulation of the plan, grouped into catego-
ries of analysis as follows: governability, habitability, and social, economic, and
environmental sustainability.
Finally, in the third stage, the formulation of the management plan was addressed
by ordering the projects and proposals within a management model composed of
transversal strategies and programs in which the different projects necessary to con-
front to the problems that were identified in the aforementioned second stage of the
methodology were designed.
5.4.1 Citizen Engagement Strategy
In all statements and conventions that refer to cultural heritage, there is a repeated
call to communicate the cultural meanings and values of heritage elements, in order
to generate recognition and respect for heritage. This respect can foster a sense of
responsibility and, thus, help ensure the sustainability of this legacy for future
generations.
In the development of the plan, the leaders of different social groups interested
in participating in the diagnosis of the PEMP were identified. A group of 39 people
was formed, which was called the “Citizen Participation Table,” and they worked
together in the development of the diagnosis and formulation of the PEMP. Two
types of activities were carried out: socialization spaces open to the whole commu-
nity and the worktables with the aforementioned participation table, with the aim of
collecting through them their perceptions of the historic city center based on their
everyday experiences.
Furthermore, the process of citizen participation had two aspects: the participa-
tory formulation of the PEMP and the promotion of local initiatives and capacities
for the protection and safeguarding of cultural heritage. In the first aspect, members
of the Ambalema community brought forth their perceptions on values, risks, and
the safeguarding and protection projects to address those risks. In the development
of these activities, a process of informed consent was carried out, in which the com-
munity was informed about routes of action for the protection of heritage in
Colombia. In addition, the community was constantly informed of the results of the
diagnosis and formulation process. To achieve this purpose, a cycle of participatory
activities was designed, which are described below:
Opening workshop of the Special Management and Protection Plan to social-
ize the process of preparing and formulating the PEMP with the community. A
public invitation was sent to members of the community in order to participate, as
well as personal invitations to the Heritage Watchers3 group of Ambalema, a team
of voluntaries that participate in multiple heritage protection and valuation activi-
ties. The participants discussed how to recognize the historical, symbolic, and aes-
thetic values of its historical center on a cartography based on the results of the
heritage valuation built with the Heritage Watchers. This participatory process gave
rise to identifying how multiple spaces and historic buildings constitute important
elements of the memory of Ambalemunos. These intangible dimensions of material
heritage were therefore seen as an oral tradition that is transmitted from generation
to generation collectively, which should, thus, be preserved through strategies simi-
lar to the safeguarding of ICH.
Stakeholder Map Workshop to identify in a participatory manner the main lead-

ers of civil society and representatives of public and private institutions engaged in
the protection of cultural heritage. The participants had to formulate a list, a brief
characterization, and a scheme of influence of the actors on the dynamics of the
historic center. To enrich this reflection, a brief presentation was made on cultural
heritage, explaining its immovable, movable, and intangible dimensions. This work-
shop was the basis for a potential organizational scheme of the PEMP and multiple
sectors of the city that must come to agreements in order to foster heritage values in
their town. Specifically, it highlighted the importance of the fishermen, through the
association ASOPEZAMBA (Fishermen of Ambalema Association). Trade and
fishing production was seen as an expression of the relationship between the popu-
lation and the environment from which they obtain their sustenance, again demon-
strating the importance of understanding heritage as living and dynamic activities
for the community of Ambalema.
3
Heritage Watchers is a strategy that encourages citizen participation in the social appropriation of
cultural heritage. Under the volunteer scheme, Colombian communities organize to recognize,
value, protect, recover, disseminate, and identify actions aimed at the sustainability of the nation’s
cultural heritage.
Cultural Entrepreneurship Workshop to recognize cultural entrepreneurship

initiatives and analyze how they can be strengthened in order to contribute to the
sustainability of the historic city center. Cultural entrepreneurs were invited to pitch
their ideas related to a cultural product or service based on different aspects of the
Ambalemuno cultural identity. This workshop offered not only practical tools for
cultural entrepreneurs in order to better promote and present their products or ser-
vices but also an opportunity to think about the historic city center as an inspiration
for ideas to promote economic sustainability activities in Ambalema and diversify
its economy.
Ambalema Public Space Assessment Workshop a participatory recognition of

the ways in which public spaces of Ambalema are structured. In this activity, differ-
ent stakeholders analyzed the values, the risks, and the opportunities to enhance the
way in which these places satisfy the urban and cultural needs. Among the topics
discussed, the participants affirmed how ICH cultural expressions, such as feasts
and traditional cuisine, play a role in the social construction of space from the his-
toric center.
Historical Valuation Workshop and Validation of a Preliminary List of

Intangible Cultural Heritage Elements participatory recognition of the historical
moments that shaped the territory and the forms of social organization present in
Ambalema. Likewise, a validation exercise of the preliminary list of intangible cul-
tural heritage was carried out. In this workshop, members of the community reflected
upon the history of the city center as a testimony of a memory collective. Through
objects that the participants considered to be of historical value, they built a timeline
that allowed us to understand how the historic center alludes to and encompasses a
past that must be communicated and transmitted.
Workshop of Architectural Appraisal: What Is the Value of My House? This

workshop was designed to address the need to identify, with the community, the
value of the architecture in Ambalema and understand the importance of preserva-
tion. For this purpose, a model house was used to demonstrate where the typological
characteristics of this historic center were evident. The model allowed for different
pieces to be replaced to show how different inappropriate interventions affect the
values of Ambalema’s architecture. As a complement, a practical workshop on
earthen architecture was carried out so the community could learn about mainte-
nance work for buildings built in traditional techniques (predominant building sys-
tem in Ambalema), thus, denying the preconception that stigmatizes these traditional
constructive systems as expensive and obsolete. This was based on one of the main
strategies to promote a closer relationship between the community and its material
heritage, which was to prioritize preventive conservation, as a way in which citizens
can engage and preserve cultural heritage without the mediation of experts or
institutions.
Presentation of the Diagnosis Phase of the PEMP to share the results of the
diagnosis of the PEMP with the community. In this framework, a space for dialogue
was opened on the problems and possible alternatives for solving the identified
problems.
Workshop for the Participative Construction of the Formulation of the

PEMP to put into discussion the solution alternatives proposed by the PEMP team
and adjust them according to the observations of the citizens of Ambalema.
Workshop to Present the Formulation of the Special Management and

Protection Plan to socialize with the community the results of the formulation of
the PEMP.
In-Depth Interviews In-depth interviews were conducted with the aim of expand-
ing the dialogue between the PEMP professionals and the community.
Moreover, the construction of information needed to plan the protection of heri-
tage values was accompanied by the implementation of heritage safeguarding and
protection initiatives and the fostering of capabilities in heritage management, in
partnership with citizens of Ambalema. The activities developed were the
following:
Training Workshop for Heritage Watchers (Volunteer Program of the Heritage
Division of the Ministry of Culture of Colombian) in the Historical City Center
of Ambalema training process for Heritage Watchers to strengthen local self-
management capacities to protect cultural heritage. In 2015, a process of formation
of Heritage Watchers began with the students of the educational institution Nicanor
Velásquez of Ambalema, the University of Ibagué, and the Ambaviva Foundation
and citizens interested in the conservation, management, and promotion of heritage
cultural. The result of the workshop was an initial inventory of cultural resources
that make up the cultural heritage of Ambalema.
Institutional Workshop Called “Education for the Social Appropriation and

Management of the Cultural Heritage of the Historic City Center” from a joint
understanding of the meaning and importance of cultural heritage, officials of the
local mayor’s office identified the cultural resources that make up the cultural heri-
tage of Ambalema to propose possible actions that can be carried out from each of
their roles. The officials were given a presentation on cultural heritage, its interna-
tional framework and legislation in Colombia, and its different categories. Based on
this initial presentation, officials presented their own view on what makes up
Ambalema’s heritage and how can they promote its protection.
Civil Culture Workshop Called “Myths and Legends of Ambalema for Respect
for Pedestrians” proposal that sought to stimulate a culture of respect for the life
and dignity of pedestrians in order to promote the social appropriation of Ambalema’s
cultural heritage. It promoted the use of art to send a message on respecting traffic
signals and laws in order to decrease the risk for pedestrians that walk through the
historic city center, using figures of myth and legend that are part of Ambalema’s
oral traditions.
Interinstitutional Project Formulation Workshop a training session to structure

projects for officials of the mayor’s office of Ambalema in order to leave an installed
capacity that serves as the basis for the implementation of the PEMP.
Exposition on Intervention Techniques for Maintaining Facades of the Historic

City Center of Ambalema in order to promote ownership and care of buildings
that make up this historic city center, a practical and visible intervention of its
façades was carried out, as these are one of the most recognizable components of its
cultural heritage. An open exposition on Ambalema’s architecture and practical
techniques for its preventive maintenance was presented in the city center.
Workshops on the Assessment of Heritage Values of Traditional Ambalema

Cuisine and Innovation Workshops reflection process on the traditional cuisine
as a reference point of the Ambalemuno identity, in order to evaluate its possibilities
of innovation and take advantage of intangible cultural resources to promote com-
munity well-being based on possible productive initiatives.
Workshops to Assess the Crafts Associated with the Magdalena River work-
shops where the problems and opportunities faced by artisanal fishing were
addressed, as an intangible element linked to the uses of the landscape and territory
of Ambalema.
Teaching Artisanal Fishing in School based on a proposal from the community,

the fishermen’s association of Ambalema led a ludic teaching cycle of artisanal fish-
ing for school students to promote the transmission of fishing knowledge and respect
for the river.
All these spaces allowed a holistic diagnosis of the situation of the cultural heri-
tage in Ambalema that reflects the vision of the municipality that its own inhabitants
have. This information was analyzed by the base work team and supplemented with
technical criteria to propose actions and projects that favor the appropriation and
valuation of the cultural heritage in Ambalema. These focused primarily on initia-
tives that can be carried out by community members with little effort, such as con-
ducting preventive conservation measures for the Ambalema houses that have been
built through traditional earthen architecture techniques.
5.4.2 T
eam Composition and Assessing Ambalema’s Heritage
Values and Resources
For the conformation of the team of professionals that formed the core group of the
PEMP, a structure was designed that reflected the need to design solutions in terms
of habitability of the heritage site and to propose solutions that promote the sustain-
ability of the historic city center’s values, in order to make a holistic approach that
would prioritize projects of greater impact. An interdisciplinary team was assem-
bled, consisting of architects, engineers, anthropologists, restorers, and economists,
who worked on collecting and processing data from primary, secondary, and oral
sources and surveys and whose fieldwork was the fundamental axis of the process
while also counting on local counterparts in the region in order to capture primary
information.
Once enough information had been gathered, the team proceeded to analyze and
intersect data of different characteristics (from socioeconomic statistics to the trans-
formations of houses and other heritage buildings in city center), in order to identify
the current problems of Ambalema in terms of cultural heritage and build new indi-
cators of variables that could affect the cultural assets of the municipality.
All the primary and secondary information, both technical and socioeconomic,
was structured in a geographic information system, in basic, thematic cartography,
and a large database of property and land information. This allowed spatial analysis
and the characterization of the variables, superposition, crossing of information,
consultations, and correlation, among other geoprocesses, that supported the syn-
thesis of diagnosis and decision-making process of the PEMP.
5.4.3 Processing and Analyzing Information
For the characterization and assessment of Ambalema’s cultural heritage, biblio-

graphic information was organized in thematic periods from a historical perspec-
tive. These led to establish zones within the territory where traces of each historic
period of development physically manifested. This zoning was then reinforced and
analyzed with geographic, property and land data, and problematic situations that
had been identified through the consultation, participation, and fieldwork activities.
The information was then further organized according to axes and spaces of cultural
significance (Space 1, Campoalegre; Space 2, Foundational Center; Space 3, The
railroad; Space 4, Center expansion; Space 5, La Esperanza; Space 6, Nicanor
Velásquez; Space 7, Industrial). In each of these, the cultural elements that make up
its particular heritage value were referenced. In order to process the relevant infor-
mation of each of these spaces of cultural significance, heritage valuation sheets
were prepared and constructed for each of the zones. This facilitates decision-
making, in sections of the territory, grounded in protecting the different cultural
expressions and tangible heritage that reference a connection with memory and
identity.
5.5 A
ssessing the Vulnerability Status of Urban Heritage
Values
5.5.1 Problem Tree Analysis for Ambalema
To synthesize the results of the diagnosis, a logical framework approach was

applied, a tool that requires identifying a central problem that affects a situation or
condition, the “condition” being the historic city center of Ambalema and which is
the basis for the formulation of a plan to solve the central problem.
Based on this methodology, the problem tree was built,4 which for this case relied
on Vester’s matrix5 to identify the central problem from which the circumstances
that affect the sustainability of the historic city center derive from (De los Heros
Rondenil 2015). In this way, the logical framework allowed the identification and
prioritization, from the central problem, of the circumstances (causes) that put at
risk (effects) the values attributed to the Property of Cultural Interest, as well as
those particular scenarios that affect the management and actions derived from the
policies developed for cultural heritage protection (Fig. 5.3).
The problem tree is a result implementing this exercise which was first applied
by the base team of the PEMP and then supplemented and deepened in different
workshops and conducted with different stakeholders in the town of Ambalema
(officials, citizens, and councilors, among others).
Next, the critical aspects identified in the diagnosis are synthesized, by means of
the evaluation of the frequency of certain aspects, as well as the deficiencies in the
dynamics of assessment of values, of sources of information, and, therefore, in the
application of the management instruments.
5.5.2 Identifying the Central Problem
In the case of Ambalema, there are three fundamental aspects that, if not
addressed, threaten to distort the cultural significance of the municipality: con-
flicts in urban planning and regulations; poor prioritization of actions by the
local administration and civil organizations, for the protection and safeguarding
4
Diagram showing the current undesirable or problem situation, along with other problems identi-
fied around the main problem and cause and effect relationships between
5
A tool that facilitates the identification and determination of the causes and consequences of a
problematic situation. A qualitative technique developed by Frederic Vester.
Fig. 5.3 Problem tree elaborated for the historic city center of Ambalema. Elaborated for the
PEMP of Ambalema 2016
of the values attributed to the historic city center; and the weakening of the
social fabric and leadership as the basis for initiatives aiming to protect cultural
heritage.
This situation has been aggravated by the scarce economic diversification of the
municipality, financial instability, the concentration of labor demand in a few stake-
holders, and the lack of regional articulation to consolidate an economic vocation in
the municipality. In other development planning instruments, there is an absence of
projects that address the decrease in the quality of life, the loss of identity of the
Ambalemunos, the high vulnerability of the workers situation, the exodus of the
population, the lack of investment in the maintenance of buildings in the historic
city center, and, in general, an increase in the poverty of the inhabitants that particu-
larly impacts the young and the elderly, which is detrimental for the sustainability
of traditional cultural practices. Therefore, the PEMP went further than being an
instrument of heritage management to being a road map for development with cul-
ture at its epicenter.
In this sense, it has been identified that the cultural significance of Ambalema as
a referent of the economic history of Colombia and of urban development in terms
of productive dynamics is being blurred by the economic and social situation that
Ambalema currently faces. Therefore, Ambalema is in dire need of investment
opportunities that may allow the diversification of its economy in new sectors in
Cause Effect
•Lack of identification, prioritization and •Loss of institutional legitimacy on behalf of the

coordination of efficient actions for the protection community, due to the lack of capacity of the local
of the historic city center (Governance) administration to properly manage the heritage
•Poor planning and urban regulation of the historic site (Governance)
city center (Habitability) •Loss of values , lifestyle, and significance of this
•Lack of capacities to gather and negotiate more heritage site (Habitability)
resources for the management of the historic city •Exodus of the population and loss of identity and
center (Habitability-external stakeholders) self-esteem (Social Sustainability)
•Weakening of the social fabric and leadership in •Increased poverty and decrease in the quality of
the historic city center (Social Sustainability) life for the lower income bracket of the local
•Scarce economic diversification of the municipality population (Economic Sustainability)
(Economic Sustainability) •Alterations to the environmental conditions of
•Decrease in public health and sustainability of buildings, public spaces and places where
cultural practices based on their relation to natural traditional crafts and festive acts are conducted
elements, such as artisanal fishing in the historic (Environmental Sustainability)
city center due to environmental impacts
(Environmental Sustainability-external
stakeholders)
Fig. 5.4 Causes and effects of the central problem of the PEMP. Elaborated for the PEMP of
Ambalema 2016
order to generate more capital that can create a stronger sense pride and identifica-
tion with the town itself, deterring the current exodus of people to larger cities, and
generating more local purchasing power which can help drive the circulation of
cultural goods and services locally, based on traditional and cultural practices. On
the other hand, the city lacks resources to invest in the protection and safeguarding
of its cultural heritage. Thus, economic sustainability was identified as a main factor
in identifying the central problem. This leads to the central problem of the PEMP:
The loss of heritage values of the historic city center of Ambalema due to the altera-
tion of the traditional way of life because of economic hardship. Having identified
the central problem, the next step was the systematization of the causes that gener-
ate the risks and the state of vulnerability of the heritage values. Next, in order to
understand the causes of risks to the heritage values of Ambalema, the effects of
such causes were identified. Aiming to generate concrete changes in the framework
for development of the city, the information gathered was analyzed to help develop
policy components and guidelines for the protection and safeguarding of cultural
heritage. The following causes and effects were identified (Fig. 5.4).
5.6 Developing Policies and Actions
Formulating actions and policies that make up the whole process of planning,
design, and implementation of the PEMP aimed at the sustainability of heritage
values in dialogue with the development needs of Ambalema required the construc-
tion of strategies, programs, and projects, derived from a defined tree of objectives
that in turn responds to the risks and vulnerabilities identified in the latter stage. For
each component (governance, housing, social and economic sustainability, and
environmental sustainability), short- and medium-term targets were proposed. This

eased the definition of guidelines for the main local stakeholders (government, civil
society, academia, and private sector) who make up the management framework of
Ambalema’s heritage to follow and form a structure of cooperation. These strategies
were defined as follows:
1. Institutional Strengthening: Formulate planning, urban management, and moni-
toring tools necessary to ensure proper management of cultural heritage of
Ambalema.
2. Heritage Education: Design and implement educational activities linking the
local population (civil and institutional society) with the cultural heritage of
Ambalema to strengthen the bonds of territorial identity.
3. Enhancing Productivity: Design and implement actions to promote economic
activation in Ambalema, based on cultural resources and territorial assets.
4. Infrastructure: Promote the development of intervention projects fostering

Ambalema’s cultural heritage as a development tool for local benefit.
5. Memory and Heritage: Consolidate history and “memory” of Ambalema in the
territory through enhancement of cultural heritage appropriation, both tangible
and intangible, as key resource for the culture of the Ambalema community.
For each of the strategies, financing, information sources and goals, and an orga-
nizational structure were designed. For example, in the case of the first strategy,
Institutional Strengthening, four projects were identified with the sole purpose of
enhancing the capacities of local authorities to develop heritage protection projects
and promoting their capacities to regulate urban planning for a cultural heritage
perspective. The strategy hopes to create more autonomy in the decision-making
process at the local level and address the lack of investment in Ambalema’s cultural
heritage by fostering capacities in project formulation aimed at competing for inter-
national and national financing sources. The financing structure aimed at formulat-
ing low-cost but high impact projects, where capacity building is key. A detailed
budget for each of the projects was formulated, which resulted in a total of an esti-
mated 40,000 US dollars that had to be invested for this project. Three different
sources were identified: public sources, private sources, and international coopera-
tion. For each of these sources, specific funds and a model of how to present proj-
ects for them were listed in the detailed description of the specific projects. In the
case of capacity building in the use of geographic referencing tools, the University
of Ibagué was identified as an ally that could offer such training for low cost, which
could be financed by the local municipality. In terms of information sources, each
project had geographic referencing and a map of actors with a specific database that
must be articulated in the project, which in turn was the basis of its organizational
structure of implementation, with a leading institution or actor, a beneficiary, and
possible allies, in hopes that these projects can be easily be led by local
stakeholders.
Finally, the strategies are supported by a proposed functional restructuring of
local government for the articulation of functions with respect to the proposed
PEMP and a new local regulatory system. All of the projects aim to generate
employment through various heritage activities that can be funded through public-
private alliances, heritage funds offered by the Colombian government, and interna-
tional cooperation, especially regarding environmental protection of the local
ecosystem. Therefore, heritage becomes a motivation in fostering development in
Ambalema, by expanding the notion of cultural resources beyond architecture and
monuments.
5.7 Conclusion
As seen through this paper, Ambalema’s case study demonstrates three main aspects.
First, the HUL approach has acknowledged a reality that all towns face when plan-
ning for cultural heritage within the framework of sustainable development. Cultural
heritage in its material expressions cannot be divided from communities’ ways of
life, national and local values, as well as elements of urban structure where a city’s
life converges. Ambalema is a classic case where the integration of urban planning
patterns, social appropriation of heritage, as well as the sustainability of the historic
areas need to be integrated.
Second, the HUL steps are not only the lowest common denominators when
applying this methodology but are also enhancers of the integration of social factors
when developing cultural heritage management plans in cities. All the strategies
applied when constructing Ambalema PEMP were articulated with the HUL steps,
which helped this PEMP to position cultural heritage and peoples’ ways of life in
the center of the spatial development plan.
Lastly, the HUL approach proposes a framework to understand the character of
the historic areas that also depends on local culture. All the policies and actions
proposed by Ambalema’s PEMP were based on this town’s reality under its cultural,
social, political, and economic bases. This helped to bring heritage conservation
processes into the center of the enhancement of well-being and quality of life as
defined by Ambalemunos.
References
Bernal Duffo, E. (2013). El Río Magdalena: Escenario primordial de la patria. Credencial, 10–24.
Colantonio, A., & Dixon, T. (2011). Urban regeneration & social sustainability: Best practice
from European cities. Wiley-Blackwell: Hoboken.
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. (1990). Carta de Quito: Conclusiones del colo-
quio sobre la preservación de los centros históricos ante el crecimiento de las ciudades con-
temporáneas (UNESCO/PNUD, Quito, 1977). Informes de la Construcción, 41(405), enero/
febrero, 13–14.
De los Heros Rondenil, M. (2015). La planeación estratégica en la educación. La aplicación en
el proyecto Fogise. En: Giovanna Valenti Nigrini (coordinator) Nueva cultura educativa: Los
sistemas educativos estatales (pp. 187–226). Mexico: FLACSO.
Decreto Único Reglamentario 1080 del 26 de mayo de. (2015). Por medio del cual se expide el
Decreto Único Reglamentario.
Duarnd, L. (2002). La relación ambiente-cultura en antropología: recuento y perspectivas. Nueva
Antropología, A.C., XVIII(61), 169–184.
Mendoza, M. C. (2010). Elaboracion de la primera fase del plan especial de manejo y protección
(pemp) del centro historico de ambalema y su correspondiente zona de influencia, en el depar-
tamento del tolima. Ministerio de Cultura: Bogotá.
Ministerio de Cultura. (2011). Legislación y normas generales para la para la gestión, protección
y salvaguardia del patrimonio cultural en Colombia/Ley 1185 y su reglamentación. Bogotá:
Ministerio de Cultura.
Museo Nacional de Colombia. (2010). Navegando por una nación. Bogotá: D’Vinni SA.
Novelio, V. (marzo de 1984). La cultura obrera, una contrapropuesta cultural. Nueva Antropología
VI(23), 45–56.
Chapter 6
Integrating Policy: The Historic Urban
Landscape Approach in Amsterdam
Abstract This chapter focusses on the question of how the Historic Urban

Landscape approach influenced Amsterdam’s conservation planning policies. The
research made use of a policy analysis tool (Fig. 6.1) developed to cross-relate poli-
cies in a multilevel governance setting. This tool supported the analyses of local
heritage policies and policy practices (Veldpaus, Historic urban landscapes: framing
the integration of urban and heritage planning in multilevel governance. Eindhoven.
Retrieved from http://www.tue.nl/en/publication/ep/p/d/ep-uid/482697/, 2015;
Veldpaus, Pereira Roders, Learning from a legacy: Venice to Valletta. Change Over
Time 4(2):244. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/change_over_time/,
2014) in a series of three workshops (May 2014) and a set of six follow-up peer
interviews (December 2016). The tool relates heritage management processes to
heritage concepts, following the HUL recommendation (UNESCO, 2011). The
tool is based on an analysis of international guidelines and offers a systematic way
to assess and reflect on policies and practices in relation to the used definitions of
heritage. The aim of this tool is not designed to judge the appropriateness of local
policies or rate their successfulness, but rather to understand which concepts of
cultural heritage are used and how they are applied in order to discuss them more in
depth.
The chapter focusses on the insights from the workshops and interviews that
emerged by revealing differences between HUL and local policy, as well as differ-
ences in the used heritage concepts between Amsterdam’s urban planning and heri-
tage management officers. While the focus of this chapter is on HUL in Amsterdam,
the wider aim of the research is to develop a tool to support systematic comparative
policy analysis.
L. Veldpaus (*)
School of Architecture, Planning & Landscape, Newcastle University,
Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
e-mail: loes.veldpaus@ncl.ac.uk
H. Bokhove
Programme Manager Central Borough (Stadsdeel Centrum), Amsterdam, The Netherlands
e-mail: h.bokhove@amsterdam.nl

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_6
112 L. Veldpaus and H. Bokhove
Keywords Collaboration · Multilevel governance · Workshop · Peer interviews ·

Policy analysis, discussion and development · Heritage practices, policies, and
conservation planning
6.1 Introduction: HUL as a Landscape Approach
The Historic Urban Landscape approach uses a definition of landscape that is uni-
versal, dynamic, hierarchical, and holistic and understood or managed through an
integrated, multidisciplinary approach that embraces all its components (Brown
et al. 2005; Taylor et al. 2015). The landscape approach is therefore not about trans-
formation in itself but about guiding the nature of the transformation. It addresses
the people and the quality of the resources and relationships that form a landscape
over time (Cortina 2011; Dalglish 2012). To manage heritage, a wide range of poli-
cies, laws, and regulations are readily available. These laws, principles, and guide-
lines influence each other and are also influenced by the evolving understanding of
the nature of cultural heritage (Pickard 2002). Whether the policies and laws that
apply are very rigid, more indicative, or mostly absent, they have an impact on the
historic built environment, historic preservation, and the perception of heritage.
They not only set limits of acceptable change but also effectively decide what is
considered heritage, officially and, more broadly, perceptually. Therefore it is
important to go beyond a theoretical discussion on the heritage concept and reveal,
compare, and reflect on how it is used in policies and practices.
HUL is based on the premise that heritage is a process, a process of people (who)
assigning value (why) to something (what). Supranational policies often use limited
concepts of heritage, setting strict categories as to who can define heritage, what can
become designated and why, and even how heritage has to be dealt with. HUL oper-
ates in a wider context of ideas and guidelines that is moving away from these
restrictions. HUL, as such, aims at a process of heritage production and manage-
ment in which the who, what, why, and how are not restricted to certain categories
or experts but inclusive and open.
This chapter presents the results of an analysis of Amsterdam’s urban and heri-
tage policies and their relation to what the HUL approach recommends in this
respect (Veldpaus 2015). The analysis aims to reveal, compare, and discuss the heri-
tage concepts as used in local policy in relation to the HUL approach and reveal the
discrepancies and similarities. This then does not provide a solution but a platform
for debate among and between the various departments in local government involved
in the urban management.
The review of Amsterdam’s urban and heritage policy using the policy analysis
tool does two things. First, it reveals the discrepancies and similarities between
what HUL recommends and what is the practice according to local policy makers.
This is not to judge or rate the implementation of HUL, but for local policy makers
and officers to assess and reflect on their practices and decide whether or not to
revise their policies or practices. Second, the tool aims to support discussion to
stimulate the integration of urban and heritage policies and practices. It facilitates
6 Integrating Policy: The Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Amsterdam 113
comparison of the interpretations of local policy between urban and heritage

departments and reveals potential obstacles in the integration of those policies and
practices across those departments. The policy analysis tool breaks down the defini-
tion of heritage into smaller portions, allowing the concept to be discussed more
easily. Putting those pieces back together as an integrated narrative then reveals
known and unknown gaps in policies and between practices.
6.2 Analysing Policy Practices: An Approach
The policy analysis focusses on four main questions: What is heritage? Why is it
heritage? Who is involved in the process of heritage management? How is the
process organised (What, Why, How, and Who, Figs. 6.1 and 6.2)? The categories
in the analysis tool are deducted from supranational heritage documents as pro-
duced over the past decades (Veldpaus 2015; Veldpaus and Pereira Roders 2014).
Amsterdam’s policy practices were analysed in a series of three focus group work-
shops in 2014, to introduce, fill out, and discuss the heritage concepts and cross-
relations in the tool (Fig. 6.1) and its results. The results were further reflected on
in a follow-up lecture (April 2016) and in a series of six follow-up peer interviews
conducted in November and December 2016.1
The workshop and the peer-interview methods were chosen to create a collegial
setting close to the normal context the participants work in. The aim was also to
stimulate cross-disciplinary debate between departments and levels of governance,
WHO WHY WHAT

categories
actors values intangible attributes tangible attributes

land
community experts governmental process societal traditional process societal asset related area asset
scape
Indirectly involved community
Directly involved community
Developers / private sector
Non-professional experts
Professional experts
Scientific experts
Policy officers
Policy makers
Politicians
Other cultural value
Economic value
Political value
Ecological value
Social value
Scientific value
Historic value
Age value
Aesthetic value
Development or evolution
Management process
Community / people(s)
Relation(s) to meaning (association)
Knowledge, traditions, practices
Use, function
Character
Relation(s) to context (location)
Concept or artistic trend
Urban landscape / Everything
The result of layering
Area
Context or setting
Ensemble
Natural element
Urban element
Building
Building element
taxonomy definitions
step 1 - inventory resources
step 2 - define value
step 3 - define vulnerability

process steps
step 4 - develop strategy

H
HOW
step 5 - integrate strategies
step 6 - prioritize
step 7 - built partnerships
step 8 - monitor resources
Fig. 6.1 Policy analysis tool cross-relating the how with the what, why, and who categories, based
on the how column of the wider analyis framework in Fig. 6.2
1
Peer-interviews were conducted by the 2nd author of this chapter, who at the time of research was
the manager of the Amsterdam World Heritage Bureau.
x Values
Values x Values x Values x
Values
Values
Values
Fig. 6.2 Wider Analysis Framework
as suggested by HUL, by creating an environment open for honest debate and reflec-
tion on daily practice. The three workshops were held with policy officers from both
urban and heritage departments in Amsterdam municipality. Follow-up peer inter-
views were conducted about 2 years later. For the workshops, we invited policy
officers in the fields of heritage management and urban planning, working wither
for the district/conservation area (Central Borough) or the wider city/region. This
was done to enable an overview and comparison of the different groups. The partici-
pants came from a variety of departments within Amsterdam: the Planning
Department (R&D), Bureau of Monuments and Archaeology (M&A), the Central
Borough District, and Bureau of World Heritage (BWE). The peer interviews were
with individuals from each of the categories, but not all of the interviewees were
present at the workshops.
6.3 HUL: Process in Practice, Practice in Process
UNESCO’s General Conference (2010) recommended ‘Member States and

relevant local authorities identify within their specific contexts the critical

steps (Fig. 6.1 how) to implement the Historic Urban Landscape approach’
(UNESCO World Heritage Centre n.d.). In the workshops, the participants agreed
that while those process steps are familiar and in an ideal world they would be fol-
lowed, they do not necessarily reflect reality. Political choices, biases, and ‘every-
day reality’ all play their role in influencing which of the steps are implemented, to
which extent, and in what order. The selection and order of steps taken is, con-
sciously or not, tailored per project. In the follow-up interviews, it became clear
that the HUL steps had become a consciously used tool by some heritage officers.
The recommendation and the provided steps are considered a valuable guide.
They stimulate genuine consideration of process, as well as the issues mentioned
in the steps, such as sustainability, climate change, and participation. For most how-
ever, the focus is on using the principles, and the importance of using an integrated
approach, rather than the systematic application of the suggested steps. Across the
workshops and the interviews, the participants expressed that they feel they are
implementing HUL to a certain extent, if only because the integration of urban and
heritage policies is part of the strong planning tradition which is in ‘Amsterdam’s
DNA’.
6.4 The Heritage Concept in Practice
Looking at the results of the workshops and follow-up peer interviews, we would
like to share a selection of the results considered particularly valuable by the
Amsterdam policy officers and that may be relevant in a wider context. Reflecting
on Amsterdam’s policies through the HUL workshops showed that the conceptuali-
sation of heritage in Amsterdam is becoming broader. This broadening is character-
ised by, for example, a move towards looking at more comprehensive areas,
including younger assets, and going beyond values more traditionally associated
with heritage, such as aesthetic and historic values, by including economic and
social values. At the same time, the results of the workshop demonstrated that while
there is broadening, a relatively traditional conceptualisation of heritage is still
more common in heritage policy in Amsterdam. When looking at what is consid-
ered heritage in daily policy practice in Amsterdam, the results reveal a focus on
objects and areas, and much less on for example the wider landscape.
It was confirmed by the participants that most of the policy known to and used by
them was directed at assets and areas and less at the entire urban landscape. Although
some participants argued that the ‘landscape-based’ approach was an important part
of the local policy, it soon became clear that their definition of ‘landscape-based’
corresponded with the area-based concepts of heritage in the policy analysis tool.
This shows how important discussion on concepts and interpretations is, and the
tool very much stimulated this discussion. The importance of being aware of signifi-
cant differences in interpretations of key definitions was one of the insights that
emerged from the workshops. While a variety of interpretations is not problematic
in itself, the used concepts have to be discussed, and practices analysed, to ensure
common ground (Hajer 1993). A similar issue arose around the definition of intan-
gible heritage. The discussion on intangible heritage confirmed that the main focus
in Amsterdam is on the tangible, the material, and intangible heritage is considered
a somewhat ‘foreign’ concept. One of the participants indicated that the intangible
would be ‘a bonus that follows the tangible’. The discussions revealed that despite
the fact that there is less familiarity with it, intangible heritage is considered valu-
able. It, however, has no significant position in urban management, mainly because
the participants perceived a lack of tools to deal with it in this context. Policy mak-
ers in Amsterdam do feel that the importance of intangible heritage has been grow-
ing in recent years, and there is a clear interest in improving understandings of how
to deal with intangible heritage. One reason the concept is unclear might be the way
it was introduced to most of the workshop participants. The concept ‘intangible
heritage’, as applied in Amsterdam, it appears, has mostly been introduced by how
it is defined in the World Heritage nomination file (2010). Notably, ‘intangible heri-
tage’ was not introduced into Amsterdam policy as a concept with a general defini-
tion; it was only introduced by its application in the context of this specific
WH nomination, leaving it up to the policy officers to deduce the more general defi-
nition of intangible heritage for use in their daily practice. The workshop provided
a valuable platform to discuss the concept further.
6.5 Participation in Heritage
In HUL there is a strong emphasis on being inclusive and having all stakeholders
around the table. Particularly, it focusses on community involvement in all stages of
the process. The results from the workshop showed that governmental stakeholders
in Amsterdam mostly work with other governmental stakeholders, implying an
inward focus when it comes to the management process. The results also showed
that the local community would mostly be informed about decisions, rather than
have a more active or decision-making role in the process (see Fig. 6.3). Moreover,
local community participate mainly in the part of the process that is about
decision making
enrolled
consulted
Total amount of answers in %
informed
Results per taxonomy definition | who
Fig. 6.3 Results of the tool on the question ‘“who is involved, and how’” in heritage projects in
Amsterdam the result from all steps aggregated per type of stakeholder group
identification of heritage and not for example in the management of it. The partici-
pants received this low ‘score’ on participation as a somewhat surprising and dis-
turbing result, as they considered their approaches highly participatory. However,
they also confirmed that there was no standard procedure to actively involve the
community throughout the process. While participants felt they work more with
local communities than legally required, they also concluded they should probably
strengthen community involvement and, rather than aim to reach more people,
develop more active forms of participation.
The follow-up interviews, carried out two years later, reveal a more outward-
looking focus and more active participatory practices. The main challenge identified
by the interviewees is around the implementation of collaborative practices. They
are becoming more common, and some innovative participation pilots are being
undertaken at the moment of interview. However, the best approach is still very
much debated. Co-creative practices, or the lack thereof, they feel, should not
depend only on vocal societal groups; it should be an active undertaking by the
municipal organisation to involve a wide and diverse audience. This then leads to
the question of ‘how to deal with dissonance and different voices’, as well as how to
deal with expectations and expectation management. Clarity on where the decisive
power lies and who has which responsibilities is considered very important, so as to
not raise unrealistic expectations. These questions link back to the issue revealed by
the 2014 workshops that participation is mostly undertaken in earlier stages of the
HUL process, e.g. the identification of heritage, while the management of it remains
a responsibility of the municipality. That can easily lead to unrealistic expectations,
when an identified ‘wish list’ of heritage sites does not match the reality of available
capacity or financial resources in the municipal organisation. While the focus is on
collaboration with citizens and entrepreneurs, improving the outward focus also
includes nurturing stronger and more numerous partnerships and collaborations
with knowledge institutes and commercial stakeholders.
6.6 HUL and the Integration of Urban and Heritage Policies
HUL emphasises the importance of ‘the integration of historic urban area conser-
vation, management and planning strategies into local development processes and
urban planning’ (UNESCO 2011). Looking at the integration of heritage and plan-
ning and the similarities and differences in approach between the heritage and
urban departments was therefore an important part of the research. In the work-
shops, the participants expressed a need for further integration of policies and
thinking. One of the differences identified between urban and heritage depart-
ments, through the tool and the discussions, was that the heritage department is
proactively defining what is of value and develops policy to protect those values
against potential threats. Conversely, in urban departments, the idea of proactively
defining the vulnerabilities of a certain area to then develop policies, plans, or
projects was more common. As with the differences in definitions, it is not about
the difference in focus but about awareness of this difference. Another identified
difference was the scale of their work. In the process of identifying value or vulner-
abilities, heritage departments tended to focus on objects and areas, while the
urban departments focussed on areas or the entire urban landscape.
The follow-up interviews show how the perception of integration of policies
evolved over the past years. The interviewees are more confident that Amsterdam is
using an integrated approach and refer to this process of improved integration in a
positive way. There were substantial changes to the administrative structure after
elections in 2014. One of the changes regarded the role and responsibilities of the
‘sub-municipal’ (borough) councils, and policy making powers shifted, and in 2015
this was followed by a large-scale reorganisation of Amsterdam’s civil service. This
resulted in the creation of an umbrella department of Space and Sustainability
(dienst Ruimte en Duurzaamheid) for all of Amsterdam, which includes integrated
area teams per urban district, as well as special project teams for large-scale urban
projects, and ‘team-city’, covering wider Metropolitan developments. The daily
practices of urban development in Amsterdam are now mostly organised around
those area teams which focus on a broad understanding of spatial quality. This area-
led governance structure creates urban development partnerships in which heritage
is represented by someone throughout the entire process. As such, heritage officers
feel they are better positioned to provide advice on how to deal with the significance
of heritage in planning and projects. This, according to the interviewees, not only
supports an integrated approach of working, it also stimulates interdepartmental
learning. The structure also provides chances for a better embedding of the HUL
approach, as taken forward by the heritage department. However, interviewees
emphasise that, in addition to the modified system, the role of a few very enthausi-
astic and engaged individuals pushing for better integration and collaboration was,
and still is, significant and instrumental. While the area teams are considered a posi-
tive change, the new governance structure also means the decision-making is more
centralised and the political power moved ‘up’. Decisions are now being made on
city level, rather than borough level. This, it is felt, leads to the risk of decreased
understanding and acknowledgement of the more particular issues and values of the
specific areas, as the direct connection between decisions and the area management
has been lost. This is also the case for the even more abstract regional level and plan-
ning documents such as the regional structural vision. So the area-led approach
provides a platform for on-the-ground application and dissemination of the princi-
ples of HUL without it being part of formal city or regional policy. It was suggested
that a workshop to develop a heritage-led regional vision, might provide a very
productive joint exercise to overcome the disconnect between governance levels.
Nonetheless, all interviewees mentioned the area-led approach as an important
step towards an integrated way of working. Other tools are also considered impor-
tant in the process of integration. The Dutch National Planning Policy, for example,
has become much more sensitive to heritage arguments, heritage-led planning, and
integrated approaches with subsequently the Belvedere program (1999-2009), the
‘Character in Focus’ policy (de Boer and Visie voor erfgoed en ruimte project group
2011), and most recently the new integrated Heritage Act (Ministerie van
Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties 2017; Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel

Erfgoed 2016). Heritage policy however, will still be ‘split’ between the Heritage
Act and the upcoming Environment and Planning Act (Ministerie van Infrastructuur
en Waterstaat n.d. (foreseen for 2021) which is currently being piloted. This new
Environmental Act will encompass over 25 Acts related to spatial planning and is
considered ‘heritage friendly’ as it seems much better positioned to provide oppor-
tunities for integrated planning according to the interviewees. On a local level, tools
that support integrated planning are the land use and zoning plans, which now have
to have a heritage ‘layer’. Moreover, high-rise impact assessments need to be under-
taken for proposed high rises close to the World Heritage site in Amsterdam.
Anticipating the upcomming Environmental Act, the former ‘welstandscommissie’
of Amsterdam (aesthetic quality committee) has been reformed into a spatial quality
committee, widening their scope and remit. Finally, Amsterdam has renewed its
‘heritage agenda’ (2016) which sets out actions in relation to how to integrate heri-
tage in a citywide agenda, and the city has also appointed a ‘Monumentenloods’
(MonumentsMentor) to give advice and support citizens in their dealings with heri-
tage assets they own or want to protect or develop.
These tools are all mentioned in the interviews as supporting an integrated
approach to planning, but the people are still the main drivers. The interviewees
mention that multilevel governance is still a challenge, if only because different
levels of planning have different levels of abstraction and different aims and objec-
tives. It is felt that the linkages between the plans for the wider urban landscape and
the area plans could still be improved. For example, the acknowledgement of heri-
tage in the more abstract plans could go beyond the designated structures of heritage
such as conservation areas, listed buildings, and archaeological areas. Heritage
potential in, for example the periphery, or developing wider urban or regional links
could be explored. There is even a suggestion that the process could be turned on its
head by developing a heritage-led regional vision, which then integrates mobility,
sustainability, housing, etc. Here again the differences in definitions (discourse
coalition, Hajer 1993) arise, especially around concepts of integrated planning and
local character. While similar terminology is used, meanings deviate. This time,
however, not so much between urban and heritage policy workers, but between
levels of abstraction and governance (region, city, and area). Despite this, there is
also much common ground to work with, and while differences in opinion between
urban development and heritage officers will remain, it is felt they are growing
closer, and collaboration is considered vital by all interviewees.
6.7 Reflecting On, and Learning With
Most of the discussion points come back to one main issue: the importance of con-
tinuous reflection and debate. Heritage management, as a cultural practice, needs
inclusive and ongoing debate and the reconsideration, redevelopment, and reitera-
tion of the concepts and ideas that define it. Debate, through internal and external
exchange of practices, experiences, knowledge, and ideas, is vital to reflect criti-

cally on current policies and practices.
The Amsterdam participants have been very open to learning about HUL and
debating their own practices throughout the years of collaboration. The results show
that the process of learning from discussing the evaluation of one’s practices is con-
sidered valuable. This learning could be developed further by taking a more longi-
tudinal approach of workshops and comparison of, for example, discussion and
tool results in time. Participants also felt that internal sharing of knowledge could be
better, being more explicit about what internal knowledge there is, making time for
sharing, and exploiting it further. Moreover, learning from other cities could be
increased. Generally, an emphasis on and need for reflecting and learning is
expressed, whether that occurs internally or externally, through sharing practices,
experiences, knowledge, and ideas. Further increasing the collaboration with citi-
zens and entrepreneurs and creating stronger partnerships and collaborations with
knowledge institutes and commercial stakeholders will also support this.
Collaboration between Amsterdam and the university has been a positive experi-
ence in this process of learning from and reflecting on practices. The interviews
showed that the HUL approach had been introduced to most of the participants dur-
ing a formal collaboration between Eindhoven University of Technology2 and
Amsterdam Municipality between 2011 and 2017. This collaborative programme,
including student placements, lectures, and HUL workshops, was considered a use-
ful element in learning more about HUL and discussing heritage concepts and pol-
icy practices. The collaborative programme was not set up to just collect data for
research; it was explicitly designed in a way that would make it mutually beneficial.
Both researchers and policy officers could develop and discuss ideas of heritage and
heritage management, meet and better understand each other, and take a moment to
stand back and reflect on their daily practice. For most of the participants in
Amsterdam, the HUL as an approach provides valuable principles and underlines
the importance of using an integrated approach. While the citywide implementation
of HUL approach in the literal sense is not on the agenda, it stimulates thought
about the issues mentioned in the steps, such as sustainability, climate change, and
participation.
The use and mobility of concepts in multilevel governance is also important to
consider, by both local governments and supranational bodies such as UNESCO. In
Amsterdam, we saw the term ‘landscape approach’ being used for existing practices
(e.g. area-based approaches) and relatively new concepts such ‘intangible heritage’
being inserted into local policy and practice without providing solid background
knowledge. This can easily lead to confusion and reiterates the importance of open
and reflective discussions to increase awareness of differences between academic
and policy ‘speak’ as well as internal varieties between departments and governance
levels and the expectations that come with this.
2
First author was working at Eindhoven University of Technology, Department of the Built
Environment at the time of conducting the main part of the research (2013-2014). This chapter
presents results from both that fieldwork and the follow-up peer-interviews (2016).
Another issue to highlight is that any of the felt improvements, were to a large

extent felt to be dependent on having ‘the right people in the right positions’. For
example, the more integrated way of working between the urban and heritage
departments on projects is attributed to a few people ‘leading by example’ and
really making an effort to put those ideas into practice and support those who were
willing to contribute to the process of integration. As much as this is mentioned as
a positive experience, being dependent on particular people is also recognised as a
potential problem.
A final point of reflection is to come back to the need for continued debate. A
follow-up workshop would be considered very valuable by the Amsterdam partici-
pants. This not only confirms the previous points made about reflection and discus-
sion but also provides the opportunity to further develop the policy analysis tool.
Applying it again in Amsterdam would make a longitudinal comparison between
the results possible. Going further, future research could apply the tool in other loca-
tions to compare results and discuss the differences in approach, concepts, and solu-
tions, and thus facilitate learning from other cities. This would not be to rate cities
or judge them but to learn from, and discuss, each other’s approaches and choices.
This research was designed to allow for more systematic review of policy practices.
As the method was only comprehensively tested in Amsterdam, it would benefit
from further testing and nuancing (Veldpaus 2015, p. 112) and indeed constant
debate and reflection. In addition to learning from the outcomes in Amsterdam,
applying it in other localities could potentially be beneficial for other cities too, and
this would also be relevant for the development of the method.
References
Brown, J., Mitchell, N. J., & Beresford, M. (2005). The protected landscape approach: Linking
nature, culture and community. IUCN – The World Conservation Union.
Cortina, A. (2011). Landscape ethics: A moral commitment to responsible regional management.
Ramon Llull Journal of Applied Ethics, 1(2), 163.
Dalglish, C. (2012). Archaeology and landscape ethics. World Archaeology, 44(3), 327–341.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2012.723320.
de Boer, T., & Visie voor erfgoed en ruimte project group. (2011). Character in focus: Vision
for heritage in spatial planning/Kiezen voor karakter, Visie erfgoed en ruimte. Ministerie van
Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap. Retrieved from http://www.culturalheritageagency.nl/sites/
default/files/u6/publicatie_Characterinfocus%5B1%5D.pdf
Hajer, M. (1993). Discourse coalitions and the institutionalization of practice: The case of acid
rain in Britain. In F. Fischer & J. Forrester (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analy-
sis and planning. Durham: Duke University Press. Retrieved from http://www.oalib.com/
references/9344492.
Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties. (2017). Erfgoedwet. Pub.
L. No. BWBR0037521/2017-09-01. Retrieved from http://wetten.overheid.nl/
BWBR0037521/2017-09-01.
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Waterstaat. (n.d.). Revision of environment and plan-
ning laws. Retrieved January 25, 2018, from https://www.government.nl/topics/
spatial-planning-and-infrastructure/revision-of-environment-planning-laws
Pickard, R. (2002). A comparative review of policy for the protection of the architectural heritage
of Europe. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 8(4), 349–363. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1352725022000037191e.
Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed. (2016). Heritage Act 2016. Retrieved January 25, 2018,
from https://cultureelerfgoed.nl/publicaties/heritage-act-2016.
Taylor, K., Mitchell, N. J., & Clair, A. S. (2015). Conserving cultural landscapes: Challenges and
new directions. New York: Routledge.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape. Retrieved from http://portal.
unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=48857&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.
UNESCO World Heritage Centre. (n.d.). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape.
Retrieved January 25, 2018, from http://whc.unesco.org/en/hul/
Veldpaus, L. (2015). Historic urban landscapes: Framing the integration of urban and heri-
tage planning in multilevel governance. Eindhoven. Retrieved from http://www.tue.nl/en/
publication/ep/p/d/ep-uid/482697/
Veldpaus, L., & Pereira Roders, A. (2014). Learning from a legacy: Venice to Valletta. Change
Over Time, 4(2), 244. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/change_over_time/.
Chapter 7
The Transformational Power of the HUL
Approach: Lessons from Ballarat,
Australia, 2012–2017
Abstract This paper highlights the transformative power of the HUL approach by
exploring its innovative application in the City of Ballarat, Australia, since 2012.
Part of the global pilot phase for the HUL, Ballarat is notable for its mainstreaming
of HUL principles by local government. This has had diverse and impressive out-
comes – heritage and culture have completely permeated the city’s work; new com-
munity engagement models are being developed and implemented; and many more
partners of all kinds are buying in to a bigger vision about culture and identity than
before. A broader cultural shift can be observed in Ballarat, and HUL has been an
‘energiser’ for others to try new things. Ballarat’s experience not only highlights
how local government practice can be transformed; it predicts transformational
change at other levels of government and for heritage practice itself.
Keywords Historic urban landscape · Ballarat · Urban conservation · Heritage

practice · Local government · Community engagement · City management ·
Sustainable development
7.1 Introduction
The twenty-first century has been termed the ‘urban century’, but for much of the
twentieth century, the challenges posed by a global upswing in urbanisation have
been part of international development discourses. These have provoked sweeping
high-level policy responses that have shifted the contexts for ‘urban heritage conser-
vation’ and its ability to contribute to larger questions about the social, economic
and cultural futures. As communities, city governments and other actors strive for
S. Fayad (*)
City of Ballarat, Ballarat, VIC, Australia
e-mail: susanfayad@ballarat.vic.gov.au
K. Buckley
Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia
e-mail: kristal.buckley@deakin.edu.au

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_7
124 S. Fayad and K. Buckley
urban environments that accommodate greater numbers and more diverse residents
and uses, safeguarding and celebrating distinctive cultural and natural legacies
needs bigger thinking and more versatile tools. The search for these is increasingly
recognised as a shared quest, across immense differences, settings and scales; and
the exchange of experiences has proven powerful in motivating practitioners and
decision-makers (Bandarin and van Oers 2012, 2015).
This book focusses attention on the 5 years of dialogue, experimentation and
implementation of UNESCO’s 2011 Recommendation on the Historic Urban
Landscape (HUL) (UNESCO 2011). The waves of shifting paradigms for cities and
heritage have also emerged in the global policy discourses of sustainable develop-
ment and urbanism and coincide with a ‘cultural turn’ in the international develop-
ment sector (Winter 2015). In the lead up to the adoption of the 2015 United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (United Nations 2015), UNESCO and
other organisations advocated for the inclusion of ‘culture’ in the renewed develop-
ment agenda with a campaign tagged as ‘the future we want… includes culture’
(#culture2015goal; UNESCO 2015). While this was not adopted in its entirety, the
SDGs now include various references to culture, and one specific reference to heri-
tage. New work to operationalise the urban heritage target in the SDGs (target 11.4)
and the adoption of the ‘New Urban Agenda’ by Habitat III in 2016 (UN Habitat
2016) now sits alongside the implementation of the HUL.
In Australia, the ideas, methods and mechanisms suggested by the HUL have
attracted attention in various urban locations but especially in the central Victorian
city of Ballarat, which joined the HUL pilot program in 2012. Within the global
pilot phase for the implementation of the HUL, the City of Ballarat is notable for its
ability to demonstrate the role of the local or municipal government in leading the
dialogue and developing new approaches. This paper reflects on the transforma-
tional possibilities that have been revealed for Ballarat, and the potentially powerful
role of local governments. The transformative work is seen best in ‘how’ decisions
are made, especially in the quest for better insights, evidence and knowledge that
underpin them.
The municipality of the City of Ballarat is located in the traditional country of the
Wadawurrung and Dja Dja Wurrung peoples, in what is now known as the Central
Goldfields region of the State of Victoria in south-eastern Australia. Melbourne, the
large metropolis and state capital, is located approximately 115 km to the southeast
(Fig. 7.1).
The most valorised characteristics of Ballarat’s urban form and architecture were
established during the rapid transformations of landscapes and populations that
characterised the Victorian gold rush from the 1850s (Fig. 7.2). Today’s Ballarat
includes this historic centre and a number of nineteenth- and twentieth-century sub-
urbs, each with their own characters, cultures and histories. Ballarat is therefore
comprised of a number of separate but interlocking urban and rural landscapes,
shaped fundamentally by the resources and constraints of the natural environment
(Context Pty Ltd 2013). Ballarat is a thriving regional city of over 100,000 people1
1
The municipality of Ballarat includes urban, rural and satellite townships over a land area of
73,867 hectares (739 km2) and overall population density of 1.36 persons per hectare.
7 The Transformational Power of the HUL Approach: Lessons from Ballarat… 125
Fig. 7.1 Location of the city of Ballarat in Australia and the State of Victoria. (Source: City of
Ballarat)
Fig. 7.2 The historic central business district sits high on a basalt ridge overlooking the Eureka
goldfields below and is known for both its architecture and setting. (Source: Falcon Aerial
Photography & Video for City of Ballarat)
and is a major driver of regional growth and development, providing services to

more than 400,000 people. It is a city with a long legacy of manufacturing and
agricultural support, although its economic future is changing as these sectors
restructure.
Discussion about ‘change’ is a constant in Ballarat, particularly in light of fore-
casts which have identified it as the fastest growing regional city in the State (The
Courier 2014). Projections of population growth predict that Ballarat will need to
accommodate a 60% population increase between 2015 and 2040 (City of Ballarat
2015a), bringing discourses about the future into the sometimes-uneasy present.
There will be new communities, new urban elements, new uses and new demands
on infrastructure. There are community concerns about how these changes can be
accommodated by the city, and the impacts on Ballarat’s historic character.
These are new contexts for the city council’s thinking about the purposes of heri-
tage. Heritage has become a focal point in local politics, and the politics of manag-
ing change was one of the motivators for the city government to formally engage in
the HUL. In 2013 the City of Ballarat became the first local government in the world
to sign onto an international HUL pilot program. Joining the global HUL pilot was
made possible by formal partnerships between the City of Ballarat and the World
Heritage Institute of Training and Research for the Asia and the Pacific Region
under the auspices of UNESCO (WHITR-AP)2 (Shanghai, China) and Deakin
University (Australia) (WHITR-AP and City of Ballarat 2013). However, as this
paper will demonstrate, this was a small beginning to what has become a multitude
of creative partnerships.
7.1.1 Heritage Practice in Australia
To understand the differences made possible through the use of the HUL in Ballarat,
it is useful to briefly outline the existing regulatory and practice frameworks that
establish and guide heritage conservation in Australia. Australia is a federation of
six States and two self-governing Territories. The Australian Constitution creates a
finite list of powers for the national (or ‘Commonwealth’) government, leaving
most powers related to the identification, protection and management of heritage to
the States and Territories (Boer and Wiffen 2006). The Commonwealth government
deals only with matters of national significance; and each of the States/Territories
has established legal frameworks for heritage. For the most part, there are separate
laws, policies and agencies for each of what have been termed the ‘three
environments’:
• Natural Heritage – focussed primarily on the system of protected areas, threatened
and endangered species and the conservation of biodiversity.
2
WHITR-AP is a Category 2 Centre under the auspices of UNESCO, providing a platform for
relevant UNESCO strategic programs.
• Indigenous Cultural Heritage – the cultural heritage of Aboriginal and Torres

Strait Islander peoples, including the continuing cultural traditions and tangible
evidence of the immense time depth of the human history of the continent (at
least 50,000 years).
• ‘Historic’ Cultural Heritage – associated with the histories of both Indigenous
peoples and the culturally diverse non-Indigenous peoples that have migrated to
Australia since the British invasion and colonisation of the Australian continent
in the late eighteenth century
The conceptual framework of ‘values-based management’ of heritage is well
established in Australian legislation and practice, including through the relatively
widespread use of the Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural
Significance (‘the Burra Charter’). First adopted in 1979 and revised several times
since, the Burra Charter (Australia ICOMOS 2013) is a non-government docu-
ment, but it has co-evolved with Australian government legislation and policy, and
its influence on the dialogue about heritage conservation has been substantial
(Walker 2014).
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural heritage is protected by
Commonwealth and State/Territory laws (Boer and Wiffen 2006). These are
informed by human rights instruments such as the United Nations Declaration on
the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) (United Nations 2007) and the historic
decision of the Australian High Court in the ‘Mabo case’ of 1993 that recognised
the existence of native title at the time of British colonisation and its persistence into
the present (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies
2015). In the State of Victoria, Aboriginal cultural heritage is protected and man-
aged through the recognition of Traditional Owners who are empowered to make
decisions concerning the protection and impacts on places of cultural significance
to Aboriginal people (State of Victoria 2006).
In Australia, intangible cultural heritage is far less established in legislation,
policy and government programs than ‘place’ heritage. Despite its long-standing
participation in the 1972 World Heritage Convention (UNESCO 1972) and 19
World Heritage properties (UNESCO 2017), Australia has yet to indicate any inten-
tion to ratify the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible
Cultural Heritage of Humanity (UNESCO 2003). Nevertheless, in 2016, Victorian
Government legislation for Aboriginal heritage was revised to establish, for the first
time in Australia, specific legal mechanisms for safeguarding the intangible heritage
of Aboriginal peoples (Aboriginal Victoria 2016).
Local governments (councils) are established by the States and constitute the
third ‘tier’ or ‘sphere’ of government in Australia. There are 560 local councils in
Australia (ALGA 2017), which operate according to State laws. This level of gov-
ernment is the responsible authority for the majority of Australia’s statutory pro-
tected heritage (HCOANZ 2008). For the City of Ballarat, this includes identifying
and protecting heritage in the Ballarat Planning Scheme (City of Ballarat 2017b);
acting as an approval authority for development that has potential to impact
Indigenous and non-Indigenous heritage; as an owner of local, state and nationally

significant heritage; and as a manager/trustee of heritage on behalf of the State
(HCOANZ 2008).
Planning structures are especially significant in determining heritage outcomes
at the local level. In Victoria, a standardised system for planning schemes includes
the imperative for local councils to establish a schedules of places of historic heri-
tage significance that are then subject to the provisions of the ‘Heritage Overlay’
planning controls. To assist, most councils employ specialist ‘Heritage Advisors’
and planners. The many ‘heritage versus development’ conflicts that arise are
resolved by council decision-making processes or through State appeal mecha-
nisms. Development interests and community activists alike are adept in using these
mechanisms, leaving council staff in the middle of what are often highly-contested
processes. In this typical scenario, there are few opportunities taken to look more
broadly at the urban environment, to look beyond the tangible attributes of heritage
or to engage in dialogue with citizens about the future.
7.1.2 Heritage Practice in Ballarat
Ballarat is well-known for its history and heritage – especially its gold rush history
and lavish Victorian era city centre streetscapes.3 These form part of local and
regional tourism promotion and product development. The communities of Ballarat
are diverse, but citizens are accomplished participants in heritage advocacy, and
there are several long-standing active community-based organisations.
The systems in place for the identification and protection of heritage places in the
City of Ballarat constitute a well-developed example of the generalised Australian
snapshot presented above. There is 1 place in Ballarat entered in the National
Heritage List and more than 60 individual places on the Victorian Heritage Register
(deemed to meet the high threshold of ‘state’ significance and managed through the
provisions of the state Heritage Act [State of Victoria 2017]). However, the majority
of the municipality’s historic heritage places – including 26 precincts – are pro-
tected and managed by the City of Ballarat through the provisions of its planning
scheme (Fig. 7.3). These places have been identified through a large number of
professional studies conducted since the late 1970s.
The City has been responsive to its heritage responsibilities. There are over
10,000 properties included in protected by heritage controls, generating ongoing
work to conduct statutory planning assessments for development. At the same time,
the provisions of the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (State of Victoria
2006) require investigations and development of agreed management plans for
places with Aboriginal heritage values before planning permission can be granted
for certain types and scales of development.
Victorian era buildings include those built between 1840 and 1901.
3
Fig. 7.3 Ballarat’s
heritage overlay areas
(highlighted in red) are
extensive and cover most
of the city’s central urban
area. (Source: City of
Ballarat)
Until the HUL program began, the City’s heritage-focussed financial and com-
munity engagement tools served to support the regulatory framework. The strategy
adopted in 2010 ‘Preserving Ballarat’s Heritage’ introduced initiatives to respond to
pressures arising from the regulatory framework such as advisory services; financial
support for private, commercial and not-for-profit owners of listed heritage places
(Ballarat Heritage Restoration Grants); and community engagement programs tar-
geting conservation in protected heritage areas (Ballarat Heritage Awards) (City of
Ballarat 2010).
It is paradoxically because the systems and programs for heritage protection
were well established in the City of Ballarat that it was ready for the innovation
promised by the application of the HUL. The systems were highly evolved,
supported and used, but somehow not always delivering good outcomes. There are
many dimensions to this paradox, including:
• Certain periods (gold rush) and place types (Victorian era buildings) were more
easily established as more significant than others. ‘Historic’ heritage has become
decoupled from natural heritage and Aboriginal cultural heritage (and vice
versa). The same could be said for the artificial regulatory hierarchy of national/
state/local heritage recognition. Yet the experiences of place by local communi-
ties did not make these distinctions.
• Heritage ‘battles’ were won or lost on a site-by-site basis, without a good sense
of the qualities, uses and socio-economic contexts of the whole area, neighbour-
hood or streetscape. Adversarial systems of decision-making created ‘all-or-
nothing’ polarisation of heritage and development interests, with a tendency
towards ‘preservation’ of heritage rather than more dynamic ideas of ‘conserva-
tion management’.
• While the Burra Charter and legislative frameworks provide for the recognition
of ‘social value’, the decision-making processes for associative values are far
less well established than for the ‘tangible’ attributes of important places.
• The incorporation of ‘heritage’ within town planning processes has exposed
important limitations. Listing processes are lengthy and often contested, result-
ing in variable outcomes and methods for heritage identification that are expert-
driven and legally focussed. Heritage became a ‘problem’ or obstacle for
development to overcome, and a tight and unpleasant spot for political actors.4
Ballarat’s heritage and planning practitioners are aware of the vulnerability of
existing practice, based on their own experiences and from listening to people who
have encountered the system. It is from these starting points that they recognised the
potential of applying the HUL approach.
7.2 Transforming Practice in Ballarat
7.2.1 Starting to Work with HUL
UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape first came to the atten-
tion of the City of Ballarat through the League of Historical Cities 13th World
Conference in Hue (Vietnam) in April 2012, 5 months after it was adopted by
UNESCO’s General Conference. What appealed about the HUL was the enabling
effect that it could have for local communities and practitioners to drive local solutions.
Ballarat’s elected councillors signed an agreement with WHITR-AP in 2013, embark-
ing on a comprehensive HUL program (WHITR-AP and City of Ballarat 2013).
The city’s early involvement with the HUL pilot program was conducted in
‘good faith’ as there was little evidence available to demonstrate the impact of oper-
ationalising the broad brush and high-level concepts of the HUL ‘on-the-ground’.5
4
For a more detailed comparison of the HUL, Burra Charter and Practice see Buckley and Fayad
2017.
5
Programs in Edinburgh (http://www.ewht.org.uk/) and Zanzibar (WHITR-AP and City of
Ballarat 2016) provided early inspiration for Ballarat’s practitioners, however, at the time there
were no city governments formally applying the HUL in the way the Recommendation had
foreshadowed.
The approach was not a short-term fix, but its promise of a better and more sustain-
able future generated high expectations across the council’s organisation and in the
community. It has therefore been essential to frequently set, achieve and communi-
cate milestones in order to maintain the needed political and community support.
This pressure to deliver early and tangible benefits has been challenging, especially
as the early outcomes were more profound at the operational level but less visible
on the ground.
Stepping into the broad and integrated world of operationalising HUL from the
position of local government was a difficult, yet motivating experience; and ‘seeing
urban settlements as landscapes has had more profound impacts on the rethinking
of approaches and methods than was anticipated at the start of the project for the
City of Ballarat’ (Buckley et al. 2016: 107). From the start, this critical shift to
thinking about landscapes helped move mindsets beyond the regulatory
frameworks.
Ron van Oers (2015: 328) suggests that the HUL journey is about ‘making the
planning framework a true instrument of twenty-first century forward-looking,
pro-active, inclusive and participative decision-making’. This has been the experi-
ence of the Ballarat HUL program since 2012.
The usefulness of the international partnership in maintaining interest and moti-
vation has been a factor. The ability of the mayor and elected councillors to enter
into an agreement with UNESCO and its international partners, essentially bypass-
ing the usual imprimatur from the national government, enabled Ballarat to be glob-
ally visible. At times, this added appeal to the HUL processes, creating the space
and political and social capital needed to push for change. As the first Australian city
to join the program – and the only one from Victoria – the City of Ballarat took seri-
ously its outreach responsibilities; and at times, it seemed that the ties with UNESCO
added greater credibility to these efforts.
Transnationalism of the HUL pilot was also a key factor in its effectiveness. The
international dimension of the program connected Ballarat with an increasingly
helpful network across the globe that was a constant source of inspiration. Sharing
experiences allowed the common characteristics of urban challenges to be more
clearly appreciated; and the creation of a clearing house for the exchange of new
tools enabled progress to be sustained (van Oers 2015). The network that is moving
to establish the GO-HUL (Global Observatory on the Historic Urban Landscape)
has been one of generous collaboration and great spirit that includes both research-
ers and practitioners who are passionate about furthering the reach of the HUL.
7.2.2 Actioning the HUL
Day-to-Day Practicalities
The methodology for Ballarat’s HUL pilot program is practical, exploratory and
action-based. The process has been led and delivered by Ballarat’s local government
practitioners, championed by the Ballarat City councillors and supported by
Fig. 7.4 The HUL has been operationalised initially from within and across the local govern-
ment’s wide-ranging organisational structure
scholars and a variety of consultants as opportunities presented themselves. The

capacity and skill of practitioners and collaborators, political and organisational
support, time and resources constraints and limitations and the day-to-day practi-
calities of implementing change were all factors in the implementation program
(Fig. 7.4).
No additional human or financial resources within the council were provided during
the pilot phase. Instead, the methods used for delivering existing programs and proj-
ects evolved to help facilitate delivery of the HUL approach (such as realigning the
Ballarat Strategy and refocussing heritage programs that were already underway)
and new partnerships helped bring in new resources and research capacity.6 In addi-
tion to making delivery of HUL possible, this process required exploring, testing
and building a participatory foundation, which has led to a deeper acceptance of the
HUL approach across the organisation and with program partners over time. Change
management and collaborative models were employed to progressively enable the
relevance and benefits of HUL to be experienced across many areas of the organisa-
tion. Promotion of the program occurred through workshops, conferences and pub-
lications that aimed to connect Ballarat’s program with other practitioners. The
growth of research partnerships demonstrates the momentum built around Ballarat’s
6
For example, a series of HUL-focussed conferences and workshops were only made possible
through partnerships, the City of Ballarat providing venues and funding for catering and universi-
ties providing human resources and support for guest speakers. Other projects, such as the develop-
ment of online tools, were progressed through local research partnerships rather than the more
expensive (and less flexible) digital tools available on the market at the time.
HUL program. Ballarat’s involvement in the HUL pilot program and its role as an
innovating city provided a ready-made platform for project partners, consultants
and researchers to engage at a highly visible international level (WHITR-AP and
City of Ballarat 2013).
The transformation of the role of the urban conservation practitioner under HUL
was part of the process in Ballarat and had been foreshadowed by van Oers (2015:
328–329) who saw the need for new but not yet plentifully available skills in ‘…
guiding people and interest groups, orchestrating processes, understanding different
viewpoints, making them heard and practical to broader audiences’. Ballarat’s expe-
rience exactly mirrors these predictions and coordinating the program since its
inception has required all of these skills. Following renewed commitment by the
Ballarat City councillors to mainstream the HUL approach in 2015, a new multidis-
ciplinary ‘Heritage and Cultural Landscapes’ team has been established, with
greater resources, new skills and broader knowledge than the council functions it
has replaced, highlighting further transformation underway.
Operationalising HUL in Practice
It was clear from the outset that the HUL required a ‘clean slate’ to test and explore
its possibilities. City of Ballarat practitioners, research partners and consultants at
Context Pty Ltd. came together in the first study made to operationalise the
HUL. The explorations in Mapping Ballarat’s Historic Urban Landscape (Context
Pty Ltd. 2013) opened a Pandora’s box in many ways, as those involved looked at
the ‘usual’ practices in new ways and resolved to remain ‘unsettled’ and open to
change without yet understanding how it could be achieved.7
The UNESCO Recommendation and the six critical HUL steps (action plan)
provided the main framework, along with an emerging HUL toolkit. This toolkit
remains fluid given that it comprises the experiences of the participating cities, prac-
titioners and researchers (Bandarin and van Oers 2015); however, the exchanges
made possible by the HUL network have been mutually beneficial (cf. Avila and
Perez 2016).
To effectively apply the six critical steps in a sustained and effective way, the
City of Ballarat and its project partners have focussed on identifying tools that
address identified challenges, changing what needs to be changed, value-adding to
what could work better and leaving the things that work alone. Many actions listed
in HUL’s six critical steps have been achieved, particularly at the macro level.
However, tremendous and continued tenacity is needed to achieve the required
mainstreaming (both inside and beyond local government), defining a ‘new normal’
in day-to-day practice.
For more detail about these early steps, see Buckley et al. 2016.
7
7.2.2.1 Step 1: A New World of Knowledge
Applying Step 1 from within local government has resulted in a combined focus on
research and practical realities, moving beyond exercises that only gather knowl-
edge for narrow and time-bound purposes, towards thinking that includes how
knowledge can be used more widely. Information is critical but needs to be practi-
cally usable and easily accessed. Priority was placed on creating a robust framework
for community engagement, knowledge and planning tools that can visualise
Ballarat’s ‘natural, cultural and human resources’ (UNESCO 2011). Table 7.1 out-
lines the work towards this step so far, based on recognition of the following
challenges:
• Imperfect data: Information about the City has been collected over long periods
of time, across a number of stakeholders. This information is not embedded in
day-to-day systems and can be fragmented, siloed, duplicated or forgotten. There
are gaps, and captured data often represents a moment in time and has not
evolved as the city changes over time.
Table 7.1 Ballarat’s approaches and solutions for implementing Step 1a

Studies, research and symposia Ballarat’s priorities Ballarat’s HUL tools
Mapping Ballarat’s Historic Open/public data, Public websites – ‘HUL Ballarat’
Urban Landscape (Context Pty big data (City of Ballarat and CeRDI 2014a),
Ltd. 2013) ‘Visualising Ballarat’ (City of
Ballarat and CeRDI 2014b) and ‘time
capsule’
3D Mapping System Scoping Multisource/ Memory atlas
Study (Omnilink 2014) federated data
1st International HUL Landscape data/ Research partnerships
Symposium (2014)b mapping
Cultural Mapping Audit SMART technology SMART cities (Australian
(Tsilemanis 2014) Government 2017) – Predictive 3D
modelling
Smart cities: Building the future
Interoperable and Impact analysis (CeRDI 2015)
workshop (2016) open-source
technology
Detailed Landscape Assessment – Spatial and visual
Ballarat City Historic Urban tools (Dahlhaus and
Landscape Character Appraisal Thompson 2014)
and Assessment (Borg 2016) Decision support
Online collaborative
frameworks
Research
a
Step 1: ‘To undertake comprehensive surveys and mapping of the city’s natural, cultural and
human resources’ (UNESCO 2011).
b
Hosted by the Centre for eResearch and Digital Innovation (CeRDI) Federation University
Australia and the City of Ballarat.
• New concepts/skills: The ideas of fluidity in landscapes can be contradicted by

practical approaches to mapping that require some spatial precision; and the
expertise of heritage professionals is not strong for intangible heritage (Context
Pty Ltd. 2013: 112).
• Practical constraints: There are many ideas about mapping possibilities but
modest financial and human resources. For example, 3D mapping offers real
advantages; however, there are limitations on how adaptable this technology is or
could be (particularly proprietary models).8 Costs can be prohibitive, and levels
of support (political and organisational) will undoubtedly vary over time.
Of particular note are prototype Information Communication Technology tools
(ICT) developed through a research partnership (Box 7.1), aimed at shifting ‘the
participatory landscape significantly’ (CeRDI 2015: 22). This is a foundation for
further innovation and multiplied community uses and has already contributed to
broader citywide applications, including Ballarat’s proposed SMART city
solutions.9
Box 7.1: Online Tools

www.hulballarat.org.au and www.visualisingballarat.org.au
What makes Ballarat, Ballarat?
These websites are collaborative platforms enabling local citizens and
stakeholders to contribute to understanding what is distinctive and valued.
These issue a very broad invitation to citizens and are progressively bringing
dispersed data about the city together. Research is underway to further develop
the tools, including 3D and 4D visualisations and augmented reality.
These tools have provided a collaborative platform for local communities
and stakeholders, as well as decision support capacity for local government.
They also provide a home for a growing range of aligned projects.10
7.2.2.2 Step 2: Inclusion, Collaboration and Participation
Initially, perhaps the most observable change in the City of Ballarat’s approach
through HUL was the steadily increasing democratisation of political and organisa-
tional practice. The prioritisation of local citizen collaboration resonated strongly
8
For example, ‘interoperability between Spatial and BIM – which would facilitate a viewer mov-
ing from outside to inside a building – is developing but not yet mature’ (Omnilink 2014: 23), and
the capacity to solve these types of challenges through proprietary systems is tied to commercial
demand.
9
SMART Cities is an Australian government initiative (Australian Government 2017).
10
In 2015, the tools were awarded the Victorian Spatial Excellence Award in the category ‘People
and Community’.
with the practitioners and researchers involved and was part of what initially drew
them to the HUL. Although collaboration with local citizens and stakeholders was
known to be best practice, it was often difficult to achieve.
Operationalising the HUL has facilitated broad organisational and political sup-
port to deliver best practice. By broadening the concept of the city, interdisciplinar-
ity and whole-of-council uptake was achieved as practitioners, politicians, local
citizens and stakeholders found this new approach more relevant to their interests.
The development of participatory tools – such as cultural mapping through citywide
and local area planning projects (see Box 7.2) – has helped to bypass perceived
roadblocks and improved the extent to which people are involved in decisions and
futures (City of Ballarat 2016a: 33).
Table 7.2 outlines the work towards this step so far, based on recognition of the
following challenges:
• Time and resources: Collaboration takes time and often the resources were not
available.
• Limited participation/diversity: It was sometimes difficult to navigate beyond the
dominant small interest groups and communities change over time.
• Participation methods and skills: The contexts of participation were not always
well chosen – For example, consultation on short-term projects was not always
motivating for citizens, and ‘town hall’-style meetings were not conducive to
reaching consensus.
• Variable organisational support: Levels of political and executive support for
more comprehensive engagement can waver (due to changing priorities).
• Consultation fatigue: Many communities have stretched volunteer capacities and
volunteer resources.
Box 7.2: ‘Imagine Ballarat East’ Local Area Plan (LAP)

In 2016, the City of Ballarat embarked on a series of local area plans, includ-
ing ‘Imagine Ballarat East’, which aims to develop a vision for Ballarat East’s
sustainable future in collaboration with the local community and other stake-
holders (City of Ballarat 2016b). The hope is to develop new controls for
inclusion in the Ballarat Planning Scheme (City of Ballarat 2017b) and other
required actions (soft-tools), based on a variety of cultural mapping activities
(see the ‘community map’ in Fig. 7.5 designed solely by the local community
highlighting the great things about Ballarat East).
Guided by the HUL approach, the Imagine Ballarat East local area plan is
helping decision-makers and other stakeholders to understand the subtle val-
ues and character of Ballarat East, based on a collaborative long-term vision.
Bringing this together with best practice regulatory/planning tools provides
an important implementation of this work.
(continued)
Box 7.2 (continued)
Fig. 7.5 Ballarat East community map. (Source: City of Ballarat)
7.2.2.3 Step 3: Sustainability and Vulnerability
Assessing vulnerability in the complex and integrated way proposed by the HUL
was very new for Ballarat’s practitioners and researchers working with the program
prior to 2015. In many ways, it has been the most complex of all of the HUL’s steps
to action because vulnerability associated with heritage was previously understood
by simply presuming what was driving unacceptable outcomes in the city, and in
general, cultural vulnerability was not actively considered. In 2015, Dr. Malcolm
Borg introduced the United Nations Global Compact Cities Program (UNGCCP)
and ‘The Circles of Sustainability’ to Ballarat. This tool is based on ‘…fundamental
principles that relate to the basic domains of social life: ecology, economics, politics
and culture’ (Western Sydney University 2017), offering a significant shift from the
dominant ‘triple-bottom-line approach’ (Borg 2016).
Circles of Sustainability indicators were tailored for Ballarat in order to assess
the city’s performance, sustainability and vulnerabilities and provide a baseline to
measure the impacts of applying the HUL across the municipality (see Box 7.3).
This allows actions to be measured and more effectively targeted and enables
evidence- based outcomes to be more effectively communicated in the future.
Ongoing reviews are planned to be undertaken with support from the UNGCCP
every 2 years, and the city has been invited by the UNGCCP to become an innovat-
ing city (United Nations Global Compact Cities Programme 2017), which will
enable expert support to continue over the long term.
Table 7.2 Ballarat’s challenges and solutions for implementing Step 2a

Studies, research and
symposia Ballarat’s priorities Ballarat’s HUL tools
As for Table 7.1, plus: Use of technology to achieve more As for Table 7.1, plus:
Second International HUL inclusive participatory engagement, Ballarat imagine (City of
Symposium: Revitalising two-way knowledge sharing and Ballarat 2013) (whole-of-
Historic Cities (2015)b empowerment of a range of municipality vision setting
communities to be more active for Ballarat strategy)
participants in decision-making
Historic Urban Landscape Using knowledge/data to reach Ballarat strategy
and Visualising Ballarat consensus (underpinned by local development
Impact Analysis – knowledge and values)
eResearch (First Wave) Place-based approaches Value-add to existing
extended (CeRDI 2015) engagement programs (e.g.
Making Sebastopol)
Cultural mapping Local area planning
Storytelling processes and community
Living and evolving knowledge-base maps (beginning with
Learmonth, Burrumbeet,
Tapping into existing knowledge/
Cardigan Village and
information platforms (e.g. social
Ballarat east)
media platforms)
a
Step 2: ‘To reach consensus using participatory planning and stakeholder consultations on what
values to protect for transmission to future generations and to determine the attributes that carry
these values’ (UNESCO 2011)
b
Hosted by the City of Ballarat and Federation University Australia’s Collaborative Research
Centre in Australian History (CRCAH), in collaboration with Deakin University’s Cultural
Heritage Centre for Asia and the Pacific and WHITR-AP
Box 7.3: The Circles of Sustainability Tool and Ballarat

The Circles of Sustainability tool has provided the City of Ballarat with an
approach to incorporating sustainability and climate change in its HUL pro-
gram, using both qualitative and quantitative data and indicators (see Western
Sydney University 2017).
Ballarat’s initial assessment (Fig. 7.6) highlights that the area of most vul-
nerability is the city’s ecology, which measures the city’s natural and built
environment. The tool tells us that one way to address this is through more
participatory and inclusive decision-making processes. This is successfully
being demonstrated on the ground through the Imagine Ballarat East local
area planning and cultural mapping project and the local community’s priority
for their natural and built environment.
(continued)
Box 7.3 (continued)
I I
I
I
I I
I
7 The Transformational Power of the HUL Approach: Lessons from Ballarat…
Fig. 7.6 Circles of Sustainability Aggregate Profile results for Ballarat (2015–2016) (Borg 2016). ‘This diagram tells us how sustainable our city will
be if we ‘do nothing different’. It helps identify what areas we should target if we want a more sustainable, resilient and vibrant city’. (Source: City of
139
Ballarat 2017a: 86)


Studies, research and symposia Ballarat’s priorities Ballarat’s HUL tools
2016 HUL implementation Build evidence base and Circles of sustainability
Programme, including circles of use indicators adapted for assessment (UNGCCP)b
sustainability survey and indicators; HUL (targeting socio- adapted for HUL (initial
detailed landscape appraisal; economic and climate benchmarking and ongoing
landscape vulnerability and change factors) assessments every 2 years)
liveability assessment; best practices Integrated and
(Borg 2016) interdisciplinary
a
Step 3: ‘To assess vulnerability of these attributes to socio-economic stresses and impacts of cli-
mate change’ (UNESCO 2011)
b
The United Nations Global Compact Cities Program (UNGCCP)
This is the newest part of Ballarat’s HUL program, yet the achievements already
show great potential and provide the evidence base for targeted actions in the city’s
new heritage plan, Our People, Culture & Place. A plan to sustain Ballarat’s heri-
tage 2017–2030 (City of Ballarat 2017a). Table 7.3 outlines the work towards this
step so far, based on recognition of the following challenges:
• Minimal evidence, benchmarking and performance measures to guide decisions
and monitor impacts. Even where statistics have been available, they have rarely
been used in integrated ways or spatially represented (Borg 2016).
7.2.2.4 Step 4: The Virtuous Cycle – Framework for City Development
The HUL challenges authorities to ‘redefine urban heritage as the centre of the spa-
tial development process’ (UNESCO 2011). For Ballarat, this has meant implemen-
tation across complex and multiple levels of government, authorities, departments,
organisations and stakeholder groups with many and varied agendas and priorities.
Each of the three tiers of government in Australia has responsibilities for and in
Ballarat – and each is democratically elected for a term of 4 years (but these terms
are not aligned), resulting in a continually changing policy environment.11 It is in
this context that Step 4 is being implemented in Ballarat.
When practitioners began working with the HUL in 2012, there was already a
recognition of the need for a high-level citywide strategy to deal with forecasted
change. This provided a large-scale development strategy to which the HUL could
be joined. The intent was for the strategy to sit above the 4-year Council Plan,
addressing challenges over a much longer term and setting future development
goals for the city.
Building the HUL approach into the City of Ballarat’s long-term growth strategy,
Today, Tomorrow, Together: The Ballarat Strategy (City of Ballarat 2015a), became
an immediate priority. Even though the citywide strategy was completed well in
The Ballarat City Council consists of nine democratically elected officials from three wards,
11
whereas the City of Ballarat consists of employed staff (council officers).

advance of the 2016 Vulnerability Assessment (see Step 3), the Strategy has put
heritage and culture at the core of the future sustainable development of the city.
This was made possible by prioritising participatory approaches with local citizens
and stakeholders (see Box 7.4). Integrating heritage into the wider city framework
via the HUL represents a substantial and critical shift in the organisation’s policy
settings.
Box 7.4: ‘Ballarat Imagine’ and the Ballarat Strategy

The first step in developing Ballarat’s city development framework was the
community engagement program Ballarat Imagine – a ‘community conversa-
tion’ to set a new whole-of-city strategy’s vision (City of Ballarat 2013).
Ballarat Imagine applied a values-based methodology inspired by the
HUL approach and the Burra Charter’s concept of social value (Australia
ICOMOS 2013). Set in the context of future change it invited responses to
three emotive questions: what do you love, imagine and want to retain in
Ballarat? It was distributed to every household in the municipality and was
promoted via websites, social media and postcards, while direct engagement
included workshops, events and meetings with local citizens in work, recre-
ation and education settings.
Ballarat Imagine received over 6500 responses, with heritage and culture
at the top of the community’s list. The result has put cultural identity at the
heart of the city’s future vision in Today, Tomorrow, Together: The Ballarat
Strategy (City of Ballarat 2015a).
Ballarat Imagine is a simple and adaptable model that has influenced com-
munity vision setting in other cities. It is an accessible way of getting to know
what is valued about our cities. The success of Ballarat Imagine has also
helped make participatory approaches central to work across the organisation,
providing the methodology for local area plans and a wide variety of
projects.
• Position of heritage and culture: In conventional arrangements, heritage and
local culture is dealt with only as ‘stand-alone’ assets (van Oers 2015: 327).
• Changing priorities: City strategy priorities can change with rapid political elec-
tion cycles.
• Limitations of local government: Not all desired directions are within the powers
and responsibilities of the council, which must lobby state and federal govern-
ments to shift their policies (Planisphere et al. 2015).

Studies, research and symposia Ballarat’s Priorities Ballarat’s HUL tools
As for Tables 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3, Participatory and As for Tables 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3,
plus: democratised planning and plus:
values-based approach
Implementing the Historic Cultural landscape and Today, tomorrow, together: The
Urban Landscape Program change-focussed lenses Ballarat strategy – Our vision for
through the Planning System 2040 (City of Ballarat 2015a)
(Planisphere et al. 2015) Long-term strategy and Our people, Culture & Place. A
strong commitment to plan to sustain Ballarat’s heritage
HUL (over and above 2017–2030 (City of Ballarat
political cycles) 2017a)
Various Ballarat Strategy Proactive advocacy Local area plans (LAP)
background studies, workshops Transfer HUL studies to Municipal strategic statement
and reports (City of Ballarat tangible tools (Borg 2016) (MSS) (integrating the
2015a). community vision and Ballarat
strategy into the Ballarat planning
scheme)
Heritage overlays (Ballarat
planning scheme)
a
Step 4: ‘To integrate urban heritage values and their vulnerability status into a wider framework
of city development, which shall provide indications of areas of heritage sensitivity that require
careful attention to planning, design and implementation of development projects’ (UNESCO
2011)
7.2.2.5 Step 5: Setting Priorities
Van Oers writes, ‘… next to defining new operational guidance and activities, it will
be important as well to review the overall policy landscape to detect overlaps,
including potential contradictions, and identify gaps’ (van Oers 2015: 328). For
Ballarat, this has occurred through the 2016 HUL Implementation Programme –
part of the Circles of Sustainability assessment feeding the City Scan (Borg 2016).
This brings together all of the city’s HUL work to date and provides evidence to
better target and prioritise actions. This work has been integrated into a new heritage
plan, Our People, Culture & Place. A plan to sustain Ballarat’s heritage 2017–2030
(City of Ballarat 2017a), which takes the HUL to a more detailed action-oriented
level – perhaps better termed out into the street.
Other ways actions for the city are being prioritised are coming from citizen
participation. For example, there is strong desire for people to tell their own stories.
In response, the heritage plan sets out a process for applying a whole-of-city inter-
pretation framework, aimed at gathering, engaging with and sharing the city’s sto-
ries. These stories – and the intangible, moveable and place heritage they are
associated with – are a new source of inspiration for design, businesses, tourism,
creative industry and conservation management.

Studies, research Ballarat’s
and symposia priorities Ballarat’s HUL tools
As for Tables Problem- As for Tables 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 and 7.4, plus:
7.1, 7.2, 7.3 and solving Circles of sustainability (UNGCCP) – Provide dynamic
7.4 framework evidence base
Circles of practice (UNGCCP) adapted for HUL
Today, tomorrow, together: The Ballarat strategy – Our
vision for 2040 (City of Ballarat 2015b) for high-level
alignment
Our people, Culture & Place. A plan to sustain Ballarat’s
heritage 2017–2030 (City of Ballarat 2017a) (including an
interpretation framework for Ballarat)
Conservation grants (partnership through NGO)
The Circles of Sustainabilty tool includes a process tool to ‘provide pathways to guide practitio-
ners through the process of making a significant impact upon a designated locale, such as a city, a
town or an urban region’ (Western Sydney University 2017)
a
Step 5: ‘To prioritize actions for conservation and development’ (UNESCO 2011)
• Diverse priorities: Independent decisions and varying priorities across all levels
of government, between departments and disciplines.
• Political change: Priority refocus with each new political term (different at each
level), restructures of organisations, staffing loss and poor succession planning.
7.2.2.6 Step 6: Working with Partners, Building Capacity
Without partnerships, our achievements to date would have been impossible.

Operationalising HUL requires a platform for active participation in guiding the
way that the city develops into the future; for striving to achieve sustainable prac-
tice; for validating, reviewing and reimagining approaches; and for opening a dia-
logue between conservation and social and economic development. Without the
continued involvement of many people – inside and outside local government –
none of this can succeed.
Initially, partnerships were research-based and related to the heritage discipline,
but over time this has expanded. Our People, Culture & Place. A plan to sustain
Ballarat’s heritage 2017–2030 (City of Ballarat 2017a) continues this trend by
strengthening networks through tangible, deliverable projects, ensuring that inclu-
sive stakeholder-based transformation continues and broadens out from ‘dominant
cultural groups’ (van Oers 2015: 328). The process must remain open, allowing
partnerships to evolve and change in tandem with the changing city. Van Oers pre-
dicts that more inclusive participation ‘will likely constitute a major overhaul of the
framework itself, its relevant legislation and all related components’ (van Oers
2015: 328), and this is something to watch for, highlighting again the need for
tenacity over the long term.
Step 6 therefore crosses all the others.12 All of the initiatives listed in Tables 7.1,
7.2, 7.3, 7.4 and 7.5 have embraced and furthered partnerships with the City of
Ballarat. Specific challenges included:
• Resistance from practitioners, who can be hard to convince about the benefits of
new partnerships, due to competing day-to-day pressures, and vague policy
framing (at state and national levels).
• Disempowered communities: Many groups and individuals are disengaged (par-
ticularly in lower socio-economic areas and young people).
• Research processes: Formal research funding timelines can be slow and uncer-
tain, and priorities for academic researchers can differ from those of council staff
and local communities.
Responses to these are seen in the formation of advisory committees, broad
stakeholder-based and interdisciplinary project groups, the establishment of formal
memoranda of understanding with WHITR-AP and university partners at Federation
University and Deakin University (WHITR-AP and City of Ballarat 2013,
WHITR-AP, City of Ballarat and Collaborative Research Centre in Australian
History (CRCAH) Federation University Australia 2015) and active participation in
the international networks for HUL.
7.3 Reflections on Building a New Practice Model
The implementation of the HUL in Ballarat has been a process of cultural change –
especially within the council structures. The early stages of such shifts require
considerable persistence as efforts to ‘unpack’ the implications of the HUL
recommendation were not always immediately useful in resolving day-to-day
problems. Scepticism about their usefulness was a common reaction – even within
an organisational environment that was open and supportive. However, these early
projects have proven their worth, since they identified specific things to do, con-
tinue to add value to a wide range of in-train and proposed projects and policy
work and bring many different parts of the council’s organisation into the
dialogue.
The movement towards mainstreaming the ideas of the HUL can be seen in vari-
ous ways – such as the newly common discussion of ‘values’ and ‘place’ in council
decisions, across the organisation, in the media and in the community.
12
Step 6: ‘To establish the appropriate partnerships and local management frameworks for each of
the identified projects for conservation and development, as well as to develop mechanisms for the
coordination of the various activities between different actors, both public and private’ (UNESCO
2011).
A more tangible milestone is the Ballarat Strategy, adopted unanimously by the

council in 2015, which commits to ‘Manage Ballarat’s unique heritage, landscape
and character as an integrated historic urban landscape’ and ‘implement UNESCO’s
historic urban landscape approach as the guiding framework for managing change
in our dynamic historic city’ (City of Ballarat 2015a: 183). It has been followed by
an aspirational heritage plan – adopted unanimously by Ballarat City councillors in
2017 – which focusses on people and places (rather than merely ‘things’) and deliv-
ers on-the-ground actions in three priority areas: regeneration, celebrating and
inspiring with Ballarat’s stories and managing change and safeguarding heritage
(City of Ballarat 2017a). The plan moves the council’s focus for heritage from a
regulatory-only environment towards an integrated whole-of-organisation role,
acknowledging the critical role that Ballarat’s diverse and extensive heritage plays
in the social and economic life of the city (City of Ballarat 2017a). Together, the
Ballarat Strategy and the heritage plan have adopted new ways of talking about,
thinking about, promoting and listening about heritage – all based on the HUL’s
cultural landscapes lens, a focus on change, and linking with the social and eco-
nomic goals of the city. These shifts have allowed heritage – always important in
Ballarat, but essentially off to the side of the main drivers of economic development,
urbanisation and social change – to become more relevant, visible and critical to the
city’s future. In turn, making better uses of heritage has allowed heritage conserva-
tion objectives to be seen as more compatible with development.
While there are still exceptions (and some less-than-ideal development propos-
als), moving away from the conventional paradigm of ‘preservation-versus-
development’ (Buckley et al. 2016) has reduced the levels of adversarial conflict
that seemed to accompany so many ‘heritage issues’ and remaining on this trajec-
tory predicts a different future for the city.
The emphasis in the HUL on interdisciplinarity is not especially new. However,
in Ballarat, the processes brought people from different professional orientations
into a discussion about the future of the city. The ability to bring diverse perspec-
tives to the same table has been a key factor in the success of the internal
transformations. Moving from multidisciplinary dialogue to interdisciplinary solu-
tions is still a work in progress, especially given the realities of council’s day-to-day
responsibilities and the ever-present influences of local politics. However, the appe-
tite and opportunities to make this possible are increasing steadily with much less
effort than required in the earlier stages of the pilot. Importantly, the city’s identity –
its culture, people and place – is now a key pillar for the sustainable development of
the city. This is an enormous shift and should provide a great degree of validation to
those who have worked tirelessly to develop the HUL Recommendation as a means
of ensuring that culture and heritage are at the centre of the transformative processes
of the urban century.
Acknowledgements The list of people who have contributed to Ballarat’s HUL pilot program is
extensive. We would like to acknowledge all those involved and make special mention of Dr. Ron
van Oers and colleagues (WHITR-AP); Ballarat’s council officers, councillors and local commu-
nity members; researchers at Federation University Australia and Deakin University and Dr.
Malcolm Borg (UNGCCP); contributing consultants; Francesco Bandarin and colleagues

(UNESCO); Dr. Ana Pereira Roders (Eindhoven University of Technology); and Prof. Michael
Turner (Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design).
Dr. Steven Cooke (Deakin University) has formed the third member of the continuing research
collaboration between Deakin University and the City of Ballarat and has contributed to the reflec-
tions that are presented in this paper.
We gratefully acknowledge Dr. Malcolm Borg’s generosity to include his research in this
chapter.
Finally, we would like to affectionately thank our fellow ‘HULigans’ who give more of them-
selves than anyone can imagine to operationalise the HUL approach – they’ve shared lessons and
cheered on Ballarat’s efforts from all around the world – you know who you are!
Dedication The authors would like to dedicate this paper to Dr. Ron van Oers decd. Ron is the
sole reason that Ballarat was welcomed into an international pilot program where he gave freely to
the city, passionate guidance and, personally, valued friendship. His influence is evident through-
out all of Ballarat’s work. We know that we are not alone in hoping that we can carry on his sub-
stantial legacy into the future as we are sure he would have hoped.
References
#culture2015goal [website]. http://culture2015goal.net/. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.

Aboriginal Victoria. (2016). Aboriginal heritage amendment act 2016, summary information
sheet. Melbourne.
Australia ICOMOS. (2013). The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS charter for places of
cultural significance. Burwood: Australia ICOMOS.
Australian Government. (2017). Smart cities plan [website]: https://cities.dpmc.gov.au/. Accessed
29 Dec 2017.
Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. (2015). Mabo case (online).
https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/articles/mabo-case. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
Australian Local Government Association (ALGA). (2017). [website]. http://alga.asn.au/.
Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
Avila, M. E. S., & Perez, J. R. (2016). Heritage Values Protection, from the Monument to the Urban
Dimension. Case Study: the Historic Centre of Santa Ana de los Rios de Cuenca, Ecuador. The
Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, 7(2-3), 164–176.
Bandarin, F., & Van Oers, R. (2012). The historic urban landscape. Chichester: Wiley.
Bandarin, F., & Van Oers, R. (2015). Reconnecting the city. The historic urban landscape approach
and the future of urban heritage. Chichester: Wiley.
Boer, B., & Wiffen, G. (2006). Heritage law in Australia. South Melbourne: Oxford University
Press.
Borg, M. (2016). HUL implementation Programme. Victoria: City of Ballarat. I: Aggregate pro-
file: Circles of sustainability survey and peer review. II: Comprehensive study – Circles of
sustainability report and indicators. III: Detailed landscape assessment – Ballarat City historic
urban landscape character appraisal and assessment. IV: Vulnerability assessment – Ballarat
City: Landscape vulnerability and Liveability assessment. V: Best practice. Reports to City of
Ballarat.
Buckley, K., & Fayad, S. (2017). The HUL and the Australian Burra Charter - some implications
for local heritage practices. Historic Environment, 29, 46–57.
Buckley, K., Cooke, S., & Fayad, S. (2016). Using the historic urban landscape to re-imagine
Ballarat: The local context. In S. Labadi & W. Logan (Eds.), Urban heritage, development and
sustainability. International frameworks, national and local governance (1st ed., pp. 93–113).
London: Routledge.
Centre for eResearch and Digital Innovation (CeRDI). (2015). Historic urban landscape and visu-
alising Ballarat impact analysis. eResearch (First wave) extended. City of Ballarat.
City of Ballarat. (2010). Preserving our heritage strategy (online). http://www.ballarat.vic.gov.au/
sh/heritage/heritage-project-and-studies/preserving-our-heritage.aspx. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
City of Ballarat. (2013). Ballarat imagine (online). http://www.ballarat.vic.gov.au/haveyour-
say/2013/ballaratimagine.aspx. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
City of Ballarat. (2015a). Today, tomorrow, together: The Ballarat strategy (online). http://www.
ballarat.vic.gov.au/pbs/city-strategy/ballarat-strategy.aspx. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
City of Ballarat. (2015b). Today, tomorrow, together: The Ballarat strategy. Our Vision for 2040
(online). http://www.ballarat.vic.gov.au/media/3832716/40._ballarat_imagine_our_vision_
for_2040_july2013.pdf. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
City of Ballarat. (2016a). Our people, culture & place. A new heritage plan for Ballarat 2016–
2030 (preliminary plan). http://www.ballarat.vic.gov.au/media/3985655/preliminary_heri-
tage_plan_our_people__culture_and_place_august_2016.pdf. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
City of Ballarat. (2016b). Imagine Ballarat east (online). Available at: http://www.ballarat.vic.gov.
au/pbs/city-strategy/strategic-projects-and-frameworks/current/imagine-ballarat-east.aspx.
City of Ballarat. (2017a). Our people, culture & place. A plan to sustain Ballarat’s heritage 2017–
2030 (online). http://www.hulballarat.org.au/cb_pages/ballarat_heritage_plan.php. Accessed
29 Dec 2017.
City of Ballarat. (2017b). Ballarat planning scheme (online). http://planning-schemes.delwp.vic.
gov.au/schemes/ballarat. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
City of Ballarat and Centre for eResearch and Digital Innovation (CeRDI). (2014a). Historic urban
landscape Ballarat [website]: http://www.hulballarat.org.au. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
City of Ballarat and Centre for eResearch and Digital Innovation (CeRDI). (2014b). Visualising
Ballarat [website]: http://www.visualisingballarat.org.au. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
Context Pty Ltd. (2013). Mapping Ballarat’s historic urban landscape. Stage 1 final report.
Brunswick: City of Ballarat.
Dahlhaus, P., & Thompson, H. (2014). Visualising Ballarat – Past, present, future. A collaborative
research proposal to develop online tools to support Ballarat’s Historic Urban Landscape pro-
gram. Ballarat: Centre for eResearch and Digital Innovation, Federation University Australia.
Edinburgh World Heritage. [website]: http://www.ewht.org.uk/. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
Global Observatory on the Historic Urban Landscape (GO-HUL). [website]: https://go-hul.com/.
Heritage Chairs and Officials of Australia and New Zealand (HCOANZ). (2008). Supporting local
government heritage conservation (Final report). https://www.heritage.vic.gov.au/__data/
assets/pdf_file/0020/55523/Supporting-Local-Government-Heritage-Conservation-final-
report-May-2008-.pdf. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
Omnilink. (2014). 3D mapping system – Scoping study. Unpublished report prepared by Omnilink
for the City of Ballarat Historic Urban Landscape Pilot Program – Stage 2.2. Melbourne: City
of Ballarat.
Planisphere, Forest & City of Ballarat. (2015). Ballarat’s Historic Urban Landscape Program –
Stage 2.1 – Results-based investigation of the Ballarat’s Planning System for potential Historic
Urban Landscape program implementation (draft). Unpublished report to the City of Ballarat.
Ballarat: City of Ballarat.
State of Victoria. (2006). Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 – Sect 1 Purposes (online). http://www9.
austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/consol_act/aha2006164/s1.html. Accessed 29 Dec
2017.
State of Victoria. (2017). Heritage Act 2017 (online). http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/con-
sol_act/ha201786/. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
The Courier. (2014). Ballarat the fastest growing city in regional Victoria (online). http://www.
thecourier.com.au/story/2792437/ballarat-the-fastest-growing-regional-city-in-victoria-abs/.
Tsilemanis, A. (2014). Ballarat research. Unpublished report to City of Ballarat, Australia.

Ballarat: City of Ballarat.
UN Habitat. (2016). The new urban agenda. Adopted at Quito, Ecuador, 20 October 2016. https://
habitat3.org/the-new-urban-agenda/. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
UNESCO. (1972). Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heri-
tage (World heritage convention). Paris. http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/. Accessed 29
Dec 2017.
UNESCO. (2003). Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. Paris.
http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/en/home. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape. Paris: UNESCO. [Online]
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=48857&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_
SECTION=201.html. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
UNESCO. (2015). [website] Culture for Sustainable Development. http://www.unesco.org/new/
en/culture/themes/culture-and-development/the-future-we-want-the-role-of-culture/. Accessed
29 Dec 2017.
UNESCO. (2017). States parties – Australia (online). http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/au.
United Nations. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (online).
https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/declaration-on-the-rights-of-indige-
nous-peoples.html. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
United Nations. (2015). Sustainable development goals: 17 goals to transform our world (online).
http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/. Accessed 29 Dec
2017.
United Nations Global Compact Cities Programme. (2017). Get involved (online). https://cities-
programme.org/get-involved/. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
Van Oers, R. (2015). The way forward: An agenda for reconnecting the city. In F. Bandarin & R.
van Oers (Eds.), Reconnecting the city. The historic urban landscape approach and the future
of urban heritage (pp. 317–332). Chichester: Wiley.
Walker, M. (2014). The development of the Australia ICOMOS Burra charter. APT Bulletin,
45(2/3), 9–16.
Western Sydney University. (2017). [website] Circles of sustainability. About. http://www.circle-
sofsustainability.org/about/. Accessed 29 Dec 2017.
Winter, T. (2015). Heritage diplomacy and Australia’s responses to a shifting landscape of interna-
tional conservation. Historic Environment, 27(2), 18–28.
World Heritage Institute of Training and Research in Asia and the Pacific (WHITR-AP) and City
of Ballarat. (2013). Agreement on strategic cooperation concerning the implementation of
UNESCO’s recommendation on the historic urban landscape between the City of Ballarat and
WHITR-AP. Unpublished document, Shanghai and Ballarat.
World Heritage Institute of Training and Research in Asia and the Pacific (WHITR-AP) and City
of Ballarat. (2016). The HUL guidebook: A practical guide to UNESCO’s recommendation on
the historic urban landscape. Shanghai and Ballarat.
World Heritage Institute of Training and Research in Asia and the Pacific (WHITR-AP), City
of Ballarat and Collaborative Research Centre in Australian History (CRCAH) Federation
University Australia. (2015). Agreement on strategic cooperation concerning UNESCO’s rec-
ommendation on the historic urban landscape and the league of historical cities 15th world
conference. Unpublished document, Shanghai and Ballarat.
Chapter 8
Managing Urban Heterogeneity:
A Budapest Case Study of Historical
Urban Landscape
György Alföldi, Melinda Benkő, and Gábor Sonkoly
Abstract This article has a double objective. First, it defines the major challenges
of contemporary urban heritage preservation through the specificities of the Historic
Urban Landscape (HUL) approach in order to determine an analytical framework to
examine heritage cities and quarters from the perspective of heritage preservation.
Second, it applies the analytical framework to assess current urban interventions in
the 8th District (Józsefváros) (Józsefváros – “Josephtown” in English – was named
after the Habsburg Emperor, Joseph II, in 1777. In this article, we refer to this dis-
trict as “District” or under its Hungarian denomination) of Budapest. The research
results help discuss the utility of the HUL approach.
In addition to the management of the general urban challenges of globalization,
Józsefváros – the most heterogeneous administrative unit of Budapest’s historical
center – must develop a variety of adaptation techniques, which fit its diverse built,
social, cultural, and environmental legacy. Accordingly, the launching of an overall
rehabilitation program for the District posed great dilemmas for decision-makers
and designers. As a trailblazing decision among the districts of Budapest, the 8th
District Municipality recognized this heterogeneity by the division of its territory
into 11 quarters, which were determined by their specific character and heritage in
2005. Two opposite cases are selected to compare current urban intervention.
Whereas the Magdolna Quarter Program was Hungary’s first truly integrated
socially sensitive urban regeneration program, the one-time prestigious Palace
Quarter boasts one of the highest densities of urban historic buildings in Europe,
which are rehabilitated through the establishment of a new network of interior and
exterior spaces with the participation of the locals.
G. Alföldi · M. Benkő
Department of Urban Planning and Design, Budapest University of Technology and
Economics, Budapest, Hungary
e-mail: alfoldi.gyorgy@urb.bme.hu; benko@urb.bme.hu
G. Sonkoly (*)
Faculty of Humanities, Eötvös Loránd University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary
e-mail: sonkoly.gabor@btk.elte.hu

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_8
150 G. Alföldi et al.
Keywords Budapest · Józsefváros · HUL approach · Participative urban planning

and design · Quarter-based regeneration · Urban heritage · Urban milieu · Security
· Heritage territory · Heritage community
8.1 Introduction
A recent analysis of the conceptual history of the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL)
approach allowed us to place this concept into a longer historical perspective of
urban planning and to compare it to concurrent notions of urban heritage manage-
ment (Sonkoly 2017). It was concluded that the use of the notion of “landscape” –
which is not only an integral element of the HUL approach but also the most
recurrent territorial denomination in heritage management, in urban/territorial plan-
ning, and in the related social sciences and humanities – is very similar to the way
“milieu” was applied by the central authorities in earlier centuries, according to
Michel Foucault (Foucault 2009). From this perspective, both contemporary urban
landscape and modern milieu mean a territorial unit, which is suited to the develop-
ment of the indicators on the expanding concept of security, in order to prevent
threats of uncontrolled development. In this sense, heritage preservation is inte-
grated into a long history of social security, which became very complex by the
twenty-first century. The Convention on the Diversity of Cultural Expressions,1
which states that cultural diversity is as crucial as biodiversity from the point of
view of the survival of humanity and assigns particular importance to the safeguard-
ing of cultural heritage, shows the fusion of cultural and natural heritage in the
international cultural heritage discourse, which has been expressed in the institution
of the concepts of cultural landscape, sustainability, and resilience. All these con-
cepts emphasize that the concerned communities must be mobilized to appreciate
their own culture, heritage, and traditions. The novelty of the complex conception
of security lies precisely in the relationship between the levels of belonging and
constructs of security (Foucault 2009). The milieu was invented in order to measure
security, while the landscape of cultural heritage is considered not only as a way to
measure it but also to measure its perception and sensation by its custodians2
(Ascher 2001). This complex security supposes that the territory of urban heritage
is expanding to include those parts of the city, which do not necessarily convey
exceptional historical or aesthetical values but are significant for the city dwellers.
Thus, protection is envisaged as a necessary condition for the survival of the com-
munity and its habitat. In this sense, the HUL approach has the potential to turn the
city from its territorial division between protected and non-protected territories into
an integral city, which is united by its continuous temporality and territoriality.
1
The Convention on the Diversity of Cultural Expressions and the first standard setting instrument
on HUL – the Declaration of the Conservation of the HUL – were both accepted in the same year,
in 2005 (UNESCO 2005a, b).
2
According to François Ascher, “threat and the principle of precaution” are the essential elements
of contemporary urban planning, in which social actors search for anything, which can “ensure,
reassure, produce trust” (Ascher 2001. pp. 76–77).
8 Managing Urban Heterogeneity: A Budapest Case Study of Historical Urban… 151
Fig. 8.1 Areal overview on the southern part of Budapest historic city center; inner Józsefváros is
next to the National Museum and its garden. (Source: Municipality of Józsefváros – Rév8)
Consequently, the population of current cities changes into a series of communities,

which make use of the urban landscape not only to represent their identity but also
to express their experience of their built and natural environment3 (Besse 2009)
(Fig. 8.1).
The dramatic growth of urban World Heritage properties over the last 30-years
resulted in the fact that this title is not only representative but also eventually con-
stitutes a framework for social and cultural realities.4 In addition to the universal
level of urban heritage conservation, hundreds of other historic – or less historic –
quarters are protected at national, regional, or local levels. Heritage protection is
becoming a norm, a conventional means to express belonging and identity. Moreover,
the areas concerned, which were often abandoned in the mid-twentieth century,
regained their attractiveness from the 1970s onward, which resulted in massive
immigration toward them. In consequence, the expanding territory of urban heritage
accommodates very diverse social groups – from the well-off inhabitants of freshly
3
Jean-Marc Besse explains that the landscape takes charge of the dimension of human relationship
to the world, which has been abandoned by modern science and which is the direct, immediate,
physical link to the sensible elements of this world. Thus, the landscape is primarily an
experience.
4
In Budapest, for example, since 2013, the territory of the World Heritage property has been used
to define the area in which the homeless are not allowed to dwell (Budapest 2013).
gentrified areas through fancy artistic neighborhoods to the pauperized population

of rust belts – all of whom tend to formulate their identity and the attached claims
under the banner of cultural heritage. Politicians and other social actors also use the
heritage discourse to mobilize the relevant population. As such, the 8th District of
Budapest is an excellent example of a considerably heterogeneous population,
which is reorganized according to overlapping heritage references.
8.2 Józsefváros, the Eighth District of Budapest
Since the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, Budapest is governed by a nonhierarchi-
cal, dual-municipal structure in which the central municipality is responsible for
determining urban development and management tasks, as well as overseeing the
general strategic and planning framework (Hegedűs 1999). The 23 districts operate
as autonomous units within Budapest. As a consequence of their history and current
policy, every district has different urban development and renewal strategies, proj-
ects, and achievements. Among these plans, the rehabilitation program of Józsefváros
excels by its quarter-based approach5 (Fig. 8.2).
Witnessing its fastest growing period in history, Budapest almost quadrupled its
population reaching one million between 1870 and 1930. Józsefváros grew at the
same pace amounting to 150,000 people, in the same period. This impressive
Fig. 8.2 Budapest urban

development: small
Budapest’s limit in 1873
and big Budapest’s limit
since 1950; historic core in
gray; Józsefváros is in the
black circle. (Drawing by
Melinda Benkő)
5
Budapest agglomeration, Budapest City, 23 districts, and some hundred quarters can be differen-
tiated as development unit.
d emographic and urban increase followed the District original social segregation
pattern emphasized further by the installation of the Grand Boulevard between the
1870s and 1900s, which divided the District into a richer inner part and a poorer
residential middle and outer industrial part. The inner area was dominated by the
National Museum (built in 1837–1847), which –as the new pivot of Hungarian
nation-building – attracted the aristocrats to construct their urban palaces in its
vicinities. Thus, a highly prestigious quarter evolved in the nineteenth century,
which could retain its position in the first half of the twentieth century (Déry 2007).
The larger apartments of this area were primarily sought by the upwardly mobile
members of the middle classes. On the contrary, the other parts were inhabited by
small office holders, poorer freelancers, tradesmen, the petite bourgeoisie, maids,
and servants. Here, the typical multistory tenement development was limited to the
sides of the main roads, while the intersecting streets continued to have single or
maximum two-story homes built from the middle of the nineteenth century and
smaller industrial and agricultural buildings.
Though the 8th District went through significant changes, in the twentieth cen-
tury, to its position and function within the urban fabric, its built environment
remained practically unaffected. The low-density buildup in the early twentieth cen-
tury was only slightly modified, and during the communist era, between 1949 and
1989, the historic urban core of Budapest, mainly the poorest parts, was absolutely
neglected. In 1967, an urban reconstruction plan envisaged the demolition of all the
traditional streets and buildings and the erection of ten-story prefabricated slabs and
towers in the middle part of Józsefváros (Benkő 2011).
The economic significance of the Hungarian capital increased after the fall of
communism, and Budapest was facing the challenge of double transition.6 The pub-
lic administration system, which was reformed soon after the change of regime, but
obsolete by now, conserved the inherited development inequalities in the spatial and
social structure of the city. Józsefváros’s newly gained “independence” arrived with
a troublesome social and environmental legacy. The District is partly located in the
historic city center, and it is divided into strikingly different quarters, including the
gentrifying inner city Palace Quarter with its renovated buildings and young intel-
lectuals as well as the Magdolna Quarter or Orczy Quarter with some of the highest
unemployment and lowest education and income levels in the city of Budapest.
Although the entire Józsefváros received a rather pejorative connotation in the sec-
ond half of the twentieth century, this stigma is still present in the mental maps of
Budapest residents.
In 1997, the 8th District’s local government (with 61% ownership) and the local
government of Budapest (with a 39% share) created the Rév8 Plc.7 – a public com-
pany responsible for urban renewal. The urban renewal inherited gap-toothed build-
ings and plots as the residues of two world wars and the more than 30-year
6
The double transition is an expression used in Central and Eastern European countries because
they entered simultaneously into the market economy and the globalization.
7
http://rev8.hu/english/. One of the authors, György Alföldi, was the director of this company
between 1999 and 2015.
construction restraint and centralized facility management of the communist regime.

