The 4th International Conference on Hazards and Modern Heritage (original) (raw)
Related papers
Heritage Cities and Destruction, “ADH Journal of Architectural Design and History”, 2024
The study proposed was inspired by my conviction that when we discuss architecture and restoration it’s important to reflect on a subject we cannot ignore: the protection and safeguard of so-called ‘endangered’ cultural and architectural heritage. Often we discover that some categories of mobile or immobile ‘riches’ are isolated, derelict or dilapidated due either to local indifference, the economic and social destitution of certain countries, or the powerlessness and possible complacency of international organizations to intervene in specific geographical and cultural areas. These territories are subject of crisis because of social, political and religious reasons, and the heritage is often point of assault and destruction. Communities should work jointly on common goal to support initiative to provide better protection of the cultural heritage. Therefore it is important to involve local authorities in trying to encourage ‘active protection’ and participation. Our objective is the implementation of international cooperation project to enhance the architectural heritage. Complicated situations that still direct the community into destructive scenarios where it is inevitable to think of the reconstruction in response to that need of ‘rimemorativa (remembrance)’, the “Istanza psicologica” theorized by Roberto Pane, which claims to ‘forget’ wounds inflicted in a manner so violent and unexpected. These areas have important conservation problems, all connected with the theme of the ruins; it is one of the conceptual issues of the restoration discipline. The ruin, can only be the subject of essential protection and preservation interventions, far from recoveries for that “unity” and “completeness” image no longer accessible and much less desirable. Any additions and partial additions must meet the criteria of tolerability and eligibility ‘formal’, as well as being limited only to products that need urgent conservation work and suitable protective methods. Finally, the paper concludes with different case studies in order to draw attention to these problems and encourage the drafting of protection and restoration proposals as part of a much desired ‘internationalization’ of the world’s cultural heritage. To sum up, the research aims to involve the international debate on cooperative behaviors in the management and enhancement of the architectural heritage, actions for the formation of a unique historical and cultural identity rather than a cause of conflict, hostility and destruction.
Main Goal of this Conference is to promote environmental and sustainable performance measures for existing heritage buildings without adversely impacting their cultural heritage significance. The reuse of heritage buildings has environmental, social, and economic benefits - the three pillars of sustainable development. Heritage conservation is protecting our history, past, present and future. It is the duty of every one of us. Heritage preservation can be considered as an investment in our community that rewards us today and leaves an invaluable resource for future generations. Cultural heritage professionals recognize the synergistic relationship between conservation and sustainability. However, the role of heritage conservation in achieving sustainability has not been well recognized, nor have heritage needs been well integrated into sustainability initiatives. This failure, in some instances, has led to conflict between heritage conservation efforts and environmental regulation. The UN Istanbul Declaration on Human Settlements and the Habitat Agenda of 1996 explored the ramifications of Rio for how we organize the global built environment. The 2003 ‘Global Plan of Action’ stated 2: ‘Conservation, rehabilitation and culturally sensitive adaptive reuse of urban, rural and architectural heritage are also in accordance with the sustainable use of natural and human made resources. Access to culture and the cultural dimension of development is of the utmost importance and all people should be able to benefit from such access.’ Local residents will be encouraged to participate in heritage conservation and sustainable tourism development through awareness raising and income generating activities. Training and support will be provided on heritage-related small business development and design of marketable products. We have recognized that “globalization” engenders, but also understand the futility of resisting its wide spread effects. But architecture will always be “forming” a Place. Architecture is not only the skin in which we are living, it is always a reflection of a specific philosophy of space, movement, life, presence, and has a strong impact on the human spirit. Traditional architecture –our built heritage is deeply associated with nature; it strongly affects our spiritual condition, provides us with a sort of feeling of peace and relaxes. Misunderstanding of heritage has always led to destruction by fashionable trends or internationalist movements, because they are rejecting or marginalizing its own past. This relation not only to exist but we must add the sense of the relation between memory, territory and the quality of a meaningful life which underlies the associative heritage work in considering the importance of place; we highlight the concepts of community resilience and risk management, key aspects of a response to change, while we define the word “sustainability”, the responsibility of us living people towards the heritage we received and towards the heritage we will leave to our successors, in order to play a pivotal role. All this leads us to a conclusion that there is a need for a new responsible architectural ethical design that will surpass the ego, the pretentious and abstract architectural concepts, but will result in a “dynamic process” through design and buildings life cycle. The British guidance on the Historic Environment, PPG 15, states that: ‘The presence of the physical survivals of our past adds to the quality of our lives, by enhancing the familiar and cherished local scene and sustaining the sense of local distinctiveness which is so important an aspect of the character and appearance of our towns, villages and countryside.’ In addition, many of the large historic buildings are threatened by demolition due to their lack of modern amenities. Thus not only is the context threatened but also the existing historic structures. Many of the estates also had landscapes by well-known designers which are generally not documented and often in poor condition." One important dimension of urban protection process is aimed at keeping (preserving) townscapes that people can relate to, where the signs and meanings are clear and the qualities of ambient are recognizable. Most of the conservationists agree that preserving the entire building with its co-relation between structure, interior and exterior is an appropriate course of action. Every effort needs to adapt to the demands of safety and heritage protection in terms of materials and preservation of the original structure. Any intervention will result in specific changes, causing loss of buildings’ authenticity, which means that one must be very careful when deciding on and implementing an intrusive intervention method. Each case should generate an answer on its own. Different case studies must provide us with knowledge to be used in all future interventions.
Architecture is the art and technique of designing and constructing buildings and cities for creating suitable spaces according to the needs of human life is a historical fact , the product of a society and of a particular time , that is, is the result of a number of factors and conditions that influenced their creation inside a determinate space . Also part of our cultural heritage and, in turn, is trace, testimony and document historical events. It should be clear that cultural heritage means all of cultural assets that a company receives and "...inherited from their ancestors in the obligation to preserve it for transmission to the next generation ", and Architectural Heritage buildings and urban heritage that are representative of a society, its way of life, ideology, economics, technology, productivity, etc., and a particular historical moment, which also have a recognition and cultural significance because of its age, historical significance, by serving a scientific or social function, be linked to our cultural past, by design, well as for their intrinsic values, architectural, functional, spatial, technological and aesthetic, among others. It is noteworthy that often, the architectural heritage has been called immovable property or monument. Architectural works are historical legacies that have left our ancestors and constitute our architectural heritage. We know them, study them, evaluate them and keep them for transmission to future generations. Furthermore, their study helps understanding the society that produced it, to understand why some of our ways of life, to appreciate what we have and to plan our future. The architectural heritage consists of two coexisting aspects: the first relates to the physical or constructive assembly constituent materials and the second, the urban space (with all the values involved: the historical, the aesthetic its antiquity or modernity, style, symbolic, the value to the community in which it is immersed, the architecture, etc. .), it is bounded by such construction resources, and given that the interaction of these spaces is the character that will give meaning to each style or architecture.
