No abstract

The treatment of movable and immovable heritage is markedly different. While movable objects are highly valued and carefully protected, their immovable equivalents are often under a serious cloud of threat. This peril is the result of global mismanagement, failure of governments to provide adequate funds for their maintenance, and lack of recognition by the public that these disappearing resources are assets of major value. Conservators of immovables face special ethical and practical concerns in their efforts to preserve cultural heritage within its context - depicted in this article as case histories from the World Monuments Watch list of endangered sites. The legal and procedural mechanisms that support this task are ineffectual in the face of rapid change. The field needs new methodologies that harness public appreciation of a site's 'sense of place' to guarantee its future.

No abstract

Art thefts-including kidnapping of masterpieces from museums, hijacking of transports, and robberies of churches-were daily events in the press. The theft of cultural property had become a quasipolitical issue. Thefts were carried out in the name of political refugees and movements. References to looting often surfaced in debates and exchanges between third-world countries and the developed world. The former were seen to be the victims of this phenomenon, the latter as passive beneficiaries whose attitude was seen as fostering continuation of the process.But professionals in the developed countries were also troubled by this new problem and were having their own experiences with it.They were struggling to create standards for acquisitions of archaeological material as well as for collections management and security-perhaps the two most neglected areas of museum administrative practice.While there was considerable room for improvement in museum professionals' attitudes, in institutional policy, and in actual practice, it was also clear that the problems created by theft and archaeological pillage were broader than the museum profession alone could ad- 113

The inclusion of heritage conservation in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals for 2030, target 11.4, stimulated a broad dialogue among heritage conservation practitioners intent on framing a meaningful role for heritage assets in historic built environments as contributors to sustainable development. Heritage-led regeneration positively impacts many aspects of society, community life, and the public realm, and can also play an important role in reaching zero-carbon environmental conservation goals by slowing the extraction of natural resources for construction, reducing the quantity of building materials sent to landfills, and using traditional technologies and knowledge to reduce operational energy use. Heritage regeneration can also be a strong contributor to economic growth, as restored and reused properties create wealth, serve as community social magnets, and attract prestige and visitors. However, there is little progress towards positioning heritage conservation as a focal point for multilateral public-private co-financing projects and partnerships. In 2021, the Cultural Heritage Finance Alliance (CHiFA) published research about successful models of urban heritage regeneration that engage public-private cooperation. CHiFA now presents a process, developed as part of a study commissioned by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), for advancing projects that maximize investment in heritage-led urban regeneration, matching financing strategies with local opportunities, legal frameworks, enabling tools, and the requirements of prospective investors. The result is a marketplace and ecosystem that support civic and community interests through long-term, multi-party collaboration using blended capital investment in heritage as a sustainable development strategy.