Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 141

Abonnez-vous à DeepL Pro pour éditer ce document.

Visitez www.DeepL.com/Pro pour en savoir plus.

Évaluation des valeurs du patrimoine culturel


Rapport de recherche
Le Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles
Évaluation des valeurs du patrimoine culturel

Rapport de recherche

Edité par Marta de la Torre

Le Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles


Coordinateur du projet : Marta de la Torre
Rédacteur du rapport : Marta de la Torre
Coordinateur de la conception/production : Joe Molloy
Rédacteur en chef : Sylvia Tidwell

Copyright © Le J. Paul Getty Trust

Le Getty Conservation Institute


Getty Center Drive, Suite
Los Angeles, CA -
Téléphone -
Fax : -
Envoyez un courriel à gci@getty.edu
http://www.getty.edu/gci

Le Getty Conservation Institute travaille au niveau international pour faire progresser la conservation et
améliorer et encourager la préservation et la compréhension des arts visuels dans tous les
de leurs dimensions - objets, collections, architecture et sites. L'Institut sert
la communauté de la conservation par la recherche scientifique ; l'éducation et la formation ; le terrain
des projets ; et la diffusion des résultats de ses travaux et de ceux d'autres
sur le terrain. Dans tous ses efforts, l'Institut s'engage à traiter les questions de
et la promotion des normes les plus élevées possibles en matière de pratiques de conservation.

L'Institut est un programme du J. Paul Getty Trust, un organisme culturel et


institution philanthropique consacrée aux arts visuels et aux sciences humaines qui comprend
un musée d'art ainsi que des programmes d'éducation, de bourses et de conservation.
Contenu

Introduction
Marta de la Torre et Randall Mason

Essais

Évaluation des valeurs dans la planification de la conservation


Questions et choix méthodologiques
Randall Mason

Méthodes anthropologiques et ethnographiques


pour l'évaluation des valeurs culturelles dans
Conservation du patrimoine
Setha M. Low

Évaluation économique du patrimoine culturel :


Données et perspectives
Susana Mourato et Massimiliano Mazzanti

Engourdissement et sensibilité dans l'élicitation


des valeurs environnementales
Theresa Satterfield

Concepts de capital culturel et de durabilité


dans l'économie du patrimoine culturel
David Throsby

Participants à la réunion
Remerciements

T aux contributions de nombreux

qui nous ont aidés à définir des orientations et à identifier les


questions critiques.

Le travail de Randall Mason et Erica Avrami au départ

de cette recherche a préparé le terrain pour les discussions


d'un groupe

de spécialistes qui se sont rencontrés au Getty


Conservation Institute

en mars . Les noms des personnes participant à cette

sont inclus à la fin de ce rapport. Nous

aiment à reconnaître leur précieuse contribution et leur


con-

Le soutien à ce projet se poursuit.


Introduction
Par Marta de la Torre et Randall Mason
d'autres domaines et de représentants d'intérêts
particuliers arrivent dans le domaine du patrimoine avec
leurs propres critères et opinions - leurs propres "valeurs"
- qui souvent differ de la nôtre en tant que spécialistes du
patrimoine.
T sur la recherche sur les valeurs
et
l'économie du patrimoine culturel qui a été lancée à la
Institut de conservation Getty à . 1 Les premiers
résultats
de ce projet a mis en évidence certaines questions
fondamentales pour la
qui doivent être examinés plus avant. Parmi
Il s'agissait de l'absence de normes reconnues et
largement acceptées
les méthodologies d'évaluation des valeurs culturelles,
comme
ainsi que le site difficulties qui compare les résultats
des éco-
l'évaluation des valeurs nomiques et culturelles.
Les recherches dont nous rendons compte dans
cette publication commencent à aborder ces questions
en se concentrant sur les méthodes d'identification,
d'articulation et d'établissement de la signification
culturelle. L'importance culturelle est utilisée ici pour
désigner l'importance d'un site telle qu'elle est
déterminée par l'ensemble des valeurs qui lui sont
attribuées. Les valeurs prises en compte dans ce
processus doivent inclure celles détenues par les
experts - historiens de l'art, archéologues, architectes et
autres - ainsi que d'autres valeurs apportées par de
nouveaux acteurs ou constituants, telles que les valeurs
sociales et économiques. 2
La valeur a toujours été la raison qui sous-tend
la conservation de son patrimoine. Il est évident
qu'aucune société ne fait un effort pour conserver ce
qu'elle ne valorise pas. Pourquoi, alors, cet intérêt
actuel pour les valeurs ? Jusqu'à une époque récente, le
domaine du patrimoine était relativement isolé,
composé de petits groupes de spécialistes et d'experts.
Ces groupes déterminaient ce qui constituait le
"patrimoine" et comment il devait être conservé. Le
"droit de décider" de ces spécialistes était validé par les
autorités qui finançaient leurs travaux. Il y a eu un
accord tacite entre les groupes ayant le pouvoir d'agir.
Au cours des dernières décennies, le concept de
patrimoine a évolué et s'est élargi, et de nouveaux
groupes se sont joints aux spécialistes pour son
identification. Ces groupes de citoyens, de professionnels
l'importance d'inclure toutes les parties prenantes dans le
processus, nous devons nous tourner vers d'autres
disciplines pour faire participer ces nouveaux groupes aux
discussions.
Les documents de ce rapport présentent certains
Cette démocratisation est une évolution positive outils qui ont été utilisés dans d'autres domaines et qui
dans notre domaine et témoigne de l'importance du sont prometteurs pour les tâches à accomplir. Le premier
patrimoine dans la société actuelle. Néanmoins, cette document offers passe en revue les questions liées à
ouverture a apporté de nouvelles considérations aux l'évaluation des valeurs en rapport avec le patrimoine
discussions et les a rendues beaucoup plus complexes. culturel. En guise d'introduction aux méthodes présentées
Aujourd'hui, les avis des experts sont souvent peu dans d'autres contributions, il comprend un aperçu des
nombreux, dans un domaine où l'on reconnaît que le méthodes "expertes" déjà utilisées dans le domaine
patrimoine est multivalent et que les valeurs ne sont pas culturel et identifie certains des défis qui nous attendent
immuables. Dans cet environnement modifié, alors que nous tentons d'intégrer ces outils plus
l'articulation et la compréhension des valeurs ont acquis traditionnels du domaine culturel à d'autres qui doivent
une plus grande importance lorsque les décisions relatives être importés pour répondre à de nouveaux besoins. Les
au patrimoine sont prises sur ce qu'il faut conserver, méthodes anthropologiques et ethnographiques présentées
comment le conserver, où fixer les priorités et comment par Setha M. Low font partie des méthodes introduites
gérer les conflits d'intérêts. relativement récemment pour évaluer les valeurs sociales,
En tant que professionnels de la conservation, nous et elles sont déjà utilisées pour faire participer de
connaissons et maîtrisons les méthodes d'évaluation nouveaux groupes d'acteurs au processus d'identification
utilisées par les experts traditionnels du patrimoine. des valeurs. Le domaine de la conservation de
Cependant, pour identifier et mesurer les valeurs "sociales", l'environnement a une tradition relativement longue de
nous devons nous aventurer dans de nouveaux domaines. consultation avec un large éventail de parties prenantes.
Les acteurs des valeurs sociales sont généralement des Les approches du domaine de l'environnement sont
membres du public qui n'ont pas traditionnellement souvent présentées comme des exemples à suivre dans le
participé à nos travaux ou dont l'opinion n'a pas été prise en domaine du patrimoine, et
considération. Aujourd'hui, alors que nous reconnaissons
La contribution de Theresa Satterfield analyse les outils conservation, et sur l'impératif de participation du public
d'évaluation les plus utilisés dans cette discipline. Son sont des questions qui remettent en question les notions
évaluation équilibrée devrait nous aider à envisager conventionnelles de responsabilités des professionnels de
l'importation dans notre domaine de certaines de ces la conservation. Comment défendre les principes de
méthodes. conservation (traditionnels, centrés sur le caractère sacré
Les économistes semblent disposer des outils et la signification inhérente du patrimoine matériel) tout
d'évaluation de la valeur les plus développés et les plus en gérant un processus ouvert et démo-cratique qui peut
largement acceptés. Toutefois, comme nous l'avons déjà se conclure par une conser-vation en faveur d'autres
mentionné dans notre précédent rapport sur l'économie objectifs sociaux ? Cette question touche à la nature
du patrimoine3 , ces outils ne sont peut-être pas aussi précis essentielle du domaine et de la conservation en tant que
que par le passé pour mesurer les valeurs culturelles. profession : "Sommes-nous des défenseurs ? Sommes-
Un certain nombre d'économistes cherchent maintenant nous des professionnels et des experts neutres" ?
des moyens de perfectionner leurs outils pour les Les professionnels de la conservation sont
rendre plus utiles dans le domaine du patrimoine. confrontés à deux défis particuliers découlant de ces
Susana Mourato et Massimilano Mazzanti nous contextes sociaux et politiques : les défis du partage du
donnent un compte-rendu détaillé des outils utilisés pouvoir et les défis de la collaboration. Une
dans leur domaine, ainsi que des faiblesses et des participation plus large pose un défi aux rôles et
forces des différentes méthodes. Il n'est pas surprenant responsabilités des professionnels de la conservation :
que, reconnaissant que la conservation est certains suggèrent qu'aligner les politiques et décisions
multidisciplinaire, leurs conclusions indiquent une de conservation sur les valeurs démocratiques saperait
collaboration avec d'autres disciplines. l'autorité des professionnels de la conservation et
Les discussions sur les valeurs, sur la façon dont équivaudrait même à une abdication de la
les contextes sociaux façonnent le patrimoine et la responsabilité professionnelle. En d'autres termes, la
démocratisation de la prise de décision en matière de Les valeurs patrimoniales ne sont pas susceptibles de
conservation pourrait être en contradiction avec le constituer une menace pour la souveraineté du domaine,
dévouement professionnel à la conservation - que se mais elles nécessitent néanmoins un changement
passe-t-il lorsque la démocratie des voix décide qu'un d'attitude et une formation. Il faut reconnaître le caractère
site du patrimoine peut être détruit ? En tant que inévitable du commerce (offs) et des compro-mises, ainsi
professionnels de la conservation, avons-nous le droit, que le rassemblement respectueux et significatif de
ou même la responsabilité, de nous exprimer contre la modes de valorisation différents.
volonté démo-cratique ? Utiliser les nouvelles méthodes des domaines
Mais la probabilité n'est pas que le pouvoir de different signifie collaborer avec plus et different
décision réel soit démocratisé, mais plutôt que le professionnels (anthropologues et économistes, par
processus d'obtention de valeurs soit inclus. La exemple). Une telle collaboration soulève des questions
démocratisation des processus de consultation et sur qui est responsable de quelle partie du processus.
d'évaluation des Quels sont les rôles, les contributions et les
responsabilités relatifs de cette distribution de
personnages de different ? Le rôle du professionnel de
la conservation devient-il celui d'un orchestrateur de
spécialistes ? Ou d'un spécialiste parmi d'autres ? Il
semble que le restaurateur ait évolué pour jouer le
double rôle de spécialiste et d'orchestrateur. Les tâches
associées à cette dernière fonction exigent de nouvelles
façons de penser ainsi que de nouvelles compétences.
Dans le dernier document de ce rapport, David
Throsby nous fournit quelques principes qui peuvent
aider à façonner le nouveau rôle du spécialiste de la
conservation. En défendant les principes de la
durabilité, nous pouvons modérer les discussions d'un
large éventail de parties prenantes tout en mettant en
place un certain nombre de filtres qui favoriseront les
décisions dans ce domaine qui protègent le patrimoine
tout en le rendant pertinent pour la société.
Le défi à relever est de continuer à chercher les
moyens de servir le bien public en préservant les
vestiges matériels du passé.

Notes

. R. Mason, Economics and Heritage Conservation (Los


Angeles : Getty Conservation Institute, ) ; E. Avrami et
R. Mason, Values and Heritage Conservation (Los
Angeles : Getty Conservation Institute, ).
. La valeur peut être définie simplement comme un
ensemble de caractéristiques ou de qualités positives
perçues dans des objets ou des sites culturels par certains
individus ou groupes.
. Mason, éd., Économie et conservation du patrimoine.
Évaluation des valeurs dans la planification de la conservation :
Questions et choix méthodologiques
Par Randall Mason
que les forces sociales, les opportunités éco-nomiques et
les tendances culturelles), le fait que ces valeurs sont
parfois en conflit, et la grande variété de méthodologies
C -qu'ils soient concernés et d'outils d'évaluation des valeurs (utilisés par une
avec l'attribution d'un statut de "patrimoine" à un grande variété de disciplines et de professions).
bâtiment, en décidant Tous les modèles de conservation fondés sur les
pour investir, planifier l'avenir d'un bâtiment historique valeurs comprennent une étape au cours de laquelle
ou l'application d'un traitement à un site d'utilisation l'importance du site ou du bâtiment
l'articulation des valeurs patrimoniales (souvent en question est établi (Figure ). 3 Trop souvent, les
appelées "culturelles experts déterminent l'importance sur la base d'un
signification")1 comme point de référence. L'évaluation nombre limité de critères établis. Comme alternative
de la à cette approche, ce document plaide pour un
les valeurs attribuées au patrimoine sont une activité processus délibéré, systématique et trans-parent
très importante
d'analyse et d'évaluation de toutes les valeurs du
dans toute conservation effort, puisque les valeurs
patrimoine.
façonnent fortement la
les décisions qui sont prises. Cependant, même si les
valeurs sont
largement compris comme étant essentiel à la
compréhension et
la planification de la conservation du patrimoine, il y a
peu de connaissances
de la façon dont, de manière pragmatique, toute la
gamme de ses
Les valeurs de l'immobilier peuvent être évaluées dans le
cadre de la planification et de la
la prise de décision. Ce document vise à explorer
l'évaluation de la valeur
comme un aspect particulier de la planification de la
conservation et
gestion. 2 Le champ d'application est volontairement
large, comme suit
établit un contexte pour les autres contributions dans ce
volume
en mettant en relation les questions de valeur et de
méthodologie, telles que vues par
different disciplines, aux problèmes de plan de
conservation-
et politique.
Sur le plan méthodologique, l'évaluation des
valeurs patrimoniales se fait à l'aide de difficulties. Ces
problèmes découlent de facteurs tels que la nature diverse
des valeurs patrimoniales (il existe de nombreux types de
valeurs - culturelles, économiques, politiques, esthétiques,
etc. - dont certaines se chevauchent ou se concurrencent),
le fait que les valeurs changent au fil du temps et sont
fortement influencées par des facteurs contextuels (tels
Aux fins de la planification et de la gestion,
l'évaluation des valeurs présente un triple défi :
identifier toutes les valeurs du patrimoine en
question ; les décrire ; et intégrer et classer les valeurs
de different, parfois contradictoires, afin qu'elles
puissent servir de base à la réévaluation de different,
dont les intérêts des parties prenantes sont souvent
contradictoires (figure ).
Ce document explore les questions, les
méthodologies et les outils4 applicables à l'évaluation
de la valeur, et son objectif est de générer des conseils
pour sélectionner les méthodologies (stratégies) et les
outils (tâches) appropriés pour évaluer les valeurs du
patrimoine dans le cadre d'une planification intégrée de
la conservation. Cet objectif de recherche découle de la
constatation que le domaine de la conservation, à
l'heure actuelle, n'est pas très compétent pour évaluer
toutes les valeurs du patrimoine.
Ce document part de quelques hypothèses
concernant les problèmes d'évaluation de la valeur
dans la planification de la conservation :
• La conservation du patrimoine est mieux
comprise comme une activité socioculturelle, et pas
seulement comme une pratique technique ; elle englobe
de nombreuses activités précédant et suivant tout acte
d'intervention matérielle ;
• il est important de considérer les contextes d'un
projet de conservation du patrimoine - social, culturel,
économique, géographique, administratif - aussi
sérieusement et profondément que l'artefact/site lui-
même est considéré ;
• l'étude des valeurs est un moyen utile de
comprendre les contextes et les aspects socioculturels
de la conservation du patrimoine ;
• Les valeurs du patrimoine sont, par nature,
variées et souvent conflictuelles ;
• Les modes traditionnels d'évaluation de la
"signification" reposent largement sur les notions
d'histoire, d'histoire de l'art et d'archéologie détenues
par les professionnels, et ils sont appliqués à la base par
des moyens unidisciplinaires ;
• considération des valeurs économiques, une
forte
La conservation du patrimoine est une activité qui ne
relève pas de la compétence traditionnelle des
professionnels de la conservation, et son intégration
aux valeurs culturelles représente un défi particulier ;
Figure Méthodologie du processus de planification.

Identification et description Évaluations et analyses Réponse

Physique Établir des politiques


Objectifs Condition
Évaluation

Fixer des objectifs

Site Culturel Intégration

Documentation Importance/valeur de

et Description Évaluation Évaluations

Élaborer des stratégies

Gestion

Parties prenantes Contexte


Synthétiser et
Évaluation
Préparer le plan

Surveiller, examiner, réviser


• La gestion et la planification de la conservation
devraient employer une stratégie d'inclusion en faisant
appel aux disciplines de different et en intégrant les
points de vue des "initiés" et des "exclus" dans le
processus de planification ;
• une évaluation plus globale des valeurs
- aucune discipline ou méthode ne permet à elle patrimoniales et l'intégration de ces valeurs different
seule d'obtenir une permettront une planification et une gestion de la
sufficient évaluation des valeurs patrimoniales ; par conservation meilleures et plus durables ;
conséquent, une com-
• le test de more effective conservation planning
bination de méthodes issues de diverses disciplines est sa réactivité aux besoins des parties prenantes, des
devrait
communautés et de la société contemporaine.
être inclus dans toute évaluation globale de la val-
ues d'un site patrimonial ;
• Questions méthodologiques et stratégies pour
l'évaluation des valeurs patrimoniales : Quels types de
stratégies méthodologiques et d'outils d'évaluation
spécifiques sont disponibles et appropriés pour évaluer les
valeurs patrimoniales ?
• Des outils pour susciter des valeurs
Dans les autres sections de ce document, patrimoniales : Comment les opinions des nombreuses
quatre questions spécifiques sont explorées (dans le parties ayant un intérêt dans un site patrimonial
même ordre que celui que l'on rencontrerait dans un peuvent-elles être prises en compte dans le processus
processus de planification) : de planification de la conservation, y compris dans sa
• Caractériser les valeurs : Comment le large phase spécifique d'évaluation des valeurs ?
éventail • Intégrer les évaluations et orienter la prise de
des valeurs patrimoniales soient identifiées et décision : Une fois que l'éventail des valeurs
caractérisées d'une manière qui soit pertinente pour patrimoniales a été articulé, comment peuvent-elles
toutes les disciplines et tous les acteurs concernés ? éclairer la prise de décision ?
Les valeurs dans la conservation
Caractériser les valeurs
Les valeurs sont le plus souvent utilisées dans l'un des
En prélude à des discussions spécifiques sur deux sens suivants : premièrement, en tant que morale,
l'évaluation de la valeur, cette section s'attache à principes ou autres idées qui servent de guides à l'action
caractériser la notion de valeur en tant qu'idée (individuelle et collective) ; et deuxièmement, en
directrice dans la conservation du patrimoine. L'une référence aux qualités et caractéristiques des choses, en
des hypothèses fondamentales de ce document est particulier les caractéristiques positives (réelles et
l'utilité de la perspective des "valeurs" pour éclairer potentielles). 5 Le présent document porte directement sur
les questions de conservation et de planification de la la deuxième définition. La perspective adoptée ici est
gestion et rendre ces activités plus effective. anthropologique, et elle valorise la tentative de
comprendre l'ensemble des valeurs et des processus de
valorisation attachés au patrimoine - par opposition à la
vision normative, historique de l'art, courante dans le
domaine de la conservation, qui privilégie a priori les
valeurs artistiques et historiques par rapport aux autres.

Figure Le processus d'évaluation de l'importance/valeur culturelle. Ce modèle d'évaluation de la valeur en trois parties est une
représentation plus détaillée de l'ovale "Importance culturelle/évaluation de la valeur" qui occupe le centre de la méthodologie
du processus de planification (figure ). Grâce aux parties du processus d'évaluation des valeurs identifiées sur different, les
planificateurs peuvent appliquer une séquence logique de tâches pour générer et collecter des connaissances sur les valeurs et
les utiliser dans le cadre du processus de planification global.

Physique
Condition

Évaluation
Intégration
de
Évaluation de l'importance/valeur Évaluations
culturelle
et
en créant
politique
corrélation
entre les valeurs
Elicitation/ Déclarations
Tâche Identification et physique
élaboration d'importance
ressources
Postulez
durabilité

principes et

Typologie ; De nombreuses autre


Processus de
Outil partie prenante et économique groupe décision-

consultation méthodes making

cadres

Gestion
Contexte
Évaluation

La valeur suggère l'utilité et les avantages. Le œuvre d'architecture ; elle a une valeur économique en
patrimoine n'est pas valorisé en tant qu'entreprise tant que bien immobilier ; elle a une valeur politique en
intellectuelle, mais parce que (en tant qu'aspect de la tant que représentation symbolique d'un certain type
culture matérielle) il joue des fonctions instrumentales, d'ordre social ; etc. De plus, les valeurs de different qui
symboliques et autres dans la société. Cela sera plus peuvent être discernées correspondent aux parties
clair ci-dessous, à mesure que different décrit les types prenantes ou aux observateurs experts de different.
de valeur du patrimoine. Cette multivalence est une qualité essentielle du
Dans le domaine du patrimoine matériel, la patrimoine et, comme nous l'expliquons ci-dessous,
simple question "Quelle est la valeur de cette chose" elle suggère logiquement une approche pluraliste et
provoque éclectique de l'évaluation de la valeur.
toute une série de réponses, toutes significatives et Un deuxième aspect important des valeurs
légitimes - et c'est là une question importante. Dans un patrimoniales est qu'elles sont contingentes et non pas
moment donné, données objectivement. Les valeurs du patrimoine ne sont
un site, un bâtiment ou un objet patrimonial donné a un pas simplement "trouvées" et fixes et immuables, comme
certain nombre de valeurs different qui lui sont attribuées on l'a traditionnellement théorisé dans le domaine de la
- le patrimoine est multivalent. Prenons l'exemple d'une conservation (c'est-à-dire que la notion de valeurs
hypothétique église ancienne : elle a une valeur spirituelle patrimoniales est intrinsèque). Les valeurs sont produites
en tant que lieu de culte ; elle a une valeur historique en à partir de l'interaction d'un artefact et de ses contextes ;
raison des événements qui s'y sont déroulés (ou elles n'émanent pas de l'artefact lui-même. Les valeurs ne
simplement parce qu'elle est ancienne) ; elle a une valeur peuvent donc être comprises qu'en référence à des
esthétique parce qu'elle est belle et constitue une belle contextes sociaux, historiques et même spatiaux - à
travers le prisme de qui définit et articule la valeur, des différents contextes sociaux de l'objet, du bâtiment
pourquoi maintenant et pourquoi ici ? Pour les ou du site ? La réponse semble se situer quelque part
professionnels de la conservation, cela nécessite de entre les deux : la valeur se forme dans le lien entre les
repenser en profondeur les types de recherche et de idées et les choses.
connaissances nécessaires pour soutenir la conservation. Le point de vue adopté dans cette recherche emprunte aux
Traditionnellement, les valeurs étaient définies par deux extrémités de ce spectre : d'une part, tout ce qui est
l'analyse des experts du patrimoine comme une œuvre oint comme patrimoine aura, par définition, une certaine
d'art ou un témoignage du passé. Ce n'est que récemment valeur patrimoniale (à part le fait que cette valeur soit
que le domaine de la conservation a commencé à englober principalement historique, artistique ou sociale). En
des facteurs tels que l'économie, les changements d'autres termes, tout ce qui est défini comme patrimoine
culturels, les politiques publiques et les questions sociales, est réputé posséder intrinsèquement et tautologiquement
qui ne sont pas encore pleinement intégrés dans le une certaine valeur patrimoniale (bien que la nature de
domaine. cette valeur ne soit pas intrinsèquement donnée). D'autre
La question "d'où viennent les valeurs" a fait part, le point de vue contingent/construit met à juste titre
l'objet de nombreux débats. La culture matérielle reconnue en évidence les facteurs de formation de la valeur en
comme patrimoine doit-elle être considérée comme ayant dehors de l'objet lui-même et souligne les processus
une valeur intrinsèque (immuable et universelle), ou la sociaux importants de formation de la valeur. La
valeur patrimoniale doit-elle être considérée comme reconnaissance de la contingence fondamentale des
radicalement et essentiellement extrinsèque et construite valeurs patrimoniales n'exclut pas la possibilité que
certaines valeurs soient universellement détenues (ou
presque). Ces valeurs socialement construites - pensez
aux Grandes Pyramides, par exemple - sont considérées
comme universelles parce qu'elles sont si largement
répandues, et non parce qu'elles sont des vérités
objectives.

Typologies de valeurs

Les questions pragmatiques qui se posent sont les


suivantes : comment peut-on identifier et caractériser
un large éventail de valeurs patrimoniales de manière à
( ) éclairer les politiques et les décisions de
planification et ( ) à les rendre pertinentes pour toutes
les disciplines et tous les acteurs concernés ?
Les valeurs en matière de conservation du
patrimoine ont traditionnellement été traitées de deux
manières : ( ) un type de valeur prédomine et empêche la
prise en compte des autres ; ou ( ) les valeurs sont traitées
comme une boîte noire, tous les aspects de la valeur
patrimoniale étant réduits à leur "signification". Le premier
traitement est problématique car des catégories entières de
valeurs peuvent être exclues a priori. Par exemple, si l'on
laisse prédominer la valeur d'utilisation économique d'un site
historique, l'activité touristique qui maximise ces valeurs
économiques peut rapidement obscurcir ou éroder les valeurs
historiques du site (le visiteur traffic détruit le contexte
historique et même les ressources elles-mêmes, peut-être en
grimpant négligemment sur les ruines ou en prenant des
fragments comme souvenirs). Le deuxième type de
traitement (la "boîte noire") est problématique car en
réduisant toutes les valeurs à une déclaration d'importance
globale, les types de valeur patrimoniale de different sont
mystifiés ou rendus secondaires et sont donc négligés. Un
exemple de cette situation serait une église ou une mosquée
historique classée par les autorités et comprise par le public
laïque principalement comme un bâtiment d'importance
historique ou artistique ; cette circonstance peut occulter une
autre
Tableau Résumé des typologies de valeurs patrimoniales élaborées par divers universitaires et organisations
(Reigl ; Lipe ; pour la Charte de Burra, Australie ICOMOS ; Frey ; English Heritage).

Reigl () Lipe () Charte de Burra () Frey () English Heritage ()

Âge Économique Esthétique Monétaire Culturel

Historique Esthétique Historique Option Enseignement et formation

Commémoratif Associative-symbolique Scientifique Existence Économique

Utilisez Informations Social (y compris spirituel, Legs Ressource


Nouveaut
é politique, national, autre Prestige Loisirs

culturel) Éducatif Esthétique

particulier de valeur est évalué par les parties prenantes


de different - par exemple, la valeur économique telle
valeur importante du bâtiment en tant que site sacré qu'évaluée par une société exploitant et possédant un site
de travail. En accrochant trop la détermination de patrimonial, par rapport à un résident typique d'un
l'importance à la valeur artistique de l'édifice
religieux, l'autre valeur ("secondaire") du culte
religieux ou même de l'exécution musicale peut être
érodée, même s'il ne serait pas difficult de conserver
toutes ces valeurs simultanément.
Il existe tellement de types de valeurs different, et
les interactions entre elles sont si complexes, qu'une façon
plus effective de traiter cette question doit commencer par
une façon claire, effectively neutre et convenue de
caractériser les types de valeurs different du patrimoine,
comme le voient les nombreux acteurs de la conservation
efforts. Une typologie des valeurs patrimoniales serait un
guide de caractérisation effective et permettrait aux acteurs
de la conservation de se rapprocher d'une lingua franca dans
laquelle les valeurs de toutes les parties peuvent être
exprimées et discutées. En utilisant une telle typologie - un
cadre qui décompose l'importance en types de valeurs
patrimoniales constitutives - les opinions des experts, des
citoyens, des communautés, des gouvernements et des autres
parties prenantes peuvent être exprimées et comparées.
effectively.
Tout effort pour décomposer et décrire les
valeurs attachées à un site patrimonial particulier
rencontre immédiatement le difficulties conceptuel et
pratique. Les articulations different de la valeur
patrimoniale (en termes d'asso-ciation historique, de
mérite artistique ou de dollars) sont à un certain niveau
different des expressions des mêmes qualités, vues à
travers les yeux de different. Les unités et les critères
utilisés par les historiens de l'art, les sociologues et les
économistes, par exemple, ne sont pas facilement
comparables ou traduisibles. Outre ces differ-ences en
matière d'épistémologie et de modes d'expression, il existe
de véritables differences dans la manière dont un type
suite de cette section, nous souhaitons mettre en évidence
son caractère provisoire. Nous ne prétendons pas que
village voisin. Un troisième difficulty dans la cette typologie (ou une autre) conviendra à tous les sites
caractérisation des valeurs réside dans le fait que les ou situations - il s'agit simplement d'une tentative de créer
valeurs sont toujours en évolution à certains égards, et un point de départ commun à partir duquel une typologie
nous devrions nous attendre à ce que cela fasse partie modifiée peut être construite dans diverses situations de
de la nature essentielle et sociale du patrimoine. Pour planification du patrimoine.
toutes ces raisons, les valeurs patrimoniales ne Il convient également de souligner les aspects
peuvent être objectivement mesurées et décomposées pratiques de la discussion des typologies. L'établissement
de la même manière qu'un chimiste, par exemple, peut d'une typologie des valeurs facilitera la discussion et la
analyser et décomposer un composé pour en compréhension des processus de valorisation en jeu dans
déterminer les éléments constitutifs. la conservation du patrimoine different. Ce type de
Si la subjectivité et la contingence des valeurs connaissances peut en fin de compte guider les praticiens
patrimoniales font qu'il est nécessaire pour difficult dans le choix des méthodes d'évaluation appropriées pour
d'établir un cadre clair ou même une nomenclature des un large éventail de valeurs patrimoniales. Les typologies
valeurs (semblable aux éléments et composés d'un constituent également un outil de recherche de premier
chimiste), c'est précisément ce qui est nécessaire pour ordre, en ordonnant et en organisant les connaissances de
faciliter l'évaluation et l'intégration des valeurs manière à ce que la recherche s'appuie sur elle-même - ce
patrimoniales de different dans la planification et la qui évite aux praticiens de devoir continuellement
gestion de la conservation. Le concept de valeurs doit réinventer la roue. L'avantage de l'utilisation d'une
donc être décomposé et défini dans une typologie, au typologie commune des valeurs est qu'elle permet de
moins provisoirement. En suggérant une typologie dans la comparer l'évaluation des projets du site different.
Il s'agit d'un objectif important de la recherche sur la Les typologies minimisent implicitement
planification de la conservation - établir des points de certains types
comparaison entre de nombreux types de projets de valeur, d'en élever d'autres, ou de mettre en avant
patrimoniaux et en tirer des conseils sur les meilleures les conflits entre la culture de certaines valeurs au
pratiques applicables à de nombreuses situations détriment d'autres. Dans la Charte de Burra, par
different. Enfin, la typologie est à la fois un outil exemple, les valeurs économiques sont minimisées
d'analyse et un moyen de faire progresser une plus large parce qu'elles sont considérées comme dérivées de
participation au processus de planification. Les catégories valeurs culturelles et historiques et sont donc
de valeurs correspondent aux positions des parties reléguées au second plan.
prenantes de different exprimées dans les débats et les Il est évident qu'il existe plusieurs catégories
projets sur le patrimoine, et la conception et le débat de la distinctes, sinon totalement séparables, de valeur
typologie sont eux-mêmes des moyens de stimuler la patrimoniale - économique, historique, spirituelle,
participation. politique, éducative, esthétique, artistique. Si l'on devait
Comme on pouvait s'y attendre, étant donné les cartographier ces schémas de valeurs, il y aurait
difficultés conceptuelles rencontrées jusqu'à présent, il beaucoup de chevauchements, même entre des cadres
s'est avéré difficile de s'entendre sur une typologie ou une different tels que celui de Frey (de l'économie) et celui de
nomenclature des valeurs patrimoniales. Presque tous Reigl (de l'histoire de l'art). La typologie proposée dans le
ceux qui s'intéressent au patrimoine - citoyens, récent document de English Heritage sur la durabilité est
universitaires, écrivains, professionnels ou organisations - peut-être la plus complète et la plus équilibrée (English
ont une conception légèrement different, avancée d'un Heritage ). Cette répartition est bien orientée vers la
point de vue particulier, de la manière de décrire ces pratique de la conservation, car les catégories de valeurs
caractéristiques du patrimoine. Considérons l'échantillon se concentrent sur la manière dont le patrimoine est
de typologies de valeurs patrimoniales conçues par les utilisé et valorisé (de manière contingente, et par des
universitaires et les organisations de different et résumées personnes autres que les élites et les experts), alors que de
dans le tableau . 6 Dans la plupart des cas, ils décrivent la nombreuses autres typologies relèvent davantage de
même tarte, mais la découpent de manière subtile l'appréciation et des valeurs professionnelles et sont
different. fortement influencées par la notion de valeur intrinsèque
du patrimoine.
Une large distinction est souvent faite entre les
Tableau Typologie provisoire des valeurs patrimoniales.
valeurs éco-nomiques et culturelles comme les deux
principales méta-catégories de la valeur patrimoniale. Cette
distinction a servi de point de départ aux recherches Valeurs socioculturelles Valeurs économiques
entreprises par le Getty Conservation Institute sur les
Historique Valeur d'usage (marché)
questions liées aux valeurs les plus pertinentes.
Culturel/symbolique Valeurs de non-usage (non marchandes)

Social Existence

Spirituel/religieux Option

Esthétique Legs

de la conservation. Cependant, défendre une séparation


stricte des sphères économique et culturelle est intenable.
Le comportement économique ne peut être au-delà ou
séparé de la culture, qui par définition est une "façon de
vivre ensemble" ou des attitudes et comportements
transmis. En effet, l'économie est l'une des (sous-)cultures
les plus dominantes - les façons de vivre ensemble - dans
de nombreuses sociétés.
Néanmoins, la distinction économico-culturelle
est largement partagée et reste une con-venience
analytique très utile. La distinction économico-
culturelle a une résonance parce que : ( ) elle met en
évidence la privatisation et l'influence de la logique du
marché dans des sphères toujours plus nombreuses de la
vie sociale, une question sociale contemporaine des plus
urgentes ; ( ) elle est liée aux débats traditionnels autour
des notions de base économique et de superstructure
culturelle et de leur relation dans les sociétés modernes ;
et ( ) peut-être le plus important pour nos objectifs
actuels, les sphères économique et culturelle
représentent deux attitudes/perspectives bien distinctes
à l'égard du sujet des valeurs et de l'évaluation.

Typologie provisoire

La typologie provisoire présentée dans le tableau -


qui n'est ni exhaustive ni exclusive - est offered
comme point de départ et de discussion.
Cette typologie inclut les types de valeur les plus
souvent associés aux sites du patrimoine et aux questions
de conservation, mais elle ne suppose pas que chaque site
du patrimoine ait tous les types de valeur. L'hypothèse de
travail qui sous-tend la typologie présentée ici est que ces
catégories englobent la plupart des valeurs patrimoniales
qui façonnent la prise de décision et qui doivent être prises
en compte dans la planification et la gestion de la
conservation. Le danger d'utiliser une telle typologie est
qu'elle peut suggérer qu'un cadre de valeurs s'applique aussi à tous les milieux culturels. Si elle était utilisée de cette
bien à tous les sites du patrimoine, à toutes les questions et manière normative, et comme un
a priori, cela préfigurerait trop les valeurs d'un site aux bases de different pour prendre des décisions de
patrimonial. Il est donc réitéré que toute typologie de gestion ou de conservation.
valeurs ne doit servir que de point de départ et que les Remarquez qu'il n'y a pas de catégorie distincte
types de valeurs devront être ajustés et révisés pour pour la valeur polit-ique. La raison : toutes les valeurs
chaque projet/ensemble. attribuées au patrimoine sont, en fait, politiques, en ce
Les deux grandes catégories - socioculturelle et sens qu'elles font partie des luttes de pouvoir et des efforts
économique - ne font pas réellement référence à different, qui déterminent le sort du patrimoine. Les valeurs
des ensembles de valeurs distincts. L'économique et le occupent le devant de la scène lorsqu'il s'agit de prendre
culturel sont deux façons différentes de comprendre et des décisions - politiques - sur la conservation du
d'étiqueter le même large éventail de valeurs patrimoine.
patrimoniales. Il existe des chevauchements importants
entre les valeurs que chaque colonne du tableau aide à
identifier. Le principal difference entre elles réside dans
les cadres conceptuels et les méthodologies utilisés pour
les articuler, qui sont très differ-ent. 7
Il en va de même pour les sous-catégories du
groupe "valeurs socioculturelles" ; elles ne sont pas
distinctes et exclusives ; en fait, elles se chevauchent
assez largement. Cette imbrication contraste avec les
catégories de la colonne "valeurs économiques", qui se
veulent distinctes et exclusives les unes des autres.
LES VALEURS SOCIOCULTURELLES
Les valeurs socioculturelles sont au cœur traditionnel
des valeurs de conservation attachées à un objet, un
bâtiment ou un lieu parce qu'il a une signification pour
des personnes ou des groupes sociaux en raison de son
âge, de sa beauté, de son art ou de son association
avec une personne ou un événement important ou
(autrement) parce qu'il contribue aux processus de
affiliation.
Les types de valeurs socioculturelles décrits ci-
dessous se chevauchent. Par exemple, une qualité définie
comme une valeur spirituelle/ religieuse (l'utilisation
continue d'une église historique par une congrégation, par
exemple) peut également être définie comme une valeur
historique (l'histoire des générations qui ont célébré le
culte dans l'église et joué un rôle dans le développement
de la communauté environnante) ou comme une valeur
artistique (la conception particulière du bâtiment et de son
mobilier) ou encore comme une valeur sociale (utilisée
pour des rassemblements non religieux, par exemple un
concert de vacances ou une soupe populaire). Bien que
ces utilisations soient étroitement liées, il est important de
les comprendre comme des valeurs de different, car elles
correspondent aux façons dont different conçoit la valeur
du patrimoine, aux groupes d'acteurs de different, et donc
Valeur historique sans valeur culturelle. Les valeurs culturelles sont
Les valeurs historiques sont à la base de la notion même de utilisées pour construire le affiliation culturel dans le
patrimoine. La capacité d'un site à transmettre, incarner ou présent et peuvent être historiques, politiques, ethniques,
stimuler une relation ou une réaction au passé fait partie de ou liées à d'autres moyens de vivre ensemble (par
la nature et de la signification fondamentales des objets exemple, liées au travail ou à l'artisanat). Dans cette
patrimoniaux. La valeur historique peut s'accroître de typologie, la valeur culturelle/symbolique fait référence
plusieurs manières : en fonction de l'âge du matériel aux significations communes associées au patrimoine
patrimonial, de son association avec des personnes ou des qui ne sont pas, à proprement parler, historiques (liées
événements, de sa rareté et/ou de son caractère unique, de aux aspects et significations chronologiques d'un site).
ses qualités technologiques ou de son potentiel archivistique La valeur politique - l'utilisation du patrimoine
ou documentaire. pour établir ou maintenir des relations civiles, la
Il existe deux sous-types importants de valeur légitimité gouvernementale, la protestation ou des causes
historique qui méritent d'être mentionnés. La valeur idéologiques - est un type particulier de valeur culturelle/
éducative/académique est un type de valeur historique. La symbolique. Ces valeurs découlent du lien entre la vie
valeur éducative de son patrimoine réside dans la civique/sociale et l'environnement physique et de la
possibilité d'acquérir des connaissances sur le passé à capacité des sites patrimoniaux, en particulier, à stimuler
l'avenir, par exemple grâce à l'archéologie ou à le type de réflexion positive et de comportement politique
l'interprétation créative par un artiste des documents qui construit la société civile. La valeur politique/civile
historiques contenus dans le patrimoine. La valeur peut être manifestement symbolique, ou elle peut
artistique - valeur basée sur le fait qu'un objet est unique, découler de la recherche et de la compréhension de la
qu'il est le meilleur, qu'il est un bon exemple, qu'il est manière dont les sites du patrimoine sont créés et
l'œuvre d'un individu particulier, etc. évoluent, et de la connaissance de ceux qui ont façonné
l'environnement. Comme toutes les valeurs patrimoniales,
Valeur culturelle/symbolique
la valeur politique peut être interprétée sous un angle
L'histoire et le patrimoine sont des éléments essentiels de
positif, en tant que contribution essentielle à la société
toutes les cultures - les idées, les matériaux et les
civile, ou, de manière plus cynique, elle peut être
habitudes ont traversé le temps, de sorte que les valeurs
interprétée comme un outil politique utilisé pour faire
culturelles font partie, comme la valeur historique, de la
respecter la culture nationale, l'impérialisme, le
notion même de patrimoine. Il n'y a pas de patrimoine
postcolonialisme, etc.
Les valeurs liées à l'artisanat ou au travail un lieu de rencontres sociales telles que les fêtes, les
sont souvent des aspects très importants du marchés, les pique-niques ou les jeux de balle, des
patrimoine. Un bâtiment incarne les méthodes activités qui ne tirent pas nécessairement parti
utilisées pour le concevoir et le fabriquer, et les directement des valeurs historiques du site mais plutôt
valeurs liées au processus de fabrication et de des qualités d'espace public et d'espace partagé. Les
construction sont souvent séparées (ou perdues) des types de groupes sociaux renforcés et favorisés par ce
valeurs historiques ou esthétiques plus statiques. type de valeurs peuvent aller des familles aux groupes de
Cette catégorie comprend également les valeurs voisinage, en passant par les groupes ethniques et les
patrimoniales utilisées pour stimuler l'identité d'un groupes d'intérêts spéciaux (par exemple, les
groupe ethnique, dans les cas où le groupe n'a pas un ornithologues).
aspect religieux fort. La valeur sociale comprend également les aspects
Valeur sociale "d'attachement au lieu" de la valeur patrimoniale.
L'attachement au lieu fait référence à la cohésion sociale, à
Le concept de valeur sociale suit de près la notion
du "capital social", un concept largement utilisé dans les l'identité communautaire ou à d'autres sentiments de
domaines des sciences sociales et du développement. Les affiliation que les groupes sociaux (qu'ils soient très petits et
valeurs sociales du patrimoine permettent et facilitent les locaux ou d'envergure nationale) tirent des caractéristiques
connexions sociales, les réseaux et autres relations au sens patrimoniales et environnementales spécifiques de leur
large, qui ne sont pas nécessairement liées aux valeurs territoire "d'origine".
historiques centrales du patrimoine. Les valeurs sociales d'un Valeur spirituelle/religieuse
site patrimonial peuvent inclure l'utilisation Les sites du patrimoine sont parfois associés ou
imprégnés d'une signification religieuse ou autre
signification sacrée. Ces valeurs spirituelles peuvent a fait valoir que la catégorie de l'esthétique peut être
émaner des croyances et des enseignements de la interpénétrée plus largement pour englober tous les sens :
religion organisée, mais elles peuvent aussi englober l'odorat, le son et le toucher, ainsi que la vue. Ainsi, un
des expériences séculaires d'émerveillement, de site patrimonial pourrait être considéré comme précieux
crainte, etc. qui peuvent être provoquées par la visite pour l'expérience sensorielle
de lieux patrimoniaux. it offers. La valeur esthétique contribue fortement à
Valeur esthétique un sentiment de bien-être et est peut-être la plus
La valeur esthétique est largement reconnue comme une personnelle et la plus indi-vidualiste des types de
catégorie de valeur socioculturelle, bien qu'elle renvoie à un valeurs socioculturelles.
large éventail de qualités. En général, l'esthétique se réfère LES VALEURS ÉCONOMIQUES
aux qualités visuelles L'évaluation économique est l'un des moyens les plus
du patrimoine. Les nombreuses interprétations de la puissants pour
beauté, du sublime, des ruines, et de la qualité des que la société identifie, évalue et décide de la rela-
relations formelles considérées plus largement ont valeur des choses. Les articles de ce volume par David
longtemps été parmi les critères les plus importants pour Throsby et par Susana Mourato et Massimiliano
qualifier les choses et les lieux de patrimoine. La Mazzanti caractérisent et analysent magnifiquement
conception et l'évolution d'un bâtiment, d'un objet ou dans certains
d'un site peuvent être une autre source de valeur détailler la notion de valeur et de valorisation telle qu'elle
esthétique. C'est aussi est perçue par le disciple
de l'économie. Les valeurs économiques se chevauchent
beaucoup
avec les valeurs socioculturelles (historiques, sociales,
esthétiques,
et ainsi de suite) décrites ci-dessus, et on les distingue
la plupart parce qu'ils sont mesurés par des analyses
économiques.
En d'autres termes, les valeurs économiques sont
different parce que
ils sont conceptualisés de manière fondamentalement
different
(selon une épistémologie fondamentalement different, un
non commensurable avec les épistémologies narratives
utilisé pour les valeurs socioculturelles). Selon le
néoclassicisme
théorie économique, les valeurs économiques sont les
valeurs vues
principalement dans l'optique du consommateur
individuel et
choix ferme (utilité) et sont le plus souvent exprimés en
termes
de prix. Cependant, toutes les valeurs économiques ne
sont pas mesurées
en termes de prix du marché.
Les valeurs économiques découlant de la
conservation du patrimoine sont souvent, par définition,
considérées comme un bien public - reflétant des
décisions collectives plutôt que des décisions
individuelles et marchandes - et ne sont donc pas prises
en compte par les mesures des prix du marché. Il existe
une distinction importante entre les valeurs qui peuvent
être légitimement représentées en termes de prix (valeurs
privées, qui peuvent être échangées sur un marché) et les Les valeurs économiques de different décrites
facteurs qui déterminent les décisions d'allocation des ici, et les relations entre elles, sont résumées dans l'article
ressources (valeurs publiques, détenues collectivement et de Mourato et Mazzanti dans le présent volume. 8 La
fournies en dehors des marchés). La prise en compte de principale distinction qu'ils établissent concerne les
ces écarts est l'un des objectifs de la recherche effort. Un valeurs d'usage et de non-usage, qui correspondent aux
ensemble diversifié de méthodes d'évaluation économique types de valeurs économiques mesurées par les marchés
sera donc nécessaire pour combler cet écart entre les et en dehors des marchés. 9
valeurs privées/marchandes et les valeurs publiques/non
marchandes.
Valeur d'usage (valeur marchande) qualités du patrimoine motivent les
Les valeurs d'usage sont des valeurs marchandes10 - celles décisions économiques :
auxquelles il est le plus facile d'attribuer un prix. Les Valeur d'existence : Les individus
valeurs d'usage du patrimoine matériel font référence aux apprécient un bien patrimonial pour sa
biens et services qui en découlent et qui sont négociables et simple existence, même s'ils ne le vivent
dont le prix peut être fixé sur les marchés existants. Par pas eux-mêmes ou s'ils "consomment ses
exemple, les droits d'entrée d'un site historique, le coût d'un services" directement.
terrain et les salaires des travailleurs sont des valeurs. Parce Valeur de l'option : La valeur
qu'elles sont échangées sur les marchés, ces valeurs d'option du patrimoine se réfère au
peuvent être facilement exprimées en termes de prix, et souhait d'une personne de préserver la
elles sont sensibles aux nombreux outils d'analyse des possibilité (l'option) qu'elle puisse
économistes basés sur la théorie néoclassique. consommer les services du patrimoine à
Valeur de non-usage (valeur non marchande) un moment donné dans le futur.
Les valeurs de non-usage sont des valeurs économiques qui Valeur du legs : La valeur du legs
ne sont pas échangées ou capturées par les marchés et sont découle du souhait de léguer un bien
donc difficult à exprimer en termes de prix. Par exemple, de patrimonial aux générations futures.
nombreuses qualités décrites comme des valeurs
socioculturelles sont également des valeurs de non-usage.
Elles peuvent être classées comme des valeurs économiques
parce que les individus seraient prêts à allouer des ressources
(dépenser de l'argent) pour les acquérir et/ou les protéger.
Le domaine de l'économie décrit les valeurs de
non-usage comme émanant des qualités de bien public du
patrimoine - ces qualités qui sont "non rivales" (la
consommation par une personne n'empêche pas la
consommation par une autre) et "non exclusives" (une
fois que le bien/service est fourni à quelqu'un, les autres
ne sont pas exclus de sa consommation). Un site
archéologique public présenterait très clairement ces
qualités. Les marchés ne fournissent pas de biens et de
services publics, et les valeurs de non-usage posent donc
un problème méthodologique aux économistes difficult.
En grande partie, les valeurs de non-usage sont
une autre façon d'envisager les valeurs socioculturelles
décrites et distinguées ci-dessus. Les valeurs
socioculturelles et les valeurs de non-usage sont en
quelque sorte deux façons de découper la même tarte.
Les valeurs de non-usage sont souvent
ventilées en catégories étroitement liées (qui ne sont
pas exhaustives) afin de préciser exactement quelles
Valeurs intrinsèques conservation de l'environnement, par lequel on
suppose que les caractéristiques "naturelles" (la
Comment la typologie suggérée ici s'aligne-t-elle sur les
nature sauvage) ont une valeur intrinsèque.
arguments de "valeur intrinsèque" avancés en matière de
Cette idée est parallèle à la notion d'authenticité
patrimoine - et aussi par rapport à la nature dans la conservation
dans le domaine du patrimoine, qui suppose
de l'environnement ? Cette typologie repose sur l'hypothèse que
qu'une certaine valeur historique est représentée
les valeurs sont fondamentalement contingentes, c'est-à-dire
par un matériau intrinsèquement ancien et donc
qu'elles sont construites aussi bien socialement que
authentique (authentique en ce sens qu'il a été
spatialement. Mais peut-on supposer que certaines des valeurs
témoin de l'histoire et qu'il porte l'autorité de ce
du patrimoine sont intrinsèques (sinon fixes ou absolues) -
témoin). Ainsi, si l'on peut prouver l'authenticité
c'est-à-dire qu'une sorte de valeur historique est intrinsèque à
d'un matériau, la valeur historique est établie de
toute la notion de quelque chose qui est identifié comme
manière indélébile.
patrimoine ?

