Entrepreneur: Start & Grow Your Business

Cultural heritage in socio-economic development: local and global perspectives.


by Loulanski, Tolina
Environments • Nov, 2006 • IDEAS

Abstract

In an era of holistic and integrative thinking, the potential of culture and heritage as both elements and tools for socio-economic development has been gaining the attention and imagination of scholars and policy makers alike. This article provides some idea of the contemporary culture-and-development discourse, followed by an overview of heritage-centered development trends and practices across a wide geographical span. Examples primarily focus on tangible heritage and illustrate a shift toward the inclusion of cultural heritage as a central feature of community and economic revitalization. Reference is made to parallel trends that can be observed in England, Canada, Australia, and Japan, as well as in developing countries--although the former examples are given more attention. The aim is to show the omnipresence of the expanding social context and the relevance of cultural heritage. The discussion illustrates its significant potential and the emerging global/local policy thread that advocates for integrating culture within development strategies.

En cette ere de reflexion holistique et integrative, l'idee que la culture et le patrimoine peuvent constituer des elements du developpement economique et servir celui ci attire l'attention et frappe l'imagination des universitaires, comme celle des responsables des politiques. L'auteur de cet article presente quelques unes des idees du discours sur la <>, suivies d'un apercu des tendances et des pratiques en matiere de developpement axe sur le patrimoine, sur une vaste etendue geographique. Les exemples utilises mettent l'accent sur le patrimoine materiel comme element central de la dynamisation de la collectivite et de l'economie. On y fait reference aux tendances que l'on peut observer parallelement en Angleterre, au Canada, en Australie, au Japon, ainsi que dans les pays en developpement, quoique l'on accorde davantage d'attention aux premiers. L'objectif est de demontrer l'omnipresence de l'elargissement du contexte social et la pertinence du patrimoine culturel. L'analyse illustre le potentiel important de la culture et le fil conducteur emergent des politiques mondiales ou locales, lequel prone l'integration de la culture aux strategies de developpement.

Keywords

Tangible heritage, socio-economic perspectives, culture and development, heritage policy and practice

Introduction

Recent changes in the global environment and within human society have occurred at a speed faster than ever before. These changes prove much more difficult to control and manage, carrying the potential risk of irreversibility and endangering the integrity of the human-environment system. Along with unprecedented advances in science and technology--which bring a series of seemingly indisputable benefits--the world in the 21st century has seen massive environmental degradation, depletion of resources, widening gaps in people's quality of life, lasting regional conflicts and wars, increasing poverty, cultural homogenization and individual feelings of alienation and rootlessness.

Arising from these changes, the very idea of what development does or should mean has also rapidly evolved. Development is no longer equated solely with the endless pursuit of material and economic goals; it is increasingly perceived as a never-ending process of change towards a continuous improvement of the human condition (Rana 2000). The objective of human development has been reinterpreted to include expanding the capabilities of people to live the sorts of lives they desire (Sen 1999). It has become necessary for economic development--together with environmental, social and cultural development--to be regarded as part of a bigger whole: sustainable human development (UNDP 1994).

As an example, Throsby (2001) argues that there are clear signs of a shift underway in thinking about development. The old commodity-centered notion of economic development is giving way to a new people-centered strategy of human development, where people--as the object and means of development--do not exist in isolation. In addition, the shift is associated with a refocusing on human beings as both the object of development and as the agents by which development is brought about.

People interact with each other and with their surroundings in a variety of ways. The framework within which this interaction occurs is provided by their culture--their shared beliefs, values, languages, traditions, and so on, that constitute their daily lives. By extension, culture has appeared center-stage, as the focus of the new development concept. The intent of this paper is to illustrate and discuss the integration of culture and development--an integration that is expected to bring a variety of benefits and comparative advantages to countries and regions. For illustration, I draw on examples from around the world, focusing on built heritage. I primarily discuss examples from urban areas in developed countries; however, culture and development are also strongly integrated in rural areas and developing countries. I provide a few such examples to further illustrate the extent of this shift and the potentials that are offered by this new direction. To begin, I offer some background on this new integrated approach and the parallel changes in the conceptualization of cultural heritage.