The launching of an overall rehabilitation program for the District posed great
dilemmas for decision-makers and designers. The planning and rehabilitation prin-
ciples were the following:
• The preservation and reconstruction of the architectural and urban heritage – for
example, in the Palace Quarter – to reevaluate the District, redefine the identity
of its quarters, and work against its stigma.
• The decrease of large, adjacent, deteriorated areas giving new development
potentials8.
• The reorganization of traffic and parking areas to create people-friendly squares
and streets.
• The extension of green surface and the amelioration of the living conditions.
• The involvement of local residents in the renewal process.
Finally, the urban regeneration strategy identified 11 quarters, based on their
physical and social contexts. The 8th District Municipality officially approved this
division in 2005, and this moment was a turning point in the current history of
Józsefváros. Every quarter has different characteristics and chances for the future,
and every quarter becomes a local unit within the District, and, thus, every quarter
develops differently. Seven out of these eleven quarters are situated within the his-
toric core of Budapest, and two of them will be taken as case study to explore the
application of the HUL approach (Fig. 8.3).
Fig. 8.3 Quarter-based
regeneration: 11 quarters
of Józsefváros; double line
presents the limit of
Budapest’s historic city
center, and sites of the
HUL case studies are in
gray. (Drawing by Melinda
Benkő)
8
The Corvin Quarter, based on this principle, became the largest development area in Budapest
historic city center as Corvin Promenade since 2005 to present.
8.3 Applying the HUL Approach
The comparison of these seven quarters by the analytical grid revealed to which
extent different local urban heritage practices relate to the HUL approach (Sonkoly
2017). Though the urban rehabilitation started with an official decision, the recon-
structed identity and the related heritage experience of urban communities are
strongly determined by the efficiency of the interaction between heritage adminis-
trators representing this decision and the inhabitants (Alföldi and Horváth 2009).
The HUL approach is specifically receptive to this interaction, in which different
definitions and practices of urban heritage are cumulated. In order to understand and
to evaluate the presence of these various heritage concepts and their relevance in the
interaction between heritage experts and the local communities, an analytical grid
of the following indicative concepts was established:
• The perception of security, that is, the temporality of urban heritage preservation,
which can vary between a strict distinction between protected and unprotected
areas (temporal rupture according the register of monument protection) and the
continuous perception of built urban heritage (in which historical distance and
aesthetic considerations are secondary to the community’s preferences). The
sub-indicators are the acknowledgment of temporal continuity, the management
of change, and the practice of active safeguard.
• The heritage territory in which the former distinction between the old and the
new parts of the city and its administrative definition (historic center, zoning,
Table 8.1 The case study selection is based on the adaptation of our HUL grid to the seven
historic quarters in Józsefváros
Historic quarters in
Józsefváros: indicative Palota
concepts of HUL (palace) Corvin Csarnok Népszínház Losonci Orczy Magdolna
Security
Temporal continuity x x x x x
Management of change x x x x x x
Practice of active x x x x x
safeguard
Heritage territory
Palimpsest city x x x x x x x
Outstanding historical x x
areas
Non-outstanding x x x x x
historical areas
Heritage community
Cultural diversity x x x x x x x
Participative heritage x x
preservation
Balanced top-down/ x x
bottom-up initiatives
8/9 4/9 6/9 6/9 3/9 6/9 8/9
core and buffer areas, etc.) becomes blurred and a consequent continuity of the
urban heritage territory can be perceived as the emergence of the growing num-
ber of coexisting urban heritage spots. The sub-indicators are the appreciation of
the historical layers of the built environment (i.e., the urban palimpsest) as well
as the protection of outstanding and non-outstanding historical areas.
• The involvement of the heritage community in the definition and the manage-
ment of its urban heritage. The sub-indicators are the local awareness of cultural
diversity, participative heritage preservation, and the proportion of top-down and
bottom-up initiatives.
The short analysis based on indicative concepts summarized in Table 8.1 gave
stable basis for the two quarters to be selected as case studies – (1) the Palace
Quarter and (2) the Magdolna Quarter, two different parts of the District – by loca-
tion, physical, and social conditions – and reports the application of the HUL
approach in Józsefváros.
While the analytical framework reveals a complex typology of urban heritage
quarters, its complementation by a SWOT analysis allows the most significant ele-
ments within each indicative concept to be determined and, thus, the implementa-
tion of the HUL approach in these quarters, in which historical, social, and economic
characteristics are truly diverse, to be evaluated. The current results of the
rehabilitation program in the two test quarters will be summarized according to its
SWOT aspects in the conclusion (Fig. 8.4 and Table 8.2).
Fig. 8.4 Courtyard of a renovated residential building in the Palace Quarter. (Photo by Attila
Baranyai – Rév8)
Table 8.2 The extension of the analytical framework by a SWOT analysis

The HUL
quarter SWOT Analysis
Security The perception and recognition of urban heritage in its temporal continuity by
different stakeholders.
The management of urban heritage accordingly and with a consensus among
the stakeholders’ groups.
The implementation of active safeguarding techniques.
Heritage The replacement of protection zones by a continuity codetermined by different
territory stakeholders’ perspectives.
The incessant preservation of (already protected) outstanding historical areas.
In accordance with the safeguarding of non-outstanding historical areas and the
establishment of a preservation unity of the diverse areas.
Heritage The recognition and mobilization of the social and cultural diversity of the
community inhabitants in order to ensure their involvement in the safeguarding of urban
heritage.
The development of the participative preservation toolkit in socially and
culturally diverse urban quarters.
The development of a mixed urban heritage governance model, which is proper
to the needs of a given quarter.
8.4 Contemporary Urban and Architectural Interventions
8.4.1 Palace Quarter
The structure of the plots, characterized by huge undivided lands, in inner

Józsefváros dates back the eighteenth century, and it allowed the construction of
palaces and national institutions in the nineteenth century. Fin-de-siècle, inner
Józsefváros, exhibited a great number of Beaux-arts architecture. This was the dom-
inant style in the center of Budapest, a uniquely homogeneous and extended historic
urban center in Europe, which resulted from the economic and demographic boom
between the Austro-Hungarian Compromise and World War I. Inner Józsefváros,
the area of the 8th District between the Small and the Grand Boulevards of Budapest,
was not only a prestigious residential area, but it boasted several national cultural
and educational institutions (Tihanyi 2012). Nowadays, this quarter still keeps its
character as a cultural center. It is not surprising that the secondary and higher edu-
cation level of local households is above the Budapest average. The local population
is typically middle class, and the older generation is overrepresented in comparison
with other parts of the city. Nevertheless, the public spaces are animated not only by
local residents but also by young people, because traditionally several secondary
schools and university buildings and other public facilities, such as libraries, health
centers, etc., have been situated there for decades.9
9
In the Palotanegyed, the internationally well-recognized regeneration method was based on the
creation of social diversity by mixing local inhabitants with students. The campus is not situated
In the beginning of the twenty-first century, the District Municipality decided to

commence to rehabilitate the inner part of Józsefváros with the widest possible
involvement of central and local governmental bodies, market, and nongovernmen-
tal associations as well as local inhabitants (Rácz and Alföldi 2012). The goal of the
long-term strategy was to redefine this spatial and cultural unit within the city where
the inherited historic environment functions are fundamental for contemporary
small-scale development. The use of a new name, the Palace Quarter, started in
2005, and today everybody knows it. The renewal process is based on existing cul-
tural diversity, promotion of economic activities (hotels, restaurants, bars), develop-
ment of students’ public facilities, amelioration of living conditions, public space
renewal, etc. The official top-down program led by the Rév8 Plc. works together
with bottom-up initiatives presented by local residents, associations, institutions,
and NGOs. Through participative actions, the locals’ awareness was directed to the
fact that the creation of new and creative touristic and cultural solutions could mul-
tiply the effect of governmental aid and that they could help to accumulate resources
needed for the renovation of public spaces, restoration of buildings, and a long-term
maintenance of the development (Fig. 8.5).
As a result of this rehabilitation agenda, a new network of interior and exterior
spaces is being established – a sort of microspace – and the inner courtyards are
still able to host the trendy “tumbledown pubs” (bar-cafés habitually installed in
Fig. 8.5 Residents’ event after the participative reconstruction of the condominium courtyard.
(Photo by Attila Baranyai – Rév8)
somewhere else, but within the historic city center. In Paris, the Masséna projects utilized this
development concept, but in the Palotanegyed, this is the inherited situation (Benkő 2010).
dilapidated buildings and courtyards), which are the contemporary continuation of

late nineteenth-century cafés and their café culture. One of the central elements of
the heritage protection program was the renovation and transformation of a
nineteenth-century building (13, Horánszky Street) into a community space. This
two-story-high building was built in the typical Beaux-arts style, and it was the
home of one of the most controversial Hungarian literary figures, Júlia Szendrey,
in the nineteenth century.10 The whole interior of the building was rebuilt with the
preservation of the stucco facade and the beautiful gate. Since its renovation, the
center serves as a hub to assist the further development of the quarter – as a student
club to target the 20,000 students studying at the Palace Quarter for participatory
actions and as an “incubator house” to help local young entrepreneurs (Alföldi
et al. 2015). The most intriguing question is how and when the inhabitants will
start using their new environment. Streets and cafés of the quarter are more ani-
mated than ever, and the new individual renovations made by a building condo-
minium or private investors seem to reflect a rising awareness of the importance of
urban heritage.
The municipality and the Rev8 Plc. could create a very efficient cooperation with
local nongovernmental organizations, especially with the Association of Citizens
for the Palace Quarter (CaPE). Public places are open for art projects. The programs
of the Újirány (“New Direction”) Group in the inner courtyards and the orthophoto
projects, for example, are internationally acclaimed as “simple, poetic interven-
tions” that can stimulate people (Lae Foundation 2015). In the Palace Quarter, small
urban acupuncture11 made in the physical and social environment as well could
influence real changes toward sustainable future (Fig. 8.6).
In the last 10 years, the majority of the historic buildings have been renovated
by the cooperation of the city of Budapest, the local municipality, and the
residents- owners. The renovation is co-financed, and the streets have been
renewed by municipality programs. In this way, public spaces, public buildings,
and private buildings form together the new Palace Quarter and its new commu-
nity. It became one of the well-recognized residential and cultural neighborhoods
in Budapest (Fig. 8.7).
10
First, she was the young “widow of the nation,” since her first husband, Sándor Petőfi, the most
famous national poet, died during the 1848–1849 war of independence. Her second marriage was
denied by many as an act of treason, and her efforts to become an independent female writer were
also often disapproved. She was an extraordinary woman searching for her voice, whose precedent
is worth of remembrance.
11
The urban acupuncture, the development method based on well-located small intervention, is
used since the 1980s; the first examples were realized in Barcelona in Spain or in Curitiba in
Brazil.
Fig. 8.6 Pollmap: the Interactive Mapping Project in 2010. Concept: Dominika Tihanyi.
Realization: Dominika Tihanyi, Árpád Kovács, Dorottya
Thurnay. (Photo by Árpád Kovács – Rév8)
Fig. 8.7 Dankó Street before the renewal. (Photo by Kornél Tóth – Rév8)
8.4.2 The Magdolna Quarter
Another part of Józsefváros, the Magdolna Quarter, presents different challenges

for the HUL approach. The Magdolna Quarter is one of the most poverty-stricken
areas in Budapest, where social segregation was constantly increasing due to the
continuous influx of disadvantaged people during last decades. The quarter is home
to a large number of Romas, who are estimated to constitute 30% of its population
of 12,000. This area situated in the middle of the District has been plagued with
prostitution, petty gang crime, and homelessness for a long time. The quarter’s main
problems are high unemployment, low educational levels, low public safety, and
high criminality, in addition critical substandard quality historic housing stock
(Alföldi et al. 2015).
The Magdolna Quarter Program (MQP) was the first truly integrated socially
sensitive urban regeneration program in Hungary, introduced and managed by the
Rév8 Plc., the local urban development public company. Three phases of MQP have
been implemented between 2005 and 2015. The first phase of local integrated urban
regeneration program was elaborated on neighborhood level funded by the District
Municipality and the city of Budapest as a pilot project. Following Hungary’s EU
accession in 2004, based on the first steps done, the MQP won funding within the
framework of the Integrated Urban Social Rehabilitation among Urban Development
Projects (Alföldi et al. 2013).
As a consequence, the second phase was completed between 2008 and 2011 as
well as the third realized between 2013 and 2015, supported by the European
Regional Development Fund. Nevertheless, these three phases constitute only the
first period of a long-term development strategy for the neighborhood (Benkő and
Germán 2016). The MQP aims to strengthen local society improving housing and
living conditions through the implementation of an area-based integrated approach
and a set of instruments for public participation. The project addresses not only the
traditional renovation of historic housing stock but also the handling of crucial
social problems. This kind of complex urban regeneration program, already in prac-
tice in other European cities (Pickard 2016), was new for Budapest: crime preven-
tion, family support, community development, occupational training, and
architectural and public space renewal are all essential components to achieve the
goal (Fig. 8.8).
Twenty-eight residential buildings, 30% of the quarter’s municipally owned
housing stock, and 20 semiprivate condominiums were involved in refurbishment
activities. The proportion of substandard social rental apartments was reduced from
50% to less than 10%. The maintenance costs – including the rent and public utili-
ties – of housing units did not increase after the renovation. The living conditions
were improved through the installation of indoor toilets, green courtyards, CCTV,
insulation, etc., for 750 families. One hundred families participated directly in the
reconstruction process, and the renovated buildings are rented by the same residents
as before. Nevertheless, new NGOs were established in order to represent the inter-
Fig. 8.8 Residential building before and after community-based renovation. (Photo by Dániel
Horváth – Rév8)
Fig. 8.9 Glove Factory, the new community center of the Magdolna Quarter. Architects: György
Alföldi, József Kolossa, and Csilla Sárkány. (Photo by Tamás Bujnovszky – Rév8)
est of tenants in the process. In addition, some interventions realized by participatory

placemaking in the public spaces helped change the livability of the neighborhood12
(Fig. 8.9).
Similar to the community center in the Palace Quarter, the MQP also established
a community hub for the quarter. The defunct glove factory at Mátyás Square was
transformed into a complex, which hosts cultural, social, and educational programs.
The Glove Factory13 Community Centre became the most important community
12
It is shown by data from 2015: while the population was shrinking until 2011, it started growing
by 2.7 percent between 2012 and 2015. The proportion of economic activity was increased from
40.3 percent to 52.9 percent, though the unemployment rate remained 12.6 percent between 2001
and 2011. The proportion of highly educated people increased from 9.6 percent to 13.7 percent
(Source: KSH)
13
The name Glove Factory reflects on the former function of the plot. The community center uses
the whole plot: a new part was built on the main squares of the quarter, but it is related to the recon-
Fig. 8.10 Exhibition of MICRO Magdolna summer school in 2014. Concept: Melinda Borsos and
Tijana Dimitrijevic. (Photo by Réka Vass)
place not only in the Magdolna Quarter but also for the neighboring quarters (Haba
2008). It offers free weekly courses and programs in arts and crafts, Internet studies,
mentoring, sports and health, etc., and hosts programs for women and for the local
literary club, etc. (Alföldi et al. 2008) (Fig. 8.10).
Several public spaces were renewed during the three phases of MQP; new func-
tions – such as sport leisure or cultural facilities – appeared in the neighborhood
(Kondor and Horváth 2008). Consequently, the inhabitants’ attitude changed radi-
cally toward their living environment. Most of the streets became humanized and
safer, and the proportion of green areas increased (Benkő and Germán 2016). The
public involvement process included local meetings, shared community actions
(e.g., community planting, constructing public furniture, painting buildings, estab-
lishing open-air stage), and the community maintenance of new green areas. Among
the public spaces, the Teleki Square possesses a primary importance from the per-
spective of the quarter and its residents. Historically, this square was situated on the
edge of the lively nineteenth-century Budapest and the countryside and served as a
significant marketplace as well as a motley center for the poor neighborhood, pri-
marily inhabited by immigrants freshly arrived in the city. The Teleki Square is one
of Budapest’s most storied squares.14
structed former industrial part. The courtyard became an important place where in the atmosphere
the new and the historic mix forming a new unit.
14
It is not only a place of memory for the local Jewish community but also the place of memory for
the communist period. The Hungarian film Eldorado presents perfectly the substance of the square.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldorado (1988 film))
Fig. 8.11 Teleki Square after the community-based renewal. Landscape architect: Új Irány
Csoport. (Photo by Tamás Bujnovszky)
Its decline began in the late 1950s, when the popular and frequented market was
displaced. It became a neglected, functionless, and stigmatized urban void, one of
the Budapest’s worst places in regard to feelings of security and crime rates. Here,
the priority of the urban design was to realize a simple, solid, and functional public
area for locals, who founded an NGO, the Association for Teleki Square, in order to
participate in the participatory placemaking and also in the maintenance of the
renewed square. Urban planning professionals relied on the socioeconomic back-
ground and applied practices of community-based public space renewal as guide-
lines to design the future of Teleki Square in accordance with the municipality and
with the inhabitants, which is a fairly unique approach in Hungary. A landscape
design studio moderated the intensive and well-documented process (Faurest and
Alföldi 2015). As one of the designers summarized the process: “Though the applied
design method was genuinely professional, it can be said that the participants became
design partners, and finally they all had the chance to envisage a better future for
themselves. For a landscape architect, working with a community was quite an illu-
minating experience, which makes authenticity and responsibility more tangible as
opposed to planning for an ‘unknown public’.”15 Thus, with the help of the regenera-
tion project, the Magdolna Quarter explored the HUL approach (Fig. 8.11).
The citation is from the designers’ webpage: Dominika Tihanyi et al. Community Design of
15
Teleki Square (http://www.ujirany.com/project/teleki-square-community-park) cited 31 July 2017.

8.5 Conclusion
The major characteristics of a HUL approach proved to be appropriate in the recent

rehabilitation programs of the 8th District of Budapest. From the perspective of the
local population, the participative approach made the previously ill-famed Magdolna
Quarter as precious as the prestigious Palace Quarter. Thus, the aesthetical and
historical values of the built environment are extended by the appreciation of the
inhabitants attributed to their neighborhood, which would not be necessarily the
object of tangible heritage protection. In this sense, the perception of urban evolution
and space as a continuity allowed planning professionals and municipality adminis-
trators to share the heritage experience of the inhabitants, who, in exchange, became
more aware of their renovated quarter and assist eagerly in its maintenance.
The fear of loss expressed in the professional discourses of monument and heri-
tage preservation as well as in the popular sensation of degrading urban areas can be
soothed by the interpretation of the city as a “living palimpsest of past processes”
(Bandarin and van Oers 2015) that creates a continuity and a promise for a shared
future, with which all the participants of urban rehabilitation can identify them-
selves more easily. Thus, concerned heritage communities are constructed on co-
creation and cooperation and could replace eventually their disadvantageous
situation with self-esteem stemming from the appropriation of their living environ-
ment and from the respect for their personal perceptions and practices.
The most important contribution of the HUL approach was the involvement of the
inhabitant’s perception on their environment and its juxtaposition with the practice of
the experts of urban conservation and local municipality. The efficiency of the func-
tioning of this triangle (i.e., the opportunities to turn a historical quarter into a resilient
and appreciated urban heritage community) is proportional to the level of democratic
cooperation within this micro-universe. The major threats emerge from outside
through the imposition of (1) external values/expectations of identity, (2) non-negoti-
ated monument protection, and (3) external political agenda in order to support finan-
cial, economic, or political interests alien to the heritage quarter and community.
References
Alföldi, G., & Horváth, D. (2009). Hogyan tovább? Egy részvételi folyamat fenntarthatóságának
kérdései – tapasztalatok Budapest Józsefvárosából. Földrajzi Közlemények, 133(4), 510–515.
Alföldi, G., Kolossa, J., & Sárkány, C. (2008). Komuntni centrum Rukavickárna. ERA21, 8(6),
23–25.
Alföldi, G., Gerőházi, É., Somogyi, E., & Tosics, I. (2013). Integrated approach to social and
economic inclusion. http://ujrev8.epiteszforum.hu/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/2013_mag-
dolna_paper.pdf. Cited 12. Oct 2017.
Alföldi, G., ifj. Erdősi, S., & Horváth, D. (2015). Handouts for European Comission: 2nd European
CITIES Forum – An Urban Agenda for Europe; Magdolna Book. http://ujrev8.epiteszforum.hu/
wp-content/uploads/2013/08/MagdolnaBook.pdf. Cited 12. Oct 2017.
Ascher, F. (2001). Les nouveaux principes de l’urbanisme. Paris: L’Aube.
Bandarin, F., & van Oers, R. (Eds.). (2015). Reconnecting the city. The historic urban landscape
approach and the future of urban heritage. Oxford: Wiley–Blackwell.
Benkő, M. (2010). Masséna: New campus of Paris. 4D Journal of Landscape Architecture and
Garden Art, 19(3), 2–15.
Benkő, M. (2011). Budapest urban blocks and their sustainability. Architektura & Urbanizmus,
45(3–4), 188–201.
Benkő, M., & Germán, T. (2016). Crime prevention aspects of public space renewal in Budapest.
Journal of Place Management and Development. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMD-09-2015-0034.
Besse, J.-M. (2009). Le goût du monde: Exercices de paysage. Arles: Actes Sud/ENSP.
Budapest. (2013). 77/2013. (XII.3.) Fővárosi Közgyűlési rendelet. https://net.jogtar.hu/jr/gen/
hjegy_doc.cgi?docid=A1300077.FOV&dbnum=104&rendelettar=fovaros&timeshift=201501
01&celpara=. Cited 20 July 2017.
Déry, A. (2007). Józsefváros. Budapest: Terc Kiadó.
Faurest, K., & Alföldi, G. (2015). Remaking the agora: The community-based design of Teleki
Square. Topos, 91, 44–49.
Foucault, M. (2009). Security, territory, population. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Haba, P. (2008). The designing powers of a community, Culture Centre in Mátyás Square. Régi-Új
Magyar Építőművészet.
Hegedűs, J. (1999). Hungarian local government. In E. J. Kirchner (Ed.), Decentralization and
transition in the visegrad: Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia (pp. 132–158).
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hendriks, M. (2015). A series of art projects for urban regeneration in the Palace quarter. In Lae
Foundation (Ed.), On the move #4, landscape architecture Europe (pp. 90–100). Blaudwdruk.
Kondor, A. C., & Horváth, D. (2008). Challenges and experiences of a participative green space
development in Budapest-Józsefváros. Urbani izziv, 19(2), 174–182.
Pickard, R. (2016). Management strategies for historic towns in Europe. In Labadi & Logan (Eds.),
Urban heritage, development and sustainability. International frameworks, national and local
governance (pp. 151–174). London/New York: Routledge.
Rácz, A., & Alföldi, G. (2012). The continuous valorisation of the palace quarter. In D. Tihanyi
(Ed.), Palotanegyed (pp. 10–13). Budapest: Józsefváros Önkormányzata.
Sonkoly, G. (2017). Historical Urban Landscape. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Tihanyi, D. (Ed.). (2012). Palotanegyed. Budapest: Józsefváros Önkormányzata.
UNESCO. (2005a). Convention on the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expres-
sions. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.phpURL_ID=31038&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_
SECTION=201.html. Cited 27 July 2015.
UNESCO. (2005b). Declaration on the conservation of the historic urban landscapes. whc.unesco.
org/document/6812. Cited 7 January 2016.
Chapter 9
Bukhara: A Living Central Asian Silk
Roads City. Application of the Historic
Urban Landscape Approach
Ona Vileikis, Sanjarbek Allayarov, Christian Ost, and Rand Eppich
Abstract Bukhara, an ancient city along the Silk Roads in Uzbekistan, is undergoing
dramatic change – an increase in visitation, introduction of new materials, and
construction techniques – along with a growing awareness of the need for protec-
tion. It has been recognized, in Bukhara and other historic cities, that there must be
a new approach to urban heritage, balancing conservation along with development
and change. The HUL recommendation proposed such an approach, taking into
account diversity of stakeholders, management, and planning tools. With this vision,
the World Heritage property of the Historic Centre of Bukhara has been preparing
its Integrated Management Plan. The preparatory process has prioritized and inte-
grated cultural heritage into the urban planning agenda. The process is not yet
complete, but, despite its own challenges, it has already achieved success by
bringing together for the first time different partners to envision a heritage city as
cultural living capital on the path of protecting while developing this unique Central
Asian medieval city.
Keywords World Heritage · Historic Urban Landscape · Management plan ·

Mapping · Participatory approach · Economic assessment · Conservation · Silk
Roads · Bukhara
O. Vileikis (*)
University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
e-mail: ona.vileikis@kuleuven.be
S. Allayarov
UNESCO Office in Tashkent, Tashkent, Uzbekistan
e-mail: s.allayarov@unesco.org
C. Ost
ICHEC Brussels Management School, Brussels, Belgium
e-mail: christian.ost@ichec.be
R. Eppich
Heritage Development, Madrid, Spain
e-mail: rand.eppich@heritagedevelopment.org

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_9
168 O. Vileikis et al.
9.1 Introduction
The quality of life of the community who live in and around historic centers is
directly related to its impressive monuments, landscapes, and culture. These places
create a spirit of home and interlink generations to connect them to their past and
reinforce a sense of belonging. This is the case of the Historic Centre of Bukhara, a
historic city located in the heart of the ancient Silk Roads in Uzbekistan. However,
its Outstanding Universal Value is extremely fragile and, thus, must be diligently
protected (UNESCO 2012).
Successful urban development aids in this protection and is a process that aims
to improve the quality of life by helping people set their own priorities through
effective and inclusive involvement, strengthening local capacity and social ser-
vices, as well as protecting and promoting culture (NIKU 2012). However, urban
development that does not address culture and the built environment risks damaging
the community, its values, and sustainability.
Improving the quality of life in historic city centers such as Bukhara is essential
and we recognize this. The Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) approach integrates
development principles into conservation planning (UNESCO 2011). This is impor-
tant for living, vibrant cities such as Bukhara where economic progress has been
rapid, international tourism is increasing, and the availability of modern materials
and new construction techniques is more widely available. The HUL approach
looks forward to find a dialogue between the needs of the community who want and
need modern conveniences and authorities who wish to conserve the atmosphere of
a medieval Silk Roads city.
In 2013, the HUL approach was introduced for the first time in Bukhara. After
that, in 2015, it was discussed in detail with stakeholders at multiple levels and
government officials, specialists in conservation, and local nonprofit organizations
working with heritage in order to integrate the HUL approach into the ongoing
Integrated Management Plan. It was agreed that while many modern changes may
seem at odds with conservation, this is not necessarily true. Modern conveniences
can be adapted to the historic environment while protecting the Outstanding
Universal Value of Bukhara.
This chapter relates the experiences during the implementation of the UNESCO
recommendation on HUL of the World Heritage property of the Historic Centre
of Bukhara, Uzbekistan. The project team gathered together with workshop partici-
pants, stakeholders, decision-makers, and others assisting this urban community to
safeguard their cultural heritage and landscapes while also seeking to improve
socioeconomic development.
9 Bukhara: A Living Central Asian Silk Roads City. Application of the Historic Urban… 169
9.2 Bukhara as World Heritage
9.2.1 Current Issues and Challenges
Bukhara is changing rapidly. People are discovering the unspoiled beauty of this
medieval Central Asian city including regional and international visitors. This
change, for the most part, is beneficial to the residents as it brings economic oppor-
tunity and prosperity and international connections and boosts the well-deserved
reputation of this beautiful city (Vileikis and Allayarov 2015). However, these
changes are also not without drawbacks. They include the widespread use of
modern and cheaper materials, exposed utilities, and other modern conveniences
such as air conditioning units, unrestricted parking, and capitalism expressed in
large banner signs and backlit store advertisements among others.
Bukhara largely retains its medieval feel, and the most significant monuments,
with some exceptions, are being well cared for and diligently conserved. This urban
fabric is largely intact in terms of plan and scale. It is a special atmosphere when
visiting the main monuments to pass through this historic urban landscape (see
Figs. 9.1 and 9.2). It includes small narrow streets, buildings in the scale of one or
two stories close to the exterior which are made of paksha before viewing the
impressive monuments, and the lively market atmosphere including traditional
handicraft workshops (Vileikis et al. 2017).
Fig. 9.1 Location of the city of Bukhara, Uzbekistan. (Source: Ona Vileikis. Background: World
topographic map)
Fig. 9.2 View from the east of the Historic Centre of Bukhara, World Heritage property in
Uzbekistan. The minaret Kalon and a number of the religious complexes with turquoise cupolas
define the silhouette of the urban historic landscape. (Source: Ona Vileikis)
While the main monuments will always require conservation and a dedication of
resources, they will also have ample attention given their significance, beauty, and
scale. Their protection is clearly reflected in the mandate of the Board of Monuments,
the national heritage agency responsible for the protection of monuments and sites.
The monuments of the Ismail Samanid Mausoleum, Magok-i Attari Mosque, Kosh
Madrassah, and the massive Ark Citadel are only some of the precious individual
monuments surrounded and connected by this urban fabric (Knobloch 2001).
However, the interconnecting historic urban landscape is what is mostly at risk. This
includes the urban fabric, Bukharian traditional houses, and streetscapes of a com-
plete and unspoiled example of a medieval Central Asian town. These elements are
explicitly recognized in its Outstanding Universal Value for inclusion in the
UNESCO World Heritage List in 1993 (Republic of Uzbekistan 1990) (see Fig. 9.3).
Some of these threats are the long-term results of a limited management system,
inadequate infrastructure, lack of awareness of the importance of preserving the
traditional fabric, clear lack of regular communication between local administrative
bodies and the culture sector, and mainly lack of harmonization of the national leg-
islation with the UNESCO World Heritage Convention. They require significant
attention and resources along with multiagency cooperation, improvements in gov-
ernance policies, and building capacities and awareness.
Yet other threats are short term and could be easily addressed to make significant
impacts through small investments, clear conservation and management guidelines
and regulations for town planning, rehabilitation and new construction of housing,
and enforcement. Some of these threats include a rising water table due to lack of a
Fig. 9.3 Traditional houses close outside made of paksha, rammed earth built with clay and raw
or burnt bricks, and open inside (left and middle). Market with handcrafts located in the domes
(right). (Source: Ona Vileikis)
complete municipal sewage system, termites, inappropriate or non-contributing

structures, tourism management, uncontrolled additions, and merchant signage. If
these threats are unaddressed, Bukhara will likely retain their monuments, but it will
be an island surrounded by a sea of inappropriate and non-contributing housing,
hotels, and commercial buildings.
9.3 The Historic Urban Landscape Process
9.3.1 HUL Applied in Bukhara
The HUL approach seeks a balance between conservation and development. It rec-
ognizes that cities must be evolving, dynamic, and living while also protecting what
is unique in the Outstanding Universal Value. The HUL approach intends to manage
change rather than only preserve the past to integrate environmental, social, cul-
tural, and economic concerns. It also outlines involvement of stakeholders at all
levels (UNESCO 2011). The current conservation approach in the Historic Centre
of Bukhara is aligned with HUL in that above all it is designed to protect the
Outstanding Universal Value. However, the current conservation program and
management plans have to be incorporated in the city planning together with more
ideas and concepts from socioeconomic development as advocated by HUL.
The suggested process HUL in Bukhara incorporated, to a certain extent, all of
the following steps:
1 . Mapping – understanding what you have
2. Participatory planning and consultation on values and attributes
3 . Integration of heritage values into wider (development) context

4. Economic and vulnerability assessment of attributes but also strengths and
potentials
5. Actions and priorities for conservation and development
6. Partnerships and management frameworks
Steps 1–5 have been already accomplished by the current approach and the draft-
ing of the Integrated Management Plan for Bukhara.
In order to understand Bukhara as a living city and gather the right baseline
information, there has been extensive mapping of the monuments and their sur-
rounding urban context as well as economic values. Between 2008 and 2013, five
field campaigns took place to map and survey the historic center with a group of
national experts, international specialists, and volunteers (Vileikis and Allayarov
2014, 2015; Vileikis et al. 2017) (Box 9.1).
Box 9.1: Mapping and Survey of the Historic Centre of Bukhara

The teams carried out a quick reconnaissance mapping of the Historic Centre
of Bukhara and a door-to-door residents and owner’s survey. The mapping
included all historic monuments, water channels, khaouzes (pools) and open
spaces, as well as survey of all dwellings (historic and contemporary) within
the Historic Centre. Also, the delineation of the World Heritage boundaries
and buffer zones was reviewed. In total 4063 dwellings, including around a
hundred traditional Bukharian houses, and 180 historic buildings were sur-
veyed (Fig. 9.4).
Fig. 9.4 International and local team during summer field survey in 2013. All teams were
equipped with maps, a cover letter from the Ministry of Culture introducing the project, and
basic survey tools, such as tapes or laser distance measurers (disto) and digital cameras.
(Source: Ona Vileikis)
The survey helped not only to understand the current physical condition and
threats affecting the dwellings through a quick mapping, but also to assess the heri-
tage values and socioeconomic aspects and create awareness among residents. It
also identified traditional houses with high heritage value that were not registered
on the national heritage list and other features in a wider context. The survey
collected accurate data as baseline monitoring. During the years of survey, the
residents of the historic center actively participated. This also included the local
children who contributed with drawings and texts about “My Bukhara,” an initiative
that later developed into a leaflet describing the Historic Centre of Bukhara through
the eyes of Patrimonito (Vileikis and Allayarov 2014) (see Fig. 9.5) (Box 9.2).
Box 9.2: Awareness Raising Campaign: Children’s Leaflet of Bukhara

During the summer field survey of 2013, the children living in the Historic
Centre of Bukhara were asked: “Bukhara is the city you live in. Let your
imagination go and make a drawing or writing about Bukhara to introduce
your city.”
A total of 35 drawings were received from children between 7 and 13 years
old. A selection of them was used to design a leaflet. In it Patrimonito tells the
story of the values of the Historic Centre of Bukhara to the children. The leaf-
let has been distributed in primary schools in the city of Bukhara.
Fig. 9.5 Community participatory method. Children’s leaflet of the Historic Centre of
Bukhara, inside panels. (Source: UNESCO Field survey project 2013)
With the support of a Geospatial Information System (GIS), the study also
revealed that the UNESCO boundaries and buffer zones were not properly delin-
eated and did not have the required legal value. The main monuments, such as the
Ismail Samanid Mausoleum, were not included in the boundaries or buffer zones
(Vileikis and Allayarov 2015). This confirmed the need for a minor modification of
the UNESCO boundaries and buffer zones of the Historic Centre of Bukhara. This
change has been already approved by the World Heritage Committee (UNESCO
2016). Its legal integration into the master plan of the city is pending, and there is a
need to develop zoning and urban planning regulations. Additionally, it was
acknowledged that other attributes such as the ancient water management system
and fortification walls need further mapping (Box 9.3).
Box 9.3: Geospatial Information System (GIS) Database for the Historic
Centre of Bukhara
The information collected during the 5 years of survey was stored in a GIS
database. Thematic maps, such as state of conservation, infrastructure, and
land use, were retrieved from the system to support the further planning of the
city and the preparation of the management plan. Further GIS training to the
staff of the local authorities and the Interregional Inspection has been foreseen
as part of the action plan of the management plan as well as the development
of a strategy for updating and adding new information to the inventory
(Fig. 9.6).
Fig. 9.6 Screenshot of the GIS database of the Historic Centre of Bukhara showing monu-
ments and dwellings. Result of the five field surveys from 2008 to 2013. (Source: UNESCO
Field Survey Project 2013)
There has also been participatory planning and consultation on values as well
as a beginning of economic and vulnerability assessment. The need for economic
and social development was explicitly recognized by the government of Uzbekistan
in their separate Bukhara City Development Strategy 2030 (CDS) which was co-
developed with the World Bank and participation of a large group of stakeholders
(Republic of Uzbekistan & World Bank 2014). The CDS is, in fact, aligned with
UNESCO’s HUL and enables developing current conservation programs within the
long-term management plan. It aligns with the HUL in that it takes into account a
monitoring mechanism and coordination between administrative bodies, establish-
ment of a comprehensive management plan, promotion of traditional construction
techniques, and development of a documentation strategy. Nevertheless, the CDS
was drafted from a broader perspective and originated from the development point
of view, incorporating only recognized cultural heritage and briefly mentioning
conservation.
Between 2015 and 2017, four consultation meetings with stakeholders took
place. The agreement of short-term action plans in between these meetings aimed to
guide the authorities and push the process forward. Following the HUL approach,
from outside the cultural heritage field development, other participants or stake-
holders such as from the State Committee on Development of Tourism (former
Uzbektourism), Khokimiyat (municipality), and the mahallas (neighborhoods)
joined the meetings. It was observed that the stakeholders did not conceive the his-
toric center as a whole, including the urban layout and traditional houses as illus-
trated in the Statement of Outstanding Universal Value, but as number of single
monuments within a city (see Fig. 9.8) (Box 9.4).
Box 9.4: Participatory Planning and Consultation

In 2015, results of the survey were presented to the stakeholders of Bukhara
together with the Senate of the Republic of Uzbekistan at the round table on
the “Improvement the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention in
Uzbekistan.” The outcome of this meeting was the approval of the Decree No.
200 by the Cabinet of Ministers (Republic of Uzbekistan 2014) and an action
plan, including the appointment of a national focal point for UNESCO World
Heritage, and the creation of new departments in restoration at the Tashkent
Architectural and Construction Institute (TACI) and Samarkand State
Architectural and Construction Institute (SamGASI) (Figs. 9.7 and 9.8).
(continued)
Box 9.4 (continued)
Fig. 9.7 Bukhara field survey results presented at the jointly organized meeting with
UNESCO Office in Tashkent and the Senate of the Republic of Uzbekistan. (Source:
Sanjarbek Allayarov)
Fig. 9.8 Multidisciplinary and interinstitutional group of stakeholders at the consultation

meeting and workshop during the preparation of the Integrated Management Plan of the
Historic Centre of Bukhara in 2015–2016. (Source: Ona Vileikis)
The consultation process showed Bukhara not as a sum of monuments in isola-

tion, but as addressed by the HUL. Through a thorough wider values assessment,
Bukhara was seen as the result of a historic layering of cultural and natural values
and attributes within a broader context of their urban surroundings. This values
context included the ancient medieval narrow streets, the urban fabric with densely
packed building blocks and courtyards, fortified city surrounded by walls and gates,
water management system with a network of khaouzes (pools) and canals, Arc citadel
(the civic center of the town), archeological sites, trading domes and streets,
traditional Bukharian houses with inner courtyard, caravanserais, hammon (baths),
and Islamic religious ensembles that show the presence of Muslim theology,
particularly Sufism (madrasa, khonako, mosque, and minaret) and mausoleums.
Intangible heritage dimensions were also recognized, such as the practice of Sufism
and crossroads in trade and economy of the region, as well as the development of
science (Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Uzbekistan et al. 2017).
Additionally, after consultation with the main group of stakeholders and inter-
views with managers of hotels and B&Bs as well as tourist operators and businesses
that depend upon cultural tourism, the results of the economic assessment contrib-
uted to the broader understanding of the city. As far as use values are concerned, it
was recognized that cultural heritage of Bukhara provides urban functions for its
residents, mainly residential uses and tourism-oriented shops in the very center,
and Shaybanids tourism benefits are dominant and mostly channeled through and
regulated through market mechanisms such as the trade domes and the Lyab-i-
Khaouz. Arts and crafts activities are also well developed. Recreational values exist in
several places and green areas such as the Samanid recreation park. As far as nonuse
values are concerned, the international recognition of Bukhara’s heritage provides
many potential economic benefits.
All of these layers combined were the base to understand the challenges and
opportunities of Bukhara’s urban heritage at the center of the spatial development
process. To address these management issues and to provide the framework for the
action plan, the strategies and objectives were grouped under these seven themes:
1 . Enable conservation and manage change.

2. Promote the Historic Centre of Bukhara and improve communication.
3. Enhance the visitors’ experience in the Historic Centre of Bukhara.
4. Improve the quality of life in the Historic Centre of Bukhara.
5. Build capacities in the Historic Centre of Bukhara.
6. Involve communities of the Historic Centre of Bukhara.
7. Boost effective management of the Historic Centre of Bukhara.
The Integrated Management Plan 2017–2022 for the Historic Centre of Bukhara
was finalized at the beginning of 2017. It sets out in total 27 objectives and 107
actions. These actions take into consideration the recommendations of the World
Heritage Committee and the UNESCO/ICOMOS reactive monitoring missions
such as the creation of the Bukhara World Heritage Unit (BWHU) with a manager,
city inspector, and a steering committee as well as the development of conservation
guidelines and normative building codes for the historic center.
Along these processes, in 2014, a draft recommendation on changes of the

legislation was presented in Bukhara by UNESCO, together with the Senate of the
Republic of Uzbekistan, to adapt the cultural heritage management system responding
to the World Heritage requirements. As a result a new decree of the Cabinet of
Ministers including the creation of a World Heritage unit with a focal point within
the Board of Monuments was approved (Republic of Uzbekistan 2014). Other proposals
are still under discussion.
9.3.2 Development Defined
In order to understand HUL, development must be defined, and there must be an

understanding of how this approach evolved. This will explain how two different
fields, conservation and development, have now converged with the HUL approach.
The United Nations documents emphasize “human development” measured by life
expectancy, adult literacy, access to all three levels of education, as well as average
income of people. The notion of human development incorporates all aspects of
individuals’ well-being, from their health status to their economics and free-
dom (UNDP 2015).
The convergence between development and conservation has finally begun to
happen. UNESCO, in the late twentieth century, stated that the world is not only
facing economic, social, or environmental challenges – creativity, knowledge,
diversity, and beauty are the bases for a dialogue on peace and progress, and these
values are intrinsically connected to human development and freedoms (UNESCO
2015). The three pillars of development could not possibly reflect the “complexities
of current society” (United Cities and Local Governments 2013 p. 4). UNESCO
along with the World Summit on Sustainable Development called for the inclusion
of culture as the fourth pillar in the sustainable development model since culture
ultimately shapes what is meant by development and determines how people act in
the world.
In Bukhara, the impact of development on architectural conservation can be
addressed in several ways. First the idea of conservation has expanded from only
protecting the material fabric to protecting the underlying values including social
and economic. As stated earlier our built environment directly impacts our quality
of life. Therefore, architectural conservation naturally intersects with the concepts
of sustainable development. In addition, the conservation, reuse, adaptation, and
restoration of existing buildings are much more environmentally friendly than
demolition and reconstruction (National Trust for Historic Preservation, Preservation
Green Lab 2011). Results of the condition survey revealed that there has been an
increase in new construction and inappropriate alterations to the character defining
architectural features of the dwellings. Despite the resolution approved by the
Cabinet of Ministers (Republic of Uzbekistan 2007) “to prohibit any modern con-
struction within the defined boundaries and to increase on further conservation of
cultural heritage, repair and reconstruction as per decree No 269 (2002),” changes
are taking place. Historic houses are being replaced by new constructions using
incompatible building materials and techniques and do not follow the uses and
height characteristic of the historic center (Vileikis and Allayarov 2015). After inter-
views with the residents and owners of the houses, they agree that they have
improved their houses to achieve better standards of living.
Finally, conservation of architectural heritage, especially in countries with rich
cultural resources, such as Uzbekistan, is directly related to improving economic
development through tourism, as is the case in Bukhara (Arezki et al. 2012).
9.4 Economic Assessment
Culture and economics are often in opposition on the field, but economic factors are
critical to the sustainability and well-being of urban communities, such as Bukhara.
Cultural economics offer an enormous potential in terms of income and direct and
indirect employment, as well as generating induced macroeconomic benefits from
these resources (Getty Trust 1999). However, this process is difficult and often
raises concerns. Conflicts may exist between conservation and economic uses. Both
sides have good reasons for their work and objectives. For specialists working in
cultural heritage such as historians, conservators, and archeologists, conservation
and protection are the main focus. However, heritage operators like owners and resi-
dents of historic houses or historic accommodation seek to benefit economically
and therefore strive to adapt sites to the needs of their activities such as tourism,
gastronomy, accommodation, and private or public access. In 2016, bridging the
gap between the different needs and uses, a methodology framework for assessing
economic values was proposed and applied in the Historic Centre of Bukhara. These
results contributed to a draft statement of economic significance aiming to comple-
ment the existing statement of cultural significance (Box 9.5).
Box 9.5: Steps of the Economic Values Assessment

1. Identification of cultural heritage in terms of cultural capital (Throsby
2012), by assessing the long-term economic and social potential of heri-
tage for various urban stakeholders, including visitors (see Fig. 9.9).
2. Measurement of economic values, using methodologies that are today
common to many places (use or marketable values, nonuse or nonmarket-
able values, externalities).
3. Strategic analysis, using a SWOT analysis, to identify internal strengths
and weaknesses, external opportunities, and threats.
(continued)
Box 9.5 (continued)
Fig. 9.9 Use of historic buildings for promotion of its intangible heritage such as tradi-
tional shows and handicrafts and workshops. (Source: Ona Vileikis)
The unique cultural heritage of Uzbekistan is itself a tremendous and irreplace-

able capital and a decisive differentiating factor that contributes to the national
economy and remains essentially untapped. Therefore, integrated economic cultural
processes need encouragement in order to develop their own power and gain accep-
tance from rural stakeholders who too often do not appreciate cultural heritage as an
economic and sustainable value of its own –beyond tourism.
Economic valorization is closely linked to the appearance of urban communities
and aesthetic values. This is directly connected with the huge problem of neglected
properties, typical of missed economic chances for local inhabitants. Every single
neglected and vacant building means loss of cultural and economic value for its
owner and loss of identification for locals. There are no common avoidance strategies
yet, but we increasingly learn that the complexity of the background urgently needs
integrated and macroeconomic approaches – totally in line with HUL princi-
ples (Bandarin et al. 2011).
The identification and promotion of economic potential of cultural heritage,
taken as individual goods or as a whole, are crucial for providing short-term urban
benefits and for fostering long-term creativity and innovation (KEA European
Affairs 2009). The demolition of historic buildings in favor of erecting new build-
ings, for example, or the allocation of historic buildings in favor of developing non-
sustainable tourism initiatives is always the second choice as calculations show that
integrated and sustainable conservation offers much more long-term direct and indi-
rect effects in social and economic terms. The sound implementation of HUL
approach would bridge the gap between the needs of conservation and the expected
benefits from innovative economic uses. As stated earlier there may be conflicts
between conservation and economic uses in the short term. These must be balanced
through the early and continued involvement of both disciplines, with strong public
intervention to correct market failures.
In terms of financial resources, the same balance between conservation and
economic development is required to create innovative financial models that may
bridge short-term financial returns with long-term economic benefits from investing
in heritage conservation (Pickard 2009).
As far as economics is considered, Bukhara’s experience tells us that the HUL
approach is an incentive to strengthen the potential of socioeconomic benefits – not
just relying on tourism but also taking into consideration the potential of the historic
area for creative and innovative activities, in line with the long intangible heritage
of skills, knowledge, and craftsmanship.
Custom-made financial models for heritage operators and property owners, cou-
pled with strong incentives from local authorities, allow creating new uses, to reflect
on reuses of historic buildings. Putting emphasis on integration between the historic
area and the developing surrounding area is one of the most urgent topics in rural
development, preventing rural exodus and avoiding mass tourism (Eppich 2014).
9.5 Conservation Approach
In order to understand the integration of the HUL approach into the historic city of
Bukhara and their current conservation planning efforts, the present situation and
challenges must be described. Currently these can be divided into two general
categories – those that are the responsibility of the government authority and those
which stem from a general lack of awareness from the community itself including
individual property and business owners.
To address the challenges, working groups were held to establish a specific
conservation philosophy for Bukhara that incorporates the HUL approach based on
the Outstanding Universal Value and its setting. This philosophy was developed
during multidisciplinary working sessions with conservation architects, planners,
government, and nonprofit civil society organizations, with local, national, and
international participants. They were based upon established and recognized inter-
national standards yet sought to enable and further socioeconomic development as
advocated by the HUL approach (Box 9.6).
In order to address the challenges and preserve the Outstanding Universal Value
of the Historic Centre of Bukhara as a World Heritage property of Uzbekistan, pre-
vious General Principles of the Conservation were created to assist in guiding the
future work while promoting urban regeneration and managing processes of change
(Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Uzbekistan et al. 2017). Based on these
General Principles, specific directions for the conservation of each one of the recog-
nized attributes were also developed. These directions aim to better prioritize future
actions and establish the yearly action plan of the Interregional Inspection.
Box 9.6: Conservation Principles of the Historic Centre of Bukhara

Respect for all values – The Historic Centre of Bukhara, its original fabric,
scale, authenticity, and attributes should be respected and conserved. The
Outstanding Universal Value together with local values gives the integrity of
the urban surroundings. The urban landscape of the Historic Centre of Bukhara
includes the mahallas, its houses, the main monuments, and traditional water
systems and reflects its cultural diversity and traditions.
Minimal intervention – The values and attributes of the Historic
Centre of Bukhara should be always maintained with minimum inter-
vention. Only undertake repairs where absolutely necessary for short- and
long-term stability, moisture protection, and visitor safety. Repair rather
than replace. Any elements that require replacement must be identified.
Before replacement it is necessary that the causes of deterioration must be
studied, understood, and addressed. Maintain reversibility in any intervention
when possible and reverse existing inappropriate interventions. Avoid
drastic fragmentation of the urban fabric, such as the mahallas and public
spaces.
Compatibility and reflection of changes – All interventions should be
physically and visually compatible with the values of the heritage object
and slightly distinguishable from the original materials. All changes
should be documented.
Traditional or compatible materials and techniques – Only traditional
or compatible materials, such as fired brick or mud brick, and building
techniques, such as carcass (wooden) or brickwork, should be used. It
should follow the same or similar design, color, properties, structure, and
decorations.
Evaluation – All original materials should be evaluated and tested to
thoroughly understand their properties and attributes in order to propose alter-
native new materials for further use. All new materials and any proposed treat-
ments should be assessed.
International standards – All work should be in conformity with the
international conservation practices and charters. Some examples are the
Venice Charter (1964); Convention Concerning the Protection of the World
Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972); Charter for the Conservation of Historic
Towns and Urban Areas (Washington Charter) (1987); Nara Document on
Authenticity (1994); Principles for the Recording of Monuments, Groups of
Buildings and Sites (1996); Principles for the Analysis, Conservation and
Structural Restoration of Architectural Heritage (2003); Xi’an Declaration on
the Conservation of the Setting of Heritage Structures, Sites and Areas (2005);
FARO Convention (2015); Valletta Principles (2011); and Burra Charter
(2013).
(continued)
Box 9.6 (continued)

Maintenance of use – Monuments, traditional houses, dwellings, and
other heritage elements must be maintained in use in order to ensure
their protection. Therefore, damaged, abandoned, unused, or underused
spaces should be recovered, adapted, and made available for appropriate use
without losing the originality or spirit of the place. Their maintenance and
restoration should be economically feasible and sustainable.
Sustainability – The protection and management of the Historic Centre
of Bukhara must be guided in line with the principles of sustainable
development. Prepare for longer-term conservation projects including manu-
als for maintenance, illustrated conservation guidelines, and visitation plans.
Control the water on and around the historic center. Revitalize pools (Khaouzes),
traditional irrigation, drainage, and the ancient street network.
Understanding – Records and documentation of all works should be
easily understood and available. This includes locating historic documents,
updating monument passports, monitoring forms, and creating a bibliography.
Decision-making process about changes should be consultative, consis-
tent, well justified, and informed.
Communication – All work should be planned by a multidisciplinary
team, communicated, and shared. Knowledge and skills of experts and
active participation of the mahallas are essential in order to communicate
to the stakeholders, residents, and property owners why it is important to
preserve the original fabric and when it is appropriate to replace it with com-
patible materials.
Infrastructure – Any improvements to the infrastructure system
should respect the existing historic structures and not impact negatively
the historic urban fabric. Bukhara is a living city with active communities,
neighborhoods, and businesses. Therefore, the possibility of improving the
quality of life through the introduction of appropriate infrastructure and
service, such as water delivery systems, storm drainage, sewer drainage,
energy efficiency of buildings, and electrical and gas delivery, should be
ensured. The implementation of infrastructure must be inserted very carefully,
ideally in the presence of staff of the inspection.
Physical access: transportation and mobility – Innovations in trans-
portation and mobility should not have any detrimental impacts on the
values or the attributes of the Historic Centre of Bukhara. There should
be a balance between protection and access in the historic center. Vehicles,
private and public transport, and parking should have limited access. The city
strategic planning must include decisions on rehabilitation of the historic city
structures, such as streets and routes within the mahallas, considering the
need of accessibility of people with disabilities as well as an emergency plan
and vehicles.
9.6 Conclusion
This chapter described how the HUL approach was addressed and how it has been
incorporated into current conservation planning and management of the World
Heritage property of the Historic Centre of Bukhara in Uzbekistan. It explained how
this approach has been presented and implemented through integrative and partici-
patory planning with the group of stakeholders and the community. Acknowledgment
of the need for managed development by the government, along with publication of
the CDS and with the preparation of the Integrated Management Plan for Bukhara,
was ideal to introduce the HUL approach. The HUL implementation in Bukhara
recognized the realities of development within the historic center and the need to
improve the quality of life along with conservation of historic properties. It opposed
dividing the city into separate conservation areas to create static city museums and
aimed to preserve and enhance quality of life and productivity of the custodians.
Bukhara was recognized as a living city with several layers of significance. The
Integrated Management Plan was not the end, but the beginning of the coming years
of multilevel and multiagency dialogue and cooperation. As important as the result
was the process. It included years of mapping and surveying, socioeconomic impact
studies, review of values and legislation to understand the context, and continuous
meetings with the main stakeholders. The stakeholders’ group was engaged through-
out the meetings with rigorous debate to find the best solutions, methods, and
approaches for protecting their historic city. This process was always promoted by
the media in national TV, newspapers, and virtual networks. The experience of the
implementation of the HUL in Bukhara fostered international and interagency col-
laboration and partnerships with universities and saw conservation of the historic
city from a broader perspective, community involvement, and consensus of the
stakeholders as a key in decision-making. Finally, it aims to inspire other historic
cities to follow this approach.
Acknowledgments Thank you. The sense of pride of place was palatable in Bukhara. All the
professionals, community leaders, and concerned individuals from across many different fields,
government agencies, and professions were constantly talking about their heritage and were eager
to share their experiences, enthusiasm, and concern for this important World Heritage property.
The authors wish to thank them for being open to new perspectives and searching for innovative
approaches to protect Bukhara. This includes representatives from the Ministry of Culture of the
Republic of Uzbekistan, the Board of Monuments, the State Committee on Development of
Tourism, and the local administrations, both the Interregional Inspection and the Khokimiyat, as
well as architects, the mahallas leaders, and most importantly the community of Bukhara.
The authors also wish to thank the professional staff of the UNESCO Office in Tashkent and
the funding provided by the regular program “Implementation of the World Heritage Convention,”
the International Assistance project “Development of a Management Plan for the Historic Centre
of Bukhara,” and the UNESCO/Netherlands Funds-in-Trust project “Application of the UNESCO
Recommendation on Historic Urban landscape at the World Heritage properties of the Historic
Centre of Bukhara and Samarkand, Uzbekistan”.
Special thanks go to those who developed the HUL approach, namely, Ron van Oers for spon-
soring and organizing previous workshops and publications as well as providing the background
research to make the HUL application in Bukhara a success.
References
Arezki, R., Cherif, R., & Piotrowski, J. (2012). UNESCO world heritage list, tourism, and eco-
nomic growth. In G. Licciardi & R. Amirtahmasebi (Eds.), The economics of uniqueness.
Investing in historic city cores and cultural heritage assests for sustainable development
(pp. 183–212). Washington, DC: World Bank.
Bandarin, F., Hosagrahar, J., & Sailer Albernaz, F. (2011). Why development needs culture.
Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 15–25. https://
doi.org/10.1108/20441261111129906.
Eppich, R. (2014). Quality of rural life and culture. Editor’s Note. In Cultural heritage, land-
scape & rural development good practice, methodology, policy recommendations & guide-
lines for rural communities. HISTCAPE: Historic Assets and Related Landscapes (pp. 8–9).
The European Union European Regional Development Fund. Retrieved from http://www.
historic-towns.org/Winter%20Newsletter%202014/HISTCAPE_Cultural%20Heritage%20
Landscape%20and%20Rural%20Development-1.pdf
Getty Trust. (1999). In R. Mason (Ed.), Economics and heritage conservation. Los Angeles: The
Getty Conservation Institute.
KEA European Affairs. (2009). The impact of culture on creativity. A study prepared for the
European Commission (Directorate-General for Eductaion and Culture). Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/culture/documents/study_impact_cult_creativity_ 06_09.pdf.
Knobloch, E. (2001). Monuments of Central Asia: A guide to the archaeology, art and architecture
of Turkestan. London/New York: I.B. Tauris.
Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Interregional Inspection of Bukhara and Navoi,
& UNESCO Office in Tashkent. (2017). Integrated management plan 2017–2022. Historic
centre of Bukhara World Heritage Property. Bukhara: Unpublished.
National Trust for Historic Preservation, Preservation Green Lab. (2011). The greenest build-
ing: Quantifying the environmental value of building reuse. Retrieved from http://www.
preservationnation.org/information-center/sustainable-communities/greenlab/lca/The_
Greenest_Building_lowres.pdf
NIKU – Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research. (2012). Harnessing the hidden
potential of cities. Report from the Oslo Workshop 11–12 April 2012. Can Cultural Heritage
Investments Support Inclusive Urban Development? Oslo.
Pickard, R. (2009). Conservation in the built environment, policy law and practice. London: Taylor
& Francis.
Republic of Uzbekistan. (1990). Historic Centre of Bukhara – Nomination Dossier.
Republic of Uzbekistan. (2007). Decree No. 191 On the issue of the protection of cultural heritage
in the historic centre of Bukhara (2007.09.11). Retrieved from http://www.lex.uz
Republic of Uzbekistan. (2014). Decree No. 200 Cabinet of Ministers on Additional Measures
to Enhance Protection and Utilization of Tangible Cultural and Archaeological Heritage
(21.07.2014). Retrieved from http://www.lex.uz
Republic of Uzbekistan, & World Bank. (2014). Bukhara city development strategy 2030 (Final
report) (Unpublished).
Throsby, D. (2012). Investment in urban heritage, economic impacts of cultural projects in FYR
Macedonia and Georgia, urban development and local government. NW Washington, DC: The
World Bank.
UNDP. (2015). Human development report 2015. Work for human development. New York: United
Nations Development Programme.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape. UNESCO. Retrieved from
http://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/638
UNESCO. (2012). Decision adopted by World Heritage Committee at its 36th session (Saint-
Petersburg, Russian Federation, 24 June – 6 July 2012). Document WHC-12/36.COM/19.
Presented at the 36th session of the Committee, Saint Petersburg. Retrieved from http://whc.
unesco.org/archive/2012/whc12-36com-19e.pdf
UNESCO. (2015). UNESCO’s work on culture and sustainable development evaluation of a policy
theme. Evaluation office. Document IOS/EVS/PI/145 REV.5. p.4 Retrieved from http://unes-
doc.unesco.org/images/0023/002344/234443e.pdf
UNESCO. (2016). Decision adopted by World Heritage Committee at its 40th session (Istanbul,
Turkey, 10–17 July 2017). Document WHC/16/40.COM/19. Presented at the 40th session of
the Committee. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2016/whc16-40com-19-en.pdf
United Cities and Local Governments. (2013). Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development.
Barcelona: UCLG Retrieved from http://www.agenda21culture.net/index.php/documents/
culture-the-fourth-pillar-of-sustainability.
Vileikis, O., & Allayarov, S. (2014). Strengthening the role of community in the protection and
management of the Historic Centre of Bukhara. In The Right to [World] Heritage. Conference
Proceedings (pp. 207–218). Presented at the The Right to [World] Heritage, Cottbus-
Senftenberg: IAWHP.
Vileikis, O., & Allayarov, S. (2015). Enhancement of the implementation of the World Heritage
convention through strengthening the protection and management mechanism in the his-
toric centre of Bukhara. In Revisiting Kathmandu, Safeguarding Living Urban Heritage
(pp. 133–140). Presented at the Revisiting Kathmandu, Safeguarding Living Urban Heritage,
Kathmandu: UNESCO Office in Kathmandu.
Vileikis, O., Escalante Carrillo, E., Allayarov, S., & Feyzulayev, A. (2017). Documentation for
Preservation: Methodology and a GIS Database of Three World Heritage Cities in Uzbekistan.
ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, IV-2/
W2, 311–318. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-annals-IV-2-W2-311-2017.
Chapter 10
City as Evolving Process: Case
for the Historic Urban Landscape
Approach for Canberra
Ken Taylor and Meetu Sharma Saxena
Abstract Canberra was conceived and planned as a city not like any other for the
first 75 years of its conception from the Griffin plan of 1912 with planning guide-
lines specifically modelled to maintain it as the city in the landscape. Since self-
government in 1988, planning has been governed increasingly by the global
orthodox canon of increasing urban densification, urban consolidation and high-rise
buildings without regard for the significance of the context and setting of the city.
Two outcomes are low priority of heritage considerations leading to loss of heritage
precincts and downplaying of the historic landscape ethos leading to loss of land-
scape space and trees and blocking views of the surrounding hills that are quintes-
sential to the setting and ambience of the city. This chapter critically examines how
planning action and governance for Canberra need to refocus on the essential ele-
ments of the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) approach as rapid change and trans-
formation of the city occur.
Keywords Landscape · Civics · Town planning · Ideal city · Authorised Planning

Discourse (APD) · Participatory planning · Community
K. Taylor (*)
Centre for Heriatge and Museum Studies, The Australian National University,
Canberra, Australia
e-mail: k.taylor@anu.edu.au
M. S. Saxena
Research School of Humanities and the Arts, Australia National University,
Canberra, Australia
e-mail: meetu.sharma@anu.edu.au

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_10
188 K. Taylor and M. S. Saxena
10.1 Introduction
The twentieth century was notable in the field of town planning in that it saw a
remarkable expansion in the practice of public planning in almost all democratic
societies. It was given life by the international zeal in the first decade of the century
for the new art and science of town planning (Taylor 1999; see also Birch 1980).
The first garden city, Letchworth, was started in 1903; international town planning
conferences took place in 1910 in London and Berlin; 1911 saw the formation of
the British Town Planning Institute; the first conference on city planning in
Australia was held in 1901 (‘Congress of Engineers, Architects, Surveyors, and
others interested in the building of the Federal Capital of Australia); the First
Australian Town Planning and Housing Conference and Exhibition was held in
Adelaide in 1917; textbooks such as Barry Unwin’s (1909) Town Planning in
Practice were written and journals published (Taylor 1999). As Bandarin and van
Oers (2012: 11) aver, this twentieth-century planning movement may be seen to be
relevant to the current concept of HUL in that early twentieth-century thinking on
urban form was able to ‘show a capacity to project the modern metropolis into the
future while at the same time interpreting and valuing history and continuity’.
Indeed this is one of the fundamental strengths, and attractions, of the HUL para-
digm. Notably and additionally in the early twentieth century was a complemen-
tary emerging interest in the building of national capitals such as Canberra, New
Delhi and Washington.
The art and science of planning had social as well as physical underpinnings, in
particular the encouragement of a healthy citizenry educated in the role of civics.
This would be manifested through a utopian approach to the layout of towns where
residential areas, parks and democratic open space and shopping municipal/govern-
ment buildings would be carefully zoned and sited. Controlled physical planning
with monumental public buildings in a discontinuous pattern, space and greenery
and distinct residential zones according to economic status would have desirable
social outcomes in contrast to the overcrowded industrial cities throughout the
world. Integral to this utopian approach was the concept of civics as proposed by
Patrick Geddes in his 1915 book Cities in Evolution, which concerned itself with
the study of physical elements as a basis for planning, ‘survey before plan’ and ‘a
synoptic view’ were critical to the Geddes approach to city planning where he saw
the city as process (Taylor 1999). He also saw ‘the city as an organism in evolution,
where physical and social components interact in a complex web of change and
tradition. Geddes looks at the city in a truly comprehensive manner: from a morpho-
logical, as well as social, point of view’. In this sense, ‘he looks at the city as history
and the relationships between the city and geographic and natural context’. For him,
the whole city should be considered for conservation (Bandarin and van Oers 2012:
12/13). In these innovatory ideas, he was presaging what we now see as the Historic
Urban Landscape paradigm.
It was against this background, as the new century dawned, that the idea took
shape for a new federal (national) capital city for Australia (Taylor 2006). It was to
10 City as Evolving Process: Case for the Historic Urban Landscape Approach… 189
be an ideal city for a new nation. From the outset, the concept of a federal capital,
choice of site and initial planning of Canberra from the 1911 international design
competition were seen as a public undertaking where the concept of landscape was
an underlying determinant of the city’s morphology. In the little more than 100 years
of its existence, Canberra has acquired a series of layers which reflect planning
outcomes shaped by decisions and actions of 37 governments, 25 prime ministers,
various planning bodies and, not least, clear visions for the city and its form. The
resultant tangible and intangible aspects have created a Historic Urban Landscape
rich in symbolism and meaning, which has, however, been increasingly ignored in
the planning and management in critical parts of the city since circa 2000.
10.2 The Canberra Context
Canberra, a child of twentieth-century planning visions, is a remarkable city. In the

true sense of the word, it is a unique city, for there is no other city like it in the
world. Walter Burley Griffin declared in 1912 that ‘I have planned a city not like
any other city in the world. I have planned it not in a way that I expected any
governmental authorities would accept. I have planned the ideal city – a city that
meets my ideal of the city of the future’ (Griffin 1912). These were prophetic words,
for the development of the city over the years has maintained its status of being
unlike any other. Why is this? There are roads, houses, offices, schools, shops and
parks – all the components we associate with urban development – as in any other
city (Taylor 2006).
The underlying reason lies in the way landscape defines and articulates the city
plan so that the city is an example par excellence of the interface between culture
and nature. Changes over the years, to the form of the city (1911–1988), and hence
to the Griffin ideal, have taken place. Nevertheless, the landscape basis which
binds form and content remained vividly coherent in the city plan (Taylor 2006).
Griffin’s 1911, 1912 and 1918 plans were essentially in the city beautiful model
with generous democratic landscape and open space provision, public and private.
This was overlain by garden city planning ideals in 1921 with the advent of the
Federal Capital Advisory Committee (FCAC) under John Sulman,1 followed in
1924 by the Federal Capital Commission (FCC). It was this period that saw the
inner, now historic, ten garden city suburbs of Canberra developed. The garden
city notion held sway in the planning of Canberra for the next 60 years. As a result,
the form of the physical landscape – natural and created – is a palpable, tangible
presence defining the city but equally so is its content or intangible, symbolic
meaning.
Fundamental to the city’s spatial structure therefore is the premise that Canberra
is a city in the landscape. It was a basic premise of the National Capital Development
Commission (NCDC), the national agency that planned and developed the city from
Chairman, Federal Capital Advisory Committee 1921–1924.

1
1958 to 1988 and set out in its 1970 manifesto Tomorrow’s Canberra (NCDC 1970).
Its spatial structure has been progressively and incrementally planned from the
beginning to maintain continuity with existing design elements, in particular the
hills, ridges and valleys of the National Capital Open Space System (NCOSS) that
form a landscape skeleton for the city’s form and its meaning as the city in the land-
scape. Looking out over the magnificent prospect from Mount Ainslie (Fig. 10.1)
across the city to the hills that form its embracing backdrop, the tree-lined streets,
gardens and parks of the older residential areas pre-1988, the landscape itself is
more than physical elements. It has a meaning and significance that communicate
what Canberra is. Related to this idea was the intense period of review and scrutiny
of the city and its development in the mid-1950s. A senate enquiry in 1955 and a
1957/1958 report by British planner Sir William Holford saw the promulgation of
the NCDC by then Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies. Under the NCDC the garden
city concept flourished, and a linear model of growth, the Y Plan, was introduced
(Fig. 10.2). Integral to this was a series of five new towns in addition to inner
Canberra, separated from each other by broad-acre landscape corridors − which
also acted as transport routes – and defined by the hills, ridges and valleys of the
NCOSS. The NCOSS was, and remains, a major determinant of the morphology
and character of the city. It is one of, if not the, the major defining elements in
Canberra’s description as the city in the landscape and consists of two parts: the
inner hills and ridges around inner Canberra and then a ring of outer hills and ridges.
Fig. 10.1 View from Mount Ainslie. (K. Taylor)

Fig. 10.2 NCDC Y-shape

plan for Canberra
The system had its beginnings as a critical element in the original Griffin plan.
Griffin used the inner hills as end points to his axial vistas and the outer ring of hills
as visual reference points looking out of the city he planned. In this way he saw the
proposed city site on the Limestone Plains as a dramatic amphitheatre setting for his
city (Fig. 10.1). Approaching the city from the outside, the views of eucalypt bush
clad hills and ridges weaving through the city and views inside and across the city
framed by the hills and ridges create a powerful sense of imagery for Canberra with
its memorable, dramatic stage-like setting in an amphitheatre of hills. Freestone
(1986) observed that Griffin used the setting ‘as a theatrical whole to give a design
rich in symbolism’. As a result it is the internal views across Canberra, which are so
critical to the city’s identity, that are being compromised by high rise developments,
particularly in the inner city area. These developments and changes, take place with-
out any analysis or attempt to map the viewsheds and their significance. This is a
concern to which we return later.
10.3 Governance
In the context of the meaning and significance of the city, and in the context of this
chapter, 1988 is a critical year. It was the year self-government was forced on the
territory and city and the NCDC abolished. The act of capital building had been
subsidised by the Commonwealth government for 75 years, but increasingly this
state of affairs became difficult for the rest of the nation to accept.2 Canberra was
regarded as indulged; political tensions led to closer scrutiny of the Commonwealth’s
power and role and inevitably self-government (Brown 2014). A critical point to
bear in mind in the following discussion is that all land in the ACT is government
owned and therefore subject to 99-year leasehold agreements. There is no freehold
land (Singer et al. 1988). The ACT government therefore is responsible for the sale
of leasehold land releases on greenfield sites. It is also responsible for sale of leases
on land where government or private enterprise redevelopment of government-
owned properties – for example, government housing or office accommodation – is
planned. The government also levies betterment tax on land proposed by a devel-
oper for alternative more lucrative use. Sale of leases is a major source of income
for the government. It is a system that has been blamed for increasing house prices
as claims are made that insufficient land releases take place, thereby causing a short-
age, which inflates prices.3
The year 1988 saw alterations to the hitherto cohesive planning, development
and land management system of the city. NCDC was replaced by the National
Capital Planning Authority (NCPA), now the National Capital Authority (NCA),
2
As summarised from a series of articles titled Research Guides available online on the National
Archives of Australia website. The reference to the central piece, Long journey towards self-gov-
ernment, on the subject of self-governance is in the further reading section.
3
The lease hold system in Canberra is a constitutional provision. Section 125 of the Commonwealth
of Australian Constitution Act provided for the seat of government to be within territory belonging
to the Commonwealth. Section 9 of the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910 provided:
‘No Crown land in the Territory shall be disposed of for any estate of freehold’. The City Leases
Ordinance 1921 empowered the Minister to grant leases of land within the city area for periods not
exceeding 99 years. The basic provisions were:
( a) An annual rent of 5% of the unimproved value of the land.
(b) The value of the land to be reappraised after 20 years (later amended to 5 years).
(c) The construction of a building, in accordance with the lease, was to be commenced within
1 year and completed within 2 years of the granting of the lease.
The fact that the lease hold system is used by the government to its advantage to generate rev-
enue is a forgone conclusion and can be inferred from the way that the government releases land
and makes it available to the public. Further details on such discussions can be found at the follow-
ing online sources:
http://leofoley.com/PDF/Canberra-leasehold-system.pdf
https://www.prosper.org.au/2008/01/16/canberra/
A detailed list of articles and documents on the same can be found at https://www.archives.act.
gov.au/__data/assets/file/0010/.../Leasehold_system.rtf
with a limited planning portfolio confined to the central national area of the city and
some residual control of the critical hills, ridges and valleys of the NCOSS. The
latter is shared with the ACT government, which is responsible for the day-to-day
management. Indeed the ACT government now manages all land in the territory
except those areas gazetted as national land, which the Commonwealth retained for
its own use. The national land areas are administered by the NCA or the Department
of Finance and Administration on behalf of the Commonwealth.4
Self-government and how the various departments operate in planning, admin-
istration and land management have had an adverse impact on the way Canberra’s
essential character as the city in the landscape has been usurped. Resultant changes
to its urban landscape setting have led community groups representing various
sections of the city to question plans for redevelopment and the so-called

revitalisation.5 These actions, in particular revitalisation, are viewed as shorthand
for residential densification and urban infill schemes, increasingly in the form of
apartments, many devoid of, or with minimal, landscape space and tree planting.
Planning has increasingly, since circa 2000, been governed by the mantra of the
global orthodox canon of increasing urban densification, urban consolidation and
high-rise buildings without regard for the significance of the context and setting of
the city. Such an approach is what we call the authorised planning discourse (APD)
akin to Smith’s authorised heritage discourse (AHD) critique (Smith 2006). It
defines urban planning within strict and narrow boundaries based on a Western
experts’ derived view that sees universality of policy and action as a strategy to be
applied globally in the form of a set basis of ideas about planning. If you do not
conform to these rules, the inference is that the planning outcome will be inferior
to the superior APD. Countless ‘experts’ have been brought to Canberra from
Europe and North America, e.g. Seattle, Copenhagen and Toronto, to tell us how to
plan the city in the way they do. This is done without any regard to the particular
characteristics of Canberra, its setting and its history. The end result is a creeping
mass of urban densification where taller buildings crammed onto sites dominate
and are devoid of meaningful landscape spaces to grace the setting. This is rather
reminiscent of Frank Lloyd Wright in aphorist mood with reflections that ‘The
good building is not one that hurts the landscape, but one which makes the land-
scape more beautiful than it was before the building was built’ (Wright n.d.; see
also McCarter 2006)6 or that architecture should be ‘a grace to the landscape instead
of a disgrace’ (PBS Radio n.d.).
The application of the APD in Canberra has led to loss of landscape space and
trees and blocking views of the surrounding hills that are quintessential to the set-
ting and ambience of the city. New developments, devoid of green landscape spaces,
private, semiprivate and public, have increasingly eschewed an approach reflective
4
https://infrastructure.gov.au/department/statements/2018_2019/budget/nca1.aspx
5
‘Revitalisation’ is commonly used by planners and developers to justify change without explain-
ing what is meant and why is it needed.
6
Frank Loyd Wright as quoted in Ladies Home Journal which can be accessed at https://worldhis-
toryproject.org/1901/2/wright-published-in-ladies-home-journal
Fig. 10.3 A city like any other. New development in Gungahlin along major transport route
(Flemington Road with tram line currently under construction). (K. Taylor)
of the city’s historic character and sense of place as a city in the landscape (Fig. 10.3).
The argument developed here for the need to apply HUL principles is not against
increased densities but against the failure to plan for open space and landscape
treatments between and around buildings, residential and commercial. One underly-
ing cause of this outcome is the insistence on maximum financial return on land
sales and hence the push to maximise number of dwellings. Even where lower den-
sities are planned, with detached housing, the blocks are so small as to militate
against any meaningful open space and space for large trees. The result is extensive
undermining and destruction of Canberra’s historic character in new areas of devel-
opment and in redevelopment areas of existing suburbs. The local architect and
architectural commentator, Tony Trobe (2017), answering the question ‘How would
you describe Canberra’s current approach to planning?’ in an interview for Allhomes
observed:
To be frank, my personal opinion is that it’s just a little directionless, turgid even. We have
recently celebrated the 100th anniversary of the competition that gave Canberra its clothes.
When comparing the current state of play with the boldness of those who gave birth to the
idea of our capital, one is inclined to weep.
Some say “you can have old planners and you can have bold planners, but that you
cannot have old/bold planners”. I’m inclined to disagree: old and bold is good! I think the
time is right for some, as yet unidentified, champion to step forward to tilt at windmills.
Unfortunately this endeavour appears as a poisoned chalice from which politicians rarely
drink.
To complicate matters further, the burgeoning and onerous Territory Plan is now
1200 pages of dense rules, maps and criteria for a territory of 400,000 people. Trobe
(2017) further reflects that the ACT Planning Code has expanded so that now it is
somewhere upward of 100 MB and 1200 pages of dense rules, maps and criteria.
Exacerbating matters further has been the duality in land management for land
developed by the ACT government. The responsibility of development of the land
has until April 2017 resided with the ACT Land Development Agency (LDA), and
the statutory planning is administered by the ACT Planning Authority. Both these
authorities sit within the ACT government’s Department of Environment, Planning
and Sustainable Development. To complicate matters further, planning within ACT
is also bifurcated, administered through the National Capital Plan and the Territory
Plan created and managed by NCA and the ACT government, respectively. The two
plans divide responsibility for the development of the national capital, with the
Commonwealth retaining control of the ‘national capital’ element and the ACT gov-
ernment given responsibility for what might be called the ‘suburban and municipal’
plan. What is missing, and noticeably so, is a comprehensive metropolitan plan for
the territory. The last such plan was prepared by NCDC in 1984. Piecemeal master
plans for the area managed by the territory government have been prepared over the
past 15 years for the various town centres and some local suburban commercial
cores, but a comprehensive master plan is yet to be developed.7
There has also been reluctance by the ACT government and its agencies to invoke
meaningful participatory planning with local community groups to create precinct
master plans to guide future change. Where plans have been prepared, these are
promulgated by the government after which comes ‘consultation’ with the commu-
nity. All too often communities, with reason, regard such presentation of government
promulgated plans as a fait accompli. Private developers and development compa-
nies have seen this as an opportunity to prepare plans for extensive redevelopment
(under the guise of ‘revitalisation’) and submit these as ambit plans to the govern-
ment, often to the dismay and trenchant opposition of local community groups. Such
is the proposal for extensive developments in the Manuka-Griffith area, an estab-
lished area of the city dating back to the Griffin, the FCAC and the FCC eras.
The role that the LDA assumed for itself in land management gradually but
effectively morphed into that of a quasi-planning agency deciding on land-use
changes, densities and future land development. In a newspaper piece, Kirsten
Lawson (2017: 5) writes that the LDA got into ‘complex, perplexing land deals, in
some cases without clear authority’. Lawson also points to the fact that a number of
the LDA board members are people who are involved in property developments in
Canberra and/or are consultants to the ACT government. Such outcomes pose the
question of what is, or should be, the role of the ACT planning section of what is
known as ACTPLA (ACT Planning and Land Authority) and in particular the plan-
ning section responsible for the Territory Plan. In response to the ongoing criticism
of the LDA, it has been abolished (April 2017) and replaced by two agencies: an
Urban Renewal Authority and Suburban Land Agency. Both have an obligation on
appointed board members that they not pursue personal interests, not use board
As evident and inferred from the publically accessible documents available on the ACT
7
Environment Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate website.

membership to gain personal advantage and not undermine the agencies’ reputation.
We refer further to the Urban Renewal Agency below.
10.4 Why Canberra Needs and Deserves the HUL Approach
Given Canberra’s position as an internationally famous creation of twentieth-

century town planning, the current planning path and dogmas represent an increas-
ingly missed opportunity of applying the HUL approach to help shape the future
city form (Taylor 2015a). The following five principles are suggested for applica-
tion, and examples are given to illustrate these:
• Special nature of the city as with its visions of a planned ideal city: a city not like
any other.
• Genius loci of the city inherently centred on the culture-nature interaction.
• Preparation of a metropolitan plan for the whole city rather than separate piece-
meal plans for separate suburbs or groups of suburbs.
• Within the metropolitan plan, the need for precinct plans for suburbs that relate
to specific character of the suburb(s) and where local residents are consulted;
currently the model is the development of precinct codes that are then incorpo-
rated into the Territory Plan as technical amendments without local community
input, planning for cones of view and protecting significant vistas.
• Need to establish appropriate partnership between planning authority and resi-
dents for local area precinct planning.
The following are examples of projects (Fig. 10.4) where the application of HUL
principles, rather than the APD approach, would have been more appropriate.
10.4.1 Manuka Oval, Griffith (Fig. 10.4 site A)
The street layout of the suburb of Griffith has its origin in Griffin’s plans, in particu-
lar the 1918 plan continued in the 1927 FCC plan for the city with the FCC approach
to garden city planning inherited from the FCAC.8 By 1927, a park had been located
at the site of the now Griffith Oval; the park was turned into a sports oval circa in
1929 (Selth 2007). The area has maintained its garden city and leafy, historic character.
In February 2016, an unsolicited proposal by Grocon and GWS Giants9 was presented
to the ACT government for the redevelopment of a historic sporting hub and its sur-
rounding areas at the Manuka Oval site. The stadium was to be upgraded including
8
Plan of Canberra The Federal Capital of the Commonwealth of Australia, May 1927, complied
and published by the FCC from the first premiated design by Walter Burley Griffin.
9
Grocon is a national level property developer, and GWS Giants is an Australian Rules football
club that plays in the Australian Football League (AFL).
Fig. 10.4 Examples of projects both proposed and in progress where application of HUL would
have been appropriate
existing seating, additional covered stands and new amenities. This upgrade of the
stadium was to be offset by a $700 million commercial and residential development
on surrounding land which included a boutique hotel, 800–1000 residential multi-
storey apartment style dwellings and commercial and retail space. The obvious query
Fig. 10.5 Manuka Oval redevelopment proposal. (World Construction Network: www.worldcon-
structionnetwork.com/news/plans_unveiled-for-569m-manuka-oval-redevelopment-project/)
was where apartments and shops would be built as there was limited vacant open
space (Fig. 10.5). The proposal was welcomed by the ACT government
notwithstanding that it overturned the planning principles, which had governed the
precinct for decades (The Canberra Times Editorial 7/8/2016). Community mem-
bers outright rejected the proposal, when 300 of them turned up at the consultation
session. Their reasons were serious concerns about the impact on heritage, espe-
cially the Manuka Pool, traffic congestion in the area, the scale of the development
and the unsolicited bid process. The proposal was expressly dropped by the ACT
government just 2 months out from 2016 territory election, and an olive branch was
extended where a long-term master plan for the precinct was proposed with com-
munity involvement. Given the historic nature of the precinct and its proximity to
heritage-listed areas, a cautious and HUL-based approach would be fitting.
10.4.2 City to the Lake (Fig. 10.4 site B)
This project (Fig. 10.6) is the latest iteration of ideas that have been in the making
since the late 1980s. It is another example of public open space appropriation in the
name of development by the ACT government in the heart of the capital invoking its
rights to ownership of territory land. The proposal is for a dense development of
hotels, apartments, convention centre, a stadium (in the city centre?); ‘aquatic centre,
pleasure beach and a Brighton Pier-style arrangement’ (Waterford 2013); and
Fig. 10.6 West Basin Development showing proposed infilling of the lake foreshore and position-
ing of private apartments blocking views to the lake. (Sydney Morning Herald 28 July, 2018, www.
smh.com.au//comment/is-lake-burley-griffin-sold-down-the-river)
concrete ‘boardwalks’ to replace the grassy foreshore along the lake. It is being
touted as a part of the ‘Griffin Legacy’ based on the final plan by Walter Burley
Griffin (1918) in spite of the fact that it is nothing like the Griffin ideas for the critical
lake frontage. His 1918 plan indicates spacious lakeside parkland along the north
shore studded with national and other institutions and isolated building blocks of
unspecified nature set in generous parkland where open space predominates over
built form, the whole visually relating to the Parliamentary Zone across the lake.
Griffin’s proposals were in keeping with the democratic ideals of his design. These
have been maintained until recently and are being threatened by the proposal.
Contrary to Griffin’s vision, dense development will blight the lake’s parkland, the
city’s urban form, its city in the landscape ethos, Commonwealth Avenue and vistas
from City Hill to the mountains beyond. It will block public access and public use as
well as views across the lake to the NCOSS, which is the backbone of the plan of the
city and its democratic origins. Thus, the open space which could be accessed and
enjoyed by all will be replaced by the views being the private domain of the people
who live in the apartments. A compromise could be accommodated as at West Lake,
Hangzhou, China, where scattered low-rise built development is incorporated into
extensive lakeside parkland where views across the lake are not compromised
(Taylor 2016).
10.4.3 Northbourne Avenue Corridor (Fig. 10.4 site C)
Northbourne Avenue is one of Canberra’s major entries dating from the Griffin plan.
The ACT government with private enterprise is currently developing a tram route
from the city centre out to the town of Gungahlin to the north (called Mulligan’s Flat
in the Y Plan shown in Fig. 10.2). It is part of a major urban renewal initiative along
Northbourne to develop a special precinct along the tram line capturing increased
land values. The idea of special precincts arose in 2014, but even before this, the
Northbourne Avenue precinct had been instigated involving public housing and two
major blocks along the avenue being sold off by the government. The aim is to
increase densities through apartment building and to try to fund the tram through
land sales. The longer-term effect is uncertain in that the precinct plan does not limit
the boundary of densification to the strip front Northbourne but extends each side of
the road into low-density residential development.
Of note is the fact that the precinct is edged by some of the older suburbs of the
city, some of which are heritage listed because of their historic planning in associa-
tion with the garden city and city beautiful ideologies. A representative of these was
the Northbourne Avenue housing precinct developed post-1958. It was the first
medium-density public housing scheme undertaken by the NCDC, consisting of 169
dwelling units varying from 2-storey paired courtyard housing to 5-storey blocks,
planned as a gateway development entry to the national capital. The design by
Sydney Ancher was in the Post-War International Modernist movement reflective of
the Bauhaus period and was the only such example in Canberra. A significant aspect
of the housing was its private/semiprivate open space and tree planting. In spite of
recommendations from the ACT Heritage Council, the Institute of Architects and
the National Trust, the government decided on demolition and selling the land for
private development. In the lead up to this decision, a conservation study was under-
taken that recommended two options for future development. Each showed original
dwellings maintained with suggestions for increased densities. This was not accept-
able to the ACT government in its intent to capture redevelopment values at any cost
to the city’s heritage. Demolition was pushed through by Chief Minister Andrew
Barr (Lawson 2017). Seventeen units are retained as some form of token. One may
conclude that heritage conservation in the ACT is not exactly favoured by the
government.
10.5 National Heritage Listing
In 2009, two separate nominations for National Heritage Listing for Canberra were
submitted to the Commonwealth Australian Heritage Council (AHC) which over-
sees the National Heritage List. They are summarised in Celebrating Canberra: A
nation’s cultural and democratic landscape. Exploring Canberra’s national heri-
tage (AHC 2012). The Canberra – Central National Area and Inner Hills nomination
submitted by Ken Taylor (Fig. 10.8) was the preferred option of the AHC with
minor inclusions from the other nomination. The Commonwealth reported on its
deliberations in 2012 in the context of the following key factors for Canberra
(AHC 2012: 6):
• As an outstanding example of twentieth-century town planning.
• For its significance as the nation’s planned capital city conceived at federation
and the city’s development over 100 years of town planning theory and thought
• As a landscape and expression of Australia’s democratic ideals.
The boundary of the AHC-proposed listing includes inner hills, ridges and val-
leys, the central national area and the early garden suburbs described by Freestone
(2010: 274) as ‘an outstanding national outdoor museum of the world’s best practice
in planning from the 1910s’. It is important to note that under ‘Exclusion of private
land and structures’ (page 16), it is made quite clear that the proposed boundary of
the national heritage place – Canberra the Planned National Capital – does not
include private or commercial property outside the Central National Area and the
designated areas already under the planning control of the National Capital Authority
(NCA) and that:
• Current controls and development approval processes will remain in place.
• National Heritage Listing does not change land ownership or land use.
It is further stated (p. 17) that in the early garden suburbs, only the layout of the
streets, the avenues of street trees and the location of local parks would be protected
by a National Heritage Listing, not the private properties. Heritage protection of the
architectural and landscape aspects of early garden suburbs, including individual
street trees, would continue to be managed by the ACT government or by the
NCA. There is likely to be minimal impact on business and residences in Canberra
as illustrated in the similar 2008 National Heritage Listing of Adelaide Park Land
and City Layout (an outstanding example of early nineteenth-century town plan-
ning). In this case, the national heritage values relate to the planning and layout of
the street grid and squares within central Adelaide and the broadband of parkland
that surrounds the city centre. The AHC report further clearly states that the National
Heritage Listing does not affect the form of the buildings and has not restricted or
affected the development within Adelaide’s CBD.
Opposition from various local Canberra-based development interests, ACT gov-
ernment agencies and most recently trenchant criticism from the current Chief
Minister of the ACT have combined to delay the Commonwealth in making a deter-
mination. The latest date given by the Commonwealth Minister is June 2019, a date
which could be extended further. In the meantime, the Chief Minister has announced
the ACT government’s preferred boundary listing (Fig. 10.7) which excludes the
early garden city suburbs. The ACT government proposal purportedly draws from
the Adelaide listing as a model. If that is so, how does the ACT government explain
that in Adelaide the layout and plan of the streets of its heritage suburbs are included
but refuses to acknowledge these in Canberra. The proposal in Fig. 10.7 where the
ACT government fails to include the layout of the streets, the avenues of street trees
Fig. 10.7 ACT government-proposed National Heritage Listing boundary. (The Canberra Times
Editorial)
and the location of local parks of Canberra’s early heritage suburbs, as indicated in
the 2012 AHC report and as in Adelaide, is nonsense.
10.6 The HUL Approach
The above discussion and examples present a strong case for the application of the
HUL principles to the planning of Canberra as a cogent alternative to its rigid APD
approach. The ACT government’s tendency to entertain and present sporadic devel-
opment schemes without a credible framework suggests that the six critical steps for
implementing the HUL approach (UNESCO 2016: 13) taking into account the par-
ticular context of the city need to be recognised. Coincidental to this is the recogni-
tion that different cities will have specific management approaches best suited to
their context but all guided by the HUL framework. The critical steps are:
1. To undertake comprehensive surveys and mapping of the city’s natural, cultural
and human resources.
Fig. 10.8 Inner Canberra area proposed for National Heritage Listing by Australia Heritage
Council June 2012 (K. Taylor). Base map Designated Areas National Capital Authority
2. To reach consensus using participatory planning and stakeholder consultations

on what values to protect for transmission to future generations and to determine
the attributes that carry these values.
3. To assess vulnerability of these attributes to socio-economic stresses and impacts
of climate change.
4. To integrate urban heritage values and their vulnerability status into a wider
framework of city development, which shall provide indications of areas of heri-
tage sensitivity that require careful attention to planning, design and implemen-
tation of development projects.
5. To prioritise actions for conservation and development.
6. To establish the appropriate partnerships and local management frameworks for
each of the identified projects for conservation and development, as well as to
develop mechanisms for the coordination of the various activities between dif-
ferent actors, both public and private (UNESCO 2011).
10.7 Conclusion
The crux of this paper is the clash between the APD practice and the HUL paradigm
as a basis for urban planning with specific reference to Canberra: a city that has been
recognised hitherto as the city in the landscape where landscape has, until the last
30 years since self-government, been the major influence driving planning visions.
‘Behind Canberra’s inception, at the beginning of the twentieth century lay two
basic visions. The first was that a vigorous Australian national identity existed, that
this was related to the ideal of the Australian landscape itself and that it could be
symbolised in the layout of a capital city’ (Taylor 2006: 21). Critical, therefore, has
been the central vision of landscape as the articulator of city form maintaining the
image of a city not like any other. In this sense, it is not merely the physical nature
of landscape. It is also ‘the intellectual notion of landscape as a cultural construct
with meanings and associated social values. This is the notion of landscape as not
just what we see, but a way of seeing based on experience embodying our desire for
a sense of continuity linking past, present, and future’ (ibid: 9). It is a vison for the
city commensurate with the HUL paradigm. Embedded in HUL is the recognition
of the layering of significances and human values in cities, deposited over time by
different communities under different contexts (Bandarin and van Oers 2012).
Cities may, therefore, be categorised as a type of cultural landscape (Taylor 2015b)
representing human layers through time and replete with social meanings. Greffe
(2008: 1) neatly encapsulates this way of understanding cities not as architectural
wonders or physically spatially defined but as looking at the city as a postmodern
social and political phenomenon ‘where we are looking for feelings and emotions.
The landscape then becomes an experience’.
Parallel with Greffe’s view of the city and coincidental with the HUL approach
to cities and their future planning is the concept of the landscape urbanism discourse
that has been taking place since the late 1990s. In 2006 Charles Waldheim in The
Landscape Urbanism Reader posited that ‘landscape has emerged as a model for
contemporary urbanism … As such, landscape urbanism offers an implicit critique
of architecture and urban design’s inability to offer coherent, competent, and con-
vincing explanations of contemporary urban conditions. In this context, the dis-
course surrounding landscape urbanism can be read as a disciplinary realignment in
which landscape supplants architecture’s historical role as the basic block of urban
design. Across a range of disciplines, many authors have articulated this newfound
relevance of landscape in describing the temporal mutability and horizontal exten-
sity of the contemporary city’ (Waldheim 2006: 37).
In contradiction sits the APD approach, which focuses on the city as physical
entity where rational physical spatial planning with predominant economic goals
triumphs over any value approach inherent in HUL and landscape urbanism. In the
case of Canberra, it is an approach that is distinguished by the following:
• The disregard of layers and complexities of Canberra’s history and related
visions for the city. The result has been discontinuity in the city’s trajectory and
form. In contrast, this omission could be mitigated through the HUL approach.
• Piecemeal planning where strategies are focused on separate parts of the city
without understanding the need for connections between parts as inherent in the
HUL paradigm.
• The disregard of any understanding that Canberra is unlike the cities that the
external experts inhabit. We may look at lessons learnt but we need localised
solutions. This is provided by the HUL approach where contextual analysis is
critical to the solution (steps 1–3).
• There has been no real commitment hitherto to community participation in the
APD approach; rather it has been a piecemeal consultation on separate projects
where the public is invited to respond to plans when they are at the stage virtually
of implementation.
Conclusively, the HUL approach seems to be the most appropriate and intuitive
response for Canberra’s future planning.
References
Australian Heritage Council (2012). Celebrating Canberra: A nation’s cultural and democratic
landscape. exploring Canberra’s national heritage. exploring Canberra’s national heritage;
Canberra, Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.
http://155.187.2.69/heritage/ahc/national-assessments/canberra/pubs/canberra-info-paper.pdf
Bandarin, F., & van Oers, R. (2012). The historic urban landscape. Managing heritage in an urban
century. Oxford/Ames: Wiley-Blackwell.
Birch, E. L. (1980). Advancing the art and science of planning. Journal of American Planning
Association, 46(1), 22–49.
Brown, N. (2014). History of Canberra. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Freestone, R. (1986). Canberra as Garden City 1901-1930. Journal of Australian Studies, 19(1986),
3–20.
Freestone, R. (2010). Urban nation: Australia’s planning heritage. CSIRO Publishing in associa-
tion with the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts and the Australian
Heritage Council, Collingwood, Victoria.
Greffe, X. (2008). Urban cultural landscapes. Xavier Greffe, Griffith University, Faculty of
Arts, Griffith University, Brisbane 2008. http://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_
file/0018/100638/Greffe-Seminar1-Text.pdf
Griffin, W.B. (1912). New York Times, 2 June 1912. See also Donald Leslie Johnson, (1977), The
architecture of Walter Burley Griffin, (p. 20), Melbourne: Macmillan.
Lawson, K. (2017). Putting the LDA in the spotlight. The Canberra Times. Forum, 8/04/2017.
McCarter, R. (2006). Frank Lloyd Wright (Critical Lives). Reaktion Publication.
National Capital Development Commission. (1970). Tomorrow’s Canberra: Planning for growth
and change. Canberra: The Australian National University Press.
PBS Radio, USA. (n.d.). http://www.pbs.org/flw/buildings/wallace.html
Selth, D. (2007). A brief history of Manuka Oval. of%20Manuka%20Oval.ashx
Singer, J., et al. (1988). Land for the capital, Canberra a people’s capital (pp. 15–20). Canberra:
Australian Institute of Urban Studies.
Smith, L. (2006). Uses of heritage. Abingdon: Routledge.
Taylor, K. (1999). Picturesque visions of a national capital: Capital city in the garden. The New
Federalist. The Journal of Australian Federal History Number 3 June 1999, 74–80.
Taylor, K. (2006). Canberra: City in the landscape. Sydney: Halstead Press.
Taylor, K. (2009). Canberra as a candidate for national heritage listing. Canberra Historic Journal,
63, 38–46.
Taylor, K. (2015a). The HUL concept and cities as cultural landscapes: Canberra a missed oppor-
tunity? Australia ICOMOS Historic Environment, 27(1), 58–67.
Taylor, K. (2015b). ‘Cities as cultural landscapes’ 179–202 In F. Bandarin & R. Van Oers, Eds.
(2015).
Taylor, K. (2016). Is Lake burley griffin being sold down the river? The Canberra
Times, Canberra, July 28, 2016. http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/
islakeburleygriffinbeingsolddowntheriver20160727gqekdn
Trobe, T. (2017). Time we had a roadmap for change. Allhomes, 17 May 2017.
UNESCO (2011). Recommendation on Historic Urban Landscape [HUL]. http://whc.unesco.org/
en/activities/638.
UNESCO (2016). THE HUL GUIDEBOOK managing heritage in dynamic and constantly
changing urban environments, a practical guide to UNESCO’s recommendation on the his-
toric urban landscape. Paris: UNESCO. http://www.hulballarat.org.au/resources/HUL%20
Guidebook_2016_FINALWEB.pdf.
Waldheim, C. (2006). Landscape as Urbanism. In The Landscape Urbanism l Reader (pp. 35–53).
Princeton: Princeton Architectural Press.
Waterford, J. (2013). Blather joins city to the lake. Sunday Canberra Times, March 31 2010, p. 21.
Wright, F. L. (n.d.). http://freshome.com/2012/09/03/10-great-architectural-lessons-from-frank-llo
yd-wright/#ixzz4ekN8n8BA
Chapter 11
The HUL Approach to Create Heritage
Management Tools in the Latin American
City of Cuenca-Ecuador
Julia Rey-Pérez, Sebastián Astudillo Cordero,
and María Eugenia Siguencia Ávila
Abstract The implementation of the Recommendation on the Historic Urban

Landscape for the city of Cuenca (Ecuador) pursues an understanding of the com-
plexity of the city’s heritage. Cuenca was inscribed on the World Heritage List
(1999), and there is currently an attempt to condition the urban development of the
city for the future. For 2 years, natural, cultural and human resources in Cuenca
have been studied, mapped by the universities, and a consensus, through participa-
tory planning and stakeholder consultations, has been built. This process accom-
plishes the goal of protecting the attributes in which the city values are embedded
and at the same time can be related to steps 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 from the six-step action
plan for the HUL implementation, provided by the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation
(UNESCO 2011; Veldpaus and Pereira Roders 2013). These steps have led to a
vulnerability assessment of the city related to socioeconomic stresses as well as the
drafting of different recommendations for action for the ongoing city development
in Cuenca. Finally, after the university-driven initiative, the last steps are expected
to be implemented and led by the Municipality of Cuenca. The project itself serves
as a good practices manual on how to apply the six steps of the recommendation
approach. This paper outlines the processes involved in implementing the steps
while also reflecting on the wider significance of the case of Cuenca in the Historic
Urban Landscape Discourse.
Keywords Citizen participation · Cultural mapping · Urban development ·

Management · Urban heritage · Environment · Urban governance
J. Rey-Pérez (*)
Higher Technical School of Architecture, University of Seville, Sevilla, Spain
e-mail: jrey1@us.es
S. Astudillo Cordero · M. E. Siguencia Ávila
Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, University of Cuenca, Cuenca, Ecuador
e-mail: sebastian.astudillo@ucuenca.edu.ec

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_11
208 J. Rey-Pérez et al.
11.1 Introduction
The academy-driven project departed from two key situations. On one hand, the
research line “Historic Urban Landscape” (HUL), launched in 2012 by the vlirCPM1
research project at the Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism of Universidad de Cuenca
in Ecuador, was conducting studies based on the ongoing discussion about HUL
around the world. On the other hand, a complementary research project was formu-
lated and awarded funding in November 2014 by the Research Department of
Universidad de Cuenca (DIUC). The entitled Reassessment of the Cultural and Natural
Heritage of the city of Cuenca based on strategies for sustainable development sup-
ported by the Recommendation on Historic Urban Landscape will henceforth be
called PUH_C (by its initials in Spanish) (DIUC 2016; Rey-Pérez et al. 2017).
The aim of the project was to implement the HUL recommendation based on the
six-step action plan proposed by UNESCO in its guidance document (UNESCO
2011; Veldpaus and Pereira Roders 2013). The HUL recommendation document
defines the concept of HUL within articles 8 and 9. This notion was crucial at the
beginning of the project so as to have a common understanding of HUL recommen-
dation at the global level and its potential development in Cuenca. The backbone of
the project is defined by three characteristics: (1) the concern for heritage in an
integral and holistic way, where the study area consists of the whole city, (2) the
commitment to work in a multidisciplinary environment with professionals eager to
contribute and (3) the citizen as the main protagonist of the research project.
In this light, the objectives defined were the following: (1) evaluate the state of
conservation of the city; (2) outline cultural heritage values beyond those identified
in the nomination file of Cuenca as World Heritage Site (WHS); (3) identify the
urban, architectural, touristic, landscape, economic, social and spatial impacts on
the cultural heritage values; (4) involve stakeholders, academics and experts but
especially citizens, for a collective value assessment; and (5) draft a series of recom-
mendations for the urban development of the city. This final goal intends to – based
on heritage values – provide tools for decision-makers to define policies at the level
of the Municipality of Cuenca. Among the different tools developed throughout the
methodology, these recommendations collect detailed information from different
homogeneous areas in the city to be further used in urban growth planning strate-
gies, guidelines for contemporary interventions, or to prioritize budget investment
assignment considering an ample range of assets and disciplines involved.
According to the concept of HUL, the involvement of disciplines avoids previous
approaches of heritage management in Cuenca that exclusively focused on build-
ings and moves towards a holistic approach, even beyond the ensemble. For this
reason, as part of the methodology, the data collected by plots were grouped in
1
The vlirCPM research project “World Heritage City Preservation Management” is part of an
Inter-University Cooperation Program between the University of Cuenca in Ecuador and the
VLIR-IUC Flemish Universities (Vlaamse Interuniversitaire Raad) in Belgium. The specific coun-
terpart is the RLICC (Raymond Lemaire International Center for Conservation) of the KU Leuven
in Belgium.
11 The HUL Approach to Create Heritage Management Tools in the Latin American… 209
images of density spots and converted into raster images showing the areas of low-
and high-density concentrations. Thus, through ArcMap, over 20 information maps
were overlaid and analysed to define, according to a series of characteristics, 14
units or study areas more or less homogeneous (Siguencia Ávila and Rey-Pérez
2016; Rey-Perez and Siguencia Ávila 2017).
This study is, therefore, an innovative way of thinking, protecting, intervening
and managing the WHS of Cuenca, harmonizing cultural values preservation with
future urban growth. It consists of an involvement strategy of stakeholders from
public bodies and institutions such as the Municipality of Cuenca and the INPC
(National Institute of Cultural Heritage), driven and reinforced by academics (uni-
versities). This strategy allows trans-disciplinarity and trans-institutionality integra-
tion as well as an active participation of social actors, including those who inhabit
the Historic City Centre. Undoubtedly, the adoption of the proposed HUL approach
in the case of an intermediate city such as Cuenca can become a crucial step, since
it would imply value-based future development of management planning guidelines
for the whole city.
The highlights of the research process are presented below, and its results aim to
contribute to the commonly shared knowledge experiences for cities implementing
the HUL recommendation. Firstly, we will refer to the methodology adopted and
how the different stages of this process correspond to the steps established by
UNESCO for the implementation of the Recommendation. Then, we will go through
the reflections and lessons learned, the social and academic implications, to finally
display the current state and future directions of the project.
11.2 The HUL Approach in Practice
The relatively recent discussion around the concept of HUL, from its origins at the
2005 Vienna Memorandum and the HUL recommendation in 2011, implies that
there are relatively few case studies. These experiences are the result of initiatives
to understand the Historic City Centre in its wider context and to involve different
disciplines and stakeholders during the process. The reviewed bibliography shows
several approaches for analysis which are taken as reference to adopt a methodol-
ogy characterized by an important interdisciplinary component and by an active
citizen participation (Anderson 2010; Direction de L’Architecture et du Patrimoine
2002; IAPH 2016; Martini 2013; Miglioni and Pini 2012).
The Historic City Centre of Cuenca was inscribed on the World Heritage List in
1999 based on criteria (ii), (iv) and (v). These criteria are closely linked to the
Spanish urban planning outstanding implantation, the successful cultural fusion and
the territorial landscape harmony of the city and its geographic location (UNESCO
1999). The importance of these elements, already considered in the nomination file,
supports the recognition that the main attributes and values of Cuenca extend from
its Historic City Centre and can work in a wider territory for the studies developed
during the diagnosis phase for the application of the HUL recommendation.
Geomorphology, environment, normative, historic – cartography, mobility,

• Territorial occupation density and land use
Phase I • Heritage Anthropology, archaeology, economic activities and architectural typologies

Diagnosis
• Perception Historical – critical review of images and 16 citizen workshops
active listening, feedback, reflection and

• Sociopraxis joint action
Phase II
Identification of cultural values • Visionary 5 tables: design and built heritage,
and attributes Conference culture, environment, socioeconomic
and regulations
Phase III
• 14 Landscape – San Francisco
Identification of landscape units
units, 2 selected – Las Herrerías
and elaboration of landscape
files assessment
Fig. 11.1 Methodology used for the implementation of the Recommendation on HUL in
Cuenca – Ecuador
The methodology adopted for Cuenca (see Fig. 11.1) has a first phase of diagno-
sis and state of the art, analysing the HUL in Cuenca from three scales of study,
territorial, heritage and perception. Within the territorial, the following seven topics
are involved: geomorphology, environment, normative, historic cartography, mobil-
ity, occupation density and land use. The heritage study covers four disciplines for
analysis, anthropology, archaeology, economic activities and architectural typolo-
gies. Lastly, the perception studies developed the two activities referred to a
historical-critical review of images and 16 citizen workshops in different areas of
the city (Rey-Pérez and Astudillo 2016).
The first phase demonstrated the possibility to match the results of the diagnosis
with the first steps from the action plan proposed by UNESCO for the implementa-
tion of the Recommendation. The information obtained from the three scales of
study mentioned in previous paragraphs enables identifying, through mapping, val-
ues and attributes of the HUL in Cuenca, corresponding to action plan step 1, map-
ping natural, cultural and human resources. Likewise, this information allowed the
obtaining of relevant data for step 3, assessing vulnerability to change and
development.
Once all this information was ordered and synthesized, the process moved on to
Phase II titled Identification of cultural values and attributes. The results obtained
from the diagnosis were validated through a method used in sociology named
“Sociopraxis”, which is a participatory methodology based on the basic principles
of active listening, feedback2, reflection and joint action, framed in an integral,
participatory, synergistic and continuous process. This process, which consisted of
2
The feedback is known as “Return of information” and consists of, once collected the information
provided by citizens, this information is crossed with information from other areas or disciplines,
to re-discuss this new information generated from all the actors and validate it with them (Tenze
2015).
a participatory planning diagnostic workshop, took place during the “Visionary

Conference” event where all stakeholders involved in the first phase gathered to
discuss and reach a consensual agreement on five thematic tables (design and built
heritage, culture, environment, socioeconomic and regulations table). Experts in
different disciplines, public heritage entities members, researchers, students and
citizens from the previous 16 workshops were engaged on a 2-day workshop which
started with lectures from international experiences and was followed by group
work and a general plenary supported by thematic maps and multilemas3 combined.
This academy-driven process resembles step 2 from the action plan where reaching
consensus on what to protect: values and attributes is the main goal. At the same
time, through the construction of strong ideas in every thematic table, lines of action
for future interventions in the city were delineated. These actions strongly contrib-
uted to achieving step 4 of the action plan which involves integrating the steps
above in an urban development framework.
The process of the Visionary Conference confronted the citizens, who are not
always aware of the heritage character of the city, with technical information from
specialists. After the plenary, the event concluded with a vote from all stakeholders
on proposals that the Municipality should execute for a correct implementation of
the Recommendation, following step 5 which proposes prioritizing actions for con-
servation and development. The following are among the most voted proposals:
• Promoting the pedestrianization of the Historic City Centre
• Improving the quality of public transport
• Establishing comprehensive, inclusive, interdisciplinary, continually evaluated,
updated and massively disseminated regulation
• Encouraging housing in the Historic City Centre
• Creation of policies for heritage education
• Revitalization of public spaces
• Construction of integrated environmental planning
Despite the fact that the objective of this phase is to identify what to protect
between all the stakeholders, citizen participation was more extensive. In fact, it
was possible to define actions for the development in Cuenca and even establish a
prioritization of actions through voting. Through this process, it was possible to
verify how the information obtained by the three groups of actors, in relation to the
values and cultural attributes of the city, reinforced the criteria that inscribed
Cuenca on the WHL, Spanish urban planning, fusion cultures and landscape. And
these ideas have been the ones that have marked the development guidelines of
steps 4 and 5.
Finally, Phase 3 of the project – identification of landscape units and elaboration
of landscape files assessment – is intended to facilitate the management of
information obtained in the previous phases. The information obtained from studies
3
It is a way of grouping the phrases to prepare the return, in this case, according to the positions
that were collected on each theme of the workshops, placing them along the axes and highlighting
those phrases that best represent each positioning (Tenze 2015).
of phase 1 was adopted to identify and characterize homogeneous areas/units within

the city (landscape units) and then to select two of them for specific analyses. The
collection of all information by unit in a model data file designed as a monitoring
tool will allow quick access to the data of each unit, which greatly facilitates the use
of the information generated in the project. This file is not conceived as an end but
as an instrument to systematize cultural values and enhance heritage management in
Cuenca.
Applying in-depth studies to the whole city was not possible due to the project
execution time and the human resources available, hence the idea of continuing with
the implementation of the Recommendation but in a specific area. For this reason,
based on the level of citizen participation during the 16 workshops and the Visionary
Conference, the two units selected were San Francisco Square neighbourhood and
Las Herrerías Street district (see Fig. 11.2).
The management of urban heritage is a complex issue and demands tools, prac-
tices and instruments that, in addition to being constantly evolving, must adapt to
local circumstances (WHITRAP and Ballarat 2016). Throughout the methodology,
special importance was given to one of four tools suggested in the Recommendation,
Knowledge and planning. Meanwhile, the mapping during the diagnosis fulfilled
the action plan steps 1 and 3. Community engagement tools were employed during
the workshops and the Visionary Conference. These tools enabled the development
of 2, 4 and 5 action plan steps for the implementation of the Recommendation.
Fig. 11.2 Orthophoto of the location of the areas of study in Cuenca – Ecuador. (Source: DIUC
2016)
Despite the effort displayed during the execution of the project, the lack of con-
tinuity from the Municipality, as well as the scarce follow-up actions, constitutes the
main risks. The Municipality, as the institution in charge of heritage management in
Cuenca, should guarantee the application of the Recommendation and, in specific,
the implementation of the required actions identified during the Visionary
Conference as the result of the participatory process. Likewise, it would be more
than appropriate to create a management document that combines the information
regarding these actions together with the monitoring and regulation actions issued
by UNESCO, since Cuenca is a site inscribed on the WHL. Therefore, regulatory
systems tools are fundamental to empower and encourage local management bodies
for suitable decision-making methods. Likewise, it is the Municipality’s responsi-
bility to use the fourth tool proposed by UNESCO – Financial – in order to imple-
ment step 6 of the action plan, establishing local partnerships and management
frameworks. It is also up to the Municipality to define a working team within the
internal structure so that the application of the Recommendation is not considered
as a specific issue but as a process to be adopted in the developing of the city of
Cuenca itself.
The PUH-C Project itself constitutes good practices manual on how to imple-
ment the approach of the Recommendation on HUL, as it shows the process of
applying the six steps suggested by UNESCO. The intention is that this document
can serve as a guide to any institution or organization that wants to implement the
Recommendation in its city, neighbourhood or area.
11.3 Learning and Reflections
The development of the PUH_C research project together with previous experi-
ences has been illustrated in the previous section. In this section, a subsequent phase
where insights and lessons are extracted from the experience of each step is
expanded on. The methodology established for the project was based on preceding
practices and has taken the most relevant steps in order to achieve the critical six-
step approach suggested in the preparatory documents of the Recommendation.
However, during the study phases, series of problems arose in the course of deci-
sions being gradually made in agreement with the different participators. These
conditions might be reflected in cities around the world, where similar issues are
being faced; therefore, the way in which they have been solved in Cuenca can con-
tribute to common knowledge.
Within step 1 – throughout the three scale studies carried out – it was possible
to map data and consolidate a GIS database. This process required substantial time
and human resources, which involved both desk and on-site work. For the interest
of the methodology implemented, it was necessary to contrast and analyse differ-
ent types of information. Most difficulties lie in the collection of data since there
is a lack of integration between information from the local government, national
institutions and the work established at the academy through research projects.
The cause of this lies in the lack of interest and the insufficient background infor-
mation in order to facilitate data analysis that, due to administrative procedures,
delayed the planned schedule. Despite the relevance of data obtained from the
Municipality, a failure to update also weakened the analysis since recent data
could not be accurately compared. Therefore, there is a need to establish system-
atic checks on data accuracy as well as promoting initiatives to share information
among institutions.
By means of desk and on-site work, experts in several disciplines were required
to submit a report after a training workshop session regarding the notion and appli-
cation of HUL. The insights of this process are clearly visible in the reports of each
expert since there is a clear link made between their own knowledge and the con-
cepts discussed in the workshop. However, the results obtained among disciplines
differ and they influence the time needed for the subsequent analysis. Due to the
diversity in each field, in some cases, it was easy to analyse the results; geography,
for example, allowed an in-depth analysis and simplification of data, through a GIS
file, as well as its combination with the existing architectural heritage databases.
This is not the case for anthropology where a much more subjective reflection was
completed, but the possibilities for mapping these resources were scarce. Dissimilar
circumstances should be considered at the beginning of the project, presented at the
training sessions, and clear objectives should be established as to optimize further
data analysis in terms of time and available resources.
The extension of the territory and areas of study stalled the on-site data mapping
(see Figs. 11.3, 11.4, and 11.5). Out of the 14 landscape units, 10 contain all the
Fig. 11.3 San Francisco neighbourhood, an aerial view. This neighbourhood is located in the City
Centre of Cuenca within the orthogonal urban pattern. (Authors: Fausto Cardoso 2014)
Fig. 11.4 San Francisco neighbourhood, the square. One of the most historically relevant public
spaces in the city. (Authors: Sebastián Astudillo 2015)
Fig. 11.5 Las Herrerías Street district, a view from El Herrero square. There is a clear relation
between the public space and the houses fostering traditional gastronomy. (Authors: María Eugenia
Siguencia 2014)
information projected in the planning, while the remaining ones have not been
explored in terms of economy, architectural typology and heritage value assess-
ment. Besides, the on-site surveys were only based on visual checks from the
ground; this implies that relevant information may be missing. For example, identi-
fication of parking lots could have been complemented by the use of aerial resources
to locate them at the centre of block buildings.
Following steps 2 and 3, in the Visionary Conference, consensus was sought, and
the vulnerability was assessed in a participatory environment. For the development
of this initiative, a key and at the same time difficult point was the prior announce-
ment and the acceptance among people convened, especially community members.
Although integration is perceived among stakeholders when assembled in work-
shops, trust is only verified when people show interest in active participation and
continuous practices. From the three groups called, institutions, experts (universi-
ties) and population, the lowest percentage was that of the institutions, limited to the
Municipality. Innovative means for identifying social implications can guarantee a
sustainable conservation and development in the city. These means should consider,
as essential, education regarding civil commitment in schools, the appointment of
representatives in the decision-making of the city and the recovery of citizen confi-
dence in the role of politicians.
After a significant amount of data was obtained both from the three-scaled stud-
ies and the consensus reached at the Visionary Conference, the next step involved
the analysis and incorporation of the wide-ranging set of information into a file for
every landscape unit in the city. This practice matches step 4 in regard to integration
of the three previous steps into an urban development framework. The main goal
consisted of providing tools to governmental institutions to integrate and implement
the results expected by the community in current management systems. Nevertheless,
the research project results have not been provided to community or governmental
entities. The major problematic detected is, therefore, the lack of follow-up on par-
ticipatory processes, which requires improved effort from authorities when estab-
lishing management frameworks.
The final point relates to the last two steps, steps 5 and 6, the prioritization of
actions for conservation and development as well as the establishment of local
partnerships and management frameworks. Clearly, future opportunities seem to
depict plenty of possibility to integrate the compiled data and update the existing
information. The challenge lies in promoting a real collaborative commitment
among implicated parts of the process. The main constraint faced at the end of the
project has been the failure to execute any of the proposals suggested at the
Visionary Conference as a protocol established during this event. This fact depicts
the need for compliance of the parties as well as the importance of follow-up
measures to promote the execution of the remaining signed resolutions. Following
international experiences, a HUL observatory (GOHUL 2016) should be connected
to existing local government in charge of heritage management to receive and pro-
mote the accomplishment of proposed resolutions and a prioritized investment of
financial resources.
11.4 P
roject Impact: Social, Governmental and Research
Impact
In contrast to traditional notions of conservation, the notion of Historic Urban

