Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
E. Avrami (2000)
Values and heritage conservation, 15
Ra Mason (2004)
Fixing Historic Preservation: A Constructive Critique of "Significance" [Research and Debate], 16
H. Stovel (2007)
EFFECTIVE USE OF AUTHENTICITY AND INTEGRITY AS WORLD HERITAGE QUALIIFYING CONDITIONS
Aristotle Ross, J. Ackrill, J. Urmson (1990)
THE NICOMACHEAN ETHICS
Charles Taylor (1992)
The Ethics of Authenticity
M. Carley (1981)
Social Measurement and Social Indicators: Issues of Policy and Theory
C. Wong (2006)
Quantitative Indicators for Urban and Regional Planning: the Interplay of Policy and methods
Jim Granato, R. Inglehart, David Leblang (1996)
The effect of cultural values on economic development: Theory, hypotheses, and some empirical testsAmerican Journal of Political Science, 40
I. Serageldin (2000)
Historic cities and sacred sites : cultural roots for urban futures
Salvador Viñas (2002)
Contemporary theory of conservationStudies in Conservation, 47
Alessandro Ferrara (1998)
Reflective Authenticity: Rethinking the Project of Modernity
A. Orba̧sli (2000)
Tourists in Historic Towns: Urban Conservation and Heritage Management
S. Zancheti, Lúcia Hidaka, Cecilia Ribeiro, Barbara (2009)
JUDGEMENT AND VALIDATION IN THE BURRA CHARTER PROCESS: INTRODUCING FEEDBACK IN ASSESSING THE CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF HERITAGE SITES
S. Pearce (2012)
Objects as meaning; or narrating the past
Pedro Escobar (1999)
18. Indicadores para la evaluación del estado de conservación de ciudades históricas
E. Avrami, Randall Mason, M. Torre (2000)
Values and heritage conservation : research report
S. Zancheti, J. Jokilehto (1997)
Values and Urban Conservation Planning: Some Reflections on Principles and DefinitionsJournal of Architectural Conservation, 3
P. Drury, A. McPherson (2008)
Conservation principles: policies and guidance for the sustainable management of the historic environment
R. Frondizi (1971)
What Is Value: An Introduction to Axiology
J. Jokilehto (2006)
CONSIDERATIONS ON AUTHENTICITY AND INTEGRITY IN WORLD HERITAGE CONTEXT
Brandi Cesare (1963)
Teoria del restauro
D. Lowenthal (1999)
Authenticity: rock of faith or quicksand quagmire?, 14
Miriam Clavir (2002)
Preserving What Is Valued: Museums, Conservation, and First Nations
Miriam Clavir (1994)
Preserving conceptual integrity: ethics and theory in preventive conservationStudies in Conservation, 39
H. Stovel (2001)
The Riga Charter on Authenticity and Historical Reconstruction in Relationship to Cultural Heritage: Riga, Latvia, October 2000Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 4
H. Bossel (1994)
Modeling and simulation
B. Flyvbjerg (2004)
Phronetic planning research: theoretical and methodological reflectionsPlanning Theory & Practice, 5
Tazim *, S. Hill (2004)
Developing a framework for indicators of authenticity: the place and space of cultural and heritage tourismAsia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 9
Sektion Sozialindikatoren, W. Glatzer, J. Robert, J. Kevin (1993)
Carley, Michael, 1981: Social Measurement and Social Indicators. Issues of Policy and Theory. Allen & Unwin, London
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to set out a proposal for an indicator of conservation (Indicator of the State of Conservation – Isc) to assess the state of conservation of urban heritage sites. It was designed as a monitoring instrument to perform two tasks: to evaluate how the conservation of an urban site evolves over time (internal performance analysis); and to compare cities’ conservation performance (comparative performance analysis). Design/methodology/approach – The indicator was developed using the theoretical approach. The paper presents the main concepts used as key performance indicators, that is, significance, integrity and authenticity and how they contribute to meeting the objective of attaining the sustainable conservation of heritage sites. Findings – The Isc indicator is expressed as a function of three key performance indicators (KPIs) of significance, integrity and authenticity that are assessed by surveying the opinion of the main stakeholders involved with the conservation management of sites. The structure of the Isc is fixed and the same for all sites, independent of their geographical location. However, the structure of the KPIs can be adapted to express the social composition of stakeholders and to use the capabilities and resources of the management institutions of the sites. Practical implications – The indicator may be used for monitoring the state of conservation of the World Heritage Urban Sites. Social implications – The indicator allows a non‐biased evaluation of the conservation process of the World Heritage Urban Sites. Originality/value – The paper presents the Indicator of the State of Conservation (Isc), which is the first indicator of this type.
Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development – Emerald Publishing
Published: Oct 28, 2011
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.