Paper proceedings book, 2020
After the first edition of the IFAU 2017 – International Forum on Architecture and Urbanism organised in Tirana, and the second edition of the IFAU 2018 organised in Pescara, Italy, the Polytechnic University of Tirana – Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism (FAU) is organising the third edition: IFAU 2019 – International Forum on Architecture and Urbanism in Tirana, Albania on November 21 - 23, 2019, with the theme “Modernization and Globalization.” IFAU 2019 – 3rd International Forum on Architecture and Urbanism aims to bring together leading academic scientists, researchers, and research scholars to exchange and share their experiences and research results about all aspects of Architecture, Urbanism, Cultural Heritage within Modernisation and Globalisation trends of the XXI century. It also provides the premier interdisciplinary Forum for researchers, practitioners, and educators to present and discuss the most recent innovations, trends, and concerns, practical challenges encountered, and the solutions adopted for the Modernisation and Globalisation in the Cities in Transition. The third edition expands the horizon by introducing a series of overlapping visions spanning the recently institutionalised Adriatic - Ionian Euroregion, now extended to the Balkan and South-East European regions. The Forum will concentrate on Architecture, Urbanism, Cultural Heritage located in contexts and territories that reveal their tendencies to Modernisation and Globalisation. Modernisation and Globalization Architecture, Urbanism and Heritage provide a multi-faceted analysis that is based on the understandings of architects and urban planners working in both the developed and developing countries traditions. Globalisation is a broad concept concerning the diversity of regions, cultures, and actors and the diversity of analytical approaches that can be employed to study it. During the past decade, notions of globalisation have displaced familiar discourses of modernisation. We consider Modernisation and Globalization as a process that naturally links the past, the present and the future - as a bridge between the past and the future. Current events such as the cultural heritage protection crisis illustrate that the discussion should not be confined to specific geographic regions or narrowly defined analysis methods but in a broader and deeper search spectrum. The research presented in this Forum embraces the need to cover various aspects and dimensions of Modernisation and Globalisation in Architecture, Urbanism and Cultural Heritage, to see both its local and its global manifestations. From our perspective, globalisation studies imply research that is not just limited to the most popular spheres of globalisation but also includes the study of global problems such as sustainable development, cultural heritage, etc. In summary, the distinctive character of Modernisation and Globalisation is that it delivers an extensive international and multicultural thematic issue associated with Architecture, Urbanism and Cultural Heritage, including their impact on particular cultural-geographic regions. The Modernisation and Globalisation of territories and cities in transition is the object of this Forum. Through contributions from colleagues and scholars from different international universities, the intention is to explore different interpretations of contexts, to study processes of Modernisation and Globalisation in territories and cities in transition, to define strategies for urban transformation and to confront issues raised by environmental and architectural sustainability, all framed by an up-to-date and contemporary vision of the entire Adriatic-Ionian and Balkan region. Culture and the strength of ideas are viewed as the essential tools for building bridges between knowledge and rediscovering, in a new relationship between Architecture, Urbanism and Cultural Heritage, the key to interpreting the processes transforming territories and cities. The conference program will include the topic of interest that include, but are not limited to: 1. Global/local modernisations; 2. XXth century modernism and the question of cultural heritage; 3. Phenomena of regeneration, revitalisation, recycling, reuse; 4. Modernisation/globalisation of urban planning/design and landscapes; 5. Modern housing; 6. Modern designing and daily life/universal design; 7. The utilisation of future technologies; 8. Sustainability in the era of modernisation/globalisation.
bib.irb.hr
Probably, the greatest and gravest change in the recent past that deserves attention is the destruction of urbanism. Therefore, the crucial question is how to achieve urban context value that would both enhance local character and reinforce a sense of community. The context value refers to preservation of urban spaces i.e. the urban culture of the city that enables continuity which is proven to be desirable characteristic of cities. Nevertheless, urban problems cannot be solved exclusively by architecture (or urban design) as a medium of direct communication but more likely by a social and economic process of which architecture is only a part. Today, we are aware that the idea, the concept, is more important than physical form. The fact is that architecture and urbanism form a part of "living" heritage areas that calls for a highly developed heritage protection and management systems in place. Perhaps concentrating on «material evidences» to be «preserved» is an inappropriate appraoch to a theme chiefly characterized by its volume of output. Instead, might it not be better to consider its residue as «resources» to be «revalued»? Along with the weak legal protection and under representation of the urban tissues of our cities, other threats such as environmental degradation, pollution, infrastructural development continue to affect the state of its conservation. We should move away from revering buildings and cities as vessels of culture towards revaluing them as a social resource, thereby aquiring more, and firmer, handholds on the realities of urban life. So much depends upon how we see, and with to see, our towns and cities. The representation of the contemporary city is no longer determined by a succession of streets and avenues. The critical issue is: How much of the original needs to be retained in order to preserve the integrity of the urban landscape as originally realized?
