Cultural Territorial Systems

Springer Geography
Francesco Rotondo
Francesco Selicato
Vera Marin
Josefina López Galdeano Editors
Cultural
Territorial
Systems
Landscape and Cultural Heritage
as a Key to Sustainable and Local
Development in Eastern Europe
Springer Geography
The Springer Geography series seeks to publish a broad portfolio of scientific
books, aiming at researchers, students, and everyone interested in geographical
research. The series includes peer-reviewed monographs, edited volumes, text-
books, and conference proceedings. It covers the entire research area of geography
including, but not limited to, Economic Geography, Physical Geography,
Quantitative Geography, and Regional/Urban Planning.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/10180

Francesco Rotondo Francesco Selicato
•
Vera Marin Josefina López Galdeano

•
Editors
Cultural Territorial Systems

Landscape and Cultural Heritage as a Key
to Sustainable and Local Development
in Eastern Europe
123
Editors
Francesco Rotondo Vera Marin
Polytechnic University of Bari University of Architecture and Urban
Bari Planning Ion Mincu
Italy Bucureşti
Romania
Francesco Selicato
Dipartimento di Scienze dell’Ingegn Josefina López Galdeano
Polytechnic University of Bari Faculty of Arts, Geography and History
Bari University of Granada
Italy Granada
Spain
ISSN 2194-315X ISSN 2194-3168 (electronic)

Springer Geography
ISBN 978-3-319-20752-0 ISBN 978-3-319-20753-7 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-20753-7
Library of Congress Control Number: 2015959931
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

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.
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by SpringerNature

The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland
Preface
About the Subject
In a contemporary society that is becoming increasingly more globalized, without

territorial restrictions in the production of goods, e.g., one is able to produce in
China goods and products that are characteristic of South American crafts (to
mention just two places located at the antipodes), the only element that is not able to
be contextualized it is the identity of heritage, which is the result of close inte-
gration between cultural assets, intangible assets, and settled communities. Thus,
the heritage identity is one of the few elements, together with natural resources, that
has potential for economic development because it is still firmly tied to places and
local populations. This potential must be carefully planned and developed in order
to avoid the loss of identity, to maintain a sufficient variety of functions, and to
avoid reducing these contexts to beautiful and empty “boxes” for tourists.
Believing that the protection of these heritage elements is essential for the very
survival of settled communities, and also with the desire to enhance their full
potential, the book attempts to make clear the key role that landscape and cultural
heritage can play in settled communities in the pursuit of sustainable local
development.
This is the general scenario in which the present book seeks to enhance the
cultural dimension of sustainable development, in the view assumed in the text, by
considering not only how to preserve heritage, but also what to preserve and why to
preserve it. It is the attempt to make the best of the era of globalization, the battle
between everything that tends to transform cultural heritage into purely an object of
profit or “museification.”
v
vi Preface
The Main Themes and Objectives of the Book
In this cultural background, the focus of the book is minor historic centres and their
natural and rural landscape. Europe is a land of ancient urbanization linked at the
crossroads of civilizations that have occurred over time. The minor historical centres
of European territories are normally an integral part of long-term settlement land-
scapes, in which the processes of urbanization are still deeply tied to the evolution
of the agricultural landscape and that hinges on the environmental structures in which
they are located (e.g., seas, rivers, hills, mountains, plains, etc.). In many cases,
centres have been undermined by the more deleterious effects of industrialization
during the last two centuries. It is obvious that providing a definition of small-size
historic centres is not easy and would take a statistical analysis of existing urban
centres in Europe to locate a size threshold capable of defining the terms “minor” or
“small size” used so far. This size threshold varies from country to country because
settlement organization is the result of different processes of human activity that have
characterized historical evolution. To generalize the concept, beyond the possible
size thresholds, in this context is intended to refer to cities located outside of the
major lines of communication, far from large urban centres capable of catalysing
economic resources and political attention. They are, in short, small size not only for
demographic reason but also for economic one, e.g., they have few resources.
An alleged “minority,” these centres can now be considered a potential heritage as
well as resource for both present and future generations. These towns are often the
centrepiece of urban landscapes and geographical areas with original features; They
are-not always but often-individual places within networks of minor historical centres
linked by history, traditions, and/or natural elements in common (e.g., rivers, forests,
river systems or other natural elements). They are situated away from major touristic
networks, but there is a beginning interest to explore the touristic exploitation of these
environments. Therefore, this is the right moment to pursue sustainable and local
development of these centers in the context of a cultural perspective.
The Structure of the Book
The book is articulated in seven parts and twenty-four chapters. Part 1 describes the
cultural background of the work. Part 2 provides lessons learned from planning and
management practices on the safeguarding and revitalisation of minor historic
centres in Eastern Partnerships. Part 3 describes a different approach to cultural
heritage through by the concept of territorial cultural systems. Part 4 introduces
integrated cultural territorial plans as a new approach to the management of cultural
territorial systems. Part 5 analyses the first experiences in Eastern Europe and
compares them in Part 6 with one of the most well-known traditions in cultural
heritage of western European countries such as Italy. Part 7 concludes the book by
defining possible perspectives for territorial cultural systems.
Acknowledgments
The contents of this book are the result of reflections made by authors participating
in the research work “VIVA Eastpart,” which was funded by the EUROEAST
CULTURE European Union program and developed by many of the authors
between 2012 and 2013. The opinions reported here are solely those of the authors
and do not in any way involve the EUROEAST CULTURE European Union
program or any other EU Institutions.
vii
Contents
Part I Introduction and Background

1 Studying Cultural Territorial Systems: Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Francesco Rotondo
2 The Concept of Heritage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Francesco Selicato
3 Local Self-sustainable Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Francesco Rotondo
4 Cultural Heritage as a Key for the Development of Cultural
and Territorial Integrated Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Francesco Rotondo
5 Sustainable Development Policies for Minor Deprived Urban
Communities and Natural and Cultural Heritage Conservation . . . 29
Paolo Ventura and Michela Tiboni
Part II Lessons Learned from Planning and Management Practices

on Safeguarding and Revitalisation of Minor Historic
Centres in Eastern Partnerships
6 Lessons Learned from Planning and Management Practices
on the Safeguarding and Revitalisation of Minor Historic
Centres in Eastern Europe countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Josefina López Galdeano
7 Characterization of Minor Historic Centers: Quantitative
Indexes, and Qualitative Aspects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Claudia Ceppi and Pierangela Loconte
ix
x Contents
Part III Territorial Cultural Systems: A Different Approach

to Cultural Heritage
8 Territorial Cultural Systems: Possible Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Francesco Selicato and Claudia Piscitelli
9 An Integrated and Sustainable Approach to the Management
of Minor Historic Centres: Territorial Cultural Systems . . . . . . . . 85
10 Socio-economic Dimension in Managing the Renewal
of Ancient Historic Centers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Carmelo M. Torre
11 A Systematic Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Projects
for the Valorization of Cultural Heritage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Francesco Tajani and Pierluigi Morano
Part IV A New Approach to the Management of Cultural Territorial

Systems: Integrated Cultural Territorial Plans
12 Participation and Integrated Cultural Territorial Plans . . . . . . . . . 121
Claudia Piscitelli
13 Building Local Cultural Landscapes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Paolo Colarossi
14 Implementing and Reviewing Integrated Cultural Territorial
Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Pierangela Loconte
Part V First Experiences in Eastern Europe

15 Armenian Cultural Territorial Systems First Experience . . . . . . . . 191
Sarhat Petrosyan and Gruia Bădescu
16 Moldovan Cultural Territorial Systems First Experiences . . . . . . . 215
Gruia Bădescu and Cătălina Preda
17 Romanian Cultural Territorial Systems First Experience . . . . . . . . 241
Vera Marin
18 Serbian Cultural Territorial Systems First Experiences . . . . . . . . . 265
Aleksandra Djukic, Mirjana Roter Blagojevic and Marko Nikolic
Part VI Experiences in Italy

19 Safeguarding and Promoting Historical Heritage
and Landscape in Italy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
Contents xi
20 The Actors’ Role in Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311

Claudia Piscitelli and Pierangela Loconte
21 A Survey of Interesting Practices in the Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
Pierangela Loconte
22 Pedestrian Accessibility of Historical Centres: A Key Determinant
of Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351
Maurizio Tira
23 The Institutional Framework for Planning Instruments
and Heritage Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363
Francesco Rotondo
Part VII Conclusions: Perspectives for Territorial Cultural Systems

24 Conclusions: Perspectives for Territorial Cultural Systems. . . . . . . 373
Francesco Selicato
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383
Contributors
Gruia Bădescu Department of Architecture, Old Court, Clare College, University

of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Mirjana Roter Blagojevic Faculty of Architecture, University of Belgrade,
Belgrade, Serbia
Claudia Ceppi Department of Civil, Environmental, Land, Building Engineering
and Chemistry, Polytechnic University of Bari, Bari, Italy
Paolo Colarossi Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile Edile e Ambientale, University
of Rome “La Sapienza”, Rome, Italy
Aleksandra Djukic Faculty of Architecture, University of Belgrade, Belgrade,
Serbia
Josefina López Galdeano Faculty of Arts, Geography and History, University of
Granada, Granada, Spain
Pierangela Loconte Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture,
Polytechnic University of Bari, Bari, Italy
Vera Marin Department of Urban Planning and Spatial Development, University
of Architecture and Urbanism “Ion Mincu”, Bucharest, Romania
Pierluigi Morano Department of Science of Civil Engineering and Architecture,
Marko Nikolic Faculty of Architecture, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
Sarhat Petrosyan Department of Architecture, National University of
Architecture and Construction of Armenia, Yerevan, Armenia
Claudia Piscitelli Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Polytechnic
University of Bari, Bari, Italy
xiii
xiv Contributors
Cătălina Preda Romanian Center for Innovation in Local Development

International Expert, Bucharest, Romania
Francesco Rotondo Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture,
Francesco Selicato Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture,
Francesco Tajani Department of Science of Civil Engineering and Architecture,
Michela Tiboni Department of Civil Engineering, Architecture, Land,
Environment and Mathematics, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
Maurizio Tira Brixia Accessibility Lab, Department of Civil Engineering,
Architecture, Land, Environment and Mathematics, University of Brescia, Brescia,
Italy
Carmelo M. Torre Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Polytechnic
University of Bari, Bari, Italy
Paolo Ventura Department of Civil, Environmental, Land Management
Engineering and Architecture, University of Parma, Parma, Italy
Part I
Introduction and Background
Chapter 1
Studying Cultural Territorial Systems:
Introduction
Francesco Rotondo
Abstract The main objective of this chapter is to introduce the book as a first result
of ongoing research about cultural heritage and landscape as a key for a sustainable
local development. A place-based approach is useful to promote cultural territorial
systems as the necessary interpretative format to understand the contemporary
urban and territorial structure, which is often polarized between metropolitan areas
and small and mid-sized towns.
Keywords Urban planning Historic centre Cultural heritage
The Purpose of This Research
As Barca (2009) already stated, facing economic crisis requires the adoption of a
strong policy concept, a concentration of priorities, and key changes of governance.
The proposed place-based approach emphasises the coexistence of both efficiency
and equity dimensions in development policy. The objective of efficiency is about
realising the full utilisation of the potential of every place or region, whereas the
objective of equity is about ensuring equal opportunities for individuals irrespective
of where they live.
The majority of European territories (and not only those in Europe) are not
metropolitan regions; rather they are a reach integration between small centers and
natural and agricultural land that very often are the result of an evolution of
long-term settlement.
F. Rotondo (&)
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Polytechnic University
of Bari (Italy), Via Orabona 4, 70125 Bari, Italy
e-mail: francesco.rotondo@poliba.it
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 3

F. Rotondo et al. (eds.), Cultural Territorial Systems,
Springer Geography, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-20753-7_1
4 F. Rotondo
Industrial and postindustrial societies have based their development model on

strong unbanisation emphasising the role of metropolitan areas and large cities that
are rich in services, full of economic opportunities, and full of people.1
However, perhaps it is time to turn this trend toward a more balanced approach
so that we do not risk losing or degrading the enormous anthropic and natural
heritage that is very often found outside of large cities.
Thus, studying cultural territorial systems, their landscape, and their cultural
heritage as a key for sustainable local development is a way to comprehend and
better evaluate the concept of heritage to rediscover a new development model.
The Structure of the Book
The book is articulated in seven parts and twenty-four chapters. The aim of the first
section is to describe the reason for searching for a different approach to cultural
heritage in all of its manifestations, both tangible and intangible (Unesco 2003).
“Territorial cultural systems” is a new term used to explore a new world of research
and development based on the concept of heritage (Chap. 2) as well as the defi-
nition of local self-sustainable development (Chap. 3).
In this new development model, networks of minor historical centres and their
landscape systems are a “manifesto” of the way in which we can change our lives in
terms of cultural heritage as it has been established in their territories (Chap. 4).
Territorial-integrated plans are possible tools to exploit these territorial cultural
systems. The subject of sustainable-development policies for minor deprived urban
communities has been already studied, and one of the more recent and updated
studies is the COST C27 Action (2006–2011), which is related to the conservation
and revitalization of natural and cultural heritage. COST C27 aimed to investigate
“the range of threats to sustainable development faced by small communities and
rural areas and the planning tools developed for them” as well as “the use of
suitable indicators and parameters (planning tools, specific technical improvements)
to analyze and assess best practice case studies.” methodology, contents, and first
results, which are described in Chap. 5, present an interesting step toward devel-
oping territorial cultural systems.
In the third section, territorial cultural systems are explained as a different
approach to cultural heritage. After defining them (Chap. 8) and exploring new
minor historic centres planning-and-management models based on culture and
sustainability (Chap. 9), the book analyses social balance and economic effective-
ness in the rehabilitation of historic centers in the context of the economy of
territorial cultural systems Chap. 10) by discussing benefits and costs of projects for
the valorisation of cultural heritage (Chap. 11).
1
They are also well-known potential diseases that big cities can cause (Lederbogen et al. 2011).
1 Studying Cultural Territorial Systems: Introduction 5
Section “The Territorial Context” explains a new approach to the management of

cultural territorial systems based on a planning tool called “integrated cultural
territorial plans.” Implementing and reviewing integrated cultural territorial plans
(Chap. 14), building local cultural landscapes (Chap. 13), and sharing knowledge
and decisions in the participation process (Chap. 12) are the main arguments of this
section.
The fifth part of the book is related to lessons learned from planning and
management practices on safeguarding and revitalising minor historic centres in the
Eastern countries and in Italy, which is analysed as an interesting example among
the western European countries. All of the chapters of this part have a similar
articulation:
1. Institutional and context for planning instruments and heritage protection.
2. Identification and involvement of local stakeholders.
3. Description of physical planning measures interpreted as early attempts to
safeguard and develop minor historical centres.
This similar structure helps showing similitudes and diversity between different
countries in a sort of brief comparison inside eastern European countries not just to
compare but to observe the level of implementation gained in these fast-developing
countries, which can exemplify possible tendencies.
The book is closed by a final reflection about future perspectives for territorial
cultural systems (Chap. 24), where possible highlighting topics are pointed out.
The Territorial Context
The nations of Eastern Europe, free from self-determination for just two decades,
appear to provide a territorial context that is particularly favourable to accommo-
date this proposal for a methodology to develop territorial cultural systems.
In countries with the oldest level of industrialisation (e.g., Europe and USA), the
need to change the development model has become an urgent requirement as has
the ability to respond to financial crises of the current globalized model. To
countries that have increased their level of well-being in recent years following the
transition to a market economy (e.g., China, Eastern European countries) or the
emergence of more democratic models of governance (e.g., South American
nations), this requirement may seem more remote and less urgent. However, it
seems to the author (also looking at the European policies) that this need to change
the development model is also really very urgent in these countries, of which the
case of Eastern European countries could be an interesting example.
6 F. Rotondo
References
Barca F (2009) An agenda for a reformed cohesion policy. A place-based approach to meeting
European Union challenges and expectations. Independent Report, prepared at the request of
DanutaHubner, Commissioner for Regional Policy. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/
2009_2014/documents/regi/dv/barca_report_/barca_report_en.pdf. Accessed 26 Feb 2015
Lederbogen F, Kirsch P, Haddad L, Streit F, TostH Schuch P, Wüst S, Pruessner JC, Rietschel M,
Deuschle M, Meyer-Lindenberg A (2011) City living and urban up bringing affect neural social
stress processing in humans. Nature 474:498–501
UNESCO (2003) Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. http://
unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001325/132540e.pdf. 01 Feb 2015
Chapter 2
The Concept of Heritage
Francesco Selicato
Abstract The concept of heritage is constantly on the cultural and politic agenda
of contemporary society. The reflections in this chapter move away from legal and
legislative references toward the meaning the capital has assumed within the dis-
ciplines that study territory, landscape, and architecture. Describing the many ways
in which the term is used reveals the gradual expansion of the concept of heritage as
well as the growing importance that heritage plays in spatial planning.
Keywords Cultural heritage Sustainable development Urban planning
Introduction
The term “heritage” is currently used to express key concepts of contemporary

society, and it has a multiplicity of meanings that are as different as disciplines in
which the term is used i.e., from economics to jurisprudence, from social sciences
to historical ones, from engineering to territory, landscape, and architecture sci-
ences. It’s to these disciplines that the meanings and concepts considered here are
referred from the etymology of the term. “Heritage” derives from the Latin patri-
monium, which is the union of two terms: pater (father) and munus (duty). The
literal meaning is “the duty of the father” and, more extensively, the term can be
translated as “things belonging to his father,” that is, the goods that belong to the
father are evocative of value and sense. That breakdown still leads us to the con-
clusion, in a larger sense understood in an intergenerational key, that heritage is a
set of goods that we have inherited from our fathers and that can be passed on to
future generations. This definition inevitably places attention on the role that
F. Selicato (&)
of Bari (Italy), Via Orabona, 4, 70125 Bari, Italy
e-mail: francoselicato@yahoo.com

8 F. Selicato
heritage must fulfill, a role that varies continuously between the passive deposit of
historical memory or cultural identity and the powerful stimulus for creativity
available for the present as well as for building the future (Settis 2010; 2012).
The Legislative Domain
The heritage to which we refer—in terms of territory, landscape, and architecture

sciences—has undergone significant conceptual legislative evolution, which has the
most authoritative legitimacy in the UNESCO conventions. The most well-known
international instrument of UNESCO, aimed at the promotion of cultural and nat-
ural heritage—whether “material” or “tangible”—for the benefit of collective en-
joyment as well public interest is the Convention of 1972,1 which has been ratified
by almost all countries in the world. In this convention, both cultural2 heritage and
natural3 heritage are considered in context of their exceptionality. However, in the
late 1970s many believed that there was a need to support a similar device for the
protection of “intangible” riches of heritage constituting, as it were, “intangible
assets” for humanity. After a long journey of researching studies and making
proposals, this belief led to the new Convention of 2003,4 which completes that of
1972. There is no doubt that the protection of “material” heritage, e.g., monuments,
environments, and landscapes, is rendered meaningless without the conservation of
the cultures and social expressions that helped bring them to life, ensured their
maintenance, and preserved decorum. Summarizing the conceptual evolution
gained within this relevant international organization, it can be assumed that
starting from the 2003 Convention, in addition to having attached particular
importance to local communities regarding the definition of “heritage” and the role
that they must play in the protection and enhancement of such, the deep interde-
pendence between intangible heritage and material heritage is highlighted: this
underscores the need for an integrated approach to the protection and enhancement
of both tangible and intangible heritages for the benefit of settled communities (Van
Oers and Haraguchi 2010).
Even before the European Landscape Convention was signed in Florence in
2000, the link between tangible and intangible heritage and settled communities had
been affirmed. The convention arose, however, in terms of a deep rupture with the
past as well as the extension of the concept of landscape to mean the whole
1
The Convention on the “Protection on the world’s cultural and natural heritage” was signed on
11.16.1972.
2
Consists of monuments, sites, and settlements agglomerates formed by man such as archaeo-
logical sites.
3
Consists of natural monuments including physical and biological formations, geological and
physiographical formations, and natural sites.
4
The Convention for the “Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage” was approved by the
General Conference of UNESCO on 17.10.2003.
2 The Concept of Heritage 9
territory. The landscape is no longer just the foreshortened or panoramic view of a

beautiful “postcard.” Rather it coincides precisely with the whole territory and is
therefore inclusive of the built and natural heritage, both material and immaterial,
and its deep meanings are intertwined with the experience of settled communities.
With the European Convention, the landscape itself is the heritage and becomes at
the same time an economic and cultural asset; finally, landscape has a legal status
that can be extended virtually to the entire territory.
The Cultural Debate
In the legislative sense, heritage refers to documents that have their legitimacy in
the international field; in the cultural sense, reflections on heritage move away from
scientific debate, which matured within the literature of the field.
The conception of heritage in the thinking of Françoise Choay (1992), is highly
innovative for having undermined the idea that heritage resides exclusively in items
of historical value defined in time and space and divorced from a relationship with
settled communities. His idea of heritage as “allegory of memory” is based on the
origin of the term “monument,” which comes from the Latin “monumentum,” which
itself is derived from the verb “monere,” meaning “alert” or “remember” (Choay
1992). The monument challenges memory, calls into question the real criterion for the
selection of the elements related to the cultural heritage of a settled community. Thus,
the monument can be considered a cultural universe related to the characteristics of
the context in which it resides that support the community’s ability to recognize and
understand its value.
Alois Riegl (1903) in the early twentieth century questioned the uniqueness of
the historical dimension as an award criterion of place value. In fact, among the
categories of value, Riegl introduced the value of “ancient,” i.e., a “sentimental”
value reported to be a feeling held by the community. In this concept, heritage as a
value is no longer exclusive (e.g., the value ascribed by lovers of ancient art) or
specialized (e.g., the historical value ascribed by scholars); rather it is an inedited
value primarily determined by social consensus and thus has ethical and political
implications.
A place being marked among people, activities, and places is what, according
Maciocco (1991a,b), leads to the meaning and significance of the territory and
determines the conditions under which it can assume environmental value. The
basic hypothesis is to say that there may be elements of correspondence between the
interest of the population for a place and the environmental value of the place itself.
The environment can indeed be considered as the outcome of a process of strati-
fication, the physical signs of which are the result of the complex interaction
between man and nature. In each period, the environmental structure expresses a
dense network of relationship through which a company is located in a particular
physical context. The environment, therefore, is meant to be intimately known and
10 F. Selicato
cannot be read in its temporality. Its nature, its essence, can be understood only
through the path of its history (Azzena 2011).
Attention must therefore be paid to grasping the recurring meanings of the deep
relationship between population, activities, and places; the unifying meanings of
landscape and environment and its deep structure; and the quality of the differences of
its structural meanings (Sanna 2011). In this conception, heritage is configured as a
set of significant points. These points, however, are not specific, unique, and unre-
peatable, but they carry with them in a specific, unique, and unrepeatable way the
meanings of other places in accordance with the “perspective,” the “mores,” and the
“general will,” i.e., the unwritten laws that govern a particular society (Azzena 2011).
However, the concept of heritage perhaps has its most fertile application to
territory in the thought of Alberto Magnaghi (2003; 2005) in overriding the same
distinction of UNESCO between cultural and natural heritage, both tangible and
intangible, to arrive at an original, potentially fruitful theory of local development
planning, in which is possible to include and develop the concept of a territorial
local cultural system.
According to Magnaghi (2007), in a conventional topographic map representing
the territory, the rules of descriptive geometry are followed, thus downplaying in
the meaning of heritage the true identity of places and representing at most their
functions and quantities, items well away from the content of knowledge, to show
the identifying characteristics of the territory. In the territorialist approach
(Magnaghi 2003), those places “forgotten” by the topography functionalist, i.e.,
their interactions and the interaction between settlement and environment, become
the protagonists of a new representation. The territorialist approach gets closer to
the “physical, metaphysical and cosmological supremacy that the place had in the
ancient world” (Magnaghi 2010). Because the territorialist approach considers only
the specific qualities of a place based on the energies of the local society and the
specific style of self-sustainable development, it is obvious that the interpretation,
description, and representation of these qualities become the central theme of the
map. Through the interpretation of the identity of places, which is the outcome of a
long-term historical process, the map can in fact already provide many design
guidelines.
Magnaghi (2010) identifies an effective tool called an “atlas of the assets” In the
territorialist meaning, territorial heritage is a system of synergistic relationships
between special qualities of the physical environment, the built environment, and
the anthropic environment. It is necessary, therefore, to represent and interpret in
integrated form the three aspects of the same heritage. Atlases of heritage, com-
pared with traditional atlases, have selective and interpretive information contained
in a spatial cognitive framework because they represent complex elements. The
interpretative representation relates therefore to three atlases: the environmental
heritage, the territorial/landscape heritage, and the socioeconomic heritage. The
three atlases, according Magnaghi, are determined “through a plurality of tech-
niques and skills: cartography or visual representations, text products, archives,
synoptics paintings or multimedia hypertext” (Magnaghi 2007; 2010). The need to
verify representations through a communicative exchange with settled communities
2 The Concept of Heritage 11
imposes an organization of those presentations that makes possible, with simplicity,

determination of the public traffic, interrogation, decomposition, integration, and
correction of the produced results.
The territorial heritage, as defined and shared with the community, becomes for
Magnaghi (2003; 2007) fertile ground for action, a living system on which to act to
enhance the environmental and cultural peculiarities which are understood as part of
the broader cultural territorial and local system.
The concept of systemic heritage brought Maurizio Carta (1999) to assume
assets as being the identity matrix of the cultural armor of the territory. To
understand the territorial structure of this cultural system, it is necessary to organize
a system of multidisciplinary knowledge, within which each discipline revises its
investigation methods to make them comparable with those of other congruent
disciplines (Carta 1999). According to Carta (1999), it is therefore essential to
organize a “cognitive territorial armor,” which contains, organizes, and renders
communicable all elements of the complex territorial space. Once again, knowledge
assumes the land to be a resource and a place of condensation of local thought and
attention to the contexts, the differences, and the identities that communities have
expressed in their evolution.
To achieve this, we need a historicized and multilevel knowledge base, i.e., a
knowledge of the evolutionary process of the territory, that investigates all of the
elements that constitute the complexity of the place in question, i.e., the compo-
nents of landscapes and natural anthropogenic ones both productive and cultural.
The complexity of the results of natural and anthropic territory requires a set of
knowledge that acts on the envelope of relationships that the territorial components
maintain among themselves and with each other; a knowledge that is not superficial
or customary and limited to a system of sectoral analysis; a knowledge across
sectors that extract interpretations, which is able to listen and translate into
understandable and useful forms for decision making the many stories contained by
the territory that are told through the scattered signs of its natural and cultural
heritage and through local knowledge.
It should therefore also reflect on codes of training, learning, and communication
of common knowledge, namely, widespread knowledge and common sense. Besio
(2002) states that common-sense knowledge, unlike scientific knowledge, which is
relevant to explanation and prediction, is aimed at action. Common sense has codes
and languages of transmission that are almost always behavioral; it does not need to
be encoded from documents or rules; it has a practical reason and spreads through
interpersonal relationships; and people learn it through models of collective
behavior transmitted through the bonds of belonging to a community. This
knowledge, being face-to-face with action, is the result of an immediate vision and
a summary that comes from repeated practice with places and things, but it is rarely
explicitly transmitted. It is only valid in individual local situations; its recognition
allows people to understand the deeper meaning of each place, but it does not have
universal value and cannot be generalized (Besio 2002). The images of the
landscape, made by the knowledge of common sense, return a structured and
12 F. Selicato
comprehensive view of the territory that goes beyond the evidence of individual
phenomenal aspects (Besio 1999).
Only through a deep understanding what is written here is it ultimately possible
to attribute meaning and significance to heritage in all its forms, in its unity, but also
in its many branches held together by complex systems of relations between
landscape, architecture, art, traditions, and quality of life (Carta 1999).
References
Azzena G (2011) History for places. In: Maciocco G, Sanna G, Serreli S (eds) The urban potential
of external territories, Metodi del Territorio. Franco Angeli, Milano
Besio M (1999) Le tecnologie GIS nel trasferimento dal progetto di conoscenza al progetto di
piano. In: Besio M, Monti C (eds) Dal canocchiale alle stelle: strumenti per il nuovo piano.
Franco Angeli, Milano
Besio M (2002) Il vino del mare: gli spazi del paesaggio tra i tempi della tradizione e i tempi della
conoscenza. Marsilio, Venezia
Carta M (1999) L’armatura culturale del territorio. Il patrimonio culturale come matrice di identità
e strumento di sviluppo. Franco Angeli, Milano
Choay F (1992) L’allégorie du patri moine. Éditions du seuil, Paris
Maciocco G (ed) (1991a) La pianificazione ambientale del paesaggio. Franco Angeli, Milano
Maciocco G (ed) (1991b) Le dimensioni ambientali della pianificazione urbana. Franco Angeli,
Milano
Magnaghi A (2003) Projetlocal. Pierre Mardaga éditeur, Sprimont (Belgique)
Magnaghi A (ed.) (2005) The urban village. A charter for democracy and local self-sustainable
development. Zed Books Ltd, London
Magnaghi A (ed.) (2007) Scenari strategici. Visioni identitarie per il progetto di territorio. Alinea,
Firenze
Magnaghi A (2010) Il progetto locale. Verso la coscienza di luogo. Bollati Boringhieri, Torino
Riegl A (1903) Der modern Denkmalkultus. Wien und Leipzig
Sanna G (2011) Territory, representation, project. In: Maciocco G, Sanna G, Serreli S (eds) The
Urban Potential of ExternalTerritories, Metodi del Territorio. Franco Angeli, Milano
Settis S (2010) Paesaggio. Costituzione. Cemento. La battaglia per l’ambiente contro il degrado
civile. Giulio Einaudi Editore, Torino
Settis S (2012) Perché gli italiani sono diventati nemici dell’arte. Il giornale dell’Arte, n. 324,
ottobre 2012, Umberto Allemandi & C., Torino
Van Oers R, Haraguchi S (eds) (2010) Managing historic cities = Gérer les villes historiques.
UNESCO World Heritage Centre, Paris
Chapter 3
Local Self-sustainable Development
Francesco Rotondo
Abstract Starting from the known theories of Francoise Choay on heritage and the
subsequent developments made by Alberto Magnaghi regarding local territorialism,
this chapter, after outlining the cornerstones of most shared theories in science
relative to sustainable local development, seeks to illustrate the potential role of
cultural heritage within this paradigm. In this way, this chapter is a trait d’union
between cultural heritage and development (see Chaps. 2 and 4).
Keywords Local sustainable development Urban design Landscape planning
Introduction
Sustainable endogenous local development seems to be a globally shared paradigm

(UN-WCED 1987; UN-Millennium Declaration 2000). Reality does not always
follow academic or political choices. Yet we a have a strong globalized develop-
ment that is not at all sustainable, not local, and not endogenous (even if significant
improvements have been made to our previous behaviors). This naturally has
consequences on our common future. For example (citing one of the fundamental
resources, e.g., air, water, energy and soil, that urban governance influences), even
if there are many built-up environments in our spaces, in Europe we continue to
consume new soil, which is one of our more limited resources. As Stern already
highlighted for climate change (2006), the benefits of strong, early action to limit
and guide this phenomenon far outweigh the costs of not acting or continuing to
consume soil. We can say the same for cultural heritage. In some sense, cultural
heritage is like a species of animal in danger of extinction. In fact, in a globalized
world everyday use of the Internet and the infinite number of ways to communicate
our culture have become similar. What has been a typical expression of a territory
F. Rotondo (&)
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Polytechnic
University of Bari (Italy), Via Orabona 4, 70125 Bari, Italy

14 F. Rotondo
for centuries could become well known in many parts of the world and sometimes
be duplicated in a decontextualized way.
But what is the shared definition of local self-sustainable development, and what
are its relationships with the cultural heritage? These are the questions addressed in
the following text.
Self Sustainable Development
As already described in the preceding chapter, the novelty of the thought of

Françoise Choay about heritage lies in having dealt a blow to the idea that heritage
resides exclusively in items of historical value, definite in time and space and
divorced from a relationship with the communities settled. His idea of heritage as
“allegory of Memory” (Choay 1992) calls into question the collective thought of a
community and its capacity to remember places and identities. Without wishing to
repeat points already widely reported in the literature and already addressed in this
book, this concept of heritage has found a fertile application to the territory by the
thought of Alberto Magnaghi that went beyond the same UNESCO distinction
between cultural heritage and natural, tangible, and intangible heritage to arrive at
an original and potentially fruitful theory of local territorial development to include
and develop the concept of a local territorial cultural system, which is the subject of
the current work.
The role of the cultural heritage as a “powertrain development” lies mainly in its
ability to reconcile the two macro-components that coexist within the economy of a
territory: the local component and the global component. Although, in fact, on one
hand it allows us to know and recognize the identifying characteristics of the
territory, through the development strategy it is set in the direction of social, eco-
nomic, and cultural diversification; on the other hand the same local development
policies make the territory globally competitive. Therefore, it triggers local devel-
opment processes, thus offering opportunities to establish businesses that can
produce territorial development and enhancement that do not just take advantage of
the quality of the sites but actually produce new qualities.
Magnaghi (2003), in his essay, “The local development,” well-argued the fun-
damentals of what he defines the “territorialist approach,” which led to the planning
process of the local project. The author highlights the centrality of territorial her-
itage in producing lasting wealth and in defining particular characteristics of the
socioeconomic future of every local territorial system. The author also focuses on
the cultural transformations of social movements aimed toward the development of
consciousness of place, understood as the “caring” collective assets such as com-
mon goods, thus creating essential self-sustainable local development. On this
basis, Magnaghi identifies as a natural consequence of this process: how to change
the territory government practices. In assuming the territorial heritage and its
exploitation as the socioeconomic matrix of self-sustainable development, local
development becomes the integrated government of production and reproduction,
3 Local Self-sustainable Development 15
in which planning and design play a central role. “This is to enable a planning
process in which territory is no longer considered as a blank sheet, a technical
support on which everything is convertible to zooning economic functions and
regulate the use of the property, but as a place full of history, signs of values to
transform in resources for producing lasting wealth to transmit enriched to future
generations.” (Magnaghi 2003). Magnaghi, with an effort to give substance to his
approach, lists and describes the steps involved in territorial planning from a
self-sustainable development perspective:
• Identity representation of the territory: Without a widely shared representation
of what is considered good value and capital, the territory cannot be given
statutory rules that are not just authoritative and regulative;
• The construction of statutes: For their constitutional value, statutes necessarily
require a long participatory process that leads to a shared auto-recognition of the
use and transformation rules of the territory for a collective interest;
• The construction of strategic scenarios: This construction has in the social
production its feasibility guarantee because the involvement in the project phase
of economic, cultural, and social actors, in tune with the exploitation of heritage
deposits, involves their activation in the implementation phase with a positive
sum game in the multiplication of energy;
• The construction of plans and specific projects: This requires careful consid-
eration of the actors for their design and management taking into account the
need to act to improve integrated multidisciplinary and multisectoral projects.
Therefore, from the concept of heritage as Choay explained it, Magnaghi has
developed a vision of the area as a result of the coevolution of the relationship
between nature and culture (Magnaghi 2003). This perspective of “one’s gaze”
gives new value to the territory; he considers this value “heritage.” In terms of
“heritage,” the whole aim is to protect and enhance, putting into evidence the
historic passing of the “view” approach, which is also typical of UNESCO docu-
ments, i.e., including portions of land exclusively to be protected (for which there
was a risk of becoming “museums” or “ornament”) versus others that can be freely
edited because they are considered to have no particular value (i.e., they can be
modified without special attention), which is consistent with the subsequent
European Landscape Convention signed in Florence (2000). This approach also
changes the way we deal with urban and territorial planning because it highlights
the inadequacy of the plans that identify areas only to protect and other to be
transformed by the sole indication of primarily quantitative parameters (indexes
buildability, surfaces blankets, a minimum quantity of services to be realized),
which has the technique of zoning as its very foundation.
All of the territory needs different levels of protection and enhancement articu-
lating the degrees of transformability through quantitative parameters but also qual-
itative parameters that are able to outline the objectives of admissible transformations.
The territory reaffirms its irreplaceable developmental support role, which must return
to the category of “local” because it is linked to the potential of the environment and
the communities that inhabit it and live in it every day. This approach sustains a
16 F. Rotondo
utopian vision in contrast to the soulless globalization that characterizes contemporary

society in a form of globalization from below by networking the various “rooms” of
the world, thus creating alternatives to standardized economic paths and governed by
a few multinationals away from the interests of a growing population and aware of the
possibility of a more equitable and widespread prosperity.
In countries with older levels of industrialization (Europe and USA), the need to
change the development model has become an urgent need in addition to addressing
the financial crises of the present globalized model. However, to countries that
increased their level of well-being in the years following the transition to a market
economy (China, Eastern European countries) or that were subject to the emergence
of more democratic models of government (South American Nations), this need
may seem a somewhat more remote and less compelling (Figs. 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3).
In fact, in the author’s opinion, given the pace of economic growth and the
consumption of soil recorded in emerging countries and the extreme ease with
which they follow and in some cases exceed the rates of growth and consumption of
Western countries (Fig. 3.1), the subject also appears to be important.
Fig. 3.1 Piata Unirii, Bucharest. Buildings in the traditional Municipiul Plaza in the capital have
grown up rapidly (Image Francesco Rotondo)
Fig. 3.2 New offices Central Bank of Armenia Dilijan headquarter (Armenia). The government
has planned the new headquarter on a wonderful mountain in a touristic city of the country (Image
Francesco Rotondo)
Fig. 3.3 Russian quarter in Tartu (Estonia). This quarter was made for the executive class of the
period, which now is a new periphery with the same problems of many others cities in Western
countries (Image Francesco Rotondo)
In fact, these cities are rapidly taking on the characteristics of the model con-
temporary Western city, with the same problems and the same shortcomings
(Fig. 3.2), which are often compounded by a baseline deficit for other causes as in
the case of former communist nations (Fig. 3.3).
A model of development that has still its strengths in the mass dissemination of
standardized products, certified for all the world and unable to enhance the skills
and quality of local contexts, is likely to drag these countries toward a model of life
that is unable to ensure sustainable growth of its territorial heritage.
Local self-sustainable development, in the view of Alberto Magnaghi, is based
on a virtuous synergy between the developers of the transformation (i.e., the in-
habitants and users of the territory) and the investment of territorial capital value
through the construction of shared rules for the use of this territorial heritage to
produce well-being, lasting wealth, reproducibility of resources, and added value
for the territory (Magnaghi 2005).
It is necessary to deeply study the territory to understand the environmental
factors, vegetation, wildlife, hydrography, geomorphological, historical, archaeo-
logical, artistic, architectural, industrial, handicraft, agricultural, and social factors
that comprise the heritage of the place. Only after understanding the amount and
18 F. Rotondo
origin of this heritage, socially shared rules can be found on which to base a
perspective of development and enhancement.
In the development process, one can implement all the investments that do not
use soil in order to avoid the dissipation of resources that are not reproducible but
rather are able to increase the value of the territorial heritage, thus making it also
usable for future generations according to the now shared definition of sustainable
development (UN 1987).
Conclusions
Therefore, according to this approach, urban and territorial plans are no longer just
the design of cities and territories but become socioeconomic strategies based on a
territory, on its heritage and its community, which share territories’ exploitation,
thus ensuring the reproducibility and availability for future generations and con-
tributing to increase the territory’s values to be handed down to future generations.
This model is a slow and complete revolution of the globalized industrial
development model currently followed by the strongest economies in the world. It
is not easy to implement because it requires cultural awareness of the established
populations as well as recognizing that only this population can change the current
economic growth model, which is disconnected from the territory and often devoid
of relations between production and finance as shown in the financial crisis that
began in 2008 including all its limitations. Currently, the global economic system
has reacted to the crisis by bringing production to countries where labor costs are
lower, thus effectively not providing for the future of the poorest countries of older
industrialization and deceiving the nations where foreign investment are installed
that this is the only road capable of bringing economic growth and welfare, whereas
in reality they are only producing future inequalities as well as future poverty.
In fact, even newly industrialized countries are ignoring the spatial assets
available and layered in history to export industries and technologies with little or
no relation with what might be called the “genius loci” (Norberg-Schulz 1980).
This attitude ensures, with increasing speed, that at the moment when established
populations are clamoring for their rights to welfare, leisure, and social equity, the
economy moves to the poorest countries in a circuit that only tends to lower the life
quality level in the name of he convenience for small power groups (Harvey 2000).
It is not easy to change this development model because it appears easier and
faster to achieve favoring rapid concentrations of great wealth and economic cap-
itals. However, this enhances the capabilities and the local heritage in an effort to
ensure a lasting and widespread prosperity for large segments of the population.
It does not mean a nostalgic return to tradition but rather points toward a con-
scious search for a new development model based on the identity and local
resources or—in the sense already explained—on the heritage of the territory.
For the reasons summarized, the model must focus on the enhancement of the
characteristic elements of the local territorial assets to promote a strategy of
long-term development, and between these elements there are local agriculture and
crafts that are advanced and linked to the local culture technologies, the culture
itself, and local traditions.
In the next section, from this concept of self-sustainable local development, we
will focus on the possible role of the tangible and intangible cultural heritage,
highlighting the strengths, weaknesses, problems, and opportunities for the devel-
opment of integrated territorial plans for networks of minor historic centers.
References
Choay F (1992) L’allégorie du patrimoine. Éditions du seuil, Paris

Harvey D (2000) Spaces of hope. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh
Magnaghi A (2003) Projet local. Pierre Mardaga éditeur, Sprimont (Belgique)
Magnaghi A (ed) (2005) The urban village. A charter for democracy and local self-sustainable
Norberg-Schulz C (1980) Genius Loci, towards a phenomenology of architecture. Rizzoli, New
York
Stern N (2006) Review on the economics of climate change is a 700 page report released for the
British government on 30 October 2006. http://mudancasclimaticas.cptec.inpe.br/*rmclima/
pdfs/destaques/sternreview_report_complete.pdf. Accessed 05 Dec 2014
UN—United Nations (2000) Millennium declaration. http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/
ares552e.pdf. Accessed 05 Dec 2014
UN—WCED (1987) Our common future, report of the world commission on environment and
development. http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm. Accessed 05 Dec 2014
Chapter 4
Cultural Heritage as a Key
for the Development of Cultural
and Territorial Integrated Plans
Francesco Rotondo
Abstract After outlining the cornerstones of most shared theories in science rel-
ative to local sustainable development, this chapter seeks to illustrate the potential
role of cultural heritage to develop cultural and territorial integrated plans for the
exploitation of networks of minor historical centres and their landscape systems.
What is the role of cultural heritage in territorial systems? What is the relationship
between cultural heritage and the surrounding landscape in minor historic centres?
This chapter tries to answer these questions according to the more recent literature
in this field and cites some examples that are more deeply developed in other
chapters of this book.
Keywords Cultural integrated plans Historic centre Regional plans
Introduction
Europe is a land of ancient urbanization linked at the crossroads of civilizations that

have taken place over time. The minor historical centres of European territories are
normally an integral part of long-term settlement landscapes in which the processes
of urbanization are still deeply tied to the evolution of the agricultural landscape
and hinge on the environmental structures in which they are located (city of sea,
rivers, hills, mountains, plains, etc.). In many cases, the more deleterious effects of
industrialization during the last two centuries have undermined the heritage of these
territories. It is obvious that providing a definition of small-size historic centres is
not easy and would take a statistical analysis of existing urban centres in Europe to
locate a size threshold capable of defining the words “minor” or “small size.” This
threshold varies from country to country because settlement organization is the
result of different processes of human activity that have characterized the historical
F. Rotondo (&)
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Polytechnic University of Bari (Italy), Via
Orabona 4, 70125 Bari, Italy

22 F. Rotondo
evolution of the territory. To generalize the concept beyond possible size thresh-
olds, in this context the terms “minor” and “small size” refer to cities located
outside of the major lines of communication far from large urban centres that are
capable of catalysing economic resources and political attention. The term, in short,
means small in size not only for demographic reasons, but also for economic ones,
i.e., with few resources.1 An alleged “minority,” which can now be considered a
potential heritage and resource for both present and future generations. These towns
are often the centrepiece of urban landscapes and geographical areas that have
original features, not always but often as individual places within networks of minor
historical centres linked by history, traditions, and/or natural elements they have in
common (rivers, forests, river systems, or other natural elements). As highlighted
by Choay (1992), memory guides the recognition of assets, in particular the cultural
assets understood in the broadest sense of the term.
The Role of Cultural Heritage in These Territorial Systems
A widely held view in the industrialized world rests on the tacit assumption of a
causal relationship between “culture” and ”underdevelopment,” which holds that
individuals either are poor or remain poor because cultural beliefs and attitudes
impede their development (Unesco 2009).The relationship between culture and
development has always been very complex. Over time, this relationship has
evolved in different ways. In modern society, the positivist idea of a culture of
linear-type development has always coincided with the economic wealth of a
people including its cultural richness. After the Second World War, the Western
world found that its economic wealth was mainly determined by the scientific and
technological supremacy that characterized its development and export, which was
superior to the other duty, i.e., to allow other nations to grow economically and
culturally. Some authors (Sachs 1992; Tauli-Corpuz 2008; Escobar 1995; Esteva
1992) attribute to the speech made by US President Harry Truman, held on January
20, 1949, the division between developed nations with a scientific culture and
technology to be exported, thus effectively determining the heritage of all of the
others, especially the underdeveloped ones with a lower level of education. These
countries had to recover from a significant cultural deficit that did not allow them to
grow, even in economic terms, to the point that the deficit will always consider
cultural, scientific, and technological assets to be the unit of measurement of the
economic growth of a nation.
Other authors, such as the Nobel prize winner Amartya Sen (1997), highlighted
the role that captured the thought of the sociologist Max Weber and his theory that
1
It is possible referring to the report of Fabrizia Barca (2009) for the European Commission to
have an idea of what is called “internal areas,” which is very close to the concept of networks of
minor historical centres.
4 Cultural Heritage as a Key for the Development of Cultural … 23
attributed a prominent role to the Protestant ethic in the success of the model of
industrial development of Western economy. Sen highlights the inability of
Weberian theory to explain the recent success of Asian economies, which are
certainly not Protestant, as well as the emergence of an alleged superiority of Asian
culture based on Confucianism, such that Sen, starting from the success of the
Japanese economy, doubts that the values and culture of a people are indeed
actually crucial to the success of its economy. Only in more recent times have
theories of “post-development” highlighted the need for a definition of develop-
ment, and therefore of culture; one that is more pluralistic and garantist toward
different cultures, thus distinguishing them from those that dominated during a
certain historical period.
From these general considerations, we may share the definition that UNESCO
provides for the concept of cultural heritage (2015): The term “cultural heritage”
encompasses several main categories of heritage as follows:
Cultural heritage
• Tangible cultural heritage:
– Movable cultural heritage (paintings, sculptures, coins, manuscripts)
– Immovable cultural heritage (monuments, archaeological sites, etc.)
– Underwater cultural heritage (shipwrecks, underwater ruins, cities)
• Intangible cultural heritage: Oral traditions, performing arts, rituals
Natural heritage: Natural sites with cultural aspects such as cultural landscapes
and physical, biological, or geological formations
Always by the same general considerations, starting from the broad definition of
cultural heritage and what made us understand the theories of post-development,
UNESCO has focused on the introduction and spread of the concept of cultural
diversity, which it thusly defines:
“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 biodiversity is for nature. In this sense, it
is the common heritage of humanity and should be recognized and affirmed for the
benefit of present and future generations.” (UNESCO 2001).
Therefore, to promote a broad concept of cultural heritage with the desire to
defend and promote cultural diversity, the role of cultural heritage of minor historic
centres and the relationship with the landscape context in which they are inserted
assumes a significant value. This is the central idea of this book.
The complex of cultural heritage, in the broad sense of the definition provided by
UNESCO (tangible cultural heritage, intangible heritage, and natural heritage) is the
backbone of any idea of sustainable development that local communities can
promote. In fact, to defend and promote cultural diversity, the range of cultural
assets and the landscapes in which they are included represent values so rooted and
24 F. Rotondo
related to each other and to the settled inhabitants that they provide original
interpretative tools of possible activities, economies, and forms of development.
However, cultural property, in doing its job of acting as a catalyst for new forms
of sustainable territorial development, should not be interpreted as immutable
elements in time, territorial invariant, and not to be changed, but as elements
capable of modifying functions, uses, and roles for facing problems, issues, and
opportunities in a quota-based economy and society that increasingly change with
time. In essence, the cultural heritage of a region should be interpreted as a durable
palimpsest of different modes of interpretation of changing economic and social
conditions.
Cultural heritage, within the limits dictated solely by the need to “hand-hold” the
particular characteristics, must be able to change its function and role according to
the demands of society and the contemporary economy. A typical example of the
simultaneous use of historic properties is the famous hotel in the City of Santo
Stefano di Sessanio in Italy in the Abruzzo region, where a company, Sextantio
Ltd., bought an entire medieval village abandoned in central Italy (Fig. 4.1).
Sextantio purchased nine of the few preserved historical villages; some of them
were built in the Middle Ages and located on top of the Apennine mountains, and
others were more rural but in keeping with the surrounding area. To date, the
Fig. 4.1 Santo Stefano di Sessanio. The old village was restored to be used as a hotel (Source
photo by the author)
company has realised the first two “Albergo Diffuso” as an example of what they
want to save and of what their company could do in the future (Kihlgreen 2008).
This venture has restored two whole abandoned historic centres to use them as
hotels. This provides a typical example of a contemporary use of historic buildings,
which has the merit of keeping alive abandoned assets but that obviously leaves
many questions about the lack of identity of the property restored. In fact, if
“cultural assets” is also qualified by the ratio of tangible to intangible assets,
including objects and their use by the population, it is clear that a solution like that
of the historic village of Santo Stefano di Sessanio may risk losing this relationship,
even if the alternative is to abandon the village, with respect to which changing
identity completely is perhaps the better option.
Relationships Between Cultural Heritage

and the Surrounding Landscape in Minor Historic Centres
Minor historical centres are often bastion residues of ages, habits, and traditions
now lost in other parts of the territory. However, in an age when communication
becomes increasingly immaterial and where the more important accessibility
becomes the virtual one, centres of original identity can become hubs for new forms
of economic production based on a renewed synergy between human activities and
forms and models of the territory that have not taken place for a long time.
Valorisation of the cultural assets of a given city or territory constitutes a factor
of attraction, not only for the tourists but also for a number of investors, which
could contribute to boost the local economy through the implementation of new
activities such as new industries and development projects (Craterre-ENSAG
2006).
According to the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World
Heritage Convention (2015), cultural landscapes are cultural properties that repre-
sent the “combined works of nature and man” as designated in Article I of the
convention. Cultural landscapes are illustrative of the evolution of human society
and settlement over time under the influence of physical constraints and/or
opportunities presented by their natural environment as well as successive internal
and external social, economic, and cultural forces.
There exist a great variety of landscapes that are representative of different
regions of the world. Combined works of nature and humankind, they express a
long and intimate relationship between people and their natural environment.
Certain sites reflect specific land-use techniques that guarantee and sustain bio-
logical diversity. Others, associated in the collective mind of the communities with
powerful beliefs and artistic and traditional customs, embody an exceptional spir-
itual relationship of people with nature.
To reveal and sustain the great diversity of the interactions between humans and
their environment, as well as protect living traditional cultures and preserve the
26 F. Rotondo
traces of those which have disappeared, these sites, called “cultural landscapes,”
have been inscribed on the World Heritage List. Cultural landscapes—such as
cultivated terraces on lofty mountains, gardens, and sacred places—testify to the
creative genius, the social development, and the imaginative and spiritual vitality of
humanity. They are part of our collective identity.
In 2010, the culture of integrated conservation was internationally recognized for
the need to be maintained together with the historical city as well as the historic
cultural landscape in which it originated. The recognition of the historical city in the
contemporary urban landscape, i.e., the “urban landscape,” was first sanctioned by
UNESCO (UNESCO 2011).
Today, the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) is of fundamental importance in all
projects of urban planning and integrated conservation. For example, it is consid-
ered positively in the continued rebuilding for the protection of Japanese temples in
wood as well as the preservation of Japanese natural environment and landscape.
Historic towns and villages in their home territory are an essential part of our
universal heritage and should be understood as a whole with the structures, spaces,
and human factors in a process of continuous evolution and change.
Conservation in an urban context deals with ensembles of buildings and open
spaces that are part of large urban areas or entire small settlements, both urban and
rural, and that include intangible values (Vecco 2010). In this context, the operation
consists of reference to the city in terms of its “carat“morphological characteristics,
both functional and structural, combined into a whole as part of its territory and
surrounding environment and landscape.
The various specific values recognized in the quality of the elements characterize
the specificity of each heritage; these affect both material goods generated and
operated by man as well as property belonging to the natural properties of the places
i.e., not produced by humans (Charter of La Vallette 2011).
Each community, through the meaning of its collective memory and knowledge
of its past, is responsible for identifying the best way to preserve its
heritage (Bennett 2001). Each element of this heritage is the bearer of many values
that the possibility of change (Charter of La Vallette 2011).
References
Danuta Hübner, Commissioner for Regional Policy, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/
2009_2014/documents/regi/dv/barca_report_/barca_report_en.pdf (visited 26.02.2015)
Bennett T (2001) Cultural policy and cultural diversity: mapping the policy domain, policy note 7.
Council of Europe, Strasbourg
Choay F (1992) L’allégorie du patrimoine. Éditions du seuil, Paris
Craterre-ENSAG (2006) Cultural heritage and local development. A guide forAfrican local
governments. Imprimerie Bastianelli, Grenoble
Escobar A (1995) Encountering development: the making and unmaking of the third world.
Princeton University Press, Princeton
Esteva G (1992) “Development”, The development dictionary. Zed Books, London
Kihlgreen D (2008) Il patrimonio minore, Poligrafica Mangini, Aquila, http://www.sextantio.it/
wp-content/uploads/2012/11/PatrimonioMinore.pdf (visited 01/02/2015)
ICOMOS Charter of La Vallette (2011) Les Principes de la Valette pour la sauvegarde et la gestion
des villes et des ensembles urbains historiques, http://www.icomos.org/fr/chartes-et-normes
(visited 01/02/2015)
Sachs W (1992) The development dictionary: a guide to knowledge as power. Zed Books, London
Sen A (1997) Choice, Welfare and Measurement. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Tauli-Corpuz V (2008) The concept of Indigenous peoples’ self-determined development or
development with identity and culture: challenges and trajectories, Baguio City, Philippines,
Tebtebba Foundation. http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/files/37745/12197591975Concept_
paper_Indigenous_Peoples__Development_with_Identity.pdf/Concept%2Bpaper%
2BIndigenous%2BPeoples%2B%2BDevelopment%2Bwith%2BIdentity.pdf (visited
01/02/2015)
Vecco M (2010) A definition of cultural heritage: from the tangible to the intangible. J Cult Herit
11(3):321–324
UNESCO (2015) What is meant by “cultural heritage”? http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/
themes/illicit-trafficking-of-cultural-property/unesco-database-of-national-cultural-heritage-
laws/frequently-asked-questions/definition-of-the-cultural-heritage/, (visited 01/02/2015)
UNESCO (2009) World report. Investing in cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue
UNESCO (2001) Universal declaration on cultural diversity, http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-
URL_ID=13179&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html (visited 01/02/2015)
UNESCO (2011) Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL). http://whc.unesco.
org/en/activities/638 (visited 01/02/2015)
UNESCO (2015) Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage
Convention. http://whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines/ (visited 01/02/2015)
Chapter 5
Sustainable Development Policies
for Minor Deprived Urban Communities
and Natural and Cultural Heritage
Conservation
Paolo Ventura and Michela Tiboni
Abstract This chapter focuses on the topics and lessons of the COST C27
Sustainable Development Policies for Minor Deprived Urban Communities
(SDPMDUC) Action (2006–2011) related to the conservation and revitalization of
natural and cultural heritage. The COST C27 Action aimed to investigate “the range
of threats to sustainable development faced by small communities and rural areas and
the planning tools developed for them” as well as “the use of suitable indicators and
parameters (planning tools, specific technical improvements) to analyze and assess
the best practice case studies . . .” SDPMDUC topics, especially the growing envi-
ronmental degradation and “severe income disparities, food crises and dysfunctional
cities,” (WEF 2014) are crucial to the contemporary world’s economic critical asset.
Moreover, it is well-known that the economic crisis affects not only developing
countries but also concerns developed countries and even their wealthy areas.
SDPMDUC therapies, or best practices, look at development perspectives that are
quite different from “normal” ones. The Degrowth theory, for instance, which sys-
tematically criticizes the lack of a more comprehensive economic interpretation of
current economic phenomena, proposes new tasks and actions. Deprivation phe-
nomena are currently particularly acute because of the main facts that we assume to
having been fully demonstrated: for instance, the pioneer research performed by
Meadows et al. for the Club of Rome in 1972; the ever widening gap between gross
domestic product and the index of well-being in rich societies after the 1970s; the
growth of inequalities in terms of social and economic cleavages; the hopelessness of
P. Ventura (&)
Department of Civil, Environmental, Land Management
Engineering and Architecture, University of Parma (Italy),
Parco Area delle Scienze, 181/A, 43124 Parma, Italy
e-mail: paolo.ventura@unipr.it
M. Tiboni
Department of Civil Engineering, Architecture, Land,
Environment and of Mathematics, University of Brescia (Italy),
Via Branze, 43, 25123, Brescia, Italy
e-mail: michela.tiboni@unibs.it

30 P. Ventura and M. Tiboni
a constantly developing society. COST C27 research suggests a methodology to

build a framework of knowledge by using and improving a varied and integrated
system of analysis, synthesis, and monitoring tools. Case studies highlight, detect,
and define good and coherent policies and practices in planning strategy and terri-
torial government. One of the main topics is related to tourism-development expe-
riences. For many territories that are rich in environmental, cultural, urban, historical,
and particular social resources, tourism represents an opportunity for economic
development along with risks, contradictions and threats. C27 research shows that
government land use actions, including laissez faire ones, have a strong influence on
development and deprivation. They can create conditions and improve tools to orient
the way in which resources are used by both resident and occasional population. Only
coordinated improved planning strategy action can generate long-term effects and
social, economic, and beneficial environmental consequences.

Keywords Sustainable development Minor communities Deprivation Natural
and cultural heritage
Methodology and Contents
MDUC Definition and Quantitative Indicators
Global poverty and deprivation have been studied in depth by specialized offices of
international organisations.1 “People are the real wealth of a nation”: These words
of the 1990 Human Development Report (HDR) of the United Nations
Organization are repeated several times in the Human Development Report of 2010,
which affirms that the 1990 point of view “began a forceful case for a new approach
to thinking about development” and that “the objective of development should be to
create an enabling environment for people to enjoy long, healthy and creative
lives.” Oddly enough, the same 2010 HDR admits that the main objective of HDR
is far from being accomplished. The 1990 HDR began with a clear definition of
human development as a process of “amplifying people’s choices,” emphasizing the
right to be healthy, educated, and able to enjoy a decent standard of living.
A composite index (Human Development Index, HDI) was created and tested. In
2010, the HDR stressed that the world’s average HDI had increased by 18 % since
1990 (41 % since 1970), thus reflecting large aggregate improvements in life
expectancy, school enrollment, literacy, and income. In 2010, HDR also noted that
“there has also been considerable variability in experience and much volatility” […]
1
The growing world poverty is stressed in multiple UN publications: For instance The Challenge
of Slums. Global Report on Human Settlements 2003, United Nations Human Settlements
Program. (UN-Habitat) s.d. A several authors highlight the controversial aspects of economic
development. See for instance Wolfgang Sachs (1992). The cited pioneer study on the limits of the
growth was written in 1972 (Meadows et al. 1972).
5 Sustainable Development Policies for Minor Deprived … 31
and that “almost all countries have benefited from this progress.”2 The clash
between deprivation phenomena and economic growth theories is highlighted by
degrowth theorists who explain in a wide body of literature3 that growth in recent
years has not created employment nor improved well-being. In fact, according to
genuine progress indicators, after the 1970s costs incurred by growth (reparation
and compensation expenses) were greater than their benefits. According to this
point of view, relevant policies should to be created to counteract the phenomena.
Although poverty phenomena are not easy to define in a quantitative manner,4
CST C27 research identified a common lexical definition of the minor deprived
urban community (MDUC).5
“Minor” describes the socioeconomic dimension. A minor local authority may
be large in size but quite small in terms of financial resources or technical exper-
tise…” “Urban” indicates “…minor communities which make up urban entities
requiring basic common services…” “Deprived” means that the community “…
does not enjoy the basic level of facilities required by an accepted quality of life in
today’s Europe…” “Communities” refers to “…the smallest local authority
empowered to pass development policies for a certain territory…”
The following set of simple indicators, taking into consideration the specific
differences of the European contexts, were singled out to define an MDUC.
• Total population count includes all legal residents; for example, a community
with fewer than 5000 people can be deemed “minor.” This classification fits in
with many limits found in national laws and regulations regarding minor
community founding and planning or national statistics, e.g., the Italian
Statistical Institute (ISTAT). The population density ratio is <50 people/km2 in
most European countries, which indicates low density (rural areas, possible
existence of minor communities), whereas a density of >150 people/km2 indi-
cates high density (cities and suburbs). Total population value alone cannot be
used to single out areas, which include minor deprived urban communities,
because the average municipal area population size varies a great deal from
country to country. The population density index is more accurate.
2
2010 Report states that of 135 countries in 1970–2010, with 92 % of the world’s people, only 3—
the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Zambia, and Zimbabwe—have a lower HDI in 2010 than
in 1970.
3
(Latouche 2011).
4
“Urban poverty is often defined in terms of household income, for example, the proportion of a
city’s households that are earning less than what is needed to afford a “basket” of basic neces-
sities,” or living on less than USD$1 or USD$2 a day. Monetary measures of poverty have been
used in many countries, but they do not capture the multidimensional nature of poverty. (…)
According to Human Development Report 2010 by the United Nations Development Programme,
poverty is now correctly analyzed by the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI).
5
(Calderon 2009). For other information about COST C27 methodology see Antunes (2007),
Diéguez (2011), Garlanda and Tiboni (2009), Karantounias et al. (2011), Kotilainen et al. (2011),
Marinero (2011), Rivas Sanz (2011), Spousta (2011), United Nations (2010), Ventura and
Calderon (2011), Ventura et al. (2011), Ventura and Tiboni (2011).
• The old age‒dependency ratio is the simple third deprivation index. A rate
≥100 % indicates an ageing population with a very low turnover rate with
respect to newer generations. It is a measure of possible deprivation. The old
age‒dependency ratio can also be calculated as the ratio of the number of elderly
people at an age when they are generally economically inactive (i.e., age
≥65 years old) compared with the number of people of working age (i.e., age
15–64 years old).
• The Employment-to-population ratio computes the proportion of the commu-
nity’s working-age population that is actually working and paid. An
employment-to-population ratio <50 % is considered a symptom of deprivation.
It is important to highlight that this indicator could be low due to a high
percentage of retired and young people, which does not necessarily mean
deprivation. If there are doubts about the cause of the low indicator value, one
can check the local dependency index, which is defined as the percentage of
young and old people combined, to see if it is high among the population.
• The population growth rate ordinarily refers to the change in population over a
unit time period. It is expressed as a percentage of the number of individuals in
the population at the beginning of a certain period (10, years in our case). For
each indicator, the communities with extreme values can be selected, thus
producing one map for each selection. The values can be adjusted according to
the aim of specific further analysis. Common ranges have been adjusted in this
phase of the work so as to have a clear picture of the European situation and
determine where the most critical areas are located. Because the methodology is
a hypothesis of a definition of minor and deprived communities, the ranges may
vary to include larger or stricter ranges of values and then select more or fewer
communities.
Finally, conditions of SDUMC occur when population, its and density, is low,
the old-age rate is high, the employment ratio is low,6 and the population growth
rate is negative.
Case Studies Diachronic Investigation
A second phase in the activities of the COST C27 Action has been a diachronic
analysis, which considered socioeconomic and urban evolutions while focusing on
specific case-study territories.
6
Civilian employment (household survey based).
Qualitative Indicators
The case-study analysis takes into account the historical dynamic overview of
phenomena to investigate how historical facts affected local contexts. Strictly
speaking, this part of the analysis considers the following indicators:
• territory (percentage and type of protected areas, agricultural areas in use, areas
and population of urban settlements);
• population (resident population, emigration and immigration, resident popula-
tion of foreigners, population divided by age categories, demographic indicators,
number of families, those who are employed in their place of residence in
different activity sectors);
• dwellings (residential buildings based on year of construction, empty
dwellings);
• economic activities (local establishments and number of employees divided by
place of work in the three activity sectors);
• tourism (arrivals and guests who spend nights in accommodation facilities
divided into hotels and complementary accommodations and number of avail-
able beds);
• environmental pressure (urban waste, percentage of waste from differentiated
garbage collection, air emissions).
A preliminary overview of the analysis context may be improved by collecting
different kinds of documents regarding the case study and its territorial context
including bibliographic sources that may regard local history as well as recent
research and publications. The historical analysis is improved as a critical and
selective analysis of different sources, as well as an integrated tool, useful for the
goal of providing tools to support territorial governmental choices and to detect and
define the best planning practices.
Inside-Out Analysis—Synthesis and Comparisons
This line of analysis deals chiefly with achieving a direct knowledge of the local
context. It can be called inside-out analysis because it aims at getting acquainted
with and connecting to the inner identity of a place and a society, thereby getting
“inside” its essence while trying to capture it and convey it “out,” thus expressing
the data. The COST C27 Action aims to detect best practices by way of comparing
case studies in different geographical, social, economic, and environmental con-
texts. A vocabulary of best practices has been implemented in the final session of
the research: The idea is to give theoretical definitions to several key words,
dividing them according to urban planning and territorial government issues,
starting from the analysis and the experience relative to each case study.
That which has been produced is a thematic framework of reading, interpreting,
and relating all previous analysis, with examples and references to best practices or
planning actions, that is applied to or projected for each case study. The aim is to
define the practices and actions that may be implemented in other contexts, which
were once related to local distinctive characteristics and identities. Each key word in
the vocabulary, more than just being defined, is critically analyzed while consid-
ering the different facets of its meaning. One of the principal concepts is the idea of
living memory: Several minor communities risk deprivation or disappearance due to
many critical factors such as disorganization or lack of planning with policies
seemingly detached from local identity. By taking into account their living memory,
local communities might use it as a cultural “engine” for territorial-government and
urban-planning choices, thus improving, according to this course of action, all
actions and policies aimed at strengthening, enhancing, and rendering the com-
munity more lively and aware while paving the way for a conscious and coherent
evolution of local identity.
Main Topics and Recommendations
Development Strategies and Landscape Preservation

and Enhancement
Programs for Economic and Social Cohesion
People living in a territory must be considered as a cultural and economic resource.

In fact, according to Bourdieu, social capital is “the aggregate of the actual or
potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or
less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition.”7 Social
capital enhancement can be attained by improving and rationalizing public services.
One can foresee, for instance, a concentration of existing services, assistance to new
enterprises, and technical training for workers.One of the main difficulties of minor
deprived urban communities is usually the low accessibility to services due to their
remoteness from main urban centers. Moreover, developing services within these
minor urban centers is problematical because a critical social mass to make the
service work is needed, and this mass is usually not reached by local communities.
This topic has been approached in the case study of Val de Travers, Switzerland8 in
which it was crucial to search the deprived territory for unused resources that could
activate the development of social capital. In general terms, this approach considers
territorial development not in terms of setting up new companies but rather as the
development of an existing but under-used potential. The interweaving of the three
classical types of relationships that form social capital (i.e., bonding, linking,
bridging) is a source for territorial development. A clash or a trigger event from
outside is deemed necessary to activate social capital.
7
(The Forms of Capital, Bourdieu 1983).
8
(Louis Bouillanne 2011).
In planning and territorial government decision-making processes, it is important

to achieve a high level of trust between the various levels involved: people, experts,
entrepreneurs, and institutions. The idea is that each level should furnish the others
with all of the available information it has so as to improve collective shared
knowledge as well as define policies and actions more coherently. Democracy, in its
traditional application, often manifests its inefficacy, especially when power is not
actually in the hands of those who are supposed to exercise it.9 With this in mind,
local associations, decision-making forums, and local action groups assume an
important role. The activity of local action groups (LAG), financed by the European
Union LEADER initiative, i.e., to realize project frameworks for supporting sus-
tainable development, may represent a way to accomplish this new democratic form
of participation with specific and feasible aims while monitoring applicants during
the realization of each project within their territory.
Leisure Activities and Landscape Protection and Enhancement
With the decline of primary-sector activities, several rural areas are looking at
tourism as an opportunity to recover their economy and have the possibility of
continuing to live in their community. This change forces local communities to
have to deal with the problem of marketing to tourists (i.e., what and how to sell)
with the risk of producing wholly tourist-oriented development policies that are
detached from the local identity. The possibility of selling something becomes
fundamental if the aim is to procure economic benefits from the activity.
One question then is what can local communities sell, or what are they allowed
to sell, to tourists without losing their local identity or harming the environment?
The role of protected areas becomes rather complex in these situations because the
community must both protect the environment as well as market it (according to
economic and social sustainability); In fact, many projects that have been improved
by park authorities regard advertising issues. To preserve and express their identity,
local communities frequently must highlight the value and importance of their
connection to their territory and landscape, which also constitutes an economic
value. Tourist offers may then be planned to orient tourist choices according to a
specific social and environmental context: This coherency may represent a measure
of sustainability regarding the effects of tourism.
The development of tourism activities in MDUC frequently changes and
transforms the context as follows:
• landscape alterations caused by the construction of tourist accommodations and
facilities;
9
For instance, in some cases, people, through the action of their local public administrators, must
capitulate to stronger economic powers Regarding the provisions to be made for the use and
development of their territory. Moreover, frequently, a form of disengagement occurs between
people and administrators.
• transformation of traditional activities into tourist activities, thus turning activ-

ities in which people work together to obtain products from their land into
commercial activities where people trade their land, knowledge, and identity for
tourism;
• identity change where local people learn how to become entrepreneurs.
Furthermore, tourism development may change so much of a territory that the
initial tourist-attracting values could be modified, wasted, and lost. When tourist
development occurs in a community in ways that are not entirely sustainable, the
role of planning strategy may be that of accepting what is already within the
territory in terms of buildings, services, and infrastructures, even when not sus-
tainable, and transform what is available by improving them and giving them new
meanings and functions where needed and when possible. Along this line there
seems to be the possibility of developing a strategy in which errors of the past
become an opportunity of adding value to the future.
Tourism Life Cycle
This point of view stresses that “monitoring of the tourism life cycle fosters the
introduction of some corrections on the inadequate trend” and that “application of
the model allows for earlier awareness of negative trends and consequent mitigation
gives a positive contribution to the management of sustainable processes for
tourism sector development. This advantage must be reinforced by the use of the
appropriate indicators to measure the activity. Therefore, a careful selection is
essential to the success of the proposed life cycle modelling.”10
Sustainable or Responsible Tourism
Tourism activities, with their great fluxes of economic resources, are generally seen
by inhabitants, stakeholders, and governments as an important and rapid way to
achieve an economic gain from their land. However, in fact, reality shows that
deprived communities are often stripped of even the possibility of choosing among
different tourism development strategies and thus are forced to live under the threats
of development interventions on the part of private or public entrepreneurs.
Tourism often conflicts with traditional lifestyles, in which there may be seen an
increase in natural resource waste as, for example, in the excessive use of water for
golf courses or in the case of farmers who become attracted to what appear to be
more profitable occupations such as providing rentals.
It is worth remembering that the sustainable tourism concept is close to that of
responsible tourism as described at the Cape Town Conference (2002). According
to the declaration, responsible tourism must “foster the following characteristics:
10
(Julia Maria Lourenço 2011).
minimize negative economic, environmental, and social impacts; generate greater

economic benefits for local people and enhance the well-being of host communities,
improve working conditions and access to the industry; involve local people in
decisions that affect their lives and life opportunities; make positive contributions to
the conservation of natural and cultural heritage to maintain the world’s diversity;
provide more enjoyable experiences for tourists through more meaningful con-
nections with local people, and a greater understanding of local cultural, social and
environmental issues; provide better access for physically challenged people; it is
culturally sensitive and engenders respect between tourists and their hosts while
building local pride and confidence.”11
The COST C27 Action also looked at practical strategies for “pro-poor tourism”
(PPT).12 PPT Strategies are classified “into those that generated three different
types of local benefits: economic benefits, other livelihood benefits, such as
physical, social or cultural improvements, and less tangible benefits like partici-
pation and involvement.” Each of these strategies is disaggregated by PPT into
specific types of strategies.
It is also important to underline the fact that C27 Action shares some relevant
specific points extracted from the Kerala Declaration (2008), which focuses on
processes and approaches to implementation, which are particularly shared by
COST C27, especially regarding empowerment and governance measures.13
C27 examined many case studies based on tourism development. An entire
section of the publication (Damianos Damianakos 2011) was devoted to sustainable
tourism case studies, and some good practices were selected. However, none of
them appear to be free from economic constraints and inclinations toward “normal”
economic trends.14
Diversion of Tourism Fluxes
If investments are concentrated in only one destination, and with only these aims in
mind, the effect produced may be that of seeing a growth in tourist arrivals while
the local population begins to emigrate due to the following reasons:
11
See Cape Town Declaration and its Guiding Principles for Economic Responsibility.
12
PPT is described as “a collaborative research project of the International Centre for Responsible
Tourism (ICRT), the International Institute for the Environment and Development (IIED) and the
Overseas Development Institute (ODI), together with in-country case study collaborators. It is
funded by the Economic and Social Research Unit (ESCOR) of the UK Department for
International Development (DFID)”. Their work is a follow-up to a desk-based review of tourism
and poverty performed for DFID in 1999 by Deloitte and Touche, IIED and the ODI. (Pro Poor
Tourism s.d.). See also Responsible Tourism Partnership, n.d.
13
Some general topics and related tasks are singled out: empowerment; governance; multistake-
holder processes; partnerships: community-based tourism; markets, commercial sustainability;
environmental sustainability; monitoring, and measurement, and reporting.
14
Diletta Arcangeletti (2011) developed a significant SWOT analysis of two case studies in the
mountain areas of the Province of Parma.
• the pressure that the mass tourism industry may exert on local communities such
as urban pressure and pressure on local services;
• the difficulties of living with only a seasonal job, linked to tourism, for the
resident population: More frequently outside workers from other places are
employed only during high season, and they do not settle down there.
Economic activities in the area may be positive for local communities. In many
cases, although there may be an improvement in the tourist sector and tourist facilities,
a tourist destination may be partially abandoned by its inhabitants. This situation
occurs when economic sustainability is not linked to social sustainability. A critical
mass of tourism is achieved that allows entrepreneurs to reap economic rewards that do
not trickle down to the critical social mass. Consequently, the effect is an improvement
in tourist facilities, whereas local services for the resident population may still be
inefficient. If services are shared by both tourists and residents, then the necessary
critical mass needed for those services may be achieved, particularly if tourism is not
concentrated in one specific season but is distributed throughout the year. In this way,
urban planning will effectively be both tourist- and society-oriented. The C27 point of
view condemns the passivity of contemporary urban coastal development, which does
not consider what we have left behind on the coastline, following economic general
trends.15 The topic of sustainable tourism, which includes leisure activities and
landscape enhancement, is discussed in several papers all focused on the
Mediterranean Basin.16 Two kinds of very widespread problems are highlighted:
• the need to analyze the relationships between tourist phenomena and territorial
changes, which means a detailed analysis of economic and environmental
consequences of tourism activities;
• the need to investigate the role of town and physical planning in enacting
concrete principles and directives concerning sustainability, in terms of tourist
strategies that respect local identities.
Revitalization
It has been widely ascertained that cultural and natural heritage are real economic
assets.17 C27 analyzed case studies highlighting that the main topic is the balance
15
The appraisal of the inland is also a pretext to concisely highlight some relevant features of the
Italian landscape, which are singled out as follows: the coastal landscape or the value of the
Mediterranean; The Apennine Tuscan landscape and the value of appropriate harmony; The
Alpine landscape and the value of stratification; The Po valley landscape or the value of reflec-
tiveness (De Poli 2011).
16
See Calabria Region (Di Paola 2011) or even the Lebanese and Syrian context as quite repre-
sentative of the general unbalanced economic situation of Middle-eastern coasts on the
Mediterranean (Del Ponte 2011). Tourism development policies (TDP) in Cyprus to divert tourist
fluxes in the inland are appreciated (Zavrides 2011).
17
For instance, see the bibliography organized by Stefano M. Musso, which reminds the Bergamo
Conference of Italian Association of Historic Centres in 1971 (Pedretti 1997).
between profits from exploiting cultural and natural goods and the maintenance or
improvements costs for these goods.18
Cultural heritage, an evidence of regional identity, plays a counterpole to the
ever scantier consequences of the globalization. The term “cultural biography” has
been clarified: “one must conceive the landscape as an organic grown entity that is
the carrier of historic, economic, and social information. One might compare the
landscape with a palimpsest, a metaphor that clarifies the cultural stratification of
the site. … The interaction between heritage and social context ensures the dis-
covery and the development of new meanings and values. …. The reciprocity
between the past and the individual interpretations gives birth and form to the
heritage and ensures an emotional bond—the act of appropriation.”19 The case
study of Haspengouw, a predominantly agricultural region in the southeast of
Flanders, Belgium, Province of Limburg, seems relevant.20 The case study
of Franciacorta, a remarkable and opulent territory located to the west of the city of
Brescia, Italy, next to the scenic Iseo Lake, endures a strong competition between
vineyard and urban development.21
Rural or Remote Area Development Policies
The development of a territory may be considered sustainable when planning is able

to maintain a balance between ecological, economic, and social sustainability.
Economic sustainability and social sustainability are possible when critical masses
are reached (masses of investments, tourists, or resident population), whereas
ecological sustainability may be achieved when a balance between these masses
and the environment is reached. Some different interests and goals are involved:
When considering a tourist destination and entrepreneurs in the tourism sector,
especially those from large companies, their aim is to increase the mass of tourists
as far as possible above the critical point.
The context of development policies for MDUC is that of the National and EU
programs, which frequently provide support for farmers by using trade barriers and
subsidies because, for example:
18
The policy of preserving and promoting France's heritage pursued since 1985 by the French
Ministry of Culture and Communication is deemed an excellent practice. Historic towns and
districts have been designated Villeset Pays d'Art et d'Histoire (towns and lands of art and history).
19
“The Masterplan for Cultural Heritage starts from an imposed top-down strategy. This stands in
sharp contrast to the fact that the identity of this region has been developed from the bottom
up. A top-down strategy is a short-term vision and promotes alienation,” the authors remark
without hesitation (Leus 2011).
20
Hesbaye (French) or Haspengouw (Dutch).
21
Franciacorta is considered a territory deprived of its substance and distinctive appearance
(Richiedei 2011).
• domestic agriculture, even if inefficient by international price ratios, is consid-

ered important to avoid having to buy agricultural produce from abroad;
• farmers together with landowners have proved to be adept at lobbying;
• public administration’s attempt to slow the depopulation of rural areas and
contain the growth of urban areas;
• agricultural prices can be very volatile, even as a result of erratic weather;
therefore, government regulation and specific financial support safeguards are
designed to offer protection against unexpected adverse market conditions.
The C27 case study analysis confirms the need to incentivise the following
selected activities:
• agricultural activities, especially traditional ones, allowing both to obtain eco-
nomic profits and to preserve the physical form of the landscape (case study of
Casentino, Italy);
• forest-system cultivation, even with specific aids from sustainable tourism
activities (case studies in Finland);
• traditional craftsmanship (case study of Val de Travers, Switzerland; various
experiences in Hungary and Poland).
C27 studies regarding specific development policies in rural areas include the
following subtopics: the problem of natural resource exploitation and the size of
compatible activities; the characteristics of small scale profit making activities and
the impact of new infrastructures; and the need of connecting MDUC.
Small-Scale Profit-Making Activities
The principal aim of an entrepreneur is usually to obtain economic benefits from his
or her activity. In minor communities, where relatively small enterprises are active,
if the profit is primarily personal and not in a context of a network or of a common
strategy, then each entrepreneur will fight to overpower the others while trying to
concentrate on himself all of the scarce economic benefits that result from the sale
of his or her products or services.
In contrast, a collective approach, in which entrepreneurs network and cooperate
in designing a common action strategy, may help local producers to enhance the
quality value of their local products , to have more opportunities to sell collectively,
and to collaborate and strengthen society while working together instead of clashing
with each other.
Development is usually associated with the idea of economic growth, which in
the long term may not be sustainable for environment and society. According to this
model of constant economic growth, communities tend to forget the possibility of
slowing it down to improve social and environmental sustainability. In general
terms, people have the opportunity to develop as consumers and sellers not based
on a model of economic growth without limits or research but based on developing
and improving a model more linked to primary sector activities while accepting a
limit to economic growth and at the same time working together to plan a strategy
of sustainability for the economy, the society, and the environment. A particular
kind of “deprived area” in the context of wealthy regions was singled out by
applying the definition of “grey areas” from the British economic literature and the
definition of low-potential areas (LPA) introduced by the multiyear program of
Switzerland 2008–2015 in reference to the implementation of the new regional
policy (NRP).22 The general regional policy in Switzerland, in use since 2008, is
deemed very relevant.23 Whereas regional policy before 2007 focused on regional
development in the sense of equity, the actual regional policy is an instrument used
for economic-promotional activities. As a result, supported projects should have a
strong focus on innovation and the creation of value. The policy is meant to foster
the regional potential of the regions to make them more competitive, but it does not
fully contribute to the principle of sustainability. Another way to counteract the
economic decline of agricultural activities is to reconcile residential functions
together with proactive agricultural practices. A C27 case study located on the
outskirts of Parma, the Italian capital of high-quality food production,24 delineate a
few specific criteria to plan a rural-urban settlement, called “an agrivillage,” situated
in the Po Valley. Agrivillages in periurban areas are considered as alternative
models to the more or less intensive urban transformation operating at the edge of
the city. This new settlement, both agricultural and residential, is characterized by a
dimension of food and energy self-sustenance. Its goal is to create a new settlement
starting from the morphological and productive organization of farmland.
A third kind of agricultural strategy relates to a very deprived context of arid and
semiarid regions and the possibilities of implementing rural and urban development
plans. The case study of Wilaya of Naâma, an arid region in the South Western
region of Algeri, has been introduced and explained.25
New Infrastructure and Connecting MDUC
Remoteness is a normal feature of MDUC. The question is if it can be sustainable to

maintain minor communities in remote areas. This problem is complex because
many difficulties occur in the planning and managing of services for these com-
munities. Concentrating everything in urban centers, or in nearby urban centers,
where it is possible to connect periurban zones with fast mobility infrastructures,
seems to be more rational from the point of view of accessibility and economy. In
contrast, people have the right to choose their place of residence, thus protecting
22
(Alberton et al. 2011).
23
(Reinhard 2011).
24
(Ghini 2011).
25
(Sahli 2011) Tiboni and Rossetti’s relevant contribution (Tiboni and Rossetti 2011), based on a
very wide case study analysis, especially in Italy, of deprived areas attempts to offer concrete
elements to set up a practical Best Practices Handbook, which was one of the most important aims
of C27 Action.
remote areas of historical and cultural heritage from dwindling or disappearing.