Landscape, as a way to approach heritage management, in the case of Cuenca,
depicts the evolution from narrow management processes towards integrated prac-
tices. It has incorporated and confronted diverse visions to reach consensus. A key
component in the methodological process has been the input received from not only
experts but also the locals. This implies a potential for further collaboration between
the groups of stakeholders identified in the three following categories, the social,
governmental and the academic group.
The social implication entails the search for a sustainable accomplishment of
development goals with a dynamic participation and a continuous growth of confi-
dence. During the experience driven by the research group, different social groups
were not only identified but in certain cases adapted from the workshops carried out
in the preparation stage of the Visionary Conference. The case of the main square
Parque Calderon is a clear example of the effort made to involve citizens in partici-
patory processes. The strong presence of commercial land use in the vicinity of this
square does not provide the space for living activities, and therefore no community
association exists in the area. However, the singular, traditional activity of reading
the newspaper persists among retirees, who actively contributed in the workshop
conducted by students in this particular zone. In general, during the partial work-
shops, several actors have been encouraged to understand heritage matters as part of
their own identity, through activities challenging the identification of collective val-
ued assets, threats perceived in their territory as well as notions to delimitate their
area of influence (Rey-Pérez and Astudillo 2016).
During the process of the workshops, participants were asked about those ele-
ments of their city that could not disappear, because, if these elements were not
present, they would stop identifying with their city. The attributes mentioned were
gastronomy, city squares, the sound of the rivers and the perspective of the moun-
tains, as well as the valuation of assets outside of the declared heritage area (streets,
parks, houses, etc.) (J. Rey Pérez and González Martínez 2018, 109). They were
also asked about those elements that should disappear so that their city remains a
place to live with a high quality of life, and they identified threats such as public
safety, pollution and hygiene, which could endanger the construction of identity and
the authenticity of the city (J. Rey Pérez and González Martínez 2018, 109). Then,
during the Visionary Conference, awareness about not only cultural and heritage
matters but also several fields such as nature, regulation, archaeology and economy
have been raised.
These processes hold insights for initiatives for education through workshops
developed with the community, students and experts who were embedded in the
system for understanding and conducting actions for heritage conservation. The
bond created through the academy and with the collaboration of experts raises an
increasing interest from local government entities to include a broader vision for
heritage conservation considering landscape management. The generation of spaces
like workshops supports the understanding and the creation of a common work
framework among the three groups mentioned. The government plays a substantial
role since they are responsible for short- and long-term cultural and development
management and should, therefore, be involved in measuring the impact that spe-
cific proposals may have on the significance of cultural heritage assets (Tarrafa
Silva and Pereira Roders 2012).
The understanding of the HUL approach through multiple perspectives in the
context of Cuenca depicts the feasibility for the implementation of the
Recommendation. Protecting and safeguarding the continuity of the most significant
heritage attributes are critical. However, finding ways to address development needs
and potentials in a way that is compatible with the heritage is equally important in
the HUL approach (Hosagrahar 2015). The methodology presented for the research
project allowed, through academic exploration, the compiling of tools and instru-
ments adapted to the local context. Digital and non-digital technologies were used
to tailor every step, and, depending on the availability of resources from different
studies and the empowerment of groups of stakeholders, this combined work has
consequently resulted in a strong academic impact.
The main outcome lies in the diversity of the assets obtained from mapping in
different fields and the relation of the information within the assorted groups of
stakeholders. The creation of a GIS database with all of the information is the first
step in the construction of relevant data with the possibility to make it available for
the local community in the future. This is remarkable practice that should be con-
sidered so as to improve other experiences, since information that makes up the GIS
database should be strengthened, via multiple expert disciplines, and consensual
among stakeholders. The results of this consensual practice are published by the
Research Center of the Faculty of Architecture (CINA) in the proceedings of the
Visionary Conference, a document financed by the Faculty of Architecture of
Universidad de Cuenca, acknowledging the joint work demonstrated during the
event. Five hundred copies were distributed among the participants in the event,
government participants, academics and the main representatives of community
groups (Cuenca 2015).
Besides the local results, the research project has been presented at national and
international conferences (Rey-Pérez and Auquilla 2015; UNESCO, 2015a, b), as
well as the main results structured in articles submitted to scientific journals (J. Rey
Pérez and González Martínez 2018; Rey-Perez and Siguencia Ávila 2017; Siguencia
Avila and Rey Pérez 2016). Last but not least, at the international level, Cuenca has
been placed on the list of pilot cities implementing the HUL notion, an initiative of
the World Heritage Institute of Training and Research for the Asia and the Pacific
Region WHITRAP (WHITRAP n.d.). In addition, in the framework of the Global
Observatory on the Historic Urban Landscape (GOHUL 2016), Cuenca is one of the
practice cases presented in an international network, sharing experiences and
improving methodologies in a collective way. This collaboration has had a big
impact on the diffusion of the project, and funds have been assigned for a publication
funded by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science of the Netherlands (in
trust with UNESCO) and the Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism at Universidad
de Cuenca (FAUC) (Rey-Pérez et al. 2017).
11.5 Current State and Future Directions
The application of the HUL approach suggests the inclusion of multiple aspects in
the area of conservation and heritage management of historic centres and/or sites
where assets and practices of high cultural significance are registered. The
Recommendation on Historic Urban Landscapes issued in 2011 has been the stimu-
lus for the application of concepts defined within the document approved in Paris.
The challenge for cities immersed in extreme urban development processes is to
recognize valuable elements worth preserving and integrate them harmoniously into
urban and territorial planning. It is a way of planning the heritage city, considering
both values and the global pressures to which it is subjected.
Cities around the world, including Cuenca, try to outline their own models to
implement the Recommendation, in order to suit their contexts and particularities.
The study in Cuenca is an attempt to understand the complexity, on the one hand, of
the historic background by which the city has been recognized as World Heritage
and, on the other hand, the current circumstances outlining the future. In Cuenca,
heritage management traces back to the 1970s, recognizing that conservation efforts
have resulted in a number of protection, control and management tools. However,
they are focused on purely object, material and aesthetic protection, recognized in
care of built goods. The process developed highlights the need for strategies that
exceed the existing level of protection and that integrate different disciplines and
actors in the conservation and planning of the city. From this, a series of tools and
strategies are suggested that allow the current diagnosis, and also suggest actions,
for the proper management of the historic centre, linked to its extensive territory and
under the vision of multiple actors and experts from various disciplines. This will
deliver guidelines of application of the Recommendation, to both the Academy and
to the management entities, which reinforce and give continuity and validity to the
work undertaken in the quest to preserve the heritage of Cuenca.
In the academic field, the results show a very close relationship between the cri-
teria for which Cuenca was inscribed in the World Heritage List and the values
identified through citizen participation. The applied methodology collects informa-
tion not only from the field of architecture and urbanism but also from the interdis-
ciplinary work and from the community. Integrating these diverse voices was one of
the biggest challenges that had to be faced but at the same time one of the most
important results of the process.
Contributions from the fields of geology, biology, economics, archaeology and
anthropology, added with the architectural-urban vision, have provided a significant
contribution to the understanding of the link between their expertise and the conser-
vation of the heritage of the city, putting on the table the need to develop a good
practices manual at territorial level as a key to understand the heritage issue from a
holistic perspective.
Citizen participation facilitated the identification of tangible and intangible heri-
tage, which is not necessarily part of the current heritage system, recognizing repre-
sentative symbols and observation points that have been considered as
characteristics – natural and intangible – that strengthen the sense of ownership and
the identity of the city.
Citizen workshops were able to involve experts, technicians, neighbours, stu-
dents, etc., in the heritage management system, but also met the goal of disseminat-
ing knowledge and educating citizens. The formation of a heritage information
system (GIS) with all the alphanumeric and geospatial information generated,
which must be articulated and complemented with the existing one, is a first step in
making the information accessible and diffusing it, laying the foundations for urban
development in the city.
Throughout the process, there were also difficulties that deserve to be mentioned
and have been referred to in this chapter, in order to overcome them: the lack of
integration between the information provided by various local entities and that col-
lected by the academy; the incipient updating and validation of data, which delays
its processing and analysis; the weak relationship between institutions and commu-
nity, as well as the lack of interinstitutional relationship, duplicating actions and
overlapping competencies; the non-consideration of the population in the process of
patrimonial management and therefore the omission of the local values identified by
it; etc.
As society changes, values, perceptions and priorities do also. Therefore, the
implementation of the HUL Recommendation must be part of a continuous and
dynamic process. This application, particularly in relation to the last three steps
defined by UNESCO, unquestionably requires the commitment of the institution
that is in charge of heritage management, which in the case of Cuenca is the
Department of Historic Areas of the Municipality. This department fulfils the tasks
of planning and control of the historical and heritage areas of the city and the can-
ton. To do this, maps should be used to integrate resources, values, attributes and
vulnerabilities.
Internationally, and thanks to the relationship with WHITRAP, Cuenca is part of
a network of pilot cities that are in the process of implementing the HUL
Recommendation (WHITRAP and Ballarat 2016). This allows a sample of the
efforts that are being carried out in preserving the heritage of the city to be demon-
strated, without losing sight of the current situations in which the city is affected and
future opportunities.
To conclude, in spite of the difficulties and weaknesses mentioned, the process
of implementing the HUL in Cuenca has meant a very important change in the man-
agement of the city from the heritage and sustainability approach. It has achieved an
involvement of different disciplines within the university, which before never
engaged with the urban heritage, a significant citizen participation, and, most impor-
tantly, a change of mentality of citizens towards the urban heritage of Cuenca. The
Municipality of Cuenca has been involved in the dissemination of knowledge of a
new tool such as the Recommendation, and they have been involved with citizens in
discussing their city. The citizens have been heard, and Cuenca has been located in
the international panorama of research and management through the
Recommendation. There are many challenges and difficulties, but undoubtedly, the
balance of the implementation process of the HUL is absolutely positive.
References
Anderson, C. (2010). Land use consultants. Character appraisal and management plans.
Edinburgh.gov.uk. Edinburgh: City of Edinburgh Council. Retrieved from http://www.edin-
burgh.gov.uk/info/20065/conservation/430/conservations_areas/
Cuenca, U. de. (2015). Conferencia visionaria. Una mirada ciudadana de Cuenca hacia el futuro.
¡Todos tenemos algo que decir! (S. Moscoso, Ed.). Cuenca: Universidad de Cuenca. Retrieved
from http://whc.unesco.org/document/137365/
Direction de L’Architecture et du Patrimoine. (2002). Zone de Protection du Patrimoine
Architectural, Urbain et Paysager. París: Ministére de la Culture et de la Communication,
France.
DIUC, D. de I. de la U. de C. (2016). Revalorización del Patrimonio Cultural y Natural de la
ciudad de Cuenca a partir de estrategias de desarrollo sostenible apoyadas en la figura del
Paisaje Urbano Histórico (PUH-C). (S. Astudillo & J. Rey Pérez, Eds.) (Universida). Cuenca:
unpublished work.
GOHUL. (2016). Global observatory on the Historic Urban Landscape. Retrieved December 9,
2016, from https://go-hul.com/
Hosagrahar, J. (2015). Knowledge and planning tools. In F. Bandarín & R. van Oers (Eds.),
Reconnecting the city. The Historic Urban Landscape approach and the future of urban heri-
tage (pp. 249–260). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
IAPH, I. A. del P. H. (2016). Guía del Paisaje Histórico Urbano de Sevilla. Sevilla. Retrieved from
http://www.iaph.es/web/canales/patrimonio-cultural/guia_paisaje_historico_urbano_sevilla/
contenidos_guia_paisaje_historico_urbano_sevilla.html
Martini, V. (2013). The conservation of Historic Urban Landscapes: An approach. Universitá IUAV
di Venezia. Retrieved from http://www.ung.si/~library/doktorati/konzervatorstvo/6Martini2.pdf
Miglioni, F., & Pini, D. (2012). Urban regeneration Project for Historic Cairo. First report of
activities. (F. Miglioli & D. Pini, Eds.). UNESCO. Retrieved from http://www.urhcproject.org/
content/pdf/book_english.pdf
Rey-Pérez, J., & Astudillo, S. (2016). La construcción del paisaje desde una mirada interdisciplinar
y ciudadana. El caso de Cuenca, Ecuador. In S. Moscoso (Ed.), Actas Conferencia Visionaria.
El paisaje Urbano como soporte del Patrimonio Cultural y Natural de Cuenca en debate. Una
mirada ciudadana de Cuenca hacia el futuro de la ciudad (pp. 57–68). Cuenca: Universidad
de Cuenca. Retrieved from https://gohulsite.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/proceedings-confer-
encia-visionaria_com.pdf
Rey-Pérez, J., & Auquilla, S. (2015). Revalorización del Patrimonio cultural y natural de la ciudad
de Cuenca a partir de estrategias de desarrollo sostenible apoyadas en la figura del Paisaje
Urbano Histórico. In M. A. Hermida, D. Orellana, C. Calle, P. Osorio, N. Cabrera, & L. Guerrero
(Eds.), Ciudad es decir ciudad. LlactaCamp 2.0: La ciudad como proceso. Cuenca: Universidad
de Cuenca. Retrieved from http://dspace.ucuenca.edu.ec/bitstream/123456789/23454/1/Libro_
Final_4.pdf
Rey Pérez, J., & González Martínez, P. (2018). Lights and shadows over the recommendation on
the historic urban landscape: “Managing change” in Ballarat and Cuenca through a radical
approach focused on values and authenticity. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 24(1),
101–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2017.1362572.
Rey-Perez, J., & Siguencia Ávila, M. E. (2017). Historic urban landscape: An approach for sus-
tainable management in Cuenca (Ecuador). Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and
Sustainable Development, 7(3), 308–327. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-12-2016-0064.
Rey-Pérez, J., Astudillo, S., Siguencia, M. E., Forero, J., & Auquilla, S. (2017). La aplicación
de la Recomendación sobre el Paisaje Urbano Histórico (PUH) en Cuenca – Ecuador. Una
nueva aproximación al patrimonio cultural y natural/The application of the Recommendation
on Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) in Cuenca – ecuador. A new app. (J. Rey Pérez, Ed.).
Cuenca: Universidad de Cuenca. Retrieved from http://historicurbanlandscape.com/index.
php?classid=5356
Siguencia Avila, M. E., & Rey Pérez, J. (2016). Heritage values protection, from the monument
to the urban dimension. Case study: The historic centre of Santa Ana de los Ríos de Cuenca,
Ecuador. Historic Environment: Policy and Practice, 7(2), 164–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/1
7567505.2016.1172785.
Tarrafa Silva, A., & Pereira Roders, A. (2012). Cultural heritage management and heritage (impact)
assessments. In Proceedings of the Joint CIB W070, W092 & TG International Conference:
Delivering Value to the Community (pp. 23–25).
Tenze, A. (2015). Perception of the Historic Urban Landscape in Cuenca from the citizenship
participation workshops. Universidad de Cuenca.
UNESCO. (1999). Advisory Body Evaluation. Historic Centre of Santa Ana de los Ríos de Cuenca
(Ecuador) no 863. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/863
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape, including a glossary
of definitions. Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=48857&URL_
DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
UNESCO. (2015a). Hangzhou Outcomes. International Conference ‘Culture for Sustainable Cities’.
Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/culture-and-development/
culture-for-sustainable-cities/
UNESCO. (2015b). International Conference on urban conservation: Role of the Recommendation
on the Historic Urban Landscape in safeguarding modern heritage in the Arab States, Kuwait
City. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/en/events/1248/
Veldpaus, L., & Pereira Roders, A. (2013). Historic Urban Landscapes: An assessment framework
part II. In PLEA2013 – 29th Conference, Sustainable Architecture for a Renewable Future.
Munich, Germany. Retrieved from https://pure.tue.nl/ws/files/3693559/376129496053604.pdf
WHITRAP, & Ballarat, C. of. (2016). The HUL Guidebook. Managing heritage in dynamic and
constantly changing urban environments. Retrieved from http://www.historicurbanlandscape.
com/index.php?classid=5355&id=170&t=show
WHITRAP, T. W. H. I. of T. and R. for the A. and the P. R. (n.d.) The Historic Urban
Landscape. Retrieved August 4, 2016, from http://www.historicurbanlandscape.com/index.
php?classid=6043
Chapter 12
in Edinburgh’s Old and New Towns:
Implementation of Projects on the Ground
in a Living Capital City
Adam Wilkinson
Abstract The Historic Urban Landscape Approach represents a holistic, value-

based approach to the management of complex urban areas. Since 1970, efforts to
conserve Edinburgh’s historic centre have relied upon similar approaches and meth-
odologies that are now being adapted to the new paradigm. The main actor in this is
a third party, Edinburgh World Heritage, which uses its position between the com-
munity and government to build consensus around projects that serve to enhance the
World Heritage Site to the benefit of residents, businesses and visitors. A number of
key tools are deployed in this work – community engagement, partnership working,
expertise and financial tools. While individual projects act as a microcosm of the
HUL approach, ensuring the implementation of the HUL approach at municipal
level in a UK context requires a change of mindset: many of the individual steps of
the HUL approach are already in place.
Keywords Edinburgh · Urbanism · Community engagement · Stakeholder · World

heritage · Tenement · Conservation · Interpretation · Urban landscape
12.1 Introduction
The Edinburgh Old and New Town World Heritage Site covers the mediaeval Old
Town and the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century classical New Town. These two
strongly juxtaposed urban forms, which sit across the Waverley Valley from one
another, are both the product of completely different approaches to city planning.
Within the area, which covers 3288 hectares, there are approximately 4000 build-
ings (World Heritage Centre, brief synthesis), the majority of which are protected
A. Wilkinson (*)
Edinburgh World Heritage, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
e-mail: Adamwilkinson@ewht.org.uk

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_12
224 A. Wilkinson
by either statutory listing or conservation area status (an idiosyncrasy of the UK

system is that World Heritage is protected through existing legislative and policy
tools, based in the planning system) (Scottish Government 2014). Edinburgh World
Heritage is an independent charity that endeavours to safeguard the heritage of
Edinburgh through providing informed counsel regarding conservation activity in
the World Heritage Site, along with conservation, engagement and capacity build-
ing programmes that involve the community who still call Edinburgh’s Old and
New Towns their home. The charity operates a community centred approach that
incorporates aspects of the Historic Urban Landscape Approach. This paper will
briefly outline the evolution of this approach to heritage and planning in Edinburgh,
before discussing EWH’s role in the contemporary city. There is further reflection
on operating and implementing programmes, both traditional and innovative, as a
charitable, third-party non-governmental organisation. Throughout, the approach of
EWH is placed in the context of the Historic Urban Landscape Approach.
12.2 The Evolution of the Approach in Edinburgh
In 1970, a major conference on Edinburgh’s New Town (the construction of which

started around 1780) was held, with the intention of highlighting the architectural
and historical importance of these remarkable urban phenomena – perhaps the larg-
est, most rigorously consistent area of high-quality classical architecture in the
world. Led by Modernist architect, Sir Robert Matthew, the conference set an
agenda for the long-term regeneration of this half of the city centre, standing across
a valley from the mediaeval Old Town (Glendinning 2013).
From the outset, this regeneration initiative recognised that private owners and
community groups were essential actors, alongside national and municipal authori-
ties. The starting point for the initiative was a thorough survey of the area (covering
some 300 ha), carried out by volunteers from the Edinburgh Architectural
Association, setting a clear baseline and identifying priorities within the vulnerable
area. It immediately directed the focus to the “tattered fringes” of the New Town
area, and led to the setting up of the New Town Conservation Committee, which
acted as a conduit for government repair funds, and a source of advice and commu-
nity support from its premises in a former shop.
In the 1980s, government and municipal attention turned to the mediaeval Old
Town, stretching a mile from the castle at the peak of a volcanic outcrop to the Palace
at Holyrood. Significant attempts had been made to revive the Old Town from the
late nineteenth century (Cooper 2014), from the “conservative surgery” of Patrick
Geddes to the modernist interventions of Basil Spence, with limited success. In
terms of tourism, despite the Old Town being the cradle of the Scottish Enlightenment,
and home to many of the country’s most important monuments, the New Town was
the principal visitor destination. Local and national government set up the Old Town
Renewal Trust to help address the social, economic and environmental challenges
the area faced, working closely with the local community as part of a concerted
effort to rebuild the social structures around the physical fabric.
12 The Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Edinburgh’s Old and New Towns… 225
These two linked but separate approaches continued through the inscription of
the Old and New Towns of Edinburgh on the World Heritage List in 1995. In 1999,
New Town Conservation and the Old Town Renewal Trust were merged to create
Edinburgh World Heritage (EWH), an organisation independent of local and
national government, but designed to work in partnership with both the municipal-
ity and Scottish Government’s heritage agency in the management of the World
Heritage Site (Douglas Hamilton et al. 1996). EWH took a number of years to find
its feet and to consolidate its approach, aspects of which are outlined in following
sections.
12.3 Edinburgh World Heritage’s Approach
Following on from its predecessors, EWH recognised the importance of engaging

the community in the long-term regeneration of the city centre. At the point of this
author’s arrival as Director of EWH in 2008, its principle tools were participatory
and financial, with a strong focus on building conservation and spatial planning
(Edinburgh World Heritage 2008).
Recognising that there are other competent actors in the realm of legislative and
policy tools, EWH backed away from handling the minutiae of planning in a World
Heritage Site of over 4000 individual buildings, most of which are in private owner-
ship. The organisation instead focused only on proposed changes with the potential
to negatively impact outstanding universal value and advising its other partners on
the implications of this (City of Edinburgh Council et al. 2018). EWH also looked
to ensure that the correct policy framework was in place at a local level, introducing
local policy to ensure that no new development would harm the attributes for which
the site was included on the World Heritage List and addressing the lack of a buffer
zone (City of Edinburgh Council 2010).
While the lack of a formal buffer zone is an accident of history, it gave EWH the
opportunity to consider alternative approaches. Given the site’s dramatic topogra-
phy, a full study of its skyline was carried out in order to understand how this con-
tributed to the outstanding universal value, where vulnerabilities lie and how this
might be protected. The result was the identification of a large number of key views
into, out of and across the World Heritage Site. These were then aligned with view-
ing cones, rather than the usual tool of corridors, allowing for development and
change within the topography (City of Edinburgh Council 2007).
More generally, the system of planning in place across the UK (with its variants
in the constituent parts of the UK) ensures that the first two steps of HUL are at least
partly in place: the system of structural and local plans ensures the mapping of and
understanding of an area and, through consultation and examination at public
inquiry, allows for participation (Scottish Government 2009a, b).
Having set a firmer policy basis, EWH was able to concentrate on taking a more
holistic approach to the management of the World Heritage Site, developing first its
learning and interpretation programmes. As these were getting going, EWH devel-
oped another financial tool through a monument repair programme, enabling it to
226 A. Wilkinson
anchor in charitable and public donations (in effect a public/private partnership) and
then to start to build up experience and expertise in energy efficiency and community-
based action to help lower carbon emissions in the World Heritage Site.
In all these programmes, which are explored in the next part of this paper, the key
to EWH’s approach has been an understanding that the heritage outcomes of the
resulting projects, while critical to EWH and managing our WH status, are often
secondary to the other actors and partners. As such, the professional team at EWH
acknowledges that it is more frequently the translator of community thinking, needs
and values, which requires a good deal of humility. As will be demonstrated in the
highlighted programmes, EWH has been largely successful in implementing the
sixth step of the Historic Urban Landscape Approach, which is establishing local
partnerships, though the maintenance of these partnerships over time can vary
depending on available resources and interests.
12.4 The Conservation Funding Programme
While programmes of grant assistance for the conservation and repair of historic
buildings are far from rare, the pattern of land ownership in Edinburgh means that
the buildings that are often most in need are also the hardest to ensure a good state
of conservation in – across the city around 65% of pre-1919 buildings require some
sort of repair, and 48% have critical elements (Scottish Government 2017). The
majority of residential buildings in the city centre World Heritage Site and its
nineteenth-century suburbs are under multiple ownerships, normally with up to ten
owners and in exceptional cases over 50 (National Records for Scotland 2011). For
a conservation and repair scheme to succeed, every owner has to be in agreement.
This represents a major vulnerability in the care of the World Heritage Site (and
more generally Scotland’s built heritage), which is acknowledged and prioritised
through successive World Heritage Site Management Plans, which seek to ensure
the historic centre supports a strong residential population (HUL steps 3 and 5).
EWH uses buildings at risk methodology to understand trends in decay and areas
where problems are concentrated in order to understand how best to target its efforts.
Creating agreement to repair requires a period of careful negotiation by EWH staff
to bring about an agreed scheme which meets the needs of the owners and the conser-
vation objectives (HUL step 6). The first £50,000 of any grant is, as an incentive,
given as straight funding. However, further funding is repayable on the sale or trans-
fer of property. Funding shares are generally decided by floor area (EWH 2012a, b).
A recent example of a repair is 181–189 Canongate, a nineteenth-century tene-
ment (apartment block) on the Canongate section of the Royal Mile. One of the
eight owners approached EWH, concerned about the damage being caused by an
overflowing gutter. Working with that owner, EWH staff set up owners’ meetings to
help bring the other owners, some of which were absentee landlords, on board with
the principle of repair. The owners then formed a committee, which appointed an
appropriately qualified professional (in this case a conservation architect) to lead
the development of the scheme and its eventual execution. Investigation of the
building led to a careful scoping of the works needed. EWH staff also worked with
the owners to see where additional conservation benefit might be gained, in particu-
lar through the restoration of the lime harling (render), removed in the nineteenth
century. Ultimately the owners did not feel able to proceed with this element, but
were in agreement with all other elements of the scheme, and it proceeded to site,
some 12 months after first approaching. This inspired the owners in two neighbour-
ing blocks to come together for EWH supported repair schemes (Wilkinson 2015).
While the conservation funding programme undoubtedly works (with over 1500
building projects supported since 1970) and produces both sustainable conservation
and community outcomes, bringing people together, it requires a great deal of man-
power. In particular, the system requires a great deal of effort and negotiation in
creating the community partnerships and encouraging the owners as they work
through what can often be complex conservation projects. The timing of projects is
also hard to predict, as owner groups can only move at the speed of the slowest
member. This makes it hard to achieve high impact over focused areas in short (or
political) time frames. Consequently, as a programme, it does not satisfy those
focused on numbers as it has a poor cost to spend ratio, and it does not always sat-
isfy politicians, as the overall impact of projects over a 5-year period can be hard to
judge. It requires a consistent, long-term approach but achieves long-term, sustain-
able results.
12.5 World Heritage Projects Programme
One aspect of the conservation funding programme evolved into a programme in its
own right around 2006, by focusing 15% of EWH’s capital budget on the repair of
monuments and public realm around the city. Recognising that these structures are
vulnerable, with no economic value in their own right, other than forming the back-
drop to the daily lives of the citizens of the city, EWH asked the municipal authori-
ties to form a funding partnership for 12 of the most important of these monuments.
EWH offered to put forward 30% of the funding if the City of Edinburgh Council
would put forward 30%. EWH would then fundraise the rest from charitable sources
(Edinburgh World Heritage 2009).
This approach was tested on a relatively small but important military monument,
with a repair valued around £20,000, and was proven to work. Initially, a 3-year
period was set for the other eleven monuments, ranging in scale from £50,000 to
£450,000 (the remarkable Burns Monument, by Thomas Hamilton from 1831). In
these projects, EWH took on the role of project coordinator, client and fundraiser.
The programme took 6 years in total, due to the fundraising effort required. However,
the leverage achieved through this approach was significant: in total, the 12 monu-
ment programme, through the partnership of public, private and charitable, raised
£1.2 m, split roughly 47% EWH grant, 25% charitable funds raised by EWH and
228 A. Wilkinson
28% from the City of Edinburgh Council, and, moreover, the clearly defined pro-
gramme was politically popular, showing clear outcomes for the city.
This approach also allows flexibility and a vehicle for building relationships
amongst often sceptical local authority officers. One of the aims of the World
Heritage Projects programme is to change perceptions of some of the World Heritage
Site’s urban spaces. Working with artist Callum Innes and the Ingleby Gallery,
EWH was able to encourage the City of Edinburgh Council to allow the installation
of an artwork under a handsome viaduct, dating from the early nineteenth century.
The artwork covers the stonework of the vault in a wash of gently changing coloured
light (Ingleby Gallery 2012). As well as highlighting a fine piece of architecture, the
project also resulted in a drop in reported crime around the underside of the bridge,
by a back entrance to the city’s main railway station, to zero. Having seen the ben-
efits of this temporary project, the partners were able to convince the City of
Edinburgh Council to take ownership of the work of art and maintain it. The weak-
ness of this approach is the lack of certainty – had the partners not been able to
convince the city to take on the work of art, the time and money invested would have
been lost.
12.6 Learning Programmes
Article 27 of the World Heritage Convention reminds us of the importance of ensur-

ing knowledge of the cultural importance of our heritage is passed on from genera-
tion to generation (UNESCO 1972). However, it is sufficiently broad to allow for a
great deal of flexibility. EWH’s conservation and repair programmes provide an
excellent and relevant source of material and means for engaging residents with
their heritage learning and interpretation, allowing for the continued valorisation of
heritage. This is usually in the form of a temporary information board at the site of
any repair. More recently, social media has become a powerful way to take this to a
wider audience. With the right photographs, it is possible to inform ever increasing
numbers about the importance of their heritage and create a two-way discussion
around values.
The flexibility in Article 27 has allowed EWH to continue its theme of using
heritage to achieve a wide range of outcomes: our historic environment does not
only have to be used to teach heritage. EWH ran a trial programme called “Heritage
Detectives” which aimed to create a deeper engagement with the city centre’s heri-
tage amongst an audience that was completely disconnected from it (Edinburgh
World Heritage 2012a, b). EWH joined forces with consultants Daisychain
Associates and charity Circle Scotland to manage a project aimed at introducing
young people to the World Heritage Site. Circle Scotland provides c ommunity-based
support for marginalised children and families, working to improve opportunity for
disadvantaged families, and those with children at risk of school exclusion, experi-
encing neglect or affected by parental drug or alcohol abuse.
Over 8 weeks, a group of 17 young people gathered at the EWH office in

Charlotte Square on Friday afternoons. Divided into small teams and led by a Circle
Scotland expert, they were tasked to go out and about around the city, to find out the
truth behind topics such as Edinburgh’s underground city, crimes, famous Scots and
traditional myths, visiting a number of buildings and sites across the World Heritage
Site. The project culminated with several performances of a short piece of drama,
inspired by and starring the participants. Titled “Bondi Brenda and the Heritage
Detectives”, the piece imagines the young people challenging Edinburgh’s worst
tour guide and exposing her somewhat exaggerated stories.
How do you measure the success of an outreach and engagement project? Firstly,
no one dropped out of the project. Considering that the project happened in their
free time, and some of the group did not have good attendance records at school,
this is by itself a real achievement. Secondly, the group went to places they had
never been before, and this widened their horizons and perceptions of the city. In the
case of a project such as this, anecdotal evidence is important. One member of the
group had spent 6 months at home after being excluded from a catering course for
poor attendance. He commented: “It’s built my self-confidence learning about
Scotland’s important role in history and realising this is where I’m from; before I
wouldn’t have known where to look”.
While it seems that this approach to heritage learning – embedding it in other
subjects and meeting other needs – has real strengths, the challenge has been in scal-
ing it up: it requires funding, and in the case of EWH, as a charity, such funding is
given by trusts and foundations rather than by an institutions paying for a service.
As a result, it is not possible to predict whether funding will be a one-off or on a
more sustainable basis. This indicates that the charity model is fragile when inno-
vating, as opposed to when it is handling established methodologies, such as with
the conservation and repair programmes.
In terms of the Historic Urban Landscape Approach, this project represents the
sowing of the seeds for a participatory approach amongst different audiences: the
danger of public engagement is that it can become a tick box exercise that results in
narrow engagement, leading to plans and projects that are only bought into by a
narrow section of society. It takes effort and care to engage with different audiences
and to demonstrate how heritage can help meet their objectives.
12.7 Energy Efficiency
If conservation was the watchword of the 1970s, climate change and energy effi-
ciency have been those of the last 10 years, with significant changes in government
policy reflecting the challenges. These are particularly relevant in urban areas, as
areas of intense consumption and fragility in relation to climate change. Recognising
the Scottish Government’s highly ambitious targets in relation to climate change
(Scottish Government 2009a, b), EWH positioned itself to ensure that proposals to
adapt the historic building stock were appropriate and would not damage the
230 A. Wilkinson
historic or architectural importance. This meant setting up a programme to explore

the sorts of changes that might work and executing them with a willing partner. At
the start of the programme, the willing partner was a housing association, which
allowed us to trial a range of practical solutions for its tenants in one early nineteenth-
century tenement, from reinstating internal window shutters to installing solar ther-
mal panels in the valley of the roof. The outcomes of this helped inform national
policy, as well as understand what was and was not acceptable in relation to out-
standing universal value (Changeworks 2008, 2009). The implementation of this
programme reflects the “Assess Vulnerability” step in the Historic Urban Landscape
Approach.
This programme of work developed further, taking advantage of funding from
Scottish Government intended to help communities reduce their CO2E. EWH set up
a series of projects for residents helping address fuel poverty (a relative measure of
heating costs to income) by giving them the skills to adapt their properties sensi-
tively themselves and through working with communities to reinvigorate lost urban
gardens as food growing spaces in which gardening skills could be taught. The
garden at Acheson House was designed by children from the local school, with food
varieties selected with the assistance of experts from the Royal Botanical Gardens
Edinburgh to ensure they were authentic to the seventeenth-century date of the gar-
den (Edinburgh World Heritage 2011).
The current development of the work is to set up a new vehicle, capable of
accessing funds that EWH as a charity- and heritage-focused organisation is not
able to access. These funds will be used to support the sensitive retrofit of statutorily
listed buildings, improving living conditions for residents and so helping sustain the
residential population of the World Heritage Site. The next project lined up for
action is a post-war listed building in the Old Town, which represents a vulnerable
typology, with a series of different challenges to the usual building stock (Simpson
and Brown 2013).
Again the challenge for EWH as a third party is in scaling up this work to make
a substantial difference at a city level: to date, it has been engaging with communi-
ties at the grass roots, using climate change and energy efficiency as a means of
engaging people with their historic built environment. Operating at a different scale
requires direct access to the levers of power, which are not readily available to a
small third party organisation. Another challenge, for the conservation purists, is the
question of whether this represents mission creep or a natural evolution of the con-
servation movement: as a city of highly educated people, criticism is never far away.
12.8 Future Directions
Innovation is exhausting and failure is an essential part of innovation. Therefore, it

is often seen as a waste of precious resources by public and private bodies, espe-
cially at a time in the UK when financial resources for heritage are hard to find. It
can be disorientating for staff, and the temptation to chase the objectives of external
funders rather than focusing on core objects can be strong.
EWH needs to consolidate around its successes in deep engagement with com-
munities in conservation, learning and energy efficiency, confining its experimenta-
tion and innovation to a limited number of new areas, and, in doing so, build on its
core skills rather than working in areas where others have greater expertise or are
more effective.
Areas that currently look promising include building capacity, such as the provi-
sion of professional training, as a way of ensuring the demand for the traditional
skills needed to conserve Edinburgh’s stone built heritage is strong (Historic
Scotland 2011). The temptation provided by the general direction of external fund-
ing would be to attempt to teach the craft skills themselves, but there is already good
provision in this area. Focusing on professional training means that the core skills
of the professional team are further utilised.
The same temptation affects EWH in relation to international programmes – in
spite of the UK’s decision to leave the European Union, there remain a number of
international networks and programmes where EWH’s experience and knowledge
are valued (often more so than in Edinburgh), and careful choices are needed over
where to expend effort to ensure that the core mission of the organisation is
supported.
Other areas that will require attention in the coming years include understanding
how to handle the pressures of mass tourism, in particular the impact this has on the
life of established communities in the city centre (WTTC 2017). At the heart of how
we increase our understanding of this – and other areas – must be a strengthened
relationship with the city’s universities. At present, their research agendas are not
aligned with the needs of the city or the planning of its future.
12.9 Further Strengths and Weaknesses
A key strength of the EWH approach is the depth of community engagement that is
fundamental to the programmes. However, this demands a long-term approach,
often beyond the funding horizons of public bodies, and so there is a general under-
standing with the community groups that the promises of a programme can only be
delivered when the funding is available and that EWH will use its position as a
third-party organisation to raise funds. This ensures EWH is one step removed from
criticisms of political decisions around funding, but it is also understood by the City
of Edinburgh Council, which sees value in a third party leveraging in additional
funding.
The weakness of being a third party is the need to ensure political buy-in at local
and national level to EWH’s mission and activities. This buy-in needs to be across
the political and administrative spectrum and requires constant attention. The narra-
tive used to help address this is that heritage is being used as a tool to meet other
needs and outcomes – in other words, it is a means to an end rather than, as the
232 A. Wilkinson
traditional approach to heritage would suggest, an end in itself. However, UNESCO

status links to a counter-narrative present in Scottish politics relating to interference
in Scottish affairs from outside. This usually relates to the UK government in
London but is occasionally directed at other external organisations.
Linked to the challenge of political support is the question of political leadership.
The leadership structure of Edinburgh divides power between a civic leader, a politi-
cal leader and an administrative chief executive. The electoral system and current
political landscape tend towards coalition, which further complicates the leadership
picture.
The general structure and culture of the City of Edinburgh Council over the last
decade has been one of “silo” working, precisely the opposite of the integrated
approach supported and promulgated by EWH, although steps are in underway to
address this: the current chief executive is restructuring the council and leading a
city vision exercise that asks basic, HUL-like question – what do you like about
Edinburgh, what would you change about Edinburgh and where should Edinburgh
be in 2050? Deep integration is still a long way off.
The picture at a Scottish government level in relation to promoting an integrated
approach is somewhat complicated by the way in which World Heritage is still
“apart” from mainstream government thinking. Despite a strong focus on nation-
building and community empowerment, heritage is not yet widely seen as a tool for
either (yet Scotland’s six World Heritage Sites beautifully encapsulate the nation’s
story).
Until heritage is seen as essential to the future of the city, the question of scaling
up successful activities will continue to be a major challenge: scaling up requires
long-term funding. This problem is far from unique to Edinburgh. More generally,
the structure of the planning system in the UK makes the full implementation of the
Historic Urban Landscape initiative a challenge: it means pushing the mapping of
assets at the local plan stage beyond those related to land use, it means working hard
to ensure consultation and community engagement is deep and genuine and it means
ensuring coordination across policies and governance structures.
The greatest strength of EWH’s integrated approach must be the range of out-
comes that result from its projects. These should provide evidence that can act as the
political leverage needed to embed its programmes and support a wider integrated
approach, but the body politic has not yet made the leap. The greatest challenge in
relation to the Historic Urban Landscape is also a reflection on EWH’s key weak-
ness; although it can be influential, it remains a third party non-governmental organ-
isation. Its recommendation to local and national authorities – that an integrated,
Historic Urban Landscape-type approach to its historic centre be adopted – remains
just that, a recommendation. This is especially true in relation to the fourth step of
HUL – ensuring the coordination of heritage values within the wider framework.
The means of mitigating this is the creation of an active advocacy programme, but
even so, success is not guaranteed. You can take a horse to water, but you can’t make
it drink.
References
Changeworks. (2008). Energy heritage.

CHangeworks. (2009). Renewable heritage.
City of Edinburgh Council. (2007). Skyline report: The protection of key views.
City of Edinburgh Council. (2010). Edinburgh City Local Plan.
City of Edinburgh Council, Edinburgh World Heritage, Historic Environment Scotland. (2018) Old
and new towns of Edinburgh management 2017–22.
Cooper, M. (2014). Transactions of the ancient monuments society. Historic Environment, 4(2).
Douglas Hamilton, J., et al. (1996). Statement of intent: Old and new towns of Edinburgh World
Heritage Site.
Edinburgh World Heritage. (2008). Annual review 2007/2008.
Edinburgh World Heritage. (2009). Journal one.
Edinburgh World Heritage. (2011). Acheson house garden teacher’s guide.
Edinburgh World Heritage. (2012a). Conservation funding programme guidance notes.
Edinburgh World Heritage. (2012b). Journal four.
Glendinning, M. (2013). The conservation movement: A history of architectural preservation:
Antiquity to modernity. London: Routledge.
Historic Scotland. (2011). Traditional building skills: A strategy for sustaining and developing
traditional skills in Scotland. Edinburgh: Historic Scotland.
Ingleby Gallery. (2012). Callum Innes: Regent bridge. http://www.inglebygallery.com/events/
the-regent-bridge/
National Records of Scotland. (2011). Scotland census.
Scottish Government. (2009a). A guide to the planning system in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scottish
Government.
Scottish Government. (2009b). The climate change (Scotland) act.
Scottish Government. (2014). Scottish planning policy. http://www.gov.scot/
Publications/2014/06/5823/0
Scottish Government. (2017). Scottish household survey.
Simpson and Brown. (2013). Sir Basil Spence’s Canongate housing conservation statement.
UNESCO. (1972). World heritage convention.
Wilkinson, A. (2015). November 2015 director’s notes.
World Heritage Centre. Brief synthesis. http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/728/
World Tourism and Travel Council. (2017). Coping with success: Managing overcrowding in tour-
ism destinations.
Chapter 13
Havana: From the Walled City
to a Historic Urban Landscape
Pablo Fornet
Abstract Thirty-five years after its inscription on the World Heritage list, Old
Havana is at a crossroads once again. The heritage management process that begun
in 1993 reinforced the role of the Office of the City Historian as a leading public
institution through a comprehensive plan and financing mechanisms that would
ensure overall sustainability. Since then, the Historic Centre has benefitted from a
boost in the local economy, and hundreds of buildings have been restored with an
eye to retaining the resident population, one of the project’s key premises. During
the past 5 years, however, some facts and tendencies both at national and local levels
are generating an entirely new dynamic. The current scenario poses a challenge and
an opportunity for a city that is recognized for its outstanding heritage values along
with accumulated urban problems and also for its longtime practices of heritage
preservation. At present, there is a pressing need to define a buffer zone for the WHS
that allows a new point of view regarding historic urban landscape of Havana Bay
and its environs.
Keywords Old Havana · World Heritage · Heritage preservation · Tourism ·

Sustainable development · Management plan · Historic urban landscape · Historic
Centre · Gentrification · Buffer zone
13.1 The City and Its History
In 2019, the city of Havana will turn 500 years old. For more than two centuries, this
so-called Key to the New World was the West Indies Fleet port of call through which
Spain traded with its overseas possessions. Since the 1720s, the development of
shipyards and construction of vessels increased its strategic importance (Fig. 13.1).
Coveted as it was by several empires, the city was surrounded by the most impres-
sive defensive system built in the Americas. In 1837, Havana became the site for
Latin America’s first railroad. By the end of the nineteenth century, Havana was
P. Fornet (*)
Office of the City Historian, Havana, Cuba

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_13
236 P. Fornet
Fig. 13.1 The Port and City of Havana in 1855. Lithography by Eduardo Laplante
Latin America’s seventh largest city with about 250,000 inhabitants and boasted one
of the most active ports (Wilson 2014).
The city grew within the walled precinct until the middle of the eighteenth cen-
tury. A century later, however, the wall became obsolete and demolition works
started in 1863. The valuable contiguous lands entered into a process of accelerated
development. Major public spaces took shape (Prado Promenade, Central Park) as
well as splendid buildings dedicated to official uses (Presidential Palace, Capitol),
theatres, hotels and commercial centres.
During the twentieth century, the city developed swiftly to the west, with flour-
ishing middle- and upper-class neighbourhoods, while popular settlements grew to
the south. By 1950, the city had become a metropolitan area with one million inhab-
itants. Old Havana gained in density after the construction of some high-rise build-
ings and the related proliferation of ciudadelas.1 The port generated thousands of
jobs; the financial district, as well as commercial areas, was consolidated.
In 1959, the triumph of the Cuban Revolution triggered radical changes in the
country’s economy, its society and its regional development. The new government
stressed the improvement of rural areas and small poor settlements that had been
neglected for centuries. The Cuban economy was highly dependent on the United
States, so at a juncture when the new government was implementing radical
reforms, tensions between the two countries increased. These circumstances caused
1
In Cuba, a house that was originally built as a single-family residence and later sold to be rented
by poor people that crowded around the centre of the city. Towards 1980, almost one third of
Historic Centre buildings belonged to this category.
13 Havana: From the Walled City to a Historic Urban Landscape 237
disruptions in the supply of goods and resulted in a decrease in commercial activi-

ties. Many wealthy people emigrated.
In the 1970s, Cuba’s demographic growth rate was higher than its own capital
city and exhibited a significant improvement of countryside quality of life, a singu-
lar behaviour in the Latin American context. Havana remained “frozen in time”
which implied, on the one hand, the preservation of its rich urban heritage but, on
the other hand, a deterioration of the housing stock and infrastructure.2
13.2 The Beginning of the Project, 1981–1993
As in other countries of Latin America, the second half of the 1970s brought a
change in the valuation of cultural heritage. Several regional meetings and interna-
tional charters, including The Convention Concerning the Protection of the World
Cultural and Natural Heritage, placed heritage preservation at the centre of the
public agenda. In Cuba, the Heritage Act turned out to be the first law passed after
the promulgation of the 1976 Constitution. And in 1978, the Historic Centre was
declared a national monument; 4 years later, in 1982, Old Havana and its fortifica-
tion system were inscribed on the World Heritage list (in Latin America the fourth
Historic Centre just after Quito, Antigua Guatemala and Ouro Preto), by virtue of
their Outstanding Universal Value. The urban area (Historic Centre) comprises the
ancient walled city and the former ring beyond the walls, 214 ha altogether.
The inclusion on World Heritage list coincided with the beginning of the first
5-year restoration plan (1981–1985), which sought national government financing
for some 30 buildings. An action plan was drawn up, articulating the efforts of vari-
ous stakeholders, mainly the city government, the Ministry of Culture and the Office
of the City Historian (OCH). The works carried out in the Plaza de Armas and the
conversion of Obispo Street (Fig. 13.2) into a pedestrian walkway as well as a cam-
paign to increase awareness greatly contributed to drawing the attention to the
recovery of heritage. In 1986, a second 5-year plan was endorsed. By the end of the
decade, some 60 buildings had been restored – mainly for cultural, commercial and
housing purposes. This was an important step in a run-down territory where more
than half of the buildings were in bad condition.
In 1990, the collapse of the Soviet Union provoked the loss of a third of Cuba’s
GDP. The country plummeted into a severe economic crisis that paralysed the urban
rehabilitation project. Cuba opened its doors to foreign investment and tourism. In
this new context, Old Havana was to play a key role given its accessibility and tour-
ist potential. The relaunch of the project was highly symbolic and allowed for a
reformulation of a strategy that showed discrete yet sustained achievements regard-
ing urban matters. The need to generate financial resources without losing sight of
the heritage preservation goals yielded a new approach and creativity.
2
With its 720 km2 and 2 million inhabitants, Havana was 1 of the 14 provinces of the country, with
15 municipalities, 1 of which was Old Havana.
238 P. Fornet
Fig. 13.2 A block in the nearby of Plaza de Armas. An early action that combined the in-depth
restoration of ancient buildings and the rehabilitation of a traditional shopping street
13.3 The New Management Model
In 1993, the OCH was accorded status as the entity in charge of the urban restora-
tion project3 and was no longer subordinate to the government of the city. It began
to report directly to the State Council, the highest national government authority.
Permission was granted to the OCH for comprehensive planning well beyond tradi-
tional heritage approaches. Among these new possibilities were property acquisi-
tions, building permissions, investment promotion and the establishment of financial
mechanisms for sustainability purposes. Old Havana became a Zona Priorizada
para la Conservación. Heritage was now not only a matter of national pride but also
an economic resource that would guarantee the continuity of the project (Hill 2007).
3
The OCH was founded in 1938 as a City Council agency. Under Eusebio Leal’s leadership, the
OCH carried out the restoration of the former Palacio de los Capitanes Generales from 1967 to
1978, converting it into the City Museum.
13.3.1 1
994–1999: Heritage: A Cultural Asset Turned into an
Economic Resource
The OCH had been comprised of a museum department, an architecture and archae-
ology group and a small construction enterprise. The new model demanded impor-
tant organizational changes. Two new companies were created – one oriented
towards real estate (Fenix) and the other dedicated to tourist management
(Habaguanex); they were to generate the financial resources required to sustain the
restoration process. With a loan from the Cuban banking system, abandoned proper-
ties were rehabilitated and transformed into hotels, restaurants and shops. Earnings
obtained from these installations would provide the bulk of the funds, with addi-
tional support from the contribución a la restauración4 as well as from international
partners.
The building enterprise was reinforced with equipment and a trained workforce.
The newly created technical (traditional crafts) school became integrated more fully
into the project, and new units emerged that focused on social matters and commu-
nication (publishing house, radio station).
With support from the Spanish Cooperation Agency, specialists from various
entities worked on a “master plan” intended to define the urban policy. Out of a
process that was to have generated a guiding document (it would take 5 years to be
published the integral development plan) emerged a space for discussion and coor-
dination; this eventually led to the creation of the Master Plan Office, an institution
responsible for planning and managing the process.5
From 1995 onward, the Master Plan Office conducted research in two important
areas: a population census and a building inventory. The study of the population was
a necessity identified from the very beginning. And it was the subject of debate:
should the ancient buildings be restored with people continuing to inhabit them, or
was it inevitable to reduce the number of residents? Was it possible to measure the
local residents’ respective feelings of belonging and, based on that, define those
who eventually would stay and those who would be relocated? The census reported
just over 70,000 inhabitants, a population density of 330 inhabitants per hectare,
which was unusually high in the Latin American context (Table 13.1).
A building inventory was undertaken along with the census. Given that Old
Havana’s last survey had taken place 20 years before,6 it was crucial to update it. A
digital mapping was ordered down to parcel level. However, organizational factors
impeded the completion of the task within the designated period. In 1999, a new
4
This sort of tax is a value-captured tool that establishes a gross income proportion (up to 5%) as
a contribution of the businesses located in the area of the restoration project.
5
For Master Plan Office references: http://www.planmaestro.ohc.cu
6
Comprising only the ancient part of the city within the walls, the survey was accomplished before
Old Havana was included in the WHS list (Capablanca et al. 1977).
240 P. Fornet
Table 13.1 Evolution of population: former walled city and Historic Centre (in thousand)
Area/year 1953 1970 1981 1995 2001
Former walled city 59,5 61,8 61,3 58,4 57,9
Historic Centre 70,6 66,7
Source: population census, 1953–2001
Table 13.2 Number of buildings according to grade of protection, 1999a

Grade of protection Total %
3 370 100
1 120 3,5
2 431 12,8
3 2527 75,0
4 292 8,7
a
The “grade of protection” is a criterion defined by the Cuban heritage legislation that determines
the scope of allowable actions on a particular building. Grades 1 and 2 imply higher restrictions.
Grade 3 buildings focus mainly on preservation of the urban contextual value. Those classified as
grade 4 are considered less valuable and admit more flexible adaptation.
Source: a singular experience (2006)
inventory was undertaken with fewer variables (location, building typology, grade
of protection, technical condition and use), as well as a basic photographic survey,
thereby providing enough information about the territory in order to manage the
urban rehabilitation project (Table 13.2).
The rehabilitation process regained the momentum it had achieved during the
years preceding the crisis. Investments privileged the profitable sector, that which
should generate financial resources, and was concentrated around the main squares.
After the Plaza de Armas, attention turned to the Plaza de San Francisco, including
the rehabilitation of the Convent of San Francisco and the Lonja del Comercio. The
process moved along the Calle de los Oficios, the most ancient street of the city,
thereby connecting both squares. As building restoration was accomplished, public
spaces were improved. Sites like the Castillo de la Punta, the Parque de la Maestranza
and the Hotel Santa Isabel were also rehabilitated.
A polygonal sector of 40 blocks was taking shape, which guaranteed the maximiza-
tion of the investment process and ensured a balance among tourist facilities, social
installations and housing (Fig. 13.3). The rehabilitation of an important site like
Convento de Belén was to provide guidelines for the social dimensions of the project.7
7
The Convento de Belén is currently the OCH Department for Humanitarian Affairs seat. Hundreds
of elderly people receive daily health care here and also take part in social and cultural programs.
Fig. 13.3 The Historic Centre. Area under rehabilitation and prioritized sectors according to the
development plan
13.3.2 2000–2004: Focusing on Social Affairs
At the beginning of the decade, the project was consolidated. The average number
of recovered buildings had increased from 5 per year in the mid-1990s to more than
20. The tourist arm, Habaguanex, consisted of a network of 15 hotels and more than
100 shops, cafes and restaurants, which generated revenue in excess of 100 million
USD. The OCH cultural arena was comprised of more than 30 institutions (muse-
ums, concert halls, art galleries).
Despite these achievements, some problems remained unsolved: 40% of the
housing stock was still in bad condition. A shortage of green spaces and recreational
areas for young people was evident. Waste collection and water supply presented
serious problems. The revenues that should have been consistently reinvested in
new profitable facilities had to be directed towards social works (housing, educa-
tional and health institutions).
242 P. Fornet
Beginning in 2000, Old Havana became a site for implementing projects pro-
moted by international cooperation. The management ability of the OCH coupled
with the “high visibility” stimulated the participation of partners and strengthened
the commitment of Cuban authorities.
In 2001, after an agreement between the OCH and the municipal government, a
strategic plan was outlined, with priorities given to heritage, housing, infrastructure
and environment (Plan Maestro 2002). Many activities were undertaken to create
awareness and sensitize the population.8
During this period, important buildings like Palacio Lombillo, San Felipe Neri
Church and Hotel Telégrafo were restored. A project was launched for the rehabili-
tation of an entire block at the very heart of the Historic Centre that stressed housing
development (including a residence for elderly people that had been identified as a
priority in the area) as well as other social facilities.
In 2004, 10 years after implementing the new management model, UNESCO
promoted the project as “a singular experience” regarding the rehabilitation of
urban heritage areas. The OCH collected, processed and brought to light a great deal
of data concerning the territory, its rehabilitation and financial management (OCH
2006).
13.3.3 2005–2009: Reflecting on the Practice
In 2005, a joint initiative between the University of Havana and Master Plan Office
resulted in the implementation of a geographic information system that provides
detailed information about more than 3000 buildings. For the first time in Cuba,
such an advanced tool was accessible for institutions and citizens.9
In 2007, the Colegio San Geronimo was inaugurated at the same place where the
University of Havana was founded in 1728 (the old convent was demolished in the
past, to build an office building). The inharmonious façade was reformed so that it
would blend into the existing cityscape. A program leading to a degree in “Heritage
Management” was created, thereby taking 30 years of practical experience to an
academic level. El Colegio became a permanent space for research and innovation
on heritage matters.
During this period, the “La Reunión” drugstore was restored, one building was
renovated into a modern planetarium and another into a hotel (San Felipe), and work
was done on the archaeological sites next to the seawall. Building and restoration
continued on housing and public spaces. But without a doubt, the crowning achieve-
ment was the completion of the Plaza Vieja project, 25 years after it had begun.
8
Since 2001, every summer a program (Rutas y Andares) promotes direct exchange among citizens
and experts (architects, archaeologists and cultural promoters), disseminating information about
ongoing and future projects.
9
GIS is accessible at http://www.sit.ohc.cu
Plaza Vieja: A Symbolic Space and Urban Example10

When Old Havana was inscribed as a World Heritage site, the Director-
General of UNESCO, Amadou-Mahtar M’Bow, visited the Plaza Vieja and
launched a campaign for the square’s preservation. Outlined since the six-
teenth century, it is considered the first planned organizational attempt of the
city. Over the course of time, houses of prominent families and renowned
business establishments surrounded the square. Throughout its history, the
square was transformed several times. In the mid-twentieth century, an under-
ground parking lot was built right in the centre of the public space, while 200
families lived around the square in overcrowded conditions. Of the four main
squares in the Old City, only the Plaza Vieja served a residential function.
In the mid-1980s, a project to recover its “colonial times” image and to
rehabilitate the square’s dilapidated buildings and its diversified functions was
conceived. However, the project had to be interrupted after the economic cri-
sis of the early 1990s. Later on, it had to deal with different stakeholders and
restoration criteria as well as with financial restrictions. Finally, the project
had to find mechanisms to move the families out during the execution of the
works.
Relaunched at the end of the 1990s, the existing primary school was
improved, the public space was restored, and the dwellings were rebuilt, one
by one, thus, accommodating nearly a hundred families in adequate houses.
The Plaza Vieja project was an example of what had been proposed and devel-
oped for the Historic Centre, and it became a reference for future works.
13.3.4 2010–2014: New Instruments and Stakeholders
In 2011, the Master Plan Office called for a public consultation process with the
participation of institutions and residents in the area. The Comprehensive
Development Plan (2011–2015) (Plan Maestro 2011) defined a new plan of spatial
organization and identified priority actions and management tools with a methodol-
ogy integrating “emerging issues” (governance, culture, economy, society and envi-
ronment) with sustainability indicators (Rodríguez Alomá 2009).
In addition, a project focused on “climatic change adaptation” permitted the
updating of the land-use plan and building code for the waterfront sector (Plan
Maestro 2014), as well as to assess mitigating alternatives for marine impact at the
seafront (including the protection of underwater heritage). A building model was
designed for the eventual occurrence of coastal flooding. This project encouraged
rehabilitation processes in this important area, although the complexity of the
planned works far exceeds the financial capability.
A balance of this project can be reviewed at Fornet (2011) and Oficina del Historiador/Junta de
10
Andalucía (2012).
244 P. Fornet
Finally, various institutions are working together to elaborate an environmental

strategy by 2020, including actions aimed at healthy housing, water and solid waste
handling, transportation, green spaces and energy (Plan Maestro 2013).
Environmental subjects have been playing a major role in the urban agenda with a
great social impact like the improvement of infrastructure, the recycling of solid
waste and the recovery of Quinta de los Molinos, the ancient botanical garden.
The evaluation of these participatory processes generated a proposed methodol-
ogy, developed by the OCH, which complements the formal mechanisms estab-
lished in the country through the Poder Popular. A procedure was formulated for
ongoing public consultations with institutions and citizens. A pilot participatory
budget exercise was carried out in one neighbourhood. Spaces enabling the interac-
tion of private and public stakeholders were promoted.11 Participatory experiences
that generated synergy with the urban project were disseminated.
The systematization and transfer of best practices was adopted as a goal for
Cuban Heritage Cities’ Network (Plan Maestro 2012), establishing mechanisms of
exchange and joint projects concerning cultural tourism, capacity building among
young people and data management.12
Among the main works executed in the Historic Centre during this period are the
restorations of the imposing capitol building (home of the legislature) and the
emblematic Theater Martí and the revitalization of the Plaza del Cristo and the
Avenida del Puerto (Old Havana seafront promenade). During the last 20 years, the
OCH recovered some 400 structures and built 1200 housing units – including new
and rehabilitated ones.13 Thanks to the coordinated work between the OCH and the
public companies in charge of managing the infrastructure networks, the under-
ground water, sewage, drainage, gas, electricity, telephone and fibre-optic networks
were completely renovated throughout the Historic Centre.
At the beginning of the 2010s, new stakeholders appeared on the national stage.
In 2011, within the context of the Cuban Social and Economic Model Updating
process, regulations concerning housing acquisition became more flexible. In spite
of restrictions – the law permits the purchase of a single house and only by residents
of Cuba – the new regulations have caused an immediate impact on the Historic
Centre. During the short span from 2010 to 2013, requests for permission tripled
11
These processes were developed after a collaboration project between the OCH and the Swiss
Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).
12
The network was created in 2008 comprising five cities (Havana, Santiago de Cuba, Camagüey,
Trinidad and Cienfuegos, all included on the World Heritage list). Later, another five cities were
added: Baracoa, Bayamo, Sancti Spiritus, Remedios and Matanzas. A balance of the work of the
first ones appeared in Oficina del Historiador 2012.
13
The OCH housing program was finalist of the 2010 World Habitat Awards (https://www.bshf.
org/world-habitat-awards). The experience was taken as a case study for the Cuba Housing Profile
promoted by UN-Habitat and identified as Best Practice in the Cuba’s report to the Habitat III sum-
mit (IPF 2016). Other recognition has been granted for the OCH and for Eusebio Leal, the histo-
rian of the city.
and hundreds of new business emerged, mostly lodging, restaurants and souvenir
shops. For some, this sounds alarms, signalling the beginning of a gentrification
process, a phenomenon previously unfamiliar to Cubans.
Further data seems to confirm the trend: for the first time in decades, the popula-
tion decreased dramatically, from 67,000 inhabitants in 2001 to 55,000 in 2012.
This is not unique to Old Havana – in fact, nearly 100 of the 168 Cuban municipali-
ties show a population decline – but here the decrease has to do not only with low
birthrates and an ageing population but also with a change in housing use and the
related displacement of families.14
Meanwhile, the number of tourists arriving in the country has gone over the three
million mark, with Old Havana as one of the main destinations. Habaguanex’s gross
income has increased to some 150 million USD per year.
On December 17, 2014, headlines around the world shared the breaking news:
the presidents of Cuba and the United States announced the reestablishment of dip-
lomatic relations, putting an end to the half-century-long conflict. That very same
day, the National Commission of Monuments declared Havana Bay and its sur-
roundings a protected zone.
13.4 The New Scene
Since 2015, Cuba has captured a great deal of world attention. Old cars and ancient
buildings shape an image of a country that has been inaccessible to many people for
more than half a century. The Old Havana project has been consolidated, and the
area is the object of a new public consultation process with an eye towards creating
a development plan outlining a long-term strategy (towards 2030, in accordance
with the citywide strategy).
This new instrument ratifies the policies and premises of integral development
and territorial organization (Rodríguez Alomá 2016) and emphasizes the strength-
ening of institutional regulation and management of property while underscoring
the emergence of small private investments. In barrios like Santo Ángel, public-
private partnership has accelerated the pace of rehabilitation. The need for increased
capacity to accommodate tourists will likely result in the insertion of contemporary
architecture – mainly alongside Paseo del Prado, the former ring beyond the wall – a
site that has been untouched for decades. With nearly 13,000 employees, the OCH
is undertaking global readjustment of its structure including technical, administra-
tive and corporative areas.
However, the locus of attention is now shifting in another direction, following the
national government’s decision to move commercial activity from the port of Havana
towards Mariel, 45 km to the west, with conditions for becoming the country’s main
future logistic hub (Alemany 2016). The Havana Bay area, the raison d’être for the
The OCH develops a joint project with the United Nations Fund for Population Activities
14
(UNFPA) to study demographic dynamics in the Historic Centre.

246 P. Fornet
birth and development of the city, remains a valuable heritage treasure. The cultural
landscape includes the Historic Centre, the fortifications and archaeological sites,
the seaside communities of Regla and Casablanca, old industrial and transport facil-
ities and the omnipresent body of water.
13.4.1 A New Vision for the Heritage Site
Coinciding with the 30th anniversary of Havana’s inclusion in the World Heritage
list, in 2012 the OCH (as the public authority responsible for the property manage-
ment) and the National Heritage Council convened workshops to analyse the site
and its boundaries. From the time of its designation, this serial property appeared
poorly defined both in terms of the Historic Centre and fortifications (Fig. 13.4).
The decision to relocate most of the port activities highlighted the need for analysis
and the formulation of a proposal specifying precise limits for each of the declared
elements, as well as for an adequate buffer zone on the land side and, for the first
time, also one on the waterfront (Fig. 13.5).
Once the proposal was completed, work began in two directions: with the World
Heritage Centre, to update the property definition in accordance with Operational
Guidelines,15and at the national level, in the study, demarcation and protection of
Fig. 13.4 Map of Old Havana and the fortifications as was submitted to UNESCO in 1981
In 2013, the World Heritage Centre adopted the retrospective statements of outstanding universal
15
values (37COM 8E) and changes to names of properties inscribed on the World Heritage list: Old
Havana and its fortification system (37COM 8B.1) and, in 2016, the clarifications of property
boundaries and areas (40COM 8D). http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/204. Consulted on Dec. 22,
2016.
Fig. 13.5 A recent proposal of boundary modification for the Heritage Site and the buffer zone
the area. The designation of the bay and its surroundings as a protected zone16 was
an explicit recognition of its historic urban landscape condition – beyond the notion
of “historic centre” or “ensemble” (UNESCO 2011). Such designation also recog-
nized the need to undertake an integral study of this area.
For several years, the OCH had been restoring relevant buildings, rehabilitating
ancient storehouses, renewing infrastructures and gradually transforming the land-
scape of the western bayfront, Old Havana’s borderline. However, new challenges
are emerging. The reestablishment of diplomatic relations with the United States
lifted some of the existing restrictions, and the silhouette of cruise ships had an
immediate impact on the urban landscape, while waves of tourists wash into a city
that lacks adequate facilities for receiving them. Like in other ports of the world, “as
the cruise ship industry has expanded and diversified, so has its impact upon the
economies, environments and cultures of the communities with whom it has come
into impact” (Cheong 2013).
How to confront the challenges of a city that possesses such extraordinary heri-
tage and, at the same time, such urgent problems that need solving within its com-
munities? How to manage a site that is not strictly urban – as has been the case of
Old Havana – but rather a cultural landscape including urban and natural areas, a
rich intangible heritage, archaeological sites, former industrial facilities and an
extraordinary array of ancient fortifications from various centuries? How to inte-
grate different stakeholders, both local and foreign, institutions and citizens? How
The protected zone comprises Old Havana, fortifications at the surroundings of the bay and a
16
great buffer zone around. Been more distant, fortifications like Castillo de El Principe and forts of
La Chorrera and Cojimar, which are also part of the World Heritage site, are not included.
248 P. Fornet
to think about a territory that seems called to play a key role in the future develop-
ment of the city?
13.4.2 New Territory, New Urban Approach
Since 2015, the OCH has been participating in a project – sponsored by the EU –
that has among its objectives the study and proposal of a heritage management plan
for Havana Bay and its surroundings. The project started with a survey of existing
heritage (mapping and digital images acquisition, inventory of structures, delimita-
tion of landscape units). The information compiled allows extending the GIS already
functioning for Old Havana to this zone. Natural areas, semiurbanized zones and
structures related to port activities – all vastly different from the calm regularity of
the urban grid – must be included in the new project.
A second step consisted of document analysis, consultations with experts and
workshops, all of which permitted the envisioning of this territory from the perspec-
tives of different stakeholders in order to identify and assess the problems of the site
(housing, pollution, mobility, public space, port-city relationship). Diverse studies
regarding the impact of climatic change enabled an assessment of flooding risks in
the area that surrounds the bay.
As was the case in the beginnings of the Historic Centre project, the current pro-
cess makes visible the diverse agendas of those focused on heritage preservation,
those engaged in tourism and other revenue-generating activities, as well as the resi-
dents of the area. The stakeholders’ map shows a greater level of complexity given
the convergence of different levels of government (national, provincial and munici-
pal), multiple ministries (transport and tourism) and the presence of large industrial
facilities, like Cuba’s most important oil refinery. Although a large area (with some
2000 hectares, counting the property and buffer zones), it constitutes barely 5% of
the total area of the city. And despite its high historic, cultural and even economic
value, the area is far from articulating a city development or conservation strategy.17
Different stakeholders face the challenge of moving the analysis and implementa-
tion from the scale of the Historic Centre – where rehabilitation has been a source
of pride and identity for a long time – towards the less studied and understood land-
scape of the bay, where policies, actions, priorities and the people responsible for its
transformation are still to be determined. The plan, published as an advance (Plan
Maestro 2017), opens a new dialogue between the different stakeholders as well and
a more active community involvement, a key step in the renovation process of the
most valuable urban landscape of Havana.
In the early 1990s, a study identified 47 “urban zones with historic and cultural values” in the city
17
of Havana (Chateloin 2008), adding up to 2700 ha and one fifth of the population of the city.
13.5 Conclusion
The Old Havana project has maintained its continuity for 40 years. Heritage preser-
vation proved to be an important tool for urban transformation in a moment of crisis
and established a mode of operation that has put to test the ability of the OCH to
adapt to changes and relaunch the project.
The project implemented in Havana demonstrates that beyond specific political
features, “there are certain premises that should guide any urban initiative of this
sort: the recognition, by institutions and citizens, of the value of the city; the exis-
tence of a legal framework reflecting the desire to preserve and utilize the heritage
for the bennefit of the city and its inhabitants; the creation of a forum where all
actors can engage in dialogue at both the local and national level. Some others
premises are the establishment of an organizational structure that ensures a compre-
hensive planning and management under the guidance of a lead agency, development
of mechanisms that guarantee the financial viability of the project and, last but not
least, civic education and people’s participation as key components of social sus-
tainability” (Fornet 2011).
Today’s scenario is decidedly more complex from the point of view of manage-
ment (it’s necessary to accelerate the intervention in the Historic Centre and gener-
ate new urban tools and forms of participation), social (to incorporate new
stakeholders and effect social cohesiveness) and territorial (the Bay as a historic
urban landscape with its potential and vulnerability). The site is, at the same time, a
heritage zone to be preserved and an attractive space for the future development of
the city.
The adoption of the historic urban landscape approach might provide a leap from
a model that has responded to needs up to this point to one that keeps in mind the
six critical steps, from comprehensive mapping to a management framework (Van
Oers 2015), and that appropriates innovative tools that need to be developed, like
civic engagement, knowledge and planning, regulatory systems as well as financial
tool (UNESCO 2011). The change of scale will inevitably generate a new group of
stakeholders and forge a new consensus that will foster efforts to identify the prob-
lems and adopt a strategy in favour of the city and its inhabitants.
References
Alemany, J. Avances en la revitalización del puerto de La Habana, PORTUS, n. 32,

December 2016. RETE Publisher. http://portusonline.org/es/avances-en-la-revitalizacion-
del-puerto-de-la-habana
Capablanca, E., Dunn, C., & Melero, N. (1977). Anteproyecto de Plan Director de La Habana
Vieja. La Habana: ISPJAE.
Chateloin, F. (2008). El patrimonio cultural urbano y el criterio de centro histórico. Caso de estu-
dio: Ciudad de La Habana. La Habana: ISPJAE.
Cheong, C. (2013). Impacts and Trends: A Literary Review. In Harboring Tourism. Cruise Ships
in Historic Communities. Report of an International Symposium held in Charleston, South
Carolina, USA, February 6–8, 2013 (pp. 8–39), World Monuments Fund.
250 P. Fornet
Fornet, P. (2011). Twenty-five years of transformations in the historic center of Havana. A case
study of the Plaza Vieja. Facilities, 29(7/8), 303–312.
Hill, M. (2007). Re-imagining Old Havana: World Heritage and the production of scale in late
socialist Cuba. In S. Sassen (Ed.), Deciphering the global. Its scales, spaces and subjects
(pp. 59–76). New York: Routledge.
Instituto de Planificación Física [IPF]. (2016). Cuba: Informe Nacional hacia Hábitat III.
Oficina del Historiador/UNESCO. (2006). A singular experience. Appraisals of integral manage-
ment model of Old Havana. World Heritage Site, Editorial Boloña.
Oficina del Historiador/Junta de Andalucía. (2012). La Plaza Vieja de La Habana. Proceso de
recuperación. Sevilla.
Plan Maestro. (2002). Desafío de una Utopía: Estrategia integral para la gestión de salvaguarda
de La Habana Vieja. La Habana: Ediciones Boloña.
Plan Maestro. (2011). Plan Especial de Desarrollo Integral. La Habana: Ediciones Boloña.
Plan Maestro. (2012). Luces y Simientes. Territorio y gestión en cinco centros históricos cubanos.
La Habana: Ediciones Boloña.
Plan Maestro. (2013). Estrategia Ambiental 2013–2020. La Habana: Ediciones Boloña.
Plan Maestro. (2014). Malecón Tradicional. Plan Especial de Rehabilitación Integral y
Regulaciones urbanísticas. La Habana: Ediciones Boloña.
Plan Maestro. (2017). Plan de Manejo. Paisaje Cultural Bahía de La Habana (Avance). La
Habana: Ediciones Boloña.
Rodríguez Alomá, P. (2009). Gestión del Desarrollo Integral de los Centros Históricos. La
Metodología ‘Tesis’. La Habana: ISPJAE.
Rodríguez Alomá, P. (2016). “Nada humano me es ajeno”. El caso de La Habana Vieja. Patrimonio
Mundial No. 81, Centro del Patrimonio Mundial-UNESCO, September 2016, pp. 42–47.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape, including a glossary of defi-
nitions. http://portal.unesco.org/en. Consulted Jan 23th, 2017.
Van Oers, R. (2015). The way forward: An agenda for reconnecting the city. In F. Bandarin &
R. Van Oers (Eds.), Reconnecting the city. The historic urban landscape approach and the
future of urban heritage (pp. 317–332). Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
Wilson. (2014). The population of every urban centre in the world with more than 100,000 inhabit-
ants in the year 1900. http://www.thebillywilson.com/2014/04/every-city-in-world-with-more-
than.html. Consulted Feb 13th, 2018.
Chapter 14
The Implementation of the Historic Urban
Landscape of the Island of Mozambique
Solange L. Macamo, Jens Hougaard, and Albino Jopela
Abstract In 2011, a 5-day multi-stakeholder workshop was organized by the

UNESCO World Heritage Centre on the application of the Historic Urban Landscape
(HUL) approach on the Island of Mozambique. This was followed by a detailed
study of the changes in the architectural fabric that had taken place since 1983
(Island of Mozambique Historic Urban Landscape in Perspective: Part 1 – Stone
Town), published in 2012. Besides the introduction of a holistic integrated urban
approach, one of the key contributions of the HUL approach for conservation of the
Island was the emphasis on the need for effective civic engagement tools that allow
the involvement of a diverse cross section of stakeholders.
Whereas the government conservation and development efforts have been tradi-
tionally supported by multiple local stakeholders, public-private partnership has not
yet been fully assessed and recognized as part of an integrated framework for con-
servation and management of the Island of Mozambique. Taking stock of local
development programs and conservation initiatives, this paper emphasizes the
importance and the challenges of building public-private partnerships for sustain-
able conservation of the Island. This reflection will take into account the cultural,
political, economic, and administrative elements and dynamics that influence not
only the implementation of the Historic Urban Landscape approach but also the way
heritage is used, preserved, and managed on the Island of Mozambique.
S. L. Macamo (*)
Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, Eduardo Mondlane University,
Maputo, Mozambique
Ministry of Culture and Tourism, Maputo, Mozambique
J. Hougaard
GACIM, Island of Mozambique, Mozambique
Faculty of Architecture and Physical Planning, Lúrio University, Nampula, Mozambique
A. Jopela
Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, Eduardo Mondlane University,
Maputo, Mozambique

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_14
252 S. L. Macamo et al.
Keywords Historic Urban Landscapes · Integrated urban development · Public-

private partnerships · Management frameworks · Uses of heritage · Island of
Mozambique
14.1 Introduction
For decades the Island of Mozambique has had considerable attention from the
government and international partners, in particular the UNESCO World Heritage
Centre, with focus on the reversal of the increasing degradation of the Island’s built
heritage and improvement of the living conditions of its inhabitants (Jopela and
Macamo 2011; Macamo 2014).
The Island is the only heritage site in Mozambique with a management institu-
tion, special status, and conservation plan. The Island of Mozambique Conservation
Office (GACIM) has been operational since 2006, and the multi-stakeholder (public-
private)-driven Management and Conservation Plan was initiated in 2010. This plan
expired in 2014 and is in the process of revision. In this chapter it is argued that the
HUL approach can help to identify conservation problems and that valuable lessons
can be learned from its application.
Following a UNESCO decision (paragraph 6, Decision 40 COM 7B.15), a
Regulation for the Classification and Management of the Island of Mozambique
Built Heritage and Landscape (Decreto n.°54/2016, de 28 de Novembro) was
approved by the government. This tool aims to assist the management institution in
a flexible way in the decisions to be taken for interventions in historical buildings
and their compatible uses. This considers the local, provincial, and national levels
of decisions and the role of UNESCO, in respect to the inscription of the Island of
Mozambique in the World Heritage List. The national regulation for the manage-
ment of immovable cultural heritage (Decreto n.°55/2016, de 28 de Novembro) that
was approved at the same time establishes the mechanism for coordination among
different stakeholders and the way public and private sectors can be involved in
heritage management. The Historic Urban Landscape approach is a tool that rein-
forces the existing legislation, and it is used in this chapter to discuss the challenges
for the public and private participation in the World Heritage of the Island of
Mozambique. For example, the two collaborating universities in the Island of
Mozambique help to reinforce capacity building, while the private sector is instru-
mental for the development of sustainable tourism.
14 The Implementation of the Historic Urban Landscape of the Island of Mozambique 253
14.2 Geographical, Historical, and Urban Setting
14.2.1 Geographical Setting
The Island of Mozambique is a raised coral reef situated 4 km from the African
coast of the Indian Ocean at the entrance to the Mossuril Bay in Nampula Province,
northern Mozambique. It forms an archipelago with the two smaller uninhabited
islands of Goa and Sena (Fig. 14.1). The island, from which the name of the country
is derived, is 3 km long and 200 to 500 meter wide, with a fully urbanized area of
approximately 1 km2. It is now connected to the mainland by a bridge that was built
in the 1960s (Jopela and Rakotomamonjy 2010:28).
Fig. 14.1 Map showing the location of the Island of Mozambique (Source: Map from 1933 at the
Capitania – Photo Jens Hougaard)
14.2.2 Archaeological and Historical Background
By the tenth century AD, the Swahili was responsible for urban origins along the
East African region. In addition, it is suggested that the distribution of the
Swahili societies along this region was part of one of the dispersal movements of the
early farming communities who are the Bantu-speaking people (for discussion, see
Duarte 1993: 38). The island was dominated by Arabian trading between the eighth
and the sixteenth centuries followed by the Portuguese settlement in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries and the Indian economic dominance in the following two
centuries (Secretaria de Estado da Cultura, Arkitektskolen Aarhus 1985).
Although no early urban structures are found at the Island of Mozambique prior
to the Portuguese arrival in the late fifteenth century, a Swahili community was
already established there (Duarte 1993: 59). Swahili architectural influences can
still be perceived on the Island, especially in the Macuti town, the former native
quarters (Nguirazi 2008). However, it is in the area of intangible heritage that
Swahili influences have mostly developed.
The early slave trade within the Indian Ocean created a mixture of cultures, and
the later Atlantic slave trade brought the economic base for the construction of the
impressive eighteenth-century commercial houses (feitorias) on the Island
(Secretaria de Estado da Cultura, Arkitektskolen Aarhus 1985). In a book by Moira
Forjaz and Amélia Muge, the historian Luís Filipe Pereira, who grew up on the
Island, reflects on his childhood’s wonder at these impressive buildings and on how
he only later understood the background of their construction (Box 14.1; Forjaz and
Muge 1983).
Box 14.1 Extract of Luís Filipe Pereira Memories About the Buildings of
Island of Mozambique
…”Como tinha sido possível construir monumentos com aquela estrutura e
todo aquele casario de pedra e cal sem cimento? Donde vinha a pedra? Quem
Construíu?
Mais tarde foi fácil descobrir os buracos donde saía a pedra, imaginar os
recursos engenhosos dos homens, entender o esforço do trabalho escravo”
(Forjaz and Muge 1983).
”How had it been possible to build monuments of such structure and num-
ber without cement, just using stone and lime? Where did the stone come
from? Who was the builder?
Later it was easy to discover the holes from where the stones had been
extracted, to imagine the ingenuity of man, to understand the strength of slave
labor” (Translation by the authors).
Fig. 14.2 Map showing the division of the Island into the Stone Town and the Macuti Town
(Source: Arch. Alexandre Mimoso, Portuguese Cooperation)
The dramatic history and interchange of human values are expressed in the
Historic Urban Landscape of the Island, divided into two different types of d wellings
and urban systems: the colonial city and the native quarters, now known as the
Stone Town and the Macuti Town (Fig. 14.2).
The Stone Town or Bairro do Museu (Fig. 14.3), with a strong Portuguese and
Goes influence, comprises numerous administrative, commercial, religious, and
military buildings testifying the presence of the Portuguese colonial government
Fig. 14.3 Sections of the Stone Town (Photo Jens Hougaard)
Fig. 14.4 Section of the Macuti Town (Photo Jens Hougaard)
between 1507 and 1898 (Secretaria de Estado da Cultura, Arkitektskolen Aarhus

1985). It occupies approximately two thirds of the Island and is organized in 33 city
blocks with a total of 379 original buildings (excluding the new constructions). It
holds a relatively small part of the island population (Jopela and Rakotomamonjy
2010; Forjaz 2010).
The Macuti Town (Fig. 14.4), named after the original coconut palm leaf roofing
(macuti),1 is of Swahili origin. It hosts different variations of the vernacular type of
architecture under the macuti category, ranging from precarious stick huts, without
plaster and windows, to solid houses built of mangrove poles sewn together to form
1
Macuti refers to the palm fronds tied to a stick, forming a “roofing tile.” This tile is then tied to a
skeleton of mangrove wood and bamboo creating a cover which, if good quality and having
matured properly, may stay watertight for up to 6 to 8 years (Sollien 2013:49).
an internal wall, around which stones and lime mortar are placed (Nguirazi 2008;
Sollien 2013: 50). This area of the Island is organized into seven neighborhoods
(Bairros),2 with a total of 1330 original buildings (excluding buildings erected after
1997). The Macuti Town is now in a process of change. Cement blocks and metal or
fibrocement industrial roof sheets are now the building material of choice (Forjaz
2010: 25, 42; GACIM 2010:33).
The two urban systems have an interdependent relationship of historic character.
The Stone Town was mainly built of coral stone extracted from the southern part of
the Island (Ponta da Ilha) leaving big basins. By the end of nineteenth century, a
bylaw ruled that macuti houses could only be built at the southern part of the Island,
defined by a line drawn across the Island immediately south of the large new hospi-
tal (Secretaria de Estado da Cultura, Arkitektskolen Aarhus 1985: 19). While the
Stone Town faced an exodus of inhabitants after independence, the Macuti Town is
still holding a population that maintains the memory and consciousness of the his-
toric significance of the urban environment that they inhabit. This part of the city,
however, suffers from an acute water shortage, a lack of sanitation, and a serious
flooding danger at certain times of year (Jopela and Rakotomamonjy 2010:34;
Macamo 2012:130).
During an interview, Flora Magalhães, native of the Island, pinpointed one of the
major challenges of the Island: the overpopulation (see Box 14.2). Her focus is on
sanitation and urban infrastructure.
Box 14.2 Extract from the Interview to Flora Magalhães, Native of the
Island
Regressando aos problemas do Bairro de Macuti, conclui Dona Flora: “E com
a saída das pessoas da cidade podemos reordenar. Podemos fazer um novo
alinhamento, podemos fazer canais de drenagem. Agora não há espaço porque
tudo está ocupado. Assim vamos poder fazer latrina em cada casa. Levar água.
Vai ficar bonito lá. Agora mais de 80 por cento da população lá chegou depois
da independência. Antes viviam lá cerca de 7.000 pessoas. Cerca de metade
das que agora lá vivem devem sair.” (Leite 2009: 466)
… Coming back to the problems of the Macuti town-ship, Dona Flora
concluded: “And with people leaving the town we can reorganize. We can
make a new line-up (of buildings). We can make drainage canals. Now there
is no space because all is ocupied. We can make latrines in each house. Get
water. It will be beautiful there. More than 80 per cent of the population there
came after independence. Before ca. 7.000 people lived there. Half of those
who live there now must leave.” (Translation by the authors)
2
The “bairros” are Litine, Esteu, Marrangonha, Makaribe (spelling in ref. is Macaripe), Areal,
Quirahi, and Santo Antonio or Unidade. The order of the bairros seems strange. Mentioned from
north to south on either side of the Island, it should logically be Esteu, Litine, and Macaripe facing
the bay and Marrangonha, Areal, Quirahi, and St. Antonio facing the open sea.
14.2.3 Urban Expansion
The Island of Mozambique gained status as a city (Cidade) in 1818. The capital of
the territory was transferred to Lourenço Marques (now Maputo) in 1898. The
change did not immediately affect the island city much, as a simultaneous opening
of the interior of the country was taking place.
In 1913 the building of a railroad from the Lumbo peninsula in front of the island
started, in order to connect to the newly occupied territories. A small town around
the railroad terminus became the administrative center of the new continental urban
extension with a ferry connection to the island. With the construction of a bridge to
the Island in the 1960s, however, the railroad terminus lost its importance and the
small town falls into decay.
Over the last 20 years, the municipality has expanded onto the adjacent coast
around the landing of the bridge. This new suburb now holds the major part of the
urban population. The present urban panorama of the Island of Mozambique munic-
ipality is thus composed of three major stage sets:
• The Stone Town (the former colonial city in the northern part of the island)
• The Macuti Town (the former native quarters in the southern part of the island)
• The continental suburbs around the landing of the bridge on the continental side
(inhabited by a mixture of people of rural origin and lodgers from the island
seeking a place of their own)
14.3 Island of Mozambique: World Heritage
14.3.1 The UNESCO Listing
After independence in 1975, a new approach to the historic patrimony of the Island
of Mozambique within a national context had to be developed. Conservation and
development became a national government issue, rather than a negotiation between
local stakeholders. The National Service for Museums and Antiquities was created
in 1977 under the Ministry of Education and Culture, which assured the mainte-
nance of the classified monuments on the Island of Mozambique by a maintenance
brigade. In 1980, the brigade was complemented by a conservation office that initi-
ated historic, urban, and architectural studies.
Acknowledging that the task of conservation on the Island could not be carried
out by the government alone, the Secretary of State for Culture at that time, Luís
Bernardo Honwana, approached UNESCO and the Gulbenkian Foundation in
Portugal for support, which resulted in two consultant visits to the Island in 1981.
The first UNESCO visit report by Krzysztof Pawlowski proposed measures and
methods to help protect the Island and suggested that listing as a UNESCO World
Heritage Site could be one way to achieve these (Pawlowski 1981). The government
enthusiastically embraced the idea of World Heritage nomination as a strategy for

getting external support from international donors for the conservation of the Island
and ultimately to use the Island as a resource for tourism. The initiative was sup-
ported by the publication, in 1985, of an urban and architectural study (Ilha de
Mocambique Relatório – Report,1982–1985) also known as the “Blue Book,” which
was the result of a collaboration between the former Conservation and Restauration
Office and the School of Architecture of Aarhus, Denmark, whose main coordinator
was Architect Jens Hougaard. In fact it was the main reference document for the
nomination dossier, apart from the heritage law that was later published in
Mozambique (Lei 10/88, de 22 de Dezembro).
In 1990, the Government of Mozambique submitted a “tentative list” of natural
and cultural patrimony to the World Heritage Centre (UNESCO-WHC) as one of
the requirements for the nomination to take place. The Island was inscribed on the
UNESCO World Heritage List in 1991, under criteria (iv) and (vi):
Criterion (iv)
The town and the fortifications on the Island of Mozambique are an outstanding example of
an architecture in which local traditions, Portuguese influences and, to a somewhat lesser
extent, Indian and Arab influences are all interwoven.
Criterion (vi)
The Island of Mozambique bears important witness to the establishment and development
of the Portuguese maritime routes between Western Europe and the Indian sub-continent
and thence all of Asia. (ICOMOS 1991; Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal
Value for Island of Mozambique 2011)
Although the government recognized the responsibilities of the country, resulting

from the nomination of the Island in the World Heritage List, over the years the
conservation strategy was depending on foreign donor support.
14.3.2 Measures Following the Listing
In 1997, the Director General of UNESCO, Federico Mayor, launched an interna-

tional campaign to “safeguard the Island of Mozambique.” Under this initiative, the
World Heritage Centre spearheaded a “Programme for Sustainable Human
Development and Integral Conservation” funded by the United Nations Development
Programme, UNESCO, the European Union, and the Finnish Government. This
program resulted in the design of 50 micro-projects in areas such as water and sani-
tation, tourism development, and heritage restoration that were presented to poten-
tial donors during the International Donor’s Conference in 1999. The rehabilitation
of the architectural, urban, and cultural heritage component of the program was
estimated in the region of USD 11,737,000 (Mutal 1998). As well as presenting a
forward-looking approach to heritage conservation, it provided important
recommendations (e.g., the need for a special status for the Island in the form of a
law, which was only adopted in 2006). For multiple reasons this program was not
implemented in its integrated format.
In this chapter it is argued that while the Ministry of Culture was given the
responsibility to be the direct interlocutor for the implementation of the program,
the tools for action were in the hands of other ministries (i.e., the Ministries for State
Administration, Finance, Public Works, and Tourism). It was obviously difficult for
the Ministry of Culture to impose cultural concerns as crosscutting issues in any
development strategy (Hougaard 2013). Secondly, and more importantly, the pro-
gram was based on the assumption of the availability of donor, government and
private funding. It was assumed that it would be possible to bring different foreign
and national private donors together to implement different projects under the pro-
gram. This did not happen despite the fact that in the years that followed, different
donors continued to independently or bilaterally invest in specific projects on the
Island. The national private sector also started to develop small activities in the tour-
ism sector with direct impact on local economy (e.g., job opportunities to local
people and rehabilitation of ruins).
14.3.3 The 2007 Action Plan
During the following years of national postwar reconstruction, little happened on

the site until 2006, when the government and UNESCO finally agreed on an action
plan for management of the Island of Mozambique World Heritage. In the same
year, it was decided, under the Ministry of Culture, to establish a special status that
was approved by the government in 2006 (Decreto nr 27/2006, de 13 de Agosto). At
the same time, a conservation office was established (GACIM) (Decreto nr. 28/2006,
de 13 de Agosto) based on the former postindependence Gabinete de Conservação
e Restauro dos Monumentos da Ilha de Moçambique. The action plan was presented
at an international seminar on the Island in 2007 (Documento número 0.7/
SCI/2007)3.
Following the action plan, the first phase of the rehabilitation project of the Fort
San Sebastian started in 2007 (Eloundou and Weydt 2009), funded by Union of
Portuguese Speaking Capital Cities and the governments of Japan, Flanders, the
Netherlands, Portugal, and UNESCO. The project focused on urgent structural con-
solidation and restoration works in order to prevent further deterioration and to
provide basic services and facilities (electricity, public water facilities, and public
toilets). It was jointly coordinated by the Ministry of Culture and UNESCO. A
Management and Conservation Plan for the Island of Mozambique was also made
possible, in 2010 (Jopela and Rakotomamonjy 2010), as a result of the action plan.
Plano de Acção para a Gestão do Património Mundial da Ilha de Moçambique, 2007–2011.

3
14.4 Historic Urban Landscape Approach
14.4.1 Application of HUL to the Island of Mozambique
As part of the framework of the World Heritage Cities Program, UNESCO World
Heritage Centre organized a 5-day workshop in July 2011 for the Application of the
Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) on the Island of Mozambique. The workshop
debated issues of effective conservation and tested the validity and robustness of the
HUL approach on the Island of Mozambique (Van Oers and Pereira Roders 2012).
The workshop provided a unique platform to introduce and discuss the HUL
approach and to identify and understand the needs and wishes of the Island of
Mozambique stakeholders. As a result, there has been an enhanced understanding of
the challenges of urban conservation and management of the World Heritage city of
the Island of Mozambique.
Following the workshop, field research was conducted from November 2011 to
January 2012 in partnership between the Lúrio University (Mozambique), the
Eindhoven University of Technology (the Netherlands), and the University of
Minnesota (USA). The result of the work was presented to stakeholders on the
Island and published in a report in 2012: Island of Mozambique Historic Urban
Landscape in Perspective: Part 1 – Stone Town (Pereira Roders et al. 2012; also
known as the Orange Book). The report presents the results of the field research on
the “Ownership of buildings on the Island of Mozambique” as well as a survey of
changes in the building mass during the 30-year period since the previous fieldwork
undertaken in 1982–1985 (Secretaria de Estado da Cultura, Arkitektskolen Aarhus
1985).
The annual progress reporting exercise, by state party, can also be used as a tool
for the HUL implementation (see, e.g., Eloundou 2013). To this end he provides a
reporting trend to address general threats such as natural disasters and lack or insuf-
ficient infrastructure particularly in the Macuti Town (ibid: 79). In the following
sections, some steps forward are discussed, including the management plan, regula-
tory measures, and the development of partnership.
14.4.2 A New Heritage Management Plan
In December 2016, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism through its National
Directorate for Cultural Heritage of Mozambique in collaboration with UNESCO
organized a National Seminar on the Conservation of Heritage on the Island of
Mozambique, with the participation of local and international stakeholders involved
in the conservation of the World Heritage of the Island. The meeting aimed at evalu-
ating the degree of implementation of the outdated Conservation and Management
Plan (2010–2014) as well as the lessons learnt from the 5 years’ application of the
HUL approach on the Island of Mozambique.
The seminar also focused on the need to articulate and complement the HUL
approach with other directives presented in the UNESCO Global Report on Culture
for Sustainable Urban Development, “the New Urban Agenda,” and the “Sustainable
Development Agenda 2030.” One of the outcomes of the seminar was the elabora-
tion of an action plan for the revision of the Conservation and Management Plan for
the Island of Mozambique (2018–2023) to be finalized in December 2017.
During the seminar, the participants also considered the importance of the 2001
UNESCO Convention for the protection of underwater archaeology. The govern-
ment followed this up during the third African Regional Meeting in Maputo on the
Protection of Underwater Archaeology that came immediately after.
14.4.3 Learning from the Application of the HUL
The HUL approach proved to be of critical importance for the Island of Mozambique,
not only by broadening the concept of heritage conservation and including various
aspects of conservation into an integrated framework (cf. Bandarin and Van Oers
2012) but also by facilitating, through the six-step action plan, a deeper assessment
of the various needs regarding the conservation, management, and development of
the Island of Mozambique. The implementation of HUL recommendation on the
Island, however, still requires the development of some practical guidelines and
tools on how to deal with change (for discussion, see Pereira Roders 2013), how to
accommodate contemporary interventions, and how to regulate the “uncontrolled
development” in the Macuti Town. These guidelines must promote the maintenance
of the heritage values of the Island without obstructing the improvement of the
population’s living conditions (Macamo 2012; cf. van Oers 2013: 12). Another
major challenge for the implementation of the HUL recommendation, as noted by
many stakeholders, is that GACIM staffing remains insufficient. It has not been pos-
sible to find specialized national staff. GACIM has had to rely on time-limited con-
tracted staff, as was the case of one specialized architect. Only in 2016 permanent
GACIM staff has been undergoing specialized training in conservation.
14.4.3.1 Lesson 1
Many of the approaches for conservation and management of the Island of

Mozambique adopted over the years already integrated several principles and ideas
that came to be formulated as key elements/stages of the HUL approach. This can
be seen in a number of ways, including:
• Participatory planning and stakeholders’ consultations on what values to protect
and the attributes that carry these values (step 2 of HUL approach)
• Development of a conservation strategy for urban centers (step 4 of HUL
approach)
• Prioritization of development and conservation activities (step 5 of HUL
approach)
Fig. 14.5 Rehabilitation of “Casa Girassol”, originally a commercial house and later administra-
tive building, that had fallen into ruin. A network project between the Municipality of Ilha de
Moçambique and the Heritage Management Office of the City of Bergen, financed by the
Norwegian Agency of Development Cooperation (NORAD) (Photo Jens Hougaard)
The revision of the buffer zone (Fig. 14.5) and inclusion of underwater archaeologi-
cal heritage is a good illustration of the point made above. The World Heritage
nomination file defined the Island as the “core area” of the site and the surrounding
coastal areas and minor islands as “buffer zone,” leaving out the inner part of
Mossuril Bay including the Lumbo peninsula. Yet, over the years it was felt that
there was a need to expand the buffer zone to include the Lumbo peninsula with the
former railroad terminus and small town, where there is also significant heritage to
be protected (Fig. 14.6).
The revision of the buffer zone finally took place during the HUL field research
in 2012. This revision was supervised by Dr. Ana Pereira Roders under the request
of the National Directorate for Cultural Heritage. It now includes the urban expan-
sion area on the Lumbo peninsula and the whole of the Mossuril Bay, as underwater
archaeological heritage should be entitled to the same protection.
The discussion about the inclusion of underwater archaeological heritage in the
buffer zone was held, in Island of Mozambique, during a consultation meeting about
the UNESCO Convention (2001) of Underwater Cultural Heritage, organized by
UNESCO-Maputo, in collaboration with the Ministry of Culture, in 2016 for pro-
tection. The local and provincial stakeholders participated in this consultation
Fig. 14.6 Buffer zone. (Source: Nomination Document 1991)
eeting and also the representatives from the Department of Archaeology and
m
Anthropology of Eduardo Mondlane University.
In Mozambique, underwater archaeological heritage is protected under a general
regulation (Decreto nr. 27/94, de 20 de Julho), for the Protection of Archaeological
Heritage. The adoption of the UNESCO Convention for the Protection of Underwater
Cultural Heritage (UNESCO Convention 2001) became necessary, for the country,
to reinforce the national regulation. As a result of the university efforts in collabora-
tion with the Ministry of Culture and Tourism and UNESCO support, the Convention
was accepted by the Council of Ministers in 2017 (Fig. 14.7).
14.4.3.2 Lesson 2
Another lesson learnt is that the HUL approach proved to be of critical importance
to the Island of Mozambique by broadening the concept of heritage conservation,
including various aspects of conservation in an integrated framework (cf. Bandarin
and Van Oers 2012). The six-step action plan contributed to a more holistic approach
and a much-needed deeper assessment of the various needs regarding the conserva-
tion, management, and development of the Island of Mozambique (Jopela and
Fig. 14.7 Revised buffer zone 2012. (Source: Island of Mozambique Historic Urban Landscape in
Perspective)
Rakotomamonjy 2010; Macamo 2012). In this, the following steps were of particu-
lar relevance:
• Mapping of cultural, natural, and human resources in urban centers (step 1 of
HUL approach)
• Assessment of the vulnerability of these values and attributes in relation to the
most urgent threats (step 3 of HUL approach)
• Establishment of partnership and frameworks for local management (step 6 of
HUL approach)
14.4.3.3 Lesson 3
Although community engagement was already an established practice with regard

to conservation of the Island’s heritage, the application of the HUL approach clearly
highlighted the importance and benefits of establishing partnerships with local and
national stakeholders. The application of the HUL approach created the platform for
cooperation on the Island between some of the participating universities and the
local institutions for follow-up activities. Thus, the HUL approach has contributed
to changing the nature of previous dominant partnerships for conservation
(including technical assistance) mostly involving the government, UNESCO World

Heritage Centre, the advisory body ICOMOS, and donors. The HUL approach was
also important to highlight the need to bring other stakeholders under the umbrella
of the public-private partnerships for conservation of the Island.
The HUL instrument is also being used to update the Management and
Conservation Plan of Island of Mozambique, aiming to incorporate the observation
that the quality of the urban environments is based on culture (Djaffar, pers. comm.
2016). The following section will discuss the importance of building partnership in
the Island of Mozambique as a way to support conservation activities, in a sustain-
able way.
14.5 Partnerships on Conservation
14.5.1 Public-Private Partnership
Public-private partnerships are more and more perceived as arrangements that can
further drive heritage conservation and sustainable development (Glasbergen 2007:
3). There is a myriad of models of public-private partnerships for conservation of
heritage across the world implying different levels of responsibilities between the
public, private, and the community sectors. In Mozambique one of the objectives of
the country’s monuments policy (Resolução nr. 12/2010, de 2 de Junho) is to
“encourage the participation of the community and the private sector in the manage-
ment of monuments and sites, with a view to ensuring their sustainable conserva-
tion” (ibid: 134). This is also reinforced by the newly approved regulation for the
management of cultural properties (Decreto no 55/2016, de 28 de Novembro), by
establishing the mechanisms of coordination between the public and the private
sectors.
Despite the fact that the conservation and development efforts in the country
have been traditionally supported by multiple local stakeholders, particularly from
the private sector, public-private partnership has not yet been fully assessed and
recognized as part of an integrated framework for conservation and management of
the Island of Mozambique. One of the aims of this chapter is to contribute ideas to
fill a gap in discussing public and private partnership.
14.5.2 C
oordination Between Local Stakeholders
and UNESCO
The experience of the Island has shown a complex reality whereby UNESCO has
been directly involved in the management of a World Heritage property. Between
2006 and 2011, a UNESCO office functioned on the Island in order to coordinate
the rehabilitation process of the San Sebastian Fortress. During this time, the resi-
dent UNESCO officer was a key player in the discussions regarding the conserva-
tion of the Island and its close collaboration with GACIM (a very fragile institution
at the time). This somehow created the wrong perception among some stakeholders
that cultural heritage on the Island, especially the Stone Town, indeed, belonged to
UNESCO and not the local Ilhéus.4
It can be seen now that the hierarchical system for decisions to be taken, from
local, provincial, and central levels, while it is participatory by principle, can also be
challenging from the point of view that UNESCO-WHC must be consulted prior to
any decision taken in relation to the interventions in the property. The “Regulation
for Classification and Management of the Built and Natural Heritage of the Island
of Mozambique” (Decreto n.° 54/2016, de 28 de Novembro), however, attempts to
solve this problem by indicating clearly that for any intervention in the property,
UNESCO-WHC must be consulted. The challenge is how to efficiently implement
this procedure. It was also noted that the hierarchical system is problematic since
decisions take a long time, as illustrated in the case of the sports complex (complexo
desportivo) that will be discussed below.
There is a need for the different stakeholders to be aware of the UNESCO opera-
tional guidelines, and these guidelines need to be integrated into local mechanisms
of decision-making. The Management and Conservation Plan should incorporate
these guidelines so that they are publicized both among the public and private
sectors.
14.5.3 P
artnerships Between National and Foreign Institutions
for Technical Assistance
Collaboration between the Ministry of Culture and the Eduardo Mondlane University
in Maputo has taken place over the years in order to establish the overall legal
framework and tools for the conservation of the Island (Carrilho and Lage 2018;
Lage 2018; Macamo 2018) . The National Council of Cultural Heritage (Conselho
Nacional do Património Cultural) as an advisory body to the Ministry of Culture
has benefitted from this collaboration (Decreto n° 27/1994, de 20 de Julho). There
has been a line of partnership projects between GACIM and foreign educational
institutions. Scholars and students from abroad have spent time as researchers or
interns stationed in the office. This has resulted in exchanges of experience and
know-how, but this type of collaboration has limited long-lasting effect. The Island
and its institutions have often played the role as subject for investigation but received
little feedback and, thus, profited little from the results of the investigation. However,
there is another perception that this is changing and that there are positive improve-
ments in the process of building partnership relations on the Island of Mozambique,
Island inhabitants.
4
as indicated by some examples that follow. The above-indicated field research con-
ducted in partnership between the Lúrio University (Mozambique), Eindhoven
University of Technology (the Netherlands), and the University of Minnesota (USA)
actually helped to strengthen local management tools.
A new study and documentation center (Centro de Estudos e Documentação da
Ilha de Moçambique (CEDIM), under the Faculty of Architecture and Physical
Planning (FAPF) of Lúrio University in Nampula, has been created on the Island and
might result in a more lasting and mutual beneficial partnership. In 2013, FAPF
(Faculty of Architecture and Physical Planning) and the Municipal Councils Urban
Department carried out an urban diagnosis of the insular part of Island of Mozambique
municipality. The diagnosis still needs to be followed up by a detailed urban plan.
In 2016, the linking areas between the historical island and the continental sub-
urbs, comprising the areas around the landings of the bridge on either side, were
subject for the final thesis in architecture and urban planning at the faculty. It is the
plan to present the students’ projects on a workshop on the Island. A new faculty of
social sciences, including two courses covering “Patrimony and Tourism
Management” and “International Relations and Local Development,” was estab-
lished on the Island in 2017.
Current initiatives by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, in partnership with
Eduardo Mondlane University, toward the protection of underwater archaeology,
are encouraging the implementation of a Slave Wreck Project on the Island. This
project coordinated by US George Washington University aims to train students and
local people in diving skills and museum work. It is now recognized that the exist-
ing national capacity can help to protect underwater archaeology in the Island of
Mozambique, by means of research and conservation.
In addition the grade system to regulate interventions in buildings was an initia-
tive undertaken with the assistance of the Faculty of Architecture and Physical
Planning of Eduardo Mondlane University. This tool has been incorporated into the
newly approved regulations (Decreto 54/2016, de 28 de Novembro de 2016; Decreto
55/2016, de 28 de Novembro).
Finally, contacts between GACIM and Lúrio University on one side and research-
ers from the Pontificate Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (Pontificia
Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio) have resulted in postgraduate
level scholarships for Mozambican colleagues in the fields of heritage management
in Brazil. The courses are conducted by the Interdisciplinary Nucleus of Reflection
and Afro-descendent Memory (Núcleo Interdisciplinar de Reflexão e Memória
Afrodescendente) at PUC-Rio and the National Institute of Historic and Artistic
Patrimony (Instituto do Patrimônio Histórico e Artístico Nacional).
The HUL was instrumental in reinforcing the understanding of the growing need
to mobilize national and international actors such as universities to conserve the
Island of Mozambique. As well, the implementation of the HUL approach contrib-
utes to the change in partnership trends of technical assistance for the conservation
of the Island. However, these efforts have been hindered by the lack of mechanisms
of coordination between the government and UNESCO that could easily facilitate
decisions to be taken for interventions in buildings, within a clearly defined man-
agement system, as illustrated by the case of the proposed new developments at

Complexo Desportivo (see Sect. 14.5.4; Macamo 2018). However, the approved
Heritage Regulation for the Island of Mozambique seems to be a solution to this,
since it defines clearly the mutual responsibilities for the uses of the built heritage
from local to central levels. It also refers to the need for a consideration of UNESCO
recommendations prior to any decision taken regarding interventions in buildings
(Decreto 54/2016, de 28 de Novembro de 2016).
14.5.4 The Role of the Private Sector
After the privatization of national property in 1992, the Island was confronted by a
wave of investors. Some have played a significant role in the development of the
Island as a tourist destination by opening restaurants and guesthouses and training
local personnel. In 2017, the sports complex project, by MozIlha, an example of the
proposed interventions in ruins, was finally approved by UNESCO, with some rec-
ommendations to be followed up, as will be shown below. It was discussed at local
and provincial levels. The architectural intervention was evaluated by Eduardo
Mondlane University, Faculty of Architecture and Physical Planning, as the repre-
sentative of the National Advisory Council, in collaboration with the Ministry of
Culture and Tourism through the National Directorate for Cultural Heritage.
The “Complexo Desportivo” project, by MozIlha private company, is here pre-
sented as an example of sustainable tourism. The ruin, known as “Complexo
Desportivo,” is located in the Stone Town and will be rehabilitated in order to be
transformed into a hotel. As compensation, the existing sport field in Macuti area
will be improved with adequate facilities such as changing rooms and toilets for the
local female soccer championship. After assessing the project, considering “impacts
on attributes that convey Outstanding Universal Value (on the conditions of integrity
and/or authenticity or impacts on wider setting)” (ICOMOS 2017), ICOMOS indi-
cated that “Besides the issues related to the planned new construction, no other
issues were identified as having an impact on other attributes.”
ICOMOS also presented a number of advantages related to the proposed develop-
ment, which are detailed described in point 7 (ICOMOS 2017). Some of them relate
to (i) the integrity, “the new hotel respects the visual skyline integrity of the hotel,”
and (ii) tourism facilities – “The construction of a new hotel will contribute toward
the improvement of lodging capacity for tourists and tourist competitiveness on the
island” (ibid). Finally, ICOMOS recommended the following to the state party:
To respect the Outstanding Universal Value, and in particular the integrity and authenticity
of local architecture, ICOMOS suggests that the State Party be recommended to build the
hotel by mainly using local materials, such as stone and lime, and not modern materials.
The construction of the hotel using local building techniques and materials would also raise
awareness for best practices among the island population, especially considering the fact
that the project is located in the Stone Town. (ICOMOS 2017)
Another example relates to the “Homestays” initiative, under experimental phase,

for the rehabilitation of Macuti houses, in partnership between Island of Mozambique
Association and TechnoServe. This has been valued as a positive response to the
community needs in the Macuti Town (Macamo 2014: 14).
This example helps to understand the contribution by private sector to the man-
agement efforts of the Island of Mozambique Heritage and the challenges in this
process (see discussion below). In addition, the UNESCO Historic Urban Landscape
initiative as an instrument in the field of urban conservation helped to understand
the role of the private sector. According to Ron van Oers (2011):
This new instrument aims to address the need to better frame heritage conservation strate-
gies within the larger goals of urban sustainable development, in order to support public and
private actions aimed at preserving and enhancing the quality of the human environment.
(van Oers 2011:1)
However, the limited capacity of GACIM to control the execution of works and the
reluctance of the municipal council to interfere in investors initiatives have resulted
in a number of unfortunate renovations and new constructions. Some recent exam-
ples are as follows:
• A new private house built on public ground at the coast near the sea
• The recent demolishment of the old quarantine station to give place for a new
private mansion
• The change of the skyline of the old warehouses, which have been turned into
hotels (Figs. 14.8 and 14.9)
Fig. 14.8 New hotels in old warehouses facing the bay (Photo Jens Hougaard)
Fig. 14.9 New private construction occupying the beach towards the open sea (Photo Jens
Hougaard)
Traditional public spaces and greens, representing a significant quality in the

historic urban landscape, have been occupied by informal privatization through
extension of existing buildings, fenced private gardens, or even new construction.
Some examples are as follows:
• The public green between the old customhouse and the port, traditionally used
for repairs of boats but now divided into private gardens
• The proliferation of small commercial stalls in the city squares
• The occupation of the seaside coast by precariously constructed restaurants
(barracas)
This mentioned, it must still be recognized that without private investors, very
little conservation of the built heritage would have taken place.
Private investors are obviously pursuing business, taking the opportunity of
Island of Mozambique being UNESCO World Heritage Site, and this is not bad at
all. Some of them are even aware about the significance of Island of Mozambique
as World Heritage Site. However, there is a need to provide them more information
about the rules and regulations for the safeguarding of the authenticity and integrity
of the historic urban landscape.
The articulation between the public and private sector is in some cases formal-
ized by signing a “Memorandum of Understanding” to help to clearly define the
existing mutual responsibilities and respect the national and UNESCO procedures
regulated by the corresponding regulation. There are responsibilities for the public
sector in relation to the implementation of the monument and museum policies of
the country, aiming to value the site for education and cultural tourism. At the same
time, there are responsibilities for the private sector to manage the facilities attached
to the property, in most cases hotels and restaurants that can provide income. Indeed
the growth of tourism depends also on good facilities, capable of stimulating further
initiatives for the benefit of the private sector as well as for the economic and social
development.
14.6 Concluding Remarks
The development since independence has changed the situation of the Island com-
pletely. In 1975, the challenge was how to interpret and preserve the historical heri-
tage of the Island within a national cultural policy; the situation is now more
complex. The main challenge now is how to save the authenticity and integrity of
the historic urban fabric and landscape within a greater urban development context.
How can conservation be merged into the urban planning and management com-
plex, not only of the Island but also of the protected buffer zone at the continental
side?
This chapter demonstrated the importance of the existence of the management
structures, in both public and private sectors, for a sustainable conservation of the
site, guided by national and UNESCO legislation. This also takes into account local
development programs centered on human needs, as it is shown in the Management
and Conservation Plan under revision. This was discussed also taking into consider-
ation the role of the public sector represented by GACIM, the museum institutions
and other national partners, such as universities, and the private sector.
However, building public and private partnership in the Island of Mozambique is
still at initial stage and needs to be further developed in the context of HUL approach.
It is hoped that the Regulation for the Classification and Management of Island of
Mozambique Built Heritage and Landscape will improve the coordination between
different institutions and the decisions to be taken for interventions and compatible
uses of the built heritage.
Taken together, public and private sectors cover a significant spectrum of the cur-
rent challenges facing the Island of Mozambique, as a national and World Heritage
site (cf. Van Oers 2011). No doubt the intervention in heritage and in particular the
rehabilitation of buildings in the Island of Mozambique is a growing activity, and it
is intimately related to tourism and town management. This also demands the exis-
tence of an efficient legislation. The recently adopted National Regulation for
Heritage Management attempts to address this issue and has been used for the dis-
cussion in this chapter.
Although a lot has been achieved, the situation of the Island is still critical. The
authenticity and integrity of the island have been damaged, but much can still be
saved. The line of UNESCO interventions and the introduction of the HUL strategy
have had positive influence on the legislative level, but there is an urgent need for
the following:
• Integration of legal instruments for conservation and urban planning and

management
• Coordination of urban management procedures between GACIM and the munic-
ipal council
• Establishment of basic urban management tools, such as municipal cadaster and
property register
• Capacity building of technical staff authorities engaged in conservation and
urban development
• Awareness raising of the values of the historic urban landscape between authori-
ties, investors, and the public in general
It could be said that the most important is to create professional capacity within
the responsible institutions and a broader public understanding of the importance of
conservation as an integrated part of urban development.
In order to achieve this, young Mozambicans are now doing masters and Ph.D.
in conservation (Cláudio Zunguene and Aiuba Ali at IPHAN and NIREMA PUC-
Rio, in Brazil), and a partnership has been established between the Faculty of
Architecture and Physical Planning at Lurio University, Nampula, and the
Department of Architecture at Coimbra University, focusing on capacity building in
conservation and urban planning and publication. UniLúrio, with the collaboration
of Eduardo Mondlane University and the University of Coimbra, will also soon
offer a master’s course in Heritage and Development, in the Island of Mozambique.
Eduardo Mondlane University in collaboration with George Washington
University, within the scope of the Slave Wreck Project sponsored by the USA, is in
the process of establishing an archaeological center in the Saint Sebastian Fortress
that will operate in the areas of research, training, and dissemination (Madiquida
2018). The new institution will be designated Archaeological, Investigation and
Resource Centre of Island of Mozambique (C.A.I.R.I.M). This is a good example
related to compatible uses of monuments to implement the UNESCO recommenda-
tions reinforced by the new heritage regulations (Decreto no 54/2016, de 28 de
Novembro; Decreto no 55/2016, de 28 de Novembro) that help to implement
ICOMOS/UNESCO recommendations. The given example is a positive indication
of the importance of the collaborative role of universities, for sustainable
conservation, aiming to develop partnership, in line with the purposes of the HUL
approach discussed in this chapter.
References
Bandarin, F., & van Oers, R. (2012). The historic urban landscape – Managing heritage in an
urban century. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Carrilho, J., & Lage, L. (2018). Sobre a preservação do património cultural edificado em
Moçambique. In W. Rossa & N. Lopes (Eds.), Oficinas de Muhipiti: Planeamento estratégico,
património e desenvolvimento (pp. 25–48). Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra.
Convenção da UNESCO para a Protecção do Património Mundial, Cultural e Natural. 1972.
Paris: Centro do Património Mundial da UNESCO
Convenção da UNESCO para a Protecção do Património Cultural Subaquático. 2001. Paris:

Centro do Património Mundial da UNESCO
Decreto no. 27/1994, de 20 de Julho: Aprova o Regulamento de Protecção do Património
Arqueológico e a composição do Conselho Nacional do Património Cultural. Boletim da
República. I Série, no.29. Maputo (Moçambique)
Decreto no. 27/2006, de 13 de Julho: Aprova o Estatuto Específico da Ilha de Moçambique.
Maputo: Conselho de Ministros.
Decreto no 28. (2006). de 13 de Julho: Cria o Gabinete de Conservação da Ilha de Moçambique
e aprova o respectivo Estatuto Orgânico. Maputo: Conselho de Ministros.
Decreto no. 54/2016 de 28 de Novembro: Aprova o Regulamento sobre a Classificação e Gestão do
Património Edificado e Paisagístico da Ilha de Moçambique, o Glossário, o Mapa da Área de
Protecção Costeira, o Mapa das Praias Abertas e Enfiamentos Visuais, o Mapa de Infraestruturas
Viárias, o Catálogo dos Edifícios Classificados da Ilha de Moçambique da Cidade de Pedra e
Cal. Boletim da República. I Série, no. 142. Maputo (Moçambique).
Decreto no. 55/2016 de 28 de Novembro: Aprova o Regulamento sobre a Gestão de Bens Culturais
Imóveis. Boletim da República. I Série, no. 142. Maputo (Moçambique)
Duarte, R. T. (1993). Northern Mozambique in the Swahili world: an archaeological approach,
Studies in African Archaeology 4. Maputo/Stockholm/Uppsala: Eduardo Mondlane University/
Central Board of National Antiquities/Societas Archaeologica Uppsaliensis.
Eloundou, A. (2013). Island of Mozambique. Mozambique- Report on the Historic Urban
Landscape Workshops and Field Activities on the Swahili Coast in East Africa 2011–2012. Ron
van Oers and Sachiko Haraguchi (Eds.), (pp. 20–40/78–95). Paris: UNESCO World Heritage
Centre.
Eloundou, L., & Weydt, J. (Eds.). (2009). Reabilitação da Fortaleza de São Sebastião na Ilha de
Moçambique. Paris: UNESCO-WHC.
Forjaz, J. (2010). Island of Mozambique – Architectural survey and study on local vernacular
architecture. Reference Nr: 513MOZ4001. Maputo: José Forjaz Arquitectos.
Forjaz, M., & Muge, A. (1983). Muipiti – Ilha de Moçambique – Colecção presenças da imagem
Imprensa Nacional. Casa da Moeda.
Glasbergen, P. (2007). Setting the scene: The partnership paradigm in the making. In P. Glasbergen,
F. Biermann, A. P. Mol, & E. Elgar (Eds.), Partnerships, governance and sustainable develop-
ment: Reflections on theory and practice (pp. 1–28). Glos: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Hougaard, J. (2013). Mozambique Island development and conservation strategies and practises,
with focus on the period 1943 to 2011. In A. Seifert (Ed.), Global city-local identity? (p. 45).
Dar es Salaam: Mkuki na Nyota Publishers Ltd.
ICOMOS. (1991). World heritage committee nomination documentation Ref. 599. Paris:
UNESCO-WHC.
ICOMOS Technical Review. (2017). ICOMOS (Unpublished report in the possession of the
author).
Jopela, A., & Macamo, S. (2011). Workshop report on the UNESCO’s Historic Urban Landscape
(HUL) Approach in the Island of Mozambique, 11–15 July 2011. Unpublished report submit-
ted to UNESCO – World Heritage Cities Programme at the World Heritage Centre. Maputo:
National Directorate for Cultural Heritage.
Jopela, A., & Rakotomamonjy, B. (coords.). (2010). Plano de Gestão e Conservação da Ilha de
Moçambique 2010–2014. Maputo: Ministério da Cultura.
Lage, L. (2018). A contribuição da FAPF na protecção do património imóvel em Moçambique. In
Y. A. Froner (Ed.)., (org.) Património Cultural e Sustentabilidade: ação integrada entre Brasil
e Moçambique (pp. 76–89). Editora São Jerónimo, IEDS: Belo Horizonte.
Lei nr. 10/88 de 22 de Dezembro, que determina a protecção legal dos bens materiais e imate-
riais do património cultural Moçambicano. Boletim da República nr. 50 (I Série). Maputo
(Moçambique)
Leite, O. P. P. J. (2009). Casa Muss-amb-ike – O Compromisso no Processo Museológico (p. 466).
Lisboa: Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e tecnologias.
Macamo, S. L. (2012). Macuti town and community involvement in the conservation of
Mozambique Island. In T. Malao, S. Varissou and P. MacQuilkan (Orgs) Academic Papers:
International Conference on “Living with World Heritage in Africa”. 40 years World Heritage
Convention (pp. 125–134). Pretoria: African World Heritage Fund (AWHF) and the Department
of Arts and Culture.
Macamo, S. (Coord.). (2014). Ilha de Moçambique, Património Mundial. Maputo: Ministério da
Cultura
Macamo, S. (2018). O Sistema de Gestão da Ilha de Moçambique: Implementação da legisla-
ção na área do património edificado. In W. Rossa, N. Lopese, N. Gonçalves (orgs) Oficinas
de Muhipiti: planeamento estratégico, património e desenvolvimento (pp. 89-136). Coimbra:
Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra.
Madiquida, H. (2018). Informação sobre o Centro de Arqueologia da Ilha de Moçambique.
(Unpublished document in the possession of the author). Maputo: Eduardo Mondlane
University, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology.
Mutal, S. (1998). Island of Mozambique – World heritage site: A programme for sustainable
human development and integral conservation. Maputo: UNESCO/UNDP.
Nguirazi, T. (2008). Conservation of Traditional Buildings on the Island of Mozambique: A Case
Study of Macuti City. Unpublished MA Dissertation. Harare: University of Zimbabwe.
Pawlowski, K. (1981). Rapport technique, les problèmes de sauvegarde de l’The island de
Mozambique. Paris: UNESCO.
Pereira Roders, A. (2013). Lessons from the Island of Mozambique on Limits of Acceptable
Change. In Ron van Oers and Sachiko Haraguchi (eds.), Swahili Historic Urban Landscapes –
Report on the Historic Urban Landscape Workshops and Field Activities on the Swahili Coast
in East Africa 2011–2012 (pp. 20–40.: 40–49). Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Pereira Roders, A., Aguacheiro, J. A., & Hougaard, J. (Coord.). (2012). Island of Mozambique his-
toric urban landscape in perspective part 1: Stone town – 2011/2012. Eindhoven: Eindhoven
University of Technology.
Resolução n° 12/2010, de 2 de Junho, que aprova a Política de Monumentos. Boletim da República
n° 22 (I Série). Maputo (Moçambique)
Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value for Island of Mozambique. (2011). Paris:
UNESCO World Heritage Center.
Secretaria de Estado da Cultura, Arkitektskolen Aarhus. (1985). Ilha de Moçambique: Relatório
1982–85. Aarhus: Phønix A/S.
Sollien, S. E. (2013). Approaching the Macuti House – Identity and Heritage Conservation in Ilha
de Moçambique. In A. Seifert (Ed.), Global City-Local Identity? (pp. 48–58). Dar es Salaam:
Mkuki na Nyota Publishers Ltd.
Van Oers, R. (2011). Terms of reference for the HUL Workshop in Mozambique Island. Unpublished
email document sent by the author.
Van Oers, R. (2013). Swahili historic urban landscapes. applying HUL in East Africa. Swahili his-
toric urban landscapes – Report on the historic urban landscape workshops and field activities
on the Swahili Coast in East Africa 2011–2012. Ron van Oers and Sachiko Haraguchi (eds,),
20–40.: 6–18. Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Van Oers, R., & Pereira Roders, A. (2012). Historic cities as model of sustainability. Journal of
Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 2(1), 4–14.
Further Readings
Adamowicz, L. (1987). Projecto “CIPRIANA”, 1981–1985. Contribuição para o conhecimento

arqueológico entre os Rios Lúrio e Ligonha, província de Nampula. Trabalhos de Arqueologia
e Antropologia, 5, 47–144.
Chami, F. (1994). The Tanzanian Coast in the First Millennium ad: an archaeology of the iron-
working farming communities: with microscopic analyses by Anders Lindahl, Studies in
African Archaeology 7. Uppsala: Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis.
CMIM. (2006). Código de Posturas Municipais. Ilha de Moçambique: Conselho Municipal da

Cidade da Ilha de Moçambique.
CESO-CI. (2009). Plano de Desenvolvimento Integrado da Ilha de Moçambique. Maputo: BAD/
MEC.
Dantas e Sá, V., & Mather, C. (2011). Ilha de Mocambique: Conserving and managing world heri-
tage in the developing world. Tourism Review International, 14, 1–12.
Duarte, R. T., & Meneses, M. P. (1996). The Archaeology of Mozambique Island. In G. Pwiti &
R. Soper (Eds.), Aspects of African archaeology: Papers from the 10th congress of the Pan
African association for prehistory and related studies (pp. 555–559). Harare: University of
Zimbabwe Publications.
Derks, R., Damen, S., & Pereira Roders, A. (2012). Historic Urban Landscape. In A. Pereira
Roders, J. A. Aguacheiro, & J. Hougaard (Eds.), Island of Mozambique historic urban land-
scape in perspective part 1: Stone town – 2011/2012 (pp. 69–122). Eindhoven: Eindhoven
Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. (1983). A Ilha de Moçambique em Perigo de Desaparecimento.
Porto: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.
Honwana, L. B. (2008). Política Cultural em Moçambique: uma reflexão. Savana, 18 de Maio de
2008: 11.
Hougaard, J. (2011). Enforcement of planning instruments for conservation of Island of
Mozambique. Paper presented at the Historic Urban Landscape Workshop, 10–15 July 2011,
Island of Mozambique. Island of Mozambique: GACIM.
Jopela, A. (2013). The Historic urban landscape and the conservation and management of the
Island of Mozambique world heritage site (special essay). In Swahili historic urban land-
scapes – Report on the historic urban landscape workshops and field activities on the Swahili
Coast in East Africa 2011–2012 (pp. 92–95). Paris: UNESCO.
Macamo, S. (2015). Ilha de Moçambique. In Caderno de Gestão do Património (pp. 85–94). Rio
de Janeiro: Centro Regional de Formação para a Gestão do Património sob os auspícios da
UNESCO.
Macamo, S., & Ekblom, A. (2018). Living Heritage. Cultural Heritage Management and
Archaeological Practice in Mozambique. In A. Ekblom, C. Isendahl, & K.-J. Lindholm (Eds.),
The resilience of heritage. Cultivating a future of the past. Essays in honour of Professor Paul
J.J. Sinclair. (pp. 393–410). Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet.
Omar, L. (2013). Os Desafios para Conservação Ambiental e Património Cultural na Ilha de
Moçambique. Unpublished MA Dissertation. São Paulo: Universidade de São Paulo.
Pereira, L. (1988). Algumas notas sobre a Ilha de Moçambique- Património Histórico Nacional em
degradação acelerada. Arquivo, 4, 5–12.
Pereira Roders, A., & Hougaard, J. (2012a). Introduction. In A. Pereira Roders, J. A. Aguacheiro,
& J. Hougaard (Eds.), Island of Mozambique historic urban landscape in perspective part 1:
Stone town – 2011/2012 (pp. 15–22). Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology.
Pereira Roders, A., & Hougaard, J. (2012b). Conclusions and Recommendations. In A. Pereira
Roders, J. A. Aguacheiro, & J. Hougaard (Eds.), Island of Mozambique historic urban land-
scape in perspective part 1: Stone town – 2011/2012 (pp. 197–200). Eindhoven: Eindhoven
Resolução n.° 22/AMCIM/2010. Código de Posturas – Code of Postures. Island of Mozambique:
City Council of the Island of Mozambique.
Sollien, S. E. (2011). The Macuti House, Traditional Building Techniques and Sustainable
Development in Ilha de Mocambique. Paper presented at the 17th ICOMOS General Assembly
and Scientific Symposium – “Heritage, a Driver of Development”, 28 November-1 December
2011, UNESCO, Paris, France.
Sollien, S. E. (2012). The Persistence of the Myth of the Native Hut and the Cradle of Portugueseness
on the Indian Ocean, Traditional Dwellings and Settlements Working Paper Series 253
(pp. 1–25). Berkeley: International Association for the Study of Traditional Environments
(IASTE).
Chapter 15
Urban Heritage Conservation
and Management in Jaipur
Abstract As an exemplar of urban planning, Jaipur is unique and futuristic in its

urban heritage that informs the idea of it as a centre of trade and commerce and a
creative hub for arts and crafts. It is a city with a distinct artistic identity. The Jaipur
Heritage Management Plan prepared in 2007 was one of the first heritage planning
initiatives at urban level in India, followed by similar attempts for other Indian his-
toric cities such as Madurai and Varanasi in 2008–2009. These initiatives were rec-
ognized by the Ministry of Urban Development and impacted the inclusion of
city-level heritage plans in the revised toolkit under urban renewal mission in 2013.
The Heritage Management Plan of Jaipur became part of Jaipur Master Plan 2025
and is recognized as a Best Practice example by the National Institute of Urban
Affairs, Ministry of Urban Development Government of India in 2015. Key schemes
for the walled city of Jaipur, including the Management Plan for World Heritage
Site of Jantar Mantar, are now being implemented as part of the Smart City Plan
under the Ministry of Urban Development. Besides achieving World Heritage Site
inscriptions for Jantar Mantar (2010) and Amber Fort as part of a serial site nomina-
tion (2013), Jaipur was designated as a City of Crafts and Folk Art, as part of
UNESCO Creative City Network, in December 2015. As part of this commit-
ment and recent nomination of Jaipur Walled city for World Heritage in 2018,
Municipal Corporation of Jaipur will be upgrading and implementing urban conser-
vation works in craft streets in the historic city. Through the case studies of con-
scious heritage planning and urban conservation projects in the city of Jaipur since
2007, this paper demonstrates how Jaipur fosters the creativity and imagination of
its people using its rich cultural resources to showcase a model of sustainable devel-
opment as promoted by the UNESCO 2011 Recommendation on the Historic Urban
Landscape.
S. Jain (*)
DRONAH, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
R. Jigyasu
Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University,
Kyoto, Japan

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_15
278 S. Jain and R. Jigyasu
Keywords Heritage conservation · Jaipur · Trade and commerce · Conservation

initiatives · Local crafts · Capacity building · Urban renewal · Heritage walk ·
Management plan
15.1 Introduction
The historic urban landscape approach recognizes the interconnection between tan-
gible and intangible values that are present in any city (UNESCO Historic Urban
Landscape Recommendation (2011) and The New Urban Agenda (UN-Habitat)
http://whc.unesco.org/en/hul/).
The integrated approach is important since tangible and intangible values are
mutually dependent and complementary. Moreover, it is paramount to find ways and
means to regenerate traditional livelihoods in order to protect intangible heritage in
historic urban landscapes in India. These should be the basis for rehabilitation of the
area, and financial, technical and social tools and systems need to be created to sup-
port local economic development in the area (Recommendation on the Historic
Urban Landscape, 2011, Page 4–5, http://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/docu-
ments/activity-638-98.pdf).
As hubs of several economic activities primarily in the informal sector such as
crafts, historic urban areas are potential source of economic and residential oppor-
tunity for the urban craftspersons (UNESCO Historic Urban Landscape
Recommendation (2011) and The New Urban Agenda (UN-Habitat) http://whc.
unesco.org/en/hul/).
Therefore, besides protecting the tangible and intangible heritage values, the
holistic historic urban landscape approach should incorporate the interests of the
indigenous crafstpersons, challenging the existing systems that have led to unsus-
tainable development. At the same time, interventions in historic urban areas should
address the contemporary needs of mobility and functions aimed at improving the
overall quality of life of the inhabitants. Reducıng disaster risks resulting from natu-
ral and human-induced hazards would also contribute towards building urban resil-
ience. Active engagement of the residents will help in forging collaborative alliances
that would enable creative use of the historic city and protecting the present of its
past for future generations.
The case study of the historic city of Jaipur demonstrates how various initiatives
have contributed towards fulfilling various objectives outlined above.
15.2 Historic and Geographic Context
Jaipur is located amidst the Aravali hill ranges at an altitude of approximately 430
metres above mean sea level. The city is part of Jaipur district situated in the north-
eastern part of the state of Rajasthan, India, and is an exceptional urban example of
indigenous city planning in South Asia. In a remarkable difference from the
15 Urban Heritage Conservation and Management in Jaipur 279
predominant medieval practices, where settlements developed in a more organic

manner (that grew over a longer period of time, in layers, in response to local geog-
raphy, topography, climate and sociocultural systems including caste system and
occupation), Jaipur was conceived and developed in a single phase with gridiron
model and principles of traditional architecture and town planning based on Hindu
religious belief systems that later became a trendsetter for many nineteenth-century
towns of India. Built under the patronage of Sawai Raja Jai Singh II (rule 1700–
1743 CE), a project approach was taken towards the city construction. Most of the
city infrastructure as well as public and royal spaces were completed within a span
of 4 years, from 1727 to 1731 CE, and the city was thrown open for habitation (Jain,
Shikha, Chapter 2, Nomination Document for Jaipur Walled City (2017), Jaipur
Municipal Corporation, unpublished).
Jaipur is an expression of the astronomic skills, historic values, unique urban
form and exemplary foresighted city planning of an eighteenth-century city in India.
Its urban morphology reflected the coming together of elements from eastern and
western planning, expressing a culture of a ‘trade and commerce city’ and town-
scape that are unparalleled anywhere in South Asia (Jain, Shikha, Chapter 2,
Nomination Document for Jaipur Walled City (2017), Jaipur Municipal Corporation,
unpublished). Envisaged as a trade capital, the main avenues of the city were
designed as markets, which remain characteristic bazaars of the city. Chaupar, or
designed large public squares at the intersection of roads, is another feature distinc-
tive to Jaipur, as are its single to multicourt havelis and haveli temples. Additionally,
its iconic monuments such as the Govind Devji Temple, the City Palace, the Jantar
Mantar [Fig. 15.1] and the Hawa Mahal [Fig. 15.2] excel in artistic and architectural
craftsmanship of the period.
Since its inception, the city has been an international tourist destination, visited
by European travellers in the eighteenth to twentieth centuries, and its extraordinary
planning has fascinated many researchers, academics and urban planners. These
factors have increasingly put pressure for the conservation and sustenance of this
historic city, more so in the post-independence period. However, Jaipur has con-
sciously adopted heritage conservation measures since the 1970s during the formu-
lation of bye-laws in the Municipalities Act that allow it to retain the architectural
character, urban form and ‘pink colour’ associated with its earlier planning. Several
conservation initiatives (DRONAH and JVF (2007), Jaipur Heritage Management
Plan Built Heritage for JHERICO (Jaipur Heritage Committee), Government of
Rajasthan, Jaipur) for the walled city have been taken by international organiza-
tions, NGOs and local government authorities since Jaipur became the capital of the
state of Rajasthan in 1949.
15.3 Planning of the City
The basic plan of Jaipur was derived by marking the loci using the surrounding
topography of the site. The centre of the nucleus of the city had already been estab-
lished at the Jai Niwas Garden with the installation of the idol of Govinda Devji in
Fig. 15.1 View of the Jantar Mantar and the City Palace with Nahargarh Fort on the hilltop.
(Source: DRONAH)
Fig. 15.2 View of Hawa Mahal. (Source: DRONAH)

1715 CE that later became the city centre with the Govind Devji Temple. The main
axes of the city were defined by the sacred site of Galtaji, an important pilgrimage
centre since the sixteenth century, located on the hillock called Ambagarh on the
eastern side of the city. This axis was aligned 15 degrees to the north-east, running
along the natural ridge. Stretching in line with the Nahargarh Hill on the west, the
ridge marked the main east-west axis with Surajpol at the eastern end and Chandpol
at the western end. The north-south axis was marked in alignment with Jaigarh Fort,
the highest point in the north, and hillock of Shankargarh (Moti Dungri Fort) in the
south [map in Fig. 15.3 marking the planning of city along the topography on site].
Historically, the east-west axes of the town were divided by three perpendicular
roads. The crossing of the two cardinal axes defined the main public squares of the
city called the Badi Chaupar or Manak Chowk. On the west, a road parallel to the
Fig. 15.3 Reinterpretation of an eighteenth-century Jaipur plan. This partial map of the walled
city is based on an earlier map of Jaipur that has been dated in the reign of Pratap Singh (1778–
1803) by Gole (Indian Maps and Plan). The original map was not to scale and was made just to
show the construction of a canal till Sanganer and thus was purely representational in nature.
(Source: Jain, Shikha (Ed.), 2005 Pricely Terrain: Amber, Jiapur and Shekhawati, Shubhi
Publications)
north-south axis created the second town square called the Choti Chaupar or Amber
Chowk and effectively placed the Palace Complex in the centre of the city. Another
parallel road on the eastern side created the third public square called the Ram Ganj
Chaupar or Ram Chowk. The intersecting axis divided the city into eight portions,
with the central portions of equal size and the outer portions as per the remaining
dimensions of the axes reaching from the western gate of city at the Chandpol in the
west and eastern gate Surajpol in the east. These three chaupars worked as the cen-
tres and sub-centres of further subdivision and structuring of Jaipur city. All the
important temples and significant havelis of the leading courtiers and merchants
were located around these chaupars and along the axis. The city was further divided
into seven sectors or chowkris on either side of the axis with the eighth one in the
north-east falling in a low-lying, unusable area [Fig. 15.4 schematic evolution of the
plan of Jaipur].
There are nine gates to the walled city, seven original and two added later. The
main markets, shops, havelis and temples on the main streets were constructed by
the state, ensuring uniformity of the street façade. The land for the houses of impor-
tant nobles was located on the main streets and allocated according to caste, rank
and financial status. Thus, the main commercial streets had the primary purpose of
trade with a series of equal size shops. The urban façade was further enriched by
entrances to havelis and temples. Another unique feature of the city was its water
supply system of underground canals and the square central tanks that were located
in Badi Chaupar and Choti Chaupar. These are now defunct since the introduction
of pipelines in the twentieth century (UNESCO New Delhi IN/2011/CL/35, A
Concept Paper (http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0019/001921/192113e.pdf).
From the eighteenth century to the twentieth century, the shifting façades of
Jaipur bazaars reveal distinct stylistic layers of growth and development [Fig. 15.5
showing the stylistic evolution of architectural elements of the facade]. The evolu-
tion of Jaipur walled city can be broadly classified into three phases:
• Eighteenth century (Sawai Jai Singh II) – contemporary Rajput-Mughal archi-
tectural vocabulary, square base and round chattris, cusped and multifoliated
arched openings, niches, lime jaalis
• Nineteenth century (Sawai Ram Singh II) – colonial influence in architectural
styles, introduction of classical elements such as semicircular arches, small pedi-
ments, pilasters and stone railings adapted in a unique localized Rajput-British
style, categorized as Indo-Saracenic
• Twentieth century – introduction of the Art Deco style, recognizable by doors
and windows with rectangular ventilators, circular openings in the parapets,
curved and colonnaded balconies pioneered by Mirza Ismail Singh during the
period of Sawai Madho Singh II
Fig. 15.4 Evolution of Jaipur plan (eighteenth century). (Source: UNESCO New Delhi IN/2011/
CL/35, A Concept Paper http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0019/001921/192113e.pdf)
Fig. 15.5 Schematic representation of evolution of built form of Jaipur Bazaars (Chaura Rasta).
The top image showcases the eighteenth-century Rajput-Mughal style architecture with ban-
galdaar roofs, chattris and multifoliated arched openings with niches and jaalis. The middle image
shows addition of new block of the nineteenth century built in colonial style with architectural
features like semicircular arches and stone railings. The last image from the twentieth century
showcases the addition of new buildings in Art Deco style and transformation of existing blocks.
The new addition as seen above is the parapets and colonnaded balconies. (Source: DRONAH)
15.4 Walled City as a Living Heritage
Jaipur is a living site, a vibrant city breathing through its heritage. The heritage
resources of the city are not only the built components, inside and outside the walled
city, but also include the archaeological and natural heritage components. The urban
and architectural components of the city retain their original form and design as
conceived from the eighteenth to the early twentieth centuries. Also materials are
largely retained as per original, primarily lime and stone. In some cases, later
twenty-first-century structures in concrete are added, although they incorporate ele-
ments of the original architectural vocabulary and form. The use and function of
most royal and public spaces and monuments are now adapted to contemporary
requirement of public places visited by all, while the shops, temples and private
houses largely retain their original use and continue to function in the same manner
as historically planned. The structures in the walled city are in good state of conser-
vation. Overall, the urban character of the city remains in its original shape with the
city gates, walls, major iconic monuments and bazaars. Intangible values of the city
associated with the city God Govind Devji and worship of other deities in various
temples continue along with public festivals and rituals. Historically the city is said
to have housed chattis karkhana (‘36 industries’), majority of which included crafts
Fig. 15.6 Local crafts of the walled city of Jaipur. (clockwise) – block printing on fabric has pat-
terns ranging from simple contemporary motifs to complex and intricate patterns based on Mughal
and Rajput art; Gota work on cloth is an appliqué embroidery technique, where gota is cut and
stitched onto a base fabric in elaborate geometrical patterns and natural motifs; blue pottery is an
amalgamation of Chinese glazing technology with Persian stylistic influences; Katputtli or pup-
petry is a string puppet performance where these string puppets are made of mango wood with
dresses inspired from Rajput dressing style. (Source: DRONAH)
like gemstones, lac jewellery, stone idols, miniature paintings and others, with a
specified street and market designed for each craft that continues to the present [Fig.
15.6 showcasing few of the local crafts of Jaipur city]. During the nineteenth cen-
tury, the local crafts received further momentum with British influences in the UK,
including establishment of institutions such as Rajasthan School of Arts and Albert
Hall Museum. While the local traditions of guilds continued, formal institutions for
crafts, policies and programmes by government and private sector further contrib-
uted to national and international recognition of Jaipur crafts in the twentieth and
twenty-first centuries. The continuing building crafts of Jaipur contribute much to
the conservation works of the city, and the renowned craftsmen from Jaipur con-
tinue to conserve and restore historic structures across many cities in India
(DRONAH (2016) Detailed Project Report under Smart City Plan, Jaipur for Amber
Development Management Authority and Jaipur Municipal Corporation).
Listed under the UNESCO Creative Cities Network (https://en.unesco.org/cre-
ative-cities/jaipur), Jaipur showcases its rich and vibrant creative heritage on a
global platform and encourages innovation and local capacity building. The vision
of the city has been to tie together the goals as a world-class city (https://smartnet.
niua.org/content/f2a57ffa-1d34-41eb-ad3f-0219a2798c10), a heritage destination
and a city which uses its treasure trove of crafts and folk arts to maximize opportu-
nities of social, economic and cultural development. Jaipur offers a wide array of
unique crafts as a knowledge base and offers a platform for sales and promotion for
other cities as well. There are opportunities for exchange programmes and events
that contribute to productive international relationships helping to achieve the com-
mon goals of sustainable development.
Efforts are being made at various levels by means of promotion through educa-
tion, fair trade and sustainable practices. Educational opportunities aid in sustaining
the traditional practices and creating a stronger link between traditional crafts and
contemporary design. It also helps in creating a stronger link between different
crafts at city, state and national levels and also ensuring that the new generations of
craftsmen are exposed to a wide range of technologies and opportunities as incen-
tive to take up family tradition. Works have been undertaken for educational and
capacity building, listing of craftsmen and artisan has been undertaken and a ‘design
store’ has been proposed for the promotion of paintings, stone crafts, etc. İt is also
proposed to provide scholarships and increased education opportunities for crafts-
men. Events conducted for cultural promotion and dissemination with creative part-
nerships and initiatives include prospects to intercultural collaborations with other
member cities of UNESCO Creative Cities Network, annual festivals for the promo-
tion of local crafts and folk art aid in creating awareness and focus on tourism initia-
tives in the city.
15.5 Protection and Management Initiatives
Jaipur was the first city in India to prepare a city-level Heritage Management Plan
in 2007, which is now included in the Jaipur Master Plan 2025, and was recognized
as a Best Practice by the Ministry of Urban Development. Its urban conservation
initiatives for the bazaars in 2013–2014 were recognized by national awards, and
conservation of the remaining nine bazaars along with Rajasthan School of Arts and
other iconic structures is currently being implemented through the Jaipur Smart
City Plan (DRONAH (2016) Detailed Project Report under Smart City Plan, Jaipur
for Amber Development Management Authority and Jaipur Municipal Corporation)
[Fig. 15.7 Plan highlighting the projects implementing within the Jaipur walled city
from 2012 to 2016]. The Municipalities Act of 2009 (amendment) and Jaipur
Building Byelaws 1970 guide the architectural control on urban character of Jaipur
which has helped in retaining the original architectural form of the bazaars. Besides
these, Jaipur city has also developed specific architectural control guidelines for its
various bazaars recognizing the distinct features of each bazaar. The World Heritage
Site of Jantar Mantar, including major urban monuments of Jaipur such as the Hawa
Mahal, the City Palace, the Jaleb Chowk and the Town Hall in the buffer area, is
protected and managed through its Site Management Plan, which is also a compo-
nent of the Jaipur City Master Plan (INTACH 2015, “Jaipur Heritage Management
Plan” in Compendium of Good Practices, Urban Heritage in Indian Cities by NIUA,
Fig. 15.7 Plan of walled city of Jaipur highlighting the projects implemented from 2012 to 2016.
(Source: DRONAH)
p. 20–25, New Delhi, NIUA, 2015). All these aspects have helped Jaipur walled city
to retain its authenticity in terms of material, colour, spirit and location.
Some initiatives for conservation and urban renewal in Jaipur since 1971 are
listed in Table 15.1.
15.5.1 Urban Renewal for Walled City of Jaipur (2009–2014)
Specific urban renewal proposals were implemented for the main bazaars of Jaipur
under the Jawahar Lal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission, partially funded by the
Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India. Besides this, a comprehen-
sive mobility plan for the city was prepared which identified the need for a metro
system with parking zones in the nominated property. Conservation works on three
bazaars, one heritage walk in the inner street area, street and pavement upgrades of
major bazaars and initiation of an underground Metro line were some of the major
works carried out under this proposal that were partially funded by the Ministry of
Urban Development, Government of India.
All 12 bazaars have maintained the original façades since 2007 even though
there have been some changes in the structures prior to that. Three of the bazaars,
Table 15.1 Conservation and urban renewal initiatives in Jaipur

S. No Year Organization responsible Walled city renewal initiative
1 1971 JDA (Jaipur Development Municipality act including control guidelines for
Authority) urban character of the walled city
2 1985 Ford Foundation and JDA Study of heritage buildings within the walled
city
3 1995 Avas Vikas Sansthan and Conservation and restoration works of heritage
Department of Tourism structures
4 1998 JDA Master Plan, 2011 addressing the needs of the
walled city
5 2001 JMC (Jaipur Municipal Operation Pink, removal of encroachments in
Corporation) main commercial streets of the walled city
6 2001 INTACH (Indian National Heritage Walk in Chowkri Modikhana
Trust for Art and Cultural
Heritage) and JVF (Jaipur
Virasat Foundation)
7 2001 ADB (Asian Development The Asian Development Bank project of
Bank) and JMC infrastructure – reuse of wells and repair work in
the walled city/installation of sewage pipes
8 2002 JMC, JDA and CTP Multi-storeyed parking options within the walled
(Country and Town city
Planning)
9 2003 JVF Jaipur Heritage International Festival
10 2004 Asia Urbs A revitalization proposal for Chowkri
Modikhana
11 Since Government of Rajasthan Conservation of city gates, Amber Palace, Jaleb
2005 Chowk in City Palace and Ghat Ki Guni heritage
zones, lighting of several monuments, making of
Heritage Acts and Laws and Empanelment of
Conservation Architects to prepare conservation
proposals for grade I and II monuments
12 2006– JHERICO (Jaipur Heritage Management Plan prepared with 1096
2007 Heritage Committee), listed structures and conservation project of
JMC Amber Fort and Hawa Mahal
13 2007– ADMA (Amber Conservation project of Jaleb Chowk, Jantar
2008 Development and Mantar and Ghat ki Guni
Management Authority)
and Department of
Archaeology & Museum,
Rajasthan
14 2009– ADMA and Department Architectural Control Guidelines (initiated) and
2010 of Archaeology and inscription of Jantar Mantar as World Heritage
Museum, Rajasthan Site
15 2011– JDA, DLB (Department of Heritage Management Plan included in Jaipur
2013 Local Self Government), Master Plan 2025 and Documentation of Crafts
JMC as part of UNESCO dossier
ADMA, JMC Conservation of Jaipur Bazaars, Ghat ki Guni
and Jantar Mantar buffer zone
(continued)
S. No Year Organization responsible Walled city renewal initiative
16 2014– JMC and Jaipur Smart Jaipur SMART City Plan includes Walled city,
2016 City Ltd. Heritage Management Plan (Best Practice 2015)
onwards and bazaars conservation
ADMA, Department of Conservation projects of Heritage Walk, Jantar
Archaeology & Museum, Mantar Interpretation Centre
Rajasthan
Department of Jaipur city on Tentative List and Jaipur
Archaeology & Museum, designated as UNESCO Creative City
Rajasthan and JMC
2018 Jaipur Municipal Jaipur historic city nominated for World Heritage
Corporation
Fig. 15.8 Proposed view of Chaura Rasta, one of the major bazaar of the walled city after the
implementation of conservation work. (Source: DRONAH)
i.e. Chaura Rasta, Tripoliya and Johri Bazaar are in a good state of conservation as
a major conservation project was undertaken from 2009 to 2013 to conserve the
façades of all buildings along these bazaars [Fig. 15.8 Proposed view of Chaura
Rasta]. Additionally, consolidation of buildings showing structural defects was also
undertaken as was specialized artwork conservation on façades of specific havelis.
The National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA), a guiding institution for all
Urban Conservation works in cities at the national level, has also recognized two of
Jaipur Urban Conservation initiatives for Best Practice in heritage conservation and
management (INTACH 2015, “Jaipur Heritage Management Plan” in Compendium
of Good Practices, Urban Heritage in Indian Cities by NIUA, p. 20–25, New Delhi,
NIUA 2015). These are Revitalization of Bazaars and Ghat ki Guni, a revitalization
project for tourism development [Fig. 15.9 Implemented conservation work in Ghat
ki Guni]. The State Government of Rajasthan has also signed a memorandum of
understanding with NIUA for further capacity building of the state government in
urban heritage management plans. (https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/
govt-to-focus-on-value-of-historic-towns-cities/articleshow/60266571.cms)
Fig. 15.9 Exterior wall of Rajniwas at Ghat Ki Guni after conservation works in 2007. (Source:
DRONAH)
15.5.2 Revitalization of Heritage Walk
Since 2009, conservation works have been carried out in most of the temples along
the bazaar, in the central chowkri and inside chowkri Modikhana. A Heritage Walk
has been designed and conducted through a selected segment of the walled city in
chowkri Modikhana, aiming to showcase the architectural heritage of the area. Over
the years, mapping of social activities, preparing inventory of the historic buildings
and crafts and listing of infrastructure development needs have been undertaken. It
provides an encounter with Jaipur’s traditional communities, stories of its streets
and city’s history, providing a closer look at the city’s traditional lifestyle and craft
activities and historic buildings.
From May to July 2003, an on-site social survey among the residents and shop
owners of the area was undertaken in chowkri Modikhana to get feedback from the
community on its views on the proposed conservation works, create awareness and
enable participation of the community. This led to the formation of two heritage
committees and four youth forums within the community. The map of the chowkri
was prepared marking the historic structures; institutional and organizational frame-
works and human resources from within the community were identified. It also
helped in identifying the intangible heritage including the craft traditions and oral
history in the chowkri. In 2005, a detailed survey of Thatheron ka Rasta was under-
taken, focusing on the sanitation issues such as drainage and sewerage in the area.
A pilot project of street revitalization was undertaken in the area, and façade and
public squares of the street were restored, with full support from the local commu-
nity. In 2013, door-to-door social surveys were conducted for 170 households with
83 residents in the area. Exhibitions have been conducted to involve the community
in the conservation process. The Heritage Walk project generated among the local
people a sense of pride and ownership of their heritage and aided in improving the
condition of the local craftsmen and facilities for the visitors and residents. This
participatory design method aided in arriving at feasible solutions.
15.5.3 The Built Heritage Management Plan, Jaipur (2007)
With the aims to integrate heritage conservation with urban renewal and sustainable
tourism, to build socio-economic strength of the city and provide necessary skills
and human resource requirements to deliver heritage related services in a sustain-
able manner, the Built Heritage Management Plan was prepared for the city of
Jaipur in 2007 (DRONAH and JVF (2007), Jaipur Heritage Management Plan Built
Heritage for JHERICO (Jaipur Heritage Committee), Government of Rajasthan,
Jaipur).
It has been developed as a tool for economic regeneration and sustainable growth
of the city. 1096 heritage structures have been listed in the walled city area, which
are part of Jaipur Master Plan 2025 [Table 15.2]. This plan, prepared by the Jaipur
Heritage Committee, provided guidance and an action plan for the listed structures
and master plan area. The action plan drafted in 2007 had also outlined achieving
World Heritage status for Amber and the walled city area. Other works outlined
such as conservation of bazaars, Ghat ki Guni, inscription of Jantar Mantar as
World Heritage and UNESCO Creative City designation are also being imple-
mented systematically. It is used as a reference while drafting any new plans for the
city such as the Jaipur Smart City Plan 2016 (INTACH 2015, “Jaipur Heritage
Management Plan” in Compendium of Good Practices, Urban Heritage in Indian
Cities by NIUA, p. 20–25, New Delhi, NIUA 2015).
Table 15.2 Listed heritage structures in the Built Heritage Management Plan of Jaipur, 2007
Listing outside walled
Built heritage type Listing within the walled city (No.) city (No.)
Fort and palaces 1 12
City walls and gates 60 7
Temples and religious 187 24
buildings
Havelis and houses 210 10
Public and commercial 41 (Public) + 528 (Commercial- average 9
buildings 4–5 shops in one no.)
Wells and bavdis 68 9
Cenotaphs 1 11
Total structures listed 1096 82
Total structures listed by Ford Foundation (in walled city) – 293
Total structures listed by INTACH (within and outside walled city) – 350
Monuments under Archaeological Survey of India and State Department – 45
15.5.4 Jaipur Master Plan 2025
As per Jaipur Master Plan 2025 (http://jda.urban.rajasthan.gov.in/content/raj/udh/

jda%2D%2D-jaipur/en/town-planning/master-development%2D%2Dplan-2025.
html), the historic walled city area is a specially designated heritage zone, and any
work related to heritage conservation is guided by detailed heritage management
plans and project reports implemented through mandated government agencies.
15.5.5 Architectural Control Guidelines for the Walled City
Façade control guidelines have been prepared for the main bazaars in Jaipur walled
city and Chowkri Modikhana. These guidelines are an extension of the Municipal
Council, Jaipur (Building) Bye-Laws, 1970 (Part V, No. 26). The aim of these
guidelines is helping to counteract the loss of architectural style and to contribute to
the revitalization of the precinct through heritage conservation and protection. Most
of the privately owned structures are in a good state of conservation with their archi-
tectural elements and artworks intact. These are bound by the Municipalities Act
1971 and Architectural Control Guidelines (DRONAH- JVF (2009), Façade Control
Guidelines, Main Bazaar, Jaipur Walled City, Jaipur Municipal Corporation,
Jaipur). They maintain their original form and shape thus retaining the overall urban
character of Jaipur.
15.5.6 Jantar Mantar Management Plan (2010)
Jantar Mantar was inscribed as a World Heritage Site in 2010 (http://whc.unesco.

org/en/list/1338). Jantar Mantar Management plan has been under implementation
since its inscription, and various works have been carried out in the property area
and buffer zone (DRONAH (2015), Jantar Mantar, Jaipur, A UNESCO World
Heritage Site, Prepared for Department of Archaeology and Museums, Rajasthan
(2014–2020).
As part of this plan, various secondary plans have been prepared, namely, com-
prehensive Landscape and Environment Plan, Risk Management Plan, Interpretation,
Use and Visitor Management Plan and Comprehensive Mobility Plan. The compre-
hensive Risk Management Plan is one of the secondary plans for this World Heritage
property (Jigyasu 2016, Risk Management Plan for Jantar Mantar Jaipur, Prepared
for Department of Archaeology and Museums, Rajasthan). It includes risk assess-
ment of the site and its urban surroundings with regard to heavy rainfall and storm,
earthquake, fire, theft and terrorism. Critical disaster scenarios were prepared, and
resulting mitigation, preparedness, emergency response and recovery procedures
were proposed as part of the integrated risk management that considered multiple
hazards and vulnerabilities. An emergency drill was also conducted in July 2014
with the support of the civic defence agencies and municipal authorities. The plan
also helped in identifying and addressing basic infrastructure and urban planning
issues that increased vulnerability of site to disasters and needed participation of
stakeholders ranging from the Departments of Archaeology and Tourism,
Municipality, City Palace Museum Trust, local residents as well as visitors.
The Management Plan is being systematically implemented by the overarching
authority for this property, i.e. Amber Development and Management Authority. An
interpretation centre has been opened since its inscription, new signages and facili-
ties have been installed in property area, and buffer zone and regular readings of the
astronomical instruments are being recorded by astronomical experts to ensure their
proper functioning [refer to Fig. 15.10]. Efforts have been made to ensure sustain-
able and integrated development of the site.
15.5.7 Jaipur Smart City Plan 2016
Jaipur has been selected as one of the 100 smart cities under the Smart City Mission
of the Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD), Government of India launched in
2015 (http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/india-20-smart-cit-
ies-list/). The city has had to prepare a vision plan including an area-based plan in
consultation with its citizens and identify its own parameters for being ‘Smart’.
Jaipur was one of the few cities where citizens collectively decided and voted for
heritage planning for the nominated area of the walled city. The plan envisioned
‘Innovative and Inclusive solutions’ that involved the use of technology, informa-
tion and data to make infrastructure and services better, so as to ‘Enhance the
Quality of Life’. Along with this, the Smart City goals included aspects to develop
a world-class smart heritage zone by conserving and developing heritage structures
along with provision of smart and sustainable solutions to improve the overall visi-
tor experience. The historic walled city of Jaipur was selected for area-based devel-
opment under the Smart City Plan. The intention is to preserve the historic urban
Fig. 15.10 Interior view of Interpretation Centre in Jantar Mantar. (Source: DRONAH)
character through series of interventions related to urban façade improvement, con-

servation of façades, façade lighting and illumination, traffic control and provision
of adequate physical infrastructure and services.
In the final selection of Smart City Plans, the Ministry of Urban Development
ranked this Heritage Tourism Vision Plan for Smart City Area of Jaipur as third
among the list of 100 cities. This plan is currently under implementation since 2016,
and it focuses on carrying out urban conservation and adaptive reuse works in the
nominated area in a similar fashion as outlined in previous plans mentioned above
for the city. These works under Smart city are now being monitored through
an Action Plan (under the adapted Built Heritage Management Plan for Jaipur
prepared in 2007 and revised in 2017) to monitor the proposed criterion for World
Heritage nomination of Jaipur Walled City in 2018.
15.6 Conclusion
Since 2006, conscious efforts have been made by the government, professionals and
locals to safeguard the heritage. However, at times the changing political situation
leads to disconnect in the vision and has impacted certain decisions. Overall the
impact has been largely positive, with feedback from the local people and heritage
experts on most planning and project-related works in the historic city area. A suc-
cessful initiative at the planning level has been the inclusion of Jaipur Heritage
Management Plan in the Jaipur Master Plan 2025. It is used as a reference while
drafting any new plan for the historic city. However, the lack of decision-making
towards safeguarding heritage during the Jaipur Rail Metro Project leads to the loss
of documentation of unique water systems in the Chaupar areas of the walled city of
Jaipur in 2014–2015. Even though citizens protested against this particular inter-
vention, the authorities were more focused on timely delivery of the metro projects
instead of additional components such as salvage archaeology that could have
informed about historic infrastructure while building new ones.
Another issue is the apparent disconnect between initiatives for tangible and
intangible heritage, which are often undertaken under separate programmes and
institutional mechanisms. The challenge, therefore, is to build synergy between
conservation and management of built form as well as social and economic regen-
eration. Additionally, mainstreaming of heritage in various urban development sec-
tors such as infrastructure, housing, environment and health is critical for larger
sustainability of urban heritage conservation and management initiatives.
As discussed in this chapter, the works undertaken in the past have focused on a
people-based approach and feedback from experts, residents and visitors. It has
been realized that for a successful and effective implementation of any plan in a
historic area, support of various interest groups is beneficial, be it the government
authorities, the local residents, NGOs and/or the visitors. Besides the policies, data
collection and documentation of heritage, conservation and urban renewal, interpre-
tation and heritage awareness as well as heritage valuation play a critical role for
longevity and sustenance. The relevance of a contextual framework of ownership,

significance and economic potential of the heritage need to be understood, and plan-
ning has to be undertaken, reinterpreting and adapting the historic city to the present
urban pressures. It is a collaborative effort of the residents, visitor and the heritage
managers of the city that will provide a sustainable opportunity for the heritage to
nourish and flourish as promoted by the UNESCO 2011 Recommendation on the
Historic Urban Landscape.
Bibliography
(1989). Imperial Gazetteer of India: Provincial Series Rajputana. Usha Publications.

Anand, M. R. Jantar Mantar: Time, Space and Deity’, Homage to Jaipur. Bombay: Marg
Publications.
Asher, C. (2000). Mapping hindu muslim identities through the architecture of Shahjahanabad
and Jaipur. In Gilmartin et al. (Eds.), Beyond turk and hindu: Rethinking religious identities in
islamic South Asia. Gainesville: University of Florida Press.
Bahura, G. N. (1978). Ramvilaskavyam. Jaipur: City Palace Museum.
Bahura, G. N., & Singh, C. (1990). Catalogue of historical documents in Kapad Dwara, Jaipur,
Part II: Maps and plans. Jaipur: Bahura, G N & Singh, C.
Baig, A. (2010). Forts and palaces of India. New Delhi: Om Books International.
Bhattacharya, M. (2008). The Royal Rajputs: Strange tales and stranger truths. New Delhi: Rupa
and Company.
Coomaraswamy, A. K. (2002). Early Indian architecture: Cities and city gates. New Delhi:
Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
Davies, P. (1989). The Penguin guide to the monuments of India, II: Islamic, Rajput, European.
New York/London: Viking.
DRONAH. (2015). Jantar Mantar, Jaipur, A UNESCO World Heritage Site, Prepared for
Department of Archaeology and Museums, Rajasthan (2014–2020).
DRONAH. (2016). Detailed Project Report under Smart City Plan, Jaipur for Amber Development
Management Authority and Jaipur Municipal Corporation.
DRONAH and JVF. (2007). Jaipur heritage management plan built heritage for JHERICO (Jaipur
Heritage Committee). Jaipur: Government of Rajasthan.
DRONAH- JVF. (2009). Façade Control Guidelines, Main Bazaar, Jaipur Walled City. Jaipur:
Jaipur Municipal Corporation.
DRONAH- JVF Façade Control Guidelines. Chowkri Modikhana, Jaipur Walled City. Jaipur
Municipal Corporation, Jaipur.
Gole, S. (1989). Maps and plans of India. Delhi: Manohar Publishers.
Hardy, A. (2007). The temple architecture of India. Chichester: Wiley.
Hooja, R. (2006). A history of Rajasthan. New Delhi: Rupa & Co.
Hooja, R., Hooja, R., & Hooja, R. (2010). Constructing Rajpootana – Rajasthan. Jaipur: Rawat
Publications.
INTACH. (2015). Compendium of best practice: Urban heritage in Indian cities. PEARL Initative,
NIUA Publication. https://pearl.niua.org/sites/default/files/books/GP-IN4_HERITAGE.pdf
Jafa, J. (2004). Royal Jaipur. New Delhi: Lustre Press/Roli Books.
Jain, K. C. (1972). Ancient Cities and Towns of Rajasthan: A Study of Culture and Civilization.
Delhi/Varanasi/Patna: Motilal Banarsidass.
Jain, S. (Ed.). (2004). Havelis: A living tradition of Rajasthan. Gurgaon: Shubhi Publications.
Jain, S. (Ed.). (2005). Princely Terrain: Amber, Jaipur and Shekhawati. Gurgaon: Shubhi
Publications.
Jaipur Development Authority, Master development plan- 2015.

Koch, E. (2002). Mughal architecture: An outline of its history and development (1526–1858).
New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Manchanda, B. (2006). Forts and palaces of India: Sentinels of history. New Delhi: Roli.
Meena, B. R. (2009). Heritage of Rajasthan: Monuments and archeological sites. Aryan Books
International.
Michell, G., & Martinelli, A. (1998). The royal palaces of India. London: Thames and Hudson.
Mishra, R. L. (1985). The forts of Rajasthan. Kutir Prakashan
Nath, A. (1996). Jaipur, the last destination. I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd.
Papillaut, R. (2008). ‘Amber and Jaipur: The territorial demarcation of a city’, Context: Built,
Living and Natural. Vol. V Issue 1 Spring/Summer.
Prabhakar V. B. (1982). Forts and Palaces of India. New Delhi
Roy, A. K. (1978). History of the Jaipur City. New Delhi: Manohar Publications.
Sachdev, V., & Tillotson, G. (2001). Building Jaipur: Making of an Indian City. London: Reaktion
Books.
Sachdev, V., & Tillotson, G. (2002). Building Jaipur. London: Reaktion Books Ltd.
Sarkar, J. (1984). A History of Jaipur. New Delhi: Manohar Publication.
Singh, C., & Bahura, G. N. (1990). Catalogue of historical documents in Kapad- dwara, maps &
plans. City Palace Museum, Jaipur.
Singh, C., & Mayaram, A. (2002). Protected monuments of Rajasthan. Jaipur: Jawahar Kala
Kendra in Association with Publication Scheme.
The Rajputana Gazetteers. Vol II.
Tillotson, G. H. R. (1991). Mughal India. London: Penguin Books.
Tillotson, G. H. R. (1999). The Rajput palaces: The development of an architectural style, 1450–
1750. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Tillotson, G. (2006). Jaipur Nama: Tales from the Pink City. New Delhi: Penguin Books.
Tillotson, G. H. R. (2007). Jaipur Nama: Tales from the Pink City. Penguin Global.
Tod, J. (2002). Annals and antiquities of Rajasthan (Vol. 1 &2). New Delhi: Rupa & Co. (First
published in 1829 by Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., London).
Toy, S. (1965). The Fortified Cities of India. Heinemann.
Verma, A. (1985). Forts of India. Delhi.
Chapter 16
Roadmap for Implementation of the HUL
Approach in Kuwait City
Roha W. Khalaf
Abstract Transferring the historic urban landscape (HUL) approach to national

and local operational levels is key to its successful adaptation and implementation.
In cooperation with UNESCO, the National Council for Culture, Arts and Letters
(NCCAL) launched the project to implement it in the State of Kuwait in March
2015. Given that dissemination of information to the public is limited, this chapter
reports on qualitative research rather than the actual results of the project. It identi-
fies, and reflects on, challenges and opportunities with a view to helping the state set
a roadmap for practical application of the HUL approach, particularly in Kuwait
City. This approach is interpreted as the coexistence of layers, stakeholders, priori-
ties, resources, and values. It is foreseen to improve the management of change in
the city, where many buildings have been demolished, leaving behind large vacant
areas awaiting development. Special emphasis is placed on the harmonious integra-
tion of contemporary interventions into the existing urban fabric in conformity with
Items 12 and 22 of the Recommendation.
Keywords Recommendation on the HUL · HUL approach · HUL action plan ·

Harmonious integration · Contemporary intervention · Management of change ·
Thoughtful change · Roadmap · State of Kuwait · Kuwait City
16.1 Introduction
What is already accepted, what we assumed to be finished thinking, is open yet to further
clarification and exploration. (Ely et al. 1997)
The meaning of historic urban landscape (HUL) is twofold: (1) it is an urban area
“understood as the result of a historic layering of cultural and natural values and
attributes,” and (2) it is an approach to urban heritage conservation and management
that helps “reach decisions about the advisability of particular interventions” or
R. W. Khalaf (*)
Consultant Architect and Independent Scholar, Kuwait City, Kuwait

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_16
298 R. W. Khalaf
“proposals for change,” such as “contemporary architecture and infrastructure

development” (UNESCO 2011a, Items 8 & 26, Preamble, Appendix). Bandarin and
Van Oers (2012, p. 191) set the underlying theory, clarifying that HUL “does not
constitute a separate ‘heritage category’”; it is “a new lens to the practice of urban
conservation” or rather “an approach to managing change” that may “‘break the
walls’ of separation between conservation and development.” Bandarin and Van
Oers (2015, p. 317) highlight the need for supporting tools to help reconnect “urban
conservation with the process of city planning and regional development; new
architecture with the historic context,” which is the focus of this chapter.
In order to explore its adaptation and implementation, the HUL approach must
first be clarified to governments, policy-makers, property owners, clients, and prac-
titioners such as architects, planners, managers, developers, and contractors. Taking
this preliminary step can be especially challenging “in quickly developing econo-
mies and urban centers that wish to accelerate the pace of change (e.g., some cities
of the Arab Gulf States)” by replacing old layers with new ones rather than search-
ing for means to integrate them harmoniously (Khalaf 2016a, p. 75). A case in point
is Kuwait City in the State of Kuwait as described in the following section.
16.2 Case Study Description
16.2.1 Layers of the City
From the eighteenth century to the 1950s, Old Kuwait Town was a port town com-
prising densely packed courtyard houses and narrow thoroughfares, which were
characteristics of the ancient Mesopotamian model (Lewcock 1978; Khalaf 2012).
Urban morphology was the result of organic growth rather than that of defined plan-
ning. Private residential quarters (fereej) and public zones of economic activity were
separated to ensure domestic privacy. Passive cooling design strategies, such as
wind towers, initially developed in Southern Iran (Hawker 2008, p. xvii), were
implemented to help communities cope with the eminently hot and arid climate.
The town was connected to global trade networks and had already imported
materials and design ideas before the discovery of oil in 1937. That discovery, how-
ever, fueled the desire to acquire modernity in standards of living.1 The impact of oil
revenues on vernacular architecture and urban morphology, following the first ship-
ment of oil in 1946, was unprecedented (Shiber 1964; Gardiner 1983; Khalaf 2012;
Norman 2014). “Rapid and frequently uncontrolled development” caused not only
“fragmentation and deterioration to urban heritage” but also social fragmentation
“with deep impacts on community values” and livelihood (to use the words of
UNESCO 2011a, Preamble). Economic and technological change (HVAC) broke
“Acquiring modernity” is actually the title of the State of Kuwait’s project for the 14th International
1
Architecture Exhibition of La Biennale di Venezia (Alsager 2014).

16 Roadmap for Implementation of the HUL Approach in Kuwait City 299
the bonds with the Mesopotamian model that had shaped the town’s character and
urban identity since the earliest human settlement.
To implement the first Kuwait Master Plan (KMP1) in the 1950s, prepared by the
British firm Minoprio, Spencely, and MacFarlane, most buildings in Old Kuwait
Town were demolished. At the time, it was believed that modernization could only
emerge after wholesale demolition or tabula rasa. This belief meant “out with the
old and in with the new” (Al-Nakib 2014, p. 7). The destruction of the old, however,
“was not simply a means of clearing space” for the new modern state capital, i.e.,
Kuwait City, but it was also “a conscious act of erasure, of deliberately shedding
Kuwait’s past while dreaming of a better future” (Al-Nakib 2014, p. 7). Architects
and planners from abroad were recruited to plan and design the new city.
The municipality proceeded with KMP1 in order to accommodate “efficient
street layouts,” “regular plot alignments,” and a “vehicular circulation network” (Ali
1988, pp. 3–4) despite the “Law of Antiquities of 1960, which called for the clas-
sification, documentation, preservation, and restoration” of the remaining traces of
Old Kuwait Town (Ali et al. 2009, p. 9). To this day, the Law of Antiquities, updated
in 2016, is the only official document that addresses cultural heritage (State of
Kuwait 2016).
The pre-oil layer of the Kuwaiti urban landscape is mostly gone. An area com-
prising densely packed, inhabited, courtyard buildings with narrow thoroughfares,
reminiscent of the Mesopotamian model, can no longer be found. There are no
historic “urban” areas per se but rather historic “vacant” areas (Fig. 16.1), some of
Fig. 16.1 Map of Kuwait City. Map data: Google, Image © 2017 DigitalGlobe
300 R. W. Khalaf
Fig. 16.2 A historic vacant area used for surface parking, photographed from Al-Babtain Tower
on 30 December 2016 © Roha W. Khalaf
which are used for surface parking (Fig. 16.2). The few remaining historic buildings
are scattered and overshadowed by high-rise development, which is why “the sense
of place of the old city must be hard to achieve for younger generations” and the rest
of the population (Norman 2014, p. 138). The post-oil layer of the Kuwaiti urban
landscape, between the 1950s and 1960s, has also been subjected to demolition,
particularly from 2003 onward, “to make way for something newer still,” such as
“profitable high-rises” (Al-Nakib 2014, p. 8).
16.2.2 Cultural Heritage
The National Council for Culture, Arts and Letters (NCCAL) is “the sole responsi-
ble authority” that “decides the importance” of cultural heritage at the national level
(State of Kuwait 2016, Article 2). The conservation of “all recorded sites of antiqui-
ties and historical buildings” refers to the operations of maintenance (al-seyana)
and/or repair or restoration (al-tarmeem) (State of Kuwait 2016, Article 12). The
latter is usually carried out by the Ministry of Public Works (and selected contrac-
tors) with direction from, and supervision by, the NCCAL (Al-Beeshi 2016). A
register of built cultural heritage was first prepared in 1988 and subsequently
Fig. 16.3 Bait Ghaith bin Abdullah bin Yousif, photographed on 31 December 2016 © Roha W. Khalaf
published as a book (Ali et al. 2009). An example of a recorded historical building

is Bait Ghaith bin Abdullah bin Yousif, built in the 1930s, later restored, and cur-
rently owned by the NCCAL (Fig. 16.3). It “represents social, economic and cul-
tural features of Kuwaiti society in the past” and has an “architectural layout typical
of the original urban structures in old Kuwait” (Al-Beeshi et al. 2010, p. 219). In the
1990s, the NCCAL established a grading system comprising four criteria to rank
“the importance” of recorded buildings and sites, but heritage values (e.g., cultural,
social, aesthetic) and attributes are not identified.2 This grading system remains
valid (NCCAL 2018).
In the 1980s, the Ministry of Finance and the municipality proposed the idea of
a “heritage village” in Kuwait City. In 2003, the Architecture Department of Kuwait
University produced conceptual drawings, which the local firm AEC transformed
into working drawings. Construction began in 2004 in a nationally designated heri-
tage area that faces the first dhow harbor, Nakrat Al-Shamlan. It holds archaeologi-
cal remains and eleven recorded buildings, dated between 1760 and 1811. Their
importance was ranked as per the NCCAL’s grading system (Khalaf 2013, pp. 175–
178). Although the “heritage village” is meant to be a reconstruction project, the
original forms and functions are not entirely retained. The materials used to build it
The list of criteria in English is available in (Khalaf 2013, pp. 175–176).

2
302 R. W. Khalaf
Fig. 16.4 A close-up of the heritage village, photographed on 30 January 2011 © Roha W. Khalaf
are reinforced concrete, lightweight brick, teak wood, and decorative plastering to
match the color of mudbrick (Fig. 16.4). It includes underground parking; more-
over, two skyscrapers were built in its immediate vicinity (Fig. 16.5).
It is noteworthy that Abraj Al-Kuwait (Kuwait Towers) and Sheikh Abdullah
Al-Jabir Palace were added to the Tentative List of the State of Kuwait in 2014 and
2015, respectively, to be potentially nominated for inscription on the World Heritage
List (UNESCO-WHC 2018a). In 2017, furthermore, the NCCAL launched the proj-
ect to preserve and promote Kuwait’s cultural heritage. It aims to strengthen cultural
policy, institutions, management, and planning in partnership with the UNDP and
the museum sector in particular (UNESCO Transparency Portal 2018a).
16.2.3 Management of Change
Although “the control of land and resources falls under various state institutions
including the parliament, the council of ministers, the municipal council, and the
municipality,” the municipality is the primary operational level that controls “most
of the land” and property transfer (Alshalfan 2013, pp. 12–13). As a consequence,
since the 1950s, residential areas were reduced in Kuwait City, which has become,
to a large extent, a commercial and financial center. According to the latest Kuwait
Master Plan review, “residential areas occupy only about 9.2% of the city total land”
Fig. 16.5 The heritage village (under construction), the Central Bank of Kuwait Tower (on the
right), and the Kuwait Investment Authority Headquarters Building (on the left) next to the first
ring road (phase II under construction), photographed from Al-Babtain Tower on 31 December
2016 © Roha W. Khalaf
in which mostly expatriates reside (Kuwaiti Engineering Group and Colin Buchanan
and Partners 2005, p. 44; Kuwait Central Statistical Bureau 2014). The historic
urban fabric has long been an inconvenience to the municipality (Ali 1988, pp. 3–4),
which associates progress with Westernized planning and high-rise development.
This explains why it has approved vernacular buildings to be demolished or left to
deteriorate on vacant land (Fig. 16.2 above is an example).
In cooperation with UNESCO, the NCCAL launched the project to implement
the HUL approach in the State of Kuwait in March 2015 (UNESCO Transparency
Portal 2018b). This project, however, risks being undermined by the municipality’s
management of change and vision for the future of the city, where urban heritage
plays a small role, and the sense of connection between the new and the old (or the
existing urban fabric) is not a top priority. The following section relies on current
practice to further elaborate on the challenges facing the implementation of the
HUL approach and to assist the needed reform at legal-institutional and sociocul-
tural levels.
304 R. W. Khalaf
16.3 Challenges for the HUL Approach
16.3.1 Urban Planning
Urban conservation as defined in the Recommendation on the HUL (UNESCO

2011a, Appendix) is not a mainstream activity in urban planning policy and practice
in the State of Kuwait as evidenced in the three Kuwait Master Plans (KMP1,
KMP2, and KMP3). KMP2 was planned in 1967–1968 by Colin Buchanan and
partners who suggested improving the road system and constructing new cities. In
1990, the municipality commissioned two international project management,
design, and master planning consultancies, Atkins UK and SSH, to plan KMP3,
which was completed in 1997 (Mahgoub 2008). A local practitioner recently argued,
“rather than importing yet another Master Plan, one should be developed locally,
allowing the people to take part in shaping Kuwait of Tomorrow” (Hayat 2014,
p. 23). Still, in November 2016, the municipality recruited the international consul-
tants Perkins+Will and Dar Al-Handasah to prepare the fourth Kuwait Master Plan
(KMP4). Its stated goal is to “turn Kuwait into a commercial and financial hub by
2040” (Dar 2018). KMP4 will likely incorporate and build on the Kuwait City
Urban Development 2030 Plan, prepared by Atkins and Gulf Consult for the munic-
ipality and completed in 2012 (Gulf Consult 2018). In partnership with Dar
Al-Handasah, moreover, SSH is preparing a “Consolidated Zoning Code and
Zoning Regulations and Urban Planning Standards Manual” for the municipality
(SSH 2018). Zoning to control planning and new development, however, remains a
challenge. According to the review of KMP3, for instance, “building heights within
Kuwait City do not follow a particular pattern that would initiate a well-integrated
coherent urban fabric” (Kuwaiti Engineering Group and Colin Buchanan and
Partners 2005, p. 53).
16.3.2 New Development
Another challenge is the fact that international consultants are often recruited to
design major projects in the State of Kuwait. Examples include the first ring road by
WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff and mega skyscrapers (Fig. 16.6). In a typical scenario,
the Consultants Selection Committee (CSC) sends the terms of reference (TOR) on
behalf of the client to international firms such as AECOM, C7A, Foster+Partners,
HOK, OMA/Koolhaas, or SOM. If they accept the invitation, they must each con-
tact a firm based in the State of Kuwait such as Al-Jazeera, Gulf Consult, KEO,
PACE, SSH, or TAEP to enter the competition. Each international-local partnership
must prepare a financial and a technical proposal. Eighty percent (80%) of the posi-
tions in the organizational chart (i.e., the required professionals such as architects
and engineers) must be assigned to the international firm. If further clarifications
about the TOR are needed, questions can be sent to the CSC prior to the scheduled
Fig. 16.6 Mega skyscrapers (height 300m+): Al-Hamra Tower by SOM (on the left), National Bank
of Kuwait Tower by Foster+Partners (under construction), and Arayya Tower by Fentress Architects
(on the right), photographed from KIPCO Tower on 29 December 2016 © Roha W. Khalaf
pre-tender meeting during which all received questions are answered. After the sub-
mission and review of proposals, the client selects a partnership to carry out the
design.
In terms of project execution, it is usually the project manager and the client who
select the contactors “in whose hands ultimately depends the final outcome”
(Aljouder 2014, p. 12). Traditional craftsmanship and construction materials such
as mudbrick and coral sea rock, i.e., available natural resources, no longer form part
of the city’s development agenda, unlike construction in concrete, steel, glass, and
aluminum (Fig. 16.6).
This reliance on designs from abroad and modern materials is worrisome,
because it is making the city less Kuwaiti with the passage of time. Admittedly,
there are many impressive buildings that “possess spectacular architectural and
structural qualities,” but they “do little to fulfil the environmental and cultural needs
of local communities or to connect with their surroundings” (Khalaf 2015, p. 79).
However, some Kuwaiti citizens do consider high-rise development part of their
urban identity and pride (Khalaf 2016a, p. 69.
306 R. W. Khalaf
16.3.3 Unfamiliar Terminology
Another challenge is that “historic urban landscape” is unfamiliar terminology to

authorities and practitioners in the State of Kuwait. It is translated to al-manazer
al-hadriyah al-tarikhiyah in the Arabic version of the Recommendation (UNESCO
2011b), which, if translated back into English, means “historic urban sceneries.”
When the author of this chapter asked professionals at the NCCAL and the munici-
pality in the early stages of the research to explain what they thought al-manazer
al-hadriyah al-tarikhiyah meant, the dominant answer was “views” and “natural
features” in historic areas. Although its actual meaning is not “readily grasped,”
local municipal authorities and practitioners must gain a clear understanding of
“what [the approach] entails, and more importantly, what it can achieve” if they are
determined to implement it successfully (Rodwell 2015, p. 137). This first step is
indeed necessary, but not always easy. In China, for example, “professionals
explained having a difficulty with the terminology” when the approach was initially
being explored to set a roadmap (Van Oers and Pereira Roders 2013, pp. 9–10).
An expert meeting was held in February 2014 in Kuwait City to discuss the
Recommendation (UNESCO-WHC 2018b), after which the project to implement
the HUL approach was launched in March 2015 (UNESCO Transparency Portal
2018b). The NCCAL and the Arab States Unit of the UNESCO World Heritage
Centre also organized an “International conference on urban conservation: role of
the Recommendation on the historic urban landscape in safeguarding modern heri-
tage in the Arab States” which took place in Kuwait City in December 2015
(UNESCO-WHC 2018c). The outcomes and follow-ups of these events are not yet
public information at the time of writing, which disables a broader debate on the
implementation of the HUL approach.
Kuwait City could benefit from recommendations directed at urban actors. More
specifically, a closer cooperation between the NCCAL, municipal authorities, and
the College of Architecture at Kuwait University (which is the only architecture and
planning program in the state) is needed to (1) integrate “heritage conservation in
the training of future architects and urban planners,” which was one of the objec-
tives of the conference (UNESCO-WHC 2018c), as well as (2) integrate “historic
urban area conservation, management and planning strategies into local develop-
ment processes and urban planning, such as contemporary architecture and infra-
structure development, for which the application of a landscape approach would
help maintain urban identity” as per the Recommendation (UNESCO 2011a,
Preamble).
The lack of effective collaboration with the municipality, which is the primary
operational level, is a major setback to the implementation of the HUL approach. The
creation of “synergies between different urban actors” as recommended in Bandarin
and Van Oers (2015, p. 326) is necessary to clarify, explore, and successfully imple-
ment it. Reflecting on the HUL toolkit and the six-step HUL action plan is a good
start to identify opportunities with a view to helping the state set a roadmap, particu-
larly in Kuwait City, as attempted by this author in the following section.
16.4 Opportunities for the HUL Approach
16.4.1 Compatible Contemporary Interventions
Since there are many large vacant areas in Kuwait City,3 new development merits
special attention. According to the Law of Antiquities, new development should be
“specified so as to be harmonious with the existing historical environment” (State of
Kuwait 2016, Article 15). The HUL approach could inform policy and practice to
guide “the harmonious integration of contemporary interventions” (UNESCO
2011a, Item 22; see also Item 12) and to improve the management of change in
Kuwait City. For, indeed, “in order to ensure a prosperous tomorrow, Kuwait can no
longer afford to simply replace the old with the new” (Hayat 2014, p. 20). The quest
for harmony could protect built heritage from adverse impacts while accommodat-
ing the desire and need for progress.4 It is one way “to reframe the conservation
process within the broader context of urban management and development”
(Bandarin and Van Oers 2012, p. 67).
It is noteworthy that conservation has been redefined as managing thoughtful
change (The Getty Conservation Institute 2009, p. 13; Veldpaus et al. 2013, p. 11).
“Thoughtful” can mean “harmonious,” “compatible,” and/or “sustainable.”
Compatible design is often sustainable, but sustainable design is not always com-
patible. For example, incorporating wind turbines and photovoltaic panels in the
design of buildings can be environmentally friendly but can also affect the visual
integrity of the historic environment. That is not to say that compatibility is exclu-
sively a visual judgement because “thoughtful change” should not be judged solely
by its cover. It is the understanding of the overall context (human, man-made, and
natural indicators) that can help achieve the goal of compatible interventions/har-
monious integrations (Khalaf 2016b, p. 248). Indeed, “developing a more sustain-
able urban environment means striving for a harmonious continuum between the
past, present, and future” (Van Oers and Pereira Roders 2013, p. 5).
16.4.2 Theoretical Model and HUL Toolkit
A theoretical model has been developed to demonstrate how the goal of compatible
interventions/harmonious integrations in Kuwait City could be achieved (Khalaf
2013, pp. 231–244). In terms of data collection, different sources of literature were
reviewed (including Charters and UNESCO Recommendations), in-depth inter-
views were conducted with applicants and evaluators of proposals for change
including professionals at the NCCAL and the municipality, and a qualitative sur-
vey was gradually carried out with a sample of the Kuwaiti population including
See Sect. 16.2.1.
3
See Sect. 16.2.3.
4
308 R. W. Khalaf
adolescents, which is an effective civic engagement tool (UNESCO 2011a, Item

24a). Following data analysis and interpretation, the theoretical model, which also
served to organize research findings, was created to facilitate follow-up interviews
(an internal validity strategy) and to facilitate interviews with external auditors (an
external validity strategy). This combination of different research methods (triangu-
lation) enhances the accuracy and reliability of the study (Creswell 2009).
Because “HUL” was unfamiliar terminology in Kuwait City when the research
was being conducted, conceptual rather than literal translation was used. More spe-
cifically, the terms historic urban “environment” (al-biaa) and “areas” (al-manatek)
were used instead of “landscape” (al-manzar); and “compatibility” (al-tawafok)
between the old and the new was used to refer to the “HUL approach.” Unlike
“landscape,” “environment” was (and remains) common language in official docu-
ments such as the Law of Antiquities (State of Kuwait 2016, Article 15) and in
scholarly literature such as the booklet on Acquiring modernity, published by the
NCCAL (Alsager 2014). Moreover, “compatibility” is one of the main goals of the
“HUL approach,” which aims at reconciling conservation and development to
achieve thoughtful change, to prevent the demolition of old layers, and to improve
quality of life.
The character-defining elements (attributes) of the historic environment and
associated values were identified and included in the theoretical model to promote
values-based decision-making when designing and reviewing proposals for
change in Kuwait City. To prevent “unthoughtful” change, a new design review
process overseen by a specialized committee (an independent governance structure)
was embedded in the model. That committee, hypothetically speaking, would be
tasked with assessing finalized development proposals and reaching legally binding
decisions that the municipality would have to follow before issuing building per-
mits. The regulatory system (UNESCO 2011a, Item 24c) developed in the model
consists of thematically grouped probing questions as opposed to criteria. In this
regard, literature shows that the fulfilment of criteria (whether standards and/or
design guidelines) does not necessarily result in thoughtful change; it is rather the
understanding of the place of intervention (Khalaf 2015, p. 85). Probing questions
can be more neutral, adaptive, and focused on the opportunities available for com-
patible design, on a case-by-case basis, than criteria (Khalaf 2015, pp. 82–86).
Questions directed at environmental impact assessment, which is an internationally
applied knowledge and planning tool (UNESCO 2011a, Item 24b), are included in
the theoretical model. As a result, this model can inform policy formulation and
guide the practical application of the HUL approach.
16.4.3 Six-Step HUL Action Plan
In order to set a roadmap for implementation of the HUL approach, a preliminary

step is to get people to learn more about it. One way to do so is to clarify its meaning
and merit to different interest groups from the public, private, and civic sectors
during many open information sessions to maximize attendance. These different

groups need to understand the impact the HUL approach can have on their lives and
the environment in order to determine whether they will use it to boost a governance
reform. This familiarization phase may therefore create an opportunity to explore
the HUL approach, which could be interpreted as the coexistence of layers, stake-
holders, priorities, resources, and values.
The relevant stakeholders to consult and involve in participatory planning should
be identified. Activities should remain open for other interest groups to join.
Together, they could elucidate and map the city’s resources and then develop the
grading system of the NCCAL to include the values that should be protected, to
determine the attributes that convey these values, and to assess their vulnerability to
socio-economic stresses. Constructive dialogue and negotiation can help build con-
sensus (Myers et al. 2016). These are the first three steps of the HUL Action Plan
that deal with the sense of place.
A conservation strategy could then be established and embedded in the compre-
hensive development plan for Kuwait City in KMP45 because it is important to
integrate “historic urban area conservation […] into local development processes
and urban planning, such as, contemporary architecture and infrastructure
development” (UNESCO 2011a, Preamble). The formulation of new policy to sup-
plement KMP4 and the Law of Antiquities can be instrumental in this regard. To be
effective, any new policy document, which may build on the above-mentioned theo-
retical model,6 must be tied down by legislation and receive governmental recogni-
tion from the Council of Ministers, which is the legislative body that enforces
regulations in the State of Kuwait. These are the fourth and fifth steps of the HUL
Action Plan that deal with the vision for the future of the city.
Once it is formulated and adopted, the policy document must accompany the
TOR of every project, whether for conservation or development, to give invited
international-local partnerships a heads up before they prepare their technical
and financial proposals.7 Besides, practitioners usually prefer consistency and pre-
dictability in decision-making, because they want their respective proposal to be
selected and eventually approved. Clarifying the regulatory framework and review
process from the outset to practitioners, as well as clients, can help achieve the goal
of thoughtful change. It is also important to establish strategic alliances and coordi-
nation mechanisms between urban actors that manage, and operate in, the city, espe-
cially the municipality, the Ministry of Public Works, the NCCAL, and the selected
consultants and contractors. Overall, this is the sixth step that deals with the man-
agement of thoughtful change.
5
See Sect. 16.3.1.
6
See Sect. 16.4.2.
7
See Sect. 16.3.2.
310 R. W. Khalaf
16.5 Conclusion
“Historic urban landscape is a mindset, an understanding of the city, or parts of the

city” (Van Oers 2010, p. 14), which is why the HUL approach is more intellectual
and aspirational than practical. In order to facilitate its adaptation and implementa-
tion, and build on its main principles, operational levels must first be willing to
understand its rationale and determine its relevance to their specific context. Without
political and social willingness, the HUL approach will not happen on the ground
with a view to reconnecting the city.
The case of Kuwait City shows that the sense of the possible, fueled by the desire
of local authorities and citizens to acquire modernity (Alsager 2014), prevails over
the sense of place that gives the city its distinctive character and identity. To shift the
balance in favor of the latter, urban conservation should become a mainstream activ-
ity in urban planning policy and practice. This shift, however, may be difficult to
align with the national aspiration, which is to “turn Kuwait into a commercial, and
financial hub by 2040” (Dar 2018).
One may argue that international capital can be attracted, and economic growth
and social benefits can be achieved, while embracing urban conservation. The prob-
lem, though, is that “‘the walls’ of separation between conservation and develop-
ment” in Kuwait City are difficult to ‘‘break” – to use the words of Bandarin and
Van Oers (2012, p. 191). International architectural designs and master planning
have a strong influence on current practice. This situation hampers the contextual-
ization and implementation of the HUL approach at local and national levels. On a
brighter note, the quest for harmonious integrations is an opportunity to turn
thoughtful change into reality, which is the ultimate goal. The constructive six-step
HUL Action Plan tailored for Kuwait City in this chapter is a potential roadmap that
may contribute to achieving this goal.
References
Al-Beeshi, A. (2016). Interview on 4 December with Aljarida newspaper, section 26 thakafaat

[cultures]. Kuwait City: Aljarida newspaper [Arabic].
Al-Beeshi, A., et al. (Eds.). (2010). Kuwait: history, heritage, architecture 1837–1950. Kuwait
City: National Council for Culture, Arts and Letters.
Ali, E. S. (1988). Historical preservation study for Kuwait Town summary report. Kuwait City:
Kuwait Municipality.
Ali, E. S. et al. (2009). Kuwait historical preservation study: Old Kuwait Town. (3rd print). Kuwait
City: Kuwait Municipality.
Aljouder, D. (2014). Monologues with bureaucracy. In N. Alsager (Ed.), Acquiring modernity
(pp. 10–12). Kuwait City: National Council for Culture, Arts and Letters.
Al-Nakib, F. (2014). Introduction: Kuwait’s modern era between memory and forgetting. In
N. Alsager (Ed.), Acquiring modernity (pp. 7–9). Kuwait City: National Council for Culture,
Arts and Letters.
Alsager, N. (Ed.). (2014). Acquiring modernity. Kuwait City: National Council for Culture, Arts
and Letters.
Alshalfan, S. (2013). The right to housing in Kuwait: An urban injustice in a socially just sys-
tem. Kuwait programme on development, governance and globalisation in the Gulf States, 28.
London: The London School of Economics and Political Science.
Bandarin, F., & Van Oers, R. (2012). The historic urban landscape: Managing heritage in an
urban century. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Bandarin, F., & Van Oers, R. (Eds.). (2015). Reconnecting the city: The historic urban landscape
approach and the future of urban heritage. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Dar. (2018). Kuwait Municipality signs contract for Kuwait fourth Master Plan 2040. http://www.
dar.com/news/details/kuwait-municipality-signs-contract-for-kuwait-fourth-master-plan-
2040?org=about. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
Ely, M., et al. (1997). On writing qualitative research: Living by words (p. 10). London: Falmer
Press.
Gardiner, S. (1983). Kuwait: The making of a city. Harlow: Longman.
Gulf Consult. (2018). Kuwait City urban development 2030. http://gckuwait.com/portfolio_page/
kuwait-city-urban-development-2030/. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
Hawker, R. (2008). Traditional architecture of the Arabian Gulf: Building on desert tides.
Southampton: WIT Press.
Hayat, H. (2014). The unfinished city. In N. Alsager (Ed.), Acquiring modernity (pp. 20–23).
Kuwait City: National Council for Culture, Arts and Letters.
Khalaf, R. W. (2012). Traditional vs. modern Arabian morphologies. Journal of Cultural
Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 2(1), 27–43. https://doi.
org/10.1108/20441261211223252.
Khalaf, R. W. (2013). An approach to compatible new buildings in historic urban environments:
Case study in the Arabian Gulf region. Ph.D. dissertation. Université de Montréal. https://papy-
rus.bib.umontreal.ca/xmlui/handle/1866/10213. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
Khalaf, R. W. (2015). The reconciliation of heritage conservation and development: the success of
criteria in guiding the design and assessment of contemporary interventions in historic places.
International Journal of Architectural Research, 9(1), 77–92. ISSN 1938 7806.
Khalaf, R. W. (2016a). The search for the meaning of ‘compatibility’ between new construc-
tion and heritage in historic areas: An exploratory study. The Historic Environment: Policy &
Practice, 7(1), 60–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/17567505.2016.1142698.
Khalaf, R. W. (2016b). Architectural compatibility beyond the eye of the beholder. Journal of
Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 6(3), 238–254. https://doi.
org/10.1108/JCHMSD-07-2015-0028.
Kuwait Central Statistical Bureau. (2014). Annual statistical abstract 2014. http://www.csb.gov.
kw/Socan_Statistic_EN.aspx?ID=18. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
Kuwaiti Engineering Group and Colin Buchanan and Partners. (2005). Third Kuwait Master Plan
review – Kuwait City structure plan. Kuwait City: Kuwait Municipality.
Lewcock, R. (1978). Traditional architecture in Kuwait and the northern gulf. London: Art and
Archaeology Research Papers.
Mahgoub, Y. (2008). Kuwait: Learning from a globalized city. In Y. Elsheshtawy (Ed.), The evolv-
ing Arab city: Tradition, modernity and urban development (pp. 152–183). London: Routledge.
Myers, D., Smith, S. N., & Ostergren, G. (Eds.). (2016). Consensus building, negotiation, and
conflict resolution for heritage place management: Proceedings of a workshop organized by
the Getty conservation institute, 1–3 December 2009. Los Angeles: The Getty Conservation
Institute.
NCCAL. (2018). Mabani tarikhiyah [historical buildings]. https://www.nccal.gov.kw/Pages/
HistoricalBuildings/mbanitraekhya. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
Norman, K. (2014). Intangible challenges in the management of tangible cultural heritage in
Kuwait. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 16(2), 131–144. https://doi.
org/10.1179/1350503314Z.00000000078.
312 R. W. Khalaf
Rodwell, D. (2015). Reconnecting the city: The historic landscape approach and the future of
urban heritage. Journal of Architectural Conservation, 21(2), 136–138. https://doi.org/10.108
0/13556207.2015.1055098.
Shiber, G. S. (1964). The Kuwait urbanization: Being an urbanistic case-study of a developing
country. Kuwait City: Government Printing Press.
SSH. (2018). Consolidated zoning code and zoning regulations and urban planning standards
manual. http://www.sshic.com/news/consolidated-zoning-code-and-zoning-regulations-and-
urban-planning-standards-manual. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
State of Kuwait. (2016). Princely Decree No. 1 of 1960 of the Law of Antiquities modified with
Decree No. (111) of 1976 and Law No. (9) of 1994. Kuwait City: National Council for Culture,
Arts and Letters.
The Getty Conservation Institute. (2009). Historic urban environment: Conservation challenges
and priorities for action meeting report. Los Angeles: The Getty Conservation Institute.
UNESCO. (2011a). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape [English version]. http://
whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-638-98.pdf. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
UNESCO. (2011b). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape [Arabic version]. http://
whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-638-97.pdf. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
UNESCO Transparency Portal. (2018a). Project: Preservation and promotion of Kuwait’s cultural
heritage. https://opendata.unesco.org/project/XM-DAC-41304-KUW0102378. Accessed 5 Jan
2018.
UNESCO Transparency Portal. (2018b). Project: Implementation of the World Heritage
Convention and of the Recommendation on the historic urban landscape in the State of Kuwait.
https://opendata.unesco.org/project/XM-DAC-41304-946KUW4000. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
UNESCO-WHC (World Heritage Centre). (2018a). Tentative Lists – State Party: Kuwait. http://
whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/state=kw. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
UNESCO-WHC (World Heritage Centre). (2018b). UNESCO Recommendation on the his-
toric urban landscape – expert meetings. http://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/638#activities.
Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
UNESCO-WHC (World Heritage Centre). (2018c). International conference on urban conser-
vation: Role of the Recommendation on the historic urban landscape in safeguarding mod-
ern heritage in the Arab States. Kuwait City, 1–3 December 2015. http://whc.unesco.org/en/
events/1248. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.
Van Oers, R. (2010). Managing cities and the historic urban landscape initiative – An introduction.
In R. Van Oers & S. Haraguchi (Eds.), World heritage papers 27: Managing historic cities
(pp. 7–17). Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Van Oers, R., & Pereira Roders, A. (2013). Road map for application of the HUL approach in
China. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 3(1), 4–17.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-01-2013-0002.
Veldpaus, L., Pereira Roders, A., & Colenbrander, B. J. (2013). Urban heritage: Putting the past
into the future. The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, 4(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.11
79/1756750513Z.00000000022.
Further Readings
Labadi, S., & Logan, W. (Eds.). (2015). Urban heritage, development and sustainability:
International frameworks, national and local governance. London/New York: Routledge/
Taylor and Francis Group.
WHITRAP (World Heritage Institute of Training and Research for the Asia and the Pacific Region).
(2016). The HUL guidebook – Managing heritage in dynamic and constantly changing urban
environments. Shanghai: WHITRAP.
Chapter 17
Case Study: Lamu Old Town
Mohammed Ali Mwenje and Salim Mohammed Bunu
Abstract This chapter discusses the urban challenges experienced by Lamu Old
Town, a World Heritage site in Kenya. The paper reviews the interventions being
undertaken jointly by Government of Kenya, the National Museums of Kenya, the
County Government of Lamu and its predecessor the County Council of Lamu in
trying to safeguard the Outstanding Universal Value while also enhancing the attri-
butes and functionality of the historic old town as it struggles to meet the challenges
associated with urban growth and development. The chapter highlights the potential
of Historic Urban Landscape tools in enhancing the future development of the town.
Lamu Old Town is regarded as the oldest and best preserved of the Swahili settle-
ments in East Africa, and it still retains its traditional character and functions. The
town received national recognition in 1986 and was subsequently inscribed on the
UNESCO World Heritage list in 2001. Over the last 10 years, Lamu Town has expe-
rienced an inordinate population increase resulting from an influx of immigrant job
seekers. The ensuing high demand for housing has resulted in the development of
informal settlements around the old town, which now impacts negatively on the
character and attributes of the town. Mega infrastructural developments earmarked
for development within the precincts of the adjacent mainland coastline also pose a
threat to the integrity of the old town.
Previous partnerships on the implementation of the UNESCO supported pro-
grammes on Historic Urban Landscapes have enabled site managers to argue for the
integration of conservation initiatives into the broader development agenda of the
county government. In order to enhance the quality of life within the town for both
visitors and residents, the County Government of Lamu (CGL) has initiated a num-
ber of ongoing infrastructural improvement projects. The projects include paving of
open public spaces, pedestrian walkways and provision of street lights.
M. A. Mwenje (*)
National Museums of Kenya – Lamu World Heritage Site and Conservation Office
(LWHSCO), Nairobi, Kenya
e-mail: mamwenje@museums.or.ke
S. M. Bunu
County Government of Lamu – Office of the County Secretary, Lamu, Kenya

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_17
314 M. A. Mwenje and S. M. Bunu
Keywords Urbanization · Historic centres · Development · Governance · Planning
17.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the urban challenges experienced by Lamu Old Town, a
World Heritage site in Kenya. The paper reviews the interventions being undertaken
jointly by Government of Kenya, the National Museums of Kenya, the County
Government of Lamu and its predecessor the County Council of Lamu in trying to
safeguard the Outstanding Universal Value while also enhancing the attributes and
functionality of the historic old town as it struggles to meet the challenges associ-
ated with urban growth and development. The chapter highlights the potential of
Historic Urban Landscape tools in enhancing the future development of the town
17.1.1 Background
The Old Town of Lamu is one of a series of ancient Swahili urban ensembles located
within the present-day County of Lamu. Lamu County is located on the northern-
most part of the Kenyan Coast and consists of a mainland and the Lamu Archipelago.
According to the Lamu County profile, the county covers a total land surface area of
6273.1 km2 and borders Garissa to the north, the Indian Ocean to the south and
southeast and Tana River to the southwest and west (Lamu County Government
2013a, b). The most notable aspect of Lamu County is the Lamu Archipelago, home
to the Lamu and Pate old towns.
The famous monsoon trade of the western Indian Ocean entrenched a unique
culture on the East African coast that is manifested in the magnificent stone towns
between Barawa in the north and Sofala in the south. The complexity of these towns
is solid evidence of the diverse cultural fusion that shaped them.
By the fifteenth century, Lamu was already a thriving city-state. The town is an
exceptional Swahili ensemble with more than 700 years of continuous habitation. In
this context, it is one of the oldest living towns in East Africa. Most of the other
Swahili settlements along the East African coast, especially north of Lamu Town,
underwent modern changes, while others were reduced to ruins.
At the beginning of the nineteenth century, two events took place which proved
important to the later development of the town, the advent of Oman rule and, soon
after, the influx of Indian merchants from Gujarati on the north-west coast of India.
These events brought about, on one hand, the construction of the Fort and the build-
ings around it and, on the other, the development of the bazaar street called Usita wa
Mui. Houses and shop buildings began to line the western side of the bazaar street
(Directorate of Antiquities Sites and Monuments 2000). This was a milestone for
the traditional urban functions of Lamu as it created the first truly commercial dis-
trict of the town.
17 Case Study: Lamu Old Town 315
17.1.2 Conservation of the Town
Lamu Town is one of the most celebrated ancient urban ensembles on the East
African coast. The town is credited as the oldest and best-preserved Swahili settle-
ment in the region. Retaining its traditional character and functions, built in coral
stone and mangrove timber, the town is characterized by simplicity of structural
forms enriched by features such as inner courtyards, verandahs and elaborately
carved wooden doors (Directorate of Antiquities, Sites and Monuments 2000). The
town was gazetted as a National Monument in 1986 and subsequently listed as a
UNESCO World Heritage site in 2001.
Since 1972, the Kenyan government through the National Museums of Kenya
has been undertaking an active cultural heritage conservation and development pro-
gramme within the Lamu Archipelago. Elaborate conservation projects ranging
from built heritage restoration and conservation to enactment and strengthening of
legislation for the protection of historic landscapes within the region have been
undertaken. Some of the iconic projects include the establishment of the Lamu Old
Town Conservation Office, the adaptive reuse and restoration of Lamu Fort from a
prison to a sociocultural centre, the development of the Lamu town square and the
restoration of 20 classified buildings within the Old Town of Lamu in 1986 with
support from the European Union.
The core of the old town’s beauty and grandeur is made up of stone buildings,
which are well planned with patterned niched interiors, giving Lamu Town a
unique status above many coastal Swahili towns. A building audit conducted in
2005 revealed that about 65% of the building stock within the site (gazetted area)
is in fairly good condition, while 20% needs minor refurbishment, 10% needs
urgent restoration, and 5% are ruins which have been abandoned for a long period
of time. Over the last 10 years, the conservation office has overseen more than 15
restoration projects of buildings that were classified as ruins (LWHSCO 2003)
(Figs. 17.1 and 17.2).
17.1.3 C
urrent Urban Functions and Problems Encountered
in Implementing the Urban Scheme
Lamu Old Town is the administrative hub of the larger Lamu County and serves as
the county headquarters with the entire government administration located in the
old town. Lamu is a relatively small urban settlement of approximately 25,000 resi-
dents, of which 10,000 reside in the historic core of the designated World Heritage
site (Fig. 17.3). Even though there are no conventional large-scale manufacturing
industries or associated service industries on the island, the rejuvenated cultural
tourism industry supports a host of associated economic activities including tradi-
tional crafts manufacture, fishing, hotels and restaurants. Despite the small size of
the town, most of the basic/essential services of an urban centre can be found in
Fig. 17.1 Lamu Old Town. Source LWHSCO-National Museums of Kenya. (Department of
Physical Planning (1986) Lamu Old Town Conservation Plan Nairobi, Government of Kenya)
Fig. 17.2 Lamu Archipelago Source: Ms Swabra Bwanamkuu – GIS Analyst, County Government
of Lamu – Directorate of Lands and Physical Planning
Lamu including banks, a post office, travel agents, insurance companies and airline
booking offices (Fig. 17.1).
The implementation of urban schemes in Lamu is facing a number of problems.
In the last 10 years, Lamu has experienced an inordinate influx of people coming to
the town in search of job opportunities. Lack of housing and land within the town
itself has incentivized the local people to develop satellite informal, unplanned, set-
Fig. 17.3 Aerial photo of Lamu Town showing the old town and surrounding informal settle-
ments. “Lamu Old Town” was inscribed into the World Heritage list in 2001 under criteria (ii), (iv)
and (vi). Lamu Old Town conservation area, which is equivalent to the inscribed area, comprises a
total area of 15.6 ha. The buffer zone is approximated to be about 1200 ha covering part of the
Indian Ocean waters, the Manda island skyline and the sand dunes on the southern side of the town,
which are the principal source of water for the Old Town of Lamu. (Source graphics: Mwenje M.A
(2007) unpublished report. Orthophoto GOK Ministry of Lands and Housing)
tlements around the town to profit from the multitudes of immigrants. The increasing
population has put unprecedented pressure on the existing infrastructure, particularly
the wastewater and solid waste disposal system, causing it to collapse. There is a lack
of funds for redevelopment and expansion of the town’s infrastructure, which has
also contributed its accelerated dilapidation. These problems are worsened by the
lack of capacity to enforce existing local authority by-laws which govern the smooth
running of the urban centre. Further, there is no suitable development plan or dedi-
cated resources towards developing a conventional commercial district within the
urban centre to accommodate the growing number of small enterprises. The Kenyan
government has revived the 1978 plans for constructing the country’s second com-
mercial port in Lamu District, to serve the southern Sudan region, and has com-
menced actualization of these plans. Even though the proposed port site is not in the
vicinity of the World Heritage site, there are some concerns about the impact on the
cultural heritage resulting from the development of the port-associated infrastruc-
ture. Subsequently, even though sufficient legal structures exist to ensure that there
is a comprehensive environmental and cultural impact assessment, there is a clear
shortage of expertise and resources to implement the recommendations of the HIA.
17.2 I dentifying Development Challenges in Lamu

and Previous Intervention Strategies
The plight of Lamu County’s future development has been an ongoing discussion
from the onset of the post-independence government. In the late 1960s, the govern-
ment initiated a task force (Maleche 2000) to map out the future development of the
then Lamu District and whose main terms of reference were as follows:
1 . Assess the resource potential of the District
2. Identify resource use conflicts within the District and their implications for effi-
cient resource use and management
3. Determination of resource use zoning priorities and their coordination as a guid-
ing spatial framework for integration of development of the District and the effi-
cient allocation of land for different uses
4. Assigning intersectoral responsibilities and relationships in the development of
the District
17.2.1 Recommendations of the Intergovernmental Working

Party
In 1972 an Intergovernmental Working Party was set up to investigate the future of

Lamu District. This party recommended that further specific studies should be car-
ried out into the building standards which are required in order to ensure that the
existing architectural and social cohesiveness of Lamu Town is not destroyed
through unsuitable design or bad sitting of buildings. It was specified that these
studies should include identifying which buildings require renovations, which con-
tain features of unique importance requiring preservation and which are suitable for
demolition, conversion or redevelopment. The working party recommendations
were accepted by the government and funds voted through the National Museums
of Kenya to carry out further studies. These studies culminated in the conservation
report for Lamu led by the late Usam Ghaidan (1976) and the planning Lamu report
by Siravo and Pulver (1986).
17.2.2 L
amu Workshop: Conservation of Historic Towns
and Monuments
In 1978, the Kenyan government in collaboration with the Commonwealth

Association of Architects and the Commonwealth Association of Museums orga-
nized a technical workshop in Lamu to discuss the treatment of monuments and the
impact of tourism on local communities in historic towns, as well as the need to
retain such historic towns as living communities. The control of development and
the integration of historic towns into regional and economic planning was also dis-
cussed (Directorate of Physical Planning 1978). The government eagerly antici-
pated that the workshop would make recommendations on how best Lamu could
adapt to socio-economic changes that could not always be in harmony with the
conservation strategy.
The highlight of the workshop was probably the revelation by the Kenyan gov-
ernment of plans to construct the country’s second seaport within the district
(Directorate of Physical Planning 1978, p. 32). The government proposal was
enthusiastic about the possibility of reconciling development and conservation
though it did not specify a specific technical approach to achieve this. The govern-
ment opined that all new developments be subjected to mandatory environmental
impact statements or reports which summarize the critical aspects of the project, as
a basis of their acceptability, and that these should be applicable to all spheres of
development including conservation of historical towns and monuments. The gov-
ernment further highlighted plans for the relocation of the district headquarters to
the mainland and introduction of settlements schemes and ranching projects
(Directorate of Physical Planning 1978, p. 47).
The main recommendation of the conference was the acknowledgement of a
monument as more than a single building, encompassing its wider context, includ-
ing artefacts which during the monument’s existence have become part of it.
However, this recommendation was not immediately integrated into preceding dis-
trict development plans. Hence, the conservation programme for the ancient Swahili
settlements in Lamu District failed to attract serious attention from many govern-
ment agencies.
17.2.3 Previous Intervention Strategies
Rapid growth of urban population without complementary expansion of infrastruc-

ture and services has posed huge challenges to Kenya’s urban centres, many of
which were established without regard to their viability or service delivery capacity.
Thus, the urban infrastructure in Kenya has not maintained pace with the rapid
population growth, and the problem is manifested in the current environmental and
socio-economic challenges, such as mushrooming slums.
The Kenyan government initiated a number of municipal support programmes
which provide financial and technical assistance to many of the urban centres and
towns.
Kenya Municipal Programme (KMP) The KMP is intended to address the insti-
tutional constraints, municipal capacity, finance and reforms and simultaneously
support investment to improve infrastructure and local service delivery of major
municipalities in the country.
Kenya Slum Upgrading Programme (KSUP) The KSUP aims to tackle rapid
growth of slums in urban Kenya. It focuses on improving living conditions in slums
by enhancing security of tenure and investment in basic infrastructure while sup-
porting mechanisms to prevent the emergence of new slums.
Small Town Development Project (STDP) This is a capacity building programme

for small- and medium-sized urban areas to enhance management of urban services,
address urban sprawl and improve financial management and budget administration.
However, participation in the above programmes was initially guided by a strict
criterion established by the then Ministry of Local Government. It was unfortunate
that the Old Town of Lamu, with its peculiar characteristics and attributes, could not
fit into this criterion. Moreover, the Kenyan government under the Ministry of Local
Government has never run a specific programme for upgrading historical towns.
Lamu Old Town, thus, missed out on many of these urban development opportuni-
ties. Following extensive lobbying, the town received assistance from the small
town development programme which enabled the construction of the new Lamu
market and subsequent removal of street traders from what is now Mkunguni Square
(the most important public space for the town). Prior to the market construction, the
space in front of Lamu Fort served as an open-air market but has currently been
upgraded to a public square.
17.3 Lamu and the Historic Urban Landscape Approach
Historic urban districts across the globe have been facing myriads of challenges,
especially those concerned with the provision of conventional urban services and
redevelopment of historic cores. With a view of enhancing intervention strategies,
by both the public and private sectors, that are geared towards uplifting the quality
of life within the historic districts, the UNESCO World Heritage Centre (WHC)
developed the HUL concept to better outline heritage conservation strategies within
the larger goals of urban sustainable development.
Representatives from the Lamu World Heritage site were first invited to a work-
shop on the application of HUL in 2009, held in Zanzibar. During the workshop, the
emerging tools under the concept of the HUL were highlighted. However, the site
still lacked technical and financial resources to adopt this recommendation.
In 2011, the state party received a grant from UNESCO WHC (through funds
from the Flemish Government) for the implementation of the HUL in Africa
(LWHSCO 2011). The HUL conference was preceded by a follow-up mapping
exercise in 2012 jointly undertaken with the University of Minnesota through the
support of UNESCO with funding from the Flemish Government (LWHSCO 2012).
The Lamu HUL workshop was conceived by the WHC as one of three special-
ized workshops intended for the East African region, aiming to familiarize state
agencies and other stakeholders managing historic districts with the HUL concept
and to assist them with its implementation. The workshops were supported finan-
cially by the Flemish Government.
The Lamu workshop held in August 2011 was organized by National Museums
of Kenya, through the Lamu World Heritage Site and Conservation Office in col-
laboration with the WHC and attracted 30 participants from different Kenyan gov-
ernment agencies concerned with urban and heritage management.
The overall objective of the Lamu meeting was to advance the ongoing discourse
on the UNESCO Historic Urban Landscape Recommendations, with the specific
objectives of introducing the HUL approach to the relevant Kenyan government
agencies and to get feedback on the specific needs of the World Heritage site. The
workshop enabled the government agencies to better understand the concept of
HUL through a review of the challenges of urban conservation and management in
Lamu and other World Heritage-designated cities across the globe. The workshop
also proposed follow-up activities that would enable formulation of strategies to
assist the implementation of the HUL in Lamu Old Town.
One of the key participants of the Lamu workshop was the then coordinator of
the formulation of the Kenyan National Urban Development Policy (NUDP). In his
presentation, he noted that even though urban areas in Kenya contribute signifi-
cantly to the country’s gross domestic product, they had not been systematically
supported, developed and managed. The development of the NUDP thus specifi-
cally aims to ensure orderly, competitive and sustainable urban development. It rec-
ognized the old towns of Mombasa and Lamu as the epitome of urban origins in the
country and important reference points in the NUDP discourse.
The experts drafting the NUDP had taken note of shortfalls that excluded the
historic towns from effective participation in a number of previous urban upgrading
programmes and were impressed by the ongoing proposals to protect the Lamu
World Heritage site, through the upgrading of informal settlements that have
recently emerged on the periphery of the old town. The informal settlement of
Langoni, Gardeni and Bajuri which surround the old town is densely constructed
with no regard to building guidelines. These settlements are a potential source of
catastrophe to the old town. The poor planning and lack of necessary social
infrastructure are already causing a strain on the old town. These newer settlements
are also more susceptible to disasters such as fire and flooding (considering that
other buildings have been constructed on the town’s natural drain) which may easily
spread over to the historic core. Moreover, the informal settlements reflect nega-
tively on the presentation of the old town. Therefore, improving conditions in these
settlements is important to address the threat posed to the old town.
Highlighting urban heritage in the NUDP would open more opportunities for
future intervention in historic areas, including the integration of the latest innovative
approaches like HUL into the future urban upgrading initiatives.
17.3.1 Post Lamu HUL Workshop: Mapping Exercise
The 2011 Lamu Workshop on Historic Urban Landscapes (HUL) resolved that, as
part of the way forward, the WHC would support a fieldwork exercise to assist the
site management in the implementation of the concept of HUL by establishing pri-
ority conservation efforts in the preservation of the urban fabric.
The identified and approved exercise focused on the documentation of public
spaces and was undertaken through expert direction from the University of
Minnesota in close cooperation with the National Museums of Kenya and in col-
laboration with the University of Nairobi.
The first activity of the technical support programme was a 14-day (UNESCO
2013) training workshop on mapping for members of the Lamu World Heritage
Site and Conservation Office (LWHSCO), conducted by experts from the
University of Minnesota (UOM) in January 2012. The training workshop intro-
duced participants to a mapping tool that had been developed by the UOM for
documenting public open spaces within the old town. The database provided for
the incorporation of a location map, a photograph, GPS coordinates, notes and a
brief narrative of the square. The database formed the basis for a comprehensive
inventory of all public open spaces, including their current functions and uses.
Members of the LWHSCO team had ample opportunity to practice field collection
of data, preparation of specific location maps and data input into the database. A
training manual developed by the UOM was also presented to the LWHSCO for
future reference.
The second activity, the actual mapping, was conducted in April 2012.
Postgraduate students in urban design from the University of Nairobi took part in
the mapping exercise. The students also enriched the mapping exercise by giving a
critique and providing the LWHSCO with an overview of how to effectively buffer
the site form the envisaged Lamu mega-port project. Their input has provided means
for future collaboration with academia on finding practical solutions to the chal-
lenges of managing Lamu’s cultural heritage in light of the scheduled LAPPSSET
project.
A total of 32 open/public spaces were surveyed in detail during the exercise. The
key achievements of the exercise were the development of appropriate procedures
for identification and documentation of public/open spaces and the preparation of
an interactive map of squares for easy access to the data of each square. The partici-
pants also mapped out all the significant Swahili timber doors and covered streets
(Wikios) within the old town including GPS coordinates and photographs and pre-
pared a digital map.
17.4 I mplications of HUL Application and Integrating

the Approach
The dispensation of the new 2010 Kenya Constitution and the formation of the pre-
scribed devolved county governments brought to light new opportunities for resolv-
ing the urban challenges of Lamu Old Town. The newly devolved county
administration has had the benefit of skilled personnel and better resources to initi-
ate intervention programmes. The devolved units are also better placed to bargain
with the national government entities for participation in the ongoing urban support
programmes.
Through the new council of governors, urban centres that initially were not qual-
ified to participate in the slum upgrading programme successfully lobbied for their
inclusion. This particular intervention strategy has seen the initiation of projects
supported by the Kenya Slum Upgrading Programme implemented within the infor-
mal settlements in Lamu with the aim of improving their performance and outlook,
thereby protecting the presentation and functionality of the old town. The project
has seen the provision of paved pedestrian walkways and street lights. In order to
enhance the quality of life within the stone town for both visitors and residents, the
CGL has also provided a free Wi-Fi hotspot and built a tourist information centre.
Other ongoing infrastructure projects include fencing of the ancient graveyards,
rebuilding of the town gate and installation of CCTV cameras. The CGL in collabo-
ration with National Museums of Kenya (NMK) and tourism stakeholders have also
embarked on a rebranding project for the island town, dubbed the island of festivals,
that seeks to market the traditional festivities undertaken during the different sea-
sons and which has attracted a huge following. This initiative seeks to enhance
Lamu’s image as a centre of culture and the old town as the arena of centuries-old
cultural festivities.
The conceptualization of these beautification and upgrading projects was
informed by the outputs of the 2012 survey of public open spaces under the HUL
supported activities. The projects were spearheaded by senior county government
officers who had been seconded to the newly formed CGL and who had taken part
in the HUL workshop and follow-up activities.
17.4.1 I ntegrating HUL into Planning and Development

Processes of the Lamu County Spacial Plan
The new County Government Act compels all county governments to prepare
county integrated development plans, county spatial plans and sectoral plans as the
key budgeting tools for the respective governments. The County Government of
Lamu has been earnestly committed to developing these key plans and since 2014
has been preparing a county spatial plan (Fig. 17.4).
The county spatial plan has for the first time provided the basis for proper inte-
gration of protected landscapes into the future development ambitions of the
county. The spatial plan development also provided for the first time a platform
where the envisaged mega development projects earmarked for the district could be
discussed alongside the conservation needs of fragile ecosystems and protected
cultural sites. Lessons from development challenges experienced by other historic
sites across the globe have played a crucial role in defining alternative planning
solutions sensitive to protection and preservation of the sites and monuments within
Lamu County. For example, an ideal intervention which could be emulated in Lamu
is the Ngambo Tuitakayo (the desired other part of town) initiative in Zanzibar town
that is integrating HUL tools in the development of baseline surveys and needs
assessment for the redevelopment of urban sectors in the semi-informal areas of the
city (DoURP 2014).
Fig. 17.4 The Lamu County Spatial Plan has proposed a zoning plan for Lamu Island which
intends to protect the attributes of Lamu WHS and her complimentary buffer zone areas
The development of the specific area development plan for Lamu Old Town will
be articulated using planning tools introduced through the HUL workshops, and
there will be a focus on reclaiming public open spaces, especially within the sur-
rounding informal settlements. The CSP has laid out a structure plan as shown in
plate 8. The zoning plan is to be further developed in sector plans through a number
of objectives detailed in Chapter 13 of the CSP. This is the first time the county
government has developed an official document that comprehensively takes into
account the cultural heritage and also specifies how the actions will be achieved.
The development of the sector plans offers opportunities for integrating safeguards
for the site’s OUV that include the view cones and the mangrove forests that are a
setting for the island town.
17.4.2 Upgrading of Social Infrastructure
In 2014 the Kenyan government, through the Kenya Municipal Programme, rolled
out a series of training programmes on the preparation of Integrated Spatial
Development Plans (IDeP). The training programmes were aimed at providing local
leaders and decision-makers with the necessary tools and approaches to support
IDePs, which have been specified in the new 2010 Constitution as mandatory bud-
geting tools for the devolved county units. The County Government of Lamu took
part in the training programmes and was part of a cluster group whose training was
held in Malindi in June 2014. This training programme was an eye opener for the
CGL who was able to successfully request for technical and financial support from
national government agencies. The CGL received grants from the Kenya Slum
Upgrading Programme (K-SUP), for installation of street lights, laying of concrete
block paving and rehabilitation of water wells. The CGL had identified the impacts
on the historic core by the informal settlements, as discussed in 4.1, as one of the
key areas that required immediate attention. With information from the 2012 HUL
supported mapping exercise of public open spaces, the CGL was able to identify
which areas were to be given priority for upgrading. The CGL also received techni-
cal support for carrying out a baseline study on the informal settlements around
Lamu Town (K-SUP 2014) (Fig. 17.5).
17.5 Conclusion
Current projections show that Kenya’s urban population will only reach 50% of the
total population after 2050 (UN-Habitat 2015). However, urban development in
Kenya faces major challenges and is, hence, unable to cope with the rapid growth in
urban populations. The ancient towns of Lamu and Mombasa are also experiencing
the impacts of rapid urbanization and urban sprawl. The Old Town of Lamu, a World
Heritage site, has not featured prominently in the numerous urban support
Fig. 17.5 Rehabilitation of the town entrance (before and after)
programmes initiated to address the ever rising urban challenges in the country. This
exclusion may partly be attributed to the town’s peculiar characteristics that do not
fit into the criteria for national urban classification.
Over the last 10 years, the town has experienced an inordinate population growth
that has resulted in the development of informal settlements around the historic
core. These informal settlements lack social amenities, thus depending heavily on
the old town facilities including palatable water, public spaces, markets and shop-
ping. Most of the income-generating activities are also concentrated within the his-
toric core which has led to an increase in undesirable commercial activities such as
bicycle or motorcycle taxis, or boda boda as they are known in East Africa.
Kenya’s newly devolved system of governance provides possibilities for resolv-
ing Lamu’s urban challenges. These opportunities can be effectively harnessed
through tools prescribed by UNESCO’s new approach in historic urban manage-
ment. The Historic Urban Landscape tools will enable the managers of the site to
understand Lamu Town as a complex whole in which the natural setting, the historic
fabric and the urban formation, the residents and visitors and their collective cul-
ture, social life and livelihood are part of a “complex urban landscape ” (Fusco
Girard 2014, p. 17). All these constituent components of the urban whole must be
articulated in the urban development plans. Previous conservation plans for the old
town focused on the built heritage and at a later stage some cultural activities. The
scheduled spatial development plans need to address these discrepancies through
the notion that heritage-based urban regeneration can be used as a means to create a
sustainable urban development. In the particular case of Zanzibar, discussed above,
HUL is being used to create continuity between the Stone town and the Ngambo
area in the new urban development of the city (M. Callenberg 2016). Pilot studies
undertaken by Mia Callenberg in Mapembeani, an area rich of cultural history,
exemplify how history can be interpreted into the future ensemble. The study fur-
ther demonstrates how negative interventions can be avoided in the buffer zone
areas of the World Heritage site of Stone Town. The Zanzibar approach thus carries
significant lessons for the Lamu World Heritage site as the urban sectoral zoning
plans are being prepared.
References
Callenberg, M. (2016). Gothenburg, hidden stories and urban values Chalmers University.
Directorate of Antiquities Sites and Monuments. (2000). Lamu nomination Dossier. Nairobi,
National Museums of Kenya.
Directorate of Physical Planning. (1978). Report of the workshop/conference on conservation of
historic towns and monuments. Nairobi Government of Kenya.
Directorate of Urban and Rural Planning (DoURP). (2014). Enabling transformation of Zanzibar:
National spatial development strategy. Zanzibar.
Fusco Girard, L. (2014). Creative initiatives in small cities management. The landscape as an
engine for local development.
Ghaidan, U. (1976). Lamu: A study in conservation. Nairobi: The East African Literature Bureau.
K-SUP. (2014). Report on informal settlements upgrading in Lamu Technical Partnership between
the National and County Government.
Lamu County. (2013a). Nairobi, County integrated development plan-CIDP) Government Printer.
Lamu County. (2013b). First County integrated development plan.
LWHSCO. (2003). State of conservation report Lamu WHS. Lamu: National Museums of Kenya.
LWHSCO. (2011). Lamu HUL workshop report. Lamu: National Museums of Kenya.
LWHSCO. (2012). Final report on training and mapping of public open spaces exercise. Lamu:
NMK.
Maleche, Z. (2000). Profile Nairobi. Profile University of Nairobi. Retrieved from://profiles.uonbi.
ac.ke/zachariahmaleche/files/cv_maleche.pdf.
Siravo, F., & Pulver, A. (1986). Planning Lamu: Conservation of an East African seaport. Nairobi:
The National Museums of Kenya.
UNESCO. (2013). Paris, report on the historic urban landscape workshops and field activities on
the Swahili coast in East Africa 2011–2012.
Un-Habitat. (2015). Report on capacity building for county governments under the Kenya munici-
pal programme.
Chapter 18
Conservation and Exploitation:
Governance and Sustainability Issues:
The Case of Lijiang
Abstract This chapter focuses on Lijiang City, China, one of the most controversial
heritage sites in China. This site suffers from an excess of mass tourism, where eco-
nomic exploitation seriously undermines the conservation of the site. The difficulties
in dealing with tangible and intangible aspects are investigated while also addressing
the issue of institutional fragmentation. Indeed, the site is composed of three differ-
ent villages, with no coordination among them. Focusing on the major two (Dayan
and Shuhe), a tension between conservation and exploitation emerges, with an inter-
esting articulation of the notion of conservation. Neither site is able to find an ideal
balance between conservation of the material aspect (tangible) and the social fabric
of local population (and the Naxi minority in particular). Attempts to achieve this
balance have led to diverging approaches and results; one site protects the artifact but
feigns the social fabric, while the other has created a new area in the village to deflect
visitor attention, protecting the old town and its social and agricultural activity.
Keywords Management · Institutional fragmentation · Preservation and exploita-

tion · Mass tourism · Over-commodification · Trade-off
18.1 Introduction
This chapter focuses on Lijiang, one of the most controversial city sites in China,
often referred to as a case of over-commodification for mass tourism, which under-
mines the survival of the site itself (e.g., du Cros 2006). Within the Historic Urban
L. Zan (*)
Department of Management, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
e-mail: luca.zan@unibo.it
T. Wang
Pritzker Chair of Asian Art, Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
e-mail: twang@artic.edu

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_18
330 L. Zan and T. Wang
Landscape (HUL) debate (Bandarin and Van Oers 2014), Lijiang is explicitly
referred to as 1 of 39 cases demonstrating “potential harmful impacts of urban
development” as reported by the World Heritage Committee in 2007 (Van Oers
2010: 7).
This chapter uses the lenses of administration and management studies to ana-
lyze two specific elements of interest the contradiction between methods of dealing
with tangible and intangible heritage in sites and governance issues and the question
of institutional fragmentation in particular. Institutional fragmentation is an issue
affecting many heritage sites, including World Heritage and city sites. These ele-
ments are of relevance for the case of Lijiang in particular and potentially for the
whole debate on HUL.
The analysis is based on a field research on the management of Unesco World
Heritage sites in China (Wang and Zan 2011). The aim was to investigate the
impacts of being inscribed on the World Heritage list for individual Chinese sites,
through examining, for example, changes to professional aspects (conservation and
presentation), effects on visitors (numbers, profile, behaviors), and financial terms
(investment costs for fulfilling the procedure and coping with standards, additional
revenue, and costs after being listed). Rather than debating general policy issues, the
focus was on actual impacts at the local, micro, level and on day-to-day practices in
the selected institutions.
18.2 P
reservation vs Exploitation and the Issue
of Governance
Balancing preservation and exploitation is a crucial issue in heritage management,

involving a compromise between different imperatives. Mass tourism can easily
lead to unprecedented numbers of visitors in sites that become fashionable.
Economic exploitation of mass tourism makes alternative uses of sites problem-
atic – such as alternative and more traditional economic activities, e.g. agriculture,
and the sustainability of historical patterns of livelihoods of traditional inhabitants,
in this case 300,000 members of the Naxi minority – while undermining the conser-
vation of the site itself. Moreover, in the case of old towns and villages, the potential
contradiction between preserving the physical and the intangible, the linkage
between the two is a central element in the HUL debate (Van Oers 2010; Bandarin
and Van Oers 2014), is particularly pressing.
However, in this context, the influence of institutional aspects has been over-
looked, i.e., how governance issues are likely to have an impact on the dynamics
between preservation and exploitation. This is particularly relevant in case of insti-
tutional fragmentation, with unclear, ambiguous impacts on actual decision-making
processes.
Indeed, worldwide, institutional fragmentation is a common phenomenon in
heritage and is an administrative challenge, particularly for Unesco (Machu Picchu
18 Conservation and Exploitation: Governance and Sustainability Issues… 331
and the question of the “Management Unit” are perhaps the best example: Zan
2011). This is also one of the most interesting findings of our research, with various
important examples. The Great Wall World Heritage site actually consists of three
different locations (Badaling, Jiayuguan Pass, Shanhaiguan), under different admin-
istrative bodies, with little if any coordination between them; in turn, the Great Wall,
as such, is not run by any one administrative body. Qin Mausoleum and the Terracotta
Warriors have been run for a long period by two different bodies, causing controver-
sies and conflicts. Yin Xu is a single site, with a very unusual – and conflictual –
relationship between local authorities and the China Academy of Social Sciences,
wherein the latter is directly involved in the management of the site and the museum,
often with tension with the local government.
18.3 Lijiang Case (Or Cases)
The Old Town of Lijiang was inscribed on the World Heritage list in 1997:
The Old Town of Lijiang, which is perfectly adapted to the uneven topography of this key
commercial and strategic site, has retained a historic townscape of high quality and authen-
ticity. Its architecture is noteworthy for the blending of elements from several cultures that
have come together over many centuries. (http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/811)
Lijiang is a perfect example of institutional contradictions. The “site” is, in reality,

composed of three different locations, three old towns/villages: Dayan (the biggest
and most important, the one which is normally referred to when talking generally
about “Lijiang”), Shuhe, and Baisha. Curiously enough, the literature seems to
ignore the latter two. Only the Unesco Mission Report document clearly highlights
this issue (2008).
The site is also affected by institutional fragmentation. The three old towns are
run under two different administrations, without serious coordination between
them. Among those interviewed, there was no clear consensus on whether the office
in Dayan for Unesco issues (Heritage Monitoring Centre) should be in charge of
such coordination in the future. From this point of view, Lijiang, more than a single
case, represents three distinct cases, to a large extent unconnected.
Such a lack of connection represents both problems and opportunities. On one
hand, major problems include a lack of coordination, barriers to the diffusion of
“best practices,” and vested interests. However, on the other hand, such administra-
tive “anarchy” opens the way to the emergence of possible alternative solutions and
represents a barrier to diffusion of “worst” practices. In particular, this applies to the
issue of removing the Naxi people from historical centers, as we will see.
The following sections focus on Dayan and Shuhe, highlighting differences in
their developing paths (when the research was conducted, no major developments
were noted for the third village, Baisha, which seemed to be in a state of limbo, with
a pending proposal by the developer responsible for Shuhe to run the site directly,
using Shuhe as a model).
18.3.1 Conservation and Exploitation in Dayan
Dayan is one of the most controversial sites in the world. There was a massive res-
toration project in support of the nomination process, which continued after its
inscription in 1997. Also, a new museum was set up. Though a precise figure of the
investment is not available, the magnitude was “several million RMB,” according to
an interviewee at the municipal level.
Unesco Bangkok (2007) assigned an Award of Merit to Lijiang Ancient Town (in
reality referring to Dayan), for the safeguarding of vernacular heritage and the
implementation of conservation guidelines:
The conservation of 174 traditional houses in the World Heritage site of Lijiang Ancient
Town hallmarks a significant step forward in public-private efforts to safeguard vernacular
heritage. Through a matching grants program aimed particularly at underprivileged resi-
dents, the project has supported the upgrade of a historic townscape threatened by modern
urban development and the tremendous increase in tourism to the site. The implementation
of clear and easily-implemented conservation guidelines aimed at homeowners has guided
the process through the use of appropriate levels of technology, local materials and tradi-
tional methods of building repair and consolidation. The partnership between the residents,
management authorities, external conservation experts and donors allows for a broad-based
and participatory conservation approach within the framework of the overall World Heritage
site conservation management plan. (Unesco Bangkok 2007)
However, Lijiang still faces serious criticism, particularly related to the lack of mass
visitor management (McKann 2001; Yamamura 2004; Caddison 2007; du Cros
2006; Wang 2007). The trend is impressive, charting an increase from a few hun-
dred thousand at the beginning of the 1990s to six million in 2008, and at present
visitor numbers exceed 30 million (Table 18.1).1
To what extent such an explosion in visitor numbers is related to World Heritage
inscription is debatable (precise numbers are missing for the relevant years).
However, it gives the impression that World Heritage status had a more radical
impact than what would normally be expected. A special warning is perhaps neces-
sary in marketing heritage in China. When millions of visitors can travel to sites
with relative ease, there is a risk of losing control on acceptable numbers (the issue
of carrying capacity was never addressed in Dayan).
The parallel process of “museification” is astonishing. This has led to the site
becoming a “fake” city, where most of the houses are transformed into inns, B&Bs,
and trivial shops selling items that have nothing to do with local craft, for example,
CDs and souvenirs common anywhere in China (du Cros 2006). People have moved
out in more radical numbers than suggested in documents provided to Unesco:
“along the street in the most accessible areas for tourists, already 90 percent of the
original residents have moved out” (du Cros 2006: 211). On the whole, the number
of the original population has dropped to 20% (Street, 2004 as quoted in du Cros
2006).
We would like to thank Janli Yu from CACH, Beijing, for helping update this data.
1
Table 18.1 Visitor numbers and tourism income in Lijiang City