Culture and Development

Culture has recently moved to centre stage as an important aspect of development--although it must be said that culture had already entered the stage in policy-making in the 1960-70s, the "age of decolonization." At a conference in Venice around that time, Rene Maheu, Director-General of UNESCO turned to the audience with the words:

The idea of development has, in fact, gradually become broader,

deeper, and more varied so that going beyond the purely economic

aspects of improving man's lot, it now also embraces the so-called

social aspects ... Man is the means and the end of development; he

is not the one-dimensional abstraction of homo economicus, but a

living reality, a human person, in the infinite variety of his

needs, his potentialities and his aspirations ... In the concept of

development the centre of gravity has thus shifted from the economic

to the social, and we have reached a point where this shift begins

to approach the cultural (Maheu quoted in UNESCO 1999).

The current debate about the role of culture in development has intensified on all levels. Culture has reached its peak on the agendas not only of UNESCO but of many international organizations working in the development field. Culture Counts (World Bank 1999a), The Power of Culture (UNESCO 1998), Recognizing Culture (Matarasso 2001 for UNESCO and World Bank), Culture in Sustainable Development (World Bank/UNESCO 1998), Culture and Local Development (OECD 2005) are only some of the titles in their key documents. Certainly, the emphasis on a possible symbiosis between culture and development has far-reaching implications and presents one of the greatest challenges to rethinking the development paradigm.

Development today is ever more identified as specific to culture and context. As Hettne (2002) maintains, the significance of culture and identity has to do not so much with integrating the cultural factor in the process of development as with abandoning Eurocentric development thinking. Rather than "development as catching up and imitation," there is a shift to "conceiving and conceptualizing development as an inclusive, liberating process, in which different worldviews are accommodated and constitute a dialogical process" (Hettne 2002: 7). The picture of culture and development and their multiple interactions becomes particularly difficult to grasp and deal with in the age of globalization. Globalization and culture interact in various ways, in the better case, producing multiple-choice situations. Undeniably, globalization threatens to homogenize culture, but at the same time it gives opportunities to express and emphasize cultural diversity. To illustrate, I give an example of the so-called global localization or glocalization phenomenon. An initiative of the Economic Institute of Development of the World Bank and several non-government organizations (NGOs) led to the creation of a virtual bazaar in 1997: . Although started as an experiment to demonstrate the possibilities presented by the Internet for a poor isolated village and its people, the project has turned into a permanent virtual space enabling producers from Morocco, Tunisia and Lebanon to present their countries' crafts and access international markets. Participants not only receive encouragement to further develop their traditional industries but also achieve far better economic rewards for doing so. Obviously, their success on the global market can be attributed to offering unique products typical of their specific local cultures (SDC 2003).

Curiously, the role of culture in the economy of cities, countries and regions is not only greatly expanding in countries lagging behind in their economic development. On the contrary, the tendency proves far more typical of industrialized countries. For example, in 2000, the Government of Denmark released a report entitled Denmark's Creative Potential, suggesting that a closer interaction and even convergence between culture and industry should take place because of its potential to "trigger a new social dynamic, which will, at one and the same time, strengthen culture and the arts, offering new opportunities for development, and add impetus to industrial development marked by innovation, creativity and resourcefulness" (Government of Denmark 2000: 4). A similar approach is taken locally by many big and small cities, towns and villages all over the world. Kim (2001: 1) calls it the "cultural turn of capitalism" and observes that in the global-local context, culture can be both a resistant and a resilient force. More broadly, culture is currently perceived not only as facilitator of the economy, but also of individual well-being and the collective well-being of society as a whole; it is identified both as an essential social capital and as a builder of such.

The foregoing tendencies in the culture-development discourse have significantly contributed to a shift in the concept of cultural heritage. They serve as a background for the following discussion, which extends the heritage concept to the framework of economic and social development.