Cet argument de valeur intrinsèque dans la conservation du


patrimoine serait analogue à l'argument "intrinsèque" dans la
disponibles est le grand potentiel du domaine de la
Questions méthodologiques et stratégies
conservation pour emprunter ou adapter des méthodes
d'évaluation de la valeur éprouvées dans des disciplines
Il a été affirmé plus haut que les questions de valeur et telles que l'anthropologie et l'économie.
d'évaluation ne sont pas, pour la plupart, susceptibles de Avant de décrire des méthodes et des outils
solutions techniques. Les valeurs sont ancrées dans la spécifiques, il convient de répéter certaines
culture et les relations sociales, qui sont en constante questions stratégiques qui sous-tendent le choix des
évolution. Les réalités politiques - les modèles de pouvoir méthodes et des outils. Cette section met en
qui unissent et séparent les différents acteurs du patrimoine évidence quatre de ces questions :
- sont toujours présentes : elles sont parfois à la surface des • quelques questions et conditions générales
activités de conservation ; souvent, elles se cachent juste en entourant l'activité d'évaluation de la valeur ;
dessous. L'objectif pratique de la conception de • les méthodes quantitatives et qualitatives
méthodologies, d'approches, de routines et d'outils d'évaluation de la valeur, et le fondamental
d'évaluation de la valeur11 est de ne pas chercher la épistémologique et pratique differences entre eux ;
meilleure réponse unique, ni d'apporter l'objectivité, la • la nécessité d'une approche méthodologique
précision technique ou une technique unique pour la "boîte à outils" pour l'évaluation de la valeur du
planification de la conservation effective. Au contraire, patrimoine, qui combine avec souplesse une grande
l'accent mis sur les méthodologies (sur le processus de variété d'outils d'évaluation ;
production de connaissances) apportera des informations • l'identification des parties prenantes et la
pertinentes, conférera une transparence au processus et question politique largement reconnue de la
favorisera l'objectif d'une participation plus large et plus participation - en d'autres termes, l'impératif politique
significative au processus. et pragmatique de donner la parole aux experts, aux
Cette section du document aborde un certain professionnels et aux autres "initiés" à la conservation,
nombre de questions concernant les stratégies à la planification et à la prise de décision, ainsi que de
méthodologiques pour l'évaluation des valeurs donner la parole aux profanes, aux communautés
patrimoniales et examine ensuite un certain nombre locales et aux autres "étrangers" au processus.
d'outils qui sont, ou pourraient être, utilisés pour
l'évaluation. Un thème récurrent dans l'étude de ces outils
Questions et conditions générales meilleure solution. Un autre défi, abordé ci-dessous,
consiste à faire correspondre les méthodes appropriées à
Les choix méthodologiques pour l'évaluation de la
toutes les valeurs identifiées pour établir une typologie.
valeur doivent, à un moment donné du processus de
Troisièmement, le contexte est l'un des mots
planification de la gestion, aborder quelques
d'ordre qui permet d'assurer une perspective variée et
questions générales et fondamentales (figure ).
solide sur les valeurs à évaluer. Le contexte, tel qu'il
Premièrement, le processus d'évaluation de la
est utilisé ici, fait référence à l'environnement physique
valeur en fait
et géographique, aux modèles et récits historiques, et
se compose de quelques parties discrètes mais étroitement
liées. Valeur aux processus sociaux ayant un impact perceptible sur
L'évaluation n'est pas une simple question de le patrimoine et sa conservation. Il s'agit des conditions
simultanéité culturelles, sociales, économiques et autres qui
l'identification et la mesure, comme la prise de contribuent à l'importance du site, ainsi que du cadre
température de gestion et de l'environnement physique du site. Les
ture. L'évaluation peut être divisée en trois parties : sites et les objets du patrimoine doivent être compris
l'identification, l'obtention et l'élaboration (y compris en relation avec leur contexte, c'est-à-dire de manière
l'exploration des liens et des chevauchements), et le holistique. On ne peut pas comprendre pleinement un
classement et site sans comprendre ses contextes, qui, forcément,
l'établissement de priorités. s'étendent au-delà du site lui-même, tant sur le plan
Deuxièmement, nous pouvons supposer littéraire que conceptuel.
qu'aucune méthode d'évaluation de la valeur ne donnera Les professionnels de la conservation ont
une connaissance parfaite, totale ou même adéquate pour toujours été très compétents pour examiner certains
éclairer les décisions de conservation sur le terrain. Étant contextes de l'œuvre - en rapport avec la détérioration
donné la nature variée des valeurs patrimoniales, la physique, les conditions environnementales et d'autres
meilleure façon d'acquérir des connaissances à leur sujet facteurs physiques, ou avec les récits historiques et les
est d'adopter un certain nombre de perspectives canons esthétiques - et ont développé des
(épistémologies) assez different et, il s'ensuit, des méthodologies et des outils pour analyser ces contextes.
méthodologies. Pour évaluer sufficiently toutes les Mais la compréhension des valeurs patrimoniales au
valeurs patrimoniales d'un projet ou d'un site et pour sens le plus large du terme exige que les professionnels
informer les décisions de conservation sur le terrain, une de la conservation élargissent leur champ d'action et
série de méthodes variées - quantitatives ou qualitatives, prennent en compte davantage et different contextes de
économiques ou anthropologiques - est probablement la
la conservation - économique, culturelle et politique. En traditionnels de conservation. En outre, la signification
corollaire, les professionnels de la conservation et les du site archéologique pour les communautés qui vivent
planificateurs doivent s'ouvrir à d'autres domaines et autour de lui pourrait bien être l'une des forces motrices
disciplines - qui ont déjà acquis une certaine expérience dans derrière le effort pour planifier et conserver. Dans ce cas,
l'évaluation de ces questions contextuelles - et apporter plus les professionnels de la conservation doivent comprendre
de rigueur à cet engagement. les valeurs telles qu'elles sont perçues par cette
Par exemple, dans l'approche de la planification communauté, ce qui suggère toute une série de
de la conservation d'un site archéologique, il est souvent méthodologies pour articuler ces valeurs (allant des
impératif de comprendre et de traiter les pressions et les études ethnographiques aux groupes de discussion et aux
opportunités présentées par le développement du entretiens, en passant par la participation de la
tourisme - non seulement les activités touristiques qui se communauté et les processus de "cartographie").
déroulent sur le site mais aussi les valeurs qui façonnent Quatrièmement, plusieurs complications découlent
les décisions bien avant et bien après la visite proprement du fait que les valeurs viennent des gens - ce sont des
dite. Une telle planification exige une compréhension des opinions. Les valeurs n'entrent en jeu que lorsqu'elles sont
forces économiques, des méthodes d'analyse articulées et défendues par les parties prenantes. Mais qui
économique, des politiques publiques, des tensions consulter ou demander ? Quelle est l'étendue du réseau
culturelles et du commerce - offs - qui accompagnent d'informateurs, de porte-parole et d'experts ? Où peut-on
souvent le développement du tourisme, ainsi que de la tracer la ligne pour limiter le nombre de voix afin que la
relation entre ces facteurs et les objectifs et principes diversité des valeurs soit représentative et gérable et non
écrasante ? Il n'existe pas de solution universelle à ce Méthodes quantitatives et qualitatives
dilemme, mais on n'a pas non plus que l'intuition à suivre.
Les modes économiques et culturels de conceptualisation
Ces questions sont abordées par l'analyse des
et d'évaluation de la valeur représentent deux manières
circonscriptions et les méthodes ethnographiques décrites ci-
distinctes et quelque peu disproportionnées de considérer
dessous. Une autre complication concerne la manière dont on
la valeur : l'une quantifiable et fondée sur les préférences
pose les questions - ou, dans les termes exposés ci-dessus,
individuelles, l'autre résistante à la quantification et
comment on obtient des valeurs ? Comme le montrent les
fondée sur la signification collective. Dans l'ensemble, les
recherches de Theresa Satterfield, le fait de demander des
valeurs économiques sont plus faciles à obtenir et à
réponses numériques et narratives aux questions d'incitation
exprimer par des méthodes de recherche quantitatives.
aux valeurs donne quelque peu different des ensembles de
Les mathématiques sont, après tout, le langage
valeurs (voir Satterfield, "Numbness and Sensitivity in the
fondamental de l'économie moderne. À l'inverse, les
Elicitation of Environ-mental Values", ci-après ; voir
valeurs culturelles ne se soumettent à la quantification
également Satterfield, à paraître). Tout d'abord, il faut viser
que de manière adaptée et inadéquate. Les méthodes de
une diversité d'outils et de formes
recherche qualitatives, qui vont des récits et des analyses
de connaissances (pas seulement numériques, pas
rédigés par des experts aux entretiens avec des citoyens
seulement narratives) ; deuxièmement, on peut rechercher
ordinaires, permettent d'obtenir des valeurs culturelles
les types de valeurs et d'acteurs qui s'avèrent
plus effectively.
généralement les plus insaisissables - communautés
On prétend que les méthodes économiques
défavorisées, valeurs spirituelles, sentiment
basées sur la théorie néoclassique permettent une
d'appartenance à un lieu.
évaluation globale des valeurs patrimoniales. Ces
méthodes traduisent tous les types de valeur, dit-on, en
termes de dollars en simulant des marchés ou en
supposant que des marchés existent pour eux. De telles
affirmations sont toutefois entachées de problèmes. La
meilleure évaluation des valeurs patrimoniales, beaucoup
en conviennent, provient d'une utilisation
complémentaire des méthodes économiques et
culturelles. (Dans son article publié dans ce volume,
David Throsby parvient à cette conclusion, en se plaçant
dans la perspective d'un économiste qui réfléchit à la
valeur de la culture et des arts).
Les méthodologies quantitatives et qualitatives
dérivent des épistémologies assez different. Elles
permettent toutes deux de prélever des échantillons et de
faire des approximations de réalités complexes qui ne
peuvent être décrites dans leur totalité. Les deux
approches peuvent être considérées comme des tentatives
de mesurer les mêmes valeurs, bien que du point de vue
de different, avec les outils et les discours de different, et
avec les résultats de different. Les informations générées
par les deux types de méthodes sont disjointes - il est
difficult, sinon impossible, de les mesurer et de les
comparer sur la même échelle. Bien qu'elles puissent être
considérées comme des paradigmes concurrents, les
informations qu'elles génèrent sont souvent
complémentaires.
Les forces et faiblesses particulières des approches
quantitatives et qualitatives doivent être examinées avec
soin. De par leur nature même, certains types de valeurs
résistent à la comparaison ou à la mise à l'échelle - les quantitatives restent la lingua franca pour les décideurs
valeurs spirituelles, par exemple - et sont donc plus sensibles politiques. Les méthodes quantitatives se concentrent sur les
aux méthodes humanistes et qualitatives. Les résultats relations causales et dépendent de variables isolées de leur
échelonnables des méthodes quantitatives sont plus faciles à contexte. Cependant, comme mentionné
comparer entre eux - c'est pourquoi les méthodes
ci-dessus, les valeurs et autres formes de signification variété d'outils disponibles dans la boîte à outils du
sont produites à partir de l'interaction des artefacts et de planificateur, la notion de triangulation est utile. La
leurs contextes, et non à partir de l'artefact lui-même. triangulation, qui nécessite l'utilisation d'une série de
C'est dans ce domaine que les méthodes de recherche méthodes different de manière complémentaire, devrait
qualitative ont une force particulière ; elles sont sensibles être au cœur de
aux relations contextuelles (par opposition aux liens de une approche visant à susciter et à évaluer les valeurs
causalité) et sont donc indispensables pour étudier la patrimoniales. Le principe sous-jacent est que la
nature et l'interaction des valeurs patrimoniales. 12 superposition de different, d'éléments d'information
complémentaires, produira une réponse plus précise
Une approche "boîte à outils que la recherche d'un ou deux éléments
d'information.
Étant donné qu'une évaluation complète des valeurs du
patrimoine nécessitera un ensemble de méthodes diverses et
une approche flexible, comment commencer à faire
correspondre les méthodes aux valeurs ? Les valeurs de la
typologie provisoire peuvent-elles être mises en
correspondance avec des méthodes spécifiques ? Pas au sens
strict du terme. Les types d'outils qui ont été évoqués -
analyses d'experts, études quantitatives/économiques des
valeurs d'usage et de non-usage, évaluations
ethnographiques - sont, de par leur conception, assez vastes.
Dans chaque cas, les spécificités de la méthode (les
questions de l'enquête, les données collectées, les experts
consultés) devraient être conçues, au cas par cas, pour
répondre à la gamme de valeurs associées au projet et au
personnel disponible pour les gérer. Mais il serait judicieux,
par exemple, d'imaginer un processus de planification
utilisant des évaluations comportant des éléments tels que
l'analyse de l'impact économique ; des enquêtes auprès des
touristes, comprenant à la fois des questions narratives et des
méthodes de quantification telles qu'une étude sur le
consentement à payer ; des études ethnographiques centrées
sur les communautés locales (groupes ethniques, populations
autochtones, migrants récents) ; des entretiens avec des
politiciens locaux officials et des hommes d'affaires ; et des
analyses approfondies des valeurs historiques, artistiques,
éducatives et autres du site par la communauté des
universitaires/experts.
L'objectif de l'approche de la boîte à outils est de
mettre sur la table toutes les valeurs patrimoniales
pertinentes, en établissant un compte rendu le plus
complet possible pour informer la prise de décision et
l'élaboration des politiques. La variété des valeurs
représentées dans la typologie nécessite l'utilisation d'une
variété d'outils pour leur évaluation. Pour gérer cette
Compte tenu de leur diversité, l'obtention de L'objectif d'une méthodologie flexible et utile
valeurs patrimoniales pour un site nécessite de jeter ce pour l'évaluation de la valeur doit être maintenu dans la
type de large filet en superposant les approches different perspective de l'objectif plus large de recherche de
pour obtenir les résultats les plus robustes. Dans cette pratiques et de politiques plus durables pour la
veine, Denzin et Lincoln ( ) décrivent le chercheur social conservation du patrimoine. C'est un truisme que la
contemporain comme un bricoleur : celui qui assemble les même approche ne fonctionnera pas dans tous les lieux,
méthodes de different pour glaner des sortes de dans tous les contextes culturels, pour tous les types de
connaissances, de manière itérative, opportuniste, pour patrimoine - elle doit être adaptable et variable. En
construire la meilleure réponse composite à la question gardant cette flexibilité à l'esprit, les cadres développés
posée. Dans le contexte de l'évaluation des impacts ici visent à être significatifs pour un éventail de parties
sociaux des politiques environnementales, William prenantes, à adopter une vision large des valeurs comme
Freudenburg a proposé une version un peu plus structurée motivations derrière la conservation et à accepter une
et systématique de l'idée de triangulation-bricoleur. Il large participation comme aspect inhérent de la
décrit une méthode en trois parties : premièrement, conservation. L'approche méthodologique de l'évaluation
l'utilisation de techniques de recherche secondaire à partir des valeurs proposée ici ne doit pas seulement être
de données d'archives existantes (à la fois qualitatives et flexible - les idées et les approches doivent être
quantitatives) ; deuxièmement, la réalisation de transférables et utiles. Elles font partie des ingrédients
recherches primaires à l'aide de techniques de travail d'une conservation plus durable.
ethnographique sur le terrain ; et troisièmement, Il est significatif que tous les experts qui ont
l'utilisation de techniques "d'oeillères et de lacunes" contribué à ce volume parviennent à la même
(telles que la remise en question structurée, la conclusion fondamentale concernant la recherche
consultation et la participation du public) à la fois pour future : la formulation et l'expérimentation d'une sorte
combler les lacunes dans les connaissances et pour d'approche de la boîte à outils - bien "intégrée",
corriger les préjugés des chercheurs eux-mêmes comme le soulignent Mourato et Mazzanti, à travers
(Freudenburg ). les lignes disciplinaires ainsi que les types de valeurs -
est la prochaine étape urgente à franchir.
Les parties prenantes et la par souci d'équité et d'équité, de favoriser une large
participation à l'évaluation de la valeur participation et de tenir compte des avis de tous les
évaluateurs concernés. 13
Il est important d'avoir à sa disposition le plus grand
La question des parties prenantes est une
nombre de méthodes effective pour obtenir et évaluer
question essentielle dans l'évaluation de la valeur.
les valeurs du patrimoine. Cependant, le véritable
L'importance des parties prenantes pour la notion de
pouvoir d'une approche fondée sur les valeurs réside
valeur et l'évaluation de la valeur est claire : ce sont les
dans l'utilisation de ces outils pour cultiver les valeurs
parties prenantes qui font l'évaluation. Ainsi,
telles qu'elles sont ressenties, conçues et réalisées par
l'identification des groupes d'acteurs et l'utilisation de
les groupes concernés par la gestion des sites
méthodes conçues pour les atteindre et les entendre en
patrimoniaux. L'engagement des valeurs patrimoniales
fonction de leur caractère et de leur capacité particuliers
"sur le terrain" - pour ainsi dire - nécessite un
sont nécessaires à toute méthodologie d'évaluation de la
engagement sur les questions d'influence, de
valeur du patrimoine. Comme il est largement admis que
concurrence, de pouvoir et de politique. Il faut
l'élargissement du cercle des parties prenantes impliquées
s'aventurer dans des questions telles que : Qui participe
dans un projet améliore à la fois le processus et le
à l'évaluation des valeurs du patrimoine ? Quelles sont
résultat, l'analyse des groupes d'intérêt et l'identification
les valeurs qui sont prises en compte ? Ainsi, qui a le
des parties prenantes est une tâche extrêmement
pouvoir de façonner les résultats de la conservation ?
importante.
Il existe plusieurs sources de valeur
patrimoniale sur different : la communauté et les autres LES INITIÉS ET LES OUTSIDERS
groupes culturels, le marché, l'État, les conservateurs, Pour répondre aux appels à une participation plus large et
les autres experts, les propriétaires et les citoyens à l'implication des parties prenantes dans la conservation,
ordinaires. En matière d'évaluation des valeurs, la ligne il faut considérer la distinction flagrante entre les initiés et
directrice politique la plus simple consiste à essayer, les outsiders du processus de planification et de décision
en matière de conservation. Cette distinction découle de Les étrangers sont tous ceux qui ont un intérêt dans le
l'idée que certaines parties prenantes sont "à la table" où patrimoine en question, mais qui n'ont pas ou peu
les valeurs sont identifiées, évaluées et classées et où les d'influence sur le processus. Dans certains cas, les étrangers
décisions sont prises, tandis que d'autres parties prenantes sont activement exclus du processus ; dans d'autres, ils n'ont
légitimes ne sont pas présentes. aucune connaissance du processus ou ne maîtrisent pas le
Les initiés sont ceux qui peuvent participer au langage de la conservation et de la politique, et ne sont peut-
processus de plein droit ou les acteurs puissants, tels être même pas enclins à y participer. De plus en plus
que le public officials, les bureaucrates, les décideurs souvent, les deux parties font appel à efforts pour faire
politiques, ceux qui les influencent et (dans une passer les étrangers à l'intérieur. Les étrangers peuvent être
certaine mesure) les professionnels de la conservation intégrés au processus décisionnel ou bien ils peuvent
et autres experts invités dans le processus. s'imposer, ce qui arrive assez souvent.
Les étrangers ne sont pas simplement des non-
professionnels ; les professionnels de la conservation sont
en fait souvent des étrangers en ce sens qu'ils ont peu
d'accès à la prise ou à l'élaboration des décisions les plus
importantes affecting a site. Il convient de noter que les
valeurs et les intérêts des outsiders et des insiders ne sont
pas nécessairement en conflit (malgré l'opposition
impliquée dans ces étiquettes). Bien qu'ils aient un lien
avec les processus décisionnels different, les parties
prenantes des deux côtés pourraient très bien trouver un
terrain d'entente et bénéficier d'une même ligne de
conduite en matière de conservation.
La notion d'inclusion des étrangers dans la
planification des conservateurs est fondamentalement
une question politique, une question de pouvoir et
d'autorité. À un certain égard, cette inclusion peut être
abordée de manière formelle en faisant entrer des
personnes extérieures dans le groupe de clients/directeurs
d'un projet, en reconnaissant les droits des personnes
extérieures à la propriété ou à l'utilisation d'un site, etc.
La politique de participation peut également être abordée
dans le choix des méthodologies et la conception du
processus de planification/gestion. Le choix des
méthodes n'est pas seulement une question de choix
parmi les discours des experts/universitaires de different ;
il incarne également un geste politique dont l'analyse, les
voix et les valeurs sont incluses dans le processus
décisionnel. La participation doit être abordée aux deux
niveaux : l'adhésion formelle au processus et la
conception du processus.
La distinction entre outsider/insider met
également en évidence des problèmes pratiques. Si les
typologies de valeurs dont il est question ici peuvent nous
sembler sensées en tant que professionnels de la
conservation, quelles seraient les catégories de valeurs
pour les personnes extérieures ? S'agirait-il de different ?
Quel type de langage, de formulation et de
communication effectively favoriserait le plus leur
participation ? Ces questions doivent être prises en
compte lors de la conception et de l'application d'une et les autres parties prenantes à la table peuvent-ils
typologie pour un projet. Par quelles méthodes ces générer des connaissances sur les évaluations de valeur
professionnels de la conservation, officials, les décideurs des personnes extérieures au processus ?
L'idée de l'insider/outsider peut être utile pour être inclus dans la composition des équipes de projet et
identifier les participants au présent. Mais un troisième dans le processus de planification lui-même (sur effect,
ensemble d'acteurs (circonscriptions) peut également devenir des initiés plutôt que des outsiders). L'alternative
être amené à participer à la conception du processus - à ce type d'intégration des insiders et des outsiders sur
les parties prenantes potentielles. Il peut s'agir de effective - générer des évaluations séparées des types de
groupes qui pourraient à l'avenir s'intéresser au site parties prenantes sur different et simplement les collecter
patrimonial en question - des générations futures, par - ne permettrait pas une évaluation complète des valeurs
exemple - ou qui peuvent exister à distance du site patrimoniales d'un projet.
patrimonial (littéralement ou métaphoriquement) mais En ce qui concerne les méthodes et le
qui s'y intéressent (par exemple, la "communauté", la processus de planification impliqués dans cette
des citoyens d'une nation). Ces parties prenantes recherche, il existe deux façons d'aborder
doivent également être prises en compte dans concrètement la question de la participation élargie.
l'évaluation de la valeur.
ABORDER LA PARTICIPATION DE MANIÈRE
PRATIQUE
Mais comment peut-on aborder la participation de manière
pratique ? Sur le plan rhétorique, nous sommes tous d'accord
sur l'appel à une plus grande participation. En principe, il est
largement reconnu qu'une participation rigoureuse et
significative doit être considérée comme un élément
précieux du processus de planification et intégrée dans de
nombreux aspects de l'évaluation et de la planification. Mais
il faudra de réels changements dans les attitudes
professionnelles ainsi qu'un test continu de nouvelles
méthodes adaptées au contexte. Les professionnels doivent
être ouverts à d'autres points de vue, non experts, sur les
valeurs du patrimoine et les décisions qui s'y rapportent, et
adopter d'autres façons de comprendre la valeur, en
négociant differences, etc.
Les domaines de l'urbanisme, de la protection de
l'environnement et du développement - et le travail avec
chacun d'eux, la discipline de l'anthropologie - ont
beaucoup lutté contre ce problème, et un grand nombre de
travaux pratiques et intellectuels ont été réalisés sur les
questions de participation. 14 Ces préoccupations ont
également fait quelques percées dans le domaine de la
conservation du patrimoine. Parmi les exemples
progressistes de participation dans le domaine du
patrimoine, on peut citer le processus de la Charte de
Burra en Australie, le processus de Main Street lancé aux
États-Unis et de nombreux autres processus locaux
(efforts) mis en œuvre, par exemple, au Canada (Kerr ).
Les initiés et les outsiders doivent s'intégrer non
seulement dans la manière dont leurs réponses à
l'obtention de valeurs sont exprimées et enregistrées, mais
aussi dans la manière dont ils formulent les questions de
valeur. Par conséquent, les initiés et les outsiders doivent
Tout d'abord, une analyse approfondie des de la valeur (voir figure ). À ce stade, où les valeurs ont
circonscriptions est nécessaire pour identifier toutes les déjà été identifiées et une typologie du site a été créée, la
parties prenantes : à l'intérieur et à l'extérieur, proches et question méthodologique est de choisir les outils
lointaines, présentes et projetées dans l'avenir. Cette appropriés pour obtenir et caractériser (élaborer) les
analyse doit servir de base à la composition d'une équipe valeurs patrimoniales diff-erent. Plusieurs types d'outils
de projet et à un processus de consultation représentant le sont détaillés ci-dessous ; ils comprennent, par exemple,
plus grand nombre possible de positions pertinentes des des études d'impact économique, des études d'évaluation
parties prenantes different. L'analyse du groupe d'intérêt contingente, des études ethnographiques de groupes
doit également être revue périodiquement tout au long du culturels particuliers, des contextes historiques rédigés
projet, au fur et à mesure que de nouveaux groupes ou par des historiens ou des analyses scientifiques des
different apparaissent. mérites artistiques. Comme indiqué précédemment,
Une deuxième mesure visant à garantir la participation est certaines méthodologies sont mieux adaptées à
le type d'ensemble ethnographique et économique de l'évaluation de valeurs particulières. 15 Il n'existe pas de
méthodologies proposé tout au long du document, dont règles strictes pour guider le choix des outils, mais
l'objectif fondamental est d'impliquer de nombreuses seulement des règles empiriques.
parties prenantes dans l'évaluation des valeurs
patrimoniales qui sous-tendent la planification et la Des outils adaptés aux valeurs culturelles
gestion de la conservation, en leur proposant des outils
Un large éventail de méthodologies est utilisé dans un
d'incitation conformes à leur "maîtrise" et aux valeurs
grand nombre de domaines liés aux questions de
qui leur sont chères.
conservation du patrimoine. Quels types de méthodes
sont les mieux adaptés pour évaluer les valeurs culturelles
Outils pour l'obtention de valeurs patrimoniales de manière large et exhaustive (mais pas nécessairement
exhaustive) ? Nous faisons plusieurs hypothèses dès le
Comment les points de vue des nombreuses parties départ : que l'évaluation adéquate des valeurs culturelles
concernées par nécessitera un ensemble de méthodes different ; que cet
un site patrimonial soit recherché, articulé et mis sur la ensemble comprendra probablement des méthodes
table ? quantitatives et qualitatives ; que l'un des objectifs de
Cette section concerne les outils utilisés dans la l'approche de l'ensemble est l'inclusion ; que cet ensemble
partie "élici-tation/élaboration" du processus d'évaluation devra être ajusté au fur et à mesure qu'il sera appliqué
d'un projet à l'autre.
Le domaine de la conservation s'est ont traditionnellement été une source importante de
traditionnellement appuyé sur des évaluations d'experts valorisation pour
(d'œuvres d'art, de bâtiments et d'autres objets, par des le domaine de la conservation. Les œuvres de Reigl,
historiens de l'art, des architectes et des archéologues) Ruskin et
pour savoir ce qu'il faut conserver. Et le domaine s'est d'autres histoires de l'art du XIXe et du début du XXe
traditionnellement appuyé sur des méthodes siècle
scientifiques et documentaires pour analyser les ans et les critiques sont les fondements de ces méthodes
de valorisation-
conditions physiques du patrimoine et pour déterminer
de l'art et du patrimoine, qui ont été rassemblés par des
comment le conserver. 16 Les évaluations d'experts de
historiens de l'art et des
plusieurs disciplines different continueront à être une
par les collectionneurs eux-mêmes. Ces experts ont
contribution importante à l'évaluation de la valeur, bien fixé la valeur
qu'elles aient déjà commencé à être combinées et de choses, et ensuite les restaurateurs ont fixé ces choses
intégrées à d'autres types d'évaluations (détaillées ci- matérielles-
dessous), afin de capter les valeurs d'autres parties allié. Les valeurs elles-mêmes et les décisions de
prenantes. conservation
Les canons historiques de l'art : le goût, la beauté, découlent de jugements rendus par un connaisseur et/ou
l'innovation, expert savant formé aux canons du goût, authentique-
et l'authenticité - en fonction de l'âge ou de la perception et de l'importance historique.
de l'âge
Les travaux de Cesare Brandi et Paul Philippot - nous avons besoin d'une conception plus sociale du
et, avant eux, de Boito et Giovannoni et d'autres - ont contexte afin d'atteindre les valeurs qui vont au-delà
souligné la nécessité pour les professionnels de la du site lui-même mais que affect le site - par exemple,
conservation de comprendre l'objet dans son contexte le changement culturel, les marchés économiques, la
plus large et ont ainsi contribué à faire progresser la dynamique de la société civile, la politique du
notion de conservation en tant que discipline nationalisme et des conflits ethniques, etc.
interdisciplinaire, technique et humaine, bien au-delà de D'autres domaines liés à la conservation
ses origines artisanales. 17 En tant que discipline en pleine (développement rural, conservation écologique) ont
maturité, la méthode de conservation a impliqué le cherché plus avidement à comprendre les questions
développement d'approches standard pour la contextuelles et à les faire entrer dans le territoire
documentation et l'analyse de l'histoire de d'analyse familier aux praticiens.
l'art/architecture, des compositions formelles et Un large éventail d'approches méthodologiques qualitatives
matérielles, et des conditions physiques. Ces outils et est utilisé dans les disciplines des sciences humaines et
méthodologies ont fourni un éclairage supplémentaire sur sociales et dans les domaines professionnels (en particulier
l'évaluation des valeurs, dans la mesure où ils permettent l'urbanisme, le domaine du développement18 et la conservation de
de comprendre l'environnement) pour étudier les phénomènes sociaux. La
de l'évolution et de l'utilisation des objets et des lieux, plupart des méthodes sont ancrées dans une certaine
identifier les éléments et les matériaux originaux, discipline - par exemple, l'ethnographie avec l'anthropologie,
aider à interpréter l'"intention originale" des la recherche archivistique avec l'histoire, la cartographie
artistes/créateurs et relier les changements aux avec la géographie - mais la diffusion de la recherche
facteurs intrinsèques (conception, composition des interdisciplinaire et une attitude catholique largement
matériaux, etc.) et aux facteurs extrinsèques répandue à l'égard de l'utilisation et du mélange des
(environnement, intervention humaine ou absence méthodes qualitatives font qu'il est quelque peu trompeur
d'intervention, etc.) d'identifier certaines méthodes avec leurs disciplines
Mais cette notion de contexte a été étroitement liée d'origine uniquement. La principale orientation des sciences
à un contact physique avec le patrimoine lui-même. Les sociales et humaines a été la "pollinisation" entre les
valeurs au-delà de celles qui ressortent de l'analyse visuelle- disciplines.
textuelle-iconographique des matériaux par les experts en Les méthodologies générales suivantes sont
conservation et les connaisseurs ont été peu explorées. présentées sur offered comme un éventail d'approches de
Cependant, les valeurs qui dépassent celles qui ressortent de base, non pas spécifiques à un domaine particulier mais
l'analyse visuelle, contextuelle, iconographique et matérielle plutôt appliquées en anthropologie, archéologie,
des experts et des connaisseurs en matière de conservation géographie, sociologie, urbanisme et divers domaines
ont été peu explorées, hybrides. 19 Chacune est nouvellement utilisée dans
l'évaluation de la valeur du patrimoine et peut être utilisée
pour évaluer les valeurs dans la planification de la
conservation.
ANALYSE D'EXPERTS
(TEXTUELLE/ICONOGRAPHIQUE/FORMELLE/S
ÉMIOLOGIQUE)
L'analyse détaillée d'objets, de choses, de symboles et
de textes particuliers est le lot des experts dans tout
domaine universitaire ou professionnel. Comme
indiqué ci-dessus, dans le domaine de la conservation,
ce type d'analyse a été historiquement illustré par les
jugements de connaisseurs des historiens de l'art, des
conservateurs et des collectionneurs.
Un expert interprète les valeurs et autres
phénomènes à travers des écrans théoriques (en faisant
tacitement un grand nombre d'hypothèses épistémologiques)
et interprète comment ils s'inscrivent dans leur contexte plus apports (si la connaissance de l'expert n'est pas établie off à
large. Il en résulte souvent une évaluation de la valeur de partir de la connaissance des autres, elle perd sa valeur), et
l'objet ou du phénomène selon une échelle de valeurs interne vont donc à l'encontre de l'objectif d'une participation plus
à la profession. De telles distinctions disciplinaires tendent large. Qui sont ces experts ? Ce sont les professionnels
délibérément à isoler les jugements de ces experts des autres
formés dans presque tous les domaines humanistes ou ethnographique spécifique qu'elle et ses collègues ont
professionnels : historiens, historiens de l'art, architectes, utilisée pour étudier et planifier des projets
anthropologues, géographes, etc. Comme ces analyses patrimoniaux.
sont par nature du ressort des experts - les analyses sont Parmi les outils utilisés par Low et d'autres,
de facto précieuses si elles sont faites par des experts - il y citons les entretiens, les groupes de discussion, les
a peu de possibilités de comparer ou de vérifier les exercices de cartographie et les techniques d'observation
jugements portés. structurée (Low ; McHarg ). Ces méthodes
ethnographiques éclectiques mais structurées ont été
ETHNOGRAPHIE
adaptées à la conservation du patrimoine comme la
L'ethnographie comprend les méthodes de description et
procédure d'évaluation ethno-graphique rapide ( ), une
d'enregistrement des caractéristiques d'une culture.
méthode de planification développée avec le Service des
L'ethnographie est généralement, mais pas
parcs nationaux des États-Unis. 20
nécessairement, qualitative. Elle repose sur des activités
De même, une méthodologie ethnographique
de collecte d'informations telles que des entretiens, des
appliquée appelée évaluation rurale participative ( ) est
récits oraux, l'observation et l'enregistrement des
souvent utilisée dans les domaines de la santé publique
caractéristiques de la culture d'un partenaire. Avec un
et du développement (en particulier dans le
certain nombre d'outils particuliers de collecte
développement agricole efforts dans les pays moins
d'informations à disposition, l'ethnographie semble bien
développés
adaptée comme approche pour obtenir des valeurs
patrimoniales.
Initialement considérée comme une
méthodologie positiviste, l'ethnographie s'est orientée
vers la reconnaissance de la subjectivité de l'observateur
ainsi que vers l'enregistrement des caractéristiques de la
culture qui en est l'objet. De nombreuses approches
ethnographiques ont été développées dans le domaine de
l'anthropol-ogie, depuis les études d'observation de
cultures exotiques par les participants au début du XXe
siècle jusqu'à la "description dense" (qui met l'accent sur
l'intégration des pratiques et des caractéristiques
culturelles dans leurs multiples contextes, dont la
connaissance se construit par une description dense), en
passant par les approches actuelles très sensibles aux
valeurs pour représenter les nombreuses voix qui
contribuent à la culture.
Ces types d'anthropologie sociale appliquée
présentent un intérêt particulier pour la conservation du
patrimoine. En effet, certains anthropologues et
concepteurs ont utilisé conjointement des méthodes
ethnographiques dans le cadre de projets d'aménagement
du territoire et de planification communautaire, en
synthétisant des informations sur les contextes sociaux et
physiques et en utilisant ces informations pour générer
des solutions de conception et de planification. L'article
de Setha Low dans ce volume décrit l'approche
consiste en un menu flexible de techniques ethno- Le domaine de la planification/urbanisme est une autre
graphiques et de participation du public visant à source de méthodes permettant d'impliquer de multiples
comprendre les valeurs et les connaissances que les parties prenantes dans la planification et la gestion
populations locales - les cultures traditionnelles et les efforts. Depuis les années 90, de nombreuses méthodes
groupes non alphabétisés en particulier - souhaitent ont été appliquées dans de nombreux types de projets.
maintenir alors qu'elles rencontrent l'organisation non S'agissant des décisions relatives aux questions de
gouvernementale occidentale efforts pour moderniser développement urbain, social, environnemental,
et développer leurs économies. vise non seulement à infrastructurel et économique, les planificateurs ont
glaner des connaissances sur les valeurs et les utilisé divers moyens pour comprendre comment les
compétences des non-experts et des personnes sans citoyens ordinaires attribuent de la valeur et comment ces
pouvoir, mais aussi à les autonomiser directement. 21 affects décisions de développement. Les méthodes
Enquêtes et entretiens comprennent souvent des enquêtes, des réunions
Comme mentionné ci-dessus, les méthodologies publiques, des groupes de discussion et des entretiens
ethnographiques utilisent souvent des entretiens et des avec des informateurs clés, des processus de vision, de
enquêtes comme outils de collecte de données. Les enquêtes Delphi et d'autres groupes, la médiation et la résolution de
sont utilisées dans une multitude de domaines, depuis les conflits, dans les cas où un conflit clair est apparu,
études de marché dans le monde des affaires jusqu'à celles l'institutionnalisation de la participation des groupes
réalisées pour collecter des données dans le cadre d'études communautaires existants, et même la création de
sociologiques. Elles peuvent être conçues et menées de nouveaux groupes communautaires (ou le renforcement
nombreuses manières (pour obtenir des données simples ou des capacités des groupes existants).
des réponses complexes, recueillies en personne, sur papier, MAPPING
par téléphone, etc.) ). Les entretiens peuvent également être La représentation des données sur une carte ou un plan
conçus de différentes manières : structurés ou non structurés, est une façon simple et peu incitative d'organiser
à l'aide de graphiques ou de réponses écrites ou enregistrées. l'information. Cartographie
Les entretiens peuvent être menés de manière stratégique, en peut être excessivement simple ou très complexe. Il
se concentrant sur quelques informateurs clés, s'agit d'une façon si large et si élémentaire de traiter
ou de manière extensive, avec des échantillons de les données qu'il est peut-être exagéré de parler de
plusieurs centaines. Il existe une énorme littérature de méthodologie ; mais dans la définition large utilisée
travaux appliqués sur ces outils. ici, elle constitue une façon de générer des
Autres méthodes participatives connaissances.
La cartographie est déjà une méthodologie de pas gérés par des professionnels, des experts ou des
base en matière de conservation, dans le cadre de décideurs, mais plutôt par des membres de la
l'évaluation des conditions physiques du patrimoine communauté ou d'autres non-professionnels. Parmi les
étudié. Les professionnels de la conservation, les exemples de cartographie interactive, on peut citer la
architectes et les paysagistes, ainsi que les planificateurs "cartographie mentale", réalisée sous la forme d'une
utilisent régulièrement la cartographie et les informations sorte d'enquête, les cartes produites par les
cartographiées (conditions existantes) comme communautés (comme le processus de "carte de
méthodologie de base pour aborder tout projet. 22 Le paroisse" lancé par le groupe anglais Common Ground,
potentiel analytique des techniques de cartographie a été qui stimule les communautés à représenter l'identité de
rendu plus puissant par l'introduction et la large utilisation leur lieu de manière innovante) et les "cartes de rochers
des systèmes d'information géographique de bureau ( ) et et de terre" informelles incluses dans certains modèles.
23
des bases de données numériques qui y sont liées. Les
systèmes ne sont pas en eux-mêmes une méthode LA RECHERCHE PRIMAIRE
d'obtention de valeur ; ils sont un outil d'organisation et (ARCHIVISTIQUE) ET LA RÉDACTION
d'analyse des données au service de la planification et de DE RÉCITS HISTORIQUES
la gestion. La méthodologie humaniste de base de la recherche, de
Un autre type de méthodologie cartographique l'interprétation et de la rédaction d'un récit reste l'une des
est la cartographie interactive, dans laquelle le choix et plus effective pour construire et exprimer des
l'enregistrement des informations sur une carte ne sont connaissances sur les valeurs. La construction d'une
histoire, basée sur des recherches primaires et autres, est RECHERCHE DOCUMENTAIRE SECONDAIRE
une façon particulière de documenter et de décrire les La recherche documentaire secondaire va peut-être sans
phénomènes sociaux. Les récits traitent de la causalité dire, mais elle ne doit pas être négligée en tant que
de manière plus circonspecte que, par exemple, les méthodes méthodologie stratégique et pratique pour générer
statistiques. Souvent, les contextes et les cadres d'un rapidement des informations pertinentes pour un projet.
phénomène non sont regroupés dans des histoires aux côtés Elle est devenue particulièrement opportune effec-tive,
des acteurs humains et des institutions. La compréhension étant donné la disponibilité croissante des ressources
est acquise par le déroulement bibliographiques et de recherche d'informations en ligne.
d'une histoire à travers les personnages et les
STATISTIQUES DESCRIPTIVES
influences, et non, par contrecoup, à travers des
Cette méthode quantitative des plus simples est largement
relations abstraites entre des variables isolées.
utilisée par l'ensemble des disciplines qualitatives, ce qui
Au cours des dernières décennies, le travail de
l'histoire sociale - signale la quasi-impossibilité de séparer réellement les
épistémologies qualitative et quantitative. L'une des
ans a gagné de plus en plus d'influence dans le domaine
du patrimoine applications du type le plus simple de statistiques
champ. Les travaux des historiens s'adressent plus descriptives est l'analyse du contenu (de la couverture
directement à l'association médiatique ou des interviews, par exemple : combien de
(souvent appelés historiques) qui constituent une fois la valeur esthétique a-t-elle été mentionnée par
la motivation derrière la conservation. rapport à la valeur économique ?) Plus couramment,
l'analyse démographique est utilisée pour caractériser une
population en sténographie. Les données sont recueillies
sous forme de tableaux et parfois cartographiées ou
présentées sous forme graphique, donnant un compte-
rendu effective, bien que souvent assez sommaire, de
l'état actuel d'une population. (Les statistiques
multivariées sont également largement utilisées par les
spécialistes des sciences sociales, pour comprendre et
théoriser les relations entre les phénomènes different.
Comme indiqué dans la discussion précédente sur les
méthodes quantitatives et qualitatives, la statistique
multivariée est scientifique dans le sens où elle tente
d'isoler des variables et de trouver des relations causales,
tandis que la statistique descriptive vise à construire une
compréhension contextuelle plus simple).