Changes of meaning and perspectives for the destinies of the built Heritage
2022
It is difficult to say what Restoration is today and what place it occupies among the disciplines of architecture, in the fields of education, research and profession. Equally complex is to delimit the concept of Cultural Heritage, which is increasingly extended and differentiated by scale, types of artefacts, age of formation, etc. Furthermore, it is increasingly subject to risks of various kinds that cast doubts on its survival and transmission to the future. On the other hand, we still live in a "liquid" and ever faster changing contemporaneity, according to Zygmunt Bauman, while for the philosopher Umberto Garimberti it would be almost "cemented" and blocked (Palese 2014). Our relationship with the traces of the many pasts that preceded us cannot ignore this fragile, uncertain, but also open nature of the time we live and those that await us. Marc Augè, in this regard, questioned about the two great ways of relating to the future in different human societies-one that makes the future a consequence of the past: the intrigue, the other that makes it a birth: the inauguration-which find their institutional and cultural expressions (Augé 2012, 14). Even the ways in which each era and each community have lived, recognized, interpreted, preserved, or innovated their own built heritage of cultural interest and value seem to be attributable to the metaphorical figures of "intrigue" and "inauguration". Many protagonists of the life of our cities, landscapes, and territories, on the other hand, now claim the right/duty to act on that heritage, often generating radical conflicts between different ideal and operational visions and perspectives and, at times, irreversible losses of its "relevant parts". The contribution therefore proposes an ideal reflection on these themes and similar perspectives, also with reference to current events and concrete and operational situations at the local scale but not only.
Heritage for Future, 2017
Specific political and social conditions which characterized certain societies of Central and Eastern Europe after the Second World War conditioned the identity of architectural heritage built in the period 1945–1990 in these territories. Since architecture tends to reflect life principles of a certain society at a given moment in its history, the ideology of socialism, which defined not just political and economic sphere, but moreover tended to organize everyday lifestyle on certain ideas, became somewhat reflected in the programme of architecture practiced in these societies. This ‘ideological’ character of architecture prejudices valorization of an architectural work when it is approached as heritage. For that reason, modern and eventually postmodern heritage found in countries such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, a territory which from 1945 until 1990 was a part of the socialist Yugoslavia, becomes judged because of its historical character. Consequently, the jeopardy to cultural character of a certain asset becomes the main criteria when Bosnian and Herzegovinian heritage protection authorities approach the protection of heritage in question. This reflects the data that majority of enlisted assets are those of memorial nature. However, besides disabling proper evaluation of achievements in the domain of architecture at a given period, such an approach furthermore prejudices the public perception of architecture in question. Therefore, the aim of the paper is to point out benefits of expanding the range of types and categories of works with the potential of being classified as heritage, while advocating a creative approach on evaluation, interpretation and eventual revitalization of such works in order to recover their social wholesomeness and cultural prominence.