Number of visitors (and % domestic)
Year Total Domestic Overseas % Income (million Y)
1999 2,804,300 2,735,100 69,200 97.5 1.587
2000 2,903,700 2,811,500 92,200 96.8 1.866
2001 3,220,700 3,115,300 105,400 96.7 2.269
2002 3,375,100 3,226,700 148,400 95.6 2.337
2003 3,014,800 2,932,400 82,400 97.3 2.404
2004 3,601,800 3,509,700 92,100 97.4 3.176
2005 4,042,300 3,859,500 182,800 95.5 3.859
2006 4,600,900 4,292,200 308,700 93.3 4.629
2007 5,309,300 4,908,600 400,700 92.5 5.824
2008 6,254,900 5,789,100 465,800 92.6 6.954
2009 7,581,400 7,055,500 525,900 93.1 8.866
2010 9,099,700 8,488,300 611,400 93.3 11.246
2011 11,840,500 11,079,300 761,200 93.6 15.222
2012 15,991,000 15,144,000 847,000 94.7 21.121
2013 20,795,800 19,799,100 996,700 95.2 27.866
2014 26,638,100 25,561,200 1,076,900 96.0 37.879
2015 30,559,800 29,414,400 1,145,400 96.3 48.348
Source: http://www.ljta.gov.cn/
Moreover, in addition to museification, there are huge impacts in terms of the

community of people that were historically living the city. An interesting picture
emerged from an ethnographic interview with a taxi driver, with several critical
issues, first of all, related to day-to-day life of the Naxi minority (Interview with a
taxi driver, female, about 30, Naxi, August 24, 2009; live translation by Ding Li):
When I was young, my family used to live in the old town, Naxi was the only people that
lived there and the small town was very calm. Our old house was near the Dragon Lake
which is a clear lake located in the upper part of the town. It was not only the source of
drinking water, but also the water supply for other activities of the Naxi. The use of water
took place according to the rule: drinking water collection only early in the morning (once
collected and taken home the drinking water is stored in a huge water vat); after 10:00 a.m.
water is used for washing food for cooking, while 2:00 p.m. it’s washing time for clothes
only. The schedule of water uses was agreed and implemented by all the Naxi in the town.
After the out-comers came, we do not use the lake’s water anymore for drinking, because
the water, though still clear and clean, is being used by the out-comers not according to the
Naxi schedule and therefore not any more safe for drinking.
Above all, the impact was huge in terms of removing people (though on a volun-
tary base, through a market mechanism):
After the company came and invested in the Shuhe ancient town, the city has become bus-
ier…Many people like me who have their old houses in the town, rent their houses to out-
comers who do their business there. With the high income of the rent, we are able to build
our own villas or better/bigger houses outside of the town…Most people prefer to live
outside of the city in a new and better-equipped house…To build the new houses, we take
loans from the bank, but with the high rent it is easy to pay back the loan…
What is also interesting to note is the depth of the “new living standard” that was
affecting the Naxi taxi driver and the radical lack of understanding of other possible
alternatives:
There are still Naxi families who still live in town: they have a more conservative mentality
and do not want to change; however, their living standards have not been much improved…
I am renting my old house to out-comers who sell clothes, now I live in my new house
outside of the town. My husband and myself both drive taxi, me during the day, he through
the night…Nowadays, one needs to use his head to improve his life. There are people who
are lazy to change and to work more, they just stay in the old houses and remain as poor as
before. People who are diligent and willing to use his head to catch opportunities deserve a
better life.
Unesco (Paris) has also been critical over time, criticizing the commodification
of the site and the lack of a “complete comprehensive conservation master plan,
which should provide overarching principles for regional development and tourism
control as well as conservation guidelines, together with the Site management plan”
(Unesco 2007: 3). The carefully developed 2008 Mission Report underlines the
“unnecessary imbalance” between “the high quality of the design and layout…and
tourism development” (Unesco 2008: 16). The “authenticity of the site seems to be
at risk … partly because of the change of the lifestyle of the local community and
partly because of the commodification and/or commercialization of the Naxi and
Donba culture…[Its] cultural identity risks losing its integrity if urgent steps are not
taken” (Unesco 2008: 6). The overcrowded streets undermine the “authentic atmo-
sphere of the Old Town,” while “traditional activities have been replaced by the
tourism-related ones,” with “a serious drain and eventual loss of the cultural identity
of the Old Town of Lijiang” (Unesco 2008: 18). One could argue that this Unesco
document is already embedded with the HUL approach (the term “historical urban
landscape” is explicitly used a couple of times in the document). Though the term
“authenticity” has been challenged and discussed by a number of scholars, the
imbalanced development of the Lijiang site is obvious. It is a major concern that the
over-exploitation of the site will eventually lead to the destruction of the economy
and the lifestyle of the local population.
Moreover, noise pollution has become another serious issue destroying the atmo-
sphere of the old town, with music and performance totally unrelated to the local
culture:
Since 2003, the Old Town Business Permission Certificate was issued to ban new business
into the core area or large scale renovation for the business, and to ban unsympathetic com-
mercial use such as audio-video shops, karaoke bars, internet cafés, and discos… (Unesco
2008: 18)
However, a sharp increase of the influx of the visitors has made the street condi-
tions almost unmanageable, in peak season in particular, and some of the busiest
commercial streets in Dayan have become too overcrowded to maintain the authen-
tic atmosphere of the Old Town. Moreover, traditional activities on the streets and
main squares have almost entirely been replaced by tourism-related ones. This is
causing a serious drain on the cultural identity of the Old Town of Lijiang and will
lead to its eventual loss. For example, until the 1980s, Sifangjie Square, the main
square of Dayan Old Town, was a traditional trading venue for daily foodstuffs and
commodities for local residents. It is now the main gathering place for tourists.
(Unesco 2008).
Lack of institutional coordination inside Dayan is clearly acknowledged by the
same document:
…the Mission recognized the great efforts and commitment displayed by all different stake-
holders individually, but noted also the persisting lack of institutional coordination, accom-
panied by clear conservation policies/strategies and procedures guided by a single agreed
vision for the property. This situation undermines the effective management and conserva-
tion of the World Heritage property, and … the development of an effective management
system for the sustainable protection and development of the Old Town of Lijiang. (Unesco
2008: 20)
What emerges is a striking contradiction in the characterization of Dayan, which

is well reflected in the different positions of Unesco Bangkok (2007) and Unesco
Paris ( 2007; 2008), and further in the overarching conflict between physical authen-
ticity and the destruction of social meanings; between the “hardware” and the “soft-
ware,” in the words of du Cros (2006); or between the “artifact” and the “ritual,” in
Smith’s (2010) terms.
To such an already well known situation, this research adds some useful ele-
ments: first a contrasting position inside Unesco itself with Bangkok and Paris hold-
ing opposite positions in the same period and, second, despite the mission stating
that “urgent action plans including the elimination of the karaoke bars and discos
from the core zone of Dayan old town by 3 January 2008, had been fully imple-
mented” (Unesco 2008: 20), in August 2009 the situation remained unchanged, as
can be seen in a video clip depicting the continuing of discos, karaoke, and noise
pollution that the Unesco Report assumed were going to be stopped (Zan 2011,
available on Internet).
Third, and most important, local administrators were questioned regarding their
motivations, particularly why they allow developments that lead to noise pollution,
for example, karaoke bars. One answer by an official at the city level was disarming:
“It is the market that wants this” (interview with a city administrator, April 24,
2009). This indicates a sort of a bizarre form of market fundamentalism in a social-
ist country, which ignores that market force can and must be regulated.
In contrast, the director of the Provincial Cultural Relics Bureau in Kunming
shared the views of the critics (interview on 24.04.09). He expressed concern
about over-commodification. “The problem is that we are lacking institutional
mechanisms at the Province level, toward city administrators, there is no way to
stop them, if not persuasion.” If that is true, Lijiang provides perhaps another
example of the excess of decentralization that characterizes China (Zan 2014a, b;
Guo et al. 2008).
18.3.2 O
utsourcing to a Private Developer: Conservation
and Exploitation in Shuhe
A totally different solution can be found in Shuhe, the second location of the Lijiang
World Heritage site. Given the total lack of municipal resources at the beginning of
the process, management of the site was contracted to a nonlocal developer:
The developer was chosen amongst the most important developers in Kunming, with a good
reputation, with good cultural education, and well aware of regulations prior to investing.
(interview with 24.04.09)
A rather unusual solution was suggested. They would not profit from commercial
exploitation of the old town but rather create a new area with buildings in the style
of the old town (see Fig. 18.1). In this area houses would be sold to private people,
parking places would be provided, and attendance fees would be charged (visiting
this area requires a separate ticket to the Dayan one). Also, some funding was pro-
vided to support traditional agricultural cultivation by local inhabitants. Since 2003,
the company invested 500 million RMB while still making a profit with this original
business model, including private investment in new construction and social activi-
ties (agriculture and old house conservation; income from house selling and
tickets).
Fig. 18.1 Boundary
identification map of world
cultural heritage. Shuhe
region. (Source: Unesco
2008: 43)
The new town is totally “fake” and largely “Disneyfied.” Unfortunately – one of
the Unesco criticisms (Unesco 2008:8–9) – there is not a clear distinction between
the new (fake) and the old part of the town. Interestingly, however, the great major-
ity of visitors remain in the initial, new, part of the town, leaving the upper, old, part
in peace, wherein the traditional social and economic activity seem to continue.
Though additional investigation is needed, what emerges is almost the opposite
of the contradiction in Dayan. A physical intervention of new buildings in an artifi-
cial old style is coupled with a greater degree of preservation of social meanings
(the life of locals in the old part, including agricultural activity). However, reloca-
tion of original residents still seems to take place even in this case; according to the
interviewed taxi driver, 1 year of rent allows residents to buy a house outside of the
village.
18.4 Discussion
Despite Lijiang case being one of the most studied in China (du Cros 2006: 206), and
despite the need for further research findings in the overall area of Unesco sites in
China (Wang and Zan 2011), something can nonetheless be addressed on this basis.
The World Heritage site of the Old Town of Lijiang constitutes three separate
cases, which each present very different solutions and results, both in conservation
and exploitation. Any discussion should be able to take into account the internal
division within the World Heritage site. In that context, these individual locations
(here focusing on Dayan and Shuhe) face, along with the impact of mass tourism
and the associated economic exploitation, very different threats, for example, the
destruction of the social fabric and the exodus of 300,000 Naxi people and the trans-
formation of the city into a tourist enclave in Dayan and parallel threats of removal
of local people and the abandoning of traditional agricultural activity in Shuhe.
Different solutions can be found, with almost opposite results in terms of physi-
cal and social conservation in Dayan and Shuhe. In Dayan well-designed physical
preservation is coupled with the disruption of the social fabric, while in Shuhe the
construction of a new mock old town has helped preserve social habits in the actual
old town (Fig. 18.2).
Differences between Dayan and Shuhe can also be seen in the different forms of
exploitation. Shuhe seems to allow a process of segmentation, where visitors with
only marginal interest can stop in the more entertainment-oriented part of the town,
while more engaged visitors have a chance to appreciate the poetic, calm atmo-
sphere of the old town. In the upper, authentic, part of Shuhe, the locals can also
continue the basic functions of their lives. This segmentation is not possible in the
mass tourism exploitation in Dayan. Moreover, a difference between short and long-
term exploitation emerges. In Dayan, where they are not expecting a return visit,
they have opted for a harvest strategy, compared to a more complex strategy of
value generation in Shuhe.
Fig. 18.2 Trade-off
between conservation and
Physical impact
exploitation: tangible vs Authenticity Reconstruction
intangible
Preservation
Shuhe
Social Impact
Disruption
Dayan
Though requiring further investigation, from an institutional point of view, Shuhe

represents a potentially interesting example of outsourcing and involvement of pri-
vate investors. For, in the words of the Province Director of the Cultural Relics
Bureau, referring to an underlying institutional/ governance dilemma, “it is easier to
deal with independent firms. They are less oriented to profit maximization than
local administrators.”
18.5 Concluding Remarks
On the basis of this research, some conclusions can be drawn with implications
reaching beyond the Lijiang cases alone.
This case illustrates a curious internal conflict within Unesco itself (the 2007
Unesco Bangkok award versus the criticism of the 2008 Unesco mission).This is
perhaps a sign of an incomplete establishment of the HUL approach at that time
even between various articulations of Unesco offices.
This research also demonstrated that institutional settings represent a crucial
issue that has been rarely addressed in heritage research and intervention (in general
and in China). The trade-off between preservation and exploitation that in general
characterizes heritage management has to be strongly linked to institutional settings
and governance.
Further, particularly in the case of World Heritage sites, whether institutional
solutions should be considered a local issue or rather should be identified before (for
instance, as a precondition of inscription) is a delicate, controversial, open issue.
While imposing or calling for institutional solutions from outside might cause or
aggravate political issues, the reference to local administrative traditions – an argu-
ment often used by national administrations to resist similar requests – has no link
at all with broader identity processes. (Indeed this is far from being a Chinese prob-
lem only: see the over-fragmented situation of Ravenna, Italy, with eight separated
Unesco sites: http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/it.)
The crucial importance of monitoring the impact of World Heritage inscription is
illustrated in Dayan. The astonishing trend in visitor figures at Dayan remains unex-
plained, perhaps other determinants were/are in place, aside from the inscription
itself. However, understanding the impacts of the inscription would help prevent
similar mass development in the future.
Solutions to related issues, such as defining carrying capacity, are not self-evident
and should be anticipated. The sooner these potential issues can be anticipated, the
better. The explosion of visitor numbers, and how this increase in numbers has been
managed, makes Lijiang a case of worst practice that can provide an example of
how these issues should not be addressed.
In addition, in terms of visitor numbers, the Dayan case seems to corroborate a
tendency for polarization between poor and too-rich heritage sites: failing to survive
the former and risking physical/social devastation the latter, ironically a choice
between being killed by financial unsustainability and by profit maximization.
The remarkable differences within the same World Heritage site (Lijiang) can be
emphasized. The “creative solution” of Shuhe – faking the physical while protecting
the social, in complete contrast with Dayan – is in itself interesting.
To conclude on a less pessimistic note, recent years have seen some improve-
ments in China, with new achievements in terms of monitoring. On October 9,
2015, following a secret service quality inspection on some of the most debated 5
A-grade scenic spots, the China National Tourism Administration gave a serious
warning to the Yunnan Lijiang ancient scenic spot area while canceling 5 A-class
scenic spots in Shanhaiguan, Qinhuangdao city in Hebei (http://www.echinatravel.
com/china-trains/the-national-tourism-administration-processing-part-of-the-sce-
nic-spots.html).
References
Bandarin, F., & van Oers, R. (Eds.). (2014). Reconnecting the City: The Historic Urban Landscape
Approach and the Future of Urban Heritage. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Caddison, A. C. (2007). Disappearing world. London: Collins.
du Cros, H. (2006). Managing visitor impacts at Lijiang, China. In A. Leask & A. Fyall (Eds.),
Managing world heritage sites. Butterworth-Heinemann.
Guo, Y., Zan, L., & Liu, S. (2008). The management of cultural heritage in China. General trends
and a micro-focus on the Luoyang municipality. Egea, Milano (available as print-on-demand
at www.egeaonline.it).
McKann, C. F. (2001). The good, the bad and the ugly: observations and reflections on tourism
development in Lijiang, China. In C. B. Tan, C. H. Cheung, & H. Yang (Eds.), Tourism, anthol-
ogy and China. Bangkok: White Lotus Press.
Smith, J. (2010). Marrying the old with the new historic urban landscape. In R. van Oers,
S. Haraguchi (Eds.) Managing historic cities, World heritage papers # 27.
Unesco. (2007). Decision 32COM 7B.67 – Old Town of Lijiang (China) (C 811). http://whc.
unesco.org/en/decisions/1674
Unesco. (2008) MISSION REPORT Old Town of Lijiang (China) (811), 10–19 January, WHC-
07/31.COM/7B.
Unesco Bangkok. (2007). http://globalheritagefund.org/index.php/in_the_news/press_releases/
ghf_applauds_lijiang_ancient_town_receiving_2007_unesco_award.
Van Oers, R. (2010). Managing cities and the historic urban landscape initiative – An introduction.
In R. van Oers, & S. Haraguchi (Eds.). Managing historic cities (World heritage papers, 27).
Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Wang, Y. (2007). Customized authenticity begins at home. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(3),
789–804.
Wang, T., & Zan, L. (2011). Management and presentation of Chinese sites for Unesco World
Heritage List. Facilities, 29(7/8), 313–325.
Yamamura, T. (2004). Authenticity, ethnicity and social transformation at World Heritage Sites:
Tourism, retailing and cultural change in Lijiang, China. In D. Hall (Ed.), Tourism and transi-
tion, governance, transformation and development. Oxford: CABI Pub.
Zan, L. (2011). Preservation and exploitation. Lijiang old town, China. http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=mnVYVzY6U3U
Zan, L. (2014a). Cultural heritage in China between policies, development, professional discourse
and the issue of managing. Public Archaeology Journal, 13(1–3), 99–112.
Zan, L. (2014b). New approaches to heritage administration in China. In C. Smith (Ed.),
Encyclopaedia of global archaeology: Cultural heritage management section. New York:
Springer.
Chapter 19
Managing the Global Heritage City
of Mexico City: Adapting the HUL
Approach to the Globalised Urban Context
Deniz Ikiz Kaya
Abstract This chapter explores the complexities of adapting the HUL approach to
the context of global heritage cities through the analysis of Mexico City, assessing
its existing urban heritage planning and management systems and identifying effec-
tive policies and tools for the implementation of the toolkit addressed in the Historic
Urban Landscape (HUL) Recommendation. The assessment of this case leads to the
identification of complexities and analysis of best tools adopted by different stake-
holders to cope with the management challenges. In parallel with the HUL toolkit,
these specific instruments and strategies include the adoption of an integral manage-
ment plan that conducts vulnerability assessment and strengthens the capacities of
relevant parties to execute programmes, the establishment of innovative partnership
models and grassroots initiatives as an effective community engagement tool that
brings together voluntary groups, experts and local administrative bodies, along
with the assignment of a site management unit and a local peripheral body to serve
as a catalyst and enhance better communication among stakeholders. Focusing spe-
cifically on Mexico City, this chapter intends to make an original contribution to
literature by introducing the size, scope and complexities of global cities to the
management of historic urban landscape discourse. Furthermore, it defines a new
perspective for the adaptation of the HUL approach to the globalised urban context
and tests the feasibility and effectiveness of the tools developed in the
Recommendation.
Keywords Global heritage city · Historic urban landscape · Historic Centre of

Mexico City · Community engagement · Grassroots heritage · Integral manage-
ment plan
D. Ikiz Kaya (*)
Ozyegin University, Istanbul, Turkey
e-mail: deniz.kaya@ozyegin.edu.tr

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_19
342 D. Ikiz Kaya
19.1 Introduction: Global Heritage Cities
This chapter focuses on the management of historic urban landscapes located within
global cities, referred as global heritage cities hereafter, which encounter high lev-
els of administrative, economic and social complexities. In this rapidly globalising
world, the binary approach of managing change in historic cities while promoting
their sustainable development and transmission to future generations has been a
daunting task. It is further complicated for global heritage cities by a number of
issues: engagement with global actors in addition to a broad range of stakeholders
in the decision-making processes; limitations of the existing legislative and admin-
istrative frameworks to meet the competing demands of all relevant parties; and
increasing development pressures that create a dilemma for local administrative
bodies struggling to find a balance between global principles of urban conservation
while securing adequate funding to ensure development all contribute to their
unique management challenges. Now acknowledged as a leverage for more inclu-
sive and resilient cities as part of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, cultural
heritage plays a crucial role as a driver of sustainable development. The develop-
ment pressures inherent in global cities thus bring out the needs and complexities
necessary to be addressed in different fronts, not just advocating developments to
cope with the requests for more housing and infrastructure but also to improve the
quality of living, which is strongly rooted in their identity and manifested in their
heritage attributes.
In this contemporary era of globalisation, the traditional planning and heritage
discourses fail to provide a convincing framework for values and roles attributed to
historic cities by modern societies while addressing the interests of global actors, as
well as governmental bodies, citizens and users. The current literature is mostly
focused on different aspects of urban heritage and development, which still regard
heritage protection, urban development, economic gains and goals of sustainable
development as different spheres of knowledge. Hence, the existing theoretical
framework and practices have emphasised the urge for a more inclusive and inte-
grated approach. The recent policy documents and supporting toolkits promote such
an ethical, inclusive and holistic approach that intend to create a stronger basis for
the sustainable development of historic urban landscapes. The Historic Urban
Landscape (HUL) Recommendation presents a wide range of new interdisciplinary
tools including policies and actions organised under four categories to be adapted to
suit each local context (UNESCO WHC 2011). Acting as a soft law, the
Recommendation stimulates the state parties and local governments to integrate this
approach into their existing policies, management tools and regulatory systems on
a voluntary basis (Bandarin and Van Oers 2015). Hence, its implementation depends
on the commitment of the local administrators to adapt their existing management
and planning frameworks in accordance with the toolkits and action plans
provided.
The initial studies and pilot programmes concerned with the implementation of
the HUL approach to local contexts contributed to the identification of gaps in the
19 Managing the Global Heritage City of Mexico City: Adapting the HUL Approach… 343
existing management strategies and fostered the development of additional actions

by international intergovernmental bodies through technical and financial assistance
packages, educational tools and formation of a monitoring process. A number of
pilot cities were then selected from around the world, which demonstrated how a
variety of HUL tools were implemented in different local contexts and contributed
to building of a cooperative network for historic urban landscapes (Bruin et al.
2013; De Rosa and Di Palma 2013; Van Oers and Haraguchi 2013; Bennink et al.
2013; Buckley et al. 2016; Siguenca Avila and Rey Perez 2016). Considering the
range of these pilot cities worldwide, it is observed that cities of small or medium
scale with less stakeholders being involved in the management processes are more
willing to engage with international intergovernmental organisations and advisory
teams in order to test the adaptability of this approach into their existing national
and local frameworks. These case studies have also clearly demonstrated that prac-
tices vary considerably based on the size and geo-cultural background of the sites
(Van Oers and Pereira Roders 2013; UNESCO 2013; Bandarin and Van Oers 2015;
WHITRAP 2016). With the existence of a wide variety of theories, definitions and
studies concerned with urban development and heritage management practices,
complemented with policies, laws and regulations already available, it is essential to
critically reflect, redevelop and reiterate the existing theoretical and practical under-
standing of the processes and actors engaged in the decision-making of historic
cities in the realm of globalisation and urban development. Referring to the limits of
these existing frameworks and practices, hence, there has been a compelling need
for a more thorough conceptualisation that positions urban conservation within the
overall urban management process specific for global heritage cities and testing of
its wider applicability in globalised urban practices.
In this context, this chapter explores the complexities of adapting the HUL
approach to the context of global heritage cities through a case study analysis, to
assessing its existing urban heritage planning and management systems and identi-
fying effective policies and tools for the implementation of the toolkit addressed in
the Recommendation. This aim is achieved through the following objectives: the
analysis of the World Heritage Site (WHS) and its state of conservation based on
issues of safeguarding of its integrity and authenticity; the assessment of its existing
urban governance, legislative and planning frameworks; the mapping out of its
decision-making mechanism and processes; and the identification of its effective
management instruments and practices in association with the six-step HUL
toolkit.
For this purpose, the multilayered historic urban landscape of the global city of
Mexico City is selected as the case study. Its selection is based on a set of criteria
including its multilayered historical urban morphology, its designation as a megac-
ity with population size exceeding 10 million, its position in the globalised urban
system and the existence of some sort of effective management mechanism. For the
case study analysis, qualitative data is collected through a critical literature review
drawn on primary, secondary sources of data and mass media outputs and the con-
duct of focused interviews with the representatives of key decision-makers
344 D. Ikiz Kaya
p articipating in the management system at local, metropolitan, national and interna-

tional stages. The analysis of the gathered qualitative data leads to identification of
complexities and the evaluation of tools adopted by different stakeholders to coun-
ter the management challenges.
19.2 M
exico City in Context: Complexities, Framework
and Governance
19.2.1 The Site
Expanded vastly in the second half of the twentieth century as a result of neoliberal
economic development and rapid urbanisation trends, Mexico City is now one of
the largest global cities. Its rapidly growing population, over 21 million at urban
agglomeration level, and presence of risks of multiple natural hazards, including
earthquakes, flooding and landslides, in addition to various socio-economic, politi-
cal and cultural factors emerging from the challenges of striking a balance between
global positioning strategies and creating a liveable, equitable and sustainable habi-
tat for a growing number of citizens, generate a high number of complexities in
regard to its urban administration and sustainable development. All these factors
overwhelm the management system of this historic urban landscape.
The Historic Centre of Mexico City was inscribed on the UNESCO World
Heritage List in 1987 jointly with the southern lakeside colonial town of Xochimilco
as a serial cultural property. The urban morphology of the Historic Centre embrac-
ing the built heritage of three consecutive civilisations at the heart of the city consti-
tutes the tangible cultural assets of the city endorsed for its worldwide promotion
within the global urban network. The reason behind this dual inscription, as
explained in the advisory body evaluation, was that the Historic Centre could be
designated as a WHS only if it was inscribed together with Xochimilco based on the
following assessment: “It is difficult to formulate a nomination concerning the mon-
uments, group of buildings or sites that are located at the heart of the major contem-
porary city whose origins and growth they most fully and clearly illustrate. In the
case of the capital of Mexico, it is truly a case of attempting the impossible
(ICOMOS 1987)”. This statement clearly demonstrates the earlier limitations of the
previous lexicon and doctrinal documents to cope with the challenges of managing
change in complex global heritage cities, prior to the adoption of the HUL approach,
which embodies a broader and holistic landscape perspective.
As Fig. 19.1 demonstrates, the territorial range of the Historic Centre WHS coin-
cides with the occupied area as designated by the presidential decree in the nine-
teenth century. It was designated as a Historic Monuments Zone in 1980 by the
federal governmental body and was subdivided into two perimeters (A and B): the
Perimeter A stands for the multilayered historic core where the majority of the
buildings with historical and cultural values are concentrated, and Perimeter B
Fig. 19.1 Protection zones A and B depicted in the map of Historic Centre. (Source: Comprehensive
Management Plan of Historic Centre of Mexico City, 2011–2016)
forms the external borders of the Historic Centre where the late nineteenth- and
twentieth-century modern buildings are located. Currently, Perimeter A defines the
limits of the World Heritage Site inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1987, and
Perimeter B stands for the buffer zone surrounding the designated site. Alba
Gonzales et al. (2017) point out that this delineation of the central area based on the
legal protection status of the built heritage resulted in a geographic fragmentation
disregarding the tangible heritage assets and values attributed to the site.
Although the Historic Centre of Mexico City has been capable of preserving and
sustaining the outstanding universal values attributed to the site, there have been
serious conservation challenges, especially in the second half of the twentieth cen-
tury. Keeping in mind that the historical city was built on shifting silt and mud of the
former lakebed in an area of continuous seismic activity and in close proximity to
two active volcanoes, the historic urban area is constantly threatened by natural
disasters and catastrophes. In addition to these natural risks, the Historic Centre has
been under the threat of numerous socio-economic, urban and cultural elements,
which can be summarised as follows: urban and economic development pressures,
deterioration and decay of the historic built fabric, congestion and environmental
pollution, lack of adequate infrastructure and lack of sufficient human and financial
resources. Additionally, it encountered a substantial population loss since the sec-
ond half of the twentieth century, despite being a popular visiting site at the core of
the city. In response to such threats and the substantial decline of the Historic Centre
346 D. Ikiz Kaya
since the 1950s, specific actions taken for the revitalisation of the historic urban
quarter and the restoration of the built heritage were initiated by the local authorities
in the late twentieth century. These series of urban revitalisation projects and the
establishment of grassroots initiatives and public-private partnerships specific for
the Historic Centre encouraged investment and development while fostering regen-
eration and liveability for the local community. These particular preservation actions
and partnership models are presented in more detail in Sect. 3 concerning normative
management tools.
19.2.2 Planning and Legislative Frameworks
The legislative framework concerning the designation, protection and management

of cultural heritage in Mexico relies on a periodic categorisation that groups historic
sites and properties in accordance to their historical periods. The authorising legis-
lation enacted in 1980 designates cultural heritage under three categories based on
temporal features: archaeological heritage for sites originating from the origins of
human occupation until the Spanish conquest in 1521; historical heritage for prop-
erties dating from the conquest until the end of the nineteenth century; and artistic
heritage for assets belonging to the twentieth or twenty-first century (López 2007).
In fact, the main distinction between the responsibility delineations of two national
administrative bodies responsible for cultural heritage, the National Institute of
Anthropology and History (INAH) and the National Institute of Fine Arts (INBA),
depends on a similar periodic division that separates heritage properties as historical
or artistic assets. This legal delimitation relying on a timeframe was criticised by
some experts for giving priority to one period over another by means of heritage
representation and interpretation (Escalante Carrillo 2013).
The same legislative act is also in effect for the regulation of cultural heritage
through the designation of protected areas by the president and their denomination
of Monuments Zone, either as archaeological, historic or artistic properties, accord-
ingly (Guzman 2011). Bearing in mind that there is no planning legislation specified
for the safeguarding of World Heritage Sites, the Historic Centre of Mexico City is
under the statutory protection of the national preservation legislation. The site was
designated as a Historic Monuments Zone in 1980, which brings to fore its colonial
heritage over the pre-Hispanic and consecutive periods.
19.2.3 Governance and Decision-Making
The Mexican governance structure is a federal system consisting of 31 states and a

single federal district. Individually, Mexico City includes the federal district, which
is an exceptional political entity established in 1928 with a unique administrative
status. It is branched into a central department consisting of 16
political-administrative units called delegaciones. In January 2016, an amendment

to the national constitution officially changed the capital’s status from a federal
district to an autonomous entity, simply known as Mexico City. This new entity
takes on some of the administrative power and responsibilities of the rest of the
states, such as having its own constitution and congress, and the delegaciones will
act as municipalities with their own elected mayors (Scruggs 2017). The complex
spatial configuration and fragmentary nature of the urban administrative system
further complicate the governance of the global city.
Processes of decentralisation and democratisation have altered the urban gover-
nance structure in Mexico through grassroots empowerment that encourages the
participation of private and voluntary sectors and the promotion of entrepreneurship
in policy goals (Guarneros-Meza 2009). Since the first federal elections held in
1997 (Wirth 2006), a new federal government system has also promoted multi-actor
partnerships through encouragement of public participation in decision-making and
collaboration among public, private and voluntary sectors in order to foster national
and local economic development with the support of international organisations
such as the UN, World Bank and OECD. The rise in voluntary associations also
stimulated an increased involvement of grassroots-oriented groups relying on neigh-
bourhood and/or community movements in the local decision-making mechanisms.
The private sector, on the other hand, has mostly appeared in partnership arrange-
ments, either through involvement in the government investment planning commit-
tees, through joint ventures with local governments in land development projects, or
as contractors in public works (Davey et al. 1996). The participation of wealthy
business groups in such partnerships has also had a great impact on their
effectiveness.
In parallel with the multifaceted urban governance structure, a highly complex
decision-making mechanism operates in the Historic Centre of Mexico City that
involves the participation of a broad range of international, national, federal and
local stakeholders in the management process at different stages. The conflicting
priorities and overlapping functionalities of certain actors, paired with the unique
fragmented nature of national and federal government, complicate the effective
operation of the management structure. The following images (Figs. 19.2 and 19.3)
exhibit the stakeholders actively involved in the decision-making mechanism and
depict the direct interactions among actors of different levels.
The main international decision-maker is the UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Taking into account its sanction power and its direct interactions with the intergov-
ernmental agencies, and a number of national and local agents including INAH, it
has a dominant role in the decision-making even though its distance to the actual
operations makes it a rather less influential actor. At the national level, INAH domi-
nates the decision-making processes based on its highly institutionalised structure
and its technical specialisation in conservation (Guarneros-Meza 2009). It is the
national governmental body with the highest rate of interactions with stakeholders
from varying positions, whereas other national actors have limited direct involve-
ment with the site. Then at the regional level, the federal government is responsible
for the regulation and administration of the territory. It has intervened in the
348 D. Ikiz Kaya
Fig. 19.2 The decision-making mechanism operating at the Historic Centre
decision-making of urban revitalisation programmes for the Historic Centre through

the establishment of public-private partnerships and provision of financial resources,
which has sustained the governmental centralisation of power (Guarneros-Meza
2009). Thus, cultural policy-making has become more permeable to citizen
participation.
In response to the lack of effective coordination between diverse parties, the
Historic Centre Authority (Autoridad – AUC) was established in 2007 with the aim
Fig. 19.3 The interactions among stakeholders
of coordinating and managing the decision-making processes through the involve-

ment of all the relevant actors. According to the social network analysis based on the
frequency of interactions among stakeholders (Fig. 19.3), the most prominent
decision-maker is this Authority that acts as a catalyst for maintaining dialogue. In
partnership with the other autonomous governmental agent, the Historic Centre
Trust, both of these entities are responsible for all the projects employed at the
Historic Centre. While the Authority is in charge of the preparation and execution of
the management plan and associated projects, the Trust operates the decisions given
by the Authority and formulates communication and action mechanisms. The
decision-making mechanism for Mexico City WHS thus manifests a bottom-up
350 D. Ikiz Kaya
approach that portrays the local administrative units including the Authority and the
Trust as the most prominent actors that are actively engaged with most of the stake-
holders in the management process. The decentralisation and democratisation pro-
cesses mediate the administrative powers at a local level. In parallel, participatory,
consultative and transparent mechanisms empower grassroots and civic groups in
decision-making while allowing the establishment of innovative partnership
models.
19.3 Normative Tools for HUL Adaptation
The national, federal and local governmental bodies have developed certain strate-
gies and instruments that have been effective in coping with the above-outlined
challenges. Although most of these actions were taken prior to the adoption of the
HUL Recommendation, they are in accordance with the six-step toolkit presented
for the adaptation of the HUL approach at local contexts. Moreover, the measures
taken in the aftermath have been more consciously driven towards a holistic land-
scape approach even though a HUL definition is not yet officially integrated into the
existing legislative and planning frameworks. In this context, this section introduces
two main management tools, the integral management plan for the Historic Centre
and the innovative partnership models that contribute to the elaboration of the HUL
approach by means of documentation, assessment and mapping, community
engagement and consensus building.
19.3.1 The Integral Management Plan
In response to the global exhort from the World Heritage Committee for the enforce-
ment of some sort of effective management systems for WHS in general, a new
inclusive management model was implemented for the Historic Centre of Mexico
City following a series of urban regeneration interventions, activated by the
Recovery and Public Commerce Programmes, that respond to these demands and
empower the civil society for participation. The federal government collaborated
with the Historic Centre Authority and the Historic Centre Trust to commit to the
coordination and management planning. The Authority was in fact created for the
sole purpose of coordination and management of the heritage site and to execute
and monitor the management plan together with the FCH. The planning process
engaged various other actors participating at different stages, including the govern-
mental entities, independent local governmental parties, private actors, universities
and experts, and it was adopted in 2011.
The management plan sets a framework of principles and guidelines to promote
the protection and revitalisation of the historic core and to support its sustainable
development. Its objectives are listed as follows: to protect and maintain the
o utstanding universal values attributed to the site; to preserve both the tangible and
intangible heritage attributes of the centre; to foster social, economic and urban
development; to generate participatory mechanisms; and to build tools for evalua-
tion and monitoring (APDF 2011). Its medium- and long-term strategy guidelines
include the designation of action zones for urban and economic revitalisation, prep-
aration of an inventory of its listed historic buildings and sites, the execution of
urban rehabilitation and housing recovery projects, the vulnerability assessment of
the built heritage and identification of properties at risk, reordering of urban mobil-
ity and improvement of connectivity between various means of public transporta-
tion and actions to improve the quality of life through citizen training and
participatory planning workshops (APDF 2011).
The integral management plan thus provides tools to designate the significance
of the site and determine the values attributed to it, to document and map its built
heritage, to assess vulnerability of these attributes and risk-preparedness and to pri-
oritise programmes of urban rehabilitation and housing recovery. It also serves as a
basis for cooperation between national, federal and local stakeholders. Its operating
schemes involve participation of agents from the public and private sectors and civil
society and enactment of institutional agreements between federal premises for
preservation issues and autonomous local government organs. In this regard, this
plan is conceived as an effective management tool that facilitates the implementa-
tion of the HUL approach in its specific context. It is permeable to regular modifica-
tions to meet the constantly changing circumstances and to adapt the broader
landscape perspective. Its flexibility is further affirmed by the interview subjects
representing numerous decision-makers based on its mediator role to facilitate
inter-institutional coordination and its ability to strengthen the capacities of relevant
parties to execute the strategies and programmes indicated within. The success of
the plan to cope with the management complexities of an urban landscape under
constant transformation also relied on the policy of permanent action adopted by the
plan, as it was asserted by a UNAM scholar interviewed. The Authority representa-
tive further highlighted its pioneering role within the Latin America and Caribbean
region for elaborating management strategies and instruments adequate for complex
historic city centres.
19.3.2 T
he Partnership Models, Community Engagement
and Consensus Building
In the past few decades, a consensus has grown based on the necessity to engage the
private sector in urban regeneration efforts, notably property owners and investors,
in order to relieve pressure on public finances. Innovative mechanisms for the reha-
bilitation of the urban centre were developed through financial incentives and agree-
ments with international institutions that kindled an interest among private partners,
including global corporations and commercial actors, in cultural heritage projects
352 D. Ikiz Kaya
when paired with a favourable legislation supporting the use of tax deduction.
Despite being previously relegated to the realm of experts, urban heritage issues
have also been gradually appropriated by the members of civil society, in parallel
with the democratisation processes. Residents and local community groups have
increasingly become aware of the connection between quality of life and urban heri-
tage, and a wide network of NGOs has emerged in favour of improved urban envi-
ronments that act as channels of communication to participate in social and political
networks.
The initial regeneration partnership for the Historic Centre was fostered through
the creation of the Historic Centre Trust (FCH) in 1990. Originally a private institu-
tion, it was delegated to manage and administer the initial urban rehabilitation proj-
ects and operated small-scale projects from monetary funds, donations and
investments of the private sector. Its board members consisted of representatives of
the federal and city government, private actors and civil society organisations, thus
manifesting the PPP collaboration. It was then reactivated in 2002 as a federal gov-
ernmental body fund in order to coordinate the activities undertaken by numerous
public institutions and private investors. As the subdirector of FCH explained during
the interview, the Trust functions as a decentralised entity of the government that
primarily focuses on the operation of practical activities in the Historic Centre.
Furthermore, they have established specific platforms of dialogue and cooperation
for the society to be involved in the decisions given. The Director General of FCH
stated that public participation is ensured through regular meetings with neighbour-
hood councils (la junta de vecinos) that represent the diverse range of community
living and working in the Historic Centre. He also indicated that FCH organises
formative courses and distributes publications to raise awareness among citizens.
The second urban revitalisation PPP was constituted with the formation of a
Consultative Council in 2001 to coordinate various stakeholders involved in the
rehabilitation of the Historic Centre and to promote the rescue and preservation of
the site in response to the concerns of abandonment and derelict. This Council was
composed of 125 members including representatives of various social groups, along
with an executive committee composed of three ministers of the federal government,
three federal secretaries and four representatives of the civil society that included a
well-known journalist, a historian, the Archbishop of the Catholic Church and a
global finance figure and investor, Carlos Slim. This initiative was widely criticised
by numerous social groups as being dominated by business elites and transnational
real estate interests mainly due to his direct involvement (Crossa 2009).
Slim founded the Historic Centre Foundation in 2002, a non-profit organisation
that aims to promote the revitalisation and integrated conservation of the Historic
Centre. The actions undertaken by the Foundation have been the acquisition of
vacant historic buildings and their renovation for the interest of middle- and upper-
class groups, collaboration in projects for the improvement of the infrastructure,
amelioration of the public health and education services and the support for cultural
and artistic events organised at the buildings renovated by the Foundation. At this
point, it is important to note that the Foundation financially supported the restoration
of only the buildings it acquired, which covered only 5% of the total budget of the
Recovery Programme, whereas the federal government had been responsible for the
90% of the financial support.
The last established urban regeneration PPP was the Historic Centre Authority,
assigned by the city government in 2007. Bearing in mind the absence of a coordi-
nation body for the Historic Centre to implement of the Popular Commerce and the
Recovery Programmes, the Authority was created to coordinate the projects, poli-
cies and strategies developed for the integral management of the Historic Centre.
The positions of the relevant governmental bodies were reformulated after the
establishment of the Authority, and the FCH was assigned as a branch responsible
for providing financial support and realising the decisions of the Authority. The
former subdirector of the Fideicomiso defined this relationship with the following
expression, “Authority is the mind, whereas the FCM makes up the limbs” (2012).
In conclusion, these innovative public-private partnership models enforced the
enactment of a pluralist and participatory management system for the Historic
Centre. The measures taken by the local management units to engage the local com-
munity groups in the decision-making process through regularly set meetings are
also noteworthy efforts to enhance democratic means of participation. These partici-
patory strategies formulated for citizens were also acknowledged as an affirmative
action for effective urban heritage management by the World Heritage Centre.
Hence, these partnership models and funding mechanisms have been imperative for
building a consensus through participatory planning and grassroots community
engagement in global heritage management.
19.4 Conclusion
In the contemporary globalisation era, the management of historic cities, with spe-
cial attention to their sustainable development, is “one of the most daunting tasks”
of the urban century (Bandarin and Van Oers 2015: 44). The management chal-
lenges are especially intensified for global heritage cities where the international
competition to attract investments and tourists, along with internal tensions, is most
profound. The articulation as a global city has a catalytic effect on urban and eco-
nomic development pressures, and the rise in financial investments is not always
sympathetic with the historic urban setting. Furthermore, the limitations of the
existing administrative, legislative and planning structures, inefficient policies and
management tools and the participation of a broad range of stakeholders in the
decision-making process bring to the fore complexities for the management of the
global heritage cities. In this respect, conducting a case study of a management
process as it unfolds in a complex World Heritage Site provides the opportunity to
identify the management complexities for such cities and to assess the effectiveness
of the specific strategies and instruments in accordance with the HUL toolkit.
Mexico City is one of the most populous megacities on Earth as a result of
rapid urban expansion and population growth in the last few decades. The protec-
tion and effective management of this global heritage city remains a challenge in
354 D. Ikiz Kaya
the presence of economic and urban development pressures materialised in terms

of large-scale urban infrastructure and regeneration projects implemented in the
Historic Centre. In this context, the study of the Mexico City WHS enables the
examination of both effective and ineffective strategies, policies and instruments
that actually underpin the distinctiveness of each historic urban landscape.
The limitations of the existing legislative and planning frameworks have a direct
influence on the confinements to an integrated management approach. The fragmen-
tary nature of the protection policy in Mexico fails to address historic cities and
world heritage sites as coherent entities. The periodic designation of heritage sites
and preference of one period over another also affects the protection criteria for
multilayered historic landscapes, such as the Historic Centre. Escalante Carrillo
(2013) points out the lack of management strategies specific for the pre-Hispanic
archaeological heritage within the city in his dissertation. World Heritage designa-
tion, moreover, carries no specific formal status in terms of designation, organisa-
tional management and financial support. For a more holistic approach that embraces
the multilevelled cultural, natural and intangible heritage assets associated with the
Historic Centre, management strategies and policies that conceive the city as a
Historic Urban Landscape should be adopted. The integral management plan, in this
regard, is considered as an appropriate tool to guide the daily decision-making pro-
cess with regard to the holistic management of the World Heritage property. The
Management Plan for the Historic Centre recognises the significance of the Templo
Mayor and other pre-Hispanic archaeological remains in enhancing the develop-
ment of protection policies for the whole site.
Another result to be derived from this case study is that the multifaceted and
fragmentary nature of the urban administration and governance structures are
directly manifested in the decision-making mechanism for the heritage site. The
local government is formulated in a two-tier basis where a single corporate and
elected level of municipality is in function with delegated smaller territorial units
performing as delegations. This decentralisation process empowers the local admin-
istrative units where the Historic Centre Authority plays a mediator role with new
bonds of reciprocity engaging all the relevant parties in dialogue about their shared
objectives concerning the heritage site. Its effectiveness resides in its ability to fos-
ter better communication and collaboration among all the concerned stakeholders,
including the local community groups. The establishment and enhancement of
dialogue-structured activities and participatory mechanisms that embrace all the
relevant stakeholders are imperative for effective management. The representatives
of the civil society have managed to express their concerns directly to the relevant
authority members through regularly scheduled meetings with the local manage-
ment units. These democratic means of communication created by the Historic
Centre Trust have enabled the voices of the community to be heard and, thus, acted
upon. It is clearly associated with the high rate of public participation in the man-
agement structure engendered after the democratisation of the federal district.
In addition, innovative partnership models have been employed in the Historic
Centre where voluntary groups, experts and local administrative bodies collaborate,
using public and private grants to enforce urban rehabilitation and regeneration. The
direct involvement of a global investor, both personally and through the Foundation,
in the decision-making mechanism demonstrates the exceptional multifaceted man-
agement structures operating in global heritage cities. Particularly in global cities
where global actors and business investors express an interest in heritage sites, their
engagement in preservation actions through public-private partnerships has been
regarded as a means of creating financial revenues for their promotion. At this point,
it is important to note that intensive revitalisation acts might result in social gentri-
fication and disturbance of the heterogeneous socio-economic character of historic
environments. In the case of Mexico City, the regeneration practices of the
Foundation cover only a minor proportion of the total WH territory even though his
contributions have been highly promoted by the mass media.
In sum, the findings of this study evidence that the implementation of a participa-
tory and communicative approach is fundamental for the creation of a new common
ground for dialogue and joint action engaging various interested parties involved at
different stages. The unique public-private partnership models and grassroots initia-
tives established for the Historic Centre are specific examples that empower both
the global and local actors in a bottom-up management structure. Furthermore, the
integral management plan, embracing the Historic Centre as a whole, comes out as
a crucial normative tool that conducts vulnerability assessment and strengthens the
capacities of relevant parties to execute programmes indicated within, which are
imperative for the effective management of the historic urban landscape. It can be
concluded that the management strategies and tools operating for the Mexico City
WHS have been effective in promoting community engagement and building a con-
sensus among all the interested parties.
The assessment of the Mexico City case demonstrates the management com-
plexities specific for historic urban landscapes of global significance and introduces
the normative management tools adopted to cope with these challenges in accor-
dance with the broader landscape approach. As more global cities adapt to this
holistic context and more cases in varying scales and geospatial distribution are
investigated, the HUL approach provides a more elaborated road map for local and
national governments that guide the better integrated and inclusive management of
global heritage cities.
References
Administración Pública del Distrito Federal. (2011). El plan integral de manejo del Centro
Histórico de la Ciudad de México. Gaceta oficial del Distrito Federal 1162.
Alba Gonzales, M., Loubier, J.-C., & Herrera, L. (2017). Collective memories and social represen-
tations of Mexico City Historic Centre. Lausanne: SNIS.
Bandarin, F., & Van Oers, R. (2015). Reconnecting the city: The historic urban landscape approach
and the future of urban heritage. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Bennink, R. H. J., Bruin, J. A. C., Veldpaus, L., & Pereira Roders, A. (2013). Knowledge is power:
policy analysis of the World Heritage property of Edinburgh. SPANDREL Journal of SPA: New
Dimensions in Research of Environments for Living, 4(7), 27–35.
356 D. Ikiz Kaya
Bruin, J. A. C., Bennink, R. H. J., Veldpaus, L., et al. (2013). Knowledge is power: Monitoring the
world heritage site of Amsterdam, a policy analysis. In M. Biriani (Ed.), Proceedings of built
heritage 2013-monitoring, conservation, management. Milano: Politecnico di Milano.
Buckley, K., Cooke, S., & Fayad, S. (2016). Using the historic urban landscape to reimagine
Ballarat: the local context. In S. Labadi & W. Logan (Eds.), Urban heritage, development
and sustainability: International frameworks, national and local governance (pp. 93–113).
Abingdon: Routledge.
Crossa, V. (2009). Resisting the entrepreneurial city: Street vendors’ struggle in Mexico City’s
Historic Center. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33(1), 43–63.
Davey, K., Batley, R., Devas, N., Norris, M., & Pasteur, D. (1996). Urban management: The chal-
lenge of growth. Aldershot: Avebury.
De Rosa, F., & Di Palma, M. (2013). Historic urban landscape approach and port cities regenera-
tion: Naples between identity and outlook. Sustainability, 5(10), 4268–4287.
Escalante Carrillo, E. A. (2013). The impact of landscape interpretation on the management of
archaeological sites in modern urban contexts: A case study of pre-Hispanic Mexico City. UCL
MA Dissertation, London.
Guarneros-Meza, V. (2009). Mexican urban governance: How old and new institutions coexist and
interact. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33(2), 463–482.
Guzman, P. (2011). Las zonas de amortiguamiento, instrumentos para la conservación y gestión
del Patrimonio Mundial. Hereditas, 15–16, 42–49.
ICOMOS. (1987). Advisory body evaluation: World Heritage List No. 412. Available via http://
whc.unesco.org/archive/advisory_body_evaluation412.pdf. Cited 28 May 2013.
López, L. A. (2007). Ciudad excavada: veinte años de arqueología de salvamento en la Ciudad de
México y su área metropolitana. Mexico City: INAH.
Scruggs, G. (2017). The people power behind Mexico City’s new constitution. Available via http://
citiscope.org/story/2017/people-power-behind-mexico-citys-new-constitution. Cited 18 Apr
2017.
Siguenca Avila, M. E., & Rey Perez, J. (2016). Heritage values protection, from the monument
to the urban dimension. Case study: the historic centre of Santa Ana de los Rios de Cuenca,
Ecuador. The Historic Environment: Policy and Practice, 7(2–3), 164–176.
UNESCO WHC. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape. Available via http://
whc.unesco.org/en/convention/. Cited 14 Jan 2012.
UNESCO. (2013). New life for historic cities: The historic urban landscape approach explained.
Paris: UNESCO.
Van Oers, R., & Haraguchi, S. (2013). Swahili historic urban landscapes. Paris: UNESCO.
WHITRAP. (2016). The HUL guidebook: Managing heritage in dynamic and constantly chang-
ing urban environments. Available via http://www.historicurbanlandscape.com. Cited 18 June
2017.
Wirth, C. J. (2006). Democracy in Mexico City: The impacts of structural reforms. Mexican
Studies/Estudios Mexicanos, 22(1), 153–174.
Chapter 20
At the Confluence of Geography, Society
and History: Montreal and the 2011
UNESCO Recommendation on Historic
Urban Landscape
Dinu Bumbaru C.M.
Abstract Founded in 1642 by French Catholics on First Nations (indigenous) land,

the utopian settlement of Ville-Marie has become the modern metropolis of
Montreal. It was shaped by the geography of its site, the diverse nature and cultures
of its people and its history as a place of confluence and trade with the river (Saint-
Laurent) and the mountain (Mont Royal) as its main landmarks. Although Canada
is a State Party to the World Heritage Convention, the Quebec Legislature acknowl-
edged ICOMOS charters in its cultural development policy (1993) and the City of
Montreal has adopted in 1992 an Urban Master Plan focusing on the urban form and
architecture, the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape
is seldom mentioned.
Yet, decades of civic and professional reflections and debates on the city’s physi-
cal and social heritage are consistent with the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation’s
concepts and processes. The long-standing attention to the iconic presence of Mont
Royal or some symbolic institutions and landmarks translated into urban planning
policies and tools addressing views and public spaces. Recognition of Montreal’s
traditional urban habitat architecture and neighbourhood structure is reflected in the
formal planning tools as well as in community structures like “tables de concerta-
tion”. And the citizen nature of the heritage debate in Montreal since the 1970s
brought an integrated Heritage Urbanism Consultation approach echoing the 2011
UNESCO Recommendation.
In 2018, the future of the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation in Canada and
Quebec rests mostly with local and metropolitan levels at a time of major infrastruc-
ture and economic challenges and the re-humanisation of the industrial city. The
history of urban heritage debates and growing devolution on metropolitan areas like
D. Bumbaru C.M. (*)
Fondation Héritage Montréal, Montreal, Canada
e-mail: dbumbaru@heritagemontreal.org

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_20
358 D. Bumbaru C.M.
Montreal offers an opportunity for the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation to accom-

pany authorities and civil society in keeping and shaping the city.
Keywords Citizen participation · Heritage views · Civic commons · Cultural

diversity · Urban identity · Metropolitan landscape · Public participation · Mont
Royal · F. L. Olmsted · Monument of nature
20.1 Introduction
How does a recently coined phrase like «Historic Urban Landscape» connect with a
long-standing civic concern for the relation between land, form and culture in a liv-
ing city? This question explains why the concept of Historic Urban Landscape is
able to inspire with a sense of timeliness in an age of rapid urbanisation and recogni-
tion that the human dimensions of places are not only a matter of design and, at the
same time confuse in a context of multiple, even competing, professional or aca-
demic disciplines and their respective terminologies.
This question is practical and relevant in the case of Montreal where a civic,
academic and professional discussion on the urban form, its significance in cultural
or collective identity terms and its heritage value have been active at least since the
nineteenth century. This arises in particular from the site, the building traditions on
which the city grew and the need to reconcile these with a growing metropolis of
trade and industry.
20.2 The Case of Montreal
Although it factually claims to have been founded by the French in 1642 as the
mystic settlement of Ville-Marie, Montreal has the benefit of a more complex and
diverse situation and existence. First, its geography is that of a 325-island inland
archipelago or river delta at the confluence of a complex river system which served
for millennia as the means of communication for the indigenous nations who inhab-
ited and moved on the land long before Europeans came. Montreal was established
on the largest island of this ensemble, at the foot of a 250-metre high hilly mass
originating in an ancient magmatic intrusion in the sedimentary layers. The rivers
are structured around a series of rapids which prevent navigation upstream, generate
energy. They explain the strategic position of Montreal and its role in trade, industry
and immigration, as a point of entry for oceanic transport.
In terms of written history, Montreal first appeared when French explorer Jacques
Cartier named the hill Mont Royal on the first recorded visit of Europeans to the
site, in October 1535. He recorded that act in his log book along with the impression
the mountain gave from its base and its summit. The log book did not record the
name of that defining feature in the language of the Hochelagan people who met the
French and guided them uphill. Whereas the mountain’s name has since appeared
20 At the Confluence of Geography, Society and History: Montreal and the 2011… 359
on maps and is still the official toponymical designation for this hill commonly
called “la montagne” by the Montrealers, the name of the colonial settlement gradu-
ally evolved towards Montréal.
Montreal society is a diverse one where traditions are in confluence with expres-
sion in the shape and habits of the city. Even the original city motto Concordia Salus
and four-emblem shield – the beaver for the French Canadians (now replaced by the
fleur-de-lys), the rose for the English, the thistle for the Scots and the shamrock for
the Irish – designed in 1833 by the first mayor, Jacques Viger, illustrates the concept
of unity and progress in diversity. The competition between Catholicism and
Protestantism is reflected in the skyline through the presence of landmarks, steeples
or institutions. Even the immigrant communities developed a sense of placing their
landmarks, often their religious or community centres, in the city fabric. Relation to
neighbourhood, central authority or local institutions as well as the choice of build-
ing materials, like locally quarried greystone or sandstone imported from Scotland,
and even the relationship to historical buildings or public spaces also reflect cultural
traditions and background.
20.3 Some Pre-2011 HUL Occurrences in Montreal
“Historic Urban Landscape” may have been formalised and officialised in 2011 by
the UNESCO Recommendation, but similar considerations and concepts can be
traced back in various debates or efforts over nineteenth- and twentieth-century
Montreal as it is likely the case elsewhere.
The most notable case in Montreal is that of Mount Royal – le mont Royal –
which was the subject of citizen movement and petitions in the 1860s and 1870s
after one of the landowners on the slope forming the iconic backdrop to the boom-
ing city decided to cut down all his woodland to sell firewood. The visual impact of
that clear cut on the city’s identity was so shocking that citizens mobilised, organ-
ised themselves and effectively petitioned the City of Montreal to acquire the land
and create, at a great cost and beyond municipal boundaries, a people’s park. Mount
Royal Park’s design was entrusted to Frederick Law Olmsted, the landscape designer
of New York’s Central Park and a major social reform thinker. At first, Olmsted
rejected the proposition considering such landform unsuitable for a park. Then he
saw in the little mountain an opportunity to provide Montrealers and their industrial
society with a rejuvenating experience for everyone irrespective of their social con-
dition and means.
In today’s terminology, this would probably be described as a pioneer act for the
natural environment but, in the context of a nineteenth-century industrial metropo-
lis, it was much more a case of recognition of the significance of such a site as part
of the city’s collective social and physical identity. In a way and despite its name
Royal, it was a democratic accomplishment inscribed in the physical landscape of
the metropolis.
360 D. Bumbaru C.M.
A century later, in last decades of the twentieth century, a number of events

would continue this endeavour and renew the Montrealers’ conscious and noncon-
scious relation to the landscape of the city.
20.4 1984: Protected Views or Cultural Landscape?
In 1984, Heritage Montreal – a not-for-profit civic organisation founded in 1975 –

made a strategic alliance with the Montreal Board of Trade, the real estate invest-
ment sector in downtown, academic leaders and professional organisations to protect
a view on Mont Royal. The “McGill College Affair” as it became known would
resonate as a moment of collective leadership in favour of proper and modern urban
planning, public consultation and the recognition that an iconic and defining geo-
graphical feature like Mont Royal is not limited in its existence, value and presence
to its administrative or legal boundaries as a park.
A commercial development project was proposing to build over McGill College
Avenue and block an axial view on Mont Royal defined in the early nineteenth cen-
tury with the establishment of McGill University. This view has become iconic and
a structuring element of downtown, echoed in the railway projects of the 1920s and
the design of Place Ville-Marie by I. M Pei and Henry N. Cobb. The developer had
incorporated a concert hall in the project to make use of specific expropriation pow-
ers to help assemble the land and got the support of then Mayor Jean Drapeau, a
towering figure of Canadian politics who led the city for almost 30 years until 1986,
bringing Expo 67 and the Olympics to Montreal and was later appointed as the
Canadian Ambassador to UNESCO.
Citizens, professionals and the press quickly mobilised along with the business
community considering the collective and private values carried by that particular
view. Petitions were signed by thousands. Heritage Montreal asked the Minister of
Culture to designate the Perspective de l’avenue McGill College as a heritage prop-
erty under the Cultural Property Act (1972). Eventually, the developer accepted the
proposition to hold an independent public consultation process, funded it and sub-
stantially modified its project following its recommendations, preserving and
enhancing the vista on the mountain.
Drawn by surveyor Henri-Maurice Perrault for the trustees of McGill University
in 1845 as a mean to generate funds and pay the institution’s debts, McGill College
Avenue became a key part of the urban development of what would become the
New Town of Montreal, in reference to Edinburgh’s own (see David B. Hanna
“Creation of an Early Victorian Suburb in Montreal”, Urban History Review 92
(1980)). Widened after the 1984 Affair and landscaped as part of an innovative part-
nership strategy involving the surrounding property owners, McGill College Avenue
is now considered an integral part of the fabric, identity and heritage of downtown
Montreal. In 2017, it was incorporated in the Promenade Fleuve-Montagne, an inte-
grated walk connecting the two founding monuments of Montreal – the river and the
mountain – to provide a strolling journey and a renewed experience of downtown’s
urbanitas, with public art, Adirondack chairs and creative animations. This prome-
nade is the first of a network – les Promenades urbaines – intended by the munici-
pality to develop an alternative grid to allow more citizens and visitors to experience
the city and its various neighbourhoods. Although the Promenades urbaines have
been developed with various inputs from the public and specific interested parties or
stakeholders, it remained very much a parks department and design-based project.
The inauguration of the Promenade Fleuve-Montagne and its presentation as a leg-
acy of the 375th anniversary of the foundation of the city raised critique in the press,
partly because of its comparison to recent iconic creations like New York’s High
Line. Hopefully, the public use will give it a more civic and lasting meaning than
what design aficionados expect in terms of ever-changing novelty.
20.5 1992: The Plan d’urbanisme and the Form of the City
The year 1992 marked the 350th anniversary of the founding of Montreal as a per-
manent French settlement. As a legacy, the administration of Mayor Jean Doré
adopted the first integrated master plan for the whole city – le Plan d’urbanisme –
after 5 years of committees and planners’ work and broad public consultation. This
process built on the conceptual and critical momentum generated by intense public
debates in the 1970s and 1980s, under Mayor Jean Drapeau over the development
model for the city and battles engaged by the heritage movement under the leader-
ship of civic figures like architect Phyllis Lambert, founder of Heritage Montreal
and the Canadian Centre for Architecture.
Deeply connected to citizens’ organisations and universities, the team working
on the Plan d’urbanisme of 1992 was fresh with young professionals, critical appre-
ciation of previous models and an openness to new solutions for a city to come.
They drew lessons from the experiences of cities like San Francisco and Barcelona.
They were also inspired by the work of Melvin Charney, a Université de Montréal
Professor, and his studio Architecture urbaine. This work explored the city’s own
social and cultural roots through elements such as the territorial structure given by
the French-period cadastre (subdivision plan) and the mur mitoyen (parting wall
between two properties legally defined as a shared ownership), all of which are part
of the DNA of the urban form and landscape (see CHARNEY, Melvin. “The
Montrealness of Montreal: Formations and Formalities in Urban Architecture”. The
Architectural Review, 167, 999 (May 1980), p. 299–302.).
The planners, commissioners and elected officers’ work and the public process
that accompanied it produced a planning instrument based on and reflecting the
form of the city as a distinct source of its development. Although it did not use the
phrase Historic Urban Landscape per se, the spirit and content of Montreal’s Plan
d’urbanisme of 1992 very much related to it both in concept and in implementation.
For example, the respect for the cadastral structure of the territory, the relation
between a building and the street and public spaces or the visual connections
between the local and the collective landmarks like Mount Royal or the St. Lawrence
River were all included in the plan and presented in a very communicative and
362 D. Bumbaru C.M.
graphic way rather than the usual technical language associated with functionalist
planning tools and regulations.
20.6 1995: Heritage and the Metropolitan Landscape
In September 1995, Heritage Montreal convened a round table of local and national
heritage NGOs to examine the World Heritage Convention through exposés from
Christina Cameron, Herb Stovel and François Leblanc. The aim was to see the pos-
sible transfer of experience and knowledge to improve the state of care and conser-
vation of the heritage in the greater metropolitan area. One observation that arose
from the discussion was the integrating concept of the metropolitan area as a land-
scape and the expression “metropolitan landscape” as a guiding concept to enhance
the quality of planning tools and their consideration for heritage, from the local site
or neighbourhood to the regional planning scale.
20.7 2006: Vienna Memorandum
The academic sector also took interest in the UNESCO Recommendation. In 2006,
the Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, at the Université de Montréal, organ-
ised a round table of experts, academics and students on the Vienna Memorandum
(2005) and Historic Urban Landscape (see www.patrimoinebati.umontreal.ca/docu-
ments/table_ronde_2006_proces_verbaux.pdf). In her conclusion of the round table
proceedings, chairholder Christina Cameron noted:
As to the phrase “historic urban landscape”, there was no consensus on the adequacy and
appropriateness of using this term. The definition differs from traditional terminology cur-
rently in use by specialists in urban studies (…). Confusion exists over the relationship of
the term “historic urban landscape” to other World Heritage definitions like “cultural land-
scape”, “urban ensemble” and “heritage landscape”. Many participants expressed the view
that the landscape component of the definition proposed in the Vienna Memorandum
appeared to have been inserted as an afterthought, not as an integral and integrated compo-
nent of the document.
In 2018, the Vienna Memorandum is still, like the 2011 UNESCO

Recommendation, quite unknown in Montreal with very few exceptions. Some
architects are regularly quoting it to support their crusade against façadism, contex-
tualism or what they consider as a form of subordination of design to surrounding
heritage buildings at the expense of the dignity and quality of the architecture of
new individual buildings. That is to say that this is a matter for doctrinal and intel-
lectual debate around these words, not just plain management by technicians.
20.8 S
pecific Mentions of the 2011 UNESCO
Recommendations in Montreal
The Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape was adopted on November

10, 2011 by the General Conference of UNESCO. On November 30, 2011, it was
referred to in the brief submitted by Heritage Montreal at the public hearings held
by the Office de consultation publique de Montréal on the proposed changes to
heights and density parameters in Montreal’s central area, possibly the first time
such a recommendation was exposed and discussed in a formal public
consultation.
Heritage Montreal is a civil society organisation founded in the 1970s when the
heritage and human-scaled city was under pressure from modern visions of devel-
opment. It encourages and promotes the knowledge, care, protection and revitalisa-
tion of the built, urban and landscape heritage of communities in Quebec, in
particular the greater metropolitan area. Its action is educational and representative
focusing on heritage, urban development and public participation and consultation.
Its definition of heritage is place based, i.e. the heritage that is and contributes to the
interest of the “where”. This view derives from local experiences and reflections as
well as national legislative framework and deliberations on concepts and definitions
expressed in the ICOMOS charters or declarations and the UNESCO conventions
and recommendations.
In 2008, Heritage Montreal’s members had formally adopted, in General
Assembly, the five-dimensional reference concept to understanding of the heritage
values of a site, building, ensemble or area – architecture, landscape, memory,
archaeology and nature. This made it quite logical and relevant to refer to the
UNESCO Recommendation on Historic Urban Landscape at the 2011 public hear-
ings and in other public consultations or events afterwards.
20.9 Mont Royal: La Montagne
In 2013, the concept of Historic Urban Landscape and the 2011 UNESCO
Recommendation were discussed at the Sommet du mont Royal – Bilan et perspec-
tives d’avenir organised by Les amis de la montagne, a non-governmental commu-
nity organisation founded in 1986 after a series of objectionable construction
schemes on Mount Royal (telecommunication tower, ski resorts, etc.), and the City
of Montreal. The Sommet was meant to examine four pressing issues – protection of
views to/from Mont Royal; the protection of natural areas; the decommissioning
and repurposing of large institutional estates (public hospitals, colleges, convents);
and the governance structure and public participation (see www.lemontroyal.qc.ca/
en/news-and-events/summit-2013.sn).
Architect and Professor Julian Smith, a Canadian participant in the drafting pro-
cess that leads to the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation, presented the Historic
Urban Landscape approach as different from the conventional visual appreciation of
364 D. Bumbaru C.M.
a landscape or a landmark and the regulatory practice of defining and preserving

views as static and quantified objects. It helped connect a diversity of dimensions,
including the personal and collective memories of experiencing Mont Royal, into a
richer approach that could also assist in planning the repurposing of the large insti-
tutional estates, considering their contribution to the collective meaning and experi-
ence of the place, as well as its governance with a greater role recognised for
citizens.
20.10 Conclusion
In conclusion, Montreal demonstrates a case where the 2011 UNESCO

Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape is relatively ignored by the for-
mal policies and tools at all level of government.
This applies to the Government of Canada which holds major civil or military
properties in Montreal, funds major infrastructures and regulates economic sectors
impacting on the urban landscapes. This is the case with the historic waterfront area
(le Vieux Port) with its iconic Silo 5 and piers, currently in a process to update its
Master Plan derived from pioneer public consultations held in 1985 and 1986.
Further examples include Federally-regulated railways dividing neighbourhoods or
the communication towers on Mount Royal.
The Government of Quebec has the constitutional authority to address cultural,
heritage and urban planning issues, develops major transportation infrastructures
and defines the powers and responsibilities of local authorities, including on public
consultation and participation, for example, its protection area around some desig-
nated heritage buildings, the provision for landscape in the Cultural Heritage Act
and in the legal requirement for the metropolitan development plans.
The City of Montreal and other municipalities have made considerable efforts
over the recent decades to improve their urban planning and heritage tools as well
as their consultative processes, for example, the regulations to address more defin-
able urban landscape elements like the city’s skyline, the distinctive architecture of
its different neighbourhoods or public trees and biodiversity corridors and the City
Charter’s provision for the right of citizens to petition for public consultation.
This applies too to citizens and their civil society organisations. They have yet to
find the opportunity to access, discuss and metabolise such international concepts in
their coded language, for example, getting familiar with underlying concepts like
Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of highly mediatised UNESCO programmes
like the World Heritage and Intangible Cultural Heritage lists, often seen as
government- led competitions somewhere else rather than illustrations of
universality.
Yet, the absence of a conscious act of adoption and implementation of the 2011
UNESCO Recommendation in the case of Montreal is very relative. The recom-
mendation’s concepts and processes find echoes in Montreal’s long history of con-
sideration and debate over the issue of the form and fabric of the city to balance
functionality-driven vision and planning. Although the Historic Urban Landscape’s

approach proposes to go beyond the visual form of the city and embraces a broader
set of dimensions, it does include these considerations which, like skylines, views
to landmarks or street trees, are more readily understood and debatable in the public
arena so as to influence policies, programmes and projects.
Perhaps a challenge for the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation is to recognise the
history of ideas and actions about the urban landscape in different cultural, eco-
nomic and political contexts and to relate its concepts and processes with the words
and the ways discussions have evolved over decades and generations, at the local
level, on the shape, space and spirit of the city and, increasingly, of the metropolis.
Building such a bridge between the local and universal will require more than the
talents and patience of politicians, specialists and bureaucrats. It will need inspiring
artists – individual urban writers as well as multimedia artist centres like Montreal’s
Société des Arts technologiques and its immersive 3D environments which are even
used by the city and its planners in their work – and the audacity to ask a poet to
write an introduction to the city’s Master Plan or a landscape architect for its eco-
nomic development.
Fundamentally, the urban landscape is like heritage. It is a form of writing, some-
times even a wonderfully humble calligraphy, recording and communicating human
activities and the fruit of a confluence of geography (the place), society (the people)
and history (time). It needs citizens who can see, hear, touch and be touched by their
city so that they better use it and enrich its living space and spirit.
ote on the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation and the 2017

N
situation in Montreal
(Following the recommendation’s order of sections and articles)
Art. Introduction (Articles 1–7)

1 The population of the City of Montreal is 1.7 M inhabitants, and that of the Greater
Montreal metropolitan area is above 4 M, about 50% of the population of the Province of
Quebec and 11% of Canada.
2 Although the rate of urban development in the Montreal metropolitan area is lower than in
Asia, South America or Africa, similar considerations have been acknowledged in the
recent planning exercise for the metropolitan area and the agglomeration of Montreal.
3 The balance between urban growth and quality of life is acknowledged as a purpose of the
planning tools.
4 Since 1867 under the Constitution of Canada, land use, creating and enabling
municipalities and the control of private property are generally a responsibility of the
provinces. In Quebec, legislation has been passed in June 2017 recognising municipalities
as local governments and granting them further autonomy. In September 2017, the
Provincial Legislature adopted an act granting the City of Montreal a status of Métropole
du Québec which includes some devolution in terms of heritage and urban conservation.
(continued)
366 D. Bumbaru C.M.
5 In 2006, the province adopted a Sustainable Development Act which is meant to create an
overall commitment, accountability and capacity of all departments and agencies of the
provincial government. In a rather unique - and very much unoticed - way world-wide, the
Act includes the following principle on heritage and landscapes: “Protection of cultural
heritage”: The cultural heritage, made up of property, sites, landscapes, traditions and
knowledge, reflects the identity of a society. It passes on the values of a society from
generation to generation, and the preservation of this heritage fosters the sustainability of
development. Cultural heritage components must be identified, protected and enhanced,
taking their intrinsic rarity and fragility into account” (article 6. k).
6 In Montreal, the heritage/planning stakeholders ecosystem can be described as composed
of the public sector (governments, municipalities, parastatal agencies), the private sector
(including investors, developers, professional service providers, privately motivated
individuals), the educational/academic sector, civil society (organised citizens movements
and groups) and the communication sector/the media, with special consideration given to
the presence of younger generations in each one of these.
7 Canada is a State Party to the World Heritage Convention (1972), but the constitution
framework grants most planning or heritage-related matters to provinces. These can
choose to share or delegate them to municipalities, thus requiring special arrangements. In
1992, the Province of Quebec adopted a cultural policy (updated in 2018) which endorsed
ICOMOS’ Venice Charter (1964), Tourism Charter and Washington Charter on historic
towns (1987). It has also adopted and used the ICOMOS Xi’an Declaration on the
conservation of the settting of heritage sites, buildings and ensembles (2005) as a guide for
implementing its heritage laws.
I. Definition (Articles 8–13)
8 The definitions used in the current planning or heritage protection tools in place in
Montreal do not specifically include the Historic Urban Landscape as defined in the 2011
Recommendation. Yet, some of the designations related to it. Whereas the designation of
Vieux Montréal in 1964 by the Government of Quebec echoed the French concept of
secteur sauvegardé or the notion of an historic centre mentioned in the recommendation,
urban planning and heritage strategies in Montreal have long exceeded this concept
focused on isolated heritage cores to include an interpretation of urban heritage that
includes neighbourhoods, connecting paths and the form of the city.
9 Such a definition could be useful to update the ones currently in use, in particular with
respect to the inclusion of cultural, social and intangible heritage aspects. Succeeding to
the Cultural Property Act of 1972, the provincial Cultural Heritage Act (2011) includes
specific definitions for landscapes and for intangible cultural heritage while empowering
municipalities to identify and protect these.
10 n/a
11 The “approach” definition of Historic Urban Landscape does not find direct equivalent but
provides possible interface with some of the existing policies and tools, in particular as
there is a growing interest in the living landscape of the city which transcends the
traditional disciplinary line between urban planning, landscape architecture and
architecture, including conservation.
12 Learning from the underlying building traditions that generated the built landscape of
Montreal was part of the underlying philosophy, approach and a defining concept of
Montreal’s 1992 Plan d’urbanisme.
13 n/a
II. Challenges and Opportunities for the Historic Urban Landscape (Article 14–20)
14 n/a
(continued)
15 In the case of Montreal, since the nineteenth century, civil society, public debate and
community involvement have been more influential in developing a collective heritage
concern and subsequent action from the authorities than in the provincial capital Quebec
City, whose historic centre is a World Heritage site, where governments and the public
sector have been more directly involved in selecting and protecting heritage.
16 Since its designation as a historic district in 1964, Vieux Montréal benefitted for decades of
a coordinated attention and investment from the city and province with some federal
government contributions to ensure the protection of its buildings and archaeology and
support its architectural and economic revitalisation. In complement to this strategy,
Montreal’s central core and neighbourhoods citizens developed a network of cultural and
civic spaces, often around historic cores or defining spaces – including spaces under road
overpasses as in the Mile End or old railway sheds like in Pointe-Sainte-Charles (Bâtiment
7), the local Maison de la Culture or public libraries. These are the Quartiers culturels
whose definition is voluntarily left open to community’s perception and local dynamics
rather than follow a precast administrative concept, thus allowing for creativity, curiosity
and care for heritage but addressing it with new eyes. Developed in Montreal’s older
central areas like Plateau Mont-Royal, Rosemont or Sud-Ouest, the concept of Quartiers
culturels is migrating into other areas even in post-war suburbia, demonstrating an
adaptation and reinterpretation capacity of the concept beyond the traditional city fabric
and spatial language. An important challenge lies in integrating such organic and civic
concept into the more formal and legal planning instruments and strategies, a challenge not
dissimilar to that of the 2011 Recommendation.
17 Montreal became the cradle and main metropolis of the Industrial Revolution in Canada in
the nineteenth century and remained as such in the twentieth century (even in the 1990s,
the textile industry was among its largest employers). Many areas of the city have declined
since the 1960s with important social and heritage impacts. Originally, these were
mitigated mostly through individual initiatives like artistic hives and private home
renovation before more official strategies were developed and implemented by the public
sector and its socio-economic partners. Although these actions have impact on the urban
landscape, its overall consideration remains largely secondary if not entirely absent.
18 n/a
19 n/a
20 The Montreal metropolitan area is mainly exposed to floods considering its river
archipelago situation with possible climate change impact. Science and historic records
have identified a seismicity for the area resulting in stricter building regulations which
have put stress on the economic viability and architectural integrity of some heritage
buildings.
Currently, the greatest disaster risks to Montreal’s urban landscapes are those affecting the
urban forest, in particular the infestation of exotic species accelerated in part by climate
change. For example, an insect – the emerald ash borer – has forced the felling of
thousands of character-defining street-lining trees in the USA and in Ontario (see http://
www.emeraldashborer.info/documents/MultiState_EABpos.pdf) and reached Montreal
around 2011. Since, it has challenged considerably municipal and local authorities in their
capacity to develop and implement a coordinated strategy because of their administrative
territorial divisions irrelevant to the insect. The response and strategies developed to face
this disaster have been mostly lead by forestry specialists, but there is growing
consciousness of the landscape and heritage dimension of these street-lining trees beyond
their environmental benefits.
III. Policies (Article 21–23)
21 n/a
22 n/a
(continued)
368 D. Bumbaru C.M.
23 In the context of the Canadian Constitution, a collaborative process brought together the
federal, provincial and territorial governments to develop and adopt common “Standards
and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada” (2nd version from 2010
available at www.historicplaces.ca/media/18072/81468-parks-s+g-eng-web2.pdf)
applicable to the following four types of heritage properties: buildings, landscapes
including historic districts, archaeology and technological/engineering heritage. The
concept of the Historic Urban Landscape is not yet integrated in this document but could
be suggested for its next revision.
IV. Tools (Article 24)
24 In terms of civic engagement and beyond the strong civil society presence in Montreal, the
consultation and participation processes put in place in Montreal over the past 30 years are
in great part resulting from conflicts involving heritage buildings, sites or neighbourhoods
as well as housing, environmental or social justice issues. These processes involve a
diversity of means and techniques, from formal public hearings with verbatim records to
less formal workshop scoping and explorations or online surveys and consultations.
Although there are growing fields of consultation or concertation-type activities by
consultants, NGOs or politicians themselves, the main instance remains the Office de
consultation publique de Montréal (OCPM; www.ocpm.qc.ca), an independent body of the
City of Montreal with commissioners appointed by the Municipal Council.
Other tools include the City of Montreal Charter of Rights and Responsibilities (http://
ville.montreal.qc.ca/portal/page?_pageid=3036,3377687&_dad=portal&_
schema=PORTAL), a participation policy and a specific right of initiative to petition for a
public consultation. OCPM was created in 2002 as a twentieth-century successor of the
public consultation processes set up by the Montreal Citizen Movement administration in
1987 but abolished in 1996 under a new political party.
Over 15 years, OCPM has held almost 150 public consultations, most of them related to
either planning or heritage issues. All these contributed to enhancing the Montreal culture
of civic engagement and participation of citizens and society to decisions which were left
to elected officers or the Mayor only in the past. Thanks to debates over heritage and the
form of the city, our society deployed its democracy beyond elections to include
participation and deliberation. Yet, a global discussion on the future of the historic
landscape of Montreal has not fully happened as consultations are held on specific
projects. The upcoming consultation on the mandatory updating in 2018 of the City’s
Master Plan could provide that opportunity and integrate a formal recognition of the 2011
UNESCO Recommendation.
At the regional metropolitan level, the Communauté métropolitaine de Montréal (CMM)
has been established by the Government of Quebec with a planning mandate that includes
adopting and updating a Metropolitan Development and Land Use Plan (PMAD for Plan
métropolitain d’aménagement et de développement). The PMAD is to set mandatory
standards for all of the 82 municipalities forming the CMM to comply with in their master
plans and planning regulations. Among the compulsory content of the PMAD is the
identification of significant natural and built sites (i.e. heritage) and landscapes. So far,
natural sites have mostly benefitted from the attention of the CMM staff and politicians for
science-based data exists and provides a comfortable base for decision-making – is it green
or not? – whereas qualitative aspects like heritage or landscapes are more nuanced and
complex for politicians and planners to handle and have been deferred to some extend (see
http://cmm.qc.ca/champs-intervention/amenagement/dossiers-en-amenagement/
paysages-et-patrimoine-bati/).
(continued)
Although it was required by law, the PMAD was left unattended by mayors and ministers
until 2010 when Heritage Montreal and the Institut de politiques alternatives de Montréal
organised of a first citizens’ agora on planning and development of the metropolitan area.
Civic in nature, this agora brought some 400 participants to learn from the tangible
experiences of Vancouver, Portland Oregon, Boston and Lyon and helped develop a
momentum that led to a public consultation with over 350 interventions by citizens and
organisations from all the sectors of the metropolitan area, an unexpected attendance for a
non-conflictual, forward looking and partly abstract document. Confident of such public
interest, politicians adopted the PMAD in 2012. To follow up on its implementation, the
CMM adopted the concept of holding a biennial agora organised by a joint committee of
elected officers and members of the civil society, a concept partly inspired by the ideas
developed by then Secretary General of ICOMOS Herb Stovel for a more collaborative
definition of monitoring in the World Heritage context.
In terms of funding tools and strategies, the situation in Montreal remains ambiguous
without a radical change in the tax structure for municipalities. In effect, Montreal receives
around 80% of its income from real estate taxes which puts it permanently in a situation of
quasi-conflict of interest in balancing the protection of built heritage or the general
landscape of the city and its neighbourhoods with generating additional revenues through
densification strategies to fund social services or economic development programmes.
Worthy causes like the reduction of greenhouse gas emission, public housing or fight
against urban sprawl also serve as justifiers for densification. This is not consistent with
“supporting innovative income-generating development rooted in tradition” stated in the
2011 Recommendation.
An example of this is the persistent temptation to raise building height limits in the central
areas to answer so-called sustainable urban development needs. In a pragmatic approach
which could be seen as a form of façadism at the level of the urban landscape, regulation
defines a set of precisely surveyed view corridors which are more manageable for city
managers or politicians than a broad and qualitative concept of like preserving the iconic
presence of the mountain. Other examples include the construction of setback additional
floors on individual terraced row houses, building commercial extensions in front and back
yards or the densification of institutional or government properties sold to the highest
bidders for redevelopment which not only change the building footprint but also the civic
character of these sites and their contribution to the public realm.
This tax situation is generally present throughout Canada, but it is amplified according to
each province and in the case of larger agglomerations like Montreal that have to cover a
broader range of expenses in infrastructures and services. Efforts have been made to
improve the tax system in Canada and introduce tax incentives for heritage properties.
Although this has yet to be successful after many attempts like the Historic Places
Initiative spearheaded by Parks Canada, tools like a National Register and a set of
standards and guidelines have been produced which include landscapes and historic
districts/areas in their scope of heritage. The Parliament of Canada and the Legislature of
Quebec are also considering draft bills and cultural policies which could include more
contemporary fiscal strategies supportive of heritage, including landscapes.
V. Capacity-Building, Research, Information and Communication (Article 25–27)
25 n/a
(continued)
370 D. Bumbaru C.M.
26 Over the past decade, the City of Montreal heritage team has developed the énoncé
d’intérêt patrimonial or heritage significance statement, a process aimed at identifying
values and their related attributed for a specific heritage building or site (see http://ville.
montreal.qc.ca/portal/page?_pageid=2240,96369584&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL).
This tool is inspired by the work and methodologies of the Canadian Federal Heritage
Buildings Review Office but also Alois Riegl’s concepts, the Getty Conservation Institute
research on value-based management and the World Heritage tool of the Statement of
Outstanding Universal Value. The process is based on a collective discussion involving a
diversified set of stakeholders (owner, civil society, municipal staff) with the benefit of site
visits and heritage studies prepared by consultants or academics for the owners. One of the
dimensions explored in this process is the landscape one, especially when the énoncé is
prepared for areas like parts of Mount Royal or complex and socially as well as visually
prominent institutional sites like the Hôtel-Dieu or the Royal Victoria hospitals. Although
most of the énoncés prepared to date are publicly accessible on the Web, the accessibility
of the heritage studies used to prepare them is not systematic and depends on the will of
their owners to post them. This method’s has been occasionally applied for urban areas like
the Norvick post-war neighbourhood in the Saint-Laurent borough but its use in relation to
the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation has yet to be explored and could enhance the
collective knowledge and institutional capacity in that context.
27 n/a
VI. International Cooperation (Article 28–30)
28 The Canadian Constitution creates a politically sensitive structure to interpret the concept
of “member state”, in particular in terms of federal-municipal relations. In that context, a
national conversation on the 2011 Recommendation is likely to happen despite the
member state through organisations like the Canadian Federation of Municipalities,
professional or academic networks or groups like ICOMOS Canada.
29 The City of Montreal is engaged in international cooperation either through bilateral
agreements or international networks such as Metropolis, a component of United Cities
and Local Governments (UCLG) and the Association internationale des maires
francophones. Such international cooperation is generally centred on the city
administration, its elected officers or staff and seldom involves collaboration with the
heritage sector of the civil society, possibly a reflection of the growing view that leadership
is centred on elected leaders in the name of accountability.
Yet, based on the Metropolitan Agora experience, Montreal initiated and hosted a thematic
meeting in preparation for Habitat III on metropolitan cooperation for sustainable urban
development with substantial participation of civil society organisations. The resulting
Montreal Declaration on Metropolitan Areas recognises the role of heritage and landscape
in the identity of metropolitan areas and the need for effective public, private and civic
leadership to their success (see http://cmm.qc.ca/evenements/
montreal-thematic-meeting-on-metropolitan-areas/).
30 n/a
Chapter 21
Urban Heritage Conservation
in the Historic Site of Olinda, Brazil:
1968–2016
Abstract The objectives of this study are to assess the trajectory of the heritage
conservation system of the Historic Site of Olinda (HSO) and evaluate the impact of
this system on the conservation of the heritage assets of the site in the long run. As
analytical reference for the analysis will be the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL)
approach developed by UNESCO, the period of analysis is 1968–2016. The HSO is
a good example of an incremental system that incorporates progressively instru-
ments of urban planning, conservation management, monitoring, documentation,
citizen participation, funding, and others that closely followed what would be a
similar approach to that proposed by HUL. HSO is also a good example of increas-
ing value of their urban properties due to the conservation policies. The HSO is the
main economic asset of the city and, therefore, attracts the initiatives of economic
agents to adjust their actions to environmental and constructive conditions of the
site, the regulation system, and the opportunities created by the local economic
environment. The control and management system of public urban conservation are
the adjustment factors between the valuation of the place and the quality of its con-
servation. In relation to HUL, the case of the HSO is a good example of an incre-
mental conservation system constructed closely to the dynamics of local development
process. It shows forward and backward movements as is expected in a complex and
democratic society. Also it reflects the larger-scale movement of the interpretation
of what is the cultural heritage of an urban historic site. The central questions that
the HUL approach tries to help answer constitute the core of today’s challenges for
the planning and conservation system of the Historic Site of Olinda.
Keywords Integrated conservation · Urban conservation · Public participation ·

HUL · Urban landscape conservation · Social conflict · Urban conservation
management
S. M. Zancheti (*)
ICOMOS, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_21
372 S. M. Zancheti
21.1 Introduction
The objectives of this paper are to describe the historical course of the conservation
system for the heritage of the Historic Site of Olinda (HSO) and to identify the
impacts of the system on the occupation of the urban land and on the architecture of
the site. This objective was chosen as a way to show the development of a heritage
management system that reached a state closely resembling that proposed by the
Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) approach. This period of analysis, from 1968 to
2016, embraces the full development process for protecting the heritage of the city
of Olinda.
The case of Olinda shows that, despite the growing importance of the theme of
conservation of built heritage in the local development process, the procedures for
introducing new planning instruments and management approaches do not neces-
sarily point to “better” conservation of the HSO. This oscillation can be attributed
to the necessary changes that have arisen from the adjustment of the institutional
framework of the planning and conservation system with the long-term strategic
development guidance.
The importance of the heritage of the HSO is also expressed in the increasing
valuation of its properties. The HSO encompasses the main economic activities of
the municipality and attracts the initiatives of economic agents. These agents adjust
their actions to the environmental and building conditions of the site, to the system
of regulation, and to the opportunities created by the local economic strategy. The
regulation system, or the public management of the urban conservation, constitutes
the adjustment factor between increasing the valuation of the site and the quality of
its conservation. The example of citizen participation here is very interesting since
the planning and management system of the HSO was pioneering in Brazil in intro-
ducing this instrument in design and in the decision process.
The analysis of the conservation process was conducted according to a historical-
analytical scheme, which deals with the context of developing the HSO, its planning
and management system, and the impacts on the built heritage. For each period, the
following themes of HUL were considered in the analysis:
• Surveys and mapping of city’s natural, cultural, and human resources (assets)
• City development strategy (urban governance, policies, laws, and plans)
• Actions and priorities for conservation and development
• Vulnerability assessments to socioeconomic stresses and impacts of climate
change
• Consensus building (participatory planning, stakeholder consultations) in what
values to protect + attributes that carry the values
• Partnerships + management frameworks
21 Urban Heritage Conservation in the Historic Site of Olinda, Brazil: 1968–2016 373
21.2 The Occupation of the City and the Historic Site
From 1530 to 1654, Olinda was one of the most significant urban hubs of the
Portuguese Colonial Empire. It was the center of the new world sugar economy
(Reis Filho 1969).
After the Dutch dominance (1630–1654), Olinda reassumed its role as the politi-
cal and administrative seat of local government although it would never regain its
economic importance. Toward the end of the nineteenth century, the city saw a
cultural reflourishing and urban improvements, as evidenced by the construction of
neoclassical and eclectic buildings. In the early years of the twentieth century, there
was a small urban expansion due to bathing in the sea becoming fashionable (Novaes
1990). The last quarter of the twentieth century was a period of expansion of the
middle and upper middle-class residences in the historic site. This movement led to
a new dynamics of social relations and to new political activism at the local level.
Today, the old colonial center is located in a region where the city of Recife is the
main center. Despite protection initiatives for its cultural heritage, Olinda is under-
going a process of urban and heritage transformation.
21.3 The Conservation Planning and Management System
21.3.1 The Formation: 1968–1988
In 1968, the Historic Site of Olinda was included on the National Heritage List man-
aged by the National Institute of the Historic and Artistic Heritage (IPHAN), and
this prompted the formulation of the Local Integrated Master Plan for Olinda
(Olinda 1973). The municipality of Olinda approved, in a pioneering move for
Brazil, legislation that, in parallel with conceiving urban growth, defined and pro-
tected the cultural heritage. The Historic Site of Olinda was designed as a sector of
the city distinct from the other sectors on account of its heritage attributes, having
the functions of administrative, tourist, and residential center. Its boundaries were
set by a ring road, and zones were established according to the density of the listed
buildings and how the landscapes were framed. Land and building controls were
defined for new constructions. This included byelaws for restorations and reforms
and recommendations for preservation with regard to color, proportions, scale, and
volumes. This legislation also signaled the start of the municipal authorities taking
part in the control of the built heritage (Milet 1998).
Between 1979 and 1982, the municipal management sought the symbolical recu-
peration of the Historic Center of Olinda, based on identifying the built cultural
heritage, restoring the exceptional listed buildings, and valorizing the traditional
cultural manifestations, customs, and business. Actions were undertaken with a
374 S. M. Zancheti
view to drawing up heritage awareness-raising exercises, publicizing the heritage of

Olinda, and building up national and international visibility. In 1982, the site was
inscribed on the World Heritage List, and the municipality created the System for
Preserving the Historic Sites of Olinda (SPHSO), based on the following
instruments:
• The Council for Preservation, the authority for institutional/political policy
• The Center for Preserving Historical Sites Foundation (hereinafter called the
Foundation)
• The technical body for supporting and carrying out the recommendations of the
council
• The Fund for Preservation, responsible for seeking and securing resources and
making the financial side of the Foundation viable
• A Local Heritage List
This may be interpreted as the first conservation management structure based on
the ideas of integrated conservation that certainly are the substratum of the HUL
approach. Other actions taken in parallel with the structuring of the SPHSO, in par-
ticular the beginning of the citizen participation in the conservation decision pro-
cess, reinforce this link with the HUL approach. Also, this was a period of intense
change in the composition of the social actors in the HSO, which encouraged both
conservation and transform of the heritage attributes of the site.
The first group of actors, consisting of professional people, identified the historic
site as a place for a bucolic life and for good and friendly neighborliness. This group
intervened in the buildings, seeking continuity of the values of the historical site
(Photos 21.1 and 21.2), and introduced elements of new architectural values (Photos
21.3 and 21.4).
The second group, made up of art dealers and those involved in activities linked
to tourism or nightlife, such as bars, restaurants, and antique shops, occupied streets
and squares, thus, constructing an image of Olinda as a party destination.
The third group is formed by poor families that occupied the marches around and
the empty parcels of land within the HSO. This last group produced enormous
changes in the historic landscape of the site (Zancheti and Milet 2007; Pereira 2004)
(Box 21.1).
21.3.2 The Transition: 1989–1996
This period is characterized by the weakening of the System for Preservation, due
to the change in the Brazilian Constitution (1988) that forbids the formation of local
specific investment funds using municipal taxes. This reduced dramatically the
amount of public investments available to conservation actions because the Fund for
Preservation was extinct.
At this point, the interests of the actors were ruptured. The disputes over the use
of local investment funds became more fierce. This led to a slow dismantling of the
Photos 21.1 and 21.2 The maintenance of traditional architectural values. (Source: Zancheti and
Milet 2007)
376 S. M. Zancheti
Photos 21.3 and 21.4 The change to modern architectural values. (Source: Zancheti and Milet
2007)
Box 21.1: Synthesis of the Period 1968–1988

Surveys
The first inventory of the buildings, monuments, and urban structure was pro-
duced but not completed and did not identify or order the main heritage attri-
butes of the site. This helped to form a new Municipal Heritage List. The
survey was extended to incorporate some nonmaterial aspects of the local
culture as the carnival, for example.
Development Strategy
The economic and social development of the site was clearly centered on the
idea of a historic center devoted to new residents (middle and upper middle
class) and leisure, encouraging festive activities, festivals, and street markets,
aimed at attracting tourists and metropolitan visitors. This strategy was
according to the national policies for the development of historic towns and
urban sites.
Actions and Priorities
The adherence of the local authority to the national development strategy
allowed the conservation system access to a program of restoration of civic
listed and unlisted buildings, carrying out projects for public spaces and
financing the rehabilitation of run-down residential buildings favoring low-
income families (Bosi 1986). Monitoring and control of the occupation and
use of the buildings and plots were also structured but without a strong admin-
istrative structure of support.
Vulnerability
The success of the development strategy quickly showed the vulnerabilities of
the site. There was a widespread tendency to change the facades and interiors
of the buildings to suit new activities. In the same way, the restoration of
monuments tended to follow a “stylistic approach” without rigorous care for
the authenticity of the heritage attributes (Zancheti and Milet 2007).
Dysfunctions between the flow of vehicles, the new urban uses, and the urban
fabric, made up of narrow streets and patios, posed a serious threat. The most
important vulnerability started to be perceived in this period: the occupation
of the marshes and the vacant land in the hills by poor families. There were no
efficient monitoring and control instruments to halt their movement.
Consensus Building
In 1987, the first local residents’ association was founded (the Olinda Society
for the Defense of the High City, Sodeca in Portuguese), by old and new resi-
dents, with the purpose of protecting the heritage of the HSO. Sodeca took
issue with the local administration over their “quality of life.” They felt that
(continued)
378 S. M. Zancheti
Box 21.1 (continued)
this was negatively impacted by the activities of leisure and entertainment that
were installed in the HSO and intensive use of the public space especially at
night (Barreto 2005).
In 1987, they took this conflict to the federal courts to determine the con-
trol of vehicle access to the Historic Site of Olinda. It was determined that the
Foundation should have a more involved role in urban regulation with a view
to making residential and tourist activities more compatible.
Partnerships
The main partnerships of this period were between the local government of
Olinda and the national government especially the sectors of protection of the
national heritage and the development of tourism.
Photo 21.5 Spoiling the urban landscape by irregular occupation. (Source: Zancheti and Milet
2007)
System for Preservation and diverting the remaining public investments to the inter-
est of the new economic actors in the HSO.
In 1995, the Foundation finally was replaced by the Secretariat for the Cultural
Heritage, which began to give preference to the promotion of musical and leisure
events.
The most relevant impact at this time was the continuous weakening of the moni-
toring and control activities and the municipal secretariat of urban planning in man-
aging the laws for zoning and construction restrictions or even to monitor the state
of conservation of the HSO and its attributes. The greatest impact of the new type of
management was the indiscriminate occupation of green areas of the landscape and
environmental interest inside the HSO and the surrounding areas. Despite the areas’
legal protection, low- and medium-income social groups moved into the mangroves
to the south and the hills in the HSO (Photo 21.5). This occupation had two impor-
tant environmental impacts in the HSO: the reduction of the green area and the
increase in the risk of landslides, since the soil of the HSO is made of fragile clay in
unstable hills (Box 21.2).

Surveys
The previous activities did not have continuity. The urban built area increased
greatly, with the construction of many new buildings.
Remained basically the same as the previous period but with strong emphasis
on the promotion of the site as the place for leisure and entertainment events
as street celebrations and festivals.
Actions and Priorities for Conservation and Development
Due to the lack of resources for investment, only small projects in the pub-
lic space were implemented. There was an important initiative to elaborate
and approve a new law for controlling the land use and the rate of occupation
of the plots (1992) based on a classical zoning approach.
Vulnerability
The vulnerability of the site continued to be dependent on the conservation
planning and management system and was especially affected by the lack of
monitoring and control activities. This led to the expansion of the area of the
irregular occupation of public spaces, notably squares and vantage points set
aside for panoramic views; the construction of extensions in backyards; and
the insertion of the new architectonic type with an increase in the rate of occu-
pation by taking advantage of the height of ceilings and the introduction of
new roofing materials (e.g., aluminum or fiber cement). The green area dimin-
ished dramatically and the risk of landslides increased.
Consensus Building
This period was characterized by great tension between the social actors. The
middle-class groups that had taken residence in the previous 15/20 years pres-
sured the municipality to control the occupation of the plots and the loss of
green areas. On the other side, the low-income families pressed for permis-
sion to occupy the free land available, mainly the marshes and some hills, for
their residences. As the two groups were acting in different parts of the his-
toric site, the municipality solved the problem by informally granting permis-
sion for the occupation of the low-income group and relaxing the control on
the internal parts of the middle-class residences.
Partnerships
It was a period of tension between the stakeholders and the municipality.
However, it is noticeable that some initiatives of that gathered shopkeepers
and residents (providing construction materials) to form a partnership with
the municipality to restore some important monuments of the HSO.
380 S. M. Zancheti
21.3.3 T
he Master Plans, Urban Development Projects,
and the Incentive to Culture: 1997–2016
With the end of the Fund for Preservation, conservation actions had to depend on
funding from the municipality itself. This situation changed with the rise, at the
national level, of the Rouanet Law and of two national pro-tourism development
programs, which brought resources to large-scale projects in the historic site
(Zancheti 2007).
In a period of 10 years, the municipal council approved two master plans (Olinda
1997, 2004) of the city of Olinda. The second master plan (Olinda 2004) proposed
redesigning the occupation of the municipal territory and the introduction of plan-
ning instruments to bring the change into effect. The core of the plan was to give
high value to the road grid, at the center of the municipality, as an area set aside for
the concentration of economic activities. It emphasizes the historic site as a Special
Zone for Protection of the Cultural Heritage and maintained the previous land and
occupation zoning in the HSO. The following instruments were introduced: com-
pulsory use, the progressive tax, and compulsory purchase using public debt bonds
on abandoned, dilapidated, or underused properties (Olinda 2004).
The Inter-American Development Bank financed the tourism development proj-
ects (the Monumenta and Prodetur programs). At first, the tourism programs were
structured to finance integrated projects for revitalization in public spaces as well as
in public and private properties. These proposals acknowledge that, with the coming
to an end of the intervention projects, the maintenance of the works would be car-
ried out without additional funds. The purpose was to generate a flow of public and
private receipts for the services rendered for the use of the urban heritage.
Some important interventions on listed buildings and several in public spaces
had been carried out, such as the rehabilitation of the public market, the creation of
a cultural center, the rehabilitation of the squares, and the creation of a training
center for construction craftsmen. The Alto da Sé project focused on the area where
the city was founded and its main point of attraction for tourists, aimed to rehabilitate
the square, to build a panoramic viewing spot on the top of the city’s water tower,
and to create a market to offer facilities to craftsmen who today occupy public
spaces.
The Rouanet Law, which encourages culture, has been used to revitalize the
historic site of Olinda ever since it came into force. More recently, improvements
have been achieved through the instrument of mecenato (Patronage Statute), such as
the underground lighting of the historic site and the restoration of monuments, espe-
cially religious buildings. Through this instrument, cultural producers develop and
approve cultural projects and seek private companies who pass on part of the income
tax due in order to carry out this project. Today this mechanism is one of the most
important sources of finance for projects in the historical site. Its success is centered
on the coalitions of actors who bring together companies promoting culture, large
companies with cultural programs, politicians and administrators, and non-
governmental organizations.
The growing volume of cultural projects generated pressure on the weakened

heritage management system. These projects are drawn up by private entities, with
little interference from the conservation institution of the site, and their being car-
ried out is therefore likely to create distortions in the functioning of the historical
site (Zancheti 2007) and increase the number of infractions in reference to the urban
regulation of the HSO (Polito 2000). Nevertheless, under pressure because of the
scarcity of resources due to its reduced budget, the municipality has felt itself forced
to accept such projects, for they represent additional resources.
The focus of the Secretariat for the Heritage of Olinda has been to draw up proj-
ects that seek and secure external resources, according to the opportunities that
present themselves at any given moment whether these are the cultural incentive
laws or special programs of funding. This adjustment has led the secretariat to adopt
a management approach that preferences cultural producers who favor a “relaxed”
system of monitoring and control of the land use and occupation of the properties.
It must be noted that in 2005 the monitoring and control of activities in the site
passed to the planning secretariat of the municipality. Therefore, the monitoring was
no longer specific to the site but a part of the overall urban area of the
municipality.
This new style of management has had an impact on the occupation of the site.
The absence of a system of control has caused the municipality to act without a clear
development of strategy that favors heritage conservation. The only works carried
out were those arising from national programs. The rule of action was based on ad
hoc reactive solutions to problems, and this has had a big impact on the conservation
of the significance of the historic site, especially on open spaces and green areas
(Pereira 2004). An expansion has occurred of the area built up as a result of exten-
sions into the backyards of private properties, for the purposes of occupation by
other members of the family.
The intense illegal occupation of the free spaces of the HSO, no doubt, is in part
explained by the absence of urban control, which recognized the restrictive unreal-
ity of the parameters of urban control, laid down in the Law for the Land Use of
1992, and which did not have control instruments capable of dealing with the
cultural significance and the heritage attributes of the HSO (Pedrosa 2011). The
zoning system adopted in the law has no instruments to effectively control the new
type of expansion of the building area. The increased number of properties, whose
owners made reformations to adjust the buildings to improve their market values,
must also be noted. This movement led to the intense modification of the residential
buildings. Their interiors were modified to adapt them to trading for tourists and
services. The backyards and gardens were occupied with new constructions to
accommodate residential functions (Photo 21.6). This movement led to an increase
in risks of environmental disaster due to the fragile soil of the hills where the urban
area is settled.
The support given by the tourism development programs, to the principles of
economic growth, favored new conceptions of architectural intervention in the
existing fabric of the HSO, which strongly appealed to the urban design fashion of
the moment. Their main target was to be well received in the market to attract
382 S. M. Zancheti
Photo 21.6 The images demonstrate the changes made, from 1984 to 2000, to the tilt of the roof-
ing, to the rooms, and in almost completely occupying the backyard. (Sources: Olinda Heritage
Inventories of 1984 and 2000)
tourists and visitors. Nevertheless, this fails to consider the elements pertinent to
proposals for spaces of cultural and environmental interest, the quality of materials,
and, especially, how works are carried out. That means that there is little use of the
records of heritage attributes of the urban landscape as references for the projects of
development, revitalization, restoration, and others in the HSO.
Here the importance of using the statement of cultural significance as an instru-
ment for planning and managing of the conservation and development of the
Historic Site of Olinda is highlighted. Since the middle of the 1990s, it has been a
theme of discussion among academics and experts working with the heritage of
Olinda. There have been many proposals for new instruments that use of the concept
of cultural significance in tasks of monitoring and urban control of the HSO (Pedrosa
2011; Hidaka 2011).
The IPHAN produced a Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value
for the HSO but rarely has it been used as reference in the managing and planning
documents produced in the last 10 years. In 2016, the municipality of Olinda pro-
moted the elaboration of a Heritage Management Plan for the Historic Site of
Olinda, but it did not make use of the statement of cultural significance or a list of
heritage attributes of the site for the design of its proposals and instruments (Olinda
2016). On the contrary, the municipality continues to use a historical narrative of the
site development as the base for the documents analysis and proposals. However,
the document still has important proposals since it treats heritage the environmental
and the economic development themes in an integrated form. For the first time, the
problem of the climate change was introduced in the planning and management
system of the HSO (Box 21.3).