Another possibility for development considers the coherency of a context in which
urban settlements are relatively small and scattered but where people have a right to
live where they have a connection to their cultural and social roots. In these cases,
each community has a specific identity, which may contribute to the realization of a
web of services in which each minor community improves its specific organization
of services according to its desires and identity. At the same time, other services are
accessible thanks to an efficient network of mobility infrastructures that intercon-
nect all of the communities in a given area. None of these communities become the
principal town; rather, each community is able to take advantage of the collective
network. In this manner, the entire system is able to develop and work more
effectively than the sum of its components.
The relationship between a nation’s administrative centers and its rural or pe-
ripheral areas may vary quite a bit and present contrasting features when consid-
ering geographical as well as institutional distances. Nordic countries, such as
Norway and Finland, can be a case in point because they may be considered
“vertical” countries in that their capitals are situated in the southern area of the
country, whereas most of the rural areas are situated far from the capital. One also
discovers a vertical structure in the administration of these countries in which
decision making is performed by following a straight line from the state, which
sends down the laws to communities who are in turn expected to respect the laws.
Inversely, the requests of local communities are made almost directly to the state so
we can see that the centre (state) is physically distant from the peripheries but
institutionally close.
Heritage Preservation and Physical-Planning Measures
National governments are used to declaring that they want to preserve their terri-
tories, to avoid landscape alteration, and to at least contain agricultural land waste.
International organizations, such as ONU, UNESCO, and the EU, approve and
support these policies26 and even provide a world database.27 Specific national acts
prevent physical transformations of specific territories according to their particular
26
The Fundamental International Agreement on the conservation of the Cultural and Natural
Heritage has been adopted by the UNESCO General Conference held in Paris from 17 October to
21 November 1972. The agreement contains the following definitions of the Cultural and Natural
Heritage.
27
The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) is the largest assembly of data on the world's
terrestrial and marine protected areas containing more than 161,000 protected areas as of October
2010 with records covering 236 countries and territories throughout the world[1]. The WDPA is a
joint venture between the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation
Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN) World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA).
special beauty. In reality, however, the concrete attitudes and behavior of public
bodies appear quite contradictory, especially in the case of MDUC. C27 research in
depth studied the conflicting status of preserved territory where at least physical
landscape transformations must undergo special planning control; consequently,
economic activities are forced to suffer important limitations in various geograph-
ical contexts.
In reality, most public economic policies are planned in the short-term and
misjudge both cultural- and natural heritage‒protection aims. SDUC seem partic-
ularly seduced by development targets and underestimates heritage investigation
and protection targets. C27 research highlighted that natural- and cultural heritage‒
preservation policies appear to be necessary to carry on sustainable (long-term)
development, that planning policies must be based on an accurate survey of the
territory to be preserved, and that preservation plans, in the framework of a perti-
nent preservation theory and an effective regulation system,28 must be ductile and
attentive to the consequences inflicted to the different kind of stakeholders.
Inaccurate surveys and consequent preservation mistakes, especially if bounded
with severe top-down policies, can be very damaging. Even small interests can help
owners or business people to oppose the plan and thus cause serious heritage
misuse or loss.
The concept of singling out special areas to be preserved implies forming a
border around territories and establishing special policies to be applied. Most
European countries have a coherent legislation in the matter, a strong coordination
on the topic being well established in the UNESCO 1972 Conference. The
remoteness of deprived areas often consists of intact evidence of cultural and
natural heritage. In this case, border-tracing seems easy. However, even in this
circumstance, setting up a preservation area can stem development trends in
neighboring nonpreserved areas. In some cases, buffer zones have been set up.
Wide Protected Areas and Natural Parks
Frequently, an unfair challenge to development occurs in fringe municipalities

because they belong on different sides of the border to different administrations and
have different laws, rules, and economic resources. In these cases, even if the area
does not undergo wide-area planning tools, or if they are obsolete, cross-border
cooperation projects should be set up so that neighboring territory municipalities
are not unregulated competitors. In any case, confining and zoning procedures
require innovative techniques to interpret area-wide phenomena and to outline
adequate sustainable development policies, but the effectiveness of these policies
28
See for instance: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk a website of English Heritage, a public
body of the British Government, with a broad charge of managing the historic built environment of
England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Heritage).
depends on institutional acts and regulations as well as economic available

resources.
The process of establishing a protected area represents a delicate and important
step in paving the way for the effectiveness of its policies and actions in the future
as well as in the amount of trust that is created between local people and the
institutional level. Frequently, the establishment of a park is interpreted by local
stakeholders as a sort of “robbery.” This attitude may grow because participation in
the creative process and the initial planning stage is weak. Protected areas may be
seen as potential centers of tourism and of residential urban pressure; in contrast,
frequently we see that protected areas are depopulating while an economic devel-
opment may occur just beyond the borders of the park i.e., where the area is no
longer protected. The mechanism may be summarized in the following framework:
• The protected area does not allow developments to be built, but it can represent
a potential tourist destination, and the park area can depopulate due to its
remoteness and lack of job opportunities;
• Accommodations and tourist resorts are attracted to just outside of the protected
areas;
• Therefore, the park remains disadvantaged while people in local communities
tend to emigrate. At the same time, the area just outside the park develops but
only in a concentrated buffer zone: urbanization increases here as do seasonal
employment opportunities;
• This buffer zone grows economically while at the same time creating difficult
living conditions for the people;
• The threat caused by abandonment particularly affects the elevated sites and the
countryside as people migrate from hillside and mountains centers toward the
bottom of the valley where urban expansion and economic activities take place.
In addition, abandonment causes a progressive misuse of historic buildings.
Agricultural activities become increasingly sporadic; forests advance; and
landscape grows wild. To counteract this process, the following mid-run mea-
sures can be applied: (1) soft residential or tourist reuse of old residential
buildings; (2) high-technology cabling to make traditional buildings more
attractive to young people; and (3) regular financing.
• Advanced zoning techniques based on GIS tools are needed in the planning
process because they offer high flexibility by incorporating many other zoning
tools available such as historic settlement, river-protection corridors, major
roads, natural heritage, etc.
• This development brings economic benefits to a limited area, but it is not able to
bring real development to local communities. In addition, it creates urban
pressure in some specific areas, thus showing itself to be both socially and
environmentally nonsustainable.
The C27 Action has analysed some relevant experiences of protection policies
throughout Europe. The impact of an imposed top-down protected area on small
deprived municipalities was approached considering the case study of Akamas
Natural Park in Cyprus and focusing on the Akamas community of Inia, a Greek
village in the district of Paphos.29 Rural depopulation is not the only problem the
communities must face. The five small communities of Akamas are considered to
be “in a very difficult position the last years especially due to the deadlock of the
theme regarding the correct management of the peninsula.” Nevertheless, these
communities managed to face the problems, in time to resist, and to remain alive.
A “mild development” in the area of Turtle Beach is expected to play a determi-
native role for these communities to continue to exist. This development should
come through a correct management plan, which would protect the environment
and attract visitors to the area. An alternative form of tourism that can be developed
in some area of Akamas is agritourism. The main problem that the community of
Inia must face is the management plan of Akamas, which foresees the pure wild
conservation of the entire peninsula.
Italian and Spanish case studies30 approached the same topic of imposed
top-down conservation plan at different scales. In Spain, the efficacy of the planning
policies of San Ildefonso–La Granja, with its outstanding monumental and cultural
patrimony and strategic resources such as water and the Valsaín Mountains, was
highlighted.31 In Italy, some relevant protected areas in Tuscany were studied. Two
twin small regional parks in Italy in a highly urbanized area are considered32:
(1) the Apuane Regional Park, which combines mining activities with preservation
and safeguard of the protected area; and (2) the Parco Naturale di Migliarino, San
Rossore, Massaciuccoli, i.e., The Casentino Forest National Park,33 as well as its
buffer zone.
Urban Preservation Areas
Multiple case studies analyzed by C27 Action are worth mentioning. The case study
of Stary Sącz, Poland, highlights the relatively recent basic legal act, which regu-
lates the issues related to cultural heritage conservation in Poland. The act, relative
to the protection of monuments and the guardianship of monuments (2003),
replaced the act regarding the protection of cultural property and museums of 1962.
The new act introduces new categories of monument conservation as follows: (1) a
register of monuments (regional level), (2) historical monuments (national level),
(3) cultural parks (local level), and (4) provisions regarding local development
plans (local level). Until 2003 the only form of protection was noted in the register
29
(Charalambous 2011).
30
Namely by José Luis Vazquez, on Strategic Development Plan, San Ildefonso–La Granja, Spain,
Valentín Cabero Diéguez on the Experience of the Plan for the Management of Natural Resources
of Guadarrama Mountain Range, Spain and Angel Marinero on Planning for Sustainable
Development in Castilla y León.
31
(Vazquez 2011).
32
(Damianakos and Pizziolo 2011).
33
This very scenic national park (100 sq km) was established in 1993 (Ventura and Damianakos
2011) (Brami and Ventura 2001).
of monuments. The new act positively aims to strengthen the relationship between
conservation and urban planning. Two other case studies developed by C27 Action
deal with the regeneration of poor and remote villages in Cyprus and in Greece. The
rehabilitation of Salamiou, a rather remote village of approximately 250 inhabitants
in the Pafos District, is deemed a “rather successful and well-promising attempt for
the revival of a declining mountainous community, a community which seeks its
own future within the goals and content of sustainability (social, economic, envi-
ronmental and institutional) at all levels; local, national and European.”34 The
rehabilitation process of the small village of Galatista, Greece, is appreciated for the
strong (rare) coherence between area-wide and local planning.35 Another field of
research involves the preservation of an abandoned minor industrial heritage. The
case study of the Mining Park of the Colline Metallifere (Metalliferous Hills,
Tuscany) was deemed very important according this point of view.
Conclusions
C27 theoretical investigations and practical results may be useful for both academia
and stakeholders. Several identified case-study analyses, and parallel theoretical
investigations suggest strategies and actions for MDUC to adopt.
COST C27 activity research, based on the study of social, economic, and
environmental dynamics of many case studies, suggests a methodology to build a
framework of knowledge by using and improving a varied and integrated system of
analysis, synthesis, and monitoring tools.
With a variety of geographical, territorial, social, economic, and legal case
studies considered, problems and threats emerge not only to economic development
but even to simple resource conservation. At the same time, the studies highlight,
detect, and define good and coherent policies and practices in planning strategy and
territorial government.
The phase of case-study analysis, in which direct experience plays a basic role
for the integration of theory, has been particularly important. Contents were criti-
cally elaborated. New specific tools, useful for further investigative experiences,
were implemented to compare, acquire more in-depth knowledge of, and synthesize
analyzed phenomena. Different scenarios, related policies, and feasible actions for
urban planning and territorial government were envisaged. Further steps consist of
prolonged analysis, monitoring, and follow-up of best practices studied to be able to
evaluate the efficacy of adopted measures.
One of the main outcomes of C27 COST Action is related to
tourism-development experiences. For many territories that are rich in environ-
mental, cultural, urban, historical, and socially particular resources, tourism
34
(Panayides 2011).
35
(Kouralidou and Damianakos 2011).
represents an opportunity for economic development, which is hardly replaceable,

along with all the risks, contradictions, and threats highlighted in this chapter’s
introduction. C27 research shows that territorial government actions, including
laissez faire ones, have a strong influence on development and deprivation. They
can create conditions and improve tools to orient the way in which resources are
used by both resident and the occasional population.
Only coordinated improved planning strategy action can generate long-term
effects and social, economic, and beneficial environmental consequences. The
results are effective and sustainable as much as they are coherent with the territorial
size and cultural contents and are continuous over time.
A vast knowledge of local identities and characteristics, as well as how society
and the territory reveals and preserves its heritage, paves the way for implementing
policies and practices that are in line with both particular developmental local needs
as well as general global sustainability guidelines.
References
Alberton S, Guerra G, Mini V (2011) The grey areas of competitiveness approach. In: Ventura P,
Calderon EJ, Tiboni M (eds) Sustainable development policies for minor deprived urban
communities. McGraw-Hill, Milano
Antunes AP (2007) Introduction. In: Antunes AP (ed) Sustainable development policies for minor
deprived urban communities. Problems and opportunities, Proceedings of the 1st COST C27
Workshop. Evora: s.n
Arcangeletti D, Bettosi S, Gandolfini N, Mazzaschi P (2011) Development scenarios in
Contignaco and Taro valleys. In: Ventura P, Calderon E, Tiboni M (eds) Sustainable
development policies for minor deprived urban communities. McGraw-Hill, Milano
Boulianne L-M, Richoz S (2011) Social capital and development. Val-de-Travrs region,
Switzerland. In: Damianakos D, Ventura P, Zavrides N (eds) Minor communities and natural
and cultural heritage: an asset or a liability? McGraw-Hill, Milano
Bourdieu P (1983) Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital. In: Kreckel R
(ed) Soziale Ungleichheiten. Soziale Welt. Sonderband 2. Otto Schwartz & Co, Göttingen
Brami R, Ventura P (eds) (2001) Le aree contigue dei Parchi nazionali. Pacini Editore, Pisa
Cape Town Declaration (2002) Cape Town Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations
August 2002. https://www.capetown.gov.za/en/tourism/Documents/Responsible%20Tourism/
Toruism_RT_2002_Cape_Town_Declaration.pdf
Calderon EJ (ed) (2009) European rural development policy 2007–2013: a planning framework.
Working group 1—Final report. In: s.l.:s.n
Charalambous S (2011) Small communities and planning in protected areas. Inia village, Cyprus.
In: Damianakos D, Ventura P, Zavrides N (eds) Minor communities and natural and cultural
heritage: an asset or a liability? McGraw-Hill, Milano
Damianakos D, Pizziolo G (2011) Containment of mountain depopulation and coastal urban
sprawl: Alpi Apuane and Migliarino San Rossore Massaciuccoli Regional Parks, Tuscany,
Italy. In: Daminakos D, Ventura P, Zavrides N (eds) Minor communities and natural and
cultural heritage: an asset or a liability?. McGraw-Hill, Milano
Damianakos D, Ventura P, Zavrides N (eds) (2011) Minor communities and natural and cultural
heritage: an asset or a liability?. McGraw-Hill, Milano
De Poli A (2011) In praise of the hinterland. Getting beyond the coastline. In: Ventura P,
Calderon E, Tiboni M (eds) Sustainable development policies for minor deprived urban
Del Ponte ITL (2011) Coastal development and tourism in the Mediterranean area for the
enhancement of minor historical centres. In: Ventura P, Calderon E, Tiboni M (eds) Sustainable
development policies for minor deprived urban communities. McGraw-Hill, Milano
Di Paola A (2011) Sustainable tourism and resources planning of deprived mediterranean areas. In:
Ventura P, Calderon E, Tiboni M (eds) Sustainable development policies for minor deprived
urban communities. McGraw-Hill, Milano
Diéguez VC (2011) Interadministrative coordination for management. strenghts and weaknesses in
the experience of the plan for the management of natural resources of Guadarrama mountain
range, Spain. In: Damianakos D, Ventura P, Zavrides N (eds) Minor communities and natural
and cultural heritage: an asset or a liability? McGraw-Hill, Milano
Garlanda F, Tiboni M (2009) Case studies selection and analysis. In: Tiboni M, Ventura P
(eds) Sustainable development targets and local participation in minor deprived communities.
McGraw-Hill, Milano
Ghini AZM (2011) The agrivillage and Rur-urban settlement. In: Ventura P, Calderon E, Tiboni M
(eds) Sustainable development policies for minor deprived urban communities. McGraw-Hill,
Milano
Latouche S (2011) De-growth, ineuqlity and poverty. In: Ventura P, Calderon EJ, Tiboni M
Milano
Leus M, De Naeyer A (2011) Cultural biography as an instrument of revitalisation. Haspengow,
Belgium. In: Damianakos D, Ventura P, Zavrides N (eds) Minor communities and natural and
cultural heritage: an asset or a liability? McGraw-Hill, Milano
Lourenço J (2011) Funding programmes for Douro Valley and their aftermath. In: Kotiainen J et al
(eds) Communities in rural environments. How to get them involved? McGraw-Hill, Milano
Karantounias G, Damianakos D, Serelis K, Papazoglou E (2011) An eco.industrial and natural
park. Lavrion city and sounion national park, Attica, Greece. In: Daminakos D, Vantura P,
Zavrides N (eds) Minor communities and natural and cultural heritage: an asset or a liability?
McGraw-Hill, Milano
Kotilainen J et al (eds) (2011) Communities in rural environments. How to get them involved? Mc
Graw Hill, Milano
Kouralidou S, Damianakos D (2011) Galatista village regeneration, central macedonia, Greece. In:
Ventura P, Calderon EJ, Tiboni M (eds) Sustainable development policies for minor deprived
Marinero A (2011) Planning for sustainable development in Castilla y Leon. In: Damianakos D,
Ventura P, Zavrides N (eds) Minor communities and natural and cultural heritage: an asset or a
libility?. McGraw-Hill, Milano
Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J, Behrens WI (1972) The limits to growth (trad. it. I limiti
dello sviluppo). Universe Books, New York
Panayides P (2011) Salamiou Village Restoration, Cyprus. In: Ventura P, Calderon EJ, Tiboni M
(eds) Sustainable Development Policies for Minor Deprived Urban Communities.
McGraw-Hill, Milano
Pedretti B (ed) (1997) Il progetto del passato: memoria, conservazione, restauro, architettura.
Bruno Mondadori, Milano
Reinhard M (2011) Regional policy in Switzerland: a focus on innovation and knowledge. In:
Ventura P, Calderon E, Tiboni M (eds) Sustainable development policies for minor deprived
Responsible Tourism Partnership, n.d. Pro-Poor-Tourism. http://www.propoortourism.info
Accessed 15 Aug 2014
Richiedei A (2011) Franciacorta: a rich territory, but deprived in its own image. In: Ventura P,
Rivas Sanz J (2011) The meaning of spatial planning, guidelines for the territorial planning of
Segovia and surrounding areas, Segovia, Spain. In: Damianakos D, Ventura P, Zavrides N
(eds) Minor communities and natural and cultural heritage: an asset or a liability?.
McGraw-Hill, Milano
Sachs W (1992) Zur Archäologie der Entwicklungsidee (Des ruines du développement), 2nd edn.
francese (2003) (ed). IKO-Verlag, Frankfurt
Sahli Z (2011) Sustainable development strategies for a dry region, Naama, Algeria. In: Ventura P,
Spousta J (2011) Public transport services in rural regions, Czech Republic. In: Ventura P,
The Kerala Declaration on Responsible Tourism (2008) Incredible India Second International
Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations, 21–24 March 2008. http://www.
responsibletourism2008.org/keraladeclaration.php
Tiboni M, Rossetti S (2011) MDUC and territorial governance: case study analysis and best
practices handbook. In: Ventura P, Calderon E, Tiboni M (eds) Sustainable development
policies for minor deprived urban communities. McGraw-Hill, Milano
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat), n.d. The Challange of Slums.
Global Report on Urban Settlements 2003. Earthscan Publications Ltd, London
United Nations (2010) Human development report. The real wealth of nations: pathways to human
development. Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Vazquez JL (2011) Strategic Development Plan, San idelfonso - la Granja, Spain. In:
Damianakos D, Ventura P, Zavrides N (eds) Minor communities and natural and cultural
heritage: an asset or a liability?. McGraw-Hill, Milano
Ventura P, Calderon E (2011) C27 Action Final Report. In: Ventura P, Calderon E, Tiboni M
Milano
Ventura P, Damianakos D (2011) Preservation Policies and MDC in the buffer zone of the national
parks of Casentino Forests, Mount Falterona and Campigna, Tuscany, Italy. In: Damianakos D,
Ventura P, Zavrides N (eds) Minor communities and natural and cultural heritage: an asset or a
liability?. McGraw-Hill, Milano
Ventura P, Calderon E, Tiboni M (2011) sustainable development policies for minor deprived
Ventura P, Tiboni M (2011) Outline. In: Ventura P, Enrique C, Tiboni M (eds) Sustainable
development policies for minor deprived urban communities. McGraw-Hill, Milan
WEF (2014) Global risks 2014 Ninth edition http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GlobalRisks_
Report_2014.pdf. Accessed 14 Aug 2014
Zavrides N (2011) Small tourism development policies in Cyprus. In: Ventura P, Calderon E,
Tiboni M (eds) Sustainable development policies for minor deprived urban communities.
McGraw-Hill, Milano
Part II
Lessons Learned from Planning
and Management Practices
on Safeguarding and Revitalisation
of Minor Historic Centres
in Eastern Partnerships
Chapter 6
Lessons Learned from Planning
and Management Practices
on the Safeguarding and Revitalisation
of Minor Historic Centres
in Eastern Europe countries
Abstract This chapter addresses the study and analysis of Eastern partnership
countries experiences on the cultural and environmental heritage safeguarding and
revitalisation of minor historic centres especially in rural areas. It also offers the
main conclusions of lessons learned through the analysis of eight case study in
Italy, Republic of Moldova, Romania, and Armenia in the framework of the
VIVA_EASTPART project (AAVV (2013)).
Keywords Minor historic centres

Heritage Planning and Management

Practices Heritage Safeguarding and Revitalisation Eastern Europe
Minor Historic Centres Cultural and Environmental

Heritage in Rural Areas in Eastern Partnership countries
In this chapter, we focus on minor historic centres situated away from large cities
and/or metropolitan areas and outside major communication nodes and on practices
where the attention to and management of cultural and environmental heritage have
been noteworthy. These historic centres, despite the presence of a lower number of
historic monuments and sites compared with those of large historic centres, offer a rich
range of heritage values, historic environments and remarkable social customs and
traditions. Besides, they are also congruent with the territory in which they are
located, thus establishing valuable ties with their natural and anthropogenic heritage
and developing cultural assets, that have contributed to shape their actual form in
space.
J. López Galdeano (&)

Faculty of Arts, Geography and History, University of Granada, Calle del Profesor Clavera,
18011 Granada, Spain
e-mail: josefinalopezgaldeano@gmail.com

54 J. López Galdeano
Many of these minor historic centres have been abandoned, especially by the
young who are seeking a job or better living conditions. Their progressive degra-
dation would mean the loss of centres that are vital from the standpoint of main-
taining the landscape, environment, and geomorphology of a territory. To avoid
this, it is important to performing integrated measures that are able to improve the
territory in order to also achieve their physical renewal, restore its monuments and
maintain the tangible and intangible heritage assets.
Nevertheles, and just as it does not seem sufficient to concentrate on mere
physical renewal, likewise it does not seem sufficient to concentrate only on the
municipality or the town: The inter-municipal dimension needs to be taken into
account as it plays a considerable role in the improvement processes for two rea-
sons in particular).
The first reason regards the possibility of cooperation among various adminis-
trations and various subjects carrying on their activity in the territory and sharing
human resources and cultural assets. Reasoning in terms of systems rather than
specific locations could be the keystone. This is demonstrated by the some of the
case studies in which intermunicipalities are perhaps the most important manner of
territorial governance (Figs. 6.1 and 6.2).
The second reason relates to the need to create environmental and landscape
integration, to avoid harming the potentials of liveability and usability of the his-
toric centre, in light of the “history of the territory.”
These could include renewing building assets; paying attention to the environ-
ment as well as new forms of agricultural promotion; actions aimed at creating
employment and promoting training and service activities with the specific objec-
tives of keeping the inhabitants in the territory or bringing them back there; and
Fig. 6.1 Piata Mare View, Sibiu Historic Centre (main and most attractive historic centre linked
to the Hartibaciu Valley Territorial Cultural System), Romania
6 Lessons Learned from Planning and Management Practices … 55
Fig. 6.2 Hosman Fortified

Church. One of the most
relevant monuments of
the Hartibaciu Valley,
Romania
developing forms of sustainable tourism. In these actions we see condensed the

strong nucleus of a road to improvement.
Among the problems of the planning and management of actions for safeguarding
and revitalising minor historic centres, both cultural and environmental heritage have
been addressed with different means according to the historic and environmental
relevance of the minor historic centres: their territorial, political, and socioeconomic
relevance, their relative territorial systems, and the country’s applicable legislation,
policy, and investment programmes in those areas.
Minor historic centres, within the meaning used here, must be considered in a
broader context in administrative, environmental, social, and economic terms
(Fig. 6.3).
As stated previously, practices in minor historic centres must address different
aspects such as local development, culture, environment, territory, etc. Each one of
Fig. 6.3 Village View Hartibaciu Valley, Romania

Fig. 6.4 Participation process for the design and implementation of the Hartibaciu Valley
Territorial Cultural System, Sibiu County Council, Romania
these fields is often regulated by sectorial laws and policies. However, there is a
good set of examples of planning and management practices that have succeeded in
putting together these aspects and integrating them, which have contributed to
legislation and policies improvements and to the sustainability of those minor
historic centres as well as safeguarding and revitalising their cultural and envi-
ronmental heritage.
There is a need to identify the basis of improved sustainability as well as
integrated planning and management models. This links to the idea of cultural
territorial systems as interactions of local networks and to the idea of those net-
works as a driving force that turn local resources, i.e., heritage as a non-renewable
resource, into drivers of an integrated development strategy based on “territorial
cultural sustainability.”
The best practices analysed in the framework of the VIVA_EASTPART pro-
ject and included for this chapter are: Integrated Plan for Territorial Development
—Integrated System of Territorial regeneration and enhancement of the historic
and environmental characters of the municipalities of Cellamare, Capurso and
Valenzano, Italy; Redevelopment of Piscino Place—Capurso, Italy;
Redevelopment of Valenzano, Italy; Restoration of Dilijan Historical and Cultural
Reserve, Armenia; and Rehabilitation of Tsaghkashat villages’ Historical district,
Armenia. Moreover, the lessons learned during the design and implemenation of the
territorial cultural systems of Hartibaciu Valley, Cahul District and Tavush province
have been incorporated.
6 Lessons Learned from Planning and Management Practices … 57
A General View on the analysis of Sustainable

and Integrated Planning and Management Best Practices
of Minor Historic Centres in Eastern Europe
For this chapter, the conclusions reached in studying study cases in Italy, Republic
of Moldova, Romania, and Armenia in the framework of the VIVA_EASTPART
project will be described. All of them have contributed to their enhancement of
their country’s legislation and policies and they have also implemented sustainable
and integrated planning and management models on historic centres.
A set of criteria was established for the analysis of best practices, as imple-
mented within the VIVAEAST-PART project1: Thus, safeguarding and revitali-
sation practices needed:
• To follow an integrated approach. Case studies needed to address all the relevant
fields (local development, culture, environment, territory, etc.) and to succeed in
integrating them with acknowledgement of the legal and operational European,
national, and local frameworks.
• To advocate for sustainable development. Case studies had to comply with
safeguarding minor historic centres cultural heritage and work with sustainable
development to foster economic benefits for those minor historic centres
citizens.
• To comprise a set of demonstration projects. Case studies had to present
demonstrative actions ready for implementation and include the participation of
a broad variety of stakeholders on modelling those actions to make the result of
the initiative tangible and real for citizens.
• To establish a funding scheme. Case studies had to implement early integration
of the responsible funding authorities and organisations in order to improve the
relations and chances of obtaining funding for the defined actions. In addition to
the practices supported by private, national, and regional funding, those
developed on the basis of European Union programmes had to be observed.
Main Lessons Learned from Practices on Revitalising

the Heritage of Minor Historic Centres in Eastern Europe
At the European level, the concepts of “integration” and “social cohesion” are
keystones in culture-led regeneration initiatives. The case studies analysed and the
territorial cultural systems pilot projects show that an integrated and participatory
approach, sound management, and target and implementation‒oriented models are
1
Best practices selected from the report on best practices and VIVAEAST methodology elaborated
within VIVA EASTPART project (http://vivaeastpart.eu/).
the ones that administrations should use if they want positively influenced the
sustainable development of their minor historic centres.
Looking at these cases studies and the territorial cultural systems pilot projects,
the main ideas coming from the experience of these minor historic centres
should include the following approaches:
• Integration
– Comprehensive, cross-thematic, and cross-sectorial policies in comparison
with sectorial approaches should be applied. This approach is essential
because the cultural and environmental heritage is affecting and interacting
with a variety of fields as it has been already explained.
– Relevant sectorial policies, concepts, and actions for the safeguarding and
development of the minor historic centres must be coordinated and oriented
toward a common vision and objectives.
– Cultural and natural heritage should be recognised as a cross-cutting and
integrating pillar of territorial strategies.
• Participation
– Direct dialogue with and among stakeholders—as local experts and con-
cerned parties—is required to coordinate needs and demands and bring them
in line with safeguarding and valorisation of the cultural and environmental
heritage.
– Involving relevant stakeholders in the development and implementation of
the integrated strategy contributes to develop a collective and unanimous
vision, objectives, and actions.
– Bringing all of the relevant stakeholders together contributes to recognise
and understand each other’s needs, to develop sustainable solutions closer to
their common needs, to balance and coordinate the needs among the
stakeholders, and to reinforce the sense of ownership (Fig. 6.4).
• Sound Management
– Implementation and compliance of policies and actions in support of the-
safeguarding and revitalisation of minor historic centres demand applicable
procedures and structures for the coordination, decision-making, and mon-
itoring of the daily work required and for the long term integrated
and sustainable development of the minor historic centres.
Reference
AAVV (2013) Viva eastpart methodology: management of territorial cultural systems.

Valorisation and improving of management of small historic centres in the Eastern partnership
region. Bucharest
Chapter 7
Characterization of Minor Historic
Centers: Quantitative Indexes,
and Qualitative Aspects
Claudia Ceppi and Pierangela Loconte
Abstract According to Cassatella et al. (2011), the “sense” of the landscape,

environmental or urban that is, can be found in the intersection of different
dimensions. From here arises the difficulty of “measuring” the value of a territory
while at the same time the qualitative and quantitative evaluations must endeavor to
overcome these difficulties. An assessment, however complex and composed by
different dimension, must measure the effects of the changes that minor historical
centers are inevitably undergoing and to compare the results of human actions. In
this chapter, we explain the main indicators, often borrowed from other contexts,
that quantify the different components that characterize a historic center as well as
how they can contribute to a systemic characterization.
Keywords Cultural heritage evaluation Regional networks G.I.S.
Introduction
In the European panorama, landscape, used in the broad sense of the term, has a
long history. Europe has many high-quality centers, and among these we have a
minor historic centers. As is especially true in times of economic crisis, it is difficult
to ensure proper management of the quality of place identity without their being
drastically altered over time.
Therefore, one of the questions with which different classes of specialists—e.g.,
urban planners, landscape ecologist, architects, decision makers—are faced with is
C. Ceppi (&)
Department of Civil, Environmental, Land, Building Engineering and Chemistry,
Polytechnic University of Bari (Italy), Via Orabona 4, 70125 Bari, Italy
e-mail: ceppicla@gmail.com
P. Loconte
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Polytechnic University of Bari (Italy),
Via Orabona 4, 70125 Bari, Italy
e-mail: pierangela.loconte@poliba.it

60 C. Ceppi and P. Loconte
the challenge of ensuring sustainable development of the original landscape that is

economically sustainable and allows the involvement of all stakeholders (Vos and
Meekes 1999).
However, to ensure proper development of original landscapes and their minor
historic centers among them, they must first be identified and characterized. For this
purpose, indicators are particularly useful, on the one hand, to define the properties
as well as the priorities and strengths to be protected, which could allow, not
necessarily unchanged conservation or conservation measures that are economically
prohibitive for their management, but rather specific development according in
accordance with place identity.
In this chapter, starting from the consideration that the “sense of landscape can
be found in the intersection of different dimension” (Cassatella and Voghera 2011),
we consider that the description of historic centers is no more than the description
and characterization of a complex system and then we consider different indicators
often referred to as “landscape indicators.”
The term “landscape” synthesizes this complexity within the terms of the
European Landscape Convention. In the article titled “Definition,” the convention
define the landscape as follows:
“Landscape” means an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the
action and interaction of natural and/or human factors.
This first underpinning definition introduces three important sentence (see Vallega
2008). Among these, in the opinion of the authors, the two most important ones
consist of the assertion that (1) the landscape is the result of coevolutionary actions
of humans and natural factors and (2) that landscape should be understood in the
terms in how it is perceived by the population.
In this chapter, we will discuss the role that indicators play in the characteri-
zation and evaluation of minor historical centers; then we will discuss the main
dimensions that characterize the system and the main indicators used in the liter-
ature without trying to create an exhaustive classification system; finally, we will
draw some conclusions.
The Role of Indicators
Despite the widespread literature regarding the use of indicators as a synthesis of

some features, it seems difficult to find a uniformity of thought with respect to
which set of indicators is most suitable to represent and characterize a historic
center, in particular a minor center. Two questions must be answered before
proposing a set of indicators:
• What is their purpose, and can they measure the quality of the landscape?
• Is the territory, which is a complex system, represented by the sum of different
indicators that each measure and evaluate only part of the system or just one
aspect in particular?
7 Characterization of Minor Historic Centers … 61
As briefly explained in the previous paragraph, the complex system that represents
a minor historic center, must be represented through the use of indicators.
The indicators useful for the representation of such a complex system and which
take account of quantitative and perceptual, often qualitative, components, are an
“index or a measurement tool to assess the health of a system (economic, physical,
biological, human).”
Within the European context, different initiatives put forth by the political
agenda in recent years have suggested adopting the use of indicators to assess the
agriculture policy, as well as assess the feasibility of plans and projects, in the
framework of a strategic environmental assessment; describe the territorial systems
in the context of the emerging discipline of landscape services; assess the
achievement of the objectives of Agenda 21; and so on.
Many of these application contexts have in common the object of assessing the
landscape, but the different declinations of these studies show that it is difficult to
define a landscape because the choice of indicators is necessarily related to the use
or purpose of the evaluation and is linked to the expertise of the evaluators
themselves. The same aspect is developed in different ways and is then described by
different indicators. However, the landscape description depends on the purpose of
the evaluation, the scale of analysis, the availability of data, and many other factor
(Cassatella and Peano 2011).
In the case of a minor historic center, the purpose of the assessment could be, for
example, to describe the landscape value and understand whether the transforma-
tions to which these centers are irremediably subject are actually preserving,
enhancing, or changing territorial their place identity. However, this typology of
assessment obviously involves many experts, and according with the European
landscape Convention, the assessment requires involvement of the public to obtain
community-based knowledge.
In terms of the definition of scale to which the indicators also refer, some plans
may propose changes on an urban scale, but since they involve a historic center
with the layering of the coevolutionary footprint of human activities and the
environment as well as their mutual interdependency, a plan could propose changes
on a meta-scale, i.e., an intermediate scale between urban and regional.
Studying the landscape for the purpose of assessment through indicators there
fore entails notable interdisciplinary effort and reciprocal communication.
In this work, we will refer to different indicators, each of which is particularly
suitable for the “reading” or measurement of a particular aspect of the complex
system to which reference is made. It is important to remember that it is also
necessary to assume that the set of such indicators should be evaluated as a whole
and not in a trivial manner through their sum. In fact, they often represent the extent
of incomparable aspects that are not necessarily compensatory. However, these
considerations are the domain of evaluation theory, and they could open many other
themes that may give the reader some pointers while reading this chapter.
Another necessary premise for an exploration of the most common indicators of
landscape, in order to develop a descriptive and evaluation system of minor historic
centers, is the adoption of indicators, which although extrapolated from their use in
different contexts and deriving from an examination of the literature, must be

closely linked to a knowledge of places. In addition, their validity must be endorsed
in the individual context, not just by stakeholders, because they lack a sterile
academic exercise, but by a valid descriptor of perceptual components.
In fact, the abstraction and exportability of certain indicators is easier in the case
of natural or ecological systems, whereas one must combine local descriptors with
the complexity and relationship of different elements, functions, values, and
structures by which urban systems are affected besides indicators of the general
level.
Having said this, however, it is necessary to refer to the character of generality
that allows an objective set of indicators to assess not only the current state of the
center but also the achievement of specific objectives (Rempel et al. 2004; Dziock
et al. 2006).
At the international level, there is a large body of literature related to the study of
models and case studies. In particular, with reference to the European Community
(OECD 2003) and as emphasized by Cassatella and Peano (2011), at the interna-
tional level an indicator should be chosen on the basis of specific requirements.
An environmental indicator must have the following:
• Relevance;
• Analytical soundness;
• Measurability.
In terms of relevance, an environmental indicator should have the following:
• Provide a meaningful picture of the conditions of the environment, pressure on
the environment, and the social response;
• Be simple, easy to interpret, and able to show changes over time;
• Be sensitive to changes in the environment and correlate them with human
activities;
• Provide a basis for international comparison;
• Be used both at national level for issues at the regional level;
• Be associated with thresholds or reference values in such a way that the user can
quickly assess the level determined.
In terms of solidity, the analytical an environmental indicator should:
• Be defined from a theoretical point of view and in technical terms;
• Be based on international standards and be validated at the international level;
• Be ready to interface with the economic models and territorial standards.
Finally, in terms of measurability, data needed for the construction of an indi-
cator must be:
• Already available or obtainable at a reasonable a cost/benefit;
• Appropriately documented and certified quality;
• Revised at regular intervals in accordance with the validation procedures.
According to the concept explained, therefore, the indicators should be con-

sidered as an expression of the “best available knowledge” (Organization of
Economic Co-Operation and Development 1993).
In the next section, we will review the main indicators disclosed in the literature
that are suitable for the description and evaluation of minor historic centers.
Indicators in the Literature
We can say that the “land is a complex concept” (Raffestin 1981; Cox 1997; Storper
1997; Scott 1998; Scott and Storper 2003; Amin 2002; Santos 1996, Davoudi et al.
2008) consisting of an articulated set of values and resources, as well as tangible
and intangible assets, arising from the combined action of nature, humans, and
history.
This complexity arises from the interaction of man and nature with the passage
of history and includes a set of tangible and intangible heritage assets of a particular
place.
Territorial heritage, which is unique to each place, has been defined by the
Organization of Economic Co-Operation and Development, and extensively studied
in the literature, as territorial capital.
It is defined as a collection of tangible and intangible assets including “geo-
graphical location, size, factor of production endowment, climate, traditions, nat-
ural resources, quality of life or the agglomeration economies provided by its cities
[…] customs and informal rules that enable economic actors to work together
under conditions of uncertainty, or the solidarity, mutual assistance and coopting
of ideas that often develop in small and medium-size enterprises working in the
same sector (social capital). Lastly there is an intangible factor […] which is the
outcome of a combination of institutions, rules, practices, producers, researchers
and policymakers, that make a certain creativity and innovation possible” (OECD
2011).
This definition describes well not only the richness and complexity of a territory
but includes within it the set of relationships created between the territory and those
who live it and, in general, between people, their activities, and future prospects.
Moreover, human actions significantly modify the landscape and each of its con-
stitutive parts.
In general, as mentioned in the literature, “people are part of the landscape and
that landscapes are changed for their benefit” (Antrop 2001; Linehan and Gross
1998; Hermann et al. 2014).
This coevolutionary dynamic between the environment and man therefore rep-
resents the essence of the complexity of the territory.
To understand the distinctive characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses of an
area as well as the opportunities that form the basis of its development, we mist
identify possible ways of reading the context of both material and intangible
characters.
Therefore, landscape is the place in which relationships exist and in which these
evolve, thus resulting in a change of context and consequently styles, quality of life,
and opportunities for development.
For these and other reasons, much emphasis has been placed on the development of
methods for the quantification of landscape patterns, which is considered to be a prereq-
uisite for the study of pattern–process relationships (Turner 1990; McGarigal et al. 2002,
Uuemaa et al. 2013).
To describe the complexity of activities, functions, and values that describe urban
systems, such as those of the historical centers, it seems only right to proceed with a
discretization of the various interrelated domains that compose them.
Because the indicators can be considered an instrument of reading reality and
understanding phenomena, their use is enormously popular in various fields. This
implies that there is a huge literature that tries to describe and show how they can be
used in different case studies.
It seems clear that although a large group of indicators is commonly used, one
cannot perform a proper cataloging of existing indicators. Such attempt would lead
to incomplete results and could fail to contextualize the indicator from the research
in which it was studied.
The context in which to the study is being studies must be defined and, along
with this, the objective indicators being sought must be clarified.
Only after the definition of the context as well as the general and specific
objectives can a set of indicators be built that describe the reality. In our case, the
use of indicators must define and describe the characteristics of minor historical
centers.
Considering this need, the indicators should be able to describe a reality of urban
character and, in a matter of much larger context, also include the territories within
which minor historical centers exist and have evolved and transformed over time.
Therefore, we should consider not only small towns but also landscapes and ter-
ritorial agglomerations, which are influenced my and modify each other throughout
history and in the evolution of human activities.
Indicators, therefore, must be able to describe the capital territory and allow us to
understand the dynamics in progress in order to allow the development of the area
and to enhance the existing tangible and intangible heritage.
As Heink and Kowarik (2010) said, “indicators are not only used to describe
environmental states or changes but also to evaluate them and to set objectives”
(Rempel et al. 2004; Dziock et al. 2006).
A particular complexity is inherent in determining indicators that able to
describe the landscape because they must be able to translate both material and
immaterial questions, must not always be defined unambiguously and, above all,
must be objective.
Several papers have described the role of the indicators and their possible uses in
relation to the different contexts of study and the general objectives. As an example,
we refer to Cassatella and Peano (2011), Heink and Kowarik (2010), Cerreta and
Mele (2012), Van Eetvelde and Antrop (2009), Wascher (2004), Choi and Sirakaya
(2006), Oliveira et al. (2010), and Roca et al. (2011). The examples mentioned are
only part of the existing work on the theme of the indicators.
Indicators are particularly significant in that they, as well as the case studies
cited, are related to the construction of knowledge about the values of the landscape
and of the urban and territorial quality with particular reference to issues related to
tangible and intangible, historical, environmental, natural, and cultural heritage.
In an analysis of the literature, with reference to the case study, we can group the
indicators in relation to their field of membership with the knowledge that “the
development of an indicator system also requires decisions on the appropriate
spatial level of aggregation” (Walz 2000).
In particular, we present indicators that belong to the follow domains:
• Ecological characters;
• Cultural capital;
• Social capital and economic structure;
• Infrastructural character;
• Urban system and facilities;
• Land use.
The six categories of indicators identified attempt to describe territorial capital.
The depth of each of the categories was covered in the study done by Loconte and
Selicato (2014), who tried to identify an operating mode for the construction of
territorial networks and the activation of a self-sustainable local development
processes based on the recognition of existing tangible and intangible heritage
through the use of specific indicators.
The six key components descriptive of capital territory are closely related to each
other and have been described through the identification of indicators that sum-
marize the dominant characteristics.
1. Ecological characters
The objective of determining ecological characters is to describe their natural
potential with reference to the landscape ecology (Forman and Godron 1986). The
landscape can be considered as a “complex system of ecosystems,” into which the
events of nature and actions of human culture are integrated. The purpose of the
indicators is to understand the structure and the ecological richness of the land-
scape, how it is composed, the level of diversity, and whether there are dominant
features in the territorial “mosaic.” Moreover, the intent is to start the analysis is the
area of detail by determining the territorial dimension of the landscape. The indi-
cators selected according to a general study on indicators of ecological and bio-
diversity are meant to highlight the ecological peculiarities of the territory and their
effect on naturalness and ecosystems.
An example of descriptive indicators of ecological characters include the
following:
• Grain Index (Forman and Godron 1995): The indicator of grain index has the
function to measure the size of the patches in the landscape mosaic in relation to
their density. It consists of the ratio between the area of the landscape mosaic
and the number of patches present inside the mosaic. The indicator has a
recognitive function in order to understand the structure and ecological land-
scape and, in a second step, can help to prepare measures to safeguard the
richness and diversity of plant and animal species.
• Hill diversity (Farina 2004; Hill 1973): The indicator of hill diversity has the
function of measuring the dominance of a precise number of landscape elements
within the territorial mosaic. It represents one of the main indicators to deter-
mine the extent of diversity, and in particular it refers to the total number of
species present in a particular ecological system.
2. Cultural capital
The objective of “cultural capital” is to describe the cultural potential of a given
territory not only in terms of knowledge about the number of cultural heritage assets
present but also, and especially, to determine the historical characters of particular
significance for a given geographical area, their structural state (level of degrada-
tion, transformation, enhancement), and the characters of uniqueness and excep-
tionality of certain assets as well as their role within the cultural context. Next to the
assessment and knowledge of material cultural heritage is the overall significance of
the intangible heritage of a given territory and the role it plays. For this reason, we
consider both the cultural services provided by government rather than those pro-
vided just by private enterprises as well as the presence of an intangible heritage of
traditions and customs that represent the specificity and uniqueness of the place.
The indicators are intended to highlight the cultural resources of a given territory
and to understand what the role they can play within an overall vision of building
local networks of self-sustainable development.
For example, some of the indicators that are part of this group include the
following:
• Historical heritage (Backer 2009; EEA 2003; Volpiano 2011): Historical her-
itage has the function to verify the presence/absence of historical assets. Its
value ranges from 0 to the number of historical assets present or can be obtained
from the ratio between the number of goods and the total area of land. The
indicator has a recognitive function in order to understand how the assets are
distributed and whether there are traces of historical stratification.
• Rural landscape (Malcevski and Poli 2008; Volpiano 2011): Rural landscape
has the function to check the presence/absence of historical features that define
the characters of the rural landscape or the presence/absence of historical and
traditional cultivation typologies. It has a recognitive function to understand
how the features are distributed and whether there are traces of historical
stratification.
• Cultural identity (Wascher 2000; Volpiano 2011): Cultural identity has the
function to verify the presence of goods with a high degree of cultural identity or
presence of key cultural values. It has a recognitive function to understand how

the goods are distributed and whether there are traces of historical stratification.
• Exceptional character of the historic cultural landscape (Volpiano 2011):
“Exceptional character of the historic cultural landscape” has the function to
verify the presence of goods with exceptional and unique characters and
therefore a high degree of cultural identity within the territorial reference. The
indicator must be constructed by referring to expert skills and to the population
in general to understand whether there exists any property belonging to the
common cultural heritage to be considered for their exceptional character.
• Cultural facilities (Wascher 2005; Phillips and Stein 2013): “Cultural facilities”
has the function to verify the presence or absence of cultural services existing
(libraries, museums, theaters, etc.) in relation to the total resident population. It
can be obtained from the ratio between the number of existing cultural services
and population. The indicator has a recognitive function to understand whether
cultural services exist and how the dissemination of culture is distributed in
relation to the resident population.
• Fragmentation of the rural cultural landscape matrices (Van Eetvelde and
Antrop 2009): “Fragmentation of the rural cultural landscape matrices” has the
function to check the level of fragmentation of the rural cultural landscape
matrices. It can be obtained from the relationship between the surface, which is
fragmented as a result of actions of various kinds, manmade and not, and the
territorial surface. The indicator has a recognitive function to understand if
significant changes are in place regarding historical uses of the rural heritage.
• Creation of cultural routes (Vallega 2008): “Creation of cultural routes” has the
function to verify the existence of cultural routes. It can be obtained from the
ratio between the length of the path and the territorial surface. The indicator has
a recognitive function to understand whether there are already existing paths of
development of the area.
3. Social capital and economic structure

The purpose of the indicators of “social capital and economic structure” is to
describe how the population and the existing economic structure, divided into
primary, secondary, tertiary, and tourism, can be seen as a resource for the territory.
In particular, these indicators define both the structure of the population as repre-
sented by the link within the territory of the presence of cultural associations in the
area as well as their degree of participation in the construction of the development.
The indicators also highlight the economic structure of the territories, the existence
of specialized local production, their inclusion in the context and role of tourism in
order to understand whether this may, in some way, constitute one of the strategies
for the development
An example of the indicators of social capital and economic structure include the
following:
• Population: “Population” is a group of indicators that serves to verify the
structure of the resident population in relation to its total number and the dis-
tribution of the population by age, ethnicity, religion, titiolo study, activity,
income levels, etc. The value of the indicators can be calculated with reference
to the urban or territorial surface.
• Hosting (JCCM 2010; Pillet et al. 2013): “Hosting” has the function to check the
status of tourist accommodations including and evaluation of the number of
beds available and the types of accommodation in relation to the total area or
population.
• Tourism (Pillet et al. 2013): “Tourism” has the function to check the status of
tourist accommodations with an evaluation of the maximum number of tourists.
The indicator has a recognitive function in understand the state of the tourism
system.
• Presence of typical local production and handicraft (Carta 2005): “Presence of
typical local production and handicraft” has the function to check the status of
the local traditional economic system. This indicator has a recognitive function
to understand the state of maintenance of traditional activities.
• NGO (Phillips and Stein 2013): “NGO” has the function to determine the
number of nonprofit organizations and associations present in the territorial
context. The indicator has a recognitive function to understand the state of the
social capital.
4. Infrastructural character
The objective of “infrastructural character” is to describe the levels of accessibility
of the area in relation to vehicular that pedestrian mobility. Moreover, it attempts to
assess the levels of accessibility to cultural heritage as well as the sustainability of
transport and pollution levels.
An example of these indicators includes the following:
• Internal connectivity (Pillet et al. 2013): “Internal connectivity” has the function
of determining the presence/absence of a plant road such as to allow accessi-
bility within both the urban and regional levels. Its value is given by the length
of the existing infrastructure and can be obtained compared with the total area.
The indicator has a recognitive function to understand the levels of accessibility
(road and rail).
• External accessibility (Pillet et al. 2013): “External accessibility” has the
function of determining the presence/absence of supralocal infrastructure able to
allow access to the local context and differentiating them by type. Its value is
given by the length of the existing infrastructure and can be achieved compared
with the total area. The indicator has a recognitive function to understand the
levels of accessibility.
• Sustainable transport (Pillet et al. 2013): “Sustainable transport” has the

function to evaluate the levels of sustainability of the transport system. Its value
is the ratio between the length of the railway lines and the length of the roads.
5. Urban System And Facilities

The objective of “urban system and facilities” is to describe the capacity of urban
centers to respond to the needs of the population. Furthermore, these indicators are
intended to define the level of quality of the urban areas.
Some indicators in this category include the following:
• Presence of urban green areas (Dematteis and Governa 2005): “Presence of
urban green areas” has the function of determining the presence/absence of
designated public green areas inside the urban locale. This indicator is calculated
as the ratio between the surface of green areas and the total urban area. It has a
recognitive function related to urban quality and therefore should be calculated
on an urban scale.
• Presence of public facilities (JCCM 2010; Pillet et al. 2013): “Presence of public
facilities” has the function of checking the presence/absence of public services
regarding the resident population. The indicator is calculated both as cumula-
tive, i.e., the evaluation of all existing public facilities for categories such as
health, education, sports, cultural facilities, etc. Its value is the number of
existing facilities and can be obtained in relation to the total population.
• Urban quality (Dematteis and Governa 2005): “Urban quality” has the function
of determining quality levels in urban areas. The indicator is calculated as the
ratio between the surface of the green areas and the surface of reclaimed
brownfield.
6. Land Use
The objective of “land use” is to define the main uses and systems of protection of
suburban, rural, and natural areas. Moreover, these indicators attempt to assess
levels of land consumption, environmental degradation, landscape value, and the
main uses of agricultural land.
Some land-use indicators include the following:
• Soil consumption (Vallega 2008): “Soil consumption” has the function to
determine levels of soil consumption as calculated through the relationship
between natural surfaces and natural areas. The indicator has a recognitive
function and must be calculated at the regional level.
• Degradation (Vallega 2008): “Degredation” has the function to determine levels
of degradation as calculated through the relationship between degraded surfaces
and the total land area. The indicator has a recognitive function and must be
calculated at the regional level.
• Rural areas (Vallega 2008): “Rural areas” has the function to check the quality,
type, and incidence of rural areas as calculated by the ratio of rural areas (total
and type) and total land area. The indicator has a recognitive function and must
be calculated at the regional level.
Conclusion
As explained by Fagerholm et al. (2012), the several domains used to describe the
initial landscape represent only a part of the actual value of the landscape. Humans
constantly change their land and living space, which leads to multiple uses of earth
and especially to perceptions of diversity and values related to the landscape (Luz
2000; Mander et al. 2007; Raquez and Lambin 2006; Zube 1987).
Therefore, the indicators can be considered an effective evaluation of the
intrinsic value of these places, which cannot be considered simply in a static spatial
context. In fact, the value of the landscape is mainly related to the dynamic rela-
tionship that the population has with the places lived, not only in relation to what
they represent, but also to their ability to meet their own needs tangible or intan-
gible assets. Therefore any assessment system cannot be successful without vali-
dation by stakeholders.
To date, an important form of involvement can be made up of the potential
offered by VGI, which could replace or go alongside traditional methods of par-
ticipation. Involvement by stakeholders can help validate the system of indicators to
describe a landscape as well as the changes taking place with it so they can respond
to the achievement of certain goals but more importantly can set goals themselves.
At present, several examples of such forms of participation and validation are
spreading, but questions such as access to resources, structuring the contents, and
the digital divide still remain.
At the same time, it is our opinion that despite the risks described by detractors
of this new form of sharing and participation, which in the opinion of the authors
seem to discount the benefits of this new process—such as the ability to reach a
large number of people and in assessing implied valuations of what is of significant
for inhabitants—the development of these new approaches in future evaluations
cannot be ignored.
References
Amin A (2002) Spatialities of globalization. Environ Plan 34:385–399

Antrop M (2001) The language of landscape ecologists and planners: a comparative content
analysis of concepts used in landscape ecology. Landsc Urban Plan 55:163–173
Backer A (2009) Contryside quality count: an indicator for monitoring change in the characters of
English landscape 1990-2003. In: Nogué J, Puigbert L, Bretcha G (eds) Indicadors de paisatge.
Reptes I perspectives. Observatori del Paisatge de Catalunya, Barcellona
Carta M (2005) Pianificare nel dominio culturale. Indicatori e strategie per la for mazione di
distretti culturali in Sicilia. In: Economia della Cultura no. 2
Cassatella C, Peano A (eds) (2011) Landscape Indicators. Assessing and monitoring landscape
quality. Springer, Dordrecht
Cassatella C, Voghera A (2011) Indicators Used for Landscape. In: Cassatella C, Peano A
(eds) Landscape indicators. Assessing and Monitoring Landscape Quality. Springer,
Dordrecht, pp 31–46
Cerreta M, Mele R (2012) A landscape complex values map: integration among soft values and
hard values in a spatial decision support system. In: Computational science and its
applications–ICCSA 2012. Springer, Berlin
Choi HC, Sirakaya E (2006) Sustainability indicators for managing community tourism. Tour
Manag 27(6):1274–1289
Cox KR (1997) Spaces of globalization. Reasserting the power of the local. The Guilford Press,
London
Davoudi S, Evans N, Governa F, Santangelo M (2008) Territorial governance in the making.
Approaches, methodologies, practices. In: Boletín de la A.G.E. Noº 46, pp 33–52
Dematteis G, Governa F (eds) (2005) Territorialità, sviluppo locale, sostenibilità: il modello SLoT.
Franco Angeli, Milano
Dziock F, Henle K, Foeckler F, Follner K, Scholz M (2006) Biological indicator systems in
floodplains—a review. Int Rev Hydrobiol 91:271–291
EEA—European Environment Agency (2003) Environmental indicators: typology and use in
reporting. EEA, Copenhagen
Farina A (2004) Lezioni di ecologia. UTET, Torino
Fagerholm N et al (2012) Community stakeholders’ knowledge in landscape assessments –
Mapping indicators for landscape services. Ecol Ind 18:421–433
Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology. Wiley, New York
Forman RTT, Godron M (1995) Land mosaics: the ecology of landscapes and regions. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge
Heink U, Kowarik I (2010) What are indicators? On the definition of indicators in ecology and
environmental planning. Eco Log Indic 10(2010):584–593
Hermann A, Kuttner M, Hainz-Renetzeder C, Konkoly-Gyuró É, Tirászi Á, Brandenburg C,
Allex B, Ziener K, Wrbka T (2014) Assessment framework for landscape services in European
cultural landscapes: an Austrian Hungarian case study. Ecol Indic 37:229–240
Hill MO (1973) Diversity and everness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology
54:427–432
JCCM (Junta de Comunidades de Castilla -La Mancha) (2010) Plan de Ordenación del Territorio
Estrategia Territorial de Castilla –La Mancha. Documento de aprobacióninicial. 6 tomos,
Toledo
Linehan JR, Gross M (1998) Back to the future back to basics: the social ecology of landscapes
and the future of landscape p lanning. Landsc Urban Plan 42:207–223
Loconte P, Selicato F (2014) How to build territorial networks: criteria for the evaluation of the
networking potential for local self- sustainable development. In: Computational science and its
applications–ICCSA 2014. Springer International Publishing, pp 366–381
Luz F (2000) Participatory landscape ecology—A basis for acceptance and implementation.
Landsc Urban Plan 50:157–166
Malcevski S, Poli G (2008) Indicatori per il paesaggio in Italia. CATAP Coordinamento
Associazioni Tecnico scientifiche per l’Ambiente e il Paesaggio, Raccolta di Esperienze
Mander Ü, Wiggering H, Helming K (eds) (2007) Multifunctional land use: meeting future
demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Berlin
McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Neel MC, Ene E (2002) FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis
program for categorical maps. www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html.
Accessed 08 April 2015
OECD (2011) The territorial state and perspectives of the European Union, Paris
Oliveira J, Roca Z, Leitão N (2010) Territorial identity and development: from Topophilia to
terraphilia. Land Use Policy 27:801–814
Phillips RG, Stein JM (2013) An indicator framework for linking historic preservation and
community economic development. Soc Indic Res 113(1):1–15
Pillet F, Canizares MC, Ruiz AR, Martinez HS, Plaza J, Santos F (2013) Los indicators del la
cohesion territorial en el analisis de la escalasupramunicipal o subregional: policentrismo y
areas functionalesurbanas (FUAS). In: Erìa, no 90, pp 91–106
Raffestin C (1981) Pour une géographiedupouvoir. LITEC, Paris. Trad. it., Per una geografia del
potere. Unicopli, Milano
Raquez P, Lambin EF (2006) Conditions for a sustainable land use: case study evidence. J Land
Use Sci 1:109–125
Rempel RS, Andison DW, Hannon SJ (2004) Guiding principles for developing an indicator and
monitoring framework. For Chron 80:82–90
Roca Z, Oliveira J, Roca MN (2011) Claiming territorial identity and local development: from
wishes to deeds. In: Roca Z, Claval P, Agnew JA (eds) Landscapes, identities, and
development. Ashgate Publishing Ltd, Farnham
Santos M (1996) A Natureza do Espaço (The Nature of Space). Hucitec, São Paulo
Scott AJ (1998) Regions and the world economy: the coming shape of global production,
competition and political order. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Scott A, Storper M (2003) Regions, globalization, development. In: Reg Stud 37(6–7):579–593
Storper M (1997) The regional world. Territorial development in a global economy. The Guilford
Press, New York
Turner MG (1990) Spatial and temporal analysis of landscape patterns. Landsc Ecol 4:21–30
Uuemaa E, Mander Ü, Marja R (2013) Trends in the use of landscape spatial metrics as landscape
indicators: a review. Ecol Ind 28:100–106
Vallega A (2008) Indicatori per il paesaggio. Franco Angeli, Milano
Van Eetvelde V, Antrop M (2009) Indicators for assessing changing landscape character of
cultural landscapes in Flanders (Belgium). Land Use Policy 26(4):901–910
Volpiano M (2011) Indicators for the assessment of historic landscape features. In: Peano A,
Cassatella C (eds) Landscape indicators. Assessing and Monitoring landscape quality.
Springer, Dordrecht
Vos W, Meekes H (1999) Trends in European cultural landscape development: Perspectives for a
sustainable future. Landscape Urban Plann 1999(46):3–14
Walz R (2000) Development of environmental indicator systems: experiences from Germany.
Environ Manag 25(6):613–623
Wascher DM (eds) (2000) Agri-environmental indicators for sustainable agricolture in Europe.
Report from the EU concerned action project FAIR5-PL97-3448. European Centre for Nature
Conservation, Tilburg
Wascher D (2004) Landscape-indicator development: step towards a European approach. In:
Jongman R (ed) The new dimensions of European landscape. Springer, Dordrecht
Zube EH (1987) Perceived land use patterns and values. Landsc Ecol 1:37–45
Part III
Territorial Cultural Systems:
A Different Approach to Cultural
Heritage
Chapter 8
Territorial Cultural Systems: Possible
Definitions
Abstract This chapter focuses on definitions and conceptual issues relating to

territorial cultural systems recalling subject content planning, methods of study,
pursued approaches, and methods of action. The common goal of these paths is to
define sustainable development policies for the territory through the processes of
development of cultural heritage and territorial systems with which it interacts. In
this perspective, territorial cultural systems assume a leading role of development
policies. Downstream of the conceptual aspects, territorial policies practiced in the
institutional are recalled and are critically analyzed, both those completed and those
being tested.
Keywords Territorial cultural systems Cultural heritage Urban planning
Introduction
The systemic dimension of planning is a broader and more complex issue than can
be addressed by the reflection in this chapter. The systemic approach arises from the
need of the object concerned by the planning process, i.e., the territory, the settled
communities. In the territory, physical components are intertwined that in various
ways and with different weights contribute to define the constituent characteristics,
the relationship of which are not even now completely known: we know about the
interactions in terms of quality, but it is difficult to know their quantitative expla-
nations. The study of settled communities involves the social sphere, which is
difficult to ascertain even though there are qualitative dimension of the existing
relations between the different social components. In both cases, therefore, the
F. Selicato (&) C. Piscitelli

Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Polytechnic University of Bari,
e-mail: francesco.selicato@poliba.it
C. Piscitelli
e-mail: claudia.piscitelli@poliba.it

76 F. Selicato and C. Piscitelli
planning process must relate to cognitive frameworks of the territory in a systemic

manner in order to understand the mutual relations and define possible design
scenarios.
The systemic approach, in turn, must make use of interdisciplinary studies, in
which each discipline can compete profitably to solving problems if it has limits and
is therefore unable to be used constructively with other disciplines (Maciocco 1991,
1995). The context of the study, i.e., its intrinsic complex structure, its close
interlacing with the social sphere, forces us to conceive planning in both systemic
and interdisciplinary terms.
In this context, territorial cultural systems consistently interpret the meaning of
the planning as it is understood in both systemic and interdisciplinary terms and
brings into the foreground the role that cultural heritage can play in the construction
of possible scenarios of development.
Definitions and Concepts
The multiple meanings attributed to the concept of “territorial cultural systems” can
best be analyzed in the meaning of the individual terms that contribute to their
definition.
The term “territorial” expresses not only the physical extension of the frame of
reference, it also refers to the action of the administrative plan with the intent to
pursue certain goals precisely within the territorial scale. The definition of “plan-
ning,” in turn, refers to a variety of models of territorial government that involve
concepts and different tools of policy, planning, and management of territorial
transformations and forms of regulation of social processes as a function of cultural
progress. Among the many possible variations, it seems useful to recall the main
points which, according to Secchi (2000), are condensed in the schedule definition
as follows:
• Representation of the future of the city and the territory, foreshadowing what
could be, but mostly what you would like it to happen;
• Program of actions that are considered necessary to achieve that representation
and to meet the needs associated with it;
• Distribution of tasks between the different actors of the transformation;
• System of rules aimed to discipline relationships between the different com-
ponents of the community;
• Agreement between the community and its administration, built from the links
with the history and finalized to search for a shared balance between preser-
vation and innovation.
The transition from “traditional” city planning to the “territorial” dimension of
planning therefore unfolds, mainly on the role of territory, environment, landscape,
and historical and cultural heritage, which in order to be instruments of and often
obstacles to the implementation of sectoral and corrective interventions, become
8 Territorial Cultural Systems: Possible Definitions 77
constituents and foundational elements of those “models of sustainab development”

that the planning has set as goal. You could say that if in the past territory was the
means to achieve the prefixed objectives, today it has become the generator of the
goals themselves. In relation to its structural and connotative elements, the concept
of territory is configured as being totally free from any formal border.
These links of relationship are even more evident in the territorialist approach of
Magnaghi (2010), from which originates the planning process leading to the defi-
nition of local development. Territorial heritage is in fact central to the production
of lasting wealth and to the definition of the particular characters of the socioe-
conomic future of each local territorial system. Assuming territorial heritage and its
socioeconomic development as a matrix of self-sustainable development, the
government of the territory becomes the integrated governance of the factors of
production and reproduction, in which planning and design play a central role.
According to Magnaghi (2010), it is in fact to enable a planning process in which
the territory is no longer considered as a tabula rasa, i.e., mere technical support
within which everything is convertible for economic activities functional to the
regime of the property, but as “a place full of history, signs of values to be
transformed into resources for producing lasting wealth and enriched to be trans-
mitted to future generations.” This is also the concept behind the new generation of
landscape plans in Italy, including that which stands out—the Puglia region—
because it is the first region to have been given the “green light” by the ministry as
is appropriate to the new law for the protection of cultural and territorial heritage.1
One of the strategic projects outlined in the aforementioned Apulian Landscape
Plan is in fact aimed toward the realization of territorial systems for the use of
cultural and landscaped assets.
With this in mind, the historical and cultural heritage has a fundamental role for
the development of an area. It is, in fact, to set this development right from the
reconstruction of a real sense of belonging to the place and then to the signs of its
history focusing on the “unity and totality of the cultural heritage and the strong
links between architecture, art, traditions and quality of life’’ (Carta 1999) and its
elements, thus creating a singular unit, a territorial and cultural system in this way
heritage can be engines of sustainable local development.
The term “cultural” introduces the role attributed to cultural heritage within
territorial systems. If the territorial and cultural heritage plans and needs planning
for its development, the latter needs the values contained in the cultural heritage for
the sustainability of its choices and the identity of its scenarios. Cultural heritage, in
fact, cannot be considered a phenomenon in itself, i.e., not coplanar with respect to
methods and finality of a company in the construction of its own development, for a
variety of reasons: its flexibility of content, the inherent extension of its space time
dimension, and its explicit collusion and coexistence with society established that it
has produced over the centuries.
1
Legislative decree no. 42 of 22.01.2004.
Recent legislation has removed much of the typical meaning of “heritage”

deriving from the old law, i.e., an untouchable good or an “alien entity” compared
within its urban, social, and civil context, which often made heritage a source of
hindrance to, rather than a resource for, development. From a conceptual point of
view, heritage has done well in recent decades toward this direction, even if from
the point of view of common sense there is the persistent belief that sees in cultural
heritage a limitation rather than a valuable opportunity: However, this attitude can
change just from a change of course in the role of cultural heritage in planning. The
role of cultural heritage must be transformed, in fact, from passive to active.
Cultural assets must pass from the passive undergoing of planning to actively
generate planning and become an object enhancement in the implementation phase
of the policies that they themselves have inspired: It must in fact become the alpha
and the omega. All this, of course, does not mean to put the system of cultural
assets over other systems just as relevant in the territory, but it leads instead to
recognize—in an interdisciplinary way—the fundamental role that cultural assets
can play in the territory considered in its their totality and complexity. Acting on the
cultural armature allows one, in fact, to operate not on individual elements but on
relationship systems that weave cultural assets in with the entire regional planning
so that one can investigate the entire evolutionary process of formation and strat-
ification of the territory. Within the planning process, “cultural armor can therefore
perform its interpretive function as it is the structure that connects applications to
the objectives, the system of values to resources” (Carta 1999). It can be said,
therefore, that cultural assets also play a managerial role because they provide
elements of truth and legitimacy against which to assess the planning choices.
This role of cultural heritage as a power-train development factor lies mainly in
its ability to reconcile the two macro components that coexist within the economy
of a territory: the local and the global. In fact, cultural heritage allows one to know
and to locate the identifying characteristics of the territory, through which set
development strategy lines, on one hand, point to social, economic, and cultural
diversification of the sites, and on the other hand to the same local development
policies built on the exploitation of the identifying characteristics that make the
territory competitive globally. This means, therefore, that the planning process
should take cultural assets as a central factor in development policies to produce
new territorial quality. It has been believed for so long that in order to pass cultural
assets to future generations, is necessary entrust them to a right intended use that
revives the property of cultural assets and creates around them a sphere of interest
such as to naturally lead to the realization of those maintenance works necessary for
their survival over time. One must allow uses that while respectful of history and
memory, also promote knowledge, respond to the needs of the people, and promote
tourism flows, thus triggering the process of competitiveness of local identities on a
global scale (Palermo 2001). In this context, cultural heritage, beyond its materi-
ality, can also exert immaterial effects that allow the population to identify, rec-
ognize, and/or discover their cultural heritage. At the same time, the cultural
heritage can be perceived by users from other places no longer as a simple set of
monuments and objects, but rather as an expression of the civilization they are
visiting as testimony to the history of a community and a territory.
This is the meaning of sustainability as defined by Magnaghi (2010), i.e., sus-
tainability that “is not solved in the optimization of environmental quality in all
conditions, but in the search for virtuous relations between environmental, social,
territorial, economic and politic sustainability.” The cause of the actual environmental
degradation is to be found in today’s deconstruction of synergistic relations between
physical, built, and anthropogenic environments; hence, the need to reconstruct new
forms of territorial relations. The cornerstone of new design strategies becomes, then,
the search for sustainability focusing on the rules of settlement including the archi-
tectural, urban, and socioeconomic project, rules, and relationships that produce a
high quality for the environment, realizing what Magnaghi (2010) defines “local
self-sustainable development.” The terms “self-sustaining” and “local development”
emphasize the need to affirm a culture of self-government and care of territory that is
able to “overcome the reliance of sustainable development in economies directed
straight through the re-conquest by the inhabitants of the precise production of
environmental and territorial quality, in a world populated by many styles of devel-
opment’’ (Magnaghi 2010). The meaning of development, rather than referring to
growth and economics, thus recalls the growth of local society and its ability to
self-govern to produce individual and collective well-being (Becattini 1999, 2006).
The term “system” extends the levels of complexity and interaction where
cultural assets relate to each other and relate to places and population. Systemic
dimension must be related once with the planning process, which is responsible to
recompose those reports often weakened, broken, or worse, between territory, of
which the cultural heritage is an integral part, and population. The goal is to
understand the historical processes, making them legible and clear again and then to
enhance them making heritage a matrix of development in the contemporary
society. These processes, which are of long duration, have in fact produced a spatial
evolution characterized by broken deep but also by sediments and cognitive per-
sistent materials that constitute the anchor identity of contemporary landscapes.
Therefore, to interpret in procedural forms the relations between “natural” and
“cultural landscape,” multidisciplinary studies conducted with scientific rigor and
methodology are necessary including (1) the “sensitive” or aesthetic-perceptive
approach to the landscape (Castelnovi 1998; Socco 1998; Budoni 2010), which
identifies excellence and frameworks of the natural beauty and heritage of land-
scape to be preserved; (2) the “ecological” approach practiced by landscape ecology
(McHarg 1969, 2007; Steiner 1991, 2002, 2004), which identifies and addresses the
environmental quality of the landscape, its eco-friendliness, and energy flows
between the various ecosystems and habitats; and (3) the “structural” and systemic
approach (Maciocco 1991, 1995), which uses historical analysis in different dis-
ciplines2 to identify genetic codes and identity of places refined in time. Hence, the
need to identify and study areas with recurring characters in territorial identity
Disciplinary fields including geography, ecology, anthropology, ethnography, and archeology.