Interpretations of the Architectural and Cultural Values of Heritage in the Revitalization Process
Architectura & Urbanismus, 2015
The interpretation of architectural work has a particular significance when the work itself is endangered and in the need for a protection and revitalization. Different theoretical premises for interpretation of architectural work are formulated in relation to different perceptions on the cultural character and identity of the society in determined historical and political moment. Therefore, a various cultural positions upon valorization of heritage’s significance transform into different approaches on architectural heritage revitalization. This way the cultural contextualization of architectural heritage ultimately influences the selection of adequate technical methods and constructive techniques for its revitalization which consequently can result in alteration of the character of revitalized heritage, or in the other hand, alteration of heritage’s role within the society. The first question approached in the paper investigates a development of theoretical positions on re-interpretation of heritage’s values and features in the process of its revitalization. Here, case studies on revitalization of several iconic buildings of architectural heritage in the second half of the twentieth century in Sarajevo and Barcelona enable to perceive how the practice on heritage revitalization operates upon three concepts: the conservational, the interventionist and the symbolist (negativist) approach. The acceptance of disparate values of heritage is the main substance that differentiates one approach from another. The conservational approach departs from the premise that heritage’s value and thus its architectural authenticity are inflexible categories, frozen in time, caught in space, and therefore non-subjected to cultural and architectural (re)interpretations, while the symbolic approach by completely relying on intangible values of heritage and endeavoring to merely preserve symbolical significance the property together with overall proficiencies of architecture as technique and profession is in stark contrast to the first approach. In the same time, the interventionist approach strives to give same importance to tangible and intangible values of the heritage, and thus it endorses creative interpretation of legacy in revitalization in order to enable appreciation the cultural perception of heritage as a dynamic category. The insight into different case studies of revitalized architectural heritage provides a tool to question the dynamics of change of property’s architectural and cultural character, its re-layering and restructuring. The investigation presented in this paper follows from a comprehensive master study which investigated the process of revitalization of the several iconic buildings in Sarajevo and Barcelona that due to damage or degradation in the course (second half) of the 20th century were revitalized. because it was evaluated that they are of importance in architectural and cultural terms for Bosnian and Catalan societies. The findings of the research however are summarized and for the purposes of this paper described by three sets of examples: The Sarajevo City Hall and the Barcelona Grand Theatre Liceu, the Barcelona Santa Catarina Market and the Parliament and Council of Ministers building in Sarajevo and the White Sherefudin’s Mosque (Visoko). The investigation of given case studies is presented through analysis of the process of revitalization in terms of interpretation of their architectural features, that is design, material, technological and structural singularities in relation to their social significance. The objective of the analysis is to enable to establish paradigms on semiotic understanding of cultural identity in correlation to architectural heritage. This how the investigation on revitalization of heritage in question reveals to be a possible tool for analysis of cultural, political, economic and social positions within the (two) societies which in the investigated period have passed through process of national and cultural self-redefinition and re-interpretation. In this way the insight in the processes of construction, interpretation, valorization and finally revitalization of selected case studies permits observing the changes of perspectives within Catalan and Bosnian-Herzegovinian cultural identities, since the presented examples in the course of the 20th century have been used as iconological representatives of their national characters. The various interpretations of architectural heritage in those two different cultural backgrounds thus has led to establishment of a general concept on cultural perception and subservience of architectural heritage in accordance with needs of ideological (national, cultural, ethnic) agendas. From this arises a second problem approached in the paper: In what way and how a different social viewpoints, movements and trends of internal cultural self-perception within the society are perceivable on revitalized material artifacts? Approaching this question could facilitate establishing common ground for the improvement of processes of heritage revitalization. Finally, the aim of the investigation was to anticipate the dangers of partial analysis of artistic features of architectural work and one-sided understanding of heritage’s cultural properties, and thus confirm the need for the complex and interdisciplinary approach to build heritage. At the moment when contemporary society balances between the urge to pursue further technological progress and the need for recovery of primeval spiritual connection with the world, the profession on protection and revitalization of architectural heritage faces the challenge to preserve the image of the world while allowing it to continue to change. Therefore, this paper advocates the comprehensive interpretation of a constructed imaginary as the only possible way for preservation of creative potential contained in architectural legacy of past generations.
Intangible Cultural Heritage in architecture and urban planning
Pravovedenie, 2020
This article reflects several observations of our cities during the COVID-19 pandemic — particularly the initial lockdown that most parts of the world experienced since March 2020. One of the impacts of COVID-19 has been the forced closeness of people with their homes wherever they were. In the present age, perhaps, many of us have rarely experienced our own homes or shelters or architecture so closely. The pandemic may have brought us an extended moment to experience and reflect on architecture and urban planning on a very personal scale — from a room, to an apartment or a house, a neighbourhood, and then perhaps a city on a limited scale. This is an interesting moment in history to reflect on architecture and space, and how they are designed and planned. COVID-19 has exposed the limitations of many of our thoughts and practices. Apart from the author’s own self-reflections at “home”, observations include the context of South Asian cities where the globally accepted measure of lock...