Eliciting cultural heritage values: landscape preferences versus representative images of the city

Ginzarly, Manal; Teller, Jacques

doi:10.1108/JCHMSD-06-2017-0031

Download

Article (Scientific journals)

Eliciting cultural heritage values: landscape preferences versus representative images of the city

Ginzarly, Manal; Teller, Jacques

2018 • In Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 8 (3), p. 257-275

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2268/217938

DOI
10.1108/JCHMSD-06-2017-0031

Files (1)Send to Details Statistics Bibliography Similar publications

Files

Full Text

Eliciting cultural heritage values.pdf

Author preprint (1.95 MB)

Download

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.

Send to

RIS BibTex APA Chicago Permalink X Linkedin

Details

Keywords :

historic urban landscape; heritage conservation; cultural values; landscape preference; image of the city; intangible attributes

Abstract :

[en] Purpose–In 2011, UNESCO recommended the application of a value-based landscape approach to cultural heritage conservation. In this framework, culture in its manifold expressions is considered as an embrace for the social, economic, and environmental pillars of sustainable development. There is a need to unveil the different cultural values generated from the interaction between people and their environment since these values will help cities maintain their unique identity and integrity. Accordingly, the purpose of this paper is to present the results of a survey method intended to assess the range of cultural values attributed by people to the historic urban landscape. Design/methodology/approach–This paper is an experimental inquiry that combines a qualitative and a quantitative approach. It is designed to distinguish the different interpretations and outlooks of people to the historic urban landscape. It integrates landscape preference studies with investigation on representative images of the city and assesses these in relation to activities, feelings, and valued aspects of landscapes. Findings–The main finding is that the most preferred scenes of the city are not the ones that represent best the city. Results exposed two sides of the historic urban landscape and related heritage values. The first is associated with the scenic beauty of the landscape and its aesthetic values, while the second is reflected in ordinary landscapes and everyday practices. Originality/value– This paper provides an insight on the different interpretations and meanings of the historic urban landscape throughout the city. It provides an empirical evidence that ordinary landscapes are of great heritage value as they surpass all aspects of human environmental interaction to contribute to the image that societies make of themselves.

Research Center/Unit :

LEMA, Local Environment Management & Analysis

Disciplines :

Architecture

Author, co-author :

Ginzarly, Manal ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département ArGEnCo > LEMA (Local environment management and analysis)

Teller, Jacques ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département ArGEnCo > Urbanisme et aménagement du territoire

Language :

English

Title :

Eliciting cultural heritage values: landscape preferences versus representative images of the city

Publication date :

2018

Journal title :

Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development

ISSN :

2044-1266

eISSN :

2044-1274

Publisher :

Emerald

Volume :

Issue :

Pages :

257-275

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Name of the research project :

Evaluating the role of Historic Urban Landscapes in urban regeneration projects: an integrated approach based on the use of social media

Funding text :

NON-FRIA

Available on ORBi :