2
(Maciocco 1991), whose cultural assets, together with different signs of historical
anthropization, represent layers sedimented in time and configure the territorial and
cultural system. Only the enhancement of these systems can trigger a territorial
cultural actual process of re-appropriation of the places by their inhabitants, thus
resulting in consequent future development of the territory itself (Magnaghi 2010).
A portion of “territory” that can be, in terms of the above described, considered
as territorial cultural system is therefore characterized by its intrinsic and “complex
local system,” which defined by the multiplicity of tangible and intangible com-
ponents, both environmental and anthropogenic, permeated by a “cultural historical
basis” that outlines the identity of the place itself.
The Concept of Territorial Cultural System in Institutional
After reviewing the different meanings, which can be defined according to the
territorial cultural system, it becomes useful to check the meaning that has been
assumed in the main policies implemented in the institutional scope.
Numerous experiments have been promoted by European funding programs,
which have emphasized the role of the system of relations between the nodes of a
branch network as a determinant factor to boost territorial identities to be more
competitive at higher scale. In the reticular structure, each territorial subject (con-
sider, for example, minor historical centers as punctual expressions of a wider
network of settlements on the territory) is part of a system that has been organically
articulated: The network is based on the historical, landscaping, and environmental
identities and the relations, as well as the physical components, which are also
expressed in immaterial terms. The identification and the actual creation of the
territorial cultural system becomes the way in which it seeks to achieve, according
to an innovative approach, the economic and social development of a land area,
leveraging the sustainable use of the same, using the creative and intelligent
potential of tangible and intangible cultural resources and skillful promotion of all
those goods, services, and activities, which for various reason, are presented related
to the cultural heritage of a region.
Thus was born the initiative of the Italian “cultural district” with the aim of
making profitable the interaction between cultural resources and environmental
services and production activities.3 The cultural district is constituted by an orga-
nized system of relationships falling within a given territory, the premise of which
is characterized by the integration of the process of development of cultural
resources, both tangible and intangible, with the system of infrastructure, which
ensure the usability of the district with the system of organizations that provide
services and other productive sectors with which it is connected. It is a management
3
One of the most important is the cultural district including “Late Baroque Towns of the Val di
Noto” in the southeast of Sicily, which is recognized by UNESCO.
strategy (Mangoni 2009) with the goal of a development strategy of cultural assets
that aims to create new opportunities for development, employment, and social
growth.4 From this perspective the cultural heritage—not only the tangible char-
acteristics but also those that are intangible and provide cultural atmosphere, which
give to intangible, not-easily-replicable experiences, myths, rituals, customs, folk-
lore, and linguistic peculiarities and spread knowledge and innovative practices
related more directly to the sphere of economic production (Francesconi and
Cioccarelli 2013)—become relevant.
In Italy, the similar experiences of individual regions are many. Among these, of
particular interest is the initiative launched by the Puglia region with the identifi-
cation of the “Environmental and Cultural Systems” (SAC), which allows one to
network environmental and cultural resources on a supra scale to promote the
attractiveness and development of its territories. The SAC is therefore is a territorial
aggregation aimed to develop and integrate the management of environmental and
cultural assets to ensure a unified, qualified, and sustainable fruition of environ-
mental and cultural heritage. The initiative is based on some essential considera-
tions: (1) in a densely populated territory such as the Puglia region, natural and
cultural heritages are inextricably integrated; (2) environmental and cultural her-
itages present elements of continuity, relationship, and homogeneity that transcend
administrative boundaries, e.g., water courses, which are intended as ecological
corridors and their indissoluble relationship with processes of long-term
anthropization and which therefore require integrated management from a territo-
rial point of view; (3) to have the ability to properly manage heritages to also
promote their development not only just for purposes of tourism development
requires precisely an approach that integrates capital with environmental and cul-
tural assets as well as the institutional and socioeconomic subjects active on the
territory. There is a requirement to have a “jump of scale” in the management of the
assets in question that is dictated not only by the reasons mentioned above but also
by reasons related to economic sustainability, operational capabilities, and effective
promotion of environmental and cultural systems.
There is much interest in the European project “Development de systems
cuLturesTerritoriAux” (DELTA), which is aimed at the development of n integrated
economic, environmental, and cultural heritage of the Euro-Mediterranean region,
which has created institutions responsible for cultural heritage of nine countries.5 In
this project, the definition of the concept of cultural territorial system is that of a
relational context within which projects of integrated enhancement of cultural
heritage have been created. The studies carried out by the DELTA project are based
on the double bond between culture and territory, between cultural heritage
understood in its broadest sense and the development of a determined geographic
4
In truth, few observations have been raised about the real effectiveness of the valuation process.
For many it would in fact be a model of sectoral development planning based exclusively on the
tangible aspects of culture and unable to trigger a real growth process (Trupiano 2012).
5
Italy, France, Spain, Greece, Morocco, Algeria, Malta, Israel, and the Palestinian Authority.
area. The report that places closely culture and development is investigated by
referring to the identification of four key concepts: cultural resources, identities and
cultural diversity, sustainable development and the dynamics established within the
binomial territory/cultural heritage that enable a holistic approach to culture (Nigro
2007). This will take due consideration of the different components that contribute
to the definition of culture: tangible and intangible heritage, the quality of public
space; the ways in which the associative life of a particular local community is
expressed; youth culture; the experience of ethnic minorities and other social
groups within a territory; the image of a place transmitted from literature, music,
visual arts, and the mass communication media; and the typical products and tra-
ditional activities characteristic of a certain geographical area.
The DELTA project, by espousing this view, tries to adhere to the principle that
all forms of development of cultural heritage appear to be an internal force to the
territory to help guide local development as well as a key factor for improving the
quality of life of the population living within the territory (Nigro 2007). In this way,
the existing diversity in various contexts in the Mediterranean area are taken as a set
of peculiarities, for which one must define the specific mode of action without
replicating the same solutions in all cases considered.
Finally, the enhancement processes of territorial cultural systems in Eastern
Europe are the issue of the European project “Valorisation and Improving of
Management of Small Historic Centers in the Eastern Partnership Region”
(VIVA-EASTPART). In full agreement with the European studies conducted in the
Mediterranean, project VIVA in Eastern Europe is also aimed at enhancing and
promoting the development of territorial cultural systems characterized by the
integration of the historical heritage and the landscape of the countries involved.6
The concept of cultural and territorial system includes once again the physical
dimensions in close integration between historic settlements and landscapes com-
ponents as well as the practices and social and cultural values, economic processes,
and intangible dimensions of heritage. The immaterial culture, in the sense that the
project intended to define, is essential and indispensable. It’s value is even greater
when you consider that the rites, dances, traditions, proverbs, customs, songs,
legends, and any other product of the intellectual activity of a people constitute a
symbolic system; they could be define also “cultural composition” (Assman 1997),
which offers individuals the opportunity to access a common knowledge and
retrieve a collective memory through which each can define himself or herself and
develop a sense of belonging to places. Not least are the gastronomic and oeno-
logical habits, ways of life, ceremonies, festivals, everyday rituals, myths, songs,
dances, proverbs, sacred texts, stereotypes, and neighborhood gossip.
Even more, in the meaning gained in the project, significant weight is given to
the actors rather than to the actions. Interestingly, in fact, over time has evolved the
6
Three case studies corresponding to three pilot projects, one for each of the countries involved,
were identified for this purpose: Sibiu County in Romania, Dilijan in the region of Tavush in
Armenia, and Cahul County in Moldova. Italy has had the role of scientific partner.
concept of intangible cultural heritage, with a gradual shift of attention from arti-
facts (stories, songs, proverbs, knowledge) to persons (storytellers, performers,
artisans, curators) as well as their knowledge and their skills, their habitus and again
to their habitat, to be identified in their ways of life and their social worlds
(Gimblett 2006).
In the common meaning assigned to the different experiences in institutional
areas, territorial and cultural systems are therefore places that have managed to keep
more than any other reality not only the tangible signs of the historical narrative of
settlements and landscapes but also the traditions, customs, and ways of life of
those who have founded and lived in the territory over the years. Their being places
of culture based on the territory, environment, knowledge, and local traditions
makes them in absolute terms the most valuable resource for the recovery of
identity and at the same time the main target of political exploitation as places full
of cultural goods both material and immaterial.
References
Assmann J (1997) La memoria culturale. Scrittura, ricordo e identità politica nelle grandi civiltà
antiche. Einaudi, Torino
Becattini G (1999) Lo sviluppo locale. Iris, Artimino
Becattini G (2006) Ritorno al territorio. Il Mulino, Bologna
Budoni A (2010) Pianificare il paesaggio: problematiche di integrazione tra tradizione estetica,
approccio ecologico, innovazione percettiva. In: AA VV. Atti della XIII Conferenza Nazionale
SIU—Società Italiana degli Urbanisti, Clima, sviluppo e convivenza., Febbraio, Roma, pp 25–27
Carta M (1999) L’armatura culturale del territorio. Il patrimonio culturale come matrice di identità
e strumento di sviluppo, Franco Angeli, Milano
Castelnovi P (ed) (1998) Il senso del paesaggio. Atti del Seminario internazionale,Torino, 8–9
maggio 1998. IRES, Istituto di Ricerche Economiche-Sociali del Piemonte, Torino
Francesconi A, Cioccarelli G (2013) Organizzare i distretti culturali evoluti. Franco Angeli,
Milano
Gimblett BK (2006) World Heritage and Cultural Economics. In: Kratz C (ed) Karp I. Public
Cultures/Global Transformations. Duke University Press, Museum Frictions
Maciocco G (ed) (1991) Le dimensioni ambientali della pianificazione urbana. Franco Angeli,
Milano
Maciocco G (1995) Dominanti ambientali e progetto dello spazio urbano, vol 104. Urbanistica,
pp 76–91
Magnaghi A (2010) Il progetto locale. Verso la coscienza di luogo, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino
Mangoni F (2009) La costruzione dei sistemi territoriali culturali. Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane,
Napoli
McHarg IL (1969) Design with Nature. Wiley, New York
McHarg IL (2007) Progettare con la natura. Franco Muzzio Editore, Padova
Nigro F (ed) (2007) Cultura e territorio. I sistemi culturali territoriali, Carocci, Roma
Palermo PC (2001) Prove di innovazione. Nuove forme ed esperienze di governo del territorio in
Italia. Franco Angeli, DIAP, Milano
Secchi B (2000) Prima lezione di urbanistica. Laterza Editori, Roma-Bari
Socco C (1998) La polisemia del paesaggio. In: Castelnovi P (ed) Il senso del paesaggio. Atti del
Seminario internazionale,Torino, 8–9 maggio 1998. IRES, Istituto di Ricerche
Economiche-Sociali del Piemonte, Torino
Steiner F (1991) The living landscape. an ecological approach to landscape planning. McGraw
Hill, New York
Steiner F (2002) Human ecology, Human Ecology: Following Nature’s Lead. Island Press,
Washington DC
Steiner F (2004) Costruire il paesaggio. Un approccio ecologico alla pianificazione, McGraw Hill,
Milano
Trupiano G (2012) Strategie per la valorizzazione e il recupero dei centri storici minori. In:
Squillante M, Violano A (eds) Sant’Agata de’ Goti: tracce. Dai testi e dalle epigrafi verso un
sistema informativo territoriale. Franco Angeli, Milano
Chapter 9
An Integrated and Sustainable Approach
to the Management of Minor Historic
Centres: Territorial Cultural Systems
Abstract This chapter first starts with an analysis of the current scenario in the
field of minor historic centre management which has gone from a context of sub-
stantial production of culture’s public strategies and available funds to a situation of
cutting programmes and investments; as a result, this field requires new innova-
tive approaches and tools. Secondly, the chapter will focus on an innovative
approach which defines culture as a fundamental pillar for sustainable development
and, therefore, on the setting up of a new planning and management model based
on culture and sustainability. Finally the chapter will formulate a first definition of
the model of territorial cultural systems.
Keywords Integrated management Cultural systems Historic centre economy
Management of Minor Historic Centres: Current Scenario
The current scenario in the field of culture and heritage public policies and pro-
grammes indicates a general situation of significant investment cuts. Due to this
context, there is a need for new approaches and tools to tackle the lack of investment
and economic resources. In addition, an analysis of minor historic centres in rural
areas and remote regions reveals that, in most cases, these cuts are worsening the
already poor situation of low economic growth and the lack of experience and
outlook of rural heritage and communities. For many European countries, rural areas
lag behind in economic development and are mostly characterised by depopulation,
J. López Galdeano (&)

Faculty of Arts, Geography and History, University of Granada,
Calle del Profesor Clavera, 18011 Granada, Spain
e-mail: josefinalopezgaldeano@gmail.com

Fig. 9.1 Haghartsin

Monastery, Dilijan area
(Armenia). Source: Viva
Eastpart project
semi-subsistent agriculture, and little economic income. In addition, these areas and
their stakeholders are not yet aware of the cultural potential; thus, their heritage is
neglected and, in many cases, abandoned (Figs. 9.1, 9.2, 9.3 and 9.4).
This scenario is the main one described in the communication “Towards an
Integrated Approach to Cultural Heritage for Europe” (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. Brussels, 22.7.2014, COM (2014) 477 final) in
which the European Commission states that heritage has a great capacity to promote
social cohesion and integration through the regeneration of neglected areas,
including minor historic centres, the creation of locally rooted jobs, and the pro-
motion of shared understanding and a sense of community. The communication
also defines the challenges to be addressed and states that, at the current time, the
heritage field is at a crossroads because of decreased public budget as well as
decreased participation in traditional cultural activities among other issues.
9 An Integrated and Sustainable Approach to the Management of … 87
Fig. 9.2 Fortified Church,

Hartibaciu Valley, Romania.
Source: Viva Eastpart project
Therefore, it is proposed that the heritage sector must adapt to new management
and business models as well as to implement a more integrated approach to her-
itage conservation, promotion, and valorisation in order to take into account its
manifold contribution to societal and economic objectives as well as its impact on
other public policies. In the opinion of the European Commission, these new
management models also need to be built on opportunities linked to conservation
being increasingly geared toward preserving and enhancing a whole cultural
landscape rather than an isolated site, becoming more people-centred, and gen-
erating innovation and contributing to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth to
the heritage of cities and territories.
It also states that specifically for historic towns and villages that face the most
complex problems in terms of preserving the fabric of identity while generating
sustainable growth and employment, integrated management must be sustainable,
particularly for cultural heritage embedded in rural areas and remote regions, which
must focus on innovative forms of community-oriented management.
Fig. 9.3 Iacobeni Village,

Hartibaciu Valley, Romania.
Source: Viva Eastpart project
A New Planning and Management Model for Minor

Historic Centres Based on Culture and Sustainability
Taking into account these recommendations and the lessons learned through best
practices analysed for the implementation of the VIVA_EASTPART project, the
new planning and management model for minor historic centres proposed within
this project1 is defined on the tangible and intangible natural heritage being one of
the few elements with the potential for economic development but still firmly tied to
places and local populations. It is also related to culture as the fourth pillar of the
traditional paradigm of sustainable development that includes economic growth,
social inclusion, and environment.
In relation to this, culture has proved to be resilient to the crisis with innovative
solutions contributing to growth and jobs. Moreover, culture is increasingly a key
topic in discussions of sustainable development because it is agreed that it has the
potential to transform communities and individuals in positive and meaningful
ways over the long term while remaining firmly tied to places and local populations.
Finally, researchers and institutions have pointed out that a fourth dimension should
1
VIVA EASTPART project (http://vivaeastpart.eu/).
Fig. 9.4 Traditional weaving, Cahul District, Republic of Moldova Source: Viva Eastpart project
be added to the dimensions of sustainable development because the

triple-bottom-line dimensions of economic, environment, and social inclusion do
not seem to be enough to reflect the complexity of contemporary society.2
The new model, named the “territorial cultural system,” is being established in
relation to the four-pillar model of sustainability,3 on the needs for a cultural
perspective in public planning and policy by proposing practical measures for
integration, and on public authorities developing a framework that evaluates the
cultural impacts of environmental, economic, and social decisions and plans cur-
rently being implemented in communities. It also based on discussions about
sustainable development’s need to include an understanding of culture as well as of
the place in which it occurs so that community and geographic context is not
ignored. This new approach to culture as a driver of territorial development, or
“smart cultural management,” was tested and experimented at the territorial level
through the VIVA-EASTPART project (Figs. 9.5, 9.6 and 9.7).4
2
“Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development,” passed on 17 November 2010, in the
framework of the World Summit of Local and Regional Leaders–3rd World Congress of UCLG,
held in Mexico City.
3
Hawkes, J. The Fourth Pillar of Sustainability. Culture’s Essential Role in Public Planning.,
Cultural Development Network (Vic) 2001.
4
VIVAEAST methodology elaborated within VIVA EASTPART project (http://vivaeastpart.eu/).
Fig. 9.5 Mapping of cultural resources in Valea Hartibaciului. Source: Viva Eastpart project
Definition of the Territorial Cultural System Model
The territorial cultural system is both a theory and a methodology that offers
opportunities to work out some important questions for the planning and man-
agement of minor historic centres: the relation between culture and sustainability,
culture and territory, local identity and global heritage, as well as conservation
versus transformation, normative versus operational planning and, ultimately, the
positive relation between conservation and valorisation from a spatial perspective.
Fig. 9.6 Mapping of cultural resources in Cahul District. Source: Viva Eastpart project
Fig. 9.7 Mapping of cultural resources in Tavush Marz. Source: Viva Eastpart project
A territorial cultural system is established on the existence of individual units of

settlements that have given birth to a original landscape, typical of a culture deeply
rooted in the territory, that are articulated, planned, and managed as sociocultural
units within a territorial network linked by culture, history, traditions, and/or natural
elements. In breaking down its meaning, we obtain the main lines defining both the
theory and the methodology:
• Territorial
– Territory as sustainable use of space and of cultural and environmental
resources.
– Territory as a network linked by culture, history, traditions, and/or natural
elements.
– Territory as minor historic centres located in rural areas and remote regions
linked to a larger territorial context that opens up positive opportunities of
new and underused territorial potential for their sustainable development.
– Territory as spatial legislation and programming that values cultural and
natural heritage.
• Cultural
– Culture consisting of material and immaterial components related to a wide
variety of fields: history, architecture, arts, languages, songs, stories, music,
dances, skills, environment, natural and built landscapes, etc.
– Culture in relation to time as a vector of memory, to space as a geographical
identifier, and to a community as an indicator of belonging.
– Culture as an idea that can transform the image of rural areas and help to
“redefine” them.
– Cultural innovation and cultural policy as a sustainable development tool.
– Culture as a driving force for regional development.
• Systems
– System as the cultural dimension included in integrated public planning and
policy.
– System as legislative and operational planning and management tools able to
guarantee long-term conservation and socioeconomic development.
– System as empowerment of networks of actors needed to enhance processes
of impact on public action that imply substantial changes through a broader
adoption of integrated approaches and practices.
– System as a framework that evaluates the cultural impacts of environmental,
economic and social decision-making and plans.
The cultural territorial system finds its connotation in the patterns of historic
evolution and its configuration in the framework of local geographies; thus it is not
a combination of territories distinguished by a cultural dimension but a real system
characterised by specific components, values, and close connections deeply
affecting the cultural background.
The model of cultural territorial systems5 is built on the lessons learned through
experiences carried out at the local and regional levels (see Chap. 2):
5
AAVV. Viva-Eastpart Methodology: Management of Territorial Cultural Systems. Valorisation
and Improving of Management of Small Historic Centres in the Eastern Partnership Region.
Bucharest, Romania, 2013.
Fig. 9.8 Local workshops in Valeni, Cahul District, Republic of Moldova. Source: Viva Eastpart
project
• Integrated approach among institutional levels, among actors and projects: a

broad basis of common objectives could be reached to safeguard and sustainably
develop territorial cultural systems.
• Smart cultural management is a new approach to culture as a driver of territorial
development that also balances and improves the safeguarding of cultural her-
itage and sustainable development which fosters economic benefits.
• Participative approach with participation and consultation instruments formu-
lated and improved to reconcile the interests and demands of various sections of
the community (Figs. 9.8 and 9.9).
• Implementation-orientated model that structures concrete actions ready for
implementation and has been discussed with a broad variety of stakeholders to
make the result of the process legitimate, tangible and real.
The cultural and natural features of a territory must be read as part of a complex
system. A policy of conservation and valorisation of the cultural and natural her-
itage requires both the conservation and enhancement of the individual assets
belonging to different sets as well as the conservation and enhancement of each
relationship (still evident or to be strengthened or rebuilt) between the assets of the
same type and between assets of different kinds. To implement appropriate policies
for the conservation, valorisation, and management of the cultural and natural
Fig. 9.9 Symposium on private‒public partnerships for conservation and valorisation of heritage,
Sibiu County, Romania. Source: Viva Eastpart project
heritage, it is necessary to have some tools for planning and design that could
systematise the necessary and appropriate actions for these policies. One appro-
priate tool may be an “integrated territorial cultural plan,” that would have the
following seven characteristics:
• Programmatic: The plan would have as its object the physical and social (so-
cioeconomic) landscape of an area including both tangible and intangible assets
and the relationships between them.
• Structural: The plan would be a structural plan for projects that identifies
hierarchies of components, an integrated system of components, the demostra-
tive projects to be implemented.
• Incremental: The plan can be incrementally built by processing, in succession,
all of the elements that may have functional self-efficacy and significance even if
they are parts of an overall unitary methodological framework.
• Implementable: The plan can be implemented as it goes along: It does not need
to immediately be a perfect and complete plan; the different parts can be
articulated and deepen for subsequent additions and amendments.
• Flexible: The plan is not just only a “hard” and “normative” plan; above all it is
a “scenario” which is a program that addresses and identifies possible projects
with guidelines for developing the projects in a coordinated way and in
accordance with the main objectives such as conservation and enhancement of
resources. However, if useful or necessary, some specific areas or projects or
parts of projects may be subject to a specific and more detailed planning or
design regulations.
• Strategic: The plan is a strategic plan‒process (shared, participated, concerted,

and communicative) that is created both top-down (by institutions) and
bottom-up (by associations, communities and universities).
• Managed: The plan would be “accompanied” by public authorities, operators,
and associations.
Chapter 10
Socio-economic Dimension in Managing
the Renewal of Ancient Historic Centers
Carmelo M. Torre
Abstract The growing need to financially support the processes of the urban
regeneration of city centers clashes with the limited availability of public resources.
Administrations are therefore forced to prioritize the areas of intervention on one
hand by trying to pursue goals of social equity and on the other to take actions to
promote an efficient financial plan. Consequently, the reference institutional policy
of intervention is based on regulatory frameworks that require a closer integration
of programming needs of the allocation of resources and social needs. The chapter
gives examples of the conciliation among programs the seek for efficiency as well
as social equality in prioritizing interventions in the urban makeup of historic
centers.
Keywords Cultural territorial systems Urban economy Cultural heritage

evaluation
Accountability, Efficacy and Equality in Urban Renewal
The community initiative programs that plan for urban development require a
serious monitoring of policies through the evaluation of consistency of results. Local
governments, in order to increase governance, are called upon to set the decision
points on the ability to preview the requested search for coherence using the new
program tools. A useful example of the preview method is the definition of appro-
priate indicators that describe the condition of social disease and environmental
C.M. Torre (&)

Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Polytechnic University of Bari,
e-mail: carmelomaria.torre@poliba.it

98 C.M. Torre
degradation for a valuation method that supports “planological-programming”

(Archibugi 2002; Khakee 1998), which is a way to find an opportunity for land-use
while at the same time looking at efficiency.
The evaluation of choices must be made by the use of transparent approaches
that, besides being based on principles of efficiency and equity, must meet the
requirements of accountability, which are not limited to ex-ante phases but rather
are accompanied by an on-going and ex post evaluation of the implementation of
policies (Hausman and McPherson 1993; Donolo 2004).
In conclusion, we require tools for continuously monitoring the obtained results,
in the light of resource allocation, and checking the consistency of the results
according to set objectives of transparency, fairness, and economic sustainability
(Torre et al. 2013).
This search implies, e.g., in the case of the restoration of degraded historic
fabrics, to seek methods based on cost-effectiveness, which make visible the efforts
spent, effects achieved, and measures taken in light of the reduction of frequent
imbalances in the nucleus of our ancient cities.
Methods and Implications
If we look at old town centres, we can recognize the condition defined approxi-
mately 20 years ago by a notation of the Italian Ministry of Public Works (dated
22/10/1997), which establishes the issues of such development plans called “district
contracts”: “District marked by widespread degradation of the buildings and the
urban environment and by lack of services in a context of low social cohesion and
evident housing criticality.”
The evaluation of projects to submit for funding is based on criteria defined by
several national calls, which usually are integrated by criteria provided by the
regions.
The comparison among cost and effectiveness supports decision making and
provides indications about which actions, even before assuring that equal financial
resources are deployed, can pursue better targets for the reduction of the physical
and social degradation in urban contexts. This information is useful not only when
the public bodies must operate with their own funds but also when they have the
need to rationalize to higher-level institutions (and, generally speaking, all superior
sources of funding) the effectiveness of the measures for which the financial support
is requested.
An assessment of sustainability must somehow make consistent objectives of
efficiency and social equity. In the case of the requalification of urban architectural
heritage, one tries to obtain results in reducing substantial deterioration in the
physical environment and in the social context. In some cases, it is necessary to
give up the property because the unsustainability of maintenance costs is so high
that the owners put the property up for sale (Morano and Tajani 2014).
10 Socio-economic Dimension in Managing the Renewal … 99
Fig. 10.1 The logic framework at the basis of the assessment of intervention priority
A preliminary analysis becomes a crucial point when it is aiming at identifying

• the extent of the resources to be used,
• the situations of the greatest social problems,
• conditions of greatest physical degradation.
The relevant aspects in terms of physical and social degradation generate a set of
evaluation criteria for a multi-dimensional assessment yielding an index of physical
degradation as well as an index of social deprivation.
The priority is to act where the indexes assume relevant values.
For the purposes of constructing the evaluation framework (Fig. 10.1), the
phases included the following:
• developing a survey methodology to identify and quantify the changes and
situations of degradation of the historical heritage;
• determining the costs of recovery as a measure of the cost-effectiveness;
• developing a method to identify priorities for interventions supporting decisions
in the light of social equity and transparency.
100 C.M. Torre
• Create a balance between cost and effectiveness first in terms in term of physical
rehabilitation against decay and second in favour of social revitalisation.
Building a Geography of Physical and Social Criticalities
To organize data, a Geographic Information System should been set that contains a
database of the historical centre.
In such a database, photographic references, attributes collected inside schedules
of “architectural components,” and the inside schedules of the “improper changes”
can be merged; it can also include links with stock images.
Regarding details of the degradation, two sets of data should be built. The first
set should collect data at two levels: the small unit of cadastral parcels and the
broader unit of the minimum urban block (e.g., coincident with the geographic
section of population census).
The second set as well as the first should collect data at the level of the geo-
graphic section of the Italian Population Census.
The physical degradation and the social discomfort conditions at the end should
be mapped by the use of GIS (e.g., ArcMap).
Regarding the physical cost of degradation for each one of the section, the cost
per category of refurbishment is considered as attribute.
The degree of social discomfort can be defined by the set of indexes of social
discomfort.
Estimating the Cost of Architectural Refurbishment
To estimate costs, a reference is represented by the “morphological quality” that

were proposed by the trial of the Guidelines of District Contracts in the case of the
“preservation and enhancement of historic fabrics.”
According to such an objective, the main task is the preservation of a significant
architectural organism, in its aspects of historical development, thus “guaranteeing
the permanence of the figurative and material consistency.” The interventions in the
historic centre must comply with the following design criteria:
• elimination of superfluous degradation; modification of the adjunctions, con-
servation of the original plasters, the paintworks, and existing decoration (e.g.,
frescoes);
• preservation of the original external openings according to their shape and
position;
• construction of new windows made on the basis of schedules, featuring scores,
and configurations consistent with the original pre-existing typologies.
To identify the average cost of intervention, an investigation of the typology of

alteration of the built heritage should be provided. Abacuses of architectural
components and their types of alterations in the built environment have been the
basis of classificatory attributes of cost in each geographical unit.
With regard especially to the architectural heritage of private property, urban
restoration represents a significant part of the intervention in the overall rehabili-
tation of the historic centre. A survey “toolbox” should be contain the following:
• photographic survey of the prospects of the buildings
• construction of an “abacus of architectural components”
• construction of an “abacus of alterations”
• calculation of the area of land parcels and elevation of buildings affected by
degradation
• database describing the degradation of the external surfaces.
If the versatility offered by the used support can be guaranteed, it is possible to
recombine and aggregate data so that they are suitable for use in relation to the
goals. By queries, we could examine any context through spatial relationships
between each intervention for each fabric.
Inside the schedule architectural elements we collected architectural elements,
e.g., some types of doors, windows, and railings. to be used as models for future
public and private interventions (Ciaramella 2002).
In addition to creating a census of the valuable elements, one must also identify
factors that lead to disqualification of the historic centre. This classification is
helpful to assess the costs in the subsequent removal of the centre.
Similarly to what was done for the architectural components, we then prepared
an archive called “Abacus of Alterations,” which included nontraditional materials,
colors unsuitable for the environment, elements of modern fashion, and all the other
transformations that have altered the architecture of the buildings.
Assessing Social Discomfort
Next we analysed the uncomfortable condition of the inhabitants by identifying

priorities for action, especially for socially weaker families.
The disease conditions were investigated by evaluating the way in which some
situations deemed unfavourable are distributed in the area. Then the following
structural characteristics of the population were taken into account:
• elderly and young people;
• unemployed people;
• entrepreneurs and professionals;
• employees, employers, and self-employed workers;
• families in relation to the size of the household;
• housing in relation to the property deed;
• and territorial density (overcrowding).
102 C.M. Torre
Indexing Physical and Social Impacts on Expenditure
According to criteria, a multidimensional evaluation can be produced (e.g., con-

cordance analysis). At this point the evaluation can be obtained as Roy (1985)
suggests, i.e., by the use of the concordance index that characterizes each area of
intervention as an alternative, For each area we should consider two lists of
priorities:
• the first shows the priority according to seeking the best result in terms of
physical refurbishment;
• the second shows the priority according to support including the most difficult
social conditions, which could be in contrast to the need to refurbish the weakest
households living in the historic centre of the town.
If we focus on the first index, we obtain a better result in terms of the amount of
decay that must be repaired and/or restored.
If we focus on the second index, we support with public funding primarily the
members of the social class that are less able to act by themselves to refurbish their
own heritage.
Efficacy Effectiveness and Social Justice
The key to choosing is represented by equity, which is defined as the rule that
creates the greatest impact, in terms of social justice, both spatially and
geographically.
The first graph represents an example of classification of areas (represented by
numbered points on a wider set in a given city) as a function of the indices of
physical degradation and social distress.
A priority for action based on that classification is broadly consistent with a
choice of efficacy.
This approach to the choice is desirable in the absence of constraints imposed by
the need to allocate scarce resources to priority. In fact, in this case it must be
remembered that each field is characterized, even in situations of low value, by the
indices of degradation and situational discomfort from situations no matter how
deserving of intervention they are. The assessment, in fact, must determine the list
of priorities in light of the emergencies resulting from the contextual analysis.
The problem of determining priorities in the context of scarce resources is then
addressed by the evaluation of efficiency and equity of interventions.
The efficiency ratio measures the reduction of the rate of decay per unit of
monetary spending, whereas the index of justice measures the relationship between
social disadvantage and financial implementation features such as discomfort
(Figs. 10.2 and 10.3).
Fig. 10.2 An example of geographic context of the historic center of the town subdivided for
census sections
Fig. 10.3 The table of effects in terms of incidence of costs for each intervention (economic
criterion) for each sections (alternative)
Sharing Effects in Light of Equalisation
The construction of the indices of efficiency and fairness is therefore equivalent to a

standard correlation between costs and the results of multicriteria analysis in light of
some indication from the literature, which cross in new ways the analysis of the
break-even point (Morano and Tajani 2013).
104 C.M. Torre
Fig. 10.4 Table of effects in terms of incidence costs for each social condition of the households
(social criterion) for each sections (alternative)
The bands in Fig. 10.4 identified in the diagram take into account the trade-off,
and then there is indifference to choose between situations of greater physical
degradation and situations of the greatest social problems in terms of equal financial
resources used. The indifference is given by the ratio of value of each one to the other
with the purpose of the expenditure of financial resources (Figs. 10.5 and 10.6).
The second table shows the sections that have simultaneously high values of the
efficiency index and the index of fairness (equity efficiency in the diagram are
identified by the points belonging to the first and second band of the graph), for
which the amount is interventions is still estimated at approximately 550,000 euros.
The choice made on the basis of the second priority list allows one to intervene
with the same resources employed in a greater number of areas than those related to
the first priority list, thus obtaining the best distributions of effects while looking at
efficiency as well as fairness and justice. The final evaluation is based on the
definition of an “efficiency index” and an index of justice.
Fig. 10.5 A first example of priority: the highest discomfort (horizontal axis) on the highest decay
(vertical axis)
Fig. 10.6 A second example of priority: ratios of refurbishment to expenditure and social justice
to expenditure
A further comparison between the two approaches can be inferred from the
comparison between the mean values of the index of the two types of intervention.
Again, note that the first mode of decision favours mainly effectiveness because
the index of physical degradation is the only one to take into account the value of
the first hypothesis, which is greater than that assumed in the second hypothesis
(64/100 vs. 50/100).
The changes in the index of social disadvantage does not seem relevant in the
transition from one approach to another (reaching the value of 54/100).
In the second approach, ultimately the mean values of the indexes of efficiency
and equity, as related to the areas affected by the intervention, are greater than those
assumed in the first approach (respectively 0.88 vs. 0.81 and 1.18 vs. 0.7).
Final Remarks
In conclusion, the study shows how the opportunity to explain the rationale based
on the principles of effectiveness, efficiency, and equity help to improve the
character of the decision context. Even without ambitious and impossible hopes for
compensatory approaches (Arrow 1973), it is clear that the positive contribution of
integrated assessment approaches to decision making provide an advantage in terms
of accountability for choice (Fusco Girard 2010).
106 C.M. Torre
In fact, they compare two priorities that both take into account the need for
legitimacy, but they are based on different principles. In this situation, transparency
is fundamental to support the comparison between political views. This promises a
dimension of “ethics” in institutional assessment as well as considers a general
perspective of sustainability of choice.
References
Archibugi F (2002) La città ecologica. Urbanistica e sostenibilità, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino

Arrow KJ (1973) Social choice and individual values. Wiley, New York
Ciaramella A (2002) Facility manganement: problemi, esperienze e prospettive. Elementi
introduttivi. In: Tronconi O, Ciaramella A and Pisani B (eds) La gestione di edifici e patrimoni
immobiliari. Edizioni Il Sole 24 Ore, Milano
Donolo C (2004) Regolazioni appropriate per i beni culturali. In: Baia Curioni S, Nepoti P (eds) La
valutazione dei progetti culturali. Egea, Milano
Fusco Girard L (2010) Sustainability, creativity, resilience: toward new development strategies of
port areas through evaluation processes. Int J Sustain Dev 13:161–184
Hausman DM, McPherson MS (1993) taking ethics seriously: economics and contemporary moral
philosophy. J Econ Lit 31(2):671–731
Khakee A (1998) Evaluation and planning: inseparable concepts. Town Plann Rev 64:359–374
Morano P, Tajani F (2013) Break even analysis for the financial verification of urban regeneration
projects. Appl Mech Mat 438–439:1830–1835. Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland
Morano P, Tajani F (2014) Bare ownership evaluation. Hedonic price model vs. artificial neural
network. Int J Bus Intell Data Min 8(4):340–362. Inderscience Publishers, Olney, U.K
Roy B (1985) Metodologie d’Aide a la Decision. Economica, Parigi
Torre C, Perchinunno P, Rotondo F (2013) Estimates of housing costs and housing difficulties: an
application on Italian metropolitan areas. In: Kis Szilrd, Balogh Istvan (eds) Housing, housing
costs and mortgages: trends, impact and prediction. Nova Science, New York
Chapter 11
A Systematic Analysis of Benefits
and Costs of Projects for the Valorization
of Cultural Heritage
Francesco Tajani and Pierluigi Morano
Abstract In the selection phase of the projects to be implemented through the support
of EU funding, different solutions are frequently evaluated by the decision-maker
through cost benefit analysis. This chapter explores some methodological and oper-
ational aspects of this valuation technique with specific reference to initiatives aimed
at enhancing the cultural heritage in historical centers. Therefore, the preparatory
phase to the implementation of cost–benefit analysis is discussed in terms of identi-
fication of the economic impacts (positive and negative) generated by projects for the
valorization of cultural resources; at the same time, the procedures best suited for the
estimation of the input and output terms ordinarily connected with the interventions on
historical and architectural heritage are classified and explained. The study developed
represents useful technical support for operators who are preparing to plan and
evaluate interventions for the redevelopment of cultural heritage.
Keywords Cost benefit analysis

Cultural heritage
Valorization projects

Deadweight effect Opportunity cost Willingness to pay
Introduction
The current economic crisis and the devastating effects that soil sealing has had on
the climate as well as the ecosystem (Houghton and Goodale 2004; European
Environment Agency 2010; Lorencová et al. 2012) have been directing the policies
The work must be attributed in equal part to the two authors.
F. Tajani (&) P. Morano

Department of Science of Civil Engineering and Architecture,
Polytechnic University of Bari (Italy), Via Orabona, 4, 70125 Bari, Italy
e-mail: francescotajani@yahoo.it
P. Morano
e-mail: pierluigi.morano@poliba.it

108 F. Tajani and P. Morano
of major European countries toward more careful management of available

resources.
In this context, the theme of recovery and enhancement of degraded and/or
abandoned historical centers are taking a central role. The redevelopment of these
areas is associated with the opportunity to preserve and strengthen the identity and
traditions of local communities; the ability to enhance entire urban contexts with
positive effects on the surrounding areas thanks to the increase in real estate values;
and the opportunity to activate economic impacts on the territory due to the mul-
tiplier effect originated by investments in the construction sector and by the increase
in tourism.
The European Framework Program for Research and Innovation (Horizon
2020), in particular, points out the positive effects that may result from the val-
orization of the cultural heritage present in historical centers as a synthesis of the
traditional passive protection of these assets—which has proved to be unfit as well
as financially unsustainable for the public—and their “productive” use through
modalities compatible with their nature and vocation (Giddings et al. 2002). In this
sense, cultural heritage has proved to be a great engine of sustainable economic
growth. Indeed, the increase in the level of education and income, the increased
availability of leisure time, and the improvement of transport and communication
services have facilitated the “consumption” of cultural goods in recent years
(Bedate et al. 2004). Several studies have shown that psychological factors, e.g.,
entertainment, education, “escape” from monotony, and opportunity to spend time
with family, are a major push to benefit from cultural heritage (Guha 2009). In
addition to improving the level of education of individuals, cultural tourism is a
source of wealth and jobs (Herrero 1997; Dziembowska and Funck 2000). To this
must be added that fighting urban filtering and degradation of the man-made
environment, the valorization of cultural heritage promotes urban regeneration and
improves the quality of life (Pearce 1998; Del Saz Salazar and Montagud Marques
2005).
When they compete for public funding, valorization projects of cultural heritage
are evaluated using cost–benefit analysis (CBA). Since 2000, the European
Cohesion Policy regulations require a CBA of all major investment projects
applying for assistance from the Structural Funds, the Cohesion Fund, and the
Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (European Union. Regional Policy 2008).
The CBA consists of a set of rules to guide the choices of the public
decision-maker among various intervention options. Guided by the objectives to be
pursued (e.g., an increase in aggregate consumption, employment, level of quality
of life, etc.), the CBA compares the positive and negative effects generated by the
realization as well as the management of the project. In this way, it is possible to
discern between the possible options the solution that can determine the largest “net
benefits,” which are taken as a consistent reflection of the preferences expressed by
collectivity.
Implementation of the CBA goes through two complementary phases: financial
analysis and economic analysis. Financial analysis aims to check whether the
project “pays for itself” and must be performed from the point of view of the private
11 A Systematic Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Projects … 109
entrepreneur. Therefore, it compares the costs and the revenues of the initiative and
checks if the revenues exceed or at least match the costs. Economic analysis, in
turn, is aimed at evaluation of the project from the point of view of the collectivity,
that is, to assess all of the costs and the benefits that the initiative generates not only
for the operator responsible for the management of the project but for the entire
community.
The effects produced over the economic life of the investment—or during the
period of analysis as defined by other criteria—in order to be compared should be
calculated in monetary terms and should be reported through a discount operation at
the same time that is the time of reference of the evaluation.
In all cases, the use of CBA requires the identification and preventive deter-
mination of the economic items generated by the valorization projects of cultural
resources. This is the objective of the present work, which also classifies, through
procedures of monetary quantification, the input and output items ordinarily related
to intervention on historical and architectural heritage.
Classification of Benefits and Costs
CBA allows one to verify the convenience of an investment by computing the

monetary difference between the incoming items (benefits) and the outgoing terms
(costs) produced by the project during the period of analysis.
For projects aimed at the enhancement of cultural heritage, the positive effects
(i.e., benefits), and the negative effects (i.e., costs) are listed in Fig. 11.1. They are
divided into direct and indirect and then specified in Fig. 11.2 together with the
valuation approaches recognized as being more appropriate to their monetary
quantification.
The direct effects coincide with the goods and services produced or consumed
by the entity that manages the investment. The indirect effects represent the
increments or decrements of production of goods and services that occur in other
areas as a result of the investment (FORMEZ 1992).
Fig. 11.1 Classification of benefits and costs in the valorization of cultural heritage
Fig. 11.2 Benefits and costs in the valorization of cultural heritage items and estimation
procedures
Direct Benefits
Direct benefits are given by the value of goods and services produced as a result of
the implementation of the project and include avoided damages to the system with
the realization of the intervention. In the valorization of cultural heritage, these
benefits can be divided into three groups: sales benefits, employment benefits, and
cultural benefits.
The former coincide with the increase in turnover following the regime in the
project. The benefits, expressed in financial terms in the economic analysis, should
be adjusted for the amounts returning to the state.
The transition from financial items to corresponding economic items is carried

out through conversion factors (Pennisi and Scandizzo 2003), which modify the
financial amounts of the sums; these amounts, although representing a cost to the
individual trader, are not a real misappropriation of resources for the community
because they are transfers between the groups that compose it (the state, the pro-
moter of the intervention, funders, users, etc.). Examples of these transfers include
interest expense on capital borrowed, direct and/or indirect taxes (VAT, taxes on
labor and company incomes, tax on the use of energy products), and social charges
for labor employed in the project.
The employment benefits are represented by the shadow wage rate, which can be
defined as the “opportunity cost of labor.” This is the “value of production and
leisure time that has been given up in order to employ the labor factor in the
project” (Pennisi and Scandizzo 2003). In the literature, the formulas proposed for
the estimation of these benefits are considerably complex (Kirkpatrick and
MacArthur 1990). The logic that underlies it can be explained by considering that,
in transferring a work force from one job to another (i.e., the job required by the
project in valuation), the collectivity bears a cost equal to the value of the “lost”
product that would have been generated in the previous employment. In this way,
the shadow wage rate results in an application of the principle of opportunity cost:
The benefit related to the new employment can be determined as the difference
between the new salary and the salary that would have been perceived by the same
workers in the absence of the project. The balance is given by the net benefit, which
becomes maximum in the employ of jobless workers.
Cultural benefits represent the increase, due to the realization of the project, of
free access and access with reduced rates in a cultural asset. These facilities express
the educational purpose conferred by the collectivity to cultural heritage. The
quantification of these benefits requires the application of willingness to pay. The
community, in order to obtain a cultural growth of the population, agrees to support
—or, more precisely, is “willing to pay”—a cost equal to the revenues that would
have resulted if all of the users have paid the full ticket price. In a prior evaluation,
the procedure is as follows:
1. Through market analysis (Baez and Herrero 2012), the willingness to pay of
ordinary visitors attracted by the intervention to be realized is estimated. The
price of the ticket is fixed according to the willingness to pay measured; and
2. The percentage of visitors who will benefit from the free access and reduced
rates are programmed;
3. The number of visitors with free access is multiplied by the price of the regular
ticket (P) established based on the result of step no. 1, i.e., the number of visitors
with reduced rates is multiplied by the difference between P and the rate actually
paid. The sum of these two amounts corresponds to the total cultural benefits
determined by the investment being valued.
In the case of post evaluation, the procedure requires some checks. Despite the
availability of the data required by step no. 2, there are some uncertainties about the
willingness to pay corresponding to a prior evaluation. In fact, in the period after
implementation of the project, the use of the cultural resource may have changed
the perception of its value in the collectivity. Effective marketing of the cultural
asset may also have generated a widening of the spatial horizon of interest of the
cultural asset valorized. Therefore, the assessment of cultural benefits requires a
new estimate of the willingness to pay depending also on a modified catchment area
of the cultural asset.
It should also be recalled that in all cases, the residual value of the works
realized is to consider the direct benefits. This is generally determined as a per-
centage of the economic costs of investment. This percentage is a function of the
extraordinary maintenance to be carried out periodically on the cultural asset.
Indirect Benefits
Indirect benefits consist of the increase in income recorded in the activities related
to the implementation of the project. They correspond to the “added” value gen-
erated by the project on the surrounding context (Navrud and Ready 2002), i.e., the
difference between higher revenues and lower costs achieved by the implementation
of the project in sectors collateral to the main one (the reference sector of the
project).
A known method for the estimation of indirect benefits is based on the input
output matrix: This is an accounting framework that allows one to measure, in
monetary terms, the effects of activation on each sector of the economic system due
to the increased aggregate demand in a specific production sector. Use of the
methodology described ensures greater effectiveness when interventions in analysis
can produce impacts on very wide communities. The specificity of every inter-
vention for the enhancement of cultural heritage, regardless of the peculiarities of
the reference territory of the project, requires the valuator to carry out investigations
that integrate the information derived from the input output matrix and lead to
results consistent with local experience. These investigations shall be carried out by
analyzing interventions similar to the project to be assessed, realized in the past on
the same cultural asset or on other resources comparable with it, so that the evi-
dence of comparison is brought to light. The comparison is carried out on the basis
of the type of intervention in analysis, the accessibility of the site, the importance of
the cultural asset, the presence of other attractions (cultural and otherwise) in the
area, etc.
An alternative procedure to the input output matrices, although it is characterized
by a greater simplification, can be performed by separating the estimation of
indirect benefits that are specific and prevalent in the sector under analysis. For
cultural heritage, these benefits include touristic benefits, capital benefits, and
promotional benefits.
The touristic benefits can be divided into three categories: employment benefits
in the tourism sector; benefits from employment expenditure due to the added value
induced on the local economy by the expenditure of new employees; and benefits
from tourist expenditure, corresponding to the higher added value of the touristic
sector and of related sectors.
Employment benefits are estimated as described previously for the analogous
direct benefits with reference to the sector of the project.
The growth of added value induced in the local economy by the expenditure of
new workers (benefits from employment expenditure) is related to the employment
benefits. The quantification of this additional impact is performed with the method
of the effects (Nuti 1984), which allows one to determine increases in added value
triggered in different economic sectors by multiplicative mechanisms of the
expenditure attributable to new employees.
The method of the effects is also applied to determine benefits from tourist
expenditure. The size of the increased expenditure due to the growth in the number
of visitors required to establish the number of fast tourists (Nfast), i.e., those which
are limited to daily visits, attracted by the development of new functions, and/or the
enhancement of cultural heritage; the average expenditure of fast tourists (Expfast)
for the purchase of goods and services during the visit; the number of slow tourists
(Nslow) or visitors who stay in the area where the cultural resource invested by the
intervention in analysis is located; and the average expenditure of slow tourists
(Expslow), i.e., the average number of overnight stays (nights) of a slow tourist.
Collecting the data through a survey in the area of intervention, the benefits from
tourist expenditure (Btourist_exp) result from Eq. 11.1 is as follows:
Btourist exp ¼ Nfast Expfast þ Nslow Expslow nights ð11:1Þ
A second component of the benefits from tourist expenditure is related to the

financial resources used by private entrepreneurs in the building and/or the
enlargement of hotels and accommodation services after the valorization of cultural
heritage. The benefits are commensurate with the private expenditure for the con-
struction and the opening and/or the modernization of facilities and services, and
they are also related to the increase of employment obtainable in the different steps
of implementation of the private expenditure.
This procedure should be refined in relation to the deadweight effect, which is
given by the percentage of investment and employment that would be activated by
the private entrepreneurs even in the absence of interventions on the cultural her-
itage being valued (Brancati 2001; Lenihan 2003). The evaluation of the dead-
weight effect becomes particularly mandatory where public funding has been
granted to the private sector for the development of infrastructure and services:
These forms of public support generate a leverage effect on the expenditure of the
entrepreneurs’ beneficiaries of these contributions. The substitution effect that
results is captured through interviews with local operators, which reveal how public
funding has influenced the investment decision of entrepreneurs and determines
whether the private expenditure would have been activated even without the aid of
public funds. The final benefit generated by the projects being valued is, therefore,
the costs of investment incurred by private entrepreneurs net the amount of
expenditure justified by the contribution of publish funds.
Capital benefits are given by the increase in market values of properties close to
the cultural asset invested by the project. For the estimation of these benefits, in the
literature the hedonic price method is recommended, which is based on the
assumption that the market value of a property is a function of a set of intrinsic
parameters (specific to the property) and extrinsic characteristics (positional).
Therefore, the characteristic “close to a cultural asset” is identified as an explana-
tory variable of the market value of a property. When a mathematical function
relating the price to the explanatory variables is found, it is possible to predict the
change in market values of properties located in the area of cultural assets invested
by the enhancement project (Morano and Tajani 2013).
Promotional benefits are given by the growth of imagine of the area in which the
cultural asset is situated, mainly due to the publicity of the interventions realized.
The value of these benefits can be measured in terms of opportunity cost estimating
the expenditure that would have been incurred to obtain the same advertising
impact for the area (spaces in newspapers and magazines, television spots in cul-
tural programs, advertising of the events on the Web, radio, posters, etc.). The
expenses for the promotion of the investments realized on the cultural resource are
the saved costs to advertise the area.
Direct Costs
Direct costs are given by the value of goods and services used, or destroyed, for the
construction, maintenance, and operation of all the works, both public and private,
involved in the project. They include investment costs, operating costs, costs of
nonuse of the cultural asset by visitors due to restoration works, costs of wear, and
costs of reducing the enjoyment of the cultural resource due to the excessive
crowding of visitors.
Investment costs correspond to the expenditure needed for physical recovery, for
restoration, or for art shows, ceremonies, etc., in the cultural resource, i.e., for
marketing activities necessary to promote the initiatives realized in the cultural
asset. The quantification of these costs is carried out through the drafting of a bill of
quantities (synthetic or analytical) and correcting the results through appropriate
conversion factors.
Operating costs include items of expenditure relating to utilities, salaries of
employees, ordinary and extraordinary maintenance, and other fees necessary for
the normal functioning of the cultural asset. Each of these amounts should be
revised through the more suitable conversion factors.
The costs of nonuse of the cultural resource can be determined in two ways:
through the calculation of lost revenues or by using the criterion of willingness to
pay.
The first method is used when the resource invested by cultural restoration is
closed to the public or is accessible but at a reduced ticket price because of sub-
stantial and prolonged restructuring activities. The direct social cost that results is
estimated by determining, taking account of visitors recorded in normal operating

conditions, the decrease in the entire proceeds.
The second procedure is instead applied in the case in which, although con-
servation actions of the resource are in progress, it can largely be visited, and thus
the ticket price is not changed. An example is a museum for which only one entry
has been closed due to work in progress. Another example is a museum in which
scaffolding for the renovation of the external plaster, or for the restoration of the
frescoes in some salons, has been set up. In these cases, the only negative effect that
occurs is a decrease in visitors. Therefore, with direct investigation, each inter-
viewee is asked whether they would be willing to pay to take advantage of the
cultural property in its entirety is asked. Obtained with statistical processing, the
willingness to pay/per capita, i.e., the total costs of nonuse is given by the per-capita
share of willingness to pay, is multiplied by the average number of users that in the
absence of the works would have visited the cultural resource.
COSTS of wear follow the interventions of valorization of the cultural resource.
They correspond to the physical deterioration to which the cultural asset will be
subject due to the increased number of visitors. The wear will manifest, for
example, as the deterioration of flooring, plaster, and paint because of
thermo-hygrometric impacts. These impacts can be quantified as the expenditure for
further restoration of the damaged areas of the resource.
Costs of reducing the enjoyment are estimated through the criterion of willing-
ness to pay. Therefore, the value attributed by collectivity to leisure time “sub-
tracted” from the length of time it takes to visit the cultural property is estimated by
(1) determining the increase in time taken to complete the visit; (2) giving to the
“wasted” free time a unit value derived from direct analysis (interviews) conducted
on a representative sample of the population of visitors; or (3) multiplying the
values of steps no. 1 and 2 for the ordinary number of visitors to the cultural
resource.
Indirect Costs
Indirect costs of the project are identified by the value of the resources consumed in
the sectors collateral to the sector of intervention in order to implement the
investments made necessary or desirable by the realization of the main project.
Indirect costs are then an expression of the major expenses incurred in the activities
and economic sectors situated “close” to the sector invested by the project under
analysis. The prevalent categories are urban costs and social costs of employment.
Urban costs occur during the construction phase with the increase of urban
congestion and higher levels of noise and air pollution as well as during the
management phase with the possible increase of tourist flows respect to the capacity
of existing urban services.
The cost related to the increase in urban congestion is determined through the
principle of opportunity cost. The net hourly wage that the average citizen, a
resident in the area of intervention, perceives is estimated. The result of the estimate
is then multiplied by the time lost in the traffic generated by the project in analysis.
The costs for pollution damage may be evaluated using the criterion of will-
ingness to pay (or accept) or through opportunity cost. In the first case, direct
surveys are carried out to determine the quantity of money that the interviewees
would be willing to pay to avoid the damage or, alternatively, the sum of money
they would be ready to accept as compensation for the impacts caused. Through the
opportunity cost, pollution damage is instead quantified by measuring the additional
costs to be incurred to remove the dust produced or, considering additional
expenses, to limit dust generation during the realization of the intervention.
In addition, the decrease in the efficiency of urban services, such as transport,
waste collection, etc., caused by the excess of tourist flows on the load capacity of
the area can be estimated by the opportunity cost by evaluating the costs required to
restore the conditions of normal operation of the urban system.
The social costs of employment are concerned, on one hand, with the produc-
tivity that new employees would have realized if they had not been taken from the
previous employment (an effect that has already been taken into account in esti-
mating the employment benefits); on the other hand, they include, for substantial
investments, the expenditure items that the community must bear for migration and
urbanization. However, this component of the social costs of employment is esti-
mated by computing the economic amounts necessary to realize infrastructure and
urban services from which the new employees will benefit.
A final consideration should be made with reference to the evaluation of social
costs related to possible loss of human lives or permanent disabilities caused by
accidents at work. Several authors agree in estimating these costs on the basis of the
expenditure required to offset the potential “risk” that the event may occur and not
according to the actual sums to compensate for deaths and disabilities (Mishan
1974). Therefore, it is necessary to assess the statistic value of life estimated with
reference to the criterion of the willingness to pay to reduce the risk or the criterion
of the willingness to accept for the risk assumption. In theory, reasoning in terms of
willingness to pay, the monetary costs borne by each individual, both privately and
as a member of a community, to preserve the own physical and mental integrity
should be quantified. These costs, however, are already incurred by the community
in specific sectors. Therefore, even if the criterion of the willingness to accept was
used, the increase of remuneration expected by workers to accept a greater risk
should be estimated. However, even this component is incorporated into the
financial costs of labor employed in the construction of the project, costs ordinarily
already differentiated according to the dangerousness of the various work tasks.
Conclusions
The over-exploitation of territory between the postwar period and the beginning of
the 1980s has left obvious signs in the collective consciousness leading to a strong
appreciation of the link between citizens and local traditions, of which cultural
heritage is the testimony.
Despite this, the potentialities of cultural heritage are still substantially unex-
pressed such that public administrations and experts agree on the need to identify
the best compromise between the preservation of the physical conditions of cultural
heritage and its valorization.
In this context, the role of liaison between the two above requirements has been
recognized in the economic evaluation of projects while, in the presence of public
funding, the CBA has been entrusted with providing decision support in evaluating
and selecting the alternatives of intervention.
This chapter explores some methodological and operational aspects of this
evaluation technique with specific reference to the interventions of valorization of
cultural resources. Through the identification of the main items of cash flows and
detailed description of the procedures most suitable for their quantification, the
potentialities of a methodology with great effectiveness are highlighted. In this
sense, the present work identifies a study to support operators who are preparing to
plan and evaluate interventions for the valorization of cultural heritage. The chapter
illustrates a wide range of aspects that can be investigated in this category of
projects by clarifying the operational procedures in order to provide useful indi-
cators to rationalize the decision-making process.
In the terms described, CBA is a subsidiary tool for the spread of sustainable
tourism and protection of the landscape. These goals are part of the priorities
identified in the strategy of the World Bank so that the role of cultural heritage in
modern economies, both advanced and developing, has been enhanced and
consolidated.
References
Baez A, Herrero LC (2012) Using contingent valuation and cost benefit analysis to design a policy
for restoring cultural heritage. J Cultural Herit 13(3):235–245
Bedate A, Herrero LC, Sanz JA (2004) Economic valuation of the cultural heritage: application to
four case studies in Spain. J Cultural Herit 5:101–111
Brancati R (2001) Analisi e metodologie per la valutazione delle politiche industriali. Collana
Associazione Italiana di Valutazione. Franco Angeli, Milano
Del Saz Salazar S, Montagud Marques J (2005) Valuing cultural heritage: the social benefits of
restoring an old Arab tower. J Cultural Herit 6(1):69–77
Dziembowska J, Funck R (2000) Cultural activities as a location factor in European competition
between regions: concepts and some evidence. Ann Reg Sci 34:1–12
European Environment Agency (2010) The European Environment. State and Outlook 2010,
Copenhagen
European Union. Regional Policy (2008) Gu to Cost Benefit Analysis of Investment projects
FORMEZ (1992) Economia dei beni culturali. Programmazione e valutazione dell’intervento
pubblico per progetti. Quaderni Regionali, Napoli
Giddings B, Hopwood B, O’brien G (2002) Environment, economy and society: fitting them
together into sustainable development. Sustain Dev 10(4):187–196
Guha S (2009) Motivational push factors for visiting reenactment sites, Master thesis 3704, San
Jose State University. Retrieved 4 June 2012
Herrero LC (1997) Economía de la Cultura y el Ocio. Nuevas posibilidades para la Política
Económica Regional, Mercurio. Revista de Economía y Empresa 1:101–118
Houghton RA, Goodale CL (2004) Effects of land-change on the carbon balance of terrestrial
ecosystems. Ecosyst Land Use Change Geophys Monogr Ser 153:85–98
Kirkpatrick CH, MacArthur JD (1990) Shadow pricing unemployed labour in developed
economies: an approach to estimation. Project Apprais 5(2):101–112
Lenihan H (2003) Estimating Deadweight and Displacement in Enterprise Ireland Assisted
Companies using two Methodological Approaches. In: Paper presented at the 43rd Congress of
the European Regional Science Association (ERSA) Jyvaskyla, Finland, 27–30 August 2003
Lorencovà E, Frelichovà J, Nelson E, Vackà D (2012) Past and future impacts of land use and
climate change on agricultural ecosystem services in the Czech Republic. Elsevier
Mishan EJ (1974) L’Analisi Costi–Benefici. ETAS libri
Morano P, Tajani F (2013) Bare ownership evaluation. Hedonic price model vs. Artificial neural
network. Int J Bus Intell Data Mining 8(4):340–362
Navrud S, Ready RC (2002) Valuing cultural heritage. Applying environmental valuation
techniques to historic buildings, monuments and artifacts. Edward Elgar Publishing, Oxford
Nuti F (1984) L’analisi costi-benefici. Il Mulino, Bologna
Pearce D (1998) Cost benefit analysis and environmental policy. Oxford Rev Econ Policy 14
(4):84–100
Pennisi G, Scandizzo PL (2003) Valutare l’incertezza. L’analisi costi benefici nel XXI secolo.
Giappichelli Editore, Torino
Part IV
A New Approach to the Management
of Cultural Territorial Systems:
Integrated Cultural Territorial Plans
Chapter 12
Participation and Integrated Cultural
Territorial Plans
Claudia Piscitelli
Abstract Nowadays, the participation is an essential part of an urban regeneration

process, moreover in the case of the historic centres, in which the inhabitants and
their traditions and intangible heritage are an inner part of the value of that urban
setting. Starting from structuring a cognitive framework before planning the
implementations, the participation process tries to involve all the stakeholders—
moreover the inhabitants—in order to collect scientific as well as popular knowl-
edge. The process has to continue during the decisional phase, in which the par-
ticipation has to turn into the participative democracy. This chapter analyzes this
several phases of participation, focusing on the numerous conflicts generated,
especially when the issues of the inhabitant clash with the economic profit—it
happens more frequently in the most sensitive as well as attractive areas—both
essential for the future of an historic centre.
Keywords Cultural territorial plans Participation in planning Social

development
Introduction
Historic centers have long been places of difficult conflicts among numerous
stakeholders as well as city dwellers. After all, the same concepts of restoration and
renewal lend themselves to many controversial interpretations, in some cases
making different physical and social implementations difficult. Even if the first steps
of a participative process are ascribable to experiences a time far in the past, (see
Chap. 19), historic centers are still nowadays a reason for conflicts and problems
C. Piscitelli (&)
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture,
Polytechnic University of Bari (Italy), Via Orabona 4, 70125 Bari, Italy

122 C. Piscitelli
linked to their regeneration and new functions. Indeed, in the European practices of
the last decades, the role of several stakeholders—including the ones considered
“weak, that is who belongs to a local community and who doesn’t express a high
ability to represent their interests” (Ecosfera 2001)—has become increasingly
important due to the awareness of the necessary interaction among several actors to
obtain efficient restoration and regeneration actions. This interaction affects the
cognitive phase as well as the decisional one with regard to development directions
and strategic choices about the future of an essential part of the city.
A Shared Cognitive Structure
Participation has become a significant part of the process of regeneration and

requalification of historic centers especially during the first steps, in which technical
and administrative actors must achieve an in-depth knowledge of the intrinsic
features of that part of the city, which is the result of the stratifications of centuries
of history. The inhabitants are certainly the ones qualified to speak about its her-
itage. Participation during this phase consists of an ambivalent exchange of
information useful to draw a general framework about the history of the settlement,
its relationship with the context and the landscape, as well as its current conditions
from the physical, social, and economic points of view. Indeed, a planning process
that looks for the efficacy of its provisions must identify the peculiarities of that
territory not only by reading the most evident and current ones but also classifying,
representing, and acting with regard to the historical, stratified, and sometimes
hidden elements. The hardest work will be about the less-evident elements, i.e.,
rebuilding not only the formal and punctual aspects but also revealing their rela-
tionships, the belonging to wider systems, the conditions of use of the territory, and
the settlement whom they represent and transmit. Thus, it is evident that there is a
need to organize a multidisciplinary system of knowledge finalized to the planning
process, in which each discipline continuously changes its methods to make them
comparable with the ones belonging to different disciplines. That is more evident in
the case of minor historic centers due to their stronger interaction with the rest of the
settlement as well as the territorial landscape, in which they are, or were, set in an
integrated and interactive way.
According to Carta (1999), it is indispensable to organize a “territorial cognitive
armour,” which should include, organize, and make clear all of the elements that
constitute the complex territorial space. Following this kind of knowledge, the
identification of the territorial immovable elements would be like an instrument able
to identify and often solve, or at least reduce, the territorial conflict between
negotiability and non-negotiability. The way to guarantee the effectiveness of a
multidisciplinary and territorial action-oriented knowledge base is made by a sys-
temic and hypertext approach that is able to produce knowledge in the action
(cognitive action) and action in the knowledge (operational action) (Carta 1999).
12 Participation and Integrated Cultural Territorial Plans 123
Furthermore, it is required to think hard about codes of developing, learning, and

conveying the widespread knowledge of the common awareness. Besio (2002) says
that local knowledge, instead of the technical one, which involves explanation and
prevision, is action-oriented. Common sense has its own codes and languages,
which are often behavioural; it does not need to be codified by rules or documents;
it has practice reasons and it spreads through interpersonal relationships; and it is
possible to learn it also through models of collective behaviour, which pass down
by links of belonging to a specific community.
This action-oriented knowledge is a consequence of an instant vision of a
synthesis created by repetitive relation with places and objects and is rarely passed
down in an explicit way. It is valid just only in its own local conditions; its
identification allows one to understand the deep meaning of each place, and it is not
universal neither generalizable. On the other hand, scientific knowledge is analytic
and made by several layers, which often are not overlappable, but they have the
same codes and languages everywhere. Knowledge tries to cancel the individual
features of places and things in order to explain principles and general tendencies
les. Knowledge has prevented us from understanding that each characteristic local
element could become a spreading innovation, crossing and going beyond indi-
vidual gains. Indeed, the landscape images given by the local knowledge show a
complex and structured vision of the whole territory that goes beyond the obvi-
ousness of each singular feature (Besio et al. 1999). From this point of view, it
becomes necessary to have a strong interaction between the local and popular
knowledge and the scientific knowledge, in other words, between the population
and the technicians: the first ones representing the identity and individuality of the
place, and the second ones able to translate and put the knowledge into a framework
and methodology that can translate the analysis into actions.
Participation as a Legal Obligation
Awareness of the need for a permanent and productive dialogue between techni-
cians and a population, i.e., as the first steps of the planning process, seems (at least
from a formal point of view) to be an integrated part of the regeneration and
valorization process of historic centers at all institutional levels. Various laws and
guidelines about participation—from the Manuel Européen de la Partecipation
(2006) to several national, regional, and local laws that define participation as an
obligatory and necessary part of the process but often fail how to enact this or to
determine its specific objectives—have demonstrated this to be so. The risk consists
of reducing participation to a formal procedure, thus effectively depriving the
process. Many Italian regional laws have gone in that direction: They have often
interpreted participation as transparency of processes and spread of information
through more evident visibility, extended communication, and, as a consequence,
observations and remarks by the population. The Regional Law no. 20/2000
“General legislation about the safeguard and use of the territory” of the Lombardia
124 C. Piscitelli
Region speaks about a consultation of social and economic associations. The

Regional Law no. 19/2002 “Regulation about safeguard, governance and use of the
territory” of the Calabria Region speaks about “consulting the economic and social
stakeholders, […] the professional categories” guaranteeing “the simplification of
the administrative process,” “the transparency of the decisional processes,” and “the
participation of the citizens in making decisions which affect the quality of the
development and the use of the environmental resources.” Indeed, it obligates one
to guarantee “specific forms of advertise in order to safeguard of the gains which
are involved, even the ones which concern the population.” The Urban Law no.
25/2001 of the Lazio Region identifies participation as a tool able to improve the
quality of decisions made “as well as the highest level of participation of the
authorities, socio-economic organizations, citizens associations, with characteristics
as diffusion, continuity and structure.” These examples, as well as consecutive
specific laws about participation (some of them are currently in progress) demon-
strate the attempt to include participative practices in the planning process even if it
is in general and not-so-operative terms.
On the contrary, the approach of Manuel Européen de la Partecipation, made by
the Urban-Partecipando Network and taken as a model at the international level, is
more actionable due to the several real experiences noticed, which concern different
contexts, cultures, and socioeconomic conditions. In fact, a difficulty that is found
in legislation as participation, both in research and in manuals, refers to its own
inability to generalize rules and techniques that can be applied even in highly
different contexts. Hence, the need to resort often to standard worst practices in
similar contexts or the one in question rather than to patterns of action that are
“prepackaged” and inflexible to the needs of individual cases.
The Decisional Phase: From Participation to Participative

Democracy
Despite numerous laws, manuals, guidelines, etc. that have been prepared, dis-
seminated, and published on the subject, in reality numerous participatory practices
have proven, and continue to be, often unsuccessful with only partial or ineffective
involvements. The trend of recent decades has seen the transition from involvement
associable with the definition of Umberto Allegretti of “participation” to a more
inclusive practice, which can be defined as “participative democracy.” Indeed,
participation implies that the “relationship between the community and the
Institutions, in order to have a direct expression of the first one in the action
processes of the second ones. […] The meaning consists on one hand in the
representation of gains already recognized, on the other hand in the research by the
institutions for the population approval in order to legitimate the actions of the
public managers” (Allegretti 2007). On the other hand, Allegretti underlines how in
participative democracy the subjects called to take part in the process are all the
citizens without distinction: It does not consider the participation of associations,

which usually have an exclusive or prevalent role, which does not guarantee ability
of action, influence, and cohesion.
Furthermore, participative democracy assumes a temporal and procedural
character (Allegretti 2007), instead of participation, that has a more punctual
character. A good result of this participatory planning may gush, therefore, by the
involvement of the community, which must remain unrestricted in the cognitive
phase as well as the construction of the framework of the technical and common
skills. It must continue during the operational and decision-making phases. It could
be possible that by applying methodologies, which include several social actors also
passing from the analytic step to the project one, there can be originations of shared
proposals of social and spatial transformation. All of the choices must be flexible in
order to modify them in the applicative and monitoring phases, unique moments in
which we can appreciate the real effect of the implementations on the territory and
validate their efficiency. From this point of view, Giovanni Allegretti (2006) well
synthesizes the necessary conditions to make an effective participative plan:
1. The existence of the financial dimension as well as the reading of the territorial
priorities;
2. The process must not be restricted to a “neighborhood,” but it must be extended
to all the territory;
3. The existence of a “cycling” repetition rather then a unique and singular event
per year;
4. The existence of “deliberative” and decisional moments;
5. The centrality of “feedback” moments given to citizens at the end of the process.
These conditions implicate elements that are more emphasized in the case of
implementation on a part of the city as the historic centres are. Thus, on one hand it
demonstrates that participation must have a territorial character. Indeed, the historic
centre, more than every other part of the city, cannot be considered only as a
property of the inhabitants or the economic stakeholder, who operate inside it;
rather it represents the identity and the history of whole the urban fabric: Indeed all
of the population must be able to enjoy it. Furthermore, interaction with the sur-
roundings is not restricted to the urban fabric: The mobility, the toponyms, and the
morphology are some of the signs of the relationship between historic centres and
the surrounding landscape, the countryside, the stretches of water, and the natural
environment.
These signs are nowadays recognizable or newfound, in any case to be valorized,
through a renewal action that is oriented to emphasize the identity of the place while
the regeneration also responds to current needs. Given the territorial nature of the
role that a historic center has played and continues to play, despite various and often
invasive transformations, the participative process must also be territorial. It is more
evident especially if the planning process includes a network of historic centers,
which become the key elements of the territorial-regeneration process (Loconte
2012).
126 C. Piscitelli
In addition, the aforementioned cyclicality and continuity of the process, from

the cognitive phase to the decisional one, along with the consequent phases of
“feedback” and monitoring, is highlighted. To achieve this goal, the planner has a
basic role. According to Robiglio, a member of the Avventura Urbana team, which
is an association for participative urban planning founded at the beginning of 1990s
and which counts many successful experiences, “to separate the participation and
the project implies a loss in term of ability of comprehension, both for the inhab-
itants and the planner” (Sclavi et al. 2002). The “Designer.” continues Robiglio,
“must be present all along the way, because what happens in the process is the
construction of a problem, not the identification of a problem.” Matteo Robiglio
also states that “the planner has to be present during all the process, because what
happens during the process is not the identification of a problem, but the con-
struction of a problem.” His or her role is far from the one of the “advocate”
planner, who defends the gains of the weakest part of the population in “advocacy
planning” (Davidoff 1965) as well as the one of the absolute impartial role of the
planner in the “planning for real” (Gibson 1991). Instead, the planner interacts with
a context whom he listens to and which listens to him, thus applying a “creative
management of the conflicts” (Paba 2003). As a result, he could completely change
his mind, compared with his first ideas, because of proposals arising from several
other subjects.
The planner has another important role: He must be an attractor before he is a
negotiator. In the current world, in which everyone feels stressed, everyone is in a
hurry and has no free time, so it is difficult to convince common people to use their
time to give their contribution, especially if there is no personal and immediate
profit. There is the risk of a partial involvement restricted to those who see some
opportunities of economic profits but who are not for sure accurate representative of
all the community. An important contribution could be made, for instance, by
young people, who are real sources of development but who often have been forced
to find a job and a future far from their city and their region. Nevertheless, recent
experiences promoted by regional and local public corporations have demonstrated
that it is possible to create a process of respectable restoration and regeneration as
well as competitive development by giving technical and financial support to the
creative ideas of local young people.
Also in this case, the obstinacy and continuity of the actions of public admin-
istrations are fundamental and are supported by technical experts, as is the use of
the ICT, which is an indispensable tool for knowledge, efforts, and proposals, as the
results of a participative democracy.
Participation in the Economic Dimension
Among the conditions mentioned by Allegretti, the “financial dimension” has a

fundamental role, which is once again more important in the case of the historic
centers due to the need of resources for physical implementation as well as
enterprises. The social dimension is also the most frequent cause of social conflicts.
If a part of the literature refers to dimensions of economic autonomy of commu-
nities and social sustainability, the reality often presents significantly adverse
conditions for this type of development.
In fact, these kinds of projects pursue the research of the sustainability of the
settlement as well as environmental rules, including the architectural, urban, terri-
torial, socioeconomic plan, rules, and relations, to produce an environmental
quality, which is the base for a “local auto-sustainable development,” according to
Magnaghi (2010). The terms “auto” and “local” underline the “necessity of
expressing the culture of the auto-government and care of the territory, in order to
not resort to macro-economic implementations or hyper-technologic machines,
instead producing the re-conquest by the inhabitants of the knowledge about how to
obtain the environmental and territorial quality—in a world with so many kinds of
development” (Magnaghi 2010). In this case, the concept of development refers to
the local society and its ability of self-governance in order to produce individual
and collective wellness (Becattini 2002).
These positions will probably appear—even more so in times of crisis such as
those currently being experienced by the Western world—quite radical, at the limit
of the utopia of a territory that is self-sustaining, outside the logic of the global
market. However, this idea becomes understandable when seen as a reaction to the
various destructions and denaturalization that many historic centers have suffered
during the implementation of recovery and rehabilitation measures. In many cases,
the sensitivity with regard to the communities and the identity and nature of the
place was almost nothing, according instead with a blind pursuit of profit by
entrepreneurs and traders, who, in taking advantage of substantial public resources
for operations of redevelopment, saw an opportunity to reap substantial gains by
under-evaluating some aspects with inherent respect and conservation.
In the last decades, many Italian municipalities have used for the rehabilitation of
historic centers European programs such as Urban I and Urban II, which bestowed
funds for the rehabilitation of degraded areas. In many cases it caused (according to
the management) the implementation of denaturalization of identity of the historical
centers in varying degrees. In some cases, the lack of respect for the identity and the
historicity of the place was almost absolute, especially in the centers of small size
and particularly attractive from the point of view of tourism for their natural and
architectural value. For example, the urban program in Bari, a town in southern
Italy with approximately 300,000 inhabitants, has been vital for the revival and
re-opening of the old town to the enjoyment of all people: In the past it was a
hotbed of crime and degradation, whereas today it has today one of the most vital
and popular part of the city, much appreciated by the citizens as well tourists
(Fig. 12.1).
However, what was the involvement of the local community, the bearers of the
intrinsic identity of places, in the planning process, and what were the results? After
lacking involvement during the initial stage of the process (at the beginning of the
128 C. Piscitelli
Fig. 12.1 View of the old town of Bari. http://ingirovagando.forumfree.it/?t=67867981. Accessed