New perceptions of cultural heritage in development

Cultural heritage includes the material aspects of culture--sites, buildings, landscapes, monuments, and objects--as well as the non-material aspects, which are embodied in social practices, community life, values, beliefs and expressive forms such as language, arts, handicrafts, music and dance. Representative of many contemporary definitions, Graham et al. (2000: 2, 157) define cultural heritage as "the contemporary purposes of the past" or "that part of the past which we select in the present for contemporary purposes, be they economic, cultural, political or social." The concept of heritage is evolving as a result of and according to the changing attitudes, needs and demands people convey towards it. There is a clear move toward a people-centered, functional approach in regards to heritage, simultaneously shifting its focus along three interrelated axes: from monuments to people, from objects to functions and consequently from preservation to sustainable use and development (Loulanski 2006). Heritage has ceased being just about objects--with its main duty as physical preservation--and has become associated with "whatever fulfils the function of cultural heritage" (Muller 1998: 399).

Most importantly, heritage has stopped being divorced from its societal context and is increasingly perceived as a human construction, made by people and defined by them. A movement toward wider definitions, roles and uses of cultural heritage in society is thus observed. From separate objects--architecture, archeology and movables--heritage has expanded to landscapes, urban and rural areas, the whole historic environment and place. The roles of heritage, seen before in the narrow meaning of symbols of national unity and pride, have expanded to include much broader phenomena, contributing to political ideals, economic prosperity, social cohesion and cultural diversity (Clark 2000). Indeed, heritage assets are increasingly being used in their capacity as resources for a wide variety of modern purposes.

There are critics who consider use to be among the biggest threats to heritage, potentially leading to commercialization, exploitation, devaluation and destruction. There are others, like Netzer (1997: 4), who contend that "the greatest successes in heritage preservation can occur when the heritage element is in actual use, and thus capable of generating revenue to pay for its preservation" or Koboldt (1997: 56) who argue that "many if not most of the benefits [derived from cultural heritage] are realized only in the course of [its] actual use." Among the proponents of heritage use we find not only economists and sociologists but also those who have traditionally opposed the idea, such as culturalists, anthropologists, legal scientists and even preservationists. For instance Prott (2005) points to the need of preserving, together with objects, the multiple human lifestyles through the "continued re-endorsement of value by use" within communities. She warns that the practices of preservation that are typically used often lead to de-contextualization and damage of heritage. She argues for a more adequate interpretation and protection of heritage, based on prioritizing the traditional values of people for whom it holds special social and cultural meanings (Prott 2005: 231, 236).

In a similar vein, Jokilehto (2004) calls for integrated heritage management, emphasizing that every historic area and its surroundings should be considered in its totality as a coherent whole whose balance and specific nature depend on the fusion of the parts, which include human activities as much as the buildings, spatial organization and surroundings. Thus, the very notion of conservation has drastically changed from preservation to sustainable use and management of change in both the cultural and natural environment. Present practices reveal that the preservation of heritage cannot be seen as a process that attempts to stop development and change by freezing culture and heritage. Rather heritage preservation is identified with the practice of managing change as a factor driving the balance between preserving heritage values and ensuring development (Jamieson 2000). This new thinking has led towards shifting the emphasis in conservation from "the conservation of discrete monuments in isolation to the sustainable management of towns, cities and landscapes as a whole" (Clark and Drury 2000: 114).

More specifically, in a new developmental context, heritage is recognized as both engine and catalyst of socio-economic development. Graham et al. (2000) have suggested a theoretical framework, based on three main economic dimensions of heritage to explain its developmental role. First, they identify heritage as "an economic sector in itself"--often referred to as "the heritage industry"--"using resources, producing products, and generating returns in profits, [incomes] and jobs." Second, it is also considered "one element in economic development alongside others, frequently exercising a catalytic or integrating role in development projects" due to its capacity to attract economic activities and accommodate economic functions. Finally, it is looked upon as "an instrument in the management of economies at various spatial scales from the international to the local, as for example in the creation and promotion of place images for dominant economic purposes (Graham et al. 2000: 155). Most recently, the economic rationale of heritage was thoroughly discussed in Mason's (2005) Brookings Institution Report Economics and Historic Preservation--A Guide and Review of the Literature with an extensive and annotated bibliography of both academic and professional literature that reviews the current findings on the value of historic preservation and the methods used to assess that value. A case is made for improving expertise in the field of preservation economics that would allow for more objectively and rigorously quantifying the effects of historic preservation.