Des outils adaptés aux valeurs économiques

Les différents outils conçus par les économistes24 pour


évaluer la valeur du patrimoine culturel sont adaptés de
ceux conçus précédemment pour mesurer la valeur des
ressources environnementales dans le cadre des décisions
de conservation de l'environnement. Les travaux
antérieurs du Getty Conservation Institute et du cadre en
pleine expansion des économistes culturels ont résumé et
évalué ces contributions à l'évaluation du patrimoine.
Mourato et Mazzanti, dans le présent volume, fournissent
un excellent résumé de ces travaux passés et présents sur
l'économie culturelle du patrimoine, et leurs propres
travaux sont clairement à la pointe de la réflexion
économique sur les valeurs du patrimoine (voir
également Mason ; Hutter et Rizzo ). À la lumière de la
contribution de Mourato et Mazzanti à ce volume, un très bref résumé des outils économiques pour l'évaluation de
la valeur fera l'affaire.
LES MÉTHODES À PRÉFÉRENCES RÉVÉLÉES décisions individuelles, sur des marchés hypothétiques, et ne
Les méthodes des préférences révélées tirent et analysent permet pas du tout de voir l'image collective, sauf par
les données des marchés existants pour les biens et agrégation et inférence. Cette méthode commence à être
services liés au patrimoine. utilisée plus largement pour les projets patrimoniaux, car
Les études d'impact économique sont devenues très elle permet la conversion recherchée de valeurs qualitatives
populaires grâce à l'utilisation d'une méthode assez simple, en prix quantifiés. (Dans le cas du patrimoine, le concept
et elles suggèrent souvent clairement que l'investissement correspondant de volonté d'accepter une compensation pour
dans un projet patrimonial apportera des gains économiques la perte d'une ressource peut également être pertinent). Il
tangibles. En mesurant les investissements éco-nomiques et convient de noter que les aperçus et les conclusions tirés des
les gains d'emploi directement liés à l'activité de études d'évaluation contingente des ressources du patrimoine
conservation, et en multipliant cela par l'hypothèse que ces ont été limités aux cas où elles sont réalisées dans des
investissements directs produisent des gains secondaires qui conditions très strictes.
se répercutent sur l'ensemble de l'économie, les études
d'impact identifient les retours sur investissement exacts
(c'est-à-dire les augmentations de la valeur du patrimoine).
Les études d'impact peuvent être utiles pour identifier
certaines valeurs d'usage et certaines externalités des
investissements dans le patrimoine, mais elles sont souvent
suspectes en raison d'un double comptage et parce qu'elles
ne tiennent pas compte des coûts d'opportunité des
investissements dans le patrimoine.
Les méthodes de tarification hédonistes ne
peuvent mesurer les valeurs patrimoniales de non-usage
que dans la mesure où elles sont reflétées dans des
transactions de marché connexes. Elles mesurent
l'augmentation de la valeur financière obtenue, par
exemple, grâce à la proximité d'une parcelle de terrain
avec une ressource patrimoniale particulière.
Les méthodes de calcul des frais de
déplacement mesurent les valeurs patrimoniales par
l'intermédiaire des frais de déplacement liés à
l'utilisation/consommation de sites ou d'objets
patrimoniaux. En n'enregistrant les valeurs que
lorsqu'elles se traduisent par des décisions
individuelles de voyager, ces méthodes donnent un
compte rendu très partiel des valeurs patrimoniales.
LES MÉTHODES À PRÉFÉRENCES DÉCLARÉES
Les méthodes de préférences déclarées reposent sur la
création de marchés hypothétiques dans lesquels les
personnes interrogées sont invitées à faire des choix
hypothétiques, qui sont ensuite analysés comme des
jugements de valeur.
Les méthodes d'évaluation contingente mesurent la
valeur totale attribuée à un site du patrimoine par un
individu (exprimée comme la volonté de payer pour ce site)
mais ne ventilent pas la valeur, la laissant à undifferentiated.
La méthode tire des informations d'évaluations et de
La modélisation des choix est une méthode incertitudes, qu'il donne un ton dans lequel d'autres valeurs
potentiellement très intéressante pour le patrimoine dans semblent a priori exclues (ou dévalorisées). Cette situation
la mesure où elle décompose les attributs spécifiques de est problématique à plusieurs égards, notamment parce que
la valeur globale exprimée par les participants à l'étude. les gens ne peuvent pas parler de certains types de valeurs en
Par conséquent, elle pourrait être utilisée pour mesurer les termes monétaires ; sur le plan cognitif, le langage
valeurs (l'utilité pour les individus) associées aux quantitatif ne fonctionne pas très bien, par exemple, pour
caractéristiques different d'un site patrimonial, selon, par exprimer des valeurs spirituelles. Dans d'autres situations, la
exemple, la typologie décrite ci-dessus. Bien que les gens capacité à exprimer une valeur qualitative commune en
réagissent bien à ces types de scénarios et de termes quantitatifs a été essentielle pour prendre des
comparaisons, la méthode suppose des participants très décisions de conservation, de sorte que le besoin de
bien informés, et elle ne capturera pas bien les valeurs quantifier reste très fort.
immatérielles, difficult-to-price (telles que les valeurs Toutes les méthodes décrites dans cette section
spirituelles). doivent être dirigées par des économistes
Les méthodes économiques en général ont acquis professionnels ; les problèmes techniques à traiter sont
une grande crédibilité en ( ) présentant les données sous une nombreux et les méthodes peuvent facilement faire
forme apparemment objective (prix) et ( ) en faisant appel l'objet d'abus si elles sont appliquées de manière non
assez directement à la mentalité d'entreprise des décideurs éclairée. Mais les méthodes à préférences déclarées, qui
mondiaux et, de plus en plus, de la société dans son comprennent des processus d'enquête étendus, ouvrent
ensemble. Les méthodes éco-nomiques sont utilisées plus beaucoup de points communs (et de possibilités de
largement et à de nouvelles fins, et elles gagnent en collaboration) avec les approches utilisées par les
crédibilité. Mais il reste un grand danger à s'appuyer anthropologues et autres chercheurs sociaux. Les
uniquement sur des méthodes économiques quantitatives - méthodes utilisées par les économistes pour créer et
c'est un point de vue fortement soutenu par certains ajuster les instruments d'enquête sont fondamentalement
économistes, y compris certains de ceux qui participent à la identiques à celles utilisées par les anthropologues (un
recherche de l'UE. Le modèle économique néoclassique est processus itératif de pilotage, d'affinement et de
si bien affiné, si étroitement théorisé pour bloquer les déploiement).
Faire correspondre les outils aux valeurs valeur identifié (par exemple, historique, artistique,
spirituelle, d'usage). Au minimum, il devrait y avoir un outil
Dans la transition d'une typologie des valeurs à leur
général adapté aux valeurs économiques et
évaluation, il devrait y avoir un effort délibéré pour faire
un vaste outil adapté aux valeurs culturelles. Il devrait
correspondre les outils d'évaluation aux valeurs. Le choix
y avoir un outil axé sur les contributions des experts,
des outils affects valeurs - certains outils donnent une vue
ainsi qu'un outil axé sur le point de vue du public et
plus précise ou plus détaillée des valeurs de cer-tain que
des profanes. Un outil particulier peut être utilisé pour
d'autres. Par exemple, les études d'impact économique
évaluer plusieurs types de valeurs (par exemple, une
mettent en avant les valeurs d'utilisation économique
évaluation ethnographique pourrait être conçue pour
découlant des décisions des touristes, mais n'abordent pas
évaluer les valeurs spirituelles aussi bien que sociales).
directement toutes les valeurs socioculturelles d'un site.
Voici quelques lignes directrices plus générales :
Cette circonstance est analo-gique, pourrait-on dire, à la
• S'assurer que la diversité des outils et la
chimie analytique : dans une situation donnée, certains
Les "compétences" qu'ils représentent
composés sont mieux détectés par chromatographie en
correspondent à la diversité des valeurs qui
phase gazeuse, d'autres par spectrométrie de masse.
ont été identifiées.
Il n'existe pas de recette ou de méthodologie fixe
• Choisissez des experts et des professionnels en
pour faire correspondre les valeurs avec les outils. Ce qui
tenant compte de leur capacité à comprendre et à
suit est la suggestion de l'auteur sur la façon dont un
accepter les méthodologies des autres.
processus itératif d'essais et d'erreurs, ainsi que la
• Compléter les outils qualitatifs et quantitatifs.
triangulation avec une variété de méthodes, pourrait
• Rendre le processus d'évaluation itératif, dans la
constituer une approche utile pour faire correspondre les
mesure où le budget et les ressources le permettent ;
outils aux valeurs.
commencer de manière générale, puis s'adapter à des
Dans un premier temps, il convient de rechercher
outils plus spécifiques.
un outil spécialement adapté à l'évaluation de chaque type de
• Tenter de donner la parole aux outsiders aussi
Intégrer les évaluations et les cadres
bien qu'aux insiders.
décisionnels

Une fois que le large éventail de valeurs liées à un site est


évalué, comment avancer ? Comment relier ces
évaluations au travail politisé d'établissement des
priorités et de prise de décision du site difficult (en
référence une fois de plus à la figure, comment relier la
phase "évaluation et analyse" de la planification de la
gestion à la phase "réponse") ? Comme pour la plupart
des questions relatives aux processus de planification, il
n'y a pas de prescription, mais cette section décrit une
série d'étapes - nécessairement conceptuelles, jusqu'à ce
qu'elles soient développées en relation avec des projets
particuliers - pour s'appuyer sur les évaluations de la
valeur afin d'aborder les tâches de prise de décision. Ces
étapes doivent impliquer de manière réaliste une certaine
intégration et même une hiérarchisation des valeurs
évaluées. L'objectif de cette section est de suggérer
comment cela peut être fait - sans le prescrire à l'avance.
La deuxième partie de cette section décrit
(en termes généraux) comment les principes de
durabilité pourraient être adaptés afin de fournir
certains cadres pour la prise et l'évaluation des
décisions de planification de la gestion, à la fois au
sein des projets et sur plusieurs sites.
Les étapes sont décrites de manière conceptuelle,
non pas comme un ensemble de tâches par cœur et non
pas au niveau de détail qui résulterait de leur adaptation
et de leur exécution. Bien que la spécification des étapes
dans les moindres détails nécessite
dans le cas d'un site, d'un projet et d'une équipe spécifiques,
ce processus dépasse le cadre du présent document. (Ainsi,
pour aller plus loin dans cette recherche, il faut
appliquer, tester et affiner les étapes suggérées).

Intégrer les évaluations de la valeur

Quatre étapes sont proposées pour intégrer les évaluations


de valeur et les mettre en œuvre dans le cadre du processus
de planification : créer des déclarations d'importance, faire
correspondre les valeurs aux ressources physiques et aux
caractéristiques du site, analyser les menaces et les
opportunités, et élaborer des politiques et prendre des
mesures. Les étapes, qui sont discutées ci-dessous, ne
doivent pas être entreprises de manière linéaire - en fait,
certaines d'entre elles peuvent et doivent être réalisées en
parallèle (voir les figures et ).

CRÉER DES DÉCLARATIONS D'IMPORTANCE


Les déclarations d'importance découlent directement actions que l'on pourrait proposer pour le site -
des évaluations de la valeur. Leur fonction est de conservation, développement, interprétation, etc. et de
synthétiser les raisons qui sous-tendent toutes les fournir des positions claires qui constitueraient la base
La production d'une déclaration d'importance est une catégoriquement leur importance pour le site - sont
pratique courante dans la planification de la empruntées à Pearson et Sullivan ( ) et à Kerr ( ). Ils
conservation, par exemple aux États-Unis. L'équipe de suggèrent à ce stade une évaluation du degré ou du
professionnels examine toutes les valeurs et évaluations niveau de signification de chaque valeur, par rapport à
variées, en tire les dimensions de l'importance et de la l'univers du site
signification, et articule l'importance en des termes qui
seront compréhensibles pour toutes les parties prenantes
(et, en fait, ils devraient être compréhensibles pour le
grand public, les décideurs, les investisseurs, etc.)
Les déclarations proposées ici s'écartent de la
convention en soulignant le caractère pluriel, et peut-être
même contradictoire, de la signification d'un site. Les
déclarations ne doivent pas nécessairement être réduites à
un ou deux points, ni refléter un consensus unique ou une
vision universelle du site. En fait, on s'attendrait à ce que
des déclarations contradictoires sur l'importance d'un
site soient formulées (par exemple, un ensemble de
parties prenantes peut voir l'importance d'un site
essentiellement en termes de profit, alors que
l'importance d'autres parties prenantes exclurait la
possibilité d'une activité à but lucratif). Ainsi, l'accent est
mis sur les déclarations plurielles, et cela signale
l'intention de cette étape d'identifier les principaux thèmes
d'importance découlant des évaluations de la valeur, tels
qu'ils sont interprétés du point de vue des différents
groupes de parties prenantes concernés.
La création de déclarations comporte deux parties
distinctes. La première est le catalogage et l'articulation
de tous les aspects de la signification du site. En ce sens,
les déclarations sont sans aucun doute plurielles. Elles
seraient encadrées par l'ensemble des valeurs et des
acteurs identifiés plus tôt dans le processus. Il est
important de se tenir à l'écart des déclarations qui
privilégient certaines valeurs par rapport à d'autres, c'est-
à-dire que si l'on décide dès le départ que la valeur A est
moins importante que les valeurs B et C, la tendance en
cas de conflit serait de sacrifier A au profit de B et C ; si
les valeurs ne sont pas classées, il est probable que l'on
fasse plus efforts pour trouver des politiques qui les
respectent toutes. Deuxièmement, on peut commencer à
introduire un certain sens des priorités en évaluant et en
énonçant le caractère unique ou l'importance des valeurs
du site par rapport aux autres sites de la
nation/région/monde (quel que soit le domaine de
décision).
Cette reconnaissance et cette articulation de
l'importance relative des valeurs - sans classer
et des valeurs dans le domaine de la prise de décision. Ce informer les décisions que pour évaluer leurs résultats.
n'est pas là que l'on pourrait dire que la valeur historique Dans le processus de planification du modèle de l'UE
du site est plus importante que sa valeur récréative. Ce (figure ), cette correspondance se produit à la fin de la
qui est plutôt suggéré est une évaluation du degré phase d'évaluation, dans laquelle l'évaluation des
d'importance d'une valeur particulière (unique, conditions physiques est liée à l'évaluation de
importante, typique, etc.) d'un site par rapport à cette l'importance. Les modalités pratiques et détaillées de ce
valeur dans des sites connexes. processus peuvent être définies de différentes manières,
en fonction d'un projet de planification spécifique. Au
FAIRE CORRESPONDRE LES VALEURS AUX
minimum, tous les types de valeur identifiés dans les
RESSOURCES PHYSIQUES ET AUX
évaluations des valeurs devraient être "cartographiés" sur
CARACTÉRISTIQUES DU SITE
le site ; tous les principaux éléments physiques du site
La gestion, les plans et les décisions doivent intégrer les
pourraient être liés à des types de valeur spécifiques.
articulations de valeur et les propriétés et ressources
Les avantages de cette étape seraient doubles :
physiques du site. Cette intégration fait traditionnellement
premièrement, simplement, une délimitation claire de la
partie de l'analyse apportée tacitement par les
manière dont chacune des valeurs identifiées pour le site est
professionnels de la conservation, mais les
exprimée, incarnée ou représentée d'une autre manière dans
correspondances entre les valeurs et les attributs
les matériaux du site (allant des artefacts aux bâtiments et
physiques du patrimoine doivent être rendues explicites.
aux paysages) ; deuxièmement, des "complexes" clés de
Sans évaluer consciemment les liens entre des aspects
ressources (matérielles) et de valeurs (immatérielles)
physiques spécifiques du patrimoine et des valeurs
pourraient être identifiés. En identifiant ces complexes,
spécifiques, ainsi que l'adéquation des outils choisis aux
l'équipe de planification/gestion associe délibérément les
valeurs présentes, ce sera à difficult de prédire ou de
valeurs détenues par rapport au site aux ressources physiques
surveiller comment les valeurs sont affected par des
réelles qui composent le site. Par exemple, l'ensemble des
interventions matérielles ou des décisions de gestion.
valeurs historiques clés d'un bâtiment historique peut
Par conséquent, une sorte de cartographie des
associer les événements, récits et concepts historiques les
valeurs investies dans des éléments et caractéristiques
plus importants du site à la disposition des bâtiments sur le
spécifiques du site est une référence importante tant pour
site ou à la décoration de certaines pièces ou à
landscape elements such as walls or hedgerows. The The professional team, by this
most important complexes will likely be the focus of juncture, should be able to identify the
conserva-tion and management interventions. threats. The threats, of course, can only
be defined against the context of the
ANALYZING THREATS AND OPPORTUNITIES
conservation/ management goals of the
Against the background of the statements of significance
stakeholder groups governing/
and their association with particular material aspects
influencing the site. One stakeholder’s
of the site, the analysis should turn to the potential threats
threat may be another’s opportunity.
to the identified complexes of material and significance.
Threats can be quite varied and could be categorized, for MAKING POLICIES AND TAKING
instance, according to the following categories: physical ACTIONS
threats stemming from environmental factors, from van- At this point, the planning process has
dalism or violence, from neglect or poor management, or moved on to the “response” section of
from economically driven redevelopment; and social, cul- Figure . Here the actions needed involve
tural, or political forces that produce changes in meaning not so much integrating values but, rather,
and valuing. Conservation planners should not be looking acting upon them. The specific steps by
only for threats, however. The opportunities encountered at which these actions are worked out and
sites should also be brought into this analysis, as decisions implemented will vary widely from site to
to take advantage of opportunities (whether economic, site, depending more than anything on
political, interpretive, logistical) are very likely to have an institutional setup, organizational cultures,
impact on the value-material complexes— sometimes and other issues raised in the management
positive, sometimes negative. context assessment.
In light of the plural, varied, often conflicting nature Assessing Management Context
of heritage values and in light of the political processes
inescapably shaping and usually governing deci-sions about Well before the integration steps outlined in this
conservation, are there any generalizations that can be made
section, an assessment of the management con-
about conservation decision making?
It is argued here that there are some robust text needs to be undertaken. This is best under-
principles useful for framing decision making in any
taken at least as early as the physical conditions
number of circumstances. These suggestions take up
the next and final section. and values assessments are begun, and perhaps
earlier (see Figure ).

Management context refers to a number of factors

that affect the capacity of people and organiza-

tions to decide, direct, and implement any plans

that are formulated. This includes pragmatic

concerns such as financing, institutional archi-

tectures, legal and regulatory frameworks, and

available personnel, as well as political factors

such as the patterns of power and influence known

to shape the interactions and capacities of the

various stakeholders in the site. The issues arising

in the management context— especially those of

power relationships—are crucial to the ultimate

success of management planning and must be dealt

with as systemati-cally and as openly as possible.

The management context assessment through


which these factors are documented and
analyzed has not been studied in detail, though
some version of it is part of most man-agement
planning processes. The review— and possibly
the adaptation—of some of the methods for
management assessment used in the fields of
urban planning and business man-agement can
provide a starting point for the conservation
field.
Frameworks for Decision Making of them are a priori appropriate to heritage
A number of decision-making processes and protocols conservation or robust across all situations. Therefore,
are available and widely used in other fields, but none no specific decision-making tools are advocated here.
However, this paper does suggest frameworks for • build mutual trust and understanding;
decision making, establish-ing a series of guides useful • adopt sustainability as a unifying principle;
for assembling information to fuel decision making and • take shared responsibility;
frameworks for evaluating decisions afterward. • institutionalize public participation;
While there are no prescriptions or recipes for • continually refine and use decision-making tools;
heritage conservation decision making, guidance for • collect and analyze important information
planning/management decisions (ranking, prioritizing) (gather data for evaluation);
can be drawn from other fields—in particular, environ- • use incentives to encourage innovation.
mental conservation. Research, application, and evalua-
For the most part, the advice represented in these points is
tion of decision making have been the subject of consider-
not specific to environmental issues and resources and is
able work in the environmental sphere, and much of this
readily applicable to any other field. In order to retool and
is quite relevant to heritage conservation decisions. The
reorient this research for the heritage conservation field,
concept of sustainability, in particular, has been an effec-
though, the notion of sustainability needs to be rethought
tive and influential organizing principle in environmental
in terms applicable to heritage. The following section
decision making. Although full sustainability remains
con-siders the second of these guidelines and discusses
an ideal, sustainability principles have, in practice, been
how sustainability principles for heritage conservation
merged with extensive experiences in cultivating public
might be approached.
participation. The result is a growing body of practical
lessons drawn from the use of sustainability principles. SUSTAINABILITY PRINCIPLES
The use of sustainability principles for guiding FOR HERITAGE CONSERVATION
such complex decisions is the state of the art in the envi- Principles of sustainable development have proven quite
ronmental conservation field. There are many parallels useful, influential, and robust, not only in environmental
between heritage planning/management decisions and conservation and the fostering of ecological sensitivity in
environmental decisions: comparable complexities in the the development field but also, increasingly, in the urban
systems and processes being managed, diversity and development field. Sustainability has already been pro-
incommensurability of values attributed to the resources posed as an ideal and as a guide to policy in the heritage
being conserved, and political difficulties and power field (English Heritage ; / ). David Throsby has proposed
differ-ences among stakeholders, to name a few. a set of sustainability principles that could form the basis
A recent publication by several scholars and of a useful set of guidelines and norms for decision
practitioners in the environmental field provides a good making in the conservation-planning model (see Throsby,
source of intelligence for addressing the decision-making “Cultural Capital and Sustainability Concepts in the
challenges set forth in this paper (Sexton et al. ). Hav-ing Economics of Cultural Heritage,” herein).25 The
identified critical issues and cases in environmental principles are built on the notion of sustain-ability
decision making, Sexton and colleagues evaluated state- developed in the fields of ecological conservation and
of-the-art decision-making tools. The conclusion reached economic development and adapted in light of Throsby’s
was that there are no hard-and-fast rules or procedures for notion of cultural capital (heritage resources) as
making effective decisions. The goal of fostering inte- analogous to natural capital.26
grated decision making requires a lot of experimentation The notion of sustainability accords with the
and improvisation. The authors offered the following principles underlying values-based conservation planning in
guidelines, derived from twenty or so years of experience that it adopts a holistic view of resources (in this case,
with decision-making strategies in the environmental cultural resources) and their contexts and aligns with the
conservation field (Sexton et al. , – ): goal of taking account of the widest range of heritage val-
ues. It deals directly with the problem of making decisions in
the present but for the very long term—essential for
acknowledging the role of heritage as an inheritance to be
stewarded and passed on to future generations. Sustain-
ability has also proven to be politically resonant (even after
twenty or so years) and practically useful because the prin-
ciples are a flexible frame of reference rather than a fixed
benchmark or rigid method (and, not surprisingly, sustain- So as we see, sustainability holds great potential
ability has been criticized for the same reason by those as a framing concept for the task of integrating heritage
who wish for inflexible environmental standards). values, yet the concept needs to be developed further and
Ideally, the sustainability principles will influence applied to specific projects. As in the environmental and
the planning model in several ways, at several stages. First, development applications of sustainability, sustainability
they constitute an ideal, which could shape the setting of indicators could be created to bring rigor and clarity to the
project goals, the composition of the stakeholder group, the application of sustainability principles.28
analysis of significance and management contexts, and the Additional work is needed to make the argument
evaluation of project outcomes. The principles will have for using these sustainability principles and to describe
most direct impact, however, at the policy-set-ting stage: the how they can be used in real situations. For instance, how
principles would be designed to serve as tests, or criteria, are the various sustainability criteria/tests weighted? Are
against which the policies (and thus the actions that follow they all equally important in a particular project? Also,
from them) can be judged. Individually and as a group it can what exactly is being sustained—cultural resources them-
be asked, Do these policies meet the tests of sustainability? selves (buildings, artifacts, sites) or cultural memory and
Each decision can be evaluated (informally, or with formal meaning? Answers to these questions can help connect
indicators) against each of the principles. The same tests can the sustainability principles with the issues of heritage
be applied to the actions as they are being formulated. In this values and valuing.
way, the sustainability principles play the role of guidelines. Finally, decisions need to be continually
evaluated and checked against the original aims set out at
The fact that sustainability principles are a flexi- the beginning of the process. This continuous revisiting of
ble, negotiable set of standards could be seen as a weak- the effectiveness of decisions is a key ingredient to the
ness. In the environmental field, a distinction is made successful implementation of planning measures and
between “strong” versus “weak” sustainability in the envi- to the realization of effective management for
ronmental sphere. Strong sustainability insists on immedi- heritage conservation.
ate and total conformance to sustainability principles and
is not negotiable—so it is generally seen as infeasible Notes
(and therefore unsustainable!). Weak sustainability allows
change, is flexible, and doesn’t attempt to freeze things in
. The Burra Charter gives a central role to cultural signifi-
place. These two versions of sustainability parallel the
cance (Marquis-Kyle and Walker ). See Tainter and
notion of distinguishing “sacred” versus “tradable” her- Lucas ( ) for a critical history and analysis of the
itage27 and the a priori privileging of cultural values over significance concept, and Tomlan ( ) for a collection of
economic values by preservationists (or vice versa by views appraising and criticizing the significance concept in
investors or policy makers). Whereas it is easy to insist on the context of historic preservation in the United States.
the total protection of things deemed sacred, in light of . The operational, applied context of this research is the
practical considerations, this is not possible and becomes model process for conservation planning used by the
mere rhetoric. A more pragmatic strategy recognizes the Getty Conservation Institute (see Figure ). This model,
which is similar to others employed around the world
need for trade-offs and recognizes that some heritage is in
by conserva-tion agencies and professionals, draws on a
fact tradable or convertible to other forms of capital.
collective body of knowledge and experience
Sustainability principles also recognize the moral accumulated over decades of application.
aspect of sustainability, through principles regarding inter-
. “Value-based management” is the coordinated and struc-
generational and intragenerational equity, which overarch tured operation of a heritage site with the primary purpose
and strengthen the scientific, economic, and pragmatic of protecting the significance of the place as defined by
arguments for sustainability. The notion of equity, which government authorities or other owners, experts, and other
requires moral vision and ethical reflection, should be closely citizens or groups with a legitimate interest in the place.
allied with our collective sense of professional ethics and . A note on terminology: methodologies refers to strategies for
purpose. These ideas could, indeed, provide the conservation assessing heritage values; examples of two different method-
ologies would be ethnographic research and cost-benefit
field with something of an ethical-moral compass as it
analysis. The term tools, as used here, refers to specific
navigates through a period of great change.
research protocols to implement a methodological
approach; examples of tools would be oral history, expert of methods for gauging heritage values. Positivist methods
iconographical analysis, or contingent valuation analysis. assume a value-free, objective perspective. They exchange
. These definitions parallel the distinction made in the field of scientific certainty for value sensitivity. Phenomenological or
environmental conservation between “held” values (the postpositivist methods, by contrast, embrace the values and
principles or ideologies that guide environmental profession-als politics surrounding any epistemological effort. By embrac-ing
and advocates in their work or that constitute the “cause” of value differences and representing the contexts of phe-nomena
environmentalism) and “assigned” values (assigned by people being studied, postpositivist methods should be part of any
and groups to the natural resources themselves). approach to assessing heritage values. This is not to say that
positivist methods have nothing to contribute to heritage value
. Typologies of the values of natural resources provide an assessment, but one can say that a strictly pos-itivist assessment
interesting analogue to these heritage value typologies. would yield a decidedly partial account of the range of heritage
See Kellert ( ) and Rolston ( ), as well as Satterfield’s values. See Denzin and Lincoln ( ) and Frankfort-Nachmias and
paper in this volume. Nachmias ( ).
. A third major category of values could well be added to this . The political consensus is for broader participation. Note
framework—that of ecological values. Ecological value, as that this consensus is driven by a Western notion of
defined here, stems from the role a heritage site may play in democ-racy and will not be accepted or relevant in some
constituting or sustaining a natural ecosystem—as, for instance, cultural contexts. The position adopted here is to advocate
in shaping the flow of water or other natural resources or in broader participation without imposing it.
maintaining species habitat. An archaeologi-cal site could be
part of a highly valued coastal environment or watershed. As
. See, for instance, the strong base of research and application
such, these ecological values could fall into both sociocultural
reflected in Sanoff ( ).
and economic value categories—but they relate to different sets . For instance, unstructured, one-on-one interviews might be best
of stakeholders. Because these values and stakeholders can suited to eliciting the spiritual values of a site; the eco-nomic
play a significant role in decisions about a site, ecological use values of the same site would be more susceptible to an
values may in some instances war-rant classification as a economic impact study of tourist expenditures.
separate category of heritage value. A deeper exploration of the
. More recently, conservation decision makers have also
ecological values of heritage sites is beyond the scope of this
turned to economic analysis and anthropological/commu-
paper’s argument.
nity-involvement tools to strengthen the information base
. Similar breakdowns have been made in Frey ( ), Throsby ( for their decisions.
), and a World Bank report (Serageldin and Steer ). . For fragments of the writings of these and other figures from the
. Externalities are a third important kind of economic value; they history of the conservation field, consult the Getty Conservation
are a spin-off of the other types of economic values. Institute’s Historical and Philosophical Issues in the
Externalities are consequences of transactions and other Conservation of Cultural Heritage (Stanley-Price, Talley, and
decisions regarding use and nonuse values, and they are gen- Vaccaro ). Some historical accounts and summaries of
erated for better (positive externalities) and for worse (nega-tive individual contributions to the history of architectural con-
externalities). In the sense of heritage values, externality values servation are available in Jokilehto ( ).
result from transactions involving the use and nonuse values of
. Development is used here in the World Bank sense of inte-
heritage as described above. Examples are the travel costs
grated social and economic programs for poverty reduction
associated with visiting a heritage site or the increased price of
in disadvantaged areas of the globe. For more detail, see
land adjacent to a conserved site. For more background and
the World Bank Web site outlining its various programs to
detail, see the papers by Mourato and Mazzanti and by Throsby
advance development: www.worldbank.org/html/extdr/
in this volume.
thematic.htm .
. The terms market and nonmarket are used here as synonyms
. Interdisciplinary fields such as human geography, material
for use and nonuse. I believe that this association makes these
culture, vernacular architecture, and American studies
categories more understandable and accepted among
embrace the idea of a diverse choice of methodologies
noneconomists, and it follows directly from the clear
and a catholic approach to using them.
description David Throsby gives in his paper herein.
. See www.cr.nps.gov/aad ; see also Low’s paper in the pres-
. See n. .
ent volume.
. Another important distinction between types of humanities
. Two Web sites offer information and a wealth of examples
and social science methodologies is that of positivist or
on and rapid rural assessment ( ) approaches:
phenomenological (and, more recently, “postpositivist”). The
The Institute of Development Studies, based in England
positivist/postpositivist distinction is different from the
(www.ids.ac.uk/ids) and the United Nations University
quantitative-qualitative question but is not unrelated to it—
(www.unu.edu/unupress/food ). See also Bell and Morse
quantitative or qualitative methods can be either positivist or
( ) for a summary.
postpositivist—and it sheds particular light on the issue
. The overlay mapping of landscape architect and planner Ian heritage, while other things are devalorized and, in effect,
McHarg is an example of a methodology developed through destroyed. Therefore, heritage implies destruction, just as it
mapping (McHarg ). implies conservation. See Lowenthal in Avrami, Mason,
. Publications of Common Ground (www.commonground. and de la Torre ( ).
org.uk) include Greeves ( ); for an example of mental . There is an extensive literature on indicators used in sustain-
mapping of communities as an educational tool, see the able ecological development. Bell and Morse ( ) and Hart ( )
Getty Research Institute project “Mapping Local Knowl- are excellent sources on this.
edge” (available at www.getty.edu/research/programs/
public/lllk/ ).
References
. This discussion of economic methods builds on the outline
of issues and methods published in Economics and
Heritage Conservation (Mason ). The work of economists Australia . . The Burra Charter. Revised. www.icomos.org/
to measure cultural values is not dealt with exhaustively australia/ .
here, even though economists’ efforts to deal with cultural
Avrami, E., R. Mason, and M. de la Torre, eds. . Values and Heritage
value constitute one of the critical issues in this research.
Conservation. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute.
Economic methods and concepts are surveyed in Throsby
( ), in Klamer and Zuidhof ’s paper in Mason ( ), and in Bell, S., and S. Morse. . Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the
Throsby’s and Mourato and Mazzanti’s papers in this Immeasurable. London: Earthscan Publications.
volume. Denzin, N., and Y. Lincoln, eds. . Handbook of Qualitative Research.
. More detail is presented in Throsby ( ). Thousand Oaks, Calif., and London: Sage Publications.
. Throsby’s development of sustainability principles for her-itage English Heritage. . Sustaining the Historic Environment: New
conservation is built on the notion of heritage under-stood as a Perspec-tives on the Future. English Heritage Discussion Document.
form of cultural capital. The “capital” metaphor is potentially London: English Heritage.
quite useful. It brings to the surface the need to invest in Frankfort-Nachmias, C., and D. Nachmias. . Research Methods in the
heritage and to expect a flow of benefits from it. Likewise, it Social Sciences. Fifth ed. New York: St. Martin’s.
highlights the reality that trade-offs must be made (not
Freudenburg, W. . Tools for understanding the socioeconomic and
everything can be conserved), the reality that val-ues must be
political settings for environmental decision making. In Tools to Aid
balanced, and so forth. The notion of cultural capital, like
Environmental Decision Making, ed. V. Dale and M. English. New
“values,” could become a way of linking many of the issues
York: Springer.
raised in this research—strategic, methodologi-cal, political,
professional—because it converts all types of heritage into a Frey, B. . The evaluation of cultural heritage: Some critical issues.
generalized unit (cultural capital), enabling one to compare In Economic Perspectives on Cultural Heritage, ed. M. Hutter and I. Rizzo.
conservation resources, processes, and deci-sions. The London: Macmillan.
downside is that the capital metaphor suggests that heritage is Greeves, T. . Parish Maps: Celebrating and Looking after Your Place.
in some manner exchangeable—whereas conservation London: Common Ground.
professionals generally subscribe to an a priori definition that
all heritage is unique and not exchangeable. This concept of Hart, M. . Guide to Sustainable Community Indicators. North
substitutability—a fundamental part of the concept of capital— Andover, Mass.: Sustainable Measures.
is therefore problematic. One way of tackling this problem is Hutter, M., and I. Rizzo, eds. . Economic Perspectives on
making distinctions about heritage that is seen as “tradable” Cultural Heritage. London: Macmillan.
and therefore perfectly substi-tutable with other forms of Jokilehto, J. . A History of Architectural Conservation. London:
capital and even “consumable,” versus heritage that is “sacred”
Butterworth-Heinemen.
and not substitutable. The idea of tradable or nonsacred
heritage highlights the fact that conservation inherently Kellert, S. . The Value of Life: Biological Diversity and Human Society.
involves trade-offs against other social investments and Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
priorities. This understanding requires that heritage and Kerr, A. . Public participation in cultural resource management:
conservation be seen not in isolation but, rather, as thoroughly A Canadian perspective. Draft manuscript, March .
embedded in larger social contexts.
Kerr, J. . Conservation Plan: A Guide to the Preparation of
Conservation Plans for Places of European Cultural Significance.
. The tradable/sacred distinction is outlined in English Her- Fifth ed. Sydney: National Trust of Australia (NSW).
itage’s ( ) discussion paper on sustainability. It also aligns with
Lipe, W. . Value and meaning in cultural resources. In Approaches to
the argument made by David Lowenthal and others that
the Archaeological Heritage, ed. H. Cleere. New York: Cambridge
heritage is a changeable set of things. In order for heritage to
Univer-sity Press.
remain relevant to contemporary society, some things have to
be continually valorized and added to the Low, S. . Social science methods in landscape architecture design.
Landscape Planning : – .
McHarg, I. [ ] . Design with Nature. Reprint, New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Marquis-Kyle, P., and M. Walker. . The Illustrated Burra Charter.
Sydney: Australia /Australian Heritage Commission.
Mason, R., ed. . Economics and Heritage Conservation. Los Angeles:
Getty Conservation Institute.
Pearson, M., and S. Sullivan. . Looking after Heritage Places: The
Basics of Heritage Planning for Managers, Landowners, and Administrators.
Carlton, Victoria: Melbourne University Press.
Reigl, A. [ ] . The modern cult of monuments: Its character and
its origins. Reprint, trans. D. Ghirardo and K. Forster. Oppositions
: – .
Rolston, H., III. . Environmental Ethics: Duties to and Values in the
Natural World. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Sanoff, H. . Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning.
New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Satterfield, T. Forthcoming. In search of value literacy: Suggestions for
the elicitation of environmental values. Environmental Values.
Serageldin, I., and A. D. Steer. . Valuing the Environment: Proceedings
of the First Annual International Conference on Environmentally Sustainable
Development Held at the World Bank. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Sexton, K., et al., eds. . Better Environmental Decisions: Strategies for
Governments, Businesses, and Communities. Washington, D.C.: Island
Press.
Stanley-Price, N., M. Talley Jr., and A. Vaccaro, eds. . Historical and
Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage. Los Angeles:
Getty Conservation Institute.
Tainter, J., and J. Lucas. . Epistemology of the significance concept.
American Antiquity( ): – .
Throsby, D. . Economics and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Tomlan, M., ed. . Preservation of What, for Whom?: A Critical Look at
Historical Significance. Ithaca, N.Y.: National Council for Preservation
Education.
/ . . Thematic statement of International Confer-
ence, Philadelphia, April. www.icomos.org/usicomos .
Anthropological-Ethnographic Methods for the
Assessment of Cultural Values in Heritage Conservation
By Setha M. Low

Introduction Anthropological-Ethnographic
Methods for the Assessment
This paper will review qualitative methods in anthropol- of Cultural Values at Heritage Sites
ogy that are available for assessing sociocultural values at
heritage sites. In this publication, the Getty Conservation Overview of Qualitative Methods in
Institute is interested in exploring existing methods that Cultural Anthropology
could be applied or modified to elicit stakeholder and
Qualitative methodologies in cultural anthropology are
community values. Through the surveying and evaluating
characterized by their humanism and holism (a philo-
of these methods, a methodological approach and specific
sophical position that argues that humans and human
techniques could be identified that would help
behavior cannot be understood or studied outside the
conservation professionals and managers understand the
context of a person’s daily life, life world, and activities).
complexity of social relations and cultural dynamics at
Methodological strategies consonant with this definition
play in the conservation planning and development of
include: cognitive, observational, phenomenological,
heritage sites. Rapid Ethnographic Assessment Proce-
historical, ethnographic, and discourse approaches to
dures ( s) used at National Park Service ( ) historical
research (Low b). Each of these approaches focuses on
parks are highlighted as useful methods of assessment for
distinct aspects of the social world, and the approaches
planning, design, reconstruction, and management of
vary in terms of their appropriateness for different
heritage sites.
problems, their levels of analysis, and the role of the
This discussion begins with a brief overview of
researcher. Although these determinations are not fixed
qualitative methods in cultural anthropology. Ethno-
and may change over time, they provide a preliminary
graphic and observational approaches seem most appro-
framework for selecting the qualitative methods that
priate to the heritage conservation task because of their
would be most appropriate for eliciting and assessing
individual and group levels of analysis. Two other
sociocultural values at heritage sites. While all qualitative
methodologies—constituency analysis and ethnoseman-
methods have some utility in evaluating heritage sites,
tics—are also applicable to heritage sites. The limitations
some approaches have distinct advantages. For this
of each are discussed, and a third methodology, the , is
discus-sion, methodologies are arranged in order of their
proposed as the most inclusive and useful for solving
com-plexity and scope of inquiry, beginning with
heritage conservation problems. methodologies grew out
cognitive and observational approaches that focus on one
of agricultural and national park projects, and when they
dimen-sion of human activity—a mental or behavioral
are applied to planning and design problems, they
process— followed by phenomenological and historical
integrate elements of constituency analysis used in
approaches that integrate human activity with the
landscape architecture as well as ethnosemantic method-
environmental context, and concluding with ethnographic
ologies used in historic preservation projects. The remain-
and discourse approaches that include human activity,
der of the discussion focuses on the and its applica-tion to
environment, and social, cultural, and/or political context.
cultural heritage conservation.
Cognitive approaches include both the study of
cognition as a mental process—often reflected in lan-
guage—and cognition as a set of categories that structure
perception through the attribution of meaning. One
application is in the area of ethnosemantics (the study of
cognitive meaning from the culture’s own point of view),
discussed as a separate methodology later in this paper. meaning in a language and culture. Most semantic work is
Semantics refers to the linguistic analysis of the structure of based on the intensive interviewing of key inform-ants to
produce linguistic taxonomies, hierarchies of con-cepts and of meanings (Rapoport ). Nonfixed features are more
terms that describe an individual’s understand-ing of the important for the understanding of nonverbal
world and that collectively describe the culture (Low a). For communication. In all of these cases, observational
instance, a heritage conservation profes-sional working with techniques are at the core of the research project or
an anthropologist could develop a taxonomy of house types theo-retical explanation.
by asking informants to name all the kinds of houses that Phenomenological approaches differ in their epis-
exist in their town. Once a list of all the possible house types temological point of view in that the object of study is not
is developed, the researcher then asks what distinguishes separated from the act of perceiving. Studies focus on
each house type and repeats the procedure until a complete “place” and on “how place grows out of experience, and
linguistic map of all hous-ing kinds and their characteristics how, in turn, it symbolizes that experience” (Richardson , ).
has been produced. The term ethnosemantics in this paper The emphasis is on the individual perceiver and his or her
refers to a modified semantic procedure that focuses on the experience as empirical evidence of the world.
semantic structure of one group of people in relation to their Historical approaches locate a particular site,
local environ-ment. When used in studies of the built place, or built form in its temporal context. From a con-
environment, the term also incorporates the role that servation perspective, historical approaches are very
language plays not only as a structural or taxonomic system important for architectural historians, archaeologists, and
but as symbolic communication about important cultural others, because they can provide insight into past values
ideas. of the site and how perceptions and significance have
Observational methodologies in which overt changed over time. Conservators, however, have to bring
behavior is observed by the researcher are the mainstay into consideration the values of current users as well as
of qualitative researchers, and they include simple obser- those of other communities (such as experts) and past
vation of activities and behavioral mapping, as well as users. While historical approaches address past users and
elaborate systems of time-lapse photography of public the study of material culture and its evolution, they do not
spaces (Whyte ), ethnoarchaeological techniques (Kent ), address the current users of the site, who are best under-
and nonverbal communication strategies for stood through ethnographic approaches.
understanding the built environment (Low b; Rapoport ). Ethnographic approaches are broader and
For instance, William H. Whyte spent seven years filming include the historical, as well as the social and
street behavior with a small movie camera perched on the political, context of the site as a means of
top of Rockefeller Center (Whyte ). The analysis of these understanding contem-porary sociocultural patterns
observational films produced a set of urban design and cultural groups. Ethnographic research—the
principles that have governed urban public space zoning process of describing a culture—has the ability to
in New York City for the past twenty years. predict local response to design and planning proposals
Ethnoarchaeological techniques combine tradi-tional accurately, and it can help evaluate complex
archaeological data obtained from on-site excava-tion alternatives through systematic cultural understanding.
and stratification analysis with historical documents and Depending on the magnitude of the geographical
ethnographies of local groups that may be using the site area, the length of time spent, and the historical depth of
in ways similar to their local ancestors. The idea is to use the study, ethnography produces a complete cultural
observations of contemporary peoples’ built environ- description of a site, as well as descriptions of intercon-
ment, everyday behavior, and social and ritual activities nected nonlocal communities and of relevant adjacent
to interpret archaeological findings (Kent ). Finally, sites. For instance, the ethnographic study of Jacob Riis
observation of nonverbal behavior has been used to theo- Park at the edge of Brooklyn and Queens in New York
rize about how people understand a site. Rapoport argues City found that the restoration done by the National Parks
that fixed features of a site, such as the buildings, trees, Service ( ) of Robert Moses’s bathhouse was of little
and elements that cannot be easily moved, and nonfixed importance to new visitors to the site, who come to the
features, such as furniture, produce very different kinds beach to picnic in the shade and to enjoy family activities.
These new users, mostly recent immigrants from Central
and South America, are not aware of the history of the site
and do not understand the fencing off of the historic
“mall” area (with a direct view of the Empire State
Table Qualitative methodologies in cultural anthropology: research appropriateness.

Methodological Approach Scale/Level of Inquiry Degree of Involvement Research Problem

Cognitive Individual Minimal Rules, ideals, and perceptions

Observational Group (individual) Minimal Behavior, observable actions, and activity sites

Phenomenological Individual Total Experience of places and events

Historique Societal Minimal Social and cultural trends, comparison of sites

Ethnographic Group (individual) Moderate Cultural motivations, norms, values, intentions,


symbols and meanings

Discourse Individual (societal) Moderate Underlying meanings of speaking /conversation

Building). Instead, they are upset that so many of the of concern to the heritage conservation practitioner;
few remaining trees on the site are cordoned off. Their however, it is valuable to highlight the observational and
response has been to ignore the fencing and to picnic ethnographic approaches that focus on the group and the
under the trees wherever possible. The ethnographic individual within the group. These two methodologies
study illuminated this source of conflict, providing the address the core objective—that is, to identify local site
possibility of better communication, design, and use and disuse and, even more important, to understand
planning of the historic site in the future. the motivations, norms, values, intentions, and symbolic
Discourse approaches include social experience, meanings underlying that use and disuse. For example,
the reciprocal acts of speaking and being spoken to, and while phenomenological research can elicit statements of
the emergent product of that speaking, the object of the place attachment and place identity, ethnographic
conversation. Discourse approaches consider the object of research describes the place attachment of groups within
study, the text, the context, and the interpretation of the the geographical community. Furthermore, ethnographic
object as one continuous domain. Discourse approaches approaches focus on sociocultural values as a central part
are only beginning to be used in applied settings because of the research endeavor.
of the difficulty of gathering the data and because of their Ethnography combined with observational
highly specialized forms of transcription and notation. methodologies requires considerable time in the field
In Table , each methodological approach is eval- to complete—usually up to a year or more. However,
uated by ( ) the focus or scale of the research—individual, work-ing with design and planning professionals—as
group, or societal; ( ) the degree of involvement and/or well as conservation practitioners—requires brief,
contact with the research subject—minimal, moderate, or direct proce-dures for understanding a particular site.
total; and ( ) the kind of problem most often associated Two of these strategies have been used in historic
with the methodology. The utility of each methodology is landscape preserva-tion projects and are discussed
derived from the researcher’s need to answer questions at because of their appropri-ateness—they combine
a specific scale, in a time frame that controls the degree of observation and ethnography— and because they offer
involvement, and within the domain of a particular methodological shortcuts that allow for short-term
research problem. The application criteria derive from the application during an ongoing, site-specific project.
same decision variables.
These approaches are appropriate for different kinds Constituency Analysis: A Methodology for
and levels of research. For instance, the individual-based Landscape Architecture
methodologies (cognitive, phenomenological, and discourse)
The author developed an appropriate social science research
are excellent for eliciting individual users’ expe-riences and
method for landscape architecture1 as a conse-quence of
perceptions of the site, while the societal-based approaches
working as an anthropologist with design fac-ulty and
(historical and discourse) provide meth-ods that uncover
students. They needed a way to organize, collect, and
historical significance and social change. All of these
conceptualize social data relevant to design problems.
methods answer some research problem
Constituency analysis was an attempt to integrate the
complex, recursive process of design with social data. includes three social data phases, stages , , and , that
Table summarizes the five-stage design process, which necessitate anthropological methods. The first stage is
problem formulation, composed of client definition and step in the data-collection procedure includes the
problem clarification. For any project there are a identifi-cation of constituency conflicts concerning
number of possible clients and user groups, including a issues that impact the future success of any planned
paying client (often the federal government); specific change. Depend-ing on the project, an analysis of
user groups, communities, or neighborhoods on or near constituency conflicts may become part of the
the proposed site; and often potential regional or programming procedure, espe-cially when the project
national constituen-cies that may use the site in the objective is to resolve conflicting land uses.
future. Interviews, an analysis of influence processes, The third and final stage before implementation
and other techniques are necessary to generate a list of and physical design is the construction of a program, a
all the clients, or stakehold-ers, involved in the design. set of specific objectives and detailed goals upon which
Once the problem and the client are defined, the the physical design is based. The program orders and
designer begins to collect data on the perceptions of the applies the constituency needs and desires to physical
residents and future users of the site. This data-collection design decisions. Finally, an evaluation of the design,
stage takes the form of an identification of constituencies, based on original project objectives and social criteria,
as well as of their perceived needs, desires, and social requires some form of measurement of social change. A
conflicts. Constituency identification is the enumeration number of anthropological methodologies have been
and description—that is, with regard to social, cultural, developed to monitor the social impact of large-scale
and demographic characteristics—of the kinds of people projects, including the discussed below. Social change is
living on or near the project site. Any number of often measured by a questionnaire survey of previously
sampling techniques and methods, from participant defined outcome variables; however, qualitative
observation of local communities to a questionnaire techniques, such as participant observation and structured
survey of randomly selected residents and users, can be interviewing, can be used when the design intervention is
employed to collect such data. Once constituencies are at a relatively small scale.
described and catego-rized into groups, the second task— Constituency analysis is an excellent system for
identifying con-stituency perceptions, needs, and desires integrating constituency identification into the planning and
—begins. This information, which becomes the basis of design process. The process of client identification is similar
later physical design decisions, is more difficult to collect, to stakeholder identification; and constituency identification,
in that direct elicitation techniques are not usually constituency needs and desires assessment, and the working
successful. The methods suggested for constituency out of constituency conflicts are applica-ble to most heritage
needs and desires assessment are therefore indirect sites. The drawback to this methodol-ogy, however, is that
techniques that attempt to stimulate response and opinion some sites do not have clear con-stituencies—or there might
concerning possible land use and physical design be clear constituency groups that do not, however, match or
features; these techniques include expert interviews, correlate with cultural val-ues on the site. For instance, local
mental maps of patterns of site utilization and homeowners, with con-cerns about a nearby site, might not
perceptions, and projective tests. A final be visible if the analy-ses are focused on users of the site.
These reasons have led to the development of
methodologies, such as the , that are more flexible than
constituency analysis and that

Tableau Constituency analysis.

