UNESCO world heritage label

Key-Note-Presentation
Sustainable urban development
Dr.-Ing. Carola S. Neugebauer
Final Conference
26. – 28. November 2014
1
Sustainable urban development and
the UNESCO-World heritage label Experiences to share
Dr.-Ing. Carola S. Neugebauer
Nov. 2014
Structure
 background, questions and aim of research
 evaluation design
 results of research
3
I. Background
increasing relevance of the UNESCO world heritage
label (WHL) for urban and regional development in
Europe
4
The metroplitan region of Kiew (Ukraine) 2011
The cultural landscape of Dresden (Germany) 2013: Building the bridge – loosing the WH label in 2009
The world heritage city of Wismar (Germany) 2013: a peripheral city with socio-economic problems
The world heritage city of Lübeck (Germany) 2012: a peripheral city with socio-economic problems
I. Background
increasing relevance of the UNESCO world heritage
label (WHL) for urban and regional development in
Europe
controversial discussion of impacts and shortcomings of
current research
 lack of comprehensive studies
 lack of systematic explanatory research
 lack of practice-relevant conclusions
9
I. Questions of research
 What are the WHL’s impacts on urban development?
 To what extent do the “spatial context” and “local
actors” of a city shape the WHL’s impacts?
 How to assess these impacts with regard to urban
sustainability?
 What are lessons to learn?
10
I. Aim of research
The research aim are actor- and space-sensitive
approaches which open up, i.e. preserve and use the
UNESCO world heritage label as potential for
sustainable urban developement.
11
II. Evaluation design
revealing and assessing the cost
efficiency (e.g. CBA)
proofing and assessing effectiveness
defining the input-output-relation
Levels of adressing the results of projects, programms etc. (own figure according to [27]:147)
12
II. Evaluation design
sustainability assessment
 integration, participation,
justice
context
structure
intentions
activities
results
input
income
socio-scientific understanding of causality
plausibility check by
 theory testing (based based model)
 external experts
13
II. Evaluation design
whole city centres labeled by UNESCO status
active city administration
Stralsund (Germany)
metropolitan context
peripheral
Wismar (Germany)
St. Petersburg (Russia)
passive
14
II. Evaluation design
Applied methods
St. Petersburg Stralsund
Wismar
stand. survey among dwellers
300
179
191
interviews with local experts
40
41
43
interviews with external experts
analysis of local newspapers
39
1990 -2009
2002 - 2010
analysis of documents and
secondary statistics
15
III. Results of research
impacts
theses and conclusions
16
III. Results of research
Local quality of life
 space-related identity and new opportunities of urban life
 attractiveness of inner-city living/housing
Local economic development
 development of entreprises
 the city‘s attractiveness as business location
Monument preservation and urban planning
 attention and support for local monument preservation and
conservative urban development
 expertise in dealing with developing urban heritage
17
III. Results of research
Stralsund
Feeling attached to the city by
the world heritage label
Wismar
St. Petersburg
37% / 20% 29% / 31%
27% / 40%
27% / 27% 34%/ 27%
16% / 42% 9% / 79%
20% / 61%
3% / 82%
(answers „very much“ and „not at all“)
Being concerned by the WHL …
 in my feeling towards the city
 in my spare time
(answers „very much“ and „not at all“)
18
III. Results of research
investigated sectors:
 tourism
 real estate
 building and construction sector which is specialized in
monument conservation
 enterprises and institutions with high shares of highlyqualified employees
tested economic relevance of the WHL:




marketing and qualification of products/services
sale of products/services
human resource management
not intended impacts
19
III. Results of research
sectoral relevance of the WHL in local economy
The WHL as …
central argument to sell
collateral argument to sell
argument in advertising
irrelevant argument
tourism
III. Results of research
sectoral relevance of the WHL in local economy
The WHL as …
central argument to sell
collateral argument to sell
argument in advertising
irrelevant argument
tourism
real estate
III. Results of research
sectoral relevance of the WHL in local economy
The WHL as …
central argument to sell
collateral argument to sell
argument in advertising
irrelevant argument
tourism
real estate
spec. buildung sector
R&D (engineering)
III. Results of research
person 1: If the World Heritage Label is effective to attract
employees? No. But of course, Wismar has a great history as
Hanseatic habour. If somebody is interested in such things
and also in old bricks, he is right here!
interviewer: What does the world heritage label mean to you
and your colleagues?
person 1: It is very subordinated. The essential reasons to
motivate and keep our colleagues in town are a good team,
own responsibilty, fun to work in our company. And if the
salary is not too bad, than they will stay.
