The role of attributes defining intervention concepts in international doctrinal documents on built heritage

IF 1.1 Q4 GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Pub Date : 2023-10-12 DOI:10.1108/jchmsd-06-2023-0095
Mi Lin, Ivan Nevzgodin, Ana Pereira Roders, Wessel de Jonge
{"title":"The role of attributes defining intervention concepts in international doctrinal documents on built heritage","authors":"Mi Lin, Ivan Nevzgodin, Ana Pereira Roders, Wessel de Jonge","doi":"10.1108/jchmsd-06-2023-0095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose Attributes conveying cultural significance play a key role in heritage management, as well as in differentiating interventions in built heritage. However, seldom the relation between interventions and attributes, either tangible or intangible, has been researched systematically. How do both tangible and intangible attributes and interventions relate? What attributes make interventions on built heritage differ? Design/methodology/approach This paper conducts a systematic content analysis of forty-one international doctrinal documents—mainly adopted by the Council of Europe, UNESCO and ICOMOS, between 1877 and 2021. The main aim is to reveal and compare the selected eight intervention concepts, namely—restoration (C1), preservation (C2), conservation (C3), adaptation (C4), rehabilitation (C5), relocation (C6), reconstruction (C7) and renewal (C8)—and their definitions, in relation to attributes, both tangible and intangible. The intensity of the relationship between intervention concepts and attributes is determined based on the frequency of the mentioned attributes per intervention. Findings There were three key findings. First, although the attention to intangible attributes has increased in the last decades, the relationship between interventions and tangible attributes remains stronger. The highest frequency of referencing the tangible attributes was identified in “relocation” and “preservation,” while the lowest was in “rehabilitation.” Second, certain attributes play contradictory roles, e.g. “material,” “use” and “process,” which creates inconsistent definitions between documents. Third, as attributes often include one another in building layers, they trigger the intervention concepts in hierarchical patterns. Originality/value This paper explores and discusses the results of a novel comparative analysis between different intervention concepts and definitions, with a particular focus on the attributes. The results can support further research and practice, clarifying the identified differences and similarities.","PeriodicalId":45408,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jchmsd-06-2023-0095","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose Attributes conveying cultural significance play a key role in heritage management, as well as in differentiating interventions in built heritage. However, seldom the relation between interventions and attributes, either tangible or intangible, has been researched systematically. How do both tangible and intangible attributes and interventions relate? What attributes make interventions on built heritage differ? Design/methodology/approach This paper conducts a systematic content analysis of forty-one international doctrinal documents—mainly adopted by the Council of Europe, UNESCO and ICOMOS, between 1877 and 2021. The main aim is to reveal and compare the selected eight intervention concepts, namely—restoration (C1), preservation (C2), conservation (C3), adaptation (C4), rehabilitation (C5), relocation (C6), reconstruction (C7) and renewal (C8)—and their definitions, in relation to attributes, both tangible and intangible. The intensity of the relationship between intervention concepts and attributes is determined based on the frequency of the mentioned attributes per intervention. Findings There were three key findings. First, although the attention to intangible attributes has increased in the last decades, the relationship between interventions and tangible attributes remains stronger. The highest frequency of referencing the tangible attributes was identified in “relocation” and “preservation,” while the lowest was in “rehabilitation.” Second, certain attributes play contradictory roles, e.g. “material,” “use” and “process,” which creates inconsistent definitions between documents. Third, as attributes often include one another in building layers, they trigger the intervention concepts in hierarchical patterns. Originality/value This paper explores and discusses the results of a novel comparative analysis between different intervention concepts and definitions, with a particular focus on the attributes. The results can support further research and practice, clarifying the identified differences and similarities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国际建筑遗产理论文件中属性界定干预概念的作用
传达文化意义的属性在遗产管理中发挥着关键作用,并在建筑遗产的干预措施中发挥着差异化作用。然而,对于干预与属性之间的关系,无论是有形的还是无形的,很少有系统的研究。有形和无形的属性和干预是如何关联的?哪些属性使得对建筑遗产的干预有所不同?设计/方法/方法本文对1877年至2021年间主要由欧洲理事会、联合国教科文组织和ICOMOS采用的41份国际教义文件进行了系统的内容分析。主要目的是揭示和比较选定的八个干预概念,即恢复(C1)、保护(C2)、保护(C3)、适应(C4)、修复(C5)、搬迁(C6)、重建(C7)和更新(C8),以及它们与有形和无形属性的定义。干预概念和属性之间关系的强度是根据每次干预中提到的属性的频率来确定的。主要有三个发现。首先,尽管对无形属性的关注在过去几十年中有所增加,但干预措施与有形属性之间的关系仍然更强。提及有形属性的频率最高的是“搬迁”和“保存”,最低的是“修复”。其次,某些属性扮演矛盾的角色,例如“材料”、“使用”和“过程”,这会在文档之间产生不一致的定义。第三,由于属性在构建层中经常相互包含,它们会触发分层模式中的干预概念。本文探讨并讨论了不同干预概念和定义之间新颖的比较分析结果,并特别关注属性。研究结果可以为进一步的研究和实践提供支持,澄清已识别的差异和相似之处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
10.00%
发文量
63
期刊最新文献
Socially inclusive urban governance in George Town world heritage site: housing affordability concept revisiting Socially inclusive urban governance in George Town world heritage site: housing affordability concept revisiting Integrating traditional knowledge and cultural heritage with climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction: the role of training and tools Heritage conservation and energy efficiency in adaptive reuse projects the case of Gaziantep, Türkiye Breathing new life into industrial heritage: the digital era's influence on transforming Safawi cinema into a historical museum
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1