Participatory Governance of Culture and Cultural Heritage: Policy, Legal, Economic Insights From Italy

Abstract

The topic of participatory governance of cultural heritage (hereinafter PGCH) is increasingly at the core of the debate on the policy approach to cultural heritage in Europe. This paper aims at offering an innovative approach to this topic by bringing a multi-actor, commons-based governance model, whereby it is often stated that PGCH may well be implemented by entrusting local communities with the restoration and valorization of cultural heritage. We argue that this model is best realized through a public-private-community partnership (PPCP) employing a diversity of legal tools. The article sketches out the legal background underpinning PGCH, provides an overview of its conceptualization in the academic debate and looks at the main policy initiatives adopted at the European and Italian domestic level. The article goes on focusing on commons-oriented case-studies of PGCH, adopting a qualitative methodology: the experimental process of the Co-Roma social partnership (Rome); the Faro Heritage Community Friends of Molo San Vincenzo (Naples); the Royal Estate of Carditello (San Tammaro); the Catacombs in Rione Sanità (Naples). Finally, the article raises some reflections and comments on the peculiarity of the PPCP model and its criticalities. The main argument we advance is that a commons-inspired, multi-actor governance model is a way to implement the vision entrenched by the European Union and the Council of Europe for supporting PGCH. This approach to PGCH may contribute to develop a sustainable and inclusive governance model, adaptive to the local needs.

Institutional Collective Actions for Culture and Heritage-Led Urban Regeneration: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis

“…This attitude entails recognizing various types of local knowledge and developing social networks as a source of collaboration through which new initiatives can be launched legitimately [71,72]. In developing collaborative initiatives, multi-actor experiments are gaining attention, and their crucial role is being recognized [73,74]. Hence, multi-actor initiatives become a means of collectively addressing complex issues by mobilizing and integrating perspectives, efforts, and resources from various typologies of stakeholders [73,75,76].…”

Decoding Collective Action Dilemmas in Historical Precincts of Delhi

“…The council defines cultural heritage as a "shared resource and as a common good"(Article 1). Faro convention's emphasis on participatory governance lies at the center of a commons-based approach to heritage resources [17].…”

“…The appeal of treating heritage goods as commons lies in that it seems to offer a community-based collaborative solution to heritage management. The commons understanding of heritage resources emphasizes on the role of cooperative tools in building an environment for fair and inclusive governance [17]. Such an inclusive system is more likely to respond to local needs and provide benefits to the local community members (who are often considered the guardians of the heritage).…”

“…Such an inclusive system is more likely to respond to local needs and provide benefits to the local community members (who are often considered the guardians of the heritage). Further, as laione et al [17] argue a commons understanding of heritage management emphasizes the need for the development of a community around heritage regardless of the different legal statuses of the concerned resources. The commons solutions then present a sustainable solution for "controlling, protecting, and developing tangible and intangible heritage that simultaneously will be both ethical and practically effective" [8], p. 171.…”

Partnerships in Heritage Governance and Management: Review Study of Public–Civil, Public–Private and Public–Private–Community Partnerships

“…Aside from the heritage-focused work and studies that explore cultural heritage from the angle of conservation, preservation and safeguarding, the governance and management of cultural heritage have permeated multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary realms, covering issues and topics ranging from human and cultural rights and social and economic development to climate change mitigation and sustainability. This has been reflected and detected in a variety of approaches and models of cultural heritage governance and management that have been evolving in line with the increasing demands for the deregulation and democratisation of cultural heritage, articulated through governance and management schemes fostering the devolution of power and the sharing or transfer of authority between different actors [1][2][3][4]. There are several rationales why such approaches have been developing.…”