(Human resource manager of R&D enterprise in Wismar)
23
III. Results of research
24
III. Results of research
 local/external attention and support for local
monument preservation and conservative urban
development
 sectoral expertise, e.g. qualification of construction
projects
25
sectoral expertise: architectural projects
Local authorities:
arbitrary misuse of WH label and its commitees
disempowerment of the local advisory boards
ICOMOS, UNESCO: misjudgements (wrong advices)
blockade for non-professional reasons; delay
III. Results of research
 new approaches of integrative-participative urban
development in city administration
28
III. Results of research
29
III. Results of research
The UNESCO world heritage label is an unused
potential for susainable developement in the
investigated world heritage cities. Because the label‘s
potential to promote and advance local life quality,
economic development and monument preservation
is not thought and used in a consequent integrative,
transparent-participative and efficient-just way by
the local actors of city administration, economy and
civil society.
30
III. Results of research
the WH label as spatially differentiated potential
 local intentions and activities
 visibility and relative efficiency
 ressources
31
32
peripheral context
metropolitan context
33
III. Results of research
The potential of the WH label for urban dvelopment
is conditioned by the acitivities of the local actors.
The more local actors with authority enhance i.e.
protect and use the WH label in an active and
integrative manner, the more obvious and manifold
are the label‘s impacts on urban development
within the intrinsic limits.
34
„The World Heritage status is
what you make of it.“
(Rebanks Consulting 2009)
35
III. Results of research: conclusion
The metropolitan approach
= „sustainable conservation of the (world) heritage
(label)“
36
Preserving and
developing the WH
Socio-cultural
enhancement
External experts: urban
planner, ICOMOS, transport
planner, architect
Roundtable
Construction
and Planning
Veto right
Local experts: urban
planner, monument
conservators ..
Conflict mechanism
Correspomding public departments
Local actors:
organisations,
schools, museums
Roundtable
for Culture
External experts: ICOMOS/
UNESCO, OWHC, science,
foundations …
Aims and measures
WH Manager
Monitoring
Evaluation
III. Results of research: conclusion
The metropolitan approach
= „sustainable conservation of the (world) heritage
(label)“
The peripheral approach
= „sustainable conservation and use of the (world)
heritage (label)“
38
Preserving and
developing the WH
Socio-cultural
enhancement
External experts: urban
planner, ICOMOS, transport
planner, architect
Roundtable
Construction
and Planning
Veto right
Local experts: urban
planner, monument
conservators ..
Conflict mechanism
Correspomding public departments
Local actors:
organisations,
schools, museums
Roundtable
for Culture
External experts: ICOMOS/
UNESCO, OWHC, science,
foundations …
Aims and measures
WH Manager
Monitoring
Evaluation
Economic
enhancement
External experts:
associations,
science
Roundtable
for Economy
Local actors: companies,
economic associations,
property owners ..
Summary
The UNESCO world heritage label is a potential for
sustainable urban development which is …
 dependant on the local actors activities,
 spatially-differentiated,
 and limited to – at the most – collateral, positive
impacts.
In consequence, we are in need of thoroughly set up
local management approaches.
