Search results

Cultural heritage destruction, acts that are carried out by both state and non-state actors, have accompanied violence towards people in all types of wars throughout human history. Used as a means to cause terror and to directly perpetuate harm on a particular group of people, heritage destruction ultimately erases the history of the people and denies them a future at the same time. Heritage destruction, as such, is a topic that is directly relevant for conflict and peace economics. Yet, economics literature on heritage destruction, especially during epochs of violence is scant at best. Presenting some examples of heritage destruction during mass atrocities, this chapter discusses how heritage destruction is related to causes, conduct, and consequences of violence. Doing so illustrates how heritage destruction could be incorporated in extant conflict and peace economics studies and their relevance for post-conflict reconstruction and violence prevention.

Cities have long been of interest to international development as well as to criminology. Historically, criminology as a social science emerged as a response to urbanisation and the new opportunities created by cities for criminal activity and victimisation. Thus, Sustainable Development Goal 11 (SDG 11), which ‘aims to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable’, is ripe for criminological input and analysis. SDG 11 tackles housing and basic services, transport systems, urban planning, cultural and natural heritage, disaster prevention, environmental impact, and safe, inclusive, and accessible green and public spaces. There has been ample criminological research on crime and victimisation in various types of human settlements, on transport systems, on the looting and trafficking of cultural heritage, on crimes associated with natural disasters and on the importance of public leisure areas for crime prevention. Yet many of the above goals, as well as the recommendations emerging from these bodies of research, conflict with each other, and must be problematised in their aim to be inclusive of all. Women and children, the elderly and persons with disabilities are usually the reference groups for inclusion, but globally, there are many other groups, including racial and ethnic minorities, indigenous communities, and LGBTQI individuals that are commonly excluded. The chapter will analyse SDG 11 against the evidence base of urban criminology as well as the challenges for inclusion, given diversity both within-country as well as globally.

The scope of this chapter is place and its identity in view of global changes. The ground for undertaking the topic is the belief that by conscious activity undertaken to protect the value of places we are capable of facing modern changes involving the homogenization of space.

Today we are witnessing a rapid destruction of the existing urban forms, leading to fading legibility of the city structure, destroying the state of subtle balance between space and place, and shaking the sense of identity of city inhabitants. The values of identity, legibility, and a traditional network of meanings and symbols are fading away. The space of flows supplants the space of places, evoking essential changes in the functional structure of cities, almost all over the world.

Is it possible to preserve the tradition and identity of place under globalization conditions? It is a challenge for architects, urban planners, decision-makers, investors, and inhabitants. One potential role of the urban planner is perceived as active participation in creating new qualitative social attitudes, as well as undertaking mediating, promotional, and educational activities. Tools that could be helpful in shaping a new model of place involve comprehensive discussion and education in the field of the value of space, shaping social awareness and grounds for social development. It may be concluded with some caution that such comprehensive discussion will contribute to raising the level of knowledge about the world and the sense of the value of space.

Since the last decade, urban heritage tourism has picked up pace in India, specifically through the proliferation of heritage walks. Diversified in their modes of exploration and themes, these walks contribute towards increased awareness and appreciation of cultural heritage. As society reels under the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and socio-political problems, heritage walks can become a tool to address issues within the restructured tourism practices. Discussions on sustainable heritage practices in Europe foreground the role that heritage walks play in promoting resilience, responsibility and a sense of shared heritage through the active engagement of various stakeholders. It follows that the digital space offers new opportunities for a more participatory cultural consumption model. Taking cues from Europe and Germany in particular, this study discusses innovative possibilities for inclusive urban heritage tourism practices that integrate urban regeneration, heritage sustainability and community well-being.

New Towns were exemplars of Utopian social and economic visions allied to Modernist ideas of design and architecture. Initially hailed as the answer to the ailments of the historic European city and the urgent need for housing after the War, they came under considerable scrutiny when the ideas of New Urbanism on design, density and community became one of the most vocal critics on Modernist town planning.

The UK Arts and Humanities Research Council recently funded a New Town Heritage Research Network Project. Drawing on case studies from the network, this chapter will refer to the original questions posed by the above-mentioned network project: How are the Utopian social and economic visions which accompanied the New Town Movement embodied in the masterplanning, urban design and architecture of the New Towns? How can the New Town architectural and urban design heritage be evaluated? How can future planning for these towns accommodate and build on this heritage in a meaningful way, and be integrated into regeneration and growth? How can key stakeholders in New Towns create an identity and pride for their town as well as a sense of belonging, by building cultural capital through their heritage, including architecture, public art and cultural activities?