Not only in the academic literature, but in policy documents of international organizations and national and regional governments, heritage is repeatedly identified as a powerful economic and social resource, a "development asset" that can be used to "catalyze local-level development," provide employment, generate income, revitalize local urban and rural areas, enhance environmental protection and strengthen communities' social capital (World Bank 1998: 15). Although heritage and its preservation have long been regarded as oppositional to economic development (it is either historic preservation or economic growth), they are increasingly seen as effective partners in development. Their partnering is consistent with all five principles of 21st century socio-economic development--globalization, localization, diversity, sustainability, responsibility--and reinforces the five senses of quality communities--sense of place, sense of identity, sense of evolution, sense of ownership or share, and sense of community (Rypkema 1999). Indeed, cultural heritage has stopped being only a burden to national budgets, and is gradually transforming into a significant "value-adding industry" (Cernea 2001: 45). Anticipations show that investments in heritage are going to grow even further with heritage becoming "the most significant product of the 21st century, determining communities' future" (Ogino 2002: 277).

Another important current trend is detected in the newly ascribed links between cultural heritage and sustainable human development that are rooted in the reunion of conservation and development goals and the balance between economic, social and environmental aspects of development (Clark 2000). Looked upon through the magnifying lens of sustainable development and its principles, cultural heritage--with its important "contemporaneity value" (Greffe 2002: 163) and its unique integrative functional and "socially progressive potential" (Pendlebury et al. 2004: 11)--comes out as a dual force: as an integral part and as a vehicle towards sustainable development. Furthermore, being compatible with the long-term perspectives of sustainable development, heritage can be recognized as an essential cultural, social, economic and environmental asset contributing to the sustainable functioning of the three interrelated systems: nature, society and economy (Loulanski 2007).

In the light of the foregoing arguments, it is logical to maintain that cultural heritage not only could, but should, be integrated in the real life of people and that policy needs to be rethought to be more accepting of the practical dimensions of heritage. In that sense, I believe that the sensitive integration of cultural heritage within development strategies and initiatives aimed at simultaneously addressing interconnected economic, environmental, social and community objectives and challenges could be a good way to provide diverse and wise use of heritage, as well as encourage realization of its significant multi-functional potential.

Heritage-centered development trends

In what follows, I provide examples of the integration of cultural heritage in socio-economic development by referring to evidence from policies and practices internationally. Examples include urban and rural, local and national settings, from both industrialized and developing countries. The foregoing discussion drew attention to the significance of material and non-material aspects of culture. To be brief and comprehensible, the following discussion is constrained to tangible heritage.

England

Heritage has been getting higher on the public agenda in recent decades and significant changes in thinking with regard to heritage have occurred, especially in reconsidering heritage's role in economic and social life. Consider recent work in England: Comprehensive reports aiming to inform policy and its implementation have recently emerged, illustrating the increasing interest and awareness in the subject of culture. The Power of Place--The Future of the Historic Environment (English Heritage 2000a) set out a new government agenda for the future of cultural heritage in England. Its key message is to identify the historic environment as an important asset contributing to people's quality of life. Recently, efforts have been focused on collecting information and investigating the value of the historic environment to the economy. Products of this work include reports published by English Heritage (the governmental executive agency responsible for heritage): The Heritage Dividend (2000b), as well as the annually updated The State of the Historic Environment (2002). A whole section in the latter is devoted to the economic dimension of heritage, discussing its various contributions to sustainable development, environmental regeneration, tourism development, employment generation, etc.