since 09 January 2018

Statistics

Number of views

233 (60 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

581 (24 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

OpenAlex citations

Bibliography

Antrop, M. (2013), “A brief history of landscape research”, in Howard, P., Thompson, I. and Waterton, E. (Eds), The Routledge Companion to Landscape Studies, Routledge, London, pp. 12-22.
Avrami, E., Mason, R. and de la Torre, M. (2000), “Report on research”, in Avrami, E., Mason, R. and de la Torre, M. (Eds), Values and Heritage Conservation: Research Report, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 3-12.
Berman, R.W. (2006), Assessing Urban Design: Historical Ambience on the Waterfront, Lexington Books, Oxford.
Central Administration of Statistics (2014), “Resident population distribution by age group and Qada”, Central Administration of Statistics (CAS), available at: www.moph.gov.lb/ar/DynamicPages/download_file/1496 (accessed 22 May 2017).
Charaf, H. (2016), “Between the face of the future and the back of the past”, Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. iii-x.
CoE (2000), “European landscape convention”, Council of Europe, available at: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/176.htm (accessed 5 May 2017).
CoE (2005), “Council of Europe framework convention on the value of cultural heritage for society”, Council of Europe, available at: https://rm.coe.int/1680083746 (accessed 4 May 2017).
Cosgrove, D. (1985), “Prospect, perspective and the evolution of the landscape idea”, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 45-62.
de la Torre, M. (2013), “Values and heritage conservation”, Heritage & Society, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 155-166.
Demas, M. (2000), “Planning for conservation and management of archaeological sites: a values-based approach”, in Teutonico, J.M. and Palumbo, G. (Eds), Management Planning for Archaeological Sites: An International Workshop Organized by the Getty Conservation Institute and Loyola Marymount University, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 27-54.
Galindo, M.P. and Corraliza Rodríguez, J.A. (2000), “Environmental aesthetics and psychological wellbeing: relationships between preference judgements for urban landscapes and other relevant affective responses”, Psychology in Spain, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 13-27.
Gobster, P.H., Nassauer, J.I., Daniel, T.C. and Fry, G. (2007), “The shared landscape: what does aesthetics have to do with ecology?”, Landscape Ecology, Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 959-972.
Gulick, J. (1967), Tripoli: A Modern Arab City, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Hodder, I. (2000), “Symbolism, meaning and context”, in Thomas, J. (Ed.), Interpretive Archaeology: A Reader, Leicester University Press, London, pp. 86-96.
Holden, J. (2006), “The mismatch of value concerns”, in Pickard, J. (Ed.), Cultural Value and the Crisis of Legitimacy: Why Culture Needs a Democratic Mandate, Demos, London, pp. 31-41.
Hull, R.B. and Stewart, W. (1992), “Validity of photo-based scenic beauty judgments”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 101-114.
ICOMOS Australia (1999), “Burra Charter: the Australia ICOMOS charter for places of cultural significance”, available at: http://australia.icomos.org/wp-content/uploads/BURRA_CHARTER.pdf (accessed 6 May 2017).
ICOMOS Australia (2013), “The Burra Charter for places of cultural significance”, available at: http://portal.iphan.gov.br/uploads/ckfinder/arquivos/The-Burra-Charter-2013-Adopted-31_10_2013.pdf (accessed 6 May 2017).
ICOMOS Xi’an (2005), “Xi’an declaration on the conservation of the setting of heritage structures, sites and area”, available at: www.icomos.org/xian2005/xian-declaration.htm (accessed 6 May 2017).
Kaplan, R. (1985), “The analysis of perception via preference: a strategy for studying how the environment is experienced”, Landscape Planning, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 161-176.
Le Thomas, C. (2009), Pauvreté et conditions socio-économiques à Al-Fayhâ’a: Diagnostic et éléments de stratégie, L’Agence Française de Développement pour la Fédération des Municipalités de Tripoli Al‐Fayhâ’a, Tripoli.
Martin, G.J. and James, P.E. (1981), “The new geography in the United States before World War I”, in Kalkut, J. and Harmon, B. (Eds), All Possible Worlds: A History of Geographical Ideas, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, pp. 321-324.
Mason, R. (2002), “Assessing values in conservation planning: methodological issues and choices”, in de la Torre, M. (Ed.), Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage: Research Report, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 5-30.
Mason, R. and Avrami, E. (2002), “Heritage values and challenges of conservation planning”, in Teutonico, J.M. and Palumbo, G. (Eds), Management Planning for Archaeological Sites: An International Workshop Organized by the Getty Conservation Institute and Layola Marymount University, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 13-26.
Molina, A. (1999), “Les stratégies d’implantations commerciales le long de l’axe Tripoli-El Mina (Nord-Liban), example de la rue Azmi”, Rapport de recherches du DEA, Faculté de Droit, d’Economie et des Sciences Sociales, Université François-Rabelais, Tours.
