Keywords

1 Introduction

Heritage interpretation gives distinct meaning to presented items, without resorting to scientific explanations. This concept was launched in “Interpreting Our Heritage” study made by journalist Freeman Tilden in 1957, for North American promoters of national parks. Tilden has selected some principles, which since then underpin the achievement of positive impact on heritage visitors, promoting a marketing centered on visitors’ expectations and personality (AHI 2012).

In turn, sustainable development requires both a holistic approach and underlying elements of growth, which is why it finds in heritage interpretation support for achieving common objectives. Also, both put an emphasis on the role of education in developing the society ability to understand responsibility for the future.

Thus, once identified a heritage site or object—given obviously its economic, human, natural, and cultural features, it will be accompanied by a management and communication support to enable recognition of its popularity to stakeholders (Interpret Europe 2012). Heritage Interpretation becomes both a vital feature of how people share their experiences of places they visit as well as an artistic act that allows culture consumers to feel connected, inspired, and responsible equally for their past and future experiences. Therefore, the interpretation plan of a heritage site should contain among its central objectives caring for the natural and cultural environment, consistent with the need for social, financial, and environmental sustainability (ICOMOS 2008).

2 The Convergence of Conceptual Coordinates of Heritage Interpretation and Sustainable Development

Heritage Interpretation characteristics converge with those of sustainable development as both are complex activities with methodologies that cover specific needs, most often revealed after laborious analysis on a site, area or whole regions. At the same time, revealing new meanings and knowledge of the consequences of human activities, in accordance with sustainable development, it creates coherent and plausible events scenarios (e.g., impacts of climate change), which often cannot be perceived in their full extent. Thus, sustainable development researcher’s mission meets the one of heritage interpreters—both requiring interdisciplinary knowledge using a variety of techniques in order to analyze consequences on many levels and to send effective messages about the need to preserve environmental conditions, i.e., natural or cultural history (Trans Interpret 2013).

An important step in this direction was made by the World Heritage Committee, which has adopted in 2004, the “Budapest Declaration on World Heritage” by which all interested parties are invited to support World Heritage conservation key objectives identified as “the 4 C’s.” Starting from here was realized the diagram of the “7 C’s” so that heritage interpreters could better follow the feedback (Massung 2011). It is important that at the end of this cycle of interpretation does not result a new marketing cliché, but a high content of relevant meanings devoid of ostentation and deeply empathic. Despite the different methods used to achieve Heritage Interpretation, stages and its characteristic elements must ensure obtaining feedback which provides assurance that the information provided to consumers of culture enters a dynamic circuit (Fig. 12.1).

Fig. 12.1
figure 1

Source Massung (2011)

Seven C’s of heritage interpretation.

Full size image

However, natural heritage tends to create a permanent picture of the present cultural heritage through its value and potential as renewable resource tends to be the key to include Heritage Interpretation between devices that sustainable development owns in order to ensure the evolution of society. Therefore, the knowledge and promotion of heritage particularly cultural heritage through an integrated interpretation of sustainable development objectives are a crucial mechanism to facilitate peaceful coexistence, acceptance of multiculturalism, and respect for the values and beliefs widely different (CoE 2005). This can be done based on many points of convergence between Heritage Interpretation and sustainable development, enhancing awareness about the need to create better living conditions for all humanity.

Heritage Interpretation tried to integrate the economic dimension aimed at achieving welfare—after the model of sustainable development—both in its quantitative and qualitative aspects (Tweed and Sutherland 2007). At the same time, the social dimension of sustainable development is supported by the Heritage Interpretation in its ability to combine the imperative of increasing quality of life with increased growth of social justice so that all groups have equal access to resources, education, and livelihood.