Surveys
In 2000 the IPHAN elaborated a national inventory of the historic sites of
Brazil and included the Olinda case. It was a comprehensive inventory with a
large number of variables describing the buildings and the public spaces of the
HSO. The inventory was handled by the municipality, but it was not updated
since then.
Increase the space for economic activities linked to tourism such as hotels and
hostels, bars and restaurants, and commerce. Regeneration of public space
using urban design with contemporary appeal. Less restriction to the colors
and design of the traditional facade (e.g., use of graffiti).
Actions and Priorities for Conservation and Development
Regeneration of urban projects and construction of urban equipment for tour-
ist activities. Tentative action to elaborate a Heritage Conservation Master
Plan focusing on the cultural and the environmental problems.
Vulnerability
Loss of large green areas in the interior of the plots and increase in the vulner-
ability of the soil of the hills and risk of landslides. Intense use of the build-
ings forcing an intense maintenance effort for the built heritage, followed by
unpredictable changes in the buildings and in the urban fabric.
Consensus Building
Participation is used systematically in the phases of preparation and imple-
mentation of the projects. Rarely is participation present in the phase of con-
ception/design of the projects. The number and type of actors in the
participation process are larger than the previous periods. There is a larger
presence of entrepreneurs and business people.
Partnerships
There is a more stable process of forming partnerships between the public and
the private sectors. Cultural promoters and investors have taken the leadership
in the discussion of the development strategy of the HSO.
384 S. M. Zancheti
21.4 Conclusions
The framework set out and summarized in the three boxes above shows the com-
plexity of managing conservation of HSO in situations affected by the shortage of
financial and human resources and policy and administrative discontinuity.
During the first period, 1968–1988, it is situated in the context of a centralizing
federal policy, with an abundance of resources, and characterized by the efforts to
integrate protection with heritage, economic development, and urban development.
In this context, the federal authorities simultaneously set the bases on which the
three spheres of government share actions and from which emerge the municipal
policy for protection. The municipal management distinguished itself by formulat-
ing a policy for promoting and giving value to the material heritage.
The second and third periods, against a background of a shortage of national
resources, were characterized by all three spheres of government changing the con-
servation planning and management approach to adjust to a development process
based on a more active local initiative to get private investments and financing
projects.
What can be seen is the emergence and consolidation of new actors and contem-
porary social values, with the formulation of a policy targeting nonmaterial heri-
tage, such as the musical events. In this context, the municipal management has
altered its perception and started to accept a new and flexible vision of integrity and
authenticity of the heritage of the site, reflecting the perceptions of the new invest-
ing actors in the HSO.
The municipal management has governed by the notion of investment opportu-
nity, guided by short- and middle-term strategic planning. The main development
and conservation works were with resources of the national programs for the devel-
opment of tourism and the Patronage Statute incentives law. In this sense, the proj-
ects did not result from priorities established by the conservation planning and
management system and did not follow a value heritage hierarchy.
The management system of the HSO has faced a conflict between interests linked
to cultural heritage and “live culture.” It is up to the state to foster companies and
creative people so that the market can be broadened and realize its potential, not
only in terms of self-sustainability but also in social gains with regard to employ-
ment, income, and inclusion on account of the consumption of cultural goods.
Management priorities are focused on the format of the Council for Cultural
Policies, while the urgent review of the System for Preservation still awaits a favor-
able policy decision.
To sum up, it can be seen clearly that, in practice, there has been a great change
in the heritage management system in the HSO. This change indicates it is capa-
ble of investment and internal savings, reducing the dependency on official modes
of investment funding. Improvements are further evident in the increased com-
plexity of planning and management instruments introduced in the day life of the
system.
The changes in the regulation system of the HSO had a visible impact on the
urban landscape of the site. Also, there has been a perceptible change in the cultural
significance of the site, influenced by the perceptions of new social actors. However,
this change has not yet been captured by a statement of significance that formally
and institutionally expresses the cultural meanings and values in the cultural/politi-
cal arena. As the attributes and hierarchical values are not expressed institutionally
in a statement of cultural significance, monitoring and control activities suffer weak
social support in the local political arena.
In relation to HUL, the case of the Olinda is a good example of an incremental
conservation system constructed in response to the dynamics of local development
process. It shows forward and backward movements as it is expected in a complex
and democratic society. Also it reflects the larger-scale movement of the interpreta-
tion of the cultural heritage of an urban historic site. The central questions of the
HUL approach are as follows: What is heritage? What composes heritage? What is
the meaning of change and continuity in heritage? Who is responsible for heritage?
What does it mean to preserve or to conserve heritage? What are the instruments to
be used in the management of heritage? What constitutes the core challenges for the
planning and conservation system of the Historic Site of Olinda?
References
Barreto, J. C. (2005). De Montmartre Nordestina a Mercado Persa de Luxo: O Sítio Histórico de
Olinda e a participação dos moradores na salvaguarda do patrimônio cultural. Recife: Editora
da UFPE.
Bosi, V. (1986). Núcleos históricos: recuperação e revitalização, a experiência de Olinda. Revista
do Patrimônio, 21, 134–146.
Hidaka, L. T. F. (2011). Indicador de avaliação do Estado de conservação sustentável de cidades
patrimônio cultural da humanidade: teoria, metodologia e aplicação. PhD Thesis. Recife:
MDU/Federal University of Pernambuco.
Milet, V. (1998). A experiência de gestão e proteção ao Sítio Histórico de Olinda. In S. Zancheti,
G. Marinho, & V. Milet (Eds.), Estratégias de Intervenções em Áreas Históricas. Recife: MDU/
UFPE/PNUD.
Novaes, F. (1990). Olinda: evolução urbana. Recife: Fundarpe e Cepe.
Olinda Prefeitura Municipal. (1973). Plano Diretor Local Integrado de Olinda. Olinda: Prefeitura
Municipal.
Olinda Prefeitura Municipal. (1997). Olinda, cidade patrimônio mundial: Plano Diretor de
Olinda – Versão Preliminar. Olinda: Prefeitura Municipal.
Olinda Prefeitura Municipal. (2004). Secretaria de Planejamento, Transporte e Meio Ambiente,
2004, Plano Diretor do Município de Olinda: 2004. Olinda: Fundação de Apoio ao
Desenvolvimento da UFPE e Centro de Estudos Avançados da Conservação Integrada.
Olinda Prefeitura Municipal. (2016). Plano de Gestão do Sítio Histórico de Olinda: Documento
para debate. Olinda. http://www.olinda.pe.gov.br/rlush/plano-de-gestao-do-sitio-historico-de-
olinda#.WI-BjRTIxJH.
Pedrosa, P. C. (2011). Significância cultural como critério para conservação do patrimônio mun-
dial. Master Dissertation. Recife: MDU/Federal University of Pernambuco.
386 S. M. Zancheti
Pereira, C. B. (2004). A conservação da cobertura vegetal como componente do patrimônio cul-
tural em centros históricos urbanos. Estudo de caso: a cidade de Olinda – PE. Dissertação de
mestrado. Recife: MDU/Federal University of Pernambuco.
Polito, H. (2000). O controle urbanístico como elemento da conservação de sítios históricos: o
caso de Olinda. Master dissertation, MDU/Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife.
Reis Filho, N. G. (1969). Evolução Urbana no Brasil (p. 122 a 127). São Paulo: EDUSP.
Zancheti, S. M. (2007). El financiamiento de la revitalización de los centros históricos de Olinda e
Recife: 1979–2005. In F. Carrion (Ed.), El financiameinto de los centros históricos de América
Latina y el Caribe (pp. 349–378). Quito: FLACSO – Lincoln Institute of Land Police – Innovar.
UIO.
Zancheti, S. M., & Milet, V. (2007). Gestão e conservação do Sítio Histórico de Olinda: 1938 –
2006. Textos para Discussãon. 27. Olinda: CECI.
Chapter 22
Revitalizing Urban Parks to Uplift a Rust
Belt City: HUL Applied to Pittsburgh, PA,
USA
Patricia M. O’Donnell
Abstract In this paper, the key overarching ingredient of sound, visionary civic
leadership from an NGO, the Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy (PPC), in partnership
with city government, philanthropic foundations and citizens, is shown to continu-
ously engage, plan, regulate and finance a series of interrelated initiatives, collabora-
tions and projects to uplift the regional public parks and thereby neighbourhoods
and the city as a whole. Following an introductory public spaces and Pittsburgh
history, the narrative organization is framed around the four HUL tool groups: com-
munity engagement, knowledge and planning, regulatory systems and finance to
present a summary of the tools applied and the outcomes. The final section places
this work within the context of the UNESCO Recommendation on the Historic
Urban Landscape, 2011, and the more recent UN Sustainable Development Goals
2030 Agenda (UN SDGs), 2015, and the New Urban Agenda, Habitat III (NUA)
2016, making important cultural heritage linkages with the social environmental and
economic aspects of sustainability. The author, Patricia O’Donnell, preservation
landscape architect and planner, worked with the PPC from 1999 to 2014, bringing
the concepts of community participation, innovative planning, regulatory tools and
finance into the work of park renewal.
Keywords Public space · Parks · Inclusivity · Diversity · Democratic · Resilient ·

Community · HUL · UN SDGs · NUA · Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy
P. M. O’Donnell (*)
Heritage Landscapes LLC, Preservation Landscape Architects and Planners,
Charlotte and Norwalk, VT and CT, USA
LANDSCAPES Landscape Architecture-Planning-Historic Preservation,
Charlotte and Norwalk, VT and CT, USA
LANDSCAPES Landscape Architecture-Planning-Historic Preservation, Norwalk, CT, USA
e-mail: odonnell@heritagelandscapes.com

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_22
388 P. M. O’Donnell
22.1 Introduction
In many cities across the world, a heritage of parks and public spaces shaped cities,
and this commonwealth of shared spaces remains foundational assets for urban life.
Historic parks can readily adapt to twenty-first-century issues of inclusivity, safety,
resilience, climate change response, etc. through adaptive use that respects history,
accepts evolution and engages current and future needs and aspirations of a diverse
contemporary society as historic public spaces are revitalized.
As well as serving an important role as cultural heritage assets, parks and public
spaces are vital to societal well-being as democratic places, providers of environ-
mental services as habitats for urban nature and economic assets improving property
values and providing formal and informal employment. A full range of urban public
spaces are essential to a sustainable twenty-first-century city and metropolitan region.
For Pittsburgh, civic leadership has been and remains a key ingredient applying
the concepts of the UNESCO Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape,
as an early innovator, working with the author to apply the tool groups. The non-
profit Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy (PPC), founded in 1996 by a talented civic-
minded woman, Meg Cheever, has effectively partnered with local government,
community organizations and citizens to uplift Pittsburgh historic parks for 22 years.
Bringing together like-minded staff, board and volunteers, the PPC has framed a
clear value-based vision, providing a consistent voice and actions. Through the
urban heritage of parks, PPC has served an integral component of city public space
to improve the quality of life in this rebounding, former industrial city. Inclusive
public parks envisioned as fully functional, scenic, ecological and historic assets for
broad citizen access fosters social cohesion and quality of life, contributing to the
current Pittsburgh Renaissance.
22.1.1 HUL Urban Public Space Context
Public spaces comprise the city shared by all residents and visitors, open, accessible
and democratic. The well-being, inclusivity and equity of any city are legible in its
public space quality, quantity and distribution. The UNESCO Recommendation on
the Historic Urban Landscape embraces public open spaces in its definition, noting
the historic layering of the city composed of:
cultural and natural values and attributes… topography, geomorphology, hydrology and
natural features, its built environment, both historic and contemporary, its infrastructures
above and below ground, its open spaces and gardens, its land use patterns and spatial orga-
nization, perceptions and visual relationships…and… includes social and cultural practices
and values, economic processes and the intangible dimensions of heritage as related to
diversity and identity. (UNESCO 2011, paragraphs 8–9)
Further, HUL guidance reinforces the tangible and intangible expressions of

heritage noting that heritage “constitutes a key resource in enhancing the liveability
22 Revitalizing Urban Parks to Uplift a Rust Belt City: HUL Applied to Pittsburgh… 389
of urban areas, and fosters economic development and social cohesion in a changing
global environment.” Physical heritage of public open space serves as a vessel for
varied expressions of traditions and practices, the intangible aspects of heritage.
In relation to the UN Sustainable Development Goals, 2030 Agenda (UNESCO
2015) and the Habitat iii New Urban Agenda (NUA) (UN Habitat 2016), parks and
open spaces address a number of goals and objectives of these international direc-
tives. NUA commitments demand that urban development promotes sustainability
and inclusivity to reach prosperity, that equity is achieved leaving no one behind and
that human settlement is planned and implemented to achieve quality environments
and resilience (UN Habitat 2016). These laudable commitments can be achieved in
substantial measure through uplifting the urban heritage of public spaces in an
inclusive, sustainable manner. Parks and open spaces foster a sense of belonging, to
aid in developing social cohesion of a diverse urban citizenry in an era of urban
population diversity and migration. As the shared commonwealth of a city, the pub-
lic open spaces, including parks, playgrounds, streets, waterways, etc., contribute to
urban vitality, liveability, resilience and social justice, or alternately if public space
is poorly managed, degraded or absent, it makes a city less liveable, slow to recover
from impacts, unjust and unsustainable.
22.2 Pittsburgh and the Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy
Located at the confluence of the Ohio, Allegheny and Monongahela rivers, the
topography of the city provided opportunities for large parks to be set aside with the
support of local philanthropists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
The city population grew to 310,000 in 1900, expanding to 671,659 in 1940, and in
2017, it has dropped back to a point near the 1900 level. Pittsburgh originally devel-
oped as a global industry centre with the manufacture of steel and related industries.
Widely known as a gritty industrial city with poor air and water quality due to those
industries, the first Pittsburgh Renaissance, the late 1940s through the 1950s, trans-
formed downtown, rebuilding 25% of the core city in a decade employing planning
and finance tools (Heritage Landscapes LLC 2009). Over the decades, the strong
industrial base has nearly disappeared transforming to new employment types.
Currently Pittsburgh is a city of 306,000 people, while the region has a population
of 2,660,000. Today the city is home to 68 colleges and universities and businesses
fostering innovation and entrepreneurship. Google, Bosch, Apple, Intel and Uber,
among others, have a strong Pittsburgh presence (Lippert et al. 2016).
The historic Pittsburgh parks were planned and set aside in the late nineteenth
and early twentieth century. Created during the urban parks movement in the United
States, they followed on the development of Bushnell Park in Hartford, CT, in 1853
and Olmsted and Vaux’s 1856 Central Park plan and in 1869 the first city parks
system, Buffalo, New York, among others (O’Donnell 1979). The Pittsburgh parks
were civic improvements for the growing city of Pittsburgh. Enlightened civic and
government leaders worked together to donate, purchase and legally set aside these
urban parks in perpetuity for the good of the city and its citizens. These visionaries
included Edward Bigelow, Mary Schenley, Henry and Helen Clay Frick, Andrew
Carnegie and the Mellon family. The large regional parks developed starting in the
1870s remained well-tended through the late 1930s (LANDSCAPES Landscape
Architecture-Planning-Historic Preservation 1999). These years were followed by
decades of decline and intrusions as city parks staffing and budgets were sequen-
tially reduced to minimal levels.
In 1996, the Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy was founded with a mission to
improve the quality of life for the people of Pittsburgh by restoring the park system
to excellence in partnership with government and the community. Projects and pro-
grams are conducted with respect to the environment, historic design and the needs
of our diverse region. The vision of the Parks Conservancy is to foster wide appre-
ciation and enjoyment of sustainable park system landscapes, facilities and pro-
gramming. PPC’s 21 years of work has applied all four HUL tool groups: community
engagement, knowledge and planning, regulatory systems and finance. The PPC
fully embraces the importance of strong non-profit leadership and good governance
within the city and its collaborating departments for solid partnership foundation.
The four regional parks have been a primary focus of the PPC’s efforts including
Frick Park, developed from 1919 with 664 acres; Highland Park, shaped for public
use starting in 1889 with 380 acres; Riverview Park, started in 1894 with 251 acres;
and Schenley Park and Plaza, from 1890 with 456 acres. The total area of parks
covered is 1751 acres or 709 hectares, measuring 7.1 square kilometres. In addition
to these, the PPC and its partners also address another regional park, Emerald View
to the west, and smaller public spaces, boulevards, trails and neighbourhood
grounds.
Over the past 21 years, the growth and impact of the Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy
have built upon a solid foundation of valued, but degraded regional parks, fruitful
partnerships with the City of Pittsburgh, community organization, and citizens, and
visionary, preserving leadership at PPC supported by a talented staff and team of
experts. Learning from the pioneering non-profit parks partnerships of Central and
Prospect Parks in New York City, the Olmsted Parks Conservancy, Louisville
Kentucky and others, the Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy developed, and continues to
innovate, a robust tool kit to approach the challenges of revitalizing public land-
scapes. This work requires multilateral initiatives, diverse partnerships and broad
community support to address the range of physical, social, environmental and eco-
nomic issues with a clear target of uplifting daily life in Pittsburgh through respect-
ing and improving these beloved parks. Economist and author Richard Florida
argues for the improvement of urban quality of place to draw upon and maintain the
creative classes of people in a city. Works to uplift parks and present them to the citi-
zens and city visitors revitalized an important aspect of urban quality of place
(Fig. 22.1).
Fig. 22.1 City map with regional parks shown in relationship to the city, smaller parks and neigh-
bourhoods. (Courtesy LaQuatra Bonci and Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy)
22.3 PPC HUL Civic Engagement Application
According to HUL, civic engagement should involve a cross section of stakehold-

ers, empowering them and reflecting diversity in actions. From the outset PPC has
engaged citizens and partners in diverse ways. One of the first initiatives of the late
1990s was a baseline parks user survey to document park user demographics, use,
perceptions and desires. This foundational effort to engage the people of Pittsburgh
yielded predictable results. Park use types include passive, active, social and educa-
tional. Passive use, any activity that involves just enjoying and being in the land-
scape, is the dominant usage, registering at over 60% of park use (Pittsburgh Parks
Conservancy 1998). From this initial survey, the most agreed-upon issues were a
lack of drinking water and bathrooms, and limited wayfinding to move through
parks safely and comfortably, and having no one present to greet or answer ques-
tions. These findings guided initial projects to develop park visitor maps with mea-
sured paths and connecting routes, to restore paths and links, to upgrade specific
buildings with restrooms and to repair water fountains. Further surveys, at both
overall and project levels, continue to inform park improvement directions.
PPC started as a membership organization, with low-level annual dues, to build

a community of those who care about parks and to keep in touch with potential park
advocates. Early growth of membership to over 1200 residents helped to create the
political clout needed to forge strong partnerships with the city and community
groups. The membership model shifted over time to a program of volunteer activi-
ties and roles as well as one time or scheduled donations. Volunteer activities
include:
• EcoSteward, where after training you work on a specific park area to suppress
invasive species, plant native flora, control soil erosion and clean up trash all
year.
• Park garden volunteer, working alongside horticulturists and gardeners to learn
about garden care and help with weeding, dead flower removal, planting and
related maintenance activities.
• Volunteer naturalist or building docent, who after training will welcome or guide
park visitors for talks on nature and park history at the new Frick environmental
center to reveal the park to interested people.
• Corporate, school or community day volunteer coordinated with PPC to organize
and participate in a park 3–4 h outing involving planting trees, cutting invasive
vines and gardening with up to 25 people.
The objectives of these volunteer activities are to foster stronger ties to the parks,
to increase appreciation for park renewal, to cultivate park advocacy and to recog-
nize park management needs and gaps. In addition to volunteer activities, park pro-
grams engage the public in park-based learning. In 1997, 1998, 2001 and 2002,
BioBlitz surveys focused on citizen science with a 24-h study of counts of insects,
birds, animals and reptiles sited in each park. This program engaged families and
youth stirring interest and enthusiasm to improve park ecology and habitat and pro-
vided baseline habitat data for future reference.
In terms of project engagement, the process towards developing the Frick
Environmental Center included area walks, short online surveys and opinion
requests, community meetings and during construction hard-hat tours with broad
notifications and requests for engagement through postings in Frick Park and the
PPC website. Citizen inputs were incorporated effectively into this environmental
education-focused landscape and building. The centre, opened in 2016, is experi-
encing high visitation with over 70,000 visits in the first year of operation and high
user satisfaction with its programs.
PPC has documented that park use has steadily increased from 1999 to the pres-
ent. Through the collaboration of PPC, Pittsburgh Public Works Parks team and the
neighbourhood organizations and people, the parks have improved, area by area,
and more services have become available to park users, making the parks more
accessible and welcoming. These services include new and upgraded facilities and
guidance such as park maps and signage, website information, drinking water foun-
tains, restrooms and park and conscession staff in various park locations.
22.4 PPC HUL Knowledge and Planning Application
Bringing together a talented, experienced team to develop comprehensive plans that

define the way forward is a hallmark of the PPC efforts. In HUL, knowledge and
planning tools are identified as means of protection, recognition, monitoring and
management, and all four of these aspects are present in the work of the PPC and its
partners. From its beginnings, PPC sought team members with the technical knowl-
edge and experience in historic parks they needed to be successful. Community
engagement guided two master plans, project plans and park programs aligning
parks heritage, environment and society to the city-wide community.
PPC studied NGOs addressing public landscapes in terms of their means, meth-
ods and support as a way of standing on the shoulders of those who had come before
and not reinventing the wheel (LANDSCAPES Landscape Architecture-Planning-
Historic Preservation 2001). Bringing tested methods and approaches to their chal-
lenges accelerated their ability to be effective in gaining momentum and support.
Knowledge and expertise were drawn from within PPC, and from community part-
ners, individual experts, consultants and interdisciplinary teams, to match the needs
of the undertaking.
A continual sequence of planning has informed and directed the work of the
PPC. The Pittsburgh Regional Parks are managed for their historic and cultural
values and assets and for their environmental quality in an integrated manner. Two
sequential Pittsburgh Regional Parks comprehensive plans, in 2000 and 2015, pre-
sented a compelling vision for an integrated park system. The broad collaboration
among the PPC, City of Pittsburgh, park expert consultants, citizen steering com-
mittees and broad public yielded inclusive directives and widely supported under-
takings. Planning for these large parks balances history-use-function, develops
phased projects, publicizes the plan as a future guide and reinforces a high public
profile as works come forward. The 2000 master plan was a blueprint for steward-
ship of the parks, through restoration of features, systems and ecology in Frick,
Highland, Riverview and Schenley parks. That plan looked back and forward to
include history, chronology, current conditions and uses and directions for projects,
partnerships and management (LaQuatra Bonci Associates 2000).
With considerable progress in renewing the parks over the years, a 2015 master
plan update incorporates current urban best practices to integrate parks and city. The
plan applied the lens of integration studying five regional parks (one more than the
first effort) to address blue-water systems, grey-transportation networks and green-
ecological corridors. For example, the 2015 Regional Parks Master Plan focused on
multimodal transportation to connect parks and made a preliminary selection of
streets that could become green to foster habitat corridors and improve city air qual-
ity. The updated plan envisions strong projects that address park and city green-
grey- blue systems holistically, connecting parks and neighbourhoods, moving
towards greater sustainability of environment and society (LaQuatra Bonci
Associates 2015).
The Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy approach to value-based park planning and

action is multivalued and integrated, exemplifying thinking globally and act-
ing locally. Sustainability applies to all park system stewardship actions and
initiatives to simultaneously address:
• Environmental health
• Historic preservation
• Scenic quality, appreciation
• Diverse, inclusive uses
• Fiscal alignment
• Functional and durable landscapes
• Caretaker respect
• Community support
Drawn from the 2015 master plan update, source LaQuatra Bonci et al. 2015
In a simultaneous process, the city undertook a comprehensive city plan with

PlanPGH. Parks and open spaces served as the bedrock of the Open Space Plan
component of that overall effort with a vision that defines the city as a network of
existing parks and abandoned spaces that can all be uplifted. This broad plan sought
to provide city-wide access to natural and cultural assets, opportunities to be active
and healthy and places to play and celebrate. This plan highlighted pedestrian dis-
tances, at quarter- and half-mile intervals, to pinpoint well-served and underserved
neighbourhoods. While there are gaps, the regional parks are accessible to a sizable
percentage of the populace, and the additional small parks currently receiving PPC
aid bring greater access. This master plan update statement of values aligns and
integrates parks planning to city prosperity and liveability.
A core value of life in Pittsburgh is the abundance of parks set among green hillsides and
flowing rivers. Our civic leaders in the late 19th and early 20th centuries gave us this legacy
as an act of foresight – toward economic growth and competitiveness, public health and
well-being, and the simple pleasures of shared space and community spirit. (LaQuatra
Bonci Associates 2015)
22.5 PPC HUL Regulatory Systems Application
In HUL, regulatory systems include legislative and regulatory measures that address
conservation and management of urban heritage. PPC uses regulatory tools to delin-
eate roles and responsibilities of project partners so that works can proceed on a
foundation of collaboration.
Originally set aside in perpetuity as a commonwealth, parks were established for
public recreation and enjoyment for all time. The city owns parklands as conserved
areas. The PPC began its work by establishing a written agreement with the city that
outlined initial roles and responsibilities, basically to work as partners in uplifting

the regional parks. As projects were undertaken, project agreements were developed
clearly defining PPC control of construction sites during restoration and renewal
projects. The financial responsibilities, which itemize who will pay for what and
when, are particularly important in such agreements.
For some locations management agreements have also been put in place. For
example, since the Schenley Plaza revitalization, which removed surface parking
and built a public plaza, the PPC manages food booths and a restaurant and receives
lease fees, under a detailed agreement with the city. Surrounded by universities, the
area experiences heavy use, and the PPC and its partners operate programs such as
yoga classes, performances, movie nights and more (Fig. 22.2).
To undertake the restoration of Mellon Square, agreements between PPC, city
and Pittsburgh Parking Authority were required as the square sits atop a public
underground garage. These agreements clarified the responsibilities for the water-
proofing layer between square and garage. Post-restoration, a management agree-
ment currently being negotiated divides responsibilities between PPC and the city.
Small-scale cooperation with the Highland Park Community Development
board, Pittsburgh History and Landmarks and the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership
is addressed in writing through more informal letters that record agreements and
roles for collaborative undertakings and through verbal communication.
Fig. 22.2 Schenley Plaza was transformed from parking lot to park through an extensive stake-
holder engagement, design, approval, funding and management agreement process led by the
Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy. Courtesy Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy
In summary, for successful collaboration, clarity in the partnerships for uplifting

public parks is a requirement. This clarity is best achieved with legally binding
agreements that lay out the roles and responsibilities of the parties, precise com-
munications and through constant goodwill and mutual respect.
22.6 PPC HUL Financial Tools Application
Financial tools in HUL address income generation, adding that “government and
global funds from international agencies, financial tools should be effectively
employed to foster private investment at the local level” (UNESCO 2011). PPC has
effectively pursued financing of park revitalization through private sector local
sources as well as federal, state and city funds. As a non-profit non-governmental
organization, PPC is constantly seeking funding for office space, staff salaries, park
management and volunteer activities, programs and capital projects. PPC leadership
has been effective in securing foundation support from philanthropic charities,
membership dues from 10,000 members, citizen donations, state and federal project
funding in partnership with the city, management funds and business and organiza-
tion sponsorships. When state and federal funding sources are gained through grant
applications, there are requirements to match with cash and in-kind costs. Private
philanthropic funds have often been applied to meeting these fund matching require-
ments. Funds raised in the past decades for park diverse revitalization efforts have
reached $106 million (Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy 2017).
While many of the PPC projects are large and complex, others are small and
focused. For example, a family that uses Schenley Park wanted the trails to be
improved and provided $10,000 to achieve that work. With that modest fund, the
PPC worked closely with city DPW staff and called on their consultants to limit
direct costs to supervisory collaboration and materials with city staff labour. Specific
historic paths and bridges were improved with that small fund and a creatively
structured, focused, work program.
An important source of unrestricted operating funds has come from the annual
Hat Luncheon that has sponsors and income from individual tickets. Funds raised
from this yearly spring event have supported PPC office and staff over the years.
The Allegheny County Regional Asset District provides the City of Pittsburgh
with $1.5 million annually in funding for the regional parks. In addition, the Frick
Park Trust Fund provides an annual budget for the care of that park, currently at
$480,000 per year for dedicated park staff. These specific funding sources give a
boost to the regional parks in terms of addressing staffing and ongoing maintenance
needs. However, there is a huge gap between the needs of a deteriorated park system
and the funding available. That is the essential reason for developing the PPC as an
NGO advocate for community-based public parks uplifting.
One of the first projects financed through privately raised funds from a local
foundation restored the Reynolds Street entry to Frick Park, focusing on upgrad-
ing a neighbourhood entry point landscape and structure to make the park more
Fig. 22.3 Frick Park entry restored as a pilot project in 2000 welcomes people to the park gra-
ciously, as the historic design intended. Credit Patricia M. O’Donnell
welcoming. The results increased use and highlighted the historic gatehouse and
designed landscape of this entry (Fig. 22.3).
Two PPC projects provide data for project financing. In 2003, the reconstruction
of the Highland Park Welcome Entry was undertaken to include about $580,000 for
fountain reconstruction and paving, funded by the City of Pittsburgh, while the
gardens, stone curbing, soils, irrigation and plantings were funded through local
foundations, in a sequence of small projects adding up to about $650,000 (Heritage
Landscapes 2003). Planting work was carried out by a neighbourhood employment
program for disadvantaged citizens and neighbours contributed to the planting on
work days to add to the sense of ownership.
In 2008, a renewal plan for Mellon Sqaure began with a throguh report address-
ing origins, evolution, use and current conditions, recommending preservation and
adaptive use. Mellon Square is a significant Modernist design for an urban plaza,
which opened to the public in 1955. The work, accomplished in phases, combined
focused public and private funding to rebuild the main fountain and cascade, con-
struct a new terrace overlook and restore features and finishes throughout. $7 mil-
lion funded the work, while $3 million endows management to keep Mellon Square
in top condition. The focused effort on this centre city gem generated more than
$300 million in surrounding investment in offices, condominiums and hotels, bring-
ing new downtown residents, workers and visitors (Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy
2015) (Fig. 22.4).
Financing the PPC office and staff for general operations and funding projects
remains an issue to address year by year and project by project. The concessions at
Fig. 22.4 Mellon Square 1955 Modernist master work restored and extended with new terrace.
(Courtesy Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy)
Schenley Plaza produce some income that is applied on-site for the care and staffing
of this heavily used plaza. Since 1996, $106 million in funds raised by PPC with
partners have been used to revitalize and enhance heritage, functions, systems and
environment of the regional parks and smaller parks and squares. PPC is the leader
in bringing partners, stakeholders and funders together to collaborate. In terms of
future funding, there is a desire to build an endowment fund to cover PPC general
operations, and efforts to raise such a fund are in the initial stages.
22.7 P
PC and Partners Applying HUL Tools Towards Urban
Sustainability
Globally, a recent surge in city-shaping new parks has amply demonstrated the
social, economic and environmental benefits of well-designed public parks and
open spaces. Examples include the development of the Highline, New York, and the
Red Ribbon Park, Qinhuangdao, China, among many others. The same holds true
for revitalized heritage parks, squares and open spaces. The places in cities set aside
by previous generations for the benefit of current and future generations provide
public grounds where cultural diversity and biodiversity overlap and provide mutual
benefits for safe, healthy, resilient cities.
Founded in 1996, the PPC has raised and invested over $107 million to revitalize
these historic community parks, completed 17 major projects and working to
improve 22 city parks dispersed across the city. Their efforts respect the heritage of
these parks while improving functions, scenic beauty, habitat and resilience by wel-
coming diverse uses and users to build social cohesion.
Park Assets with World-Class Potential

Pittsburgh is extraordinarily fortunate to have a multistrand emerald and blue
necklace of parks, trails and water. The City of Pittsburgh has 171 park facili-
ties comprising 2800 acres, with the 4 historic, valuable large parks, Schenley,
Frick, Highland and Riverview parks, making up 60% of the parkland and
serving as the major jewels in the city system. Despite having these irreplace-
able natural and cultural assets, Pittsburgh’s parks are not yet achieving their
potential. It is thrilling to envision a future in which these thriving, sustain-
able, historic parks make Pittsburgh an enviable place to live and work,
because each park is:
Complete in all capital repairs
Well-managed and well-maintained
Engaging park users in the history, ecology and breadth of resources
Accessible for diverse recreation and well-marketed to the public
Enjoyably and intelligently programmed
Secure and perceived as safe and secure
Adopted by a significant volunteer cadre
Widely used by residents and visitors from across the region
Fiscally well-managed by maximizing appropriate commercial revenue and
raising additional private funds for sustainable support
Recognized for leadership in best practices for parks in the area and the nation
Sources: Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy (2005)
This park-centric work, for over 21 years in Pittsburgh, draws on all four HUL
tool groups and applies lessons learned to build towards an integrated vision of
parks and city. Sustainability applies to all park system stewardship and initiatives
to simultaneously address environmental health, historic preservation, scenic qual-
ity and appreciation, diverse and inclusive uses, fiscal alignment, functional and
durable landscapes, caretaker respect and community support. Value-based plan-
ning and action are exemplars of thinking globally and acting locally to foster ben-
efits community wide. Addressing integration towards urban sustainability, HUL
paragraph 22 states:
Conservation of the urban heritage should be integrated into general policy planning and
practices and those related to the broader urban context. Policies should provide mecha-
nisms for balancing conservation and sustainability in the short and long terms. Special
emphasis should be placed on the harmonious, integration of contemporary interventions
into the historic urban fabric. (UNESCO 2011)
This directive is embodied in the PPC work with its partners. Pittsburgh’s parks
community-based revitalization of these cultural assets addresses the three pillars of
sustainability, economy, environment and society, effectively towards uplifting the
city as a whole. The work integrates and frames city park heritage uplifting within
overall city development that is sustainable and makes significant contributions to
urban life. Through the works of PPC and its many partners, the parks today are
urban historic green spaces that have changed the urban context of a declining rust
belt city. Together the projects and programs provide designed open space, air qual-
ity, sunlight, recreational assets and human-tended biodiversity to renew the bodies
and spirits of urban dwellers. Persistence is required. The work continues.
References
Heritage Landscapes. (2009). Mellon Square preservation, interpretation and management plan,
for Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy.
LANDSCAPES Landscape Architecture-Planning-Historic Preservation. (1986). Patricia
O’Donnell, principal, with F.P. Clark Associates, Master plan for preservation and scenic con-
servation, Guilford, CT, 1986; a project for the Guilford Preservation Alliance, with Town of
Guildford and Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation. Chapter 5 proposed tools lays out
educational and community involvement tools, financial tools, advisory tools and regulatory
tools, pp. 27–41.
O’Donnell, principal, and Brown Carlisle & Associates, A chronology of significant events
in the history of Highland, Schenley, Riverview and Frick Parks, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
Appendix to the Pittsburgh Regional Parks Master Plan, September 1999.
O’Donnell, principal, with Barry Hannegan, Charles E. Beveridge, Meg Cheever, Susan
Rademacher, Tupper Thomas, Mellon Park preservation & management plan, for the Western
Pennsylvania Conservancy and the R.K. Mellon Foundation, 2001.
O’Donnell, principal, Construction documents, project files, Highland Park welcome entry.
LaQuatra Bonci Associates. (2015). Regional Parks Master Plan 2015 Update: Envisioning the
Historic Regional Parks as cornerstones of a vibrant parks and open space system for a sus-
tainable 21st century city with Heritage Landscapes Strada LLC, BioHabitats, Perkins Eastman
LLC, for Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy and the City of Pittsburgh.
LaQuatra Bonci Associates/Michael Stern. (2000). With Biohabitats Inc., Tai + Lee Architects,
LANDSCAPES Landscape Architecture-Planning-Historic Preservation, Earthware/Landbase
systems, Pittsburgh’s regional parks master plan: A new ethic of stewardship, for city of
Pittsburgh, Department of City Planning, Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy, 2000.
Lippert, et al. (2016). Evolving the urban landscape: Pittsburgh’s Public Spaces in Planning and
Design Building and Growing Partnerships, Presenters Josh Lippert, ASLA, City of Pittsburgh,
Department of City Planning, Frederick R. Bonci, RLA, ASLA, LaQuatra Bonci Associates,
Lauren Schmitt, ASLA, AICP, MIG, Inc, Patricia M. O’Donnell, FASLA, AICP, IFLA,
ICOMOS, Heritage Landscapes LLC, American Society of Landscape Architects Annual
Meeting, 2016, New Orleans, LA.
O’Donnell. (1979). Survey of Buffalo’s Olmsted Parks for National Register of Historic Places
Nomination, 1979, for the Landmark Society of the Niagara Frontier, and the New York State
Department of Parks and Recreation, Division for Historic Preservation
Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy. (1998). Current park use and experience citizen surveys, telephone,
intercept and focus groups, 1998, Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy.
Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy. (2005). Pittsburgh regional parks: World class assets to Steward
more effectively, by Ralph Cryder, Patricia O’Donnell, Tim Marshall, Brigid Sullivan, and
Robert Teeter, for Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy.
Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy. (2015). Pittsburgh Parks conservancy summary of Mellon Square
funding and adjacent investment summary via email, Meg Cheever PPC President, 2015.
Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy. (2017). Summary of funds raised in past 21 years via email, Meg
Cheever PPC President, 2017.
UN Habitat. (2016). New Urban Agenda, finalized at Quito Ecuador, October 2016.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development, goals
page 12, targets page 13 to 23.
Chapter 23
Perspectives for a Historic Urban
Landscape Approach in Porto, Portugal
Abstract The Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape invites states

parties to consider more sustainable development models for urban conservation
policies and practices. Urban conservation strategies have a long history in the city
of Porto. Hence, this background has a direct influence on the nomination process
of the Historic Centre of Porto, inscribed on the World Heritage list in 1996.
Presenting a perspective of the existing strategies and policies in urban conservation
management and reflecting on the implementation of a HUL approach in Porto, this
paper analyses several tools, namely, the Municipal Master Plan (PDM) and the WH
Management Plan, among others. The results indicate the existence of strengths and
potentialities that need to be developed and improved, through the increase of more
participatory processes, as well as more investment in identifying the values and
their relation to specific threats.
Keywords Historic urban landscape · Historic Centre of Porto (World Heritage) ·

Municipal Master Plan · Management Plan
23.1 Introduction
The sustainable management of the balance between urban development and heri-
tage conservation has featured prominently in recent international debate surround-
ing heritage policies and was recently synthesized in the UNESCO Recommendation
T. C. Ferreira (*)
Centro de Estudos de Arquitectura e Urbanismo, Faculdade de Arquitectura da Universidade
do Porto, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
e-mail: tferreira@arq.up.pt
A. T. Silva
Urban and Spatial Planning, Porto, Portugal

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_23
404 T. C. Ferreira and A. T. Silva
on the Historic Urban Landscape1 (UNESCO 2011). This document proposes a

holistic understanding of urban historic areas, as well as the implementation of
more all-inclusive approaches. According to the HUL Recommendation, urban her-
itage is interpreted as the result of a historic layering of cultural and natural values
and attributes, tangible and intangible, extending beyond the notion of “historic
centre” or “ensemble” to include the broader urban context and its geographical
setting, as well as all parties interested in their city’s management (UNESCO 2011).
Despite not being a binding document, the UNESCO states parties (and local
authorities) are invited to identify the “critical steps” which can bring them closer to
a HUL approach, through the resources’ mapping, the definition of their cultural
value as well as their vulnerability level to change and development. Moreover,
these outcomes should be integrated into the broader urban development frame-
work, so that action and change are continuously monitored through a participatory
process (UNESCO 2011). The HUL Recommendation is, therefore, a flexible
instrument which encompasses adaptation, dissemination and monitoring (UNESCO
2011; Veldpaus 2015; WHITRAP 2016).
In Portugal, there are so far no national initiatives to disseminate this kind of
approach. Nevertheless, some recent researches have explored its integration poten-
tials in Portugal (Tarrafa Silva et al. 2017), namely, through the spatial planning
tools (Tarrafa Silva 2017), which are indicated by the National Heritage Law (Lei de
Bases do Património Cultural, Law no. 107/2001 of 8 September: LBPC2001) as
one way to enhance heritage. On the side of spatial planning legislation,2 heritage is
recognized as a resource that should be identified by territorial planning tools, par-
ticularly in the Municipal Spatial Plans (Planos Municipais de Ordenamento do
Território: PMOT)3 which should define the application of urban parameters and
protection zones. Among those, the Municipal Master Plan (Plano Director
Municipal: PDM)4 is the only mandatory spatial planning tool, binding public and
private sectors and defining the general strategic guidelines for more detailed plans -
PP and PU (Tarrafa Silva 2017).
This paper explores some perspectives on the implementation of the HUL
Recommendation in Porto, Portugal. Recognizing its relation with the Douro River
and wine industry (Port wine), as well as its medieval historic centre (World Heritage
since 1996), Porto can be a relevant case for exploring the HUL approach, not only
1
Hereafter HUL Recommendation
2
Regime Jurídico dos Instrumentos de Gestão Territorial: RJIGT (Law Framework for Spatial
Planning Tools): Decree-Law no. 380/99 of 22 September, recently reviewed by the Decree-Law
no. 80/2015, of 14 May
3
Also known as Instrumentos de Gestão Territorial (Spatial Planning Tools), being constituted by
the PDM (Plano Director Municipal: Municipal Master Plan), the PU (Plano de Urbanização:
Urban Plan) and the PP (Plano de Pormenor: Detailed Plan)
4
Urban development in Portugal is ruled by the PDMs, which are crucial legal instrument in the
management of the municipal territory. The PDM defines the strategic framework of territorial
development of the municipality, being the reference instrument for the elaboration of the other
municipal plans (RJIGT).
23 Perspectives for a Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Porto, Portugal 405
because it is a multilayered urban settlement in a stunning landscape but also due to

its own urban conservation history and its management instruments and policies.
Indeed, the Historic Centre of Porto, in a context of opening to the international
debate influenced by the Venice Charter of 1964 (Ferreira 2007), was the stage of
one of the pioneer studies on urban conservation in Portugal: the “Estudo de
Renovação Urbana da Ribeira Barredo” (Távora 1969). Understanding the city as
a continuous series of layers that should be respected, along with its resident com-
munity (Pinho 2009), Fernando Távora developed a multidisciplinary and integrated
study including not only the urban and architectonic perspective but also the physi-
cal (environmental, geographic, etc.) and human (sociocultural, demographic, etc.)
aspects, as well as developing economic and administrative (legal framework and
policies) proposals (Távora 1969). The integration of conservation objectives into
the general urban framework, in which change was considered as part of the slogan
“continuar-inovando” (“to continue innovating”; Távora 1969), demonstrates a con-
nection with today’s urban rehabilitation doctrines and the objective of HUL
approach 50 years later.
This and other experiences have had a profound influence on urban conservation
and housing programs in Portugal since the democratic regime of 1974, namely, on
a series of technical offices5 disseminated through the country (Pinho 2009). Since
then, urban conservation looked towards a new integration of urban development
policies and urban conservation objectives (Aguiar 2010).
23.2 The Case Study of Porto
23.2.1 P
orto: A Metropolitan Area, a City and a WH Historic
Centre
Located in the North of Portugal, the city of Porto is the head of the second largest
Portuguese metropolitan area, which includes 16 municipalities and 1,684,901
inhabitants (INE 2009). The municipality of Porto stands out for activities related
with higher education and health, and more recently tourism, due to the ubiquity of
low-cost travel, which is pressuring the restructuring of the old city, and its func-
tional specializations are now increasingly targeted at visitors rather than
residents.
The city of Porto (corresponding to the municipal area – Fig. 23.1) covers an area
of 4166 ha with 238,000 residents (INE 2011). The Douro River delimitates the city
to the south, developing along a winding valley that determines a rugged topogra-
phy. The great variations of altitude along the banks determine singular forms of
appropriation of the territory that today form the Douro River and Porto landscape.
Gabinetes Técnicos Locais: GTL

5
Fig. 23.1 Scheme with the metropolitan area of Porto, the municipality/city of Porto and the
Historic Centre of Porto
The metamorphosis of the city and the extensive urbanization of the territory sur-
passed the defined limits of the old city, growing into its peripheries.
The Historic Centre of Porto is an urban agglomeration of great historical, artis-
tic, cultural and architectural value, confined, for the most part, to the line of forti-
fied walls of the fourteenth century. A geographically important point, favourably
exposed to the southern quadrant along the great river, close to the sea, the city of
Porto has always been a focal point of populations since prehistoric times. Inscribed
on the UNESCO World Heritage list in 1996 as “Historic Centre of Porto”, under
the cultural criterion (iv), the WH committee considers that the site’s OUV lies in
the “urban fabric and its many historic buildings bear remarkable testimony to the
development over the past thousand years of a European city that looks outward to
the west for its cultural and commercial links” (UNESCO 1996). When the
Management Plan was published (2010), this historic area contained 1763 build-
ings. The condition of these buildings varied, with 61% in satisfying condition and
36% classed as worst status (Porto Vivo SRU 2008). Recently, within the require-
ment of a retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value – OUV
(UNESCO) – ICOMOS-Portugal recommended the extension of the property name,
from “Historic Centre of Porto”, as was inscribed since 1996, to “Historic Centre of
Porto, Luiz I Bridge and Monastery of Serra do Pilar”6 (Fig. 23.2). After all, this
constituted a simple extension to the names of the attributes which were already
To shorten, in this article authors opted to use the 1996 property name – Historic Centre of Porto.
6
Fig. 23.2 Perspective of

the Historic Centre of
Porto from Serra do Pilar
of D. Luis and Historic
Centre of Porto. (Loza
1993)
covered by the 1996 inscription, which included also an area on the other mouth of
the river, in the neighbouring municipality of Vila Nova de Gaia.
23.2.2 A Mosaic Management
Porto has a long history of conservation management with a variety of strategies

conducted by different institutions (local and national) and various management
areas, which have been overlapping over the time. Hence, there are different areas
(Fig. 23.3) which are managed by different entities and regulations, each of them
with different aims and purposes.
The Critical Area for Urban Recovering and Conversion (Área Crítica de
Recuperação e Reconversão Urbanística: ACCRU)7 covered 1050 ha (one-fourth of
the Porto municipal area), which corresponds to the Porto Vivo Sociedade de
Reabilitação Urbana (Porto Vivo SRU) intervention area. This area includes other
delimitations, such as several Urban Rehabilitation Areas8 (ARUs), the area listed as
Property of Public Interest (IIP) – Zona Historica do Porto and the World Heritage
area and respective buffer zone (300 ha), which includes part of Vila Nova de Gaia
municipal territory (UNESCO 2006).
7
Decree-Law no. 794/76, of 5 November, changed by the Decree-Laws no. 313/80, of 19 August
and no. 400/84, of 31 December.
8
Área de Reabilitação Urbana: ARU (Law no. 32/2012, of 14 August).
Fig. 23.3 Map and timeline with different areas and instruments
Since 2007, the management of the Historic Centre of Porto has been supported
by Porto Vivo SRU, a public limited company (initially 60% state9 and 40%
municipality), whose purpose is to promote the urban rehabilitation of the area cor-
responding to the parishes of Sé, Miragaia, S. Nicolau, Vitória, Massarelos, Bonfim,
Cedofeita and Santo Ildefonso, initially corresponding to the ACRRU. Portuguese
law LBPC2001 declares UNESCO properties as national monuments, which are
governed by the Directorate-General of Cultural Heritage10 (DGPC), in coordina-
tion with the Regional Directorates of Culture of the North11 (DRCN). In 2010, the
buffer zone was replaced by an ARU on both municipalities of Porto and Gaia.
Urban development in Porto is governed by the Municipal Master Plan (PDM),
which defines the strategic framework of territorial development of the municipal-
ity, corresponding to the city territory.
9
Through the Housing and Urban Rehabilitation Institute (Instituto de Reabilitação Urbana:
IHRU).
10
Direção Geral do Património Cultural: DGPC.
11
Direção Regional da Cultural Norte: DRCN.
23.3 Methodology
Rather than an analysis of the policies implemented in the city of Porto, this article
is an overview and exploration of the urban development model followed in this
historic city, grounded in the HUL concept, which goes beyond the notion of
“ensemble or historic centre” to the broader geographic and social context (UNESCO
2011). As the Porto territory is managed by a wide range of entities, with different
targets and aims, this exercise used the documents produced by each of those actors
(Table 23.1). Documents were organized by entity and categorized according to its
nature (i.e. identify, manage or assess resources) and by its general target, namely,
if it is exclusively meant for urban development, heritage policies or if it is an inte-
grative tool of both policies.
The PDM and the WH Management Plan are the most complete documents and
thus the core of this study. Despite being both integrative tools, these two instru-
ments work over different areas and are managed by different entities.
The methodology also consisted of drawing of specific maps (e.g. historic evolu-
tion of the city, inventoried properties and assets, listed properties and assets, pro-
tected areas). Moreover, complementary statistical analysis was performed (e.g.
percent of listed buildings, percent of protected areas) aiming at exploring surveys
and resources’ mapping, as well as developing a comparative analysis over the inte-
gration of different strategies and tools.
A survey of the Porto Historic Centre inhabitants was also carried out (Ferreira
and Pinto 2017). Developed in November 2017, the questionnaires covered a ran-
dom sample of 22 individuals (11 men and 11 women) of the 4 parishes of the
Historic Centre (Miragaia, São Nicolau, Sé, Vitória), 90% adults of which 28%
Table 23.1 Data collection

Scale Entity Document Naturea Targetb
National DGPC (DRCN) National inventory (SIPA) I HP
UNESCO WH list nomination file/ABE report I HP
(ICOMOS-Portugal) (1995)
IHRU Housing policies – UDP
Rehabilitation policies (ARU/ORU) – IP
Local Porto Town Hall (CMP) PDM (2006) M IP
Heritage properties charter (IPAP) I HP
State of conservation report (1998) A HP
Periodic report (2006) A HP
Statement of OUV (2016) I HP
Periodic report (2016) A IP
SRU (CMP) Master plan (2005) M IP
Management plan (2008) M IP
Monitoring report (2011–2014) I IP
a
I inventory, M management, A assessment
b
UDP urban development policy, HP heritage policy, IP integrative policy
were over 65 years old. The majority of the interviewed had basic education (4 years
of primary studies).
23.4 P
erspectives on the Implementation of HUL Steps
in Porto
The HUL Recommendation is clear when assuming the flexible and adaptable
nature of the proposed urban development model, its action plan and tools (UNESCO
2011). According to this document, the critical steps can be adapted and followed in
a different order, as long as conservation objectives are integrated into the urban
development framework, as a crucial activity on the path for the sustainable devel-
opment. Therefore, in this paper, the results were organized according to the action
plan steps proposed by HUL approach and interpreted by Veldpaus (2015), which
will enable the estimation of the level of concordance with the current management
process (Table 23.2).
23.4.1 Understanding the Context
The deep knowledge of the city resources is the first step for sustainable manage-
ment (WHITRAP 2016). To achieve this, the HUL approach defines three crucial
steps: (1) mapping city resources (natural, human and cultural), (2) identifying val-
ues through participatory planning tools aimed at reaching consensus on the attri-
butes and values to preserve and finally (3) assessing the factors affecting those
values, revealing their vulnerability level.
Table 23.2 HUL critical steps and general stages of heritage management process
Heritage management process
(Veldpaus 2015) HUL steps (Veldpaus and Pereira Roders 2013)
Understanding the context Step 1: Mapping natural, cultural and human
resources
Step 2: Reach consensus on what to protect: values
and attributes
Step 3: Assess vulnerability to change and
development
Integration in the wider urban Step 4: Integration in the wider urban framework
framework
Managing action Step 5: Priority actions
Step 6: Establishment of partnerships
Monitoringa
Adapted from Veldpaus (2015)
a
Assumed by HUL Recommendation but not integrated as a critical step
23.4.1.1 Mapping Natural, Cultural and Human Resources
Mapping resources might include three dimensions (Veldpaus and Pereira Roders
2013): (a) identification through textual description of resources, (b) location of
resources in a map or a table and (c) the evolution of resources through their com-
pared analysis over time (Gustcoven 2016). A fourth dimension involving the (d)
assessment of resources’ state of conservation can also be introduced.
Porto municipality has been identifying heritage properties since the first inven-
tories developed in Portugal, namely, the “National Monuments” list of 1910 (e.g.
Porto Cathedral or the Clérigos Church and Tower), as well as in successive inven-
tories and listings. In this regard, it is important to recall the systematic digital
inventory Sistema de Inventário Património Arquitectónico (SIPA) created in 1993
by the former General Directorate of National Monuments and Buildings –
DGEMN12 (1929–2007).
The local cultural value as an ensemble has been recognized since the 1960s (e.g.
Távora 1969). However, the nomination process of the Historic Centre of Porto to the
WH list in the 1990s broadened the recognition of this value. This procedure, coor-
dinated by the former Commissariat for the Urban Renovation of Ribeira/Barredo
Area – CRUARB13 (Loza 1993, 1998, 2000) – covered a series of comprehensive
surveys and studies, which provided a broad understanding of the area and contrib-
uted to the compilation of the proposal to the World Heritage list, approved in 1996.
In the following period, since 1998, the Municipal Department for Cultural
Heritage (Divisão Municipal do Património Cultural) started developing the
Inventário do Património Arquitetónico do Porto - IPAP (1998–2007) – including
not only the historic centre but the whole city of Porto – which was later partially
integrated into the PDM Heritage Charter14 (PDM Porto 2006), as a georeferenced
and web-accessible instrument. Today, this collection of information constitutes a
dynamic and flexible database including not only legally protected properties (listed
or submitted to listing) but also other inventoried properties recognized with cul-
tural significance (Imóveis de Interesse Patrimonial) according to specific criteria
(CMP 2005b, pp. 247–248). The properties and areas defined in PDM Heritage
Charter consist mostly of built heritage, from single buildings to ensembles, includ-
ing also isolated urban elements (e.g. sculptures, bridges, etc.) and, for listed build-
ings, related protection areas (protection zones). The inventory of heritage (along
with the PDM Heritage Charter) came to be a fundamental support to PDM, not
only integrating this data but enhancing it with new knowledge.
Each inventoried property is also the object of individual inventory files and
georeferenced in PDM Heritage Charter by a location street, the legal protection
12
Direção Geral dos Monumentos e Edificios Nacionais: DGEMN.
13
The CRUARB (Comissariado para a Renovação Urbana da Área de Ribeira/Barredo) was the
entity in charge of the rehabilitation and recovering process in the Porto Historic Centre (including
the WH classified area) since 1974 until 2003. It has been replaced in 2004 by Porto Vivo SRU.
14
The PDM Heritage Charter is a static tool that can be periodically updated (e.g. the 2006 PDM
Heritage Charter was updated in 2012).
Fig. 23.4 2006 PDM Heritage Charter. (PDM Porto 2006)
level (listing category, when listed) and a code locating it on the map. However, the
intention to provide extra information to consider in future interventions, such as
significant values and attributes, has never gone beyond that, because the criteria of
evaluation and the values to be preserved are not identified in the inventory files.
The PDM Heritage Charter of 2006 (Fig. 23.4) integrates the different kinds of
elements proposed in the PDM report (CMP 2005a, b) and described in PDM statu-
tory ordinance (Regulamento do PDM): Properties of Heritage Interest (inventoried
and listed), Areas of Urban and Architectonic Interest, Nuclei and Places, Green
Areas of Heritage Value, Perimeters of Archaeological Protection (Special Protection
Zone/Automatic Protection Zone; Special Perimeter of Archaeological Protection/
Zone of Archaeological Potential), ACRRU and Listed Tree Species (zones with
trees; isolated trees).
There are other local inventories conducted by the Municipal Department for
Cultural Heritage, but they are not integrated. Nevertheless, these may contribute to
raising awareness for other heritage attributes typologies (Veldpaus 2015), such as
building elements (e.g. public art, azulejos database) or even intangible typologies.
Although any citizen can recommend the introduction of new properties and assets,
the inclusion process remains mainly supported by expert assessments, with sparse
participation of local inhabitants and associations. Some initiatives, such as the
projects with scholar communities (e.g. CD-ROM “Porto o nosso Património”),
may be preliminary steps to extend this process to the community.
23.4.1.2 Reach Consensus on What to Protect: Values and Attributes
The process of heritage mapping and listing in Portugal is still mostly centralized
(Tarrafa Silva et al. 2017). Rather than being the outcome of an anticipatory value-
based assessment, the inventory processes occur more frequently in a reactive way,
in order to protect a property from an imminent damage or threat, or, because its
antiquity has been recognized. This may have problematic results, as urban actors
do not know what should be protected, or why, and often see these instruments as an
obstacle to development. Reaching a consensus through stakeholder consultation
and participatory planning on values and attributes, as recommended by HUL
approach (UNESCO 2011), is crucial to solve this conflict (Bandarin and Van Oers
2012; Veldpaus 2015). Following the national perspective (Tarrafa Silva et al. 2017),
in Porto, the identification of those values and attributes resulted mostly from expert
value assessments, excluding the participation of other interested actors (e.g. pro-
moters/investors, resident community, etc.).
For instance, a recent survey of Porto Historic Centre residents (Ferreira and
Pinto 2017) revealed a common unawareness regarding the limits and attributes of
the WH site. Moreover, the inquiries reveal the intangible attributes (people and
social relations) as the most referenced cultural value (51%), contrasting with the
“architectural heritage” mentioned by less than 8% of respondents (Fig. 23.5).
In Portugal, heritage listing process is a procedure that can be opened by any citi-
zen and be evaluated by a group of experts (DGPC or town hall culture departments,
Fig. 23.5 Chart with most valued elements by Historic Centre of Porto residents. (Ferreira and
Pinto 2017)
Fig. 23.6 Chart with inventoried and listed buildings. (CEAU-FAUP 2017)
in case of properties of municipal interest) and validated by an assembly democrati-

cally elected (national or municipal assemblies). In this way, it can be considered,
in theory, as a result of a participatory decision process. The decision process defines
that certain property has such a relevant significance that should have a special pro-
tection, materialized in the legal requirement of binding advice from DGPC or DRC
and in the definition of protection zones. However, for it to move beyond being only
theoretically participatory, more actors need to be engaged in the process.
From the analysis of the PDM Heritage Charter, we can observe that about 12%
(155 properties) of the inventoried properties (total of 1324 properties) are listed as
a National Monument (MN), Property of Public Interest (IIP) or Property of
Municipal Interest (IIM), generating protection zones under the safeguarding of the
DGPC (Fig. 23.6). Although the LBPC2001 law states that inventorying is the first
step of protection, it is important to acknowledge that, in the practical day-to-day
management of interventions in the city of Porto, only listed buildings or buildings
placed in listed ensembles or protection zones have a more effective legal protection
through the binding advice of DRCN or DGPC.
It should also be highlighted that there is a wide range of buildings with legal
protection even though they are not listed individually, namely, the assets that are
included in Public Interest Ensembles (CIP) or in the area of the Historic Centre of
Porto which, according to the Portuguese legislation, is listed as National
Monument15 (Fig. 23.7). These ensembles comprise a large number of properties
that holding legal protection (corresponding to 18% of the total area of Porto)
through binding advice of DRCN or DGPC (Fig. 23.8), and it is in this extended
perspective – from the buildings to the ensembles – that we should understand the
resource’s mapping of the city of Porto, with a positive remark in a HUL
perspective.
The following Public Interest Ensembles (CIP) are currently listed: Avenida dos Aliados, Avenida
15
da Boavista, Avenida Montevideo, Praça da Republica and Rua Álvares Cabral, Conjunto da Foz
Velha and Historic Zone of Porto.
Fig. 23.7 Map with listed buildings, protected zones and ensembles of public interest. (CEAU-
FAUP 2017)
Fig. 23.8 Chart with

ensembles of public
interest and protected
zones
23.4.1.3 Assess Vulnerability to Change and Development
The identification of the factors that might affect heritage properties is the last step
to understand the context (step 3), before defining management strategies. Indeed,
it is the correlation of the defined cultural significance (attributes and values) and
the level of vulnerability of those significant resources, which enables the establish-
ment of a coherent approach towards sustainable development. In this way, the
inheritance of the past is preserved without compromising the needs and aspirations
of present and future generations. To be resilient is to be conscious of what can be
changed without compromising the authenticity and integrity of the place and on the
other hand to accept that conservation is the “management of thoughtful change”
(Getty 2010) and not the conflict with any alteration.
The socioeconomic pressures and the impacts derived from climate change have
been considered as the two of the greatest groups of threats to heritage (Veillon
2014). More specifically, in World Heritage cultural properties, the problems related
to management systems and management plans are the threats with the strongest
impact (Veillon 2014, 70).
In the Porto case, regarding the risks derived from natural phenomena (poten-
tially increased with climate change impacts), these range from floods in the Douro
River, extreme weather conditions, landslides or small earthquakes. Regarding
threats of human origin, which are the most prominent, besides fire, these range
from socioeconomic pressures and the incompatibility of uses (Loza 2017, 178), as
well as pressure from real estate (generally focused on short-term profit rather than
in sustainable or more compatible interventions). Some of those risks derive from
tourism (the fifth in the ranking of WH cultural properties’ threats in UNESCO –
Veillon 2014, 70), an economic activity that is increasing extensively in the city.
Despite the undoubted positive outcomes (e.g. employment, revenues, investment,
etc.), tourism also has negative impacts (e.g. gentrification, loss of authenticity and
services to residents, price raising, traffic, etc.), which, if not controlled, may cause
irreversible damage to the place’s value.
However, in Porto city, the only threats that have been formally reported as hav-
ing a direct impact in heritage were the loss of population in the Historic Centre of
Porto, noticed since the first Periodic Report (UNESCO 2006), as well as develop-
ment projects, particularly the ones concerning infrastructural works to improve the
navigability of the river and the protection of the shorelines (UNESCO 1998). The
report sent by ICOMOS-Portugal (2012) regarding the real estate development in
Cardosas Area warned of the impact that the proposed strategy might have on cul-
tural significance and, in this case, on OUV.
Although identified, these threats are not represented in any kind of vulnerability
tools. For instance, the definition of protection zones for legally protected and
inventoried properties consists of a mere graphic representation of buffer zones
without the identification of the relationship between properties and threats and thus
cannot be considered as vulnerability tools.
In a survey carried out on the inhabitants of the Historic Centre of Porto (Ferreira
and Pinto 2017), the major identified problems and threats were the excessive
presence of tourist accommodation (and subsequent loss of local population), real
estate pressure, as well as the negative impacts of tourism. However, local inhabit-
ants also recognize some benefits from the tourism increase. Hence, as a recom-
mendation, many residents suggested the introduction of policies or measures to
protect the remaining residents and to find a more sustainable balance between tour-
ism and local communities.
Finally, concerning understanding the context (steps 1, 2 and 3), HUL recom-
mends, as best practice, full knowledge of the context, integrating positive (attri-
butes and values) and negative (threats) factors. Though Porto is partially
accomplishing this, there is a need to incorporate more surveys regarding the sig-
nificance definition and related vulnerability assessment, applied to the entire city,
to fully implement a HUL approach.
23.4.2 Integration in the Wider Urban Framework
The fourth step of HUL approach (Table 23.2, step 4) involves the integration of the
outcomes of resource mapping, significance definition and vulnerability assessment
into the “wider framework of city development” (UNESCO 2011). The integration
of heritage conservation issues into spatial planning frameworks has been estab-
lished as legally mandatory (Veldpaus 2015) as it is for Portuguese spatial planning
tools (Tarrafa Silva 2017). While the step of resource mapping is partially accom-
plished by PDM (including the comprehensive inventory of the whole Porto city
area in the Heritage Charter), the same cannot be said of further steps, which reflect
the low investment and knowledge applied to open the discussion over values and
attributes to preserve and the development of instruments to assess the impact of
threats on defined cultural significance.
Nevertheless, an attempt to reach a consensus on the values to be preserved
(Sect. 23.4.1.2) can be explored during the public discussions organized during
planning processes (e.g. PDM), where the entire community is invited to discuss the
proposed plan. However, heritage issues are not a frequently raised theme, indicat-
ing the need to develop more ad hoc initiatives to get the community involved. In a
different perspective, acknowledging the value and influence of listing properties,
the Porto PDM incorporates a multivariable tool (SIM-Porto) to manage construc-
tion rights in rehabilitation interventions within historic area of the ACRRU. In
order to better manage the built pressures in this part of the city, the SIM-Porto
weighs up social, economic and material variables, including the “heritage value”
(given by the listing category) and the conservation status of the property, in order
to assign fair construction rights outside the ACRRU area. However, the first analy-
sis of the implementation (DMPOT 2012) of this tool has indicated a poor recep-
tion, which could be related to the economic crisis that hit Portugal during this
period.
Regarding the assessment of vulnerability, the definition of protection zones,
represented in the Restrictions Maps (Carta de Condicionantes) of spatial planning
tools, is not effective enough. In fact, the relation between the values to preserve and
the threats are not described and thus have no practical effect in the management
process.
23.4.3 Managing Action
The last steps of the HUL approach to heritage management (Table 23.2) may be
taken as the practical application of the knowledge gained in the earlier stages and
integrated into a single broader stage named “managing action” (Veldpaus 2015).
This stage consists of (a) the definition of priority actions to be taken with the “man-
agement of thoughtful change” (step 5), (b) the establishment of local partnerships
(step 6) and (c) the monitoring of those actions (UNESCO 2011; Veldpaus 2015).
The establishment of priorities and the monitoring of actions are the least estab-
lished steps, while the establishment of partnerships is often “associated with the
involvement of local community” (Veldpaus 2015, p. 87) and less with other inter-
ested parties (e.g. promoters, universities, construction companies, etc.).
Heritage is one of the main targets of Porto urban development, at least as it is
defined in the PDM strategic objectives (CMP 2005a, b) and materialized by the
continuous public investment in urban rehabilitation actions within the historic
areas. Nevertheless, the identified deficiencies in the process (from the significance
definition, step 2, and vulnerability assessment, step 3, resulting in considerable
implications on further HUL steps) indicate also that the objective might not lie in
the values and attributes conservation aims but, rather, in aims that work towards an
intermediate target to accomplish other major objectives, seen as more transversal
to society (e.g. economic, social, political, etc.).
Moreover, some rehabilitation action priorities were settled by the Management
Plan (2008), a document developed by Porto Vivo SRU that, despite covering a big-
ger area than the Historic Centre of Porto – ACRRU, is still limited to an area
smaller than the actual city. Based on a comprehensive survey of this area (including
the assessment of conservation status, occupation, ownership and economic dynam-
ics, mobility, environment), it defined four priority operations: Morro da Sé,
Mouzinho/Flores, Clérigos and Vitória. Regarding the creation of partnerships, the
town hall is very conscious of its importance and has been promoting partnerships
in urban rehabilitation programs, between owners, finance institutions and construc-
tion companies (Porto Vivo SRU 2008). On a positive note, the university is often
called to take part in planning processes such as in PDM revisions (e.g. University
of Porto). However, the integration of community in planning and decision actions
is still something that could be improved.
Furthermore, as far as monitoring is concerned, it is only assumed by the
Management Plan in the Historic Zone of Porto16 and in the proprietary operations.
Between 2010 and 2014, Management Plan Monitoring was subject of annual
reports, providing the basis for the periodic reports sent to UNESCO every 10 years
(Porto Vivo SRU 2010–2014).
Lastly, despite the described initiatives for both heritage stage processes
described in 4.2 and 4.3, the integration of the gathered knowledge in the wider
16
The historic centre considered in Management Plan corresponds to the area nationally listed as
IIP in 1997 (see Fig. 23.3), a slightly larger than the area inscribed in the World Heritage list.
urban policies and further monitoring actions suggested by HUL Recommendation

as a good practice are compromised, in Porto, by the incomplete definition of the
context, as described on the first global stage (4.1).
23.5 Conclusion and Recommendations
The HUL Recommendation is not a binding document and neither is it a new heri-
tage category. However, as a definition and an approach, it is perfectly clear regard-
ing the flexibility and adaptability to each context of the proposed action plan and
tools. The recommendation lies essentially in proceeding with the principles of sus-
tainable development, in which the widest participation possible is crucial, where
all involved parts are aware of what has been managed.
Porto has a long history on heritage safeguarding and on its integration into
urban development frameworks and strategies. However, some problems still per-
sist, and the dispersion of entities, areas and tools makes management often ineffec-
tive. As previously reported, while the identification of the city resources is well
developed, the same cannot be said regarding the identification of the values to be
preserved and the vulnerability level ascribed to them. In this way, more all-inclusive
initiatives are demanded, extended beyond the listed properties, and in which all the
interested parts are invited to effectively define the values and attributes to be con-
served. Moreover, threats jeopardizing properties should be clearly identified and
connected with the values defined to be preserved. The intersection between the
defined values and related threats is crucial for every city stakeholder.
As stated before, the deficiencies in the “understanding context” stage compro-
mise the rest of the process. In fact, as it happens in Porto (namely, in the PDM),
inventories may be integrated into wider urban development policies, but it has not
an effective consequence in the management of city development. Hence, we might
conclude that despite the legal obligation to integrate heritage in wider planning
frameworks, its perception still remains limited. In other words, heritage is often
associated with restrictions to development and not as something that can be
changed and adapted to fulfil current needs, without compromising its consensually
assumed authenticity and integrity.
The “Management Plan” appears to be the most comprehensive tool and closest
to HUL Recommendation, integrating the identification of resources besides cul-
tural ones, identifying some related threats and establishing priority actions and
partnerships. It also has its own monitoring process, in which the defined indicators
reflect a more inclusive approach. However, it only concerns a part of the city,
greater than the historic centre, but still only a part and not the city as a whole. Also,
the actions, translated in ARU, which are urban development tools, are very focused
on detailed quarters and missing the whole picture.
In Porto city, most of the identified gaps in a HUL perspective may result from
the unfamiliarity with these concepts and processes. Hence, the dissemination of
initiatives and tools to promote the HUL approach may change the way in which
heritage resources are still treated, which varies in between two extreme opposites:
everything is valuable and then everything should be preserved, or in face of the
ambiguity, every change is acceptable (including total demolition and disappear-
ance). Part of the required knowledge and tools may be already present, but a per-
spective in which heritage is fully seen as a city development resource should
auspiciously be adopted.
References
Aguiar, J. (2010). Após Veneza: do restauro estilístico para o restauro crítico. In J. Custódio &
M. Soromenho (Eds.), 100 anos de património: memória e identidade (pp. 219–236). Lisboa:
Instituto de Gestão do Património Arquitectónico e Arqueológico, I.P.
Bandarin, F., & Van Oers, R. (2012). The historic urban landscape: Managing heritage in a urban
century. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.
CEAU-FAUP. (2017). Estudo de Caracterização e diagnóstico sobre o tema “Valores Patrimoniais”
no âmbito da revisão do Plano Diretor Municipal do Porto. Centro de Estudos de Arquitectura
e Urbanismo - Faculdade de Arquitectura da Universidade do Porto. Câmara Municipal do
Porto: Porto.
CMP. (2005a). Relatório do PDM Porto. Vols. I. Porto: Câmara Municipal do Porto.
CMP. (2005b). Relatório do PDM Porto. Vols. II. Porto: Câmara Municipal do Porto.
DMPOT. (2012). SIM-PORTO: Avaliação da Implementação do Sistema Multicritério de
Informação da Cidade do Porto (Dezembro, 2012). Porto: Divisão Municipal de Planeamento
e Ordenamento do Território (Câmara Municipal do Porto).
Ferreira, T. C. (2007). Sulla storia del restauro in Portogallo: provvedimenti, protagonisti, inter-
venti, in “Ananke” n° 52, Alinea Editrice, Milano, Settembre 2007, pp. 78–95.
Ferreira, T. C., & Pinto, L., (2017). Inquiry to local inhabitants of the Historic Centre of Porto.
Porto: Centro de Estudos de Arquitectura e Urbanismo (not published).
Getty. (2010). Historic urban environment. Conservation challenges and priorities for action.
Meeting report. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute. Available via http://www.getty.
edu/conservation/publications_resources/pdf_publications/historic_urban_environment.html.
Cited 20 June 2017.
Gustcoven, E. (2016). Attributes of world heritage cities, sustainability by management – a com-
parative study between the world heritage cities of Amsterdam, Edinburgh and Querétaro.
Thesis to obtain the degree of Master of Science in Conservation of Monuments and Sites.
Leuven: Belgium: KU Leuven.
INE. (2009). Resident population by place of residence (Grande Porto, Porto), gender and age
group, for year 2009. Lisboa: Instituto Nacional de Estatística. Available via http://www.ine.pt/
xportal/xmain?xpid =INE&xpgid=ine_indicadores&indOcorrCod=0000611&contexto=pi&se
lTab=tab0. Cited 30 Nov 2017.
INE. (2011). Censos 2011 - Statistics Portugal (Instituto Nacional de Estatística). Available at
https://ine.pt/xportal/xmain?xpgid=ine_main&xpid=INE Accessed on 15 Dec 2017.
Loza, R. (1993). Porto a Património Mundial: processo de candidatura da cidade do Porto à
classificação pela UNESCO como Património Cultural da Humanidade. Porto: Câmara do
Municipal do Porto.
Loza, R. (1998). Porto Património Mundial II: Processo de Candidatura do Centro Histórico do
Porto à UNESCO. Porto: Câmara do Municipal do Porto.
Loza, R. (2000). Porto Património Mundial III. CRUARB – 25 anos de Reabilitação Urbana.
Porto: Câmara do Municipal do Porto.
Loza, R. (2017). As Caves de Gaia e o Centro Histórico do Porto – uma relação indissociável.
In Cidades de Rio e Vinho. Memória, Património, Reabilitação, Vila nova de Gaia: Gaiurb/
Afrontamento.
PDM Porto (2006). 1ª Revisão do Plano Diretor Municipal do Porto. Porto: Câmara Municipal do
Porto. Available via http://www.dgterritorio.pt/sistemas_de_informacao/snit/igt_em_vigor__
snit_/acesso_simples/. Cited 6 Dec 2017.
Pinho, A. (2009). Conceitos e políticas europeias de reabilitação urbana. Análise da experiência
portuguesa dos Gabinetes Técnicos Locais. Lisboa: Universidade de Lisboa.
Porto Vivo SRU. (2008). Management plan of Porto world heritage, vol. III. Porto: Porto Vivo
Sociedade de Reabilitação Urbana. Available via http://www.portovivosru.pt/pt/centro-his-
torico/plano-de-gestao. Cited 6 Dec 2017.
Porto Vivo SRU. (2010–2014). Management plan monitoring reports. Porto: Porto Vivo Sociedade
de Reabilitação Urbana. Available via http://www.portovivosru.pt/pt/centro-historico/monitor-
izacao-plano-de-gestao. Cited 6 Dec 2017.
Tarrafa Silva, A. (2017). Historic urban landscape approach and spatial planning. Exploring the
integration of heritage issues in local planning in Portugal. Thesis to obtain the degree of
Master of Science in Urban and Spatial Planning. Lisboa: Universidade de Lisboa: Instituto
Superior Técnico.
Tarrafa Silva, A., Valverde, I., & Pereira Roders, A. (2017). Recomendação sobre as Paisagens
Históricas Urbanas: Um modelo para integrar a gestão de recursos urbanos e atingir a
eficiência necessária ao século XXI. Revista Património. N° 4. Direção-Geral do Património
Cultural. (in press).
Távora, F. (1969). Estudo de Renovação da Ribeira Barredo. Porto: Câmara Municipal do Porto.
UNESCO. (1996). Decisions adopted at the 20th session of the world heritage committee. Paris:
UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available via http://whc.unesco.org/archive/repcom96.
htm#755. Cited 6 Dec 2017.
UNESCO. (1998). State of conservation report – Porto. Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Available via http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/755/documents/. Cited 6 Dec 2017.
UNESCO. (2006). Periodic reporting – Porto. Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available
via http://whc.unesco.org/archive/periodicreporting/EUR/cycle01/section2/755-summary.pdf.
Cited 6 Dec 2017.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape. Paris: UNESCO. Available
via http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=48857&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_
SECTION=201.html. Cited 20 Jun 2017.
UNESCO. (2016). Report of the decisions adopted during the 40th sesssion of the world heritage
committee. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available via http://whc.unesco.org/en/deci-
sions/6841. Cited 6 Dec 2017.
Veillon, R. (2014). State of conservation of world heritage properties. A statistical analysis (1979–
2013). Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Veldpaus, L. (2015). Historic urban landscapes: framing the integration of urban and heritage
planning in multilevel governance. Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology. Available
via RESEARCHGATE. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282005137. Cited 6 Dec
2017.
Veldpaus, L., & Pereira Roders, A.R. (2013). Historic urban landscape: An assessment frame-
work. In IAIA13 conference proceedings. Available via RESEARCHGATE. https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/260124111. Cited 6 Dec 2017.
WHITRAP. (2016). The HUL guidebook. Shanghai: World Heritage Institute of Training and
Research for the Asia and the Pacific Region. Available via https://go-hul.com/resources/.
Cited 20 Jun 2017.
Chapter 24
Rabat, Morocco: Sustaining the Historic
Urban Landscape of Rabat: Strategies
and Implementation
Hassan Radoine and Salwa Aomorali
Abstract The paradigm of preservation of cultural heritage has significantly shifted

in the last decade. It has moved from the conventional preservation of static material
relics in order to embrace the living realm around historic buildings, sites, cities and
landscapes. Thus, a more holistic approach that seeks to boost the sustainability of
heritage, as a human and community capital, is required. Here, sustainability not
only means the physical side of a monument that reflects the image of a site, but the
site itself is questioned as a living landscape in order to find triggers for the reactiva-
tion of the synergies of historic urban settlements. Accordingly, the North African
context is an insightful example to prove this paradigm shift. With its natural and
cultural diversity, heritage in this region has never been cut from its living roots and
endured the modernization process so as to sustain a genuine living urban land-
scape. This chapter would hence explore the sustainability approach of the
Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape through planning and manage-
ment mechanisms. The city of Rabat in Morocco is taken as a case study. Being
partially listed as UNESCO World Heritage by 2012, Rabat could not exist without
its social, cultural and environmental landscapes. This chapter demonstrates how an
urban landscape could be sustained through the preservation, planning and develop-
ment tools, as well as implementation mechanisms. This chapter provides key les-
sons and situates Rabat as a guiding best practice that pursues the long overdue
preservation and development of a heritage landscape.
Keywords Historic urban landscape · Sustainability · Resilience · Heritage ·

Rabat
H. Radoine (*) · S. Aomorali

School of Architecture, Planning and Design, Mohammed VI Polytechnic University,
Ben Guerir, Morocco

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_24
424 H. Radoine and S. Aomorali
24.1 Introduction
Sustainable and resilient landscapes are imperative for a smarter planning and
development process. The preservation of cultural and natural resources is not a
luxury action but rather a pivotal part of promoting sustainable cities. The continu-
ous interaction of users, through customs and traditions, with the physical land-
scape, engenders a sense of memory and belonging. The heritage landscape
becomes, accordingly, tangible references for a living community. The wall, gate,
green space, alley and plaza are but traces of human activity, without which no heri-
tage would be sustained as a functional system capable of renewing itself whenever
it is required.
Therefore, in this context, the historic urban landscape comprises tangible heri-
tage elements of a city that define its urban body and natural territories in connec-
tion with the image they create among citizens through intangible memories and
patterns of use. This perpetual relationship between the tangible and intangible ele-
ments of a landscape supports an inherent preservation of urban heritage. Including
this dimension in preservation planning and strategies leads to a holistic develop-
ment of historic urban landscapes, beyond the common practice of isolating restora-
tion actions, and can reactivate the social and cultural synergies.
This holistic preservation and development is not limited to cultural heritage but
also incorporates natural heritage, which is considered an intrinsic element of city
planning. Embracing historic urban landscapes, the whole city with all its parts, be
it modern or historic, becomes a vehicle for perpetuating authentic human practices
in a sustained physical heritage that is explored beyond its material shell. In this
case, what is sought is to regenerate the urban metabolism that is the essential
booster of the living community in an urban landscape.
Nevertheless, this holistic approach has been neglected by current urban plan-
ning practices in favour of functional and opportunist strategies. By revisiting the
urban planning practices, the once-contentious relationship between the preserva-
tion of the historic urban landscape and urban development would be overcome,
establishing a new process that promotes sustainable, resilient and inclusive cities.
For developed countries, sustaining cultural and natural heritage landscape is a
profitable investment that boosts the image of a city, but for developing ones it is
more about upgrading the living conditions and cultivating a culture of peace and
diversity in fast-changing cities with fewer resources (UNESCO 2016). The sense
of memory and community is, thus, a guarantor of enduring social and cultural
resilience and sustains an efficient tangible and intangible urban landscape that cul-
tivates embedded human values.
In order to elucidate the above arguments, this chapter has taken the city of Rabat
as a case study. This city reveals how the preservation of cultural resources entails
the understanding first of the social setting of the city that goes in tandem with
enduring its dynamic living landscape. Founded in the twelfth century, Rabat has
managed to preserve its tangible and intangible fabrics. While its heritage has expe-
rienced several changes throughout different periods, the current projects that plan
24 Rabat, Morocco: Sustaining the Historic Urban Landscape of Rabat: Strategies… 425
to upgrade its urban metabolism have also explored the rejuvenation of its authentic
natural and cultural landscape.
The chapter first briefly presents the history of Rabat, shedding light on how it
was organized and evolved according to sustainable ends. Second, it explores how
its historic urban landscape was altered within the setting of a new French urban
model during the Protectorate. Finally, there is an analysis of the postcolonial strate-
gies to preserve both the historic and modern sides of the city and how the contem-
porary planning and strategies sought to boost the image of this capital through the
implementation of projects of upgrading, restructuring and development of its
whole urban and natural landscapes.
24.2 A City–Landscape Evolution: Historical Background
The site of Rabat is considered a rich archaeological zone that dates back to the
prehistoric periods with vestiges belonging to the Upper Palaeolithic and Neolithic
times. The Bouregreg River estuary’s strategic location for human settlements was
underlined by several dynasties throughout history. Here, in 40 AD, Mauritania
Tangania, under the rule of Rome, founded a city named Sala, which is known today
as Chellah. According to existing archaeological evidence, this city flourished.
Despite the fact that it remained under the control of Romans, this site was aban-
doned by third century AD to give way to a new fortress town, which was built by
the Almoravids who were facing the continuous attacks of the Almohads (Khaddi
1988). Currently, such important layers of cultural and urban landscapes are not
fully presented.
24.2.1 Almohad Period: The Genesis of a Capital
Known for their majestic buildings and engineering ingenuity, the Almohads left
several mega earthen structures that occupy different landscapes all over Morocco.
Among its unique architectural and urban achievements are the sites of al-Mahdiyya
and Ribat al-Fath located on the Bouregreg River gorge, where present-day Rabat is
situated. The first was built in the twelfth century by the first Almohad sultan, and
upon the traces of this site, Oudaya’s Kasbah was founded. However, the Sultan
Yacoub el-Mansour would launch the major transformation of the whole site of
Rabat in the twelfth century.
This was the first comprehensive transformation that explored the rich natural
landscape of this strategic location and launched the first capital of the Islamic West,
representing the expanding Almohad dynasty. This capital was named “Ribat al-
Fath.” This vast urban landscape project integrated megastructures of ramparts that
linked the shore of the Atlantic Ocean, Oudaya’s Kasbah and the site of Chellah. In
addition, the sultan intended to build the largest mosque, with the tallest minaret, as
a representation of his vast territory that linked Africa and Europe. This structure
currently stands incomplete on the site of Hassan (Khaddi 1988).
This ambitious project did not come to full fruition due to the death of Yacoub
al-Mansour, and it was abandoned by his successors (Khaddi 1988). Thus, the first
urban-landscape endeavour to set a green capital resulted in scattered districts over
the site within an empty fortress with a small number of inhabitants.
24.2.2 Marinid Period: Fragmentation and the Rise of Salé
In the third century, the Marinid dynasty took over the city of Rabat until the fif-
teenth century. According to Leon l’Africain, homes in the city numbered only in
hundreds. Nevertheless, Chellah became very important as the Marinids expanded
it as a large mausoleum-walled town for their dynasty (Khaddi 1988). On the other
side of the Bouregreg River, Salé became an economic centre and a major port city.
The valley of Bouregreg was then home to several fortresses and walled towns,
which would have created a rich urban landscape texture. Despite being fragmented
entities, these were well integrated into the site and espoused its topography. This
attractive site, particularly the Chellah fortress, became a refuge for the Jews who
fled Granada in 1492 and later for the Andalusian (Moorish) Muslims (Khaddi
1988).
24.2.3 S
aadian Dynasty: Bouregreg’s Republic and the Rise
of Oudaya
In the seventeenth century, much of the Moorish population of Andalusia that was
fully expelled from Spain by King Philipp III fled to Morocco. The major part of
this population settled in the Kasbah of Oudaya during the rule of the Saadian
dynasty. They expanded upon the fragmented site of Rabat in order to develop their
own districts within the Almohad’s ramparts. However, due to political upheaval,
the population of, then, Salé and the community of Andalusians established the
independent Republic of Bouregreg. Under this republic, the city of Rabat was
home to the first significant port that rivalled those in Algeria and Napoli (Khaddi
1988).
The Kasbah of Oudaya, with its strategic naturally secure location, became the
municipal base of this nascent republic, and several European consulates were
established in Rabat (Khaddi 1988). This Kasbah since its inception had a mythical
dimension, with its location on top of a cliff at the exit of the Bouregreg River to the
Atlantic Ocean. Its location reveals not only a concern for security and protection
but also an appreciation of the romantic and picturesque natural setting and
landscape.
24.2.4 A
laouite Dynasty: Unification and Harmonization
of Landscape
By the end of the seventeenth century, the Alaouites took over the whole site of
Rabat as part of their pacification of the whole country. They used the Kasbah as
their base and ended the Bouregreg’s Republic. During this time, the Almohad’s
unfinished city witnessed a resurgence through the actions of Sultan Ben Abdellah.
The sultan expanded upon the gardens of Agdal in order to build a new imperial
castle with two mosques, one of which is still existent today as As-Sunna mosque.
He also reconfigured the urban landscape of Rabat by extending the Almohad wall
to the south and to the ocean.
Another major development that took place during this time was the creation of
the Mellah (Jewish district) in the medina. The Kasbah of Oudaya was organized
and fully upgraded as a distinct urban-walled entity, which took the name Oudaya.
In the same period, the actual medina of Rabat was distinguished from the large
Almohad territory that was once planned to be the capital. Therefore, since then, the
city of Rabat became cosmopolitan with a diverse population of Berbers, Jews,
Moorish and Arabs. This urban landscape would be preserved until the nineteenth
century and after would be altered by the French Protectorate (Khaddi 1988).
This brief historical background is essential in order to understand the urban and
natural landscape of Rabat, as there is often confusion about the genesis and evolu-
tion of its urban and natural entities. While there is always an image of the existing
medina of Rabat as the main historic city, it is important to state that Rabat has
always been a complex archaeological, natural, topographical and political site.
Nonetheless, with all mentioned changes and mutations, this city has never lost its
authentic living heritage that would be even explored and dealt with in order to
establish the colonial city under the French Protectorate.
24.3 Colonial Period: A Shift of Urban Heritage Paradigm
The French Protectorate in Morocco had a special twist as far as urbanization is

concerned. It was more of a culturalist approach than military. The choice of Rabat
as French political headquarters to rule the country was due to its strategic position
on the Atlantic and far from the resistance of the two imperial cities of Marrakech
and Fez. At an urban heritage level, Rabat had no strong core as in Fez and Marrakech
and then no strong native opposition. Therefore, because Fez had its roots deep in
the north, and Marrakech had its own in the south, the site of Rabat seemed safer for
the Protectorate to place its capital. The centralization of power was one of the main
features of the French territorial planning and hence the choice of Rabat.
Learning from previous experiences in Algeria, Tunisia and Madagascar, General
Lyautey used a new strategy in order to earn Morocco’s trust and be able to “rule
from within rather than to pursue military destruction and expensive machinery”
(Radoine 2012, p 13). Thus, his new strategy was to build new French cities in order
to establish a new urban heritage that would entrench the cultural legacy of France.
Thus, the conservation policy aimed to keep the native medina while setting up a
new competing model that reflected a sense of European progress.
Accordingly, a clear shift in the approach to urban heritage occurred. The social
structure of the historic medina dwindled gradually, and all that remained was its
“exotic glory.” Facing both the colonial agenda and the new progressive urbanism
of the Ville Nouvelle, this medina lost its historic momentum and became frozen in
time. The Ville Nouvelle, with its French architecture that explored local craftsman-
ship, engendered new heritage identification for both the Moroccan and French
inhabitants.
Nevertheless, what is striking about the French urban intervention in Rabat was
the adaptation of the French architects and planners of the urban accumulation of
this fragmented city in order to set a rational urban organization guided by progres-
sive and modern vehicular traffic. The Ville Nouvelle took into consideration the
impressive natural landscape and the already existing historic walls as its natural
boundary.
Hence, despite the postcolonial critic of colonialism, the innovative side of
French planning in Rabat still stands as valuable artistic, cultural and environmental
addition to a historic site. Today, the French colonial urban landscape of Rabat is
considered a rich heritage that is worthy of being conserved, as it represents a criti-
cal political period and symbolizes a twining of two antagonistic models, French
and Moroccan.
This rich local and colonial urban antecedents together with the exquisite natural
landscape set Rabat as an international green city, with 230 hectares covered by a
green belt in addition to the forest of Maamora that covers 1063 hectares. Being
listed as a World Heritage City by UNESCO in 2012 (Ministry of Culture 2011), the
current planning process in Rabat has been seen by local and national stakeholders
as extremely delicate. The planning process must allow Rabat to remain as the pro-
gressive political capital of the country and at the same time preserve its outstanding
urban and landscape heritage as a sustainable living vehicle.
24.4 Contemporary Rabat: Current Sustainable Strategies
After revisiting the urban and natural heritage of Rabat, and how it formed its urban
status quo, it is manifested that the notion of landscape heritage was not fully
explored. While it was taken into consideration in the different stages of evolution
of this city in the precolonial and pre-industrial period, the way this city has been
planned in the twentieth century is questionable in terms of landscape sustainability.
Meanwhile, Rabat contains an important green belt that should be conserved and
ecological/environmental potential that is not entirely explored.
In addition, since the 1980s, with the inscription of the medina of Fez on the
UNESCO World Heritage List, urban conservation and sustainable development
have been a rooted practice in Morocco. The living heritage of the medinas and
breathing landscape have surpassed mere conservation so as to espouse the upgrad-
ing of human conditions in historic sites and landscapes. The urban metabolism of
these vivid heritage sites should be boosted rather than fixing only their material
legacy. Arguably, the conservation of the urban and landscape heritage of the city of
Rabat pursued a partial strategy which overemphasized colonial heritage.
Accordingly, the urban and natural landscapes of Rabat have been recently at the
centre of urban planning and development strategies through SDAU (Schéma
Directeur d’Aménagement Urbain) of Rabat-Salé, a key instrument document of
planification in Morocco, provided by the law 12/90 of urban planning. It offers a
global study of the economic, commercial and social dynamics of a given urban
territory and presents general guidelines in order to implement new urban planning
strategies. In this critical urban document, the following strategies are scrutinized:
24.4.1 Territorial Level
New synchronization steps have been proposed in order to connect the two major
historic cities on the two banks of Bouregreg, Rabat and Salé. This would resolve
the issue of fragmentation and urban sprawl that consume land and resources within
a super-growing metropolitan area that contains rich protected natural landscapes.
This includes the delicate insertion of infrastructure such as the light new bridge
between the two cities, constructed to be less visible in the landscape of the two
sides. A tramway was also established to optimize the use of energy and reduce pol-
lution of the random heavy traffic between the two highly populated historic cities.
Furthermore, the government created an agency (Agence pour l’Aménagement de
la Valée de Bouregreg) to supervise the valley of Bouregreg, as a preserved area
where urban development should follow special rules. However, this has led to more
top-down action that promotes out-of-context megaprojects at the expense of exist-
ing environmental, ecological and archaeological landscapes, the main example to
such actions would be the ongoing renovation of the Rabat-Ville train station which
will be further discussed in Sect. 24.5 of this text.
24.4.2 Urban Level
The SDAU preserved the centrality of the medina of Rabat with its adjacent Kasbah
of Oudaya. Topography has helped the positioning of these two historic urban enti-
ties within their historic natural resources. Despite the fact that the medina is con-
nected directly to the Ville Nouvelle, contrary to other medinas where the French
planned their colonial city outside their territory, the residential, business and eco-
nomic value of the medina has been sustained. Thus, SDAU has partially planned to
boost this value in reconnecting the old urban tissue to the colonial one while keep-
ing a subtle visual boundary between the two-walled cities.
Although this connection has explored the landscape potential by setting new
urban plazas and green buffer zones to transit from the historic walls to the modern
urban fabric, it remains sectorial and not holistic at the level of the city. In fact, most
of these actions appear to be one-off interventions aiming to be primarily aestheti-
cally pleasing. As examples, the plazas of Bab (gate) al-Hadd and Bab La-allou are
considered to be restructured in order to boost these buffer zones (Agence Urbaine
de Rabat-Salé 2013). And while this intervention did connect the historic medina
with the ville nouvelle, it still needs to be included in a definite and comprehensive
strategy that would guarantee the sustainability of the historic landscape of Rabat.
24.4.3 Sustainability Implementation
Being listed as World Heritage by UNESCO has greatly contributed to the adoption
of concrete projects for Rabat to become a sustainable city, mainly by enhancing its
ecological and environmental triggers. For example, a program was launched by the
municipality of Rabat that targeted all pedestrian walks adjacent to the shore of the
Atlantic and aims at boosting the walkability around all potential heritage attrac-
tions oriented by historic walls. Nonetheless, the long Atlantic Ocean shore and the
existing green forests that were the raison d’être of Rabat have been neglected not-
withstanding the actual projects to upgrade the maritime façade of this city.
In order to bridge this gap, a new comprehensive project was launched in Rabat
embracing as a vision “Rabat: City of Lights.” It is a major initiative that has been
launched by the King of Morocco in order to develop more the cultural landscape of
the city. This is by exploring its existing natural and cultural heritage in an effective
way and using a significant budget to shift the image of Rabat from a mere political
capital as a set of power to a knowledge and heritage landscape (Oualalou 2014).
24.5 A
pplying the 2011 UNESCO Recommendation
on the Historic Urban Landscape
The city of Rabat has arguably managed to partially follow a sustainable approach
during its development. Although conservation policies were set for this city, their
scope has to further explore its historic urban landscapes as living, one of the main
aims of the HUL approach. In addition, conservation regulations need to be updated
in order to move beyond mere archaeological aspects and expand their applications
to consider the regional and urban planning of historic urban landscapes as an inter-
disciplinary and multilevel governance program.
Under the continuous pressure of globalization, and to cope with world’s prog-
ress, it is vital to enrol the historic urban cores in the goals and targets towards
sustainable urban development. For instance, by bridging between the medina and
ville nouvelle, a whole economic and cultural momentum can be generated.
No holistic conservation can be attained, without involving all concerned stake-
holders. The city of Rabat has to be more engaged in assuring that all these stake-
holders are to be included in policy- and decision-making. This would facilitate the
preservation of harmony and coherence between the historic areas and the urban
agglomeration of the city. Nevertheless, there is a continuous concern that some
new strategic urban projects taking place in Rabat may not take its historical centre
into full consideration.
In spite of the fact that the historic urban landscape as a whole is currently part
of the planning process, there is no guarantee that the sustainability of heritage is
fully explored or applied. Speculation or rushed megaprojects are sometimes over-
influencing pre-established urban documents, which hinders conservation and
development of these particular landscapes in the city of Rabat.
For example, despite its importance as a piece of infrastructure, the new Rabat-Ville
train station project is questionable. This project intended to upgrade the capacity of
a historic train station positioned in a strategic area of the ville nouvelle. The design
of the district was based on the creation of visual perspectives (Trabelsi 1988) that
enforced special considerations to the human scale and a clear concern towards
protecting the historic elements of Rabat. And despite the aesthetic value of its con-
temporary concept, the new train station project is out of scale and alters the heri-
tage character of the whole historic district around it. This district, which is the
centre area of the ville nouvelle, is highly important within the context of the wider
high historic urban landscape.
The new LGV Rabat-Ville train station project

To be more specific, this project put the whole registration of Rabat in the
UNESCO World Heritage List under question. There is no doubt that the station
would generate more economic and urban benefits in terms of increasing its capac-
ity, but subtlety is required to select concepts that respect the historic urban cores
and not the opposite. The projected monumental structure would overshadow all
strategic historic landmarks around and create a disturbing contrast in the whole
landscape of the historic ville nouvelle.
An essential question to consider is where and when to draw the line when it
comes to planning new projects in areas representative of a historic and aesthetic
identity of the city.
In this regard, the city of Rabat needs to be more delicate when it comes to
designing its historic cores and pursue its long persistent conservation actions that
sought to conserve while developing proportionally. Subsequently, the application
of the HUL approach may help to define some guidelines in addressing the issue of
intervening for architectural or urban development in such an important city, for its
region and country.
24.6 Conclusion
With all actions taken at the top and bottom level, it can be considered that the city
of Rabat is the most preserved as it can be, within a territorial and urban scope,
without freezing its medina and heritage sites. Sustaining a historic city and its heri-
tage means reactivating its living memory through its community that is a proviso
for cultivating landscape resilience. Despite financial constraints and slowness of
implementation in the previous decades after independence, Rabat case remains a
successful one in terms of how its conservation and development have pursued a
comprehensive vision, besides the last critical train station project.
This comprehensive vision could not be reached without the historic momentum
of Rabat, which sustained and endured different urban changes with regard to pre-
serving its inner social, cultural and environmental resilience. Nonetheless, what is
essential in this case and other similar cases worldwide, where the human factor is
still dynamic in a heritage landscape, is the capacity to retain an intrinsic dynamism
in the conservation process that once was limited to physical maintenance.
This process needs to embrace the living memory in order to continue generating
heritage rather than confining it. Whatever terms may be used, such as sustainabil-
ity, resilience or endurance, the new trend of conservation and development of his-
toric urban landscape should underline further the genius of the place with its
perpetual local human techne in order to not only preserve the past per se but also to
anchor it in the future.
Bibliography
Agence Urbaine de Rabat-Salé. (2013, December). Plan d’Aménagement et de Sauvegarde de la

Médina de Rabat. Retrieved from https://aurs.org.ma/Dossiers/20160801110837.pdf.
Khaddi, N. (1988). Réamanégement de la zone Bab El Had à Rabat. Architecture dissertation,
National School of Architecture of Rabat, Morocco.
Morocco’s Ministry of Culture Wilaya de la Région Rabat-Salé-Zemmour-Zaër. (2011, January).
Rabat, Capitale moderne et ville historique: Un patrimoine en partage. Retrieved from http://
whc.unesco.org/uploads/nominations/1401.pdf.
Oualalou, F. (2014). Rabat, ville lumière et capitale culturelle. Metropolis: La parole des maires
(25). Retrieved from https://www.metropolis.org/sites/default/files/media_root/voice_of_the_
mayors/25_la_voz_de_los_alcaldes_oualalou_rabat.pdf.
Radoine, H. (2012). French territoriality and urbanism: General Lyautey and architect prost in
Morocco (1912-1925). In F. Demissie (Ed.), Colonial architecture and urbanism in Africa
intertwined and contested histories (pp. 11–31). USA: DePaul University.
Trabelsi, N. (1988). Le Boulevard Mohamed V Centre Urbain de Rabat. Architecture dissertation,
National School of Architecture of Rabat, Morocco.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation. (2016). Global report on culture
for sustainable urban development. Paris: UNESCO.
Further Reading
Agence Urbaine de Rabat-Salé, Atelier Parisien d’Urbanisme. (2010, January). Plan

d’aménagement Unifié de la Ville de Rabat: Synthèse de l’analyse diagnostique thématique
sectorielle. Retrieved from https://www.aurs.org.ma/Dossiers/20160801060807.pdf.
Chapter 25
Heritage-Based Urban Development:
The Example of Regensburg
Matthias Ripp, Susanne Hauer, and Meltem Cavdar
Abstract The City of Regensburg was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage
List in 2006. Long before, the process of urban regeneration and a dynamic urban
development had already started and was based on an inventory of the historic
building stock. With the participatory elaboration of an integrated heritage man-
agement plan, the direction for the upcoming years was recently set. Sustainability,
resilience and the response to challenges and crises have been addressed follow-
ing the six steps of the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) approach, though the
holistic approach to safeguard the historic urban landscape has been enhanced.
Today, heritage is part of the citizens’ perception of Regensburg’s identity and is
diligently coordinated and communicated through an integrated governance
system.
Keywords Sustainable development · HUL approach · Heritage management ·

Participation · World Heritage Management Plan · Communication model ·
Identification
M. Ripp (*) · S. Hauer

World Heritage Coordination of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
e-mail: ripp.matthias@regensburg.de; Hauer.Susanne@regensburg.de
M. Cavdar
Faculty of Architecture, Technical University of Munich,
Munich, Germany
e-mail: meltem.cavdar@tum.de

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_25
436 M. Ripp et al.
25.1 Introduction
The Old Town of Regensburg with Stadtamhof was inscribed on the UNESCO
World Heritage List in 2006. It is located on the Danube River in Bavaria and com-
prises a mediaeval historic urban landscape, which is still authentic and functional.
Its tall buildings, dark and narrow lanes and fortification walls define the character
of the city. A vast quantity of historic structures extended over a period of two mil-
lennia, including particularly the ancient Roman, the Romanesque and the Gothic
era, illustrated by the Stone Bridge, the Old City Hall, the Cathedral of St. Peter and
mediaeval patrician houses, whose towers are the landmarks of the city. The density
of stone Romanesque and Gothic mansions, which are influenced by Italian archi-
tecture, is unique north of the Alps (Trapp 2008, p. 12).
Regensburg incorporates an ensemble on both sides of the Stone Bridge: a medi-
aeval urban city, which can be experienced nearly as it was in mediaeval times. The
entire modern City of Regensburg, with over 161,000 inhabitants, is the fourth-
largest city in Bavaria after Munich, Nuremberg and Augsburg. In the core zone of
the area designated as World Heritage live over 19,000 inhabitants (City of
Regensburg – Department of Statistics 2014), and it contains approximately 1000
architectural monuments in an area of about 183 hectares. It is surrounded by a buf-
fer zone that covers an area of approximately 776 hectares (City of Regensburg n.d.)
(Fig. 25.1).
Whilst the historic centres of Cologne, Nuremberg and many other German cit-
ies were destroyed or badly damaged in WW2, Regensburg’s cityscape survived
almost untouched. This makes Regensburg an important witness to European his-
tory, shouldering the responsibility of this unique cultural heritage. The vision for
Regensburg presented in this article is a collective vision focused on heritage-based
urban development to enable both safeguarding of the World Heritage and facilitat-
ing its sustainable development (Mühlmann 2012, p. 47). Sustainability here focuses
on more aspects than the Brundtland Report’s definition suggests: “Sustainable
development is development that meets the needs of the present without compro-
mising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Brundtland 1987).
The integrated approach in Regensburg also adds capacity building, research and
information as a fourth dimension, meaning, e.g. there is not only top-down com-
munication but also empowerment of target groups to pass on advanced knowledge
about the built heritage in situ.
25.2 Survey and Mapping
The Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) approach sees the city as a multilayered
structure in time and space. This layering includes a site’s topography, geomorphol-
ogy, hydrology, built environment, infrastructures above and below the ground,
open spaces and gardens, its spatial organization and visual relationships. Taken
25 Heritage-Based Urban Development: The Example of Regensburg 437
Fig. 25.1 World heritage core (pink), buffer zone (yellow) and listed buildings (red) of Regensburg.
Scale, 1:15000. (© City Planning Office. From Mühlmann, R. (ed), (2012). p. 96–97)
into account are additionally all other elements of the urban structure such as social
and cultural practices and values, economic processes and the intangible dimen-
sions of heritage as related to diversity and identity (UNESCO 2011). Undoubtedly,
in order to achieve a successful World Heritage management in Regensburg, one of
the most critical steps is to understand this layering system of the city, and it starts
with undertaking comprehensive surveys and mapping of the city’s natural, cultural
and human resources. To provide a deep understanding of the protected area, an
effective inventory consisted of historical studies, visual and formal analysis, map-
ping of cultural practices and identities, socio-economic and morphological analy-
sis and more (Hosagrahar 2015, p. 251–255). Hosagrahar also states: “The global
South, as much as the global North, is rich in heritage, both tangible and intangible,
making the Heritage Target a key bridge for realizing the SDG’s aspiration of uni-
versal application, particularly in the urban areas”. In the direction of this purpose,
many studies have been undertaken so far, e.g. whilst collecting data for the
Regensburg urban plan.
The documentation of built heritage already started in Regensburg at the end of
the twentieth century. Throughout Bavaria, initial documentations of the m onuments
438 M. Ripp et al.
had been made comprehensively after the Bavarian Heritage Protection Law came
into force in 1973. The data was published as a monument list, which contained
information about monuments, ensembles and archaeological sites. Ten single vol-
umes about listed heritage assets of Regensburg were printed between 1973 and
1993: Baualterspläne zur Stadtsanierung – Regensburg I–X (Breuer and Petzet
1993, p. 7). The Bavarian Federal Office for the Preservation of Monuments and
Historic Buildings updated this list in 2014, to ensure “everybody has access to this
information”. It is currently accessible online (Fig. 25.2): The Bavarian Heritage
Atlas is the online information portal of the federal state made specifically to create
an authoritative and comprehensive inventory of all built heritage structures in
Bavaria (Bavarian Heritage Atlas n.d.).
Another interactive online platform is the Urban Plan Regensburg (Stadtplan
Regensburg n.d.). It is a map addressing professionals at the municipality of the
City of Regensburg as well as citizens and visitors. It offers information on a large
scale from land-use plan, traffic and topography to culture, public facilities and
more (Fig. 25.3). This service is offered by the Bavarian Agency for Surveying and
Geo-information for the complete State of Bavaria.
Just after Regensburg was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List, the
Regensburg Urban Atlas (Fig. 25.4) was published (Sedlmeier et al. 2006). In this
city atlas, structure and architecture are analysed on the city scale, including map-
ping out inhabitants, residential situations and selected districts. It consists of a
comprehensive chapter about thematic fields such as trade and services, commerce
and transport. Maps for education, culture, leisure and nature show the multifunc-
tional character of the city. Each map has both explanatory and advanced texts,
which were co-written by 40 experts who covered the working fields from urban
Fig. 25.2 The Bavarian Heritage Atlas. (Screenshot from http://geoportal.bayern.de [30 December
2016])
Fig. 25.3 Urban Plan Regensburg. (Screenshot from http://www.regensburg.de/stadtplan [30

December 2016])
Fig. 25.4 Urban Atlas of Regensburg. (© Verlag Friedrich Pustet. From Sedlmeier, A. & Vossen,
J. (ed), (2006). Book cover)
440 M. Ripp et al.
Fig. 25.5 Web site of the department of statistics. (Screenshot from http://www.statistik.
regensburg.de/)
planning to archaeology, sociology and many more. The main data source for the
city management is the Department of Statistics of the City of Regensburg, which
releases periodical information and figures. It lists and visualizes numerous topics
such as climate, building and housing, economy and the labour market, tourism and
the demographic change in the city (Fig. 25.5). This information is essential to anal-
yse tendencies in the city development in order to take due precautions and to make
progress. These facts and figures support the decision process, as a fundamental
basis, whilst clarifying the most imperative demands of the community. In order to
involve citizenship in the development process and to facilitate the implementation
of changes and adaptions, community involvement is crucial. In Regensburg, these
participation processes are highly valued and effective tools to gain public approval
and goodwill. Details of this approach will follow.
25.3 Actions and Priorities
During the course of the preparation process of the World Heritage Management
Plan, it became crucial that priority areas must be decided on and concrete action
points must be identified. In this sense, eight issues were specified and defined as
central fields of action:
• Tangible cultural heritage

• Culture and tourism
• Economic development
• Housing
• Mobility
• Urban planning and development
• Environment and leisure
• Awareness raising and research
The members of the Site Management Working Group formulated concrete prin-
ciples, objectives and key measures for each field of action. The following fields of
actions will be explained here in detail as examples for a successful implementation
in practice: tangible cultural heritage, economic development and awareness raising
and research.
25.3.1 Field of Action: Tangible Cultural Heritage
In this field, the authenticity and integrity of the area designated as World Heritage
must be preserved with sustainable development whilst taking changing require-
ments into account. In this respect, particular consideration must be given to the
compatibility of the proposed changes with the area and its Outstanding Universal
Value (Mühlmann 2012, p. 51) (Table 25.1)
Table 25.1 Objectives and measures related to tangible cultural heritage from the World Heritage
Management Plan of Regensburg (Mühlmann 2012, p. 51f)
Objectives Measures
1. Safeguarding the tangible heritage Verification of laws
The City of Regensburg develops effective tools to Use of the funds for preservation of
pursue the conservation of architectural heritage public and private building stock
Establishment of a support programme
for private homeowners
2. Safeguarding the urban landscape Analysis of the urban development with
The visual integrity will be ensured by appropriate regard to visual integrity
tools Preparation of a silhouette studya
4. Documentation and monitoring Establishment of a continual
Documentation of the building stock will be documentation, including informative
continued and improved data preparation
5. Protection from natural risks and “adaptation Implementation of flood plan
to climate change”
This study will be explained in Box 25.1
a
442 M. Ripp et al.
Box 25.1: The City Silhouette Study: Profile Characterizing Buildings

and Monuments in Regensburg
The elevation and perspectives are very important topics for urban heritage
conservation, because silhouette and the spatial relationships contribute to the
identity of a city (Kiesow 2000, p. 123). It is being discussed in many historic
cities if high-rise buildings are compatible with the cityscape in the context of
historical urban centres or not. To answer this question, it was necessary to make
a study about the city’s silhouette in Regensburg. The City Silhouette of
Regensburg (Fig. 25.6) has been developed in dialogue between representatives
of the city administration, specialist authorities, private and public interest groups
as well as with specialist planners. The study serves as a useful tool for dealing
with profile characterizing buildings and monuments in Regensburg (City of
Regensburg 2015a, b, p. 10). This study refers closely to the HUL step 4, which
encourages cities “to integrate urban heritage values and their vulnerability sta-
tus into a wider framework of city development, which shall provide indications
of areas of heritage sensitivity that require careful attention to planning, design
and implementation of development projects (UNESCO 2016, p.13)”.
Fig. 25.6 City Silhouette of Regensburg. (© City of Regensburg)
25.3.2 Field of Action: Economic Development
Urban conservation is often assumed to withhold economic development, due to the

usage limitations of protected environment and buildings (Hotz 2004, p. 195), but
the Old Town is the shopping and commerce centre for Regensburg and the region,
and that makes it significant. The objective here was to create a sensible balance
between historical preservation and commercial interests. The Old Town is highly
attractive for shoppers and offers a unique location for businesses and workshops,
as well as retail outlets and multifaceted services for residents and visitors
(Mühlmann 2012, p. 57). Supporting local business whilst safeguarding and com-
municating built heritage follows the HUL approach as it is described in step 6,
because it links preservation motives with local bound retailers to create a unique
selling point (UNESCO 2016, p.13) (Table 25.2).
Table 25.2 Objectives and measures related to economic development from the World Heritage
Management Plan of Regensburg (Mühlmann 2012, p. 57f)
Objectives Measures
1. Improvement of offers Ensuring compliance of the retail
The Old City will be strengthened as the primary framework concept and the retail vision
retail through the range and diversity of offers. Establishment of a grocery retailer
Good quality of local supplies will be ensured in the south and east of the Old City
3. Building the feeling: “us together” Expand the “the world Heritage
A sense of “community” will be upheld particularly shopping experience” campaign
among retailers. A common “Old City brand” Preparation of a special shopping and
will be established restaurant guide for the old towna
5. Supporting start-ups Continuation of the “Regensburger
Small sized start-ups and new business ideas Startkapital” start-up programme
to be supported
This project will be explained in Box 25.2
a
Box 25.2: The World Heritage Shopping Experience Revealing the Flair
of History
Within the campaign of the “the World Heritage shopping experience –
revealing the flair of history”, a special shopping and restaurant guide was
developed. It included the information about the specific characteristics of the
historical places and the respective retail business (Fig. 25.7). The participants
in the campaign also followed certain quality criteria. This includes, for
example, regular briefings of the salesperson in English.
Fig. 25.7 Brochure raising awareness on small shops in historic buildings copyright: city
of Regensburg
444 M. Ripp et al.
25.3.3 Field of Action: Awareness Raising and Research
The City of Regensburg uses many tools to raise the awareness about the World
Heritage Convention in general, as well as promoting its own World Heritage Site.
The instruments used to inform the inhabitants and visitors are the frequently
accessed website www.regensburg/welterbe and social media, brochures, flyers and
organization of regular events such as the yearly World Heritage Day. These activi-
ties reach out to many different groups of interest, not only at local but also at
regional, national and even international level. The visitor’s centre is again a very
valuable tool to communicate heritage values as well as a sense of community and
identity. This is one of the requirements needed to reach step 2 in the HUL approach
(UNESCO 2016, p.13) (Table 25.3).
Table 25.3 Objectives and measures related to awareness raising and research from the World
Heritage Management Plan of Regensburg (Mühlmann 2012, p. 71f)
Objectives Measures
1. Information about benefits Leaflet for property owners in the World Heritage
Residents and owners will be informed asset
about the benefits of historical assets
2. Conveying the cultural value Educating city guides
Citizens and visitors will be informed Hosting series of academic lectures
about the World Heritage Regensburg Visitor Centrea
3. Educational services for children Jugendbauhütte (Youth Mason’s Lodge)
Educational services will be developed Canvass for a school to become a UNESCO Project
for children and young people School
4. Improvement of the legibility and Develop GPS or internet-based mobile World
ability to experience Heritage city guide as well as a World Heritage
audio guide
5. Research Develop a list of relevant research issues
Researchers and scientific institutions
will be activated.
This project will be explained in Box 25.3
a
Box 25.3: The Regensburg World Heritage Visitor Centre

The main action to raise World Heritage awareness is the Regensburg World
Heritage Visitor Centre in the historic salt barn. Opened in May 2011, it
covers about 700 square metres, with particular sections designed to inform
visitors about the UNESCO, the World Heritage Convention and the
inscription of the Old Town of Regensburg with Stadtamhof on the UNESCO
World Heritage List. The centre offers a multifunctional area for events and
educational purposes. It is also an information point where people can get
touristic and practical information, where the guided city tours can have a
(continued)
Box 25.3 (continued)

quick start with reference to the city development (Ripp et al. 2011, p. 290).
The idea to collect all information about World Heritage in one centre can be
considered innovative. Also, the concept of interrelating different institutions
that are active in the field of World Heritage is a relatively new principle
(URBACT 2010, p. 8). Although it is not the only criteria, high visitor
numbers are an indicator of success for the Visitor Centre. According to the
latest data, visitor numbers reach 300,000 per year, which equals 3000 a day
in the peak time. In 2017, the Regensburg World Heritage Visitor Centre is
preparing to celebrate its two millionth visitor.
25.4 Civic Engagement Tools
One of the main objectives in Regensburg is to facilitate the involvement of all

stakeholders, such as citizens, local and municipal authorities and other relevant
groups. The European Charter of the Architectural Heritage states, “Integrated con-
servation cannot succeed without the cooperation of all. Although the architectural
heritage belongs to everyone, each of its parts is nevertheless at the mercy of any
individual. The public should be properly informed because citizens are entitled to
participate in decisions affecting their environment […]” (ICOMOS 1975).
Safeguarding of the “Outstanding Universal Value” of the World Heritage cities
over the long term is a shared responsibility, which requires an integrated approach
that involves all stakeholders (Crouch et al. 2013, p. 10). Citizens can only take this
responsibility, if they are also involved in decision-making processes. In the follow-
ing chapter, the participation policy of the City of Regensburg and the role of the
different parties are further explained.
25.4.1 Civic Participation Model of Regensburg
Local administration has an important impact on the daily lives of people; therefore,
civic community engagement should be not only an objective but the basis of all
works of the City Council. The public participation process is clearly regulated in
Germany with “public participation in the land-use planning procedure” in the
Building Code (§3 Abs. 2 BauGB). Accordingly, inhabitants should be consulted
before the City Council decides to prepare a new development plan, and/or a change
in the urban land-use plan is legally fixed. Draft plans are to be available for public
inspection at least twice for several weeks at the town hall, whilst the responsible
officials are available to provide information and further explanation. Citizens are
also invited to make suggestions, which the administration examines and presents to
446 M. Ripp et al.
the City Council for consideration. The submission of the new plans and the sched-
ule is announced in an official journal as well as in the local press. Though this
legislation supports the protection of civil rights, it contributes only to a limited
civic contribution to decision-making processes. Arnstein (1969, p.216) mentioned
that without a real redistribution of the power between the parties, citizen participa-
tion is useless: “The bottom rungs of the ladder are (35) Manipulation and (36)
Therapy”. As such, in order to realize a useful participation process, the City of
Regensburg goes beyond the limits of laws to implement more interactive methods
and processes. Examples of those efforts are architecture and urban planning events,
public meetings, local workshops or design contests.
To create a reliable civic contribution process, Regensburg developed the
Communication Model for Built Heritage Assets (COBA model). The objective was
to put living practice into a schematic frame that supports and stimulates a more use-
ful communication and more efficient use of existing resources. The COBA model is
based on the concept of identity, because without self-identification of citizens with
the cultural heritage, active citizen participation is very hard to achieve. The COBA
model is structured through five serial stages, in which each level is to be seen as a
step towards more and intensified identification with the built asset. At the first level,
the identification process only touches the social identity. Over the course of the next
stages, citizens are to become more actively involved. Finally, at the expert level at
stage five, the expert multiplier is enabled not only to communicate the heritage asset
and its values, its characteristics and its context. The expert multiplier is also capable
of making adequate decisions (Ripp et al. 2014, p. 24–25) (Fig. 25.8).
Additionally, these stages should help to broaden the horizon of heritage practi-
tioners and stimulate new ideas as well as unconventional ways of heritage com-
munication (Ripp and Hauer 2017). Whilst applying the COBA model during a
wide range of heritage activities in Regensburg, we found that some principles are
important for a successful implementation, which correspond highly with the HUL
approach:
1 . A holistic understanding of the heritage at stake.
2. A comprehensive understanding of what communication today is, rather sys-
temic and multidirectional than linear.
3. An interdisciplinary team with different scientific and work-related backgrounds.
4. A flexible mindset rather than a rigorous linear step-by-step approach.
5. The willingness to fully put yourself in the position of the target groups to under-
stand their needs, interests and motivation.
6. A systemic view of heritage with a readiness to combine different activities and
cooperate with a wide range of different stakeholders.
World Heritage Days, which are designed after the COBA model, happen to have
more really good feedback from visitors than the earlier ones. This is also supported
by the fact: “Communicating heritage is a rather complex task with many parame-
ters involved. The most important ones are the members of the community, for
whom we want heritage to put to use to improve their quality of life” (Ripp and
Hauer 2017).
Development A. Attitude B. Social C. Progress of D. Role of E. Level of F. Communication

towards and Proficiency Citizen Involvement
Method Media
Heritage Asset Personal
Example
Identity
1. Definition Identify Social BASIC Name Recipient Auditive Presentations Exhibitions

Identity Visual Interviews Flyer
Articles
2. Awareness Being conscious Social BASIC Recipient Auditive Presentations Exhibitions
of Identity Describe Visual Interviews Flyer
Articles
3. Exploration Being informed Social ADVANCED Recipient Auditive Discussions Multimedia
Identity Put into Context Stakeholder Visual Motoric Interactive Use (e.g. Visitor
Personal Haptic of Media Centre)
Identity
4. Participate Being able to Social ADVANCED Multiplie Auditive Reactive Audio guides
act Identity Know Recipient Visual Motoric Instruments Apps
Personal Functional Stakeholder Haptic Events Film
Identity Context In social Workshops
context Competitions
(interact) Interactive Use
of Media
5. Transference Communicate Balanced EXPERT Multiplie Auditive Networking at Audio guides
Identity Holistic Experts Visual Motoric Expert Level Apps
(internal and Haptic Conferences Film
external) in social Presentations
Stakeholder context Workshops
Lobbyist (interact) World Cafés
Fig. 25.8 The COBA model: communication model for built heritage assets. (© City of
Regensburg © Matthias Ripp)
25.4.2 Expert Consultancy
Besides the open access public participation, expert consultancy plays an important
role in decision-making processes, in the City of Regensburg. One of the consulting
partners of the City, the architectural advisory board, is an independent committee
of six appointed experts in the field of architecture that give advice about architec-
tural and urban design projects with special relevance to the city development.
Those architects not only share their expertise with the city’s officials but also with
building owners, when a project requires more intensified consultancy. This board
was introduced in 1998 and has been working successfully ever since (City of
Regensburg n.d.).
Another important and active advisory board is the ICOMOS World Heritage
steering committee. In this committee; two ICOMOS consultants; a representative
of the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the
Länder; a representative of the Bavarian State Ministry of Sciences, Research and
the Arts; the Head of the Bavarian State Office for the Preservation of Monuments
and the Head of the City of Regensburg discuss all important building projects that
448 M. Ripp et al.
might affect the area designated as World Heritage. The main objective of this com-
mittee is to avoid conflicts at a very early stage of planning. Moreover, the munici-
pal experts give advice when issues of preservation occur (Ripp et al. 2011, p. 295).
25.4.3 Participation Practices

25.4.3.1 Site Management Plan and Citizen Participation
The local authorities of the city have prepared the first version of Regensburg’s
management plan, as part of the documents required by the UNESCO during the
nomination process. Regensburg was inscribed in 2006. In 2008, the City Council
decided to review the original rather rudimentary management plan and choose an
integrated approach, including a participation process at a large scale to give more
citizens the chance to get involved. This process was linked with the URBACT II
Project HerO (Heritage as Opportunity), which started in 2009 (Ripp et al. 2011,
p. 295). The participation of citizens was important for the development of the man-
agement plan, and in return, citizens identified themselves with the UNESCO World
Heritage title.
For the preparation process of the new management plan, a working group was
created, which consisted of representatives from public and private institutions (see
Box 25.4), led by an external expert. This expert had a chairmanship function and
was responsible for the creation of an end analysis (Mühlmann 2012, p. 87). The first
step of the external expert was to analyse the existing policies and concepts for their
heritage-relevant content. The second step was to develop the principles and objec-
tives for the individual field of action and to prepare an initial draft to supply a basis
for the working group. Then, in a series of meetings during 2009, the Management
Plan Working Group developed a list of achievable objectives and required measures
for the identified fields of action. Each field of action was further developed by spe-
cial small groups, including a leader, who would serve as a link between the munici-
pality and the World Heritage Coordination (Mühlmann 2009, p. 23).
Box 25.4: Participants of the Management Plan Working Group