Stage Tasks

Stage : Problem formulation Client definition; problem clarification

Stage : Data collection Constituency identification; needs and desires assessment; constituency conflicts

Stage : Programming Data interpretation; data application

Stage : Physical design Conceptual design; physical framework

Stage : Evaluation Measurement of change; interpretation of meaning


utilize a wider set of techniques and methods. Nonethe- Both studies began by determining the range
less, the sequencing of stages and the emphasis on the of architectural variation in the local community,
reiterative nature of design and planning problems are investigat-ing the local meanings attributed to the
useful in thinking about developing a cultural values variation, and then verifying those meanings through
assessment process for heritage conservation projects. an ethnosemantic method. Pavlides and Hesser
photographed architectural details of Greek village
Ethnosemantic Methodology: Design and houses that they suspected were symbolic of a family’s
Translation at Historic Sites social standing based on their previ-ous interviewing
and house survey (Pavlides and Hesser ). They then
Ethnosemantic techniques have been used in preservation
presented these photographs to the community and
projects to translate local values into elements of material
asked people to tell them what each architectural detail
culture that could then be respected and preserved. The
meant. The responses of community members were
separation between the perceptions of architectural histo-
used to ensure that the researchers’ interpretation of
rians and those of the public is increased by differences in
symbolic meaning reflected that of the community.
professional and popular culture (Low ). Architects and
The study of historic buildings in Oley, Pennsyl-
architecturally trained historians, as well as most con-
vania, was designed to elicit what local residents thought
servation professionals, participate in a process of profes-
were meaningful characteristics of their stone farmhouses
sional socialization that provides a common language, set
(Low and Ryan ). The project was part of a rural
of symbols, value structure, and code of rituals and
preservation program and utilized a historical buildings
taboos. The public does not share this perceptual system
survey as a guide to architectural variation in the commu-
but, instead, holds images and preferences that are
nity. A representative blue ribbon panel was interviewed
embed-ded in its own beliefs, customs, and values.
as to the degree of “Oleyness” for each of the architec-
Conflict may arise when these two cultures compete for
tural details found in the survey. The research linked
control over land use, building, landscape, and/or
architectural elements with cultural images through the
preservation deci-sions. In such a situation, the
exploration of “Oleyness” as a culturally relevant cogni-
methodological and concep-tual skills of someone trained
tive domain.
in ethnosemantics or other anthropological and linguistic
methodologies are useful to resolve the cultural conflict.
When conservation man-agers and planners face Rapid Ethnographic Assessment
decisions that they know may be fiercely contested, Procedures
looking for another way to translate the cultural
differences, through a method such as those described, Review of Rapid Assessment
may solve the disagreement by locating the middle Methodologies
ground or appropriate language necessary to pro-ceed
Rapid assessment methodologies2 have been adapted
with the plan, design, or any other desired change.
from rural and agricultural development projects in devel-
Ethnosemantic methodologies assume that cul-
oping nations. In these contexts, multidisciplinary teams
ture is encoded in language that can be elicited through a
of experts investigate socioeconomic conditions in a par-
linguistic, taxonomic analysis (see the overview of
ticular area with regard to agriculture and resource man-
qualita-tive methods above for further discussion).
agement, usually in less than a month or even a week
Structured questions organize responses into taxonomic
(Ervin ). Beebe, surveying the literature on rapid
categories to create cultural domains of meanings. These
assessment procedures, outlines three basic principles:
methods have been applied in a modified form to the
a systems perspective, triangulation of methods, and an
historic preserva-tion of buildings and landscapes.
iterative process of data collection and analysis (Beebe ).
Research on the ethno-semantic structure of Greek village
houses uncovered their traditional social status meanings The rapid assessment is used to identify the ele-ments of
(Pavlides and Hesser ) and translated culturally a local system and how they interrelate, through a
appropriate details of eighteenth-century stone qualitative data collection process of uncovering local
farmhouses in a rural Penn-sylvania community into knowledge. The semistructured interview, the expert
standards for infill architectural design (Low and Ryan ). interview, and the focus group are characteristic elements
of a triangulated methodology. The general approach—
which is based on the assumption that researchers first employed ethnographic research in
often do not know the right questions in advance—is connection with western Native American communities
to get peo-ple to talk rather than to answer direct having long-standing associations with certain parklands.
questions. These lands—natural resources and, in the case of objects
Rapid assessments differ from traditional qualita- and structures, cultural resources—are required by Native
tive research in that more than one researcher is always Americans or other local communities for their continued
involved, researcher-team interaction is critical to the cultural identity and survival. NPS terms these lands
methodology, and results are produced much faster. “ethnographic resources” and calls the peoples associated
Rapid assessment is “especially relevant when time with them “traditionally associated” or “park-associated”
constraints preclude use of intensive qualitative methods peoples (Crespi ). In providing systematic data on local
by a single researcher and when the different perspectives lifeways, applied ethnographic research is intended to
of the team members (including local participants) are enhance the relationships between park management and
essential for understanding the situation” (Beebe , ). local communities whose histories and associations with
Ervin used the term “relatively rapid” in the park cultural resources are unknown or poorly
context of a six-month community needs assessment for understood (Crespi ; Bean and Vane ; Joseph ). In many
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan (Ervin ). The research team newer parks, shares jurisdiction with other federal
worked under contract to the local United Way to rank agencies, state and local governments, mod-ern Native
the community’s social service priorities. Because of American nations, or other culturally distinc-tive
time and budget limitations, Ervin used six qualitative communities. The resulting complexity of planning tasks
methods, including focus groups, key informant inter- makes ethnographic research with affected commu-nities
views, review of existing reports, Delphi questionnaires especially helpful.
(a process in which experts participate in the research
anonymously, through writing), and public forums. The literature points to several kinds of benefits
The resulting report ranked community needs, such from ethnographic research. One is in the area of conflict
as the elimination of hunger and greater emphasis management—for example, where local communities
on preventative services. anticipate adverse impacts from new park designations or
Rapid assessment as a specific tool for ethno- from changes to existing parks. Wolf describes the contri-
graphic research—and in some cases at heritage sites— bution made by ethnographic research to community
has been written about in the CRM (Cultural Resource relations in the difficult process of establishing a national
Manage-ment) Bulletin, a periodical published by the . historic park around sites in Atlanta associated with the life
The agency’s Applied Ethnography Program defines of Martin Luther King Jr. Ethnographic knowledge helped
seven ethnographic research methodologies, among management identify opportunities for compro-mise and
them s, that are used to investigate and describe potential mitigating measures (Wolf ).
cultural relationships between particular local The process of ethnographic research with culturally
communities and park resources and that are distinctive communities affected by construction
sometimes used to support nominations of lands and projects can give a certain credibility to agency
sites to the National Register of Historic Places (Joseph decision making (Liebow ).
). The is appropriate for project-driven applications Community empowerment is another benefit, in
because it provides a great deal of cultural information that relationships established create a dialogue between
useful for planning purposes within a short time— park officials and local neighborhood and cultural groups
generally within a four-month time frame ( ; Liebow ). that would not otherwise have a voice in the park plan-
The short time frame of a is a crucial advantage in the ning process. Joseph stresses the collaborative nature of
event of substantial pro-posed construction, which the applied ethnographic research done by , where
involves major commitments of funds, negotiation of ordinary citizens and community leaders participate
political support, and timely proj-ect development. alongside elected officials, park managers, and the
researchers (Joseph ). Low suggests that most preser-
vation problems in cultural landscapes—especially
vandal-ism, underutilization, and neglect—could be
prevented with more dialogue between the community
and the gov-ernmental agency (Low a).
A third important benefit of ethnographic BEHAVIORAL MAPPING
research is to present and represent the cultural heritage Behavioral maps record people and their activities and
of local communities within the overall programming of locate them in time and space. Such maps arrange data
park resources. Ethnographic information is useful in in a way that permits planning and design analyses of
presentation, particularly for parks like Minuteman, in the site, and these maps are very useful in developing
Massachusetts, that include existing communities within familiar-ity with the everyday activities and problems
their borders. Minuteman has endeavored to restore and of a site. They are most effectively used in limited park
preserve farming as a traditional cultural practice within areas with a variety of social and economic uses,
the historic environment the park preserves and inter- where the researcher can return repeatedly to the
prets. Information that may be uncovered only through various social spaces during the day.
ethnography, such as the gendered division of labor on
TRANSECT WALKS
family farms, may be crucial to the continued effective
A transect walk is a record of what a community consul-
management of a generations-old practice (Joseph ).
tant describes and comments upon during a guided walk
Where the presentation of historic objects is concerned,
of the site. The idea is to include one or two community
ethnographic information, gained from living members of
members as research team members, in order to learn
the associated cultural group, can reveal uses and mean-
about the site from the community member’s point of
ings not apparent in the objects themselves (Brugge ).
view. In most s, local consultants work with the
“Most cultural landscapes are identified solely in
researcher as a collaborator. In the transect walk, how-
terms of their historical rather than contemporary impor-
ever, this relationship is particularly important, in that
tance to the community” (Low a, ), privileging his-torical
the method is dependent on the quality of the
meanings over those of the geographically and/or
relationship between the collaborator and the researcher,
culturally associated communities. This oversight often
and on the ability of the community member to explain
promotes friction and local disagreements that can be
and discuss the landscape.
solved through the knowledge produced by a .
INDIVIDUAL INTERVIEWS
REAP Methodology Individual interviews are collected from the identified
populations. The sampling strategy, interview
In a , a number of methods are selected to produce
schedule, and number of interviews vary from site to
different types of data from diverse sources that can
site. In most cases, on-site users and residents who live
be triangulated to provide a comprehensive analysis
near the site are interviewed, but in specific situations,
of the site. A description of each method is briefly
interviews might be collected more broadly.
presented below. Table summarizes the products
and outcomes of each method. EXPERT INTERVIEWS
Expert interviews are collected from those people
PHYSICAL TRACES MAPPING
identified as having special expertise to comment on
Physical traces maps record the presence of liquor bottles,
the area and its residents and users, such as the head
trash, and clothing, the erosion of plantings, and other traces
of the vendors’ association, neighborhood
of activities. These maps are completed based on data
association presi-dents, the head of the planning
collected early in the morning at each site. Records of
board, teachers or principals in local schools, pastors
physical evidence of human activity and presence provide
or ministers of local churches, and representatives
indirect clues as to what goes on at these sites during the
from local parks and institutions.
night. Physical traces mapping presumes that there is a base
map of resources and basic features available which can be IMPROMPTU GROUP INTERVIEWS
used to locate the physical traces. Otherwise, part of the task Impromptu group interviews occur where people gather
is to create such a map, both for the physical traces and for outside of public places or at special meetings set up with
the behavioral maps discussed below. church or school groups. The goal of group interviews (as
At many archaeological sites, a base map might not be opposed to individual interviews or focus groups) is to
available—a condition that would add another step to collect data in a group context, as well as to provide an
the research process. educational opportunity for the community. Impromptu
group interviews, which are open-ended and experimen-
tal, include any community members who are A number of procedures are used to analyze the
interested in joining the discussion group. data. First, the resource maps are produced by an overlay
method that combines the behavioral maps, physical
FOCUS GROUPS
traces, and participant observation notes. These maps are
Focus groups are set up with those people who are
descriptive, in that they summarize activities and distur-
impor-tant in terms of understanding the site and local
bances on the site. Second, a research meeting is held in
popula-tion. As opposed to the large, open group
which each participant summarizes what he or she has
interviews, the focus groups consists of six to ten
found in the interviews. These are general observations
individuals selected to represent especially vulnerable
that guide the researcher or research team as more precise
populations, such as schoolchildren, seniors groups,
coding strategies are developed. This synthetic stage is
and physically challenged groups. The discussions are
quite important, in that it provides a place to start think-
conducted in the language of the group; they are
ing about what has been found. These general summaries
directed by a facilitator and are tape-recorded.
are used to explore theoretical approaches and to priori-
PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION tize the coding procedure.
The researchers maintain field journals that record their The third step is to take each generalization and
observations and impressions of everyday life at the site. break it into a set of codes that can be used to analyze the
They also keep records of their experiences as they inter- field notes. Once this process is completed, the interview
act with users and communities. Participant observation questions are reviewed, and a similar coding scheme is
is a valuable adjunct to the behavioral maps and inter- developed. The interview coding relies on the findings of
views. It provides contextual information and data that the maps, on the field notes (just discussed), and on the
can be compared to what is seen, and such observation is structure of the questions themselves. This is the lengthy
said to enable accurate data interpretation. part of the analysis process, and it requires discussion of
the research team with the client and, in some cases, with
HISTORICAL AND ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS
the individual stakeholders. Some coding schemes may
The collection of historical documents and review of
require multidimensional scaling and a quantitative
relevant archives, newspapers, and magazines begins the
analy-sis, although qualitative content analysis is usually
process. At historically significant sites, this process may
ade-quate in a .
be quite extensive, especially if secondary sources do not
Because the is a rapid procedure, the num-ber
exist. The importance of a careful review of historical
of interviews is usually under , and therefore, they can
documents should be emphasized, since it is through a
be analyzed by hand. The advantage of a qualitative
thorough understanding of the history of the site that
analysis procedure is that the data are not abstracted
areas of cooperation and conflict often become clear and
from their context, and so they retain their validity and
identifiable.
detail. The final step involves a triangulation of the
ANALYSIS various analyses and a search for common elements
Interview data are organized by coding all responses, and and patterns of behaviors and the identification of areas
then content is analyzed by cultural or ethnic group and of conflict and differences, both in the nature of the
study question. Transect walks, tours, and interviews are data and in the groups themselves.
used to produce cultural resource maps for each group.
Focus groups determine the extent of cultural knowledge
Application of REAPs for Heritage
in the community, and they can identify the areas of con-
Conservation Sites
flict and disagreement within the community. Mapping,
transect walks, individual and expert interviews, and
Two projects—the first on Independence National
focus groups provide independent bodies of data that can
Historical Park in Philadelphia, which focused on the
be compared and contrasted, thus improving the validity
importance of ethnicity and cultural representation in park
and reliability of data collected from a relatively small
use; the second, an evaluation of access alternatives to
sample. As in all ethnographic research, the use of
Ellis Island, New York—are presented to provide possible
interviews, observations, and field notes—as well as
knowledge of the cultural group patterns and local politics prototypes for developing a methodology for heritage
—are used to help interpret the collected data. conservation. The issues involved—identifying
Table Products and outcomes of research methods used in the REAP.

Method Data Product What Can Be Learned

Physical traces mapping Collected trash, patterns of erosion Description of nighttime activities Identifies evening activities not
on site observed

Behavioral mapping Time/space maps of site Description of daily activities on site Identifies cultural activities on site

Transect walks Transcribed interviews and Description of site from community Community-centered understanding
consultants’ map of site members’ points of view of the site; local meaning

Individual interviews Interview sheets Description of responses of the Community responses and interest in
cultural groups the site

Expert interviews In-depth interview transcriptions Description of responses of local Community leaders’ interest in the
institutions and community leaders site planning process

Impromptu group interview Transcription of meeting Description of group perspective, Group consensus of issues and
educational value problems

Focus groups Tape-recorded and transcribed Description of issues that emerge Elicits conflicts and disagreement
in small group discussion within the cultural group

Participant observation Field notes Sociocultural description of the Provides context for study and
context identifies community concerns

Historical and archival Newspaper clippings, collection History of the site’s relationship Provides historical context for current
documents of books and articles, reading notes to the surrounding communities study and planning process

the stakeholders, community, and local users; eliciting self-government, as they relate not only to the founding
their cultural values; understanding the meanings that of the nation but also to the birthplace of modern
the site holds for various groups; and giving voice to demo-cratic government worldwide. The Liberty Bell,
their concerns and perspectives—are similar to the an inter-national icon and one of the most venerated
issues addressed by a conservation professional who objects in the park, evolved as a symbol of liberty
must evalu-ate a site. Each case study is presented in because of its associa-tion with various struggles for
detail so that conservation practitioners can adapt the freedom, including the events of to .
procedure to their own needs. The historical park project became part of a
larger effort in the s to renew Center City Philadel-phia.
Independence National Historical Park: The epicenter of the renewal effort was Society Hill, an
Ethnicity, Use, and Cultural Representation area adjacent to the new national park. Because of the
proximity of this neighborhood to the projected park area
The idea of a historical national park in Philadelphia
as well as to downtown and because of the high quality of
origi-nated with the Federal Historic Sites Act of ,
much of its building stock, the city saw in the national
which authorized the to engage in research and
park planning process an opportunity to restore the
educational and service programs and to protect,
racially and culturally heterogeneous neighborhood to its
preserve, and main-tain historic buildings and sites for
colonial-period status as a wealthy residential area. The
public use. Planning and site acquisition began in the
name Society Hill was rediscovered and put to use in
late s; demolition, site preparation, and construction
mak-ing over the district’s image.
took place throughout the s.
Sections of Society Hill were designated as
The Independence National Historical Park’s
redevelopment areas. Homeowners were given the choice of
enabling legislation and primary historic resources focus
restoring their properties according to strict historic
on Independence Hall and related structures as the scene
preservation guidelines adopted by the planning authori-ties
of the central events that resulted in the creation of the
or of selling to the redevelopment authority. Since few could
United States of America. These structures are the
afford the costly work of historic restoration, most sold their
physical reminders of the epic struggle for freedom and
homes. The city then offered the properties for
sale at a nominal price to buyers who could prove that dance with the guidelines. The banks, the real estate com-
they had the financial resources to restore them in accor- munity, and the news media cooperated with the city in
creating a favorable image of the redevelopment area, Americans, the Italian Market Area for Italian Americans,
thereby creating a market of affluent, mostly white buy- and Norris Square for Latinos. These neighborhoods were
ers. Thus, over a period of roughly fifteen years, the pre- selected based on the following criteria: ( ) they were within
dominantly poor, heterogeneous community of long walking distance of the park (except for Norris Square); ( )
standing was dispersed and replaced by a new they had visible spatial and social integrity; and ( ) there
community of predominantly white professionals. were culturally targeted stores, restaurants, religious
The social and physical upheavals involved in cre- organizations, and social services available to res-idents
ating Independence National Historical Park and Society which reinforced their cultural identity. The Jewish
Hill did little to foster communication with local commu- community could not be identified with a spatial commu-nity
nities. The extensive demolition and erasure of the city in the downtown area; therefore, members of both
fabric removed many of the settings that had meaning for Conservative and Orthodox synagogues in the Society Hill
members of local communities. In particular, the uproot-ing area were interviewed as a “community of interest,” rather
of the historic African-American community from what is than as residents of a physically integrated area.
now Society Hill is a legacy that has made it diffi-cult to In thirty-six days of fieldwork, people were consulted
build ties between the park and that community. in the form of individual and expert interviews,
Nevertheless, the supports numerous com- transect walks, and focus groups. Table presents the
munity outreach programs and has recently created the product and outcome of each method utilized.
Yellow Fever exhibit, which focuses on the heroic roles The data were coded and analyzed by cultural
of African Americans during this deadly plague. group and study question. All places in and around the
Further-more, the receives and responds to numerous park with personal and cultural associations for the
requests for park use from the many cultural and research participants were recorded on cultural resource
ideological com-munities in greater Philadelphia. maps. One map was prepared for each cultural group.
In , Independence National Historical Park One of the goals was to involve and educate
began developing a general management plan that would com-munity members about the park planning process, as
set forth basic management philosophy and provide well as to learn their thoughts about the park. They were
strategies for addressing issues and objectives over the con-sidered research “collaborators” rather than
next ten-to-fifteen-year period. The planning process informants, and at the conclusion of the interview, they
called for extensive public participation, including a were given a form that could be mailed back to the park
series of public meetings, televised town meetings, with written suggestions and comments on the park’s
community tours, and planning workshops. As part of future use.
this commu-nity outreach effort, the park wanted to work
RELEVANT FINDINGS:
coopera-tively with local ethnic communities to find
CULTURAL REPRESENTATION
ways to interpret their diverse cultural heritages within
the park’s portrayal of the American experience. The Many participants were concerned with issues of cultural
study, there-fore, was designed to provide a general representation. Some assimilated Italian Americans and
overview of park-associated ethnic groups, including an Jews were ambivalent about presenting themselves as dis-
analysis of their values and the identification of cultural tinct from other Americans. African Americans, in con-
and natural resources that are used by the various groups trast, saw a lack of material and cultural representation in
or are cul-turally meaningful to them. the park’s historical interpretation. For some, the park
The research team spent considerable time inter- represented the uneven distribution of public goods: “So
viewing cultural experts and surveying the neighborhoods much for them [tourists, white people] and so little for us
located near Independence National Historical Park. [African Americans, working-class neighborhood resi-
Based on these interviews and observations, four local dents].” Asian Americans and Latinos favored a curatorial
neighborhoods were selected for study: Southwark for approach less focused on national independence which,
African Americans, Little Saigon for Asians and Asian instead, integrated their immigration stories and colonial
struggles into a more generalized representation of lib-erty
and freedom within the American experience. Italian
Americans, too, were interested in a more inclusive repre-
sentation—one that did not end park interpretation in or but
continued to the present.
Table REAP methodology for Independence National Historical Park. (Adapted from Low et al. [ forthcoming] .)

Method Data Duration Product What Can Be Learned


(days)

Behavioral mapping Time/space maps of site Description of daily activities on Identifies cultural activities on site
site

Transect walks Transcribed interviews and Description of site from com- Community-centered under-
consultants’ maps of site, special munity member’s point of view; standing of the site; local meaning;
places, special events, culturally problem with using tour guides— identification of sacred places
significant areas ample data but seemed rote

Individual interviews Interview sheets in English, Description of responses of the Community responses and interest
Spanish, Vietnamese, or Chinese, cultural groups in informal in the site
with map settings

Expert interviews In-depth interview transcriptions Description of responses of local Community leaders’ interest in the
institutions and community site-planning process
leaders

Formal/informal Interview sheets Description of the context and Provides context for study
discussions; participant history of the project; and identifies and
observation description of site needs community concerns
Focus groups Field notes, and tape recordings Description of issues that emerge Enables understanding of
in English, Spanish, and in small group discussions— conflicts and disagreement
Vietnamese (used facilitator and difficult to organize, conduct, and within the cultural group
translator) transcribe
Historical documents Newspaper clippings, collection History of the park’s relationship Provides historical context for
of books and articles, reading to the surrounding communities current study and planning process
notes

Three of the cultural groups—African Ameri-cans, RELEVANT FINDINGS: CULTURAL VALUES


Latinos, and Jews—mentioned places they would like to see The demonstrated that the park holds multiple val-ues for
commemorated or markers they would like to see installed to Philadelphians which are often overlooked because of
bring attention to their cultural presence within the park management’s emphasis on accommodating visitors.
boundaries. Many participants—particu-larly Latinos, Visitors was a problematic term, because residents using
African Americans, and Asians—saw the need for more the park do not see themselves as visitors. Treating every-
programming for children and activities for families. Unlike one as a visitor (read tourist) neglects an important sense
the visual, pictorial experience the tourist seeks, residents in of territoriality. The resident incorporates the park into her
general were interested in the park’s recreational potential: home territory; the visitor knows she is a visitor. To the
as a place with sociable open spaces where one can get food, resident, the park is symbolically and functionally part of
relax, and sit on the grass; or as a place for civic and cultural the larger landscape of the city and the neighborhood. The
celebrations. These residents wanted the park to be a more resident likes being surrounded by familiar sights and
relaxed, fun, lively place. As a group, Latinos made the most places, follows his/her own rhythm in moving around the
use of the park for recre-ational purposes in their leisure city, and enjoys a proprietary right of access. Those sensi-
time. Latinos were partic-ularly interested in developing the bilities are offended by crowds of tourists, by the denial of
recreational potential of the park, but their sentiments were free access to historic sites (that is, when not part of a
echoed by at least a few consultants in each of the other tour), and perhaps by an emphasis on official interpreta-
ethnic groups. tions. The more the park sets its landmarks off from the
surrounding city, reducing everyday contact with resi-
dents, the more the objects and places lose their meaning
for residents.
The of Independence National Historical Park is culture correspond with either use or nonuse. Identi-fying
a model for heritage sites where issues of ethnicity and relevant cultural or ethnic groups as constituencies that
live in the local neighborhood or that traditionally have a Visitors to the Ellis Island Immigration Museum
relationship to the park, then learning about those groups mostly arrive by ferries that leave from Battery Park in
and neighborhoods through the methods, provides a quick New York City and make stops at the Statue of Liberty
but complete snapshot of the commu-nity and its diverse and then at Ellis Island before returning to Battery Park.
values, meanings, and sense of cultural representation. There is also an infrequent ferry from Liberty State Park
Furthermore, this was able to distin-guish between visitor in New Jersey. The cost of the ferry trip was $ . –$ . at the
and resident values, which on this site were in conflict. time of this study. People who work on Ellis Island,
One aspect of the methodology, however, that needs to be however, especially construction workers with trucks and
expanded for use in the conser-vation field would be more materials, drive across a temporary bridge built to enable
emphasis on the needs of the visitor as well as of the local the earlier historic preservation work; the bridge spans the
community residents. four hundred meters from Liberty State Park in New
Jersey to Ellis Island. Senator Lautenberg of New Jersey
Ellis Island Access Alternatives: was able to appropriate close to $ million of the federal
Conflicting Cultural Values budget to build a permanent bridge to replace the existing
structure. The proposed bridge would have allowed both
The research goal was to provide commentary from an
vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
ethnographic perspective on four possible scenarios—a
This study was begun in the summer of and was
bridge, subsidized ferry, elevated rail, and tunnel. For the
undertaken as part of the environmental impact statement
purposes of this project, the culturally appropriate popu-
required under federal law to disclose and eval-uate the
lations included the local users of Battery Park and Lib-
impact of building and operating the proposed bridge. Much
erty State Park; local providers of services at Battery Park
of the concern focused on whether making Ellis Island
and Liberty State Park, including vendors and small-scale
accessible by footbridge would compromise the island’s
tourist services; residents of the Jersey City neighbor-
historical integrity. The task was to evaluate the impact of a
hoods adjacent to Liberty State Park; special populations
bridge on the sociocultural environment of the two places
such as children, the elderly, and the physically
from which the existing passenger ferry service departs for
challenged; and “traditional cultural groups”—those
Ellis Island—Liberty State Park in Jer-sey City and Battery
people whose families entered through Ellis Island or who
Park in New York—and to consider the impact on nearby
are them-selves immigrants with identities and aspirations
Jersey City neighborhoods. The author was also asked to
symboli-cally connected to Ellis Island.
find out whether the research participants were in favor of
Ellis Island in New York was the principal
the bridge or not. The bridge was later taken out of the
federal immigration station in the United States from to
federal budget, and the project was dropped. The
. More than twelve million immigrants were processed
“temporary” bridge remains in service to authorized
there, and it is estimated that over percent of all U.S.
vehicles and personnel.
citizens can trace their ancestry to those who came
through the Registry Room. In , Ellis Island closed and BATTERY PARK
was virtually abandoned until , when President Battery Park is one of approximately fifteen hundred
Lyndon Johnson added it to the Statue of Liberty parks, playgrounds, and other public spaces under the
National Monument under the jurisdiction of the . The jurisdiction of the City of New York’s Department of
restoration of Ellis Island began in , and the Ellis Parks and Recreation. The park covers almost twenty-
Island Immigration Museum opened in , with the three ( . ) acres of land in a tear-shaped form that
building being restored to the period of – . stretches among State Street, Battery Place, and the
New York harbor. The ferry to the Statue of Liberty
and Ellis Island leaves from the end of the park. On
any summer day, the park is filled with tourists
waiting in line for the ferry.
Visitors to the park consist of various categories
of tourists, the Wall Street lunchtime crowd, and New
York and New Jersey residents who come to enjoy the
park. Tourists can be found throughout the park, although
the majority tend to convene near the ferry landing, twentieth century. By the s, all passenger rail and
souvenir pushcart area, and tour bus area. Lunchtime freight operations on the site had been abandoned. The
workers tend to sit both in the sun and in the shade of State of New Jersey acquired the site and has been
Eisenhower Mall, around the great lawn, and in the gradually transforming it into a public park. The first
picnic areas. Fishermen tend to gather at the end of the phase of Liberty State Park opened in June , in time for
harbor. Bikers and rollerbladers use the length of the the national bicentennial observances. The area devel-
promenade. Sunbathers can be found along the edges oped for park use so far comprises approximately three
of the prome-nade where there is the least shade. hundred acres, mostly at the southern and northern
Several different groups of park and recreation edges of the park.
authorities serve Battery Park. rangers are generally The southern area—which was the first part of
inside or at the door of Castle Clinton, directing tourists the park to be constructed and opened and is the most
or giving guided tours in the parks and surrounding intensively used area in Liberty State Park—includes
neighborhood. City Parks and Recreation employees grass-covered fields, a public boat launch, walkways
work throughout, maintaining the park. Several city along the waterfront, spacious parking lots, and the park
employees regularly lunch in the playground area at the head-quarters, which contains a food concession stand,
picnic tables. A police car patrols the park for security, rest-rooms, and visitor information. The northern area has
and often city park officers are seen talking with three centers of activity widely separated by flat, mostly
homeless individuals or illegal street vendors. treeless fields. Two of the activity centers are major
There are many kinds of vendors in Battery Park. devel-opments of recent years: the Liberty Science Center
Three pushcart vending companies—two that concen- and the restored head house and concourse of the Central
trate on food and one that sells souvenirs—have pushcarts Railroad of New Jersey ( ) ferry terminal, where pas-
regularly in the park. One of these vending companies sengers once boarded ferries for New York.
also owns both outdoor restaurants. This company has The third concentration of activity in the north-ern
only four carts, which are within the vicinity of the east- area is the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island passenger ferry
side outdoor restaurant. Another pushcart company dock, which is located along the Tidewater Basin.
employs the majority of immigrants operating pushcarts Visitors to the two national monuments can park in the
near the entrance to the park, Castle Clinton, and the newly constructed parking lot across Johnston Avenue,
nearby tourist bus stop. The third company occupies terri- west of the terminal train shed, and walk across the
tory near the tour-bus stop, as well as near the ferry land- street to the ferry dock, from which the ferries come and
ing. Independent vendors are spread out between the two go at roughly forty-five-minute intervals. Next to the
ends of the park. dock are a ticket stand operated by the ferry company,
Street performers position themselves on the a film and souvenir stand, several picnic tables,
promenade where boat lines are formed, along the wide sheltered waiting areas, several refreshment vendor
path to the great lawn, at the crossroads in front of the carts, and public lavatories.
great lawn, or between the Castle and the promenade. The most popular area includes the perimeter
A large number of homeless people reside in the park. walkways around the Liberation Monument, east of
The stone slabs of the war memorial offer privacy to a park headquarters, and the section of Liberty Walk that
person sleeping on a bench. Patches of healthy grass, contin-ues from this field on a trestle across the south
bathrooms, and a running fountain in the park are cove. This area is within easy walking distance of two
resources to the homeless residents. By evening, the large parking lots and offers spectacular views of the
homeless residents outnumber other park users. A bay, the Statue of Liberty, and the New York skyline.
service center for homeless individuals is located Liberty Walk itself has numerous benches where
underneath the Staten Island terminal, and a soup people rest and enjoy the views and the breezes.
kitchen is located in the surrounding neighborhood. The picnic grove is used by families, organized
LIBERTY STATE PARK
groups, and some individuals alone. People can buy take-out
Liberty State Park occupies , acres of land and tide-land food at the stand in the park headquarters, but most seem to
along Upper New York Bay in Jersey City, New Jersey. bring picnics, and some cook on outdoor grills. The stretches
The site was a vast railroad yard throughout most of the of Liberty Walk that bridge the north and south coves are
popular with people who fish, especially in
the early morning and in the evening—times when next to the sign, and the World Financial Center
the fish are feeding. ferry dock in New York.
The brick plaza next to the Terminal is used The center of the neighborhood is made up of
occasionally in the daytime for ceremonies, such as Flag three corner parks across from one another, where people
Day observances by the Jersey City Fire Department. In sit on benches in the shade during hot summer after-
summer, Jersey City sponsors Sunday afternoon jazz con- noons. The park users are representative of the various
certs here. On sunny evenings, people may drive down to residents of the neighborhood: some are Polish-speaking
the plaza, parking in the free lot next to the ferry terminal, immigrants who are longtime residents of the area, some
to watch the sunset. The Terminal is lightly used on are Spanish-speaking recent immigrants, and a few are
weekdays by people visiting the historical exhibits in the older English-speaking European Americans. The
old waiting room, using the lavatories, or just looking at gentrified center of the community is Washington Street,
the building itself. On some weekends the terminal is used a mixed residential and commercial street, with an
for special events like ethnic festivals or collectors’ expensive Italian restaurant across from law and real
shows, which may attract thousands of people. estate offices. There are a number of churches in Paulus
NEARBY JERSEY CITY NEIGHBORHOODS
Hook, including Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and
Three neighborhoods bordering Liberty State Park were a Polish Roman Catholic church, Our Lady of Czesto-
chowa. Each of these churches offers numerous commu-
selected for study: ( ) Paulus Hook, a small gentrified
area of brownstone row houses and corner parks; ( ) Van nity activities and services, including senior centers,
Vorst, a larger area of elegant brick and brownstone row parochial schools, and summer children’s programs.
Van Vorst is bounded by Grand Street on the
houses focused on Van Vorst Park, a residential square,
south and by Monmouth and Brunswick Streets on the
with some gentrification amid a highly heterogeneous
west. The streets surrounding the park, including York,
population; and ( ) Lafayette, a mixed industrial and
Mercer, Montgomery, Monmouth, Varick, and Barrow
low-income residential area of tenements, wooden row
Streets, are lined with substantial row houses of brick and
houses, public housing projects, and newer, subsidized
brownstone dating from the middle and late nineteenth
modular housing. These neighborhoods were selected
century. The largest and most splendid houses look out on
both for their proximity to Liberty State Park and
Van Vorst Park from Jersey Avenue. Gentrification has
because they are representative of the social diversity
been under way in Van Vorst since at least the mid- s.
of Jersey City.
Many houses in the neighborhood have been refurbished
Paulus Hook is a historic, peninsular neighbor-
and their architectural details restored. On the same
hood, across the Tidewater Basin from Liberty State Park.
streets, salsa music can be overheard from double-parked
It is bounded by Hudson Street on the east, York Street on
cars of residents who have stopped to talk to a friend at
the north, Marin Boulevard on the west, and the Tide-
the local bodega or to someone sitting on a row house
water Basin on the south. The Morris Canal Little Basin,
stoop. Many of these conversations are in a mixture of
on the southeastern edge of Paulus Hook, is the last ves-
English and Spanish. Further down the street, elderly
tige in Jersey City of the early-nineteenth-century Morris
African-American residents sit or stand on their stoops
Canal, a shipping channel that crossed the state of New
conversing with neighbors who are returning home or
Jersey to connect the two great rivers of the Mid-Atlantic
passing by on the way to the busy bodega. Van Vorst has
region: the North River (the Hudson) and the South River
a number of churches, including various Spanish-
(the Delaware). The clearance of industrial buildings from
speaking congregations of local evangelical churches.
the lot between Hudson Street and the Hudson River has
Lafayette is located along the western edge of
opened up beautiful views of the river, the harbor, and the
Liberty State Park. It is a residential neighborhood with
skyscrapers of downtown New York. The open lot is cur-
many intrusions of car repair shops, scrap metal yards,
rently used for public parking. The enormous Colgate
and piles of old tires and other industrial waste. Part of the
toothpaste electric sign, the face of its clock big enough to
neighborhood has small manufacturing shops side by side
be read from Manhattan, has been relocated from the for-
mer Colgate factory nearby to a site at the river’s edge, with residential streets. Most of the community members
just east of the open lot. A new weekday passenger ferry interviewed were African Americans or Spanish-speaking
service operates between the newly named Colgate Pier, Caribbean Americans who had lived in the neighborhood
for some time. Families live in brick or
stone row houses, in larger apartment projects, or in the RELEVANT FINDINGS:
new, subsidized modular attached town houses. The cen- INTERESTS AND ATTITUDES
ter of the Lafayette African-American male community is The research focused on constituency groups; further into the
the barber shop, where men sit, talk, and exchange news project, however, when constituency analysis did not provide
throughout the day. The bodegas and bus stops on each statistically significant clustering of similar people and points
corner of Pacific Street also provide opportunities for con- of view, a values-orientation-based analysis was
versations and neighborly interchange, particularly for incorporated. The constituency groups provided a guide to
women, younger men, and mothers with young children. sampling the users and residents on the three sites—Battery
The major school in the area is the Assumption–All Park, Liberty State Park, and the Jersey City neighborhoods
Saints parochial school, run by Sister Maeve McDermott. surrounding Liberty State Park (Paulus Hook, Van Vorst,
According to Sister Maeve, she is responsible for children and Lafayette)—who were consulted concerning their
in this relatively poor area. The Convent of the Sisters of perceptions of possible positive or nega-tive impacts of each
Charity has been a mainstay in the community for over of the proposed access alternatives. Their attitudes and
eighty years and runs the school and summer programs concerns were collected through a series of data collection
for local children. There are a number of other churches methods—including behav-ioral maps, transect walks,
throughout the neighborhood, including the Monumental individual interviews, expert interviews, impromptu group
Baptist Church, where the researchers inter-viewed a interviews, and focus groups—completed at the various field
number of the congregation, and the African Methodist sites (see Table ). A total of people were consulted: through
Episcopal Church, as well as other small evan-gelical and individ-ual interviews in the two parks, through impromptu
storefront congregations. group interviews in neighborhood gathering places, and

in focus groups both in the parks and in


neighborhood churches and institutions.

Table REAP methodology for Ellis Island access alternative project.

Method Data Duration Product What Can Be Learned


(days)

Physical traces mapping Map of trash and clothing left at site Description of physical condition Identifies nighttime activities that
of site would be affected by the proposed
bridge and alternatives

Behavioral mapping Time/space maps of site, field Description of daily activities Identifies daily activities that
notes at site would be affected by the
proposed bridge and alternatives

Transect walks Transcribed interviews and Description of site from Community-centered understand-
consultants’ maps of site, field notes community member’s point ing of the site; local meanings
of view

Individual interviews Interview sheets, field notes Description of responses of the Community and user responses
constituency groups to the proposed bridge and
alterna-tives

Expert interviews In-depth interview transcriptions Description of positions of local Community leaders’ responses
institutions and community to the proposed bridge and
leaders alterna-tives

Group interviews Field notes, video or tape recording Description of various Involves the neighborhood and
community groups and their church groups in the planning
responses to the proposed bridge process; provides for public discus-
and alternatives sion of issues in the local context

Focus groups Field notes, video, or tape recording Description of issues that merge Enables the development of a
in small group discussion typology of responses and in-
depth discussion of alternatives
The data were analyzed by coding all responses Park were found in Liberty State Park. The two most
from the interviews and focus groups and then by com- frequently cited value orientations were health and
paring constituency groups. Constituency groups were recreation, and park quality—quite a contrast from the
defined as groups of people who share cultural beliefs and economic findings in Battery Park—followed by
values and who are likely to be affected by the proposed aesthetic concerns and concerns about improved access.
access alternatives in a similar way. Correlational, The residents of the various neighborhoods sur-
content, and value orientation analyses were utilized to rounding Liberty State Park were generally in favor of the
present the various positions held by consultants across proposed bridge and less interested in the other alterna-
the sub-groups studied in this project. tives, yet each neighborhood had a slightly different per-
In addition to the coding of all responses from the spective on the issue. Paulus Hook residents had very
interviews and the analysis by constituency, correla-tional mixed opinions about the proposed bridge and were con-
analyses were applied where possible. The attitudes cerned about potential problems, such as increased traffic
toward the alternatives were analyzed for content and pre- or limited parking, that might occur. Van Vorst residents
sented as lists of arguments for and against the bridge and were more positive and considered the proposed bridge a
the other alternatives. Finally, a value orientation analysis way to increase democratic access to Ellis Island. They
summarized the various positions held by consultants saw the recreational benefits of the bridge as an improve-
across the subgroups studied in this project. ment to their neighborhood. Lafayette residents were the
In Battery Park, the people the most concerned most positive about the proposed bridge because it would
about the negative impact of a bridge were the service allow them to visit Ellis Island without paying the ferry
managers, city employees, park employees, ferry repre- fare, which was perceived as too high for families and
sentatives, and tour bus drivers—that is, those constituen- groups of children to afford in this low-income area.
cies with a vested interest in the success and profitability They, too, saw the bridge as an amenity that would add to
of Battery Park. The greatest differences in attitudes the beauty and recreational potential of Liberty State Park
about the proposed bridge were found between people and their local community.
who were recreating, versus those who were working, in
RELEVANT FINDINGS: VALUE ORIENTATIONS
Battery Park—recreating consultants were more positive,
Table presents the value orientations compared across the
and workers were more negative—and between people
parks and neighborhoods. What is clear from this
who were immigrants and those who were native born—
comparison is that each area has slightly different priori-ties
immigrants were more positive, and the native born were
and concerns. Battery Park workers and users are not at all
more negative. Overall, Battery Park users were most
concerned with the cost of the ferry or the bridge but instead
concerned about the economic consequences of the
are concerned about the possible economic consequences of
proposed access alternatives, but there were a number of
the proposed access alternatives. Liberty State Park workers
people who were concerned about access to Ellis Island
and users, on the other hand, are con-cerned with the health
or who questioned the social priorities of the bridge
alternative. and recreation advantages and park-quality disadvantages of
the access alternatives. The residents of Paulus Hook, Van
In Liberty State Park, constituency groups were
Vorst, and Lafayette are most concerned with the cost of the
not predictive of attitudes toward the alternatives, with
ferry or proposed access alternative. Cost, access, park
the one notable exception of such vested interests as
Liberty State Park officials and workers, who were over- quality, and econom-ics were the most frequently mentioned
concerns for all groups. Table is useful in understanding the
whelmingly against the proposed bridge. The active
recreation users, such as walkers and cyclists, were more variation among these populations and can be used to judge
in favor of the bridge than were the passive user groups how often a concern was expressed by consultants in this
and organized group leaders. There was also a sharp dis- study.
tinction between Latino and non-Latino consultants:
the Latino consultants were very positive about the access
alternatives, as compared with non-Latino groups. The
same differences in attitude between user type (work-
related use versus recreational use) and place of origin
(immigrant versus native born) found in Battery
One important conclusion from Ellis Island is
Integrating Anthropological-Ethnographic
that all the people the researchers talked to were inter-
Methods into Heritage Conservation Planning
ested in the questions asked and were quite
and Practice
sophisticated in their understanding of the problem and
its conse-quences, regardless of cultural or educational
back-ground. Thus, concerns that the general public Table outlines a research approach to heritage conserva-
would not be able to evaluate the access alternatives or tion planning that includes constituency analysis, ethno-
would not care about the proposed changes to Ellis semantic methodologies, and s, as strategies in a values
Island and Lib-erty State Park were unfounded. This assessment process. Although these are not the only
strategies for assessing relevant cultural values, they are
finding suggests that values assessments and planning
an excellent place to start. A Getty Conservation Insti-
processes can be enhanced by consultation with local
tute report, from the “Economics and Heritage Conserva-
populations through the process.
tion” meeting of , which was focused on the econom-ics
of value assessment, also proposes a number of other
strategies for overlaying and assessing heritage, once the
values are identified ( ).
Table Value orientations by site in Ellis Island access alternative A final question about who should be undertak-
project. ing these various projects does not have a simple answer.
The overall project—including the identification of stake-
Value Battery Liberty Surrounding Total holders, the development of a values typology, the values
Orientation Park State Park Neighbor-
assessment process, the evaluation and ranking of values,
hoods
and a follow-up with more detailed assessment as neces-
Cost sary—should be organized and directed by the conserva-
tion professional. But values assessment, particularly
Access
when a is used, is a team process.
Park quality Experienced ethnographers and field workers
Économique will be able to produce the necessary data more quickly
and easily than other professionals. Furthermore, the
Health and
recreation
analysis process requires considerable training and back-
ground in qualitative analysis techniques. Yet the tech-
Choice
niques involved in constituency analysis, ethnosemantic
Esthétique methodologies, and s can be learned through a series of
Social training workshops. Local participants can become
priorities excellent on-site field workers, and the process usu-ally
includes local collaborators. In fact, part of the point of
Political
undertaking a is to create connections to the local
Education community.
Personal The best situation, if finances allow, is to bring
Safety and together a team made up of conservation
comfort professional(s), ethnographer(s) (the number depends
on language demands), and two to three local residents
New
technology and/or experts who would like to be part of the values
assessment process. The residents and experts can be
Ecological
trained by the ethnographers to assist in interviewing
Not going to and mapping, while the ethnographers would
have impact undertake the group interviews, focus groups, and
Community participant observation. There are many combinations
quality of expertise that are useful, and these would have to be
developed for each project on site.
Tablea
u Cultural values assessment procedure.