An analogous endeavour is the review, Measuring the Economic and Social Impact of the Arts (Reeves 2002), published by the Arts Council of England. Other significant contributions to the government-led initiatives are the comprehensive report of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister Select Committee entitled The Role of Historic Buildings in Urban Regeneration (2004) and The Contribution of Culture to Regeneration in the UK: A Review of Evidence (Evans and Shaw 2004). The former views the historic built environment as a core element of regeneration schemes in both urban and rural settings, since it gives a character, quality and spirit to an area, containing the 'deep-seated associations' of the local population. It argues that the built environment can act as a catalyst of the regeneration of places, boost the local economy and create jobs, reinforce local cultures, instill a greater sense of pride and confidence, and, last but not least, contribute to a better use of natural resources. A call is made for a creative, intelligent and sensitive incorporation of the old and the new, balancing both historic and modern. The latter report views culture as a driver, a catalyst or at least a key player in the process of regeneration, providing ample evidence for the impact of culture on social, economic and environmental regeneration in the UK. The government accordingly responded with the consultation paper, Culture at the Heart of Regeneration (DCMS 2004), recognizing the key role of culture as a driving force in regeneration and the need for 'organic development', born from local needs, in opposition to the traditionally dominant top-down development plans and strategies.

In this direction, the newest joint-project is Heritage Works (English Heritage 2006). Said to be the first publication of its kind, it combines the expertise of leading bodies into a new practical guide for developers, owners, practitioners or community groups for creating successful heritage-led regeneration projects. Including links to more than 30 other information sources, it is designed to be a one-stop reference document, a checklist for regeneration in the historic environment. It recognizes built heritage as an asset possessing multiple layers of value (social, cultural, economic, aesthetic, historic, etc.) and the ability to become the focus of regeneration projects. Furthermore, heritage is considered important for assuring sustainability, since its proper re-use and adaptation can significantly reduce the amount of energy consumed and waste generated during demolitions and new developments. The main challenges are seen as finding viable solutions based on partnership, shared vision, flexibility and innovation, and making heritage really work for its multiple stakeholders: owners, occupiers, landscapes, community and the environment at large. One critical consideration for the success of such heritage-centered projects is finding appropriate beneficial economic uses for the assets; uses that could support the initial refurbishment, provide the owner or developer with a reasonable return on their investment and generate enough income for the long-term maintenance of the building.

Canada

In Canada, Simon Brault, the vice-chair of the Canada Council of the Arts, in a recently released article entitled The Arts and Culture as New Engines of Economic and Social Development estimates the contribution of cultural industries in Canada to be $26 billion (Cdn). He points to arts and culture as "incredible vectors of creativity, the principal driver of economic and social growth." He argues for a new cultural approach that could unlock the potential of culture, expanding its reach and allowing imaginative and promising links between education and culture, between health and culture, between citizenship and culture, and between economic development and culture (Brault 2005: 56).

Another report, released in 2006 and titled The Lazarus Effect (Shipley et al. 2006), explores the economics of heritage development in Ontario. It identifies the presence of a healthy and growing business in heritage development, providing evidence that preservation of built heritage can be economically competitive. The calculations, based on a sample of 23 projects, reveal that heritage development projects prove slightly more expensive than new developments but are usually rewarding developers with a higher rate of return on investment. However, lack of awareness of the heritage potential is still widespread on many levels: within communities, municipalities, planning authorities and political circles. The report re-emphasizes that heritage considerations are not attempts to freeze urban change but only to direct it in constructive and rational ways. It advises municipalities to adopt coherent policies that promote building reuse as an integral part of their smart growth strategies and to seek closer cooperation with heritage-minded and creative developers.

Australia

Along similar lines, the Sustainability Strategy of Western Australia reads:

Heritage conservation does not stand in isolation, but is

Inseparably linked with economic development, tourism, urban

'liveability', reduction of waste, and the social cohesion of

communities. It is a major asset in promoting goals in these related

areas, and it helps provide the 'glue' that holds them together.

