Ποιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

Protection and promotion of cultural heritage - common policy and law

Orientation

 

Situation in Europe (2006)

Before Bulgaria entered the EU, cultural heritage remained for a long time an open book in need to be closed as part of the overall negotiations with the EU. Since HERMES followed closely the fate of the various new Eastern European countries (e.g. Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria) before, during and after entry, or else still faced requirements before entry was made possible e.g. Croatia, these transitions and their impact upon cultural heritage has to be examined in a two-folded way. As the museum of Socialist monuments outside of Budapest in Hungary shows, once former regimes are toppled or a change of system has incurred, then the entire memory base shifts.

Interesting was around that time the information provided by the Council of Europe about 'cultural routes', and in particular what common danger to all heritage the Council has identified, namely the potential 'loss of memory' as the latter constitutes 'intangible heritage'. It is comprised of

            - meanings

            - stories

            - special associations (in the imagination) or myths

Most of the time, these pertain a certain place in which is inherent certain characteristics with meaning for people back then, and at risk to be no longer remembered today as to what took place there, at that location. This is because Europe is a changing cultural landscape whereby the transformation of place can be quite drastic and often no longer traceable as if everything has vanished.

In that sense, it becomes important what kind of cultural heritage is taught in all European schools since connected with teaching methods is the crucial question, whether or not cultural heritage is being used to fortify national identity rather than reveal the universal values of mankind all over the world?

Case study: Bulgaria

- listing of cultural heritage objects (buildings, archaeological sites, natural landscapes) was still an open question in Bulgarai (2006) with no definite law passed as of yet, and also no solution when cultural heritage sites overlap municipal boundaries and therefore would require the cooperation between different municipalities to safeguard cultural heritage.

The problem can be summed up as follows: "Bulgaria used to have quite good experience when the state was taking care about the heritage. During the period of transition (last 15 years) the politics has collapsed."

Case study: Greece

-Cultural heritage had enjoyed for a long time priority at policy level, not withstanding the problem of matching law for protection with different competences existing at various levels (Ministry of Culture, Archaeological services) and often in conflict due to differences in opinion and priorities with local and regional authorities. The budget made available for the protection of cultural heritage has altered considerable in the funding period 2000 - 2006 when compared to what happened in the period 2007 - 2013 when culture had no longer its own national or regional operative programme to channel structural funds towards cultural projects.

 

^ Top

« 4th HERMES Symposium: Heritage and Media in Europe (2006) | Cultural heritage and a common European identity by Hatto Fischer »