08 April 2015
1990s), several local associations, all of which are strongly rooted in the ancient
heart of the city, funded a Committee of the District in 1996, which was a key
subject in “stressing the implementation of the planned initiatives, oriented to
promote the dissemination of knowledge about the program and the participation of
the inhabitants in its implementation” (Barbanente and Tedesco 2002). This was
made possible through the opening of an information desk and the organization of
several public conferences in order to make the people aware of the program,
although the nature of these initiatives was purely informative about the design
choices already fully taken by the administration. However, an important role was
played by the committee in the assistance provided to local operators about requests
for access to the funds foreseen in measure 1 of the program, “Starting new
businesses—support for productive activities,” which was made available to
stimulate old and new activities in the historic centre. Most of these funds were in
particular directed to those activities promoted by the residents themselves, in an
attempt to forge a local development and promote development opportunities for
the most vulnerable people, in terms of socio-economic conditions, which at the
time was the majority of the inhabitants of the old town. Unfortunately, the result
was quite unsuccessful. The difficulties of obtaining effective involvement of the
population in developing economic activities were far greater than what had been
imagined. From this point of view, we could consider this experience as a failure of
the mentioned “self-sustainable development.” Failed, for example, was the attempt
to involve population in promoting forms of widespread receptivity, such as bed

and breakfast establishments, which in fact represented a potential reconciliation of
the tourist development of the area and the need to benefit residents. The outcomes
of the tender notices for funding new activities showed among the beneficiaries a
prevalence of external people rather than inhabitants. The lack of “incidence of the
citizens of Bari Vecchia among young people and the economic operators involved
in the training courses, although the invitations would provide explicitly among the
recipients a greater percentage of residents compared to that of the “externals””
(Barbanente and Tedesco 2002) must also be mentioned. Although in the opinion of
many people the outcome of the whole program is still positive today, 20 years later
there are critical issues that are also still unresolved, some of which are probably
just related to the inadequate, or at least limited, process of participation. In fact, the
measures put in place have certainly given back to all citizens a part of town that
had appeared ruined due to the physical degradation and widespread crime.
Furthermore, many young people have been able to achieve their business ideas in
these places, and others have been able to renew their existing local activities; the
real estate market returns also an image of a successful exploitation judging by the
property prices increasing in a very short time and still steadily increasing.
However, some existing problems have been not solved to date; on the contrary, in
some cases they have been accentuated. The marginalization and social exclusion
that characterized the historic centre before the program have been solved. In fact,
only in a few areas of the old town, mainly along the perimeter and the connections
with the rest of the city, to which among other things a new population of more
affluent professionals has been attracted. This has fostered a phenomenon of gen-
trification already in progress, although it has not realized that a true social mix,
producing a clear physical separation between the places retrained and inhabited by
new residents and those left intact and occupied by the original inhabitants.
The activities funded mostly include the restaurant sector, with some exceptions
for the sale of handicrafts, while only marginally affecting the businesses and the
sale of essential goods, again placing inhabitants in the background compared with
the external clients. That shows not only that most of the residents have not ben-
efited from the program, but also that in some cases it has even made their condition
and quality of life worse: Frequently there are conflicts between residents and users,
who appropriate the streets and public spaces, often noisily, during evening and
night hours.
The journalist Gaetano Rossini wrote about this subject in 2001, summarizing
effectively the views of those who saw in these implementations on the historic
centre of Bari a substantial distortion of the ancient heart of the city: “In the name of
sound principles of recovery […] they are transforming the neighborhood in which
I live in a morgue […]. So we have exhibitions in closed ovens and out of work
bakers, squares occupied by the cars and the kids in the “ghetto” of the stadium, the
chatter of the VIPs and the silence of women, the coffee bars in the premises of the
carpenters, the pervasive power of employees and the folding of the original resi-
dents. That is the way to kill an historic center: breaking the delicate balance
130 C. Piscitelli
Fig. 12.2 Inhabitants of the historic center of Bari and new restaurant activities. http://4.bp.
blogspot.com/-M59jZifVf94/UY4t_1j3ZYI/AAAAAAAAALY/qNjPuG-P0-0/s1600/_DSF5889.
jpg. Accessed 08 April 2015
(the most authentic attraction, the real tourist scene) of things, men and activities on
which it still stands (but how long more?) the neighborhood life, and giving
a “container” to all people, from the mayor to the president of the Province, from
the rector to the superintendent.” (Figs. 12.2 and 12.3).
The conflict between the tourist-recreational activities and the needs of the
residents is even harsher in historic centers of small dimensions, where, due to their
size, there is no physical separation between the two functions. They have suffered
a real global invasion as well as a total loss of identity: The residents were “forced”
to move away to seek an environment more suited to the requirements of the
residential functions or even more often to make money from the sale of their
property—indeed the value of the houses has been exponentially increasing due to
the attraction of new businesses. Nowadays the buildings are not in degraded
condition like they were in the past. Thanks to public and private funding, the new
tourist and recreational activities are innumerable, and the original ones that sur-
vived are very few. Consequently, the centre’s vitality is also highly dependent on
the seasonal nature of tourism: The effect is sometimes of a holiday village in the
summer and a ghost town in the winter.
The examples above show the risk of difficulty in achieving the dream of
self-sustainable local development as well as how external economic logic can
easily prevail and diminish the historical identity of an historic centre. Thus, it is
necessary to have a conscientious and well-targeted participation, spread across the
Fig. 12.3 Inhabitants of the

historic center of Bari and
new restaurant activities.
http://www.ondadelsud.it/wp-
content/uploads/2010/10/
commercio-vie-bari-vecchia.
jpg. Accessed 08 April 2015
whole process, leading to a real shared and comprehensive framework of knowl-

edge and choices both physical and economic. They not only must be “commu-
nicated” to the residents in order to trigger virtuous processes but also to see a
fruitful coexistence between previous inhabitants and the new ones, between tra-
ditional and innovative activities, locals and the tourists, from the point of view of
development and integration rather than colonization and marginalization.
References
Allegretti G (2006) Comunità partecipate. Guida alle buone pratiche locali. In: Lombardi E,
Naletto G (eds) Lunaria
Allegretti U (2007) Verso una nuova forma di democrazia: la democrazia partecipativa. In:
Democrazia e diritto, no. 3/2006. Franco Angeli Editore, Milano
132 C. Piscitelli
Barbanente A, Tedesco C (2002) Bari. Un nuovo volto per il Borgo Antico. In: Palermo PC,
Savoldi P, Il programma Urban e l’innovazione delle politiche urbane. Esperienze locali:
contesti, programmi, azioni. Franco Angeli, Milano, (II quaderno)
Becattini G (2002) Le condizioni dello sviluppo locale, Supplemento a La Nuova Città., Firenze
Besio M, (2002) Il vino del mare. Il piano del paesaggio tra i tempi della tradizione e i tempi della
conoscenza, ed. Marsilio, Venezia
Besio M, Alessio G, Bobbe A, Colombo A, Frigo E (1999) La conoscenza per il piano: le
molteplici rappresentazioni della realtà ambientale, in Besio M., Monti C., (a cura di), Dal
cannocchiale alle stelle: strumenti per il nuovo piano, Angeli, Milano
Carta M (1999) L’armatura culturale del territorio. Franco Angeli
Davidoff P (1965) Advocacy and pluralism in planning. J Am Inst Planners 31(4):331–338
ECOSFERA (2001) Le ragioni della partecipazione nei processi di trasformazione urbana,
Grafiche Chicca e Csnc, quaderni La città intelligente, Comune di Roma, USPEL
Gibson T (1991) Planning for real: the approach of the neighbourhood initiatives foundation in the
UK. RRA Notes (11):29–30. IIED London
Loconte P, Rotondo F (2012) Innovazioni nelle prassi: il pist dei Comuni di Capurso, Cellamare e
Valenzano. In: Selicato, Rotondo, Torre (eds) Percorsi di rigenerazione urbana e territoriale.
Mario Adda Editore
Magnaghi A (2010) Il progetto locale. Verso la coscienza di luogo, Bollati Boringhieri
Paba G (2003) Movimenti urbani, pratiche di costruzione sociale della città. Edizioni Franco
Angeli, Milano
Rossini G, paper In: La Gazzetta del Mezzogiorno, Wednesday 7th February 2001
Sclavi M, Romano I, Guercio S, Pillon A, Robiglio M, Toussaint I (2002) Avventure urbane.
Progettare la città con gli abitanti, Eleuthera, Milano
Chapter 13
Building Local Cultural Landscapes
Paolo Colarossi
Abstract The “Plan for Local Cultural Landscapes” (PLCL) presented here is not
supposed to be some form of planning with normative value defined by national or
regional law but rather a process that consists of several stages and features to direct
landscape interventions. The underlying motivation for the construction of a PLCL
is that to make quality landscapes (in summary, a beautiful landscape), i.e., the
purpose of the objective of a good living, it is necessary and useful to promote and
build local processes, namely processes that affect the scale of the small-size
landscape. A plan of the local landscape integrates top-down planning by treating
assets not identified by the same or the precise details identifying possible inter-
ventions on parts of assets identified by institutional planning. Ultimately, a PLCL
should not be the instrument capable of arousing, stimulating, and realizing in
operational terms the attention and care (i.e., love) of inhabitants for their own
territory.
Keywords Local landscapes Inhabitants Minor cultural resources
Introduction: Definitions and Clarifications
This chapter has the purpose to provide some initial guidelines to local communities
(municipal administrations, associations, social groups, scholars, universities,
individual citizens) for starting and managing processes for the construction of local
landscapes. First one should outline a proposal for a methodological way for the
development of a plan for the construction of local cultural landscapes. The term
“construction” means the operations of conservation, restoration, and redevelop-
ment of landscapes as well as the transformation, when appropriate or required, of
existing landscapes.
P. Colarossi (&)
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile Edile e Ambientale, University of Rome
“La Sapienza”, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184 Rome, Italy
e-mail: paolo.colarossi@uniroma1.it

134 P. Colarossi
The proposal to make plans to build local cultural landscapes requires some
premises that can explain the fundamentals and content.1
Behind the proposal to make plans for local cultural landscapes (PLCL), there is
the idea of the centrality of the landscape, in general, as the object of all of the
planning and design operations on all scales. This idea is a result of a possible
interpretation of what was written in the European Landscape Convention of 2000
(European Landscape Convention, 2000).
In the convention, in articles 1 and 2,2 respectively, is given the definition of
landscape, which is determined the scope of the convention. Briefly, the convention
gives a definition of landscape that includes all of the world—the physical, natural,
rural, and urban world—as perceived by the people who inhabit it. This definition,
therefore, focuses on the inhabitants of a given part of the territory or city as users
holding the perception of those landscapes. At the same time, the assertion that all
of the perceived world is a landscape implicitly puts the landscape itself at the
center of the goals and outcomes of all the operations of conservation, preservation,
and transformation of the physical world and therefore the work of planners and
urban designers and architecture. Landscape must be specified by type according to
the character of part of territory or city to which it refers: the historical landscape,
the suburban landscape, the rural landscape, the landscape of production and trade,
etc., each with its own further appropriate specification. The conception of the
landscape in the convention is a great innovation and can be the basis for a new
culture of the territory and cities.3
Moreover, given the results of the direct and indirect transformations that ter-
ritories and cities have endured over the last 60 or 70 years, a new culture of the
territory and the city actively involved politicians, technicians, operators, and in
general all of the inhabitants. They had the task of creating and managing the
prevailing construction in territories and cities and ensuring the qualities for a good
living, which is an indispensable objective. One can find, among others, four basic
qualities for good living: environmental quality, social quality, economic/functional
1
The proposal comes as a reflection, deepening, and development of the objectives and contents of
the project VIVA EASTPART, in particular the proposal contained in it about cultural integrated
territorial plans.
2
The European Landscape Convention of 2000 (Florence 2000) gives in the art.1the definition of
landscape and art. 2defines the scope of the Convention:
“Art. 1. Definitions. <Landscape> designates a certain portion of territory, as perceived by
people, whose character derives from the natural and/or humans and their interrelationships.”
“Art. 2-Scope Subject to the provisions of Art. 15, this Convention applies to the entire
territory of the Parties and covers natural, rural, urban and peri-urban. It includes land, inland
waters and marine. It concerns landscapes that might be considered outstanding, both the land-
scapes of everyday life or degraded landscapes.”
3
For some time various parts of planning regulations have invoked a new urban culture capable of
addressing the problems of providing adequate urban quality of the new settlements but above all
to improve the quality of the existing city that was recently built.
13 Building Local Cultural Landscapes 135
quality, and aesthetic quality.4 The four qualities are interrelated to form a system in
the sense that aesthetic quality, i.e., the beauty in the city and the territories,
presupposes the other three, and the other three are insufficient to a good living if
there is no beauty that, as discussed above, is the beauty of the landscape.
The “cultural landscape” is one of the possible specifications of the landscape,
and it can be defined as a landscape in which are prevalent and perceived as such by
the inhabitants and more generally by the users of that landscape, all of the natural
and cultural resources (assets). Natural assets should also be classified as belonging
to the cultural landscape assuming that they are appreciated, or appreciable, by the
inhabitants as useful or necessary assets for good living and therefore subsumed
into the culture of cities and territories.
The classification proposed here, i.e., natural assets as part of the cultural
landscape, is also suggested by tradition and by the characterization of the
European landscape for much of the historic landscape and agriculture and by the
growing interest in the touristic use (nature tourism) of natural assets.
An integrated territorial cultural plan5can therefore be conceived as a plan of
landscape and one of its forms may be the plans for local cultural landscapes.
It should be pointed out that from now on, under the name “plan for local
cultural landscapes,” there is not supposed to be some form of planning with
normative value defined by national or regional law but rather a process that
consists of several stages and characteristics of address for intervention actions
taken on the landscape. In addition, any formalization regulations to be included in
the unfolding of the process, using tools of national or regional planning legislation,
may be appropriate, but not necessary, for certain aspects or parts of the process of
formation and implementation of the plan for local cultural landscapes.
A beautiful landscape in which to live is one of the conditions for good living.
A beautiful landscape is perceived as beautiful by the people and also as built,
tidy, and therefore beloved by the residents. And this happens when that landscape
is felt (perceived) as a product of a community, felt like it is “owned” by the
community of inhabitants. The local-scale landscape, or if we want a smaller-size
landscape, has an important role in the perception of feeling “right” by a com-
munity. This can involve an existing landscape, and as a result, the construction of a
beautiful landscape. In fact, the etymology of the verb “inhabit”6 conjures a feeling
4
See: Paolo Colarossi, “Elementi di estetica urbana,” in: Paolo Colarossi, Pietro Antonio Latini
(ed): La progettazione urbana. Vol II: Metodi e materiali, Il Sole 24 Ore, Milan, 2008, pp. 71–430.
5
See the Integrated Territorial Plans Cultural contained in this volume.
6
Inhabit: from Lat. HABITARE (frequentative of HABERE have) in the sense that its worth to
continue to have, but more commonly Avercus to mary in a place, dwell (…)”. From Ottorino
Pianigiani, “Vocabolario etimologico della lingua italiana,” Publishing House Sonzogno, Milan,
1936.
136 P. Colarossi
of belonging by the people to a place or places, or rather in a field as is the complex

format of most places, but of adequate size (small size) in order to be perceived and
understood7 by the people as “their” place of living, a place to care for and
appreciate. A “local landscape” will be that one of a small town, a neighborhood, a
part of the valley of a hill, a portion of plain bounded by recognizable margins, a
stretch of river or ditch, etc. However, it can be a set of these places that are
identified and recognized by the inhabitants as “their place.”
Municipalities of small or medium size can have an important role in the con-
struction of local landscapes, which in the Italian tradition appear as areas of the
territory in which the inhabitants identify themselves as belonging (i.e., inhabitants)
not only for personal reasons but especially as areas of daily life.
The construction of local landscapes on a municipal scale can strengthen and
make the way of living more meaningful.
We can therefore say that working in and for the small-size landscape is a
determining factor for obtaining quality of living and that the local culture is (for
better or for worse) the foundation for the beauty of the area. In large municipalities,
plans for cultural local landscapes should cover recognizable small areas: edge
areas of the outer boroughs, campaign bands, or natural areas close to neighbor-
hoods, agricultural or natural areas identified for their positive characteristics, etc.
These considerations require the need for top-down (from above) and bottom-up
(from the bottom) cooperation and integration in the construction of landscapes, a
collaboration and integration between proposals of institutional planning (from
area-wide area to municipal) on one hand and the operating procedures of local
processes (which generally involve areas of the part of the municipality) on the
other. It requires cooperation and integration between an institutional vision of
the landscape and local insight regarding two types of construction processes of the
landscape: a process that tends to the production of an “institutional landscape” and
a bottom-up process that tends to build “local scenery.” Speaking of the relationship
between top-down and bottom-up processes in the construction of landscapes, these
require some clarifications. First we want to explain the terms “top-down pro-
cesses” (from above) and “bottom-up processes” (from below) in the construction
of landscapes. “Top-down processes” means those sets of policies, plans, and
actions that are determined and decided by governments at various levels (from the
state to municipalities) and producing, indirectly or directly, effects on landscapes
(landscapes institutional). “Bottom-up processes” means those sets of projects and
actions that are produced by the initiative of the people and that affect the land-
scapes (i.e., local landscapes). The fundamental problem is how to make consistent,
7
Understand: (…) from lat. COM-prehendere (…) comp. COM = CUM together and prehendere
take (…) -Propr. Take together; indi Contain itself; and Fig. Embrace the mind ideas, (…). From
Ottorino Pianigiani, op. cit.
integrated, and synergistic the two types of processes. It is good to recognize that
the top-down plans of institutional planning are necessary tools. However,
top-down plans are those that primarily, by their very nature, tend mainly to
determine constraints for the conservation of the landscape and can only give
guidelines for their maintenance, upgrading, and construction, which, as mentioned,
are realized only through the action of the inhabitants at the local level.
Conservation through constraints is not enough: One must also actively maintain
and care for landscapes, and sometimes it is required, or is appropriate to, reha-
bilitate degraded landscapes and construct new landscapes. In fact, landscape is
always a changing space resulting in each historical moment affecting the geo-
graphical characteristics of a location (environment) and the human action on it;
evolution means building a new landscape, positive or negative. Maintenance,
upgrading, and construction of new landscapes are operations for which must be
addressed in general way from top-down plans, but they will be specified and
feasible only at the local scale, i.e., in small size. Maintenance, upgrading, and
construction of new landscapes can be implemented only with the activation of
local processes that produce insights or new knowledge at the local scale and may
require one to change the constraints and plan of top-down (or bottom-up) pro-
cesses. The protagonists of constructing, upgrading, and maintaining landscapes are
the inhabitants. With this designation we want to indicate even those inhabitants
below the complex of associations, scholars, universities, i.e., the productive sectors
and individual citizens. Hence, the definition of “local landscapes,” as well as the
innovative and operating role that municipalities can play in the construction of
landscapes. The district, in fact, can be both an actor and manager of the con-
struction of the cultural landscape in its territory through a tool such as the plan for
local cultural landscapes (PLCL), the which characteristics of which are specified in
later text. In conclusion, the underlying motivation for the construction of a PLCL
is that making local landscapes, for the objective of it being good to live in a
beautiful landscape, it is necessary and useful to promote and build local processes.
A plan for local landscape integrates top-down planning by considering not just
assets identified by the same or just the precise details and identifying possible
interventions on parts of assets as identified by the institutional planning. It should
also be noted that the preservation, maintenance, upgrading, and construction of
landscapes can take place if there are activated local processes even in the absence
of an institutional planning.
138 P. Colarossi
Quality8and Content of a Plan for Local Cultural

Landscapes (PLCL)
The name “Plan for Local Cultural Landscapes” (PLCL) means, as mentioned,
mean a process that must possess seven qualities of performance as follows:
(1) It must have as its focus the cultural physical landscape and the social land-
scape (socioeconomic) of a given territory for areas outside the existing city;
this refers to both the urban landscape at the city margins, i.e., the landscape
outside of the city, and both tangible and intangible assets and the relation-
ships between these (intangible assets as they produce or can produce effects
on the physical landscape) within the city.
(2) It must identify the individual assets as well as the systems of assets or
measures to create the system of individual assets, the possible integration
between the different types of assets, the scenarios of intervention, intervention
priorities, and methods of implementation and management (with particular
attention to the issue of maintenance).
(3) It must be incremental because a PLCL can be built with the processing, in
succession, of parts that can have each functional autonomous meaning and
effectiveness while taking place within in the methodological framework of an
overall unit.
(4) It must be implementable. It is not necessary right away that the process for
the formation of local landscapes is perfect and complete. Rather the different
parts and stages that comprise it can be articulated and made complex with
added depth for subsequent additions and integrations.
(5) It must be flexible with regard to the content: A PLCL should produce, as one
of the results of the process, not an institutional plan but rather a “scenario”
(scenario perspective), which is a program of addresses and a list of possible
projects with guidelines for developing and implementing the different pro-
jects according to the directions of the scenario and coordinated among
themselves. When useful or necessary, some specific areas or projects or parts
of projects will be formalized in the context of urban-planning instrumenta-
tions in force. A PLCL is also flexible over time because it should be con-
ceived as a process to be verified by monitoring the states of project
implementation and the effects produced by the interventions including pos-
sible corrections during construction.
(6) It should be strategic and shared as such with concerted and elaborate com-
munication. In addition, is should also be implemented as a process over time
in phases depending on the occasion and the economic and human resources
available, but it should always follow the directions of the scenario.
8
To define what should be the quality (characteristics) of a PLCL, according to the qualities
defined for an integrated territorial cultural plan, as developed under the project VIVA.
(7) It must be managed over time (“accompanied” and monitored by both the city
council, associations, public authorities, operators, and inhabitants).
Therefore, the central product of a process for the construction of a PLCL is a
scenario of the future structure of a municipality’s landscape, which constitutes, in
accordance with local policies and planning, tools for institutional cultural land-
scapes as the reference for the basis of the construction of local cultural landscapes.
The advantages of a PLCL compared with institutional planning are evident
from the quality characteristics produced by their formation process, which takes
place over time and in stages.
There are four stages in the process of elaboration of a PLCL: two phases for the
construction of scenarios and two phases for the execution of scenarios. The City
Council and the residents may each play different roles in each phase from time to
time.
The steps for the construction of the scenarios are locating and identifying the
cultural Resources of the municipality and processing the different scenarios.
The steps for the execution of the scenarios are the construction of conditions for
the implementation of projects accompanied by implementation, which involves:
monitoring, maintenance, and management.
Building Local Landscapes Scenarios
The Atlas of Local Cultural Resources
The foundation for the construction of local cultural landscapes is the identification
of cultural resources contained in the territory of a municipality. It is proposed, as
an outcome of this phase of the process, the formation of a list of resources that can
be called the “Municipal Atlas of Local Cultural Resources.” The atlas of resources
is the annotated list of historical and archaeological resources, as well as natural and
landscape resources, typically contained in a municipal area. Here, is intended to
refer to, as told to external resources of consolidated populated centers. The subject
of a PLCL, as it is described here, will be the resources contained in both agri-
cultural and natural areas as well as areas of possible “leakage” or urban sprawl.
At this stage in the formation of the atlas, the roles of both the municipality and
the inhabitants are relevant. The role of the municipality is critical because the city
should complete the task of promoting the formation of the atlas in two different
ways. The first part of the material, which could form the nucleus of the atlas, is
formed from the resources identified by the institutional planning of a local-wide
area or identified and listed by institutions or documents, studies and research of
universities, or a search of cultural centers. In parallel, the city should promote and
encourage the contribution of the inhabitants by giving support to research and local
studies. The collection, organization, and cataloging of materials produced by
associations or by individual scholars who have already conducted or who are
140 P. Colarossi
conducting ongoing studies and research on assets scattered in the territory, which
often escape by plans and institutional standards, requires the expansion of
research. Area assets include minor historical artifacts; fountains; places that hold
local memories; historic mills; farmhouses; religious shrines; monumental trees,
paths, and abandoned historic buildings; scenic views or bands of scenic roads
(with preparation of maps showing visibility of the territory), and small enclosed
basins (i.e., the “rooms” of the landscape). Certain assets may be defined as minor,
but they may constitute factors of importance in determining the quality of the
overall landscape of the municipal area. In addition, but certainly not least, and as a
foundation of a cultural landscape, there are agricultural areas or crops, which for
their scenic interest or for their local economic importance (niche and specialized
products) must have a place in the atlas.
The atlas should be constituted by a document, arranged in “cards,” which
should contain, at least for each of the goods identified, the following:
• the location within the territory on base maps, aerial photos, and cadastral (at
least one of these three);
• a description of the current characteristics of the resource with an assessment of
current conditions and possible dangers; and
• a photo dated with localized point shooting
For resources of historical value, the card should also contain historical notes,
whish can be added after the first draft of the card.
For an area to have its legitimacy and recognition in the atlas, there should be a
document that, regardless of whether its processing is required or promoted by the
residents (i.e., individuals or organizations), has been formalized by the City
Council as a document defined and legitimized by special municipal regulations.
This document should contain rules about the types of resources to be included in
the atlas, the filling out and delivery of the cards and the check of their contents, the
methods of storage and accessibility on the part of the inhabitants to read the same
cards.
Perspective Scenarios for the Attitude of a Local Landscape
This perspective scenario is an elaborate drawing and describes, in plan, a future

asset for a local landscape.
The main content of the scenarios depends on the characteristics of each terri-
tory. Here we present some methodologies for the process of elaborating the
scenarios.
To begin, you must locate the hierarchies of importance of the resources iden-
tified from the atlas. Hierarchies can be defined both in relation to their value from a
scientific point of view (objective value) as well as the value attributed to them by
the people (point of view of the perceptions of the inhabitants). From the scientific
point of view, hierarchies may be identified in relation to the rarity, the state of
deterioration and urgency of recovery, and the risk of damage or destruction
degradation (for example, the visual risk of concealment) of the resources. From the
point of view of the inhabitants, resources may be perceived as having greater or
lesser value in relation to the possible role given their memories or of their current
or potential use. Memories (memorial value) concerns local stories, events, and
traditions (e.g., the historic fountain where they watered the animals or where you
took the water to the house; the house where he was born or lived; or some
character of local or national importance, etc.). The value in use concerns the
established uses (places that are destination of walks and relative paths, places of
civil and religious festivals, meetings, and trade) as well as the potential use for
economic activities (tourism uses, agricultural production, etc.). The aesthetic value
attributed by the inhabitants to certain places should also be considered.
As a result, the definition of hierarchies may be identified priorities for inter-
ventions. Even in this case, the priorities will be defined in relation to assessments
of both objective type as well as assessments by the inhabitants.
Thus, the role of the inhabitants, as well as that of the municipal administration,
is clear in the definition of hierarchies and priorities for interventions.
As for the elaboration of the scenarios, two general indications—a content and a
method—can be given. For content, a scenario should be composed of one or more
plans (depending on the scale of representation considered appropriate), from a list
of projects that comprise it, as guidelines for the implementation of the projects
(guidelines also contain directions regarding functional and aesthetic qualities that
must be found as targets) as well as three-dimensional design scenarios with
explanatory and illustrative guidelines.
Considering concerns about the quality of a flexible PLCL tool, it should be
reiterated that the quality of implementation and integration should include a pro-
cess for building a local landscape. This can occur, and indeed it may be hoped for,
as a first processing that could also be called partial scenario trim for a local
landscape. A scenario, therefore, could be made up in its simplest form of an initial
graphic planimetric scheme drawing of the future structure of the local landscape of
the municipality, even if only partially, and a list of some interventions (projects)
considered desirable and of priority status. A scenario can be defined as proposal
containing only partial proposals for interventions for only some of the resources
contained in the atlas (or even because the atlas itself may contain, at the time of the
scenario, only a portion of the resources available in that municipality). The
142 P. Colarossi
development of a partial scenario could be useful because it could play a role of

example and lead to implementation of the scenario but also the subsequent
development of the atlas of resources.
Next are added the guidelines for the implementation of the various interventions
as well as three-dimensional scenarios for better understanding of the guidelines
themselves (regarding the implementation of the scenario). These three-dimensional
design scenarios (integration scenarios) can integrate both the design structure of
the local landscape as well as the list of actions to be taken.
For the indication of method, it can only be said that in general, the preferred
method should be the composition in a system, or systems, of the resources that are
generally present in the collection of the Atlas as a set, or rather a set of different
sets, of resources that often do not have obvious relationships between them.
Composing means primarily to propose a design based on a structure of “green”
paths that connect individual assets (e.g., artifacts and places). The routes are
defined as “green” consist of walking and cycling routes. Depending on the type
and variety of the present resources and landscape features of the township, the
paths will also be specialized (e.g., the archaeological path, the path of the olive
trees, the location of the houses, the walk along the river, walk ridge, etc.)
The scenarios will even contain even predictions of actions on assets identified
by the planning and the institutional rules. However, in same scenario we propose a
local project set-up and use, especially for places (also part of places) or for arti-
facts, within the context of the priorities and desires of the inhabitants. The scenario
in perspective, particularly in the in the parts affecting areas and products consid-
ered by institutional planning on a larger scale, must be coordinated and discussed
with the respective institutions. Those networks of routes and individual assets
connected to form the system will be structured and listed in the scenario as a set of
implementation projects to be developed. In addition, the individual components for
each of the projects will be identified and listed, and guidelines for the preparation
of projects for implementation will be given.
As mentioned previously, a scenario is not an institutional development plan.
A scenario is something less and something more than a plan. It is less than a plan
because it does not have normative value. It is something more than a plan because
a scenario, even by virtue of the strategic nature it must have, must also contain
descriptions of landscapes that would result from the implementation of the various
parts and components of a scenario. For this, a scenario should, as mentioned
previously, contain drawings of the assets likely resulting from some interventions
(three-dimensional design scenarios) or at least the most important ones having the
value of the model of example.
From everything said here, it is evident that the development of scenarios,
starting with their partial form, should be initiated by the municipal administration
and, although coordinated and led by designers and planners, should take place with
the participation and cooperation of the residents. Indeed, scenario development
should be seen as a first step in building a quality strategic tool for the imple-
mentation of projects in a plan for local cultural landscapes.
For administrative formalization of the scenario, especially in relation to the
quality of flexibility of the tool, a resolution of the city council, with which the
administration will take efforts to implement the scenario, should be sufficient. In
this way you can explain to the residents the role of the municipal administration in
supporting a policy of paying attention to the local landscape and at the same time
the administration and the people together would provide an operational tool of
“light driving” regarding interventions for the construction of the local landscapes.
Feasibility, Implementation, and Management Scenarios
Feasibility and Implementation
As said, a scenario for the construction of local landscapes is articulated in projects

and therefore the scenario is realized for projects. To reiterate once again the nature
of a flexible strategic plan for local cultural landscapes, it should be clarified that the
projects to be processed may be included in the contents of a PLCL even after the
formulation of the scenario in order to supplement or modify such.
The feasibility of the proposed projects from the scenario of the PLCL deter-
mined in terms of the economic and human resources available. Resources are made
up of public and private funding, the latter of which will be located by operations
through consultation, but also resources that can be made, and on occasion may be a
condition for the success of the project, that are undertaken by voluntary action. In
this regard, the PLCL may prove as a relevant factor of incentive and enhancement
of volunteering in the care of the land. Volunteering, once again it must be said,
should be supported and encouraged by the municipal administration with appro-
priate regulations and agreements.
The projects identified in scenario will be of two types:
1. The first is a projects system consisting of several components and more design
operations (physical, social, economic), for which it requires the formulation of
a plan of the overall system.
2. The second is individual projects, which will be implemented within the project
plan or system projects, which are directly enforceable regardless of the
development of a plan of detail, why monotypes or why isolable within the
overall system of the scenario, or small size.
System projects, even those that relate to a set of small diffuse interventions that
coordinate with each other and that may produce a whole positive effect on the
144 P. Colarossi
quality of the relevant local landscape, can be defined. How, for example, should
the creation of small rest areas along a scenic road (roads in the landscape) be
undertaken? Or how should the creation of small areas of garden, which have the
role of marking entry into areas of natural or historical and archaeological value, be
designed?
In this phase of construction process of the plan for local cultural landscapes, the
city administration must primarily perform its institutional role to define and put
into action the administrative conditions for implementation of the projects.
Namely, the city administration must directly implement or promote the processing
of documents necessary to the eventual adoption of urban institutional implemen-
tation plans or their variants or enact laws and regulations when required. It is clear
that this role is crucial for the success of the process for both its implementation and
construction over time.
In this phase, the inhabitants are crucial for aspects of consultation, along with
the municipal administration, to identify resources and operators/entrepreneurs who
demonstrate interest and willingness to work toward the implementation of some
projects. In this connection, city administration can play a role of great importance
to alleviate stress and proffer support. A PLCL, given its strategic nature, is a plan
that must be continuously managed and addressed over the course of time.
Managing the Implementation of the Scenario
Because the structure of a landscape should be considered to be in a state of

continuous evolution, it requires continuous management, namely, every landscape,
for of the achievement of adequate levels of good living for the communities that
inhabit it, must be accompanied and monitored over time in its evolution to correct
and support the scenario or, at times, to avoid certain problems. The process of
building a local landscape requires participation and consultation; this can often be
the residents themselves reporting problems or identifying needs/opportunities for
amendments to both parts of the scenario. Ultimately a PLCL should be a tool
capable of arousing, stimulating, and realizing, in operational terms, the attention
and care (i.e., love) of the inhabitants for their own territory.
Appendix 1. Suggestions for an Atlas of Municipal Local

Cultural Resources
The formation of a municipal atlas of local cultural resources is the first necessary
step toward the construction of local cultural landscapes. at the same time, building
an atlas is necessary first of all to raise the recognition and awareness on the part of
local people of the cultural resources contained in their territory; secondly, it is a
tool for the dissemination of their knowledge, and therefore also for the preser-
vation and dissemination of their know-how and growth, attention, interest, affec-
tion, and finally care for the local landscapes, which represent one of the factors of
local identity as well as one of the factors in the quality of a beautiful landscape.
The purpose of the atlas is mainly for the inhabitants of the area to consciously
learn, know, appreciate, and love those places, artifacts, buildings, and traditions
that are called “minor assets” just because they have little or no recognition by the
institutional planning and thus have little or no place in the narrative of the quality
of institutional landscapes. However, these resources are very present, and perhaps
defined as “major” in the imagination, mental maps, and narratives of the local
inhabitants, they deserve to be considered part of local landscapes as they are
perceived by the people.
A review of categories of minor assets, certainly not complete and only as an
example, that would be appropriate to consider as a part of the local landscape,
might include the following:
• Tree-lined rows and hedges
• Memorial trees
• Breeding animals
• Spontaneous urban gardens
• Agricultural crops
• Rural buildings
• Fountains, wash troughs
• Hydro-geo-morphological formations
• Well-loved places
• Small churches, chapels, places, and objects of devotion
• Small historical centers
• Viewpoints
• Minor ruins
• Historical trails and paths
• Terraces and drywall
• Micro-landscapes
These categories all belong to the physical landscape, or contributing to the
shape of the physical landscape, and could be considered components of the shape
of the local cultural landscape. To these should be added other categories that,
although important in the formation of the overall local cultural landscapes, have a
minimal direct impact on the shape of the physical landscape. For example, this
includes categories such as:
146 P. Colarossi
• Feasts, festivals, and celebratory fires

• Products of agricultural transformation
• Music and traditional songs
• Dialects
• Culinary traditions, etc.
Below, for better clarification of possible assets to be included in a municipal
atlas of local cultural resources, we offer a series of sample images, taken from
different parts of Europe, displaying example categories of components that shape
the local cultural landscape.
1. Tree-lined rows and hedges
Tree-lined rows along roads and paths marked, often far away from the land-
scape, offer shaded walks and gsreen tunnels of great beauty.
Hedges that enclose the fields build and emphasize the mosaic of crops and
determine the fences, which more or less create large or small “rooms” of the
landscape.
(Figures 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6)
Fig. 1.1 Tree-lined in rows and hedges

Fig. 1.2 Tree-lined in rows

and hedges
2. Monumental trees
Monumental trees are valued for their size, beauty, and age. They represent real
monuments plants to be admired, cared for, and loved.
(Figures 1.7, 1.8, 1.9 and 1.10)
3. Breeding animals
Herds of local breeds of animals are often of great interest, but they should also
be protected from the risk of extinction; there may also be a need to reintroduce and
develop herds that were abandoned or being abandoned.
(Figures 1.11 and 1.12)
4. Spontaneous urban gardens
Floral decorations, small private gardens, examples of paving, trees, or shrubs
characteristically prevalent in the urban fabric are the components of a sort of
spontaneous “furniture” that comes from traditions and inhabitants’ desire, even
from residents’ competition, to produce the beautification of urban space with
effects that strongly characterize the landscape of entire urban centers or
neighborhoods.
(Figures 1.13, 1.14, 1.15 and 1.16)
148 P. Colarossi


150 P. Colarossi
Fig. 1.7 Monumental trees
Fig. 1 8 Monumental trees


152 P. Colarossi
Fig. 1.11 Breeding animals
Fig. 1.12 Breeding animals

Fig. 1.13 Urban spontaneous

154 P. Colarossi

5. Agricultural crops
Agricultural crops are often features of local productions or are used for the
transformation of local products appreciated facets of the local culture. Some crops
are also or cultivated traditional forms, often to great effect, in the landscape for
their originality and beauty.
(Figures 1.17, 1.18, 1.19 and 1.20)
6. Rural buildings
Isolated buildings or small groups, built as housing or shelter for animals or
storage of products, have a long tradition in Europe and still dot the agricultural
landscape where they remain intact with the various criteria for location of the
various building types.
(Figures 1.21, 1.22, 1.23 and 1.24)
7. Fountains, troughs, and sinks
Fountains, troughs, and sinks are the architectural disseminators of water
dispensed to the local populations. They also represent meeting places and points of
social communication.
(Figures 1.25, 1.26, 1.27 and 1.28)
8. Hydro-geo-morphological formations
Rocks with unique mineral colors that form patterns of great beauty, stretches of
gravel and sand, gullies, gorges, caves, meandering streams and ditches, small
Fig. 1.17 Agricultural crops

156 P. Colarossi

Fig. 1.21 Rural buildings

158 P. Colarossi

Fig. 1.25 Fountains, troughs, sinks

160 P. Colarossi
Fig. 1.27 Fountains, troughs,

sinks
waterfalls, ponds, and lakes are all characteristic features of the beauty of a local
landscape.
(Figures 1.29, 1.30, 1.31 and 1.32)
9. Well-loved places
Every village, even small ones, has its special places that are well-loved by the
inhabitants because they represent collective community memories; they are places
where annual festivals and rituals are held; or they are places for recreation such as
meadows, forests, valleys, stretches of banks along streams, or rivers where bathing
is allowed.
(Figures 1.33, 1.34 1.35 and 1.36)
10. Small churches, chapels, and artifacts of devotion
Interest in the history of religions, as well as the current practices of devotion,
has spread across Europe and includes not only cathedrals and churches but also of
small buildings or artifacts that are used in the daily life of the inhabitants.
(Figures 1.37, 1.38, 1.39 and 1.40)
162 P. Colarossi
Fig. 1.29 Formations hydro-geo-morphological


164 P. Colarossi
Fig. 1.33 Places loved


166 P. Colarossi
Fig. 1.37 Small churches, chapels, artifacts of devotion
Fig. 1.38 Small churches,

chapels, artifacts of devotion

168 P. Colarossi
11. Small Historical Centers

Small historical centers may be defined as minimal town centers but still have
stories to tell, also perhaps minimal, but that have an important part in the local
memory.
(Figures 1.41, 1.42, 1.43 and 1.44)
12. Viewpoints
Viewpoints are high places, from which inhabitants can admire a landscape and
recognize, one by one, the places where their daily lives and their life stories take
place.
(Figures 1.45, 1.46, 1.47 and 1.48)
13. Minor ruins
Minor ruins include rural buildings, small towers, and artifacts of various kinds,
which also tell the stories of a region and are part of the local identity.
(Figures 1.49, 1.50, 1.51 and 1.52)
14. Historical trails and paths
Historical trails and paths, often abandoned and now almost unrecognizable,
throughout history have allowed communication between a center and nearby
Fig. 1.41 Small historical centers


170 P. Colarossi
Fig. 1.44 Small historical

centers
villages, or access to sources, fields to cultivate, and forests from which to cut
wood.
(Figures.1.53, 1.54, 1.55 and 1.56)
15. Terraces, dry stone walls, piles of rubble
Terraces, dry stone walls, piles of rubble bear evidence of the hard work of
many generations. However, today they are forms and artifacts evocative of great
beauty.
(Figures 1.57, 1.58, 1.59 and 1.60)
16. Micro-landscapes
Micro-landscapes are usually small and often enclosed in small deep circular
valleys or bordered by hillsides, or they may be steep banks of rivers or streams
enclosed by vegetation that form a sort of “room” in the landscape. The onlooker
has the perception of being indoors often because their interior is an invisible sign
of urbanization. They can also be special places arranged by individual residents to
form significant and surprising effects on the landscape.
(Figures 1.61, 1.62, 1.63 and 1.64)
Fig. 1.45 Viewpoints

172 P. Colarossi

Fig. 1.49 Ruins minor

174 P. Colarossi

Fig. 1.53 Trails and historical paths

176 P. Colarossi

Fig. 1.57 Terraces, dry stone walls, piles of rubble

178 P. Colarossi
Fig. 1.60 Terraces, dry stone

walls, piles of rubble
Fig. 1.61 Micro landscapes

180 P. Colarossi

Chapter 14
Implementing and Reviewing Integrated
Cultural Territorial Plans
Pierangela Loconte
Abstract The aim of this chapter is to understand the ways in which one can
implement, monitor and modify an integrated cultural territorial plan during the
operational period. The goal is to give a series of suggestions as well as some
thoughts on how the plan will be monitored and, especially, by whom. The man-
agement and implementation steps of the plan are not secondary; rather they rep-
resent a new critical point that, if not properly addressed and resolved, may not
allow the plan to achieve the growth targets defined.
Keywords Cultural territorial plans Urban regeneration Urban history
Introduction
The integrated cultural territorial plan is configured as a complex plan in which

proposals represent choices for territorial transformation. Discussing concepts of
territory and landscape policies means the consideration of multidimensional and
complex systems (Bottero et al. 2013). In particular, “economic developments are
not solely the result of a properly combination of production factors such as labor,
land and capital but also a consequence of a balanced use of overhead capital in
general” (Vreeyker et al. 2002). Flexibility and possibility of continuous review
and implementation represent a key feature that the plan must possess.
To achieve the objectives of enhancing the landscaping as well as the historical,
cultural, and socioeconomic development proposed by the plan, there is a need to
build a system of procedures for the management of territorial dynamics and tools
for evaluating the choices made and for monitoring the effects.
P. Loconte (&)
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Polytechnic University of Bari (Italy),

182 P. Loconte
Implementing the Actions, Structures, and Procedures
The permanent objective of the integrated cultural territorial plan is based on the
integration and coordination of economic development, resource conservation, and
social and cultural equity (Mega and Pedersen 1998). Based on the foregoing,
therefore, the territory should be considered as a “subject” producer, user, and
multiplier of knowledge through the articulation of networks of information
exchange that are formed within the plan (Salone 2005).
The achievement of the objectives of enhancing the landscaping as well as
historical, cultural, and socioeconomic development becomes particularly complex
in the case of an integrated cultural territorial plan because the territory is often
intercommunal. “All forms of decision-making necessarily have some temporal
dimension, whether it is the timescale over which a policy will act, the timing of
policy review and reformulation, the use of projections of economic, social and
demographic trends, and so on. In this sense governance always embodies some
form of future decision-making” (Pugliesi and Although 2004).
The implementation and management plan can be very complex if not all
administrations involved have the will to overcome their specificities and protag-
onism in favor of the growth and development of the community. Implementation
and revision of the plan also require a high capacity for coordination between the
participating municipalities as well as a multiscale approach that is related to the
dynamics of development present at different geographical scales, the effects they
have on the dynamic local level, and the phenomena of “restitution” to higher scales
of solicitations from the local level (Santangelo 2005).
This means that, both in the analysis, project, implementation and monitoring
steps, it is necessary to switch from the regional scale to a detailed one to verify
every single opportunity or criticality and, then, return to the territorial dimension if
we need to make an account the need for changes to be made at the macro scale.
An example of a possible approach that the project supervisor can take is that of
management plans for sites that promoted by UNESCO and defined by
Italin Ministry for Heritage and Culture as follows:
• strategies for knowledge related to the continuous monitoring of resources;
• conservation strategies, which are reflected in the procedures to achieve a
coordinated and systematic organization;
• participation strategies for the involvement and growth of identity values;
• developing strategies for the enhancement of the local level;
• marketing strategies and territorial communication (Ministero per i Beni e le
Attività Culturali 2005).
This is a problem that requires a multidisciplinary and integrated system of
actions and, thus, it is necessary that the implementation of the actions and the
definition of structures and procedures is performed in a coordinated and consistent
manner.
14 Implementing and Reviewing Integrated Cultural Territorial Plans 183
For this reason, as already provided in many Italian cases, such as the case of the
enhancement of the historic centers of Umbria Region, we must define a real
organizational and decision-making group.
The task of this group is to develop organic policies and actions, constitute a
point of reference and encourage synergy between the various public and private
stakeholders.
The organizational and decision-making group, established at an early step of
preparation of the integrated cultural territorial plans, must be composed of people
with technical and managerial functions belonging to all municipalities that draw up
the plan. It must be able to provide strategic support in the identification of
vocations and potential, analyses and activities to be performed, and the program to
be drawn up. It must also be able to provide operational support for the preparation
of the plan and to monitor the progress and implementation, thus facilitating the
dialogue between the administrations involved, between the different public actors,
and between the public actors and private stakeholders.
There must be the presence of a person with management functions in the orga-
nizational and decision-making group. The task of this person is to manage the process
of acquiring a consensus around a common vision of enhancement as articulated in the
strategic and integrated guidelines (Regione Umbria, Centro di Ricerca Focus 2009). In
particular, organizational and decision-making group should be able to:
1. coordinate any thematic analysis;
2. Manage the forum, roundtables, workshops, and the process of conflict reso-
lution and consensus building;
3. program initiatives of animation and communication;
4. supervise the planning and implementation of Geographic Information System
with the aim to update the analysis performed and the construction of indicators
for monitoring;
5. ensure traceability of the participatory process. (i.e., Umbria Region
Guidelines)
6. evaluate the changing environment in the implementation phase of the
interventions;
7. take corrective actions to achieve the general and specific objectives through
the monitoring and detection of criticalities and the dissemination of good
practice
8. provide technical and operational support to those who implement the plan on
the territory;
9. verify objectives and ensure consistency with the existing planning tools and
programming;
10. coordinate the technical group to ensure fruitful cooperation between all
stakeholders.
Monitoring is the activity of collecting and processing information that is useful
for testing the conformity of the project to the original design and its compliance to
the plan’s objectives. This activity comprises the processes put into place to observe
and measure the execution of the project to identify the risks and potential problems
184 P. Loconte
and to take, when necessary, corrective actions to put the project back in line with
its objectives.
This means that the monitoring must be able to help actors of the process to
constantly supervise the process itself and correct and reiterate the actions taken
through the available information. The monitoring should have the character of
strategic control and needs to be redesigned according to the context in question
(Bottero et al. 2013) as well as be able to have an ongoing dialogue with stake-
holders so that the actors are constantly informed about the state of project
implementation and can verify its progress. In literature (Bottero et al. 2013), there
are several approaches that lead to different monitoring procedures as follows:
1. Monitoring objectives: assessing the consistency of results achieved in relation
to the initial objectives;
2. Monitoring resources: this allows one to analyze the use of essential resources
used than those available;
3. Monitoring actions: giving an assessment of the actions implemented;
4. Monitoring of the local context: evaluating the difference between the current
situation, recognized in previous cognitive framework, by highlighting the
positive and negative results (Bottero et al. 2013).
The implementation of each of these points requires the use of specific tools and
requires adequate levels of training and information of stakeholders and, in general,
of all of the people involved in the plan.
The monitoring and implementation of an integrated cultural territorial plan are
based on the following:
1. checking the status of actions;
2. checking the availability of resources and how to use them and determining the
forms of economic advantage that can be put in place to launch and support the
actions of the plan;
3. communicating the ex-ante, ongoing, and ex-post evaluation of benefits to
society generated by plan;
4. checking the expected results and taking possible corrective actions;
5. checking and comparison with the population.
Among the instruments that can be used to monitor and implement the plan, the
following should be given priority consideration:
a. an evaluation system capable of estimating, from both an economic and social
point of view, the environmental effects produced by the plan (cost benefit
evaluation, multicriteria evaluation);
b. a financial plan able to establish coherent financial matters and to monitor them;
the plan should always upgradeable to ensure that the actions planned are
actually feasible, and it should be able to account for public as well as private
resources;
c. a Geographic Information System available by public administrators and tech-

nicians that able to give back the actual real-time progress of the project from
technical and economic points of view;
d. a Web site and a Web GIS able to disseminate the objectives and actions of the
plan, thus allowing the continued participation of the population in the con-
struction and implementation of the plan, and to the ability to accommodate
observations, reflections, critiques, and suggestions.
The Web site has a promotional function in relation to the outside (for tourism
purposes) but above all for the citizens, for whom the Web site can become a
point of reference and provide an update on the ongoing dynamics of the plan as
well as an opportunity for training and information.
In particular, some of the actions described previously in a rather general way
and that can be implemented by governments are the subject of extensive discussion
within the international scientific debate. First of all, in relation to the possibility of
using methods of evaluation to understand the possible effects of this type of
territorial project, it is necessary to pay particular attention to the possibility of
using the construction of future scenarios and integrating it with the multicriteria
decision analysis.
As said by Montibeller et al. the two methods seem to play a complementary role
and can be a powerful combination for decision support in strategic decisions
(Montibeller et al. 2007).
The use of these methods can be useful in both the construction phase of the
Integrated Cultural Territorial Plan as well as during its management. In this way,
one can determine whether the actions taken are leading to expected outcomes and,
if not, what corrective actions should be taken.
To evaluate on an ongoing basis the evolution of the plan and the achievement of
objectives, it may be useful to define a set of indicators that are able to give useful
information on the evolution of the parameters. In the case of an Integrated Cultural
Territorial Plan, is probably is more correct to refer to the “landscape indicators.”
“The landscape indicator is defined as a quantitative or qualitative element, which
can be used to assess and monitor the evolution and state, public satisfaction, and
the effectiveness of public and private initiatives for the improvement of the same”
(Bottero 2011). The indicators must to be able to verify whether the actions taken
by the plan are actually bringing benefits to the community by the achievement of
general and specific objectives of the plan.
These indicators may be of different types as follows: economic, demographic,
environmental and urban quality, use of tangible and intangible heritage, landscape,
and the state of conservation of the property. It is essential that indicators are
identified able to test the achievement of both general and specific objectives as
well as determine the satisfaction of the end-users, i.e., stakeholders, citizens, or
city users. This means that there is a need to identify indicators of achievement as
well as indicators of impact both local and global.
The choice of indicators is essential and strategic in the monitoring phase of the
project because they allow one to monitor the real state of progress. It is important
186 P. Loconte
for indicators to have the ability to translate the status of a territory/landscape as

well as its evolution over time and to support the decision-making of the admin-
istrative machinery and subsequent verification of the achievement of objectives.
In addition to these tools, there is a need to implement processes of participation
of the population. These tools should not be used only in the initial phase of
construction of the plan, but they must also accompany the realization of the plan in
order to determine the need for any necessary changes and monitor the entire
evolution of the process. “Participatory approaches in policy development have
been advocated on the grounds that complex, multiattribute issues should not be
evaluated on a one-dimensional basis, but require the consideration of the diverse
perspectives and viewpoints of different stakeholders” (deMarchi and Ravetz 2001;
Akgün et al. 2012). For this reason, it is necessary to recognize that the integrated
cultural territorial plan is very complex not only for the richness of its content but
also because of the complexity of building it.
The integrated cultural territorial plan must be an instrument capable of pro-
moting the sustainable development of an area by enhancing its territorial capital
and creating opportunities. This process takes place over the long term and must be
monitored constantly to achieve the desired objectives.
This “monitoring” task cannot be given to solely the government; it must be
given to all stakeholders. “The role of participation in design and planning is a
mechanism to support the identification of the issues, interests, priorities and
wishes of those who will make use of the site, as well as those who may be affected
by the future development” (Kelsey and Gray 1986).
The preparation of instruments of public participation (multimedia and interac-
tive ones if possible) that can create a constant link between the population and
those who manage the plan can be an interesting way to monitor the effects of
planning and the changes taking place. In this logic processes, e-planning and
e-participation can help disclose the contents of the plan and support the imple-
mentation process.
Finally, if defined and used in synergy with the tools described above, the
activation of territorial marketing policies can play a strategic role in the gover-
nance and development of the territory. One can define local marketing as “a
process aimed at the creation of value for a community composed by the set of
individuals who benefit from the predetermined area within its boundaries”
(Cercola 1999).
Territorial marketing is the process aimed primarily at the development of a local
economy through the creation and promotion of the elemental attractiveness of the
region and encouraging collaboration between the public and the private. It should
be noted that local marketing is not activated exclusively for the purposes of
tourism development in a given territory.
As well known in the literature, territorial marketing can be of two different
types: internal if dominated by the imperative of “quality”, “exploitation” of the
existing, geared to satisfy the internal public, residents (citizens and businesses) and
local actors, and external if addressed primarily to external customers (tourists,
investors and potential new residents) of a territory, with the goal of attraction and
generation of external trust, then call up as much as possible within the territory the
different segments of external customers (Marenna 2005).
According to what was said then, the definition of a marketing plan and a
territorial brand in synergy with integrated territorial cultural plan can contribute to
the reappropriation and exploitation of local identity as well as play an important
promotional role against potential external users. This entails that the plan must
necessarily be structured and modeled on the territory as well as the tangible and
intangible heritage contained in it, on the population and the local identity.
The repeatability of the actions or their adaptability to different contexts than
those for which they were designed not ensure the success of the operation. What,
however, can be adapted and repeated is the organizational structure of the plan and
the use of the instruments described above provided they are adapted to the context
in which they will be used.
References
Akgün AA, van Leeuwen E, Nijkamp P (2012) A multi-actor multi-criteria scenario analysis of
regional sustainable resource policy. Ecol Econ 78:19–28 (Elsevier)
Bottero M (2011) Indicators assessment system. In: Peano A, Cassatella C (eds) Landscape
indicators. Assessing and monitoring landscape quality. Springer, Dordrecht
Bottero M, Levi Sacerdotti S, Mondini G (2013) La valutazione delle politiche turistiche:
un’applicazione del visitor management al caso dei paesaggi piemontesi. In: Barosio M,
Trisciuoglio M. I paesaggi culturali. Costruzione, promozione, gestione. Egea, Milano
Cercola R (1999) Economia neoindustriale e marketing territoriale. Sviluppo e organizzazione 172:67
De Marchi B, Ravetz J (2001) Participatory approaches to environmental policy. Environmental
valuation in Europe. Policy Research Brief.: Cambridge Research for the Environment, no° 10
Kelsey C, Gray H (1986) The citizen survey process in parks and recreation. American Alliance
for Health Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, Reston, VA
Marenna M (2005) Un’analisi teorica sul Marketing territoriale. Presentazione di un caso studio. Il
“Consorzio per la tutela dell’Asti”. Ceris-Cnr, W.P. No° 7
Mega V, Pedersen J (1998) Urban Sustainability Indicators. European Foundation for the
Improvement of Living and Working Condition, Dublin
Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali (2005) Progetto di definizione di un modello per la
realizzazione dei Piani di Gestione dei siti UNESCO
Montibeller G, Gummer H, Tumidei D (2007) Combining scenario planning and multi-criteria
decision analysis in practice. J Multi-Crit Decis Anal 14:5–20 (Wiley)
Puglisi M, While A (2004) Futures work in urban and regional governance: rhetoric or reality? In:
EURA-UAA Conference ‘City Futures—An international conference on globalism and urban
change’, Chicago, USA
Regione Umbria, Centro di Ricerca Focus (2009) Linee Guida per la definizione del Quadro Strategico
di Valorizzazione. Perugia. http://www.centriurbani.regione.umbria.it/ Accessed 08 April 2015
Salone C (2005) Il territorio nelle politiche. Reti di soggetti, risorse localizzate e vantaggi
competitivi nei processi di sviluppo locale. In: Dematteis G, Governa F (eds) Territorialità,
sviluppo locale, sostenibilità: il modello SLoT. Franco Angeli, Milano
Santangelo M (2005) Transcalarità e multiscalarità dello sviluppo locale. In: Dematteis G, Governa F
(eds) Territorialità, sviluppo locale, sostenibilità: il modello SLoT. Franco Angeli, Milano
Vreeyker R, Nijkamp P, TerWelle C (2002) A multicriteria decision support methodology for evaluating
airport expansion plans. In: Transportation Research Part D 7, pp 27–47. Elsevier Science Ltd
Part V
First Experiences in Eastern Europe
Chapter 15
Armenian Cultural Territorial Systems
First Experience
Sarhat Petrosyan and Gruia Bădescu
Abstract Armenia’s planning system, which is based on Soviet planning tradi-

tions, was developed continuously during the last decades in the framework of
European and international best practices. As presented in this chapter, despite the
changes in legislation, in practice the reality is different because post-independence
improvements in the legislative framework and modernization of the planning
system did not place communities as a focus of development. The brief analysis of
participatory decision making in the Armenian context, highlighting the recent
experience of the historic town of Dilijan and the surrounding area, highlights the
challenges of the planning system. The core issue is the need to re-evaluate the role
of the community in implemented policies and strategies, thus leading to the
democratization of public administration, in particular territorial planning and
government. The inclusion of the community is essential to harness the potential of
the existing cultural strengths and enhance a territorial cultural system approach for
spatial-development policies in Armenia.

Keywords Urban planning Armenian national planning system Urban planning
legislation
S. Petrosyan (&)
Department of Architecture, National University of Architecture
and Construction of Armenia, 105 Teryan Street, 0007 Yerevan, Armenia
e-mail: sarhat@urbanlab.am
G. Bădescu
Department of Architecture, University of Cambridge, Old Court,
Clare College (England), 1-5 Scroope Terrace, Cambridge CB2 1PX
England, UK
e-mail: gb413@cam.ac.uk

192 S. Petrosyan and G. Bădescu
General Overview
From the Balkans to the Caucasus, Southeastern Europe has been distinctively
shaped most importantly by layers of Ottoman and socialist history. Historical
Armenia and the contemporary Republic of Armenia have been part and parcel of
these developments. The current Republic of Armenia, a land-locked country
occupying 29,740 km2 of area, is covered by mountainous terrain and hosts a rich
cultural heritage of mostly Christian religious temples and monastery complexes.
Amidst a rich tangible heritage, including monuments from the prehistoric period to
Antiquity, from the Middle Ages to modern dates, Armenian religious architecture
stands out for its architectural expression but also for its historic role as the first
nation to adopt Christianity as a state religion in 301 AC. Holy Cross Church in
Van and The Holy Virgin Cathedral, both in Turkey, the churches Ejmiatsin,
Hripsimeh, Zvartnots, Odzun [See Image 1] and the monastery complexes of
Haghpat [See Image 2], Sanahin, Norvanak, Haghartsin, and others located in
modern Armenia are remarkable masterpieces of Christian architecture. Some are
included in the UNESCO World Heritage list, and some are in the process of being
included. Nevertheless, there are few urban historic centers, such as Gyumri, Goris,
Yerevan, Meghri, Gavar, Dilijan, and some other smaller towns and villages, that
have preserved historical parts and that are the subject of both protection and
conversation. Armenia’s intangible cultural heritage includes a rich variety of lit-
erary practices (e.g., mythological poetry), traditional dances, rituals (traditional
wedding ceremonies lasting up to 1 week, fire jumping, water throwing, decoration
of ritual bread, etc.), crafts (e.g., forging, cross-stone making), and food, some of
them inscribed in the UNESCO list.
As did many post-Soviet countries, Armenia experienced difficulties in
reforming its industry, which was dependent through resources and markets to the
collapsed Soviet state, and consequently lost most of its industrial capacities in
early 1990s. Armenia’s experience of the last years of the Soviet Union and the
early years of independence was also marked by two turbulent events. First, the
earthquake of 1988 in the northwest part of the country destroyed approximately
363 towns and villages and took approximately 25,000 lives.1 Second, a conflict
erupted with Armenia’s eastern neighbor, the former Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist
Republic. Despite the fact that the territorial conflict of Nagorno Karabakh has
halted and there are ongoing negotiations for reconciliation, small military incidents
continue to remind Armenia about its existence.
After 2000, Armenia started to recover from the economic collapse engendered
by the previously mentioned situation. A common vision for the country has been
shaped based on priorities and capacities of development. The Government of the
Republic announced real estate, tourism, health care, and information technologies,
together with agriculture and mining, to be the main industries for economic
1
Presented numbers are taken from Armenian National Service for Seismic Protection; www.nssp-
gov.am.
15 Armenian Cultural Territorial Systems First Experience 193
Image 1 Odzun Monastry Complex, 6th to 7th centuries, Odzun village, Lori marz, Armenia.
Credit Sarhat Petrosyan
Image 2 Haghpat Monastery Complex, 10th to 13th centuries, Haghpat village, Lori marz,
Armenia. Credit Sarhat Petrosyan
growth. Especially the first two are tightly connected to planning policies and must
be the subject of consideration in the framework of spatial-planning policies and
capacities. Its foundations are laid by the legislative system, which is structured
based on Soviet town-planning traditions, to which some elements of a free market
economy have been added.
Armenia is administered at two different scales. The country is divided into
10 marzes (regions) and the capital Yerevan, a community with a special status.
Governors of marzes are appointed by the central government and are considered
regional representatives of the central government with mostly executive roles.
There are 915 local communities that are considered self-governing bodies and are
elected. The electoral system is shaped in such a way that there are only two levels
of elected bodies: national and local. The remaining gap between these two levels,
i.e., the regional level, is one of the main challenges for territorial planning and
development for the current Armenia. From 915 local communities, 49 are towns
where approximately 63 % of 3 million people live (as of December 2013).
Yerevan has approximately 1.1 million inhabitants and concentrates 85 % of trade
and services of the country.2
In this chapter, we will explore the legal and institutional context for planning
instruments and heritage protection as well as analyze the public participation of
stakeholders by looking at a number of scales. First, we will analyze the framework
of planning and heritage protection at the national level and discuss the general
trends countrywide regarding public participation in the management of heritage
within the framework of territorial cultural systems. Second, we will look at the
regional and local scales scrutinizing the lack of examples of best practices in the
regions. We will explore situations of public engagement in Armenia that are
mainly located in the capital Yerevan, and we will discuss the lack of such
dynamics in the regions, thus highlighting problems and possible avenues for the
future to catalyze such efforts in the regions of Armenia. To do so, we will use as an
avenue of study the Dilijan area in Tavush region, which was the subject of research
and project implementation within the framework of the “Valorisation and
Improving of Management of Small Historic Centers in the Eastern Partnership
Region” project.
The territorial system, which we will refer to as the Dilijan area, includes the
town of Dilijan, the surrounding four villages Haghartin, Teghut, Gosh, and Hovk,
and the adjacent mountainous territory; it has a population of 24,000 people, 17,700
of whom live in Dilijan town as of December 2013 [See Image 3]. The area blends
distinctive natural and cultural heritage. Although Armenia’s landscape is domi-
nated by grassy highlands, the Dilijan area features picturesque mountainous
landscape covered with woods, which led to its description at times as “Armenia’s
Switzerland.” The area has a high altitude ranging from 1100 to 1500 m from sea
level for the settlements but reaching ≤2000 m in the Dilijan National Park, an area
2
All demographic and statistic data were taken from the official Web site of the National Statistical
Service of the Republic of Armenia; www.armstat.am.
Image 3 Map of Dilijan town and surrounding communities. Credit urbanlab Yerevan
that occupies approximately 34,000 ha. The lush landscape hosts a rich cultural
heritage dating back to the Middle Ages. Among the 531 objects listed in the State
List of Historical and Cultural Immobile Monuments of Tavushmarz (206 monu-
ments) stand out the monastery complexes of Haghartsin (12th to 13th centuries),
Goshavank (12th century), Jukhtak (13th century), and Matosavank (13th century),
which are some of the best examples of Middle Age Armenian religious archi-
tecture in the country. Another notable example of architectural heritage are the 71
houses dating back to the late 19th early 20th centuries from the town of Dilijan,
which can be considered one of the rare cases in Armenia when relatively a
complete neighborhood is being listed for preservation. These houses were built in
the period when Dilijan became a well-known resort town in the region under the
rule of the Russian Empire in late 19th century. Local crafts in wood carving and
specific gastronomy due to a diversity of populations (Russian immigrants in the
19th century [the Molokans] alongside Armenians) distinguish this area within
Armenia. Consequently, through its natural landscape and its cultural heritage, both
immobile and mobile, the Dilijan area is both an integral part of the system of
territories and heritage in Armenia as well as a specific, well-defined system of its
own with a distinctive identity and potential. Discussing the dynamics of heritage
protection across scales, from the territory of the state to the territorial cultural
system of Dilijan, will provide insights on the challenges of managing heritage and
landscape in this part of Europe.
Legal and Institutional Context for Planning Instruments

and Heritage Protection
Legislative Framework
The Republic of Armenia gained independence in 1991 through a referendum and

developed its own juridical and governmental system. Based on the 1995 consti-
tution ratified by a referendum, Armenians chose a presidential government system,
which was transformed after the 2005 referendum to a semi-presidential system,
and through 2015 referandrum to parliamentary system. The revision of the con-
stitution was one of the responsibilities that Armenia undertook after joining the
Council of Europe in 2003. As a part of these responsibilities, Armenia ratified most
of the European conventions including the European Landscape Convention.
Moreover, Armenia ratified most of the UNESCO’s and Council of Europe’s
conventions related to heritage and sustainable development—first the UNESCO
Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict
(The Hague 1954) and the Convention concerning the Protection of the World
Cultural and Natural Heritage (Paris 1972), which were both ratified in 1993.3
The UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural
Heritage (Paris 2003) was ratified in 2006, and furthermore, four elements were
included in the UNESCO List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent
Safeguarding4 [See Image 4]. The Convention on the Protection and Promotion of
the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (Paris 2005) was ratified in 2007.
In the case of European conventions related to cultural landscapes, the first
document ratified by Armenia in 1997, even before becoming member of Council
of Europe, was the European Cultural Convention (Paris 1954). Conventions
(mentioned herein later in the text) were ratified by Armenia, which are shaping the
European responsibilities that the country has taken thus far as follows:
• 2004—The European Landscape Convention (Florence 2000);
• 2004—European Convention for the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage
of Europe (Valletta 1992);
• 2009—European Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of
Europe (Granada 1985);
• 2012—European Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society
(Faro 2005).
3
All legal data are taken from the Armenian Legal Information System of the Ministry of Justice of
the Republic of Armenia; www.arlis.am.
4
By December 2014, elements in the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural
Heritage of Humanity presented by Armenia are Duduk and its music (2008); Armenian
cross-stones art, symbolism and craftsmanship of Khachkars (2010); Performance of the Armenian
epic of “Daredevils of Sassoun” or “David of Sassoun” (2012); and lavash, the preparation,
meaning, and appearance of traditional bread as an expression of culture in Armenia (2014).
Image 4 Armenian
Khachkar (Cross-Stone),
Haghartsin Monastery
Complex, 10th to 11th
centuries, Teghut village,
Armenia. Credit Sarhat
Petrosyan
Among these documents, the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the
Intangible Cultural Heritage and European Landscape Convention had interesting
follow-ups at the national level. The national legislative and regulatory system
included new perspectives on preservation derived from these conventions. For
both of them, action plans were developed at the national level aiming to build
capacities among professionals and authorities and also raise awareness of land-
scape and intangible-heritage protection. In the framework of these documents,
some legislative and regulatory development was planned, in particular the Law on
Intangible Cultural Heritage was developed and the Law on Urban Planning had an
amendment.
One of the crucial legislative documents, based on what the territorial admin-
istrative policies are being implemented, is the Law on Local Governance, which
was approved in 2002. It is the main law that regulates responsibilities and lia-
bilities of local authorities based on what community heads are in charge of
urban-planning policies. The council of elders is considered to be the legislative
body of the communities and is in charge of changes in urban-planning documents,
growth strategies, and annual budgets. The number of members differs with the size
of community. The head of the community and the council of elders are elected for
a 4-year term through direct elections as individuals. Starting from 2008, when
Yerevan gained its special status, the mayor has been elected through indirect
elections by the council of elders, which consists of 65 people elected through a
proportional system (i.e., lists).
The Law on Urban Planning, which was approved in 1998, is the main law in the
planning field. The law in Armenian is titled “the law of building towns,” which is
direct translation from Russian (Armenian: , Russian:
). Such direct translations, as well as the approximate use of
terminology, have tended to create confusion and thus impede the alignment of the
planning field with international best practices. The Law on Urban Planning, as well
the common understanding of the field, covers three different aspects: spatial planning,
architectural construction (design and building), and the maintenance of buildings.
Spatial planning, although considered a new concept added to the law by way of
a 2005 amendment, is in fact a continuation of central planning instruments from
the Soviet era tailored for the communist ideology and administration. In the Soviet
era, the state acted as land owner, planner, client, supervisor, and builder. The
single-player planning system on one hand was a unique opportunity to stress the
public interest; in contrast, it decreased the role of the private sector interest for
ownership and entrepreneurial self-realization. Strategic development plans for all
levels, from the entire territory of the Soviet Union to small sovkhozs (agricultural
cooperative unions), were the basis for all long- and short-term development.
Spatial planning in Armenia, as introduced by the law, in fact has continued this
specific outlook on planning.
Architectural construction, i.e., design and building, refers in fact to building
permits, which are the main component in trying to balance open market private
sector activities with public needs. Nevertheless, as is easily visible in urban areas
and as mentioned in international reports, e.g., Doing Business Reports (World Bank
2014), Transparency International, etc., issuing permits continues to be considered a
corrupt and uncontrollable aspect of the planning field. Although Armenia improved
its ranking for Doing Business Report 2015, building permits continue to be one of
weak components of business sector.
The same law and other documents are not paying sufficient attention to the
maintenance of buildings and in general other urban units (town, district, housing
block, etc.) and have no specific mention of any heritage issues. Despite the fact
that the law highlights its aim to cover these issues, both the law and reality give
another impression. The reality is that the maintenance of a significant part of
housing properties is out of touch and out of the possibilities of the community in
the context of misunderstanding the role of local authorities and the state in general.
Because most of the social housing blocks were built and owned by the Soviet
authorities and privatized by tenants in early 1990s, there is a lack of understanding
that the whole building is owned by tenants and not by any authority anymore.
A large number of spaces (staircase, roof, courtyards, etc.) are “owned” by local
authorities or entities established and supported by them. In fact, these must be
considered common property owned by house owners who at this time do not share
their ownership liabilities for their maintenance. For that reason, there are several
legislative and policy initiatives trying to address the situation.
Although the Law on Urban Planning is the main legislative document in the
urban-planning field, several guidelines have been approved by the government that
regulate most of the procedures in the field. The most relevant are the guidelines for
developing spatial-planning documents for five different types of planning docu-
ments. The above-mentioned documents define the requirements and procedures for
the development and approval of spatial-planning documents and their amendments:
• Guidelines for Development, Expertise, Validation, Approval, Changes and
Monitoring of (National Spatial) Settlement Master Plan (adopted in 2002);
• Guidelines for Development, Expertise, Validation, Approval and Changes of
Regional Spatial Schemes and Plans (adopted in 2003);
• Guidelines for Development,… of Master Plans for Communities (adopted in
2003);
• Guidelines for Development,… of Simplified Master Plans for (small mostly
rural) Communities (adopted in 2003);
• Guidelines for Development,… of Zoning Plans for Urban Areas (adopted in
2001).
The Law on Preservation and Use of Historical and Cultural Immobile
Monuments and Historical Environments is another fundamental law approved by
the National Assembly in 1998. With minor changes in 2003, the law continues to
maintain most aspects of the preservation field with its 15-year-old definitions and
approaches. Based on it, the Government of the Republic is in charge to approve the
State List of Historical and Cultural Immobile Monuments for each marz.
Approximately 27,000 objects (of approximately 7,000 monuments) are listed, thus
accounting for a density of 1 object, 1.1 km2. The listed monuments are considered
to be under state protection, and any activity in their area and surroundings must be
approved by the Agency for Preservation of Historical and Cultural Monuments of
the Ministry of Culture. Monuments are being listed with two statuses based on
their importance: national and local.
The policy making and executive duties for preservation are under the auspice of
Ministry of Culture, which can initiate also legislative developments for ratification by
the National Assembly. The only guideline that regulates the planning process in
preservation is the Guideline on State Assessment, Study, Preservation,
Strengthening, Renovation, Restoration, and Usage of Historical and Cultural
Immobile Monuments (approved in 2002), which is the main document where all
procedures regarding developments in and around historical sites are defined and
categorized. Based on this document, a Historic Cultural Concept Plan is an optional
planning document that is being commissioned by the local self-governing institu-
tions, which is an equivalent of Special (Historic) Plans being developed in most of
European urban and rural communities with valuable historical environments.
Some other government decrees can be considered relevant to our study. One of
them is the Concept Paper for Implementation of Landscape National Policy based
on Guidelines for the implementation of the European Landscape Convention.5

Based on this paper, an action plan was developed that was aimed to raise
awareness and build capacities for the improvement of landscape policies within the
country. Although many steps of this action plan were implemented, Armenian
landscapes policies did not in fact significantly change.
Regarding public administration of the field, currently there are four ministries that
deal with the issues concerning the protection and development of landscapes (by
December 2014): the Ministry of Territorial Administration and Emergency
Situations (deals with regional development and local authorities), the Ministry of
Urban Development (is responsible for the urban planning and other aspects of built
environment), the Ministry of Culture (responsible for cultural activities including the
preservation of historical and cultural monuments), and the Ministry of Economy (for
tourism). The executive body of implementation of these policies local self-governing
bodies. Nevertheless, the lack of resources and capacities at the local level gives more
liabilities for the execution of projects to the central national government. Without
underestimating the background of public administration, in some cases it is more
efficient to influence national-level policies than have an impact on the local level.
This approach can be considered a short-term impact instrument, whereas for
long-term results local actors and stakeholders should be empowered.
Planning System
The above-mentioned three levels of governance make territorial and spatial

planning a sophisticated challenge. The public administration traditions from the
Soviet Union where vertical and centralized decision making was the pivot of
governance, plus a weak regulatory framework and capacities at the local level,
have stimulated a strict hierarchy of planning. At the first glance, this would make
the subordinate process of planning documents a workable system, but in reality it
gives a completely different impression. One example of this unsynchronized
programming is the largest transportation project of the last decades, the North
South highway, which is aimed to link the southern border (at Iran) with the
northern border (at Georgia). Based on the Settlement (National Spatial) Master
Plan of Armenia approved by the Government in 2003 (which won the architecture
state prize the following year), the new North South highway was supposed to
connect the central part of Armenia, including the capital Yerevan, with Georgia
through the town of Aparan. The project, which costs ≤$1.5 billion USD and
funded by the Asian Development Bank and the Government of the Republic
5
Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)3 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the
guidelines for the implementation of the European Landscape Convention (adopted by the
Committee of Ministers on 6 February 2008 at the 1017th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies).
Armenia, is built through Gyumri (the second largest town of Armenia), which has
very low strategic importance. This direction was not even considered as an
alternative in the Settlement (National Spatial) Master Plan. This is one of many
small gaps that can be presented when important proposals in the framework of a
newly accepted spatial-planning document are ignored in future decision-making
processes. This happens not only just at the local level, where lack of knowledge
and long-term planning can be the main reasons, it also happens at the highest
national level quite often.
Meanwhile, Armenia can be considered one of the rare countries that has most of
the planning documents needed for spatial planning. By December 2014, the
above-mentioned spatial-planning documents had been approved by different
public administration bodies:
• Settlement Master Plan for Armenia (2003);
• Regional Spatial Schemes and Plans (for 2 regions);
• Master Plans (72 out of 915 communities);
• Zoning Plans (71 communities and part of Yerevan);
• Historic Cultural Concept Plan (only for Yerevan and Goris have been devel-
oped but not adopted).
The Settlement Master Plan of the Republic of Armenia, the proper translation of
which is the “National Spatial Plan of Armenia,” was developed from 2001 and
approved in 2003. Despite the fact that it was developed based on previous plans
from the Soviet period, this was the first document prepared under open market
economy conditions. As has been already stated, it did not influence the main
decision-making processes at which it was aimed.
Up to 2014, only two Regional Spatial plans were developed. The first one was
developed for Shirak marz, which was developed with the Master Plan of Gyumri
town, the second largest town, which had significant earthquakes 1988s. The plan
was called the “Shirak Regional Spatial Scheme” and was accepted in 2005 based
on guidelines developed in 2003. The second regional plan was developed for the
improvement of the Sevan lake shore area, which had undergone chaotic private
development in previous decades. There were two initiatives for development of
regional plans for two marzes in 2014, which are not launched yet (as of December
2015). Because the number of regional plans was low, and there no complete
regional plans were developed after independence, this could be an important
dimension to develop. Because the requirement by law to have Master Plans for all
communities by January 2016 is not realistic, regional plans can then also cover this
for groups of communities.6
Master plans are considered the main planning document in the current mindset,
which has its roots in Soviet planning tradition and background. In fact, if most of
6
This proposal was presented in the Report of Project on Analysis and Development of the Urban
Planning Documentation System performed by urbanlab Yerevan in 2013, Authors: S. Petrosyan,
S. Tovmasyan, B. Kocharyan, A. Aktaryan.
the documents mentioned previously were also developed during the Soviet era,
zoning plans are new despite the fact that there is more than 1.5 decades have
passed since zoning plans were introduced to all levels of governance. Still, Master
Plans are considered the main strategic urban-development documents. In the last
changes made to the Law on Urban Planning, there is a stipulation for local
self-governing institutions (communities) that starting from January 2016 institu-
tions lacking spatial-planning documents (i.e., Master Plans) will not be able to
provide any construction permits. We must consider the fact that 843 communities
(92 % of 915) did not have such documents as of December 2014.
For all communities except Yerevan, zoning plans can be developed in the
framework of the Master Plan for those areas where new developments are initiated.
This means that zoning plans are not considered regulatory documents but rather
strategic proposals. At the first draft of the law, instead of zoning plans, Detailed
Planning Plans (Armenian: , Russian: ) were introduced. These DPPs
were the last and required plan for the development of Master Plans during the
Soviet period. That was a unique site (master) plan with footprints of the building
that would be built in that area in the future by the state. Another document that has
been inherited from Soviet period, which is called “Architectural-Planning Task”
(Armenian: , Russian: ), which was developed based on the Detailed
Planning Plan and was the last legal outcome of the planning document, which was
an official document with all permits and requirement for design. Now that the
Detailed Planning Plan has been eliminated from legal system, the zoning plan must
be the document where all requirements and permits must be included for open
access. Nevertheless, the Architectural-Planning Task continues to be the only legal
document for private and public developers with references to approved available
zoning plans or Master Plan. This is another important challenge for the planning
field in Armenia because in most reports construction permits are considered a
weak aspect of the competitive private sector.
A significant concern for our present study is the role of heritage protection in
the planning process, which is mostly introduced in the Master Plans. Based on
legislative traditions, mostly individual buildings and elements are listed for
preservation. There are only 8 items in almost 27,000 elements that are historical or
valuable ensembles (streets, squares, quarters, etc.). This means that at this level,
listed buildings, along with the accompanying land, are the overwhelming subject
of consideration. Despite the fact that there has been a guideline and tradition for
the development of a Historic Cultural Concept Plan since the Soviet era, during the
two decades of independence only plans for Yerevan and Goris, as such, were
developed. Although it was neither discussed nor adopted by the local authorities,
these are the only more or less complete examples of such document. Despite the
fact that this plan is considered to be a concept plan and must have a regulative role
for preservation aspects within urban-development policies, it was developed
2 years after the development and approval of the master and zoning plans of
Yerevan. This fits in the requirements of the Law on Urban Planning where it is
stated that in the hierarchy of planning documents, historic cultural concept plans
come after master and zoning plans. For that reason, the Historic Cultural Concept
Plan, the only document for preservation policies and regulations, has a very weak
role in the whole planning system.
As a continuation of the same hierarchy, any plan for special (natural or heritage)
protected zones is again less important than any Master Plan developed in the
framework of the community boundaries. A good example can be the Regional
Spatial Plan for Sevan Lake Basin, one of the rare cases of a protected-zone plan that
was actually developed. Its impact area was extended to a larger area than are the
community boundaries, but this was limited to the boundaries of Gegharkunik marz
(region).
This concern could be addressed in the case that Historic Cultural Concept Plan
(or Plan Special) would be developed in the framework of a Master Plan. As was
stated previously, this document comes after the master and zoning plan, and it is
considered an optional document. Because two examples have been developed, and
because no special guideline has been developed for this type of project (as in the
case of other planning documents), it is difficult to study and analyze this type of
plan. Meanwhile, this singular and as-yet-unapproved plan defines or proposes
three layers of urban context, which is also stated also in the Law on Preservation
and Use of Historical and Cultural Immobile Monuments and Historical
Environments. The first and most highly ranked the Protection Zone of Monument,
which in most cases repeats the land limit for monuments and has to belong to the
same owner. The second one is the Regulated Building Zone, which addresses
special attention for monuments for surrounding developments. The last one is the
Landscape Protection Zone, which could consider a wider scope for preservation of
the environment or landscape. Paradoxically there are only seven zones of third
protection zone for the whole of Yerevan despite the fact that the city has
approximately 381 listed monuments, 232 of which are in its center.7
As we have seen, the inclusion of heritage ensembles and historical environ-
ments in planning is not yet a common practice. Although such a plan has been
proposed for Yerevan, it has not been adopted; smaller communities have not yet
approached this issue at all. Moreover, within the current framework, despite
signing relevant landscape conventions, issues of cultural-landscape protection and
planning of what we understand as territorial cultural systems have therefore have
neither been discussed nor introduced in legislation. We shall now analyze in the
following sections how these issues have been addressed in practice in small his-
toric centers in Armenia.
7
The Yerevan Historic Cultural Concept Plan is not accessible to public, and the considerations are
based on the draft version that was presented by its planning team to Transparency International
Anti-Corruption Center based in Yerevan, Armenia.
Planning in Practice: The Case of Dilijan
The first Master Plan for Dilijan, made by planner and painter Yeskov, was
approved in 1928. The Master Plan was in relationship to the development of
tourism in the area, which got a boost in 1926 when Dilijan got the status of
resort-town and its first Master Plan. The other Master Plan during the Soviet Period
was developed in 1961 (by head planner Isabekyan), which resulted in another
important document—the Historic Cultural Preposition Plan (authors Avetisyan and
Telumyan) for the town. Based on this plan, the site of Kyarami Kucha, where most
of the well-preserved houses are concentrated, was proposed to become a complete
protected district as a whole historical environment.
In 2006, the first Master Plan for Dilijan town of the independent Republic of
Armenia (by head architect Ghalumyan) was approved, thus highlighting that the
main development direction for town should be tourism [See Image 5]. It differed
from the previous plan because it was developed for an open market economy and
was a tool to attract new investments. Paradoxically, 2 years after the approval of
this document by the Government of the Republic of Armenia, there was another
decision, made again by the Government, to develop strategies for making Dilijan
the financial center of the region and even to move the Central Bank of Armenia
there. Subsequently, the government developed several projects in the same spirit,
in particular, the Financial Educational Center of the Ministry of Finance and
Dilijan International School were established.
For Armenia regarding cultural heritage and territorial cultural systems, we can
identify two best practices: the Old Dilijan district and the Rehabilitation Project of
Tsaghkashat village. Especially the first example was quite relevant for this area
Image 5 Historical and