This chapter will analyse how New Towns and their associated Modernist Heritage have been perceived by different audiences and are positioned in the overall heritage discourse including the question of a shared European Heritage.

This chapter will present an analysis of mobilisation, framing processes and outcomes of environmental conservation campaigns in Ireland. By locating contemporary disputes about the public space in Ireland within an understanding of this transition from a traditional rural and agrarian society into that of a modern industrialised and urbanised European state, a wider understanding of the circumstances surrounding such contests emerges. ¹ This form of analysis goes beyond a social narrative, and facilitates a fuller understanding of the consequences emanating from the framing and reframing of heritage within a context of a society where an obsession with history has been displaced by a zealous predilection for economic development.

The Mediterranean has long been celebrated for the richness, diversity, and historical depth of its cultural heritage. However, in recent years heritage and heritage practice could be said to have become a new mode of production in the region (Bianchi, 2005). There are a number of reasons for this; one has to do with the stagnation of the Mediterranean's traditional “sun, sea, and sand” tourism. As a result of this tour operators and national governments have started to push the packaging of “culture” and “heritage” for a more diversified “up-market” product to attract higher-spending tourists to the region's cities and rural hinterland. Another factor is the restructuring and liberalization of the regional economy since the closing decades of the 20th century. There has seen a shift from agriculture to services as the dominant economic sector in this region and the concomitant discovery of culture has become an economic asset for investors seeking an outlet for global capital flows (Bianchi, 2005; Daher, 2007; Nogués-Pedregal, 2002). The European Union (EU) has had an important role to play in these processes, both in driving the region's neoliberal market reforms, and in promoting the establishment of its cultural heritage economy. Cultural heritage has become a priority area in EU Mediterranean policy, with millions of euros earmarked for heritage related projects. This takes the form both of loans to private investors from the European Development Bank, and of grants for public sector cultural heritage initiatives, for example, through its Euromed Heritage programs, the fourth phase of which is underway at the time of writing (Bianchi, 2005; Euromed Heritage, n.d.).

Cities are the place where people spend the great majority of their daily time. Many cities face a variety of social issues such as: high unemployment, increasing crime rate, migration flows, shifts in types of social interactions and lifestyle. These examples represent only a few of the issues encountered. Increasing the number of cultural offerings of a city may help improve the population's general sense of well-being as well as to increase its attractiveness for investments. However, the topic is delicate, and culture is an asset that must be treated carefully. Hence, enhancing culture as a positive asset to be cultivated may seem to be the perfect solution to overcome these issues. Often, a city's government will assume that enhancing and supporting cultural and creative industries will provide a solution to urban socio-economic crises and the stress of the urban fabric without effectively considering their own particular historical-geographical and socio-political conditions. Sometimes cultural heritage is exploited without giving due consideration to the creative sources of value generation in the city. Thus, this may lead to side effects such as the general risk of attracting socially and economically unsustainable mass tourism; the risk related to the possibility of being trapped by city's own cultural heritage and history acting as obstacles against any possible innovations; the risk of gentrification with a consequential loss of important traditions and social relationships characterising the urban areas.

The development of public art in French New Towns in the 1970s and 1980s was one of the most spectacular forms of state intervention in urban policy. Along with the new architecture programmes, the hundreds of works of art that adorn the public realm of the French New Towns help to differentiate them from the grands ensembles. This public art, which was highly publicised at the time, represents a heritage intrinsically linked to the urban history of New Towns but also to the history of French cultural policies at the end of the twentieth century. Artistic and town planning innovations underlie many public art projects. Artists and town planners participated, on a city scale, in the cultural developments that sought to respond to the expectations of the May 1968 crisis. In New Towns, the role of art was not simply to provide a backdrop to beautify the city but also to contribute to the success of new urban neighbourhoods. This involved placing visual landmarks in the urban space, confronting the residents with living art (painted walls, sculpted staircases, light paths, etc.).

The appropriation of these works of art by the public and councils was far from unanimous. It was only at the beginning of the twenty-first century that a heritage reflection emerged and led to a list of works of art being drawn up, with a view to protecting them. With the disappearance of state supervision over certain New Towns (1998–2002), damaged works has become a stigma in the public realm. A policy of restoration is being therefore introduced in certain New Towns, with public art participating in the identity of councils that do not hesitate to present themselves as ‘contemporary towns’ and take on the restoration or achievement of certain works that they now consider to be their heritage.