Cultural Territorial Systems

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.

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 disciplines 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.

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).

After outlining the cornerstones of most shared theories in science relative 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.

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 environmental 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 systematically criticizes the lack of a more comprehensive economic interpretation of current economic phenomena, proposes new tasks and actions. Deprivation phenomena 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 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 territorial government. One of the main topics  is related to tourism-development experiences. 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.

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)).

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.

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.

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 substantial production of culture’s public strategies and available funds to a situation of cutting programmes and investments; as a result, this field requires new innovative 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.

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.

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 operational 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 identification 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.

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 knowledge. The process has to continue during the decisional phase, in which the participation 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.

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 interventions 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.

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 management and implementation steps of the plan are not secondary; rather they represent a new critical point that, if not properly addressed and resolved, may not allow the plan to achieve the growth targets defined.

Armenia’s planning system, which is based on Soviet planning traditions, 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.

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 economic 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 infrastructure and severely low budget. The local-level analysis also suggests ambivalence 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.

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.

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 conventions 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 planning 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 territory 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 sustainable development of the region, professors and students of the Faculty of Architecture University of Belgrade were involved. The student’s projects 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 elaboration of development strategy for this area in future.

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.

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 management 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.

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.

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.

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.

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 developed in the last decade. In this perspective, the development model is entrusted to the increased capacity of territorial cultural systems to combine the local population’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.