(Government of Western Australia 2003: 211).

The strategy outlines various social and economic benefits of heritage conservation: better understanding of society and its development; enhanced continuity, familiarity and beauty of the local environment; attracting people and investments; improving urban amenity and livability; tourism development; proportionate growth of jobs; better local expenditure-retention in regional areas; and economic diversification, cost and energy efficiency in building practices.

Japan

In Japan, there are also examples where heritage conservation and urban redevelopment have been successfully integrated, especially in middle and smallsized Japanese towns. Kakiuchi (2000) illustrates the trend, referring to the case of Nagahama, located in Shiga Prefecture. This small town of 50,000 inhabitants was built as early as the 16th century, but like other towns during the 1980s, it stagnated and went into economic decline. In 1988, a public-private co-operation project was initiated to reverse the decline by rehabilitating cultural heritage and encouraging a particular cultural industry. The preservation of a building from the Meiji era (1868-1912), originally constructed as the Kurokabe bank and scheduled for demolition in 1987, triggered an ambitious project. The town council together with private companies set up a new kind of third-sector enterprise--Kurokabe Inc.--as a joint venture with capital of 40 million yen from the city government and 90 million yen from eight regional companies. Its goal was to encourage economic activity in businesses other than pre-existing industries and further promote the image of Nagahama city. Both traditional and modern crafts of glassware were used as the basis of the town's development strategy. Old houses in the vicinity were renovated and became shops, restaurants and galleries. At present, the town's central square comprises around thirty buildings, mostly converted from old structures such as warehouses, merchant houses and so on.

The project turned into a catalyst for further cultural development of the town, attracting more people involved in pre-existing performing arts and events. It also became a base for further public-private cooperation projects, capital investment projects and new developments. What is more, the initiative spun off a centre for regional regeneration in 1998, which now operates independently. This centre functions as a bridge between local government, shops and citizens, providing information and coordinating services for various events. Overall, the project has been recognized as a telling example of the way in which cultural heritage restoration and reuse can be combined with a specific cultural industry to promote urban regeneration and revitalization (Kakiuchi 2000).

The urban regeneration efforts in Nagahama have been underway for over 15 years. By 1998--only a decade from its beginning--annual sales were estimated at almost 900 million yen and visitors were numbered at 1.8 million per year, indicating that a balanced expansion of an important cultural industry was obtained. Local public opinion is quite positive. The public appreciates Kurokabe's upgraded regional image and cultural standards, the creation of new tourist venues, the protection of the historic landscape and the contribution to the local economy. Kurokabe square has turned into a lively area, welcoming more than 2 million visitors annually, half of whom are return visitors. However problems still remain: Depopulation of the city centre continues, and less than 10% of the two million visitors to Kurokabe actually stay overnight in the city (Kakiuchi 2003).

Analogous cases include Kanazawa, a city praised for its endogenous development characterized by a balance of environment, culture and economy, and Otaru, once a business capital and fishing port of the northern Japanese island Hokkaido, which now relies to a large extent on its unique natural landscape, history and rich cultural heritage, combining restoration and adaptive reuse with the development of traditional crafts and industries.

Europe

After significant developments in the international arena took place--where the role of culture in achieving sustainability and development was recognized and reflected in development policies--broad-scale national and regional endeavours became possible in Europe. One such seminal event was the Intergovernmental Conference on Cultural Policies for Development held in Stockholm in 1998, where the 150 represented countries agreed to make cultural policy one of the key components of their endogenous and sustainable development (UNESCO 1998). In this way, a path was created for integrative policies on regional and local levels in both urban and rural settings.