Cultural Monuments
Scheme of Master Plan of
Dilijan Urban Community
(Town), 2006, Head
Architect L. Ghalumyan,
Architon. Credit
Architon LLC, Source www.
mud.am
because it is located in the core of the town of Dilijan and was one of the first
revival efforts in the area by accentuating the importance of the preservation of
heritage for development purposes. The project was initiated during the 1980s by
Hovhannes Sharambeyan, a local researcher on folk arts and director of the Folk
Arts Museum located in Yerevan. The project involved the restoration of some old
Dilijan houses in the center of town aiming to recreate an old historic district. The
original project was abandoned after the earthquake of 1988 and the collapse of the
Soviet Union. In 2005, Tufenkian Heritage Foundation, working both in Armenia
and the United States, initiated private development and tried to continue this
project. In 2008, the district, consisting of a handful of buildings, was officially
opened. In a very short time it became one of the most visited places in the town.
Being located close to city center, it is now considered a “must see” place where
handicraft shops, cafes, a restaurant, and a boutique hotel are located.
Identification and Involvement of Local Stakeholders—

Civil Society on Its Way to Participatory Planning
In the Eastern partnership region, community involvement has its own unique
interpretation. In the socialist period, there was an ideological call for “involve-
ment” of different social groups in state policies. Nowadays the shift from com-
munities dealing with the government to them engaging with a private sector and its
tight connection with officials makes the situation much more complicated because
the lack of capacities in most of the cases, as well as weak legal instruments, make
this process less effective and hardly maintainable.
A few decades ago there were 5-year plans for each state, community, and
institution, which were mostly not realized or were only replicated. In the case of
the Republic of Armenia today, communities must approve 4-year development
plans based on the Law of Self Governance. In most cases this is considered only a
structure for expenditures, in particular, to obtain funding from the state budget.
Analyzing them gives the impression that they do not try to highlight longer-term
strategic-development visions and actions. Even in those cases when communities
have approved Master Plans, which can be a good foundation for shaping any
strategic plan, in many cases they are not reflected in the 4-year development plans.
The Law on Urban Planning of Armenia has a specific chapter (Chap. 4) on
community involvement in the implementation of urban-planning activities, which
defines the importance of such and gives general directions. A few months after the
approval of the law in 1998, the Government of Armenia accepted the Guideline on
Community Awareness for Planned Changes on Built Environment and Society
Representative Involvement on Decision Making and Discussion for Publicized
Urban Planning Plans and Projects. This guideline tries to regulate the process by
defining the timing and step-by-step actions for carrying out mostly the duties of
authorities.
Another law, the Law on Environmental Assessment and Expertize, focuses
mostly on environmental issues and has an active watchdog community around it
mainly from the environment nonprofit sector. Based on this law, building and
planning projects that cover an area >1,500 m2 must be evaluated by this law,
which means all planning documents are part of this strict monitoring. For that
reason, the previous guideline, which is focused on communities’ involvement in
the planning process, have become less effective compared with this instrument.
Meanwhile, it must be stated that by having this regulation, in reality local
stakeholders are not part of the planning process because in most cases it is con-
sidered a checklist item and not real participatory decision making for the formation
of trust and improving the quality of decisions. Although there are these issues, it
must be stated that some regulative development in the public-hearing institution
are desirable. For example, more detailed scheduling and easier access to proposals
can broaden the participation of parties. The most crucial tool can be to maintain an
open dialogue as early as possible, ideally from the moment the idea is initiated.
Today, based on existing requirements, the planning document must be presented
into public hearings at the last stage of development when the project is more or less
over and any change can be time and resource consuming, which is a serious
impediment for proper consultation of and catering to the community’s real needs.
Another aspect of public hearing is the language being used by authorities and
professionals. The common approach to the professionalization of planning must
provide a common ground for transferring urban-planning policies and concepts to
a more understandable language and format. One of the solutions could be to
transform zoning plans or regulations into more perceptible instruments by showing
step-by-step developments through digital-simulated phasing rendering.
It is always more practical in countries such as Armenia to put the stress on the
legislative aspects of issues because due to the centralized policy implementation
system, it is easier to target the lobby to one point. Meanwhile, there should be no
doubts that for the sustainability of these policies, it is crucial to develop awareness
on a local level through local actors. The shift in society’s mindset during the last
decades is visible. During the first urban developments of the early 2000s, many
neighborhoods in the central part of Yerevan were gentrified by pushing >2500
people from their houses for new elite residential developments as a part of the
Northern Avenue development.8 Today this kind of “development” will meet a
strong reaction from people living in the area as well as support from other society
members, mostly young environmental and preservation activists. Starting with
2007, Facebook and other social media became part of Armenian reality, and access
to mass media has been resolved as being one of the main obstacles of civil society.
8
The number of displaced people varies in different sources. This figure is taken from a blog post
“Victims of “State Needs”; Business eats density of Yerevanians” from V. Ishkanyan’s blog dated
November 28, 2007, http://vahanishkhanyan.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/petakan.
One of the first instances was the civil movement Save Open-Air Hall of Moscow
Cinema, which as a modernistic heritage element built in the 1960s was listed under
state protection, but it lost its status based on a government decree. It “has been the
first case in the post-Soviet history of Yerevan where a major construction project
was halted because of the public opposition” (Zolyan 2010). The mostly young
people involved in this movement managed to stop destruction by using all
available legal and awareness-raising instruments. This success story initiated
several other movements for the preservation of green spaces and monuments,
which were successful in some cases only. From this row, Mashtots and Vishap
Park movements were started by “We Are the Owners of Our City” civic initiative
focused on environmental aspects and the movements Save Republic Square,
Arami 30, Preserve Covered Market, and Save Afrikyan House, initiated mostly by
preservation activists, are worth being mentioned.
These examples have one main thing in common. Despite the fact that some of
those were successful, they all were initiated when the realization of the idea that
they were opposing was in progress. It took some time until the moments when
representatives of this and other initiatives realized that they should not only act on
the decisions already made but also start to influence policies in advance. Some of
these groups transformed from watchdogs and activists to lobbyists on different
platforms in legislative, executive, and local institutions. That happened when
several legislative-development initiatives were put to discussion such as the
compliance of the article on displacement of monuments on national law to the
European Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe
(initiated by urbanlab Yerevan)9 or another proposal suggesting to enhance the
institute of public hearing for the urban-development programming (developed by
the National Center for Legislative Regulation at the Government Staff of the
Republic of Armenia with support of the Organization for Security and
Co-operation in Europe/OSCE), as well as some other legislative and regulative
proposals. In the framework of the last mentioned proposal, there was a special
remark to also improve the content and format of accessible presentation infor-
mation for public hearings aside from focusing on timing and other formalities.
As can be seen from the aforementioned text, most accomplishments and events
are centralized in Yerevan, which relates in fact to the general spirit of legislation
and administration. During the coming years, this issue will be one of the main
obstacles that civil society and Armenian establishment must face because there are
many talks to improve spatial conditions in Armenia and develop growth project in
regions as well. Debates on elected marzpets (governors of marzes) are in progress
initiated by some NGOs and opposition parties at the State Committee on
Constitutional Changes. In addition, some active NGOs are being involved in
decision making in local communities, particularly in Gyumri, where a
9
This proposal was presented in the Report on Study, Analysis and Development Program for the
Legislative Basis of the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments, performed by urbanlab
Yerevan in 2012, Authors: S. Petrosyan, B. Kocharyan, N. Ashoughatoyan.
representative of local civil society organizations was elected into the elders’
council of the town.
In some of the above-mentioned cases and, in general, the public pressure
managed to postpone some activities; parties were obliged to engage in dialogue,
but the lack of capacities required for the establishment of communication make
dialogue difficult and quite often useless. If in the case of environmental issues there
are people who can be considered professionals representing the community point
of view with a legal and environmental background, in the case of planning issues
(mostly urban) there is a lack of people willing to tackle with it who at the same
time are able to maintain their professional and balanced position. Aside from
everything else, the difficulty is also a result of being in a relatively small country
with fine professional community members, for whom, in some cases, professionals
supporting alternative approaches can be considered opponents of the mainstream
and thus face different unpleasant reactions in their professional career and activ-
ities. This fear of the professionals is one of the main challenges for alternative and
critical thinking in the current phase of Armenia’s society. It has to sharp corners,
first when professionals must keep their professional position and not act as an
activist and another case when activists are being considered “professional acti-
vists,” which makes their voice less trustful and gives them a label of being an
opponent to everything.
If we reflect on these concerns on a local level, we see that internal migration is
also influencing this situation because most of the young people with enthusiasm
migrate to larger cities, mostly to the capital Yerevan, for better education and work
opportunities. This leaves local community participation in other places only on the
level of middle age citizens; where trust to plan and influence possibilities is lost for
already mentioned historical reasons. An option for this can be considered sup-
porting local nonprofit organizations for establishing wider coalition and also
introducing e-governance components and social media tools into this process. This
could work in the case of Armenia by having a centralized human capital in and
around Yerevan that continues to follow-up from a distance. That will make it
possible to be involved in the participatory process without maintaining a local
permanent presence locally, and using online tools to support local players who can
duplicate and influence the process on-site will also help.
There are some online platforms, mostly Facebook pages representing small
towns, which are run by activists or journalists who are not involved in any
executive bodies. Currently they do not have sufficient impact on processes, but
on-line instruments can later become a tool for broader involvement.
An opposite approach is the call to decrease inner migration. Defining the local
and territorial uniqueness of natural and man-made assets can be considered a tool
for reducing the need to search for new opportunities out of one’s local home
community. Protection and promotion of cultural and natural heritage can first help
to develop new work places on local level as well as improve social and economic
conditions; it can also mature local pride among the community and endorse cre-
ative and entrepreneurial industries. In Armenia, especially young people leave
small towns and rural areas because of the lack of opportunities to develop their
skills and improve their quality of life. This decision is being made on a personal
level and can be influenced in the case of having positive feelings about and a sense
of belonging to one’s living environment. Thus, it is a cornerstone of considering
local community members not only as stakeholders but also “holders” of territory
with its broader cultural and natural aspects. In addition, physical interpretation of
valuable and historical landscape can seed this kind of pride and connect young
people with their communities, especially in this communication age, when with
limited resources wider audience can be covered.
Most of these concerns could be eliminated if there was trust of democratic elec-
tions and if local authorities had more personal responsibility and accountability to
deal with the opinion of community to ensure their future re-election. This is another
common fear that comes from Soviet period: The role of authority is not considered
the arbiter of public and private interests, but it continues to be a role gained from
someone (from the communist party to current parties) to control the community and,
in some cases, with personal will supporting or approving a community or an indi-
vidual’s initiatives. Without trying to go through political and social aspects, it is
difficult to avoid this mindset as a core of issues on local (self) governance.
In conclusion, it must be stated that although tendencies to democratization of
planning issues have had a positive course, there is a need for more institutional and
political support for the protection and development of cultural and natural land-
scapes based on local and territorial platforms.
During recent years, there were several attempts to raise communities’ concern
about participatory planning abilities in Dilijan town, which is currently being
considered one of the most dynamic areas of Armenia. In the framework of some
projects focused on planning issues, several actions were taken in this regard.
From Mapping to Acting—Encouraging

the Implementation of Cultural Territorial Systems
Knowledge About the Territory
During the early years of independence, the collapse of the economy was accom-
panied by a poor performance of the public administration. In early 2000s, the
public administration almost restarted from scratch with new legislative initiatives
and programs for the improvement of institutional capacities on a national level,
which established a new framework for territorial administration and actors.
However, during the 10 years of mismanagement, the main planning and research
institutions were privatized or lost their status, which resulted in a loss of most of
the previously collected data about the territory. As previously stated, Armenia has
developed Master Plans for approximately 72 municipalities and now is trying to
develop those for the remaining 92 % of municipalities through January 2016. The
vast portion of the budget for the development of such plans is being spent for
developing topographic, geomorphological, and seismic surveys. At the same time,

some other aspects of spatial-planning process are elaborated without rigorous
studies and analysis, including the social and economic forecasts, demographics,
and environmental surveys, in particular, studies on biodiversity, etc. This situation
highlights the need to rethink the requirements for the development of
spatial-planning documents.
Planning can be considered an constant ongoing process, it should also be
mentioned that the instruments for monitoring and redefining strategies are one of
the aspects that was not considered thoroughly in the Armenian planning envi-
ronment. Based on the working regulatory framework developed for
spatial-planning documents, only in case of the National Spatial Plan is the mon-
itoring component considered mandatory and included in the legal guidelines.
Consequently, even on the regulatory level, which is being developed based on the
national level, there is not enough attention to the monitoring of approved spatial
plans. In this regard, it is worth mentioning that in 2006 there was a government
decree for the monitoring of the implementation of the Master Plan of Yerevan
approved in 2005. Despite the fact that results of that monitoring are not accessible
or available, there was a Revision of the Master Plan of Yerevan of 2010, which
was developed based on the Ongoing Monitoring of Master Plan of Yerevan. The
main aspects of the revision were the change of the borders of Yerevan, by
extending its limits, which made more vacant lands in the periphery of the city
available for urban activities; in addition, there were actions to adopt already
provided building permits that were contradictory with the previous Master Plan.
Another planning challenge in Eastern European countries is ownership-right
transfers from state to private hands. In some countries where socialism happened
in a later stage (i.e., after the Second World War), after the fall of the regime a
restitution of ownership rights followed. This was not a simple process, especially
with the emergence of dual rights (mostly of pre-socialist owners and socialist
tenants), which caused several issues that are continually a matter of dispute in
some countries (e.g., Romania). In the case of Armenia, however, with the
installation of the Soviet regime in the early 20th century, post-socialist restitution
did not happen. However, most agricultural lands were privatized, and then the
government sold residential properties to their tenants. A third wave of privatization
was the distribution of shares for common assets that included most of the small-
and medium-sized commercial spaces and industries. Later, heavy and larger
industrial properties were privatized through direct sales based on
business-development plans. Today when the state and local authorities are being
considered the largest land owners in urban areas, incomes from land sales are
being considered one of the major income sources of municipalities. Being con-
sidered the fifth major10 privatization movement, the selling of public assets in
10
During the last quarter century, there were some other privatization waves that had quite local
impacts, for example, the privatization of basements, rooftops, and other social housing utilities.
These mostly were concentrated in urban areas where there were sufficient economic activities.
urban areas is one of the main challenges of current planning in dynamic urban
areas. The profits from selling community lands are considered a tangible part of
budgets of local communities; however, access to such information is difficult. The
town of Dilijan has very limited land remaining owned by the municipality because
there was quite a high demand for properties in those areas during last few years’
collateral with the “fifth privatization wave.” That wave also influenced the whole
area including the villages around it, where many dachas (Summer House in
Russian) can be seen among rural houses. This is especially an issue in Teghut, the
village closest to Dilijan.
Considering the context of these land-privatization tendencies, which are cor-
roborated by the available capacities and the willingness for long-term programmed
growth, they stress the importance of cultural territorial systems being essential for
emergence workable strategies that can change the whole vector of development.
We must admit, however, that the great need for funds, plus the nationwide pref-
erence for private ownership, are influencing the land-use policies of municipalities
to sell the lands now rather than develop long-term policies.
This lack of capacities, which is shaping the policies of municipalities, could be
mediated through local-level actors. They would have the capacity to influence the
process if they had sufficient access to available documents, especially if these
documents were “written” in common and “understandable” language and format.
For example, most Master Plans developed through the Ministry of Urban
Development are available at their official Web site. At first glance, they look
honest and lawful, but the quality provided makes them an imitation of accessible
planning documents, e.g., when a 1:10,000 scale drawing is uploaded as a raster
image (JPG format) with poor quality where it is hard to recognize legends.
Sharing the Diagnosis with Local Community
These issues could be eliminated if on the local level, accompanied by easy access
to information, there was active community to influence the decision-making
process. This requires not only accessibility but also a way to establish a common
language with authorities and professionals. The media could be a collective
instrument for this “discussion” to define common agenda and language, but it has
its unique challenges. First of all there are not enough amounts of local media
sources with sufficient influence. Furthermore, despite the fact there is a great
interest about urban issues during recent years, the proper discussion needs more
specialized content developers such as journalists, contributors, and editors. If the
first issue can be solved by using internet prospects, the second one requires broader
actions and time.
By overlooking the local (mostly Yerevan-based) media coverage of urban
issues, which mostly involves preservation and green-space issues, we can see that
it offers a one-dimensional approach close to the interview format without trying to

find in it a deep and multilevel analysis. Because these issues must be addressed by
professional and public administration professionals, social media platforms are
trying to cover news in their own way. Several influential bloggers and content
writers have shaped their audience and are influencing the “discussion” by building
an alternative media wave that is out of the “control” of any institution.
Since 2012 with the launch of the VivaEastPart project, several actions have
been taken with the first being mapping the existing situation. In the case of Dilijan,
comparing it with other areas, there was an approved spatial-planning document
that could be considered a good starting point. During the early phase, it became
clear that a planning document can have negative impact on the initial “under-
standing” phase of the area because the existence of an approved document and
contrary implemented policies decreased trust in spatial documents in the eyes of
community members and local authorities: Both the decisions to approve the
Master Plan of 2006 and to transform Dilijan into a regional financial center were
taken without actual consideration of local needs and visions. This meant that
implementation of the project had to start from gaining a tangible trust in planning
instruments among local community, and then together with them to rethink the
vision of the development strategy based on the cultural assets on site.
Another challenge is to highlight the importance of the territorial approach because
neither the legislation nor the community wanted consider it. The fear of community
was the future dominance of Dilijan town by taking advantage of the merged policies.
It must be stressed that during the project and for 1 year afterward, Dilijan was the
second dynamically growing urban area in the country (after the capital Yerevan) for
the scale of development projects, which cost >$200 million USD.
Based on developed strategy of the project local action group was shaped that
through in an inclusive methodology managed to concentrate capacities available
locally. During several meetings, of which three were moderated by international
experts, step-by-step, based on participatory discussions, many concerns, issues,
and fears were highlighted. These became the cornerstone for the future Action Plan
for the Territorial Cultural Systems of Dilijan town and the surrounding area.
Because the methodology was based on a territorial approach, special stress was put
on the development of spatial-planning documents, for example, the updating
master and zoning plans development for Dilijan urban and Haghartsin rural
communities and the development of new master and zoning plans development for
Gosh, Teghut, and Hovq rural communities.
Especially after the second meeting with the local action group, which took lace
6 months after the first meeting, common ground for considering the territory as a
whole was established. That helped to develop several other measures by special
focus on territorial approach, in particular the following:
• Preparation and approval of a common and long-term development strategy for
the territory;
• Development of a guideline/manual for architectural and construction activities
by accentuating heritage-preservation issues;
• Preparation and approval of a long-term tourism-development strategy by

accentuating the territory’s local potential for cultural, educational, resort,
ecotourism, and other alternative tourism types for the territory;
• Development of a Regional Spatial Plan for the area, in the framework of which
is based on National Law develop a Historic Cultural Preposition Plan of the
territory.
One of revolutionary proposals discussed during the meeting, which was added
into Action Plan, was shaping a new coordination joint body for the territorial
development for the implementation of common policies aiming At the following:
• Creation of a common branding identity for promoting the territory;
• Founding an information database focused on culture and tourism;
• Encouraging small and medium entrepreneurial activities in tourism and creative
industries.
In conclusion, we must highlight that despite the previous experience of partici-
patory decision making, particularly regarding environmental and social issues,
VivaEastPart project managed to shape a common understanding of
community-based planning. It not only affected the mindset on the local level; indeed
it managed to influence the mainstream approach by the planning field. The best proof
for that is the report of the Deputy Minister of Urban Planning, which was held in
February 2014 when the president of the Republic of Armenia attended a meeting at
the Ministry of Urban Planning. During this meeting, the Deputy for the first time
announced “Those micro regions for the Government planned extensive development
have to develop (spatial planning documents-Authors) (e.g., Dilijan area, “Tatev”
Touristic Center).”11 This is an important statement that does not fit into the frame-
work of Armenian legislation, but it was proclaimed and can be considered an out-
come of the Action Plan developed for the territorial cultural systems.
This is one of rare cases that gives confidence and enthusiasm to local actors and
experts involved in the field. The Eastern European region, with its multiplicity of
rich and unique heritage, could develop its capacities for sustainable development
by being open to a dialogue on learning lessons from the expertise and practices
elsewhere, successes and failures alike. At the same time, the particular challenges
of this context could serve as important insights for elsewhere on how to balance
public and private aspects and how to work with communities to build trust and
networks that contribute to a more meaningful and community-based development.
11
The information is available through the Official website of the Presidents of the Republic: http://
www.president.am/hy/press-release/item/2014/02/14/President-Serzh-Sargsyan-visit-Ministry-of-
Urban-Development/.
References
Petrosyan S, Kocharyan B, Ashoughatoyan N (2012) Report on Study, Analysis and Development

Program for Legislative Basis of the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments.
urbanlab Yerevan, Yerevan
Petrosyan S, Tovmasyan S, Kocharyan B, Aktaryan A (2013) Report on Project on Analysis and
Development of the Urban Planning Documentation System. urbanlab Yerevan, Yerevan
World Bank (2014) Doing Business 2015: Going Beyond Efficiency. Economy Profile Armenia
2015. World Bank Group, Washington DC
Zolyan M (2010) Armenia’s Facebook Generation: Social Networks and Civic Activism in
Armenia. Newsletter of the Institute of Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies of the
University of California, Berkeley, vol 27, issue 2, pp 7–13
Chapter 16
Moldovan Cultural Territorial Systems
First Experiences
Gruia Bădescu and Cătălina Preda
Abstract Planning and heritage policies in independent Moldova must be seen in

the context of a multilayered, turbulent transition reflecting an economic downfall,
territorial instability, and a fluctuating political identity. Despite political and eco-
nomic turmoil, Moldova’s planning and heritage legislation was harmonized with
European practices. Nevertheless, holes in legislation as well as the incongruence of
law and practice have led to abuses and damage to Moldova’s heritage and to
planning obstacles. Regarding the shift in scale from the national level to the
southern district of Cahul, this chapter further discusses the challenges of planning
and heritage in a rural area with rich intangible heritage but with a poor infras-
tructure and severely low budget. The local-level analysis also suggests ambiva-
lence toward built heritage as well as the predicament of public participation. The
implementation of a cultural territorial system approach in the Cahul district, to link
natural and cultural heritage, spatial planning, and local stakeholders, is discussed
as an opportunity for local and community development. A discussion of various
actions—including mapping heritage and landscape, building local networks, and
geotourism as a relevant development paradigm and a catalyst approach—suggests
that even with few financial resources, rural regions and small historic centres can
approach creatively and successfully the promotion of local development through a
cultural territorial system approach.
Keywords Urban planning Moldovan national planning system Urban

planning legislation
G. Bădescu (&)
Department of Architecture, University of Cambridge, Old Court,
Clare College (England), 1-5 Scroope Terrace CB2 1PX Cambridge, England, UK
e-mail: gb413@cam.ac.uk
C. Preda
Romanian Center for Innovation in Local Development International Expert,
Bucharest, Romania
e-mail: preda.catalinadana@gmail.com

216 G. Bădescu and C. Preda
Legal and Institutional Context for Planning Instruments

and Heritage Protection
The Republic of Moldova: A Multilayered Transition
The Republic of Moldova1 obtained its independence from the Soviet Union in
1991. Planning and heritage policies in independent Moldova must be seen in the
context of a multilayered, turbulent transition. First, there was the Washington
Consensus post-1991 transition from centralized Socialist planning to laissez-faire
capitalism, which is common for the entire region. In Moldova, however, this was
colored by the return in power, unique in the whole region of the Party of
Communists, who ruled the country from 2001 to 2009, albeit without conducing to
a re-communization of the country. Second, there was Moldova’s transition from a
constituent republic of the Soviet Union to an independent country. This was not a
smooth process and involved an early conflict in Transnistria, the eastern part of
Soviet Moldova, currently a breakaway republic. Although not recognized by any
other country, Transnistria functions to this day as a de facto independent entity
with its own government, currency, etc. Furthermore, Moldova includes the
autonomous region of Gagauzia, which has its own management but has been
integrated into the Moldovan framework
Within 20 years after its independence, Moldova went from being a relatively
well- off Soviet republic, celebrated for its crops and wine, to the unenviable record
of being Europe’s poorest state in terms of GDP per capita, beset by unemployment
and out-migration, with an estimated 25 % of the population working abroad. This
overall socioeconomic transformation, with its roots in the first two, can be seen as
a third transition involving a profound change in the population profile. One of the
most rural countries of Europe to start with, Moldova underwent a rather distinctive
pattern of reruralization: The rural population went from 52.3 % in 1989 to 61 % in
2004 as a result of the collapse of the industry and quality of life in urban areas. The
high proportion of rural population is also associated with a rich set of practices of
intangible cultural heritage. The urban exodus was followed by work migration to
Russia or Western Europe, which affected a majority of households and weakened
some of these practices. More than 80 % of the residing population lives in set-
tlements of <10,000 inhabitants, which makes a discussion of heritage in small
historic centers a very relevant issue.
1
The official name of the country is the “Republic of Moldova,” but we also use “Moldova” in this
chapter. This should not be confused with Moldova/Moldavia, the eastern province of Romania.
The two Moldovas were a single unit—the principality of Moldavia (Romanian: Moldova)—until
the Russian annexation of the eastern half in 1812 corresponding in part with the current Republic
of Moldova. Although the remaining Moldovan principality united with Wallachia to form
Romania in the later 19th century, the eastern Moldova joined Romania in 1918 only to be
annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940.
16 Moldovan Cultural Territorial Systems First Experiences 217
A fourth transition relates to nation-building, identity, and relationship to

neighbors. Moldova’s decades after independence brought a meandering sense of
direction regarding nation-building and identity for the majority population, as well
as relationship to its neighbors and to Europe. On one hand, Moldova was shifting
between having strong links with Russia and the CIS to a staunch pro-EU politics
and desire to access the EU. In contrast, nation-buildings processes made Moldova
oscillate between the Soviet line of Moldovenism, i.e., Moldovans as a separate
nation, and the cultivation of the cultural and linguistic links to Romania, of which
Moldova was a part until 1940 and with which it shares the majority of its intan-
gible cultural heritage including rituals, music, and food. In addition to the majority
population of Moldovans/Romanians,2 a number of minorities—including ethnic
Ukrainians, Russians, Gagauz, Bulgarians, Roma, and Jews—ensure a rich, mul-
ticultural intangible heritage. Although members of each ethnicity usually have as
mother tongue the language corresponding to the ethnicity, the majority of the
population is bilingual with Russian as a language of interethnic communication,
i.e., a Soviet legacy.
The many influences, allegiances, and identities, together with the economic and
political ruptures, accounted for a transformation of practices in heritage and
planning, which reflects both general trends in Central and Eastern Europe as a
whole as well as rather specific processes. Although the discussion in this chapter
will focus on the technical aspects of planning and heritage, they should be
understood not as an expression of a smooth transition but in a framework of
ruptures and challenges uncommon to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe
that joined the EU in 2004 and 2007.
A Complex Body of Laws, yet Beset by Problems
In the Republic of Moldova, legislation regulating the planning system and cultural
heritage has evolved continuously since its 1991 independence. The protection of
immobile cultural heritage objects was the first to be regulated legally through the
1993 Law on the Protection of Monuments. Urban planning came next with the
1996 Law on Principles of Urban and Territorial Planning. Additional laws, such as
the 1999 Law of Culture or the 2001 Law Concerning Architectural Activity, dealt
tangentially with issues of heritage. In 2002, Moldova adopted the Law on
Museums, while a Law on Popular Art followed in 2003. Mobile cultural heritage
was the subject of the Decision of the Government of the Republic of Moldova no.
1111 of 11.09.2003 concerning the Rules of the State Register of Mobile Cultural
Heritage. Additional documents in the 2000s set a framework for protected areas
2
The preliminary results of the 2014 census split the majority population into 56.8 % Moldovans
and 23.2 % Romanians. Of the entire population, 40.3 % declared the native language Romanian,
whereas 38.4 % declared Moldovan as the native language.
and landscape architecture. In 2010, the Law for the Protection of Archaeological
Heritage was promulgated. In 2011, a Law for Monuments in Public Space was
adopted.
Despite the fluctuations of orientations of political parties in power, Moldova’s
planning and heritage legislation showed a commitment to harmonize the country’s
body of laws with the international treaties signed as well as with the legislation
existing in other European countries. Regarding the former, after its 1991 inde-
pendence, the Republic of Moldova signed and ratified a number of international
treaties concerning heritage including the following:
• European Cultural Convention (Paris 1954), ratified 1994;
• Convention for the Protection of Architectural Heritage of Europe (Granada
1985), ratified 2001;
• European Convention for the Protection of Archaeological Heritage (La Valletta
1992), ratified 2001;
• European Convention of Landscape (Florence 2000), ratified 2002;
• UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the Cultural and Natural
Heritage, (Paris 1972), ratified 2002;
• Convention Concerning the Protection and Promotion of Diversities of Cultural
Expression (Paris 2005), ratified 2006;
• UNESCO Convention Concerning the Safeguarding of Immaterial Cultural
Heritage, (Paris 2003), ratified 2006; and
• Convention-plan of the European Council Concerning the Value of Cultural
Heritage for Society (Faro 2005), ratified 2008.
Regarding the “Europeanization” of the heritage legislation, a number of
Moldovan experts have commented that much of the Moldovan legislation and
regulations on planning and heritage matters are in fact adapted from the corre-
sponding contemporary Romanian documents. Although this could be seen as a sign
of a historic rapprochement with Romania, from which Moldova was severed in 1940,
it can also be understood as a pragmatic choice of adapting an already “Europeanized”
set of regulations and laws because Romania adopted practices and regulations from
the UE in its accession process, which were all already written in the language that
Moldova uses for official purposes.3 This can be framed in the discussions of heritage
as a subject of cultural diplomacy (Gienow-Hecht and Donfried 2010) with heritage
practices and regulations expressing cultural affinities and political options. For
instance, in the region, Romania traditionally adapted French legislation, with
Moldova following suit, whereas other countries in the region have traditionally opted
for German or Austrian models. After decades of heritage legislation being shaped
under the Soviet model, the turn toward Romania and the EU could reflect both a
cultural and political direction in Moldova.
3
The official language of Moldova, the name of which was a subject of contention, is Romanian.
The language was called “Moldovan” by the government, with the paradoxical acknowledgement
that it is identical to Romanian, until the Constitutional Court stipulated it should be called
“Romanian” in 2014.
Nevertheless, despite the extensive and seemingly comprehensive existing leg-

islation on natural and cultural heritage, a number of caveats and important
observations must be made.
First, there is the issue of harmonization of laws and signed international treaties.
Although the legislation of the Republic of Moldova gives priority to signed and
ratified international treaties, the international legislation in the field of heritage is
not “erga omnes” and obliges the state to adjust the existing legislation; only the
law on protecting archaeological heritage respects the Convention of La Valletta.
For all of the other conventions, up to 2012, legislation has not been adjusted.
Second, despite the apparent complexity and sophistication of the legal frame-
work, certain evident holes in legislation led to significant abuses and damage of
cultural heritage in the last 2 decades. For instance, although the Law on the
Protection of Monuments dating from 1993 provides extensive protection to
monuments, this was contingent on the publication of the Monument Registry in
the official publication of legislation in Moldova, the Monitorul Oficial, which was
delayed until 2010. A monument, however, could be protected only if it appeared
on the list. Consequently, for 12 years, monuments were de facto (and de jure)
unprotected by this law. This created significant inconveniences to the protection of
historical monuments because there have been numerous cases of buildings that
were demolished without the authorities taking any appropriate step in claiming the
lack of knowledge of which buildings actually are on that list. In Chisinau, for
instance, 83 buildings (10 % of those in the registry) were demolished between
1993 and 2010, and 17 additional buildings were severely damaged. Furthermore,
during the same period, 155 illegal architectural interventions on monuments were
also recorded (Ştefăniţă 2010).
Third, and perhaps the most problematic, is the incongruence between law and
practice. Reports from the Agency of Inspecting and Restoring Monuments of the
Ministry of Culture (2011) as well as policy briefs of Friedrich Ebert Stiftung
(Ştefăniţă 2011) underline that although the legislation is extensive and the country
has ratified international documents, they are ignored in practice, which is a key
issue affecting heritage in the Republic of Moldova.
The majority of Moldovan towns have urban plans dating from 1980. The lack
of financial resources led to a postponement from year to year of the actualization of
these plans or the creation of new ones. Cities that have elaborated urban plans,
such as Chisinau, were criticized by the 2011 report of the Ministry of Culture for
ignoring heritage protection in the city. Nevertheless, newer versions of these plans,
including the General Urban Plan for Chisinau as well as the a Local Urban Plan for
the Central Area, approach the topic of heritage and even propose the modification
of the listing category from local to national importance. The methodology to
elaborate such plans includes provisions to consider the issue of heritage both as
single objects (“monuments”) or as “protected areas” (i.e., ensembles with a high
heritage value).
A Planning System Seemingly Accommodating of Heritage

Issues
The framework for urban-planning activities in the Republic of Moldova was set up
by the General Urban Planning Regulation from 05.01.1998. The regulation states
that all settlements with their own local public administration should have a general
urban plan. It describes the planning tools used in the Republic of Moldova,
highlighting the general urban plans (PUG), zonal urban plans (PUZ), and detailed
urban plans (PUD), which correspond both in terminology and meaning with their
Romanian counterparts.
The regulation addresses also specific issues of planning in “heritage areas”
pending on Ministry of Culture or subordinates, namely that the approval of con-
struction permits in “heritage areas” should be performed only on the basis of a zonal
urban plan (PUZ) or a detailed urban plan (PUD) (article 31–34). Furthermore, the
regulation stipulates that architecture and urban-planning bodies within the local
public administration are obliged to match evidence of cultural heritage from the
administered territory with the goal to utilize, protect, and conserve it. Moreover,
architecture and urban-planning bodies within the local public administration are
obliged to control compliance with the legislation in the protection areas of monu-
ments; to analyze compliance for approval of technical documentation for the
execution of the works of investigation, design, restoration, conservation, recon-
struction, and adaptation; and finally to work together with state entities to determine
measures of protection, restoration, exploitation, and conservation of monuments.
The central authority responsible for policy and legislation is the Ministry of
Regional Development and Construction, mainly through the General Directorate
for Architecture, Design, Urban Planning and Spatial Development.
In the field of regional development, the EU-Moldova Action Plan, part of the
Eastern Partnership, emphasized the need for three actions as follows:
1. Promote balanced regional development through reducing economic and social
disparities across the country;
2. Implement measures on regional and rural development using an integrated
approach that builds on local precedents as well as well on EU best practice; and
3. Develop plans and undertake specific actions to promote growth of SMEs in
regions and in rural areas.
Part of the “Europeanization” of Moldova’s planning system was the shaping of
an integrated planning system that would address the needs of both territorial
planning and regional-development objectives. Through a capacity-building project
completed in 2014, Towards An Integrated System Of Spatial Planning And
Regional Development, Moldova aimed to avoid overlaps and thus reach a better
efficiency of public investments without dispersing human and financial resources.
A team of international experts, jointly with Moldovan professionals, examined the
Moldovan planning legislation. Among the conclusions of the study, which was
performed through the Ministry of Regional Development and Construction (2014),
was the fact that the spatial-planning legislation is not connected to

regional-development laws and policy, although many general objectives of these
two are common. Moreover, there is insufficient delimitation between strategic and
operational documents, which calls for distinctions and clarifications of the rela-
tionships between different types of documents: strategies (e.g., integrated vs.
sectorial, national vs. local), spatial plans (e.g., documentation for territorial
development and urban planning), and planning documents (e.g., development
plans, action plans, implementation and investment programs).
Heritage in the Republic of Moldova and Its Legislation
Law no. 1530 on the Protection of Monuments, from 22.06.1993, defined the
immobile cultural heritage under protection (i.e., monuments and protection areas
around them) and the attributions of the state and owners regarding the protection of
monuments. In the decade that followed, a number of regulations complemented
this law and defined the legal relations between different actors with impact on
cultural heritage as follows:
• The Regulation Concerning Urban Planning Certificates and Authorizations for
Construction or Demolition of Constructions (1997)
• The General Urban Planning Regulation (1998)
• The Regulation Concerning Protected Natural and Built-Up Areas (2000)
• The Regulation Concerning the Consultation of Population in the Process of
Elaborating and Approving Urban Planning Documents (1997)
• The Regulation Concerning the Activity of Local Architecture and Urban
Planning Bodies (2000)
As of 2013, the Ministry of Culture was working on the elaboration of a new
code of laws regarding cultural heritage: the Law on Historical Monuments, the
Law on Intangible Heritage, the Law on Mobile Cultural Heritage, the Law on Art
Monuments, as well as a number of additional regulations. The possibility to
develop a completely new law for monuments to replace the 1993 law is also
discussed.
Heritage Practices and Their Discontents
The law and the regulations define who has the agency on heritage protection. The
main structure within the Ministry of Culture responsible for the national cultural
heritage, both mobile and immobile, is the Direction of Cultural Heritage and
Visual Arts. The direction is responsible for the protection of heritage, maintaining
archives, and coordinating impact studies of urban and regional development on
heritage issues. The law obliges the responsible state institutions to systematically
monitor and examine the state of historic monuments. Consequently, another

structure within the Ministry of Culture with an executive role is the Agency for
Inspecting and Restoring Monuments, which was created in 2006 but has been
more visible since 2010. Furthermore, the ministry has a number of institutions with
a consultative role: the National Council of Historic Monuments, which meets twice
a month and establishes the a need to intervene on a certain historic monument and
its protection area, the National Archaeological Commission, the National Council
for Monumental and Decorative Art, and the Commission of Museums and
Collections. If this accounts for a comparatively sound institutional structure, in
practice, it is plagued by severe staff shortages. For instance, the Agency for
Inspecting and Restoring Monuments has only seven staff members. The report
from the Council of Europe Experts Mission to Moldova (2012) comments that the
personnel is a group of dynamic and motivated young professionals, but the volume
of work is incommensurate to their number, and the pay is very low to provide a
sustainable framework to preserve or attract a skilled workforce.
It is not only at the level of national institutions that skilled staff shortages are
felt. The Soviet system of “restoration factories,” which reunited in institutions at
various scales architects, engineers, and restoration specialists, was discontinued in
1993. The current market demand for such specialists is low towing to meager
financial possibilities on the one hand and to a lack of a high cultural status of
heritage objects on the other. Furthermore, there is no specific training for heritage
specialists at the moment in the Republic of Moldova (Council of Europe Experts
Mission 2012).
The practice of heritage management is also affected by the lack of available
mechanisms. Although the legislation stipulates that structures of funding heritage
management and research are put in place, as well as incentives for those who
protect heritage, there are hardly any mechanisms in practice. For instance,
according to article no. 45, the state is obliged to provide benefits to natural or
judicial persons who produce or provide materials, tools, and equipment necessary
for the evidence, research, safeguarding, conservation, and restoration of monu-
ments. Benefits include an exemption from paying customs taxes, reducing taxes, or
preferential treatment for loans. Despite the provision by law of money incentives
for activities to protect cultural heritage, this rarely happens in practice. A report of
the Ministry of Culture (2012) blames the lack of funds and the indifference of local
bureaucrats toward this matter, which is caused by a lack of tradition in heritage
protection and the lack of an efficient mechanism of financial redistribution.
Furthermore, there is a lack of a system to provide fiscal facilities.
One additional problem in practice is the lack of coordination and cooperation
between the two ministries with responsibilities related to built heritage and urban
areas: the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Regional Development and
Constructions. On one hand, the Law for the Protection of Monuments has con-
tentions with the Law for Authorization in Construction. On the other, the Agency
For Inspecting And Restoring Monuments and the State Inspectorate for
Construction do not coordinate their actions, which leads to the possibility of abuse
(Council of Europe Experts Mission 2012).
Making Heritage: Incongruities in the Register

of Monuments
The case of the Register of Monuments of Moldova is telling of the overall tensions
between legislative achievement and problematic loopholes. Moldova today has an
elaborate Register of Monuments, which lists 5206 monuments to be under state
protection, of which 4086 are of national importance and 1120 of local importance.
There are no cultural heritage monuments of international importance (i.e., UNESCO
World Heritage Sites, etc.) on the territory of the Republic of Moldova (there is one
natural heritage site, the Struve Geodetic Arc, which the country shares with other 9
states). The register includes 2696 archaeological sites, 1284 historic monuments,
1261 architectural monuments, and 225 art monuments. Beyond the 5206 sites
recorded in the national registry, a number of monuments with local importance are
recorded in local registries (raion and city based). Although this is seemingly a neat,
well-recorded register, there are a number of essential entries of this register that have
adversely affected heritage in the last two decades. We have already discussed pre-
viously how the register was published in the Monitorul Oficial very late (17 years
after the Law of Protection of Monuments), which led to many abuses. However,
even the adopted register now is beset by its methodological beginnings.
The issue here is that the register is incomplete and inconsistent. The methodology
for including monuments was different for each of the three regions of the Republic of
Moldova. This inconsistency was caused by the historical context in which the list was
shaped. The first initiative to create an inventory of monuments was in 1976 when a
new department of monument research was created within the Academy of Sciences
of the Moldovan Soviet Socialist Republic (MSSR) with the goal to elaborate the
Code of Historical and Cultural Monuments of the MSSR, which was part of a larger
Soviet project. After 10 years of research in the northern part of the country, the first
volume appeared in 1988 in Russian. Monuments were selected to reflect a certain
vision of history focused on class fight and the becoming of a Socialist state
(Ministerul Culturii 2011). Research for the central part of the country, including the
city of Chisinau, took place, however, in the context of the end of the Soviet Union and
the creation of the independent Republic of Moldova. Consequently, the principle of
selecting monuments based on class fight was abandoned, and the importance of the
monument for national historic as well as its mere artistic value became the two new
main principles. Buildings erected in eclectic, Russian Art Nouveau, and
Neo-Romanian styles, considered decadent and ideologically inadequate during the
Soviet period, were included on the list for the central area. Furthermore, regarding the
protection of single monuments, the second research also included the idea of pro-
tecting ensembles of monuments (ibid.) After the elaboration of Law 1530 on the
Protection of Monuments, there was a call to update the list to make the Registry of
Monuments required by law. Monuments with a specific reference to communist
ideology were removed from the original list for the northern sector. Nevertheless, the
main problem was with the southern part of the country including Cahul. The list for
this region was made as a compilation of monuments resulting from secondary
sources without primary research (ibid.). Consequently, the final list that appeared in
the registry consists of a juxtaposition of three lists obtained with different method-
ologies; it is also inconsistent and contingent on the politics of various periods. The
report of the Expert Mission of the Council of Europe in the Republic of Moldova
(2012), Evaluating the State of Cultural Heritage, even highlighted that there is a
tendency to use ideological or identity-based criteria rather than “scientific” criteria in
the process of selection of heritage monuments.
This brings to the forefront the specific challenge of heritage as a tool of
identity-making and ideology, which in the region has nuances and expressions
unfamiliar to contemporary Western European situations. The sensitive nature of
heritage as a symbolic representation of particular groups or historical narratives is
captured in the Law of Monuments by a specific call to avoid any form of judgment
connected to ethnicity, confession, or a certain historical period: “In the definition of
the status of monument, any discrimination based on chronological, ethnic, con-
fessional or other criteria is forbidden. The aesthetic, functional and material value of
a monument is subsidiary to the quality of historical evidence” (article no. 3, law
1530, 1993). This article in the Moldovan law reflects the challenges of situations
where particular pieces of heritage could be interpreted in terms of nation-building or
national oppression, with conflicting meanings, and is a careful expression of cau-
tion in such a political context. For instance, a Russian tsarist building or a Soviet
memorial could be seen as embedding meanings of oppression by the Romanian
language majority, whereas Romanian interwar churches or monuments could be an
expression of a pan-Romanianism with which ethnic minorities or Moldovans, who
want to distance themselves from the Romanians, would be uncomfortable. After
acutely political heritage strategies occurring in both interwar Romania and the
Soviet period, independent Moldova would thus reflect through this law a desire to
stand clear of symbolic clashes over heritage and regard heritage as apolitical.
Consequently, such an article, perhaps self-explanatory for a Western audience, is an
important declaration in a region where politics, identity, and the nation are
re-narrated in links with political transformations and radical re-imaginations of the
state. Nevertheless, a claimed depoliticization of heritage is a difficult act: As
Ashworth et al. (2007) have shown, heritage strategies are always political. What is
important here is the volition to portray a will to transgress historical debates and
reshape a new Moldovan state identity that is cosmopolitan and beyond ethnic
politics. Nevertheless, despite the intention in the law to separate the political and the
“objective,” in practice (as we have seen from the analysis of the register of mon-
uments), both heritage selection and management carry various biases.
Scale Shifting: Evolving Concepts for Protecting Areas
In 2000, the regulation on natural and built protected areas seemingly widened the
definition of protected heritage to include larger sites and areas. The regulation
defined protected areas, established the criteria to delimit them in the
documentation for urban and territorial planning, described the basic exigencies
required for the conservation and enhancement of these areas, determined the
competencies in this field of the central and local public authorities, and proposed
special rules for sites and reservations. The regulation distinguished between
internationally, nationally, and locally important protected areas.
The regulation described the manner in which protected areas should be estab-
lished: (1) identification of heritage objects (in the case of built heritage these are
the monuments described in the Registry of Monuments); (2) the realization of the
background study (heritage type, influence area of monument, dysfunctionalities);
(3) the realization of the project of the protected area (including a PUZ or PUD; and
(4) obtaining approval from the Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry of
Culture). Until the background studies are made, the area around a monument
within a 100-m (urban areas), 200-m (rural areas), or 500-m (outside settlements)
area should receive the legal status of a protected area.
It is important to mention that according to this regulation, a protected area in the
Republic of Moldova was not an area that has an ensemble of constructions with a
historic or ambiental value but rather is an area related to a single monument.
Consequently, the law only partially managed to shift scales by sidestepping the
importance of heritage ensembles. This is why, in 2013, an additional article was
added to the law by specifically referring to ensembles, which “due to their
architecture, unity and integrity in landscape” are nationally valuable “from a
historical, artistic or scientific point of view.”4
Decision 1009/2000, connected to the regulation on protected areas, lists a series
of prerogatives and obligations that public bodies have regarding heritage. First, the
decision recommends to county and local councils to create registers and lists
evidencing natural and built heritage to spatially define and legalize the zones
considered to have heritage value. Second, the decision obliges the Ministry of the
Environment and Territorial Planning to determine the program of tourism devel-
opment, including rural tourism, which has as goals the following: the inclusion in
the touristic circuit of heritage; to ensure the methodological support to enhance the
value of heritage; to create, together with the Ministry of Culture, the Commission
for Monuments and Protected Areas; and to periodically organize seminars for
specialists and local public authorities, which have the role of familiarizing them
with the regulation. Third, the decision stipulates that the Ministry of Culture is in
charge of keeping the evidence of cultural heritage and in controlling its use by
permanently working with the owners of heritage monuments. Finally, the decision
describes financing sources to be used for the elaboration of projects for protected
areas.
[Art. 1 al.(3), lit. b) modified through LP62 of 04.04.13, MO91/20.04.13 art. 288].
4
Intangible Heritage in a Diverse Land
The majority of the heritage legislation has been concerned with immobile cultural
heritage. Nevertheless, the rural and multicultural nature of Moldova accounts for a
rich set of intangible cultural heritage. At the initiative of the Ministry of Culture
and the Academy of Sciences from 2010, the national program, Safeguarding the
Cultural Heritage of the Republic of Moldova, involves the preservation, research,
and involvement of the cultural heritage of the Republic of Moldova and has shed
significant light on intangible heritage. Major objectives of the program include the
completion of an inventory of the heritage of the Republic of Moldova, of Moldova;
the mapping in a GIS system all of the monuments and sites; the creation of cultural
heritage archives and electronic databases mainly for intangible cultural heritage;
and creating the mechanisms and instruments of monitoring and safeguarding
research. The necessary resources for this program can be ensured from two
sources: (1) the state budget as the main funding source of the entire program; and
(2) European funds in case the program will be divided in distinct projects.
A Register for Intangible Cultural Heritage has been in preparation since 2012. It
is divided into two volumes: The first volume includes the intangible cultural
heritage of the majority of the Moldovan/Romanian population, whereas the second
volume is dedicated to the intangible cultural heritage of the minority population.
Heritage, Landscape and Territory: The Missing Link
The Republic of Moldova signed the European Convention of Landscape (elabo-

rated in 2000 at Florence) on the 14th of March 2002. Nevertheless, up to this day,
no law has been adopted in Moldova regarding landscape that would apply the
principles of the convention. To this end, the Ministry of the Environment has
prepared a Law Concerning Landscapes, which has been planned to be presented to
the government for approval. The planned law has the goal of both applying the
convention and of executing the national strategy and the Action Plan on
Conserving Bio-Diversity. Consequently, and also in connection with the fact that
the issuing body is solely the Ministry of Environment, the planned law is biased
toward natural heritage.
The planned law has as a stated goal the insurance of “protection, planning and
management of landscapes to satisfy the ecological, cultural, economic and touristic
needs of society and the organization of European and international cooperation in
the field.” Among the fundamental principles of the protection, planning, and
management of landscapes, the law describes the sustainable development of
landscape, the priority of environmental protection, the conservation and protection
of landscapes as habitat, the use of advanced technologies to prevent the degra-
dation of landscapes, and the engagement of civil society in the decisional process
regarding landscape protection and management.
The planned law defines what is a landscape of national importance including

four categories of landscapes: (1) specially identified untouched” landscapes that
are unaffected by economic activities; (2) natural areas protected by the state;
(3) agricultural territories with a high natural value identified according to bio-
logical crtiteria or/and that comprise geologial and physical-geographical valuable
objects; and (4) landscapes with a special recreational value. Just this list reveals the
fact that the category of cultural landscape is not directly present in the law since it
barely touches on category no. 4. Consequently, the promulgation of the Law on
Landscape is not seen to have a major impact on the issue of cultural landscape.
Although there is no current legislation on landscape, the national program, The
Moldovan Village, addressed holistically the issue of rural development in the
Republic of Moldova including both landscape and heritage concerns in its contents
and vision. The programme, planned in 2005 but in action since 2010, dealt with a
variety of socioeconomic issues affecting rural settlements and the rural populations
of the Moldova. A number of objectives dealt directly with the issue of landscape
and heritage including the maintaining of “rural landscapes, cultural-historical and
natural values,” the protection and enhancement of national cultural heritage, and
the renovation and conservation of national heritage that has touristic value as well
as its inclusion in tourism activities. The proposed actions of the program include
the vaguely defined protection and enhancement of national cultural heritage, the
development and revigoration of artistic crafts, the inclusion of revitalized crafts as
an important component of the national touristic product, and the dissemination of
the importance of the development of tourism (rural, ecological, wine-based, cul-
tural, etc.) for local development. Finally, the program proposed the organization of
a “practical-scientific conference” called “the valorification of cultural and natural
heritage—a chance for the revitalization of the country’s settlements,” highlighting
national best practices.
Local Stakeholders—Participatory Planning for Cultural

Territorial Systems
We have seen how planning and heritage issues in the Republic of Moldova are
conditioned by a canvas of complex factors relating to the multidimensional tran-
sitions that the country has been through in the last 20 years. As we have seen, the
majority of Moldova’s population lives in rural areas or in towns with a popula-
tion >10,000. To understand the dynamics of planning and heritage at the level of
these communities, we shall discuss the case of the Cahul district, which has been
under study between 2012 and 2013 within the framework of the VIVAEast project.
A Rural, Agricultural Area, the Cahul District is

Representative of Moldova’s Cultural Landscapes
Located in the south of the Moldova, Cahul district (raionul Cahul) lies in the
Lower Prut valley at the border with Romania with Cahul town being 170 km from
Moldova’s capital, Chisinau. In its southern end, it borders Ukraine and includes
the confluence of Prut with the Danube, the southernmost point of the Republic of
Moldova. The district occupies 1545 km2, which accounts for 4.5 % of the territory
of the country, and consists of low rolling hills descending in altitude from north to
south and toward the Prut river valley (Fig. 16.1). The valley has been a part of a
scientific natural reserve—the Lower Prut Reservation—since 1991 and is naturally
connected to the UNESCO Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve in Romania. It is one
of the warmest and driest areas of the country, which provides the conditions for
vineyards and orchards and the shaping of a corresponding landscape. The majority
of the land is arable (70 %), and the district has a rural character including only one
town (Cahul [35,800 inhabitants]) and 54 villages organized in 37 communes and
accounting for 83,600 residents. The landscape of the area reflects a long-term
evolution having distinctive geological, natural, cultural, and habitat features, an
identity that owes much to the interplay of the Prut river front and the largest lakes
of the country, meadows and pastures, and plains and woods against a backdrop of
low hills. The traditional pattern of rural habitat is of small-scale settlements situ-
ated along the roadsides or hidden on the hill slopes among vineyards, orchards,
and gardens (Fig. 16.2).
Fig. 16.1 The natural landscape of the Lower Prut Valley

Fig. 16.2 Rural landscape in Cahul district
The cultural environment of the region was forged by multicultural communities

of Moldovans/Romanians (78 %), Ukrainians (6.5 %), Russians (6.5 %), Bulgarians
(4.9 %), and Gagauz (3 %) with specific tangible and intangible heritage. Although
there is ethnolinguistic diversity, the majority of the population (98 %) adheres to
the Orthodox church. Before the Second World War, there was also a German
minority in the area, which was colonized by the Russian Empire after 1814, but
with the Hitler—Stalin pact the ethnic Germans were transferred to Germany in
1940.
The district represents Moldova in a nutshell: an undulating landscape of low
hills with a profound rural and agricultural character and the coexistence of a
number of minorities. It is a good avenue for study of the dynamics of heritage and
planning in small historic centers for the whole country within the framework of
cultural territorial systems. The premise of the VIVAEast project in the district was
that the territorial system formed by the town of Cahul and the rural localities
ensure a structure that, in compliance with environment and landscape, can support
a sustainable development in the future based on culture, nature, and community.
Planning Challenges and Opportunities to Involve

Stakeholders
The district also reveals some of Moldova’s planning challenges as follows: dif-
ferences between rule and practice, severely low budgets, and poorly connected
infrastructure. Local authorities have noted that planning for community develop-
ment is hampered because of the small number of localities that have updated PUGs
(General Urban Plans). In 2013, only 12 of the 37 communes in the district had such
plans updated. District authorities have stated that there is an initiative on developing
such a plan for the entire district. In addition, one of the priorities of the District
Council is to update all PUG documentation in the next 3 years and to proceed with
the elaboration of local development plans as well as feasibility studies for infras-
tructure projects. The national Urban Project Institute, which has a branch in Cahul,
was singled out as a possible great contributor in drafting the aforementioned doc-
umentation, but the financial situation of the District Council and the relatively long
time required for drawing up these plans must be taken into account.
In the Viva East project, we aimed to explore ways in which stakeholders could
be involved in the planning and development of cultural territorial systems. The
phases developed at the local level started with the identification of stakeholders
and champion teams, the organization of three workshops aiming at (1) raising
awareness and involvement of local actors in defining priority areas of intervention,
(2) developing an Action Plan and a Local Pact to be agreed and signed, and
(3) piloting projects relevant to a holistic development that would be implemented
through a territorial cultural system.
The participative process developed during the project, in workshops, thematic
seminars, and on-site meetings, underlined the opportunities and threats for the
territorial development and heritage enhancement and valorization in order to
provide a better quality of life for the members of the local communities.
During the workshops in Cahul, the issue of the involvement of private stake-
holders was brought up. For the change to occur in a reasonable period of time and
to obtain new resources to ensure the implementation of other projects in Cahul, the
planning process should involve more coordination among various activities and
the various actors. Both private and public actors must collaborate and coordinate
their actions to ensure the smooth running of the project. For instance, one possible
coordination is that between producers of wine and the public and private orga-
nizers of cultural events including several dance festivals and celebrations.
An Undervalued Tangible Heritage
Cahul district is the setting of a particularly rich intangible heritage (folklore, tra-
ditions, music, dance) alongside the tangible heritage (mobile = crafts, gastronomy;
immobile = vernacular and religious architecture). Although the intangible heritage
is celebrated through numerous festivals alongside the community practices, the list
of monuments and the policy analysis reveals that the immobile heritage is under-
valued. Although our field research showed that the majority of the built environ-
ment consists indeed of Socialist-era structures built with modern materials, we also
found a handful of valuable traditional houses in each village that were generally in
disrepair. Much of this heritage is not listed due to the methodological problems
highlighted in the previous section, i.e., the Registry of Monuments did not include a
study of the southern part of the country and includes only 20 monuments for the
entire southern region out of 5206 listed objectives in the Republic of Moldova. For
instance, in the area around Cahul, including the town, 6 orthodox churches, 1
memorial house, 10 monuments of art, and 1 park are listed. These do not reflect the
richness of the territory because the traditional/vernacular architecture, local
ethnographic museums or traditional craftsman workshops, community public pla-
ces supporting folk dances (“hora” squares), not to mention the cultural landscape
generated by the agricultural and cultural practices. are not taken into consideration
to be listed at the local or national levels and therefore to have an important part to
play in a strategy of sustainable development adapted to local context because they
are capable of producing synergies of the economy with social and cultural life in the
area. The analysis of the area heritage values sheds light on the specificity of the
village morphology, adapted to the relief and natural landscape, where local com-
munities have practiced agriculture, vine and fruit tree growing, and shaping the land
into cultural landscapes, thus producing a specific architecture for living or storing
their products (houses, caves) and developing skills in crafts using local materials
(wood, earth, reed, straw). In terms of heritage, the character of Cahul district, and
specifically the project area, is a symbiotic relationship between nature and culture,
between tangible and intangible, with “cultural landscape” being the best descriptor
for all values incorporated in the territory. Nevertheless, although
national-development strategies have engaged with the role of cultural heritage
regarding the district territory, culture was not taken into consideration as a main
factor for sustainable socio-economic development at the local level (Fig. 16.3).
Democratizing Heritage Planning
A challenge for implementing a strategy based on territorial cultural systems in the

Cahul area was how to develop an approach aiming to democratize planning and
decision-making for territories with heritage elements that are unequally present in
current sustainable development plans. This was an important challenge related to
the range of stakeholders who were willing to commit to working toward a con-
sensus in setting a cultural network and determining relevant priorities for the
enhancement of the territory.
In the Republic of Moldova, the Law on Transparency of Decisions (239/2008)
stipulates that local communities and stakeholders should be both informed and
included in consultation processes. In practice, however, consultation is often
Fig. 16.3 The diverse

heritage of Cahul district:
a vernacular architecture in
the Prut valley; b decorative
carpentry; c the Bread
Museum; and d traditional
dance
limited to the dissemination of information. Consequently, the organization of a

consultation with local stakeholders in Cahul enthused the participants. Most of the
participants were representatives of local authorities, district authorities, the
Ecological Agency, the State University in Cahul, and the Art and History Museum
Cahul with local NGOs having only a slight involvement in these debates.
Despite the heterogenous nature of the stakeholders, the discussions reflected a
common longing for an effective way to participate in the shaping of a sustainable
future development based on culture. Participants showed discontent for the limited
involvement of stakeholder groups affected by previous project developments in the
decision-making process. The lack of a proper involvement of community members
in the decision-making process misses out on its value to development because
involving them contributes to cement a community spirit and local pride.
During the three workshop debates, local actors presented various valuations and
perceptions of the area’s heritage. The dynamics of the public-consultation meet-
ings showed that the local stakeholders are very interested in the intangible and
mobile heritage, whereas the built environment is not considered to be an important
asset. This matches the policy analysis reported here and triggers this question:
How can the difference between the valuation of experts and that of local stake-
holders be mediated for a harmonious development? In the case of Cahul, the
answer lies in the specific situation of the “valuable” (in the terms of the experts)
traditional architecture that is not seen by local stakeholders, from authorities to
residents, as being valuable.
Working together for the same goal—to value their heritage (which for some
communities was intangible and for others was tangible local assets)—did not occur
in the previously existing development plans or in programs and projects. Within
this context, a network of cultural “places and events”—i.e., a cultural territorial
system—and the implementation of VIVA methodology brought a new integrative
way of thinking and acting for a common goal for stakeholders and especially for
local authorities.
From Mapping to Acting—Visual Instruments and Visible

Results for Encouraging the Implementation
of a Territorial Cultural System
Mapping Heritage in Cahul: From Experts to Community
Mapping heritage data of the area, which is an essential feature of the implemen-
tation of a territorial cultural system based development, became a challenge. This
was a difficult task because local authorities were not previously interested in
gathering and organizing such information to sustain a professional analysis of the
situation on the ground. This was contrary to the fact that urban and territorial
planning, in theory, should have used such a tool for each locality and for the
district territory as a whole.
To have a real diagnosis of the territory, field research was the starting point for
the mapping and determination of valuable tangible heritage, landscapes, and
intangible heritage. Using photography of the identified objects and practices, the
expert team assembled a database, which was then recorded on a map. This was just
a first step of the mapping process because experts could just obtain access to the
most “visible” forms of heritage, i.e., the immobile heritage as well as the selected
intangible heritage that somehow stood out.
An essential subsequent step was to have community input on that
map. Intuitively, this would serve the community well especially for intangible
heritage practices that are inaccessible directly to the experts. The locals suggested
first natural heritage elements, e.g., the river valley, lakes, forests, and then the local
traditions, particularly music.
To test the methodology, a phase of monitoring and evaluation for projects with
such an unusual approach for Moldova would help in obtaining relevant feedback.
This would also serve to adapt the tools of the methodology to territories that have a
different history in the way that they understand sustainable territorial development
based on cultural heritage. Regarding tangible heritage, locals suggested the his-
torically, but not architecturally, relevant supposedly French vine cellars as well as
the Soviet-era built Socialist realist Palaces of Culture in the city while shunning
traditional, rural vernacular or religious architecture. Although the local vernacular,
which is in harmonious composition with the natural landscape, materials, and
colours, is physically degraded, it also suffers from a lack of acknowledgement and
valuation. This could be seen in connection with the processes of Soviet modern-
ization, which brought Socialist realist architecture of a pseudo-neoclassical style in
the rural areas as a symbol of urbanization. The sumptuous architecture, despite
having been discordant with the local building traditions, had the role of a symbolic
status upgrade for local peasants, thus becoming a new object of pride.
Consequently, there is a need for mitigation between expert perspectives, which
treat these forms of architecture as interrupting the discourse of landscape as well as
the territorial cultural system and the local perspectives, which have appropriated
them while being oblivious, or even embarrassed, by the rural vernacular (Fig. 16.4)
Mapping Landscape
After the site visits and analysis of the territorial context for the target area of
VIVA EAST PART project (represented by the town of Cahul and the villages of
Colibasi, Valeni, Slobozia Mare, and Vadullui Isac or Branza), a main valuable
feature for sustaining the development of a territorial cultural system appeared to be
the landscape, i.e., the natural landscapes of the national scientific reserve of Lower
Prut (geological protected areas as in the Valeni village hills) as well as the “or-
dinary landscapes,” e.g., pastures, woods, gardens, vineyards, and small-scale rural
buildings, which represent evolving patterns of land use and landscape character
that must be preserved and protected. A proper landscape management for
Fig. 16.4 Mapping heritage of Cahul district

environmental heritage must accommodate new development of the area of refer-

ence in a sustainable way.
The recognition by authorities and local communities of the fact that each
landscape, whether cultural or natural, requires a tailored approach first by the
proper identification and mapping of the most important parts as distinctive land-
scape settings (such as settlements and the buffer zones that separate adjacent ones,
areas with key distant perspective scenery views, natural or architectural landmarks)
as well as locally degraded landscapes needing enhancement programs. Cultural
landscape assessment and enhancement will benefit inhabitants by providing a
better quality-of-life environment and will attract, through new adapted forms of
tourism, visitors looking for authenticity and identity of places while being
respectful of the local environment and the local community’s way of life.
From Maps to Networks
Once the participative map of the territorial cultural system has been shaped, a next
step at the local level was to define the actions aimed at preserving and promoting
the identity of settlements through capitalizing on the mapped local resources. The
latter, which includes material and immaterial cultural heritage, natural and man-
made ecosystems, etc., are key engines of growth that should be embedded in
planning measures that act in synergy to generate added value. Local stakeholders
highlighted the need for an integrated “network” development to create cultural,
tourism, social, and economic networks and thus to “articulate” the territory to
enhance the spatial cohesion and the community. The network was aimed at pro-
moting specific elements in five localities (Cahul, Valeni, Borceag, Colibasi,
Slobozia Mare) and natural landscapes (vineyards, Natural Park, Prutul de Jos) with
the principles enunciated in the Florence convention (protection of landscape and
traditional activities, crafts, etc.). The usefulness of an integrated territorial devel-
opment plan was discussed, a plan that would facilitate the creation and interre-
lation of communication networks as well as physical and transportation networks
(including alternative mobilities).
The development vision for the Cahul region that resulted from the analysis of
spatial characteristics and the consultations with local stakeholders is that of a
territory with a human scale, benefitting from its nature and respecting the envi-
ronment, whose economic growth will be based on cultural values (natural and
built), on traditions and customs that give the “spirit of the place”, understood and
enhanced for a better quality of life of its inhabitants. Through the participative
process of a team, including stakeholders, local authorities, international partners,
and local and international experts, some priorities for the area emerged:
• Agriculture as basic traditional economic activity
• Tangible (natural, built) and intangible heritage (valorization within an inte-
grative management system)
• Infrastructure and territorial equipment/services

• Tourism adapted to territorial context (nature and culture area- based tourism)
• Community development
Most proposed initiatives related to the development and promotion of agri-
culture, as a traditional economic activity, connected to the valorization of heritage,
community, and tourism development in the area. The development of different
types of tourism, e.g., ecotourism, rural tourism, and cultural tourism, also emerged
as a priority. The need for achieving a comprehensive tourist and cultural offerings
in the area—along with proper services and related activities for both locals and
tourists (leisure services, cycling trails, visits organized in villages with tourist
potential, landscape route, etc.)—was emphasized, These measures would serve to
animate and increase the attractiveness of the territory. In this respect, the idea of a
tourist and cultural passport of the area, e.g., to visit various events and tourist
attractions, was discussed. At each visit, a “stamp” will be applied, and people who
collect a certain number of points/stamps will be rewarded with a symbolic prize (a
bottle of wine, a local craft object, etc.). There was a proposal of creating a brand of
the region. In this respect, a contest could be organized that would be open to all
community members.
After the discussions, diverse ideas resulted in the need for coordinating and
shaping an integrated plan of the territorial assets that can then provide a common
basis, which local stakeholders can better understand and on which they can reach
agreement regarding the priority actions needed for territorial development.
Sensible Tourism for Cultural Territorial Systems:

Geo-Tourism
The Cahul region, through its geographical location close to the river system
formed by the Prut and Lower Danube rivers as well as its rich natural and cultural,
especially immaterial, heritage has a significant potential for development through
tourism. Tourism-development planning focused on innovative approaches that
enhance the territory such as ecotourism (for natural sites) and geotourism (for local
communities) is recommended as a component of smart growth. Geo-tourism is a
holistic approach to tourism and local development: It starts from the premise that
the specific geographical character of a place is an asset for tourism and economic
development. It is defined as a type of tourism that supports the geographical
character of a place, i.e., the specific natural environment, the culture, and the
welfare of its inhabitants because it is both part of sustainable development com-
mitted to conserve environmental resources and biodiversity as well as a
cultural-revitalization program. Central to geotourism is a respect of the sense of
place and the enhancement of local assets including heritage. A fundamental
principle of geotourism is that there is a fundamental relationship between eco-
nomic development, tourism, and the character of a place, and these three elements
must be mutually supportive. A second fundamental principle is that resources

within the community must be involved in the process of tourism by encouraging
and supporting local economic initiatives. It is recommended that development
policy should be based on partnerships as well as encouraging the valorization of
the local character, history, and culture,, including traditions, gastronomy, music,
crafts, etc. One priority example is hiring local labor and using products and
materials from the area.
Convergence in a Catalyst Project
The team of experts and local stakeholders chose a pilot project to implement the
vision that emerged from the mapping exercise and the connected discussions.
During this process it was decided to implement a pilot program that will focus on
the valorization of a folk festival that takes place each year in Valeni, one of the
target villages in the project. The implemented project was Integrated System for
the Support and Promotion of a Cultural Site Valeni/Slobozia Mare. The project is a
small-scale infrastructure for developing cultural events related to intangible her-
itage and exhibitions of locally produced handicrafts, gastronomy and art. Its aims
are to be a significant node of the cultural territorial network in the area as well as a
marking point in terms of visibility and awareness for locals and visitors. The
specific actions to be undertaken are to create a specific mobile equipment to enable
local public authorities and their partners from Cahul district to organize festivals
and other cultural events (on an itinerant basis) and to contribute to the preservation
and valorization of the cultural heritage of the Cahul area. The main investment was
in specific furniture made of natural materials (such as wood, stone, etc.) by local
craftsmen for a better organization of the festival Dulce Floare de Salcam, which is
held in a picturesque location called the “Golden Hill” due to the geological
peculiarities of the site and its specific color of the surroundings. This bridged the
valuation of natural heritage as a setting of social life (the mobile scene would be
placed in meadows and a clearing) with the one of intangible practices. The specific
furniture and most of the interventions made are movable so that other community
could benefit from and be able to organize cultural events in any location of Cahul
district, thus increasing project sustainability and ensuring the multiplication effect
as well. Under the newly created brand of the Golden Hills cultural site, events can
gather communities from all of the territory presenting their intangible heritage
(represented by songs, dances, traditions, and crafts) in a place where a small-scale
infrastructure was manufactured using local materials by local artisans. Because it
was constructed in movable parts, it is ready to be used for cultural events in other
“nodes” of the cultural territorial system of the district.
Another objective of the pilot project was to create a Web portal that will
promote the cultural and natural heritage of the area. To create the premises for an
optimal communication of heritage assets and needs, both within of the territory and
communities and for the stakeholders outside them, participants agreed on the need
to make a Web portal as a priority project. The Web portal was intended to be a
support for both the communities and the networks that will be created so they to
know the potential of the territory and the added-value actions to be taken. The Web
platform would provide information about the region and would contribute to the
development of a database of local cultural heritage. The map was published on the
Web portal, and local stakeholders were trained in an IT workshop to update the site
with their opinions on heritage. The aim was to shape a network of ideas and sites
that would reflect the relationships and objects present in the territorial cultural
system.
The portal will be comprised of statistical data, urban-territorial data, maps, and
plans, and information on the legal and economic framework to conduct similar
urban operations. The structure of the portal will be modular to facilitate access to
different areas of information and will containing both a technical database and a
list of the partners involved in these efforts (authorities, NGOs, industry, services).
The long-term results aim to provide a more efficient use of resources (urban
spaces, public or private buildings that contribute to the existence and value of the
cultural landscape) and to reduce the gap in the development of local communities,
thus preserving local identity and attracting investments.
The implementation through the local action plan could determine the devel-
opment of the Cahul cultural territorial system, which will highlight the full
potential and cultural heritage of the territory in the context of balanced and sus-
tainable socioeconomic development.
References
Ashworth GJ, Graham BJ, Tunbridge JE (2007) Pluralising pasts: heritage, identity and place in
multicultural societies. Pluto Press, London
Council of Europe Experts Mission in the Republic of Moldova/ Misiunea de experţi a Consiliului
Europei în Republica Moldova (2012) Evaluarea situaţiei patrimoniului cultural. Ministerul
Culturii, Chisinau
Gienow-Hecht JCE, Donfried MC (eds) (2010) Searching for a cultural diplomacy. Berghahn
Books, New York
Ministerul Culturii (2011) Patrimoniul cultural al Republicii Moldova, de la realitate la necessitate.
Chisinau
Ministry of Regional Development and Construction (2014) Towards an Integrated System of
Spatial Planning and Regional Development
Ştefăniţă I (2011) Policy Brief. Pastrarea patrimoniului cultural istoric al Moldovei, o provocare a
modernitatii. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Chisinau
Ştefăniţă I (ed) (2010) Cartea neagră a patrimoniului cultural al municipiului Chişinău. Minsterul
Culturii, Chişinău
Chapter 17
Romanian Cultural Territorial Systems
First Experience
Vera Marin
Abstract A member of the UE since 2007, Romania is looking for ways to be not
just an extension of the EU market but also a real democratic and competitive
country. The totalitarian regime left important marks on the country, especially
during its last decade: isolation of the country, unsustainable industrialization, and
maybe even more important, mistrust between people and confused values and
beliefs. With this “difficult heritage,” the transition toward a market economy as
well as a democratic society has been difficult including “wild” privatization of
previously state enterprises, delayed and messy retrocession process of land and
buildings, corruption of decision makers, lack of understanding about the role of
civil society, and the inherent weakness of this newly born third sector (there were
no associations or foundations during the communist regime). Even more so than
the large cities, small historical centers struggle to keep the population, to find
economic viability, and to preserve in the same time the local identity. Their future
depends very much on the capacity of their leaders to understand and make use of
the few opportunities that are currently available. In other words, these places
depend of the ability of their communities to plan for their future.