3 Evolution of Heritage Interpretation to Patrimonialization—Heritage Hermeneutics

While presenting heritage remains a simple activity of information to the general public, heritage interpretation provided a structured concept, including its presentation, covering all activities that can be implemented to educate the public and make well worth the subject or heritage site in question. Tilden considered, referring to the US National Park Service, that heritage interpretation is a non-formal educational activity that reveals meanings and relationships, using original objects, direct experience, and illustration tools rather than simply communicate information and facts related to a particular destination (Interpret Europe 2013).

Thus, interpretation work may satisfy the requirements of the three pillars of establishing universal value of heritage: heritage inclusion, compliance of integrity, and protection and proper management (UNESCO 2012). Although the principles of Tilden remain widely available, other authors have sought to broaden his definition. Following this research, the term “Heritage Interpretation” describes how to use specific disciplines and communication in order to differentiate from other meanings in which appears the word “interpretation.” This is due mainly to the fact that the “heritage” concept includes both natural and cultural world, which implies a too large expansion of meaning to explain issues and topics that are not usually considered strictly part of heritage issues although they have become extremely important, such as climate change and sustainable development (Uzzell 2000).

In this context, the notion of “interpretation” has become increasingly vague and permissive but also inclusive between information, pedagogy, planning, implementation of the heritage, culture, and tourism economy. Thus without denying the possible achievements by launching the concept of Tilden, the new theory of heritage finds applications in several areas of relationship management with various audiences. It aims to facilitate the understanding of need to integrate heritage elements into a unified framework that can highlight diversity of relationships among social actors interested in establishing collective strategies of heritage objects (Massung 2013). By focusing on the entire process related to heritage and not only public appearance of packaging, patrimonialization considers all elements related to the role and functionality of all categories of heritage. Thus became possible decantation of heritage components, from expert’s decision referring to appropriate ranking to survey and collective perception, through putting into practice and feedback (Oers and Haraguchi 2003).

Patrimonialization refers to the dynamic establishment of heritage, managing to confer the status of every constituent representation, using management which gives it a central role in society. Thus, heritage exits the constraints of its dual significance—economy and social sciences—to join the general coordinates of sustainable development. If in the first sense, resulting in the concept of legal property, heritage related to individual assets owned by a person, and in the second, got a collective dimension, represented by the common heritage of which the holder is not the owner, but only manager (Landel and Senil 2008), by patrimonialization, heritage is perceived as a vector for sustainable development.

On the other hand, patrimonialization has the credit of taking advantage of new interpretation, learning, and participation strategy, taking into account the role of each stakeholder and establishing best ways in which they collaborate to highlight the importance of heritage. Thus, existing resources shall be used more efficient and shall be covered potential gaps that heritage interpretation would leave on its integration as a whole. However, patrimonialization helps maximize funding opportunities, given that sources of funding for heritage can now be attracted by other stakeholders than those enshrined including individual. Patrimonialization strategy provides an integrated approach to heritage interpretation and of all resources necessary for its exploitation, in order to involve as many partners in sustainable and open capitalization to universality of contexts in which it is placed (Carver 2011).

From this broad, conceptual development of idea of heritage has emerged the need for hermeneutics, conceived as an exegesis able to critically analyze various aspects of heritage, including the process of forming heritage. This leads to understanding and integration of heritage in general scientific discourse about human projection in fundamental relations (work, socializing, connecting with the environment), without particular emphasis on how to set up technical heritage body itself (Uzzell 2000).

Researchers who study heritage in order to use its assets as part of sustainable development share the common mission to discover importance and beauty of the natural environment, such that finding a noninvasive place for humankind, to make him cherish and preserve both nature and culture. Even if this philosophy—least possible interventionist—is accepted unanimously, this manifests itself differently from one country and region to another for reasons related to socio cultural or climatic context (Espace Naturel Régional 1999).

In the case of world heritage, wealth consists in diversity. Patrimonialization remains with the task of reconciling local trends to interpret heritage (focusing on landscape and local customs) with those regional, which considers environment as part of an assembly (Landel and Senil 2008).