Tâche Methodology Specific Techniques

Identify stakeholders Constituency analysis Expert interviews, behavioral mapping, physical traces
mapping, participant observation

Develop values typology Ethnosemantic methodology Work with panel of representatives from each constituency
to evaluate values typology, translate values typology into local
categories

Values assessment Individual interviews, transect walks, focus groups, participant


observation

Overlay values assessments Ecological planning and design process Constituency groups are represented in a process that assesses
values and negotiates ranking of values priorities/importance

Discuss assessments with Focus groups, impromptu interviews, group interview


stakeholders

Repeat procedure for more Constituency conflict analysis Individual interviews, behavioral mapping, expert interviews
detailed assessments of individual
values where conflicts arise

Conclusion Notes

This paper has outlined how qualitative anthropological- . Adapted from Low ( ).
ethnographic methods can be incorporated into the . Portions of the literature review are based on the
process of value assessment at heritage sites. The pro- more extensive discussion found in Taplin, Scheld,
posed methodologies are intended to be complementary and Low (forthcoming).
to a parallel economic values assessment that utilizes the
techniques identified in the Economics and Heritage References
Conservation meeting report ( ). The next step in
developing an integrated “sociocultural-economic” model
of valuing the significance of a historic site requires field Bean, L. J., and S. B. Vane. . Ethnography and the : Opportuni-
ties and obligations. CRM Bulletin ( ): – .
testing with clients or stakeholders and local community
groups, as well as field testing that addresses values Beebe, J. . Basic concepts and techniques of rapid appraisal.
Human Organization : – .
conflicts. When this proposed methodology is applied in a
real-life case study, problems and redundan-cies in the Brugge, D. M. . Cultural use and meaning of artifacts. CRM
Bul-letin ( ): – .
assessment process will become apparent. After this test
application, the conclusions of this paper should be Crespi, M. . Ethnography and the : A growing partnership.
CRM Bulletin ( ): – .
revisited, discussed, and evaluated, and a final model
methodology should be proposed. Ervin, A. M. . Trying the impossible: Relatively “rapid” methods in
a city-wide needs assessment. Human Organization : – .
Getty Conservation Institute ( ). . Economics and Heritage Conser-
vation: A Meeting Organized by the Getty Conservation Institute,
December , ed. R. Mason. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute.
Joseph, R. . Cranberry bogs to parks: Ethnography and women’s
history. CRM Bulletin : – .
Kent, S. . Analyzing Activity Areas: An Ethnoarchaeological Study of the
Use of Space. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
Liebow, E. . Social impact assessment. CRM Bulletin ( ): –
.
Low, S. M. . Social science methods in landscape architecture.
Land-scape Planning : – .
———.. Professional culture: The boundary between theory and
practice in design. Resources in Education, ERIC Report: – .
———.a. A cultural landscapes mandate for action. CRM Bulletin
():–.
———. b. Developments in research design, data collection, and
analysis: Qualitative methods. In Advances in Environment,
Behavior, and Design, vol. , ed. E. N. Zube and R. T. Moore. New
York: Plenum Publishing, – .
———. a. Culture, politics, and the plaza: An ethnographic approach
to the study of urban public spaces in Latin America. In Cul-ture-
Meaning-Architecture, ed. K. D. Moore, – . Aldershot: Ashgate.
———.b. On the plaza: The politics of public space and culture.
Austin: University of Texas Press.
Low, S. M., and W. Ryan. . Noticing without looking: A methodol-
ogy for the integration of architectural and local perceptions in Oley,
Pennsylvania. Journal of Architectural Planning and Research : – .
Low, S. M., et al. Forthcoming. Recapturing erased histories:
Ethnicity, design, and cultural representation. Journal of
Architectural and Planning Research.
National Park Service ( ). . Applied ethnography program.
Web site (http://www.cr.nps.gov/aad/appeth.htm).
Pavlides, E., and J. E. Hesser. . Vernacular architecture as an expres-
sion of its social context in Eressos, Greece. In Housing, Culture, and
Design: A Comparative Perspective, ed. S. M. Low and E. Chambers, –
. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Rapoport, A. . The Meaning of the Built Environment. Beverly Hills,
Calif.: Sage Publications.
Richardson, M. . Place: Experience and symbol. Geoscience and Man
:–, – .
Taplin, D., S. Scheld, and S. Low. Forthcoming. in urban parks:
A case study of Independence National Historical Park. Human
Organi-zation.
Whyte, W. H. . The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Washington,
D.C.: Conservation Foundation.
Wolf, J. C. . Martin Luther King Jr. CRM Bulletin ( ): – .
Évaluation économique du patrimoine culturel :
Données et perspectives
By Susana Mourato and Massimiliano Mazzanti

I , for cultural destinations has become a major ety but in a way that is not translated into any market
force in the global economy (Greffe , ; Pearce and price—i.e., they are external to markets. The impacts on
Mourato ). Tourist trips typi-cally include cultural conservation of this “market failure” can be severe: under-
heritage elements that range widely, from a journey to funding, with insufficient funds generated to finance con-
a historical town center to a visit to a museum or a servation; strong reliance on government support and
stroll around a historic garden. Visitors benefit from public subsidy, which leaves the conservation of many
the expectations, experiences (educational, visual, important cultural assets at the mercy of political whims
recreational), and memories offered by heritage assets; and overstretched government budgets; overuse, with
while nonvisitors may benefit indirectly through resulting wear and tear, congestion, vandalism, and theft;
magazines, films, or, increasingly, the Internet (virtual and inability to compete on the same level with alterna-
visits). Even if one does not use a cultural asset at tive development projects, as the economic value of cul-
present, investing in its conservation and maintenance tural assets appears to be zero or very small. A notorious
retains the possibility of being able to use it at some example is the recent loss of the ancient city of Zeugma in
point in the future. This option value of cultural Turkey, which was flooded because of the construction of
destinations is akin to an insurance premium. a dam. The discovery on site of some of the most beauti-
Furthermore, people may attach a value to the ful Roman mosaics in the Near East did not prevent the
conservation of cultural resources for a number of rea- complete destruction of the city remains.
sons—without ever using or visiting them. There may be Paradoxically, underuse of cultural resources
altruistic feelings associated with the knowledge that can also be detrimental for conservation. This is the
other people may enjoy cultural heritage. Or there may be case, for instance, when the goal of preserving a site is
bequest motivations accruing from the desire to conserve pursued by implementing only defensive policies,
cultural goods for future generations. Or there may even such as listing, without investment in integrated
be existence values—that is, benefits that come from the strategies of valoriza-tion: conservation, restoration,
knowledge that cultural heritage is being conserved for its and demand-oriented policies.
own sake. These nonuse values are thought to be a signifi- Even when cultural goods and services are
cant proportion of the total economic value of cultural mar-keted, like many cultural destinations where
her-itage, which may well extend beyond country borders. visitors are required to pay an entry fee, more often
Yet despite its obvious benefits to society, than not there is a failure to practice optimal charges—
cultural heritage is increasingly threatened with namely, fees that would maximize visitor revenues
degradation and destruction. While some risk factors without compromising targets for number of visits and
result from natural environmental causes (such as fees that could subse-quently revert to conservation
earthquakes, landslides, volcanism, floods, avalanches, (Steiner ; Hett and Mourato ; Beltran and Rojas ). For
and coastal dynamics), human activities are arguably the example, in the case of the Historical Sanctuary of
main pressures behind the decay and loss of cultural Machu Picchu in Peru, where both foreign and national
assets. These include tourist and user pressure, unplanned tourists are charged the same, Hett and Mourato
urbanization, destructive development projects, theft, estimate that percent of all visitors would be willing to
vandalism, war, air pollution, vibration, and plain neglect. pay higher fees (Hett and Mourato ). A policy of price
Part of the problem is that many cultural assets are differentiation between foreign and national tourists
not traded in markets: they have a “zero price” and can be was found to increase the profitability of the site by
enjoyed by many without charge. In other words, these so- more than percent while simultaneously increasing
called nonmarket cultural resources are valued by soci- visitation rates of national visi-tors by about percent.
Statements in the existing cultural heritage litera- erence to large “cultural values” are commonplace (Feld-
ture that attempt to motivate conservation policies by ref- stein ; Couper ; Hutchinson ), and the deteri-oration or
disappearance of any item of this heritage is thought to world where potential visitors are spoiled for choice, time
constitute a harmful impoverishment of the world heritage constrained (rather than income constrained), and getting
of mankind as a whole ( ). However, apart from what can more sophisticated, cultural destinations are having to
be inferred from data on visitors and from maintenance renew and market themselves to compete and survive.
and restoration expendi-tures, little is known about the A consumer-oriented approach has increasingly taken
actual magnitude of the economic value of nonmarket over traditional supply-driven approaches to cultural her-
cultural resources. Even less is known about how changes itage management and conservation, leading to ongoing
in quality affect the value of these resources. Somewhat market research studies to understand demand, strong
surprisingly, there has been little effort to demonstrate marketing to generate awareness and attract new visitors,
these values in practice. and a focus on building “brand” loyalty and encouraging
But there is some good news. In the last two repeat visits, essential for long-term survival. For these
decades, economists have developed techniques to assess reasons, discussed in more detail in the following
the economic value of changes that are external to mar- sections, demand-led approaches, such as economic
kets. In recent years, a number of these nonmarket valua- valuation tech-niques, might quickly form an integral part
tion methods have gained increasing popularity among of the new lexicon of the cultural industry and a useful
academics and policy makers, particularly since a panel component of the cultural analyst tool kit. Economic
of experts led by two Nobel laureates in economics ruled value as defined here does not deny the importance of
that, under certain conditions, they were reliable enough other value dimen-sions but has a specific, and arguably
to be used in a U.S. court of law in the context of natural special, role to play in cultural policy toward heritage
resource damage assessment (Arrow et al. ). Follow-ing fruition, enhancement, and conservation.2
this historic decision, survey methods like contingent In essence, neglecting to take into account the
valuation (Mitchell and Carson ) have flourished and have economic value of cultural heritage conservation and the
been widely used in environmental decision making at full costs and benefits of policies, regulations, and projects
various levels (Bateman et al. ). A contingent valua-tion with cultural components can lead to suboptimal alloca-
questionnaire is a survey instrument that sets out a tion of resources in the sector, investment failure, and
number of questions to elicit, among other information, continuous degradation of the world’s cultural assets.
the monetary value of a change in a public good or ser- Clearly, these are complex issues that need to go beyond
vice. Most interestingly, its use has slowly but inexorably the financial aspects and be understood in the wider con-
extended into other fields, such as health, transport, text of raising adequate financing for conservation and
social, and, notably, cultural policy.1 renewal, while, at the same time, reaching out and
The estimation of the economic value of cultural encouraging a demand to visit and appreciate cultural
heritage conservation has increasingly been recognized as heritage. This paper argues that economic valuation is a
a fundamental part of cultural policy (Frey ; Throsby ; necessary (although not sufficient) stage to achieve the
Maddison and Mourato ; Creigh-Tyte, Dawe, and Stock ; sustainable use of cultural resources and to help reach a
Darnell ; Navrud and Ready ; Nuti ; Pearce and Mourato ; balanced, optimal mix of preservation, conservation, and
Davies ). Empiri-cally, there are at least two powerful access, while assessing the relative opportunity costs of
arguments for using economic valuation to inform macro each component.
and micro decisions in the cultural heritage sector. On the The rest of the paper is organized as follows: The
one hand, public institutions are increasingly being next section, “Economic Valuation: Principles and Tools,”
required to justify their expenditure decisions or requests presents the basic principles of economic valuation and
for funding in terms of generated “consumer benefits,” examines a range of economic tools for the evaluation of
and those that are unable to do so might find their budgets cultural heritage, explaining their advantages and disad-
cut. Furthermore, in a vantages. In the following section, the authors discuss the
role of economic valuation techniques for microanalysis of
cultural policies and cultural institutions and argue the need
for measuring (nonmarket) economic flows to inform
cultural policy and management; some cultural targets that
economic valuation tools might help to achieve are also
suggested. The following section reviews
the current evidence on the application of economic main findings and implications. The final section
valu-ation methods to cultural goods and discusses its proposes a new framework for the valuation of cultural
heritage, based on recent developments of economic pared to pay for it, there is no corresponding welfare
measurement tools and on a more integrated approach loss, as people simply do not buy that good.
for socio-economic-cultural evaluation. Conclusions A large proportion of cultural goods and services
and sugges-tions for future research are also presented. are traded in markets: cultural tourism, performing arts,
antiques, paintings, and books are just a few examples of
Economic Valuation: cultural goods for which thriving markets exist. But even
Principles and Tools in these cases, pricing polices are many times controlled,
noncompetitive, and arbitrary, and price discrimination is
not effectively implemented (see Hett and Mourato or
Basic Principles
Beltran and Rojas for examples). Further, many market
In line with standard economic theory, human well-being imperfections are present, such as the monopoly power of
is determined by people’s preferences. A benefit is defined institutions and government subsidies, which prevent
as anything that increases human well-being, and a cost as competitive pricing.
anything that decreases human well-being. Measurement But of specific interest to this paper are the many
of preferences is obtained by finding out individuals’ cultural goods and services that are not traded in the mar-
max-imum willingness to pay ( ) for a benefit or for the ket and that hence do not have a price. This is due to some
avoidance of a cost, or their minimum willingness to of the special characteristics of cultural heritage, related to
accept ( ) compensation for tolerating a cost or forgo-ing a its property rights and type of use, that prevent the exis-
benefit. The rate at which individuals are prepared to trade tence of the necessary markets for individuals to express
off goods and services against one another corre-sponds to their preferences. Using economic terminology, many cul-
the total economic value of a change in the price or tural assets are nonrival and nonexclusive in consumption;
quality of a good or service.3 This is because it forces in other words, the fact that one individual enjoys an asset
people to take into account the fact that they are being does not prevent others from enjoying it as well, and no
asked to sacrifice some of their limited income to secure one can be excluded from its enjoyment (i.e., open access
the change and must thus weigh the value of what is being or common property). Assets with these characteristics
offered to them against alternative uses of that income. In are called public goods and are typically provided for
this sense, is a much more powerful mea-sure of value collectively by governments and paid for through taxes.
than an attitudinal statement. While people may say, in A historical town center is a good example of a public good:
response to an attitudinal question, that they “care about” it is open-access, and large numbers of visitors can enjoy it
many things, in practice they will only be able to pay for a simultaneously. A similar case occurs when a cul-tural good
much smaller subset of these things. has external effects (externalities) that are not captured by
is normally expressed in the marketplace. The the market. For example, conservation works carried out on
market equilibrium between demand and supply of goods a historical building may have a positive visual externality
and services is a reflection of people’s preferences and is for passers-by. This external effect is not captured in any
characterized by an optimal quantity and price. Consumers market (pecuniary) transaction.
who are willing to pay the market price of a good or service As noted previously, these situations where the
will buy it: for those willing to pay exactly the market price market does not reflect the full welfare provided by the good
and no more, the cost of buying the good or service—i.e., the are called market failures, and they typically occur with
money they spend—is just equal to the benefit they get from assets, such as cultural heritage, that have public-good
the purchase—i.e., the well-being generated by the good; characteristics. Market failure can result in under-pricing
while those consumers who are willing to pay more than the and overuse and lead to “free riding”—a situation in which
price will also buy that good and get a net gain from the people can enjoy the benefits of the cultural asset without
purchase, a “consumer surplus,” measured by the excess of having to pay for them. Going back to the previous
over price. When the price of the good exceeds the price that example, people may derive utility from viewing the facade
people are pre- of a building without having to pay for it. Mar-ket failure
provides a justification for government subsidy in support of
culture, since commonly, the revenues col-lected from users
are insufficient to cover conservation expenditure. Hence,
cultural assets can become overly
dependent on (volatile) government subsidy. The cultural goods also means that many destructive
inability of the market to reflect the full value of
development projects are implemented on the grounds changes in nonmarket commodities, which is a major
that they appear to gen-erate higher financial benefits. step beyond standard financial analysis that ignores
Evidently, the fact that many public cultural many key values that affect well-being and behavior.
goods are not traded in markets does not mean that they The absence of markets is solved by the use of either
do not have a value. The problem is how to measure that stated-preference or revealed-preference techniques. 5
value, given the absence of a market. In the past, taking Table gives a summary of the available methods
maintenance costs as a proxy of economic value has too applicable to the cultural her-itage context. 6
often justified cultural heritage financing and manage-
ment. But true to prevent damage may be larger, smaller,
Table Selected economic valuation methodologies.
or equal to maintenance or mitigation costs. This point is
best illustrated through an example. Revealed Preferences Stated Preferences
Suppose that a town council is interested in esti-
Hedonic price method Contingent valuation method
mating the value of restoring and conserving a decaying
ancient historical house, of notable architecture, where a Travel-cost method Choice modeling

famous musician lived for most of his life. Adopting the Maintenance-cost method
maintenance cost approach would mean that the costs of
cleaning, repairing, and restoring the fabric of the build- Revealed-preference methods look at “surro-
ing would be taken as a proxy for the value of its conser- gate markets”: they analyze preferences for nonmarket
vation. But this may seriously miscalculate the true eco- goods as implied by behavior in an associated market.
nomic value of cultural conservation. On the one hand, Popular revealed-preference techniques include the
restoration and maintenance practices may not prevent hedonic price method, the travel-cost method, and the
damages to the structure of the house from occurring, and maintenance-cost method. Although useful and
some practices may even cause additional injuries. As a theoreti-cally sound (in the case of hedonic pricing and
result, a part of the total value of the property may be travel cost), the potential for their use in the estimation
irreversibly lost when the original material is altered or of the value attached to cultural sites is limited:
replicated. Furthermore, the “cost” of maintaining the revealed-preference methods cannot estimate option
building may seriously underestimate the “benefits” to the and nonuse values and cannot evaluate future marginal
public of conserving it, which extend beyond mere users changes in cultural assets.
of the building, as the property might be valued by many • The hedonic price method is based on the idea
others for its historical significance and architectural that house prices are affected by a house’s bundle of char-
beauty. Hence, existing figures on cultural property costs acteristics, which may include nonmarket cultural factors,
(say, per user, per area, or per year) should always be such as historic zone designation (Rosen ). Other things
accompanied by and compared to similar and commensu- being equal, the extra price commanded by a house in a
rable figures on benefits. Decisions should be based on a historic area would be a measure of the for his-toric zone
rigorous assessment of both benefits and costs and not designation. This method is of partial and lim-ited use in
solely on cost considerations.4 the valuation of cultural heritage: it does not measure
nonuse or option values and is only applicable to cultural
Valuation Techniques heritage elements that are embodied in property prices. It
also relies on the unrealistic assumptions of a freely
Recent developments in environmental economic theory
functioning and efficient property market, where
and social survey methodology have made it theoretically
individuals have perfect information and mobility.
defensible and practically feasible to value the economic
• The travel-cost method uses differences in travel
benefits of several types of amenities not traded in
costs of individuals making use of a cultural site to infer
markets, such as the benefits from accessing or conserving
the value of the site (Clawson and Knetsch ). If differ-ent
cultural resources. There is now an extensive literature on
individuals incur different costs to visit different places,
the methodologies for measuring the monetary values of
these “implicit” prices can be used instead of con-
ventional market prices as the basis for estimating the
value of cultural sites and changes in their quality. This
method also has limited applicability: it can only estimate
visitor values for cultural heritage sites and is only useful tion of multiattribute cultural sites and the presence of
for sites entailing significant travel. In addition, the valua- substitute locations present methodological problems.
• As was already mentioned above, the avoided- Please imagine the following situation. Priorities for public
maintenance-cost approach has often been used to esti- spending are changing in the United Kingdom. One of the
mate damages to cultural materials (for example, from sectors that will be negatively affected by government bud-
air pollution). The reason is that cost information is getary cuts is the libraries and archives sector that contains a
easier to collect than benefit information. The method great part of our recorded heritage. Due to this situation,
consists of calculating the cost savings implied from a unless additional resources are found, the Surrey History
reduction in maintenance cycles due to reduced damage Centre might close down in . As a result, all the resources
rates. How-ever, as noted before, maintenance costs are contained in this archive will be lost as collections and may
not the cor-rect measure of the benefits derived by experience deterioration, or be dispersed (relocated to a
society from reduced damage to cultural resources, and number of other institutions) or be sold. Obviously some
the sole consid-eration of costs may seriously materials now contained in the Surrey History Centre may
underestimate true eco-nomic values. also be found elsewhere: but other materials and infor-
In contrast with the group of techniques mation are unique and might be therefore lost forever.
described above, stated-preference methods use “hypo- Now suppose that the council is considering charging
thetical markets,” described by means of a survey, to every local household an annual council tax surcharge for
elicit preferences where there may be no surrogate an emer-gency grant to ensure that the Surrey History
market for a cultural good or service.7 Centre does not close down, that the services it provides
The most popular stated-preference method is the to the commu-nity can be maintained at their current
contingent valuation ( ) method, which has been widely levels, and that all scheduled investments will continue to
used in both developed and developing countries, go ahead. It was esti-mated that this would cost each
particularly in the last decade, to determine the economic household in the council £ per year.
feasibility of public policies for the improvement of envi-
Please think about how much keeping the Surrey History
ronmental quality. By means of an appropriately designed
Centre open is worth to you and your household. If it would
questionnaire, a hypothetical market is described where
cost each household only a small amount of money, then you
the good in question can be “traded” (Mitchell and Carson
might think that it was a price worth paying. On the other
; Bateman et al. ). This contingent market defines the good
hand, if it was going to be very expensive, then you might
itself, the institutional context in which it would be
prefer not to pay it and to have the archive close down.
provided, and the way it would be financed. A random
Would you agree to pay an extra £ per year in council taxes
sample of people is then directly asked to express their (or
to prevent the closure of the Surrey History Centre and to
) for a hypothetical change in the level of pro-vision of the
ensure that its services are maintained at their current levels?
good. Respondents are assumed to behave as though they
were in a real market. In fact, question-naires bear some
resemblance to conventional market research for new or In the example above, a dichotomous choice
modified products. elicitation question was used to uncover . That is,
As an illustration, in the context of cultural respondents were simply asked whether they would be
heritage, consider the following contingent scenario used prepared to pay or not pay a particular amount of
in a study designed to estimate the benefits of keeping the money. This amount was varied across subsamples—
Surrey History Centre, a local archive in the United i.e., different people were asked to pay different
Kingdom, open and running (adapted from Mourato et amounts. There are many other ways of asking the
al. ). The scenario was preceded by questions about question, including simply asking respondents what
perceptions and attitudes toward recorded heritage con- their maximum is (the open-ended format) or asking
servation, use of the archive, and information about the them to pick their maximum amount from a list of
archive’s services and resources. Both direct users and money amounts (the payment card approach).
local nonusers of the archive were interviewed. Theoretically, the method is based on welfare
economics and assumes that stated amounts are related
to respondents’ underlying preferences. Further-more,
unlike revealed-preference techniques, is able to capture
all types of benefits from a nonmarket good or service,
including nonuse values. Neglecting the estima-
tion of nonuse values is potentially a serious omission, as benefits, possibly with transnational and intergenerational
many cultural goods arguably generate substantial nonuse characteristics. As mentioned in the introduction, much of
the impetus for the acceptance of the method was the All these aspects introduce a number of questionnaire design
report of the special panel appointed by the U.S. National issues that do not occur in the case of opinion polls or
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( ) (Arrow et al. marketing surveys for private goods. Mitchell and Car-son
). The panel concluded that studies could produce note that “the principal challenge facing the designer of a
estimates reliable enough to be used in a judicial process study is to make the scenario sufficiently under-standable,
of natural resource damage assessment including nonuse plausible, and meaningful to respondents so that they can
values. and will give valid and reliable values despite their lack of
While similarities exist between surveys and experience with one or more of the scenario dimensions”
the type of surveys conducted in other disciplines (Mitchell and Carson , ).
(Boulier and Goldfarb ), questionnaires possess some The design of a questionnaire comprises three
distin-guishing features that require special interrelated stages. The first and principal stage consists
consideration. This is mainly for three reasons: of identifying the good to be valued, constructing the
• questionnaires require respondents to consider valua-tion scenario, and eliciting the monetary values. In
how a possible change in a good or service that is the second stage, questions on attitudes and opinions,
typically not traded in markets might affect them. knowl-edge, familiarity and use of the good,
• The type of public and mixed goods and demographics, and various debriefing questions are
services usually considered can be complex and added. The third stage consists of piloting the draft
unfamiliar to respondents. questionnaire for content, question wording, question
• Respondents are asked to make a monetary format, and overall structure and layout. These stages are
eval-uation of the change of interest. depicted in Table . For a detailed discussion, see that of
Bateman and colleagues (Bateman et al. ).
Designing and implementing studies may seem to
be a trivial task, where all that is required is to put
together a number of questions about the subject of inter-
est. But this apparent simplicity lies at the root of many
badly designed surveys that elicit biased, inaccurate, and
useless information, possibly at a great cost. In fact, even
very simple questions require proper wording, format,
content, placement, and organization if they are to elicit

Table Stages of CV questionnaire design.

Stage Description

Formulating the valuation problem Identifying the policy change to be valued

Writing a credible, meaningful, and understandable valuation scenario

Choosing an elicitation format (open ended, payment card, dichotomous choice) and asking the
question

Selecting additional questions Questions on attitudes, perceptions, and opinions

Questions on knowledge and uses

Debriefing questions (e.g., reasons for paying or not paying, credibility of scenario, etc.)

Questions on socioeconomic characteristics

Pretesting the questionnaire Focus groups

One-to-one interviews

Verbal protocols

Field pilots
accurate information. Writing effective questionnaires in understood by respondents and which encourage them to
which scenarios and questions are uniformly and correctly answer in a considered and truthful manner is no easy task
(Mitchell and Carson ). To address these difficulties, a set may influence the actions of relevant agencies and when
of guidelines for applying to enhance the validity and they care about the outcome of the valuation questions,
reliability of estimates of nonuse values in natural they will answer according to their preferences, so as to
resource damage assessment was developed by the panel maximize their expected well-being (Carson, Groves, and
(Arrow et al. ) and recently updated by Bateman and Machina ). In order to do so, they will respond to the
colleagues for the U.K. government (Bateman et al. ). incentives set out in the survey design: obviously, prob-
Following these guidelines does not automatically warrant lems will occur when respondents feel that the survey
quality—neither does noncompliance necessarily indicate market provides some incentive to do other than reveal
lack of validity. They are, however, a useful refer-ence their preferences truthfully. Unfortunately, there are a
and the best available set of recommendations for considerable number of possible situations in which truth
practitioners in all fields. telling might not seem the best way to maximize well-
In the context of the currently available valuation being. An example of relevance to cultural heritage stud-
techniques, the method and its derivatives can arguably be ies is the use of charitable donations as a payment vehicle
considered the best available techniques to estimate the in questions (as opposed to other mechanisms, such as
total economic value of cultural assets that are not usually taxes or entry fees). In this case, respondents have an
traded in the market and where nonuse values are thought incentive to overstate the amounts in the survey to secure
to be an important component of value. the provision of the good, and then, once the good is
provided, they have an incentive to free ride when it
Issues and Limitations comes to actually donating the amounts stated, as pay-
ment is voluntary.8 Hence, one observes stated amounts
But no method is without fault, and is no exception. As
that are much higher than actual payments, a discrepancy
repeatedly pointed out by critics, a number of factors may
that is not due to the hypothetical nature of the survey
systematically bias respondents’ answers. Generally, these
market but to the fact that respondents have been given
factors are not specific to as such but are com-mon to most
the wrong incentives to reveal their true pref-erences.
survey-based techniques and are predomi-nantly
This is the issue of “incentive compatibility,” and
attributable to survey design and implementation
determining whether a given study design is incentive
problems. Mitchell and Carson and Bateman and col-
compatible is fundamental in order to avoid misrepresen-
leagues provide an extensive review of possible sources of
tation of values. In the example above, problems could
bias (Mitchell and Carson ; Bateman et al. ). These
potentially have been avoided by the use of a tax or an
include strategic behavior (such as free riding),
entry fee as the payment vehicle in the questions, if at all
embedding (where the valuation is insensitive to the scope
possible.
of the good), anchoring bias (where the valuation depends
Among the types of biases mentioned above, the
on the first bid presented in a dichotomous choice
problem of embedding is arguably the one that raises
context), information bias (when the framing of the
most concern for cultural valuation. Concerns regarding
question unduly influences the answer), or hypotheti-cal
scope and embedding arise from “the frequent finding that
bias (umbrella designation for problems arising from the
for a good is approximately the same for a more inclusive
hypothetical nature of the market).
good” (Fisher , ). To illustrate, if respon-dents cannot
Perhaps the most often quoted criticism of
meaningfully separate out the conservation value of one
studies (and, indeed, of all survey-based research) is
historic house from the value of all the his-toric houses in
“Ask a hypothetical question and you will get a hypotheti-
a region, then the validity of their responses has to be
cal answer” (Scott ). In addressing this issue, a useful
questioned. Careful design and pretest of questionnaires is
approach is to examine what type of questions are likely
needed to minimize the serious potential for embedding
to deliver useful information even when they are asked in
(Bateman et al. ). In particu-lar, when scope problems are
regards to a hypothetical scenario. Carson, Groves, and
thought likely to arise (i.e., when one is interested in the
Machina show that when respondents feel their response
benefits of conservation of some parts of a cultural site but
not of others, or of some historical buildings in a city but
not of others), tests can be built into a survey design in
order to see how far responses are sensitive to the scope
of the good being valued.
Furthermore, since heritage conservation gener- heritage valuation is that of how future values might be
ates values for the future, a legitimate concern in cultural taken into account, since one cannot survey generations
yet to come. Of course, generations do overlap to some important implication that individuals may be willing to
extent, and part of these future values are taken into pay more to a local environmental issue for which there
account by the bequest motivations of current genera- are few contributors than a national issue they value more
tions. But problems still arise as cultural heritage conser- highly, but for which the costs of the intervention are to
vation sometimes involves very long-term perspectives, be shared by a proportionally larger number of people. . . .
and future preferences with respect to art have been found Price fairness is assumed to be one of a number of
to deviate from the values held by current generations contin-gencies influencing behavioral promises in
(Frey ). It might be that, because of changing tastes, future studies” (Blamey , ).
generations will not want to conserve as much cul-tural While psychological anomalies do present a
heritage as does the current generation. But, in gen-eral, it prob-lem in some instances, it is meaningless for
is arguably more likely that that people in the future will economic analysis to try to disentangle the realm of
value cultural heritage conservation more highly than the citizens’ value and that of consumers’ value: the two are
living generation. Aside from changing tastes, future intrinsically entangled when the valuation of public policy
generations are expected to be richer than current and public goods is at stake. As citizens, individuals are
generations, and hence, they are likely to be will-ing to still influ-enced by their values and preferences for public
pay more for cultural heritage preservation. Also, it is goods. What is important to bear in mind is that values are
inevitable that, over time, some cultural heritage will contingent to the information provided in the valuation
deteriorate or be lost: given increased scarcity, the value scenario, and preferences are sensitive to the attributes of
of the heritage will naturally increase. More research is the contingent market described. This is perfectly rational.
needed on the best way to treat and account for future val- As long as the public good and the contingent market are
ues. In practical terms, a sensible approach for unique and correctly described, credible, and incentive compatible,
important cultural resources is to combine economic val- this should not be an issue.
uation with a precautionary approach, which means that Finally, in order to avoid easy misunderstanding,
any decision not to undertake preservation is afforded it is important to stress that economic valuation methods
very careful scrutiny. do not pretend to assess cultural values as such but to
Other authors put forward more radical criti- assess the economic values associated with cultural her-
cisms of that question the basis of economic theory, itage—that is, the flow of benefits arising out of a physical
focusing on known psychological anomalies such as the stock. Economic values relate to the enhancement of
disparity between the value of gains and losses (Frey )— human/individual/social well-being; they are anthropo-
that is, when questions yield different valua-tions than centric and based on people’s preferences (Pearce ). They
corresponding questions—or suggesting that respondents lend themselves to quantification and to the assess-ment
may be driven by nonrational/nonmaxi-mizing of trade-offs between goals and resources (Robbins ). As
preferences, acting and behaving as citizens and not as discussed above, the economic value of cultural heritage
“consumers” when facing choices concerning pub-lic is a wide-ranging, complex, and multifaceted concept, as
goods (Blamey, Common, and Quiggin ; Vatn and preferences for cultural assets stem from many different
Bromley ). For example, Blamey states, “Respondents motivations, ranging from self-interest to pure altruistic
often adopt a contribution model when processing sce- concerns.
nario information, rather than the purchase model Focusing on economic values, as broad and
assumed by environmental economists. In contrast to the encompassing as they may be, does not mean that other
purchase model, where an individual is assumed to ask values are less important. Economists do not claim that all
herself whether she is prepared to pay the specified values can be measured in money terms and be captured in
amount to obtain the environmental improvement rather actual financial flows: there will be cases where the
than do without it, the contribution model assumes that information is inadequate, the uncertainties too great, or the
individuals treat the environmental improvement as a consequences too profound or too complex to be reduced to
good cause, that warrants supporting. . . . This has the a single number (Hanemann ). Nor do economists claim that
economic values subsume all that is important in cultural
heritage conservation policy. Other relevant (nonmonetary)
cultural, religious, symbolic, and spiritual values also have a
role to play in decision-making
processes. The point is that economics, as a social science, investigative tools to disciplines dealing with cultural issues,
can and should provide complementary techniques and for a holistic assessment of cultural values.
has been extensively applied to the valuation • assessing nonvisitors’ potential demand and
of environmental goods and services (Mitchell and Car- investigating the factors that might influence that demand
son ; Carson et al. ). However, there have been • estimating price and income elasticities of
surprisingly few applications to cultural assets, in spite of demand for cultural assets
the obvious links between questions of the conservation • designing successful pricing strategies for
of natural and cultural goods. Cultural policy and man- cultural destinations: who pays what, when, and how
agement would benefit a great deal from a set of sound, • ranking cultural heritage characteristics, thus
theoretically structured, and operational evaluation tools. assessing priorities for new marginal improvements
The next section discusses the role of economic valuation • prioritizing among competing projects at the
in cultural heritage and suggests a number of possible micro/institution level
areas where these tools might be used successfully. • assessing visitor preferences both before and
after the visit experience and evaluating repeated
The Role of Economic Valuation visitors’ experiences
for Cultural Policies and Institutions • gathering information on how socioeconomic
characteristics (age, sex, membership, income, education,
attitudes) explain visitation rates and spending patterns
It has been argued above that cultural heritage is a mixed
• identifying groups that might be excluded from
good, framed over a multidimensional, multivalue, and
enjoying cultural heritage at certain prices and given
multiattribute environment, generating private and pub-
cer-tain management policies
lic/collective benefits for current, potential, and future
• evaluating the impacts of congestion-reduction
users and even for nonusers. How resources are allocated
options
and consequently how institutions and services are man-
aged, organized, and provided affect people’s well-being,
Financing Cultural Heritage
attitudes, and participation toward cultural heritage. In
this context, what are the cultural goals faced by policy As far as the financing of cultural heritage is
makers and managers that economic valuation tools concerned, the objectives that can be informed by
might help to inform? These goals, interrelated in many economic valua-tion may be listed as follows:
ways, pertain to three main areas: management, financ- • assessing the existence and measuring for
ing, and resource allocation. access, conservation, and improvements of cultural
heritage
Cultural Destinations Management • analyzing pricing policies for cultural destina-
tions: uniform pricing, interpersonal price discrimination,
As far as the management of cultural destinations is
voluntary prices, intertemporal price discrimination, etc.
con-cerned, economic valuation may help to inform
• investigating how the prices that people are
decisions and policies of the following type:
pre-pared to pay vary across different socioeconomic
• assessing what type of changes/attractions/exhi-
groups (by age, sex, income, education, etc.)
bitions/ improvements should be introduced in cultural
• quantifying the gap between benefits to the
destinations in order to maximize profits/revenues/access
com-munity provided by cultural heritage and costs
• evaluating pollution, tourism, and development
incurred to provide them
damage done to cultural destinations
• providing information for a multisource
• assessing what type and degree of conservation
funding strategy, based on local and national taxes,
measures should be undertaken (e.g., restoration,
private donations, funds, entry fees, and public/private
replace-ment, cleaning)
partner-ships designing incentive systems to motivate
• estimating the demand for a cultural asset and
and finance conservation
predicting future demand trends
• investigating whether subsidies to cultural her-
itage are justified and informing how much they should be
Resource Allocation • allocating funds between cultural heritage and
other areas of public spending
Regarding the macro process of allocation of
• gathering information of strategic policy impor-
resources among sites and institutions, pursued by a
tance about the level of public support (financial and
public evalua-tor body, economic valuation can be
used to help a num-ber of policy decisions:
nonfinancial) for the cultural sector or a specific cultural Of course, economic valuation is just one among
institution for the process of resource allocation other existing economic instruments and tools that can be
• allocating cultural budgets within competing used in the cultural heritage context: its main aim is to
institutions/areas demonstrate that economic values exist and to measure
• measuring people’s satisfaction for existing them. Subsequently, other economic tools can be used to
cultural services and then ranking institutions with “capture” those estimated values—that is, to transform
respect to benchmark parameters them into actual cash flows. In particular, economic
• appraising and ranking interventions in the valuation might precede the use of instruments such as ( )
cultural sector—for example, for competitive (grant) local or national taxes aimed at financing culture,
allocation ( ) fees aimed at regulating access and raising funds,
• allocating a budget within one institution/area and ( ) voluntary donation mechanisms aimed at
among competing projects raising money without imposing a fee. The focus here
• deciding whether a given cultural asset is to is strictly on the argument that cultural economic
be conserved and, if so, how and at what level values exist and that there are ways to measure them
• assessing which sites, within a city area or a validly, rather than on capturing those values (see
cultural district, are more worthy of investment and Pearce and Mourato and Bailey and Falconer for a
for which the impacts are more significant discussion of economic capture instruments).
Despite the potential, existing cultural heritage
Management, financing, and resource allocation strate-
valuation studies are scarce and limited in scope and
gies are evidently entangled, as evidenced above. Eco-
con-tent. The next section reviews the current body of
nomic valuation is of use in all three spheres, for macro
evi-dence and discusses the implications of its findings.
and micro cultural policies oriented toward access,
con-servation, or quality improvement goals.
Current Evidence: Lessons and
Controversies
Figure Stated-preference valuation studies of cultural heritage
by country.
This review focuses on the emerging literature on the val-
uation of cultural benefits by means of stated-preference
techniques (mainly ). As noted above, it is only in recent
years that methods have started to be applied within the
realm of cultural heritage economics, and so far, very few
studies

studies have been undertaken. A search of published and


unpublished international sources uncovered just over
thirty stated-preference studies of cultural goods.9 Appen-
dix contains a summary overview of these studies. As
de

illustrated in Figure , the existing literature is strongly


concentrated geographically, with the majority of studies
Number

coming from Europe ( percent) and with the U.K. pro-


ducing the largest share ( percent). Some percent of
studies were carried out in the United States and Canada.
Early studies on cultural heritage valuation were
U.S.A./Canada

Latin America
Other Europe

Middle East

small-scale surveys, exploratory in nature and mostly


Australia
Africa
Italy
U.K.

confined to finding a price for the good in question using


Country of origin a then-novel methodology in the sector (see, for example,
Willis and Martin ). Since then, some progress has been
achieved at various levels: sampling, study design,
implementation, statistical estimation, testing the validity
of the estimates produced, and exploring the nature of
people’s preferences toward cultural goods. In
this respect, however, cultural heritage is still a long defaced aboriginal rock paintings in Canada [Boxall,
way from the level of knowledge already gathered in Englin, and Adomowicz ]). Some of these responses can
other areas, such as the environment or health. be considered protests against some aspect of the sur-vey
Existing studies vary widely, both in terms of the instrument (i.e., a dislike of paying taxes or a rejection of
type of good or activity analyzed and the type of benefit the contingent scenario) and thus are not a reflection of
evaluated. As documented in Appendix , there are some people’s true preferences. Others, however, are “genuine”
instances where similar types of goods were evaluated zero values arising from budget constraints, from lack of
(cathedrals, castles, archaeological sites, groups of historic interest in cultural issues, and from the fact that cultural
buildings, recorded heritage). However, the type of benefit heritage preservation is typically ranked low among com-
estimated is usually different, as is the sample frame used, peting public issues, as is shown consistently by
making it difficult to make meaningful com-parisons attitudinal questions. Hence, the welfare of a significant
among studies. proportion of the population seems to be unaffected by
While the conclusions of each study are different, changes in cultural goods/activities. In some instances,
some consistent findings emerge from the studies that the positive estimated values are driven by a minority of
have been conducted to date. These are discussed below. the popula-tion—typically, the users of the cultural good
and the richer and more educated segments of the
The Significant Value of Heritage population (e.g., improving the landscape of Stonehenge
Conservation and Use in the United Kingdom by tunneling a nearby road
generates positive benefits to percent of the U.K.
Generally, the findings suggest that, on average, people
population, a group that was found to be on average
attribute a significantly positive value to the conservation
wealthier and more educated than the percent who were
or restoration of cultural assets (Appendix ). The implica-
not willing to pay anything for the improvement
tion is that damages to cultural goods are undesirable and
[Maddison and Mourato ]).
that the public would be willing to pay positive amounts
This finding has important implications for the
to avoid them or to slow the rate at which they occur.
funding of cultural heritage goods. For example, in
Mean values range from less than a dollar (for example,
instances where more than two-thirds of the population
Bulgarians were found to be willing to pay about $ . –$ to
express a zero , the imposition of a tax may be infeasi-
preserve their famous monasteries [Mourato, Kon-toleon,
ble; targeted voluntary donations or entry fees may pro-
and Danchev ]) to over $ (for example, the conservation
vide more appropriate means of extracting existing values
of an archaeological park in Italy was valued at about $ by
(although the former invites free-riding behavior); or, if a
local residents [Riganti and Willis ]), with the distribution
tax mechanism is used, care must be taken to ensure that
skewed toward lower value ranges. Perhaps a more
meaningful measure for comparison pur-poses is as a
the distributional effects are taken into account with
offsetting expenditures. In order to reduce distributional
proportion of per capita gross national product ( ): typical
annual household amounts for cultural heritage conflicts, education and information policies are impor-
tant and should be targeted at increasing the consumption
conservation are calculated to range from . percent to .
percent of per capita . of culture by affecting tastes or by reducing the costs to
disadvantaged groups of consuming culture. There is
The large dispersion of estimated values is due
large potential for cross-fertilization between valuation of
to large differences in the type and scope of the cultural
change being evaluated, to taste and income variations preferences for culture and the implementation of cul-
in the sampled populations, and to disparities in value tural educational policy.
The link among income, education, and cultural
elicita-tion methods. Clearly, these values are only
benefits found in cultural valuation studies also seems to
indicative and should be taken cautiously, given the
small number of studies on which they are based. suggest that the value of cultural heritage conservation
will grow as incomes and education rise. It lends some
Is It a Minority Benefit? support to the proposition that future generations might
attribute a larger value to heritage conservation than do
Several of the studies depicted in Appendix show a rela- present generations, in part because of higher incomes
tively large proportion of respondents stating a zero (up and education levels.
to percent in the case of the recreational value of
The Importance of Actual Users Most of the studies summarized in Appendix indicate
that there can be significant values from recreation and
educational visits to cultural destinations (e.g., foreign What about Nonusers?
visitors to the Fes Medina in Morocco valued a visit at $
Studies dealing with nonuse values of cultural heritage
–$ [Carson et al. ]). Hence, policies aimed at increasing
sites show that these can be important (Appendix ). In
and facilitating access to cultural sites can also be
cases where the relevant population benefiting from
expected to enhance economic cultural values.
improvement or maintenance of the cultural good is
Nevertheless, it is misleading to assume from
thought to be sizable, possibly crossing national borders,
these results that charging users optimal entry fees will
the total aggregated benefit can be very large: even when
solve all the financing problems of cultural sites. First,
individual is very small, when multiplied by a vast
user values alone may not be enough to deliver sustain-
number of people, a large value will be obtained. This is
ability for the large proportion of cultural goods and ser-
the case when unique and charismatic cultural heritage
vices that are not unique in many respects and where sub-
goods are at stake. For example, the estimated value of
stitute destinations exist, which explains the accumulated
improving the landscape of Stonehenge for the U.K.
deficits and/or degradation experienced by many cultural
popu-lation was found to be mainly driven by nonuse
sites. Second, it may institutionally be difficult to charge
values (mainly a desire to protect the site for future
optimal prices. For example, entry fees might be regu-
generations), with percent of the population never actually
lated, or there might be a membership system in place
having visited the stone circle (Maddison and Mourato ).
whereby members can gain free access to certain cultural
However, as noted above, there is a trade-off,
destinations in exchange for a fixed membership fee. Such
as the available evidence also suggests that the
a circumstance happens in the United Kingdom with the
proportion of those stating zero is largest among
National Trust, a charity founded in to preserve places of
nonusers. Drawing from the environmental valuation
historic interest or natural beauty permanently, for the
literature, nonuse values are also thought to decline with
benefit of the nation. The National Trust is the largest
the avail-ability of substitute sites and with households’
conservation charity in Europe, with properties opened to
distance from the site (“distance decay”). Future research
the public and . million members in . Members account
for a large proportion of all visits to the Trust’s properties, should pay close attention to the geographical limits of .
but, as they are entitled to free access via their
The Issue of Embedding
membership fee, they would therefore not be affected by
increases in entry fees. It was already mentioned how the issue of embedding
A number of related issues should also be taken or insensitivity to the scope of the change being
into account when user pricing mechanisms are designed: valued might affect cultural values. Indeed, in an early
on the one hand, the effect of higher prices on visitation cultural valuation study, Navrud, Pedersen, and Strand
rates should be carefully considered and addressed, given found that respondents were insensitive to the scope
the current focus on making heritage available to the gen- of the air pollution damages to the Nidaros Cathedral
eral public; on the other hand, the possible trade-off in Norway (Navrud, Pedersen, and Strand ). This
between access and conservation (i.e., too many visitors potential problem has been insufficiently addressed by
might cause deterioration of a site by overuse) should be the existing literature.
analyzed explicitly, and future studies should attempt to Evidently, embedding will be less of a problem
measure tourist carrying capacity of a site, as well as cal- for flagship cultural goods with no substitutes (e.g., the
culate any possible congestion costs. Pyramids in Egypt). But it may distort results significantly
when cultural goods perceived as being nonunique are
evaluated (e.g., historical buildings, castles, churches, and
cathedrals): for example, the estimated values for a partic-
ular cultural good may reflect a desire to preserve all simi-
lar goods and thus overstate the value of the good. And, as
Navrud, Pedersen, and Strand discussed, this type of bias
may also affect the evaluation of the scope and duration of
conservation policies for a single site (Navrud, Peder-sen,
and Strand ). More research is needed in this important
area.
“Quick and Dirty” Valuation Studies The lack of financial resources and/or the lack of knowl-
edge about valuation methods has led to several poor val-
uation studies, in terms of consistency with economic In fact, cultural valuation studies that have can-
theory, survey design, statistical performance, and sample vassed opinions from both experts and the general public
significance. This is as true for cultural heritage valuation as have found consensual views in many areas (Mourato et
it is for valuation studies in other areas. In some cases, the al. ). Moreover, as has been pointed out, most valua-tion
lack of sound preliminary investigation—by means of pilot studies have uncovered significant cultural values even
studies, focus groups, and interviews—has led to “quick,” for small changes, overcoming the fear that the pub-lic
and consequently faulty, studies, confirming the golden rule does not know enough about the cultural sector to be
of empirical analysis: the result one gets is dependent on the able to hold sensible values on it.
quality of the data one inputs. More-over, a good valuation Top-down experts’ perceptions and bottom-up
study requires adequate financial and human resources, as it public demands should be brought together and should
is a time-consuming and com-plex activity; but, more often balance each other within the realm of cultural policy,
than not, sponsoring bodies are unwilling to allocate enough since cultural heritage is a complex economic good
time and resources for practitioners to produce a good study. requir-ing a comprehensive and participatory approach to
The recent empha-sis on producing best-practice guidelines man-agement that includes all stakeholders. In the context
developed by field practitioners is an attempt to ameliorate of valuation studies, while expert knowledge should be
this situa-tion (Arrow et al. ; Bateman et al. ). sought at various stages of the research process, it is prob-
ably most useful at the designing stages of the valuation
Whatever the budget available, good knowledge survey, to inform the context and framing of the valuation
of the theoretical underpinnings of valuation, of the les- scenario, enhancing its credibility and the usefulness of
sons yielded by previous studies, and of survey the results for formulating policy.
implemen-tation guidelines helps in achieving efficiency It has been discussed already how demand-led
(measured in quality of output divided by costs). approaches are fundamental to justifying the spending of
Interdisciplinary teams of economists, other social limited public money on cultural heritage, how resource
scientists, cultural man-agers, and marketing researchers allocation within the sector is increasingly based on gener-
may set up valuable and reliable cost-effective studies, ated “consumer benefits,” and how cultural destinations are
exploiting economies of scale in ( ) preparing more than becoming more consumer oriented—investigating and
one valuation study/ experiment at the same time, and ( ) reaching new markets, encouraging repeat visits by change
integrating the valu-ation experiment with broader and renewal, providing integrated experiences, and striving
socioeconomic or market-ing investigations. to surpass expectations. The emerging valua-tion literature
supports this modern view: valuation stud-ies have
Should Decisions about Cultural Heritage invariably uncovered large average values among the lay
Conservation Be Left to Experts? public for cultural assets. Cultural heritage seems to be an
important part of people’s lives, and accordingly, they are
A common criticism of survey-based economic valuation
willing to trade off some of their limited income to access it
approaches is that decisions about cultural assets should not
and to protect it. Many more good-quality studies are needed
be left in the hands of the public, thought to be too ignorant
to confirm these early findings and to address the several
about cultural goods to possibly be able to make sensible
gaps in knowledge identified above.
judgments about them. Is expert judgment an alternative to
survey- based (stated- and revealed-) prefer-ence analysis?
Cultural experts clearly play a leading role in determining A New Framework for the Valuation of
the value of cultural heritage. Nonethe-less, relying only on Cultural Heritage
experts’ judgment may be dangerous, leading to improper
allocation of resources, arbitrariness, lobbying pressures for In this section, two avenues are proposed for improving
funding, and paternalism. the assessment of cultural values in a more integrated
and holistic environment. One constitutes an
improvement over current economic valuation
techniques that comes from within economics; another
complements and expands standard economic valuation
practices by making use of complementary lines of
inquiry from other social disciplines.
New Economic Tools: Choice Modeling which assumes that the utility that consumers get from
Approaches a good can be broken down into the utilities of the
Partly as a response to the problems experienced by
compos-ing characteristics/attributes of the good
researchers in studies, valuation practitioners are
(Lancaster ). Empirically, variants of have been widely
increasingly developing an interest in alternative stated-
used in the market research and transport literatures
(e.g., Hensher ; Green and Srinivasan ; Hensher and
preference formats such as choice modeling ( ).10 is a family
Johnson ), but the method has only relatively recently
of survey-based methodologies for measuring pref-erences
been applied to other areas, such as the environment or
for nonmarket goods, where goods are described in terms of
culture. Louviere, Hensher, and Swait ( ), Bennett and
their attributes and of the levels that these take. Respondents
Blamey ( ), and Hanley, Mourato, and Wright ( )
are presented with various alternative descriptions of the
provide recent and extensive overviews of techniques
good, differentiated by their attributes and levels, and are
and their application to the environmental field.11
asked to do one of the following:
A typical exercise is characterized by a number
( ) rank the various alternatives in order of preference,
of key stages. These are described in Table .
( ) rate each alternative according to a preference scale,
As an example, consider an area abundant in
or ( ) choose their most preferred alternative out of the
properties of historic interest, and suppose that the local
set. By including price or cost as one of the attributes
cultural authorities want to find out which attributes of the
of the good, can be indirectly recovered from people’s
properties attract the most visitors and which are val-ued
ranks, ratings, or choices. As , can also measure all
the most. Table exemplifies a exercise that could be used
forms of value, including nonuse values.
to estimate tourist demand for various historic property
has one main advantage over standard
attributes. Respondents are presented with two imaginary
formats: its capability to deal with multidimensional
(but realistic) property descriptions (there could be more
changes. By describing a good or policy in terms of its
than two) and then asked to choose which property they
component attributes, values can be obtained not only
would prefer to visit (they are also given the option of not
for the good/policy as a whole but also for each of its
visiting any of the properties described). Each property is
attri-butes. Furthermore, the method avoids an explicit
defined in terms of five attributes: exis-tence of a garden;
elicita-tion of by relying instead on expressed choices
architectural style of the house; quality of collections
or rankings among alternative scenarios from which
(furniture, porcelain, glass, tapestries, or paintings);
can be indirectly inferred: this might reduce the
visitor facilities (cafeteria/restaurant, shops), and entry
incidence of people protesting or refusing to answer
fee. Each attribute can take various levels. For example,
the valuation question.
the garden attribute might have only two levels (“has a
The conceptual microeconomic framework for
garden’’ or “no garden”), while the entry fee attri-bute
lies in Lancaster’s characteristics theory of value,
might have four levels ( , , , ). Typically, each

Table Stages of a CM exercise.