Keywords Urban planning Romanian national planning system Urban planning
legislation
V. Marin (&)
Department of Urban Planning and Spatial Development, University of Architecture
and Urbanism “Ion Mincu”, Strada Academiei 18-20, 010014 Bucharest, Romania
e-mail: vera.marin@atu.org.ro

242 V. Marin
Legal and Institutional Context for Planning

Instruments and Heritage Protection in Romania
Planning Instruments in Romania
“In Romania, the spatial planning field has a task that is twice as hard than in
developed countries. Following the fall of the centralized planning system in 1989,
Romania had to basically learn to do planning from scratch. This process has been
arduous, plagued with fits and starts, and it is on-going. The legal, regulatory, and
institutional framework has been continuously evolving to respond to evolving
needs and challenges. In the past 20 years, Romania has, arguably, shifted from
radical centralized planning to no planning, and further on to a struggle to redefine
and impose a new scope and aim of spatial planning functions. Significant efforts
and energy have been invested in building a spatial planning system from scratch,
and in changing public perception and discourse on these issues.”1
Francois Ascher, in a famous work entitled “The New Principles of Urban
Planning,”2 presents conditions for the exercise of the urban planner profession in a
society where there is more rationalization, more differentiation, and more indi-
vidualization than ever before. Ascher showed that nowadays, every individual and
every community must face rapidly changing circumstances and therefore can count
on very limited previous direct experience. As a consequence, special considera-
tion, adapted to a specific situation, is required because the planner is unlikely to
have been faced with exactly the same circumstances in the past.
Master plans should be used as the spatial expression of public policies, and
consequently the relationships between public authorities, professionals, citizens,
and the business community have changed. Therefore, instead of working with
predesigned, individual projects and with frozen schemes, planning instruments
must be correlated with instruments of negotiation.
These are also the principles contained in Law no. 350/2001, the specific law
for spatial and urban planning in Romania; however, the spatial planning system
—with its instruments, activities, and institutions—did not perform at the level
stipulated by these principles. Its approval meant a consistent improvement after
10 years of post-communist lack of regulatory framework in this domain (from
1990 to 2001). However, after its approval, the law had many amendments,
which shows the difficulties of the Romanian society to manage the tension
between ownership rights and imposed building regulations. In contrast, the
number of professionals involved in spatial planning and interested in landscape
protection has increased, and they have been increasingly exposed to practices
from other EU Member States
1
Enhanced Spatial Planning as a precondition to Sustainable Development—Report of the World
Bank for the Ministry of Regional Development, 2013.
2
Ascher, F—Les nouveaux principes de l’urbanisme, Ed. de L’aube, Paris, 2001, p. 11.
17 Romanian Cultural Territorial Systems First Experience 243
Unfortunately, there is a divide between professionals and politicians: After 1990,

there was no political commitment toward the importance of planning. Of course, one
could say that the laws themselves could be considered as a form of commitment, but
they were proposed by professionals to parliament voting. Even if the legal framework
is there, the system does not work without proper reinforcement, especially in a
society where the relationship to the rule is not an easy one and where this particular set
of rules touches “sacred” ownership rights. Hence, planning instruments are of
interest mainly for planning professionals. The public does not know or understand
much about the colored schemes or the strategic documents produced by planning
professionals, and the political leaders see, in general, that the obligation to have these
planning documents is either a waste of time and money or even worse: They force
them to share some of their decision-making power with the planners.
Law 350/2001 defined several planning documents that are hierarchically con-
nected and compulsory: from the territory of national scale (PATN–National
Territorial Plan with various sections dedicated to themes such as transportation,
water, protected areas), getting through the level of county-level territory (PATJ–
County Territorial Plan), to the general urban plan for every settlement
(PUG–General Urban Plan) and to the Zonal Plan for historical centers of rural or
urban settlements. In addition to these obligatory documents, there are also those that
depend on specific circumstances: coastal zones, mountains zones, risk zones, etc.
Documents dealing with the territory level have a guiding function for
lower-level documents. Those elaborated and approved for one urban or rural
settlement have both a strategic and a normative role because they create the
building-regulation framework, which form the basis for issuing building permits.
According to the principles stated in Law 350/2001, spatial-planning instruments
must be “global, aiming at coordinating different sectorial policies in an integrated
manner; functional, having to consider the natural and built environment, build on
cultural values and common interests; prospective, having to analyze long term
development trends of economic, ecologic, social and cultural phenomena and
interventions as well as consider those when applied; democratic, ensuring the
participation of the population and its representatives in decision making processes”
(article 3 of the Urban Planning Law). Urban planning must be “operational, by
detailing and on-field delimitation of spatial planning acts provisions; integrative,
by synthesizing sectorial policies regarding the territory management of settle-
ments; and Normative, by regulating land use, defining destinations and building
volumes, including infrastructure, amenities and plantations” (article 4 of the Urban
Planning Law) (Table 17.1).
The basis for planning instruments to operate properly lies in several articles of
the Romanian Constitution referring to private and public property and to the
organization of central and local public administration. Legal provisions concerning
property rights are stipulated in various laws, but an organic law, specifically for
defining the general legal regime of property and inheritance as it was stated in
Article 136 of the constitution, has never been issued. Article 44 of the constitution
introduces the possibility of limiting property rights for public interest cause with
due compensation. This article is rather vague, and it introduces the obligations as
244 V. Marin
Table 17.1 1 Territorial and urban planning documents in Romania

Scale Initiators and public bodies Approval level
issuing assents
A. Territorial plans
National territorial plan Government Parliament
Zonal territorial plan MRDPA Deconcentrated County council
Regional or intercounties government institutions and Local council
Intercities or intercommunes interested territorial and local General council of
Border areas agencies Bucharest
Metropolitan, periurban for main municipality
municipalities and cities
County territorial plan MRDPA Deconcentrated County council
government institutions and General council of
interested territorial and local the Bucharest
agencies municipality
B. Urban plans
General urban plan and regulations (PUG)
Bucharest municipality MRDPA Deconcentrated General council of
government institutions and the Bucharest
interested territorial and local municipality
agencies
Municipalities MRDPA county council Local council
Deconcentrated government
institutions and interested
territorial and local agencies
Cities County council Local council
Commune County council Local council
Municipalities, cities and MRDPA county council Local council (city
communes which include tourist Deconcentrated government or commune)
resorts institutions and interested
Zonal urban plan and regulations (PUZ)
Inner part of the city of Bucharest MRDPA Deconcentrated General council of
or other area of interest government institutions and the Bucharest
interested territorial and local municipality
agencies
Inner part of municipalities or MRDPA County council Municipal council
other area of interest Deconcentrated government
Inner part of the city/communes or County council Local council
other functional areas of interest
(continued)
Table 17.1 (continued)

Scale Initiators and public bodies Approval level
issuing assents
Protected areas or areas under MRDPA Local
specific restrictions as well as those County council councils/General
that extend over the limits of a Deconcentrated government council of Bucharest
territorial administrative unit institutions and interested municipality
including Bucharest municipality territorial and local agencies
Detail urban plan (PUD)
Buildings listed as historical sites MRDPA Local
as well as those situated in County council councils/General
protected areas Deconcentrated government council of Bucharest
institutions and interested municipality
Any other buildings Interested territorial agencies
Local
councils/General
council of Bucharest
municipality
Source adapted from WB report, Enhanced Spatial Planning as a Precondition for Sustainable
Development p. 53, 2013
property rights: “the property right includes the obligation of respect of all servi-
tudes [obligations imposed by law on property] concerning environment protection
and good neighborhood conditions, and also the respect of other obligations which,
according to law or tradition, are owner’s duty.” The provisions of article 53 of the
constitution mention other situations in which rights might be limited: defense of
public health, defense of citizens’ rights and liberties, and prevention of conse-
quences of natural calamities, disasters, or very severe events.
The organic law concerning property rights was never issued, and this fact could
be explained through the delicate situation of post-communist positioning toward
ownership. The planning law is not an organic law, and the restrictions imposed by
the regulations in the urban-planning documents are actually quite weak and, when
in court, they can be and often are dismissed.
Without a solid basis, there is not much impact of the rather elaborate planning
system with its various planning instruments, even though there are specific pro-
visions for heritage and environment protection that could affect property rights.
Because heritage is not among the public interest issues listed in the constitution or
in an organic law, the heritage protection professionals effectively “build houses on
the sand.”
246 V. Marin
Legislation for Built Protected Areas
Either in large cities or in small settlements, the diffuse heritage should be of special
concern. Whereas the procedures for listed buildings are more easily recognized
and accepted, the protection of the areas where the “ambiance” is the value to be
protected is rather unsecured. These areas are designates as “built protected areas”
through local urban regulations with some guidance from heritage-protection
institutions. Hence, it is important to see how these areas are presented both in the
heritage-protection legislation as well as the planning legislation.
There is some confusion in the official definition of “protected areas” in the
current legal framework of Romania. Since 2001, in the current legal framework,
there are three categories of historical monuments following the 1972 UNESCO
Convention for Heritage: monuments, ensembles, and historical sites. Sometimes
historical monuments from the list are included in the protected areas, but some-
times these areas do not contain any listed building.
To increase the confusion even more, another legal definition of “protected
areas” is given in the National Territorial Planning Act–section III, which includes
natural protected areas and built protected areas; in this last group, there are his-
torical centers of cities and villages that have a high degree of coherence. It could
therefore be stated that even though the definition of “protected area” differs from
one law to another, in what concerns the object of this article, i.e., small historical
centers and their surrounding landscape, the practice clearly points toward
urban-planning documents to identify and regulate the areas to be protected.
Romanian heritage legislation is based on the principle that heritage is a common
interest and therefore requires institutionalized protection, but there is also much
confusion regarding the responsibilities of the public institutions as well as a very low
level of law enforcement. No punitive measures are included against local authorities
who chose to ignore governmental ordinances and even laws requiring, for instance,
the inventory of green spaces or just the counting of the blocks of flats. Here is another
example relating to the topic of this article: The law approving the natural and cultural
protected areas of national importance3 states that local authorities are obliged to
finance and insure (with the support of the central authorities) studies for the delimi-
tation of the areas listed in the law with a maximum delay of 12 months. After their
delimitation, local authorities are supposed to have specific urban-planning docu-
mentation for these areas. The documentation is supposed to be elaborated in respect to
a specific methodological framework, i.e., the Zonal Urban Plan (PUZ) for Protected
areas, which was issued by the Ministry of Transportation, Construction and Tourism4
3
Law no 5/2000 PATN—Plan for the National Territorial Development—section V—Protected Areas.
4
Elaboration methodology and content frame for urban planning documentation in protected built
areas (PUZCP)—Regulation issued by the Ministry of Transport, Construction and Tourism,
Published in Official Monitory, no. 125bis from 11/02/2004, elaborated by Research Institute for
Urban and Territorial Planning—Urban Proiect.
as a tool related to the Urban Planning Law. Nothing happened to those local public
authorities for not doing anything.
Official methodological frameworks also exist for the elaboration of historical
studies, which form the basis for definition of the areas to be protected. They show
clearly the role of the specific segment of professionals in the delimitation of areas
that are supposed to have the status of protection and to present these areas in the
PUG general master plan. The necessary studies and the procedures for the elab-
oration of a Zonal Urban Plan for a Protected Area are supposed to be presented in
detail, and there are professionals having the appropriate diplomas and recognition
to do so, but they are not called by the municipalities.
Although the texts of the heritage law mention, for instance, fines for the owners
of historical monuments who do not take care of their property and even penal
action against those who destroy historical monuments, no visible action is taken
against these people. What is visible on the streets of large or small settlements in
Romania are decaying buildings. Sometimes, in large cities with more people
involved in civil society organizations, one could also see protest banners against
the new construction of buildings having an overwhelming size and the contrasting
use of materials and architectural language compared with the characteristics of the
place where they are inserted (Fig. 17.1).
Although the Ministry of Culture and the municipalities have the possibility of
using a right of pre-emption, the budget for buying listed buildings from their
private owners who wish to sell is always low or simply nonexistent.
The Urban Planning Law from 2001 allowed private investors to initiate and
finance urban-planning documents that would suit their purposes. The legislators
presented as argument the fact that some cities have limited local budgets, and
development must be especially welcomed in these cities; thus, if developers have
the funds to pay for studies and propositions for new regulations, this should be
accepted to make development possible. This rationale was meant to make room for
exceptional situations, but unfortunately it has become the rule, and this “private
urbanism” is practiced everywhere in Romania no matter how large or small the
local budget.
Weak Correlations Between Heritage Protection

and Planning Procedures
There was not much concern for insuring coherence between the legal framework
for heritage protection and the one for territorial and urban planning. A proactive
attitude of local public municipalities was missing in negotiating with the private
sector, and one argument for that is the fact that there are no legal frameworks
specifically designed for public private partnership in urban development or any
formal instruments for urban-scale operations (not for new urbanization perimeters
nor for the regeneration or the restructuring of existing parts of the city).
248 V. Marin
Fig. 17.1 New insertions in one of the built protected areas in Bucharest. a Bird’s eye view over
the built protected area (courtesy of Bing Maps). b Map of built protected area regulations
approved in 2000 (www.pmb.ro)
In addition to this, the law concerning authorization procedures for building

activity has dramatically changed several times since 1991, and we can speak about
periods when coordination was lacking between the general procedures for building
permits and the specific procedures regarding protected areas. For the city of
Bucharest, the legal responsibilities were even less clear, even though it has its own
Direction for Culture and its own “regional” commission, because Bucharest has
been assimilated to a county level for many administrative issues.
Much confusion was introduced through numerous changes in the laws but also
through abuse in the interpretations of these laws by public servants in the
urban-planning departments of the local administration or by the directors from the
Ministry of Culture regional and central directions.
The Ministry of Culture has established a special section of the National
Commission for Historical Monuments entitled the Section for Urbanism and
Protected Areas. It is a consultative body with permits being issued by the Direction
of Historical Monuments, Archaeology, Cultural Landscapes and Protected Areas,
which is coordinated by the State Secretary for National Cultural Patrimony. This
commission has the role of analyzing not only technical documents but also the
historical studies that are part of the preliminary work before proposing urban
regulation documents or demolition/construction technical documentation.
The Ministry of Culture has also has county-level Directions for Culture and
National Patrimony, which are decentralized public services reporting to the
General Direction and relying on the counseling from a Regional Commission that
has been established for several neighboring counties. In the years of increasingly
intense real estate pressure in large cities, how effective was the National
Commission, the General Direction, and the Bucharest Direction of the Ministry of
Culture in resisting the propositions for interventions that have been realized?
Illegal situations are very hard to document and prove without the support of the
ministry, the State Inspectorate in Constructions, or the Discipline in Construction
services of the municipalities (in case they have such services).
These entities should be the first to signal and take measures to punish inap-
propriate interventions. Instead, they usually ignore requests for information
coming from nonprofit heritage-protection organizations. It could be stated that
within the legal framework, and with the blessing of entities having the responsi-
bility of protecting heritage, current practices in large cities include demolition
permits and zonal derogatory master plans that were changing building regulations
in the interest of the owners for one parcel that is part of a protected area. In small
historical centers, the real estate investment pressure is not present, the main
problem being the lack of resources of the old or new owners: The retrocession
process is still causing much confusion, and many buildings are underused or even
unused while owners wait for the clarification of the property status.
The urban-planning law was subject to contestations precisely because it was too
flexible in allowing private individual interests, sometimes against the common
interests,5 to be accommodated, There are a huge number of cases when, with
5
August 2008—Governmental ordinance no. 27 brought limitations for derogatory plans in pro-
tected areas (article 18 of the ordinance, which modified article 47 of the Urban Planning Law no
350/2001). If one owner/developer was willing to change the urban regulations for a plot that was
part of a protected area, then the whole area should have been subject to a new regulatory zonal
plan. One year later, when validated as law no…, this limitation was not accepted in the
Parliament.
250 V. Marin
perfectly legal backup, even historical monuments have been demolished for larger
new buildings. As previously explained, in the “protected areas” the protection is to
be ensured more through “local law” expressed in urbanism regulations than in
national binding rules.
The legal framework for built heritage was also analyzed in a publication entitled
“Heritage, Historical Centers and Local Development—Cooperation Between
France and Romania.”6 Here, the authors describe the state of the heritage-protection
field before, during, and after the communist regime. Among the positive aspects of
the communist period, they list the creation of a good “restoration school” between
1962 and 1977 with professors who were educated abroad, mainly in Rome. In this
group of experts, important attention was paid to the identification of urban fabric
with cultural value (“minor architecture”), and there were also studies and projects
for the restoration of historical centers seen as complex operations. Unfortunately,
the communist party imposed the restructuring of the city centers to erase the past
and show the force of modernity through new architecture; consequently many cities
witnessed great losses of heritage. These demolitions were permitted due to the fact
that, in the same year as the famous Systematization Law (1974), the laws con-
cerning built heritage were replaced by a very schematic legal act. After 1977, the
Historic Monuments Direction disappeared, and thus no financial resources were
dedicated to heritage protection. It is only in the academic environment that the
preoccupation for built heritage continued. Criveanu states that without real practice,
and because of the “hiatus” in the field, an entire generation of architects and
planners that are currently at the peak of their professional career are lacking
experience in both restoration and urban interventions in historical tissue.
In 1990, one of the first reparatory gestures of the political power was to
re-establish the National Commission for Monuments, Historical Sites and
Ensembles. In the first years after communism, the authors of this report on the legal
framework show that the Ministry of Culture and the ministry responsible for urban
planning issues were cooperating well in the identification and protection of valuable
historical parts of cities and villages. The perspective was very much advanced
because in the official document that is mentioned in this report,7 it is stated that
these areas should be protected through specific regulations, but the need to, inte-
grate protected areas in the economic and social life of these settlements is also
mentioned. In this way, both conservation and development aspects are taken into
consideration, and this constitutes an advanced sustainable approach, which very
much encouraged in the European Union as we will see in the following section of
this chapter. The cooperation between the two ministries concerned with the “diffuse
heritage” is very valuable, but unfortunately it was lost in the year 2000.
6
Patrascu Ghe. and Popescu Criveanu, I—Histoire comparée des législations, des outils de pro-
tection du patrimoine et des autorisations des travauxen France et en Roumanie—chapter:
Patrimonies, centres historiques, développement local, la cooperation francoroumaine, ed.
Simetria, November 2007, p. 41—published in 2007 as a result of two cooperation conferences
held in 2004 in Targoviste and 2005 in Sibiu.
7
Ibidem 6, p. 44.
Identification and Involvement of Local Stakeholders

in Romania
Disconnection Between Regulatory Planning and Planning

for Attracting Financial Support from the European Union
Urban policies bring together not only professionals and decision makers but also
the business sector and the local community. Urban policies are defined as “mul-
tidisciplinary and constantly adjusting themselves to new demands.”8 To be suc-
cessful, urban policies must be integrated. This means that multiple connections
must be built across domains such as the labor market, spatial planning, housing
issues, environmental sustainability, safety, mobility, economy, culture, and
social-inclusion concerns. The concept of governance is highly relevant in con-
nection to the role of the local public administration in the promotion of sustainable
development. In general, governance “refers to the way a society sets and manages
the rules that guide policy-making and policy implementation.”9 European best
practices and theoretical approaches show that good governance at local level
means “increased citizen and civil society participation, as well as cooperation
between local authorities and municipalities that are an indispensable part of urban
policy and of effective management.”10
The final perspective of the Toledo Reference Document on Integrated Urban
Regeneration and Its Strategic Potential for a Smarter, More Sustainable and
Socially Inclusive Urban Development in Europe is dedicated to governance. “Good
governance has acquired even greater importance in the current financial crisis,
which makes it particularly significant to achieve the maximum optimization of
resources and efforts by stressing cooperation and synergies, multilevel governance
and the integrated approach.” In the scientific literature, there is a sort of reserved
attitude of the researchers toward the real possibilities of answering simultaneously
to all of the requirements of the sustainable approach. Very often environmental-
protection interests conflict with those of economic development, and the same tense
relationship can be found with social-development interests. In our view, this
skeptical attitude is legitimated even more in transitional societies where all of the
cards are played on economic development and where social development and
environment protection are on the public agenda just because “Europe says so.” It is
a real challenge for urban policies makers “to be able to provide convergent answers
with equal levels of efficiency to the environmental, social and economic questions
raised in cities.” However, it has also been stated that it is possible to overcome
conflicts and discrepancies when using an integrated approach and multilevel gov-
ernance, thus ensuring “appropriate coordination platforms and frameworks—
8
http://www.eukn.org.
9
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan027075.pdf.
10
http://www.eukn.org.
252 V. Marin
whether formal or informal” that would bring transversal, vertical, and horizontal
coordination among the actors involved in “city building” (i.e., public authorities,
property and financial sectors, professionals, etc.).11
These models of doing things through the coordination between sectors, between
administrative levels, and between public authorities and the other stakeholder
groups are presented as being the best because they bring forward and exhibit all of
the interests and divergent ideas to be analyzed. By so doing, negotiation becomes
possible, and the doors are then open to find the compromise that would please the
most group possible. If we agree in principle with this mechanism, which is sup-
posed to set the conditions for negotiation, it is more difficult to see how these ideas
apply in a context where there is a lot of suspicion among the groups of actors and
where, even for the same group of actors, the interests are not clearly set.
Whether it is appreciated or not by professionals or public servants, the two
ministries (the Ministry of Culture and the ministry dealing with spatial-planning
instruments) are connected to each other for issues concerning protected areas in
small or large historical settlements, and that is so because, among other things, the
laws impose the definition of protected areas through the General Master Plan
(PUG). For the delimitation of protected areas, preliminary studies must first go
through the National Commission in the Ministry of Culture.
The ministry dealing with urban planning issues has changed its name many times.
It has, of course, competence in analyzing propositions of the General Master Plans
including the definition of protected areas, and reviewing the zonal regulatory plans
that include historical monuments, archaeological sites, and historical ensembles.
Even though for a short period of time, immediately after the fall of the com-
munist regime, there was a strong connection between central public institutions
from the planning field and the Ministry of Culture with its local and regional
structures, in recent years we have witnessed an increasing polarization of
approaches. Opinion leaders, politicians, ministries, public servants, NGO repre-
sentatives, and professionals want to make clear their loyalty to one group or the
other as if it would be inconceivable to work toward development and protection
together. One plan must “travel” from one commission to another and from one
General Direction to another, and even though the protected areas are recognized by
both central administration institutions as being both “urbanism” and “culture,” it
proved to be impossible to gather the two perspectives into one single document to
be issued by both institutions.12 The proposition was rejected not only by the
11
Toledo Reference Document on Integrated Urban Regeneration and Its Strategic Potential for a
Smarter, More Sustainable and Socially Inclusive Urban Development in Europe. Available at: http://
ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/newsroom/pdf/201006_toledo_declaration_en.pdf. Accessed: June 2010.
12
Initiative of the Ministry of Regional Development, through the General Direction for Urbanism
and Territorial Planning, in 2009: In the pursuit of the simplification of authorization procedures
required by the European Commission, instead of having two different permits, it has been
proposed by the General Direction for Urban and Territorial Planning from the Ministry of
Regional Development and Tourism to have only one document issued and signed by both
General Directions when there is a building project in one protected area.
representatives of the Ministry of Culture but also by the professionals and by some
nongovernmental organizations. The argument was that although the Ministry of
Regional Development represents “development,” the Ministry of Culture repre-
sents “preservation,” and these two “opposite” perspectives cannot be on the same
official document. Therefore, a common commission is not appropriate because
there must be room for confrontation between these supposed positions.
Through the decentralization process, increasingly more responsibilities have
been allocated to the local level, but this has been done in a context of scarce
financial resources. Human resources represent and have represented another very
important problem at the local level. The legal framework points toward local
authorities for the well-being of the local community and for the sustainability of its
development in the future. Planning this future today means that decision makers
and public servants are working together with professionals using some instruments
that are sometimes imposed or simply made available by the central authorities. In a
nutshell, after decentralization, apart from some governmental programs through
which the central government could impose some conditions on the local authorities
in exchange for funding, there has been very little cooperation between the local
and the central levels.13
In large cities, because many protected areas are in the center and because real
estate pressure has naturally been placed on the centers, many derogatory
urban-planning documents were prepared and voted to change PUG regulations in
protected areas. The energy of private investors was not redirected toward other
parts of the city through well-defined strategies of the local public administration. In
general terms, local authorities have lacked a proactive, but reactive, attitude toward
investors: local councils have in most cases voted in favor of these derogations.
In small historical centers, which are the subject of the present publication, there
was no investment energy. The built heritage is facing lack of maintenance or even
demolition. These communities are struggling with the economic difficulties and
confusion brought by the transition period along with a decrease in population and
having to learn democratic principles.
Unfortunately, the fact that development strategies and land-use regulations must
be strongly connected to each other is still not obvious for decision makers, not
even for consultancy firms and professionals. We have seen local development
strategies that do not have one single map of the city on which to place the foreseen
projects. And we have also seen general master plans that have nothing in common
with the local development strategy that was voted on 1 or 2 years before and
subsequently forgotten. In addition, the derogatory urban documentation was voted
in by the same decision makers who were also voting for development strategies
that stated the importance of heritage protection.
13
For instance, in an attempt to gather data about the professional background of the chief
architects and public servants from the urban-planning departments in city halls across the country,
the Ministry of Regional Development had to ask the support of the Ministry for Public
Administration to obtain the questionnaires filled in, and even then the ratio of participation was
not very high.
254 V. Marin
Territorial plans have as a major objective the function to emphasize the listed
historic monuments of national interest. However, usually very little action is
usually taken to address landscape values and improve the operational side of
“protection for development.”
Territorial plans are the spatial expression of major development programs and
projects in a specific territory. Therefore, “protection” is perceived as being
opposed to development if development means infrastructure for circulation, eco-
nomic production, and energy production. A major shift is very much needed in the
way that the “cultural landscape” is understood. Unfortunately, in general, both
politicians and an important part of the professionals in Romania do consider that
“beauty” and “culture” comes after having solved basic needs and that sometimes
one should “sacrifice” some of these for having the others. “Nature” has a better
position in the hierarchy of priorities on one hand because there is a higher level of
awareness related to climate change and also because the legal framework for
environment protection is more developed.
Even when the cultural landscape is a priority for professionals and the territorial
plans do show clearly where and what is to be valued as heritage, it is difficult to
find strong-minded politicians who have the will to consider heritage as asset for
development and who have an agenda to gather the resources for acting in line with
these objectives.
Very often the plans that are elaborated and approved for programs funded with
European money do not have a strong spatial approach. They are made with the
help of OPERATIONAL consultants who emphasize objectives and only some-
times concrete actions to be taken without a proper analysis of what place should be
used in space for the short listed projects. In contrast, territorial plans, i.e., the
documents that are elaborated with the help of professional who focus on SPACE,
analyze the physical realities and suggest measures and important projects. The
spatial plans define the “where” with their technical knowledge. However, the
“how” question is not covered well enough even if it is of great interest from the
administrative and political perspectives (Fig. 17.2).
Possible causes for this gap could be identified in the inertia from the past: It is
rather difficult to pass from an over-centralized system with few decision-making
actors and professionals who were receiving their briefs from one single “voice” to
a system with multiple voices and a severe lack of continuity on the leadership side.
In the 1990s and even the 2000s, even the word “planning” was not appreciated
very much because it was associated with the plans of the communist regime that
came around every 5 years. Even when there are prepared and voted plans,” they
are not followed, and monitoring and evaluation of their implementation are not
seen as being very important. Again, this can be explained through the past: The
communist plans set impossible goals, and the reports were full of lies and inflated
figures. No one really believed in them.
Fig. 17.2 Schematic representation of the gap between operational planning and spatial planning
Planning for the Rural Areas of Romania
If the planning exercise is difficult in cities, in the rural areas, even if there is less
mistrust and people are somehow less blasé, the planning problems are even more
complicated. This is also because it is rather difficult to plan the future of villages
when there are no answers to the important questions related to agriculture policies,
the ageing population, and the lack of interest of well-trained people to live in the
countryside. The European Funds for Rural Development are actually one of the very
few entities trying to answer these delicate questions. A lot of hope was invested in
the European funding programs, but for the period 2007–2013 the use of these
opportunities remained limited due, unfortunately, to bureaucratic aspects at the
central level and also due to the limited capacity of the organization at the local level.
Establishment of the Local Action Groups took off with an important delay, and
the efficient functionality of LAGs is still rare. However, the idea of having local
stakeholders with various backgrounds and perspectives (local public administra-
tion bodies, business sector, NGOs, cultural institutions) together in a juridical
entity is very much needed in order to have a shared vision and to also share also
the responsibilities for reaching that vision.
The consultants who were called to help with the elaboration of the Local
Development Plan were paid very little usually and the quality of their work is
sometimes quite poor. Hopefully, for the European Financial Exercise of 2014-2020,
more resources will be available for contracting experienced advisors to the Local
Action Groups. There is a delicate debate whether the consultants who give advice to
local public authorities for local development strategies or various other local
policies documents should have some sort of official recognition. The official
256 V. Marin
planning documents defined by Law 350 can not be elaborated by professionals who
do not have an official recognition. The professionals who are recognized by the
Register of Urban Planners in Romania have to pass an examination procedure in
order to be able to sign as coordinators of territorial or urban planning documents.
The same recognition procedures apply for the experts who are willing to have the
signature right for elaborating analysis reports required for the planning documents.

Results for Encouraging Territorial Cultural Systems
in Romania
Connecting Planning Instruments with Local Needs

and Values
“I do not think that one could find peasants now, who have commitment and
initiatives to build in an ecological manner and to have objectives related to sus-
tainable development. The attitude of the rural population towards their built
environment is influenced through two channels: on one hand there are building
regulations and on the other hand, there are references, internalized models. In the
past, these models were organic, local, they were reproduced for centuries and they
were defined, in time, based on local criteria, local needs, local mentalities.
At the moment, the constraints from the regulations side are weak and that is
because the State is not efficient in imposing the respect of these rules. The models
are not organic any longer. They didn’t grew here, they are not from that landscape,
from that context but they are “imported” from other places.”
This is the opinion of Vintilă Mihăilescu, sociology and anthropology professor,
expressed in a round table intervention entitled “Between Tradition and
Development,” published afterwards in “Urbanismul” Magazine in May 2009 the
article entitled “Village as Cultural Landscape.”
As professor Mihăilescu stated, the right level for action is in the middle between
the individual references and the state authority. Even in the rural environment, the
dynamics of the territory are too complex for counting on up-to-date exhaustive
information on every field and sequence of space. With the very limited resources
that are currently invested in Romania for databases and for the good functioning of
institutions having the responsibility of monitoring the territory, it is essential to
have a good knowledge of this territory starting with the end in mind. The local
community representatives and decision makers should have in mind the devel-
opment hypotheses based on shared values. Then it becomes feasible to validate
these ideas with a more effective data collection and analysis. However, no one
could define shared values without participatory processes.
In Romania, very little trust is placed on the participatory approach in planning
from the perspective of both decision makers and planners perspective. As stated
previously, the stakeholders are reluctant to embrace the idea of “planning,”

However, when the need for planning is actually accepted, there is resistance to the
idea of sharing the power of decision and the power of expertise with people who
have businesses in the area or who have land and a personal history related to the
place. Apparently, in rural environments this resistance is less important, and may
be this is due to the fact that decision makers are more like neighbors in a small
community than politicians avid for power. Usually, the professionals follow the
decision makers on their will to open up to dialogue or to have a more discrete
elaboration process. Fortunately, the legal framework imposes more transparency
and more involvement of the public in these elaboration processes for territorial
plans and planning documents (Order of Ministry no. 2701/2011).
Local Action Group Ready to Action: The Case of Patz

Valea Hârtibaciului
During history, there were significant migration movements of the population

toward this valley due to sociopolitical circumstances, generally increasing its
population. However, starting in the 1960s, the population has constantly decreased
due to internal (from the rural area to the towns in the surroundings of Sibiu and
Tarnava Mare area) or external migrations (especially the Saxon migration to
Germany in the beginning of the decade 1990-2000 [approximately 10,000 people]
or the deportation during the second World War). All of these phenomena dislo-
cated the rural traditional community, carrying along significant movements that
deeply influenced multiple plans demographically, socially, economically, and
culturally (Fig. 17.3).
Fig. 17.3 Agnita Area—built heritage and high poverty level

258 V. Marin
Spatial planning and cultural-landscape-protection instruments were the main

focus for VIVA project and it was a project aimed to consider the major challenges
related to these instruments in the Eastern Partnership area but also to see the
applicability of the experiences of Western Europe in relationship to protection of
the cultural landscape. For VIVA project team, it was essential to consult written
materials and to have discussions with the involved international experts on the
mapping instruments that are, of course, much complex when there are georefer-
enced databases and previous efforts to obtain to knowledge about the cultural
landscapes zones as well as the touristic assets.
Planning begins by getting to understand the existing situation. The VIVA
project team in Romania has worked on identifying (mapping) evident and potential
cultural landscape zones and touristic assets in the implementation area of Valea
Hârtibaciului. The team has also made an analysis of the recognition of these values
in the existing official planning documents for this territory: the Territorial Plan for
the Zone of Valea Hârtibaciului, the Local Action Group strategy for the devel-
opment of Valea Hârtibaciului, the County Council development strategies, and the
tourism master plan for the County of Sibiu. But why are these official documents
necessary? Why there is need for planning instruments in the rural areas of
Romania? Do we need the spatial approach in this planning? How do we apply the
principles of the ratified Landscape Charter in Romania? How do we ensure con-
nections between the existing legal framework for environmental protection and
specific measures for heritage protection in minor historic centers? What could be
the concrete instruments for bringing closer the concepts of “development” and
“protection” through the territorial cultural systems approach? (Fig. 17.4).
Fig. 17.4 Territorial plan for the county of Sibiu, 2011 Cultural heritage analysis
As stated previously, the practice of developing county-level territorial plans is

not focused on operational aspects. These local development plans had a strong
operational role because they were the basis for LAGs to be able to organize calls
for applications in their micro-region. One major argument for the selection of
Valea Hârtibaciului as a pilot area for the VIVA EAST-PART project was that,
since 2009, the Ministry of Regional Development has financed a very interesting
territorial planning experiment, i.e., the Zonal Territorial Plan for a micro-region.
This intermediate level is very important for a planning instrument that should bring
together the operational and regulatory sides. Even if there are several more
important urban settlements in these areas, it is still a rural environment. Territorial
planning at the county level does not go into too much detail about specific
ethnographic or geographic features, identity aspects, or local pride. This is to say
that the “micro-region” scale is very much adapted to the territorial cultural system
approach promoted by the VIVA EAST PART project (Fig. 17.5).
For the case study of PATZ–Valea Hârtibaciului, there was no structured partici-
patory process, and this is because of the fact that an important part of the elaboration
processes was developed before the legal obligations for information and consultation
of the public came into action. Through local workshops and the events organized in
the Valley, the VIVA EAST PART project team was helping the local stakeholders to
see the importance of the Zonal Territorial Plan of Valea Hârtibaciului. The project
team developed synthetic materials for each local public authority in the valley with
provisions of the PATZ for every settlement ). (Fig. 17.6).
Fig. 17.5 Natural heritage map inserted in the local development plan developed by the LAG of
the Valea Hârtibaciului micro-region
260 V. Marin
Fig. 17.6 Scheme of the participatory processes in the VIVA EAST PART local workshops
The participatory approach for the elaboration of the Local Action Plan for
which the Local Champions Pact was signed is a good example of the applicability
of participatory principles and instruments in the rural environment of Romania. IT
tools for the visualization of cultural heritage, with a spatial approach as well as
invitations to consultations with local stakeholders having their interests in view,
have contributed to an increased level of awareness concerning the importance of
planning for the area (Fig. 17.7).
Conclusions. It Can Be Performed in Romania!
For now, in Romania only a small group of professionals has been delivering
messages on sustainable development to other actors, and as a consequence there is
only limited knowledge on the processes, tools, and responsibilities related to it.
Our assumption is that the spatial planners do have a privileged position that allows
them to improve the thinking frames of the other stakeholders. However, are spatial
planners in Romania capable of and willing to encourage cooperation between
various experts, local council representatives, public servants, NGO representatives,
and business people? Due to professional reasons, spatial planners are likely to
understand complex local contexts better than others. Yet do they have the required
interest and capacity to follow local social and political issues? Do they have the
necessary tools for really working together with professionals from other social
sciences to include community and societal values into spatial planning? Do spatial
Fig. 17.7 Exchange-of-experience workshop with local bed and breakfast owners during VIVA
project implementation
planners have the understanding, motivation, and interest to encourage public

participation and cooperation of all of the local stakeholders to build inclusive
public policies with spatial impact?
262 V. Marin
Fig. 17.8 Scheme of the connections between the spheres of concern of the three major categories
of stakeholders
The VIVA project has contributed to the sharing of sustainable rural develop-
ment principles. It should be underlined that the concept of “cultural territorial
system” does not require another type of official documentation for territorial plans
or for local development strategy. However, it is important to base the approach on
correlation between the objective technical arguments, the political will of the
decision makers, and the energy that comes from active entities of the local com-
munity. The strategic territorial planning instruments are perfectly capable of
ensuring these correlations. The existing instruments could be improved to place the
focus on natural and cultural assets as well as on the functional and spatial links
between them. The VIVA EAST PART project has brought this idea to the
attention of local stakeholders, and also to the attention of the Ministry of Regional
Development and Public Administration, to emphasize that the needed reform of
the planning instruments in Romania does not necessarily need to focus on intro-
ducing new instruments but rather on adapting the content of the existing ones
(Fig. 17.8).
As a consequence of ratifying the Florence Charter in the Romanian legislation,
the central administration has a mission for defining, through government decisions,
the areas that must be protected as cultural landscape. To fulfill this mission, rather
than sending a team of professionals to “chase” the cultural landscape across the
country, it is may be more efficient to ask local public authorities to make this
section compulsory in their territorial strategic plans. Hence, it becomes possible
that, through the lenses of territorial cultural systems, more connections between the
operational aspects and the regulatory ones can be secured.
Europe seems to become increasingly interested in promoting a concrete set of

criteria and rigorous orientation for decision makers who are willing to embrace
sustainable development principles. From our perspective, there is a strong con-
nection between the fact that the actors do not have a common definition for the
concept of sustainable urban development and the lack of trust between the four
main categories of actors. We claim that there is a cause-and-effect relationship to
be proved: Weak cooperative relationships between the groups of actors are caused
by the lack of a common focus on sustainability. There has rarely been a fruitful
collaboration between the technical input and the decision making processes,
between the professionals proposing protection regulations and the owners of the
concerned buildings, between these owners and the activists for built heritage
protection, and even less between the people involved in watchdog activities over
the public institutions with heritage-protection responsibilities and the persons who
sign and stamp demolition permits or intervention permits: This lack of connection
leads to the aggression toward old buildings. In addition, the actors are in conflict or
simply ignoring each other because each category of actors is in the pursuit of their
goal with very little understanding of the other actors’ position and interest and
sometimes with too much disdain for the pressures faced by the other groups. If
more pressure for sustainable solutions was placed on all actors, then instead of
confrontation, possible frameworks for mutual cooperation could be established.
References
Ascher F (2001) Les nouveaux principes de l’urbanisme. In: de L’aube (ed) Paris
Enhanced Spatial Planning as a precondition to Sustainable Development (2013). Report of the
World Bank for the Ministry of Regional Development
Patrascu G, PopescuCriveanu I (2007) Patrimonies, centres historiques, développement local, la
coopération franco-roumaine. In: Histoire comparée des législations, des outils de protection du
patrimoine et des autorisations des travauxen France et en Roumanie. Simetria
Toledo Reference Document on Integrated Urban Regeneration and Its Strategic Potential for a
Smarter, More Sustainable and Socially Inclusive Urban Development in Europe. June 2010
Chapter 18
Serbian Cultural Territorial Systems First
Experiences
Aleksandra Djukic, Mirjana Roter Blagojevic and Marko Nikolic
Abstract In the first part of the chapter analyzed the legal and institutional context
in the field of environment, spatial and urban planning and constructions in Serbia
and its relation to the cultural heritage. The interest in the field of cultural heritage
has long history – from early 19th century, but the modern approach to the cultural
heritage protection is developed after the WWII. The protection of cultural and
natural heritage is based on the Venice Charter (1964) and international conven-
tions and recommendations, adopted in the late twentieth century and in more
recent times. As the one of the most important international documents for future
protection and improvement of cultural heritage today in Serbia is implemented the
Council of Europe Faro Convention (2005), which offers ways to help the national,
regional or local authorities and the civil society in general to establish an integrated
approach to the preservation of cultural heritage as a basic element for future
sustainable development. Sustainable planning and management of settlements are
in the competence of the central and local authorities, and regulated by The Law on
Planning and Construction (2009) and The Spatial plan of the Republic of Serbia
(2010). The second part of chapter elaborate the recent actions and efforts in
regeneration of rural heritage areas, as part of the overall economic and social
development, based on an integration of rural areas into regional and urban plan-
ning processes, as well as economic, social and cultural policies. According the
international methodology established by Council of Europe during the realization
of The Regional Program by Cultural and Natural Heritage in South East Europe
the Local Development Pilot Project Resava-Mlava were implemented on the ter-
ritory of Municipalities Despotovac and Žagubica. The methodology which was
used in the project involves the inclusion of local inhabitants in the form of various
workshops. Among others institutions, in the research process of exploring and
proposing a new approaches and models for heritage activation as a part of sus-
tainable development of the region, professors and students of the Faculty of
Architecture University of Belgrade were involved. The student’s projects
A. Djukic (&) M. Roter Blagojevic M. Nikolic

Faculty of Architecture, University of Belgrade (Serbia),
Bulevar kralja Aleksandra 73/II, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
e-mail: adjukic@afrodita.rcub.bg.ac.rs

266 A. Djukic et al.
successfully achieved their goal – to strengthen the awareness of the population of

the heritage value as important resource for future sustainable development, as well
as to provide municipal authorities with new, fresh ideas that can connect heritage
protection with improvement of living condition. This provides a basis for elabo-
ration of development strategy for this area in future.
Keywords Urban planning Serbian national planning system Urban planning

legislation
Planning Instruments and Heritage Protection: Legal

and Institutional Context
Planning Context
In Serbia, the government’s responsibilities are the formulation of regulatory

framework (laws, by-laws, ordinances, norms) for the protection of cultural heritage
as well as the creation of other strategic documents that must be politically sup-
ported and that produce direct operational outcome. Sustainable planning and
management of settlements are in the hands of central and local authorities in the
Republic of Serbia. The Ministry of Planning, Construction and Ecology of the
Republic of Serbia is the central institution responsible for the preparation and
enforcement of policies and laws in the field of environment, spatial and urban
planning, and construction. Local self-governments are responsible for elaborations
on and enforcement of physical and urban plans within its administrative territory.
The Ministry of Culture and Information of the Republic of Serbia is responsible for
the protection of cultural heritage (RZZSK RS 2014). The protection of cultural and
natural heritage in Serbia is based on the Venice Charter and international con-
ventions and recommendations adopted in the late twentieth century and again in
more recent times.
The importance of the preservation of historic buildings and spaces for future
generations, as well as their regeneration and inclusion in modern social and eco-
nomic development as accepted, heritage is treated as an integral part of the
development process and strides are taken to prevent its degradation and disap-
pearance. Some attention is devoted to the protection of rural areas, which are
considered in their integrity as coherent entities whose balance and specific nature
depend on the fusion of natural elements both tangible and intangible. Furthermore,
efforts are made to incorporate the latest international recommendations into the
heritage-protection methodology, which direct the focus toward the community and
society and the spiritual and cultural heritage as well as to the importance of their
conservation for future sustainable development. Striving to give more attention to
intangible traditional values, the idea is that modern conservation of cultural heritage
and its sustainable use have human development and quality of life as their goal.
18 Serbian Cultural Territorial Systems First Experiences 267
A few very important strategies related to cultural heritage protection for the
Republic of Serbia were adopted after 2000, and they are among 106 strategies that
have been adopted during the past 15 years. The government adopted the National
Strategy for Sustainable development 2009–2017 (Official Gazette RS 2005, 2007)
and The Strategy for Development of tourism in Serbia (Official Gazette RS 2006).
The Strategy of Sustainable Development is improved compared with the previous
strategic documents in Serbia because it includes several jurisdictions based on
scientific indicators, quality SWOT analysis, and objectives that are consistent with
the general objectives of the EU member states. In the Strategy of Tourism
Development of the Republic of Serbia, the positive image on the world market and
provisions for protection and sustainable use of natural and cultural resources for
tourist developments is underscored. The Strategy of cultural development of
Serbia 2013–2023 is still in progress and has not yet been adopted, but a few cities
—like Novi Sad and Niš—have their own strategies for cultural development
(Strategy of cultural development of the City Pančevo 2010 and Strategy of cultural
development of the City Niš 2011).
On the 11th of September 2009, the new Law on Planning and Construction,
which regulates the area of planning, building land, and construction, entered into
force (Official Gazette RS 2009). Both the new Law on State Survey and Cadaster
Act (Official Gazette RS 2009) and the Law on Planning and Construction represent
a significant reform of the legal real estate framework in Serbia. The main scope of
the new laws is to harmonize the issue of planning and construction with the text of
the Serbian Constitution, especially regarding the rights to urban building land and
harmonization with European Union regulations and standards.
Development of space is based on horizontal and vertical coordination.
Horizontal coordination implies linking with adjacent territories during planning to
resolve common functions and interests as well as the networking and participation
of all those involved in spatial development of the public and civil sectors and
citizens. Vertical coordination implies the establishment of links between all levels
of spatial planning and the development of space from national to regional and on
to the local level (Official Gazette RS 2009).
The Law on Planning and Construction prescribes in a new way the types of
documents of spatial and urban planning and new deadlines for their adoption. It
establishes a hierarchy of plan-related documents in the context of the hierarchy of
spatial and urban planning. Documents of spatial and urban planning must be
reconciled so that documents of a narrow region are in compliance with documents
of the wider region. All planning documents must be in compliance with the Spatial
Plan of the Republic of Serbia, and all urban plans must be in compliance with
spatial plans. The law fully provides for a democratic decision-making process
regarding the manner and conditions of the use of space.
The physical plan (i.e., the spatial plan) of the Republic of Serbia was adopted in
2010 (Official Gazette RS 2010). In this plan, long-term goals of physical planning
and development were set in accordance with total economic, social, ecological,
cultural, and historical development. Special attention is devoted to the natural,
cultural, urban, and architectural heritage.
Numerous plans exist on the local level. Cities and municipalities often have a
regional plan (for their region), a spatial (physical) plan for the metropolitan area, a
general urban plan for the city, general regulations plans for its municipalities,
dozens of local detailed regulation plans for settlements and smaller zones, and
urban projects. All plans have a “chapter” in and graphic presentation of historical
built heritage and protected historical urban cores within the area that covered. The
local authority is responsible for ordering and adopting of urban plans. City council
approves spatial and urban plans.
Legal and Institutional Context of Cultural Heritage

Protection
The appearance of interest for the Serbian heritage in the 18th and 19th centuries
was a result of an awakening of national conscience and a desire to protect the
cultural and national sense of community of the Serbian people living at that time in
the Austrian and Turkish empires. The first inventory of heritage was initiated after
the restoration of the Serbian Principality in 1836, in which 293 churches and 50
monasteries were described. In 1844, a Regulation on Antiquities Monuments
Protection was adopted, and The Serbian Museum was founded for collecting and
maintaining heritage objects for posterity (Jovanović 1994).
An important event in 1841 was the founding of The Society of Serbian Letters
(the forerunner of The Serbian Academy of Science and Arts). The very first law in
the field of cultural heritage in Serbia was on the protections of ruins and castles as
spomenik drevnosti, i.e., monuments of antiquity, and the law was adopted on the
22nd of February 1844. The initiator was Prince Aleksandar Karadjordjević with
the agreement of the State Council. The title of this document was “The regulations
on protection of heritage monuments,” and it is one of the first legal acts of this kind
in Europe in the 19th century (along with laws in the Vatican and in Greece).
Namely, it is the first origin of modern laws in the field of protection of cultural and
built heritage in Serbia (Lukić 2007).
From 1871 to 1884, the Society of Serbian Letters organized scientific research
excursions of its members, Mihailo Valtrović and Dragutin Milutinović, who are
architects and professors at the High School. They visited and performed technical
surveys of 150 sites, thus creating the foundations of historiography and archae-
ology in Serbia (Damljanović 2006; Damljanović 2007 and Damljanović et al.
2008). On those grounds, in 1889, professor Valtrović made a Proposal of a
Monuments Protection Act using the terms spomenik (monument) and starine
(antiquities). In the early 20th century, in 1908, the new act defined the term
“antiquities” as artifacts possessing cultural, scientific, historic, and artistic values
of the period and the place from which they originated.
After WWI, The Kingdom of Serbia became a part of the Kingdom of Serbs,
Croats, and Slovenes. At the first conference of experts in the field of museology
and conservation in 1922, a “Proposal for a new law on museums and monuments
protection” was adopted. The best consideration in Serbia was given to the pro-
tection of medieval churches and monasteries. The “Committee for churches and
monasteries maintenance and restoration” was formed in 1923. Simultaneously
some others organizations dealing with heritage protection were founded: the
Serbian Archaeological Society, the Zograf Society, and The Heritage Enthusiasts’
Society. All of that contributed the adoption of an order for the protection and
maintenance of artifacts of historical, scientific, artistic, natural values, and rare
beauty in 1930, and in 1934 a new Heritage Protection Act was prepared with the
idea of forming a Conservation Bureau (Jovanović 1994). It is important that even
during WWII some regulations on heritage protection were adopted, on which the
Central Institution for Heritage Protection was established and became the very first
national institution in the field (Lukić 2007).
The interest in cultural heritage increasingly developed after WWII. In 1945, the
Yugoslav National Liberation Committee adopted a “Decision on the protection
and safeguard of cultural monuments and antiquities,” which was the first document
in this field in the new Yugoslavia. Sometime later, a new Act on the Protection of
Cultural Monuments and Natural Rarities was adopted (1947), and the Institution
for the Protection and Investigation of Cultural Monuments of the Republic of
Serbia was established as well. Later on, in the 1950s, the Federal Institution for the
Protection of Cultural Heritage was founded (renamed after 1963 as the Yugoslav
Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage). According to the principles of the
Venice Chapter from 1964, which one of signatories was Serbia, the Law on
Cultural Monuments Protection was adopted in 1965, in which it is declared that the
stationary and nonstationary objects, as well as groups of such objects, having
scientific, technical, or other values represent cultural monuments of high social
interest and should be protected (ICOMOS 2004).
Today the Republic Institute for Protection of Cultural Monuments in Belgrade,
under the authority of the Ministry of Culture, is the principal institution of heritage
protection in Serbia. The period from the 1950s to the 1970s was highly fruitful for
heritage protection in Serbia. A planned heritage protection system was creates,
similar to the French legislation, with a network of institutions employing various
experts needed for quality protection of Serbia’s cultural heritage. Along with the
Republic Institute, two provincial, seven regional, and a number of other similar
institutions were founded. In 1977, the Act on Cultural Property Protection was
adopted following the 1972 World Heritage Convention.
However, in the early 1980s, a process of disintegration of national and local
institutions in Yugoslavia and Serbia started, which along with a poor economic
situation had a negative impact on heritage protection. In recent years, in cooperation
with the Italian Government, the Central Institute for Conservation was founded in
2009 (CIK 2014). It opened up new perspectives to an international cooperation on
integrative heritage protection based on contemporary theory and practice.
The actual Law on Cultural Properties from 1994 uses the term kulturno dobro,
which means cultural property as a general term classified as movable and
immovable property. Immovable property includes cultural monuments, cultural
historic units, archaeological sites, and memorial places (Official Gazette RS 1994).
Regarding their value, there are cultural properties of great value and those of
outstanding value. There are 2481 cultural properties listed in the Central Register
including 200 of great value and 582 of outstanding value (RZZSK RS-catalog of
immovable cultural property 2014). On the List of The World Cultural and Natural
Heritage, there is monastery Studenica, the cultural historic region Stari Ras with
the Sopoćani and Djurdjevi Stupovi monasteries, endangered monasteries in
Kosovo (Gračanica, Pećka Patrijaršija, Bogorodica Ljeviška, and Dečani), and the
archaeological site Gamzigrad (Milić and Pejić 1998).
In addition to government and local official institutions in Serbia, ICOMOS
Serbia, EUROPA NOSTRA Serbia, and Serbian Association of Conservators are
independent expert organizations gathering in the field of cultural heritage pro-
tection (ICOMOS Serbia 2014; Europa Nostra Serbia 2014; DKS 2014).
Because the focus in Serbia is on the protection of medieval architecture and in
recent years on ancient Roman sites, the protection of heritage from other historic
periods is not sufficiently covered in the contemporary investigations and cultural
heritage protection activities. Some building in Belgrade, erected in the Secession style
from 1900 to 1914, are listed, as are a number of buildings related to the Modern
movement between the two world wars. However, very few buildings of modern
architectural style built after WWII are listed. Today a number of listed building and
scheduled complexes of contemporary architecture are in a very poor condition. There
are two remarkable examples: (1) the complex of the Ministry of Defense and the
Military Headquarter, which were built in 1955–1965, designed by architect
N. Dobrović, and heavily damaged during NATO bombardment of Belgrade in 1999;
and (2) the Museum of Modern Arts, which was built in 1962 to 1965, designed by
architects I. Raspopović and I. Antić, and has been closed and neglected for years. That
was motive for the establishment of a national chapter of the Do.co.mo.mo.
International in 2011 (DOCOMOMO Serbia 2014). This independent expert organi-
zation for the documentation and conservation of building, sites, and neighborhoods of
the Modern movement were established within the Belgrade Association of Architects,
and it initiated activities to inform and educate the public about the values of modern
architecture and to contribute to its popularization as well as to present the national
contemporary movement to the world public. The national working party intends to
elaborate a National Register and to include the public in activities concerning the
protection of the Serbian endangered contemporary heritage of the 20th century.
Identification and Involvement of Local Stakeholders

in Serbia
Public Participation in Urban Planning
Participants in the process of urban planning have their own interests and ideas, and
all of them are trying to achieve the best solutions and to obtain the best methods
for realizing their goals. Identification of their needs, interests, and goals and the
development of methods and techniques for conflict resolution, i.e., achieving

compromises and consensus, are prerequisite to planning.
Participation reflects the characteristic of quality of life in the community. It is a
process that represents a social and civilizational standard of achievement.
Sustainability also implies that citizens have the feeling of belonging to, identifying
with, and being an active part of the community (Djukić and Milovanović 2003).
Furthermore, one of the preconditions for a sustainable city is an active citizenry to
whom a range of creative activities are offered. “To be an active citizen one must be
interested. To be an interested in community one must be informed. To be
informed, the system must be democratic” (Pušić 2001).
The diversity, plurality, and equality of citizens are contemporary social trends,
which include the possibility that differences of opinion are expressed and heard.
The following period is marked by a distinctive cooperation between all stake-
holders (at different levels) in the process of urban planning.
Participation is one of the main instruments for achieving sustainable develop-
ment, for the identification and preservation of existing local values, and for the
creation and implementation of new values. The development of institutions,
mechanisms, and techniques for easier implementation of public participation can
provide faster transformation of cities and towns into sustainable ones with a dis-
tinctive identity.
A Critical Look at the Model of Public Participation in Serbia
During the second part of 20th century, the urban-planning system was developed as
a unified and centralized entity in Eastern European countries, and the state and
municipalities had an unlimited power (as land owners, investors, entrepreneurs, and
investment decision makers). Problems of local development and local planning were
often ignored in the interests of “higher goals.” In Serbia, the public interest is often
placed on the back burner, which is particularly evident in the period of transition (the
last two decades). This reflects, among other things, the short time of the existence of
civil society (compared with other European countries) (Djukić 2011).
Law on Planning and Construction in Serbia in 2003 (Official Gazette RS 2003)
established procedures for public participation. Citizenry as participator in the
urban-planning process can manifest as follows:
• initiator, i.e., originator of the plan;
• interested party in the public insight on the draft plan;
• interested party who requests information on the possibilities and limitations of
spatial development;
• investor in the process of issuing zoning permits and approvals;
• offender.
The participation of citizens has not been crucially changed by this law com-
pared with the previous Law on Planning and Development of settlements in 1995.
The new Law on Planning and Construction (Official Gazette RS 2009) did not
change attitudes toward the participation of citizens in the process of urban plan-
ning. Practically the same forms of citizen participation, as mentioned in the pre-
vious Act of 2003, remained.
Some procedures, such as public approach to the draft plan, process of issuing
zoning permits and approvals, and penalties for offender laws, have been in practice
since the mid-1970s (the then applicable law), whereas some procedures are rela-
tively new (initiation and initiation of development of the plan [the Act of 1995]).
In most cases, initiators of the urban plan or project are usually just interested
investors or groups of citizens interested to regulate illegal construction (usually
individual housing). In this situation, an individual citizen “follows the process” as
a passive actor in the process from proposing initiatives for the preparation of
planning documents (or urban design) to implementation of the plan.
Right of access to planning documents by citizens has been in effect since the
mid 1970s. Citizens have the right to inspect any plan (although they are usually
interested in their plots and not in general goals of plans or public interest).
Insufficient or inadequate involvement of citizens in the preparation of planning
documents for the city sometimes results in uprising and protests against plans for
urban reconstruction. Several civic protests in the past were related to the proposed
radical reconstruction of the old city center or part of it (Djukić 2011).
Increasing the role of citizens as participants in urban planning is to be expected.
Urban planners should manage the different interests of stakeholders and directs
changes to and transformations of the space. Urban planning should be characterized
by flexibility taking into account the investor and customer initiatives as well as
proposing exact and measurable effects of interventions in the area (Nikezić 1996).
The past practice of including citizen participation in the processes of urban
planning has not produced satisfactory results. Only adequate results are achieved
with radical changes (e.g., different tools of communication, position of partici-
pation in the planning process). The established practice of urban planning in Serbia
allows the citizens inspection only of almost finalized plans. However, this practice
bypasses the role of citizens in creating solutions at the stage of defining the
development vision and program of future development.

Results for Encouraging Territorial Cultural Systems
Implementation of a New International Program Based

on the Society and Sustainability
One of the most important international documents for future protection and
improvement of cultural heritage today is certainly the Council of Europe Faro
Convention (2005) (Council of Europe Framework Convention 2005), which offers
ways to help national, regional, or local authorities and the civil society in general
to establish an integrated approach to the preservation of cultural heritage as a basic
element for future sustainable development. The idea is to promote understanding
of the common heritage of Europe, which consists of all forms of cultural heritage,
which together constitute a shared source of remembrance, understanding, identity,
cohesion and creativity; and the ideals, principles, and values derived from the
experience gained through progress and past conflicts, which foster the develop-
ment of a peaceful and stable society founded on respect of human rights,
democracy, and the rule of law. The convention highlights that everyone, indi-
vidually or collectively, has the right to benefit from the cultural heritage and to
contribute to its enrichment; has the responsibility to respect the cultural heritage of
others as much as their own and consequently the common heritage of Europe; and
to be aware that exercising the right to cultural heritage may be subject only to those
restrictions that are necessary in a democratic society for the protection of public
interest and the rights and freedoms of others (Council of Europe Framework
Convention 2005).
One of the most important international programs is the Regional Programme on
Cultural and Natural Heritage in South East Europe (Council of Europe RPSEE
2014) developed by the Council of Europe in accordance with the Faro Convention.
This programme is supported by the European Commission and has been imple-
mented since 2003. It is conducted by Albania, Bosnia, and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,
Croatia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, and Kosovo. The RPSEE emphasizes “local development” as a concept
that encourages connections between countries and opens up the Balkan region to
the rest of Europe. It focuses on reconciling economic efficiency, cultural diversity,
social cohesion, and ecological balance through active participation of all of the
stakeholders involved in decision-making processes. A strong emphasis is placed
on urban and rural management, heritage, democratic and participatory processes,
and improved living conditions and quality of life.
The RPSEE has three components: (1) Institutional Capacity Building Plan–
ICBP; (2) Integrated Rehabilitation Project Plan/Survey of the Architectural and
Archaeological Heritage-IRPP/SAAH; and (3) Local Development Pilot Projects–
LDPP. Component no. 3 represents a challenge for testing new models of social and
economic development based on the promotion of cultural and natural heritage as a
key element for future development (Council of Europe LDPP Serbia 2013).
Communities are in a position to engage with all of the public as well as private,
national, and international partners in numerous cooperative activities set up
throughout the process. The partners collaborate and share a vision of the future,
thus guaranteeing sustainable development and exploitation of the resources of their
cultural environment.
Involvement of the Local Stakeholders in the Local

Development Pilot Project Resava-Mlava
In accordance with modern principles of protection, in Serbia in recent times special

efforts have been put into the regeneration of rural heritage areas, as part of the
overall economic and social development, based on an integration of rural areas into
regional and urban planning processes as well as economic, social, and cultural
policies. In practice, however, there is a lack of understanding about the importance
of preserving traditional settlements and old rural houses or of the ability to adapt to
modern needs and standards.
That is the reason why LDPP in Serbia has focused on the Resava-Mlava pilot
territory since 2007. The pilot territory is located in the municipalities of
Despotovac and Žagubica in the undeveloped southeast mountain area of Serbia.
The program has four phases of implementation: (1) signing of the Memorandum of
Understanding and the Terms of Reference (2012); (2) territory diagnosis (analysis
of the local situation, potential, and resources [2012–2013]); (3) elaboration of the
development strategy (long-term development plan for 15–20 years [2013–2014];
and (4) operational programme (preparing concrete projects [2014–2015]) (Council
of Europe LDPP Serbia 2013).
With the support of the Ministry of Culture and some other public institutions, a
team of experts from the Council of Europe, in cooperation with local participants
from various institutions and associations, performed some activities as part of
component (1), i.e., the institutional capacity building plan (ICBP). In the beginning
of the process, the focus was on providing tools for building up local capacities
such as the cooperation between line ministries, local authorities, the private sector,
NGOs, and the civil society. In that way, the approach to the project was to obtain
many independent opinions to create the best possible strategies for improvement.
The Project Implementation Unit of LDPP, Professor Anne Pisot (project manager)
and Fabrice Chateau (expert), with the support of the Ministry of Culture, organized a
prediagnosis mission and two public meetings in October 2012 with numerous par-
ticipants and representatives of local authorities, public institutions, cultural institu-
tions, tourist organizations, public companies, media, entrepreneurs, farmers, etc., in
Despotovac and Žagubica. In the Ministry of Culture in Belgrade interviews were
organized with experts from National Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage,
Central Institute for Conservation, National Institute for Nature Conservation of
Serbia, and National Tourism Organization of Serbia as well as professors from
Faculty of Agriculture, and Faculty of Architecture from the University of Belgrade.
Methodology and Results of Students’ Territory Research Y
Among others institutions, during the research process of exploring and proposing
new approaches and models for heritage activation as a part of sustainable
development of the region, professors and students from the Faculty of Architecture
at the University of Belgrade were involved. The main reason why students were
engaged in the process is recognition of the need for substantial training of future
architects and planners who will cope with future problem of preservation and
renewal of cultural and architectural heritage in their practice. Today, the impor-
tance of students’ greater involvement in projects related to the research of
opportunities and forms of preservation and revitalization of cultural heritage in the
modern world is evident (Jokilehto 2004).
During the school year of 2012–2013, didactics was realized on two levels of
study within the pilot project Resava-Mlava at the Faculty of Architecture at the
University of Belgrade. Third-year undergraduate students participated in the work
on the Elective Course: Architectural Heritage–research and evaluation (the mentors
were Teaching Assistant M. Roter Blagojević and Assistant Professor M. Nikolić),
whereas first-year master’s students Integrated Urbanism participated through the
Studio Project: Urban restoration of the area Resava Mlava (the mentors were
Professor E. Vaništa Lazarević and Assistant Professor M. Milaković) and Course:
Urban Design-methods and techniques (the mentors were Professor A. Djukić and
Assistant Professor M. Vukmirović). The group of master’s student consisted of
graduated professionals from various faculties (architecture, anthropology, jour-
nalism, etc.), fields of study that were particularly important taking into account a
current trend of inclusion and cooperation of professionals of different profiles into
programs of protection and restoration of architectural heritage.
At the very beginning of the research, the students collected materials and
literature on important church structures and monastery complexes, medieval for-
tresses, and vernacular and industrial architecture of Despotovac and Žagubica area
(Figs. 18.1 and 18.2). In the first stage of the work, professionals from the Institute
of the Protection of Cultural Monuments of Serbia and the Institute of the
Protection of Cultural Monuments of Kragujevac provided students with invaluable
help. They provided significant data, photographs, and text appendixes on
Fig. 18.1 Old mill in

Despotovac (photo M.
Nikolić)
Fig. 18.2 Trška church from

the early 13th century in
Žagubica (photo M. Nikolić)
vernacular architecture and sacred architecture as well as the study on the protection
of cultural heritage of the Municipality of Despotovac.
After the collection of the materials, a student excursion with professors was
organized, during which the students continued their research in the field and
collected data on structures and areas in the territory of the municipalities of
Despotovac and Žagubica. This type of didactics was exceptionally valuable
because the students became familiar with the area directly and perceived its
advantages and disadvantages as well as possibilities for its activation and
advancement in accordance with contemporary needs. The experience the students
gained through conversation and discussion with the local authorities and popula-
tion was particularly important (Figs. 18.3 and 18.4).
In the first stage of their work, the students outlined their research in the detailed
systematization of complete data collected through the work on historical, urban,
and architectural analysis of areas and buildings of Despotovac and Žagubica.
Special attention was devoted to intangible heritage, rural areas, and historical
heritage. At this stage, the work on SWOT analysis and its contribution was taken
up, and the master’s students of the course on Integrated Urbanism recapitulated the
strengths, weaknesses, threats, and possibilities for development of this area. They
especially pointed out the value of historical heritage and rich flora and fauna as
well as the readiness of the local government to act in the right direction as
strengths of the researched area. As a result of this, they formed adequate basis for
further work on evaluation.
In the second stage of the work, the students worked on valorization of cultural
and natural heritage of the Resava-Mlava area with special emphasis on the
Fig. 18.3 Presentation of students’ analysis in the city library Despotovac (photo M. Nikolić)
Fig. 18.4 Professors and students in discussion with local authorities in the municipality of
Žagubica (photo M. Nikolić)
valorization of intangible heritage as an important element of vernacular architec-

ture in this area, which is evident in customs, clothing, food, and drinks.
Valorization prepared and enabled the necessary conditions for a transition to
another phase of the creative process. This was an attempt to see through the
essence of the relations between existing built space and a particular environment,
according to which students created their own conceptual solutions.
In the final third stage of the work, on the basis of all previously mentioned
analyses and valorization of space and buildings, the students set potentials and
limitations necessary for new content on the site and defined spatial and functional
connections within the existing space. They also realized everything they needed to
define the character of new spaces and the possibilities of small-scale architectural
and urban solutions that should be proposed, and they offered a range of ideas for
small interventions in the preservation to revitalize and present the cultural and
natural heritage of the Despotovac-Žagubica area. The students filled various areas
with numerous new features to improve historical, cultural, artistic, and techno-
logical importance and value possessed by buildings and areas. Thus, a dynamic
concept of continual enrichment of authenticity of a historical place was honored
through changes and layers that were brought about by both historical and
Fig. 18.5 Students research

the cultural, historical, and
natural values of the
Resava-Mlava area (student
papers: Nadja Beretić, Ana
Kanlić, Aleksandar Grujičić,
and Biljana Grujičić)
contemporary time. One of the urban-planning methods applied during the course
was scenario planning. It is a strategic planning method that provides flexible
long-terms urban plans by combining known facts about the future with trends,
predictions, and visions and involves aspects of systems thinking (combining the
factors in complex way). The main phases in creating the scenarios were decision

about the main drivers for change and the hierarchy of criteria, brainstorming, and
production of six mini-scenarios, testing scenarios and reduction from six to three
scenarios, and the presentation (text and graphics) and evaluation of scenarios and
checking the most critical outcomes (Figs. 18.5, 18.6 and 18.7).
The goal of these interventions was activation of the area and features to pre-
serve and highlight cultural and natural values but also to gain possibilities for the
development of this area. Attracting foreign investment and creating conditions for
the development of cultural tourism would contribute to the preservation and
development of the Resava-Mlava area, thus creating better life conditions for the
local population (Figs. 18.8 and 18.9).
Through their design suggestions they proposed an advanced insight in area
potentials (Figs. 18.10 and 18.11). The students showed that improving places is
possible through small interventions in the area and that substantial resources and
investment are not necessary. The students’ projects successfully achieved their
goal, i.e., to strengthen the awareness by the population of their heritage value as an
important resource for future sustainable development as well as to provide

Fig. 18.8 The main street in the town of Zagubica before and after student intervention (photo M.
Nikolic)
Fig. 18.9 The main street in the town of Zagubica after student intervention (student paper Mila
Joksimović and Mina Miladinović)
Fig. 18.10 The main square

in the town of Despotovac
before student intervention
(photo M. Nikolić)
Fig. 18.11 The main square in the town of Despotovac after student intervention (student paper
Aleksandar Stojanović)
municipal authorities with new, fresh ideas that can connect heritage protection
with an improvement in living condition.
In October 2013, the Faculty of Architecture at the University of Belgrade
organized an exhibition of students’ works connected with a pilot project of local
development of area Resava–Mlava as a result of collaboration of the Faculty of
Architecture, the Ministry of culture and information of Republic of Serbia, and
local communities Despotovac and Žagubica with support of the European Council.
In the scope of the development of international cooperation, the exhibition was
visited by the students of the Faculty of Economy of the University of St. Etienne–
ISEAG–Master “Conseilen Developpement territorial,” accompanied by Professor
Anne Pissot, project leader, on behalf of the European Council.
Epilogue
The goal of the international local development pilot project was to involve local
inhabitants in the development of their communities; therefore, it is innovative
approach in Serbia. The methodology used in the project involved the inclusion of
local inhabitants in the form of various workshops. This work provides a foundation
for further elaboration of a development strategy for this area. The first phase of the
methodology is territory diagnosis and analysis of the local situation, potential, and
resources. The second phase involves analysis of the region, in which the inhabi-
tants and representatives of the institutions try to define development goals in five
categories: ecology, culture, tourism, agriculture, and energy.
The important element in this new approach to the preservation of natural and
cultural heritage and future activation of the investigated territory is involving a
various national and regional cultural and scientific institutions, NGOs, and citizens
in the process. The main attention is switched to the chain collaboration, which
means proactive relations and attempts to spur the local population by creating a
linkage between the authorities, local stakeholders, and citizens. The main objective
is to make a common diagnosis of the core values and potentials, as well as to
define the problems of the area, based on a broad range of views.
We can say that the special value of this methodology is the active role of local
stakeholders and citizens in the transformation processes that affect their living
environment, stimulate society, support democratic culture, generate citizenship,
and, by helping public action to better respond to society’s needs, create new
conditions for “living together.” In this kind of development model, heritage is an
asset. It is the expression of values, beliefs, knowledge, and traditions. Furthermore,
it is valuable resource for sustainable development.
References
Centralni institut za konzervaciju u Beogradu (CIK) (Central Institute for Conservation in

Belgrade). http://www.cik.org.rs/. Accessed 09 Dec 2014
Council of Europe (2005). Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society
(Faro). http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/199.htm. Accessed 13 Nov 2013
Council of Europe RPSEE (2014). Regional Programme on Cultural and Natural Heritage in South
East Europe (RPSEE). http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/cooperation/see/default_en.asp.
Accessed 09 Dec 2014
Council of Europe. LDPP Serbia (2013). http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/cooperation/see/
LDPP/default_en.asp. Accessed 13 Nov 2013
Damljanović T (ed) (2006) Valtrović i Milutinović: Dokumenti 1—terenska gradja 1871–1884
(Valtrović and Milutinović: Documents 1—fieldstructure 1871–1884). Istorijski muzej Srbije,
Beograd
Damljanović T (ed) (2007) Valtrović i Milutinović: Dokumenti 2—terenska gradja 1872–1907
(Valtrović i Milutinović: Documents 2—fieldstructure 1872–1907). Istorijski muzej Srbije,
Beograd
Damljanović T et al (2008) Valtrović i Milutinović—tumačenja (Valtrović and Milutinović—
interpretation). Istorijski muzej Srbije, Beograd
Društvo konzervatora Srbije (DKS) (The Association of Serbian conservators). http://www.dks.
org.rs/. Accessed 09 Dec 2014
Djukić A (2011) Očuvanje identiteta glavne gradske ulice vojvodjanskog grada u procesu urbane
obnove (The preservation of the identity of the main street of the city of Vojvodina in the
process of urban renewal). Dissertation, University of Belgrade—Faculty of Architecture
Djukić A, Milovanović D (2003) Participacija gradjana u kreiranju i očuvanju identiteta gradova
(Participation of citizens in improving and creating the identity of a city). In Proceedings of
International conference “INDIS”, Novi Sad, 2003
Europa Nostra Srbija (Europa Nostra Serbia). http://europanostraserbia.org/. Accessed 09 Dec

2014
ICOMOS Srbija Nacionalni komitet (ICOMOS National Committee of Serbia). http://icomos-
serbia.com/. Accessed 09 Dec 2014
ICOMOS. International Charters for Conservation and Restoration, Monuments and Sites (2004).
http://openarchive.icomos.org/431/1/Monuments_and_Sites_1_Charters.pdf. Accessed 09 Dec
2014
Jokilehto J (2004) Key-note speech. In: Neuckermans H (ed) Workshop on education in
conservation in Europe. EAAE, Leuven
Jovanović M (1994) Muzeologija i zaštita spomenika kulture (Museology and Protection of
Cultural Monuments). Filozofski fakultet, Beograd
Law on Planning and Construction (2003). Official Gazette RS, No.47/2003
Law on Planning and Construction (2009). Official Gazette RS, No.72/2009
Law on State Survey and Cadaster Act (2009). Official Gazette RS, No.72/2009
Lukić M (2007) Zaštita, konzeracija i restauracija u Srbiji – Istorijski pregled (Protection,
conservation and restoration in Serbia—Historical overview). U: Studija izvodljivosti za
Centralni institut za konzervaciju u Beogradu. In: Feasibility Study for the Central Institute for
Conservation. Generalna direkcija za saradnju u razvoju Ministarstva spoljnih poslova Italije i
Ministarstva kulture republike Srbije, Beograd
Medjunarodna radna grupa za dokumentaciju i zaštitu gradjevina, mesta i celina modernog pokreta
DOCOMOMO Srbija (International Working Group on Documentation and protection of
buildings, sites and a whole Modern Movement DOCOMOMO Serbia). http://www.
docomomo-serbia.org/ Accessed 09 Dec 2014
Milić M, Pejić S (1998) Spomeničko nasledje Srbije: nepokretna kulturna dobra od izuzetnog i
velikog značaja (The monumental heritage of Serbia: immovable cultural property of extremely
great importance). Republički zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture, Beograd
Nacionalna strategija održivog razvoja 2009–2017 (National Strategy of Sustainable Development
2009–2017). Official Gazette RS, No. 55, 71, 101
Nikezić Z (1996) Neizvesnost kao polazna predpostavka u odredjivanju aktivnosti i usmeravanja
razvoja grada (Uncertainty as a starting assumption in determining the activities and directing
the development of the city). U: Lazarevic-Bajec N, Ralevic M. (eds) Strategija urbanizacije u
uslovima neizvesnosti (Urbanization strategy under uncertainty), Arhitektonski fakultet
Univerziteta u Beogradu, Beograd
Pušić Lj (2001) Održivi grad: ka jednoj sociologiji okruženja (Sustainable City: toward a
sociology of environment). Slobodan Mašić-biblioteka Nova 175, Beograd
Prostorni plan republike Srbije 2010–2020 (Spatial Plan of the Republic of Serbia 2010–2020).
Official Gazette RS, No. 88/10
Republički zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture republike Srbije (RZZSK RS) (Republic Institute
for Protection of Cultural Monuments of Serbia). http://www.kultura.gov.rs/cyr/zastita-
kulturnognasledja/kulturna-dobra. Accessed 09 Dec 2014
Republički zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture republike Srbije – katalog nepokretnih kulturnih
dobara (RZZSK RS) (Republic Institute for Protection of Cultural Monuments of Serbia—
catalog of immovable cultural property) http://www.heritage.gov.rs/cirilica/nepokretna_
kulturna_dobra.php. Accessed 09 Dec 2014
Strategija kulturnog razvoja grada Pančeva 2010–2015 (2010) (Strategy of cultural development of
city Pančevo 2010–2015). Pančevo
Strategija kulturnog razvoja grada Niša 2012–2015 (2011) (Strategy of cultural development of the
City Niš 2012–2015). Niš
Strategija razvoja turizma Republike Srbije (2006) (Strategy for Development of tourism in
Republic of Serbia). Official Gazette RS, No. 91/2006
Zakon o kulturnim dobrima (1994) (The law on cultural properties). Official Gazette RS, No. 71/94
Part VI
Experiences in Italy
Chapter 19
Safeguarding and Promoting Historical
Heritage and Landscape in Italy
Abstract The reflections in this chapter focus on the preservation and enhancement
processes that characterize the historical and cultural Italian landscape. For this
purpose we present a brief critical review of approaches and methods practiced that
have affected the historic city in Italy. In this reading we also examine the gradual
shift of interest toward the issues of regeneration extended first to the entire city and
later to the territory in its wider landscape values. The landscape dimension of
today’s land policy is then examined in light of the latest legislative innovations and
first experiences of regional landscape planning.
Keywords Landscape planning Historic centres Urban planning
Introduction
“Italy is a country of historic centers,” wrote the journalist Fazio (1976). It is a

statement that expresses, in summary, the idea that the Italian identity can be traced
to a complex articulation of its local identity and to the plurality of stories rooted in
the territory, which contribute to define the cultural depth of the nation.
Long before the unification of the country, the Italian states were the first in the
world to adopt rules and public institutions in the field of urban landscape planning.
Italy was the first to integrate the protection of the landscape and cultural heritage
into the fundamental principles of its constitution.1
1
Article. 9 of the Constitution states: “The Republic…. Protect the landscape and the historical and
artistic heritage of the nation.”.
F. Selicato (&) C. Piscitelli