4 International Networks Role for Heritage Interpretation

Once developed heritage interpreter profession by the US National Park Service, based on the approach of Tilden, programs that encourage visitors to respect environment sites acquired new meanings. Taking over this pattern, Britain and Canada began to introduce interpretation in conservation and recovery domain, primarily in natural environments and then into cities and their historical sites. Naturally, associations have emerged for interpreting heritage, both in Spain, Italy, and Scandinavia, which benefited from inspired mentors who have done heritage interpretation become a recognized technique and representative for management, especially of protected areas and sites (UNESCO 2012).

In 1999, at the Conference of heritage interpreters in Bournemouth, England, it was decided to form a European network of interpreters, which became official in 2010, in Slovenia, the European Association for Heritage Interpretation (Interpret Europe 2013). Recognizing that cultural dissemination and exploitation of cultural results requires new ways of production and consumption, all international networks of heritage interpretation aim exploiting its potential to stimulate creation of new jobs, economic growth and encourage sustainable economic development of all economic sectors involved. These issues concern not only promotion of modern cultural policy and sustainable culture economy, but also creation of national wealth through valorization of each of its coordinates social, economic, and political (AHI 2012). Also, these networks encourage investment in cultural resources and entrepreneurship to improve the quality of life in a given area by attracting new economic, financial, and human resources, improving social and territorial cohesion, and definition of new types of professions resulting from this collaboration.

Recognizing the capacity of cultural heritage concepts, intangible heritage, conservation, preservation, promotion, and interpretation thereof and importance of local identity affirmation and protecting heritage from joint initiative of European Commission and Council of Europe have been launched since 1999, European Heritage Days. Thus, the 50 signatory countries of European Cultural Convention have the opportunity to exchange experiences by opening sites and historic buildings that are normally closed to the public. This is not only a civic responsibility but also an opportunity to create benefits to local communities through tourism development and revitalization of crafts and traditions (EC, CoE 2013).

Such contributions to heritage valorization as a device of sustainable development made to establish itself in Strasbourg in December 2011 during the meeting of coordinators and national experts in heritage interpretation, the concept of European dimension of events related to heritage. It is characterized not only by working on multiple levels (local, regional, national, international, and transnational), but also by creating micro-networks to use technology in order to achieve information coverage on cultural diversity and small communities according to the text adopted by Council of Europe, European Commission, and UNESCO (Interpret Europe 2013).

On these considerations, in 1972 was created the World Heritage Fund which is aimed at helping Convention Parties States in identifying, preserving, and promoting World Heritage sites. Mandatory contributions are 1% of UNESCO annual funds, supplemented by voluntary contributions and other income from donations and sale of publications. The estimated four million dollars collected annually represents an insufficient amount to meet the growing needs for international assistance on heritage (UNESCO 2007). Therefore, these resources are supplemented by loans from World Bank who contributed even to creation of sustainable development plans of several historical cities. Among them stands city of Berat in Albania which was given the chance to human and financial resources and ensuring sustainable beyond the framework of a project (UNESCO 2012).

Concrete results of cooperation within interpretation networks enabled heritage assets to be considered today a key element of building peace and sustainable development and, at the same time, a source of identity and dignity for local communities and a source of knowledge that has the ability to share identity values. In addition, these networks have improved heritage interpretation capabilities, particularly through support for specific initiatives in three directions, represented by practitioners, institutions, and networks. This approach, outlined in Table 12.1, allows World Heritage to be addressed by stakeholders in various sectors, for example, from non-governmental organizations to directly concerned owner groups.

Table 12.1 Different categories of audiences and learning areas covered by networks of heritage interpretation
Full size table

The table highlights three target audiences for the purposes of determining learning needs of capacity building for heritage capitalization. Networks also have the role of extending training process to all those concerned—vital for broadening sustainable and efficient management responsibility of heritage. Thus, by increasing knowledge about heritage, development of responsible behavior of heritage management and conservation can be achieved improvement of institutional structures and processes at policy-maker’s level.