40
Dr.-Ing. Carola S. Neugebauer
Associate professor at RWTH University Aachen
[email protected]
PDF S.98
Der räumliche Kontext der Welterbestadt wird im Rahmen dieser Arbeit entweder als peripher
oder metropol beschrieben. In Anlehnung an die aktuellen BBSR-Raumtypen ([50]) und die
analytischen Metropolenforschung (u.a. [47]) unterscheiden sich metropole und periphere St¨adte
vor allem hinsichtlich ihrer zeitlichen Erreichbarkeit, ihrer Wirtschaftsstärke bzw. -schwäche
und ihrer nationalen und internationalen Bekanntheit. Sie verfügen letztlich über unzählige
bzw. begrenzte soziokulturelle und wirtschaftliche Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten. In der
Abbildung 2.7 des Kapitels 2.3.4 sind im Detail die Indikatoren zur Beschreibung der
differenzierten Raumkontexte zusammengefasst.
89
Anders als beim Kriterium ”Räumlicher Kontext“ konnte im Vorfeld der Auswahl bei dem
Kriterium”Umgang der Stadtverwaltung mit dem Welterbestatus“ nicht auf detailliertes Wissen
zu der Ausprägung des Merkmals in den Fallstudien zurückgegriffen werden. Wie in Kap. 2.2.1
dargestellt, ist nämlich für Welterbestätten bisher keineswegs der lokale Umgang im Sinne von
Schutz und Nutzung einheitlich und umfassend erfasst. Daher beruht die Auswahl der Fallstudien
hinsichtlich dieses Kriteriums auf Experteneinschätzungen aus dem jeweiligen
nationalen Kontext.
190
42
 stimulation or limitation of
cooperations for the WHL‘s
enhancement (preservation and use)
within administration and/or with
external partners
 qualification or blockade of new
developments within the WH area
(projects , concepts)
local
economic
development
 binding or scaring of inhabitants and
incoming city dwellers (space related
identity, facilties of culture and
education)
local quality
of life
 binding or scaring entreprises and
quailified work forces
mounument
preservationur
ban planning
communication
networking
UNESCO
Label
qualification
economy
administration
 stimulation or limitation of civil
engagement for monument
conservation and urban development
(Corporate Citizenship, honorary
activities, donations)
civil society
 stimulation or limitation of the local
entreprises‘ development
Individual actors
Collective actors
services
OWHC
building companies
real estate agencies
ICOMOS
touristic firms
advisory boards
R&D enterprises
local politics
city dwellers
civil organisations
trade associations
marketing associations
city administration
universities and educational institutions
national/ regional governments
UNESCO chairs
national UNESCO commissions
UNESCO
Co-orporative actors
authority:
sphere of activity:
public administration and policy
private economy
civil society
scales:
local level
national/ regional level
international level
high
middle
small
46
47
Bewertungsperspektive: Nachhaltigkeitsprinzipien
Das Prinzip der Integration fordert das Zusammenspiel von ökologischen, sozialen,
kulturellen und ökonomischen Belangen (Hübler2000: 26). Daher:
 Gewährleistung der Ausgewogenheit von Schutz und Entwicklung der städtischen Umwelt
durch bzw. in der Inwertsetzung des UNESCO-Welterbestatus
 Umsetzung einer Querschnittsorientierung im Umgang mit dem Welterbethema, zumindest
in Ziel- und Maßnahmenformulierungen
Das Prinzip der Partizipation umfasst verschiedene Formen der Einbindung von Akteuren in
die Stadtentwicklung, zumindest aber gegenseitiges Informieren und Diskutieren (DalaClayton 2002:180f). Daher:
 Gewährleistung der Transparenz welterbebezogener Kommunikationsaktivitäten als
Grundlage des Informierens und Diskutierens (keine Konsenspflicht)
 Ansprache der potentiell relevanten Adressaten für die Inwertsetzung des Welterbestatus,
zumindest einen weiteren Akteur jenseits der Denkmalpflege
Das Prinzip der Verteilungsgerechtigkeit spricht generell die intergenerative und
intragenerative Gerechtigkeit an (Hübler 2000:26). Daher:
 Gewährleistung des ausgewogenen Ressourceneinsatz bei der Welterbeinwersetzung (keine
Überlastungen, keine Parallelstrukturen)
 Gewährleistung des sozial nichtselektiven Zugangs zur Ressource Welterbe (Kosten,
Niederschwelligkeit, Verdrängung)
48