C. Piscitelli

Italy also has a great tradition of actions aimed at the recognition, protection, and
development of its historic cultural heritage and landscape. As clear testimony of
this fact stand the many laws promulgated first for the conservation of architectural
heritage and second for the protection of the landscape. And then there has been the
intense debate that developed within the cultural scope about the concept of
architectural heritage and methods of development—especially in town centers—
which has lasted since the early decades of the 20th century. The cultural fomen-
tation, which initially developed in some academic circles, has gradually involved,
albeit with ups and downs, almost all schools of architecture and urban planning in
the country, on several occasions even crossing national boundaries.2
Therefore, all of the testing design produced and at the same time powered by
this cultural fomentation is of great interest. Macro-planning (for large historical
centers) and micro-planning (for small historical centers) have become increasingly
more widely embedded in the fabric of the consolidated city and recently in the
wider landscape of the suburban territory, have tried to combine complex issues that
often conflict. In this context, we are confronted with issues of different levels of
operation of the recovery actions, authoritarian approaches and processes, more
democratic consensus building, impositive methods, and participatory approaches
of both public and private entities.
Nor can we ignore the intimate bond that ties the historical architectural heritage
to the landscape. The combination of “landscape and cultural heritage” embraces a
whole extraordinary material legacy of Italian history from the wealth of art works
of the city as well as the territory. As such, and perhaps more so than in other
countries, this heritage—which is immense and universally recognized for its
uniqueness—is a foundational element of national identity and contributes to the
quality of individual and collective life of the located communities.
Brief Critical Review of Approaches and Methods

for the Safeguarding and the Revitalization
of the Historic City
Even from the early decades of the last century, the demolition of the Fascist period
—aimed to enhance the monumental building consistent with the rhetoric of the
regime’s aims to celebrate monumentality and to regain possession of the
2
As in the case of the International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic
Monuments, held in Venice in 1964, during which a number of important resolutions were adopted
for the protection and preservation of cultural heritage worldwide. Among them were the adoption
of the Charter of Venice, the International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of
Monuments and Sites, and the establishment of ICOMOS (International Council of Monuments
and Sites) in the role of technical and scientific committee of UNESCO.
19 Safeguarding and Promoting Historical Heritage … 289
“Roman”3—has been questioned by some schools of thought that were conceived

of by Giovannoni (1931). The teaching of Giovannoni in the School of Architecture
of Rome starts with the “theory of thinning” (Giovannoni 1931), which is taken as
the main ways to combat the practice of the widespread demolition of the historic
fabric of the city consistent with the “lightening” of the original thickening of
existing buildings by eliminating the parts considered “unnecessary.” Thinning
aims to “demolish small parts of the building fabric, leaving the free areas and
reconstructing little or nothing, “opening new visuals, bringing light and air
between isolates, “thicker and filthy,” and to provide ‘‘ beautification Road”
(Giovannoni 1931) (Fig. 19.1).
The postwar period saw a revival of interest about the means of intervention in
the ancient city. They provide clarification of the terms and ways of conservation
and, despite new and violent assaults on the historic fabric, are formalized and
experienced through urban plans of a new concept, i.e., the terms of a different
approach.
The period of great cultural fomentation continued into the 1960s and 1970s due
to the state of physical degradation and social distress of many historical centers.
The convention of Italia Nostra in Florence in 1957 and the convention of Gubbio
1960 (promoted by Giovanni Astengo) established the principle of integral pro-
tection of the historic center. The convention of Gubbio lead to the founding of
ANCSA (National Association of Historic Artistic Places), which will significantly
contribute to keep alive the debate—about the preservation of historic centers (Di
Biase 1990). Following the same convention the Charter of Gubbio4 was pro-
mulgated, which declares the national importance of historical centers and the need
to include specific rules about the ancient city in the General Regulatory Plan
including a “recovery conservatively plan,” pending which a constraint of absolute
safeguard must prevail.
The ANCSA’s first conference, held in Venice in 1962, elaborated the concept of
the “historic artistic center,” thus leading to the extension of activities to protect
historic centers in their entirety. The historical and architectural heritage is no
longer just a “cultural heritage” but also a “socio-economic heritage” and can in
itself constitute a factor of development and be an element of improving the quality
of life. In 1964, at the Second International Congress of Architects and Technicians
of Historical Monuments, held in Venice, the ICOMOS (International Council of
Monuments and Sites) was formed. In this entity, the Venice Charter5 was pro-
mulgated, which states that the notion of the monument should be extended to any
environment (city and/or landscape) that testifies to the history of a civilization.
3
In the program of modernization and expansion of Rome, enunciated by Benito Mussolini in
1925, it is predicted to demolish what has been built in the « centuries of decadence » so that the
Roman monuments were to return to « gigantic development in their loneliness ».
4
The final declaration, known as the Charter of Gubbio, was unanimously approved at the con-
clusion of the National Convention for the Protection and Restoration of Historical Centers held in
Gubbio in the days17-18-19 September 1960.
5
Ibidem.
Fig. 19.1 Building thinning of the old city of Bari in the town plan of architect Concezio Petrucci
prepared according to the theories of Giovannoni. The plan highlights two main roads obtained by
the demolition and widening of existing roads (Cucciolla 2006)
At the end of the 1960s, new regulations concerning the so-called “homoge-
neous zones A,6 were formed. These introduced for the first time the protection of
historic centers with a plan that looks not so much like the outstanding value of
individual architectural elements that make up the particular historic center but
6
Ministerial Decree no.1444 of 04/02/1968, in accordance with Law no. 765 of 08/06/1967.
rather a traditional urban plan that must preserve the center in its entirety as a
material testimony of settled communities. In the new normative conception, the
historic fabric, although it does not distinguish between parts of greater or lesser
architectural importance inside the historic center, essentially refers to the built
fabric up until 1860.7 Passionate battles waged by some authors have contributed
greatly to make more mature the awareness that the preservation of historical
heritage should include the full architectural heritage and environment of the past
and move beyond the abstract temporal scanning that many hypothetical plans
contain (Cederna 1956, 1961; Erbani 2006).
In 1972, the Supreme Council of Antiquities and Fine Arts, i.e., the Italian
Restoration Charter,8 was created. This charter consists of four separate reports
containing instruction, among other things, for the protection of historic centers.
In 1975, at the ICOMOS conference in Amsterdam, the European Charter of the
architectural heritage9 was presented and subsequently adopted by the Committee
of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which enshrines the principle of “integrated
conservation.”
In the 1970s, Italian administrations believed that they could solve the problem
of the preservation and rehabilitation of historic centres through recovery inter-
ventions aimed at ensuring public housing under a new state law.10 These trans-
actions allowed, in cases where this was possible, to pursue social goals to meet the
basic needs of the weaker social classes.11
Project experiences of recovery and rehabilitation of important antique centers,
despite so many more modest and similar initiatives, have been started in recent
years and have become exemplary approaches.
The focus on the morphological characters, i.e., the relationship between empty
versus full and open versus closed spaces, the structure and hierarchy of the
parties—is particularly important in recovery plans, e.g., Assisi in the late 1950s,
Astengo (1957, 1958a, b) and Urbino in the early 1960s, De Carlo (1964, 1966) and
Pesaro in the early 1970s, and Carlo Aymonino and others (1974); plans and
projects that fit into the “groove” of traditional studies of schools of architecture
7
Circular of the Ministry of Public Works no. 3210 of 28/10/1967.
8
The Italian Restoration Charter is a reworking of the rules on the restoration of Circular of the
Ministry of Education no.117 of 04.06.1972.
9
The European Charter of the Architectural Heritage will once again emphasize that the European
architectural heritage is not only formed by the most important monuments but also by sets of
buildings that make up the city in their natural or built environment or built.
10
Law no. 167 of 18/04/1962.
11
Piero Bottoni had already proposed in 1958 that the INA-Casa (National Insurance Institute for
the Construction and Management of Housing for Low-Income Families) would have to obtain
accommodation within old houses. Later, at the ANCSA conference in Venice in 1962, it was
agreed that government agencies would purchase degraded properties in the historic centers per
law no. 167/1962 to curb the increase of prices in the area. At the ANCSA conference of Ascoli
Piceno, in 1968, the proposal to allocate resources to reorganize and create housing in town centers
was made clear (Di Biagi 2001).
Fig. 19.2 Architectural elements of centuries 500–700, to protect and preserve, in the Recovery
Plan of Astengo for Assisi (Astengo 1958a, b)
oriented to capture all possible interactions between architectural design and the
role of the urban plan (Panella 1980; Paone 2005) (Figs. 19.2, 19.3 and 19.4).
The recovery plan of the historic center of Bologna (Cervellati et al. 1970, 1977)
for in-depth survey on building types conceived before and completed after an
Fig. 19.3 The system of

roads and open spaces in the
plan for Urbino in 1964 (De
Carlo 1964)
ambitious program of recovery (with 13 compartments) is aimed at building public

housing units (according to law 167/1962). With the plan for the historic center of
Bologna and with the administrative affairs that accompanied the implementation
and management for >20 years, the old town becomes a mixed field of experi-
mentation of urban, social, and preservation policies of historical heritage. The
experience of Bologna therefore assumes importance for having a privileged
urban-management approach, to be “able to take on both of the aspects that relate to
the protection of physical artifacts such as those of the management processes of
use and behavior of social subjects” (Gulli and Talò 2012). The rigor of Bologna’s
plan of typological analysis12 and the corresponding categories of recovery then
12
A turning to urban studies oriented in the typological key was traced in the 1950s by Saverio
Muratori in research and surveys, which have the merit of having laid the foundations of theo-
retical, methodological, and operational typological analysis as a possible answer to the problems
of decoding the historic building heritage (Caniggia 1988).
Fig. 19.4 Buildings of monumental value and processing of building parts in the detailed plan of
the old town of Pesaro Aymonino in 1974 (Gabrielli 1993)
gave way to the adoption of a new law,13 through the means of intervention in the
recovery actions toward + the existing built fabric were defined (Figs. 19.5, 19.6,
19.7 and 19.8).
In the late 1970s and throughout the following decade project experiences
intensified, where from time to time the recovery mode was deepened, new con-
ceptions to understand and/or manage the recovery process were realized, new
paths were explored, and the use of new tools (such as recovery manuals) was
undertaken.
In Palermo, in the early 1980s (De Carlo et al. 1982), due to the size of the
historical context, a “plan program” was defined and accompanied by critical notes
on the morphology of “architectural closed and open space systems.” It is a real
programmatic base document—which anticipated today’s experiences in some
ways—for the subsequent formation of recovery plans. In Palermo at the end of the
13
Law no. 457 of 05/08/1978.
Fig. 19.5 The printed

volume of the recovery plan
of the historic center of
Bologna (Cervellati et al.
1970)
1908s, a new recovery plan (Benevolo et al. 1988) assumed a greater typological
characterization, which explored the structural features of the historic city in the
stratification of its different construction phases. In Ascoli Piceno in the early
1990s, with Secchi (1993), attention was focused into the recovery of the soil, of
underdeveloped collective space (e.g., squares, streets, gardens); thus, it can be
considered that the plan was characterized as a “project of the ground,” and thereby
was invested in any public space of the ancient city.
A special case is that of the historic city of Matera, the district “Sassi,”14 for
which in the 1970s an international competition of ideas15 to start the recovery
14
The “Sassi” of Matera were enrolled in 1993in the list of UNESCO World Heritage Sites.
15
The public competition, established by Law no. 1043 of 29.11.1971, has been performed
between 1975 and 1977, but ends without the award of the first prize, to give way to the City -says
the verdict—to plan and manage directly the whole process of retrieving of Sassi, setting up a
technical and administrative structure appropriate for this purpose. Won the second prize in the
group coordinated by Thomas Jura Longo (1978), whose line methodological and cultural, sub-
sequently endorsed by the municipality, is based primarily on the following points: the Stones
should be considered in all respects the historic city center and recovered to the preeminent
residential function; the rehabilitation of the Sassi is a problem of urban renewal (Acito 2010), to
be implemented by decoding the morphological rules, architectural and planning that led to the
Fig. 19.6 Floor plan to share the road a block in the recovery plan of the historic center of
Bologna (Cervellati et al. 1970)
process was convened. The start of the competition represents a turning point
compared with the policy of rehabilitation, which was conceived until then as
“emptying.” The outcome of this policy would be the museification of the remains
(Footnote 15 continued)
construction in time; must be pursued integration between Sassi and above “city plan”, namely that
sort “turning their backs to the Sassi” (Piccinato 1959); must be pursued the preservation of natural
plateau overlooking what context environmental habitat rock.
Fig. 19.7 Examples of the

type categories in the
recovery plan of the historic
center of Bologna (Cervellati
et al. 1970)
of the ancient city such as “the Roman forum of civilization” (Levi 1945) or the
“necropolis of an agricultural-farmer” (Restucci 1991). The conservative restoration
became the priority of recovery to ensure the basic requirements necessary to the
housing usability of buildings in the ancient city (Figs. 19.9 and 19.10).
In addition to some pilot experiences like those already mentioned, the drafting
of recovery plans continues on a widespread basis, almost everywhere in the
country, that emulate experience of Bologna. All of these experiences are united by
a strong analytical dimension of the investigation, both direct (in many contexts
minors and even “door to door”) and indirect, launched on the territory, the side of
Fig. 19.8 Elevation profile of building facades in the recovery plan of the historic center of
Bologna (Cervellati et al. 1970)
the physical components of the urban fabric, and the components of the socioe-
conomic structure of the population (Figs. 19.11, 19.12, 19.13 and 19.14).
The outcomes of this entire production of recovery plans are still somewhat
controversial, especially in the southern part of the country. There have been,
however, experiences they intend to deal with, albeit in terms of demonstration,
such as a less static and traditional recovery of the historical heritage. At the end of
the 1970s (1979) Otranto experienced the first “neighborhood workshop”16 for
historic centers designed by Renzo Piano under the patronage of UNESCO. The
realization of the neighborhood workshop tries not to alienate people from their
homes and use them to participate actively in the recovery work but to put into
motion a mechanism that has been jammed for a long time: the “continuous per-
manent yard” (Piano et al. 1980). In this sense, the laboratory site would not be
exhausted within the narrow time frame of the experiment performed in Otranto,
but one would have to project into the future, assuming the guise of a self-managed
atelier, able to plan the investment cycle (Massari 2010). Other similar experiences
with the laboratory of the district of Rome in 1993 (Amendola and Sivo 1995) and
that of Cosenza in 1995 (Dioguardi 2014) soon followed. The purpose of these
workshops was to facilitate decision-making related to the physical, economic, and
social regeneration of the historic city.
In the 1990s, the use of technical tools for accompanying recovery plans, con-
sisting of a real “recovery textbook,” was facilitated. Among the most relevant of
these instruments is the “Textbook Recovery of Rome” (Giovanetti et al. 1989;
Giovanetti 1997), the “Recovery Textbook of Città di Castello” (Giovannetti 1992),
and the “Recovery Textbook of the Historic Center of Palermo” (Giovannetti
1997). The textbooks translate the written rules of the specific working methods of
intervention, represented graphically by way of example, which included the
development of numerous construction details. The historic city—in the structuring
16
The laboratory was built by the company of Dioguardi (2014) who developed useful information
to propose its activation in other cities as well. Dioguardi realized a new laboratory a few years
later, in a suburb of the city of Bari, conceived in the form of intelligent management of the city
with the aim of working an owned and programmed maintenance of an urban periphery: “the
laboratory performed a qualitative leap, from the recovery of the historical center to the scheduled
maintenance of the new city” (Milella 1985).
Fig. 19.9 Photo of Sassi of Matera in the 1960s (Gabrielli 1993)

Fig. 19.10 Sketch of work for the recovery of the old town of Matera (Longo and Longo 1978)
Fig. 19.11 Functions and services provided for in the recovery plan of the historic center of
Monopoly in southern Italy (Selicato 1983)
of built versus free spaces, in the relationship between empty and full, and in the
local building material the evidence of cultures that have marked—manifests
completely its character of nonrepeatability; building work to be performed in a
certain manner and with engineering techniques must therefore be aimed at the
conservation and reuse of the historic city to preserve its individuality and
uniqueness (Figs. 19.15, 19.16 and 19.17).
Fig. 19.12 Analysis sheets in the physical recovery plan of the historic center of Monopoly
(Selicato 1983)
From Restoration to Territorial Regeneration

of the Historic City
In the 19902, the analysis of urban problems, as well as determining the structural
reasons for the degradation of city centers and the perverse effects of the accelerated
growth of settlements, shifts the focus to the need to relate relevant planning issues
in the scope of intervention policies for the existing city. The question of historic
centers highlights the relational links between the urban structure of the territory on
one hand and economic processes, i.e., the social relations and manner of use of the
territorial government, on the other. From the debate that developed around these
issues mature awareness extended to the entire city, or even better, the entire
existing building, the alternative strategy of the reuse, and the consequent con-
tainment of new settlement forecasts in urban planning (Mazzoleni 1991).
The historic city is understood as complex and multiform environment, and its
detection no longer refers to the time limits of the development of the city but in
qualitative parameters extends to the entire physical city. These parameters require
an interpretive reading of the entire urban order to bring out the quality of the
differences: A more careful observation cannot detect the differences between the
parties that make up the city, which are well-established in identity features.
Fig. 19.13 Relief of a block in the recovery plan of the historic center of Monopoly (Selicato
1983)
Assuming that the historic centre cannot be isolated from the city, to intervene with
transformation actions in the existing city to physically reorganize the structure first
means to develop a “methodology that would give forth a comprehensive inter-
vention that integrates functional, social, economic and formal aspects of the his-
torical heritage and the recent one” (Mazzoleni 1991).
Fig. 19.14 Elevation profiles in the recovery plan of the historic center of Monopoly (Selicato
1983)
Claims related to the need for a different approach to finding solutions to urban
problems and the more general improvement of the quality of life find, therefore,
resulted in the incentive to create a new definition of a new institutional and
legislative framework at the central level.
From the mid-1990s to the early 2000s, some complex programs were consol-
idated on a national scale (according to a new and different concept of urban
instrumentation) comprising, among others, the “urban recovery program,” the
“urban renewal programs,” and the “district contracts,” with the aim to recover parts
of the city (including, but not limited to, the historic fabric) with a predominant
attention to the recovery of public housing units and the supply of services. The
extraordinary nature of these programs, the availability of public resources tendered
through mechanisms of competitiveness and competition for public and private
financial resources, represent the novelty of these new forms of planning.
In the 2000s, the testing of complex programs continues nationally with the
Urban Community Initiative program, the results of which indeed appear somewhat
contradictory. During the same years, the widespread testing of programs of urban
regeneration and territorial seen start, especially in Puglia, which is in a leading
position compared with other Italian regions.
Puglia approves a regional law on urban regeneration,17 and introduces the
“planning document for urban regeneration,” through which municipalities are
17
Regional Law no. 21 of 29.07.2008.
Fig. 19.15 Recovery textbooks
required to identify areas to be favored in urban regeneration operations ensuring,

among other things, the protection of historical and cultural heritage, landscape, and
environment. The latest tools for regeneration in Puglia refer to integrated programs
for urban regeneration (PIRU), integrated programs of urban development (PISU),
and integrated programs of territorial development (PIST).In all of these programs,
the main actions are aimed at upgrading the existing city and its historical cultural
heritage with special attention, especially in the programs with territorial valence,
paid to strengthening the relationships connecting the systems of smaller urban
centers, with particular regard to those strongly connected in terms of natural and
cultural history.
The new territorial dimension of today’s policies of regeneration of the historical
heritage is fully justified in the new law18 transposing the full concept of landscape
adopted by the European Convention of 2000.19 Under the new rules cultural assets
18
Legislative Decree no. 42 of 22.01.2004, commonly known as the Code of Cultural Heritage and
Landscape.
19
European Landscape Convention signed in Florence by the Member States on 20.10.2000.
Fig. 19.16 Types of masonry from the recovery textbook of Città di Castello (1992)
can be effectively protected and enhanced only when considered in their national
context that considers the importance of landscape. The Italian regulatory apparatus
then takes a mighty structure, consistent with the new conception of landscape
Fig. 19.17 Vaults from the recovery textbook of Palermo (1997)
defined at European level, but it is still not very effective in terms of the results
achieved. To date, it does not seem to have found convincing solutions with a view
of positive convergence of landscape and land-use policies with local development,
a balanced convergence that sacrifices neither the issues of protection nor those of
development but also considers the landscape like as an economic resource
(Clementi 2005).
It should, however, be noted that the processes of urban and territorial regen-
eration are increasingly complex and difficult to implement. Urban regeneration is a
long and complex process requiring financial and human resources (intelligence),
integrated knowledge (engineers, architects, economists, politicians, and experts in
environmental disciplines), creativity, incremental methods (small steps) and
exemplary interventions, detailed visions of organizations, and specific instruments
(e.g., municipal technical agencies with information desks and help for citizens and
investors, information systems, and monitoring) to create solutions that are con-
sistent with the characters and local identities (Selicato et al. 2012).
The regeneration of parts of cities or areas of land cannot be addressed only by
public or private actors to secure the importance of the commitment that is typically
required, hence, the emergence of more methods of partnerships in public private
intervention where everyone does their part.
Landscape Protection in Terms of the Outcomes of the Past

and the Challenges of Recent Innovations
The evaluation of landscape-protection interventions, despite so many successful

experiences—especially if extended to include both the politics of protection of
architectural heritage and those of the landscape (i.e., interventions for soil con-
servation)—certainly cannot be considered positive. For example, in terms of
protecting the landscape there is the new 2004,20 in which the coding rules appears
to be among the most advanced in Europe, whereas on the other hand there is still
much to do regarding defense of the soil, especially in terms of verifying the
effectiveness of interventions. The fragility of the Italian territory and the model of
intensive land use practiced in recent decades on one hand shows the lack of
multiannual investment programming, persistence of a continued policy of emer-
gency intervention, and inability to start a serious initiative to ensure lasting gen-
eralized maintenance of the territory. The same fragmentation of institutional
responsibilities, in contrast, is a dramatic testimony. As partial solution of the issues
related to soil conservation, a new bill on land use has been proposed, which is now
being examined by the national government.
Nearly 30 years of experience in the field of landscape planning, since the same
was introduced as a mandate in every region,21 have highlighted some limits of the
activity performed. What is generally missed in the different landscape plans is its
20
Legislative Decree 42 of 22.01.2004, already mentioned.
21
The Landscape Plan becomes mandatory tool of regional planning for the protection of the
landscape with the law 431 of 08/08/1985.
recognition of the specific characteristics of the Italian landscape, i.e., “their endless
interdependencies among the constituent characteristics of individual local identi-
ties” and “the relational value between history, nature and local companies” was
lost (Clementi 2005).The landscape is not a summation of values to be protected; it
is rather a “whole context, which is shaped in a dynamic combination of characters
from local identity” that give rise to an entity recognized for its collection (Clementi
2005).
Under the new law of protection of 2004, the contents of landscape planning are
redefined assigning to each territory specific quality goals of the landscape. The
new framework opens new scenarios for the future: It requires widespread attention
to all landscapes, even those of minimum quality or even devoid of quality, and
invites us to consider a change in values, i.e., to avoid solutions entrusted to a
freezing of arbitrary forms inherited from history. Above all, it puts emphasis on
policies, namely the actions, the actors, and the resources, needed to preserve,
maintain or upgrade the existing landscapes. They are no longer just constraints but
“forms of active management that need to engage, motivate and empower the many
subjects that variously involved in the construction of the landscape” (Clementi
2005).
All of this brings to the foreground the debate that recursively proposes a
“loosening” of the legislation of protection in favor of more design, which already
includes protection as a guideline for the formulation of such possible solutions. In
this debate different points of view are compared and often collide: On one side
stands the regulatory constraint-based approach; on the other side lies design. The
later cannot be less than the former, which is aimed at protecting. In fact, proposing
an approach aimed at maintaining exclusively political and legislative forms of
protection does not mean giving up the prerogatives of protection; it can also mean
“to want to strengthen.” More generally, it is the old dilemma between standard and
project (Maciocco 1995; Magnaghi 1995; Gambino 1997).
Purely “constraining” policies have proven to be generally bankrupt. This is a
fact that needs no further demonstration other than impending environmental dis-
aster, i.e., the carnage and chaos of the settled landscape, which is visible to all. The
cause of all of this does not reside only in mismanagement or lack of control but
also the limits inherent to the concept of “constraint,” which is understood as a mere
instrument of the limitation of use or possible transformation of a certain property,
thus showing a purely conservative intention, i.e., of “passive protection,”
regardless of the “use value” of the asset (Piscitelli and Selicato 2014).
Overcome traditional approaches that are purely constraining then does not mean
“delete constraint force” but rather means to reinterpret (or “implement” them, if
you prefer) within a proactive and strategic framework in which the protection of
the environment, landscape, and cultural can find explication through a coherent
integration of compatible human activities.
In particular, the Regional Territorial Landscaping Plan (PPTR) of Puglia, which
is in the process of final approval and first-floor landscape in Italian adapted to the
new law of 2004,22 faces this new direction. The plan goes to the heart of the
character design of constructing landscapes for the future, defining the scenario as a
set of strategic projects for the active development of the landscapes of the region.
There are five projects processed at the regional level that draw together a strategic
vision of the future territorial organization aiming to raise the quality and the social
usability of landscapes in the region.23
Building on the innovative features introduced in the Italian legal system, one
can overcome the purely capable traditional approaches provided that one has the
capacity to conceive of projects as a matrix driving the preservation and
enhancement of the landscape. This means therefore to promote smarter and more
forward-looking policies designed to overcome mechanisms that generate trans-
formations ordered through the encouragement of compatible uses that are under-
stood themselves as instruments of exploitation and development of territories and
living communities (Piscitelli and Selicato 2014).
References
Acito L (2010) I Sassi di Matera. Storia di un restauro urbano. Urbanistica 141:9–14

Amendola G, Sivo G (1995) L’Agorà efficiente. L’impresa e la città creativa, Clear Edizioni, Roma
Astengo G (1957) Piano Regolatore di Assisi. Comune di Assisi
Astengo G (1958a) Assisi: salvaguardia e rinascita. Urbanistica 24–25:2–8
Astengo G (1958b) La città entro le mura. Urbanistica 24–25:29–70
Aymonino C, Dardi C, Fabbri G, Lena M, Panella R, Polesello G, Semerani L (1974) Piano
Particolareggiato del Centro Storico di Pesaro. Comune di Pesaro
Benevolo L, Cervellati PL, Insolera I (1988) Piano di Recupero del Centro Storico di Palermo.
Comune di Palermo
Caniggia G (1988) Saverio Muratori. La didattica e il pensiero. In: Montuori M (ed) Lezioni di
progettazione. Dieci maestri dell’architettura italiana. Electa, Milano
Cederna A (1956) I vandali in casa. Laterza, Bari
Cederna A (1961) Salvaguardia dei centri storici e sviluppo urbanistico. In: Casabella Continuità
250:49–55
Cervellati PL, Emiliani A, Renzi R, Scannavini R (1970) Bologna. Centro storico, Edizioni Alfa,
Bologna
Cervellati PL, Scannavini R, De Angelis C (1977) La nuova cultura delle città: la salvaguardia dei
centri storici, la riappropriazione sociale degli organismi e l’analisi dello sviluppo territoriale
nell’esperienza di Bologna. Mondadori Edizioni, Milano
Clementi A (2005) Paesaggio, territorio, Codice Urbani. In: Cicala V, Guermandi MP
(eds) Regioni e ragioni nel nuovo codice dei beni culturali e del paesaggio. Istituto per i
beni artistici culturali e naturali della Regione Emilia Romagna, IBC Editore, Bologna
22
This would confirm the innovative scope, even a planning perspective, of the new Italian law on
the protection of cultural heritage and landscape.
23
Regional projects include the construction of the regional ecological network, activation of
integrated projects as part of the so-called pact between town and country, construction of the
infrastructure system for soft mobility, enhancement and upgrading of integrated coastal land-
scapes, and realization of regional systems for the use of cultural heritage and landscape.
Cucciolla A (2006) Vecchie città/Città nuove. Concezio Petrucci 1926–1946. Edizioni Dedalo,
Bari
De Carlo G (1964) Piano Regolatore di Urbino. Comune di Urbino
De Carlo G (1966) Urbino. La storia di una città e il piano della sua evoluzione urbanistica.
Marsilio Editori, Padova
De Carlo G, Di Cristina U, Samonà G, Sciarra Borzì A M (1982) Piano Programma del Centro
Storico di Palermo. Comune di Palermo
Di Biagi P (ed) (2001) La grande ricostruzione. Il piano Ina-Casa e l’Italia degli anni ’50. Donzelli
Editore, Roma
Di Biase C (ed) (1990) 30 anni ANCSA, 1960-1990. ANCSA, Milano
Dioguardi G (2014) Nuove alleanze per il terzo millennio. Città metropolitane e periferie
recuperate, Franco Angeli, Milano
Erbani F (2006) I vandali in casa. Cinquant’anni dopo, Laterza, Bari
Fazio M (1976) I centri storici italiani. Silvana Editoriale d’Arte/Ancsa, Milano
Gabrielli B (1993) Il recupero della città esistente. Saggi 1968–1992. EtasLibri, Milano
Gambino R (1997) Conservare innovare. Utet, Torino, Paesaggio, Ambiente, Territorio
Giovanetti F, Marconi P, Pallottino E (1989) Manuale del Recupero del Comune di Roma. Dei
Edizioni, Roma
Giovanetti F (ed) (1992) Manuale del recupero di Città di Castello. Dei Edizioni, Roma
Giovanetti F (ed) (1997a) Manuale del recupero del Comune di Roma. Dei Edizioni, Roma
Giovanetti F (ed) (1997b) Manuale del recupero del centro storico di Palermo. Flaccovio Editore,
Palermo
Giovannoni G (1931) Vecchie città ed edilizia nuova. Unione tipografico-editrice torinese, Torino
Gulì L, Talò F (2012) Cinquant’anni di esperienze nella gestione dei centri storici in un caso
esemplare. In: J Dept Cult Heritage 5:41–61. University of Macerata
Levi C (1945) Cristo si è fermato a Eboli. Einaudi, Torino
Longo GT, Longo GR (1978) Concorso internazionale di idee per il restauro urbanistico
ambientale dei rioni Sassi di Matera e del prospiciente altipiano murgico. Over Edizioni,
Milano
Maciocco G (1995) Dominanti ambientali e progetto dello spazio urbano. Urbanistica 104:76–91
Magnaghi A (1995) Progettare e pianificare il territorio: un contributo alla questione ambientale.
Urbanistica 104:65–76
Massari A (2010) Laboratorio Progettuale. L’esperienza di Renzo Piano a Otranto. Learning Cities.
Rete per le città che apprendono, http://www.learningcities.it
Mazzoleni C (1991) Dalla salvaguardia del centro storico alla riqualificazione della città esistente.
Trent’anni di dibattito dell’ANCSA. Archivio di Studi Urbani e Regionali, vol 40. Franco
Angeli, Milano
Milella L (1985) Nuovo e bello: laboratorio di quartiere, computer, manutenzione della città: un
progetto di Renzo Piano realizzato dalla Fratelli Dioguardi e dal Cer. Laterza, Bari
Panella R (1980) L’attuazione del progetto urbano. In: Casabella, vol 456. Gruppo Editoriale
Electa
Paone F (2005) 1968: grandi architetture residenziali. In: Architettura e città, n.2. Di Baio Editore
Piano R, Arduino M, Fazio M (1980) Antico è bello, il recupero della città. Editori Laterza, Bari
Piccinato L (1959) Piano Regolatore Generale di Matera. Comune di Matera
Piscitelli C, Selicato F (2014) “Rigore della tutela vs istanze della trasformazione”, Nuovi Scenari
Urbani. In: Architettura e Città, n.9. Di Baio Editore, Milano
Restucci A (1991) Matera, i Sassi. Einaudi, Torino
Secchi B (1993) Piano Particolareggiato Esecutivo per il Centro Storico di Ascoli Piceno. Comune
di Ascoli Piceno
Selicato F (1983) Il Piano del Centro Storico di Monopoli. Analisi e prospettive, Schena Editore,
Fasano
Selicato F, Rotondo F, Torre CM (eds) (2012) Percorsi di rigenerazione urbana e territoriale. Mario
Adda Editore, Bari
Chapter 20
The Actors’ Role in Practices
Claudia Piscitelli and Pierangela Loconte
Abstract The purpose of the chapter is to understand what may be the ways in
which you can implement, monitor, and modify the integrated cultural territorial
plan during operation. The purpose is to give a series of suggestions and open
thoughts on how and by whom the plan will be monitored. The phase of man-
agement and implementation of the plan does not appear secondary but rather
represents a new critical point that, if not properly addressed and resolved, will not
allow the plan to achieve the development goal it was aimed to achieve.

Keywords Participation in planning Collaborative planning Urban management
The Actors’ Role in Practices
The need of stronger and more active participation of the population in the planning
and regeneration processes in Italy began during a particular and animated historic
period. The 1960s was a period characterized by many new elements in the social,
economic, and political fields. The social issues and the ideological thrusts also
increased due to the strong international social movements. People became more
conscious about their rights and power. They started to speak aloud. This situation
was also connected with the issues of public housing, which started after the World
War II, and with the poor hygienic and structural conditions of many houses. Many
people lived in a condition of low quality of life, and they started to turn their needs
into claims. At the same time, in some foreign countries there were some new
theories and experiences about the involvement of the population in planning
process such as in the Advocacy Planning theory created by Davidoff (USA 1965) .
C. Piscitelli (&) P. Loconte

P. Loconte

312 C. Piscitelli and P. Loconte
Fig. 20.1 Graphic output by the regeneration plan of the historic centre of Bologna, Cervellati
(1969)
In Italy, the attention of public administration, architects, and academics has

been focused on historic centres for many years, but all of the actions until now
were linked only with morphological, external, and structural aspects. Many
refurbished historic buildings were used for institutional functions, whereas new
residential suburbs were being built far from historic centres with such conse-
quences as gentrification of the low class and increased real estate values in the
historic centres. Thus, the real novelty in the regeneration processes of this period
comprise paying attention to the needs and perception of the population. Initially
these elements were identified only by an analysis of the socioeconomic data, but
soon the tools became more concrete and nearer to the people and their life. The use
of tools such as interviews and questionnaires became widespread to keep in touch
with the real needs and perceptions of the inhabitants. An emblematic case of this
technique is the Regeneration Plan of the historic centre of Bologna (Italy) made by
Luigi Cervellati in 1969 (Fig. 20.1).
The goals of this plan on one hand were the physical regeneration of the
buildings and spaces of the historic centre and on the other hand the cultural and
ideological regeneration of the inhabitants through active participation. An
important and identified objective was to give back to the historic centre its ability
to communicate, linked with a new but at the same time traditional cultural inter-
pretation of the historic architecture, in which “culture” did not mean “elitè” culture
but “popular” culture. It was important to re-establish the lost relationship among
functions, meanings, and architecture (Fig. 20.2).
The methodology theorized by planners and sociologists to research the “ex-
pression” of the historic centre of Bologna consisted of three steps: (1) the inclusion
of approximately 20 in-depth interviews to identify some problems and to find a
framework for the next steps; (2) the inclusion of structured interviews to focus on
the aspects that were explored in the questionnaires; and (3) the inclusion of
questionnaires, with or without multiple answers, that were often linked with pic-
tures. Examples of these questions include the following:
20 The Actors’ Role in Practices 313
Fig. 20.2 Picture of

inhabitants of the historic
centre of Bologna, 1969
(source Bologna centro
storico, Catalogue of the
exhibition Bologna/centro
storico, ed. ALFA, 1970)
• The houses, the buildings, and the streets of the historic centre of Bologna are
older than the rest of the city and have peculiar features. Could you identify the
most typical and frequent colours, elements, and architectural structures?
• What do you think about them while you walk through the historic centre? Answers
included I like them/they irritate me/I don’t care. Citizens are proud of a
well-preserved historic centre. Do you agree? Answers included yes/no/I don’t know.
This methodology to investigate the needs and perceptions of the population
became very common after the case of Bologna. Many architects and academics
used it in their works, but sometimes they put an excessive emphasis on the social
aspects, overlooking, for example, the economic ones. In some cases all of the
questions produced an opposite effect: The inhabitants were almost forced to stay in
the historic centre rather than moving to new and more comfortable buildings in the
new and modern suburbs.
Another important turning point in the participation of the regeneration pro-
cesses was the “neighborhood workshop” of the regeneration of the historic centre
of Otranto made by Renzo Piano in 1980. The goals of the realization of this
workshop were to obtain knowledge about the needs and perceptions of the pop-
ulation, the valorization of the local crafts, and the use of the innovative tech-
nologies. It consisted of a mobile cubic temporary structure situated in the heart of
the historic centre of Otranto. Each side of the “cube” was involved in a different
Fig. 20.3 Pictures of the neighborhood workshop in Otranto conceived of by Renzo Piano in the
1980s
field: analysis and diagnostics, information and teaching, open project, work, and
construction. The functions of the neighborhood workshop were to collect data and
information from the population and furthermore to inform and teach the population
crafts and methods linked with the refurbishment of their historic centre. Thus, it
was also a tool to link people and backgrounds to have the participation of the
population in the regeneration process as well as the future activities of the historic
centre. Many experiences in 1980s followed the example of Otranto (Fig. 20.3).
During the 1990s, the attention on historic centres decreased, probably due to
emerging themes such as sustainability and the environment. The interventions on
historic centres during this period were connected to urban programs, which were
founded by the European Union and directed to improve degraded urban contexts
including historic centres, ex-industrial areas, suburbs, and large districts of public
houses. The most degraded areas in Italy often corresponded to the historic centres.
These programs were provided to regenerate the historic centres in many Italian
cities such as Naples, Venice, and Bari (Fig. 20.4).
The urban programs had many goals going beyond physical regeneration: to
support small and medium local companies and to stimulate the creation on new
ones, to increase the local employment, to improve and increase the social services,
Fig. 20.4 Map of the most important Urban I, Urban II and Urban Italian programs (http://www.
retecittaitalia.gov.it/en/)
to solve the problems of primary needs and to improve the quality of life by
increasing security improving infrastructure. In some cases, an important aspect in
these processes was the community involvement while at the same time being a
goal of the program and a tool to focus the best planning choices. In the case of the
urban program in Salerno, a city in the southwest of Italy, community participation
was a real part of the regeneration process because all of the choices and actions
were participative. There was a strong cooperation between local government, the
population, and the Urban Observatory, a structure involved in a continuous link
with the citizens (information, advertising, technical and administrative support,
collection of citizens’ data and opinions), which was founded during the urban
program with the objective to continue its action at the end of the program. An
opposite case was the urban program of Bari, which made the historic centre
attractive for new stakeholders and activities (restaurants, pubs, etc.) more than for
the inhabitants. The attention was focus on security and hygienic conditions only in
the most visible part of the historic centre, and this had the consequences of
increasing the real estate values, the gentrification, and the lack of attention to the
primary needs of the inhabitants, e.g., infrastructures (Figs. 20.5 and 20.6).
However, in most Italian cases during this period, participation was integrated into
the planning process; furthermore, the Italian National Institute of Urban planning
Fig. 20.5 Public space in the historic centre of Salerno, Italy (http://www.campaniameteo.it/
immagini/immagini_articoli/Salerno-piazza-Abate-Conforti.jpg)
Fig. 20.6 Pubs and restaurant in the historic centre of Bari, Italy
(INU) instituted an award for the best participatory practices as proof of the impor-
tance of this theme for institutions, academics, and experts. In contrast, participation
as an obligatory step of the process could involve a risk: It could be simply a formality
without real contents, a simple collection of the acceptance of top-down choices.
A turning point regarding community participation in the regeneration processes
in the Apulia Region laws was Regional Law no. 21 of the July 29, 2008. It states
that “The municipalities define the geographical areas which, due to their charac-
teristics of suburb and marginal urban areas, need a urban regeneration. For this
purpose, the municipalities establish a PLANNING DOCUMENT FOR URBAN
REGENERATION, developed with the participation of the population, taking into
account the proposals for action made by other public and private entities […]”. This
means that the participation must start in parallel with the planning process as a basic
part of said process. Furthermore, the regeneration of the historic centre became in
this period a tool of a larger regeneration, which starts from the heart of the city to
involve the urban fabric, the suburbs, the countryside, and the landscape. Thus,
participation in all of these fields become a starting point for this huge process: It was
a tool, on one hand, to promote the knowledge of the population, to achieve
awareness of local, cultural, historic resources, and a sense of “place.” In contrast, it
was a tool for concrete action with regard to transactional participation (Friedmann
1987), in which each participant must renounce something to achieve the common
goals and for whom the final decisions created neither winners nor losers.
Community Involvement
The most effective participation is spontaneous. It has been tested in many experi-
ences, in which many people had the same problems and fought together to achieve
the same goals. However, these are rare cases. An example is the case of the Fibronit
industry in Bari (Italy) in the 1990s. Bari is situated a quarter with social, economic,
and urban issues; the condition of the quarter is aggravated by a dangerous site of an
old abandoned asbestos cement corporation called Fibronit, which in the last decades
has caused hundreds of deaths. All of the inhabitants of the quarter joined in a
protest, which created strong interest by the administrations, the media, and local
experts. The following project originated from the collaboration among citizens,
institutions, planners, and designers. The aim was to give dignity back to a pivotal
area for the city and for the quarter, which had been abandoned for decades. This
action represented a strong social “ransom” that revitalized an area and a quarter and
could start revitalizing a entire part of the city (Fig. 20.7).
Another case of effective spontaneous participation is the case of the loss of an
evident resource. An example is the case of the business of the centuries-old olive
trees in Monopoli, in which the popular protest managed to the get passed a
regional law in 2007, which protects the centuries-old olive trees and forbids their
transport out of their original territory (Figs. 20.8 and 20.9).
Fig. 20.7 The old abandoned asbestos cement corporation Fibronit in Bari, Italy
Fig. 20.8 The flat land of the monumental olive oil trees in Monopoli, Italy
Fig. 20.9 News items about the attention of citizens toward the case of the olive trees in the
Agricutural Park of the Olive Trees, Monopoli, Italy
To achieve real participation, which is closest to spontaneous participation,

forms have been promoted through citizens’ associations and specialized multi-
disciplinary studios (along with architects, city planners, political scientists, com-
municators, facilitators, Web designers, and social workers), which give the
administration and planners indispensable tools to achieve an effective and useful
participation. An Italian example of this kind of professional studio is called
“Avventura Urbana” (Urban Adventure), which was founded by Iolanda Romano
(architect) and Andrea Pillon. It consists of a group of experts from various field:
architects, city planners, political scientists, communicators, facilitators, Web
designers, and social workers. Unlike specialization in the field, which is an
appropriate planning method for multifaceted and complex contexts. The
Avventura Urbana team has worked together for >15 years to promote participatory
planning by exploring innovative new ways to deal with public policies and private
interventions in the territory. Their aim is to deal with problems by using a pro-
gressive “polyphonic” approach. Knowledge and planning go hand to hand (as it
says on their Web site), and no matter who benefits from the change, personal
opinion is considered a highly valuable way to broaden the possible choices and to
look for a good solution. The tools are many: projects for public development,
housing, workplaces, and parts of the territory; deliberative democracy events for
public policies; urban renewal; managing conflicts; communication campaigns;
actions to promote environmental endurableness; feasibility studies; strategic plans
for the cities, and much more (Fig. 20.10).
Fig. 20.10 Web site of “Avventura Urbana” (http://www.avventuraurbana.it/)
One of the most useful method used by Avventura Urbana is called “open space
technology,” a form of involvement that is close to spontaneous participation. OST,
theorized by Harrison Owen in the 1980s, is based on the auto-organization and
ability of the participants to make proposals (Owen 2008). It is an “open space”
filled by the ideas, proposals, and visions of the participants. The participants feel
free to express themselves: Whoever wished can stand up, propose a subject, and
create a discussion group. The debates must be short, and at the end of the process
all results must be shared with all of the participants (Fig. 20.11).
Nowadays, an important tool for both the exchange of information and the
dissemination of innovative methods is the Internet. An example of its use is a
widespread method called the “electronic town meeting” (e-TM). The participants
discuss in small groups organized around round tables. For each table, a facilitator
with special training provides an open and democratic discussion. Observations
arising from each group are sent through a network of laptops connected with
wireless technology to a team whose function is to capture the most challenging and
common themes that emerged from the individual tables and to summarize the
content. These summaries are immediately shown on big screens to the whole
assembly to display directly the outcomes of the discussion. The Web power is also
expressed in a sort of remote participation through tools such as blogs, social
networks, and smart phone applications, which also provide a continuous moni-
toring of perceptions and opinions (Fig. 20.12).
Another relevant aspect of community participation is the real active involvement
of the population not only to collect data but also to provide an active role to the
participants in taking decisions. A good example of this is the “urban-planning
workshop,” which was used in 2011 for the Regeneration Plan of the Small Historic
Centres of the Municipalities of Statte and Crispiano (Apulia Region, Italy). The
goal of this plan was to realize a network of small historic centres to satisfy the needs
Fig. 20.11 Pictures of an example of open space technology (source http://jaysmith.us/post/ost_

part_2.aspx)
Fig. 20.12 Example of an electronic town meeting

Fig. 20.13 Historic centres

of Statte and Crispiano, Italy
(source Final report. http://
www.euro-consulting.biz/wp-
content/uploads/2013/01/
Relazione-di-rendiconto-
finale.pdf)
of the population and, in contrast, to promote new and traditional activities. Three
urban-planning workshops were held about urban planning, slow mobility, and
ancient crafts. The teamwork identified consultation methods specific to the viral
market and decided to move forward in stages, defined and shared, which included a
gradual involvement of all parts taking part in the process and expanding partici-
pation in the workshops as soon as the laboratory passed to the next stage. Thus, the
incremental process of participants was divided into five steps, which at first
included the steering group and then progressively the mixed groups, the experts, the
public relations workers, and the community (Figs. 20.13, 20.14 and 20.15).
Another interesting experience of participation is the one that took place as part
of Project LAB.net and Project LAB.net Plus by the Sardinia region in partnership
with the Tuscany and Liguria regions and Corsica.
In general, the purpose of the project was (1) to create a network of laboratories
for the recovery of historic centers to be seen as a local reference by implementing
interventions and (2) to build a wealth of common knowledge about traditional
types and manufacturing techniques.
Fig. 20.14 Urban-planning

laboratory in Statte, Italy
Fig. 20.15 Scheme of the

incremental logic of
participants
Within this experience, which began in 2004 and is still ongoing, the compe-
titions Kaleidos and Kaleidos 2 represented an important moment of sharing work
with local communities and have helped raise reflections, opinions, and ideas for
the future of the resident population through the involvement of children.
In particular, the competitions were aimed to help improve the community’s
sense of affection for places in the area, and this was made possible through the
privileged point of view of children.
The competitions have certainly encourage them to know their territory, live in it
every day, to interact with it, and to communicate their views and proposals to lay
the foundations for the reactivation of a new process of identity construction of the
place.
In the first competition, Kaleidos Your City: A Kaleidoscope of Discoveries,
children were exposed to constructed and historically structured places in their city,
preferably places they knew and usually lived in. They were asked to narrate,
describe, and design spaces of the historical town, based on their specific needs and
aspirations, to investigate the relations between man and the historic environment
established by themselves in those places.
Fig. 20.16 Kaleidos—Final event Tempio Pausania 2007 (Image source http://www.inu.it/blog/
centri_storici_min/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/melis.pdf)
The initiative, promoted by the Region of Sardinia, allowed the children to tell of
the historic urban spaces they know and to describe how they would like to live in
them through mediums such as drawings, clay models, painting, and making paper
mache objects (Fig. 20.16).
In the second portion of the competition, Kaleidos 2 Our Countries Cultivate
Talents tried to strengthen and improve the perspective of community members of
places creating in them an awareness of their land and resources and their means of
encouraging self-propulsion to assume leading roles in the development of the area.
The fields of investigation of the competition included the following:
• Construction of community maps;
• Recognition of situations of degradation and proposals for restoration and
enhancement of the landscape; and
• The project “route of the landscape.”
Both contests were intended for primary school children. In this way, the
competition allowed the involvement in and awareness of families to the theme of
the development of the area and the local identity (Fig. 20.17).
Moreover, the experience with the children made it possible to bring the
attention of administration and regional planning to community’s specific needs,
which are often ignored or undervalued, and to assess from an original and
authentic point of view about territory the landscape and enhancement processes.
In conclusion, in the participation process the role of the methods and tools is
relevant, but it is important to underline the important role of the experts who
provide people with knowledge of the right way to participate. The balance between
expert and popular knowledge, between theory and practice, depend on the ability
Fig. 20.17 Logo Concorso

Kaleidos 2
of the mediators, who must know deeply the territory and the stakeholders. Their
role also concerns turning the information and input gleaned from the participation
process into concrete actions and planning.
References
Cervellati PL (1969) Bologna centro storico. In: Cultura e società in Emilia-Romagna, atti del
convegno, Mosca 4–17 settembre ‘78, Bologna, Giunta regionale dell’Emilia-Romagna, 1978,
pp 33–35
Davidoff P (1965) Advocacy and pluralism in planning. APA J 31:331–338
Friedmann J (1987) Planning in the public domain. Princeton, From Knowledge to Action
L.R. n.21 of the July 29th, 2008, Regional Law of Apulia Region, Norme per la rigenerazione
urbana (Law about the urban regeneration), BURP, n.124 of the August 1st, 2008
Owen H (2008) A brief user’s guide to Open Space Technology. Berrett-Koehler Publishers
Web references
http://www.avventuraurbana.it/. Accessed 08 April 2015

http://www.parterre-project.eu/?electronic_town_meeting=1. Accessed 08 April 2015
http://www.slideshare.net/euresgroup/psmazara-lancio-pillon. Accessed 08 April 2015
http://www.retecentristoricistattecrispiano.it/. Accessed 08 April 2015
http://www.centriurbani.regione.umbria.it/. Accessed 08 April 2015

http://www.sardegnaterritorio.it/documenti/6_477_20130517134733.pdf. Accessed 08 April 2015
http://labnet-plus.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/29.-Report-concorso-Kaleidos2.pdf. Accessed
08 April 2015
http://labnet-plus.eu/. Accessed 08 April 2015
Chapter 21
A Survey of Interesting Practices
in the Country
Pierangela Loconte
Abstract The aim of the chapter is to describe some parts of the Italian experience
that are considered particularly significant related to the enhancement of cultural
and the environment heritage, in particular, small historic centers. Specifically we
focus on the possible role of public authorities and private individuals regarding this
issue. For this reason, we will examine in depth some case studies presented by
proposals for public initiative through the use of specific regulations; proposals for
participatory public/private initiative and, finally, proposals for a voluntary private
initiative.
Keywords Landscape planning Urban planning Urban history
Introduction
Looking at the international scene and the complexity of the experiences of

enhancement and regeneration of smaller historic centers and their territories and
landscapes, we can see that the Italian experience is definitely one of the most
significant and complex.
The presence of extensive layering of historical and cultural features charac-
terizes the entire national territory.
A significant, but not exhaustive, example of the richness of Italian heritage is
the fact that Italy is the country with the largest number of goods registered as a
World Heritage Site by UNESCO. Among the 50 assets registered in the list of
UNESCO since 1979, there are both individual monumental assets and historical
centers, networks of goods, natural beauty and unique landscapes that are symbol of
Italy in the world.
P. Loconte (&)

330 P. Loconte
The example of UNESCO is the most emblematic and effective way to tell the
Italian experience and the historical, cultural, and landscape heritage that charac-
terize it. In addition, however, one must refer to that common heritage that char-
acterizes Italy and that has unique elements and characteristic data from the
sediment of the history, culture, and human activities within natural and human
landscape, although they may not be recognized as a World Heritage Site.
This means it is very complex to achieve a comprehensive overview of the most
interesting experiences related to the preservation and promotion of historic centers
and Italian landscapes. Before proceeding to a roundup of cases, it appears par-
ticularly interesting to make some significant assumptions about the reasons that
led, in different ways, to start policies of exploitation and regeneration.
As described by Ricci (2010), Italy is characterized by a constellation of small
towns: approximately 92 % of the 8048 Italian municipalities have a population
of <15,000 inhabitants occupying the majority of the national surface (*80 %).
These data show how small towns are a particularly significant reality within the
country, such as large cities are, and that they cannot neglected even though most of
the population is concentrated in the larger centers.
The Italy of small towns is characterized by the presence of a large and varied
cultural and environmental heritage as well as prestigious property, arts, and tra-
ditions that have been handed down over time.
This Italy of small towns, however, is unable to compete with the large urban
centers: the small towns, although characterized by a better quality of life than is
found in the large cities, are not always able to offer facilities, infrastructures,
green spaces and job opportunities to the resident population.
Most of the buildings that constitute the small centers are in a state of partial or
total degradation and are often characterized by functional, maintenance and
technological inadequacy. This obsolescence is constitutive of small towns and,
often, their difficulty in connecting with other parts of the territory is exacerbated by
issues related to the hydrogeological system, the seismic vulnerability and, in
general, poor maintenance of the territory. Finally, the poor quality of the housing
stock and the reduction of economic activities encourage the emergence of issues
related to social decline and the decrease of public safety. The combination of these
urban, social, cultural, economic and environmental issues produces depopulation
and abandonment of small towns, which are increasingly inhabited only by the
older population. Although this analysis may seem rough, it really reflects the
situation in which the majority of small Italian towns can be found.
A second issue that must be put into evidence in this preliminary phase is linked
to the purposes of regeneration. The processes of the enhancement of small towns
have increasingly aimed to answer the existing or hypothetical touristic question,
which will hopefully act as a “flywheel” to the local economy. In this regard, the
hope is that tourists and tourism-related activities do not “replace” the resident
population and existing activities, but that we strive to determine the appropriate
economic and functional balance able to secure the survival of the “originality” of
the small towns. Against this background, we have chosen to illustrate a series of
21 A Survey of Interesting Practices in the Country 331
Italian experiences that are deemed particularly interesting with reference to the
following:
1. proposals for public initiative through the use of specific regulations;
2. proposals for participatory public/private initiative;
3. proposals for a voluntary private initiative.
For each of these, we tried to identify the best practices in place or nearing
completion to be able to highlight the strengths, weaknesses, threats, and oppor-
tunities. The intent was also to highlight the peculiarities of the Italian heritage and
its landscapes and the path that leads, at different levels, to recognizing them as
assets, which if properly by upgrading or enhancement can be seen as a resource for
the resident population. The roundup of experiences has as a starting point the
awareness of the existence of “territorial capital” (OECD 2011) with potential still
untapped, underutilized, or used in a nonprofitable way.
Proposals for Public Initiative Through the Use of Specific

Regulations
The Italian experience is characterized by the absence of specific national legisla-

tion about urban planning. According to article 117 of the Italian Constitution, the
government of a territory is a concurrent matter between the state and the regions.
For this reason, each region, as part of its autonomy, has been able to fill in their
own way the legal vacuum.
First of all, this happened in the field of urban and regional planning, but it also
has occurred in local planning and enhancement as well as urban-regeneration
processes. In particular, during the last 15 years, there are been a large number of
laws about protection and enhancement of the historic centers, each with its own
peculiarities and specifically declined in its regional context. In addition to these
regulations, a large number of other instruments have been developed at the
regional level, related to the availability of access to the European level in rela-
tionship to well-defined axes of operations in the Operating Plan European
Regional Development Fund. Through the use of public calls, regional adminis-
trations have been able to make a selection of worthy and fundable projects.
The Italian experience is particularly interesting because within each regional area,
each administration has taken steps to organize independently of the mode of action
trying to create synergies between regulatory systems and sources offunding, to use the
available resources, to merge into a single general idea both protection and enhance-
ment and to avoid isolated actions or those that are not integrated with each other.
In Italy every region must draw up its Regional Landscape Plan. It is the planning
tool that defines the methods of landscape management, indicating actions to pre-
serve, enhance, restore or create landscapes. In general, the experience related to the
drafting of the Regional Landscape Plans tried to give substance to actions
332 P. Loconte
encouraging the combination of the need to identify forms of territory and landscape
protection and, at the same time, to identify development opportunities for local
communities focus on building self-sustainable local development (Magnaghi 2005).
The ability to create dialogue between instruments, funds, promoters and actu-
ators by regional governments remains essential. These experiences have long-term
high complexity and not necessarily well-defined periods.
Among the experiences that can be considered particularly significant, we
consider the case of the Sardinia region. Regional policies for the protection and
enhancement of the territory and the historical landscape of the Region of Sardinia
began in 1998 with Regional Law No. 29, the “Protection and enhancement of
historic centers.” After this a series of policies for urban areas under the Regional
Operational Plan, closely related to the new Regional Landscape Plan, were put into
place. Article no. 1 of the Regional Law says that “the Autonomous Region of
Sardinia, also to the enhancement of real estate resources available and limiting
the consumption of land resources, consider preeminent regional interest recovery,
rehabilitation and reuse of historic centers and historical settlements children and
provides for you respecting their socio-cultural, historical, architectural, urban,
economic and environmental values”1 (Sardinia Region 1998).
For this reason, the law provides for definitions of the possible ways of action i.e.,
integrated programs of historic centers useful to municipalities to intervene in the urban
settlements and building that need to be restored, protected and enhanced and imple-
mented through joint projects, and urban redevelopment and upgrading of primary
urbanization and services and interventions of primary recovery of individual units.
Moreover, the law provides for the establishment of a “repertoire of historic centers”
(Article no. 5), which is the general framework for the acts of regional planning.
Within the repertoire the following is inserted: “municipalities that are char-
acterized by the presence of complex construction and the built environment with
significant architectural or urban planning historical testimony, cultural and
environmental value, connotation typological or aggregation and therefore recip-
ients of regional resources aimed at the recovery urban and building”2 (Sardinia
Region 1998).
Finally, the law provides for the possibility for municipalities to access regional
contributions through a public competition for restoration, redevelopment and reuse
works of built town into the historic centers and settlements of Sardinia “for a
minor historical buildings or residential structures and their appurtenances
(Category A) and buildings or structures intended for economic or social activities
such as shops, small businesses, crafts and cultural and/or small extra hotel
accommodation (Category B)”3 (Sardinia Region 1998).
Figure 21.1 shows the distribution of the municipalities that have had access to
regional fund.
1
Our translation.
2
Our translation.
3
Our translation.
Fig. 21.1 Distribution of the municipalities that have had access to regional fund (image source
http://www.sardegnaterritorio.it)
The enhancement process started with Regional Law 29/98 was continued with
the definition of the Measures and Actions Sardinia POR, a development document
drawn up by Sardinia Region, in agreement with the Italian State and the European
Commission for the use EU funds. Specifically, Measure 5.1, which is relative to
urban areas, defines the objectives and actions for major urban as well as
medium-sized areas, the strengthening of smaller towns and the social capital and
provides for the introduction of new governance tools.
Small centers represent almost all of the municipalities of Sardinia and the
purpose of the actions has been to create networks of small centers and, therefore,
existing service equipment to create real local offices and capable of promoting
regional cooperation. These measures result in the construction of four calls for the
redevelopment of urban areas for access to funding consistent with the Regional
Law 29/98 called Polis, Civis, Domos and Biddas.
The call Polis included funding for the preparation of high-quality projects for
large urban areas; the call Civis included funding for networking centers and
included funding Domos for the enhancement of the historical centers; finally, the
call Biddas included funding for the implementation of measures that can impact on
enhancement of the built heritage of historic settlements.
Calls Civis and Biddas are particularly interesting in processes of exploitation of
small town centers and their territories. Indeed, although the former is aimed at
334 P. Loconte
build networks of small towns by promoting network facilities with a view to

improving the quality of life as well as the cohesion and identity of the catchment
area, the latter allows funding for interventions on existing buildings only to those
municipalities that have joined in a territorial network by homogeneous characters.
Moreover, this kind of action was aimed to foster sustainable tourism by
encouraging interventions to improve urban quality and to promote the reuse of
existing buildings that have fallen into disuse and, consequently, the improvement
of the building fabric, the redefinition of public and private space, the limitation of
the consumption of land, and the promotion of public awareness on the issue of
local residents and landscape (Fig. 21.2).
Figure 21.3 shows an example of the result obtained in one of the small
Sardinian municipalities through the integration of actions for the enhancement of
minor historical centers and their urban heritage and cultural landscape. We can see
how, in a decade of activities aimed at preservation and revitalization, small towns
have undergone massive changes not only related to material interventions but
linked to the rediscovery of the places, the dissemination and sharing of knowledge
and the typical spread of existing cultural heritage, traditions, arts and crafts.
This process of urban and landscape regeneration was also accompanied by the
publication and dissemination of Manuals for the Recovery of Historic Places,4
written in collaboration with the Sardinia Universities, with the intent to provide
common guidelines for the implementation of measures compatible with the
existing historical heritage and to enable the recovery and restoration of traditional
architecture and public spaces in line with the characteristics of different geo-
graphical areas. The manuals were born in synergy with the regional administration
and as part of the activities of an observatory for the historic centers. This way of
protection, transmission and sharing of knowledge for the purpose of enhancement
is not yet completed.
Since 2004, the Sardinia Region, in partnership with the Tuscany Region and
Corsica, initiated Project LAB.net with the aim of enhancing the architectural
heritage of the cross-border areas with a view to sustainable development in terms
of the protection of local identity, landscape and natural environment.5 The purpose
of the project was to create a network of laboratories for the recovery of historic
centers able to be seen as a reference to the local level for the implementation of
interventions and to build a wealth of common knowledge about traditional types
and manufacturing techniques.
Moreover, the objective of LAB.net was to implement a series of pilot projects
to recover assets but above all to start a disclosure and management able to raise
awareness of all ages on themes related to the protection of the environment and
landscape and the rediscovery of local identity.
This process consisted of the preparation of coaching and technical support to
municipalities in activating forms of listening to the needs and requirements of
4
Our translation.
5
http://www.sardegnaterritorio.it/j/v/1123?s=6&v=9&c=7678&es=6603&na=1&n=100.
Fig. 21.2 CallCivis: Map of regional networks of small town (source image http://www.regione.
sardegna.it/documenti)
336 P. Loconte
Fig. 21.3 Strategies and processes for the enhancement of the historic landscape. Example of the
results obtained by policies for the enhancement and protection activated by the Sardinia Region
for the town of Gonnosnò (Image source http://www.inu.it/blog/centri_storici_min/wp-content/
uploads/2010/03/melis.pdf)
citizens, the rediscovery of local knowledge and the recovery of the “memory”
through the involvement of a dense network of partners and the younger popula-
tion, thus creating an exchange of knowledge and common experiences. This
experience, which started in 2004, continues today with the second phase of the
project, called LAB.net plus-Cross-Border Network for the Enhancement of
Landscapes and Local Identities, which was funded in the 2007–2013 European
programming with the aim to strengthen the partnership built consistent with the
guidelines of the European Landscape Convention.
Finally, in synergy with the new Regional Landscape Plan, now in the approval
phase, the project provides for the establishment of the Observatory of Historic
Centres. In particular, the project expected to be present on the territory of the
so-called “Territorial Antennas” i.e., local presidiums able to support the munici-
palities within the activities of enhancement consistent with historical, cultural and
environmental characters. Moreover, these presidiums have a multifunctional,
flexible, and interdisciplinary nature and are able to disclose the current activities
and achievements. The project is therefore part of the policies implemented by
Regional Law 27/98 with the intent to build both a material network, made up of
small old towns and landscapes and an intangible network created by the trans-
mission and sharing of information. Figure 21.4 shows the structure of the
Fig. 21.4 Observatory for the protection and enhancement of the historic centers (image source
http://www.inu.it/blog/centri_storici_min/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/melis.pdf)
observatory with the location of territorial antennas and implementation of the

network of relationships between different regional presidiums.
Finally, particularly interesting is the fact that people can consistently meet and
implement the information available through the web-site (http://labnet-plus.eu/)
and can use tools of geo-tags to implement the system of knowledge through the
use of an intuitive and familiar graphical interface as that of Google Maps, inte-
grated by geographic information systems tools (Loconte and Rotondo 2014).
The example of the Sardinia Region is particularly interesting case in the Italian
scenario, probably one of the first significant experiences underway regarding the
protection and enhancement of small historic centers. The case of Sardinia is
interesting for the complexity that distinguishes the possibility of making, today, a
reading of the results obtained through the activation of a process lasting almost
20 years.
Beside this experience, the ongoing process in the Umbria Region, in central
Italy, is particularly significant. This process started with the publication of
Regional Law no. 12/2008 called the Law for the Historic Centers (Umbria Region
2008). Following the example of Sardinia, the regional law has the intention of
verifying the state of protection and enhancement of both material and intangible
existing assets. In particular, Regional Law 12/2008 requires municipalities to
perform the following actions:
338 P. Loconte
1. draws up a Strategic Framework for Development6 of the historic center

(QSV) required for municipalities with >10,000 inhabitants or a historic center
with an area of >4 hectares; and
2. definition of Areas of Priority Revitalization7 (ARP), i.e., the parts of the his-
toric centers where there is the presence of degradation conditions to be eval-
uated through the use of appropriate indicators.
The regional administration has provided guidelines to help municipalities to un-
derstand the construction, implementation and management of both the Strategic
Framework for Development (QSV) and the Areas of Priority Revitalization (ARP).
The two instruments, foreseen by the Law of the Umbria Region, are particularly
interesting because they represent a new way to look at historical centers and, above
all, they are the first result of the search for new methods of action for the resolution
of issues related to the development and protection of the historic centers and, in
particular, those of small size.
The rule arises from the awareness and from the need to find solutions to
emerging problems such as depopulation with associated loss of services, facilities,
offices and shops; increased social segregation and urban conflict, which affect the
livability of historical centers; and poor accessibility and the exponential increase in
land use, especially for residential purposes, with an associated increase of build-
ings in a state of neglect and decay.
In particular, the Strategic Framework for Development (QSV), which is to be
drafted during the first phase, is a complex and multisector process that must be
able to gather the planning and policies that each municipality has already per-
formed as well as the different dimensions of enhancement (i.e., building
enhancement; economic, cultural and social enhancement).
The QSV is a presentation document of the Municipality; this effect is particularly sig-
nificant the assumption of a marketing policy consistent with the objectives of enhancing
the historical center expressed in QSV. The fact, QSV plays an economic value that allows
the old town (and its reference area) to fit properly in a competitive territorial system8
(Umbria Region 2008).
In this way, the Strategic Framework for Development (QSV) was meant to be a
simple way for constructing a strategic scenario of the old town and their territory
and, for that reason, it cannot be a static but must be a dynamic tool. For its
implementation and construction, it needs the contribution of all stakeholders,
citizens, associations and governments.
For this reason, within the QSV municipalities can delineate the Areas of
Priority Revitalization (ARP), as defined by article 2, paragraph 1, letter b of the
law, as “areas demarcated by the municipalities, mainly within the historic centers,
6
Our translation.
7
Our translation.
8
Our translation.
presenting characters of urban, environmental, economic, social and functional

decay and, therefore, constitute a priority to revitalize”9 (Umbria Region 2008).
The special feature of the regional law is that the delimitation of the ARP and the
inclusion of these areas within programs or planning instruments for restoration,
rehabilitation and restructuring implies recognition and reward to owners of urban
properties.
This is an area that the owners can use for build outside the historic centers and it
is calculated within the meaning of article 8 of the law itself. The idea is that the
urban reward can be used as a way to promote the activation of processes of
recovery of degraded parts of the old town; therefore, its quantification must be
proportional to the investment held by private people for the attainment of inter-
ventions within ARP.
Finally, another peculiarity of the law is to define, at the regional level, a
“control room” consisting of a coordination committee constituted by public and
private operators, as well as a permanent technical group, with the aim of sup-
porting municipalities both strategically and operatively by providing them with the
tools useful for the construction of QSV, the zoning of the ARP and the calculation
and use of urban reward. Furthermore, the “regional control room” aims to monitor
and control the entire process in its complexity in an attempt to be constantly
updated on the implementation of the standard and to understand its strengths,
weaknesses, threats and opportunities by ensuring the continuous review of the
process in order to improve it.
For example, we show one of the projects that make up the Strategic Framework
for Development of the town of Narni. It collects and prepares a summary of the
information contained within the plans and programs already implemented within
the municipality with the aim to build a unified and strategic vision of the
municipality. It also seeks to highlight the role of the city of Narni within the
regional and local context: in particular focuses on the value of the historical
heritage is understood as a cultural unit with its symbolic value and expression of
the local identity (Fig. 21.5).
Regional Law “Rules for the Historic Centers” has high potential because in an
economically difficult time such as the present, it encourages private stakeholders to
invest in the revitalization of the city centers in order to fuel territorial rebalancing.
It thus tries to enable policies to enhance and revitalize the existing cultural heritage
and, at the same time, enable improvement processes of urban quality and services,
encourage the development of economic activities and promote social gathering.
Another factor of particular interest is related to the ability of municipalities to
create local networks for the achievement of a unified Strategic Framework For
Development, thus aiming to comprehensively develop and encourage local gov-
ernments to cooperate to overcome emerging difficulties and to implement policies
that can bring benefits to various levels.
9
Our translation.
340 P. Loconte
Fig. 21.5 The example of Strategic Framework for Development of the town of Narni (image
source http://qsv.comune.narni.tr.it/documenti/)
Although the aim is of particular interest, this highlights a series of problems

related mainly to the lack of regional funds useful for activation of the process at the
municipal level. Furthermore, some studies (Ricci 2010) have shown that private
actors who want to implement interventions within the Areas of Priority
Revitalization should make a high economic investment in the face of decreased
compensation by getting in development rights.
Finally, we note the difficulty of the municipalities in starting the process because
of the lack of a qualified technical staff able to build, manage and implement the
process as required by the regional law due to its complexity.
A final case study that seems especially interesting is related to policies for
urban and territorial regeneration implemented in Apulia Region in southern Italy.
Unlike the examples of Sardinia and Umbria Regions, Apulia Region does not have
a law specifically dedicated to the protection and enhancement of historic centers
but has Regional Law no. 21/08, the Rules for Urban Regeneration.10 The law is
intended to promote the regeneration of parts of cities and urban systems in
accordance with municipal and intermunicipal strategies and is aimed to improve
the urban, residential, socioeconomic, environmental and cultural aspects of human
settlement conditions and is processed by means of intervention with involvement
of interested public and private actors (article 1) (Apulia Region 2008).
To achieve this goal, all municipalities were required to develop a Policy
Document for Urban Regeneration able to identify degraded areas and to construct
10
Our translation.
a system of knowledge about the existing physical deterioration as well as the state
of tangible and intangible assets in order to understand which policies should be
implemented for revitalization.
The regulatory framework described was implemented in the regional context
with Regional Resolution no. 1445 of 4 August 2009, by which Apulia Region
defines the Program Implementation FESR 2007–2010 with the aim to improve the
attractiveness and foster development “through urban regeneration policies to
counter the marginalization and social exclusion, improve environmental quality
and to strengthen the identity characteristics of the places […]”11 (Apulia Region
2009).
In synergy with the overall objective, the line of action aims to regenerate the
territory through Integrated Plan for Territorial Development (PIST).
The PIST is aimed at strengthening, upgrading, rationalizing and, where nec-
essary, designing functional networks and the plot of relationship connecting the
systems of smaller urban centers with particular regard to those that are strongly
connected (or with high potential for connection) from the point of view of nature,
history and culture (Loconte and Rotondo 2012). The Integrated Plan for Territorial
Development aims, then, to build a set of integrated and coordinated actions with
the intention of responding to both material and immaterial deterioration of the
heritage and the environment and tie these to social, economic and cultural issues.
From this perspective, the PIST is configured as a tool to support the actions of
urban and territorial regeneration, and for that reason, it was required that they were
drawn up by networks of municipalities constituted as a unified territorial group of
action.
The PIST then proceeds to analyze the territorial system trying to understand the
historical, cultural, and environmental issues between the parties, pointing to the
redevelopment of the existing historical and environmental value and, therefore,
working on the territorial identity.
An example is the Integrated Plan for Territorial Development of the munici-
palities of Capurso, Cellamare and Valenzano (Loconte and Rotondo 2012). In
particular, these municipalities have promoted the use of disseminated cultural
heritage through the activation of specific policies to rebuild, strengthen and
enhance existing relationships in the textures of the territorial system. The project is
interesting primarily because the “engine” generating the entire idea occurs at the
regional level: this means that the role of public administration is to encourage the
population to raise their awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of the territories
in which they live and, at the same time, identify opportunities in terms of
development of the local economy and, in general, in terms of improving the
quality of life of the resident population. It is worth emphasizing that the goal is
urban and territorial regeneration and actions taken are not solely focused on the
enhancement of tourism.
11
Our translation.
342 P. Loconte
Fig. 21.6 PIST. The project for the municipalities of Capurso, Cellamare and Valenzano (Loconte
and Rotondo 2012)
Second, the Integrated Plan For Territorial Development tries to put at the center
of development the resident population; for this reason, governments have tried to
create a transparent and participatory process so as to build a plan based on the real
needs of the population and not on alleged instances (Fig. 21.6).
Proposals for Participatory Public/Private Initiative
Alongside the protection and revitalization initiatives undertaken by governments,

in Italy there is a wide and varied overview of initiatives of public/private part-
nerships of regeneration of urban and territorial contexts that are in a state of decay.
It seems necessary to emphasize that, although in the case of interventions of

exclusively public initiative, the public intent was to start and, where possible, assist
actions able to regenerate the city and its functions to ensure the use (or the best
use) for residents. In the case of public/private initiative, for obvious economic
reasons, it is mostly in front of interventions related to the tourist development of
the urban and territorial areas. The actions taken, therefore, seek to improve the
attractiveness of the territories and make them attractive on the real estate side
through the activation of different kinds of economies.
In contrast, however, such actions threaten to eject the living population outside
the town centers or villages, triggering processes of replacement of seasonal
character connected with the flow of tourists.
There is, then, the risk to have small towns being heavily animated during the
summer months and almost deserted during the winter.
Certainly, in the last decade, there have been many steps forward in trying to
launch economic processes of higher quality than in the past while being careful
about the protection and enhancement of the existing context as well as to a private
interest.
Moreover, the spread of the idea that sustainable tourism is possible and that the
enhancement of existing cultural and natural heritage can be considered a resource
for its economic achievement is leading to abandonment of the old models.
In this process also, the “end user tourist” plays an important role because, now
more so than ever, he is able to express precise needs and, taking refuge in the small
town centers, makes a clear choice and expresses a tourist demand linked to the
rediscovery of traditions and originality of the places therein.
The concept of sustainable tourism is fundamental in the construction of this
new approach. As underlined by Eber (1992), Sustainable tourism is tourism and
associated infrastructures that: both now and in the future operate within natural
capacities for the regeneration and future productivity of natural resources; rec-
ognize the contribution that people and communities, customs and lifestyles, make
to the tourism experience; accept that these people must have an equitable share in
the economic benefits of local people and communities in the host areas (Eber
1992).
In particular, after the evolution from the general concept of tourism to sus-
tainable tourism, the idea in recent years has focused on the identification and
construction of a new model of hospitality that is different than the past one and
able to respond to new user questions.
The enhancement of small town centers and their landscapes also revolves
around this question.
In the Italian context, this desire to return to authenticity and the contact with the
culture, history and, in general, with the landscape has materialized the tourist offer
based on so-called “albergo diffuso” (diffuse hotel). The model of welcome and
hospitality of albergo diffuso developed in the early 1980s in Italy arose from the
need to reuse existing buildings and uninhabited villages, which as a result of
seismic events had to be repurposed, and the movement hit its peak and spread at
the beginning of the 1990s.
344 P. Loconte
Albergo Diffuso is presented as a model of sustainable development, which aims

at the exploitation of local resources both tangible (cultural heritage, agriculture
and handicrafts, small businesses) and intangible (traditions, knowledge, social
ties) (Vallone et al. 2013).
Like Fissi et al. (2014) say, the model of hospitality of Albergo Diffuso is
characterized by a horizontal dimension as opposed to the hotels “typical” vertical
accommodations. This horizontal dimension can be described as the set of rela-
tionships that can be created with the context of the territory in which the place was
physically born and with the kind of hospitality found in the local community. Of
crucial importance are the connections and the relationships between the structure
and its territory (Fissi et al. 2014). There are many references in the literature that
describe, explain, analyze and highlight this experience which was born in Italy and
has now spread around the world.
Studies related to the development of new forms of sustainable tourism and the
enhancement of existing assets and economic opportunities related are particularly
interesting. The choice, then, is to refer to a model of sustainable local develop-
ment, which is not resolved in the optimization of environmental quality in all
conditions but in the search for virtuous relationships between environmental,
social, territorial, economic, “political make consistent basic needs, self-reliance,
eco-development”12 (Magnaghi 2000).
The Albergo Diffuso is not only a structure can provide specific services to their
users but is characterized by the presence of a host community ready to share their
culture and their territory with the guests.
It is thus not only to host someone but to integrate the tourist into their context,
thus making him part of it and creating links between people, art, nature, with
existing intangible heritage (Fig. 21.7).
Assuming that the experience of albergo diffuso is now widely known, the
village of Santo Stefano di Sessanio is shown like example. The village of Santo
Stefano di Sessanio is located in Abruzzo within a natural environment that is
particularly relevant, i.e., the National Park of Gran Sasso and Monti della Laga.
Until 2004, the village was subjected to a slow and inexorable process of
abandonment of the population, which has led to a strong state of degradation of the
entire existing building. In 2004, the operation performed by the company
Sextantio (http://www.sextantio.it/santo-stefano/?lang=it), based on different areas
of intervention, began as follows:
• The development and enhancement of the local economy through the activation
of a process of revitalization of the typical local activities, now abandoned, and
the recovery of existing professional skills (restorer, blacksmith, carpenter, etc.)
and through the start of the new activities linked to offering hospitality and
12
Our traslation.
Fig. 21.7 Suggestion about Albergo Diffuso Model in an image of Prof. Yasushi Watanabe
(image source http://www.albergodiffuso.com/)
services for tourists, that are strongly associated with the discovery and
exploitation of the land and the existing heritage;
• The recovery and redevelopment of the degraded building stock respecting the
original character and identity of the places and referring to the local con-
struction methods and the recovery of ancient masters;
• The development of the agricultural territory through the identification of local
products and all related activities, the recultivation of seeds in that have fallen
disuse, and traditional techniques related to the recovery of traditional recipes
and flavors of tradition. Development of the natural through the inclusion of the
village within the paths of discovery of the park and the construction of a large
tourist offer connected with the natural heritage; and
• The disclosure of traditional intangible heritage and the rediscovery of local
history, legends and art.
Surely there are many strengths in the idea of hospitality called “albero diffuso.”
First of all, it wants to give new value (social and economic) to existing settlements
and natural and cultural heritage in trying to meet the ever-growing demand for
sustainable tourism. We are not just talking about a proposed hospitality or a
management style but of a real reacquisition of values and originality that answer to
a new tourist demand. In this way, the proposal of the albergo diffuso in an
environmental and cultural context that is already well defined is not to distort it and
to chain it to the logic of the traditional tourist market, but rather it gives an
opportunity for development based on local heritage in these small towns. To be
successful, this hospitality project, for protecting the identity values, must be built
with all local public and private stakeholders with them involved to activate vir-
tuous processes of exploitation and to prevent the logic of the market take over the
overall objective of the project.
346 P. Loconte
Proposals for a Voluntary Private Initiative
Finally, in recent years, considerable attention has been paid to the voluntary
construction of local networks to enhance the existing assets mainly with the aim of
encouraging tourism. A particularly significant experience in Italy is represented by
the club de I Borghi più Belli d’Italia (http://www.borghitalia.it). This network was
founded in 2001 by the Council for Tourism of the Association of Italian
Municipalities (ANCI) with the idea to include in tourist flows small villages
characterized by the presence of a significant environment of historical and cultural
heritage. These realities widely spread on Italian territory because of its long history
and the abundance of the signs of aging and layering and transformation of human
activities.
As reported in previous paragraphs, Italy is full of hundreds of small villages
characterized by high levels of depopulation and phenomena of marginalization and
degradation. The idea of joining the club had the objective of giving a new
opportunity to those small historic centres that can join it only by owning specific
criteria. Like described in article 1 of the Chart of Quality, the main objective of the
club is to protect, promote, and develop the municipalities recognized as being the
most beautiful villages in Italy. The eligibility criteria are different as follows:
• The population present in the historic center or the hamlet should not exceed
2000 inhabitants;
• The center or hamlet must have an architectural heritage and/or natural certified
by documents in the possession of the municipality and/or by the superinten-
dent. The historic buildings must prevail over the whole of built mass and give
rise to a complex aesthetically homogeneous form;
• The center or hamlet must offer abundant quality of planning (accessibility,
consistency, link between urban and natural systems) and architecture (harmony
and homogeneity of volumes, materials and decorative elements);
• The center or hamlet must express the will to achieve enhancement and
development through the adoption of appropriate measures aimed at safe-
guarding its heritage and improvement of its quality. It must also be able to
promote the typical local activities (i.e., crafts) and promote and animate the
territory through the organization of events that highlight the original characters
of the village and give new value to local traditions;
• The historic center or hamlet must be able to satisfy the need for tourist
accommodation, catering and services (Fig. 21.8).
Access to the network of I Borghi più Belli d’Italia is definitely an opportunity
for these small towns that would otherwise be cut off from the traditional tourist
routes. The voluntary choice to belong to the network is an awareness of (1) the
existence of environmental, cultural and urban values; and (2) the fact that to
activate enhancement processes, there is need of the entire community, to con-
tribute, thus promoting its own development.
Fig. 21.8 Screenshot from the istitutional web-site http://www.borghitalia.it/
Because the idea is to build a network as large as possible to promote territorial

authenticity, the club I Borghi più Belli d’Italia is part of the larger international
experience called Les Plus Beaux Villages de la Terre, which gathers together
similar associations around the world to promote the development and promotion of
small villages (Fig. 21.9).
Inclusion within these associations of towns is configured as a kind of territorial
certification able to guarantee the quality of the places to potential visitors. In this
Fig. 21.9 Screenshot from the istitutional web-site of the distribution of I borghi più belli d’Italia
in central Italy (image source http://www.borghitalia.it/)
348 P. Loconte
perspective, finally, if defined and used in synergy with the tools previously
described, the activation of territorial marketing policies will play a strategic role in
the government toward the promotion and development of the territory.
Territorial marketing is the process aimed primarily to develop the local econ-
omy through the creation and promotion of the elements of attractiveness of the
area and the encouragement of collaboration between public and private people. It
should be underlined that territorial marketing should not be triggered solely and
exclusively for the tourist development of a given territory.
In contrast, as is well known in the literature, territorial marketing can be of two
different types: internal if dominated by the imperative of “quality”, “exploitation” of
the existing, geared to meet the internal public, residents (citizens and enterprises)
and local actors, and external if addressed mainly to external customers (tourists,
investors and potential new residents) of a territory, with the aim of attraction and
generation of external confidence, then to recall as much as possible to inside the
territory of the different segments of external customers13 (Marenna 2005).
According to this, the definition of a marketing plan and a territorial brand can
contribute to the reappropriation and exploitation of local identity as well as play an
important promotional role toward potential external users.
References
Apulia Region (2008) Regional law n. 21/08 Rules for urban regeneration. http://www.regione.
puglia.it/index.php?page=burp&opz=getfile&file=2.htm&anno=xxxix&num=124 Accessed
Jan 2015
Apulia Region (2009) Regional Resolution n. 1445 of 4 August 2009. http://fesr.regione.puglia.it/
portal/pls/portal/FESR.DYN_DOCUMENTO_VIEW.show?p_arg_names=id_documento&p_
arg_values=5073 Accessed Jan 2015
Eber S (ed) (1992) Beyond the Green horizon: a discussion paper on principles for sustainable
tourism. Worldwide Fund for Nature, Godalming
Fissi S, Gori E, Romolini A (2014) Il connubio tra impresa e territorio. Il caso dell'albergo diffuso
il Borgo di Sempronio. In Impresa Progetto Elettronic Journal of Management. vol. 1, pp 1–16
Loconte P, Rotondo F (2014) VGI to enhance minor historic centers and their territorial cultural
heritage. In: Computational science and its applications–ICCSA 2014. Springer International
Publishing, Cham
Loconte P, Rotondo F (2012) Innovazioni nelle prassi. Il PIST dei comuni di Capurso, Cellamare e
Valenzano. Il caso di Cellamare e Valenzano. In: Rotondo F, Selicato F, Torre C M. Percorsi di
rigenerazione urbana e territoriale. Adda Editore, Bari
Magnaghi A (2000) Il progetto locale. Bollati Boringhieri, Torino
Magnaghi A (ed) (2005) The urban village. A charter for democracy and local self-sustainable
Marenna M (2005) Un’analisi teorica sul Marketing territoriale. Presentazione di un caso studio. Il
“Consorzio per la tutela dell’Asti”. Ceris-Cnr, W.P. N° 7/2005
OECD (2011) The territorial state and perspectives of the European Union, Paris
Ricci M (ed) (2010) Centri storici minori risorsa del Sistema insediativo. In: Urbanistica no. 142, pp 7– 35
13
Our translation.
Sardinia Region (1998) Regional Law No. 29 Protection and enhancement of historic centers.
http://www.regione.sardegna.it/j/v/86?v=9&c=72&s=1&file=1998029 Accessed Jan 2015
Umbria Region (2008) Regional Law No 12 Law for the historic centers. http://leggi.crumbria.it/
mostra_atto.php?id=33033&v=FI,SA,TE,IS,VE,RA,MM&m=5&datafine=20080731
Accessed Jan 2015
Vallone C, Orlandini P, Cecchetti R (2013) Sustainability and innovation in tourism services: the
AlbergoDiffuso case study. In: 10th EBES Conference—Istanbul 2013. http://whc.unesco.org/
fr/etatsparties/it. Accessed 20 Dec 2014
Chapter 22
Pedestrian Accessibility of Historical
Centres: A Key Determinant
of Development
Maurizio Tira
Abstract Walking is being increasingly promoted as a sustainable solution for

private mobility in urban areas, especially in historical centres. The key factors for
pedestrian accessibility are limited physical distances, availability of dedicated
infrastructure, behaviour of car drivers, and several other urban space qualities.
Health care services are trying to save money by preventing diseases through the
promotion of walking. In contrast, traders, retailers, and shopkeepers believe that
car traffic is vital for the economical sustainability of their activities downtown
where the number of residents has declined significantly. The purpose of this
chapter is to assess the conditions for people to walk more and to foster the possible
solutions for coaxing people to leave cars and increase their walking, especially to
historical centres. What has been quite difficult to achieve so far could be reached
through a coalition of interests, especially where the townscape has not been
conceived for cars.
Keywords Pedestrian accessibility Historic centre Infrastructural planning
Introduction
Walking has always been the essence of city life: at first because it was the far most
common way of moving and later because it was the best way to enjoy open spaces
mainly in warm-climate countries. The great majority of European towns, 30 % of
which are of Roman origin, were established far before the car era began. Even
more so in Italy, 2684 municipalities were founded during Roman or pre-Roman
times; 4164 towns have a centre that dates back between the VIIIth and the XIVth
centuries; and only the cores of 1215 municipalities are “more recent” (after the
XVth century). In short, those towns were conceived for cars and rarely for other
M. Tira (&)
Department of Civil, Architectural, Land and Environmental Engineering and Mathematics;
Brixia Accessibility Lab, University of Brescia, Via Branze, 43, 25123 Brescia, Italy
e-mail: maurizio.tira@unibs.it