5 Heritage Contribution to Economic Recovery Through Transnational Cooperation Projects

Needs of sustainable development highlighted by patrimonialization have made an increasing number of different actors to work together, thus helping to protect heritage and to include it among business opportunities taken into account by entrepreneurs who want to offer specific heritage sites goods and services.

Figure 12.2 shows the flow diagram of types of benefits arising from exploitation of protected area. These advantages can be divided into use and nonuse benefits which, in turn, can be subdivided into direct and indirect benefits and, respectively, inherited or present benefits. Various goods and services of protected areas fall within one or more of these categories.

Fig. 12.2
figure 2

Source Patry (2008)

Heritage protection beneficiaries.

Full size image

Clearly, heritage has potential to become a “business” as far as the protected site is managed so that it can provide products and services that “sell,” for example, the uniqueness and beauty of a habitat or its importance. An essential difference between world heritage management and usual business is the fact that the first must not undermine, but highlight and enhance the values for which the site was notified (Patry 2008). It is important for entrepreneurs to be aware of the challenges of management and the need to meet sustainability requirements before proceeding to analyze economic benefits (UNESCO 2012).

In terms of heritage, transnational cooperation promotes projects that engage countries in a specific region, focusing in particular on issues of sustainable development of cities, innovation, and environment. On these directions also goes Transnational Southeast Cooperation Programme which aims to define a common strategy of marketing heritage as means of transition towards European integration (Southeast Europe 2013). Regardless of level of integration of participating countries, regional cooperation in Southeast Europe becomes essential for stability, prosperity, and security in this area.

As well as European citizenship, heritage and common cultural values have resources to lead to overcoming the current crisis and stimulate further revision of EU policies so that they provide a solid basis for development of cultural heritage that future generations will consider as being truly European (EC 2013).

A good example to illustrate that transnational cooperation heritage can be helped to gain a sustainable European dimension, was My European City Project, which has provided partners (cities: Nantes, Caen, Le Mans, Laval, in France; Padova in Italy; Szczecin in Poland; and Sibiu in Romania) experience of common European interpretation of heritage and possibility of implementing an inclusive European route (My European City 2011).

6 Challenges for Heritage as a Mechanism of Sustainable Development—National Specificities

One of the most significant aspects of which—in the same way as sustainable development—heritage must face is its vulnerability to natural disasters and major climate change phenomena. Even if it is impossible at all times to prevent damage to sites, it is imperative to conduct research and take steps to avoid at least some favoring circumstances. For this, it is necessary to use a catalyst of climate change impacts on heritage awareness after discussions which propose to support climate change mitigation policies and to disseminate best practices from vulnerabilities evaluation projects, for adopting adaptation and mitigation strategies under the specific nature of each heritage (UNESCO 2007).

In the field of climate change, there is a clear opportunity for all sectors closely linked to achieving sustainability agenda, among which, also, falls heritage. Many of the initiatives promoted or practiced of heritage conservation institutions stated sustainability strategies and compliance with requirements imposed by respect for the environment and climate change constraints. Thus, the concept of low-carbon activities can influence the field of heritage under three possible scenarios: implementation of existing technologies, use of advanced technologies on goods and services, or acceptance of creative economy in terms of introducing new services to reduce demand and consumption of products that are not within rules (Brinkley et al. 2010).

Therefore, UNESCO World Heritage List is expanding very slowly, given the fact that inclusion of sites considered as having outstanding universal value must cope with increased demands. Currently, this list includes 981 properties from 160 countries, including 759 cultural, 193 natural, and 29 mixed sites. Romania appears with the following seven sites: Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Village settlements with fortified churches in Transylvania, Horezu monastery, painted churches of Northern Moldavia, Dacicum Fortress of Orăştie, Sighisoara town center, and wooden churches of Maramures.