Stage Description

Selection of attributes Literature reviews and focus groups are used to select the attributes of the good to be valued that are
relevant to people, while expert consultations help to identify the attributes that will be impacted
by the policy. A monetary cost is typically one of the attributes to allow the estimation of .
Assignment of levels The attribute levels should be feasible, be realistic, and span the range of respondents’ values.
A baseline, status quo level is usually included (e.g., a no-payment level in the case of ).

Choice of experimental design Statistical design theory is used to combine the levels of the attributes into a number of alternative scenario
descriptions.

Construction of choice sets The scenarios identified by the experimental design are then grouped into choice sets to be presented to
respondents. Choice sets can have two or more alternative scenarios.

Measurement of preferences Respondents are typically asked to choose their most-preferred alternative out of each choice set, or to rank
the alternatives in order of preference.
respondent would be given a number of these choice sets If the s have witnessed the emergence of the
to answer, each with different property descriptions. method within the realm of cultural economics, the
first decade of the new century may see the development Being survey based, approaches also suffer from
of applications to the cultural heritage valuation arena. the problems associated with survey techniques pre-
This is because the many dimensions, attributes, and viously discussed. A further limitation of this approach
values characterizing the supply and demand of cultural lies in the cognitive difficulty to respondents associated
goods and services lend themselves to analysis by mecha- with complex choices between bundles with many attri-
nisms that have the capability of dealing with situations butes and levels. Previous research in the marketing and
where changes are multidimensional, of analyzing trade- environmental literatures by Ben-Akiva, Morikawa, and
offs among them, and of eliciting separate values for the Shiroishi ( ), Chapman and Staelin ( ), Hausman and Ruud
various functions of interest. In particular, pursuing an ( ), and Foster and Mourato ( ) found evidence of
attribute-based valuation—by breaking down cultural unreliable and inconsistent choices/ranks. In particular,
institutions and policies into a set of functions and respondents were found to ( ) choose options that are
services—might serve a number of objectives relevant worse than others in all respects (domi-nated options), ( )
to cultural policy: make choices that are intransitive (i.e., choose A over B,
• to measure the total value associated with differ- B over C, and then C over A), and ( ) make inconsistent
ent cultural property or policy descriptions (i.e., proper- choices across choice sets (i.e., choose A over B in one
ties/policies described by different attribute levels) choice set and B over A in another). The number of
• to measure the contribution to the total value of illogical choices seems to increase with the complexity of
a cultural site of single attributes, services, or functions the choice/ranking task (i.e., with the num-ber of
(of a public or private nature) attributes, levels, choice sets, and scenarios in each task
• to determine possible trade-offs among and when choices are made between alternatives that
attributes (e.g., such as the intrinsic trade-off between respondents dislike). Possible explanations for the occur-
access and conservation) rence of these problems include respondent fatigue, learn-
• to derive an implicit ranking of attributes ing effects, and the adoption of rules of thumb to facili-
accord-ing to user preferences12 tate the choice task (like choosing options with reference
• to determine public support of specific cultural to one attribute only, ignoring all the others). For these
property or policy scenarios reasons, exercises should be as simple as possible, using a
• to estimate the market share of a particular site limited number of attributes, levels, and choice sets, so as
• to avoid some of the protests arising from to avoid overburdening respondents with information.
direct elicitation of for cultural goods To summarize, has explicit advantages over the
method in the analysis of goods of a multidimen-sional
nature. As far as cultural heritage is concerned, brings
Table Example of a choice set from a CM exercise. together a structured economic theoretical frame-work, a
powerful and detailed capacity of evaluation, and a great
Features Property A Property B variety of application possibilities. It is suggested here to
Garden Has a garden No garden add this comprehensive valuation technique to the
available box of cultural economic tools to be drawn upon
Architectural style Remarkable Unremarkable
by cultural policy makers and cultural managers as
Collections Exceptional Exceptional needed. Further research and applications to cultural
Facilities Large restaurant/shop Basic cafeteria/shop policy are therefore strongly encouraged.
Entry fee
Integrating Instruments for Socioeconomic
O I would prefer to visit property A O I would prefer
Evaluation of Cultural Heritage
to visit property B
O I would not visit any of the properties Stated-preference techniques were argued above to be
capable of producing valid and reliable monetary mea-
sures of the benefits associated with cultural heritage
access, conservation, and improvements. But the sugges-
tion that these methods produce “theoretically correct”
measures of value should not be taken as an argument for
their superiority over other evaluation tools. It is one thing economics (and in that sense is “theoretically cor-rect”), but
to acknowledge that has its theoretical basis in welfare it is another thing to use that as an argument per se for
applying it to cultural values. The rightness of an evaluation using qualitative information to further our understand-
approach is to be judged neither from its disciplinary basis ing of economic values in the context of cultural policy.
(economics) nor from its theoretical foundation The following social science tools might play
(neoclassical welfare economics). Rather, it is to be judged a useful role in complementing economic techniques in
on the basis that its value judgments are compatible to those a new integrated approach to assess cultural values.
society holds for cultural values, for which economic
EXPERT JUDGMENT
valuation is being undertaken.
With careful integration, expert judgments and public
Furthermore, nonmarket valuation remains con-
valuation may play useful complementary roles toward
troversial. As was discussed above, the techniques are
the assessment of cultural values. As noted previously,
sub-ject to a number of potential flaws—on theoretical,
valuation practitioners know that the preparation of a
methodological, and empirical grounds—that are all the
well-structured survey needs to receive information from
more serious when studies are conducted without refer-
many sources (i.e., experts, people working at cultural
ence to accepted best-practice guidelines (Bateman et al. ;
institutions, museum managers, users, and nonusers) in
Arrow et al. ; Mitchell and Carson ).
order to take into account comprehensively all the rele-
Of course, this in itself is hardly surprising, as no method
vant aspects of the problem at stake. Integrating expert
is without problems; but failure to address and resolve
views in preliminary phases is advisable in this context
these limitations may result in considerable misrepresen-
(see Mourato et al. for an example).
tation of the impacts of important policies, projects, and
Taking this practice a step further, alternative
regulations, as nonmarket valuation approaches are
approaches to nonmarket valuation, where elicitation of
increasingly used by governments, international organiza-
contingent values actually derives from small focus
tions, and other public and private bodies.13
groups of stakeholders (rather than from the general
Hence, as appealing as they may seem to econo-
public), have been proposed (Cookson ). Although the
mists, consumer sovereignty and economic valuation
goal of eliciting people’s from well-informed and
should not be the only driving engines as far as cultural
interested agents is acceptable and useful, to use this
policy-making assessment is concerned, and their relative
technique as the sole method to elicit values seems to be
validity should be assessed by comparison with the per-
unrealistic and to suffer from many theoretical, statistical,
formance of competing instruments. And herein lies the
and procedural distortions—namely, departing from a
main problem faced by decision makers and cultural man-
demand-led assessment. Valuation studies should not be
agers interested in applying a scientific approach to assess
influenced by experts’ perspective only, which is to be
the value of their policies: while economic valuation crit-
considered among other important views. Hence, in our
ics have been quick to find fault with the technique, they
opinion, the use of experts and other key stakeholders has
have been very slow to present better and viable alterna-
an important role to play, mostly in the design stages of
tives to economic evaluation. Alternative noneconomic
the economic survey instrument and in the ex-post evalu-
approaches at the moment are either incipient or nonex-
ation of results.
istent. Even if these alternative tools were readily identifi-
able, the question would still remain of how to integrate SOCIAL ASSESSMENT
them in a logical, credible, and workable way. Social assessment methods were developed by the World
Despite the apparent lack of competing, analyti- Bank in order to provide an integrated framework for
cally sound, noneconomic evaluation techniques, it is still incorporating participation and social analysis into devel-
worthwhile to try to outline the possible structure of an opment projects (World Bank ). They involve consul-
integrated approach to cultural valuation. Rather than a tations with stakeholders and directly and indirectly
radical departure from current practice, a possibility is to use affected groups. These methods offer great potential to
existing lines of inquiry from market research, psy-chology, complement an economic assessment of cultural policies,
and other social sciences within an economic val-uation as issues such as gender, ethnicity, social impacts, and insti-
study, to complement and enhance its capabilities, tutional capacity also need to be taken into account in cul-
tural policy evaluation.
The complementary use of social assessment
tools in parallel with an economic valuation methodology
will help ensure that the change in the cultural good
(e.g., a management change aimed at increasing access) is it, and that gender and other social differences are
acceptable to the range of people intended to benefit from reflected in the policy evaluation. It is also essential to
identify adverse social impacts of cultural projects and to the focus group stages and in the final questionnaires), it
determine how they can be mitigated (e.g., the local social would not be infeasible to expand the qualitative compo-
impacts of increases in entry fees to cultural destinations). nent of these surveys. Another avenue already pursued by
Impacts in disadvantaged groups (e.g., the poor, less edu- some authors is to check whether intended behavior, as
cated groups, minority groups, and indigenous people) are expressed by , is a satisfactory indicator of real behav-ior;
particularly important to assess and overcome. this checking can be done in a laboratory setting (see
EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY TOOLS
Foster, Bateman, and Harley for a review).
Stated-preference methods are designed to uncover values PARTICIPATORY RURAL APPRAISAL
rather than motivations. Thus, experimental psycholo- Participatory rural appraisal ( ) is an approach for
gists have argued that there is a need to go deeper into shared learning between local people and outsiders
understanding individual motivations for than is com-mon (Chambers ). The term is somewhat misleading,
practice among valuation practitioners (Kahneman, Ritov, as techniques are applicable in urban settings and can
and Schkade ; Tversky and Kahneman ; Green and be employed to complement economic assessments.
Tunstall ; Kahneman and Thaler ). In the context of cultural heritage evaluation, these
In brief, the psychological approach claims that the set of tech-niques can enable researchers and local people to
assumptions defining the microeconomic neoclassical work together in identifying, planning, and designing
environment is too restrictive, too static, and not suffi- the best cultural policy package. There is a wide range
ciently focused on the process of preference formation and of partici-patory data collection methods that can be
on underlying motivations. Several contributions have used; these include semistructured interviews, focus
emerged from this line of psychological/economic groups, non-monetary preference ranking exercises,
research, with some interesting, although generally participant obser-vation, transect walks, mapping
ambiguous, results. The abstract idea of homo economicus exercises, and other visual illustrations.
certainly appears in need of being extended and devel- techniques might constitute a valuable aid in
oped, but it does not arise as flawed in its foundations.14 furthering our understanding of people’s motivations for
It seems that the entangled and complementary cultural use and conservation and in providing insights
realms of individual motivations and economic values into their behavior, particularly in what relates to uses of
should be the joint targets of socioeconomic investiga- cultural heritage in developing contexts. For example,
tion. In other words, the joint use of economic and behav- there may be values that a structured survey will not be
ioral psychology tools is both needed and encouraged. For able to uncover properly and that only careful observation
example, the model developed by Fishbein and Ajzen and group exercises might identify. This might be the case
offers a way to infer behavior by a chain of connections, in assessing values that local communities in developing
starting from beliefs and then going to attitudes and inten- countries hold toward their cultural heritage.
tions and finally to behavior (Fishbein and Ajzen ).
MARKETING RESEARCH
Along the chain, each step is determinant and explanatory
Marketing studies are highly complementary to economic
for the following one. Stated-preference methods elicit
inquiries. Marketing practitioners have decades of experi-
measures that are “intentions of behavior.” There-
ence in designing surveys, in administration, and in analy-
fore, an interesting way of testing the validity of stated
sis, and these professionals are constantly developing new
values is to examine closely the relationship between
methodological variants and survey interfaces (Malhotra );
them and the beliefs and attitudes held by respondents
economic valuation research could advance more rapidly by
toward the cultural good of interest and toward culture in
learning from this related discipline. For exam-ple, focus
general, via the inclusion of adequate measurement scales
groups are still not used in many surveys’ developmental
in the survey instrument. Since stated-preference studies
stages, although they are standard practice in marketing
typically elicit varying amounts of qualitative and non-
research. Moreover, the framework described above derives
monetary information as well as monetary values (both in
from the marketing literature, which was subsequently
extended to the economics realm. Marketing investigation
and economic studies, although aimed at different goals,
share many common objectives within a demand-led
approach, and economies
of scale can easily be exploited by joint research. As we can see from the above discussion, there
is a great potential for cultural experts (anthropologists,
architects, art critics, etc.), psychologists, marketing fore an important tool for ascertaining efficient
researchers, and other social scientists to play an outcomes of allocating the limited resources available
impor-tant role in the process of economic evaluation for cultural heritage. While economic valuation does
of cultural assets. Conversely, the analytic rigor and not deny other value dimensions, it does have a specific
quantitative pre-cision favored by economic valuation and special role to play in cultural policy toward
tools can be usefully borrowed by other disciplines. heritage conservation and development.
For this potential to become a reality, economic More generally, people’s preferences should inform
valuation instruments must break with some misconcep- and influence the ranking of public priorities, and they
tions and be made available for routine use in the cultural should affect the direction of change in policy mak-ing in the
field, for the different purposes envisaged in this paper. cultural sector. If individuals would like the gov-ernment to
As Nuti observes, “The real test will come when and if support the existence and conservation of cul-tural heritage,
will be introduced as a routine method of evaluation in consumer sovereignty would be violated if the public
public decisions. . . . The introduction of criteria and authority did not pursue this aim. If people express a positive
methods as a routine in the control of public expenditure economic value for future generations, it would be odd if the
[in Italy] will surely prove to be a lengthy and very frus- government and cultural institu-tions neglected these,
trating accomplishment—this is not to say that it is not however elusive, nonuse values. Similarly, national and local
worth pursuing” (Nuti , ). It will also be necessary for governments should be cau-tious to invest in cultural
other social scientists to be willing to collaborate with infrastructures without having a clear indication of people’s
economists in joint research efforts to assess cultural val- preferences on public priori-ties and, specifically, on cultural
ues, and to bring with them to the research forum com- priorities. In most cases, culture does not rank high in public
plementary social research tools as suggested above, both priorities. Thus, a careful assessment of preferences is a
quantitative and qualitative in nature, where cross-fertil- worthwhile exercise for knowing where, at the margin,
ization with economics might be feasible and desirable. It economic value is highest, across sectors and within the
would be important, for this aim, to develop investigation cultural sector. To deny these considerations to be a part of
and policy using a framework of “tools and targets.” decision making would be to deny the fact that individuals
After a clear definition of the set of economic and of hold strong opinions and values about cultural policy,
noneco-nomic tools and of economic and noneconomic mankind her-itage, and future generations.
targets, it would be easier and more effective to
implement sound strategies and sound multidisciplinary As with environmental resources, if the alterna-
research on cultural issues. tive to economic valuation is to put cultural heritage value
Integrated approaches are what cultural policy equal or close to zero, the cultural sector would, as a
needs. Although the development of such approaches has result, be severely damaged. Ignoring economic prefer-
proved to be highly difficult in the past, the authors hope ences can lead to undervaluing and underpricing of cul-
that this paper will contribute to the clarification of mis- tural assets. This, directly and indirectly, reduces the
conceptions, to the achievement of reconciliation, and to amount of financial resources available to cultural institu-
the mitigation of resistances to the use of economic tools. tions relative to other public priorities. It also gives an
incentive for people to perceive cultural heritage assets as
Conclusions open-access resources without enforced property rights,
and not as mixed-collective goods with an attached set of
This paper has attempted to highlight what the role of clearly defined values and stakeholders. Open access, if it
microeconomic evaluation techniques in the cultural sec- emerges and affirms itself as the social norm, is disruptive
tor might be. Despite criticism, economic valuation meth- for nonmarket assets.
ods remain among the few analytical instruments capable The aim of the stated preference valuation meth-ods
of producing valid and reliable empirical measures of the discussed in the paper is not only to justify and infl-uence
benefits of cultural heritage conservation. They are there- decisions but also to provide information, as food for
decision making in the cultural sector. Three levels of
relevancy and use for estimates of economic values were
seen to arise in the sector. The first level is concerned with
economic-management issues at the level of cultural insti-
tutions, and the target is estimating demand schedules, among projects; ranking potential investments; and evalu-
pricing schedules, and price elasticities; prioritizing ating impacts of pollution, tourism, development, and so
on. The second level is related to financial aspects and necessary to close gaps between economics and other
involves analyzing pricing policies, designing incentive social cultural disciplines. A definition in terms of tools
systems to encourage conservation, and justifying subsi- and targets is helpful insofar as it delimits the application
dies. The third level is more politically oriented, and the environment of each discipline. Building on both eco-
target is to estimate values for gathering information of nomic instruments and other tools developed by social
strategic policy importance—i.e., allocation of budget to sci-ences dealing with culture, researches can establish a
the cultural sector and cultural institutions, reflecting their com-prehensive framework of microlevel valuation.
relative value, and allocation of resources within the It is hoped that an interdisciplinary discussion
sector where the economic value is higher. might advance and receive stimulus as a result of the
For the future, the task is to develop and ideas developed here.
establish a comprehensive multitool and multidisciplinary
frame-work for the measurement of cultural values, as a
Notes
response to the complex, multifaceted, and multivalue
nature of cultural heritage. The authors have argued that
economic instruments should be used as complementary . See, for example, Kenkel, Fabian, and Tolley ( ) for
health research examples, Maddison et al. ( ) for transport
means for socioeconomic analysis, together with a range
refer-ences, and Cook and Ludwig ( ) for an example of
of other tools from other disciplines. Measuring cultural an application to crime reduction.
benefits/values in this context should therefore be the
. It is also important to note that the concepts of economic
output of a multidisciplinary teamwork that includes not value and financial value are distinct, although there are
only economists and conservation specialists but also link-ages between the two. Financial value, such as the
other social scientists. price of an antique manuscript sold in an auction, is part
In what concerns the microeconomic realm, such of eco-nomic value but does not exhaust it. In many
a framework can be built on a set of economic tools that cases, the financial value is not even the most important
part of the total economic value of the cultural asset. As
include revealed- and stated-preference techniques—in
mentioned above, economic values embrace also the
particular, and , which consistently rely on eco-nomic broader social value of an asset, including option values
theory for estimating economic preferences. In what and a range of nonuse values.
concerns other disciplines, it was suggested that some
. Note that the concept of economic value is a reflection
existing social research tools could be integrated and used of people’s preferences and therefore explicitly
in conjunction with economic valuation meth-ods to anthropo-centric. An analysis of other types of values
provide a fuller assessment of complex cultural val-ues is beyond the scope of this paper.
that cannot be fully described and measured by any one . In cases where a building or structure has no special
discipline or method. This paper identified a few, by no cultural significance, the maintenance cost approach may
means exhaustive, complementary lines of inquiry, such be consid-ered satisfactory, given the cost of conducting
as expert judgments, social assessments, psychologi-cal original valua-tion studies and the absence of any
significant nonuse values.
measures of attitudes and beliefs, laboratory experi-
ments, participatory appraisal techniques, and marketing . Other methods used for measuring cultural values include
the economic-impact-analysis literature. This analysis is
research methods. It is likely that many other relevant
lim-ited to observable effects on indicators such as
measurement approaches exist in other disciplines that consumption, employment, income, and public revenue
could be adapted for the purposes of assessing cultural (Vaughan ; Greffe ; Martin ). Economic dimensions such
values, within the proposed multidisciplinary framework. as employment are clearly important; yet, by neglecting
Hence, by using the largest possible set of theo- non-market benefits, potentially powerful additional
retically consistent and operational tools, cultural targets arguments in favor of cultural heritage conservation are
being ignored. Moreover, employment is not a primary
will be achieved in a more effective and efficient manner.
goal of cultural policies. There are also some references
To make this framework operational, the use and wide- to the use of multi-criteria analysis in the context of
spread understanding of evaluation technique targets is cultural goods, but there are no insights as how actually
to estimate nonuse values (Fusco Girard ).
. Detailed reviews of the various techniques can be found
in Mitchell and Carson ( ); Freeman ( ); Pearce, Whit-
tington, and Georgiou ( ); Bateman et al. ( ); Garrod
and Willis ( ); Bateman and Willis ( ); Hanley, Mourato,
and Wright ( ); Louviere, Hensher, and Swait ( ); and References
Bennett and Blamey ( ).
. Other stated-preference methods, not addressed here, are Arrow, K., et al. . Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent
political markets (referendum) and the use of laboratory Valuation. Federal Register ( ): , – .
experiments (in place of surveys).
Bailey, S. J., and P. Falconer. . Charging for admissions to museums
. Of related interest, Foster et al. ( ) provide a detailed analysis of and galleries: A framework for analysing the impact on access.
the extent of free riding in charitable giving in the U.K. and of Journal of Cultural Economics ( – ): – .
possible incentives to reduce this behavior.
Bateman, I., et al. . Economic Valuation with Stated Preference
. As a comparison, Carson et al. ( ) produced a bibliogra-phy Tech-niques: A Manual. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
of published and unpublished environmental studies: even
Bateman, I., and K. Willis. . Valuing Environmental Preferences:
as early as , their list had over two thousand entries from
Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the US, EU,
more than forty countries.
and Developing Countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
. A variant of this approach is sometimes known, within the
Beltran, E., and M. Rojas. . Diversified funding methods in Mexi-
marketing field, as conjoint analysis.
can archaeology. Annals of Tourism Research ( ): – .
. In order to reduce the cognitive burden to respondents and Ben-Akiva, M., T. Morikawa, and F. Shiroishi. . Analysis of the reli-
to provide more information on specific details of the ability of preference ranking data. Journal of Business Research : – .
valuation, some authors have proposed to integrate
elicitation within a multiattribute environment structured on Bennett, J., and R. Blamey, eds. . The Choice Modelling Approach to
a so-called multiattribute analysis (Satterfield, Slovic, and Environmental Valuation. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
Gregory ; Gregory, Lichtenstein, and Slovic ). While the Blamey, R. . Contingent valuation and the activation of environ-
valuation tool proposed in this paper is different, it is also mental norms. Ecological Economics ( ): – .
framed over a multiattribute environment.
Blamey, R., M. Common, and J. Quiggin. . Respondents to contin-
. The possibility of deriving an implicit ranking of attributes gent valuation: Consumers or citizens? Australian Journal of
(Hanley, Wright, and Adamowicz ) is relevant, as it allows Agricultural Economics ( ): – .
considerations on both monetary and nonmonetary measures of
Bolling, J., and V. Iversen. . Tourists’ willingness to pay for restora-
value. Economic appraisal can address choices where all of the
tion of stone town to its original state and stopping habitat destruction
costs and benefits can be measured in money terms, but it can
in Jozani Forest Reserve, Zanzibar. M.Sc. thesis, Agricultural Univer-
also be used as a basis for making decisions and providing
sity of Norway.
information support where ele-ments of costs and benefits
cannot be given money values (Creigh-Tyte, Dawe, and Boulier, B. L., and R. S. Goldfarb. . On the use and non-use of sur-
Stock ). is compatible with a broader range of appraisal veys in economics. Journal of Economic Methodology ( ): – .
techniques in which monetary assessments might be Boxall, P. C., J. Englin, and W. Adamowicz. . Valuing undiscovered
complemented by weighting and scor-ing analysis attributes: A combined revealed-stated preference analysis of North
(multiattribute utility) to assess the importance of benefits that American Aboriginal artifacts. Paper presented at the World Congress of
are not measured in monetary terms but that may be quantified. Environmental and Resource Economics, Venice, June.
Weighting and scoring allow the construction, for each option,
Brand, S., and R. Price. . The Economic and Social Costs of Crime.
of an index of “suitability,” which synthesizes the ratio of
Home Office Research Study . London: Home Office.
quantified benefits and costs. Using the implicit survey rankings
as scores/weights reduces the subjectivity of these analyses. Carson, R. T., et al. . A Bibliography of Contingent Valuation Studies and
Papers. La Jolla, Calif.: Natural Resource Damage Assessment, Inc.
. Examples of official use of nonmarket valuation techniques in
the U.K. government are increasingly frequent: the figures used Carson, R., et al. . Non-Moroccan Values for Rehabilitating the
to estimate the costs of morbidity in the context of transport Fes Medina. Report to the World Bank on the Fes Cultural
accidents, air pollution, and violent crime are partly based on Heritage Rehabilitation Project.
studies (e.g., Brand and Price ); a large-scale study was Carson, R. T., T. Groves, and M. J. Machina. . Incentive and infor-
commissioned to assess the external damages caused by quarry mational properties of preference questions. Plenary address, Ninth
activities, in order to inform the level of an aggregates tax Annual Conference of the European Association of Environmental
(London Economics ); and a study of the heritage benefits and Resource Economists, Oslo, Norway, June.
associated with construct-ing an expensive tunnel for a road
Chambers, R. . Rural Appraisal: Rapid, Relaxed, and
near Stonehenge was used as supporting evidence for the social
Participatory. Institute of Development Studies Discussion Paper .
and economic desirabil-ity of the project (Maddison and
Sussex, U.K.: Institute of Development Studies.
Mourato ).
Chapman, R. G., and R. Staelin. . Exploiting rank ordered choice
. See also McFadden ( ) on this core point.
set data within the stochastic utility model. Journal of Marketing
Research : – .
Clawson, M., and J. Knetsch. . The Economics of Outdoor Recreation. Cook, P. J., and J. Ludwig. . Gun Violence: The Real Costs. New York:
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Oxford University Press.
Cookson, R. . An alternative approach to valuing non-market goods. In Green, C., and S. Tunstall. . A psychological perspective. In
Environmental Valuation, Economic Policy, and Sustainability, ed. P. Valuing Environmental Preferences, ed. I. Bateman and K. Willis.
Mason and M. Acutt. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Coulton, J. C. . Optimal cultural heritage allocation: A model and Green, P., and V. Srinivasan. . Conjoint analysis in consumer
contingent valuation study. M.Sc. thesis, University College London. research: Issues and outlook. Journal of Consumer Research : – .
Couper, A. . The principal issues in underwater cultural heritage. Greffe, X. . La valeur economique du patrimoine. Paris: Anthropos.
Marine Policy ( ): – .
———.. La gestion du patrimoine. Paris: Anthropos.
Creigh-Tyte, S., G. Dawe, and T. Stock. . The White Book. Option
Gregory, R., S. Lichtenstein, and P. Slovic. . Valuing
Appraisal for Expenditure Decisions. Technical Paper No. .
environmental resources: A constructive approach. Journal of Risk
London: Finance Division, Department for Culture, Media, and
and Uncertainty ():–.
Sport.
Grosclaude, P., and N. C. Soguel. . Valuing damage to historic
Darnell, A. . Some simple analytics of access and revenue targets.
buildings using a contingent market: A case study of road traffic exter-
Journal of Cultural Economics ( – ): – .
nalities. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management ( ): – .
Davies, S. . By Popular Demand. London: Museums and
Hanemann, M. . Valuing the environment through contingent
Galleries Commission.
valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives ( ): – .
Dixon, J. . Estimating economic rents from tourism in Jordan.
Hanley, N., S. Mourato, and R. Wright. . Choice modelling
World Bank Web page, www.esd-worldbank.org .
approaches: A superior alternative for environmental valuation?
Feldstein, M., ed. . The Economics of Art Museums. Chicago: Jour-nal of Economic Surveys ( ): – .
University of Chicago Press.
Hanley, N., R. Wright, and V. Adamowicz. . Using choice
Fishbein, M., and I. Ajzen. . Belief, Attitude, Intention, and experi-ment to value the environment. Environmental and
Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Boston: Resource Economics (–): – .
Addison-Wesley Longman.
Hansen, T. . The willingness to pay for the Royal Theatre in
Fisher, A. C. . The conceptual underpinnings of the contingent Copenhagen as a public good. Journal of Cultural Economics ( ): – .
valuation method. In The Contingent Valuation of Environmental
Harless, D. W., and F. R. Allen. . Using the contingent valuation
Resources: Methodological Issues and Research Needs, ed. D. J.
method to measure patron benefits of reference desk service in an
Bjornstad and J. R. Kahn. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
academic library. College and Research Libraries ( ): – .
Foster, V., et al. . The Price of Virtue: The Economic Value of the
Hausman, J. A., and P. A. Ruud. . Specifying and testing economet-ric
Charitable Sector. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
models for rank ordered data. Journal of Econometrics : – .
Foster, V., I. Bateman, and D. Harley. . A non experimental
Hensher, D. A. . Stated preference analysis of travel choices:
com-parison of real and hypothetical willingness to pay. Journal
The state of practice. Transportation : – .
of Agricul-ture Economics ( ): – .
Hensher, D. A., and L. W. Johnson. . Applied Discrete Choice
Foster, V., and S. Mourato. . Testing for consistency in contingent
Model-ling. London: Halsted Press.
ranking experiments. Journal of Environmental Economics and
Manage-ment (in press). Hett, T., and S. Mourato. . Sustainable management of Machu
Picchu: A stated preference approach. Department of
Freeman, A., III. . The Measurement of Environmental and
Environmental Science and Technology, Imperial College of
Resource Values: Theory and Methods. Washington, D.C.:
Science, Technology, and Medicine, London. Mimeograph.
Resources for the Future.
Holt, G. E., D. Elliott, and A. Moore. . Placing a value on public
Frey, B. . Evaluating cultural property: The economic approach.
library services. Public Libraries, pp. – .
Journal of Cultural Property : – .
Hutchinson, G. . Threats to underwater cultural heritage:
Fusco Girard, L. . Risorse architettoniche e culturali: Valutazioni e
The problems of unprotected archaeological and historic sites,
strategie di conservazione. Milan: Franco Angeli.
wrecks, and objects found at sea. Marine Policy ( ): – .
Garrod, G. D., et al. . The nonpriced benefits of renovating his-
Kahneman, D., I. Ritov, and D. Schkade. . Economic preferences or
toric buildings: A case study of Newcastle Grainger Town.
attitude expressions?: An analysis of dollar responses to public
Cities (): –.
issues. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty ( – ): – .
Garrod, G. D., and K. Willis. . Economic Valuation of the
Kahneman, D., and R. Thaler. . Economic analysis and the
Environ-ment. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
psychol-ogy of utility: Applications to compensation policy.
American Economic Review ( ): – .
Kenkel, D., R. Fabian, and G. Tolley, eds. . Valuing Health for Policy:
An Economic Approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kling, R., C. Revier, and K. Sable. . Estimating the public Paper presented to the Association for Cultural Economics
good value of preserving a local historic landmark: The role of Conference, Minneapolis.
non-substitutability and information in contingent valuation. Lancaster, K. . Modern Consumer Theory. Cheltenham, U.K.:
Edward Elgar.
London Economics. . The Environmental Costs and Benefits of Pagiola, S. . Valuing the benefits of investments in cultural her-
the Supply of Aggregates. Phase . London: Department of the itage: The historic core of Split. Paper presented at the World
Environ-ment, Transport and the Regions. Bank Economists’ Forum, Alexandria, Va., May – .

Louviere, J., D. Hensher, and J. Swait. . Stated Choice Methods: Pearce, D. W. . Economic Values and the Natural World. London:

Analysis and Application. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Earthscan.

McFadden, D. . Rationality for economists? Journal of Risk Pearce, D. W., and S. Mourato. . The Economics of Cultural
and Uncertainty ( – ): – . Heritage: World Bank Support to Cultural Heritage Preservation
in the MNA Region. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Maddison, D., et al. . Blueprint : The True Costs of Road Transport.
London: Earthscan. Pearce, D. W., D. Whittington, and S. Georgiou. . Project and Policy
Appraisal: Integrating Economics and the Environment. Paris: .
Maddison, D., and T. Foster. . Valuing congestion in the British
Museum. Department of Economics, University College Pollicino, M., and D. Maddison. . Valuing the benefits of cleaning
London. Mimeograph. Lincoln Cathedral. Journal of Cultural Economics ( ): – .

Maddison, D., and S. Mourato. . Valuing different road options for Powe, N. A., and G. K. Willis. . Benefits received by visitors to
Stonehenge. Journal of the Conservation and Management of her-itage sites: A case study of Warkworth Castle. Journal of
Archaeological Sites (in press). Environmental Planning and Management ( ): – .

Malhotra, N. . Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation. rd ed. Riganti, P., and K. Willis. . Categorical nesting and temporal
Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall. reliability of estimates for complex historic goods. Paper
presented at the World Congress of Environmental and Resource
Martin, F. . Determining the size of museums subsidies. Economists, Venice, June.
Journal of Cultural Economics ( ): – .
Robbins, L. . Political Economy: Past and Present. London: McMillan.
Mitchell, R., and R. Carson. . Using Surveys to Value Public
Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, D.C.: Roche Rivera, H. . The willingness to pay for a public mixed good:
Resources for the Future. The Colón Theatre in Argentina. Paper presented at the Tenth Interna-
tional Conference on Cultural Economics, Barcelona, – June.
Morey, E., et al. . Valuing acid deposition injuries to cultural
resources. Report for the National Acid Precipitation Rosen, S. . Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Production differ-
Assessment Program. entiation in pure competition. Journal of Political Economy : – .

Mourato, S., et al. . Beyond dusty archives: The economic benefits Santagata, W., and G. Signorello. . Contingent valuation and cul-
of preserving recorded heritage. Cultural Trends : – . tural policy design: The case of Napoli Musei Aperti. Journal of
Cultural Economics ( ): – .
Mourato, S., A. Kontoleon, and A. Danchev. . Preserving cultural heritage
in transition economies: A contingent valuation study of Bulgarian Satterfield, T., P. Slovic, and R. Gregory. . Narrative valuation in
monasteries. In Valuing Cultural Heritage: Applying Environ-mental a policy judgment context. Ecological Economics ( ): – .
Valuation Techniques to Historic Buildings, Monuments, and Arti-facts, Scarpa, R., G. Sirchia, and M. Bravi. . Kernel vs. Logit modelling
ed. S. Navrud and R. Ready. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar. of single bounded responses: Valuing access to architectural and
Navrud, S., P. Pedersen, and J. Strand. . Valuing our cultural her- visual arts heritage in Italy. In Environmental Resource Evaluation:
itage. A contingent valuation survey. Centre for Research in Applica-tions of the CVM to Italy, ed. R. C. Bishop and D. Romano.
Economics and Business Administration, Oslo, Norway. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publisher.

Navrud, S., and R. Ready, eds. . Valuing Cultural Heritage: Applying Scott, A. . The Valuation of Game Resources: Some Theoretical
Environmental Valuation Techniques to Historic Buildings, Aspects. Canadian Fisheries Report No. . Department of Fisheries
Monuments, and Artifacts. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar. of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.

Nuti, F. . Paternalism vs. consumer sovereignty. In Environmental Steiner, F. . Optimal pricing of museum admission. Journal
Resource Evaluation: Applications of the Contingent Valuation of Cultural Economics ( ): – .
Method to Italy, ed. R. C. Bishop and D. Romano. Amsterdam: Throsby, D. . Economics and Culture. Cambridge:
Kluwer Academic Publisher. Cambridge University Press.
Throsby, D., and G. Withers. . What Price Culture? Journal
of Cultural Economics ( ): – .
Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman. . The framing of decisions and the
psychology of choice. In Question Framing and Response
Consistency, ed. R. Hogarth. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
. . World Heritage Convention. N.p.: .
Vatn, A., and D. W. Bromley. . Choices without prices without
apologies. In The Handbook of Environmental Economics, ed. D. W.
Bromley. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.
Vaughan, D. R. . The cultural heritage: An approach to analyzing
income and employment effects. Journal of Cultural Economics ( ): – .
Whitehead, J., C. Chambers, and P. Chambers. . Contingent valua-
tion of quasi public goods: Validity, reliability, and application to
valuing a historic site. Public Finance Review : – .
Willis, K. G. . Paying for heritage: What price for Durham Cathe-
dral? Journal of Environmental Planning and Management ( ):– .

World Bank. . Social Assessment: Incorporating Participation and


Social Analysis into the Bank’s Operational Work. Washington, D.C.:
World Bank.
Appendix Overview of Stated-Preference Studies of Cultural
Goods
WTP (US$) WTP % Zero WTP2 Sample Size2
Cultural Type of Definition1
Authors Asset Value – (on-site, (nonusers)(nationals on-site),
Maddison and Value of the nationals) Household, (approx.)(nationals off-
Mourato Stonehenge, impacts of – (off-site, annual site),
road nationals) ( years), / , (fore
improvement . – (on-site, tax
s foreigners) ign
(nationals)/e
on-
ntry fee
site)
(foreigners)
Mourato, Bulgarian Value of .–. Household, annual,
Kontoleon, and monasteries preservation , tax (all Bulgarians)
Danchev
Pollicino and Value of aesthetic – (per year of Household, annual, (Lincolnshire
Maddison Lincoln Cathedral, changes soiling) , tax (approx.) residents)
due to air
pollution Household, annual,
Surrey History (users) , tax (pilot)
Mourato et al. Centre, Total value . (nonusers)
Household, annual,
Hulton Getty Value of (nonusers) , tax (pilot)
Mourato et al. Picture preventing
Individual, per
Library, deterioration
visit, , n.a.2
Maddison and
Foster British Museum, Congestion costs entry fee
Individual, annual,
(users) /, (users) (Naples residents)
Santagata and Napoli Musei
Signorello Aperti, Italy Total value (nonusers) (nonusers
donation )
– (Citadel)
Machu Picchu, Individual, per
– (Inca visit, , None (Citadel),
Hett and Mourato Peru Value of access Trail)
entry fee (Inca Trail)
(cable car)
Petra and Wadi Market price Individual, per
(Petra)
Dixon Rum, analysis visit of . n.a. n.a.
(Wadi Rum) days, , economic
Jordan
– (tax, rent
Kling, Revier, and Northern Hotel, Preservation
Household, one-
Sable Fort value low–high
time, , n.a. n.a.
Collins, information)
tax/forgone rebate
– (forgone
rebate, low–
Holt, Elliott, and St. Louis public high Household, annual, (public),
Moore libraries, Total value information) , tax n.a. (teachers),
(business)
Cabell Library, Total value of
Individual, annual, (students),
Harless and Allen Virginia reference
, (staff )
Commonwealth desk services and
University, value – tuition and fees
of additional (students/st
hours aff, current
hours)

(students/
staff,
additional
hours)
Authors Cultural Asset Type of Value WTP (US$) WTP Definition1 % Zero WTP2 Sample Size2
Pagiola Historic core of Split, Value of restoration (domestic and foreign Individual, per visit n.a. n.a.
Croatia tourists) (tourists); individual,
(local residents) annual (residents), , tax

Coulton Prehistoric cave paintings, Preservation value (more access, less Individual, one-time, , n.a.
Peak District, preservation) tax
(less access, more
preservation)

Bolling and Iversen Stone Town, Zanzibar Value of restoration (tourists) Individual, per visit, n.a. n.a.
/ , arrival fee

Whitehead, Chambers, St. Genevieve Academy, Preservation value – Individual, one-time, (Missouri residents)
and Chambers Missouri, , donation

Roche Rivera Colón Theatre, Buenos Value of rehabilitation Individual, annual, , tax , (Buenos Aires residents)
Aires, Argentina

Riganti and Willis Campi Flegrei archaeo- Value of conservation Individual, annual ( years), (approx.) and(city residents)
logical park, Naples, Italy , donation

Boxall, Englin, and Aboriginal rock paintings, Recreational value of – (pristine) Individual, per trip, ,
Adamowicz Nopiming Park, Canada pristine and defaced . – . (defaced) travel cost (visitors)
travel cost

Carson et al. Fes Medina, Morocco Non-Moroccan value of – (Fes visitors) Individual, per trip (approx.) (Fes visitors),
rehabilitation – (Morocco visitors) (visitors)/one time (approx.) (Morocco visitors),
– (Europe nonvisitors) (nonvisitors), , tax min. (experts)

Morey et al. Monuments in Value of acid deposition (low impact) Household, one-time only, (approx.) (northeastern U.S.
Washington, D.C. injuries (medium impact) , none population)
(high impact)

Scarpa, Sirchia, and Rivoli Castle, Italy Valuing the right to access – Individual, annual, , (approx.) , (visitors)
Bravi at present charges donation

Beltran and Rojas Mexican archaeological sites Value of access and – . (visitors) Individual, per visit, , n.a. (visitors),
preservation . – (city residents) entry fee , (city residents)

Garrod et al. Historical buildings in Value of renovation – Household, annual, , tax (city residents)
Grainger City, Newcastle,

Powe and Willis Warkworth Castle, Value of visitor benefits Individual, per visit, , fee n.a. (visitors)

Hansen Royal Theatre, Copenhagen Value of continuing current – Individual, annual, , tax , (Danes)
activities
Authors Cultural Asset Type of Value WTP (US$) WTP Definition1 % Zero WTP2 Sample Size2
Willis Durham Cathedral, Value of access . Individual, per visit, , fee (visitors)

Grosclaude and Soguel Historical buildings, Damages from traffic- – Individual, annual, , (city residents)
Neuchâtel, Switzerland caused air pollution donation

Martin Musée de la Civilisation, Total value of Quebec Individual annual, , tax n.a. ,
Quebec, Canada museum

Navrud, Pedersen, and Nidaros Cathedral, Norway Damages from air pollution (originals preserved) Individual, annual, , n.a. n.a. (visitors)
Strand (restoration losing
originals)

Throsby and Withers Theater, opera, ballet, Value of arts support – Individual, annual, , tax n.a. (city residents)
music, visual arts, and
crafts, Sydney, Australia

. = dichotomous choice, = open ended, = bidding game, = payment card, = choice modeling.

