Assessing endangerment of archaeological heritage in Latvia: legal framework and socio-economic aspects (original) (raw)
Related papers
DAMAGE TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES: ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND SITUATION IN LATVIA
Damage to Archaeological Sites: Assessment Criteria and Situation in Latvia, 2020
The aim of the article is to reflect the necessity of introducing objective criteria in articulating monetary value of the damage caused to archaeological sites (immovable cultural monuments) as a result of illegal activities. The research focuses on the damage assessment criteria and resulting diminishment of economic value that are used in several countries, as well as examines the key interests and stakeholders in damage assessment process and outcome. It further describes the corresponding situation in Latvia, determines the existing challenges and proposes the basis for improvement in administrative and legal procedures. Methods applied in the research are literature review, legal framework and documentary analysis, statistical analysis and elements of qualitative content analysis. International intercomparisons have been made consulting with foreign experts. The assay is mostly done from legal and socioeconomic point of view. The results of the research could be used for the purposes of amending legal regulation and damage assessment mechanisms.
Development Aspects of Archaeological Sites in Latvia
Archaeologia Lituana, 2021
Archaeological sites as part of cultural heritage satisfy a broad range of interests of different stakeholders. Along with satisfying cultural, social, scientific, etc., interests, their role is no less important in strategic socio-economic development.Unlocking asocio-economic potential of archaeological sites requires clear vision of how to conserve and protect each particular site, how and by what means to maintain and manage the object as well as what to do with it next. It is widely acknowledged that archaeological sites, in particular those having the status of archaeological monuments, play a socially important role, but their maintenance and development often require significant investment. While the laws make owners of archaeological sites, both private and public, solely responsible for conservation, restoration and maintenance of cultural monuments in their property, there should be appropriate mechanisms that mitigate the financial and legal burden and support owners alo...
Assessing Damage to Archaeological Heritage in Criminal and Administrative Proceedings
Heritage, 2019
The economic assessment of damage to movable and immovable objects considered part of archaeological heritage is a matter of increasing interest, both at the legal level and in terms of government management. The primary reason for this interest is the urgent need to agree on a sound and reliable approach to economically quantifying not so much the cultural value of the damage caused as the civil liability for having caused it in those cases in which it was produced by a harmful human act. Assessment methods require a broad consensus to be considered reliable. The lack of consideration given to this matter has only made the absence of such a consensus more acute. This paper offers a mainly Spanish case-based analysis of the most common valuation methods for both movable and immovable archaeological objects. With regard to movable objects, it examines the problems involved in both the exclusive use of an object’s market price as its cultural value and the lack of justification for the chosen valuation system, concluding that current methods are insufficient. This insufficiency, also perceived by the authors of the expert reports used in the analyzed proceedings, has been dealt with arbitrarily. With regard to immovable object, it concludes that the systems currently used to assess the damage to sites are likewise insufficient, despite having been legally acknowledged in some cases. This paper will thus examine the methods used in environmental assessments—whose parallels with archaeological heritage are clear—and proposes that they be adapted for this purpose.
Victims of Heritage Crimes: Aspects of Legal and Socio-Economic Justice
Open Archaeology
The aim of this research is to show how different groups of stakeholders are suffering as a result of heritage crime. Research primarily addresses Latvian situation (with international comparisons) in relation to archaeological sites as the most vulnerable, however, the findings can be applicable to other heritage objects and broader territory as well. Most of these stakeholders are currently limited in, if not denied, access to justice and rights for an effective remedy within the traditional criminal law system. Insufficient level of social awareness of socio-economic benefits and rights stemming from integrity, development, and use of archaeological sites together with existing legal constraints results in poor self-recognition by individuals and groups as victims of heritage crime. While suffered parties abstain from protecting their rights, there is lack of information and proactive action from public authorities including law enforcement. Current research analyses the nature a...
2018
European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Revised), adopted by the Council of Europe in 1992, had a significant influence on the practice of archaeology in Europe. The attitude expressed in the Convention considers prevention as a prerequisite for the preservation of archaeological heritage which can be conducted through the active participation of experts in the early stages of planning procedures. After the ratification in 2004, the Convention became an important factor in the development of archaeological practice as a direct participant in the planning of spatial and infrastructural development in Croatia. Although the changes were significant, they did not include the full range of requirements needed for the successful practice of preventive archaeology. As Croatian archaeology is still not turning in that direction, this paper is focused on consideration of factors which can fulfill the requirements for implementation of efficient preventive archaeology, but also the ones which are currently preventing Croatian archaeology from changing attitude towards sustainable archaeological heritage management.
The Problems of "Black Archaeology" in Estonia
Estonian Journal of Archaeology, 2010
In recent years, several illegal excavations have taken place on the archaeological sites in Estonia. Yet, only a few cases have resulted in legal solutions and these have not unfortunately been positive from the perspective of the protection of archaeological heritage. This article addresses the issues related to the protection of archaeological finds and "black archaeology" in Estonia, aiming at evaluating, on the basis of three case studies of illegal excavations, the major problems of the protection of archaeological heritage with regard to legal regulation, ethical conflicts and economic interests. Although Estonian laws comply with international principles, applicable administrative capacity is the major concern. Next to regulating the use of metal detectors in Estonia, the measures influencing the market, the raising of public awareness and the enhancement of control mechanisms instead of more severe sanctioning could be considered as additional options.
Criminal Law in the Context of Environmental, Natural and Cultural Heritage Crimes
Agora International Journal of Juridical Sciences, 2023
The evolution of law follows the evolution of society and the socioeconomic relations that generate legal relations. Lately, environmental crimes among which we mention: pollution, contamination with dangerous chemical substances of abiotic environmental factors; wildlife poaching; deforestation in violation of the forestry regime, etc., are frequent, entering a spectrum of everyday normality. At the same time, the poaching of cultural heritage is a new element that has come under the focus of criminal investigation bodies, although the trade in artefacts and priceless heritage values has been consumed for a long time. The Romanian authorities and legal specialists easily pass over existing cases affecting the environment and cultural heritage, as these important paradigms for humanity are not active subjects of law. The correction of some characters whose aim is to enrich themselves through the destruction of abiotic environmental factors and the sale of cultural heritage objects, can only be done in an organized and focused way, including through the development of a criminal code of the environment and cultural and natural heritage. The code will have to capture the existence of crimes in relation to the action or inaction of individuals and in relation to the legal ethical principles of the environment and heritage accepted by the international community, which gives more and more importance to this segment, which is imposed in constitutional law of the signatory countries of international conventions. Our material launches some ideas and puts into scientific debate the possibility of creating a unitary legal framework to prevent the destruction of elements of cultural and natural heritage and to protect the environment.
2010 Archaeological looting and economic justice
Phyllis M. Messenger and George S. Smith (eds), Cultural Heritage Management, Policies and Issues in Global Perspective. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 261–77., 2010
The illegal and destructive appropriation and trade of archaeological heritage is a well-documented phenomenon. It causes economic loss and cultural dislocation for the dispossessed "source" communities and countries, balanced by corresponding economic and cultural gains for the acquiring communities and countries. States and international NGOs have developed legal and other normative instruments aimed at controlling the trade, and relevant professional bodies are beginning to explore the ethical dimension. Nevertheless, laws and ethics have fallen short of their purpose, and the problem persists. The design of more appropriate legal and ethical responses is hampered by a poorly developed conceptual framework (with an imprecise terminology to match) founded upon a patchy evidence base of uncertain reliability. There is an urgent need for more empirical research and some innovative theoretical input.