Internal participants: Records and Conservation Office, City Planning Office,
Building Regulation Department, Office for Urban Development,
Environmental and Legal Office, Office for Economic Promotion, Main Press
and Public Relations Department, Regensburg Tourismus GmbH, and World
Heritage Coordination
External participants: Bavarian State Business Authority, Bavarian State
Building Authority, Bavarian State Conservation Office, Government of the
Oberpfalz, City Marketing Association Regensburg, Aktionsgemeinschaft
Altstadt e.V., Chamber of Commerce and Industry Regensburg (IHK), and
Weltkulturfonds Regensburg – Die Förderer
Fig. 25.9 Heritage Dialog Workshop. (© City of Regensburg)
In 2010, after giving these leaders special training on moderation techniques, a

public event called Heritage Dialogue for the citizens and more stakeholders was
organized (Fig. 25.9). Around 70 persons attended the event, where they were split
into six groups for the different fields of action. The working group leaders were
the moderators for the sessions and guided the citizens to collect and prioritize their
ideas for the discussed actions. The results of the event were a list of actions which
are most favourable to the citizens. It was also decided to include two citizen rep-
resentatives in the Management Plan Working Group: Dr. Rosa Micus, a specialist
in German studies, and Dr. Peter Morsbach, an art historian. As advocates of the
citizenship, they were able to participate in all working group meetings and con-
tribute in particular the proposed actions of the citizenry to the process (Mühlmann
2010, p. 29). The actions identified by the community were implemented within
the frame of the regular investment programme of the municipality. To realize the
implementation of the developed action, financial resources from the local level,
the Bavarian level, the national level and the European Union were used.
In 2011, the World Heritage Management Plan was completed and submitted to
the City Council for approval. On January 2012, it was made available online, in
German and English language. The vivid public interest and engagement during the
process have clearly shown the importance of civic participation especially in the
field of heritage management and World Heritage in particular. Consequences of
this innovation are varied, e.g. a follow-up event in 2017/2018, regular meetings of
the working group and a steady communication between the relevant stakeholders,
so the public stays informed about the implementation of the management plan and
can also take part in its revision. All actions identified in the management plan refer
to one of the six steps of the HUL approach.
450 M. Ripp et al.
25.4.3.2 C
ivic Participation Practice in Field: Renovation of the Central
Pedestrian Zone
To improve the quality of this specific public space, the City of Regensburg plans to
modernize some parts of the pedestrian zone in the city centre. According to this
project, the central pedestrian zone will be renovated by approximately 2020. Besides
the works on the road, a tunnel and channel construction, more trees, seating arrange-
ments, bicycle stands and additional waste bins are also planned. During this pro-
cess, maintaining communication with the public and the building civic participation
is essential. Local workshops were held, in which inhabitants and local shopkeepers
could actively contribute to the planning in nearly all aspects, e.g. design of the pave-
ment in the pedestrian zone. Additionally, a design contest “Object-Art Competition,
Seating Furniture” was organized for two specific squares in the project area. Original
and innovative ideas should be supported and implemented. The jury of the design
contest also was completed with two citizen representatives, who were selected dur-
ing the local workshops (City of Regensburg 2015a, b, p. 10).
25.4.3.3 Specific Issue: Vulnerability Assessment
The vulnerability and adaptation assessment are significant for local administrations
working on World Heritage cities, as it provides them with the knowledge needed for
the definition of priorities and integrating these priorities into regular programmes
and budgets. In order to minimize the risk for the built heritage, it is necessary to
analyse potentially affected areas. The following environmental forces are mentioned
of particular significance by the Site Management Plan of Regensburg: flooding
caused by the proximity to two rivers, the acid rain caused by air pollution which cor-
rodes the limestone of the historical monuments and the global climate change which
calls for action to adapt to changing climatic conditions (Mühlmann 2012, p.21).
First of all, a 100-year flood (HW100) would have reached a level of five metres
above the water level in Regensburg. It is called HW100 (Flood100), because a
flood of this extent is likely to happen once in a 100 years. This could not only be
dangerous for humans and animals but also for listed buildings and the historic
urban landscape of Regensburg. The “Blue Plan” (Fig. 25.10) which was prepared
by Water Management Office of Regensburg, making use of the most modern meth-
ods, shows all of the low-lying areas of Regensburg which risk being flooded during
a 100-year flood (Lehner 2006, p. 158). This study provides the necessary basis to
help in the preparation of a flood control system.
Since 2000, the State of Bavaria, in conjunction with the City of Regensburg, has
been working on a flood control system. As part of this project, an interdisciplinary
idea and realization contest was held in 2003. The focus of the contest was to foster
the creation of technical and design solutions for flood protection in the municipal
area. After this contest, a subsequent “optimization phase” was organized.
Eventually, two successful draft proposals were examined for concrete feasibility in
2005 and 2006. After another optimization phase, the development of the c onceptual
Fig. 25.10 The blue plan of Regensburg. (© Verlag Friedrich Pustet. From Sedlmeier, A. &
Vossen, J. (ed), (2006). p. 159)
foundation for a technical flood control of the City of Regensburg was completed
(City of Regensburg – Water Management Office n.d.). The results focused primar-
ily on stationary and/or mobile solutions (Fig. 25.11).
Like step 3 of the HUL recommendation states, heritage cities are obliged “to
assess the vulnerability of these attributes to socio-economic stresses and impacts of
climate change” (Veldpaus et al. 2016, p.13). In Regensburg the serious debate
about this issue began, as stated above, in the year 2000. In 2008, Regensburg hosted
an international OWHC conference dealing with “Earth, Wind, Water, Fire –
Environmental Challenges to Urban World Heritage”.
Experts from more than 15 European countries attended the Northwest-European
Regional Conference. The conference participants jointly adopted the “Regensburg
Recommendation”. The paper formulated basic strategies on the protection of his-
toric towns and World Heritage cities against environmental risks and natural haz-
ards (City of Regensburg, n.d.). The background of the conference’s discourses was
the publications from Mechthild Rösseler World Heritage and Climate Change:
Impacts on Cultural Sites and from Michael Petze Heritage at risk. Both give a
good impression how urgent it is to take action. This was afterwards reflected in the
so-called Regensburg Recommendation under Point 4: The World Heritage cities
(are called on) to make risk preparedness and the impacts of climate change an
integral part of the cities’ management of the World Heritage area and to develop
proper emergency plans” (OWHC 2008, p.85).
After the threats of flooding, air pollution is a quite special challenge in relation
to the local communities, but also to limestone conservation of important listed
452 M. Ripp et al.
Fig. 25.11 Mobile flood protection walls to the Danube. (© Available from http://www.hochwas-
serschutz-regensburg.de/mobile-elemente.html)
buildings and monuments. Over recent years, a new method of limestone conserva-
tion has been developed and successfully applied to three of the most significant
historical structures – the Porta Praetoria, the Stone Bridge and St. Peter’s Cathedral.
This method will continuously be used in the future (Mühlmann 2012, p. 22).
Third, global climate change is also noticeable in Regensburg: In the last decade
of the twentieth century, the annual average temperature rose from 7.9 °C to 8.9 °C
(Dittmann 2006, p. 160). Although the city’s climate in the core and the surrounding
of Regensburg is still comfortable, for the future of heritage management, the pri-
mary focus is on the following questions: How this pleasant micro-climate will
remain? And how can the World Heritage area be adapted to the consequences of
climate change? It seems to be important to protect and expand the green spaces in
the first place. Secondly, it is essential to raise awareness within the community
about the consequences of climate change and to promote a more environment-
friendly lifestyle.
25.5 Networking
Apart from a few objections before the inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage
List, its label is not an obstacle for urban development. On the contrary, with a
tailored management strategy, Regensburg defined a vision to use heritage and the
UNESCO title as a driver for sustainable urban development. This vision was
displayed in the management plan. Accordingly, “the unique UNESCO-World
Heritage Site Old Town of Regensburg with Stadtamhof – center of European
history – must be safeguarded in its substance and be made accessible for all c itizens
and guests to experience. And the unique UNESCO-World Heritage Site Old Town
of Regensburg with Stadtamhof is to be preserved and further developed as a
multifunctional and vibrant place for all citizens, businesses and guests” (Mühlmann
2012, p. 47). In other words, Regensburg appropriates the HUL approach and
explores integrated urban heritage conservation strategies within the larger goals of
overall sustainable development as a target (UNESCO 2011).
Regensburg’s integrated management principles had been clarified and reflected
in the “World Heritage Management Plan for the Old Town of Regensburg with
Stadtamhof”. It is at the same time a fundamental basic text for the heritage-based
urban development strategy of Regensburg. This strategy has a four-pillar basis:
(35) integrated approach, (36) action-based orientation, (37) citizen participation
and (38) continual improvement (Mühlmann 2012, p. 10).
An integrated approach means, basically, both the combination of the consider-
ation of preservation of the physical environment and the development of the World
Heritage zone as a living, working and leisure area. Action-based orientation
addresses the importance of prioritizing the concrete issues of the World Heritage
Site, such as housing, public transportation, culture and tourism, for implementation
of the heritage management strategy.
Citizen participation, as well as the cross-sectional cooperation and stakeholder
participation, is crucial to promote the identification as a World Heritage city. It is
also needed to get necessary human and financial support for the further projects,
and continual improvement refers to possible updates of the management plan
according to changing demands and requirements over time.
The City of Regensburg is aware of its main challenges and the obligatory strat-
egy: to establish integration between conservation and change and between preser-
vation and development. There is a popular historical quotation about Regensburg,
and it is still valid: “Regensburg is old but new at the same time” (Morsbach 2016).1
Regensburg’s integrated management system has been supported by a broad range
of different stakeholders with the higher objective of heritage conservation, includ-
ing the World Heritage assets and its multifunctional quality, for a comprehensive
urban commercial development (Ripp et al. 2011, p. 300). The next chapter presents
the major fields of action in the World Heritage Management Plan and some exam-
ples from three different fields.
For the City of Regensburg, regular engagement in several heritage-related
networks became an important aspect of the urban agenda: The city takes part in
networks at the national and international level, such as ARGE Historic Cities and
the OWHC (Organization of World Heritage Cities). Moreover, a series of projects
1
This quotation comes from Otloh, a monk of the Regensburg monastery of St. Emmeram, from
the middle of the eleventh century. With these words, Otloh described the mediaeval Imperial City
of Regensburg.
454 M. Ripp et al.
co-funded by the European Union has enabled Regensburg to cooperate directly

with other cities facing similar challenges. The strategic use of networks includes
the exchange on real-world solutions for specific problems, the development of
model solutions that can be transferred to other cities with a significant part of urban
heritage and the joint lobbying to improve the conditions (in terms of funding
schemes, capacity building, increase awareness on higher political levels, etc.)
(Crouch et al. 2013).
The latest project was COMUS (Community-Led Urban Strategies in Historic
Towns), which focuses on stimulating social and economic development by enhanc-
ing cultural heritage in nine historic towns in Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, the
Republic of Moldova and Ukraine (Council of Europe 2016; Ripp and Stein 2018).
Throughout the project, a methodology and principles for heritage-based urban
development in countries of transition were developed.
Within the OWHC network, member cities are represented by their mayors,
which secure the involvement of the political level. More operational is the role of
the heritage management specialists, who transform the strategies into actions. The
OWHC’s headquarters are located in Québec City, which hosted the first International
Symposium of World Heritage Cities in July 1991. There are eight regional secre-
tariats that support the work of the general secretariat.
The main achievements of the Region Northwest Europe and North America are
an enhanced communication policy and a vivid exchange between the cities, which
already shows great benefits for all parties. Networking, in general, is crucial for a
successful work in heritage management not only because of the input from other
experts but also to join forces to put urban heritage on the political agenda. Being
part of networks enhances visibility and raises awareness, both of which are criti-
cal to gain access to funding and funded projects. Regensburg experienced that
good networking eases considerably the development of an innovative heritage
management.
25.6 Conclusion
Though the World Heritage Management Plan of Regensburg was published in

early 2012, it is not outdated. The whole process of the implementation was updated
on a regular basis. Several meetings of the working group were settled, and in 2015
the interim report was published, which explained the status quo of the actions and
measures: 75% of the proposed actions are either completed or are currently imple-
mented as permanent tasks (City of Regensburg 2015a, b, p. 10). The rest will be
implemented as soon as possible. Thus, the tool management plan develops in
accordance to the heritage site as it was intended in the first place. Some adjust-
ments, however, will be necessary in the upcoming months due to some structural
and thematic changes within the municipality of Regensburg after the 2013 elec-
tions. The focus on the issue of integration must be reflected in the management
plan as well as Regensburg’s orientation towards creative industries.
It is also crucial to be aware that management plans are not management systems
in the sense the HUL approach demands. They are structures in need of interpreta-
tion. Often to reach some objections, management plans provide the outcome but
not the methodology and methods. Strategies of heritage interpretation though com-
bined with a well-structured management plan could be a better way of approach
here. “In short, effective governance in UNESCO World Heritage Sites demands a
reframing of the role of management plans as a tool to significantly improve com-
munity engagement at local level and also to be aware of their limitations. Allied to
this, a change of emphasis, especially in regional and national locations where they
are more appropriate, in favour of the alternative provision that is set out in the
Operational Guidelines, namely, management systems” (Ripp and Rodwell 2018).
To manage a smooth integration of the topics and the stakeholders, the
Management Plan Working Group will be extended and the working fields adjusted
accordingly until the end of 2017. In this process, also new actions could be devel-
oped to meet the actual challenges. Heritage-based urban development in Regensburg
means, therefore, an interactive system, which can respond to current effects and
balances those fractions by integrating them into the system, based on good gover-
nance principles that are constantly implemented (Ripp et al. 2011, p. 300).
Following the HUL approach principles, Regensburg puts a strong emphasis on
community engagement and the participation of interdisciplinary experts. The main
objective though is not only to detect and analyse the City in the spirit of the historic
urban landscape but also to entitle and capitalize on a governance system in which
as many elements of the system as possible are considered.
References
Arnstein, S. R. (1969, July). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of
Planners, 35(4), 216–224.
Bavarian Heritage Atlas. http://www.blfd.bayern.de/denkmalerfassung/denkmalliste/bayern-
viewer/. Accessed 17 September 2018.
Breuer, T., & Petzet, M. (1993). Vorwort. Baualtersplan zur Stadtsanierung Regensburg/10
Register und Nachträge (p. 7). München: BLfD.
Brundtland, G. H. (1987). Report of the world commission on sustainable development.
Geneva: UN.
City of Regensburg. (2015a). Zwischenbericht Management plan. Available from: http://www.
regensburg.de/welterbe/welterbekoordination/service-downloads [07 December 2016].
City of Regensburg. (2015b). Beschlussvorlage/öffentlich: Neugestaltung “Zentrale
Fußgängerzone”. Available from: www.regensburg.de [15 November 2016].
City of Regensburg. (n.d.). Facts and figures. Available from: http://www.regensburg.de/unesco-
world-heritage/about-regensburg/facts-and-figures [09 December 2016].
City of Regensburg – Department of Statistics. (2014). Bevölkerungsstatistik der Stadt Regensburg.
Available from: www.statistik.regensburg.de [16 November 2016].
City of Regensburg -Water Management Office. (n.d.). Wettbewerb/Optimierungsphase.
Available from: http://www.hochwasserschutz-regensburg.de/wettbewerb-optimierungsphase.
html [29 December 2016].
456 M. Ripp et al.
Council of Europe. (2016). Available from: http://pjp-eu.coe.in/en/web/comus

Crouch, T., Dumas, A., & Ripp, M. (2013). Safeguarding and further developing world heritage
cities-position paper. The OWHC’s regional secretariat for Northwest Europe. Organisation
of World Heritage Cities (OWHC). Available from: https://www.regensburg.de/sixcms/media.
php/280/OWHC_Position_Paper_maximise_size.422368.pdf. 17 September 2018.
Dittmann, C. (2006). Hochwasser in Regensburg: Nasse Füße laut Blauem Plan. In Stadtatlas
Regensburg (p. 160). Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet Verlag.
Hosagrahar, J. (2015). Knowledge and planning tools. In Reconnecting the city. The historic
urban landscape approach and the future of urban heritage (pp. 249–261). West Sussex: Wiley
Blackwell.
Hotz, C. (2004). Deutsche Städte und UNESCO-Welterbe. Probleme und Erfahrungen mit der
Umsetzung eines globalisierten Denkmalschutzkonzeptes. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovač.
ICOMOS. (1975). European charter of the architectural heritage. Available from: http://www.
icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts/179-articles-en-francais/ressources/charters-and-%20%20
standards/170-european-charter-of-the-architectural-heritage [09 December 2016].
Kiesow, G. (2000). Denkmalpflege in Deutschland. Eine Einführung. Theiss, Darmstadt.
Lehner, C., (2006). Hochwasser in Regensburg: Nasse Füße laut Blauem Plan. Stadtatlas
Regensburg (pp. 158). Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet Verlag.
Morsbach, P. (2016). Regensburger Almanach 2016 – Regensburg ist alt und jung zugleich.
Mühlmann, R. (2009). ‘Der Welterbe-Management plan: Ein integriertes Handlungskonzept für
Regensburg‘ Jahresbericht 2009 der Welterbekoordination. (pp. 22–25). Regensburg, City of
Regensburg.
Mühlmann, R. (2010). ‘Welterbe-Management plan: Welterbe-Dialog am 5. und 6. Februar 2010′,
Jahresbericht 2010 der Welterbekoordination. (pp. 29–30). Regensburg, City of Regensburg.
Mühlmann, R. (Ed.). (2012). World heritage-management plan for the old town of Regensburg
with Stadtamhof. Regensburg, City of Regensburg.
Organization of World Heritage Cities. (2016). Available from: http://www.ovpm.org/en/
regional_secretariats/northwest_europe_and_north_america
OWHC. (2008). Regensburg recommendation. In Proceedings EARTH WIND WATER FIRE.
Environmental Challenges to Urban World Heritage. Organization of World Heritage Cities
(OWHC). Northwest-European Regional Conference in Regensburg from September 16-18,
p. 85.
Ripp, M., & Hauer, S. (2017). Communication model for built heritage assets going from knowing
to identification. Published: Built Heritage Issue 4. Available: https://www.built-heritage.net/
rippandhauer.
Ripp, R., & Rodwell, D. (2018). Governance in UNESCO world heritage sites: Reframing the role
of management plans as a tool to improve community engagement, in aspects of management
planning for cultural world heritage sites (pp. 241–253). Cham: Springer.
Ripp, M., & Stein, P. (2018). Applying the Faro convention principles to deliver heritage-based
urban development: The COMUS-project. Community-led urban strategies in historic towns.
In Council of Europe.
Ripp, M., Eidenschink, U., & Milz, C. (2011). Strategies, policies and tools for an integrated world
heritage management approach; experiences from the city of Regensburg. Facilities, 29(7/8),
286–302.
Ripp, M., Hellmann T. R., & Hauer S (Eds.) (2014). Communicating heritage assets. In HerMan
Final Brochure. p. 24/25.
Sedlmeier, A., Vossen, J., & Maag, K. (2006). Stadtatlas Regensburg. Regensburg.
Stadplan Regensburg: http://stadtplan.regensburg.de/tabs.php?tab=stadtplan. Accessed 17
September 2018.
Stadplan Regensburg. Available from: https://www.regensburg.de/20/stadtplan/stadtplan-regens-
burg [31 January 2018].
Trapp, E. (2008). World heritage Regensburg: A guide to the history and art history of the old town
of Regensburg with Stadtamhof. Regensburg: Verlag Schnell & Steiner.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape. Available from: http://whc.
unesco.org/en/activities/638/ [06 December 2016].
UNESCO. (2016). The HUL Guidebook-Managing heritage in dynamic and constantly changing
urban environments. A practical guide to Unesco’s Recommendation on the Historic Urban
Landscape, p. 13
URBACT. (2010). Analytical case study. Visitor Centre World Heritage Regensburg. Available
from: https://www.regensburg.de/sixcms/media.php/280/Regensburg_case_study.pdf
Veldpaus, L., Fayad, S., Jian, Z., Rogers, A.-P., Juma, M., Re, A., Pérez, J., & Verdini, G. (2016). The
HUL guidebook: Managing heritage in dynamic and constantly changing urban environments.
§3 Abs. BauGB. Baugesetzbuch in der Fassung der Bekanmachung vom 23. September
2004 (BGBl. I S. 2414), das zuletztdurch Artikel 6 des Gesetzes vom 20. Oktober 2015
(BGBl. I S. 1722) geändert worden ist. Available from: http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de
[22 November 2016].
Chapter 26
Enhancing Rural-Urban Linkages
Through the Historic Urban Landscape
Approach: The Case of Shuang Wan Cun
in the Jiangsu Province
Abstract Shuang Wan Cun is a peri-urban village located in the Wujiang District
of Suzhou, in China. During 2015–2016, the village experimented with the imple-
mentation of the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) recommendation, being assisted
in this process by the Research Institute of Urbanisation of Xi’an Jiaotong-
Liverpool University. It was one of the pilot projects to implement the ‘Shanghai
Agenda for HUL in China’ at WHITRAP (2015). Among those, it is one of the few
cases of HUL application in China dealing with the challenges of an ordinary rural
village affected by problems ascribable to the massive urbanization process. This
case is particularly relevant because of the strong local political willingness to
study alternative development strategies more considerate of local historic struc-
tures and to implement civic engagement tools with the local community. This has
proven to be an engine for real transformation, and some tangible results have been
achieved.
The main aim of this chapter is to report on the process and the outcomes of this
experiment, in the context of Suzhou, and focus on the enabling conditions for mak-
ing implementation of HUL possible. The favourable context of a long-lasting his-
tory of urban conservation in Suzhou, as described in the paper, has been a fertile
terrain to experiment new soft tools of conservation. While there are still some
limits in its application, HUL has proven to be successful in reframing development
priorities in more sustainable terms, reconnecting a locality to the opportunities of
its surrounding urban context, which has been for years considered a source of
negative impacts.
G. Verdini (*)
Department of Urban Planning and Transport, University of Westminster, London, UK
e-mail: g.verdini@westminster.ac.uk
F. Huang
College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai, China

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_26
460 G. Verdini and F. Huang
Keywords Rural-urban linkages · Rural regeneration · Small settlements · Civic

engagement · China
26.1 Introduction
The conservation and utilization of cultural heritage in rural areas are usually con-
fined, in the best scenario, to limited interventions of physical protection of build-
ings linked to unoriginal exploitative tourism strategies. This is primarily due to
lack of resources, institutional weaknesses and, very often, to lack of local vision
and effective regional development strategies. Therefore, the deficiency of suitable
governance systems for rural settlements may reinforce their condition of isolation
or dependency, preventing them from embarking autonomously on sustainable
paths of local development. The enhancement of rural-urban linkages can instead
help to develop complementary and synergic functions, between rural, peri-urban
and urban areas, capable of reinforcing different localities, reshaping their identities
and their development opportunities in a more creative and sustainable way (Verdini
2016a).
The experience of Shuang Wan Cun has addressed some of the points raised for
small settlements in the UNESCO Global Report ‘Culture Urban Futures’ (2016).
At the time of the discussion with the local government of Shuang Wan Cun and
then Wujiang District, the main local interest was to study ‘human-centred’ solu-
tions to improve the urbanization of the area, by referring to the then recently
released ‘New Urbanization Plan’ (2014). This national policy paved the way to
research better urban-rural integration mechanisms to preserve the countryside and
bottom-up forms of development. It further opened avenues of research into address-
ing urban sprawl and protecting agricultural land, alongside the scattered experi-
mentation of rural village conservation (Verdini et al. 2016).
In particular, Suzhou had been at the forefront of rural conservation, due to the
safeguarding of some historic water towns such as Tongli, also located in Wujiang
District. For this reason, the water towns of the Yangtze River received the UNESCO
Asia-Pacific Heritage Award of Distinction in 2003. However, due to its proximity
to Shanghai, some water towns have become famous tourism destinations with mas-
sive annual visitor flows and a series of negative externalities.
The discussion in Shuang Wan has been instead, since the beginning, framed as
an attempt to preserve the historic landscape of the area, traditionally linked to the
complex water system and rich agricultural activities. The main aim was to deliber-
ately explore place-based rural development paths complemented by soft tourism
strategies. This was made possible by the relative scarcity of outstanding heritage
structures in the village, which made a pure tourism strategy unviable.
This paper provides a historical overview of the urban development trajectory of
Suzhou, alongside the urban conservation attempts in the last decades. Later, the
experience of research and HUL implementation in Shuang Wan is explored, show-
ing its potential applicability in other cases in China and some of its limits.
26 Enhancing Rural-Urban Linkages Through the Historic Urban Landscape… 461
26.2 Suzhou and Its Region: Historical Overview
Located in one of the most developed areas in China, the Yangtze River Delta,
Suzhou has, historically, always been a prosperous city. The mild climate, fertile
soil and the presence of the dense water network of the Tai Lake Plain have nurtured
the development of rich agricultural production, including rice, tea and mulberries,
together with a flourishing handicraft silk trade and industry. With the completion
of the Grand Canal, Suzhou has become the hub of the waterway transport in the
region and consequently the economic and the cultural centre of southern Yangtze
region (Dong 2004). Its urban fabric is also seamlessly integrated with the dense
water network. The so-called double-chessboard urban form is used to describe
such special urban morphology of Suzhou as the waterway, an important part of the
local transport system, goes parallel to the road system and forms a grid pattern.
This unique urban form is already visible on a map of the thirteenth-century city, the
so-called Pingjiang map. Its urban form, despite major modern changes, shows
some correlations today (Fig. 26.1).
Due to the dense network of canals, Suzhou is also known as the ‘Oriental
Venice’. Since the thirteenth century, many private gardens have been built by local
merchants and officials. They seek to recreate the natural landscape in the miniature
and reflect the profound metaphysical importance of natural beauty in Chinese cul-
ture and are widely acknowledged as the masterpieces of the genre (UNESCO
1997). Representing the highest value of garden design and artistic merit, four gar-
dens were inscribed as World Heritage in 1997, and five more were added in 2000
(Fig. 26.2).
Fig. 26.1 Suzhou City map in the thirteenth century (Xu 2000) and the aerial view today
Fig. 26.2 Classical garden in Suzhou and the traditional urban landscape in the historic city
centre
Besides the historic city centre, the part of the city stretching beyond the city wall
also integrates with the surrounding natural environment, such as the lake and the
hills, where many villages were also built. These settlements, paddy fields and fish-
ponds form a unique rural landscape typical of the lower Yangtze region. This com-
bination of land and water appeared already unique to the eyes of the Jesuit priest
Matteo Ricci when in his travel accounts of China reported:
This is one of the two towns which the Chinese have put into the proverb: “What in heaven
is called the seat of blessed, on earth in Suzhou and Hangzhou”. It is one of the most impor-
tant cities of this region and is known for its splendour and wealth, for its numerous popula-
tion and about everything else that makes a city grand. It is situated on a calm river of fresh
water, or one might more aptly say on a lake, swept by gentle winds. (reported in Marme’
2005, p.20)
26.2.1 Industrial Innovation and Urban Conservation
Since the nineteenth century, the city of Suzhou suffered from a severe decline, los-
ing its position as the economic centre of the region. With the decline of the water
transport as well as the rise of the railways in the late nineteenth century, Suzhou
also lost its importance as the regional hub on the Grand Canal. This led to Shanghai
soon replacing Suzhou as the economic centre (He 2007). Consequently, the built-
up area of the city did not expand much until the 1980s (Fig. 26.3)
Since the opening and reform in 1978, China has shifted from a planned econ-
omy to a market-oriented one. Not only has the economy developed remarkably
since then, but also the urban area has expanded enormously, from 28.62 km2 in
1980 to 329.29 km2 in 2010, by 11.51 times (Wang et al. 2015). The administrative
division of Suzhou has also changed during these years, and now the metropolitan
city of Suzhou consists of five urban districts and four county-level cities. These five
urban districts are Gusu District, Suzhou Industrial Park (SIP), Suzhou New District
(SND), Xiangcheng District, Wuzhong District and Wujiang District and form a
Fig. 26.3 Built-up area in Suzhou by 1982 (Wang 2005)
polycentric urban pattern (Fig. 26.4). Wujiang was granted the status of ‘urban dis-
trict’ in 2012 with repercussions on the economic and urban dynamics of the area,
as will be discussed later.
With the approval of the Law on the Protection of the Cultural Relics in 1982,
Suzhou was designated as China’s ‘Famous Historic and Cultural City’ in the same
year. Since then, conservation of the historic urban fabrics and important sites has
become the first development priority of the historic city centre, and mass construc-
tion has been prohibited. Commercial, cultural and tourism activities have become
the pillar of the economy of the historic city, while other functions have to seek
other areas to be allocated.
Conversely, the boom of local state-led township and village enterprises since
the 1980s has significantly boosted the local economic development. This unique
approach of countryside industrialization has ensured wide economic and social
benefits while threatening the quality of the surrounding natural environment and
rural landscape (Friedmann 2005). Overall, in the last 20 years, the GDP of Suzhou
City has rapidly increased and accounts now for 20.7% of the total GDP of Jiangsu
Province, ranking 1st in Jiangsu Province and 7th in the country (SSB 2016).
Since the release of the master plan of Suzhou of 1986, the local government
decided to expand the city towards the west first, building a new district (SND) for
industrial development, while preventing large-scale construction in the centre to
Fig. 26.4 Suzhou urban districts and county-level cities with the location of Shuang Wan Cun
preserve the historic city. The city has then been increasingly driven by foreign
direct investments with an important spatial reconfiguration of the city. In 1994, the
openness of the city of Suzhou reached a new height with the establishment of the
Sino-Singapore Industrial Park (Wang et al. 2015). To facilitate the transformation
of Suzhou from a productive city to an innovative city, in 2002, the local govern-
ment established a higher education town, the Dushu Lake Higher Education Town.
Suzhou has now consolidated its east-west development axis, and the new master
plan (2011–2020) is fostering urbanization along the north-south axis.
While the north of the city is becoming increasingly competitive and equipped
with modern and efficient infrastructure, like the new high-speed train Beijing-
Shanghai, the south has retained a more rural and tourism-oriented vocation. In
Wuzhong District, the Suzhou Tai Lake National Tourism Vacation Zone was estab-
lished in 1993 taking advantage of the proximity to the Tai Lake with its beautiful
natural scenery, where many historic villages and towns are located. This area is
also famous for its special local agricultural products like tea and fruits. Therefore,
priority has been given to the conservation of the natural landscape and historic
settlements for tourism development. In contrast to the mass sightseeing tourism in
the historic city centre, the local government has adopted a strategy that encourages
soft tourism, which is more ecologically and socially friendly. Today, Wuzhong
District attracts tourists from the surrounding cities, especially people from Suzhou
City and Shanghai, and has become a popular place for events such as Tour of Tai
Lake (cycling race).
As the capacity of the urban area of Suzhou has been almost reached, the city has
been seeking new areas to expand into. In 2012, the county-level city, Wujiang, was
redesignated as Wujiang District and became part of the Suzhou urban area.
26.2.2 Suzhou Peri-urbanity: Diversity and Dynamics
The countryside and the peri-urban area of Suzhou are very diverse and dynamic.
Unlike the suburbs in the western country where the land use is dominated by resi-
dential function, the urban fringe area of Suzhou is a dense rural region and a com-
plex and polycentric urban system. It is characterized by a special typology of rural
landscape, a mixed form of local economy, as well as small settlements with strong
vernacular local features. The formation of such special morphology originated
from local agricultural activities, developed in response to the scarcity of cultivated
land due to the high population density. This unique morphology has been under the
threat of the rapid urban growth in the Yangtze River Delta. Besides being well-
known for paddy fields, fishponds, vegetable gardens and orchards, another
agriculture-related economic activity is the textile industry of this region, which
dates back to silk production in ancient times. Besides agriculture, the small-scale
and family-based silk production used to be the main income source of local people
during the 1930s, and it could be, to some extent, seen as the proto-textile industry
of this region (Fei 1939). Today, the tradition of engaging in the textile industry still
remains in this region, especially in south Suzhou, although in a quite different
form. In the past, the families produced the silk starting from the breeding of the
silkworm, while today many places just process raw materials imported from out-
side. For instance, some areas in the peri-urban area of Wujiang District accommo-
date many home-based workshops and small enterprises for sweater production.
Influenced by the flourishing of local state-led township and village enterprises
and the rapid urban sprawl, nonagricultural jobs have become a major income
source for local people. Instead of engaging in agricultural production, local farm-
ers also work temporarily in the factories nearby or on the construction sites during
the offseason of farming. In some cases, some farmers even lease their farmland to
contractors and commute every day to the nearby industries, where they work full-
time. For instance, in a village in SND by Tai Lake, half of the local villagers’
income is derived from the activities taking place outside the village, such as work-
ing in the factories, while home-based embroidery accounts for the largest propor-
tion of local people’s income derived inside the village (Verdini 2014). This
representative case indicates that although the sprawling city and industrialization
have significantly changed the structure of the local economy, local-based activities
still maintain their importance.
From agriculture to tourism, the variety of activities indicate that the peri-urban
area of Suzhou is a diverse place which is able to adapt itself to the changing regional
context. However, the current policy framework functions inadequately in conserv-

ing this complex and dynamic system. On the contrary, it may even accelerate the
disappearance of this special peri-urbanity.
26.2.3 Peri-urbanity: Challenges and Opportunities
In the metropolitan city of Suzhou, the diverse urban fringe area is threatened by the
urban sprawl of the city. Although there are several policies tackling urban growth
that protect the rural area, especially the arable land, they function inadequately in
protecting the peri-urban area. The policies targeting the rural area favour simplified
solutions for this complex situation, instead of addressing its diversity.
The central problem of the current urban sprawl issue is the land finance model
in urban development. After the reform of the finance system, the local government
no longer has economic support from the central government. Therefore, the local
government has to seek other sources of revenue to finance public projects, such as
infrastructure construction. Leasing public land to private developers has become
the fastest and most straightforward solution to local financial problems, resulting
in aggressive actions on the rural land, especially the peri-urban area. Rural land is
simply redesignated as urban land, allowing the local government to purchase the
land from the farmers at a low price, while leasing it to developers at a high price.
To some extent, policies attempting to control the urban sprawl cannot work without
a major change to this land-financing system (Verdini 2016b).
One of the major policies for the rural area is the so-called relocation and central-
ization of the villages. The main rationale of this policy is to tackle the issues of
inefficient land use in the rural area and to mitigate the problem of land scarcity. It
involves relocating the villagers who live in small villages, scattered throughout the
countryside, to bigger towns, and then the village land can be reclaimed for agricul-
tural or other use (Ren and Yao 2000). However, this simplified solution is not able
to address the diversity of the rural area and focuses solely on the quantitative
aspects, while ignoring many other precious qualities of the rural area.
Commitments have also been made to protect the scarce arable land and guaran-
tee the food supply. The most productive land has been designated as basic arable
land, and any type of developments is strictly prohibited according to the Law on
the Protection of the Basic Arable Land. However, the law still compromised on
urban development by introducing the mechanism of the ‘dynamic balance’ which
means that if any development is made on basic arable land, the same amount of
farmland must be reclaimed elsewhere. By introducing this mechanism, one of the
strongest barriers for urban sprawl has gone, and the local government has been act-
ing more aggressively on the rural area. At the local level, Suzhou City has been
adapting the policy ‘4 Million Mu Project’, which aims to create/conserve one mil-
lion mu productive basic arable land for rice production, one million mu aqua-
product breeding, one million mu gardening and vegetable fields and one million
mu ecological woodland. The effort of the local government to protect the e cological
value of the countryside and, at the same time, guarantee the food supply can be
seen from this policy. However, when the policy is implemented at the district, town
and village levels, the quotas imposed locally on villages do not often take into
consideration the complex local context, as described later.
26.3 Report from Shuang Wan Cun Case Study
Located in south Wujiang District, the village of Shuang Wan could be seen as a
typical case reflecting the current issues in the peri-urban/rural area of the metro-
politan area of Suzhou. Like many other villages in the area, Shuang Wan Village is
characterized by dense water network which consists of canals, small rivers and
fishponds, and the houses stretch along the main watercourse (Fig. 26.5).
Local people’s income mainly derives from family-based small textile industries,
breeding of fish and leasing the village land for rice cultivation, and these economic
activities are embedded in the built environment and rural landscape. Moreover,
such a combination also has a place-based cultural meaning, representing a typical
lifestyle of such settlements in the Yangtze River Delta region. The village has been
designated as a settlement with the vernacular style of the region indicating that it
can be protected from relocation and demolition in the urbanization process.
However, as mentioned above, it has been threatened by the imposed upper-level
Fig. 26.5 Aerial view of Shuang Wan Village and its surrounding landscape
government policy, which intends to change the land use. Almost 50% of the total
fishponds in the village have to be reclaimed and changed to arable land to meet the
quota in the four Million Mu Project. This will result in not only a change in the
rural landscape but also a decrease in the local people’s income.
In light of this background, local leaders have consulted the Research Institute of
Urbanisation at XJTLU to research alternative solutions to the current challenges
brought by the new policy and to implement strategies for sustainable local develop-
ment. The main concerns expressed were the reduction of the local people’s income
and the change in rural landscape but also the willingness to conserve the heritage
that shapes the local cultural identity (Verdini et al. 2017). In this case, the approach
of Historic Urban Landscape has been applied to find a balance between the urban
development and the conservation of the landscape. In practical terms, a prelimi-
nary reseaech has been conducted and a participatory design workshop has been
organised to define potential future development scenarios together with local
stakeholders. As a result, three main strategies have been agreed and presented in
front of the village committee in a public hearing session. These three strategies are
introducing the cultivation of rose to mitigate the negative effect of the incoming
change to the rural landscape, improving the public space and network of mobility
for not only the local people but also the potential rural tourism development in the
future and the conservation of the historic built environment to keep the local cul-
tural identity.
Based on the outlined strategies, during the workshop, researchers and students
from different universities have researched the topics reported in Table 26.1, coming
out with a 3-year programme of actions 2016–2019 and a master plan for sustain-
able local development.
The main idea behind the master plan is to gradually insert new agricultural
products, such as roses (this is a preliminary proposal which will be subject to a
feasibility study), in the eastern and western parts of the village, retaining the fish-
ponds at the two main entrances of the village (north and south). The time frame is
Table 26.1 Topics and target outcomes discussed during a participatory design workshop held in
July 2015 in Shuang Wan.
Topic Action Target outcomes
1: Fishponds vs To balance fishponds and To increase the area’s economic output and to
farmlands reclaimed land by reduce the overall water pollution
introducing new activities
2: Open space To redesign open spaces and To improve the local landscape
create possible green nodes
3: Household To rethink/redesign the To provide new houses that match the local
typologies household typologies identity and residents’ needs
4: Heritage To list heritage areas and To maintain the historical footprints and
conservation preserve specific sites/houses preserve the local heritage
5: New mobility To redefine the road system To improve the mobility, create a new road
hierarchy and foster ‘slow mobility’ for
pedestrians and bicycles by limiting car access
linked with the agricultural contracts, which will expire during the period 2016–
2019, and is associated with the construction of a system of green roads (within the
village) connected by a regional bicycle path, the building of two new pedestrian
bridges, the conservation plan for the south part of the village, the upgrading of a
central area for retail development and the construction of two rose gardens in the
core of the village. In this respect, the new agricultural project is an opportunity to
rethink the entire village morphology and the future economic activities in modern
terms (Fig. 26.6). More detailed and related proposals have been developed during
the workshop (Fig. 26.7), for example, on how to utilize the bay area and the public
space for showcasing the local products (e.g. rose exhibitions and rose fireworks);
on how to develop a related creative industry, reconciling the dual economy, which
is now entirely separate (rose cultivations and textile activities); and on how to
design two rose gardens with leisure functions related to the conservation of the
south area for tourism purposes.
Fig. 26.6 The master plan which was presented to local officials and local people in a public ses-
sion on the 12 July 2015
Fig. 26.7 The residential Charette. Meetings with the local community
26.4 Discussion and Conclusion
With more than three decades’ development since the opening and reform, Suzhou
has already become the most economically developed city in Jiangsu Province.
However, the great achievement in terms of ‘numbers’ has brought a number of
problems. The spatial function division of the city, namely, the cultural-touristic
historic city centre and the surrounding industrial parks, such as SIP and SND, is
damaging the diversity and vitality of the city, traditionally featuring mixed land use
pattern and profound rural-urban linkages as in many Chinese cities (Xu 2000). The
historic city centre, as well as the ancient water towns such as Tongli, is suffering
from the huge tourism fluxes, and they are on the edge of ‘venetianization’, risking
to become de facto ‘amusement parks’, while other more sustainable development
alternatives have been often neglected (Verdini and Huang 2017).
Similarly, the sprawling urban development has affected the surrounding coun-
tryside, which could instead be conceived as an opportunity for alternative rural
development strategies. In this context, tourism is a complementary asset and not
necessarily the ultimate aim.
The HUL approach implemented in Shuang Wan has been primarily focused on
suggesting new planning tools (a strategic master plan) and development options,
based on a careful assessment of local needs via civic engagement. In particular, the
involvement of local stakeholders in the scenario exercise has been instrumental to

legitimatize a shared vision of development, resolving some local conflicts. For
example, the perceived risk of losing village’s income due to fishponds reclaiming
has been overcome by the consensus found around the introduction of new cultiva-
tions (roses for tea, in this case), due to its increasing urban demand, where the
interests of various economic stakeholders converged. This has reinforced a pro-
posal of village rebranding (the village of the roses) where both the enhancement of
rural landscape and the conservation of vernacular architecture could coexist with a
viable economic development option. Not all actors have been directly involved, but
there has been an attempt to also give voice to the marginalized ones, such as
migrants so to ensure an inclusive development scenario (Verdini et al. 2017).
The enthusiastic response of the local community has been acknowledged by the
Wujiang District, which has granted Shuang Wan Cun the title of ‘China Beautiful
village’ in September 2015. This has been accompanied by the allocation of funding
for starting a rural regeneration process, materialized in the improvement of the
public realm, a few months later in early 2016.
The case of Shuang Wan demonstrates the suitability of HUL to provide a set of
integrated tools to reconnect the historic identity of a place to various innovative and
more sustainable development scenarios. Particularly, when applied to small settle-
ments, this means defining a place-based rural strategy for localities often directly
or indirectly threatened by the urbanization process. However, it is by enhancing
their sustainable linkages with the urban realm (and the quality demand of the new
Chinese middle class) and by redefining their new identity, coherent with the past
and shared with local stakeholders, that small settlements and their unique historic
landscapes have the chance to survive.
Acknowledgements A preliminary version of part 2 of this chapter ‘Suzhou and its Region:
Historical Overview’ has been published in Italian (Verdini and Huang 2017).
References
Dong, J. (2004). Zhong Guo Cheng Shi Jian She Shi [The history of city construction in China].
Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press.
Fei, H.-T. (1939). Peasant life in China. London: G. Routledge.
Friedmann, J. (2005). China’s urban transition. Minneapolis/London: University of Minnesota
Press.
He, Y. (2007). Zhong Guo Chuan Tong Gong Shang Ye Cheng Shi Zai Jin Dai De Shuai Luo—Yi
Suzhou, Hangzhou, Yangzhou Wei Li. [The decay of the traditional merchant cities in China
during the late 19th century and early 20th century—the case of Suzhou, Hangzhou and
Yangzhou.]. Journal of the Southwest University for Nationalities, 28(4), 1–11.
Marme’, M. (2005). Suzhou. Where the goods of all provinces converge. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
Ren, C., & Yao, W. (2000). Guan Yu Qian Cun Bing Dian Zheng Ce De Fen Xi [Analysis on the
policy of ‘Relocation and Centralisation of Villages’]. Urban Problems, 2000(6), 45–49.
Suzhou Planning Bureau (SPB). (2016). Suzhou city master plan 2011–2020. http://www.szghj.
gov.cn/szghj/ghcg/002001/. Accessed 17 May 2017.
Suzhou Statistical Bureau (SSB). (2016). Suzhou statistical yearbook (p. 2016). Beijing: China
Statistics Press.
UNESCO (Ed.). (2016). Global report on culture for sustainable urban development. Culture
urban future. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (1997). Inscription: The classical gardens of Suzhou (China). Decision: CONF 208
VIII.C. Paris: UNESCO. http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/2872. Accessed 20 Dec 2017.
Verdini, G. (2014). The costs of urban growth at the fringe of a Chinese city: Evidence from Jinshi
Village in Suzhou. International Development Planning Review, 36(4), 413–434.
Verdini, G. (2016a). Culture as a tool for harmonious territorial development. In UNESCO (Ed.),
Global report on culture for sustainable urban development. Culture urban future (pp. 212–
219). Paris: UNESCO.
Verdini, G. (2016b). The rural fringe in China: Existing conflicts and prospective urban-rural syn-
ergies. In G. Verdini, W. Yiwen, & Z. Xiaonan (Eds.), Urban China’s rural fringe: Actors,
dimensions and management challenges. London: Routledge.
Verdini, G., Wang, Y., & Xiaonan, Z. (Eds.). (2016). Urban China’s rural fringe: Actors, dimen-
sions and management challenges. London: Routledge.
Verdini, G., Frassoldati, F., & Nolf, C. (2017). Reframing China’s heritage conservation discourse.
Learning by testing civic engagement tools in a historic rural village. International Journal of
Heritage Studies, 23(4), 317–334.
Verdini, G., & Huang F. (2017), La maniera di Suzhou: Innovazione urbana e continuita’ urbano-
rurale, Urbanistica Informazioni, 272. Available online at: http://www.urbanisticainformazioni.
it/Suzhou.html
Wang, D. (2005). Zhong Guo Cheng Shi Gui Hua Shi Gang [The History of Urban Planning in
China]. Nanjing: Southeast University Press.
Wang, L., Shen, J., & Chung, C. K. L. (2015). City profile: Suzhou – a Chinese city under trans-
formation. Cities, 44(2015), 60–72.
Xu, Y. (2000). The Chinese city in space and time. The development of urban form in Suzhou.
Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Chapter 27
Actual and Intangible in Tel Aviv:
A Reexamination of Conservation
Strategies in a Modern City
Rachel Gottesman and Jeremie Hoffmann
Abstract In 2003, the “White City of Tel Aviv, the Modern Movement,” was
inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage List. Thus, the historic city of Tel Aviv
received international recognition as a distinct representative of modern architecture
and urban planning. The international recognition led to a conservation surge in the
city and to large-scale entrepreneurship, which, alongside the rapid growth of the
city, presented new challenges and dilemmas – a need to provide a broader cultural
and social infrastructure for the “White City” area in particular and Tel Aviv in
general.
This article reviews the foundation of the “White City Center” at Liebling House,
which constitutes a center for modern urban heritage, with its tangible and intangi-
ble layers. The center focuses on research, education, and community networking
according to the HUL approach, understanding the city as a result of a historic lay-
ering of cultural and natural values and attributes, extending beyond the notion of
“historic center” or “ensemble” to include the broader urban and cultural context.
Keywords Tel Aviv · Modernism · White City · HUL · White City Center ·
Conservation · Conservation department · Community · Research lab
R. Gottesman (*)
White City Center, Tel Aviv–Yafo, Israel
J. Hoffmann
Conservation Department, Tel Aviv-Yafo. Focal point, White city of Tel Aviv, Israel

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_27
474 R. Gottesman and J. Hoffmann
27.1 Introduction
For the men, not the walls nor the empty galleys, are the city. (Thucydides, History of the
Peloponnesian War, 7.77)
The Historic Urban Landscape approach moves beyond the preservation of the physical
environment and focuses on the entire human environment with all of its tangible and intan-
gible qualities. It seeks to increase the sustainability of planning and design interventions
by taking into account the existing built environment, intangible heritage, cultural diversity,
socio-economic and environmental factors along with local community values. (UNESCO
2013).
In recent years, Tel Aviv has established its status as a city with a modern heri-
tage and was recognized by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site (World Heritage
Committee 2003). However, concurrent with the success of this move and the
extraordinary urban momentum that it brought, an increasing need to expand the
urban discourse has occurred, which had so far focused on the actual, physical, and
architectural aspects of the city. The Historic Urban Landscape approach deepens
the concept of urban preservation and also encompasses the areas of culture, com-
munity, and sustainability. This approach begins with the physical and tangible lay-
ers of the city and moves away from them into the realm of the intangible, tracing
the special spirit dwelling in urban spaces laden with people, memories, and tradi-
tions. In recent years, the need to create platforms to investigate, plan, and manage
Tel Aviv has grown stronger, taking into account the interrelations existing between
the physical urban space, the people living in it, and their culture. This article
reviews the establishment of Tel Aviv as a modern heritage site and the construction
of the “White City Center” at Liebling House, constituting a center for modern
urban heritage and aiming to provide solutions for research, culture, and education
approaches in the HUL’s spirit.
27.2 White City: A Modern City
In 2003, the “White City of Tel Aviv – the Modern Movement” was inscribed on the
World Heritage List. Thus, the historic city of Tel Aviv – with its textures, com-
plexes, and buildings at the city center, established in the 1930s in the international
style – received international recognition as a distinct representative of architecture
and modern urban planning.
The inscription has led to a conservation surge in the city, to municipal and pri-
vate investments, to large-scale entrepreneurship, and to a promotion of tourism.
Today, the status of Tel Aviv as one of eight modern heritage cities, with interna-
tional recognition, is strong. The concept of conservation and its importance were
assimilated into the city’s urban, administrative, and economic discourse, and the
“White City” brand became a mark of architectural quality and design purity. Since
the inscription, conservation in Tel Aviv has focused on the architectural aspects of
27 Actual and Intangible in Tel Aviv: A Reexamination of Conservation Strategies… 475
buildings identified for preservation, and the successes of this enterprise are evident
in the streets of Tel Aviv.
Immediately after the inscription of the “White City” as a World Heritage Site,
the city council adopted a precedent-setting decision: high-rise buildings would no
longer be built in the city center or its immediate vicinity. This history-making deci-
sion necessitated the adoption of a new planning policy, one that considers a wide
range of values in the modern urban fabric. The municipal conservation plan
included more than a thousand international style buildings and provided various
types of incentives encouraging the buildings’ owners to carry out conservation
processes. Since the inscription, hundreds of buildings have been restored and pre-
served, and Tel Aviv is slowly renewing its facade while exposing the heritage of the
modern architecture that characterizes it. At the same time, the public attitude
toward the city also changed; domestic and foreign tourism following the architec-
ture of the White City has begun; owners of buildings, entrepreneurs, and residents
started taking pride in their homes built in the international style; and the demand
for housing in the city center rose. In the past decade, the center of the city has blos-
somed, as well as that the “White City” concept has been assimilated: architecture
exhibitions and books have been introduced on the subject, luxury boutique hotels
have been opened in the heart of the historic urban fabric, ornaments and works of
art were branded through the images of the White City, and it seems like the city had
undergone some kind of revival.
At the same time, many municipal functions have been pushed into the buffer
zones, in order to serve the inscribed area in the heart of the city and to maintain Tel
Aviv’s function as a vibrant city with a wide variety of needs. The use of buffer
zones enabled the city’s active and organic existence and prevented the city from
turning into an “open museum.” Such a development would have hindered the daily
activities of the inhabitants and caused it to stagnate, as was the case in Toledo,
Spain, or Carcassonne, France (Berkowitz and Hoffmann 2008).
27.3 The Dialects of Tangible and Intangible
The assimilation of the “White City” concept and the many successes associated
with the recognition of Tel Aviv as a modern architecture heritage site led to a rec-
ognition of the value of conservation by the city’s authorities, entrepreneurs, and
residents. This played a part in the urban, economic, and cultural momentum char-
acterizing Tel Aviv in the last decade.
However, alongside the many accomplishments, the limitations of the contempo-
rary conservation discourse, which focused mainly on the physical and formal
aspects of architecture in the city and even provided a narrow, and at times, conser-
vative interpretation of the concept of conservation, became evident. Over the years,
a need arose, to provide a broader cultural and social infrastructure for the “White
City” area in particular and Tel Aviv in general. One of the many examples for this
can be found in the understanding of the concept of the “White City,” which had
been defined as such in the nomination documents due to the large number of inter-
national style buildings built in the 1930s and 1940s and is characterized by specific
structural elements. However, behind the style and form of the buildings stood the
cultural, political, and social values of the architects of the 1930s. The so-called
international style architecture is, in fact, only the formal aspect of a comprehensive
worldview and a whole set of values. These are architects who:
Believed architecture could influence the social order and it was their ambition to create a
new world for a secular, free socialist society. (UNESCO 2002. p. 8)
The buildings in the international style now scattered throughout Tel Aviv express a
historical, cultural, and political moment that has many meanings. These buildings
are more than a design style or type of plaster. However, contemporary conservation
does not engage in these aspects, which concern themselves with social justice and
the community, but rather focuses meticulously on the physical aspects of the build-
ing and the style.
Gradually, and simultaneously with the conventional conservation processes, the
understanding grew that in order to preserve the “White City,” we must preserve not
only the architectural structure but also give room to the values and communities
that stand behind it and underline the facades of the houses and the streets. The
urban landscape of Tel Aviv is actually a dialectical interaction between physical
space and society, between matter and values and between the actual and the intan-
gible. The case of the international style is one of many in the city, and as the con-
servation activities in Tel Aviv expanded, so did the feeling that a managerial and
research approach should be formulated to address the various layers of the city, its
development over time, and the people and communities living in it. There is a need
to reexamine the concept of conservation and expand on the way we perceive Tel
Aviv, as an urban center with a multifaceted historical, cultural, and communal heri-
tage that must be preserved while encouraging its growth and renewal. We must not
only relate to the city center as a historical space that expresses the “ideal modern
city” of the 1930s but also examine how the idea of a modern city continues to exist
within the ever developing, changing, and progressing city. Instead of asking what
the modern city was, we must also ask about the city’s future. How are the values
and forms of modernism relevant to Tel Aviv today? What is the future of modernity
in Tel Aviv?
Moreover, branding the heart of the city as the “White City” and the momentum
of conservation that followed drove gentrification processes and the increase of the
real estate value in the city center, a process that led to the exclusion of young peo-
ple, artists, and creators, who are forced into peripheral neighborhoods or satellite
cities. The heart of the city has indeed been renovated and enjoys an economic
boom but at the expense of some of the creative and young forces, who can no lon-
ger afford the housing prices.
In light of the above, we realized that focusing on architectural preservation is
important and necessary but is hardly sufficient. Concepts of conservation should be
expanded to include the urban evolution since the establishment of Tel Aviv in 1909
to this day, the city’s transformation, the various communities living in it, and its
cultural and intangible values, the importance of which often outweighs one build-
ing style or another. Precisely due to the success of the White City preservation
process, the understanding arose that the time has come to rethink the historical
heritage of the urban space and to have it include elements other than the mere
physical ones. There was a realization that action should be taken to preserve the
spirit of the place and the shared values of the people living in it while recognizing
the significance of social, economic, and cultural processes and taking into consid-
eration the interrelations between them. This broadening of the perception in regard
to the historical urban space is consistent with the HUL approach, which provides
an ideological basis for a new kind of urban sustainability perception. We apply this
urban perception at the White City Center in Liebling House.
27.4 The White City Center at Liebling House
The White City Center at Liebling House was established as a response to the need
to expand and deepen the urban heritage perception of Tel Aviv. The center is a col-
laboration between the Tel Aviv-Jaffa Municipality and the German Government
Federal Ministry of Construction, and it constitutes a center that is engaged with the
heritage of modernism in Tel Aviv as an architectural heritage site and with the ways
in which this heritage had taken an active part in local culture in the past and how it
continues to do so at present. The center at Liebling House is working to deepen and
expand the concept of urban conservation and address the approaches that see the
urban heritage as a multifaceted theme reflecting both the built-up area of the city
and its cultural layers.
Liebling House is located at 29 Idelson Street, Tel Aviv, in a building built in the
international style, which is currently undergoing a comprehensive renovation to
turn the building from a residential building into a public center. During the renova-
tion work, the center operates in an alternative building and maintains a public pro-
gram (see below). The Liebling Center operates through four interrelated divisions:
research, culture, education, and management. Each of the divisions operates from
an urban perspective that focuses on the conceptual, formal, and cultural fabric of
the modern heritage of Tel Aviv:
27.4.1 Research
The White City Center at Liebling House has set up a research lab, which consti-
tutes the research body of the center. It engages in research on conservation, archi-
tecture, urbanism, and the historical and cultural heritage of Tel Aviv. The lab works
in close cooperation with the Tel Aviv-Jaffa Municipality Conservation Department,
and its research covers a broad range of topics, starting from wide-scope surveys of
architectural styles, characterization of typologies, analysis of public and green
spaces in the city, definition of urban zones of historical values, conducting research
of historical and cultural nature, and collaborations with artists and writers who
trace intangible elements in the city. The lab’s research approach is consistent with
the HUL agenda, and the research projects it conducts aim to combine the physical
aspects of the urban space with its cultural and communal aspects, creating a deep
understanding of the reciprocal relations between environment, culture, and society
in the unique modern space of Tel Aviv. The lab cooperates with various conserva-
tion entities in Israel and sustains regular work connections with other urban
research labs around the world and with UNESCO’s HUL centers. The lab’s agenda
and activities relate to step V of the recommendation on the Historic Urban
Landscape (capacity, building, research, information and communication). Later, in
Section 5 below, two case studies from the lab’s work are presented, illustrating how
the HUL approach is applied in the framework of concrete studies.
27.4.2 Culture
The White City Center in Liebling House has set the goal of becoming a cultural
center: a home for lectures, permanent and changing exhibitions, and various types
of public activity that engages with the values of modernism and the urban space of
Tel Aviv. During the period of the renovation work at Liebling House, the center
will carry out an “open renovation” program – Liebling House is an example of a
typical Tel Aviv apartment building that reflects the modern way of life in Israel –
from building materials to the way spaces are organized and utilized. During the
renovation, the construction processes will be revealed while discussing repair,
maintenance, and living in Tel Aviv apartments in the past and today.
The building will become an educational construction site which allows practical
experience in various crafts such as the restoration of building carpentry, plaster cast-
ing, and many others. The building will host expert craftsmen and trainees, local
architects, and conservators, in order to expand the dialogue and mutual learning
around the physical activity, as well as conduct tours of the construction site, led by a
preservation expert that will illuminate fundamental and ethical issues that arise dur-
ing the process of renovating a historic building. Every month the building will open
for a weekend of activities around a monthly theme, in which the preservation process
will be presented as part of tours, hands-on workshops, lectures, and exhibitions.
At the completion of the renovations and at the opening of the center in 2019,
Liebling House will carry out an ongoing program of activities engaging with vari-
ous aspects of the modern heritage of Tel Aviv and urban life in general: urbanism,
environment, architecture, design, art, culture, community, and memory. The public
program is interdisciplinary and includes lectures, exhibitions, cultural activities,
and reading groups, as well as hosting experts from various fields: architects, pres-
ervation experts, city planners, designers, historians, educators, curators, plastic art-
ists, and stage performers. The purpose of the public program is to conduct a lively
dialogue with the community and to deepen the interaction between the urban space
and cultural heritage in Tel Aviv.
All these activities relate to steps V and VI of the recommendation on the Historic
Urban Landscape (capacity, building, research, information and communication,
and international cooperation).
27.4.3 Education
The educational program of the White City Center focuses on the community. The
program’s goal is to offer a variety of learning options on topics the center engages
in: the White City, modernism, urbanism, crafts, and sustainability. The center’s
educational division operates workshops, classes, summer schools, tours, and activ-
ities at the center itself, as well as collaborations with elementary schools through-
out the city, where the center’s educational staff organizes weekly workshops for
children on the topic of urbanism and habitation in Tel Aviv.
At the completion of the renovation work at Liebling House in 2019, the center
will offer visitors, adults, young people, and children various opportunities for
learning and creation. Our training programs are based on experiential observation
of the city through a variety of means – theoretical, practical, artistic, and playful –
which seek to inspire the students’ curiosity, criticism, pleasure, and creativity.
In addition to the children-oriented content, Liebling House hosts hands-on
workshops in the field of crafts. These workshops aim to preserve the professional
knowledge of traditional skills and crafts and to encourage exchange of knowledge,
restoring knowledge of lost crafts and expanding the community of people engaged
in preservation of building traditions.
These activities, concerning education and community, relate to step V of the
recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (capacity, building, research,
information and communication).
27.4.4 Site Management
The White City Center in Liebling House operates in close cooperation with the Tel
Aviv Municipality Conservation Department, with the aim of improving and deep-
ening the managerial tools of municipal conservation and assisting in the documen-
tation and mapping of actual and intangible urban elements. Once in a quarter, the
center hosts a meeting of researchers, including the staff of the lab and staff of the
municipality conservation department, in order to create an ongoing and productive
dialogue between the center and the municipal institutions. When the renovation of
Liebling House is completed and the building will be open to the public, the munici-
pality’s conservation department will keep a weekly reception open to the public in
the center. The cooperation with the Tel Aviv municipality relates to step III of the
recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (policies).
27.5 Case Studies
The activity of the research lab is focused on conducting research on a broad range
of topics and includes different approaches to conservation issues. In addition to the
research and engagement with the architectural and spatial aspects of Tel Aviv, the
lab aims to promote research on the cultural aspects of Tel Aviv’s modern heritage
and explore the intangible components of history and society in the city. In this
framework, two ongoing researches being conducted by the laboratory are pre-
sented as case studies below. These case studies offer cultural analysis and context
to the historical urban landscape of Tel Aviv.
(a) Une ville Blanche on the shores of the Levant: The presence of Middle Eastern,
French-speaking architects and French Mediterranean architectural modernism,
in Tel Aviv of the 1930s and 1940s.
Dr. Arch. Tzafrir Fainholtz.
The study examines the architectural biography of Middle Eastern, French-speaking
architects, who were active in Tel Aviv in the 1930s and 1940s. As a study of the
genealogy of architectural knowledge, it follows the professional path of these
architects and examines how their architectural training and the cultural background
influenced their work and their status as professionals in Tel Aviv. The study exam-
ines the influence of modern Mediterranean architecture on the work of these archi-
tects, presents their work in Tel Aviv side by side with contemporary architecture in
the Maghreb and the Levant, and shows how their work represents a unique archi-
tectural “modernism” in the city and an expression of deep-rooted societies in the
Mediterranean area.
In general, modern-style construction in Tel Aviv is mostly attributed to the
waves of immigration that came from Germany to the Land of Israel in the wake of
the Nazi Party coming to power and World War II and especially to the legacy of the
Bauhaus school. Fainholz’s study, which is conducted under the supervision of
Jean-Louis Cohen, sheds light on the Middle Eastern and Mediterranean context of
the Tel Aviv architecture of the 1930s. This is a subject that has not yet been studied,
and it enriches and deepens our understanding of the Jewish immigrant society in
Israel and the cultural heritage it left behind in the city. The research relates to step
V of the recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (capacity, building,
research, information and communication) and views the architectural heritage of
the city as a complex, multilayered social and economic entity.
(b) POMO TLV: Post Modern architecture in Tel Aviv
Dr. Arch. Jeremie Hoffman & Arch. Orit Rosenthal
Postmodern is a general term usually referring to an intellectual movement which
gained popularity during the 1970s and as a result had many manifestations in polit-
ical, social, and cultural processes (Lyotard 1993). The postmodern movement also
had a distinct expression in Tel Aviv. The POMO TLV study examines the postmod-
ern aspect of the city, the spirit of the period, the economic and social changes
experienced by the city during these years, and its physical and architectural
expressions.
The study engages with the transformation and development of the city over a
period of about two decades and defines the social and cultural effects of postmod-
ernism in Tel Aviv. It analyzes the processes that preceded and led to new postmod-
ern approaches regarding the city, examining the influences of the conservation
system on the transformation of the city’s facade, as well as observing and examin-
ing the city today in its post-post-modern state.
The uniqueness of the study lies in its dialectical method, ranging from analysis
of socioeconomic processes (starting at the level of the individual and up to the level
of the general society, its values, and the mechanisms that operate it) to the analysis
of architectural products and urban effects that took place in Tel Aviv during those
years.
The roots of the postmodern era in Israel and Tel Aviv can be found in the 1970s.
This decade saw the destruction of the utopic social and political attitudes toward
the state, attitudes that accompanied Israel from its establishment in 1948, as well
as the decline of the “Sabra” ethos and the disintegration of social and collective
solidarity in favor of the development of a new ethos, based on capitalism and indi-
vidualism. During these years, Israeli society underwent a process of social disinte-
gration into ethnical, ideological, and cultural congregations and groups. The social
and economic ideal of solidarity and collectivity shifted into a new ethos, focusing
on individualism – the joint efforts put into building the state evolved and became a
private effort aimed at personal gain.
Concurrently, Tel Aviv underwent a radical change in these years, mainly a mas-
sive abandonment and neglect of the city center. In terms of its image, Tel Aviv was
transformed and was perceived as a neglected, dangerous, and ugly city. Tel Aviv
was abandoned by both its managers and its residents (Hoffman 2014).
However, beginning in the late 1980s, the municipal policy changed, and a mas-
sive urban renewal process began, including the restoration of the city center, the
definition of the historic city and its values, a new construction boom, and a brand-
ing process that created a far-reaching change in the image of the city. Though this
was a slow process, it ultimately led to positive immigration and reinforcement of
the city as the cultural and business center of the country. As a result, new urban
phenomenon began to appear throughout the city – phenomenon which represents
the ideas and values of the postmodern era and reinforces a glamorous and presti-
gious image of Tel Aviv. These are expressed in the creation of urban heterotopies
such as enclosed residential complexes, luxury towers, and penthouses on the roofs
of buildings designated for conservation (as construction extensions). The POMO
TLV study examines the interaction between architectural and spatial effects and the
deep economic, social, and cultural processes that Tel Aviv underwent during this
period.
POMO TLV relates to step V of the recommendation on the Historic Urban
Landscape (capacity, building, research, information and communication).
27.6 Summary and Conclusion
The HUL approach poses new and complex challenges to the management of his-
toric cities, an approach which combines matter with spirit, actual with intangible.
Thucydides, in the fifth century BCE, wrote that “men, not the walls nor the empty
galleys, are the city” (Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, 7.77). Today,
like Thucydides, we too begin to acknowledge that it is not the walls, streets, and
buildings that make the city or ensure its long-term sustainability but the people and
communities living in it and their frequent adaptation to the changes of the city as a
complex system. As stated in the recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape,
urban heritage, including its tangible and intangible components, constitutes a key
resource in enhancing the livability of urban areas and fosters economic develop-
ment and social cohesion in a changing global environment.
The White City Center at Liebling House provides an exceptional opportunity to
examine and implement new urban conservation approaches and social sustainabil-
ity principles. The center allows for a deeper understanding of the historical “White
City” while at the same time expands on conservation concepts to include urban
evolution, communities, and the cultural and intangible values of the city. The cen-
ter in Liebling House acts for the heritage of the “modern city,” as it was conceived
and built in the 1930s while preserving the spirit of the place, the common values of
the people living in it, and the diverse cultural assets it produces.
References
Berkowitz, C., & Hoffmann, J. (2008). The White City of Tel Aviv. In O. Martin & G. Piatti (Eds.),
World heritage and buffer zones, World Heritage Papers, no. 25. Davos: UNESCO p. 124.
Hoffmann, J. (2014). History of the White City of Tel-Aviv – Evolution of a Modern site and
its architecture, Phd dissertation, Sorbonne-Paris1 INHA, Chapter 3: Une ville surelevee,
pp. 332–427.
Lyotard, J. F. (1993). Le Postmoderne Expliqué aux Enfants Correspondance, 1982–1985.
UNESCO, 2002. Statement of significance, in: ‘White city of Tel Aviv- the Modern Movement’,
nomination file, January 2002. p. 8.
UNESCO. (2013). Historic urban landscape approach explained. http://whc.unesco.org/en/
news/1026/. Accessed 25 Jan 2018.
World Heritage Committee. (2003). Decision 27 COM 8C.23, Paris, July.
Chapter 28
The Circular Economy as a Model
to Implement the Historic Urban
Landscape Approach: Which Integrated
Evaluation Method?
Abstract The UNESCO Recommendations on Historic Urban Landscape (2011)

recognises the fundamental role of cultural heritage and landscape for sustainable
local development.
The operative tool available for the assessment of the impacts of requalification
projects on historic urban landscape is the heritage impact assessment (HIA).
In this research, HIA has been applied to evaluate the impacts of a requalification
project for Torre Annunziata waterfront. The aim is to demonstrate that this method
is a fundamental tool to understand the impacts on the integrity and authenticity of
heritage resources, but not enough to define the tangible and intangible values of the
cultural heritage, that assume different features in the different international urban
areas. This tool lacks an economic and social perspective and a certain evaluation of
the impacts for different planning strategies.
In this paper, a new tool has been proposed to assess the economic and social
impacts of cultural heritage conservation/transformation/regeneration, allowing
interdisciplinary research and collaboration among stakeholders, capable of defin-
ing some guidelines to improve requalification projects in a win-win perspective.
The results of this new method have been used to define a new project for Torre
Annunziata waterfront based on the principles of the “circular economy”.
Subsequently some key indicators have been identified to measure the economic,
social and environmental performance of the project.
The circular economy is capable of restoring the city’s identity and increasing
the tangible and intangible value, according to the UNESCO recommendations.
M. Angrisano (*)
Pegaso University, Naples, Italy
e-mail: mariarosaria.angrisano@unipegaso.it
L. F. Girard
Luigi Fusco Girard, University of Federico II Naples, Naples, Italy
e-mail: girard@unina.it

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_28
484 M. Angrisano and L. F. Girard
Keywords Circular economy · Participative method · Waterfront regeneration ·

Historic urban landscape · Cultural heritage · Maritime identity · Sustainable
planning · Heritage impact assessment
28.1 Introduction
The definition of historic urban landscape (HUL) proposed by the UNESCO

Recommendation in 2011 represents the most recent contribution to the interna-
tional debate on the identification, conservation, enhancement and management of
cultural heritage.
The HUL recommendations aim to guide, to improve and to ensure the preserva-
tion of the cultural heritage. It is a tool that stimulates local authorities to emphasise
the HUL approach in local planning, especially for the requalification of historical
centres (UNESCO, 2011).
In this paper, the impacts of a requalification project for the Torre Annunziata
waterfront have been analysed using the heritage impact assessment (HIA).1
Torre Annunziata is a coastal city, in part a UNESCO site, in the Gulf of Naples
that suffers from abandoned areas along the waterfront that have become no-go
areas.
Before using HIA, some examples of good practice were analysed, such as
Liverpool, Hedon Haven, Stockholm and Warsaw, where the tool was applied.
Liverpool has been chosen as an example to follow. The impact of the Liverpool
Waters project on a UNESCO site was evaluated (De Figueiredo 2011; Lisitzin,
2012; Calder et al. 2014; Furrer 2013).
The HIA was applied progressively in our case study, and the results were anal-
ysed. The weaknesses and the strengths of the evaluation method were examined.
The first weak point of the HIA is the identification of the real value of the cul-
tural heritage. There is a wide margin of interpretation in Appendix 3A (Example
Guide for Assessing Value of Heritage Assets) (ICOMOS, 2011).
The fundamental basis of this process is the interpretation of these values, the
significance of the attributes (tangibles and intangibles) and their relationships with
the context.
In particular, it is clear that the ICOMOS Guide focuses on the efficiency of the
procedure rather than on the expected results in terms of protection of the heritage
attributes (Pereira Roders et al., 2013). The need for a comprehensive approach to
1
The Historic Urban Landscape recommendations and the operating tools promoted by the
ICOMOS “Guidance on Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties” of
2011 configure the most recent dispositions regarding the preservation, protection and enhance-
ment of the cultural heritage (Fusco Girard, 2010). The ICOMOS Guide was considered the most
suitable tool for evaluating the impacts of the big requalification project of the urban waterfront on
cultural heritage.
28 The Circular Economy as a Model to Implement the Historic Urban Landscape… 485
the historic urban landscape that is more objective still needs to be addressed. This
would consider the relationship between attributes and values in different
contexts.
For this reason, a participatory method (Facebook for Urban Facelift) has been
identified to improve the HIA approach. It is based on a research project proposed
by Annet Smit for the requalification of some neighbourhoods in the Netherlands
(Smit 2011).
This method was important in identifying the real values (tangible and intangi-
ble) of the heritage and in defining the priority actions for the requalification proj-
ect, according to the wishes of the different stakeholders involved.
When the results were achieved, the HIA was applied again to define the real
values of cultural heritage.
The new application is being elaborated, following strictly the UNESCO recom-
mendations of the HUL, to satisfy these aims:
1 . To adapt the HIA to different contexts
2. To promote social participation
3. To understand what are the “attributes” and the “heritage values” relating to the
context in which they are integrated (World Heritage Properties).
The results of this second step have been analysed to define the priority actions
for the new functions to build along the waterfront according to the principles of the
circular economy. The inhabitants of a city demand a liveable city, a city that invests
in the green economy, in the use of photovoltaic panels and in the reuse and recy-
cling of resources.
The aim of this new project is to enhance the social and economic regeneration
of the port area, through the reorganisation of new business activities, and to enhance
the symbiosis between the city and harbour.
The strategy is to improve the symbiosis between the different districts endowed
with different economic, social, cultural and landscape characteristics.
Circular economy systems are gaining increasing attention in Europe and around
the world because they represent a potential way to increase prosperity and to reduce
the use of primary materials and energy (Rizos et al., 2015).
Circular economies, social cohesion and the civil and collaborative/sharing
economy are considered to be an integral part of the evaluation framework, as they
are able to produce positive impacts both in the economic and the conservation
perspective.
Cultural heritage conservation is a priority, but economic resources to invest in
restoration projects are limited. Therefore, demonstrations of the economic benefits
of conservation become extremely important (European Commission, 2014).
A circular economy is able to increase “real estate value” because it reduces the
requalification costs through sustainable choices such as the reuse of materials,
components and elements, as proposed in the third step (see paragraph 3).
28.2 T
he Heritage Impact Assessment to Evaluate the Torre
Annunziata Waterfront Requalification Project
28.2.1 The Case Study
The heritage impact assessment was applied to evaluate the impacts of the Torre
Annunziata waterfront project.
The city of Torre Annunziata is classified as a medium-large urban centre (20,000
to 50,000 inhabitants) and covers an area of about 7.33 square km and 6 square km
of waterfront.
The Port of Torre Annunziata is one of the most important seaports in the
Campania region, famous for the storage of grain.
The abandoned areas along the waterfront suffered from a situation of lawless-
ness, which allowed the port to be used for illicit trafficking. The waterfront is now
perceived as a space without identity, consisting of unpaved areas, warehouses,
disused factories, disorderly productive activities and residential units (cf. Fig. 28.1).
Torre Annunziata represents the most depressed coastal municipality in metro-
politan Naples (Gravagnuolo and Angrisano, 2013).
This degraded situation is confirmed by the real estate value of the buildings near
the port area: about €1300/m2 for the historic centre, €1700/m2 for the north area of
the port and €1100/m2 for the buildings located in the industrial area (cf. Table 28.1)
(borsinoimmobiliare.it).
Despite this, the charming landscape represents a strong factor of great
attractiveness.
Fig. 28.1 The figure shows the project sketch for the requalification of Torre Annunziata water-
front. It was defined in the guidelines of “Pompeii Great Project” (Source: Russo 2011)
Table 28.1 Residence real estate value along historic centre, port and industrial area of the
waterfront
Real estate values historic centre Real estate values port area Real estate values waterfront
1300 €/m2 1700 €/m2 1100 €/m2
Source: borsinoimmobiliare.it
Torre Annunziata has been a UNESCO World Heritage site since 1997. It is
located 3.5 km from the Pompeii archaeological area and 6 km from Vesuvius
National Park. It is very near to Sorrento, the Amalfi Coast and Capri.
In 2011, a project was proposed for the requalification of the Torre Annunziata
waterfront within the Pompeii Great Project that provides substantial private invest-
ment for the requalification of the UNESCO buffer zone. This is a sustainable devel-
opment project, with the aim of transforming the waterfront into a cultural district
(Russo 2011).
The guidelines of the project aim:
1 . To connect the archaeological areas to the waterfront.
2. To promote the reuse of abandoned areas in the buffer zone.
3. To valorise the landscape and the cultural heritage.
A reception area will be built on a surface of about 1000/1500 m2 that will
include a leisure area and some hotels with more than 1500 rooms. An area of
45,000 m2 will be designated for theatres, didactic laboratories, experimental muse-
ums, reception areas and green spaces (cf. Fig. 28.1).
These new functions and the impacts of this project on the cultural heritage and
landscape have been defined and evaluated, through the HIA.
The Liverpool example of good practice has been considered as the most signifi-
cant model where HIA was applied.
The Liverpool Waters project involves the requalification of the docks along the
River Mersey, in an area declared a World Heritage site in 2004. For this reason,
English Heritage and the Peel Group considered it necessary to perform an environ-
mental impact assessment (EIA) and a heritage impact assessment (HIA) to evalu-
ate the impact of the project on the UNESCO site.
After this analysis, the different steps used to apply the HIA were defined. The
first step is to produce a reconnaissance of the Torre Annunziata UNESCO
heritage.
The second step is to define the project actions and to evaluate the impact using
this methodology:
1. Evaluate the direct and indirect impact on the cultural heritage along the water-
front (12 buildings, some of them of industrial archaeology interest)
2. Develop a summary matrix of direct and indirect impact on the cultural

heritage
3. Evaluate the visual impact on the key views
4. Develop a summary matrix of the impact on the key views (15 key views)
5. Analyse the results
6. Define the mitigation actions and the future recommendations.
The heritage (12 buildings) along the waterfront (endowed with OUV) has been
identified.
In this area, there are many historic buildings such as the Villa Filangieri (built in
1872), the spa where the temperature of the waters varies thanks to the proximity of
Vesuvius.
There are canals that connect the thermal area with the villa of Oplontis that sug-
gest a hypothetical connection with the old Roman city. The Real Fabbrica d’Armi
was one of the most important factories in the South of Italy. It was built in 1758 by
Carlo of Bourbon. The Bourbon Bridge, 12 km long, was part of the first railway
line in the Campania region.
Then the direct and indirect impacts and some key views were evaluated, follow-
ing two key indicators (cf. Table 28.2 and Table 28.3):
1. Building and fabric
2. Setting and context
The impact is graded with a 1–9 rating scale with 1 corresponding to “major
adverse” and 9 to “major beneficial” (9, major beneficial; 8, moderate beneficial; 7,
minor beneficial; 6, negligible beneficial; 5, neutral; 4, negligible adverse; 3, minor
adverse; 2, moderate adverse; 1, major adverse) (ICOMOS, 2011).
Then the impacts on the key views were identified (cf. Table 28.3).
To identify the cultural value, the HIA suggests a rating scale of 1–5 with 1 cor-
responding to “very high” and 5 to “negligible”. Also for the identification of the
impact, there is a rating scale 1–5, with 1 corresponding to “neutral” and 5 to “very
large” (ICOMOS, 2011).
Then the results and the mitigation actions were analysed (cf. Table 28.4).
It will be necessary to be careful when the volume and the height of new build-
ings are decided. They could have potentially negative effects on the perception of
the historical centre and the national park. It is important to preserve the particular
skyline of the city with the sea and Vesuvius.
Another weak point is that the HIA cannot evaluate different scenarios and define
different mitigation actions promptly (Appendino et al., 2016).
The same application of the HIA conducted by English Heritage and the Peel
Group had different results, probably due to the absence of criteria that enable an
objective assessment of the tangible and intangible values that characterise the
examined area (Angrisano, 2015).
The tool left a wide margin for the subjective interpretation of results and the
definition of the cultural heritage values provided by the OUV.
For this reason, our attention was focused on the identification of the strengths
and weaknesses of the HIA to propose some integrations.
The HUL recommendations of 2011 (UNESCO 2011) point out that this instru-
ment must be adapted to the different international contexts that have different char-
acteristics in culture, tradition and urban stratification.
The archaeology, culture and landscapes of different countries are placed in com-
pletely different contexts, and, for this reason, the tool provided by ICOMOS cannot
be applied in the same way to different international contexts.
Table 28.2 Heritage impact assessment about direct and indirect impacts on Torre Annunziata
Impacts on
buildings Impacts on the
Built heritage or environment
Value of cultural heritage historic urban Built heritage or Significance of
Built heritage or historic Redevelopment landscape historic urban effect or overall
Cultural heritage Description of the heritage urban landscape project (Major beneficial) landscape impact
1 Italtubi Torre Annunziata The history of the metalworking Very high Experience area Major beneficial (9) Major beneficial (9) Major beneficial
industry of Torre Annunziata Botanical garden (9)
begins with the arms factory Other buildings or urban Equipped Change to key Comprehensive Very large
founded by the Bourbon in the landscape of recognised waterfront historic building changes to the beneficial (9)
eighteenth century. international importance Light train elements that setting
The first industrial installation of Underground contribute to OUV,
this type, dating back to the parking such that the
1980s of the nineteenth century, Navigable canal resource is totally
when some entrepreneurs and altered
financiers in France (A. Natanson,
Source: www.bicentenario.pro
R. Duche, M. Gaugnat, F. D’
vincia.napoli.it
Hautpoul) founded a modern iron
and steel plant devoted
exclusively to the processing of
scrap metal, called before
Natanson-Duche and C. and then
Ferriere of the Vesuvius
(continued)
Impacts on
buildings Impacts on the
Built heritage or environment
Value of cultural heritage historic urban Built heritage or Significance of
Built heritage or historic Redevelopment landscape historic urban effect or overall
Cultural heritage Description of the heritage urban landscape project (Major beneficial) landscape impact
2 Deriver Torre Annunziata Deriver Torre Annunziata Very high Experience area Major beneficial (9) Major beneficial (9) Major beneficial
The deriver, former big Botanical garden (9)
engineering industry, was Other buildings or urban Equipped Change to key Comprehensive Very large
connected directly to the station landscape of recognised waterfront historic building changes to the beneficial (9)
of Central Torre Annunziata. international importance Light train elements that setting
Within the industry the tracks Underground contribute to OUV,
were also used to interchange parking such that the
Source: http://www.lostrillone.tv/ between trains and ships thanks Navigable canal resource is totally
to a pier equipped with tracks that altered
wind into the sea. To transport,
the cars were used as small
electric locomotives.
The terminal part of the pier was
in iron, while the initial part was
made of reinforced concrete
3 Dalmine Torre Annunziata The area Dalmine can be Low Experience area Major beneficial (9) Neutral (5) Minor
considered as a former industrial Botanical garden beneficial (7)
engineering of Torre Annunziata, Historic (unlisted) Equipped Change to key No change on Neutral
located in via Terragneta. A small Buildings of modest waterfront historic building setting beneficial
factory, next to the coastline, Quality in their fabric or Light train elements that
which has undergone many Historical associations Underground contribute to OUV,
changes in function over time parking such that the
Navigable canal resource is totally
Source: Google earth altered
Source: Angrisano Mariarosaria

Table 28.3 Table heritage impact assessment key views on Torre Annunziata
Importance of
Historic buildings Value of cultural Redevelopment impact or impact
Key views in the waterfront in these key views historic landscape project Impacts on the landscape historic landscape comprehensive
1 Torre Annunziata view of the Sanctuary of Spirit Very high Waterfront Negligible beneficial Slight beneficial
port Torre Annunziata equipped port
Bridge Bourbon redevelopment
Historic landscapes of Very minor changes to key historic
Historical pasta
international value, landscape elements, parcels or components;
manufacturing
whether designated or virtually unchanged visual effects; very
Basilica SS. Mary
not slight changes in
snow
Noise levels or sound quality; very slight
Port of Torre
changes to use or access; resulting in a very
Annunziata
small change to historic landscape character
2 Harbour view from downtown Port of Torre Very high Waterfront Negligible beneficial Slight beneficial
Annunziata equipped port
Sites or structures of Very minor changes to key historic
redevelopment
acknowledged landscape elements, parcels or components;
international importance virtually unchanged visual effects; very
inscribed as of universal slight changes in noise levels or sound
importance as WH quality; very slight changes to use or access;
property resulting in a very small change to historic
Source: Http://.Comuni-italiani. landscape character
It
(continued)
Importance of
Historic buildings Value of cultural Redevelopment impact or impact
Key views in the waterfront in these key views historic landscape project Impacts on the landscape historic landscape comprehensive
3 Vesuvius view from the sea Sanctuary of Spirit Very high Waterfront No change Neutral
Torre Annunziata equipped port
Landscapes of No change to elements, parcels or
Bridge Bourbon redevelopment
acknowledged components; no visual or audible changes;
Historical pasta
international importance no changes in amenity or community factors
manufacturing;
inscribed as WH
Basilica SS. Mary
property
snow
Port of Torre
Source: Angrisano Mariarosaria Annunziata

Table 28.4 Impacts of the projects and mitigation actions

Impacts Mitigating actions
Evaluation direct and indirect impacts on cultural heritage along the waterfront
1 They were found negative impacts arising These effects can be mitigated by providing
from the construction of too high appropriate “urban standards” to regulate the
buildings along the waterfront, which height of new buildings
could obscure the perception of the old
town behind it, hiding the iconic buildings
2 They were found negative impacts, These impacts can be mitigated through the
resulting from the few links between the provision, already in the planning stage, of new
old town, the area of the waterfront and strategic links between the sea and the old town
harbour
3 The redevelopment of Dalmine area of This area very close to the waterfront can be
Torre Annunziata has a neutral impact that valorised through the definition of new functions
can be achieved through a dedicated
project, increasing the existing few
activities
4 They were found neutral impacts for the The redevelopment of the baths is capable of
redevelopment of the Oplontis thermal improving the city’s tourism through a
baths. “dedicated project”
The project does not involve the
redevelopment of these areas
5 The redevelopment of the pasta factory These negative effects can be mitigated through a
near the waterfront of Torre Annunziata is project to restore the historic building,
not included in the present project reconverting its functions
Visual impact assessment key views – Waterfront
1 View of the Vesuvius from the harbour These effects can be regulated with the height of
and waterfront new buildings
2 View from the waterfront of the shipyards These effects can be mitigated through
appropriate redevelopment of shipbuilding
activities in order to improve their visual
perception
3 View of the church of SS. Mary of the These effects can be mitigated, with appropriate
snow “urban standards” to regulate the height of new
buildings. In particular, we should be very
careful to not deny the view from the scenic
waterfront of the church and behind Vesuvius
4 View of the Villa Filangieri These impacts can be mitigated through the
enhancement of the eighteenth-century villa
from the seaside also providing guided tours
along the sea to reach a small bay that is very
impressive
5 View of the old town from the port These effects can be mitigated by providing
appropriate height of new buildings
6 View of Oplontis Spa from the waterfront These negative impacts can be mitigated through
the upgrading of spas located along the
waterfront. The visual perception of a very
important historical building can help to improve
the waterfront
Therefore, the ICOMOS Guide was applied again with the aim of dealing with
some weak points, first of all, evaluating the social participation role in the process
of the heritage impact assessment.
In particular, the participatory approach allows us to achieve good knowledge of
places through a perception of the immaterial values of a different urban area, to
understand the real problems of a site, to identify the priority actions of a requalifi-
cation project and to understand the real values of the cultural heritage.
28.2.2 H
eritage Impact Assessment and the Participative
Method
In relation to the weak points that have been found, our research seeks to understand
how to adapt the ICOMOS Guide to different international contexts and to identify
the tools capable of supporting social participation.
A cultural good, endowed with outstanding universal value, is made of values
and attributes that have been stratified and consolidated over time.
The most important contribution of the participatory method is the enhancement
of social and civil capital that it identifies as an intangible form of energy, able to
reflect collective community spirit, which promotes social cohesion and relational
values that can increase the resilience of cities (Fusco Girard 2003).
Therefore, in order to implement HIA, a participative method, called “Facebook
for Urban Facelift,” has been proposed. It is capable of supporting the ICOMOS
tool and guiding the design choices for the regeneration of the waterfront area.
This methodology began with Smit’s research paper: “The Influence of District
Visual Quality on Location Decisions of Creative Entrepreneurs” (2011).
This research gave direction to western world cities that had many abandoned or
neglected districts.2
The method provides full answers to the historic urban landscape recommenda-
tions, 2011. It is a tool capable of promoting knowledge of a place and encouraging
social participation.
This tool is able to formulate strategies that encourage the economic growth of
cities, giving a key role to the participation of decision makers (entrepreneurs, poli-
ticians, people, architects, agencies, associations, etc.).
The participative process is based on two important phases. The first one is the
cognitive analysis of the city, and the second one is the identification of priority
actions for the future development of the urban areas. Both phases expect the par-
ticipation of the stakeholders.
2
In this project, a lot of interviews were conducted with entrepreneurs in three abandoned indus-
trial districts: the Eastern Dockland in Amsterdam, the Lloyd Quarter in Rotterdam and the Hortus
Quarter in Groningen. This research demonstrates a significant relationship between “district
visual quality” and the “investment of entrepreneurs”. The visual quality of the district contributes
to increased productivity and the sustainable planning (Smit A., 2011).
Therefore, the method started with an analytical study to understand all the
waterfront characteristics. The most important historic buildings and the economic
activities were identified. Then, the safety conditions of the district were analysed
along with relations to the UNESCO sites of Pompeii and Oplontis. When this
information was acquired, a SWOT analysis was done to understand the weak-
nesses, the strengths, the opportunities and the threats. This process is fundamental
in defining, in a better way, new strategies for the future of cities. Some stakeholders
were involved (entrepreneurs, residents, shopkeepers, different professionals, asso-
ciations and municipal employees) to understand better the city problems and to
define future regeneration strategies.
For these reasons, a questionnaire was designed to be administered to the stake-
holders in two parts. In the first part, five aspects of the services present along the
waterfront were incorporated: architecture and urban design, cultural and relational,
energy and environment, economic activities and transport and services. For each
aspect, the respondents are asked what is their visual perception and what is the
intrinsic value that they attribute to the different functions. For example, in architec-
ture and urban design, they were asked what is the perception of the buildings along
the waterfront and how they recognise their historical value. The answers were rated
on a 5-point scale, where 1 is very bad and 5 is excellent.
This is a very important phase because the needs and the problems are
identified.
Subsequently, according to their needs, they were asked what are the priority
aspects in which it is necessary to intervene for the waterfront regeneration, defining
different actions for each aspect, thus making it possible to express their preferences
in a sequential way (cf. Table 28.5).
In the second part of the questionnaire, four future perspectives (the urban face)
for the city development project by 2050 were proposed. These images are the
“entrepreneurial city”, the “connective city”, the “pioneer city” and the “liveable
city”. Then, each stakeholder chose his/her favourite city image. Ultimately, for
each image, the respondents chose three types of intervention: new urbanisation
(radical reorganisation of the waterfront), targeted intervention (reuse of cultural
heritage and enhancement of existing functions) and revitalisation (valorisation of
existing functions).
An analysis of the results of the questionnaires shows that the perception of the
waterfront architecture is strongly influenced by the current situation of degrada-
tion. The port area is considered to be abandoned but, at the same time, to have
significant intrinsic value.
The greater infrastructure (the port) is evaluated negatively, due to the lack of
sufficient services. The presence of an existing structure was perceived positively,
but the quality and usefulness of the services offered were considered insufficient.
The data relating to energy and the environment show the pollution problems of
the city. The average marks emphasised the perception of environmental quality as
very low.
The “winning future image” is the “liveable city”, meant as a safe city, rich in
green areas, where the landscape and the investment in the green economy will be
Table 28.5 Identification of priority interventions

PriorityOrganise the
aspects according to the Priority – componentsMark with an Advice,
Analysed priorities of intervention X the component that you believe is designs,
aspects from 1 to 5 a priority for each aspect analysed ideas
Architecture and Public/identity space
urban design Visualised space
Perceived space
Green areas
Waterfront
Cultural and Cultural activities and events
relational Sports equipment
Cultural equipment
Perception of safety
Social cohesion
Energy and Recycling and reuse
environment Renewable energies
Pollution
Energy efficiency
Economic Productive activities
activities Environment activities
Business activities
Tourism/hospitality
Spa activities
Activity/viability waterfront
Transport and Health and education services
services Administrative services
Education/university
Transport
The big infrastructure
able to attract workers and residents. People who live in this city can walk and use
bikes or public transport, without any problems. It is a city that promotes the use of
renewable energies.
From these results, a need arises to identify the intervention priorities for the
requalification project of Torre Annunziata waterfront, through the criteria of a live-
able city.
These results encourage the development of a participatory methodology as a
tool capable of supporting urban planning, of identifying public policies for sustain-
able and shared urban development (Fusco Girard and Nijkamp 2003).
The results of the participatory approach were used to reapply the HIA to the
case study, in particular, to identify the real value of the cultural heritage with the
support of the stakeholders. They know the real city problems and the tangible and
intangible values of the waterfront.
The participatory method can be used to adapt the ICOMOS Guide to different
international contexts, characterised by different values in culture, traditions and
urban stratification.
Subsequently, new tables have been developed to define the different criteria to
identify the real value of the heritage (very high, high, medium, etc.) and the nature
of the impact.
The results obtained are useful in understanding what are the real characteristics
of the heritage (its value and attributes), combining historic research and the sensi-
tivity of the residents.
Therefore, the direct and indirect impacts have been evaluated through the for-
mula that we proposed in the questionnaire.
The 12 buildings were considered for specific aspects:
1 . Architecture and urban design
2. Cultural and relational
3. Energy and environment
4. Economic activities
5. Transport and services (cf. Table 28.6).
The results of this second application were analysed, and the most important
results indicate a satisfying identification of the heritage real value, thanks to the
perception of the inhabitants.
The second HIA application established a shared vision for waterfront requalifi-
cation by 2050, through the implementation of shared decisional process. This is a
missing element in the Liverpool case study and in the first application in Torre
Annunziata.
The most important difference between the two applications is the participative
method defining the real value of the heritage (observing the perception of the
residents) and the possibility of applying the ICOMOS Guide in a more respon-
sible way.
The participatory method that supports the HIA is able to identify priority
actions, to promote the well-being of the residents and the common good.
The new functions were defined according to the objectives of the liveable city
(deduced from the questionnaire results) (cf. Table 28.7).
After the analysis of these two applications, it is clear that the combination of the
cultural economy and the green economy is the answer to the problems of Torre
Annunziata.
Table 28.6 Architecture and urban design
Architecture and urban design
Public and identity spaces, visualised space, space lived perceived, green areas, waterfront
Site heritage of acknowledged international importance inscribed as of universal importance as WH properties
Value of cultural Impacts on Impacts on the
heritage built buildings built environmental
heritage or heritage or Built heritage or Significance of
Description of the historic urban Redevelopment historic urban historic urban effect or
Cultural heritage heritage landscape project landscape landscape overall impact
1. Teatro Moderno This building is an High Equipped Major Moderate beneficial Moderate
example of Italian theatre. waterfront beneficial9) (8) beneficial (5)
It represents another Requalification of Large
“iconic building” for the port beneficial
city. Today it is areaRestoration of
abandoned. It was built in historic buildings
the twentieth century and facades
Source: Angrisano Mariarosaria symbolises the culture
and art of the belle
Époque period
Second application Medium Moderate Minor change (6) Slight
change (7) beneficial (6,5)
Architecture and urban design
Public and identity spaces, visualised space, space lived perceived, green areas, waterfront
Site heritage of acknowledged international importance inscribed as of universal importance as WH properties
Value of cultural Impacts on Impacts on the
heritage built buildings built environmental
heritage or heritage or Built heritage or Significance of
Description of the historic urban Redevelopment historic urban historic urban effect or
Cultural heritage heritage landscape project landscape landscape overall impact
2. Borbonic bridge This is an historic bridge Very high Equipped Major Major beneficial (9) Major
that originate in Naples waterfront beneficial beneficial (9)
and finish in Requalification of Very large
Castellammare; it was port area beneficial
12 km long; it represents
the first railway line of the
Campania region,
nowadays still in use

Second application Very high Major Major beneficial (9) Very large
beneficial (9) beneficial (9)
3. Villa Filangieri This villa is located on Very high Equipped Major Neutral (5) Minor change
“Punta Oncino” and was waterfront beneficial (9) (7)
realised in 1872 by an Requalification of Large
aristocrat Naples family. port area beneficial
Nowadays there are
different architectural
styles, probably for
Source: Angrisano Mariarosaria different interventions
occurred in different
period
Second application Medium Moderate Slight (6) Moderate
change (7) beneficial (6,5)
Table 28.7 Architecture and urban design

The needs of citizens The new functions
New jobs 1. Improve the existing factory, especially in the
maritime cluster
2. Enhance the handcraft productions
3. Enhance the existing industry of the port
Maintain the identity of the city and don’t New function along the waterfront controlling the
modify its skyline with a new project height of new buildings
More cultural functions Increase the service sector
Assign new functions to the port Realise a terminal cruise in the port to allow cruise
passengers to visit Pompeii, Oplontis and the
Vesuvius National Park
New libraries, new theatre, new Develop new cultural, economic functions along
restaurants, new educative functions, new the waterfront
commercial functions
Promote recycling of waste, the use of Enhance the circular economy principles
photovoltaic panels
Valorisation of cultural and landscape Promote the reuse of existing buildings and
heritage enhance the scenic areas of the city
Enhance the safety of the city Enhance the security of the city
New public space Redevelop in a sustainable way the existing public
space and realise new parks and new squares
Enhance the real estate value and realised Enhance the real estate value thought the circular
new houses economy principles
New the touristic functions 1. Improve the Pompeii and Oplontis UNESCO
site
2. Connect the Oplontis UNESCO site with the
waterfront and Pompeii excavation
28.3 T
he Circular Economy as a Tool to Implement the HUL
Approach
28.3.1 A
Circular Project for the Requalification of Torre
Annunziata Waterfront
The results of the heritage impact assessment second step can be considered
sufficient if the aim is to improve the evaluation method but not sufficient if we
want to promote a new conservation and valorisation programme of a historic urban
landscape based on the principles of the circular economy.
To develop the liveable city is necessary to use a highly innovative approach
based on the circular economy.
A review of literature shows that the circular economy model can be deduced
from a number of basic concepts: the green economy, natural capitalism, the funda-
mental economy, the creating of shared value principles, the resource and energy
efficiency gap and the ecological transition (Ezzat 2016).
The circularisation processes and synergies, which promote resilience and cre-
ativity and then sustainability (Fusco Girard 2010), should be transferred from a
sectorial approach (waste management, etc.) to the whole organisation of the city,
its economy, its social system and its governance in order to improve urban produc-
tivity (Fusco Girard 2014).
In the New Urban Agenda, the circular economy model is considered a funda-
mental strategy to manage resources like land, water, energy, materials and food. It
is able to resolve the problems related to the emission of greenhouse gases and air
pollutants. It is very important to evaluate the environmental impact and the sustain-
ability of a new project and to strive to transition to a circular economy while facili-
tating ecosystem conservation, regeneration, restoration and resilience in the face of
new and emerging challenges (Habitat III 2017).
Many examples of best practice, where circular economy strategies were applied,
have been analysed, for example, the city of Paris3 (Hidalgo and Guhl 2015);
Amsterdam,4 Vienna (Fellner et al. 2017); Rotterdam (Martin van der Does et al.
2015); Helsinki (Sitra 2015); Barcelona (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2016);
Brussels (Markus Zils 2015); Peterborough (Peterborough City Council 2016); and
Bologna.5
The requalification project of the Torre Annunziata waterfront has been thus
rethought in relation to the results of the two applications of HIA according to the
principles of the circular economy.
Therefore, new functions for the waterfront have been defined to enhance the
social and economic regeneration of the port area and to increase the symbiotic
processes between the city and the harbour.
The project foresees an overall increase in the functional surfaces relative to all
port activities guaranteeing each of them maximum efficiency through reorganisa-
tion of space and relocation of functions; improvement of accessibility and perme-
ability port-city by replacing the small sidewalks with pedestrian-cycle paths and
the ones of shipbuilding activities in the east of the port returned to the city; rede-
sign of waterfront provision of urban services; reclamation of affected areas; and
project strategies aimed at reducing energy consumption and waste.
According to the aims of the liveable city, the project has been divided into set-
ting areas (cf. Fig. 28.2):
3
In 2014, the municipality of Paris launched a call for innovative urban projects with the aim to
rethink 23 Parisian sites. The strategy is founded on circular economy and promotes social, eco-
nomic and environmental challenges (Hidalgo et al., 2015).
4
The approach of the circular economy in Amsterdam is based on the reuse of all the materials that
enter into an infinite technical or biological cycle. All energy comes from renewable sources; the
resources are used to generate (financial or other) value (Klaske, 2015).
5
In the city of Bologna, it was experimented in the community rooftop garden of a public housing
building, where we produced and grew lettuce, tomato, chilli, pepper, eggplant and melon. The city
is conceived as a living organism where the raw materials are transformed for a specific use.
Watermelon on soils and leafy vegetables use three techniques: nutrient film, floating hydroponic
and soil cultivation (Sanyé-Mengual et al., 2015).
Fig. 28.2 The new project for Torre Annunziata waterfront based on the circular economy prin-
ciples (Source: Angrisano 2016)
1 . Setting 1: tourism port

2. Setting 2: commercial port
3. Setting 3: cruise port
In the first area, a tourism port will be designed serving different functions: docks
with 1119 berths, a slipway, port authorities and executive offices, parking for sail-
ing enthusiasts, fish market with some restaurants, sailing school for sailing sports
and rowing activities. In the second setting, there will be an area for a commercial
port with Solacem silos, shipyards with warehouses and wharves. The cruise port
will be in the third setting. It will be divided into different functions for cruise ships,
a cruise terminal, a big reception area, a trade fair centre for wine and food, restau-
rants, a composting centre, a logistic hub, an open-air car park, walking trails, green
areas and new roads. The aim of the driveway and pedestrian road redevelopment is
to connect the waterfront with the archaeological areas of Oplontis and Pompeii
creating a cycle path in two-way traffic, lined with trees.
This new project is based on circular economy principles. All living systems are
characterised by circular processes, with no waste. They are able to conserve and
reproduce themselves. Circular processes, through reuse, recycling and regenera-
tion of components and energy, make cities regenerative. To satisfy this concept,
different strategies have been chosen to build a synergic symbiosis between the city
and the port:
1. Sustainable illumination
2. Recovery and reuse of rainwater
3. Management and recycling of waste, through the design of a composting plant

4. Uptake of marine energy
5. Electrification of the docks, cold ironing
6. Greening of surfaces and roofs.
7. Use of photovoltaic panels.
8. Electric mobility
The efficiency of public illumination sector was followed through with the instal-
lation along the waterfront of 1130 lights that guarantee an annual saving of
€135,300 (cf. Table 28.8).
Cold ironing has been adopted as a solution for the port, as a result of other posi-
tive experiences in this sector, through the electrification of the docks using renew-
able sources that guarantee 43% of the energy needs of the harbour (cf. Table 28.8)
(Angrisano and Fusco Girard 2017).
The photovoltaic panels will provide 2119 families with electricity, assuming an
energy requirement of 3300 kWh/year per family. The panels will be installed on all
the new buildings along the waterfront (cf. Table 28.8) (Angrisano and Fusco Girard
2017).
A sustainable management of the cycle of the waters has been chosen based on
the exploitation of less noble waters and on the use of high quality water exclusively
where the characteristics of quality are really needed (cf. Table 28.8).
The green roofs on 110,000 square metres of buildings have been chosen to
improve the environmental components (air, ground and microclimate) (cf.
Table 28.8) (Angrisano and Fusco Girard 2017).
An aerobic composting plant will produce consumable products (quality com-
post and organic mulches) using the putrescible waste from the cruise ships, the
waterfront activities and organic waste from the diversified refuse collections of the
municipalities of Torre Annunziata, Torre del Greco and Castellammare di Stabia
(cf. Table 28.8).
This strategy starts a symbiotic process between the city and the port. The quality
compost produced will be employed as a fertiliser for the Vesuvius agricultural area
and for the terraced hills near Sorrento and the Amalfi Coast (cf. Fig. 7) (Angrisano
and Fusco Girard 2017).
The impact of the project has been evaluated through the analysis of economic
benefits identifying five economic sectors: touristic economy, creative and cultural
economy, industrial economy, environmental economy and social and civil econ-
omy (cf. Table 28.8).
The significant positive impact of this new project relates to economic, environ-
mental and social aspects. The most important results involve the creation of new
jobs as a result of the proposal of new activities.
The redevelopment of this area is necessary to rebuild the historical and cultural
landscape and identity of the city, in accordance with the UNESCO
recommendations.
504
Table 28.8 The impacts of the Torre Annunziata requalification project

Economic benefits
Touristic economy Cultural and creative economy Industrial economy
2
New beds in 1200 New offices 600 m Fishing port 5749.70 m2
hotels
Area for the 2700 m2 New laboratories 29,839 m2 Touristic port 181,137.2 m2
construction of
new hotels
Port of Pompeii 10,761.63 m2 New nautical school 1829 m2 Solacem 35,565.03 m2
industry
Cruise terminal 1000 m2 New parks 1998 m2 Shipyards 17,129 m2
New berths 1433 New areas along the docks 3182.5 m2 Port of Pompeii 1150 m2
New restaurants 740 m2 New playground 1,232m2 Composting 4000 m2
Centre
Trade fair Centre 3434 m2 New trade fair Centre for wine 17,603 m2 Fish market 1350 m2
for wine and food and food
Requalification of 29,839 m2 Yacht club 1000 m2
the ancient pasta
factories as
creative
laboratories
New shops 24 shops (1500 m2) Skate park 416 m2
New services for 250 m2 Sea amphitheatre 3182.51 m2
the floating
Environmental economy Environmental economy: Green areas Uptake marine energy
Waterfront 7 km Green areas 108,540 m2 Lawn and 108,540 m2 Uptake marine 8.850.825 kWh/year
coastline for the realised shrubs newly energy
requalification designed
M. Angrisano and L. F. Girard
Economic benefits
No. of collecting 55,021 m2 Number of 1270 trees Production of 6,602,850 m3 Photovoltaic panels
rainwater new trees C02 by lawn
and shrubs
Reuse of 27.970.654 l/year (that Production 184,291 m3/year Requirements 36,180 people Total area of Total of energy
rainwater satisfies the water of CO2 with C02 per year photovoltaic produced
demand for 225 WC the new tree panel used 367,585.32 kW/year
5854,20,017 and the 38,812 m2 (245
irrigation of kWp)
108,540 m2)
Production of compost Marine capture system Sustainable illumination
Quantity of 4278.9 on 42,789 Energy produced from marine 982,872 kWh/year Nr. points LED 1130
organic waste inhabitants (100 kg/ capture system light
produced by the inhabitants)
city of Torre
Annunziata
Quantity of 6646.6 on 66,466 Sustainable transport Energy saving 761 kWh/anno
organic waste inhabitants (100 kg/
produced by the inhabitants)
city of
Castellammare
Quantity of 8627.5 on 86,275 No. of electric vehicles to 20 Cold ironing
organic waste (100 kg/ inhabitants) transport tourists to Pompeii and
produced by the Oplontis archaeological area
city of Torre del
Greco
Total quantity of 19,592.9 Social and civil economy Energy cruise 8,640,000 kWh/year for
organic waste tons/year on 195.530 New jobs 884 ship requested 4 days in a month
produced by the inhabitants a year
28 The Circular Economy as a Model to Implement the Historic Urban Landscape…
three cities
(continued)
505
506
Economic benefits
Fish market 33.2 tons/year Square metres destined to the 22,986 m2 Covered 43%
creation of new jobs requirement for
the
electrification
of docks by
renewable
sources
Quantity of 374.8 tons/year Reduction in the unemployment 2.1% Percentage of 8.850.825 kWh/year
organic waste rate energy covered
produced from from renewable
cuttings and sources
prunings
Quantity of 40 tons/year (48 day/ Reduced travel times to reach 3.5 km
organic waste year) the sea Pompeii
from cruise ships
Composting plant 20,000.01 tons/year Reduced travel times to reach 800 m
capacity the sea Oplontis excavations
Good product: 5000 tons/year Population which benefits of the 20,622 people
Quality compost new waterfront areas
Good product: 3000 tons/year Direct annual revenue for each 1300 €
Organic new worker
mulching
Total good 8000 tons/year No. of internet point 2 out of 10 stations
product
Source: Angrisano, Bosone 2016
M. Angrisano and L. F. Girard
The last contribution of the project proposal is about the possibility of increasing
real estate value, reducing the cost of requalification and restoring quality to the
landscape through the principles of the circular economy.
A market survey puts the cost of requalification at about €1200/m2 (Municipality
of Torre Annunziata).
This requalification costs can be reduced and optimised by promoting circular
economy strategies as demonstrated by the good European practices that we have
identified (Markkanen 2016).
Recently, the circular economy in real estate had some positive effects, for exam-
ple, in Finland (Markkanen 2016). The use of new technologies and innovative busi-
ness models, including sharing, modular construction, 3D printing and smart
management, might reduce costs for the reuse of buildings, thus enhancing profit
(Angrisano and Fusco Girard 2017).
There are different strategies to reduce the cost of requalification of the existing
buildings, for example, the use of renewable energy, which allows us to use the
incentives for the installation of the panels; the purchase of recycled material has a
lower cost than conventional material (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2016).
In the city of Helsinki today, there are many companies that invest in the real
estate sector. They worked hard to define the concept of the circular economy in the
real estate industry to adapt the theoretical perspective framework in a more con-
crete way (Markkanen 2016).
It is important to reuse the materials that come from the excavations/ demolition
of other buildings. The real estate companies made profits from these activities.
There should be an industrial symbiosis between different factories that exchange
resources. This area can become an economic hub of a circular and sharing econ-
omy: this process is called sharing industrial symbiosis.
Circular economy for new construction and renovation projects should focus on
the minimisation of virgin material usage, on the removal and recycling of waste
from the construction process and on designing a resource-efficient plan for build-
ing (Markkanen 2016).
Therefore, if the principles of the circular economy are applied, both in the
design of new buildings and in renovating buildings, many positive impacts occur,
especially because the interventions on an area have been focused on a pleasant
view overlooking the sea, an added value of great importance.
Indeed, the circular economy model evokes a new notion of economic value: a
“circular economic value”, in which the intrinsic value (e.g. cultural/symbolic) gen-
erates specific use values, and this, in turn, increases market value and provides
better protection of the spatial physical quality (environmental values).
It is a “relational” value that connects, reconnects, regenerates and glues, and as
such, it represents the heart of the circular economy. Therefore, the economic value
that emerges in the circular economy model connects the different use values with
the independent use value (intrinsic value). This complex notion of value is abso-
lutely coherent with the historic urban landscape notion that represents the reflec-
tion of a landscape systemic interpretation.
This value notion could be seen in a multidimensional and complex perspective

in which each value, in a certain dimension, becomes the generator/regenerator of
other values in other dimensions.
28.4 Conclusion and Recommendation
The HUL approach represents a new perspective sector for the cultural heritage
conservation, to combine “contemporary interventions” into the historic urban fab-
ric (paragraph 22 HUL, 2011).
The intrinsic value of cultural heritage can be exploited through the adoption of
innovative cultural-led business, governance models and evaluation tools (Angrisano
et al. 2016). The HIA should be a tool capable of supporting the urban planning and
evaluating the impacts of the regeneration projects. Some changes are necessary for
applying this tool. One of them is the modification of the criteria for the identifica-
tion of the cultural heritage values. The participative methods reduce this weakness.
The community is considered the principal actors of the sustainable development,
as mentioned in the III/V/VI section of the UNESCO document (UNESCO 2011).
The participative methods are able to interpret the urban habitat and their natural
and cultural resources.
The proposed method is based on a participative process able to build a shared
long-term strategy for the enhancement of spatial quality of port areas. The results
highlight the potential of this participative tool to evaluate different scenarios for the
future of waterfronts development (Gravagnuolo et al. 2015).
The “management of the change”, introduced by the HUL approach, requests the
integration of specific integrated evaluation tools (paragraph 24 HUL, 2011).
The experience conducted in Torre Annunziata has allowed the HIA to be used
to deduce the volumetric project plan, resulting in an hypothesis of functional
organisation of the waterfront.
This proposal has been verified through some interviews with various stakehold-
ers: they have highlighted their perception about the needs, the functions and the
new activities to be localised along the waterfront.
The evaluation process underwent then a strict “participative phase”, to verify
the project’s economic sustainability.
The assessment of complex relationships and values can be implemented only
through a multidimensional and integrated evaluation perspective (Gravagnuolo
and Fusco Girard 2017).
The “circular economy perspective” has allowed, on the basis of the comparison
between demand and supply, the activation of short loops between the port-city and
the extra-urban territory, thus reducing some economic costs as well as ecologic and
environmental ones and creating new employment (jobs).
In other words, through this subsequent evaluation processes, the “waterfront
project” has been progressively refined so as to identify an overall “satisfying”
solution, capable of guaranteeing the economic, social, environmental and cultural
impacts.
Also, the participative method supports the “circular economy approach”,

because all the projects are shared with the community. This approach reinforces
the network of sharing and knowledge, encouraging the social responsibility.
The historic urban landscape can reveal the comprehensive “wealth” of the city
and, thus, can enhance the well-being of communities.
Thus, a new tool to assess the social, environmental and economic impacts of
cultural heritage conservation/transformation/regeneration has been proposed.
Interdisciplinary research and collaboration among stakeholders can use the historic
urban landscape as a complex indicator of urban sustainability.
References
Angrisano, M. (2015). Economic heritage impact assessment as a tool for evaluating the impacts
on the great requalification project of the coastal cities, UNESCO sites. The case study of Torre
Annunziata, in the gulf of Naples. Territorio Italia, 2015(2), 71–94.
Angrisano, M., Biancamano, P. F., Bosone, M., Carone, P., Daldanise, G., De Rosa, F., Franciosa,
A., Gravagnuolo, A., Iodice, S., Nocca, F., Onesti, A., Panaro, S., Ragozino, S., Sannicandro,
V., & Fusco Girard, L. (2016). Towards operationalizing UNESCO recommendations on
“Historic Urban Landscape”: A position paper. In Aestimum.
Angrisano, M., Fusco Girard, L. (2017). The circular economy approach for the regeneration of
Torre Annunziata port area (pp 11–22). In BDC Bollettino del Centro Calza Bini, n.1.
Appendino, F., Giliberto, F., & Labadi, S. (2016). Il ruolo delle valutazioni di Impatto Ambientale
e di impatto sul Patrimonio Culturale: il caso Liverpool sito UNESCO. In Valori e valutazioni
n. 17 (pp. 57–57).
Calder, A., Jones, A., Roe, A. (2014). Cultural heritage impact assessment. East riding of Yorkshire
council. East Riding of Yorkshire Council.
De Figueiredo, P.(2011). Liverpool waters heritage impact assessment. Assessment of potential
effects on the Liverpool World Heritage Sites. www.liverpoolwaters.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2016). Growth within: A circular economy vision for a competitive
Europe.
Ezzat, A. M. (2016). Sustainable development of seaport cities through circular economy: A
comparative study with implications to Suez Canal corridor project. European Journal of
Sustainable Development, 5.
European Commission (2014). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,
the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions – Towards an integrated approach to cultural heritage for Europe, COM 477 final,
Brussels, 22.7.2014.
Fellner, J, Lederer, J., Scharff, C., Laner, D. (2017). Present potentials and limitations of a circular
economy with respect to primary raw material demand. Available at: http://www.cec4europe.
eu/fileadmin.
Furrer, B. (2013). Report on the ICOMOS advisory mission to historic centre of Warsaw. The
Historic Centre of Warsaw (Poland) Advisory Mission, Report.
Fusco Girard, L. (2010). Sustainability, creativity, resilience: Toward new development strategies
of port areas through evaluation processes. International Journal of Sustainable Development,
13(1).
Fusco Girard, L. (2014). The role of cultural urban landscape towards a new urban economics:
New structural assets for increasing economic productivity through hybrid processes. HOPUE,
1(1), 3–27.
Fusco Girard, L., & Nijkamp, P. (2003). Le valutazioni per lo sviluppo sostenibile della città e del
territorio. Milano: Franco Angeli.
Gravagnuolo, A., & Angrisano, M. (2013). Assessment of urban attractiveness of port cities in
southern Italy—A case study of Torre Annunziata. Sustainability, 5(9), 3906–3925.
Gravagnuolo, A., & Fusco Girard, L. (2017). Multicriteria tools for the implementation of historic
urban landscape. Qual Innov Prosper, 21, 186–201.
Gravagnuolo, A., Biancamano, P. F., Angrisano, M., & Cancelliere, A. (2015). Assessment of
waterfront attractiveness in port cities – Facebook 4 urban facelifts. J Glob Environ Issues,
14, 56–88.
HABITAT III (2017). United Nations New Urban Agenda: Adopted by the UN general assembly,
25 January 2017, New York, USA.
Hidalgo, A., & Guhl, A. (2015). On the circular economy of greater Paris. In: Direction regional
Ile De France.
ICOMOS. (2011). Guidance on heritage impact assessments for cultural world heritage proper-
ties. Paris: ICOMOS.
Klaske, K. (2015) Circular Amsterdam: A vision and action agenda for the city and metropolitan
area. Geemente Amsterdam: Circle Economy.
Lisitzin, K. (2012). The potential impact of the Stockholm bypass and Ekerö road project on the
outstanding universal value of the world heritage property of Royal Domain of Drottningholm
Sweden. In: The Swedish National Heritage Board.
Markkanen, J. (2016). Circular economy in real estate investment companies – case study:
Suomen Yliopistokiinteistöt Oy, Kampusareena. In: Helsinki Metropolia University of Applied
Sciences.
Rizos, V., Behrens, A., Kafyeke, T., Hirschnitz-Garbers M., & Ioannou, A. (2015). The circular
economy: Barriers and opportunities for SMEs. In: CEPS working document, n. 412.
Pereira Roders, A., Bond A., & Teller J. (2013). Determining effectiveness in heritage impact
assessments. In: IAIA13 Conference Proceedings, 33rd Annual Meeting of the International
Association for Impact Assessment, Impact Assessment the Next Generation, Calgary
Stampede BMO Centre | Calgary, Alberta, Canada, May, 13–16.
Peterborough City Council. (2016) Peterborough preliminary draft local plan.
Russo, P. (2011) Ridare vita a Pompei: un progetto di sviluppo sostenibile per l’area vesuviana. In:
Unione Industriali Napoli, Camera di commercio Napoli.
Sanyé-Mengual, E., Orsini, F., Oliver-Solà, J., Rieradevall, J., Ignacio Montero, J., & Gianquinto,
G. (2015). Techniques and crops for efficient rooftop gardens in Bologna, Italy. Agronomy
Sustainable, 35, 1477.
Sitra (2015). The opportunities of a circular economy for Finland. Available at: https://media.
sitra.fi.
Smit, A. (2011). The influence of district visual quality on location decisions of creative entrepre-
neurs. Journal of the American Planning Association, 77, 167.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape, including a glossary of defi-
nitions. In: Available at: http://portal.unesco.org.
Van der Does de Bye, M., Van der Vusse, R., & Van Tilborg C. (2015). Roadmap circular economy
Rotterdam. In: Available at: http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents.
Zils, M. (2015). Towards a circular economy rethinking value chains to boost resource productiv-
ity. In: Available at: http://www.environnement.brussels. http://www.reinventer.paris/en/sites.
Chapter 29
Operationalizing the HUL
Recommendation in Urban River
Corridors: Challenges and Perspectives
Abstract This article proposes to consider urban river corridors as historic land-
scapes and an integral component of our common heritage and collective memory.
It acknowledges the range of cultural values associated with urban rivers as well as
the role of the latter in shaping the city through history, thereby contributing to our
identity and sense of place. It reflects on the application of the historic urban land-
scape (HUL) recommendation in urban river corridors. The article focuses on a
double-lens approach that combines morphological/ecological analysis on one hand
and cognitive representations of everyday landscapes and practices on the other
hand. This paper further proposes an assessment of the efficiency of current legisla-
tive and institutional framework for heritage conservation. It takes the historic core
in the city of Tripoli, Lebanon, as a case study where conservation practices have
followed a monument-centric approach, neglecting the cultural value of the Abu Ali
River flowing through the city. It concludes with a SWOT analysis to highlight how
best to operationalize the HUL recommendation in urban river corridors.
Keywords Historic urban landscape (HUL) · Everyday landscapes · Urban river

corridors · Heritage conservation · Morphological analysis · Ecological analysis ·
Regulatory system · Tripoli · Lebanon
29.1 Introduction
Over the centuries, the relationship between cities and water bodies (rivers, lakes,
seas, and oceans) has been largely influenced by changes in urban design and plan-
ning approaches to cities. Throughout the history of civilization, water bodies have
been the foci of most urban developments because they offer key resources and
services, including drinking water, fertile agricultural lands, fishing, power produc-
tion, and transportation links (Guillerme 1983; Grimm et al. 2008). Today, most
M. Ginzarly (*) · J. Teller