. n.a. = not available.


Numbness and Sensitivity in the
Elicitation of Environmental Values
By Theresa Satterfield

T of value both colloquial and formal. This paper takes attributes of a good) but also intangible (e.g., those based
stock of recent work by social scientists and ethicists on on more nebulous qualities, such as the ability to inspire
the subject of environ-mental values. Its foremost purpose awe or the ability to symbolize revered spiritual or cul-
is to highlight the central features of scholarly efforts to tural properties). In addition, many (though not all) of
(a) articulate the environment-centered values these approaches seek to provide alternatives to dollar-
characteristic of different social groups, and (b) centric definitions of value. Of particular concern is the
operationalize environmental val-ues in the context of use by economists of contingent valuation ( ) methods
policy decisions about land manage-ment. Its secondary wherein an individual’s (hypothetical) market preference
purpose is to cull from this literature a few central (i.e., “value” for) a natural good is ascertained by asking
tensions and problems encountered in the study of stakeholders or survey respondents to state how much
environmental values. It is hoped that any derived they would be willing to pay to improve the status of a
insights will be useful not just to the evaluation of particular environmental good—for example, to improve
environmental goods but to scholars concerned with the the habitat of an endangered species.
value-based assessment of cultural heritage and the prac- Two broad-stroke (though not necessarily con-
tice of heritage conservation. I will begin with a review of sciously articulated) positions underpin much of the val-
several exemplary and seminal studies. Then I will ues literature. The first can be characterized as axiomatic.
address emergent critiques of conventional practices and An axiomatic, or maxim-focused, approach operates on
the exploratory methods that such critiques have inspired. the premise that certain categories of value are better,
The paper closes with a few recommendations and ques- “truer,” more important, more self-evident, and/or more
tions that all valuation practices need address. intellectually defensible than all others. Such prioritized
values should, as is implied or asserted, provide the basis
Valuing the Environment
from which environmental policy is derived. Axiomatic
traditions are, by definition, expert driven. Determining
higher-order values is achieved by assessments, argu-
The last decade has witnessed a flurry of research aimed at
ments, or measurements produced by disciplinary special-
identifying the value of nature (broadly construed), specific
ists who are not necessarily attendant to the opinions of
environmental goods (a northern spotted owl), or cherished
stakeholders or nonspecialists. The second position—an
places (Yellowstone National Park). Contribu-tions to the
antiaxiomatic, or relativistic, one—is guided by the
literature have been generated from most cor-ners of the
princi-ple of cultural or intersubjective relativism. The
natural, economic, social, psychological, politi-cal, and
point for these practitioners is that there are no right or
decision sciences, as well as from philosophy, from which
wrong value positions, only different ones. Researchers
has emerged the subdiscipline of environmental ethics. Some
are expected to elicit but not judge or influence these dis-
have sought methods that reflect axiomatic definitions of
parate perspectives during the elicitation process. Their
value, while others assert the importance of relativistic or
findings are used to provide insight to those responsible
subjective approaches. Some make distinc-tions between
for making land management decisions or setting envi-
held values (beliefs we adhere to), while others focus on
ronmental policy.1
assigned values (rankings or numeric tags that express the
relative weight of one value as compared to one or more
different values). Others still are con-cerned with the proper
representation of values that are not only tangible (e.g., those
based on the specific physical
Axiomatic Traditions in Environmental
A rich body of axiomatic work on the subject of environ-
Ethics
mental values can be attributed to environmental ethi- or causes our heedless exploitation of natural systems. It
cists. Ethics—in this case environmental ethics—are is further assumed that if people adopt a more ethical ori-
defined as the putting into practice of notions of “right” entation toward the environment, environmental prob-
versus “wrong” conduct toward nature (Armstrong and lems will in part be solved (Dickson , ).
Botzler ; Proctor ; Rolston ). Environmental Despite a prodigious scholarly output in recent
ethicists have considered, therefore, the philosophical years, very few ethicists have put forth specific value
basis for assigning value (and thus right practice) by typologies or rankings of higher- to lower-order values.
argu- The field is concerned, instead, with exploring the moral
ing for different instrumental and, importantly, intrinsic arguments for and behavioral implications of specific
moral values embodied in nature (and/or its component ethics when put into service in multiple (applied)
parts). Due to consciousness, only humans are moral contexts. Two of the more compelling examples include
agents (and thus can evaluate things); ecosystems, organ- the land ethic and the naturalness principle. The land
isms, and species can nonetheless be defended as ethic, first invoked by forester and philosopher Aldo
possess- Leopold and the basis of much modern ecology, stipulates
ing certain kinds of value in and of themselves (Callicott that (a) our definition of community should be extended
, , ; Nash ; Norton ; Rolston , to include the biotic community—that is, to soil, water,
; Sagoff , ; Stone ). plants, ani-mals, or, collectively, the land—and (b) that to
Among the ethical divisions central to this litera- destroy any one part is to threaten the whole, humanity
ture is that between anthropocentric versus biocentric included (Leopold ). Because the loss of any one
positions (Callicott ; Norton ; Rolston , ). An (ecosystemic) part threatens the whole, ultimate value is
anthropocentric ethic posits that nature’s worth is derived placed on maintaining system integrity. One must keep all
primarily from its capacity to serve human ends. A the parts of a healthy system. Hence, the conservationists’
biocentric ethic respects all living organisms; because motto aimed at avoiding irreversible ecological damage:
nature is alive, it is regarded as “good” in its own right the first rule of intelligent tinkering is to keep all the parts.
and thus deserving of moral consideration. Many nuanced Conserving natural value as the highest-order
arguments exist within these broad-stroke positions—for value proposes, alternately, that species and ecological
example, whether it is better to inculcate an environmen- sys-tems be maintained in a form that best replicates their
tal ethic based on the potential human benefits of a state in nature as it would be in the absence of significant
healthy environment (Norton ), on the argument that human intervention (Rolston ).2 A park ranger follow-ing
nature has rights and thus its welfare should be taken into a natural wildlife ethic would not, therefore, attempt to
account or enshrined in law, on the aesthetic attributes of rescue a bison falling through the ice. The bison would be
nature, on the basis of a cross-human and human-to- left to manage the predicament alone. But the ranger
nature ethic of egalitarianism, and so on (Merchant ). would intervene to save fauna injured by park motorists,
These considerations, in turn, raise several questions as there is nothing “natural” about a car traveling through
about humans’ obligatory posture toward nature— wildlife habitat at sixty miles per hour.3
namely, what are our obligations to the natural environ-
ment? And are those obligations derived from our obliga- Axiomatic Traditions—Ecological Values
tions to ourselves and other humans, or are they derived
from a discrete obligation to nature (Dickson )? A second, very significant contribution to axiomatic meth-
Regardless of any one ethicist’s position on the ods for identifying environmental values is driven by the
above points, most agree that the values or attitudes work of ecologists. Scientists generally think of their work
human beings hold about nature are the root cause of as value free, and in this sense, they do not conceive of their
environmental problems. Theirs is a fundamentally work as axiomatic. But their efforts are, neverthe-less, expert
ideational argument. It is assumed that current value sys- driven, and their conclusions are suggestive of practices that
tems reflect our disregard for nature and even our willing- are themselves axiomatically defended. The value of
ness to dominate nature (a position typically attributed to environmental goods for this group of scholar-evaluators is
the Judeo-Christian tradition), which in turn legitimizes assessed on the basis of their contribution to the functioning
of the overall system and/or for the importance attributed to
particular ecosystem service
(e.g., the provision of clean water). For modeling and indi-cators of system integrity, health, carrying capacity,
assessment purposes, emphasis is typically placed on or resilience. This practice can point in turn to the
designa-tion of critical habitat or draw attention to (i.e., Regardless, ecologists and, to a greater extent,
valorize) system functions—for instance, the waste- ethicists labor to argue that nature is typically under-valued
filtering capaci-ties of wetlands or the importance of a and that—if we become more fully cognizant of the moral
keystone species to the overall health of a system. A qualities as well as of the material, aesthetic, and spiritual
central question for most of these approaches is: What is benefits of nature—nature might come to be managed by
the best indicator of overall health, and/or Which humans with respect and according to a range of axiomatic
indicators speak to which components of a system—be principles. They valorize certain quali-ties of natural
that at the level of organ-isms; whole populations; or the systems, attributes regarded as overlooked in a post–World
larger forest, tropical, desert, or other ecosystems of War II era that prioritizes the extraction of renewable and
which these are a part (Suter ). nonrenewable natural resources.
Prominent among the efforts by ecologists to val-
orize ecosystem services is the adoption by Costanza and
colleagues of the economists’ penchant for market expres-
sions of value. “The Value of the World’s Ecosystem Ser-
vices and Natural Capital” was published first in the jour- Table Summary of average global value of annual ecosystem
nal Nature and subsequently in the journal Ecological services. (Source: Adapted from “The Value of the World’s
Eco-nomics (Costanza et al. ). The paper contains a typol- Eco-system Services and Natural Capital,” by R. Costanza,
ogy of worth based on the economic contribution (or the R. d’Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B.
Hannon, S. Naeem, K. Limburg, J. Parnelo, R. V.
“total global flow of $ value per year”) of different geo-
O’Neill, R. Raskin, P. Sutton, and M. van den Belt, ,
graphic domains (marine, riverine/lake, terrestrial, wet- Nature , p. . Copyright by Nature Publishing Group.
land, grassland, desert, tundra, urban, etc.). Each domain Adapted with permission.)
is examined for its contribution to specific ecosystem ser-
vices (e.g., gas regulation, climate regulation, water sup- Ecosystem Services Total Global Flow
ply, nutrient recycling, etc.). The authors’ breakdown of Value ( /year–1 x 9)
services is a viable schema of ecologists’ thinking on val- Gas regulation ,
ues, whereas the attention their findings draw to the func-
Climate regulation
tions of nature normally taken for granted is oft cited.
Disturbance regulation ,
A summation of these features is characterized in Table .
The concluding assessment by Costanza and col- Water regulation ,
leagues that the total global biosphere is worth, on aver-age, Water supply ,
$ trillion per year (nearly twice the annual gross national
Erosion control
product of the United States) has, however, been very
controversial. Many economists working to elicit dol-lar Soil formation
value as a measure of and a means for ranking public Nutrient cycling ,
preferences for natural goods view the authors’ costing of the
Waste treatment ,
globe as a slight to their disciplinary integrity. Ecocen-tric-
Pollination
leaning ecologists, meanwhile, remain ill at ease with
Costanza and colleagues’ preoccupation with human- and Biological control
market-centric (i.e., capital-worth) perspectives as the basis Habitat refugia
for environmental valuation.
Food production ,
Raw materials

Genetic resources

Recreation

Culturel ,
1
Total ,

. In trillions of dollars, for a total of trillion, billion.


Relativistic Traditions
Ethicists and ecologists have forced onto the values stage Contingent Valuation as
the relevance of both a systemic/functional and a morally Willingness to Pay
resonant definition of value. The cross-fertilization with
As implied above, expressed preference work is
other disciplines of these ideas is ongoing and significant,
dominated by contingent valuation surveys employing
some of which will become apparent below. It remains
willingness-to-pay ( ) and willingness-to-accept ( )
the case, however, that the study of environmental values
protocols (Mitchell and Carson ).4 Resting on the
for policy and land management purposes is heavily
economists’ assumption that dollars are as neutral a
influenced by relativistic approaches or, more colloquially,
metric for measur-ing value as is available, practitioners
by practitioners whose central goal is the monitoring of
posit a hypothetical market on which environmental
public opinion. This relativistic slant is partly because of
improvements and losses are exchanged for promised
the deep tradition across the social sciences of “value-
payment. It is further assumed that preference is akin to
neutral” approaches to human behavior and partly
the pursuit of individ-ual human welfare or self-interest
because “the individual being is seen, for all practical
played out as a rational market choice. Participant-
purposes, as the originator of preference and, therefore,
citizens in / studies are asked to state the maximum price
of value” (Brown , ). It is also because of the role
they would be willing to pay to obtain an improvement in
citizen preferences play in the instigation of endangered
environmental quality (e.g., a restored bird habitat) or to
species legislation, the growth of environmental activism,
state the price they would be willing to accept given
and the general public support for environmentally ori-
deterioration of status (e.g., loss of said habitat). Requests
ented behavior (recycling, water conservation, wilderness
to assign dollar values to such environmental goods are
recreation, green consumerism, etc.). More important,
generally accompanied by technical information on the
considerable support exists today for public consultation
geophysical domain (e.g., a community watershed) in
as the basis of good governance and civil society.
question and quantitative details about the benefits
Following Brown and Gregory, most of the
(perhaps recreational or ecologi-cal) and costs (perhaps
avail-able social science valuation tools are glossed as
jobs lost or revenues forgone) of different policy options.
expressed preference approaches (Brown ; Gregory ).
Total is the product of aver-age or mean multiplied by the
“Pref-erence is used here to mean the setting by an
population to which the decision applies (a local town,
individual of one thing before another because of a notion
users of an environ-mental asset, a county, a nation-state,
of better-ness” (Brown , – ). This overarching category
etc.). Total is then pitted, in a cost-benefit analysis,
can be subdivided further still into approaches that work
against the costed interests of other stakeholders
to identify held values (underlying values or ideals that
(industry, government, competing resource users, etc.).
prior-itize modes of conduct and desirable qualities) and
those that work to measure assigned values (the relative Psychological and Social Studies of Value
impor-tance or worth of an object in a given context,
which is not a characteristic of the object per se but the Dissatisfaction with economic definitions of value and a
impor-tance of which is derived, at least partially, from strong tradition in the study of attitudes and beliefs in
held val-ues). Understandably, much confusion for new sociology and psychology have helped fuel many alter-nate
students of environmental values is generated by the nonmonetary studies of value. Most of this work emphasizes
failure of many practitioners to clarify whether one is a “values held” definition. Much of it also rec-ognizes the
talking about held or assigned values. (To confuse the escalation of environmental concern over time and across
matter further, held values can be converted to assigned social groups and finds that values once thought extremely
values in that they can be ranked as more or less radical are held by a broad variety of individuals and groups
important relative to one another. Furthermore, norms (Dunlap and Scarce ). More important, this body of work
overlap with held values to the extent that a norm is a disavows (a) the assumption that, taken literally, values and
value that one asserts as more important than others, as valuation are synonymous, that quantitative values equal, or
something that one should do or act in accordance with, actually express, one’s values, and (b) the assumption that
versus something that one enduringly believes matters.) the public majority endorses and is satisfactorily portrayed
by rational, eco-nomic expressions of the value of nature.
Most define
Table Responses to new environmental paradigm (NEP) scale items by the general public sample (GPS) and the environmental
organization sample (EOS). (Source: Adapted from “The ‘New Environmental Paradigm,’” by R. E. Dunlap and K. D. Van
Liere, Journal of Environmental Education ( ), no. , pp. ‒ . Reprinted with permission of the Helen Dwight Reid Education
Foundation. Published by Heldref Publications, th Street NW, Washington, D.C. - . Copyright © .)

Statement Agreement Agreement


in GPS (%) in EOS (%)

. We are approaching the limit of the number of people the earth can support. . .

. The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset. . .

. Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs. . .

. Mankind was created to rule over the rest of nature. . .

. When humans interfere with nature, it often produces disastrous consequences. . .

. Plants and animals exist primarily to be used by humans. . .

. To maintain a healthy economy, we will have to develop a “steady-state” economy, . .


where industrial growth is controlled.
. Humans must live in harmony with nature in order to survive. . .

. The earth is like a spaceship with only limited room and resources. . .

. Humans need not adapt to the natural environment because they can remake it to suit . .
their needs.

. There are limits to growth beyond which our industrialized society cannot expand. . .

. Mankind is severely abusing the environment. . .

value as “what we care about” (Keeney , ), as the human-nature interface (i.e., the beliefs that limitless
“basic motivations which guide thoughts and action” progress is possible, that faith in science and
(Axelrod , ), or, following Rokeach, as general goals technology is abundant, that nature exists to serve
or orienting dispositions from which attitudes to humans, etc.). The measures include twelve statement
specific items are derived (Rokeach ; Stern et al. ). items with either a pro- or antienvironmental cast;
Recall that the principal distinction between rela- topically, the items explore the tolerance expressed for
tivistic and axiomatic studies is that for the first group, the limits to growth, support for a greater balance between
goal is to characterize the values held (and for , assigned) the human and nonhuman world, and support for
by the public, while for the second group, the goal is to antianthropocentric positions (Table ). Salient among
instantiate the wisdom of recognizing some val-ues as Dunlap and Van Liere’s findings is the “remarkable
more important or significant than others and, in so doing, degree of acceptance of the —not only among
overturn the historical force of a human-centric, utilitarian environmentalists, which was expected, but among the
worldview that promotes human arrogance toward and general public as well” (Dunlap and Van Liere , ).
dominance over nature. Yet the salient feature of three Equally renowned (with conclusions not unlike
classic nonaxiomatic studies of value is the decid-edly Dunlap and Van Liere’s) is Stephen Kellert’s broadly cross-
ecocentric flavor detected in survey responses. cultural survey work, much of which is summarized in his
As early as , Dunlap and Van Liere argued book The Value of Life (Kellert ). Humans universally
convincingly that a “new environmental [value] para- recognize, argues Kellert, the importance of biodiversity to
digm”( ) was emerging to supplant the dominant social their physical, emotional, spiritual, and intellectual well-
paradigm ( ) (Dunlap and Van Liere ). The is that being. Relying on studies conducted in several North
“constellation of values, attitudes, and beliefs” thought American, European, Asian, and African nation-states,
to underpin key Western assumptions about the Kellert argues that we are by nature biophilic—that is,
Table A typology of basic values. (Source: From The Value of Life: Biological Diversity and Human Society, by Stephen R. Kellert. Copyright © ,
Island Press. Reproduced by permission of Island Press/Shearwater Books, Washington, D.C., and Covelo, California. All rights reserved.)

Value Definition Function

Utilitarian Practical and material exploitation of nature Physical sustenance/security

Naturalistic Direct experience and exploration of nature Curiosity, discovery, recreation

Ecologistic-scientific Systematic study of structure, function, and relationship in nature Knowledge, understanding, observational skills

Aesthetic Physical appeal and beauty of nature Inspiration, harmony, security

Symbolic Use of nature for language and thought Communication, mental development

Humanistic Strong emotional attachment and “love” for aspects of nature Bonding, sharing, cooperation, companionship

Moralistic Spiritual reverence and ethical concern for nature Order, meaning, kinship, altruism

Dominionistic Mastery, physical control, dominance of nature Mechanical skills, physical prowess, ability to

Negativistic Fear, aversion, alienation from nature subdue Security, protection, safety, awe

predisposed to appreciate the nonhuman world, an Two final well-known contributions to the field
appre-ciation he regards as rooted in nine core value are Stern and Dietz’s work on the value basis of environ-
orientations (Table ). These nine values, considered mental concern and Kempton and colleagues’ work on the
biological in ori-gin, signify basic structures of human intersection of cultural models and environmental values
relationship and adaptation to the natural world (Stern and Dietz ; Kempton, Boster, and Hart-ley ). Stern
developed over the course of human evolution. Edward and Dietz isolate those values most closely associated
O. Wilson conceived the term biophilia to describe the with the preservation of nature and environ-mentalism
deep biological need for affiliating with life and nature. generally. Upon factor analysis of numerous attitudinal
The nine values are thought to reflect a range of statements, a tripartite value schema emerged composed
physical, emotional, and intellectual expressions of the of egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric value ori-entations.
biophilic tendency to asso-ciate with nature (Kellert , ). The first category distinguished some people as self-
Culture, history, and human experience may interested maximizers, the second as concerned pri-marily
diff-erently shape the salience of these values across with the costs and benefits carried by others (altru-istic),
popula-tions. Further, Kellert is careful to assert that and the third as concerned with the costs and benefits
his cate-gories are labels of convenience and that he posed for the biosphere as a whole (biospheric). Kempton,
does not mean to indicate their order of importance. Boster, and Hartley similarly found that most values could
Humanistic values may be more widely endorsed by be attributed to, or were deeply rooted in, religious
Americans than utilitarian ones, but that is not to say thought, utilitarian and human-centric self-inter-est, and a
that Kellert is himself promoting the significance of biocentric belief in the rights of nature and species
one orientation above another (Kellert , , ). (Kempton, Boster, and Hartley ).5 They also found that
Some scholars disagree with Kellert’s assump- such values were inseparable from lay theories or models
tions about biological or biophilic predispositions. about the causes of environmental problems (in their case,
They may also find difference where Kellert finds global warming). That is, study participants were easily
universality— to wit, they interpret the ethnic-, drawn to and persuaded by causal explana-tions (however
income-, and gender-driven differences uncovered in accurate or erroneous) most closely articu-lated with their
his book as more meaningful than does Kellert. His values orientations.
typology is, nonethe-less, consistent with a number of
subsequent studies (e.g., Steel et al. ) and is supported,
equally, by work in other disciplines.
Conundrums in the Development
Cognitive Difficulties and Moral
of Valuation Practices
poor-quality judgments. Cognitive difficulty can also be
The above contributions to the social and psychological attributed to the features of the decision task itself. Most
dimensions of value have legitimized a much broader value studies work to identify the links between values
conception of the term value than was heretofore com- held and the decision or policy that such values support,
mon in the field of environmental valuation. Social scien- but it turns out that standard surveys offer relatively poor
tists have provided evidence for the claim that opportunities for respondents to think through the links
expressions of value are rooted both in utilitarian between a value stated and an action endorsed. Together
approaches to preference (which address the question these difficulties suggest that how a value is elicited—the
What is it that a person values or will “pay for” because it way in which a valuation task is set up, worded, or
benefits him or her as an individual?) and in ethical and framed—strongly influences the outcome.
deontological approaches (which address the question
Framing Effects
What does a person believe to be important to the greater
good that is nature and society?) (Sagoff ). The enormous Prominent examples of framing effects follow.6
advances in value identification techniques offered by • The availability heuristic, which finds that
these seminal studies cannot be underestimated. How- people estimate the frequency of the occurrence of
ever, as researchers, decision makers, and policy advisors something on the basis of how easily they can imagine
look for ever deeper understandings of value, and for or recall an instance of it. Vivid examples (e.g., the
greater clarification as to how values influence decision prospect of a wildfire or the thought of a charismatic
making, a new set of criticisms (and a new set of research species) leave us fixated on single aspects of a decision
directions) has emerged. The next section addresses these problem or cause us to underestimate the importance of
criticisms, in particular (a) the cognitive limitations that less-familiar aspects of the problem.
most persons exhibit when facing a value-based decision • Gain/loss effects, which find that questions
problem, (b) the inability to link values and actions, and worded in an apparently equivalent manner are not always
(c) the fact that the language and context in which values perceived as such. For example, questions framed as gains
are elicited still serves to silence many ethical values and versus losses can have an unintended effect on the
moral concerns. The next section examines this author’s outcome of a valuation task, because people tend to react
recent experiments with tools aimed at addressing both more strongly to the thought of a loss than to the thought
cognitive and ethical variables. of a gain. As a result, higher scores will be attributed to
the recovery from a loss of ten acres of a wetland than to
Cognitive Difficulties
the gain of the equivalent area of wetland (Gregory,
The study of environmental values is increasingly influenced MacGregor, and Lichtenstein ).
by the work of psychologists and decision analysts, who • Numeric expression effects, which find that
have found, overwhelmingly, that peoples’ cognitive ability informa-tion about an environmental good or a heritage
is bounded. This bounding is due not to lack of wisdom per site is over- or undervalued depending on the type of
se; it is simply the case that everyone has difficulty numeric expression used to characterize a good’s status.
navigating through the complexities involved in making Presenting information in percentages (e.g., percent of the
judgments about value or in making decisions. The inability local population agree that the site should be saved)
to manage that complexity intel-lectually is attributed to instead of on a frequency scale ( in people agree that the
features of human cognition. Namely, problems arise site should be saved) leads people to undervalue that
because people routinely and unconsciously avert informa-tion. That is, different representations of the same
complexity by relying on a consistent set of biases or proba-bilistic information lead to very different
“heuristics” (rules of thumb) that make information valuations. This is true with both expert and nonexpert
processing easier and simplify decisions. Such heuristics and populations (Slovic, Monahan, and MacGregor ).
biases can be an elegant means to an efficient decision, but in • Cognitive fogging: The presentation of
many cases, they lead to errors or information pertinent to a decision can impose mental
fatigue and thus fog the participant’s ability to juggle
cognitively the many pieces of some decisions. (It is
generally agreed that people can juggle three or four
dimensions of a problem at one time.)
The Weak Values-Action Link vey results. This finding, in turn, has several
implications for studies of environmental values.
Further problems stem from what is generally referred to as
Evidence from a recent study of eastern Canadi-
the weak values-action link. Historically, social scien-tists
ans’ environmental values in a forest management
have assumed that studying held values is essential because
context offers a case in point (Satterfield and Gregory ).
they offer a reasonable indication of expected future
In that study, Ontario’s population (a largely urban
behavior. Agreement with a value statement in a survey
“gen-eral public”) was randomly sampled, as were
context should mean that actions that fulfill that value will
residents of rural timber-dependent communities and
be supported. Consider, for instance, Inglehart’s evidence
residents of timber-dependent households within those
for an emerging postmaterialist value orienta-tion (Inglehart
communities. Despite the demographic and likely
) . Adherents of this orientation pur-port a willingness to
ideological differ-ences across these urban-rural groups,
forgo further material wealth (assuming basic needs are
surprisingly uni-versal support for “green” values
met) when attaining such wealth threatens the environment.
emerged. In only one instance do two of these three
When a respondent declares a postmaterialist value
groups differ as to their stated value orientations by more
orientation by agreeing with the survey statement “I’m
than a few percentage points. More typically, support
willing to accept a lower standard of living to ensure a
across all groups for sev-eral proenvironment value
healthy environment,” one is led to expect commensurate
positions is very uniform, a pattern that is maintained
support for actions that fulfill that position. Thus,
when moving from the resounding support for species
postmaterialists might be expected to agree with a reduction
egalitarianism to more cautious endorsements of the
in timber jobs or an increase in local tax revenues, to ensure
spiritual qualities in nature, or of postmaterialism
forest health. Such expectations are, however, not
generally. The results are depicted in Figure .
substantiated by most sur-

Figure Environmental values: General public, timber-dependent communities, and timber-dependent households (percent “agree”
and “strongly agree” responses). * p <. . (Source: From “Reconciling Environmental Values and Pragmatic Choices,” by T.
Satterfield and R. Gregory, , Society and Natural Resources , p. . Copyright by Taylor & Francis. Reprinted with permission.)

I think environmental problems are extremely important. %


%
%
When I see or hear a story about an environmental %
%
issue, I pay particular attention to that story. %
*All species, including humans, have an equal right to %
%
coexist on the planet. %
*It bothers me that the world’s natural %
%
environment is changing so quickly. %
*I am attracted to the spiritual qualities inherent in the %
%
natural world. %
*I would be willing to sacrifice much of my current %
%
standard of living in order to help ensure that nature is not %
harmed.
%
%
Technological development is destroying nature. %

General public % % % %
Timber-dependent residents
Timber-dependent households
Figure Management goals and actions (percent “agree” and “strongly agree” or percent “acceptable” and “very acceptable” responses).
*p <. ; **p<. . (Source: From “Reconciling Environmental Values and Pragmatic Choices,” by T. Satterfield and R. Gregory, ,
Society and Natural Resources , p. . Copyright by Taylor & Francis. Reprinted with permission.)

** Timber harvests in Ontario forests should be reduced in light .%


.%
of global pressures on environmental resources. .%

** Sustainable forestry in Ontario will require a major reduction .%


.%
in timber harvest levels. .%

* Forests should be managed primarily as places for human .%


.%
recreation, such as hiking, canoeing, camping, or fishing. .%

** The first priority for forest managers should be to provide .%


.%
local communities with jobs in the wood products industry. .%

** Using managed fire to control for unwanted vegetation is .%


.%
acceptable. .%

** Timber harvesting inside provincial parks is acceptable. .%


.%
.%

** Clearcutting to harvest timber in Ontario is acceptable. .%


.%
.%

* Spraying herbicides from helicopters or airplanes to control .%


.%
unwanted forest vegetation is acceptable. .%

General public % % % % %

Timber-dependent residents

Timber-dependent households

These results are in concordance with the work


of Kellert and of Dunlap and Van Liere, to the extent that
environmental values, once assumed to be central to the
differentiation of social groups generally opposed to one
another, are more widely held than one might think
(Kellert ; Dunlap and Van Liere ). However, a sim-ilarly
consistent relationship between expressed prefer-ences
for management goals and actions cannot be found.
These findings are represented in Figure . At the level
of action, pronounced between-group differences
emerged in the Ontario study in response to the
acceptability of clear-cutting (a difference of . %),
harvesting in provin-cial parks ( . %), the reduction of
timber harvesting to promote global environmental The implications for assumptions about value
health ( . %) or sustain-able forestry ( . %), and the studies (and the ability to sustain confidence in common
importance of timber indus-try employment ( . %). methodologies) are twofold. First, resounding support for
environmental values, even strongly biocentric ones
endorsing species egalitarianism, is a relatively poor indi-
cator of support for management goals or practices. Sec-
ond, the problem is not likely to be solved by designing
better value statements for survey purposes because the
problem arises from the tendency to confuse expressions
of values that refer to an individual’s fundamental beliefs
(held values) with operational expressions of those values
in terms of context-specific objectives or the means by
which desired values are realized (Kraus ; Ladd and
Bowman ).
Language and Meaning zero or by offering an unrealistically high value, in
response to questions about the worth of an environmental
Also central to criticisms of value scholarship is the ques-tion
good. Quite often these entries are accom-panied by
What languages are most appropriate to the elicita-tion of
margin comments reflecting the respondent’s discontent
value? The concern is that the linguistic style that
with being asked to think of the environmen-tal good in
accompanies cost-benefit analyses and dollar measures
question in monetary terms.
inscribes particular forms of discourse into the elicitation
Kahneman and colleagues explain this protest as
process itself. That is, the language (in most cases, an eco-
rooted in a misunderstanding, by economists, of the eval-
nomic one) used to measure or discuss stakeholder “val-ues”
uator’s intent (Kahneman and Knetsch ; Ritov and
determines the values that are “allowed” to surface in the
Kahneman ). Economists supportive of methods
research context. An economistic frame insinuates a market
assume that value is easily and accurately assigned by the
preoccupation and, more broadly, a rationalizing discourse
respondent, who, as a rational agent-consumer, uses that
that may unintentionally exclude moral or political
dollar assignation to express his or her preference order
imperatives (in favor of bureaucratic and techno-scientific
for environmental goods or states. A higher dollar value,
ones), despite the fact that key stakeholders often defend their
it is assumed, will (a) be assigned to states (e.g., clean
claims in the most profoundly moral terms (Brosius , – ).
water) preferred over and above other states, and (b)
Lockwood similarly notes that many elicitation instruments
reflect the true amount that people are willing to pay, in
fail to “give participants any opportunity to explore different
ways of expressing their values.” In the absence of
alternatives, participants “must offer a response that is against
their preferred mode of value expression” (Lockwood , ).

The Purchase of Moral Satisfaction

Evidence for the argument that the format and language of


valuation methods limit respondents’ ability to articu-late
the moral dimensions of value properly is particularly
compelling in the context of studies. Such studies fre-
quently produce what are known as “protest zeros,” as well
as unusually high amounts. These are instances where
study respondents resist the prevailing format by entering a
the same sense that if you prefer car A over car B,
you’re likely willing to pay a fixed amount more for car Resistant Participants and Taboo
A. How much more depends on your income and on Trade-offs
your subjec-tive degree of appreciation for car A.
A second body of evidence supporting the idea that
But if, as the above work on framing effects in
respondents are dissatisfied with attempts to over-
judgment and decision making suggests, valuations are
rationalize their expressions of value by treating valua-tion
often inexact or labile—and thus they can change as judg-
as a market transaction stems from work on “protected
ment conditions are altered—something other than a con-
values” (Baron and Spranca ) and taboo trade-offs (Fiske
ventional market transaction must be taking place in the
and Tetlock ). Valuation exercises can be an
mind of the respondent. Support for this speculation was
uncomfortable experience for many participants because
derived, initially, from a set of results known alternately as
the exercises force them, whether implicitly or explicitly,
the scoping problem, the embedding effect, or the part-
to make trade-offs that may give rise to moral and ethical
whole problem, which finds that when evaluating non-
dilemmas that are fundamentally difficult to resolve. A
market goods, participants are insensitive to quantity. That
growing body of evidence suggests that many people are
is, amounts do not change significantly when the value of
deeply offended by or have a profound psycho-logical
saving one lake, versus all of the lakes in a region, is rated.
aversion to trade-offs because they view a subset of trade-
Moreover, average correlates highly with support for the
offs as violating norms they seek to protect or regard as
good in question and ratings of satis-faction derived from
sacred. For instance, a person who holds as essential the
making a contribution. It is, there-fore, probable that rather
protection of an endangered species might reject outright a
than treating the transaction as the purchase of a good,
or formula that trades dollars for that species’s survival.
respondents are in fact purchasing something akin to the
Such trade-offs are experienced as abhorrent because the
moral satisfaction achieved from contributing to a cause.
task reflects back to the partici-pant a self-portrait as
Theirs are symbolic actions that express the intensity of
morally compromised. Willingness
their feelings about a good and the moral importance
attributed to that good.
to make trades becomes tantamount to acknowledging move in a particular direction, no matter how minor,
that one’s defense of bald eagles can be bought off or will lead to or is symbolic of devastating future
that one is willing to discredit the sanctity of life by outcomes. This is akin to legal decisions that are
deciding how many human lives should be saved. established on the basis of minor infractions but which
In practice, this lack of a willingness to address are ultimately contentious because they hint at the
trade-offs and incorporate them into policy decisions undermining of such inalienable rights as free speech.
has a number of results. The argument that people are not assigning value
• Absolutism. Trade-off efforts often break down but are, rather, avoiding trade-offs or purchasing moral
because the posed options trigger respondents into believ- satisfaction because they are denied proper opportunity to
ing that they must sacrifice a deeply held principle in order express the ethical dimensions of the problem suggests
to participate in any negotiation or decision process. strongly that value scholars may have overrationalized
• Quantitative insensitivity. The hallmark of pro- their practices and that, in so doing, they have failed to
tected values is the belief that scale does not matter, that address properly the moral qualities that give shape to
an act or management choice is taboo, regardless of much of what we value. Nor is the problem unique to
scope or occurrence. Participants may believe that economic protocols. The same might be said of some sur-
destroying one species through a single act is as bad as vey instruments that operate on the premise that we can
destroying a hundred through a single act, and therefore, ask respondents direct questions and receive direct
they refuse to participate in a discussion about possible answers about values. Both survey and elicitation contexts
trade-offs (Baron and Spranca ). may be so robotic or flat (affectively speaking) that they
• Denial. Study participants often refuse to believe that strip the valuation context of meaning. Func-tionally, they
one must face an unpleasant trade-off, and thus they deny the expunge the valuation context of the very language and
trade-off’s necessity or suspend decision making until a more style that many people use to discuss val-ues—that is, the
palatable option can be found. conversational talk and sometimes pas-
• The slippery slope dilemma. Finally, trade-off
resis-tance can also be equated with the belief that any
sionate argument that are part of everyday reflections
on beliefs and values. Balancing Numbness and Sensitivity
One needs to consider the possibility that some
values cannot or should not be rationalized (at least not This is a sobering list of problems, and it is reasonable to
initially); to do so is to risk marginalizing value positions assume that no single valuation tool will likely emerge to
based on affective investment or moral conviction. Ratio- solve all of the difficulties posed. Instead, it is necessary to
nalizing processes may compel respondents to avoid recognize that there is only, at best, a certain art and sci-ence
expressions of value that come across, to put it bluntly, as
to balancing the powerful affective, aesthetic, ethi-cal, and
flaky, despite the possible importance of ethical proposi-
spiritual values about nature held by many stake-holders and
tions about the rights of nature and spiritual investments in
the demands of complex, technical, on-the-ground
natural areas. It may be that many study participants are
considerations of what, where, when, and how to proceed
not especially good at giving voice to values that are
when a balance between human and natural wel-fare is
ethically charged, deeply held, privately defended, or not
sought. The point, therefore, is to transparently seek balance
available to consciousness at a moment’s notice—or per-
between numbness and sensitivity. Numb-ness may set in
haps participants are not even given the chance to do so.
when study participants are deprived of opportunities to think
Tangible, rational values, such as those that specify nature
through the complexity of a value-driven decision or are
as biologically and economically beneficial, are readily
estranged by the style, language, process, or value-exclusivity
defined in most elicitation contexts. In contrast, less-tan-
of an approach. Sensitivity might alternately refer to
gible expressions of value, such as the proposition that
participants who are oversensi-tive to single features of a
rights should be extended to nature or that wild nature is
value problem. Perhaps they hold fast to (or are highly
enchanting or sacred to some people, are relegated to quiet
sensitive to) single-item priori-ties that they seek to protect
corners.
against all others, and thus they are unwilling to make trade-
offs or consider different management options.
In response to much of this, a new breed of value conversations through which we define ourselves and our
studies is emerging that works to (a) provide contexts that actions in relation to natural systems. With this in mind,
enhance participants’ ability to articulate more elusive or one set of studies (Satterfield ) speculated that more
impassioned expressions of value, (b) address the cogni- inclusive portraits of value could be found in value-rich
tive complexities inherent in most decisions about how narratives if only one could elicit such narratives from lay
best to “manage” nature, (c) create better links between the stakeholders in a defensible manner. These studies
value stated and the action endorsed, (d) place on equal assumed that morally resonant, image-based, and narra-
footing value dimensions that are qualitatively dis-parate— tive-style elicitations would help respondents articulate a
from the deeply moral to the fiscally practical, and (e) broader range of noncost and nonutilitarian environmen-tal
examine the conditions under which careful delib-eration values. Three elicitation tools were developed toward this
of problems is enhanced. Moreover, the entire field is end. One of these mimicked a projective test, the Thematic
moving, it seems, from more abstract studies and Apperception Test ( ). Respondents were asked to tell a
categorizations of value to the implications of such values story about what the (unidentifiable) person in a
for concrete, context-specific decisions about different photograph of an old-growth grove or a clear-cut was
planning and conservation options. An expansive mood is thinking. A second tool sought open-ended reactions, or in
afoot wherein experimentation is encouraged and conven- some cases rebuttals, to several affectively charged “pro”
tion is sometimes, though not always, subverted. What and “anti” narratives about logging activities. This task
follows is a train of research thought that reflects these exploited the connection in the respondent’s mind between
newer breeds of research—in particular, efforts with which emotional investment in a point of view and expressions of
I am involved or most familiar. value (Lutz ; Stocker and Hegeman ). A third device told
the story of a policy dilemma about a rare species of pine
Value Articulacy on the brink of extinction and

Consider first the problem of value articulacy—to wit, the


problem that some values cannot be expressed as num-bers
or declarative statements but are, instead, embedded in the
contextually, emotively, and morally rich stories and
the desire to harvest that species because it provided an
essential ingredient known to send into remission per-cent
of all cases of lymphoma and leukemia. Respondents were
asked to tell us how they would resolve the conflict and to
explain their actions on the basis of their sense of a “just,”
“fair,” or “moral” world.
Several hundred pages of written responses were
produced. Identifying the different invoked value expres-
sions was understandably difficult. Moreover, the research
sought better representation of ethical values, which
necessitated a coding scheme that spelled out such value
dimensions. Rolston’s book Conserving Natural Values
was used as a basis for developing that coding scheme
(Rolston ). Each chapter was culled for discrete types of
value. Over thirty-five categories of value were generated,
though some categories were eliminated due to overlap
and due to nonmention by respondents. In the end, twenty-
five categories of value remained pertinent. These are
defined in Table .
The rich, lengthy, and value-dense passages that
characterized responses to these three tasks lends cre-dence
to the claim that under “naturalistic” conditions (i.e.,
conditions that mimic ordinary talk and ardor), par-
ticipants have a great deal to say about values. Consider the
following passage taken from a participant’s response to a
thematic apperception task using an old-growth pho-
tograph. It is not an exceptional passage, and like many, it
is unabashedly romantic (a discursive style ill suited to
conventional valuation exercises). Nonetheless, it man-
ages to convey meaning as defined by the forest’s capacity
to invoke the ephemerality of human life, to suggest that
forests represent something larger and more enduring than
the human self. “She hiked farther, finding herself beneath
a canopy of old growth shade. She was amazed by the
immense size of the trees, which due to old age and climate
were covered in moss. Staring out at the tree, she thought
to herself, ‘It’s so old.’ She thought further about her age
in relation to the trees. It occurred to her that her life was a
very small part of the life of the earth.”
Briefly stated, expressions of value emerged
across the twenty-five different value categories. Figure
depicts the ordering of value categories according to their
frequency of mention across all elicitation tasks. The top
six of these categories (ecological sustainability, principles
of equity and the rights of nature, philosophical or spiri-
tual values, recreational values, aesthetic value, and life
support value) encompass the large majority ( . %) of all
responses. Less-common, though intriguing, value refer-
ences include:
Table Value Definitions. (Source: Rolston’s Conserving Natural Values ( ) was the basis for this coding scheme. Each chapter was
culled for discrete types of value. The definitions in column two either quote or paraphrase Rolston ( ); column three gives page
references to Rolston’s text where applicable. The author takes full responsibility for these definitions; they are summations of her
reading of Rolston and should be understood as such. Adapted from “In Search of Value Literacy: Suggestions for the Elicitation
of Environmental Values,” by T. Satterfield, , Environmental Values , p. . Copyright by The White Horse Press, Cambridge, U.K.
Adapted with permission.)

Value Category Definition Pages

Ecological sustainability Valuing development that does not compromise ecosystem integrity

Rights/equity Deliberations on the rights of nature, including: (a) basic idea that nature has rights, (b) idea –
of balance between humans and natural rights, (c) idea that rights of nature take priority over
humans, (d) idea that human rights take priority over nature

Loisirs Nature as provisioner of a physical challenge (e.g., mountaineering), as a show to be watched


(e.g., bird-watching), as a place to build skills (e.g., scouting organizations)

Philosophical/spiritual/religious Nature as a philosophical and religious resource, as inspiration for religious/philosophical/ –


spiritual thought and experience

Esthétique Beauty in life and landscape, admiring a rainbow/snow-capped mountain, etc.

Life support Earth as a biological habitat/home. Biosphere as a source of climate, water cycles, photosynthesis, etc.

Historical/evolutionary Historical value of nature and landscapes as a record of past processes (geological formation of the
earth) and as an evolving system

Future generations Recognition of the rights of future generations to a healthy environment –

Population sustainability Concern about nature as it meets human needs; concern for the equitable division of products –
of nature among Earth’s citizens

Économique Commodity value of extracted natural resources

Employment Valuing resource-based jobs —

Biodiversity Valuing the preservation of biodiversity expressed as variety of species (number of species present) –
and rarity of species

Place identification Nationally recognized places—e.g., “the prairies” –

Pharmacy Valuing resources in nature that can cure human illness or have the potential to cure human illness —

Wilderness Valuing the existence of wilderness or wild places –

Intrinsic Value inherent in nature in and of itself, not because it serves some human, biological, or
ecological need

Community Recognition of humans as members of the biotic community and/or valuing the idea of a biotic
community

Complexity Valuing the complexity and intricacy of material systems –

Scientific/intellectual/creative Valuing nature as a basis for creative or intellectual thought ,

Recovery Valuing the ability of an ecosystem to heal itself, to recover from natural or anthropogenic –
devastation

Existence Valuing the simple possibility that a natural place is out there and in good shape, though one may —
never see it

Cultural sustainability Valuing the relationship between cultural and biological sustainability –

Cultural symbolization Wildlife as cultural symbols—e.g., bald eagle for the U.S.; the maple leaf for Canada

Charisma Valuing nature for its charm and character; emphasis on charismatic megafauna

Oppositional forces Valuing the struggle between destructive and life- giving forces of nature
Figure Most- to least-commonly-invoked categories of value across all seven elicitation opportunities (total number of mentions of value categories).
*denotes categories in which at least half of total responses were generated by conflict scenario; ** denotes categories in which at least half of
total responses were generated by old growth TAT; † denotes categories in which value was invoked in at least six or seven possible elicitation
conditions. (Source: From “In Search of Value Literacy: Suggestions for the Elicitation of Environmental Values,” by T. Satterfield, ,
Environmental Values , p. . Copyright by The White Horse Press, Cambridge, U.K. Reprinted with permission.)