Another issue that threatens the role of heritage in sustainable development is the lack of economic development prospects and the uncertain nature of property, which makes recording a heritage asset of outstanding universal value to come up against bureaucratic aspects which makes even more difficult a process already complex and long lasting (UNESCO 2012).

In the absence of such business plans, we are faced with the phenomenon of non-patrimonialization which unfortunately is manifested in Romania as irresponsible negligence. The effects of this lack of concern for community values, no matter of what explanations are offered, affects all social plans because of missing an excellent opportunity for socioeconomic and cultural development based on European synchronicity and encourage participation that leads to restoration of solidarity. Through such an approach could be resolved both spiritual heritage issues, and those related to employment and young people’s interest to promote specific retrieved identity.

However, despite the fact that Romania has a highly valuable intangible cultural heritage, stored in popular practice, traditional artistic expressions and cultural associated spaces, lack of professionalism and even interest in its capitalization led to the proliferation of kitsch, hijacking, and improvisations. This is also the case for Bucharest’s historic buildings that have not been properly capitalized until now. Instead, attention was given to fashionable activities of image and transient recognition of human performances for entry into the Guinness Book of Records. Therefore, communities, groups, and, in some cases, individuals are invited to get involved in recognition and proper management of their cultural heritage (Lira and Amoêda 2009).

Romania also faces the problem of unaltered transmission of intangible cultural heritage from generation to generation, under conditions of changing social structure and depopulation of villages, which makes its recognition no longer belong to community groups, but to some managers who have no direct interest in reviving its natural heritage and restoration interactions with nature and history. Moreover, if we consider only the example of organized hunting in Balc, Bihor County, we understand the danger of diversion of national heritage capitalization for private purposes only, which creates a dangerous precedent.

Another challenge that patrimonialization must face in Romania is the lack of funds raised so that, by using cutting-edge technology, visitors to national heritage to be able to overcome the position of passive recipients of information. On the other hand, it is true that being a delicate and difficult exercise, interpretation of a site and its patrimonialization reclaim a responsibility towards the heritage resource to be promoted, which often inhibits the stakeholders so much that is not anyone willing to take any initiative in this regard.

7 Conclusion

Considered an alternative device for sustainable development, patrimonialization can contribute to overall economic regeneration, especially in Southeast Europe, where the interpretation of heritage was not encouraged. This certainty resulted from the cultural heritage feature of putting cultural values in the service of sustainable development and creating links and multilateral interactions between cultures and different practices. If socioeconomic potential of heritage will be capitalized properly by the action of all stakeholders, the corollary of environmental, social, historical, aesthetic, spiritual, and economic values, promoted by sustainable development, will be found in all actions for promoting heritage.

Using as working method examination of recent bibliographic sources, the paper highlighted the relationship in three steps, between heritage and sustainable development. In the first stage, based on the common goals of sustainable development and heritage interpretation, we found that interpretation can be considered as part of sustainable development. From the second step, results that patrimonialization provided to sustainable development opportunity to become part of the heritage. And the third step, thanks to the integrated approach of heritage system that patrimonialization suggests, which allows implementation of all activities related to heritage in the service of sustainable development.

We also concluded that, despite the fact that identification heritage items were already resolved by instrumentalization of interpretation process, its placement in the field of sustainable development could be done only by interdisciplinary targeting of correlation elements. This opens the possibility for future research to examine the degree to which patrimonialization policies, as well as heritage interpretation strategies, integrates objective of making local heritage a universal essential vector, not only to improve access to natural and cultural heritage of humanity and support the management of these sites, but also a settlement factor of the local economic mechanism on sustainable development coordinates.

Although heritage can be analyzed and valued from several perspectives, the economic benefits arising from transnational cooperation projects on heritage is a challenge much too important to be left prey to contradictions and interests within a social system that tolerates non-patrimonialization and that threatens necessity of enrolling national and universal heritage on the sustainable development coordinates.