352 M. Tira
Fig. 22.1 A raised pedestrian

crossing in Pompei (Italy)
means of transport (i.e., horse-powered carriages and animal wagons), and they
have almost the same layout in the inner town! It is interesting to note that facilities
were designed for pedestrian even in those ancient times (see Fig. 22.1).
Nevertheless, walking has lost several of its natural functions and appeal even in
core towns for many reasons. First of all, distances are a problem. Town devel-
opment has always followed the technological progress of the era; thus, public
transport (first) and private cars (later) have shaped the urban settlements, mostly by
enlarging them. There are several reasons why towns grew: these are market driven
but also based on residents’ attraction for ex-urban destinations that are easily
accessible by car. Therefore, car use is both the cause of and the effect of town
dynamics in most countries.
The general result of using such a flexible means of transport is that its use
extends even to less (or not at all) suitable places, especially when intermodality
transport is not promoted. Thus, the access to city centres continues with the same
vehicle used in low-density areas and walking often is replaced by the car even for
very short distances. As a general result, the strongest of all modes, private
motorised mobility has dominated all of the others, influencing mobility even in the
inner parts of towns. Automobile dependence (as defined by Dupuy 1999) is
becoming an ever greater obstacle to sustainable transport policies. This
22 Pedestrian Accessibility of Historical Centres … 353
dependence is due mainly to the fact that the positive effects of the growth of the
automobile system are greater than the negative effects of traffic congestion. Taxing
automobiles and automobile use is not enough to offset the above-mentioned
effects. Nevertheless, car dependence seriously affects the well-being of citizens and
increases the health-care expenditure for diseases related to pollution, noise, con-
gestion, and downgrading of open public spaces. Those features are all too common
in today’s cities and towns (OECD 2012).
In addition to those general explanations, walking is often restricted by minor
local obstacles and hostile conditions (Tira 2003a): children are driven to school to
avoid dangerous streets; elderly people are often confined in their houses due to the
difficult access to public transport; and the disabled are seized up by steps and kerbs.
Understanding how to promote more sustainable transport modes is difficult,
given the conflict between individual behaviours and public policies. Daily deci-
sions are made regarding several issues that are directly or indirectly related to
walking, e.g., parking availability which indirectly determines the pedestrian’s
movement because each trip regardless of mode begins and ends as a pedestrian trip
(Busi and Pezzagno 2011). The best way to achieve the desired goal is to form a
coalition of interests and select a starting focus, which could be the inner town,
where the townscape was not initially designed for cars.
Historical Background
When looking at available mobility data (of which there is little relating to
pedestrian movement), walking has not disappeared from statistics, but the priority
it is accorded has been affected by several factors (OECD-ITF 2012). Some of them
are related to psychological elements and to the way in which societies are struc-
tured. The era of the private car has completely changed town design worldwide.
Some settlements have been planned explicitly assuming the use of the private car.
Furthermore, general increases in personal income have led to the growth in the rate
of car ownership (see Figs. 22.2 and 22.3), resulting in the irrational use of motor
vehicles at the expense of pedestrian movement.
In industrialised countries, road infrastructure and its appartenancies have
gradually developed to meet the needs of growing traffic and mobility. Their present
state reflects conflicts and compromises between the different transport modes,
particularly between vulnerable road users and motorised traffic (OECD 1998).
Conflicts, beliefs, and regulations have evolved over time, and one key to the
present mobility problems experienced by pedestrians can be found in the historical
perspective. The 1960s and 1970s were marked by the rapid expansion of car
ownership. Roads were built or widened to accommodate growing car traffic often
with disastrous effects to pedestrians and residents of built-up areas: as the use of
cars increased, sidewalks were narrowed to put in additional car lanes; parked
vehicles invaded a large amount of space previously devoted to pedestrians or
cyclists; and large new urban thoroughfares cut through historical neighbourhoods
354 M. Tira
Fig. 22.2 Motorisation rate in EU countries (Source Eurostat and Corine Land Cover)
Impermeable soil and motorisation rate

(value 100 for 1990)
160
140
120
100
80
60
Impermeable soil
40
Motorisation rate
20
0
1990 2008
Fig. 22.3 Impermeable soil and motorisation rate in EU countries (Source Eurostat and Corine
Land Cover)
(OECD 1998). On top of this, the limited space allocated to pedestrians was not
always properly maintained and tended to be obstructed by all sorts of obstacles
including traffic signs. Traffic growth was a particular problem in small towns on
main rural roads. Widening the carriageway for the increased traffic had the addi-
tional side effect of encouraging vehicle speed in the very location where the speed
limits were the lowest!
Urbanised areas also expanded, increasing the travel distances from home to
work, thus making walking and cycling impractical for a large part of everyday
trips. Due to the new modal shift, many urban areas have been built according to the
principle of segregation of pedestrians and motorised vehicles (e.g., Swedish Scaft
guidelines 1968).
The trend started to reverse at the end of the 1970s when it was found that the
street networks of old towns and city centres could not take an indefinite increase in
traffic. It was soon found that it was necessary involved to reduce private car traffic
in city centres and, simultaneously, to improve public transport and/or provide
better facilities for pedestrians. Pedestrian-friendly streets started to appear mostly
in commercial or tourist areas. Car parks were built at the edge of pedestrian
precincts, or park-and-ride schemes were organised, clearly showing that pedes-

trians were considered nothing more than car drivers or passengers who managed to
abandon their vehicle for a short while (OECD 1998).
A new concept of integration of mixed traffic appeared in The Netherlands: The
“woonerf” is based on the idea that drivers should slow down and give precedence
to pedestrian, especially children, on the street. For the first time, it was
acknowledged by decision makers that urban streets could have another function
than just motorised traffic (Tira and Yerpez 2004). In 1999, in The Netherlands
there were >6000 “woonerf,” and similar zones were introduced later in Germany
and Italy (in the latter they are called “residential streets”).
The concept developed through several experiences, namely the French
Programme “Ville plus sûre, quartiers sans accidents.” which in the early 1980s
showed how a redesign of streets could improve the integration of traffic modes to
benefit road safety and accessibility (CERTU 1994).
In the past two decades, new tools have been developed in order to integrate and
restrict circulation in historical centres. All these new strategies are alternatives to
the most radical measure of pedestrianisation, which is difficult to implement in
large areas (Tira 2005).
The 30 km/h (20 mph) zones: These zones restrict car speed through physical
measures and signs. There is a proposal for extending that limit to all urban areas in
EU towns.
In Italy, the so-called Limited Traffic Zones (ZTL), especially in small- and
medium-sized towns, protects the most valuable areas by restricting car access.
Entering is regulated by time and type of vehicle with an overall benefit for resident
living conditions. Problems may arise for the public-space furnishings (e.g.,
benches, planters, etc.) because the transit during some time periods restricts the
permanent placement of such.
Self-explaining roads: These roads restrict car speed through road layouts and
materials to influence drivers’ behaviour by limiting or eliminating the use of signs
and signals.
Home zones: These zones restrict driver behaviour using a space designed for
low speed so as to integrate all transport modes. Traffic-calming measures are
generally used to obtain this goal.
Walkability of Town Centres
Walking short distances can become more attractive than using a car or motorcycles if
accessibility is developed both as a general feature of public space (also linked to
distances and availability of means of transport) and as a design detail for all (Tira 2008).
Conflicts about accessibility can be more easily solved in historical small centres
knowing that traders and shopkeepers claim for help in fighting against large
shopping malls, which attract people based on car accessibility and the provision of
free parking. Anyway, the belief that economic activities are based on motorised
356 M. Tira
mobility is well spread among stakeholders, and the model of historical centres
seems to be the same: huge underground parking for winning concurrency.
The conditions for people to walk more will be assessed as will possible solu-
tions for coaxing people to leave their cars and increase their walking especially
“to” and “within” historical centres.
Some fundamental issues of planning pedestrian spaces can be identified as
follows:
• accessibility and proximity are a precondition and thus necessary planning
criteria;
• saving energy should be a fundamental criterion of transport choice;
• design according to climatic conditions is relevant both for walking and
sojourning;
• safe mobility should be a major concern.
Other features are less evident. For example, acceptable walking distance increases
with the size of the core city. When distances appear greater, facades are longer,
streets are wider, and people accept a longer trajectory to reach their final destination.
This is true foremost for walkable distances, but it also applies to travel time.
Conversely, in small and less densely settled villages, especially when no pedestrian
facilities are provided, people are less likely to walk long distances. Although per-
haps a paradoxical result, increased car use, even for short trips, can be shown in
small towns. Other variables, primarily parking facilities, influence such behaviours.
Public Space Location and Orientation
The size of public space and its proximity to pedestrian paths is an incentive to
walk. It is known from environmental psychology that humans favour an acces-
sible, varying, safe, and comfortable environment. For example, a study by Badiani
(2006) examined the benefits of green areas along a walking route to a public
transport stop. Microclimate (where climate may change considerably over a short
distance) also affects weather and how long humans choose to stay in one place,
particularly with people becoming accustomed to comfortable environments in
homes, offices, and cars. Thus, climatic conditions seem to affect walking trips in
terms of both number and length. There is evidence of a paradoxical effect of
favourable weather conditions resulting in less walking in the Southern European
countries.
Building Location in Relation to Public Space
The positioning of buildings adjacent to pedestrian paths is also important in terms

of typology, morphology, length and continuity of façades, maintenance, etc.
(Orfeuil 1997). For example, older people feel comfortable and secure when a
continuous built façade can help in preventing unexpected attacks because they are
more concerned about personal security than traffic safety.
Building Types and Uses at the Ground Level
Urban morphology with a high connectivity can provide shortcuts for pedestrians,
which are often crucial for walking trips. That is one of the concepts of the Transit
Oriented Development guidelines (see Ottawa TOD guidelines, 2007). Open
ground floors can give more space to pedestrians, as in some historic cities, as well
as increase the level of security of the public space.
Legibility of the Urban Environment
An easily “readable” urban form can heavily influence the ability of people to cope
with urban environment. Unlike the availability of road maps and, increasingly,
GPS in cars, which continue the tradition of facilitating the way for drivers,
pedestrians have generally less information when starting a trip in unfamiliar sur-
roundings; factors such as footpath conditions, width, maintenance, continuity,
visibility, lighting, and comfort are largely unknown before setting out (Fond.
Caracciolo 2005).
Social Control
Urban shape as well as the continuity and discontinuity of façades also influence the
level of “natural surveillance.” The risk of personal attack is often perceived as
greater than road accidents, so social control, through the presence of social
activities, shops, restaurants, mixed uses, etc., which are usually managed as traffic
attractors, are seen as positive influences on this aspect of urban design.
Redeveloping Life in Downtown Areas
What is believed to be a handicap for development of economic activities in

downtown must be turned into an opportunity. The overall expansion of urban areas
and the transformation of land use in city centres due to the new trend in commerce
and new policies which increased housing prices in historical centres, are trans-
forming and generally decreasing the population.
358 M. Tira
Even today, urban quality is highly linked to the presence of commerce in cities.
Thus, the permanence of the quality of historic centres is linked to commerce, even
if it is not the sole condition.
Historical centres must compete with those new attractions by focussing on the
quality of urban space. Data about commerce in historical centres show a general
decrease in the amount of sales in inner-city commerce and at the same time a
growing development of peripheral shopping malls. There are several explanations,
but the main one is purely economic. Large retail centres have been developed to
give customers lower prices, thus attracting the traditional customers of downtown
shops.
There is a clear economies-of-scale factor in the success of shopping malls, and
parking is one of the reasons. In addition the common management of all facilities
is an incentive for attractiveness.
At the same time, recognising that people prefer vibrant urban environments to
anonymous large open spaces, the layout of more and more malls now resembles to
that of a town centre. Thus ironically, policies for renovating the attractiveness of
town centres must be somehow inspired by those of large retail centres.There must
be clear evidence of the relation between business and the walkability of a space
(see Fig. 22.4) together with a provision of public transport facilities or parking
places in the vicinity.
Fig. 22.4 A ZTL in Brescia, North of Italy

Vienna
Rouen
Pomona CA
Munich (D)
Minneapolis
Hereford (UK)
Essen
Duesseldorf
Copenhagen
Koln
Atchinson KA (USA)
0 10 20 30 40 50
Source: UITP Millennium Cities Database
Fig. 22.5 Increase in business volume of retail sales after “pedestrianisation” (quoted in Fond.
Caracciolo 2005)
Important investments are needed to improve the quality of urban public spaces
and to assure their maintenance.
A balanced mix of residents and economic activities is also crucial. Spending
money and efforts will be more accepted if residents will benefit.
Thus, it must be assured that historic centres are not places where people just
buy products; they must become real living places in the town (Fig. 22.5).
Cooperation between public and private enterprises is also crucial: Following the
management model of big retail centres, individual shops should set up a common
programme and a general agreement about the contribution to the design and
maintenance of public spaces, where many often extend their businesses by renting
dehors (Fig. 22.6).
Concluding Remarks
There are several policies forcing towns to reverse the present trend regarding both
land use and mobility.
The EU target of “zero growth” by 2050 should stimulate policies to renovate
building stocks, without new town extensions, thus limiting the unsustainable
sprawl and hopefully limiting car use. New chances for historical centres could then
be stimulated.
Policies for sustainable mobility are also flowering rooted in the call of residents
for a better urban environment, or by the need of contain health care costs, or
improve road safety … and so on.
360 M. Tira
Fig. 22.6 A nice and attractive pedestrian area in downtown Cremona, North of Italy
A holistic approach must be taken because there are several ways to improve
accessibility and urban quality (Tira 2003b). Some could start by improving air
quality, reducing noise, and limiting congestion. Others could use the means of safety
or health care policies. Others again are surely interested in architectural conservation
and townscape promotion. Not to be neglected is the broad economic interest of
shopkeepers and home owners in the renewed quality of the built environment. Every
administrative level should try to gain as much as possible from those opportunities
and first of all connect policies that are traditionally separated. Urban planning and
mobility must be coordinated as has seldom happened in the past.
References
Badiani B (2006) Una metodologia di analisi degli spazi urbani. Aracne, Ariccia (RM)
Busi R, Pezzagno M (eds) (2011) Una città di 500 km. Gangemi, Roma
CERTU (1994) Ville plus sûre, quartiers sans accidents. Réalisations evaluations, Paris
Dupuy G (1999) From the “magic circle” to “automobile dependence”: measurements and political
implications. Transp Policy 6(1):1–17
Fondazione Filippo Caracciolo (2005) Centro storico: museo-ghetto o motore di sviluppo? Roma
OECD (1998) Safety of vulnerable road users, Paris
OECD-ITF (2012) Pedestrian safety, urban space and health, Paris
Orfeuil JP (1997) Tre futuri per la mobilità e per la città, Trasporti europei, 6, pp. 41–46
Tira M (2003a) Sicurezza d’uso. In: Lauria A (ed) Persone “reali” e progettazione dell’ambiente
costruito. Maggioli Editore, Rimini
Tira M (2003b) Safety of pedestrians and cyclists in Europe: the DUMAS approach. In: Tolley R
(ed) Sustainable transport. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge
Tira M (2005) Sustainable management and design of urban mobility networks and public space
… as if safety for vulnerable road users’ mattered. In: Yearbook 2005, European Transport
Safety Council, Brussels
Tira M, Yerpez J (2004) Managing mobility: reflecting on the French and Italian planning tools at
local scale. In: Proceedings of the AESOP 2004 congress, Grenoble
Tira M (2008) Accessibilità e sicurezza degli spazi pubblici urbani. In: Arenghi A (ed) Design for
all. Progettare senza barriere architettoniche. UTET, Milano
Chapter 23
The Institutional Framework for Planning
Instruments and Heritage Protection
Francesco Rotondo
Abstract After the author re-read synthetically the planning system in Italy, which
since 2001 has become increasingly regionalized, this chapter addresses the role
that cultural heritage and landscape play in this system. It highlights the potential
and the limits of the national framework indicating possible developments driven
by the changes that both the economic crisis and those in economic markets and
societal attitudes have brought.
Keywords Planning instruments Heritage protection Urban planning law
Introduction
After synthesis of the planning system in the Italian-made Compendium (CEC

1997), the framework of national planning abroad was unchanged at the institu-
tional level although it has changed considerably. In fact, as a result of the Italian
constitutional change, urban and territorial planning became a competitive matter
between the state and the regions: No fewer than 20 Italian regions may adopt rules
on town planning.
As a result of this constitutional amendment, although the national state has not
changed its discipline, the regions have now all adopted different rules governing
urban planning.
Fortunately, they voluntarily used a prevailing model that has been shared
between experts of the discipline as well as between regional governments, which
have now completely replaced the old General Master Plan as regulated by Law no.
1150/1942, which has been in force for approximately 60 years.
Italy is made up of 20 regions (of which 5 have special status giving them a greater
degree of autonomy), 100 provinces, 10 metropolitan cities, and 8047 municipalities.
F. Rotondo (&)
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Polytechnic
University of Bari (Italy), Via Orabona, 4, 70125 Bari, Italy

364 F. Rotondo
The organization of the state and local governments is rather complicated and often
redundant.
This model does not include a national plan, but it requires the presence of
spatial plans and landscape on a regional scale, as well as a territorial plan at the
provincial and municipal levels, with the latter being divided in two forecasts—a
structural focus and a strategic and operational focus. In addition, for the 10
metropolitan cities it is necessary to draw up a strategic metropolitan plan in
addition to the spatial plan.
As can be seen, there are many levels of planning that do not always have clear
objectives and clearly identified and different tasks but rather have multiple over-
lays (Cotella and Rivolin 2011; Vettoretto 2009).
To the system of urban and regional planning articulated at different geo-
graphical scales is joined the cultural heritage and landscape-protection system and,
more recently, some regional standards for the protection and enhancement of
minor historic centres and the landscapes in which they are situated.
Italian National and Regional Planning System
The constitutional reform approved in 2001 profoundly altered title V of the

Constitution and has given regions the legislation responsibility for territorial
government and has left to the State the only the definition of the general principles.
The state has not yet fulfilled its task, whereas most regions have now finally
reformed their planning regulations to be more or less consistent with the model
proposed by the National Institute of Urban Planning (INU) in the National
Congress in Bologna1 in 1995.
The reform proposed by the INU for the new national planning law (which was
never approved) articulates the planning system in three complementary tools:
(1) the Piano Strutturale (PS), which outlines the fundamental and lasting choices of
trim and land protection in the medium to long term; (2) the Piano Operativo (PO),
which establishes and governs main urban transformations achievable within
5 years (in some regions, such as Puglia, the times have been increased up to
10 years in consideration of the actual implementation capacities of public and
private actors) and assigns development rights; and (3) the Regolamento
Urbanistico (RU), which governs minute changes in the consolidated urban fabric,
usually without a defined time limit (Oliva et al. 2002).
The structural component (no. 2 above) has no normative constraint or pre-
scriptive value, especially not to conform the rights of owners (this are the major
1
The National Institute of Urban Planning (INU) was founded in 1930 to promote the construction
and urban studies and disseminate the principles of planning. The Articles of Association,
approved by Presidential Decree 21 on November 1949 n. 1114, defines the body as INU “high
culture and technical coordination legally recognized” (article 1). The INU is a member of the
European Council of Town Planners (Source: www.inu.it, visited 15.2.2015).
23 The Institutional Framework for Planning Instruments … 365
differences with the previous model); rather, it has only indicative powers, so it
contains provisions, but shall not place constraints (except those arising from the
recognition of landscape or environmental values), and it does not assign building
rights. The operational component (no. 2 above) contains normative constraints. it
is prescriptive; therefore, it indicates such requirements and constraints for the
reporting period and assigns building rights and thus conforms to the land-use
system.
This new model of urban planning is aimed at eliminating the inefficiency and
inadequacy of the old regulatory model (i.e., the General Mater Plan, Piano
Regolatore Generale [PRG]), which is totally property prescriptive and conforma-
tive with respect to certain fundamental aspects:
• The very clear failure of an instrument created to regulate urban sprawl to face
the now-prevelant problems of urban regeneration;
• Excessive rigidity forecast, which resulted in a continual recourse to the practice
of “zoning variance” with complex and lengthy procedures, whereas the current
needs require greater flexibility in moving from the idea of the urban project to
the implementation plan, to obtain, as close as possible, the outcomes of the plan;
• The need to resolve the fundamental legal issue of unequal treatment of soils of
public and private property as determined by the planning restrictions aimed to
expropriation (which last 5 years as established by national law) intended
mainly to implementation by public policy, whereas the development rights,
destined mainly to implementation by private initiative, were assigned indefi-
nitely, also involving a difference in property values between public (bonds) and
private soils (i.e., building areas identified by the development rights assigned);
• The attention to environmental aspects of city planning that occur only at the
structural level, the only nonnegotiable elements to be identified as structural
invariants, able to realize large ecological networks, as shown in many recent
experiences. Moreover, the growing attention to the agricultural use of suburban
land, a theme traditionally little addressed in general master plans (PRG), may
be a hope for a renewed focus on natural environments that are a result of
intense processes of human settlement. The identification of structural territorial
invariant, i.e., an environmental matrix, should not only be aimed solely at
measures to protect (although necessary) but especially to define design choices
consistent with the structural elements of the area; in other words, the planners
must understand to what extent and the way in which the structural invariants
help to guide the design choices (a useful lesson is given by historic places from
isolated settlements to historic towns);
• The remarkable flexibility of the operational part of the plan, a subject on which
we will focus more later in the text, requires broader forms of public participation
and shared planning between public institutions and private entities that con-
tribute to the formation of the planning instrument in a way that is more com-
prehensive than simple observation procedures adopted and set out in the PRG.
It is clear that a plan with no property restrictions, that is not prescriptive, and that is
not conformative for proprietary rights does not involve the legal contradiction, as
366 F. Rotondo
highlighted previously, because the planning restrictions are abolished by the

structural component (to which remain the only environmental and landscape
constraints) and transferred to the operational component, where, however, they
have the same time duration as the development rights.
Although the mode of implementation of transfer of development rights (Micelli
2002,2 which is also treated by all regional laws approved in recent years and which
replaces the old expropriation model (now anachronistic and impractical), may
solve the problem of values, that is, the unequal treatment of owners who are bound
by the same conditions of fact and law.
Passing then the functional zoning, through the introduction of Transfer
Development rights areas, characterized by a “mix” of uses, gives functional and
flexible openings to different organizational methods of settlement transformation,
which bring to the fore the role of urban planning in the process of city buildings
(Barbanente 2005).
This model, which is not yet completely established, appears in some respects to
have already been passed by the consequences of the economic crisis that has
completely demolished the housing market, rendering less usable the tools Transfer
Development rights, which often led to strong increases in the use of agricultural
land.
In this cultural system, at the state level, governments that have been established
since 2001 have not yet been able to regulate a standard allowing the development
the territorial government that is consistent throughout the country The regions,
after the constitutional change, each proceeded to fill the vacuum of the legislative
national standard with its own, which in most cases decreased this same articulation
of planning instruments.
Unfortunately, regional autonomy without a framework of national consistency
has meant that in Italy, there are currently 20 different laws governing urban and
regional planning causing a great fragmentation, particularly in regional areas in
which neighbouring residents and professionals can be forced to follow different
disciplinary guidelines with the possibility that activities neighbouring territories
are not possible in the other one.
The System of Cultural Heritage and Landscape Protection
What is called “landscape” in Italy it has been the subject of legislative action from
the beginning of the last century. Law no. 778 of 1922 and, subsequently, Law no.
1497 of 1939, were marked by a design aesthetic that identified the landscape with
the overall view as the landscape with “natural beauty” (as recited texts of law).
Only in 1985 was Law no. 1497/39 supplemented by Law no. 431, which in turn
moved the thematic focus on the natural environment to be preserved. It has thus
2
They are also called this in United States (Johnston and Madison 1997; Pruetz 2003).
passed from a conception of perception-aesthetics of the landscape to a vision based

almost exclusively on physical and objective data.
The distinction made later (initially at a theoretical level and then transposed into
legislation) between “landscape” and “environment” helped define the first as a
product of man’s natural environment in a vision so marked by historicity and also
able to recover that aesthetic dimension, which in recent years also has seemed to
be lost.
The Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape (Legislative Decree 42/2004)
adopted the latest guidelines on the definition of landscape, thus enshrining the full
membership of this concept in cultural heritage. A key reference in the elaboration
of the text of the law was the European Landscape Convention (stipulated in the
Council of Europe), which was opened for signature in Florence on 20 October
2000 and ratified by Italy in 2006.
The identitarian appearance is one of the cornerstones of the convention and it is
recalled in paragraph 2 of Article 131 of the code (i.e., “The Code protects the
landscape in relation to those aspects and characters that are material and visible
representation of the national identity, since expression of cultural values”).
One of the merits of the code is that it unified the themes of landscape and
cultural heritage in a single law capable of understanding the landscape value of the
cultural heritage and the cultural value of the landscape, which in the case of minor
historic centres is a combination of extraordinary importance.
Several aspects of the code should be improved that are often linked to the role
of the superintendent, an institution that has an important role in the protection and
enhancement of cultural and landscape heritage but which until now has interpreted
it in a formal and bureaucratic way, not very proactive, and unable to foster
enhancement but pays attention only to protection. Thus, the administrative pro-
cedures for assessing the landscape compatibility of the interventions appears at
once long and run jointly between local bodies (local committees for land man-
agement) and superintendents.
The first (local bodies) on goods bound by the code only express indicative
opinions, but they manage the relationship with the user, the latter of which does
not manage the relationship with the user (which are deemed as having an insuf-
ficient number of workers and therefore unable to handle a large number of users)
but express only the binding opinion.
In summary, the same procedure is managed by more public entities; therefore,
responses to the needs of citizens lag and opinions are in some cases discordant.
In any event, the rule, although in some aspects must be reviewed, along with the
role and organization of the superintendents, appeared actually able to govern the
most innovative aspects emerged in the international literature on the themes of
landscape and cultural heritage.
368 F. Rotondo
Early Attempts to Safeguard and Develop Minor

Historical Centres
Supporting initiatives have been aimed at the conservation, restoration, and

enhancement of historic villages in the country as well as regional ones, which are
recognized by local communities, to protect the historical, artistic, and cultural
landscape of small towns as well as to promote the image of the region within the
segment of quality tourism in consideration of the potential tourist attraction that
these centres possess. This perspective of sustainable development, which can
change the current model of global development, fills a need that in this last decade
was particularly strong in Italy from the point of view of both regulatory evolution
and disciplinary enhancement (Coletta 2010; Ricci 2007).
At the state level, there were a number of bills, but that which seems to be
approved is the Draft Law 65/2013.3 This draft law just passed the examination of
the Budget and Environment Committees of the Chamber of Deputies. In Italy,
there is already a precedent, but exclusively dedicated to mountain areas (inter-
ventions required by the law 31 January 1994, Law No. 97, the so-called Law on
the Mountain). The law provides measures for supporting small municipalities and
economic activities, agriculture, and commercial and craft enterprises in a manner
consistent with the peculiarities of the territories of small towns, which will rep-
resent an investment in social and economic recovery and the enhancement of the
environmental, historical, and cultural heritage of these areas.
The reductions in rent, maintenance of school facilities and garrisons health, the
military barracks, the ability to pay bills in electronic form in shops, and the
guarantee to have a gas station are the main measures that the bill proposes to
reverse the demographic and socioeconomic downward trend of these municipal-
ities. The idea behind the bill is that in the international territorial competitiveness
there aren’t weak areas due to some form of misfortune, but only areas that are not
in a position to compete (although in fact one could argue that threesome areas are
certainly structurally weaker than others).
To turn a problem into an opportunity, i.e., to prevent a significant and majority
part of the nation that remains marginalized and “unread” as an opportunity for
economic growth and territorial balance, one must to create pre-conditions for
development that equip the areas that are most “fragile” with local services that
avoid the generalized political support made after the Second World war. These
services must be targeted and selective, must be implemented according to forms of
3
http://www.camera.it/_dati/leg17/lavori/stampati/pdf/17PDL0002950.pdf, (XVII Legislatura),
Web site visited 12/02/2015.The text of the bill, however, reproduced in the first part, the text of
the bill note no. 54 by the Deputy Chamber of the XVI legislature, presented by all parliamentary
groups and approved almost unanimously by the House of Representatives but no one could also
conclude the process to the Senate (Senate Act n. 2671, XVI legislature). In Italy, the law to be
approved must be passed by the Chambers of Deputy and Senate.
partnership between public and private, and must be able to express a positive
economic, environmental, and intergenerational balance.
It is a norm that seeks to implement concrete measures in line with the proposal
of Barca (2009) in an Independent Report prepared at the request of Danuta
Hübner, the commissioner for regional policy, who proposed a place-based
approach to meeting the European Union challenges and expectations. This pro-
posal seeks a better economic and social cohesion by promoting what he calls “the
inner areas,” in which smaller historical centres often constitute the urban centres.
The law has not yet been adopted, although some Italian regions have already
approved local measures that seek to promote small municipalities in some ways
that are similar to cases in several other national settings but that still bear witness to
the relevance of the question.
On that topic, in fact, the Italian regions, created in 1972, have now issued at
least two generations of rules: The first set of laws were enacted between 1980 and
2000 and were aimed at safeguarding the physical integrity of historic centres as a
whole (Campania Regional Law no. 26/2002, Friuli Venezia Giulia no. 2/1983,
Lombardy no. 30/1980, Marche no. 11/1997, Apulia no. 45/1980, Sardinia no.
29/1988, and Veneto no. 2/2001 (the latter only for the historic centres of towns
with <1500 inhabitants)); the second group of laws has been enacted since 2000 and
are aimed to promote development policies and integrated improvement over that of
protection: for example Lazio (Regional Law 38/1999) Tuscany (LR no. 39 of 27
July 2004); Lombardy (LR 5 May 2004, no 114 and Law no. 25 of 15 October
20075); Molise (LR no. 9 of 3 March 2009), the Abruzzo Region (Regional Law no.
32 of 8/11/2006), and Puglia (LR 44/2013.6)
The population-detection threshold by which to define a “minor” old town is
very different between regions and it ranges from 1500 inhabitants (in Veneto) to
3000 inhabitants (in Lombardy) up to 5000 inhabitants in most of the other regions.
It is clear that without sufficient capacious and economic measures, these rules are
not sufficient to promote these important heritage and numerous settlements; in fact,
the regions that have approved rules of the second group have always also funded
interventions of reuse as well as physical recovery and in some cases have sought
the cooperation of the private actors.
The relationship with the private sector is an aspect of the debate that has never
resolved because some opinion makers still believe that the development of state
cultural heritage consists in the performance and discipline of all those activities
designed to promote the awareness of heritage and to ensure the best conditions for
the use and enjoyment of this heritage to all audiences, in order to stimulate the
development of culture, excluding different ways to reuse this heritage if not bound
4
Support measures in favor of small towns of Lombardy.
5
Regional measures in favor of the population of mountain areas, http://normelombardia.consiglio.
regione.lombardia.it/NormeLombardia/Accessibile/main.aspx?view=showdoc&iddoc=
lr002007101500025, Web site visited 27/02/2015.
6
Provisions for the recovery, protection, and enhancement of the most beautiful towns in Italy in
Apulia Region.
370 F. Rotondo
to the culture (Montanari 2015). Others believe that enhancing cultural heritage
means to allow the reuse, even for purposes other than cultural ones, in ways
compatible with the heritage protection and thus do not affect its distinctive
characteristics.
In any case, it must be put into evidence, as stated by Settis (2010), that the
central role of the historical does not, however, reside in quantity but rather in
quality, and especially in following three different factors:
(1) the age-old harmony between the city and the landscape;
(2) the strong presence in the area of heritage and environmental values; and
(3) the continuous in situ use of churches, palaces, statues, and paintings.
In Italy, museums contain only a small portion of the artistic heritage that is
widespread in the cities and in the countryside. In this set, which is the result of a
centuries-old accumulation of wealth and civilization, smaller historical centres
play an essential role only in the dissemination and consistency of assets, which in
the XXI century actually began to have value after they were saved (when it was
possible) from the rampant urban expansion that occurred after World War II.
References
Barbanente A (2005) Sviluppo locale, nuova programmazione e pianificazione territoriale. In:

Savino M (a cura di) Pianificazione alla prova nel mezzogiorno, Franco Angeli, Milano
Danuta Hubner, Commissioner for Regional Policy. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/
2009_2014/documents/regi/dv/barca_report_/barca_report_en.pdf. Accessed 26 Feb 2015
CEC—European Commission (1997) The EU Compendium of spatial planning systems and
policies, regional development studies, vol 28. Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, Luxembourg
Coletta T (2010) I centri storici minori abbandonati della Campania. Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane,
Napoli
Cotella G, Rivolin UJ (2011) Europeanization of spatial planning through discourse and practice in
Italy. disP 3–186:43–54
Johnston RA, Madison ME (1997) From landmarks to landscapes: a review of current practices in
the transfer of development rights. J Am Plan Assoc 63(3):365–379
Micelli E (2002) Development rightsmarkets to manageurbanplans in Italy. Urban Stud 39(1):141–
154
Montanari T (2015) Privati del patrimonio. Enaudi, Torino
Oliva F, Galuzzi P, Vitillo P (2002) Progettazione Urbanistica. Materiali e riferimenti per la
costruzione del Piano Comunale, Maggioli Editore, Rimini
Pruetz R (2003) Beyond takings and givings: saving natural areas, farmland, and historic
landmarks with transfer of development rights and density transfer charges. Arje Press,
Burbank
Ricci M (2007) Minor historic centres, the many ways of promotion and improvement,
Urbanistica 133
Settis S (2010) Paesaggio Costituzione Cemento. La battaglia per l’ambiente contro il degrado
civile, Giulio Einaudi Editore, Torino
Vettoretto L (2009) Planning Cultures in Italy—Reformism, Laissez-Faire and contemporary Trends.
In: Knieling J, Othengrafen F (eds) Planning cultures in Europe. Ashgate, Farnham, pp 189–204
Part VII
Conclusions: Perspectives for Territorial
Cultural Systems
Chapter 24
Conclusions: Perspectives for Territorial
Cultural Systems
Francesco Selicato
Abstract The concluding remarks of this chapter consider the potential for
the development of territorial cultural systems—planned, initiated, or simply
advocated—in the light of the disciplinary debate and political institutions devel-
oped in the last decade. In this perspective, the development model is entrusted to
the increased capacity of territorial cultural systems to combine the local popula-
tion’s basic needs, such as social and economic welfare and therefore the quality of
life, with the protection and enhancement of territorial capital. The chapter starts by
pointing out the results of case studies of minor historic center networks and then
refers more widely to territorial cultural systems in general.
Keywords Landscape planning Urban planning Urban development
The Cultural Heritage as a Genetic Matrix of the Project

for Territorial Regeneration
Globalization is the phenomenon that has most defined the twentieth century, not
only in economic terms but also in terms of architecture and urban planning, where
the spread of architecture and standardized settlement patterns have endorsed ter-
ritories and traditions. The territory becomes increasingly more a neutral location of
processes that are indifferent to places. Among the few areas of activity still inti-
mately linked to the territory, e.g., its architecture, archaeological assets, its natural
and rural areas, and its intangible heritage of identity and cultural tradition, food
and wine, and ethnography, is the enhancement of the environmental and cultural
heritage.
In this context, Italy, although affected like all industrialized countries by the
effects of globalization, has always been at the forefront in the protection and
F. Selicato (&)
Via Orabona, 4, 70125 Bari, Italy

374 F. Selicato
promotion of cultural heritage, exporting to other countries service, good practices,

methodologies, and know-how acquired through policies, programs, and measures
to protect and enhance the national cultural heritage.
Romania, Armenia, and Moldova, used as examples of many other eastern
European countries in this book, after the Soviet period all experienced fast growth,
somehow reproducing western European countries experiences, but in just a few
years. After 2000, many of them, such as Serbia, had few but very important
strategies related to cultural heritage protection and sustainable tourism develop-
ment,1 which were often related to a new but as yet unformed hierarchical planning
structure.2
In Italy and France and in other western European countries, from numerous
experiences practiced until the last century regarding recovery actions and
improved historic city centers, which then were propagated in a widespread manner
throughout the national territory, the focus gradually shifted to the historical and
cultural heritage understood as a territorial system and very soon adopted some of
the first experiences in eastern European countries such the case of Patz Valea
Hârtibaciului in Romania as described in Chap. 17 of this book.
In this approach, the historical heritage, whether we are talking about historical
centers or historical heritage spread in rural areas, is viewed in its close link with the
landscape with the intangible values of common knowledge, practices of use,
identity, and tradition of places. Concepts of identity, customs and traditions, his-
tory of the places, and the sense of community are the basis of this approach, and
these identifying characteristics go far beyond the urban dimension of individual
historical realities taken in case studies. They can radiate in the neighborhood of the
broader territorial context, extending to neighboring urban areas, and may seek to
recover the relationship between town and country that contributed to give sense
and meaning to “living spaces” (Magnaghi 2003, 2005, 2010a, b; Mininni 2011). It
is in the landscape, which is the incessant interaction of anthropogenic and natural
dynamics, from which the historical settlement takes its full meaning of “historical
and actual events” (Gambino 2015). This is not to revive nostalgic visions of the
past (Pascale 2013) but rather to recollect the urban fabric to its territorial reality
through a system of physical connections anchored to identifying characteristics of
historical and natural value. In the past, urban centers (today’s city centers) con-
versed directly with agricultural land (the landscape), and the boundaries between
the built and the countryside were clear. The historic fabric of the compact city
1
See Chap. 18 Serbian Cultural Territorial Systems first experiences.
2
As explained in the Serbian case, but also in the other analysed eastern countries, such as
Romania with the Law 350/2001 described in the Chap. 17 (see Chaps. 15–18), they have referred
to the general hierarchical European spatial planning law diffused in countries such as Italy,
Greece, Spain France, and Germany, as described in the European Compendium of Spatial
Planning. In fact, according to the EU Compendium of Spatial Planning Systems and Policies (EC
1997: 36–37), four major traditions of spatial planning can be identified in the 15 EU Member
States, namely, a regional economic planning approach, a comprehensive integrated approach,
land-use management, and urbanism.
24 Conclusions: Perspectives for Territorial Cultural Systems 375
reverberated in the historical settlement and spread in the country and vice versa;
urban centers were part of the local context, and they perceived this close affiliation.
All of this no longer exists, and many small- or medium-large cities have been
engulfed by the urban sprawl of metropolitan areas. Here then the historic fabric,
regenerated in its identity values, can become a node of the branch network of
social relations, the genetic blueprint of a territorial project anchored to a system of
connections—made up by significant elements of the landscape, relevant mor-
phological configurations, roads (which have historically innervated territory),
resilient peculiar parts of agricultural production in the spread of historical heritage,
signs of historical anthropization—that has its roots in the city’s historic sites and in
community spaces, yet they are landmarks of renewed identity and urban
renaissance.
Networks of Smaller Historical Centers to Promote

the Cultural Heritage
Often far from major roads and economic relationships, minor historical centers
lost, more often than not, any form of economic interest and social vitality
becoming in many cases real ghost town.3 With the emergence of a model of
self-sustainable development, looking for a conscious exploitation of local
resources, even the smaller historical centers and their cultural heritage and envi-
ronmental organizations have begun to attract the interest of economists, social
scientists, spatial-planning experts, and cultural and touristic business operators.
This interest is not limited to the asset value, whether it is considered from the
perspective of its cultural history or purely as a settlement, but intends to evaluate
and understand what could be the role of minor historical centers networks in the
promotion of the cultural heritage and environment by which they are an integral
part in a new perspective of development of the local contexts in which they are
included.
In historical centers, many minor problems have arisen from a failed protection
of the territory: Maintaining the population in small historical centers is a political
problem of European importance.4 Looking at past experiences, as shown in this
book, we understand that today we can no, longer limit our actions only to physical
interventions because we must also pay attention to the social fabric, e.g., residents
and their activities, which have similar relevance. Most of the experiences practiced
in Europe (especially in Italy or Spain) in the past focused much on the recovery of
property and redevelopment of public spaces and to a lesser extent on the
3
One of the best known cases in southern Italy is Craco in Basilicata Region, which was com-
pletely abandoned in 1963 after a landslide.
4
This is borne out by the National Strategy for the internal areas connected to the draft Partnership
Agreement 2014–2020, which was submitted to the European Commission on 9 December 2013.
376 F. Selicato
enhancement of local identities that are intimately linked to the social fabric. Hence,
the need to promote policies that integrate the physical aspects of the rehabilitation
processes with intangible ones related to settlement living quality.
Europe has, among other potential benefits, one extraordinary polycentrism and
a large and diverse network of small- and medium-sized historic centers. It should
therefore, be able to benefit from this particular settlement structure. Networks of
historic centers and the territorial systems that include them are, in fact, a great
“territorial capital” (Camagni 2008), which has its strengths in natural and cultural
resources, agricultural production systems, and tourism, a sort of social energy of
the local population and potential residents. It is this value system that gives
awareness and meaning to practices and local structures, and this helps in a decisive
way to define local identities (Camagni 2008). In this context, the unused territorial
capital can measure, in turn, the effective development potential. A necessary
condition for the success of development strategies is the strengthening of the
demographic structure of these territorial systems. This strengthening can be
achieved through a demographic growth or an increase in the working-age popu-
lation or at least in the cessation of its decline. Overcoming the inertia of demo-
graphic dynamics is a key aspect for the success of local development policies.
The strategies must therefore aim at improving residents’ quality of life, their
well-being, and their social inclusion in order to augment the demand for labor and
the use of territorial capital. This it is necessary to strengthen social and relational
capital, the value perhaps more intangible and in some ways more fluctuating,
which is now a “turn-out” factor in local development policies. The presence of a
strong “social capital in the form of associations, civic identity and presence of
shared codes of behavior, it promotes cooperation, collective action and territori-
alized processes of learning” (Camagni 2008). In this context, local development
policies are, first, the activation policies of what could be called “latent capital”
(Gastaldi 2005).
No less important are strategies aimed at land protection and the exploitation of
natural, historical, and cultural resources to promote sustainable tourism, the acti-
vation of agro-food economics, and the re-evaluation of the know-how and crafts
linked to local traditions (Vinci 2005). Obviously, the natural and cultural capital
(Camagni 2009) is not the only history product: It can be increased with appropriate
practices and policies of modernization through architecture, reuse of abandoned
urban containers, their enhancement, and their inclusion in integrated tourist itin-
eraries (for example, food, wine, or cultural character). Natural and cultural capital
requires a necessary integration with the world of entrepreneurship in order to be
translated into economic opportunity. It must be avoided that, as a result of
“opportunistic behavior of individuals—actors, owners of land near excellent
monuments, landscapes, nature—or of excessive development of highly idiosyn-
cratic activities in the same territory, the resources in question can reduce their
value” (Camagni 2009). In the same way, it is necessary to prevent the exploitation
for tourist purposes of the same values that can adversely impact on established
communities, changing the conditions of accessibility, and especially changing the
place feeling and atmosphere (Camagni 2009).
Policies and actions that can promote, ultimately, the co-construction and
exploitation of the territorial capital are many, even if they involve a new mentality,
new procedures, and new governance models. They are essential, in particular, the
elements of “integration and relationship, which require to be realized, a proper
understanding of the causal chains and a medium/long term horizon” (Camagni
2009).
These objectives and strategies are the basis of activities undertaken to facilitate
the development process of many territorial realities in Italy, which has acquired a
leading role in this field despite the inability of the political class to lead and
coordinate these spontaneous phenomena.5 Significantly, among many, the process
of historical center network protection and valorization of the Val d’Orcia in
Tuscany appears consistent with the strategies already cited.6 The landscape of the
Val d’Orcia is the expression of specific natural characteristics, but it is also the
result and the testimony of the people who live there. The strategic objectives
mainly concern the following:
1. preservation of the cultural identity of the valley combined with the needs of
ecologically and economically sustainable development of the whole territory;
2. strengthening of the elements of cultural development, which are of interest to
the population, toward a broader view of the sense of belonging of the
inhabitants;
3. economic improvement for the people while at the same time protecting the
environment with an environmentally sustainable development and the storage
and valorization of natural and artistic;
4. strengthen awareness of the value of perception and visual relationship between
city and the territory by enhancing the network of tiny vicinal connections with
the city, which constitute a heritage of great historical and local traditions for the
whole community; and
5. protection and promotion of typical products of the area.
The activities are realized by the preservation of the environment through the
design and implementation of measures for the recovery of real estate disclosed; the
development of agricultural products and handcrafts of the area with a registered
trademark; the promotion and management of a respectful tourism of the site
weaknesses and potential. The latter makes use of a number of initiatives and/or
support activities including media information for communication; reception ser-
vices; tourist transport services in convention and in agreement with the railway
companies; processing of itineraries of agro-tourism and culture; provision of road
insignias; realization of the Val d’Orcia Festival, welcoming plays and music in
multiple forms.
5
See Chap. 21, A Survey of interesting practices in the country, by Pierangela Loconte.
6
The project to develop the entire valley has seen its realization in 1996 with the signing of the
program among the five municipalities of the Val d’Orcia (Castiglione d’Orcia, Pienza,
Montalcino, Radicofani, and San Quirico d’Orcia) and the Province of Siena.
378 F. Selicato
These areas are then interpreted themselves as resources, complex territorial

systems, in which smaller historical centers and landscapes become the anchors of
the enhancement requiring the protection and management of cultural heritage and
intangible heritage kept there.
First experiences in the eastern European countries, reported in this book, are all
original declinations of this approach as described in the chapters of the five sec-
tions. In these experiences, it appears clear that some bits of attention to the
development of territorial capital have been born. Yes, there are still many diffi-
culties (see, for example, the lack of faith in the participation process7), but the
experiences described in this book manifest the enormous potential and elevate the
enhancement level already achieved.
Planning and Design of Territorial Cultural Systems

in a Model of Sustainable Development
Shifting the focus on the territorial cultural systems, more markedly than it already
emerges from the concept of network (referring essentially to smaller historical
centers), the goal becomes planning each local area within the wider context in
which they fall: Territorial cultural systems can in fact allow a unified and systemic
development of activities based on the exploitation of local resources.
In Italy, with these design goals are also outlined the prospects of development
of territorial cultural systems within the last landscape plans generated8 consistent
with what is defined in the European Landscape Convention. The results of these
new plans are still to be evaluated.
The projects are proposed hereafter precisely to enhance and make accessible the
cultural heritage—as territorial systems integrated into their territorial and land-
scape figures—thus developing an integrated vision of the future land use and
landscape. Cultural assets are therefore interpreted as an integrated territorial system
related to the territory in its historic structure, as defined by the processes of
regionalization of long duration, and identifying characteristics of territorial figures
that compose the spatial context. The purpose of this level of interpretation is to
enable an integrated reading and diachronic ratio report, which ties cultural property
to its environment and landscape and to understand the co-evolutionary stratifica-
tion and relations that over time have linked them to their cultural heritage envi-
ronment. In this sense, a territorial integrated system must be identified and
7
See, for example, the case of Armenia in Chap. 15 by Sarhat Petrosyan and Gruia Bădescu. On
the other side, see the Pilot Project Resava-Mlava, in Chap. 18, which shows the capacity to
involve local stakeholders in a case study in Serbia.
8
This happens, for example, in the new PPTR (Piano Paesaggistico Territoriale Regionale, which
could be translated in English as Landscape Territorial Regional Plan) of Apulia Region but also in
the PIT (Piano di Indirizzo Territoriale, which could be translated in English as Territorial Plan
Address) with the value of the Landscape Plan of Tuscany Region.
organized, although the design, e.g., the use of cultural, environmental, and
landscape heritage, relies on integration, and intersectoral, interscalar, bottom-up
approaches and participation in the construction of shared scenarios. The new
visions that characterize the international context, the new paradigms that guide
conservation, the reticular prospects looming in contemporary territories urging
everywhere the development of diffuse and complex strategies that are both
transscalar and intersectoral (Gambino 2015).
Therefore, planning is intended to be composed of project- and action-oriented
activities, inclusive of the plurality of ideas and needs expressed by the commu-
nities living in the territory, in the form of a different approach, i.e., a search for
solutions aimed at promoting local development. This points to the need to
understand the basic requirements of the planning process to be able to involve
residents and stakeholders; to manage the relationship between public and private
entities; to use and administer significant amounts of geo-referred data and infor-
mation; to promote the quality of the territorial and urban landscape; to pursue a
real quality of life for the users of the plan, in territories that are economically weak
and with a resident population dispersed over large territorial surfaces and often
connoted by deficiencies in infrastructure.
In addition, Romania with a Zonal Urban Plan (PUZ) for protected areas,
developed a legal and disciplinary framework to develop territorial systems, but, it
still may miss any real experience because there is a weak correlation between
heritage protection and planning procedures.9
In Serbia, heritage is an integral part of the development process, and attention is
devoted to the protection of rural areas, which are considered in their integrity as
coherent entities the balance and specific nature of which depend on the fusion of
natural, tangible, and intangible elements. Serbia has developed national strategies
to improve planning process (106 strategies were adopted after 2000), but the
Strategy of Cultural Development of Serbia 2013–2023 is still in progress and has
not been adopted yet; however, a few cities such as Novi Sad and Niš, have their
own Strategies for Cultural Development (Strategy of Cultural Development of the
City Pančevo 2010 and Strategy of Cultural Development of the City Niš 2011),
which seem interesting as a sort of experiment for the future national strategy.10
In Moldova, heritage protection and cultural-system improvement has a legal
framework based on the last international conventions, but the practice of heritage
management is also affected by the lack of available mechanisms. In fact, although
the legislation stipulates that structures to fund heritage management and research
should be put in place, as well as incentives for those who protect heritage, hardly
any mechanisms are actually in place.11 A valuable resource for future Moldovan
heritage protection and enhancement is the strong presence of a rural population
9
See Chap. 17.
10
See Chap. 18.
11
See Chap. 16.
380 F. Selicato
with its maintenance of intangible heritage, which can preserve the cultural capital
of these rural territories.
In Armenia, the role of heritage protection in the planning process is mostly
introduced in the master plans, except for Yerevan Capital city, which has devel-
oped an interesting Historic Cultural Concept Plan.12 The requirements of the
National Law About Urban Planning state that in the hierarchy of planning docu-
ments, historic cultural concept plans come after master and zoning plans. For that
reason, the Historic Cultural Concept Plan, the only document for preservation
policies and regulations, has a very weak role in the whole planning system.
Assuming cultural heritage as a key hiring factor in engine development,13 the
planning process must be able to build shared development scenarios, in terms of
complexity rather than simplified visions, to fully grasp the peculiarities and
diversity of places: Peculiarities and diversity are the foundation of development
(De Rita and Bonomi 1996). It should therefore support and consolidate, on one
hand, the “short internal relations” between local actors, the set of shared knowl-
edge, skills, and habits of coproducing territories and cultural characteristics geo-
graphically diversified, and promote, on the other hand, the “long relations”
between the local and the global (Dematteis and Governa 2005). It is in these
relationships that the process of self-determination of local society may occur
(Magnaghi 2005): The “local” and the “global” must have a large size of constant
dialectic (Palermo 2001). Thereby excluding the extreme attitudes of closure (lo-
calism) and openness (approval), the planning process must go toward the global
and then return to the local. It is important to translate into local codes successful
proposals from the global level by remembering that local development should not
be strictly conceived as an alternative to global development (as Serge Latouche
often sustains (2011)). This means, therefore, that the planning process must take
the identifying characteristics of the cultural heritage as central factors in devel-
opment policies to produce new territorial quality in order to give high levels of
competitiveness to local resources on a global scale (Palermo 2001).
The design process—really a more complex planning process—is also the only
way to transform the cultural heritage from a simple good asset into a resource. To
ensure the cultural, historical, and caretaker of identity, both for protection and
enhancement, it needs to be part of a project that makes it contemporary (Gabrielli
2011). The project area is, in contrast, the place par excellence of the integration of
the multiplicity of interests involved, the assessment and composition of values, and
the definition of strategies and development scenarios. The project area is also a
social process, a process that cannot help but move in a cooperative context, in
which the fundamental action of the parties involved can send necessary feedback
to the various levels of government (Gambino 2015).
12
See Chap. 15.
13
In Chap. 4, Francesco Rotondo, describe what is meant by thinking of cultural heritage as a key
to the development of cultural and territorial integrated plans for the exploitation of networks of
minor historical centres and their landscape systems.
It is also now time to work on a local project that combines protection and
conservation with actions capable to give anew “signification and modification” of
places (Toppetti 2011). It must be a project that clearly outline future scenarios that
address, in terms of their close interdependence, issues related to the protection of
cultural heritage and landscape as well as the inclusion of services; and (2) the
promotion of cultural opportunities and events related to the specificity of indi-
vidual territorial polarity as well as the development of settlements, mobility, and
accessibility. It is time to promote projects that refer to a grid of quality, not simply
quantitative, parameters. This is what Paolo Colarossi proposed in what he called
Plan for Local Cultural Landscapes.14
The search for an overall quality of the project lies in the ability to interpret the
logical constituents of the territory, to recognize the laws of formation, and to act as
part of a physical and social space. This is reinforced today by the same reference
standard, resulting in the European Landscape Convention, which is geared
increasingly to expand the scope of the project activity to ensure in each area the
specific objectives of landscape quality (Clementi 2008). In these development
scenarios, a project involves all landscapes, even those whose quality is only latent,
if not absent, and it considers the potential not only in relation to forms and signs
inherited from history, but also the value of the change, when it is consistent with
those signs and forms (Piscitelli and Selicato 2014) that become the driving forces
of the processes of regeneration and renewed identity.
References
Camagni R (2008) Regional competitiveness: towards a concept of territorial capital. In:

Capello R, Camagni R, Chizzolini B, Fratesi U (eds) Modelling regional scenarios for the
enlarged Europe. Springer, Berlin
Camagni (2009) Per un concetto di capitale territoriale. In: Borri D, Ferlaino F, (eds) Crescita e
Sviluppo Regionale: strumenti, sistemi, azioni. Franco Angeli, Milano, pp 66–90
Clementi A (2008) Landscape. Betrayal, innovation. Urbanistica, no. 137
De Rita G, Bonomi A (1996) Manifesto per lo sviluppo locale. Bollati-Boringhieri, Torino
Dematteis G, Governa F (2005) Territorialità, sviluppo locale, sostenibilità: modello SLoT. Franco
Angeli, Milano
European Commission (1997) Compendium of European spatial planning systems and policies,
regional development studies Report 28. Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, Luxembourg
Gabrielli B (2011) 50 anni Ancsa: le idee di ieri, le responsabilità dell’oggi. In: Toppetti F
(ed) Paesaggi e città storica. Teorie e politiche del progetto, Alinea Editrice, Firenze
Gambino R (2015) Introduction: reasoning on parks and landscapes. In: Gambino R, Peano A
(eds) Nature policies and landscape policies, towards an alliance. Springer, Dordrecht
Gastaldi F (2005) Capitale sociale territoriale e dinamiche dei sistemi locali. In: Vinci I (ed) (2005)
Il radicamento territoriale dei sistemi locali, Franco Angeli, Milano
14
See Chap. 13.
382 F. Selicato
Latouche S (2011) De-growth, inequality and poverty. In: Ventura P, Calderon E, Tiboni M
Milano, pp 71–79
Magnaghi A (2003) Projet local. Pierre Mardaga éditeur, Sprimont (Belgique)
Magnaghi A (ed) (2005) The Urban Village. A charter for democracy and local self-sustainable
development, Zed Books Ltd, London
Magnaghi A (2010a) Il progetto locale. Verso la coscienza di luogo, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino
Magnaghi A (2010b) Patto città campagna. Un progetto di bioregione urbana per la Toscana,
Alinea, Firenze
Mininni M (2011) The city-countryside pact: an agro-urban and agro-environmental policy for
apulian landscape. Urbanistica, no. 147
Palermo PC (2001) Prove di innovazione. Nuove forme ed esperienze di governo del territorio in
Italia. Franco Angeli, DIAP, Milano
Pascale A (2013) Radici & Gemme. La società civile delle campagne dall’Unità ad oggi. Cavinato
Editore International, Brescia
Piscitelli C, Selicato F (2014) Rigore della tutela vs istanze della trasformazione, Nuovi Scenari
Urbani, Architettura e Città, no. 9, Di Baio Editore, Milano
Toppetti F (2011), Centri storici. La parte per il tutto. In: Toppetti F (ed) Paesaggi e città storica.
Teorie e politiche del progetto, Alinea Editrice, Firenze
Vinci I (ed) (2005) Il radicamento territoriale dei sistemi locali. Franco Angeli, Milano
Index
A Centre
Accountability, 98, 209 urban, 34, 41
Action in planning, 33 Characterization of minor historic centers
Action-oriented approach, 122, 123, 379 quantitative indexes, and qualitative
Activity aspects, 61
agricultural, 40 City users, 185
compatible, 40 Civil society, 206, 207, 251, 273
economic, 43 Cognitive and operative actions, 10
indicator, 33 Cohesion
leisure, 35 Social, 34
primary sector, 35, 40 Collective wellness, 127
Administration, 43 Commercial activity, 36
public, 40 Communication, 11, 53
Advocacy planning, 311 Community, 9, 11, 14, 18
Agrivillage, 41 local, 34, 38, 42, 44
Algeria, 41 MDUC, 31, 34
Area minor, 31, 34, 40, 41
agricultural, 33 Community involvement, 205, 315, 317
deprived, 41, 43 Context
non-preserved, 43 economic, 33
peripheral, 42 environmental, 33, 35
periurban, 41 geographical, 33
protected, 33, 35, 44 social, 33
remote, 41, 42 COST Action C27, 31, 37, 40, 43
rural, 40, 42 diachronic analysis case studies analysis, 32
urban, 40 research activity, 33
Association Creativity, 8
local, 35 Cultural heritage, 4, 13, 14, 19, 23, 57
Cultural landscapes, 5, 25
B Cultural territorial system, 4, 5
Benefits and costs, 4 Cycling repetition of participation, 125
Best practices, 57 Cyprus, 46
Best practices in participation, 57
Bourdieu, P., 34 D
Brescia, 39 Damianakos, D., 37
Decisional and deliberative moments, 125
C Democracy
Cape Town Conference, 36 participation, 35
Capital, 41 Democratization of planning, 209

Springer Geography, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-20753-7
384 Index
Depopulation, 40 Heritage preservation

Deprivation, 30 preservation: heritage, 42, 212
Deprivation phenomena, 31 Historical centre, 5, 21
Development Historical value, 9
economic, 44 History of participation, 15
local, 45 Human development report, 30
real, 44
Development strategies, 34, 36, 231, 253, 255, I
258, 274 Identity
local, 34, 38
E Impact, 40
Economic activity, 38 Implementation, 5, 15, 25, 57, 58
Economic dimension, 31, 126 Infrastructure, 41
Economical activities, 22 Inhabitants, 17, 24, 54
Economic resource, 36 Institutions, 35, 63, 81, 88, 96, 124, 139, 142,
Electronic town meeting, 320 202, 207, 209, 222, 242, 252, 263,
Employment ratio, 32 271, 287, 317, 365
Enhancement, 35 Intangible cultural heritage, 19
Environmental impact, 37 Integrated approach, 8, 57
Environmental pressure Interactions, 10, 25, 56
indicator, 33 Involvement, 5, 15
Enhancement of heritage, 8, 18 Iseo
Estimating the cost, 100 Lake, 39
European country, 31 Italy, 39, 40
European union, 39, 42
LEADER, 35 L
Experts to community, 233 LAG. See Local Action Group
Landscape, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 21, 23, 35, 38, 42,
F 43, 54
Feedback by population, 126 agricultural, 40
Financial resources, 31 Landscape indicators, 60, 185
Finland, 40, 42 Landscape planning, 77, 287, 307, 308, 331,
Franciacorta, 39 332, 336, 378
Landscape protection, 35
G Landscape value, 61, 69, 254, 367
Genius loci, 18 Law for the Protection of Archaeological
Global poverty, 30 Heritage, 218
Government, 36 Law on the protection of monuments, 219
agricultural policies, 40 Law on urban planning, 197, 198, 202, 205
national, 42 Laws about participation, 86
territorial, 33–35 Legal and Institutional context, 194, 268
Greece, 46 Legislative framework, 196, 303
Growth, 31, 37, 40 Leisure activity, 38
Economic, 31 Life
economic, 40, 41 quality, 31
Life cycle
H modelling, 36
HDR. See Human Development Report tourism, 36
Heritage Living memory
cultural, 37, 42, 45 case study analysis, 34
natural, 37, 43 Local action group, 35
Heritage areas, 220, 274 Local auto-sustainable development, 127
Heritage management, 222, 379 Local community, 35, 38, 82, 122, 127, 208,
Heritage policies, 216 212, 253, 262
Index 385
Local context, 33 Participatory approach, 57

Local identity, 35 Participatory decision, 206, 213
Local knowledge, 11 Pedestrian accessibility, 352
Local landscapes, 133, 137, 145 People
Local needs, 47, 212, 256 local, 37, 44
Local people, 36, 37 Phenomena, 31, 33, 43
Local self-sustainable development, 4, 14, 17 Physical impacts, 102
Local stakeholders, 5 Plan
local, 45
M Planning
Management, 4, 15, 55, 57 decision making processes, 35
Management of conflicts, 126 physical, 10, 14, 38, 56
Methods and tools, 325 urban, 33, 34, 38, 46
Mediterranean basin, 38 Planning instruments, 5
Metalliferous hills, 46 Planning procedures, 247, 379
Minor community, 31, 34, 40 Planning strategy, 36
Minor cultural resources, 133, 140 Planning system, 200, 203, 220, 242, 271
Minor Deprived Urban Communities (MDUC), Planning traditions, 194, 201
30, 31, 35, 39, 41, 43 Poland, 40
impact of new infrastructure, 40 Stary Sącz case study, 45
Mobility Policy
connecting MDUC, 41, 42 regional, 41
Model of Public Participation, 271 Population
Monitoring, 36 resident, 38, 39
Monuments, 8, 54 indicator, 33
Municipal area, 31 Population [P], 32
Multidimensional systems, 102, 181, 227 Population density, 32
Multi-disciplinary approach, 11 Population growth rate, 32
Population growth ratio, 32
N Po river, 41
Natural and cultural heritage, 4, 11 Po valley, 41
Natural parks, 43 Poverty phenomena, 31
Natural resource, 36 Preservation
Neighborhood workshop, 298, 313 Heritage, 42
New Policy Pressure, 38
Regional (NRP), 41 environmental, 33
Norway, 42 urban, 38, 44
Product
O local, 40
Old Age rate, 32 Pafos
Old town, 98, 127, 129, 293, 339, 369 district, 46
ONU, 42 Protecting areas, 224
Open space technology, 320 Protection, 40, 44, 45
Poland, 45
P Poland legal act, 45
Park, 35, 44 Proximity, 356
cultural, 45
mining, 46 R
Parma, 41 Recovery, 99, 108, 114, 129, 141, 288, 289,
Participation, 5, 35, 37, 44 291, 292, 294, 295, 297, 298, 303,
Participative democracy, 124, 126 339, 345, 369, 374, 375, 377
Participative methods, 94 Regeneration, 57
Participative planning, 15 Regional and local corporations, 123, 126, 339
Participative practices, 124 Rehabilitation, 4
386 Index
Resource, 34, 44 Territorial capital, 17

economic, 43 Territorial cognitive armour, 122
natural, 40 Territorial context, 33
Revitalization, 4, 29 Territorial cultural systems, 4, 5
Richoz, S., 34 Territorial development, 34
Rural area, 227, 234, 257, 276 Territorial network, 94, 238, 334
Rural activity, 36 Territorial participation, 5, 122
Rural area, 31, 35 Territorial plan, 5, 15, 18, 19
Rural region, 215 Territorial priorities, 125
Tourism, 237
S indicators, 33
Salamiou, 46 mass, 38
Safeguard, 55–58 indicators, 39
Self-sustainable local development, 14, 19 responsible, 36
Settlement sustainable, 40
historic, 44 Tourism activity, 35, 36
new, 41 Tourism development, 36, 37
rural-urban, 41 Tourism industry, 38
urban, 33, 42 Tourism sector development, 36
Small historic centers, 194, 203, 216, 229, 337 Tourist phenomena, 38
Social balance, 4 Tourist strategy, 38
Social capital, 34 Traditional activity, 36
Social equity, 18 Tuscany, 46
Social impact, 37
Social justice, 105 U
Social sustainability, 35 UNESCO, 42
Stakeholders, 5, 57, 58 Urban development, 39, 41, 97, 200, 202, 206,
Stary Sącz, 45 207, 247, 251, 263, 304
Strategy for development, 258, 267 Urban observatory, 315
Sustainability, 35, 38, 41, 46 Urban plan, 244, 270
ecological, 39 Urban planning, 26
economic, 38, 39 Urban programs, 314
environmental, 40
Social, 35 V
social, 38–40 Valorization, 95, 108, 109, 113, 123, 276, 313,
Sustainable development, 10, 13, 18, 35 377
Sustainable tourism, 36, 37 Val de Travers, 34, 40
Switzerland, 34, 41
Val de Travers case study, 40 W
Walking, 142, 352–356
T Ways to involve the populations, 128, 129
Tangible and intangible heritage, 8 World heritage sites, 223
Technical knowledge, 254

Cultural Territorial Systems - Landscape and Cultural Heritage As A Key To Sustainable and Local Development in Eastern Europe (PDFDrive)

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

Cultural Territorial Systems - Landscape and Cultural Heritage As A Key To Sustainable and Local Development in Eastern Europe (PDFDrive)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Springer Geography

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/10180

Vera Marin Joseﬁna López Galdeano

ISSN 2194-315X ISSN 2194-3168 (electronic)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2015959931

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by SpringerNature

About the Subject

In a contemporary society that is becoming increasingly more globalized, without

The Main Themes and Objectives of the Book

The Structure of the Book

Part I Introduction and Background

Part II Lessons Learned from Planning and Management Practices

Part III Territorial Cultural Systems: A Different Approach

Part IV A New Approach to the Management of Cultural Territorial

Part V First Experiences in Eastern Europe

Part VI Experiences in Italy

20 The Actors’ Role in Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311

Part VII Conclusions: Perspectives for Territorial Cultural Systems

Gruia Bădescu Department of Architecture, Old Court, Clare College, University

Cătălina Preda Romanian Center for Innovation in Local Development

Keywords Urban planning Historic centre Cultural heritage

The Purpose of This Research

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 3

Industrial and postindustrial societies have based their development model on

The Structure of the Book

Section “The Territorial Context” explains a new approach to the management of

The Territorial Context

Keywords Cultural heritage Sustainable development Urban planning

The term “heritage” is currently used to express key concepts of contemporary

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 7

The Legislative Domain

The heritage to which we refer—in terms of territory, landscape, and architecture

territory. The landscape is no longer just the foreshortened or panoramic view of a

The Cultural Debate

imposes an organization of those presentations that makes possible, with simplicity,

Keywords Local sustainable development Urban design Landscape planning

Sustainable endogenous local development seems to be a globally shared paradigm

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 13

Self Sustainable Development

As already described in the preceding chapter, the novelty of the thought of

utopian vision in contrast to the soulless globalization that characterizes contemporary

Choay F (1992) L’allégorie du patrimoine. Éditions du seuil, Paris

Keywords Cultural integrated plans Historic centre Regional plans

Europe is a land of ancient urbanization linked at the crossroads of civilizations that

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 21

The Role of Cultural Heritage in These Territorial Systems

Relationships Between Cultural Heritage

Paolo Ventura and Michela Tiboni

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 29

a constantly developing society. COST C27 research suggests a methodology to

Methodology and Contents

MDUC Deﬁnition and Quantitative Indicators

Case Studies Diachronic Investigation

Inside-Out Analysis—Synthesis and Comparisons

Main Topics and Recommendations

Development Strategies and Landscape Preservation

Programs for Economic and Social Cohesion

People living in a territory must be considered as a cultural and economic resource.

In planning and territorial government decision-making processes, it is important

Leisure Activities and Landscape Protection and Enhancement