Awakening to the potential of culture in development is not only a modern phenomenon, having its roots well back in the past. In the course of time, in different countries around the world, culture has been increasingly dependent upon governments, but governments have also been increasingly dependent upon culture as an essential element within economic development strategies at many scales (Graham et al. 2000). In urban Europe, incomes from visitors attracted by historic and other cultural interests and values have been an important part of the economy and development of great historic, artistic, educational and cultural centres for centuries. Well-known examples include Florence, Venice, Rome and Naples in Italy; Madrid and Seville in Spain; Paris in France; Cologne, Bonn, Munich, Nuremberg and Dresden in Germany; Vienna and Salzburg in Austria; Amsterdam and The Hague in the Netherlands; and Brussels, Antwerp and Bruges in Belgium. European cities are host to some of the world's most ambitious current development programs led by cultural heritage initiatives that are seen in Athens, London, St. Petersburg, Vilnius, Istanbul, Quito, Sana'a, Tunis, Salvador, Havana, Mexico and elsewhere. A major success in cultural heritage use that led to economic and social regeneration is the historic centre of Prague, unique in Europe for being spared direct war damage.

Furthermore, initiatives of this kind are observed in cities and towns that have never been typical tourist attractions. One such example is the city of Bradford in England, which in the past had been dominated by the textile industry. Over 25 years ago the City Council decided that, particularly with its traditional woollen industry in steep decline, Bradford could not compete with more affluent parts of the country in terms of economic and social development. It started establishing a distinctive market niche and chose culture--both historic and contemporary--as the focus of its modern-day development (Boylan 1995) in an attempt to create a new image for the city to replace the old one of "dark, satanic mills." Most recently, the city became one of the contenders for 2008 European Capital of Culture and gained international attention and acclaim for its bold vision for regenerating the city centre.

Boylan also notes that close parallels to this case can be found in many other European countries, particularly in areas of urban decline following the closure or major down-sizing of traditional urban industries, as, for example, in part of the Ruhr valley in Germany and the coalfield areas of the France-Belgium border. Another example comes from Grainger Town in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, where public sector funding for the purposes of conservation was used as leverage for private sector money, creating 1,900 jobs, 522 new homes and 70 restored old buildings (Pendlebury 2002). Plenty of examples in Eastern Europe similarly illustrate the increasing symbolic significance attributed to cultural heritage--perceived as an expression of identity and a constitutive element of society--in local and national development policies (Weber 1995). During recent turbulence and transitions, these countries--which are re-inventing and re-evaluating their traditional values and identities--have searched for a more stable marker to shape new development and have found it in their more distant heritage. This has allowed them to re-emphasize both the uniqueness and common roots of their heritage in efforts toward reunification within Europe.

Rural revitalization

Likewise, cultural heritage is estimated to play a significant role in rural revitalization. Already in 1987-1988 the Council of Europe had launched the European Campaign for the Rural World. It aimed to involve governments in the development of rural regions, preserving their historical continuity and conserving the quality of their multiple and diverse resources: from natural and environmental heritage to historical and cultural values; from architectural and artistic goods to languages, the human dimension, and working and living conditions. The Campaign focused on the necessity of multipurpose policy for rural areas to be able to reverse their decline. Again, cultural heritage was recognized as a generator for rural revitalization, and rural revitalization was simultaneously seen as a way to safeguard the unique cultural heritage in which Europe traces its roots and identity. In addition, survival of the European rural world was seen as a basic condition for stable and long-term economic development of the whole European community, filling the gap between rural and urban regions (Ashworth and Larkham 1994).

Similar trends are present in other rural regions around the world. For example, The American Farmland Trust was established in 1980 as a nationwide non-profit organization dedicated to farmland protection and sustainable agriculture, through maintaining rural lifestyles and landscapes, and especially the family farm (American Farmland Trust 2006). Another major initiative, launched by Heritage Canada in the 1980s, was a program developed to help rural areas hard hit by a weakened economy and population migration by finding new ways to regenerate communities. The approach--called Heritage Regions (Le Blanc 1991, Heritage Canada 1995)--was based on motivating and helping existing bodies integrate their various initiatives, linking education, conservation and entrepreneurship, and using natural and cultural resources.