Munjeri, D. (2004), “Tangible and intangible heritage: from difference to convergence”, Museum International, Vol. 56 Nos 1-2, pp. 12-20.
Nahas, C. (2001), Stakeholder Analysis and Social Assessment for the Proposed Cultural Heritage and Tourism Development Project, CDR and Information International, Beirut, Lebanon.
Neemeh, A. (2014), Index of Urban Deprivation: the Methodology and the Results of the Field Study in Tripoli, Arabic, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA).
OCHA (2014), “Lebanon: Tripoli governorate profile”, available at: http://reliefweb.int/report/lebanon/lebanon-tripoli-governorate-profile-11-august-2014 (accessed 10 May 2017).
Ode, Å., Fry, G., Tveit, M.S., Messager, P. and Miller, D. (2009), “Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preference”, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 90 No. 1, pp. 375-383.
Pereira Roders, A. and Hudson, J. (2011), “Change management and cultural heritage”, in Finch, E. (Ed.), Facilities Change Management, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 175-190.
Rajab, M. (1993), “Le Vieux-Tripoli (Liban), Un Espace Historique En Voie De Mutation. Problématique Et Perspectives D’avenir”, PhD thesis in Geography and Planning, Paris I-Sorbonne, Paris.
Roe, M. and Taylor, K. (2014), “New cultural landscapes – emerging issues, context and themes”, in Roe, M. and Taylor, K. (Eds), New Cultural Landscapes, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, New York, NY, pp. 1-23.
Ruelle, C., Halleux, J.-M. and Teller, J. (2013), “Landscape quality and brownfield regeneration: a community investigation approach inspired by landscape preference studies”, Landscape Research, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 75-99.
Sauer, C. (1925), “The morphology of landscape”, University of California Publications in Geography, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 19-54.
Sevenant, M. and Antrop, M. (2009), “Cognitive attributes and aesthetic preferences in assessment and differentiation of landscapes”, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 90 No. 9, pp. 2889-2899.
Stephenson, J. (2008), “The cultural values model: an integrated approach to values in landscapes”, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 84 No. 2, pp. 127-139.
Tarrafa Silva, A. and Pereira Roders, A. (2012), “Cultural heritage management and heritage (impact) assessments”, Proceedings of the Joint CIB W070, W092 & TG72 International Conference on Facilities Management, Procurement Systems and Public Private Partnership, Cape Town, 23-25 January.
Taylor, K. (2015), “Ken Taylor on the human side of heritage conservation”, available at: www.routledge.com/museumandheritage/posts/612 (accessed 5 May 2017).
Taylor, K., St Clair, A. and Mitchell, N.J. (2015), “Cultural landscapes: twenty-first century conservation opportunities and challenges”, in Taylor, K., St Clair, A. and Mitchell, N.J. (Eds), Conserving Cultural Landscape: Challenges and New Directions, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 1-25.
Thorsby, D. (2002), “Cultural capital and sustainability concepts in the economics of cultural heritage”, in de la Torre, M. (Ed.), Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 101-117.
Tress, B., Tress, G., Décamps, H. and d’Hauteserre, A.M. (2001), “Bridging human and natural sciences in landscape research”, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 57 Nos 3-4, pp. 137-141.
Tweed, C. and Sutherland, M. (2007), “Built cultural heritage and sustainable urban development”, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 83 No. 1, pp. 62-69.
UN (2016), “New urban agenda: resolution adopted by the general assembly seventy-first session”, Agenda Item 20, Quito, available at: http://undocs.org/A/71/L.23 (accessed 4 May 2017).
UNESCO (1984), “Decisions report, tentative lists”, 8th Session of the Committee, UNESCO, Buenos Aires, available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/3896/ (accessed 5 April 2017).
UNESCO (1992), “Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage”, UNESCO World Heritage Centre, available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/ (accessed 7 November 2016).
UNESCO (2003), “Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage”, 27th Session of the World Heritage Committee, available at: http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2003/whc03-27com-24e.pdf (accessed 22 January 2016).
UNESCO (2011), “Recommendation on the historic urban landscape”, available at: www.stellenboschheritage.co.za/wp-content/uploads/UNESCO-Historic-Urban-Landscapes-Recommendation-Short-Nov2011.pdf (accessed 27 November 2016).
UNESCO (2016), “The historic urban landscape guidebook: managing heritage in dynamic and constantly changing urban environments”, available at: www.hulballarat.org.au/resources/HUL%20Guidebook_2016_FINALWEB.pdf (accessed 5 April 2017).
Van der Aa, B.J. (2005), “Preserving the heritage of humanity? Obtaining world heritage status and the impacts of listing”, Thesis in Spatial Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, pp. 5-10.
Van Oers, R. (2007), “Towards new international guidelines for the conservation of historic urban landscapes (HUL)”, City and Time, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 43-51.
Veldpaus, L. and Pereira Roders, A. (2014), “Learning from a legacy: Venice to Valletta”, Change Over Time, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 244-263.