LEMA, Urban & Environmental Engineering dpt, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium
e-mail: manal.ginzarly@doct.ulg.ac.be; jacques.teller@ulg.ac.be

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_29
512 M. Ginzarly and J. Teller
river corridors do not only have important ecological roles within urban landscapes
but, similarly, have key societal, cultural, and economic values (Francis 2012;
Lundy and Wade 2011 and Cengiz 2013).
In the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, western cities were in
a process of development at a speed that was beyond the capacity of incremental
urbanism. Rapid urbanization and intensive industrial activities have largely affected
urban form, and means were developed to facilitate movement within cities (Otto
et al. 2004). Accordingly, transportation shifted from water to streets and rails, and
engineering projects have contributed to extensive changes in rivers’ functions and
structure. For instance, most urban river-edge lands were filled to accommodate
new infrastructures, and many river channels were straightened, completely discon-
necting them from their floodplains (Pedroli et al. 2002). These developments did
not only harm the ecological function of rivers (Groffman et al. 2003; Everard and
Moggridge 2012) but also disconnected the rivers physically from their urban con-
text and spiritually from the urban life since the river edge became less important as
a social and retail space (Otto et al. 2004).
In the early twenty-first century, ecological studies have grown tremendously
and have begun to influence theoretical thinking about the shape and the develop-
ment of cities (Spirn 2014). Consequently, a radical shift took place toward thinking
about cities as biological rather than solely physical systems (Wu and Hobbs 2002;
Pickett et al. 2004). Consequently, river corridors are now recognized as important
ecological and social components of urban systems.
Within the context of cities with historic urban cores, cultural heritage policies
primarily focused on the built urban fabric, neglecting natural elements, like rivers,
that gave reason for their location. In many cities, conservation practices followed a
monument-centric approach, which focused on the restoration of heritage buildings
and sites and neglected the cultural value of ecosystems at large and especially riv-
ers. Still, a number of morphological studies highlighted the influence of river net-
works on streets, plots, blocks, and building structures (Borie et al. 1981; Castonguay
and Evenden 2012).
The historic urban landscape (HUL) recommendation expands our understand-
ing of historic environments. HUL deliberately encompasses the ensemble of urban
structures and natural features as an integral entity that cannot be dissected into
fragments and that jointly contributes to creating a sense of place and identity
(O’Donnell and Turner 2012; UNESCO 2016). Following the HUL recommenda-
tion, our article stresses the need for integrating river systems into cultural heritage
conservation policies. It is hereby considered that the river influences the physical
and social patterns of human settlements contributing to form the very specific char-
acter of the latter (Guillerme 1983). To elucidate the socio-spatial relationship
between cities and rivers, this paper takes the Mamluk core in Tripoli, Lebanon, as
a case study.
This article is structured as follows: Sect. 29.1 provides details about the heri-
tage value of river corridors. Section 29.2 focuses on the need to conduct a com-
prehensive analysis of the relationship between the built and natural environment
to reveal the character of the historic urban landscape. Accordingly, it illustrates
29 Operationalizing the HUL Recommendation in Urban River Corridors: Challenges… 513
the multidimensional morphological method of analysis of the socio-spatial rela-

tionship between the river and the city. Section 29.3 applies the proposed method-
ology to the city of Tripoli. Section 29.4 reflects on the application of the HUL
recommendation through a critical assessment of existing laws and regulations and
conservation practices in relation to the HUL framework. Finally, this paper con-
cludes with a comparative SWOT analysis on the application of the HUL recom-
mendation in general and, more specifically, in urban river corridors and in Tripoli,
Lebanon.
29.2 River Corridors as Historic Urban Landscapes
In 1925, the geographer Carl Sauer introduced the term “cultural geography” into
American geography discipline (Price and Lewis 1993). Sauer (1925) argued that
the cultural aspects of the landscape and its material remains are created over a long
period by human activity. In other words, a cultural landscape is “fashioned from a
natural landscape by a cultural group. Culture is the agent, the natural area is the
medium, cultural landscapes the result” (Sauer 1925, p. 22). Urban river corridors
are paradigmatic examples of such historic cultural landscapes, especially in those
cases where urban settlements developed along the river and contributed to the evo-
lution of its structure. Many scholars have addressed the wide range of cultural
values and contributions to ecosystem services associated with urban rivers (Baschak
and Brown 1995; Forman and Collinge 1996; Everard and Moggridge 2012; Francis
2012; Kerr and Swaffield 2012; Vollmer et al. 2015). In these studies, river corridors
have been recognized as having significant ecological, social, aesthetic, historic,
and economic values. Even when they are not associated with outstanding scenic
values, river corridors usually form part of the “everyday landscapes” of the citizens
(Preece 1991; Groth and Bressi 1997). They always contribute to shaping the local
identity of a place and should hence be taken into consideration by heritage conser-
vation policies.
Different urban planning and design approaches have been applied to restore
damaged urban rivers (Marshall 2001; Otto et al. 2004). It is crucial to mention that
such projects do not aim to restore rivers to a pristine condition but to provide new
scenarios that are suitable for site specification and context. This article proposes a
multidimensional approach to capture the influence of rivers on urban settlement
patterns, the changes that occur in the physical structure of the city and the river, and
the changing role of the river and cultural values associated with it over time. The
article reflects on the application of the HUL recommendation on urban river cor-
ridors where conservation practices should include river conservation as a key ele-
ment of heritage policies.
29.3 Methodology
The core issue of this paper is to identify the different attributes contributing to the
character and cultural significance of historic landscapes in urban river corridors
through time and to reflect on the application of the HUL recommendation for the
conservation of these values and attributes. To achieve its goals, it proposes a mul-
tidimensional method for the analysis of urban form that does not only target the
morphological configuration of urban landscape but also the historical and cultural
values attributed to it. This method follows three inquiries: the first is an archival
review to analyze the riverside settlement at different historical periods. The second
involves on-site structured interviews to reveal the community perception of the
study area and different cultural values attributed by the public to the river corridor.
The third is an assessment of the application of the HUL recommendation. This
assessment is based on a review of different pieces of legislation for managing heri-
tage, listing, and cultural heritage conservation projects in the historic core to criti-
cally evaluate how concepts and tools offered by the HUL approach could be
translated into the existing regulatory framework in Tripoli.
The first investigation is a morphological analysis of the urban form based on the
cadastral maps of the city dating back to 1937. The street pattern during the early
urban settlement in the historic core in relation to the river corridor is analyzed, as
well as changes that occurred through time in the physical structure of both urban
and natural systems. A party wall map has been outlined for the city. A party wall
map is a two-dimensional plan that shows nodes of attraction in the city through
drawing one edge of each building (see Sect. 29.5.1). This method has been applied
in different projects to understand urban development through establishing a com-
prehensive relationship between the alignment of the building fabric and the city’s
physical features such as street pattern, natural features, and open spaces (Hallaj
2000; Giulia 2010).
The second investigation is an on-site survey based on a structured question-
naire. The questionnaire contains two sections. The first part is oriented toward the
interviewees’ mental image to reveal how they perceive the study area, and the
second section consists of an open-ended question about heritage preferences. Fifty
persons participated in the questionnaire survey. Interviewees included shoppers,
shops owners, and households. Interviews were completed in the street, in shops,
and in houses. They were conducted during February and March 2014. The different
elements represented in every image were subsequently extracted so as to illustrate
in a schematic way the perceived spatial attributes of the urban river corridor.
Second, the various positions toward the river revitalization were analyzed in order
to elicit the cultural values attributed to it.
The third investigation is a review of heritage regulations, listing, and conserva-
tion practices in relation to the HUL recommendation. This will help us to highlight
how tools proposed by the HUL recommendation can be translated into the local
system of urban management. Urban heritage regulations available at the interna-
tional and local levels are assessed in this perspective. Three heritage listings are
further reviewed: the UNESCO listing in 1953; the 1995 survey done by the
Association for the Preservation of the Archaeological Heritage of Tripoli, the
municipality, and local historians; and the 2002 cultural heritage and urban develop-
ment project of the city.
29.4 Study Area
Situated 85 km north of Beirut along the Mediterranean coast, Tripoli is considered
Lebanon’s second capital. The city was founded on the Mediterranean seaside dur-
ing the fourteenth century BCE. It was not until the Middle Ages that Tripoli became
a city with two poles: the marine city (El-Mina), on the original site of Tripoli, and
the Medina, currently the Mamluk historic core (Gulick 1967). In 1289, the
Mamluks conquered the Crusader City that was situated on the peninsula, razed it
to the ground, and built a city at the foot of the Crusader citadel and along the Abu
Ali River around 3 km to the west (Fig. 29.1).
Fig. 29.1 Upper left, the east bank of the river. Upper right, the west bank of the river. Lower, the
Mamluk core and the urban extension outside its periphery
Fig. 29.2 Tripoli, Lebanon, and different urban zones in the city
The two poles of the city remained separated by citrus fields until the beginning
of the twentieth century. In 1516, the Ottomans occupied the city until the beginning
of the French mandate in 1918. It was during the late Ottoman period that urban
extension outside the city’s gates started. Urbanization started along the roads con-
structed between El-Mina and the Medina in the beginning of the twentieth century
during the Ottoman period, as well as along the two banks of the Abu Ali River. By
the end of the twentieth century, urban sprawl took over most of the agricultural
fields (Fig. 29.2). In the second half of the twentieth century, the city experienced a
spectacular population growth under the influence of new urban developments and
rural exodus from the neighboring north regions (Le Thomas 2009).
29.5 A Double-Lens Approach to HUL Documentation
The historic urban landscape recommendation requires the application of an all-

inclusive value-based approach to heritage conservation. It considers the historic
layering of cultural and natural values and attributes in a city. This approach should
be based on a comprehensive documentation of the city’s natural systems and built
structure as well as the intangible heritage associated with the tangible heritage
(UNESCO 2011; Van Oers 2013). This documentation is crucial to identify the
overall character of the historic urban landscape and the values and attributes that
need to be conserved for future generations through a bottom-up participatory pro-

cess (UNESCO 2011). Therefore, the application of traditional and innovative tools,
adapted to local contexts, is recommended. These should typically include civic
engagement tools, knowledge and planning, regulatory systems, and financial tools
(Van Oers and Pereira Roders 2013; Rodwell 2015). This paper suggests addressing
Tripoli river corridor through a double lens: a morphological/ecological approach
on the one hand and a cognitive map centered on practices and representations on
the other hand. Such a double-lens perspective calls for realigning traditional desk-
based analyses with more personal, intersubjective interpretations of heritage.
29.5.1 A Combined Morphological/Ecological Approach
The character of historic landscapes in urban river corridors is intrinsically linked

with the reciprocal relationship between the river and the built environment and how
one influences and adapts to the other. Morphological analyses should consider the
evolution of urban form in relation to the river layout and its gradual changes over
time.
In the case of Tripoli, the continuous axis that extends from the southwest to the
northeast constitutes the main spine of the Mamluk core and has been maintained
through time (Fig. 29.3). It stretches along the hill where the citadel is situated and
then continues parallel to the Abu Ali River following the structure of the natural
landscape. All east-west streets are connected to this spine, and two bridges con-
nected the two sides of the river. This grid was in accordance with the natural flow
of the river corridor, and they both followed the topographical characteristics of the
area. During this period, the river was at the core of the urban settlement. The water
Fig. 29.3 Left, the street pattern of the medieval core in 1937. Right, the streets pattern of the
medieval core after 1971
resource was used for domestic as well as agricultural supply for citrus fields on the
coast and olive fields in surrounding villages. Riverine zones along the river were
used as social spaces for gathering and interacting with the natural environment and
as a green corridor that forms a transitional zone between the city and the river. The
upland on the west bank of the river was saved for the citadel that overlooks the
entire city.
Between 1955 and 1971, different factors contributed to changes in the structure
of the river (Fig. 29.3). First, in 1955, the Abu Ali River flooded the city. By the end
of 1968, the downstream river course was hence straightened in order to reduce the
risk of flooding, and an artificial concrete channel was constructed with vertical
lateral retaining walls. The river was further surrounded by a 24-m-wide avenue on
each side. These avenues were rapidly transformed into major circulation axes. With
regard to the riverfront and the river system, these interventions transformed the
river from an ecological corridor to an infrastructural artifact. The floodplain, where
the riparian vegetation originally developed, was no more a place for social gather-
ing providing the city with a public amenity. The river was no more a source of
water supply or biodiversity as wetlands and other habitats were dried up. Moreover,
in 1971, a master plan was developed for the city. It intervened in the Mamluk core
by constructing two vehicular arteries to connect the new developments with the
core and the new boulevards along the river. In between these arteries, the central
spine of the city and the inherited urban pattern maintained their original shape.
The party wall map of the Mamluk core (Fig. 29.4) shows how the historic urban
landscape was built in coherence with the natural landscape. Most buildings are
slanted toward the river stressing on the latter as the dynamic of urban development.
Moreover, newly constructed buildings along the river, after its canalization, con-
served the pattern of urban development through time and respected previous spa-
tial configurations.
29.5.2 Cultural Values Associated with Urban River Corridors
People ascribe different values to a heritage asset depending on their personal inter-
ests and interactions with their environment. Mental maps are based on local inhab-
itant’s perceptions of their city as well as their daily experience of the network of
places, streets, and buildings. Conceived as such, they help to reveal everyday land-
scapes, i.e., the set of tangible attributes that contribute to their image of the city.
When asked to illustrate their perception of Tripoli, most interviewees did not rep-
resent all the study area. Instead, they drew a small section of it according to their
personal experience and reflections. By contrast, the river and the monuments along
it were represented in all maps. Most importantly the stairs that link the east and
west banks of the river were one of the most common elements in the different
interviewees’ mental images (Fig. 29.5).
Forty-two out of 50 interviewees chose the revitalization of the river corridor
instead of the citadel as their priority in terms of urban renewal. They attributed an
Fig. 29.4 Party wall map of the Mamluk core. This strong structure can clearly be seen as a form
of heritage that largely determines a cultural urban landscape. This cultural heritage landscape is
intimately related to the river and its influence on street patterns. Even though altered after the
transformation of the 1960s, it keeps structuring the area as a whole
aesthetic value to the river. In their opinion, the river reflects the identity of the his-
toric core, and its pollution is affecting liveability in the city. Most interviewees
mentioned that their houses overlook the river, and its degradation is hence affecting
their everyday landscape. The river appears as a major component of the residents’
memory and common identity.
29.6 Urban Heritage Policies and Management
On the institutional and legal level, three main challenges could be highlighted for
the application of the HUL recommendation in Lebanese cities. First is the lack of
expertise and know-how in adapting international frameworks to the local level. For
Fig. 29.5 Two examples of respondents’ mental image of the city. Left: the river, the stairs and
residential neighborhoods on the east bank of the river, two pedestrian bridges, and the citadel.
Right: polluted river, cars, roads, the stairs and residential neighborhoods on the east bank of the
river, and school
instance, even though Lebanon has ratified the 1983 UNESCO convention for the
protection of cultural and natural heritage and the 2003 convention for the safe-
guarding of intangible heritage, the integration of these international laws and con-
cepts into the national legislative framework is fragmentary. Second, the legislation,
when existing, is not always applicable in the field. Although an updated law for
heritage conservation was issued in 2008, the 1933 law is still in force because
decrees for the operation and application of the 2008 law were never issued. Still,
according to the 1933 law, those buildings that were built after the nineteenth cen-
tury are not considered as heritage. Moreover, whereas the HUL approach considers
cultural heritage as a main pillar for achieving sustainable development, in Lebanon
the sustainable development framework is mainly based on the social, economic,
and environmental assets and does not include cultural dimensions. Consequently,
the 444 law for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) excludes cultural heritage
from its scope. Third, at the operational level, the government and administrations
are very restrictive when listing urban heritage. This practice is related to a number
of issues, among which are persistent controversies about the value of some histori-
cal remains related to divergences between communities (Saliba 2013). Still, such a
lack of designation increases the risk of demolition for some significant heritage
assets.
In this context, heritage listing in Tripoli remains mainly based on the age value
of heritage assets. In 1953, the Directorate General of Antiquity (DGA) in Lebanon
asked UNESCO to conduct an urban study about the Mamluk core in Tripoli. They
delineated the historic core and identified 44 monuments that should be conserved
(Fig. 29.6). Historic neighborhoods on the west bank of the river were not given a
heritage value. The delineation of the historic core was limited to the west bank of
the river. Moreover, the survey was very punctual and was centered on specific
Fig. 29.6 The periphery of the historic core and the classified monuments based on the report of
the mission sent by UNESCO in 1953
buildings treating them as frozen icons that stand alone in the landscape without
looking at different social and spatial relationships between the built and the natural
environment. The selection of listed buildings was mainly based on age, function,
and architectural characteristics of the buildings (UNESCO 1953). The selected
buildings are religious and public buildings. They include the citadel, churches,
mosques, khans, schools, and public baths. The mission recognized the historical
significance of residential houses and their role in constituting the specific character
of the city, but it did not include these on the list. It did not recognize the cultural
and historic value of the Abu Ali River and focused mainly on built structures with-
out studying the relation between these and their surrounding landscape.
In 1995, under the surveillance of the Association for the Preservation of the
Archaeological Heritage of Tripoli, a new heritage survey was conducted. This time
the scope of heritage was extended to include sites, comprising cemeteries, gardens,
residential blocks, and pedestrian commercial streets. This time the east bank of the
river had its portion of listed monuments as well as the early Ottoman developments
outside the boundary of the Mamluk core. Different Ottoman buildings and sites
were identified as cultural heritage, such as a public garden (Al Manshiyeh), the
municipality and the serail with and the Nawfal Palace. Even though the east bank
was included, the historic elements were still concentrated on the west bank of the
river, where most of the classified monuments are situated (Fig. 29.7). The
Fig. 29.7 The periphery of the historic core and the classified monuments and sites based on the
survey done in 1995 and on the delineation of the historic core specified by the CHUD project
recognition of heritage value embedded in the commercial streets in this phase is

crucial. In 1996, most of the listed monuments and streets were nationally regis-
tered. This review shows how the concept of heritage is still associated with con-
structions that are treated separately and has never been integrated into the wider
urban context that encompasses different historical, cultural, and social values.
A project initiative that tried to integrate urban development and cultural heritage
conservation ended up applying punctual interventions and focusing on facades
instead of approaching the city as an entity. In 2002, the Lebanese government
requested assistance from the World Bank to scale up dispersed urban heritage reha-
bilitation efforts to a national level by assisting five secondary cities (Tripoli,
Byblos, Baalbek, Saida, and Tyre). The project was entitled ‘Cultural Heritage and
Urban Development (CHUD)’. It aimed to invest in the cultural heritage of Tripoli
to integrate it into the life of the community and achieve local growth (Saba from
Al-Harithy 2005). Although the goals of the project were promising, interventions
were restricted to facades and some open spaces and to the construction of a plat-
form above the Abu Ali River to host the informal vegetable market that used to be
along the river. The project did not recognize the river as part of the community
shared memory and identity. Instead, the construction of the platform came to
ignore the significance of the river in the composition and structure of the city.
29.7 A SWOT Analysis for HUL Operationalization
The following SWOT analysis highlights the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities,

and threats concerning the operationalization of the HUL recommendation and its
application in urban river corridors as well as in the city of Tripoli, Lebanon
(Table 29.1).
When cultural heritage is reduced to built components and the age value of build-
ings, the regulatory and institutional systems contribute to increasing pressure on
cultural heritage that is not listed. Appropriation hence appears a key factor for the
Table 29.1 SWOT analysis of the HUL recommendation operationalization

Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats
General -Inclusive Orthogonal with Greater Development of
approach existing normative consideration of top-down initiatives
considering both framework in many heritage by poorly connected
desk-based countries appropriation and with the field
documentation of integration of
urban heritage social practices in
and perception/ cultural heritage
practices values
-Value-based Lack of funding for -Integration with Unstable political
assessment, supporting operational strategic urban regimes unfavorable
encompassing the application and planning policies to soft law
divergent heritage generalization beyond implementation,
values promoted case study sites experimentation, and
by the diffusion
stakeholders
-Combination of -Lack of connection -Integration into Growing resistance
substantive and with street-level the institutional to adaptation of
normative initiatives and regulatory frameworks issued
dimensions, so as systems from international
to support bodies in Global
goal-oriented South countries
implementation of
policies
Urban Balance between Lack of precise Capacity building Overrepresentation
river cultural and guidance for at the local level of visual aesthetic
corridors natural assets of balancing different oriented toward dimensions usually
river corridor heritage values cities instead of associated with
landscapes focusing on landscape
national actors considerations,
Consideration for Complexity regarding Development of a especially in urban
the three- decisions on what specific HUL river corridors
dimensional attributes and values methodology
nature of heritage to protect adapted to river
perception typical corridor cities
of urban river based on
corridors international best
practices
(continued)
Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats
Tripoli, Better Coming too late in the Appropriation by Increased resistance
Lebanon consideration for regeneration process socioeconomic from local actors
diversity of urban (what about corrective groups in their against such a
fabric and measures in already daily relations framework if there is
heterogeneity degraded contexts?) with local inappropriate funding
especially values authorities and or policy support for
related with the pursuit of the its application on the
everyday integration of field
landscapes and cultural heritage
informal into planning
settlements
Empowerment of Not integrated into the
the civic local regulatory
community and system
public institutions Lack of horizontal
and vertical
coordination between
stakeholders
integration of cultural heritage conservation concerns into urban planning. The

empowerment of the civil society and the application of innovative civic engage-
ment should be triggered as a way to conserve urban heritage that is not designated.
It can further foster awareness and dialogue about everyday landscapes, which are
associated with daily practices (Preece 1991), cultural expressions, and economic
and political processes. The HUL recommendation provides a toolkit to consider
heritage more fully, through appropriation and the range of heritage values pro-
moted by the stakeholders.
In river corridor cities, the documentation and mapping of the historic urban
landscapes based on a double-lens approach that is morphological/ecological and
cognitive at the same time would allow integrating sociocultural and ecological
values of rivers as genuine conservation concerns and acknowledging the signifi-
cance of everyday landscape in articulating people’s common heritage and identity.
Moreover, it provides an opportunity for the development of a case-specific meth-
odology, based on lessons learned from good practices at the international level.
Many projects that revitalize and reintegrate river corridors into city life have been
successfully applied in the past. Examples of these include the Los Angeles River
revitalization (USA); the Cheonggyecheon Stream Restoration Project in Seoul
(Korea); the Rouge River Gateway Project, Michigan (USA); the Isar Munich River
restoration project, Munich (Germany); and Madrid Rio project, Manzanares River
(Spain).
Furthermore, on the operational level, the application of the HUL recommenda-
tion in a local context is largely related to the efficiency of current legislative and
institutional frameworks for heritage conservation. Consequently, the main chal-
lenge in cities of the Global South is to adopt an international law to local contexts
and to translate concepts into practice.
29.8 Conclusion
Cultural heritage conservation remains challenging in those countries that suffer

from political instability, sectarianism, social segregation, bad economic condition,
and increasing informality. Although at the international level, cultural heritage has
been recognized as an enabler for sustainable socioeconomic development
(UNESCO 2016), the adoption of this agenda by institutional and legislative bodies
involved in urban management initiatives is still pending in many countries. When
urban development projects focus on local economic needs in isolation from the
social, cultural, and environmental issues, the potential value of cultural heritage
remains underexploited. The HUL recommendation emphasizes the opportunities
of integrating heritage conservation concerns with economic and social ones.
A road map for the application of the tools provided by the HUL recommenda-
tion should be developed. This study highlights that urban river corridors are char-
acterized by specific morphological structures that reflect the changing social and
spatial relationships between the city and the river over time. This structure plays an
important role in the identity and common heritage of local inhabitants.
In the case of Tripoli, our study highlighted that heritage designation keeps play-
ing a major role in the definition of heritage. Civic engagement is not yet fully
acknowledged as a way to elicit cultural values associated with historic urban land-
scapes. Existing regulations should be updated in order to match the definitions and
guidelines provided by the HUL recommendation. The lack of expertise in the bod-
ies involved in the daily urban development and heritage conservation is a challenge
to be addressed in this respect.
References
Al-Harithy, H. (2005). [Reframing] “World Heritage”. Traditional Dwellings and Settlements

Review, 17(1), 7–17.
Baschak, L. A., & Brown, R. D. (1995). An ecological framework for the planning, design and
management of urban river greenways. Landscape and Urban Planning, 33(1–3), 211–225.
Borie, A., Micheloni, P., & Pinon, P. (1981). Formes urbaines et sites de méandres. Groupe d’Etude
des formes architecturales et urbaines.
Castonguay, S., & Evenden, M. D. (2012). Urban rivers: Remaking rivers, cities, and space in
Europe and North America. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Cengiz, B. (2013). Urban River Landscapes. In M. Ozyavuz (Ed.), Advances in landscape archi-
tecture. Rijeka: InTech.
Everard, M., & Moggridge, H. L. (2012). Rediscovering the value of urban rivers. Urban
Ecosystems, 15(2), 293–314.
Forman, R. T. T., & Collinge, S. K. (1996). The “spatial solution” to conserving biodiversity in
landscapes and regions. In R. M. DeGraaf & R. I. Miller (Eds.), Conservation of faunal diver-
sity in forested landscapes (pp. 537–568). Dordrecht: Springer.
Francis, R. A. (2012). Positioning urban rivers within urban ecology. Urban Ecosystems, 15(2),
285–291.
Giulia, N. (2010). The forma Urbis of Aleppo(Syria) during the middle ages. In Studies in the
archaeology of the Medieval Mediterranean (pp. 115–154). Leiden/Boston: BRILL.
Grimm, N. B., Faeth, S. H., Golubiewski, N. E., Redman, C. L., Wu, J., Bai, X., & Briggs, J. M.
(2008). Global Change and the Ecology of Cities. Science, 319(5864), 756–760.
Groffman, P. M., Bain, D. J., Band, L. E., Belt, K. T., Brush, G. S., Grove, J. M., Pouyat, R. V.,
Yesilonis, I. C., & Zipperer, W. C. (2003). Down by the riverside: urban riparian ecology.
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1(6), 315–321.
Groth, P. E., & Bressi, T. W. (1997). Understanding ordinary landscapes. New Haven/London:
Yale University Press.
Guillerme, A. (1983). Les temps de l’eau: la cité, l’eau et les techniques : nord de la France : fin
IIIe-début XIXe siècle. Editions Champ Vallon.
Gulick, J. (1967). Tripoli: A modern Arab city. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hallaj, O. A. (2000). Mankali Bugha Moschee. In B. Bollmann (Ed.), Damascus – Aleppo:
5000 Jahre Stadtentwicklung in Syrien, Oldenburg: Staatliches Museum fur Naturkunde und
Vorgeschichte.
Kerr, G. N., & Swaffield, S. R. (2012). Identifying cultural service values of a small river in
the agricultural landscape of Canterbury, New Zealand, using combined methods. Society &
Natural Resources, 25(12), 1330–1339.
Le Thomas, C. (2009). Pauvreté et conditions socio-économiques à Al-Fayhâ’a : Diagnostic et
éléments de stratégie Catherine Le Thomas Décembre. l’Agence française de Développement
pour la Fédération des municipalités de Tripoli Al-Fayhâ’a.
Lundy, L., & Wade, R. (2011). Integrating sciences to sustain urban ecosystem services. Progress
in Physical Geography, 35(5), 653–669.
Marshall, R. (2001). Contemporary urban space-making at the water’s edge. In Waterfronts in
post-industrial cities (pp. 3–14). Taylor & Francis.
O’Donnell, P., & Turner, M. (2012). The historic urban landscape recommendation: A new
UNESCO tool for a sustainable future (p. 16). Cape Town: IFLA.
Otto, B., McCormick, K., & Leccese, M. (2004). Ecological riverfront design: Restoring rivers,
connecting communities. Chicago: American Planning Association.
Pedroli, B., de Blust, G., van Looy, K., & van Rooij, S. (2002). Setting targets in strategies for river
restoration. Landscape Ecology, 17(Suppl 1), 5–18.
Pickett, S. T. A., Cadenasso, M. L., & Grove, J. M. (2004). Resilient cities: meaning, models, and
metaphor for integrating the ecological, socio-economic, and planning realms. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 69(4), 369–384.
Preece, R. A. (1991). Designs on the landscape: Everyday landscapes, values, and practice. ROY
ALAN PREECE.
Price, M., & Lewis, M. (1993). The reinvention of cultural geography. Annals of the Association
of American Geographers, 83(1), 1.
Rodwell, D. (2015). Reconnecting the city: the historic landscape approach and the future of urban
heritage. Journal of Architectural Conservation, 21(2), 136–138.
Saliba, R. (2013). Historicizing early modernity – Decolonizing heritage: Conservation design
strategies in postwar Beirut. Traditional Dwellings and Settlements Review, 25(1), 724.
Sauer, C. O. (1925). The morphology of landscape. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Spirn, A. W. (2014). Ecological urbanism: A framework for the design of resilient cities. In The
ecological design and planning reader (pp. 557–571). Washington, DC: Island Press/Center for
Resource Economicsm.
UNESCO. (1953). Lebanon: suggestions for the plan of Tripoli and for the surroundings of the
Baalbek Acropolis. Report of the UNESCO mission of 1953, Paul Collart, Head of Mission,
Emir Maurice Chehab and Armando Dillon.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape. Paris: UNESCO World
Heritage Center. Retrieved from http://www.stellenboschheritage.co.za/wp-content/uploads/
UNESCO-Historic-Urban Landscapes-Recommendation-Short-Nov 2011.pdf. Accessed on 8
May 2017.
UNESCO. (2016). The historic urban landscape guidebook: Managing heritage in dynamic
and constantly changing urban environments. Retrieved from http://www.hulballarat.org.au/
resources/HUL%20Guidebook_2016_FINALWEB.pdf. Accessed on 8 May 2017.
Van Oers, R. (2013). Stone Town Of Zanzibar United Republic Of Tanzania. Presented at the
Swahili historic urban landscape. Report on the historic urban landscape workshops and field
activities on the Swahili Coast in East Africa, UNESCO.
Vollmer, D., Prescott, M. F., Padawangi, R., Girot, C., & Grêt-Regamey, A. (2015). Understanding
the value of urban riparian corridors: Considerations in planning for cultural services along an
Indonesian river. Landscape and Urban Planning, 138, 144–154.
Wu, J., & Hobbs, R. (2002). Key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology: An idiosyn-
cratic synthesis. Landscape Ecology, 17, 355–365.
Chapter 30
Zanzibar: The HUL Approach Explored
Muhammad Juma and Michael Turner
Abstract The Stone Town of Zanzibar has been a major case study for the develop-
ment of the HUL recommendation providing a continuous interaction since 2009
when the drafting group met to validate the approach in the African context. The
threats identified in the State of Conservation reporting and accompanying missions
have required new approaches to resolving these issues. Together with support from
outside funding and academic institutions, the wider context of cultural heritage
inscription has been developed and integrated into the planning processes of the
island. However, the integrated long-term planning approach changes have not been
matched by the level of management needed to address short-term local develop-
ment projects in a climate of urban poverty and unemployment. This paper traces
the steps of these interactions and evaluates the effectiveness of the various stake-
holders identified in the Historic Urban Landscape approach in achieving the targets
of the Sustainable Development Goals and New Urban Agenda.
Keywords World heritage · Historic urban landscape · Zanzibar · Ng’ambo ·

Urban heritage · Integrative development strategy · Sustainable development goals
· New urban agenda
30.1 The Islands of Zanzibar: Background
The Islands of Zanzibar were historically an integral part of the East African city-
states and of the wide network of “dhow culture” that encompassed the Indian
Ocean rim, dominated by Arabs, Portuguese and British for over half a millennium
M. Juma (*)
Department of Urban and Rural planning, Zanzibar, Tanzania
M. Turner
Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design, Jerusalem, Israel
e-mail: unescochair@bezalel.ac.il

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2_30
530 M. Juma and M. Turner
Fig. 30.1 Map of Zanzibar 1896 after the Heligoland-Zanzibar Treaty and the Anglo-Zanzibar
War; start of the British Protectorate
(Sheriff 2010). This network influenced a cosmopolitan culture in the Islands that
constitutes one of the most important testimonies of multiple heritages (Strandes
1961). After more than 70 years as a British protectorate (Fig. 30.1), Zanzibar
acquired its independence in 1963, and following the Revolution of 1964, the young
People’s Republic of Zanzibar signed the union with Tanganyika becoming the
United Republic of Tanzania. Since then, the Islands have maintained autonomy in
some portfolios, including planning and heritage, and shared others.
These city-states played the important role of the “middleman”, in the triangle of
commercial activities that involved many partners from the Indian subcontinent,
Persian Gulf and Asia. Taking advantage of its geographic position, Zanzibar was
also an important gateway to the African continent and a port to the mainland, a role
which was diminished due to social and economic transformations (Middleton
1992). At the time of independence, the economy of Zanzibar depended mostly on
the agricultural export of cloves. However, the competition of the clove market in
30 Zanzibar: The HUL Approach Explored 531
the 1970s with new producers such as Indonesia and Seychelles and price fluctuation
left the public authorities in the Islands no choice but to diversify its economic base.
In the early 1980s, Zanzibar embraced an economic liberalisation policy with the
tourism industry becoming an alternate source of economy.
Physically, the British influenced the planning history of Zanzibar, with the first
Master Plan of the town prepared in 1923 by H. V. Lanchester (Lanchester 1923).
This plan concentrated mainly on the area covering the Stone Town of Zanzibar
today, which then had a population of 36,000. Its main influences were in the con-
struction of the seafront and port and the reclamation of the Creek Road. A second
Master Plan, under the leadership of Henry Kendall in 1958, proposed for 60,000
inhabitants, expanded the historic Stone Town to cover the suburban area of
Ng’ambo (Zanzibar Government 1958), also rationalising a road network in the
town (Fig. 30.2). For the first and second plans, the Stone Town was still the centre
of Zanzibar town.
Fig. 30.2 World heritage nomination

In 1968, Zanzibar Town, with a total population of 68,000, prepared its third
Master Plan under the direction of Hubert Scholz when the government first decided
to shift the centre of the Zanzibar town from Stone Town to Ng’ambo (Zanzibar
Government 1968). However, it was in 1982, within the fourth Master Plan, pre-
pared by Chinese planners to accommodate the predicted 300,000 inhabitants by
2000 that the role of tourism became important with the Stone Town designated as
a tourism area (Zanzibar Government 1982). This policy was further developed by
a team of experts from the United Nations Centre for Human Settlement (UNCHS),
arriving during the same period to advise the Government of Zanzibar on how to
protect the historic buildings of the Stone Town (United Nations Centre for Human
Settlement 1983). These decisions accentuated the discontinuity between the Stone
Town and its hinterland.
Subsequently in 1983, the World Tourism Organization (WTO) prepared a
Master Plan for tourism development in the Islands (World Tourism Organization
1983). The plan proposed two types of tourism development, in the historic Stone
Town and along the beach areas in the coastal zones. Although the two types
emerged from the same initiative, for a long time they developed independently,
before converging on the growing heritage significance of the Stone Town.
Parallel to the development within the Stone Town, and with the support from the
Finnish government, in 1995 a National Land Use Plan (NLUP) was prepared to
include the coastal areas (Commission of Land and Environment 1995). The NLUP
integrated an earlier 1993 Tourism Zoning Plan, thus forming a comprehensive
National Land Use Plan, as the spatial framework of the islands for the following
20 years with its main emphases on tourism and settlement (Ali and Sulaiman
2002). With time, the government also realised the key role of the historic and cul-
tural significance of the Stone Town in the development of the tourism industry.
Zanzibar has made huge steps in developing the tourism industry from only 7827
arrivals in 1980; the number reached 376,242 in 2016. Again, while in 1982, there
were only 7 hotels with 285 beds, these figures jumped to 354 hotels and 13,037
beds by 2015.1 Currently, tourism is the most important contributor of the foreign
exchange in Zanzibar and Tanzania nationally. This social and economic transfor-
mation not only reorientated the spatial framework of the islands but also influenced
a new linkage between urban and rural territories.
It was the UNCHS report that leads to the establishment of the Stone Town
Conservation and Development Authority (STCDA) in 1985 and the preservation of
the historic town and which finally received recognition in the preparation of the
Master Plan of the historic Stone Town in 1996, by the Aga Khan team (Siravo
1996). They adopted the concept of “conservation areas”, derived from the 1983
report of UNCHS, with the concept further isolating the Stone Town from its
extended territory. This situation was accentuated by the fact that STCDA, being
responsible for the management of the conservation area, was not involved in the
planning processes of the extended territory of the urban area, under the Zanzibar
Zanzibar Government, Zanzibar Tourism Commission, 2015, and the Office of the Chief
1
Government Statistician, Zanzibar Figures 2016, Zanzibar, 2017.

Municipal Council (ZMC). Yet, it was under the enthusiastic guidance of the
STCDA that the Stone Town of Zanzibar, in 2000, was successfully inscribed on the
UNESCO World Heritage List. It should be noted that the inscribed area included a
large buffer zone on land and sea2 (Fig. 30.2).
30.2 W
orld Heritage and the Evolving Historic Urban
Landscape Recommendation
The World Heritage inscription not only had influenced the development of the
inscribed property but also increased the role of Zanzibar town within the changes on
the Islands. These development pressures had started to weaken the management
system of the Stone Town as emerged in 2006 during the first ICOMOS monitoring
mission. Then the new port construction sounded a “wake-up call” to the heritage
community, with the seafront development proposals triggering concerns that were
well expressed in the 2008 second monitoring mission (Bakker and Eloundou 2008).3
With further economic growth, influenced mostly by the tourism industry, a man-
agement system was produced through a consultative approach under the supervi-
sion of STCDA. However, this management plan approved in 2008 failed to mitigate
development pressures. Moreover, based on the decisions of the World Heritage
Committee in 2007 and 2008, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was
requested for the Malindi Port, with ICOMOS specifying an Environmental and
Cultural Impact Assessment in 2008. This request changed to an Environmental
and Social Impact Assessment in 2010 (emphasis added) which was answered with
the submission of a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) document prepared in 2011.
This was followed by further reactive comments indicating “that there are major
threats that still need to be addressed” and that the World Heritage Committee
requested a report “with a view to considering, in the case of confirmation of the
2
Further to the inscription of the Stone Town of Zanzibar as a fine example of the Swahili coastal
trading towns of East Africa in 2000, a Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value
was adopted in 2015:
Criterion (ii): The Stone Town of Zanzibar is an outstanding material manifestation of cultural
fusion and harmonisation.
Criterion (iii): For many centuries there was intense seaborne trading activity between Asia and
Africa, and this is illustrated in an exceptional manner by the architecture and urban structure
of the Stone Town.
Criterion (vi): Zanzibar has great symbolic importance in the suppression of slavery, since it was
one of the main slave-trading ports in East Africa and also the base from which its opponents,
such as David Livingstone, conducted their campaign.
3
This report and subsequent missions identified among the threats:
(a) Development pressures, (b) environmental pressures in relation with the Malindi port project,
(c) natural disasters and lack of risk preparedness, (d) visitors/ tourist pressures,
(e) lack of resources, (f) lack of legal framework and (g) weak urban/heritage governance
ascertained or potential danger to Outstanding Universal Value, the possible inscrip-

tion of the property on the World Heritage List in Danger”.4
As it can be understood, threats such as development pressure, traffic and mobil-
ity, weak urban governance and natural disasters related to a broader urban context
outside the parametre of World Heritage Site and the scope of the
STCDA. Furthermore, these threats needed comprehensive solutions beyond the
jurisdiction of the UNESCO-inscribed property boundaries. In reality, they could
also be interpreted as challenges to the management system of the property because
the historic city could no longer sustain the increasing pressure of urban change and
development. The case of the Stone Town of Zanzibar was not unique but yet
another example of challenges faced by historic cities. It however underlines the
importance of understanding the historic environment within the wider urban con-
text. This is well reflected in the changing attitudes of the World Heritage Committee
to urban heritage since the 2005 Vienna Memorandum.
In 2009, Zanzibar became the venue for one of the preliminary discussions in the
process of preparing the final texts of the HUL Recommendation, highlighting the
African context on one hand and the issues that were being faced in Zanzibar on the
other. During these discussions, the Stone Town provided a case study to better
understand the urban heritage processes and was analysed to offer the local authori-
ties an input for an improved management system and integrated development of
the historic city within large urban context. They recommended that the STCDA
“develop implementation strategies for its comprehensive management system and
prioritized action plan, with the relevant authorities and stakeholders”,5 including
policies, decision-making and actions. Although the HUL Recommendation was
not yet formulated, it was clear to the participants that Stone Town required an inno-
vative comprehensive approach towards development guidelines and management
processes. This meeting brought new ideas on the meanings of urban heritage, influ-
enced the revision of the whole planning system of the Islands and provided new
insights to the HUL Recommendation.
30.3 T
he New Zanzibar Planning Process and the HUL
Approach
In 2011, a fully fledged Department of Urban and Rural Planning (DoURP) was
established, and the NLUP was reviewed in order to formulate a new spatial frame-
work of the islands (Fig. 30.3). The process of this revision coincided with the
involvement of Zanzibar in the consultation meetings to discuss the application of
the HUL Recommendations in the African context. It was clear to the Zanzibar
4
World Heritage Committee Decision: 35 COM 7B.45; Stone Town of Zanzibar (United Republic
of Tanzania) (C 173rev)
5
Zanzibar Recommendation on the Application of the Concept of the Historic Urban Landscape In
The African Context, Zanzibar, 30 November–3 December 2009.
Fig. 30.3 Evolution of the planning documents for Zanzibar, columns from left to right, National
Plans for the Island, Master Plans for the City, Plans for the Stone Town – tourism, heritage
including HUL workshops and World Heritage missions
The future plans include a National Plan for 2030 and a NUP for the City which should engage the
NUA and the HUL Recommendation
decision-makers that for the economic role to be sustainable, the relationships

between the Stone Town, its hinterland and coastal areas need to be enhanced. The
importance of the HUL approach was very well understood, as the strategy to
anchor the Stone Town in its wider territory.
This HUL workshop, as the title suggested, addressed the application of the HUL
approach so that the gathering intended not only to go beyond the 2009 meeting
but also to test the four tools proposed in the draft recommendation. One clear
c onclusion of the meeting was that the participants encouraged the local authority
to promote public-private partnerships and cooperation for identifying and testing
tools and procedures adapted to the context of Zanzibar. For that and since 2012,
several initiatives aiming to influence a heritage-based urban regeneration to achieve
sustainable urbanisation were sponsored with the support of the City of Amsterdam,
the Stadsherstel and the Swiss Landscape Architecture Association. Exchanges with
various universities in Tanzania and abroad were encouraged to attract students to
conduct HUL-related research with Zanzibar as the case study. These initiatives
brought on board Swedish and Dutch expertise together with student input from
Minnesota, Sheffield, Chalmers and Amsterdam Universities and were an important
part of the process to integrate culture in spatial planning and to enhance the role of
urban heritage into a new planning system. It also had far-reaching consequences by
raising awareness, especially in the academic world.
The functions of the newly established DoURP, with its function as facilitator
and main advocate, were significant, and the innovating changes must be attributed
to the key local players. Their first tasks were to address the decisions of the World
Heritage Committee of 2010 (34COM 7B.54) in preparing an EIA/HIA document
in 2011. This was followed by further reactive comments indicating “that there are
major threats that still need to be addressed”. Subsequently, in 2013, the ICOMOS
mission added an independent Visual Impact Assessment (emphasis added). The
different nomenclatures of the impact assessments required cause confusion in the
application of assessments in the diverse planning regimes. Perhaps, it was for this
reason the joint 2014 Reactive Monitoring Report determined that “an integrated
and sustainable conservation and development approaches are urgently needed in
order to develop practical sustainable management strategies to ensure that the over-
all coherence of the town and its highly distinctive town planning, architecture and
traditional methods and materials of construction are sustained” (UNESCO,
ICCROM, ICOMOS 2014).
The need to enhance the role of culture as driver and enabler of socio-economic
development of the Islands was appreciated as a strategy to reinforce urban and
rural linkage. Consequently, instead of reviewing the NLUP of 1995, DoURP
decided to formulate a new spatial framework, the National Spatial Development
Strategy (NSDS). The most important decision was to completely modify the vision
and objectives, firstly, through the direction of development to strengthen urban-
rural linkages, and enhance cultural tourism with an emphasis on urban heritage.
Secondly, the role of urbanisation for economic growth was emphasised, with par-
ticular attention on the need to look at sustainable urbanisation. The NSDS was
officially adopted in 2015 reforming the planning system to allow for a continuous
urban development between the historic city and its wider territory. This strategy, in
2015 and 2016, added to the existing STCDA Board a group of new players, includ-
ing the Development Control Unit (DCU), the Stakeholders’ Forum and the Heritage
Board of Zanzibar.
For that reason, the NSDS supported the idea to create a new city centre of the
Zanzibar town, in the buffer zone, as had emerged from the research work in
2015 for the fifth Master Plan (structural plan) of Zanzibar. It was also seen as a
reasonable solution to the challenges faced by the management system of the Stone
Town, which was functioning as the Zanzibar town centre and offered little oppor-
tunities for growth due to physical constraints. The development of a new city cen-
tre in the buffer zone would potentially generate “an added layer of protection” of
the Outstanding Universal Value by reducing the economic heat in the historic cen-
tre and with a potential to vitalise the social and economic components of Zanzibar
town. Hence, the change of the status of the Ng’ambo buffer zone as a part of the
new city centre would enhance the role of sustainable urbanisation and improve a
desired continuity between the Stone Town and its hinterland through a single man-
agement plan including the buffer zone, coordinated by the ZMC and the STCDA.
30.4 A
pplying the Recommendation on the Historic Urban
Landscape: Integrative Development Strategies
With the 2011 UNESCO approval of the HUL Recommendation, a report on the
Historic Urban Landscape Workshops and Field Activities on the Swahili Coast in
East Africa 2011–2012 (UNESCO World Heritage Centre 2013) was prepared that
included recommendations on the historic towns of Zanzibar, Lamu and Ilha de
Mozambique.6 These activities, with the participation of the late Dr. Ron van Oers
who was then coordinating the city programme at UNESCO, were another impor-
tant contribution to the understanding of the real-world issues of urban heritage
conservation. Following this, a process was started for the preparation of the Local
Area Plan (LAP) of the Zanzibar city centre based on the HUL Recommendation.
Although the tools were not applied one by one, the procedures were followed by
mapping beyond “the ‘historic centre’ and ‘ensemble’ to include the broader urban
context and its geographical setting” (UNESCO 2011).
In Zanzibar, the implementation of the HUL Recommendation was also a start-
ing point to look beyond sectorial challenges and land-zoning concepts to reflect on
the emerging UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). An international Expert
Workshop and Stakeholder Conference took place in February 2014, entitled The
Zanzibar HUL Initiative that encouraged the idea of evaluating the development of
the Stone Town under the scope of an extended territory. It highlighted the socio-
economic transformations taking place at this crucial time leading “to increased
pressure on land, natural resources, the historic environment, urban infrastructure,
housing and the quality of community life. Investors are keen, and isolated projects
are plentiful, but the coordination between them is challenging. There is a real con-
cern for the future sustainability of urban Zanzibar…”. This initiative focussed not
only on changing the minds and attitudes towards heritage from the monument to
6
This was also the subject of a special essay on Culture and Urban Development in Zanzibar by
Muhammad Juma – Can UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape play a
role in developing a Spatial Strategy for Culture? (UNESCO World Heritage Centre 2013)
pp. 74–76.
Fig. 30.4 View towards the Park Hotel, the subject of tourist over-development (Juma)
the living city but also allowing the planners with a disciplinary “silo approach”, to
appreciate culture as an enabler for sustainable development. With the overall objec-
tive of the NSDS to promote local culture and harness the transformative force of
urbanisation, the target is to make Zanzibar one of the most sustainable islands in
Africa by 2030. At the urban level, this means a New Urban Policy (NUP) by apply-
ing the HUL Recommendation, so as to meet these targets of the SDGs and the New
Urban Agenda (NUA). However, the development pressures and urgent needs for
investment to address poverty and unemployment have strained the capacity of local
government to manage the long-term advantages of sustainability. In reviewing the
threats of the tourist development projects (Fig. 30.4) and port upgrading, the four
joint World Heritage evaluation missions between 2013 and 2016 failed to
encompass the wider socio-economic issues that may be addressed through strong
coordinated governance and a comprehensive planning approach.
Although the local professionals saw the potential for applying the
Recommendation on the HUL as an approach to understanding the wider context,
none of the earlier ICOMOS/ICCROM missions made mention of the
Recommendation in the State of Conservation reporting or its potential role, and it
has never been indicated in the World Heritage Committee decisions. This created
a further dissonance in the messages conveyed to the state party. Further confusion
was provided by the demands for an HIA which was still biased towards sites and
groups of buildings and lacking an integrative urban approach being detached from
Fig. 30.5 Civic engagement for facilitating the negotiation between groups with conflicting inter-
ests during the development of the Local Area Plan: community participation in one of the vision-
ing events in Ng’ambo
the complexities of national planning processes and mechanisms. Moreover, the

ICOMOS directive (ICOMOS 2011) on HIA clearly stated that “an HIA under-
taken as part of an EIA [for a World Heritage property] is not additional to normal
EIA requirements, but uses a different methodology which clearly focusses on
OUV…” (emphasis added), Vrooment et al. (2012).
The LAP for the city centre with the HUL approach offered more advantages, as
it mobilised and bridged the two important sectors of development – culture and
planning. Lately, there has been a desire to find a common language so as to view
“public space”, “compactness” and “urban and rural linkage” in the NUA as having
an equal prominence with the UNESCO concepts of “outstanding value”,
“monument” and “creativity”. This is now the challenge for applying the HUL
Recommendation in supporting sustainable urbanisation.
Sustainable urbanisation is not only in time between generations but in space
between areas; the Stone Town sustains the development in Ng’ambo, and Ng’ambo
sustains the conservation of the Stone Town. “Linking culture and nature” is another
critical concept for sustainability and may be applied by utilising the natural low-
lying open spaces in the Ng’ambo buffer zone as part of an environmental and
“urban sponge”. As such, the NSDS has identified this “urban sponge” for flood
management and effective risk preparation for climate change, encouraging the
linkage between open space and urban functions and to enhance cultural resilience.
It has also created a favourable attitude for investment with the World Bank,
initiating an important project (Green Corridor) affecting the revitalisation of both

the Stone Town and the new city centre. The HUL approach in Zanzibar has also
opened new opportunities allowing Zanzibar to embrace the sustainable urban
development goals and NUA as an evolving planning process.
Finally, the Recommendation of the 2017 UNESCO/ICOMOS Advisory Mission
noted that “owing to the complexity of problems, the range of stakeholders and
actors and the diversity of factors affecting the Stone Town”, it was concluded that
“the time has come to implement a cross-cutting task team to steer the property back
on course”. This is a step in the right direction if the context of the wider socio-
economic problems is also to be addressed.
30.5 Lessons from Zanzibar and the Way Forward
The spatial discontinuity between the historic town of Zanzibar and its buffer zone
in Ng’ambo has its historic context. When multidisciplinary authorities who are
dealing with spatial planning are not under the same umbrella, the discontinuity is
inherent in the system. In Zanzibar, three separate institutions are dealing with plan-
ning, conservation and urban development. Where professionals in these fields do
not have a common platform to interact and bridge their professional views, imple-
mentation of the HUL approach is challenging, and the convenience of the project-
by-project approach remains. The retrospective analysis reveals both the strengths
and opportunities afforded by the HUL approach in Zanzibar. Following the intro-
duction of the approach, the planning actions were engaged to craft a common
vision for the development of the Zanzibar city centre. This effort minimised the
conflicting relationships between the STCDA and ZMC, enhanced the management
of the Stone Town and also provided a platform to discuss comprehensive issues of
sustainable development (Fig. 30.5). In Zanzibar, with regard to civil society, the
most important outputs of HUL process can be classified into four realms:
(i) The better understanding of social and cultural values of the town:
An encounter with the inhabitants was essential to practically realise that
the cultural-based heritage is a value-based methodology.
(ii) The emergence of civic conscience for the inhabitants of the town:
This new value-based approach in an era of sustainability and resilience is
a new paradigm of “planning by the people”.
(iii) Relations between conservation management and development:
The inhabitants of the buffer zone (Ng’ambo) started to believe in the equi-
librium between conservation and development and link between urban heri-
tage and sustainable urbanisation.
(iv) Partnership towards sustainable development:
The exchange of knowledge and sharing of experiences between north-
south and south-south enhances the capacity and confidence of local actors to
face challenges of the newly urbanised society and environment.
The positive results of the pilot work have encouraged partners to cooperate in
applying the four tools of HUL.7 This process also provides some lessons to reflect
on the implementation of the HUL Recommendation, as a catalyst for an integrative
development strategy in the African context. In Zanzibar, the process was organised
under the planning department, which is a centralised institution, dealing with urban
and rural planning. The working culture of this recently established institution
enables the emergence of creative ideas and attitudes that bridge culture, heritage
and a value-based approach within the urban planning practice. With traditional
practice in planning, conservation and heritage, local institutions are still hesitant in
sharing their power, thereby weakening the capacity to manage and develop both
the Stone Town and the Zanzibar town. Consequently, Zanzibar town, especially the
historic part, becomes vulnerable to development pressure. Although the HUL
approach advocates integration, professionals still camp on their traditional posi-
tion; more awareness and pedagogic tools are needed to influence a novel approach.
The years 2015 and 2016 have seen four critical global documents relating to our
cities – the UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) Sendai
Framework for Resilient Cities, the UN SDGs, the Paris Agreement on Climate
Change and the UN-Habitat III NUA together with the UNESCO Global Report on
Culture: Urban Futures (UNESCO Culture Sector 2016). Currently, the HUL
Recommendation is supporting the SDGs and particularly Goal 11, safeguarding
the world’s cultural heritage “to make our cities and human settlements safe, inclu-
sive, resilient and sustainable”. All these documents are relevant to the conservation
of urban heritage, and we have, as of yet, to bring this debate to a common denomi-
nator to ensure an intelligent application of these tools for local professionals. The
multiplicity of papers and directives creates misunderstandings at the local level and
a bureaucracy that brings urban heritage into the realms of being the enemy of
progress.
It seems that for the HUL approach to gain priority within national planning
programmes, it will have to address these global agendas. In the case of Zanzibar,
the planning authority has the chance to engage the UN-Habitat in its process to
prepare a NUP as a tool for NUA; as such, HUL will be part of the implementation
of NUA. Yet in a situation where the HUL Recommendation has been anchored in
the cultural sector alone, the HUL approach will be marginalised and lose its prior-
ity in the national agenda.
A more effective evaluation methodology for understanding the causes and
effects of non-sustainable development on the city in general and the urban heritage
in particular is needed. Rather than independent HIAs, the EU has prepared simpli-
fied guidelines for an integrative impact assessment process, defining “material
assets, cultural heritage and the landscape” as components of “environment” and
7
(a) Civic engagement tools, (b) knowledge and planning tools, (c) regulatory systems, (d) finan-
cial tools.
demanded simplification in the material collected and distributed.8 Assessments are

now being required for heritage and risk together with other socio-economic factors
of the city. This integrative approach should be adopted by the World Heritage
Committee, while an up-to-date paper should be prepared that will increase the
applicability of the Recommendation on the HUL demonstrating how the 2015–
2016 global documents can be used for culture as an enabler for sustainable devel-
opment. This document should also prioritise the issues of “inclusive, safe, resilient
and sustainable” and translate them into urban actions that will allow urban heritage
to influence growth accommodating new urban values on walkability, density and
the green city. The EU actions of URBACT/HerO (City of Regensburg 2011) and
SUIT (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation 2005)9 provide a body of
knowledge, and the unpublished work of the World Heritage Centre builds on these
characterisations to recommend a more comprehensive taxonomy for use in the
World Heritage arena and beyond.
A major debate in the application of the Recommendation is in the understanding
as to whether the Historic Urban Landscape is being used as a category. In spite of
much exposure to the HUL Recommendation, it has been difficult to explain the
terminology as an approach. This is more than critical inasmuch as the proposal to
use a term “urban heritage” has not been seriously debated, though there have been
a number of documents that expand on this and similar terms. The gathering of the
many global examples for the HUL reporting to the UNESCO General Conference
in 2019 and the reopening of Annex 3 of the World Heritage Operational Guidelines
will be a major milestone in the evolution of the role of urban heritage for the city
of the future.
The authors would like to recognise the dedication of their colleague the late
Professor Karel Bakker in the evaluations of the heritage values of the Stone
Town of Zanzibar.
8
The Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014
amended the Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private
projects on the environment and in the promotion of efforts to simplify the preparation of impact
assessments.
9
HerO, Heritage as Opportunity, was to develop integrated and innovative management strategies
for historic urban landscapes and was part of the URBACT action being the European Territorial
Cooperation programme aiming to foster sustainable integrated urban development in cities across
Europe. SUIT was a programme for sustainable development of urban historical areas through an
active integration within towns.
References
Ali, M. H., & Sulaiman, M. S. (2002). The making and contents of Zanzibar national land use
plan: A brief account on a donor funded project. FIG XXII international congress – Urban
regeneration and environment, Washington, DC.
Bakker, K. A., & Eloundou, L. A. (2008). Mission to the Stone Town of Zanzibar. Paris: UNESCO
World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS.
City of Regensburg. (2011). The road to success – Integrated management of historic towns
guidebook (p. 83). Regensburg: City of Regensburg.
Commission of Land and Environment. (1995). National land use plan: 1. Appraisal – Analysis of
potentials and issues 2. Policies and proposals. Zanzibar: COLE.
Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2005). Guidance for the environmental assess-
ment of the impacts of certain plans, programmes or projects upon the heritage value of his-
torical areas, in order to contribute to their long-term sustainability (Research report no. 16).
Luxembourg: The Publications Office of the European Union.
ICOMOS. (2011). Guidance on heritage impact assessments for cultural world heritage proper-
ties. Paris: ICOMOS.
Lanchester, H. V. (1923). Zanzibar, a study in tropical town planning. Cheltenham: Ed. J. Burrow
&, Ltd.
Middleton, J. (1992). The world of the Swahili: An African Mercantile civilization. New Haven:
Yale University Press.
Sheriff, A. (2010). Dhow cultures of the Indian Ocean – Cosmopolitanism, commerce and Islam.
London: C. Hurst & Company.
Siravo, F. (1996). A plan for the historic Stone Town. In Historic Cities Support Programme (Ed.),
Zanzibar Stone Town projects (pp. 34–47). Geneva: Aga Khan Trust for Culture.
Strandes, J. (1961). The Portuguese period in East Africa (J. Kirkman, Ed.). (J. F. Wallwork,
Trans.). Nairobi: East African Literature Bureau.
UNESCO. (2011). Recommendation on the historic urban landscape (p. 6). Recommendation.
Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO Culture Sector. (2016). Culture urban future – Global report on culture for sustainable
urban development (p. 304). Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO, ICCROM, ICOMOS. (2014). Joint reactive monitoring mission to the Stone Town of
Zanzibar. Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
UNESCO World Heritage Centre. (2013). Swahili historic urban landscapes – Report on the HUL
workshops and field activities on the Swahili Coast in East Africa 2011–2012 (p. 127). Paris:
UNESCO.
United Nations Centre for Human Settlement. (1983). The Stone Town of Zanzibar: A strategy for
an integrated approach. Nairobi: United Nations Centre for Human Settlement.
Vroomen, Y., ten Hoope, D., Moor, B., Pereira-Roders, A., Veldpaus, L., & Colenbrander, B.
(2012). Assessing the cultural significance of world heritage cities: Zanzibar as a case-
study. 6th international seminar on measuring heritage conservation performance. CECI and
ICCROM, pp. 67–74.
World Tourism Organization. (1983). Zanzibar Tourism Development Plan. Madrid: World
Tourism Organization.
Zanzibar Government. (1958). Zanzibar Planning Scheme. Zanzibar.
Zanzibar Government. (1968). Zanzibar Town Scheme. Zanzibar.
Zanzibar Government. (1982). Zanzibar Master Plan. Zanzibar.
Case Study Boxes: Full Text
. Applying the Recommendations on Historic Urban

1
Landscape: Post-conflict Reconciliation in Old Aleppo
Ataa Alsalloum
Aleppo, Syria
Old Aleppo has been severely damaged as a consequence of the armed conflict in
Syria, started 2011. Despite such devastation, Old Aleppo, as a historic urban land-
scape site, has strong opportunities for recovery. This would be achieved if the his-
toric urban landscape (HUL) was applied as an inclusive reconciliation tool. The
HUL approach creates a balance between tangible reconstruction and intangible
reconciliation, as it integrates urban heritage reconstruction and sociocultural, eco-
nomic, and moral revitalization. HUL aims to safeguarding not only the values of
the national and international communities but also the traditions, knowledge, and
the values of heritage for its local communities. Indeed, the values of the ancient
city of Aleppo are not only in its tangible designation values, but they are also
embodied in its intangible attributes. The reconstruction of its survived structures
and exceptional monuments, such as the citadel, great mosque, khans, souks,
churches, and hammams, should be reinforced by revitalizing its previous tradi-
tional sociocultural and economic traditions, knowledge, and activities. This should
be proceeded by a practical application of the HUL through cooperation between
the international bodies, local authorities, and, most important, Old Aleppo’s
communities.
Related to Chap. 3.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2
546 Case Study Boxes: Full Text
. Understanding to What Extent the HUL Approach Is

2
Present in Amsterdam’s Local Urban and Heritage Policies

Amsterdam, The Netherlands
This project aims to understand to what extent the HUL approach is present in
Amsterdam’s urban and heritage policies. The research is based on a series of three
workshops (2014) and six peer interviews (2016). Heritage management processes
are systematically compared and discussed in relation to heritage concepts, using a
policy analysis matrix (Veldpaus, 2015), following the “critical HUL steps.” This is
done not to judge the appropriateness of local policies or rate their successfulness,
but rather to understand which concepts of heritage are used and how they are
applied. The results are used to facilitate further debate and learning, using the
insights and reflections that emerged. The wider aim of the research is to develop
and test a method to undertake systematic comparison of policies that can facilitate
inclusive debate on the concepts and ideas that define local and international heri-
tage management.
Related to Chap. 6.
Reference:
Veldpaus, L. (2015). Historic urban landscapes: framing the integration of urban
and heritage planning in multilevel governance. Eindhoven. Retrieved from
http://www.tue.nl/en/publication/ep/p/d/ep-uid/482697/
. Overarching Urban Planning Guidelines for the Historic

3
Perimeter of Asmara
Dennis Rodwell
Asmara, Eritrea
The objective of this mission was to prepare overarching guidelines for the historic
perimeter of Asmara in the context of the city as a whole, coordinating specialist
studies already prepared and in hand, all to promote a holistic approach to heritage
protection and sustainable urban development. The mission was undertaken within
the framework of the Cultural Assets Rehabilitation Project (CARP), an initiative of
the Eritrean government and people supported by the World Bank; the mission coin-
cided with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre’s Regional Meeting on Modern
Heritage held in March 2004. A major determinant was understanding and respect
for Asmara’s multilayered, interactive, and evolving tangible and intangible cultural
Case Study Boxes: Full Text 547
heritage traditions, embracing indigenous cultures, the colonial and Modernist era,
and today’s status as the capital city of a re-emerging nation.
Reference:
Rodwell, D. (2004). Asmara, Eritrea: Conservation and development in a historic
city. Journal of Architectural Conservation, 10(3), p. 4 and pp. 41–58.
4. Historic Urban Landscape: Ballarat

Ballarat, Australia
The city of Ballarat was part of the pilot phase for the HUL approach. The city of
Ballarat was part of the pilot phase for the HUL approach. HUL has been applied as
a whole-of-city development framework in response to challenges such as the city’s
above-trend growth projections, climate change, and a changing economic future.
HUL has helped the city move heritage from being a single planning consideration
to central to the future of the city. A strong focus on participatory engagement has
enabled local citizens to lead how their city evolves and, as a result, transformed the
city’s approach to urban conservation and city management, energizing practitio-
ners, citizens, and stakeholders. HUL has enabled strong policy commitment to a
future for the city that builds on its distinctive identity and diverse cultures, embraces
sustainable development principles, and strengthens community pride in place, live-
ability, and well-being. Ballarat’s experience shows that practices can be trans-
formed in local government, other levels of government, and heritage.
Related to Chap. 7.
Further Reading:
www.hulballarat.org.au; www.visualisingballarat.org.au
5. Centro Cultural Kirchner (CCK)
Francesca Ferlicca
Buenos Aires, Argentina
The Centro Cultural Kirchner is a cultural center located in downtown Buenos

Aires. It is modern and has wide space, dedicated to fine, performing, visual, and
digital arts, education, conferences, and exhibitions, completely open and free to the
public. It was opened on May 2015 and is located in the former Central Post Office,
declared National Historic Monument in 1997. By 2009 the last-century building
has been converted into the fourth largest cultural center in the world. Among its
main attractions are La Ballena Azul, a symphonic music hall, a chamber music
room, a hanging glass structure that emulates a great lamp, and La Cupula, the illu-
minated dome. Since its inauguration, it represents an important landmark that
enhances community engagement, participation, and valorization of local heritage.
According to the HUL recommendation, the project involves communities, deci-
sion-makers, and professionals, in order to foster understanding of the historic
urban landscape.
Further Reading:
http://www.cck.gob.ar
6. Mapping the Historic Centre of Bukhara
Ona Vileikis and Sanjarbek Allayarov

Bukhara, Uzbekistan
During 5 years, a multicultural, multidisciplinary, and multi-institutional team sur-

veyed the Historic Centre of Bukhara, World Heritage property. The Silk Roads
opened the doors to the team who conducted door-to-door interviews to the resi-
dents and owners, as well as the condition and value assessment of the dwellings
and cultural heritage within the historic center. In total 4063 dwellings were sur-
veyed, including around a hundred traditional Bukharian houses and 180 historic
buildings. Information, including photographic records, was stored as a geographic
information system (GIS) database that served the responsible authorities to develop
the management plan and will support the future decision-making. Although the
mapping of the historic city started 3 years before the HUL recommendation was
adopted, its aim was in line with the HUL first step: mapping in order to first under-
stand what you have.
Related to Chap. 9.
Further Reading:
unesco.org/new/en/tashkent/about-this-office/single-view/news/kheili_kheili_
protecting_our_heritage
7. HUL in Historic Cairo: A Potential Community Initiative
Alaa El-Habashi
Cairo, Egypt
Historic Cairo is among the largest WH city, with numerous attributes of outstand-
ing value to be protected, a task considered as limitations for development and as
burdens on local authorities. The somewhat protection of buildings registered as
monuments is an effort whose effect is negligible considering the vast historic built
fabric, mostly listed as imminent for collapse, and consistently being demolished.
Heritage lovers and conservation activists been aware of the continuous disfigu-
ration started to intervene. The experience explained here started saving a historic
building with the support of UNESCO from a demolition decree. Once the building
was bought and restored, values started to gradually surface to raise the apprecia-
tions of the community members and some local authorities. This has led to estab-
lish in the building a center for the regeneration of the historic city which mediates
between the local community and the various related authorities and attracts new
owners to restore other vacant historic buildings. The center also surveys the local
crafts in order to develop them as means to sustain local economy and to raise
appreciation to local heritage. In addition, a community awareness program empow-
ers women through heritage activities and crafts and teaches kids cultural aspects
such as the Arabic calligraphy and geometric bases of decorative designs of sur-
rounding buildings. The experience has attracted more appreciations and larger
community engagement, confirming that Historic Cairo needs its community lead-
ership to manage its neighborhoods through the support of the local authorities.
Even though scattered in Historic Cairo, this experience and few others are gaining
momentum to confirm that the civil society is capable to employ available tools to
apply HUL approach in order to regenerate the WH city.
Further Reading:
https://www.facebook.com/TurathGroup/
. Reassessment of the Cultural and Natural Heritage

8
of the City of Cuenca Based on Strategies for Sustainable
Development Supported by the Recommendation
on Historical Urban Landscape
Julia Rey-Pérez, Sebastián Astudillo Cordero, and María Eugenia Siguencia Ávila

Cuenca, Ecuador
The implementation process of the HUL approach in Cuenca has been an initiative
led by the Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism of the University of Cuenca,
Ecuador, funded by the Research Department of the same university (DIUC), and
supported by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science of the Netherlands (in
trust with UNESCO). Through a research project, whose main axes have been inter-
disciplinarity, citizen involvement, and commitment to a new way of dealing with
heritage, it has been wanted to understand and value the urban heritage of Cuenca
beyond the declaration as World Heritage. Using the definition of HUL, the six
steps, and the tools suggested by the recommendation, an applied research method-
ology has been developed that, based on the values and cultural attributes defined by
all the possible actors, has allowed the definition of a series of good practices to
ensure sustainable urban development in the city of Cuenca.
Related to Chap. 11.
Further Reading:
https://go-hul.com/2016/11/08/cuenca-ecuador/
. Mapping Economic Landscape for the UNESCO World

9
Heritage City Old Towns of Djenné
Christian Ost
Djenné, Mali
In March to April 2009, a short survey was conducted (prepared by Kathleen Louw,
Getty Conservation Institute), in collaboration with the Cultural Mission of Djenné.
The questions were structured to roughly capture the direct and indirect use values
of Djenné’s built heritage for the year 2008. The survey covered 13 neighborhoods
(for rental values, conservation projects), 11 visited cultural sites (for conservation
and visitor fee values), and 16 heritage-related businesses (hotels, restaurants, punt
transport, art and crafts, masons, guides). The Djenné test case was aimed to collect
data to test the digital mapping in order to measure use values of the city’s heritage.
Nonmarket benefits were not addressed in the survey. Ymoussa Fané, Chief of the
Cultural Mission of Djenné, coordinated the survey completion with the local tour-
ism, urbanism, and other authorities and provided data on which the neighborhoods,
historic buildings, and business were identified. Final mapping provided a tentative
rendering of historic economic landscape of the place, which was included in a
report on Heritage Economics in Historic Cities, by Prof. Christian Ost, in-resi-
dence scholar at the Getty Conservation Institute in 2008–2009.
0. Sense of Place: Toward Integrated Conservation

1
and Sustainable Urban
Hiba Alkhalaf
Edinburgh, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
This research initiates a critical dialogue to understand the possible roles of sense of
place within heritage conservation and sustainable urban development. It proposes
that sense of place-based approach can be used as a tool to analyze development
projects within its wider cultural and natural landscape. This tool unpacks the com-
plexity of local values and global narratives contributed to the construction of sense
of place. By effectively engaging various users and stakeholders, it redefines heri-
tage management to achieve more efficient integration within the planning system.
Through applying this approach to the case of Edinburgh, it shows that the role of
sense of place in the historic urban landscape can be channeled into three main
dimensions: the place itself (value assessment and designations), the people (stake-
holders and public participation), and the process (planning system and policies). It
concludes that sustaining sense of place entails balancing three main goals: con-
serving the physical structure, the suitability of new use, and community
development.
1. University of Pennsylvania Planning Praxis Course: How

1
Do the HUL, Sustainable Development Goals, and New Urban
Agenda Fit into a Local Planning Framework
Donovan Rypkema
Galway, Ireland
Each year the graduate program in Historic Preservation at the University of

Pennsylvania in the United States conducts a planning praxis course at an interna-
tional location. In 2017 this was done in County Galway, Ireland, in collaboration
with ICOMOS/Ireland and the Architectural Conservation Office of the Planning
Department. A primary purpose of the course was to evaluate how existing local
planning laws and policies were consistent with the UN Sustainable Development
Goals, the New Urban Agenda, and could the existing tools and strategies be rear-
ranged to conform with the HUL framework. Even though this was a university
course and had no official status, the active participation of both county government
officials and local ICOMOS members has meant that the student work has received
attention far past the end of the course. The students’ analysis demonstrated that the
HUL approach provides an effective context with which to review existing local
laws and policies.
2. Urban Rehabilitation of the Historic Centre of Havana,

1
World Heritage Site
Pablo Fornet
Havana, Cuba
In Old Havana the heritage management process begun in 1993 reinforced the role
of a leading public institution (the Office of the City Historian) through a compre-
hensive plan and financing mechanisms that ensure overall sustainability. The his-
toric center has benefitted from a boost in the local economy, and hundreds of
buildings have been restored with an eye to retaining the resident population, one of
the project’s key premises. In the past 5 years, some facts and tendencies both at
national and local levels are generating an entirely new dynamic. The current sce-
nario poses a challenge and an opportunity for a city that is recognized for its out-
standing heritage values and also for its longtime practices of heritage preservation.
Although HUL approach has not been explicitly implemented so far, more than
three decades of urban rehabilitation and planning show obvious references to most
of its steps and tools, clearly “integrated in tools already existing” as Jukka Jokilehto
states. At present, there is a pressing need to define a buffer zone that allows a new
point of view regarding historic urban landscape of Havana Bay and its environs.
Further Reading:
www.ohch.cu; www.planmaestro.ohc.cu
3. Living Human Treasures of Grand Bazaar: Istanbul

1
Jewelry Making as an Intangible Urban Activity
Yonca Erkan and Ayse Coskun Orlandi

Istanbul, Turkey
The jewelry making in Grand Bazaar, Istanbul, is a tradition that goes back to early
Byzantine times. In the 2000s, Turkey began to attain a leading position among
countries that process gold and sell it as jewelry. The most important force behind
the success of the jewelry sector was the mastery of precious metal processing, an
extension and consequence of the multilayered cultural heritage Turkey possesses.
Today, the traditional practice is under threat of mass production and social trans-
formations. The interdisciplinary research approach bringing together cultural heri-
tage and design innovation allowed studying the role of intangible heritage in urban
areas. Through field research extending over 2 years, 57 traditional jewelry masters
were documented. The impacts of continuation of this tradition are scrutinized for
its role for the community, contribution to space, capacity of innovation, as well as
transmission to future generations. To communicate the findings of the research,
this data then transformed to an exhibition, Gem and Craft: In Pursuit of the Artisans
of Grand Bazaar, at the Rezan Has Museum (February–November 2017). The exhi-
bition gave recognition to jewelry making as an urban art and those who produce
them.
Further Reading:
http://www.rhm.org.tr/en/event/gem-and-craft-in-pursuit-of-the-artisans-of
-grand-bazaar/
4. Jaipur Built Heritage Management Plan and Urban

1
Conservation Projects

Jaipur, India
The Jaipur Heritage Management Plan prepared in 2007 is recorded as one of the
first initiatives of a city level plan for heritage sector in India. It became part of the
Jaipur Master Plan 2025 and was recognized as a best practice example by the
National Institute of Urban Affairs, Ministry of Urban Development, Government
of India in 2015. Also, as a UNESCO Network City of Crafts and Folk Art since
2015, Jaipur Municipal Corporation has a commitment for socioeconomic upgrade
of the crafts sector in the historic city area, thus safeguarding its intangible and
tangible values. Key urban conservation projects for the historic core of Jaipur are
now being implemented as part of the Smart City Plan under the Ministry of Urban
Development, Government of India (from 2016 onward). Though unintentionally,
Jaipur presents an interesting synchronization with the application of community,
economic, planning, and regulatory tools as outlined in the Historic Urban
Landscape Recommendations. Urban conservation in Jaipur intends to foster the
creativity and imagination of its people using its rich cultural resources to showcase
a model of sustainable development despite increasing pressures of development.
Further Reading:
https://pearl.niua.org/sites/default/files/books/GP-IN4_HERITAGE.pdf
15. The Revitalization of the Historic City of Jeddah
Simone Ricca
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
The Old City has been included in the metropolis strategic planning and given rel-
evance in the new master plan being designed.
Historic Jeddah has become, for the first time, part of the overall economic stra-
tegic thinking for the future of the city and of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. While
the earlier conservation strategies aimed at “preserving” heritage as memory of the
past, setting it apart from urban development, the new plans aim at including heri-
tage in the urban and economic dynamics.
The new vision tackles the complex issue of the revitalization of historic Jeddah
at different levels, involving a large number of stakeholders, among which Jeddah
Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Old City Owners’ Associations, and local
NGOs. For the first time, also the awaqf, the administration of religious Islamic
endowments, is actively participating to the revitalization process.
Further Reading:
6. olomna: Cultural Memory as a Resource for Developing

1
a Historic City
Elizaveta Levitskaya
Kolomna, Russia
In soviet times Kolomna was excluded from popular tourist routes, as there was
based a secret military construction bureau and the access to the city was limited. In
the 2000s the revitalization process started in the historic city, where the center
comprises of 35 HA of urban fabric untouched since the nineteenth century. The
restoration of the Kremlin served as an impulse for the development of local cre-
ative industries. It was followed by several projects: land-art project “ice house”
(reconstruction of ice slides from the nineteenth century), museum and reconstruc-
tion of the factory of the Kolomna pastille, museum of the Kalach (Russian bread)
and museum of the Kolomna coin, and art residence “Art-kommunalka” – all con-
centrated in the historic part of the city. Over 8 years the revitalization of the center
together with creative industries yielded a threefold increase in tourists visiting and
activation of the local business. However, the city lacks a holistic and integrated
cultural strategy, and the development needs to be brought from the sporadic to a
systematic level to attract investment and at the same time to preserve vulnerable
historic urban landscape of Kolomna. As for the HUL approach, Kolomna has great
potential as it engages community and benefits from the regulatory systems (his-
toric cities are relatively well protected and supported). It gets financial support
from diversified sources. However, it lacks planning tools to provide comprehensive
framework for its sustainable development.
Related to Chap. 7.
Further Reading:
17. Possible Project: HUL+KMP4
Roha Khalaf
Kuwait City, Kuwait
According to the UNESCO Transparency Portal website, the project to implement

the recommendation on the HUL in the State of Kuwait has been underway since
March 2015. The National Council for Culture, Arts and Letters (NCCAL) is over-
seeing this project. In order to make the HUL approach happen on the ground, the
six-step HUL action plan should ideally be integrated into the State’s planning
framework. In this regard, it is noteworthy that the municipality recruited the inter-
national consultants Perkins+Will and Dar Al-Handasah in November 2016 to pre-
pare the fourth Kuwait Master Plan (KMP4), expected to be completed in 2018. It
will be interesting to see how (and if) the HUL action plan will be integrated into
KMP4. Such an integration would require coordination between different urban
actors/stakeholders including, but not limited to, the council of ministers, the
municipality, the ministry of public works, the NCCAL, and the international
consultants.
8. Integrating HUL into the Conservation and Development

1
Processes of the Lamu Old Town
Salim Bunu and Mohammed Ali Mwenje

Lamu, Kenya
The Lamu Old Town, a national monument and World Heritage site, is facing major
challenges in its conservation as a result of inordinate population growth, urban
sprawl, and insufficient resources for upgrading the social infrastructure. In response
to the rapid urbanization in Kenya, the government has been running a number of
urban development programs aiming at resolving the emerging urban challenges.
Unfortunately owing to its unique nature, Lamu Town has not been an active partici-
pant in many of these urban development programs. The managers of the town have
been struggling to devise suitable intervention measures. The opportunities of the
HUL tools have been considered in the development of the county spatial plan and
are key in mapping out future strategies for the resolution of the urban challenges
facing the town. Previous HUL activities in Lamu have laid the ground for incorpo-
ration of the HUL tools into the planning and development agendas.
9. Not a Formal Project on HUL: Simply Practices

1
Associated with the Management of the UNESCO Site
of Lijiang, China (Listed in 1997)

Lijiang, China
Lijiang city, China, is one of the most controversial heritage sites in China (kind of
worse practice also as HUL approach). This site suffers from an excess of mass
tourism, where economic exploitation seriously undermines the conservation of the
site. Indeed the site is composed of three different villages, with no coordination
among them. Focusing on the major two (Dayan and Shuhe), a tension between
conservation and exploitation emerges, with an interesting articulation of the notion
of conservation. Neither site is able to find an ideal balance between conservation of
the material aspect (tangible) and the social fabric of local population (and the Naxi
minority in particular). Attempts to achieve this balance have led to diverging
approaches and results; one site protects the artifact but feigns the social fabric,
while the other has created a new area in the village to deflect visitor attention, pro-
tecting the old town and its social and agricultural activity.
0. Urban Heritage of the Mediterranean: Interdisciplinary

2
Methodologies for the Characterization of the Infrastructural
Axis of the Andalusian Littoral and Its Synergies with HUL
Recommendations
María del Mar Loren Méndez
Malaga, Spain
This case study presents a research undertaken in the Mediterranean network of

South European cities, focusing on Malaga. Malaga is a historic city on the
Andalusian Mediterranean littoral, at the limit with the Atlantic Ocean, between
Europe and Africa. Unlike the centralizing condition of cities such as Seville or
Cordoba, Malaga consisted of a node in a decentralized territory, a city within a lit-
toral urban network, a characteristic feature of the Mediterranean territory. This
interdisciplinary research, which has been grant-aided by the European Regional
Development Fund, has looked at the city as part of the littoral Mediterranean road-
way corridor, proposing the infrastructure as its main argument for urban heritage
characterization. The integral historical layering of natural and cultural values, the
study of their legal protection within urban and regional planning, and the identify-
ing areas of heritage sensitivity corroborate the study’s contribution to the HUL
discussion and new strategies to contemplate the singularities of each city, of each
landscape.
Further Readings:
https://n-340.org
Published methodology and new terminology in Geographical Review: http://
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1931-0846.2016.12203.x/abstract
“Intentional creations on urban tourism. The case of the city of Malaga: from its
historical paradisiacal imaginary to the 21st century Picasso fiction as detonator
of an urban cultural park” Tourism&Architecture, Routledege, 2018.
1. Mexico City Historic Center Recovery and Rehabilitation

2
Programs
Deniz Ikiz Kaya
Mexico City, Mexico
An inclusive management model was implemented for the Historic Center of

Mexico City following a series of urban regeneration interventions activated by the
recovery and public commerce programs that respond to the demands of effective
management systems and empower the civil society. The federal government col-
laborated with the Historic Center Authority and the Historic Center Trust to com-
mit to the coordination and management planning. At different stages the planning
process engaged various other actors, including the governmental entities, indepen-
dent local governmental parties, private actors, universities, and experts. The man-
agement plan was adopted in 2011 and later revised in 2016. Although the
management plan did not make a direct attribution to the HUL definition and
approach, several tools and strategies adopted align with the main tools, such as
grassroots initiatives and the operation of smart technologies to engage local
community as public participation tools, the designation of management site and

buffer zones as regulatory systems, and the establishment of public-private partner-
ships with national and international investors as financial tools.
2. Mudurnu Cultural Heritage Site Management Plan:

2
Phase I
Ege Yildirim
Mudurnu, Turkey
This project covers the preparation of the Mudurnu Cultural Heritage Site
Management Plan and the first phase of its implementation (2014 to 2018), which
evolved from an academic project into a professional plan commissioned by
Mudurnu Municipality, with funding from the East Marmara Regional Development
Agency. Mudurnu is a small but historically strategic Silk Road town, inscribed on
Turkey’s UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List as “The Historic Guild Town of
Mudurnu,” its Outstanding Universal Value proposed as the best urban manifesta-
tion of Akhism, the Anatolian merchant guilds tradition, both through its rich and
diverse built heritage and the ritual practices. During the management plan, this
diversity of heritage was recognized as a historic urban landscape, beyond a conven-
tional urban conservation site, which the town center was legally categorized as.
The identification of management plan boundaries took into account this multiplic-
ity of heritage layers, which was proposed jointly by community members and the
planning team. Another innovative aspect is the application of the national site man-
agement legislation to a small settlement, not necessarily for a World Heritage nom-
ination but to help the local community embrace a strategy for tourism-led
sustainable development. The implementation of the plan involved collaborative
efforts of different stakeholders using diverse types of resources, not just financial
but in kind and logistic support, blending civic engagement and financial tools.
Further Readings:
Official website (Turkish): http://www.mudurnualanyonetimi.org/
Blog Post (English): https://sustainablepreservationinitiative.wordpress.
com/2014/01/31/guest-blog-post-a-cultural-heritage-management-plan
-for-mudurnu-turkey-forging-heritage-led-sustainable-development-strategies/
3. Adopting HUL Toolkits in Muharraq: The Bahrain

2
Authority for Culture and Archeology (BACA)
Alaa El-Habashi
Muharraq, Bahrain
Historic Muharraq gained quite recognition after listing a series of its cultural prop-
erties as World Heritage representing the city’s historic economy once based on the
pearling industry. The registration has paved the way for conservation frameworks,
concepts, and techniques to be introduced into Bahrain. Despite BACA’s continuous
efforts to integrate it, the local community with its mixed backgrounds, either the
native who continued residing the city or the foreign laborers who moved in for
affordability, had limited participations. The natives felt deprived from their rights
to develop their properties, and foreigners realized that development will boost the
real state to unaffordable limits. An ROT system, restore-operate-transfer, was pro-
posed by BACA as one means to encourage the community to explore the potential-
ity in investing in heritage buildings. The government acquired a number of those
about to be demolished due to their bad state of conservation, repaired them, and
undertook minimum restoration works to reveal their heritage values. The buildings
are then auctioned for rentals to potential tenants willing to continue the rehabilita-
tion works. In return, the selected tenants would have the right to use the heritage
buildings for durations of time calculated against the investments made. In parallel,
BACA leads media campaigns, community awareness programs, and a large urban
regeneration project in selected areas in the historic center. Most of the HUL toolkit
has been explored in that Bahraini experience to engage the local community
quickly enough to refraining disregards to heritage buildings and to assuring sus-
tainability for accomplished results. Would this experience, whose initial evaluation
is set by the end of 2019, achieves its goals, it will certainly offer a pioneering expe-
rience in the Arab region.
4. Preservation and Conservation of the Historic Site

2
of Olinda
Olinda, Brazil
The Historic Site of Olinda is a good example of an incremental system that incor-
porates progressively instruments of urban planning, conservation management,
monitoring, documentation, citizen participation, funding, and others that closely
followed what would be a similar approach to that proposed by HUL. It is a good

example of an incremental conservation system constructed closely to the dynamics
of local development process. It shows forward and backward movements as it is
expected in a complex and democratic society. Also it reflects the more larger-scale
movement of the interpretation of what is the cultural heritage of an urban historic
site. The central questions that the HUL approach tries to help answer constitute the
core of the today challenges for the planning and conservation system of the Historic
Site of Olinda.
Further Reading:
http://portal.iphan.gov.br/pagina/detalhes/33
25. Porto Municipal Master Plan (PDM)

Porto, Portugal
The Municipal Master Plan of Porto is a broad tool covering the whole municipal
territory, corresponding to the city area. It is a spatial planning tool that, theoreti-
cally, results from a negotiation process between all interested parts. Among the
Portuguese spatial planning tools is the only one that is mandatory, binding public
and private actors. Besides establishing the general orientations, it must identify the
municipal territory resources, including heritage (Heritage Charter), for which it
should also define valorization strategies. Therefore, this instrument appears, in the
Portuguese context, as the most suitable to apply HUL approach as it is the basic
regulatory framework dictating the rules for urban development. However, to
achieve satisfactorily the HUL steps, it needs some improvements, such as the inte-
gration of vulnerability assessment actions/tools and the effective integration of
other actors, both in assessment and in implementation phase.
Further Reading:
http://balcaovirtual.cm-porto.pt/PT/cidadaos/guiatematico/Planeamento
Ordenamento/Plano%20Diretor%20Municipal%20(PDM)/PDM%20
%E2%80%93%20Em%20vigor/Paginas/default.aspx
26. Historic Preservation Toolkit
Donovan Rypkema
Raleigh, NC, USA
The City of Raleigh, North Carolina, issued a request for proposals for a “historic
preservation toolkit” that specifically stated, “The contractor will consider tools that
fall into several project areas, which may include financial tools, policy tools, regu-
latory tools, and organizational tools.” The firm Heritage Strategies International
responded and was ultimately selected for the assignment and explicitly redefined
the city’s framework into the HUL group of tools. Twelve policies/strategies/tools
were recommended, including two or three in each of the HUL tool categories.
Examples of recommendations were conditional use permit (regulatory), property
tax exemptions for long-term heritage district residents (economic), systematic sur-
veying/documentation (knowledge and planning), and matching grants to neighbor-
hood-based organizations (community engagement). Prior to making
recommendations, extensive stakeholder focus groups were conducted. For each of
the recommendations examples were selected of other US cities, and whenever
possible international examples, applying with success the recommended tool.
7. Preparatory Assistance and Technical Support

2
for the Inscription, Conservation and Management of the Île
De Saint-Louis, Senegal
Marie-Noël Tournoux
Saint-Louis, Senegal
The Île Saint-Louis, inscribed on the World Heritage List in 2000, is one of the flag-
ship cities of colonial history in West Africa. It presents a complete architectural,
urban, and rural landscape, which is remarkable and highly varied.
At the request of Senegal, the World Heritage Centre, with the support of France,
embarked on a long process of support to both national and municipal authorities
for the protection, management, and enhancement of the site, as well as the develop-
ment of tools and management mechanisms. This assistance was also technical sup-
port through decentralized city to city cooperation between Saint-Louis and Lille
Métropole, France.
The challenges were to develop mechanisms for the management, monitoring,
and oversight to protect heritage and to promote the sustainable development of
Saint-Louis, by considering heritage, culture, and local projects. Hence, a set of
tools was developed; to improve knowledge of the site, a full inventory of built heri-
tage and its setting was carried out; to protect and manage the site, a full protection
and enhancement urban master plan was developed; and to address governance
issues, an institutional management framework (Heritage House) was developed.
The social concerns of the island’s residents were addressed, with a pilot micro-
credit scheme for families, with projects bringing together economic activity and
care for the heritage and its environment.
Subsequently, the emphasis was placed on the riverine nature of the town and on
large-scale environmental issues and urban planning. Given the challenges of pro-
viding further training and ensuring long-term collaboration through effective coor-
dination between the different participants, and particularly international aid
consistency, the challenge was to associate a positive conservation status, as part of
this broader approach to the area, in 2010, with sustainable support for the restora-
tion of heritage in Saint-Louis, both private and public. Today the challenge remains
to ensure political commitment for managing change and including culture and
heritage as core assets for ensuring quality of life for the inhabitants.
Further Readings:
http://whc.unesco.org/en/280/?id=33&
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/956
8. Scenarios for Sustainable Rural Development in Shuang

2
Wan Cun, Wujiang District, Suzhou

Shuang Wan, China
The aim of the research was to support the local government of Shuang Wan Cun in
achieving a durable and sustainable development, according to the principles of the
National Urbanization Plan (2014–2020). To achieve this goal, a multidisciplinary
team cooperated with two natural villages (Xu He Wan and Da Gong Wan) at
Shuang Wan Cun, to provide policy recommendations on how to balance economic
development and conservation of local resources. The methodology adopted was
based on UNESCO HUL approach, particularly in the way it has been adapted to
China (“Shanghai Agenda” for implementation of HUL in China, adopted at
WHITRAP in 2014). The research was comprised of three parts: comprehensive
local policy and planning review, the implementation of a scenario planning work-
shop with local stakeholders to define desirable future scenarios of sustainable
development, and policy recommendations. As a result, the village approved in
2015 a strategic master plan and later on achieved the status of “China Beautiful
Village.” This has allowed to be granted funds for public space improvements in
early 2016 from Wujiang District government.
9. Reconstruction of World Heritage Mausoleums

2
of Timbuktu
Lazare Eloundou Assomo
Timbuktu, Mali
The reconstruction of the mausoleums of Timbuktu project follows the armed con-
flict that occurred in 2012 in Mali, during which 14 of the 16 mausoleums inscribed
on the World Heritage List were destroyed. This devastation seriously affected the
urban fabric of the old city. Considered as the main cultural identity of Timbuktu,
the mausoleums reflect both the city history and its development. Timbuktu’s cul-
tural identity and local communities were vital factors for the mausoleum recon-
struction: both these factors contributed to the city’s development and cultural
heritage preservation since the eleventh century. The reconstruction, undertaken
between March 2014 and September 2015 involving local masons and artisans, not
only allowed the safeguarding of Timbuktu World Heritage site, but also demon-
strated the role of culture as an important enabler of peace reconciliation and social
cohesion. Activities that took place for this process followed the incentives of his-
toric urban landscape approach concerning policies, tools, capacity building activi-
ties, and international cooperation. Furthermore, it contributed to the revitalization
of traditional conservation methods, to improve the living conditions of affected
communities through job creation, thus restoring their cultural and socioeconomic
conditions while taking part in the recovery of Timbuktu.
Further Reading:
http://whc.unesco.org/fr/list/119/documents/
30. Pompeii Great Project: The Buffer Zone Regeneration

Torre Annunziata, Italy
The management of the change that HUL approach introduces for the conservation
of the heritage requests the integration of specific evaluation tools.
The impacts of the Torre Annunziata waterfront regeneration project are evalu-
ated through the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA). Analyzing the results of this
application emerged that HIA lacks an economic and social perspective. The criteria
for the identification of the “cultural heritage values” are not adaptable to different
international contexts.
A “participative method” has been proposed to exceed the weakness of the HIA,
capable to assess the social impacts of cultural heritage conservation/regeneration,
allowing interdisciplinary research able to promote the collaboration among
stakeholders.
The results of this method have been used to define a new-shared project for
Torre Annunziata waterfront based on the principles of the “circular economy” and
the “liveable city,” according to the needs of the stakeholders involved.
The circular economy is capable to restore the “city identity,” increasing the
tangible and intangible value according to the UNESCO recommendations.
Further Readings:
http://www.comune.torreannunziata.na.it/c063083/zf/index.php/servizi-aggiuntivi/
index/index/idtesto/20150
http://www.equiterspa.com/progetto/riqualificazione-lungomare-torre-annunziata/
1. Technical Cooperation for the Enhancement, Development,

3
and Protection of the Town of Luang Prabang, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic
Minja Yang
Town of Luang Prabang, Lao People’s Democratic Republic
The town of Luang Prabang, inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1995, is the
former royal capital of one of the kingdoms of Laos, located in the mountainous
north, at the confluence of the Mekong River and the Khan River. The town reflects
the close link between the built and natural environment and characterized by the
juxtaposition of a Laotian urban framework and a grid plan typical of the urbanism
of the colonial era. The fusion of vernacular architecture in wood with structures of
masonry of French architectural expression also marks the town. The conservation
and enhancement of the OUV of this World Heritage site was a key process in the
management of spatial planning and territorial development in a period of rapid
change brought about by the liberalization of the economy after decades of war fol-
lowed by a period of centralized planned economy. Enhancement of the cultural,
environmental, and social resources of the site has been the key strategy for the
development of the town and the surrounding region. The town of Luang Prabang
project took place before the Historical Urban Landscape Recommendation was
adopted in 2011 and can be considered as an upstream experience.
The program, so far composed of six multi-year projects was initially launched
in 1996 by the Lao authorities, with the support of the city of Chinon and the Région
Centre (France), under a decentralized cooperation framework. This long-term and
inter-sectorial program has focused from the onset on institutional and local capac-
ity building, with training of an operational team in every project, starting from
mapping and inventories of architectural, urban, and landscape features to the devel-
opment of regulatory tools covering not only for the town but also the wider-scale
landscape of the riverbanks and the surround hills resulting in the Safeguarding and
Enhancement Plan (SEP) and Territorial Consistency Scheme (SCOT) but also in
sewage and road upgrading as well as in the conservation of urban wetlands and
restoration of heritage buildings. Governance and decision-making tools at local,
regional, and national levels (Luang Prabang World Heritage Department and estab-
lishment of National and Local Heritage Committees) including public tender and
public consultation processes were given importance. Public information activities
to sensitize the religious authorities as well as the local communities on the value of
their heritage were also included in every project.
The development of tourism in the city since its inscription, as well as strong
economic and demographic growth, has encouraged work on a scale wider than the
site itself, addressing social, economic, and environmental issues linked to land-
scape protection and visual integrity, in order to support long-term development of
the region as a whole. To respond to the new challenges (livelihood of increasing
number of inhabitants through rural-urban migration, sustainable tourism, preserva-
tion of landscapes and surrounding agricultural areas), the urban development plan-
ning and landscaping tools at suburban level, inspired by the French Territorial
Consistency Scheme (SCOT) which defines the uses and roles of the city and its
wider setting, were established. Measures to preserve the natural environment and
human habitat and to support rural development in the vast buffer zone area and
beyond in the Nam Khan catchment have been initiated. A vast buffer zone of
12,500 ha has been defined in the context of the revision of the urban plan that was
approved by decree of the Prime Minister in February 2012. Finding the means to
sustain the local operational team through tourism tax along with decisions on the
overall local fiscal system remains pending. The on-site heritage management sys-
tem put into place through decades of international cooperation is therefore at risk
unless a sustainable funding source for the local operational team is found.
Further Readings:
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/479/
http://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/29/
32. Project Proposal: The Revitalization of the Abu Ali River

Tripoli, Lebanon
The proposal acknowledges the Abu Ali River as part of Tripoli’s cultural heritage.
Based on a comprehensive analysis of the urban landscape configuration and the
relation between the built and the natural environment as well as the relation
between people and their surrounding environment, an urban planning a design
strategy is proposed for the revitalization of the Abu Ali River’s cultural values,
including the ecological, social, and aesthetic values. The proposal reintegrates the
river into the city as a public amenity and an ecological corridor. It also focuses on
enhancing connectivity between the river and the city. This project unintentionally
applied the HUL approach. It looks at tangible and intangible heritage residing
within the cultural landscape and addresses continuity and change. Two of the tools
provided by the HUL approach to urban management were applied in this project:
community engagement and knowledge and planning. These tools helped identify-
ing some of the dynamics of urban change and existing shared identity and heritage
values.
Further Reading:
https://scholarworks.aub.edu.lb/handle/10938/10087
Index
A Conservation, 6, 8, 9, 11–13, 17, 22, 23, 25,

Access, 388 32, 33, 40, 41, 43, 48, 49, 60, 63, 66,
Aga Khan Trust for Culture (AKTC), 72–73 80, 82, 86–88, 92, 94, 100–102, 108,
Aleppo, 57–75, 545 114, 117, 119, 126, 129, 142, 145, 150,
Amaravathi, 79–89 151, 168, 170, 171, 174, 177–184, 188,
Ambalema, 92–108 200, 204, 208, 211, 216, 217, 219,
Amsterdam, 112–121, 546 224–230, 248, 258–262, 264, 265, 267,
Architecture, 269 268, 270, 271, 273, 287, 290, 297, 300,
Asmara, 32, 546 306, 308–310, 315, 333, 335, 343, 345,
Assets, 97, 372 347, 352, 362, 368, 370, 372–385, 417,
Authenticity, 8, 10, 43, 58, 59, 65–67, 73, 74, 418, 428, 430, 432, 441, 442, 451, 453,
164, 182, 217, 269, 271, 272, 287, 331, 460, 468, 469, 474–482, 512–514, 532
334, 335, 343, 377, 384, 416, 419, 441 Conservation planning, 184
Convention, 362, 366, 444
Convention Concerning the Protection
B of the World Cultural and Natural
Bahrain, 41 Heritage, 182, 237
Ballarat, 135, 547 Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible
Budapest, 152 Cultural Heritage, 11
Buenos Aires, 44, 547 Crafts, 97
Bukhara, 168, 548 Creativity, 7, 11–13, 16, 17, 84, 178, 180, 237,
367, 479, 501, 539
Cuenca, 208–221, 550
C Cultural heritage, 11–13, 15, 18, 32, 34, 45,
Cairo, 549 48, 62, 63, 65, 81, 112, 127, 129, 150,
Canberra, 188–205 152, 168, 208, 218, 237, 252, 259, 261,
Charter, 405 263, 267, 269, 299–302, 315, 318, 342,
Circular economy, 500, 564 346, 351, 366, 373, 378, 380, 384, 385,
City, 196, 297–310 408, 412, 424, 430, 436, 441, 446, 460,
Climate change, 16, 22, 40, 43, 115, 120, 138, 477, 478, 480, 485, 487–489, 495, 498,
140, 204, 229, 230, 367, 372, 382, 388, 508, 512, 515, 520, 521, 524, 525, 541,
416, 441, 450–452, 539, 547 546–548, 552, 558, 560, 563, 566
Community, 97, 228, 346 Culture, 97

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8887-2
568 Index
D Historic urban landscape approach, 7, 16–19,

Development, 95, 98, 266, 365, 384, 408, 418, 21–50, 64, 112–121, 145, 156,
429, 432 188–205, 223–232, 252, 261–264, 266,
Diversity, 45 268, 278, 303, 349, 363, 372, 404, 460,
Djenné, 41, 550 474, 487, 540, 563
Historic urban landscape critical steps, 40
Historic urban landscape tools, 398–400, 559
E
Economic development, 8
Edinburgh, 49, 223–232, 551 I
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), 43, Identity, 97, 366
308, 487, 520, 533 Implementation, 299
Experts, 46 Implementation of the HUL approach,
212, 256
Implementation of the Recommendation, 212
F Intangible heritage, 12, 22, 34, 58, 63, 66, 68,
FARO Convention, 182 79, 81, 84, 88, 115, 116, 120, 127, 135,
177, 180, 181, 220, 247, 254, 278, 290,
294, 330, 351, 354, 366, 474, 516, 520,
G 552, 566
Galway, 551 Intangible Heritage Convention, 12, 19
Geospatial Information System (GIS), 174, International Council on Monuments and Sites
213, 218, 220, 242, 248 (ICOMOS), 8, 10, 63, 65, 66, 71, 74,
Global observatory on the historic urban 127, 141, 177, 259, 266, 269, 273, 344,
landscape (GO-HUL), 50, 131 363, 366, 369, 370, 406
GPS, 444 Island of Mozambique, 263
Gross domestic product, 15 Istanbul, 34, 552
H J
Habitat, 4, 16, 26, 88, 244, 370, 389, 541 Jaipur, 281, 553
Habitat III, 124 Jeddah, 48, 554
Havana, 235–249, 552
Heritage, 97, 297, 303, 306, 315, 331, 336,
337, 351, 352, 354, 533, 534 K
Heritage impact assessment (HIA), 484, Kolomna, 554
486–495, 497, 500, 533, 563 Kuwait City, 298, 555
Heritage site, 315
Historic, 430–432
Historic centre, 18, 42, 124, 168, 171, 174, L
177, 179, 182, 183, 219, 226, 232, 240, Lamu, 314–327, 555
244, 247, 344, 346, 348, 352–355, 367, Lijiang, 331, 556
404–407, 419, 436, 486, 537, 548, Local community, 41, 45, 82, 116, 136, 138,
552, 557 195, 196, 218, 224, 290, 334, 346,
Historic urban landscape (HUL), 5, 17, 19, 25, 352–354, 418, 474, 549, 557–559
32, 33, 36, 44, 45, 49, 58, 62–64, Luang Prabang, 33, 564
66–72, 74, 124, 130, 138, 142, 145,
169–171, 188, 208, 217, 218, 232,
235–249, 264, 297, 306, 310, 314, M
329–330, 342–344, 358, 361, 363, 364, Malaga, 35, 557
366, 368, 372, 388, 424–432, 436, 450, Management, 157
455, 478–481, 484, 494, 500, 507, 509, Mexico City, 345, 557
512, 513, 516, 518, 524, 525, 533, 534, Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),
537–540, 542, 545, 547, 548, 551, 552, 14, 81
555, 558 Montreal, 358–370
Index 569
Mudurnu, 45, 558 351–354, 361, 366, 370, 372, 379, 391,
Muharraq, 559 398, 413, 419, 428, 431, 445, 446, 449,
453, 455, 471, 485, 494–496, 508, 509,
523, 524, 534, 536, 537, 540, 554
N Strength, weaknesses, opportunities and
Nara document on authenticity, 10, 182 threats (SWOT) analysis, 73, 156, 179,
Natural heritage, 11, 13, 15, 126, 129, 150, 495, 513, 523–524
208, 267, 284, 424, 428, 520, 550 Sustainable, 180, 431
New Urban Agenda, 4, 16–18, 25, 26, 35, 88, Sustainable development goals, 15, 24, 25, 35,
124, 262, 278 80, 85, 124, 342, 389, 437, 541, 551
O T
Olinda, 372–385, 560 Tel Aviv, 474–482
Outstanding universal value (OUV), 6, 22, 45, Timbuktu, 48, 563
59, 63, 66, 80, 81, 168, 170, 171, 175, Tools, 97, 368
181, 225, 230, 237, 246, 259, 269, 314, Torre Annunziata, 563
345, 351, 364, 370 Traditional, 97
Tripoli, 566
P
Participation, 212, 352 U
Pittsburgh, 395 UNESCO Convention (2001), 262, 263
Planning, 360, 366, 430, 546 1972 UNESCO Convention Concerning the
Policies, 13, 127, 546 Protection of the World Cultural and
Porto, 409, 560 Natural Heritage, 62
Preservation, 157 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of
the Intangible Cultural Heritage of
Humanity, 127
R UNESCO Convention of 1972, 64
Rabat, 424–432 UNESCO World Heritage, 22, 170, 546
Raleigh, 45, 561 UNESCO World Heritage Convention, 170
Recommendation on the historic urban UNESCO World Heritage list, 436, 438, 452,
landscape (HUL), 538 533
Regensburg, 436 UNESCO World Heritage sites (WHS), 455,
Resources, 98, 216 487
Risk assessment, 292 United Nations Educational, Scientific and
River, 97, 513 Cultural organization (UNESCO),
315, 344, 347, 406, 432
Universal Declaration on Cultural
S Diversity, 11
Saint-Louis, 42, 561 Urban, 228, 292, 352
Settlements, 313 Urban conservation, 3–19, 22, 24, 40, 45, 49,
Shuang Wan, 463, 562 133, 165, 261, 270, 286, 289, 298, 304,
Site, 45, 62, 73, 315, 331, 336, 337, 345, 346, 306, 310, 342, 365, 372, 405, 428, 442,
353, 354, 367 460, 462–464, 477, 482, 547, 553, 558
Stakeholders, 22–25, 33, 35, 40, 43, 45–50, Urban heritage, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 17, 19, 35,
63, 64, 74, 79–81, 84, 86, 88, 95, 99, 40, 43, 46, 74, 92–108, 123, 124, 140,
100, 104, 105, 107, 116, 117, 120, 142, 150, 151, 154–156, 159, 177, 204,
134–136, 138, 140, 143, 144, 157, 168, 212, 220, 237, 242, 288, 294, 297, 303,
171, 175, 177, 179, 183, 184, 204, 208, 342, 343, 352, 353, 366, 378, 388, 389,
209, 211, 216–218, 237, 243–245, 394, 399, 404, 424, 427, 428, 442, 474,
247–249, 252, 258, 261–263, 265–267, 477, 482, 514, 519–523, 534, 536, 537,
293, 309, 335, 342–344, 347, 349, 540, 541, 545, 550
570 Index
W World Heritage site (WHS), 48, 58, 59, 63, 80,

Workshops, 212 208, 224–226, 228, 230, 232, 243, 258,
World Heritage, 25, 315, 331, 332, 336, 271, 272, 286, 292, 314, 318, 330, 332,
337, 344–347, 353, 354, 362, 366, 337–339, 343, 444, 453, 474, 487, 552,
367, 406, 432, 436, 437, 440, 441, 555, 563, 564
443, 444, 446, 448, 449, 452,
453, 484, 533, 534, 550,
559, 563 X
World Heritage by UNESCO, 430 Xi’an declaration on the conservation of the
World Heritage Centre (WHC), 347 setting of heritage structures, 182
World Heritage Committee, 62
World Heritage Convention, 6, 9, 10, 13, 19,
64, 127, 175, 228 Z
World Heritage list, 344, 432 Zanzibar, 529–542

Dokumen - Pub - Reshaping Urban Conservation The Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Action 1st Ed 978 981 10 8886 5 978 981 10 8887 2 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dokumen - Pub - Reshaping Urban Conservation The Historic Urban Landscape Approach in Action 1st Ed 978 981 10 8886 5 978 981 10 8887 2 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Creativity, Heritage and the City 2

Ana Pereira Roders

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13785

ISSN 2366-4584 ISSN 2366-4592 (electronic)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018961391

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Delft, The Netherlands Ana Pereira Roders

Box numbers are numbers in Case Study Boxes.

Salim M. Bunu holds a bachelor’s degree in education from Kenyatta University

Manal Ginzarly is an urban planner who graduated from the American

Ana Tarrafa Silva is graduated in Cultural Heritage Studies at the University of

Part II Case Studies on the Historic Urban Landscape Approach

9 Bukhara: A Living Central Asian Silk Roads City. Application

22 Revitalizing Urban Parks to Uplift a Rust Belt City: HUL Applied

Case Study Boxes: Full Text���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 545

Ana Pereira Roders is full Professor of heritage and values at Delft University of

Francesco Bandarin is an architect and urban planner, specialized in urban conser-

Santagata for the Economics of Culture in Turin. He has served as a President of

ACCRU Área Crítica de Recuperação e Reconversão

CEDIM Study and Documentation Center (Centro de

FAPF Faculty of Architecture and Physical Planning

IPHAN National Institute of the Historic and Artistic

OCPM Office de consultation publique de Montréal

SPHSO System for Preserving the Historic Sites of

WHS World Heritage Site

Keywords Urban conservation · Urban policy · Cultural policies · Urban develop-

1.1 Culture and the New Urban Conservation Paradigm

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 3

Conservation of urban heritage is no longer simply the “freezing” of a district

The 2011 HUL Recommendation constitutes an important point of arrival of the

1.3 The Reasons for a New Urban Conservation Approach

Even if developed by a discussion initiated within the World Heritage Convention,

UNESCO 2001. Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. Paris, UNESCO.

Article 1 – Cultural diversity: the common heritage of humanity

aspects of the modern heritage conservation approach: (1) heritage, to be recognised

1.5 Urban Conservation and Sustainable Development

While the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), launched in 2000 by the

Keywords UNESCO · HUL approach · Innovation · Heritage planning · Urban

2.1 From Reality to Theory

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 21

2.2 From Theory to Supranational Governance

In times where supranational governance is put in question by more nationalistic

official documents, e.g. conventions, recommendations and declarations, as well as

2.3 From Supranational Governance to Practices

Table 2.2 List of cities, hosting/organizing activities for HUL Recommendation

42 Ajmer-Pushkar India Asia and the Pacific     

ID City Country Region Innovation - Steps

89 Cordoba Spain Europe and N. America     

ID City Country Region Innovation - Steps

49 Jakarta Indonesia Asia and the Pacific     

ID City Country Region Innovation - Steps

77 Naples Italy Europe and N. America     

ID City Country Region Innovation - Steps

145 Shahr-e Zuhak Afghanistan Asia and the Pacific     

Box 2.1 Over-arching Urban Planning Guidelines for the Historic

Several meetings followed, such as the workshops on the Management of

Box 2.2 Technical Cooperation for the Enhancement, Development and

Box 2.3 Living Human Treasures of Grand Bazaar: Istanbul Jewellery

Box 2.4 Mediterranean Network of South European Cities, Malaga as

Box 2.5 Kolomna: Cultural Memory as a Resource for Developing a

2.4 From Practices to Theory

2.4.1 The Six-Step HUL Approach

Box 2.6 Mapping Economic Landscape for the UNESCO World

Delft, The Netherlands Ana Pereira Roders

Part II Case Studies on the Historic Urban Landscape Approach

9 Bukhara: A Living Central Asian Silk Roads City. Application

22 Revitalizing Urban Parks to Uplift a Rust Belt City: HUL Applied

Case Study Boxes: Full Text�� 545

1.1 Culture and the New Urban Conservation Paradigm

1.3 The Reasons for a New Urban Conservation Approach

1.5 Urban Conservation and Sustainable Development

2.1 From Reality to Theory

2.2 From Theory to Supranational Governance

2.3 From Supranational Governance to Practices

42 Ajmer-Pushkar India Asia and the Pacific

89 Cordoba Spain Europe and N. America

49 Jakarta Indonesia Asia and the Pacific

77 Naples Italy Europe and N. America

145 Shahr-e Zuhak Afghanistan Asia and the Pacific

2.4 From Practices to Theory

2.4.1 The Six-Step HUL Approach

Box 2.7 (continued)

2.4.2 The Tools

2.4.2.1 HUL Tools

2.4.3 The Stakeholders

2.4.3.1 Types of Stakeholders

2.5 From Theory to Reality

3.2 Aleppo World Heritage Site: A Brief History

3.3 World Heritage Designation Values

3.4 Destruction of Aleppo

3.5 Heritage Policy Documents

3.6 Old Aleppo as a Historic Urban Landscape Site

3.6.1 Old Aleppo and the Values of Heritage

3.6.1.1 Outstanding Universal Value

3.6.1.2 Authenticity and Integrity Values

3.6.1.3 Cultural and Social Values

3.6.1.4 Intangible Heritage and Values

3.6.1.5 Historic and Identity Values

3.6.1.6 Economic Values

4.2 Conceptual Framework

4.3 Amaravathi Heritage Town

5.4 I dentifying Heritage Values: A Holistic and Participative

5.4.1 Citizen Engagement Strategy