In England, English Heritage drafted a Rural White Paper highlighting the strong contribution made by historic buildings, landscapes and monuments to the quality of people's surroundings, their sense of identity and to the health of England's tourism industry. It also highlighted contributions to the balanced and sustainable regeneration of the countryside through the re-use of cultural heritage (DEFRA 2000). Likewise, The Australian Heritage Commission has been very active in cooperating with local communities, landowners, and natural and cultural resource managers. The Commission (2000) has produced an award-winning guide--Protecting Local Heritage Places, a Guide for Communities--to assist communities around Australia to re-assess their heritage in the context of community needs and aspirations, including developing heritage business opportunities. A number of initiatives around Australia in recent years have brought heritage and tourism together in creative community and business ventures (King 1999).

Developing countries

It is noteworthy that heritage-based development initiatives are planned and implemented in developing countries and countries in transition as well. In some cases, these are self-initiated, in others, they are stimulated from outside. An illustrative example is the Shaxi Valley Rehabilitation Project in China. China has 70% of its population living in rural and mountainous areas where poverty and economic underdevelopment are widespread. Shaxi valley, located in the foothills of the Himalaya, is known as one of the last strongholds of the Bai minority and is famous for its historic market square of Shaxi listed as a World Heritage Site.

The recently started Shaxi Rehabilitation and Development project has focused on achieving sustainable endogenous development of the rural community by generating a framework for ecological, economic and social issues to balance development and heritage conservation in the long run. Rural tourism is not considered the sole vehicle for revitalization of the valley, but only one of four basic pillars--which include a well-maintained structural environment, improved infrastructure and economic diversification. A comprehensive plan, including zoning, transportation, sustainable basic infrastructure, tourism development, historic heritage protection, development and investment was produced by regional authorities in cooperation with the Swiss Federal Institute for Environmental Science and Technology (Feiner et al. 2002). The implementation strategy includes six different modules: Marketplace Restoration, Historic Village Preservation, Sustainable Valley Development, Ecological Sanitation, Poverty Alleviation and Dissemination, and is intended to become a guiding model for wide-scale conservation and development throughout the region.

In this vein, equally worth mentioning are the increasing number of initiatives in the sphere of development assistance in developing countries, which focus on the resource value of heritage. The World Bank has been progressively drawing attention to the fact that culture and heritage can contribute directly to core development objectives in several important ways:

* Providing new opportunities for poor communities to grow out of poverty by generating incomes from their own cultural knowledge and production;

* Catalyzing local-level development through the diverse social, cultural, economic, and physical resources that communities have to work with;

* Conserving and generating revenues from existing cultural assets by reviving city centres, conserving socially significant natural assets, and generating sustainable, significant tourism revenues;

* Strengthening social capital--in particular, to provide a basis on which poor, marginalized groups can pursue activities that enhance their self-respect and efficacy and to strengthen respect for diversity and social inclusion so that such groups can have a share in the benefits of economic development; and

* Diversifying strategies of human development and capacity building for knowledge-based dynamic societies--for example, through support for local publishing, library services, and museum services, especially those serving marginalized communities and children (World Bank 1998: 15).

In its strategy paper on cultural heritage and development for the countries of the Middle East and North Africa, The World Bank in cooperation with UNESCO, outlined a new development paradigm--one that places economic development within its social context. On the basis of this new paradigm the future of the region is seen as greatly depending on the region's unique history, culture and the cultivation of a strong identity rooted in this uniqueness but open to the rest of the world (Cernea 2001: 4). To implement this orientation, a pioneering set of investment projects in the cultural heritage sectors has already been developed in Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia and many other areas. Important economic and social impacts are anticipated.

Positive impacts are becoming visible in some places, as in the Rehabilitation and Revitalization Project of the historic city of Fez in Morocco, where the preservation of the historic urban areas proved intricately linked to the problems of achieving sustainability in all societal, cultural, economic and environmental terms. Despite being on UNESCO's World Heritage list, Fez--like most historic centres in the developing world and due to a complex of reasons--has suffered progressive erosion of it