Ecological sustainability**†

Rights/equity*†

Recreation**†

Philosophical/spiritual**

Aesthetic†

Life support†

Historical/evolutionary†

Future generations†

Population sustainability†

Économique

Employment

Biodiversity

Place identification

Pharmacy

Wilderness

Intrinsic

Biotic community

Complexity

Scientific/intellectual/creative

Recovery

Existence

Cultural sustainability

Cultural symbolism

Charisma

Oppositional forces
General public

Timber-dependent residents

Timber-dependent households

• positive valuations of the historical and temporal valuations of natural phenomena as the basis (via reflec-
evolution of biotic life (“This tree has been around tion and study) for human intelligence and creativity.
for thousands of years.” Or “Standing and looking Other responses were notable for their interweav-
at the land laid out before me, I feel a great sense of ing of values—to wit, for the contributions of biotic
loss for our world. It takes such a long time for a health to psychological and cultural health, or for the
forest to grow.”) sheer force of imagination apparent in some responses:
• recovery value (“I appreciate the recuperative “Massive barked, moss-covered, ancient soldiers that pro-
powers of nature.”) tected the gates to the true muse of nature, loves poetry.”
• complexity value, that is, valuing a physical place Several explanations may be tentatively proposed
for the intricate processes and systems that are within for the elicitation tasks’ ability to encourage discussion of a
it (“She takes notice of the symbiotic relationships she broad variety of noncost and nonutilitarian values. A first
sees around her, the moss and the tree body . . . an plausible explanation is that allowing for ordinary, storied
example of the ideal interactions that occur between talk of values during elicitation created a comfort
organisms.”)
• intellectual and scientific value—rather positive
zone or imaginative cognitive environment, which in turn sounds of trees in the wind”) between the biophysical
encouraged expansive thinking about value. A second world and the human ego or self. Narratives often focus
plausible explanation noted above is that values are affili- on personal experience and may, therefore, be
ated with symbols. Natural phenomena, concretely imag- particularly suited to the elicitation of value states or
ined through image (photographic) stimuli, suggest experienced utility.
(“symbolize”) different meanings to different people; val-
ues are stored in symbols to the extent that such symbols While the above research outcomes were
sum up or resonate personally and socially important descrip-tively worthy, the hope was that the narrative
qualities (Geertz , ). A third possibility is that while some elicitations would provide a basis for developing better
dimensions of value focus on material worth or value-focused questionnaire items—expressions that
contributions to systemic health, other dimensions are could be used in survey contexts to improve
closely related to states or to what is sometimes called researchers’ capacity to pre-dict the relationship
experience—states of mind, bodily states, and other sen- between the values held by a respon-dent and the
sory events. This distinction is akin to the distinction in endorsement of a related action or policy choice. But
behavioral decision theory between decision utility (the breaking the narrative elicitations down into their
utility derived from assigned weights or dollar estimates value-component parts for the purpose of survey work
at the time of the decision) and experienced utility seemed to defeat the original purpose. That is, the
(defined by the quality and intensity of the hedonic narrative wholes seemed greater than the sum of their
experience associated with the outcome of the decision) parts, and so using these individual value statements
(Kahneman and Snell , – ). One might value a forest for (extracted from the elicited narratives) did not
its timber, its board-feet productivity, but one might also strengthen the relationship between preferred actions
value a forest because, as many participants noted, a and values rated as very important in a survey.
forest provides the (quasi-spiritual) experience of “awe” The response to this dilemma unfolded in two
or, as other participants noted, offers the chance for an stages. In the first stage, the belief that the narrative
intersen-sory exchange (“the experience of hearing the whole was greater than the sum of its value-component
parts was tested by comparing the impact of four four parallel sets of value statements on support for
forestry-related value narratives (none longer than one land-management practices. The value positions
page) and articulated in the narratives were exactly the same in
number, order, and principle as the value positions
articulated by the sur-vey-like statements. Only the
style of delivery differed— that is, values as narratives
versus values as statements. The results were
surprising: the impact of the forest-man-agement
narratives on the policy choices was very differ-ent
from the impact of the statements, despite the sub-
stantially identical content. Support for the policy
options between the two conditions (narrative and
statement) differed by as much as forty percentage
points. The pat-tern of impact was not always
consistent, just vastly differ-ent. Thus, it was
concluded that task participants listened to and
responded differently to (i.e., did something cogni-
tively different with) narratives as compared to
statements (Satterfield ).
Shanahan and colleagues conducted a similar
experiment (Shanahan, Pelstring, and McComas ).
They, too, developed surveys using “ordinary talk” or
nar-rative passages instead of conventional belief
statements. Specifically, they compared survey items
drawn from Riley Dunlap’s above-mentioned new
environmental paradigm ( ) to respondents’
evaluations of story outcomes (Dunlap and Van
Liere ). Shanahan and colleagues affirmed an abiding
respect for surveys, but they also found that narratives
are a “distinct communication context that may
provoke different thoughts and feelings than simple
belief statements” and that “narrative mea-sures can
tap into different constructs [as compared to] typical
attitude measurements” (Shanahan, Pelstring, and
McComas , , ).
In the second stage, it was recognized that the
above, open-ended elicitation results were limited by
their descriptive but not analytic outputs. As such, they
do not lend themselves easily to the statistical rigor and
represen-tativeness of surveys. Value literacy may refer
to partici-pant capacity to verbalize multiple dimensions
of value, but literacy should also include some
understanding of what verbal descriptions mean at the
level of specific pol-icy options and how widespread or
representative those policy judgments are. It was
therefore surmised that when surveys are necessary,
value elicitors might instead use “pathways” of questions
(thematically linked sets of ques-tions). Pathway work is
rooted in the constructed prefer-ence paradigm
(described below) and can be used to cre-ate something
akin to a step-by-step narrative7 that more closely follows the reasoning that connects values with actions
(Satterfield and Gregory ).
Constructed Preferences and to assist partici-pants in completing the following
Pathway Surveys three fundamental deci-sion steps:
• Framing the decision, in terms of recognizing
Constructed preference approaches are born of the
the key contextual elements of the decision situation. In a
prob-lems and criticisms cited above, which note that
for-est policy context, the decision frame might involve
framing effects, trade-off difficulties, cognitive
speci-
fogging, and deci-sion complexity pose a challenge
for analysts and valua-tion researchers working in
real-case contexts. The researcher is caught between
the need for informed choice and the knowledge that
relatively subtle cues can influence judgments. These
approaches have therefore redefined decision making
and valuation practices as actively constructive
processes that must avoid unrealistic cognitive
demands by offering the decision maker consci-
entious supplementary and contextual help in the
teasing out of good-quality judgment information.
This is turn helps move concerns about framing
effects from the pas-sive stance of avoiding judgment
errors to the active con-struction of an improved and
appropriately defensible decision context (Gregory,
Lichtenstein, and Slovic ; Payne, Bettman, and
Johnson ; Payne, Bettman, and Schkade ; Slovic ).
In practice, constructed preferences can be
accomplished by the use of a decision pathway survey
(Gregory et al. ; Satterfield and Gregory ). By way of
example, let’s return to the findings noted above,
where residents in disparate Ontario communities
(from the very urban to the very rural and timber
dependent) appeared to similarly endorse several key
environmental values and yet disagreed strongly about
specific forest management practices. Monitoring
public opinions and values by eliciting agreement or
disagreement with sim-ple statements may disembody
values and thus mask the situational richness and
overall narrative train of thought that takes a
respondent from point A (a stated value or objective)
to point B (a considered management action).
Expressions of environmental values may be of merit
in and of themselves, but if values research is used to
inform policy, then the products of this research must
be shown to apply to specific applications or contexts.
Pathway sur-veys work to strengthen this link,
conveying more clearly the reasoning behind
respondents’ decisions.
Following the insights of constructed
preference theories, the pathway approach attempts
fying exactly what is being proposed, whether the constellations of linked questions helped unpack
action is novel or routine, whether it threatens wildlife generally stated principles about controlling nature and
habitat, and whether it benefits some communities and the appeal of related actions, such that infor-mation
not others. about trust, risks, and rationalizations associated with
• Defining key objectives, which requires different management alternatives was revealed.
carefully noting what concerns arise in the context of
the decision.
• Making trade-offs among these objectives,
which is difficult because it requires an explicit
recognition of the conflict across desired objectives, as
well as knowledge of the facts of the situation. Thinking
about trade-offs is complicated by the nature of the
objectives in conflict. As noted above, some values hold
special meaning and thus are resistant to trade-offs. Or it
might be easy to measure the effects of some value
priorities (e.g., the number of jobs provided) but not of
others—say, the importance of a less-discrete effect, such
as loss of aesthetic or cultural value through the physical
disruption of a site.
In such pathway surveys, all participants are
asked an initial question to establish broad
distinctions or paths of opinion (e.g., “Do you prefer
‘a’ or ‘b’?”). They are then asked a set of questions
meant to tease out the reasons behind their initial
response, including an exami-nation of the objectives
behind their preference (“Is that because you want
‘x,’ ‘y,’ or ‘z’?”) and any concerns (risks) that may
explain their reasoning (“In thinking about ‘a,’ do
you worry about ___ or ____?”).
The following decision pathway
questionnaire began by presenting a scenario detailing
plans to log a remote tract of land containing sixty- to
eighty-year-old trees and thereafter to replant that land
with a mixed com-bination of tree species. All
respondents were initially asked about the desirability
of “controlling nature” by managing competing
vegetation among newly planted trees. Each response
was followed by a series of related questions about
respondents’ reasoning processes; these questions
varied according to the person’s previous responses,
thus forming a decision pathway. This approach
allows the researcher to challenge basic value
judgments about controlling nature with more
complex questions about forest management and
about why con-trolling for unwanted vegetation is
seen as undesirable or not. It determined what kind of
vegetation management is acceptable and under what
circumstances, and it asked about the risks thought to
accompany certain manage-ment practices (e.g., the
spraying of herbicides). More-over, these
Figure Decision-pathways map—selected pathways. Questions and (marked by *) were each asked twice, on two different pathways.
(Source: From Vegetation Management in Ontario’s Forests: Survey Research of Public and Professional Perspectives, by S.
Johnson, T. Satterfield, J. Flynn, R. Gregory, C. K. Mertz, P. Slovic, and R. Wagner [Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada: Ministry
of Natural Resources, ], p. . Copy-right by Queen’s Printer for Ontario. Reprinted with permission.)

* * *

Paths:

n= n= n= n= n= n= n= n= n= n= n= n= n=

Grouped paths:
n= n= n= n= n=

Thirteen potential decision pathways were available


to survey respondents. Figure illustrates this; five
paths (path numbers , , , , and ) attracted most
respon-dents, while others attracted only a few
participants, or none at all.8
Ultimately, pathway studies take standard survey
methods to a nuanced (i.e., less abstract) level by helping
respondents think through conflicts or vagueness in their assumed to demonstrate a similarly uniform endorsement
answers and stated value positions. The step is an of management directives. Simple, even radical, expres-
important one because, as found above, participants who sions of environmental values may have so permeated our
uniformly support a biocentric vision of nature cannot be collective imagination that it is easy to invoke their
theoretical importance when asked for agreement with
a survey item. But when such invocations fail to
predict related actions, it becomes essential to move
beyond the idea that the richness of environmental
values can be understood through responses to
discrete “sound-bite” sentences in a survey.

Narrative Valuation as a ries of dual modes of processing can be traced to Aristo-


Constructed Preference tle’s Nichomachean Ethics and are best expressed
contem-porarily by the work of Bruner and Epstein
The decision pathway approach offers a defensible
(Bruner ; Epstein ). Both have proposed that human
approach for addressing the problems of framing effects
cognition relies upon two modes of thought: “a
and of the weak link between values and actions, as well
paradigmatic or logico-scientific” mode and “a narrative
as the cognitive difficulties posed by complex decisions.
mode that deals instead with good and believable stories.”
Its narrative-like, step-by-step method is also promising.
More impor-tant, “efforts to reduce one mode to the other
However, the full benefit of narrative expressions is not
or to ignore one at the expense of the other inevitably fail
necessarily embodied in this approach, because the
to capture the rich diversity of thought” (Bruner , – ).
emphasis in pathway studies still rests heavily on “ratio-
Narrative valuation tools also seem compatible
nalizing” one’s thinking by systematically breaking deci-
with constructive methods because narratives, by defini-
sion problems down into their component parts and sub-
tion, are largely built around plots or event structures that
jecting those parts to examination.
can be analogously used in valuation contexts to outline
Given this, it is worth comparing the benefits of
the attributes of a problem (Rimmon-Kenan ). The
presenting a decision problem using a “just-the-facts”
attributes of a problem can be clearly stated as features of
rationalizing style typical of some constructed preference
the plot but are also memorable due to their linkages to
exercises as well as of many cost-benefit studies, to the
one another; the plot structure provides an overall cogni-
benefits of using a narrative style characterized by the
experiential language of storytelling, including the
retelling of a believable sequence of events by use of
first-person narration and image-based description.
Reference to the narrative literature points to the
hypothesis that narrative decision frames would better
serve the need to clarify background information, incul-
cate expansiveness of thought, and engage participants via
use of a meaningful and relevant language. Embedding
multiple types of value (from the ethical to the technical)
within a narrative may be optimal because narratives are
said to trigger dual modes of cognitive processing (a ratio-
nalistic mode and a narrative-experiential mode). Theo-
tive map of the problem (Kearney ). Further, when imagery and anecdote (Finucane et al. ; Kida and Smith ).
judgment problems are complex and ethically challeng- Oatley similarly finds that it is through effectively
ing, study participants have also been shown to impose engaging devices that we enter into the world of the
their own narratives to help manage decisions. For exam- narrative (Oatley ). By seeing the problem from the
ple, Pennington and Hastie discovered that jurors con- narrator’s point of view, we take the problem on as our
structed narrative-like summations of trial evidence, sum- own and endeavor to solve it from a less-distanced
mations that equipped participants to process their judg- perspective than might be typical of cost-benefit or survey
ments of guilt or innocence (Pennington and Hastie ). practices.
Ease of processing might also enhance knowledge inte- A study of the values underpinning decisions
gration, which is akin in valuation contexts to the bring- about reducing the productivity of hydroelectric dams to
ing together of multiple dimensions of value in order to enhance salmon runs was designed to test these specula-
generate a summary judgment. A coherent and interest- tions. Two decision problems were developed; one
ing story may increase comprehension of the text’s main employed a rationalist style, the other a narrative style.
ideas, allowing participants to answer complex questions Both versions contained parallel information about two
about content and apply the information to new situa-tions quantitative value dimensions (about changing salmon
(Kearney , ). This ability is fundamental to value analysts’ populations and changes in the cost of hydroelectric
concern for respondents’ capacity to work with the value power) and two moral value positions (about the meaning
attributes of a problem and link those attributes to a of salmon to the community and about the spiritual
judgment about policy. Finally, a possible reason for the importance of the dam and the river to the community).
efficacy of narratives in valuation contexts is their ability Sample texts from the two conditions were as
to facilitate task engagement by opera-tionalizing a follows: The rationalist text opened with an introduction of
language that is consistent with lay talk of values. the problem, which was quickly followed by a refer-ence to
Engagement of participants can be achieved by employing the geographical setting and case: “A large number of
emotion to add meaning to otherwise abstract information hydroelectric dams have been built in the Pacific North-
and by concretizing information through the use of
west over the past seventy years to generate electricity. . . . more water is released through the dam, salmon habitat
The Monroe River is representative of many river systems and food availability will improve, and more young
that produce power and salmon.” This text later includes the salmon can survive the passage to the ocean and return
following: “Key policy decisions involve concerns such as years later to spawn. My neighbor also thinks that an
the timing of power production (e.g., letting more water increase in water flow could increase the salmon popula-
through dams on a regular basis would decrease the amount tion by at least twofold (about , fish a year compared to
of power produced but also increase spawning habitat and the current , ) and by as much as tenfold, or about ,
food availability for young salmon). . . . returning salmon a year.”
The expectation is that increased water flow will raise The results of this test were compelling: After
the number of returning salmon on the river by at least reading the background text (narrative or rationalist),
twofold ( , salmon instead of the current , ) and respondents were asked to evaluate eight policies
possibly as high as tenfold (or approximately , based on different high/low manipulations of the four
salmon).” value dimensions. The eight polices represented a
The narrative text opened with the introduction of fractional replication, which made the value
the narrator and an evocation of place: “There is a lot of dimensions uncorre-lated across the eight policies.
talk around here lately about salmon habitat and hydro- Multiple regression analysis allowed us to isolate
electric dams. I am reminded of this as I drive along the the values that actually influenced or drove the decision
road that borders the Pacific Northwest’s Monroe River.” (versus relying on participants’ self-reports about which
The text later includes the following: “My neighbor, an values mattered). It turned out that participants in the nar-
engineer, has taught me a thing or two about how dams rative condition were highly sensitized to high/low
and their hydroelectric technology can be managed in manipulations of value attributes in the policy options.
ways that kill fewer young salmon. She says that increas- Beta weights for the narrative condition indicate that two
ing water flow around the dams would help. Right now dimensions (the cost of hydroelectric power, and salmon
only about , salmon are making it back per year, but if
population) significantly predicted policy support. A third versely, in the rationalist condition, respondents were
dimension (spirituality) also had some influence. Con- insensitive to changes in value-attribute levels. Support
ratings were random, in that there was little or no rela-
tionship between the four value dimensions and policy
support ratings, save for some nonsignificant influence
from cost (Satterfield, Slovic, and Gregory ).
In sum, in this initial test of the efficacy of narra-
tives for valuation tasks, narrative valuation frames appear
to improve respondents’ ability to read about a subject,
consider a range of values as diverse as cost and spiritual-
ity, and then link that content to a specific policy choice.
This may strike many as a controversial conclusion. The
very notion that narratives have something to contribute
to valuation efforts may strike many as anathema to
efforts that “impose” a rationalist style so as to disabuse
lay stakeholders of errors in their thinking. And yet valua-
tion research has been hampered for some time now by
public and expert dissatisfaction with tools that are exclu-
sionary and ill equipped to accommodate the many
diverse expressions of value (from the economic to the
deeply ecological). It may be that doing something as sim-
ple as valorizing value expressions in judgment contexts
by putting that information into the mouths of narrators,
by understanding the impact of different affective tones,
by being clear about the appropriate use of narration and
quantification, or by animating tasks such that decision
contexts are concrete and easily imagined by participants,
changes entirely participants’ ability to evaluate and judge
a technically and ethically complex problem.

Valuation Processes and Group


Deliberation

One final development in the field of environmental valu-


ation is the emergence of group-based deliberation. Con-
structive (and narrative) processes assume that better deci-
sions will be made as researchers are able to isolate the
conditions under which people think clearly and imagina-
tively about their values, and do so from an informed,
decision-focused context. One can think of this shift as a
move toward ever-greater deliberation and forethought at
the level of cognition and decision making. But delibera-
tion is a multifaceted term, and increasingly (for students
of environmental values), it has come to mean not just
cognitive competency but also deliberative governance or
democracy. Deliberative democracy, it is argued, should
be achieved not via the “totality of the preference of indi-
vidual members” (i.e., the aggregation of their prefer-
ences elicited through increasingly refined methods) but
through processes of civic engagement wherein people tence” (the quality of public understandings and agree-
come together to learn, deliberate, and debate the means ments under the knowledge conditions provided) (Renn,
for achieving a common good. Representative voting is Webler, and Wiedemann ). Practitioners of the
central to the first, or aggregate preference, concept of Habermasian school have not historically conversed with
democracy; it comes closest to the economists’ assump- descendants of the attitudinal-psychology and judgment
tion that democracy equals the sum of individual choice or and decision making practitioners reviewed above. But
welfare (the “I want ___ and am willing to pay for it” one can see that “fairness” follows closely the concerns
equation). In contrast, the second, “civic engagement” with language noted above in this section, especially
concept comes closest to civic republicanism (among latently coercive language, and that competence has
other traditions), wherein the citizens’ ability to refine something in common with valuation scholars’ efforts to
their judgments in dialogue with one another is central. simplify, cognitively speaking, complex decisions.
“Citizens engage in deliberation not so that each can The citizen-jury model of public participation is
determine or refine his or her own interests, but so that especially promising with regard to the identification of
together they can discover a good that is not simply a value; it is more structured or systematized than most
function of their individual” preferences (Sagoff , ). other practices (e.g., advisory boards) and thus fulfills
Venues for citizen participation in policy deci- some of the features of constructed processes (Armour ;
sions have long been popular—from focus groups to citi- Crosby ). A jury provides a venue in which citi-zens
zen advisory boards to citizen juries—but little of this might ideally observe or learn about value from lay and
work has been formally structured around the identifica- expert bodies (economists, ethicists, social scientists, and
tion and/or assignation of value. Of late, however, and in biologists, as well as community activists articulating
deference to these civic traditions, the context for value multiple normative positions). The jury might, with con-
elicitation is moving from that of the individual to that of sultation, identify the desired expert witnesses them-
the group. Some practitioners have sought a halfway point selves. They might also select the questions posed to the
such that valuation exercises are conducted in groups “value” witnesses, given the decision problem at hand.
where extensive debate and deliberation are encouraged. After several days of hearings, the jury would be charged
Participants have to face and consult one another in the to reach and defend a decision based on the values
examination of a decision problem. But conclusions still selected as most relevant to the decision context/prob-
rest on data collected from participants using a voting, or lem. As in a court of law, this deliberative process would
individual preference, model. The construction of prefer- take into account parameters established by relevant legal
ences in small group contexts has also been used; in this frameworks (e.g., the Endangered Species Act or the
process, an amalgam of one aspect of deliberative democ- National Environmental Policy Act) and regulatory stan-
racy (group dialogue) and several aspects of improved dards (e.g., clean air or water standards). In a heritage
cognition or learning via decompositional analysis is val-uation context, the witnesses might be multiple stake-
achieved (e.g., Gregory ). holders (from art conservators to local stakeholders
Others are more influenced by Habermas’s phi- invested in the fate of a particular heritage site or public
losophy of communicative ethics, which addressed con- monument); whereas the regulatory parameters could be
ceptions of competent and legitimate communication and established by professional bodies not unlike the Ameri-
the conditions under which latent manipulation occurs can Institute for the Conservation of Historic or Artistic
(Habermas ). Latent can mean subtle, uncon-scious, or Works or by professional codes for practice and ethics.
unintentional actions that encourage one way of thinking
about a problem (e.g., via the unexamined assumption Conclusion
that an economic frame is neutral or ethically inclusive)
or by the practice of token participation, where citizens
Sorting one’s way through the environmental values liter-
are encouraged to present their views only to learn that
ature is a nearly impossible task. Articles in the published
the decision had already been made. Several recent
literature that include “environmental values” as key-
volumes evaluate actual participation processes (many of
words number in the thousands. Nonetheless, a few domi-
which are decision- but not value-focused) according to
nant trends are discernible. First, economic and especially
the Habermasian principles of “fairness” (which focuses
preference-centric/ definitions of environmental val-
on ideal speech conditions) and “compe-
ues dominate the field. Though methods are not the aimed at this goal. Valuation problems are simplified or
express focus of this paper, it is virtually impossible to broken down into their component parts such that partici-
dis-cuss or understand the environmental values pants can examine the multifaceted nature of their deci-
literature without some reference to , because almost sion. When this is done, value elicitation processes
all other work is defined as against (or capable of become decision-focused exercises wherein the link
improving upon) this dominant method. between a value held, a value assigned, and the support or
Second, much of the literature can be distin- basis for a final decision or policy is clarified.
guished as either axiomatic (primarily by ethicists or ecol- Fifth, the rebellion against cost-centric
ogists) or relativistic (primarily by economists, psycholo- approaches is, in part, a rebellion against the overly ratio-
gists, sociologists, and anthropologists). Axiomatic practi- nalist language of and cost-benefit analysis generally. The
tioners do not necessarily identify themselves as such, but concern is that such discursive frames silence or ren-der
their work is ultimately oriented to “right” or “best” prac- invisible expressions of moral conviction, enchant-ment,
tices, however defined. Rolston’s work on “natural value” awe, or the kind of spiritual reverie that underpins the
parallels most closely debates in heritage conservation many reasons we value nature. Group deliberation
about the primacy of aesthetic value (versus, say, histori- processes may come to address this problem. This is true
cal or deliberate commemorative value) (Rolston ). in part because the Habermasian tradition of communica-
But neither Rolston nor any of his contemporaries has tive ethics is attentive not to good cognition per se but to
offered an explicit schema for enhancing one’s experience the democratic use of language in participatory venues.
or enhancing appreciation of the natural, economic, or Ultimately, all valuation exercises must clarify
spiritual qualities of nature. There is no equivalent in and defend whether they mean to be axiomatic or
the environmental values field of Kenneth Clark’s relativistic, whether they mean to valorize those qualities
guidelines for appreciation. This lack is due both to the that are underrepresented or silenced, whether they mean
newness of the field and to the timidity produced by the to iden-tify categories of value meaningful to either expert
predominance of relativistic approaches to or lay populations (versus elicit decisions that are value
environmental valuation. based), and whether they mean to think of valuation
This brings me to my third point: Generally efforts as the summation of individual preferences or the
speaking, relativistic approaches dominate, but the extent product of group-based deliberation.
to which practices can be fully defended as “unbiased” is
compromised at best. That is, the undeniable focus on Notes
human attitudes and preferences—what people want or
believe—is compromised by the fact that environmental
. A cautionary note: like any broad-stroke distinction,
values (particularly in the form of dollar metrics) are not
discussion of these two positions—the axiomatic and the
clearly defined in the minds of respondents and as such relativistic—is meant to facilitate the reader’s grasp of a
are vulnerable to manipulation. Information processing rich and varied literature; the border between the two
errors and/or cognitive errors produced by the use of approaches is less clear than my portrait implies.
heuristics to simplify complex or unfamiliar questions are . The distinction between different ethics is not always clearly
notably common. Valuation practitioners are thus sus- defined; Leopold’s ethic might be subsumed, for instance, by
pended between the desire to be objective and the need to a natural ethic, in that maintaining a natural state may in
(a)provide information necessary for a more informed some cases serve the maintenance of a system’s parts.
examination of value, and (b) ensure that the task is . For a review of multiple ethics and their implications
cogni-tively doable. for defending value, see especially Armstrong and
Fourth, this conundrum has inspired an ongoing Botzler and Rolston .

period of innovation. Many now acknowledge that if the . Much recent work on contingent valuation has
method of elicitation affects outcome, it is better to abandoned methods in favor of choice processes and the
costing of observable (or revealed) behavior, such as the
proceed with a framework that clearly exposes the
travel costs one invests to get to a wilderness area,
researcher’s methodological rationale and, equally, ren- national park, recre-ation facility, and so on.
ders visible the context and thinking (on the respondents’
. Merchant ( ) similarly delineated identified egocentric,
part) that lead to the value elicited. Constructed prefer- sociocentric, and biocentric value systems.
ences and narrative valuation practices are generally
. Many of these studies stem from the work of Tversky Dunlap, R., and R. Scarce. . The polls—poll trends: Environmental
and Kahneman ( ) and of Kahneman, Slovic, and problems and protection. Public Opinion Quarterly : – .
Tversky ( ).
Dunlap, R., and K. Van Liere. . The “new environmental para-
. I follow, here, Cohan and Shires’s claim of “a linear digm.” Journal of Environmental Education ( ): – .
organization of events” as a defining feature of a
Epstein, S. . Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic
narrative (Cohan and Shires , – , quoted in Franzosi ).
unconscious. American Psychologist : – .
In the subsequent section, I elaborate further on what
I mean by narrative. Finucane, M. L., et al. . The affect heuristic in judgments of risks
and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making : – .
. Because there could be as many pathways as there are
respondents, the survey designer seeks to characterize Fiske, A. P., and P. E. Tetlock. . Taboo trade-offs: Reactions
in detail only those pathways that depict major to transactions that transgress spheres of justice. Political
opinion streams held by respondents. Psychology : – .
Franzosi, R. . Narrative analysis—or why (and how) sociologists
should be interested in narrative. Annual Review of Sociology : – .
References
Geertz, C. . The Interpretation of Culture. New York: Basic Books.

Gregory, R. . Identifying environmental values. In Tools to Aid


Armour, A. . The citizens’ jury model of public participation: Envi-ronmental Decision Making, ed. V. H. Dale and M. R.
A critical evaluation. In Fairness and Competence in Citizen English, – . New York: Springer-Verlag.
Participation, ed. O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedeman, – .
Boston: Kluwer Aca-demic Publishers. ———. . Valuing environmental policy options: A case study
com-parison of multiattribute and contingent valuation survey
Armstrong, S., and J. Botzler. . Environmental Ethics: Divergence and methods. Land Economics ( ): – .
Convergence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gregory, R., et al. . Decision pathway surveys: A tool for resource
Axelrod, L. . Balancing personal needs with environmental preser- managers. Land Economics ( ):– .
vation: Identifying the values that guide decisions in ecological
dilem-mas. Journal of Social Issues ( ): – . Gregory, R., S. Lichtenstein, and P. Slovic. . Valuing
environmental resources: A constructive approach. Journal of Risk
Baron, J., and M. Spranca. . Protected values. Organizational and Uncertainty : – .
Behav-ior and Human Decision Processes : – .
Gregory, R., D. G. MacGregor, and S. Lichtenstein. . Assessing
Brosius, P. . Analysis and interventions: Anthropological engage- the quality of expressed preference measures of value. Journal of
ments with environmentalism. Current Anthropology ( ): – Economic Behavior and Organization : – .
.
Habermas, J. . Communication and the Evolution of Society. Transla-
Brown, T. C. . The concept of value in resource allocation. Land
tion and introduction by Thomas McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press.
Economics : – .
Inglehart, R. . Public support for environmental protection: Objec-
Bruner, J. . Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Cambridge, Mass.: tive problems and subjective values in forty-three societies. PS: Political
Harvard University Press.
Science and Politics : – .
Callicott, J. B. . Non-anthropocentric value theory and environ-
Kahneman, D., and J. Knetsch. . Valuing public goods: The
mental ethics. American Philosophical Quarterly : – .
purchase of moral satisfaction. Journal of Environmental
———. . On the intrinsic value of nonhuman species. In The Preservation Economics and Management : – .
of Species: The Value of Biological Diversity, ed. B. G. Norton,
Kahneman, D., P. Slovic, and A.Tversky. . Judgment under
– . Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. New York: Cambridge
———.. Environmental ethics: Overview. In The Preservation University Press.
of Species, ed. W. T. Reich, – . Princeton, N.J.: Princeton
Kahneman, D., and J. Snell. . Predicting utility. In Insights in
University Press.
Decision Making, ed. R. M. Hogarth, – . Chicago: University of
Cohan, S., and L. M. Shires. . Telling Stories: A Theoretical Analysis Chicago Press.
of Narrative Fiction. New York: Routledge.
Kearney, A. R. . Understanding global change: A cognitive perspec-
Costanza, R., et al. . The value of the world’s ecosystem services tive on communicating through stories. Climate Change : – .
and natural capital. Ecological Economics : – .
Keeney, R. L. . Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision
Crosby, N. . Citizen juries: One solution for difficult environmental Making. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
questions. In Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation, ed.
Kellert, S. R. . The Value of Life: Biological Diversity and Human
O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedeman, – . Boston: Kluwer
Society. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
Academic Publishers.
Dickson, B. . The ethicist’s conception of environmental prob-
lems. Environmental Values : – .
Kempton, W., J. Boster, and J. Hartley. . Environmental Rokeach, H. . The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press.
Values in American Culture. Cambridge, Mass.: Massachusetts
Rolston, H. I. . Environmental Ethics. Philadelphia: Temple
Institute of Technology.
Univer-sity Press.
Kida, T., and J. F. Smith. . The encoding and retrieval of
———. . Conserving Natural Values. New York: Columbia
numerical data for decision making in accounting contexts: Model
University Press.
development. Accounting, Organizations, and Society : – .
———. . Ethics and the environment. In Ethics Applied, ed. E.
Kraus, S. . Attitudes and prediction of behavior: A meta-analysis
Baker and M. Richardson, – . New York: Simon and Schuster.
of the empirical literature. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin ():–. Sagoff, M. . The Economy of the Earth. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Ladd, E. C., and K. H. Bowman. . Attitudes toward the Environment:
Twenty-five Years after Earth Day. Washington, D.C.: AEI Press. ———.. Zuckerman’s dilemma: A plea for environmental ethics.
Hastings Center Report ( ): – .
Leopold, A. . A Sand County Almanac: With Essays from Round River.
New York: Ballantine. ———. . Aggregation and deliberation in valuing public goods:
A look beyond contingent pricing. Ecological Economics : – .
Lockwood, M. . Humans valuing nature: Synthesizing insights
from philosophy, psychology, and economics. Environmental Satterfield, T. A. . New methods to elicit and identify environmen-
Values : – . tal values. Paper presented at the American Academy for the
Advance-ment of Science Annual Meeting, Los Angeles.
Lutz, C. . Unnatural Emotions. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press. ———.. In search of value literacy: Suggestions for the elicitation
of environmental values. Environmental Values : – .
Merchant, C. . Radical Ecology. New York: Routledge.
Satterfield, T. A., and R. Gregory. . Reconciling environmental
Mitchell, R. C., and R. T. Carson. . Using Surveys to Value
values and pragmatic choices. Society and Natural Resources : – .
Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington,
D.C.: Resources for the Future. Satterfield, T. A., P. Slovic, and R. Gregory. . Narrative valuation
in a policy judgment context. Ecological Economics : – .
Nash, R. F. . The Rights of Nature. Madison: University of
Wisconsin Press. Shanahan, L., L. Pelstring, and K. McComas. . Using narratives to
think about environmental attitude and behavior: An exploratory
Norton, B. G. . The Preservation of Species: The Value of Biological
study. Society and Natural Resources ( ): – .
Diversity. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Slovic, P. . The construction of preference. American
———. . Thoreau’s insect analogies: Or, why environmentalists Psychologist : – .
hate mainstream economists. Environmental Ethics , – .
Oatley, K. . A taxonomy of the emotions of literary response and Slovic, P., J. Monahan, and D. G. MacGregor. . Violence risk
a theory of identification in fictional narrative. Poetics : – . assess-ment and risk communication: The effects of using actual
Payne, J. W., J. R. Bettman, and E. J. Johnson. . Behavioral cases, pro-viding instructions, and employing probability vs.
decision research: A constructive processing perspective. Annual frequency formats. Law and Human Behavior ( ): – .
Review of Psy-chology : – . Steel, B. S., et al. . Conflicting values about federal forests:
Payne, J. W., J. R. Bettman, and D. A. Schkade. . Measuring A comparison of national and Oregon publics. Society and
constructed preferences: Towards a building code. Journal of Natural Resources ( ).
Risk and Uncertainty ( ): – .
Stern, P., et al. . Values, beliefs, and pro-environmental action:
Pennington, N., and R. Hastie. . A theory of explanation-based Attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects. Journal of
decision making. In Decision Making in Action: Models and Applied Social Psychology : – .
Methods, ed. G. Klein et al., – . Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
Stern, P., and T. Dietz. . The value basis of environmental concern.
Proctor, J. . Whose nature? The contested moral terrain of ancient Journal of Social Issues ( ): – .
forests. In Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in
Stocker, M., and E. Hegeman. . Valuing Emotions. New York:
Nature, ed. W. Cronon, – . New York: W. W. Norton and Co.
Cambridge University Press.
Renn, O., T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann. . Fairness and Competence
Stone, C. . Earth and Other Ethics. New York: Harper and Row.
in Citizen Participation. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
Suter, G. W. I. . Ecological Risk Assessment. Boca Raton, Fla.: Lewis.
Rimmon-Kenan, S. . Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics.
London: Methuen. Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman. . The framing of decisions and the
psychology of choice. Science : – .
Ritov, I., and D. Kahneman. . How people value the environment:
Attitudes versus economic values. In Environment, Ethics, and
Behavior, ed. M. Bazerman, D. Messick, and A. Tenbrunsel, – .
San Francisco: New Lexington.
Cultural Capital and Sustainability Concepts
in the Economics of Cultural Heritage
By David Throsby

The “Economics and Heritage Conservation”


Introduction
meeting organized by the Getty Conservation Institute
in December showed that questions of value do indeed
Traditionally, the work of conservationists in the field of underlie these differing standpoints (GCI ).
tangible cultural heritage1 has covered a range of tasks, In broad terms, the meeting concluded that if it is
including identification, classification, certification, inter- possible to identify both the economic and the cultural
pretation, protection, maintenance, and restoration. The values generated by, say, a particular heritage item,
decisions that they make concerning, for example, what then it may be possible to reconcile the two positions.
counts as heritage or which items should be accorded More particu-larly, the meeting discussion suggested
privileged status (e.g., as listed buildings) have been that the concepts of cultural capital and sustainability
based on their professional and technical expertise. could be used to link an economic approach to heritage
Economists have recently begun to ask questions about with the essential cultural purposes that the
the economic ramifications of such decisions. For conservation profession strives to pursue.
example, Françoise Benhamou has pointed to the resource How might such a link be forged? Later in this
implications of the unconstrained enthusiasm for listing paper, more detailed definitions and analyses will be
historic buildings in France (Benhamou ). Sir Alan given, but for these introductory purposes, the connec-
Peacock has sug-gested that conservationists’ control of tion could be spelled out intuitively, as follows. We could
the heritage pol-icy agenda may be out of step with the characterize conservationists as interpreting heritage
preferences of the community whose taxes are financing items as stores of cultural value—that is, as things that
the recommended policy measures (Peacock ). have been inherited from the past which are valuable in
At the same time, when economists themselves themselves and which yield value to those who enjoy
become involved in heritage matters, they have been them in one way or another, both now and in the future.2
accused by conservationists of adopting a narrow econo- Economists in turn can readily comprehend that artifacts,
mizing attitude to heritage decisions, turning attention artworks, buildings, sites, and so on have the characteris-
away from the essential cultural values of heritage toward tics of capital assets and that the depreciation, mainte-
a more market-driven approach. For example, Daniel nance, restoration, and so on of such assets can be ana-
Bluestone points out that programs for restoring and lyzed as economic processes.3 Given that heritage as
redeveloping historic sites are often driven more by an capital has some characteristics (such as the production of
imperative to create incomes, employment, tourist cultural value) that are different from those of other sorts
revenues, and so on than by a desire to enhance intrinsic of capital, it seems that a notion of “cultural capital” to
cultural worth; he argues that looking to financial out- describe heritage might be able to integrate its principal
comes to justify expenditure on such programs may economic and cultural characteristics.
compromise the very heritage values upon which the pro- Moreover, both conservationists and economists
grams are based (GCI , – ). Although an econo-mist’s are concerned with the long-term nature of decisions
approach to heritage is in fact more sophisticated than one relating to significant capital items, invoking the notion
simply focusing on financial revenues and costs, the of “sustainability.”4 This concept has specific connotations
criticism does have validity in highlighting the prob-lems in an environmental context that relate especially to the
raised by the economic necessity of reducing all values to preservation of natural assets for future generations; so,
material terms. for example, the harvesting of fish stock is “sustainable”
if the catch is controlled so that the total population of
fish is maintained into the future. In more general usage,
a sustainable solution to a problem is one that is not a ing remedy. The antithesis of sustainability—namely,
quick fix but is likely to provide a more permanent or last- “unsustainability”—is also widely recognized. For exam-
ple, a country’s rapid rate of economic growth in the short
Cultural Capital
term might be described as unsustainable if it is not based
on fundamental strength and is not likely therefore to be
Definitional Issues
maintained over a longer period. It is thus not diffi-cult to
see that since the very same principles of long-term The concept of capital in economics is almost as old as the
decision making, concern for future generations, and so discipline itself. In formal terms, capital can be defined as a
on are important for the disciplines of both conser-vation stock of goods that gives rise to further goods and services
and economics in their respective analyses of cul-tural over time. The principal form of capital identified in
heritage, the idea of sustainability could well pro-vide a economics is physical capital, meaning plant, machinery,
link between the economist’s and the conservation-ist’s buildings, equipment, and so on, all of which provide a flow
approach to the problem. of services yielding other commodities that may be
The task of this paper, then, is to sharpen the consumed or may themselves be capital items leading to still
analytical articulation of these two concepts—cultural further commodities. Thus, for example, an automo-bile
capital and sustainability—in their application to the eco- plant is a capital item yielding a flow of services that, when
nomics of cultural heritage, and to consider ways of mak- combined with other inputs such as labor, will pro-duce
ing them operational so that they can be applied to real- further goods, namely cars. In this case the cars are
world phenomena. The latter requirement means con- themselves capital assets to the individuals who purchase
fronting problems of empirical measurement—i.e., how them, because they, in turn, are combined with other inputs
can we assess the economic and cultural value of heritage (gasoline, labor) to yield services of transport that enter the
and of the services that heritage produces, and how can individuals’ final consumption.
those values be incorporated into an empirical analysis of In economics the concept of capital invokes the
decisions relating to cultural heritage, such that sustain- notion of investment, which is the process of adding to
ability principles are effectively served? the capital stock. At the beginning of any time period,
The layout of this paper is as follows: In the fol- individuals, firms, or the economy as a whole are assumed
lowing section, under the heading “Cultural Capital,” the to possess an endowment of capital goods, which may
concept of cultural capital is analyzed in detail, beginning depreciate or deteriorate through wear and tear and which
with definitional questions and then considering the place may be replaced or augmented by new investment during
of this concept in an economic and a cultural discourse. In the time period under consideration.
this discussion we look particularly at whether any par- Economists also identify two further forms of
allels may be drawn between our formulation of cultural capital: human and natural capital. Human capital
capital and concepts of natural capital used in ecological represents the accumulated education and experience
economics. Then in the next section, “Sustainability,” we embodied in people which enables them to be more pro-
discuss the definition and elaboration of sustainability in a ductive. Investment in this form of capital implies educa-
heritage context, drawing again, where appropriate, on tion through on-the-job training, learning by doing, and so
corresponding ideas in relation to environmental preser- on, all of which yield future rewards in the form of
vation and enhancement. We suggest that the most useful improved productivity and higher earnings for the indi-
way to articulate the sustainability concept here is as a set vidual and for society. Natural capital refers to the stock of
of principles or criteria against which particular cases natural resources, such as air, land, water, and the life-
may be judged. Finally, in the section called supporting ecosystems that govern their operation.
“Application,” we look at prospects for ongoing work.
We shall be returning to the concept of natural
The question of measurement is the most obvious one to
capital later in this paper.
be considered, with reference to methodologies for In considering the phenomenon of capital in eco-
assessing both eco-nomic and cultural value. The sorts of nomics, we must be clear about the distinction between
criteria that might be used to select case studies for stocks and flows.5 The stock of capital, as its name sug-gests,
application of these vari-ous ideas are discussed. refers to the quantity of capital in existence at a given time,
measurable as the number or value of capital items in a
given situation. This capital stock gives rise over time to a
flow of services that, as noted above, may enter
final consumption immediately or be combined with other historic town center of Dublin, for example, a precinct
inputs to yield further goods and services. Take the that has been redeveloped as a cultural and commercial
center that preserves the architectural features of the orig- value. Later in this paper, we shall be more explicit
inal buildings. The collection of buildings and the rela- about what comprises both economic and cultural
tionships among them make up the capital stock, and the value; for now it is sufficient to assume that cultural
flow of services they provide can be seen in the continu- value can be measured according to a unit of account
ing benefits enjoyed by those who visit the precinct or use that plays a role comparable to that of a monetary scale
it during their everyday lives. In any analysis of capital in in measuring eco-nomic value. It is also assumed that
economics, it is essential to identify whether the capital an item’s cultural value is separate from, though not
concept being used refers to a stock or a flow variable. unrelated to, its eco-nomic value.
It should not be difficult to accept that tangible Accepting these interpretations, then, we can
cultural heritage of the sort described above can be con- provide a formal definition of cultural capital as an asset that
sidered a form of capital. Heritage items such as a paint- embodies a store of cultural value, separable from whatever
ing by Rembrandt or a historic building can be seen as economic value it might possess; the asset gives rise to a
assets: both required investment of physical and human flow of goods and services over time which may also have
resources in their original manufacture and construction; cultural value (i.e., which are themselves cul-tural goods and
both will deteriorate over time unless resources are services). The stock of tangible cultural capital thus defined
devoted to their maintenance and upkeep; and both give comprises cultural heritage as speci-fied above. Intangible
rise to a flow of services over time that may enter the final cultural capital exists in ideas, tradi-tions, beliefs, and
consumption of individuals directly (e.g., when people customs shared by a group of people, and it also includes
view the painting in a museum or visit the historic build- intellectual capital, which exists as lan-guage, literature,
ing) or that may contribute to the production of further music, and so on. In this paper, as noted above, we restrict
goods and services (e.g., when the painting inspires the attention to tangible cultural capital.
creation of new artworks or when the historic building is
used as a commercial office space). In other words, Questions of Value
heritage items can be interpreted as capital assets with the
standard characteristics of ordinary physical capital in Bearing in mind that the value of an item of cultural capital
economics. may relate to its asset value as a stock of capital or to the
Is it sufficient simply to classify tangible heritage value of the flow of services to which it gives rise, let us turn
as physical capital, or is there something else about her- attention to the types of economic value attrib-utable to
itage items that distinguishes them from other items of heritage assets. We can distinguish between use and nonuse
physical capital? Recently, suggestions have been made values. Use value refers to the direct valuation of the asset’s
that heritage items are members of a class of capital that is services by those who consume those ser-vices—the entry
indeed distinct from other forms of capital; this class has fees paid by visitors to historic sites, for example. Nonuse
been called cultural capital.6 The distinction lies in the value refers to the value placed upon a range of nonrival and
type of value that is embodied in these assets and is nonexcludable public-good charac-teristics7 typically
yielded by the goods and services they produce. A historic possessed by cultural heritage. In brief, these nonuse values
building such as Notre Dame Cathedral or the Taj Mahal may relate to the asset’s existence value (people value the
is not just any building: certainly it has the characteristics existence of the heritage item even though they themselves
of an “ordinary” building as an item of physical capital, may not consume its ser-vices directly); its option value
but in addition, it has historical and other attributes that an (people wish to preserve the option that they or others might
“ordinary” building does not have. These attributes can be consume the asset’s services at some future time); and its
described as the building’s cultural value, and the same bequest value (people may wish to bequeath the asset to
type of cultural value can be attributed to the flow of future generations). These nonuse values are not observable
services it provides. This notion of the cultural value of in market trans-actions, since no market exists on which the
certain goods and services such as heritage can be set rights to them can be exchanged, although their magnitude
alongside the more familiar concept of their economic can nevertheless be evaluated, for example, by asking people
how much they are willing to pay to ensure that these
benefits will continue to be available to them. Because these
values arise outside of market processes, they can be
referred to as examples of nonmarket values. defined above make up what we refer to as the economic
Taken together, the use and nonuse values value of a heritage asset or of the goods and services to
which it gives rise, i.e., the value of these items as
assessed by an economic analysis. It is important to note • historical value: connection with the past
that eco-nomic value in this sense differs from financial • symbolic value: objects as repositories or
value (“the bottom line”) since the latter does not include conveyors of meaning
nonmarket effects. Nevertheless, both are expressed in the
To illustrate, the cultural value of Uluru (Ayer’s Rock) in
same terms, i.e., in monetary units.
Central Australia to both indigenous and nonindigenous
The different types of economic values identified
people can be seen to comprise all five of these character-
above can be illustrated with reference to Venice. A range
istics: it is a beautiful and spiritual place, providing a
of direct economic impacts can be attributed to this his-
sense of identity to both the traditional owners and to
toric city, including the contribution of its cultural capital
other Australians and providing strong historical links
stock to the net value of the output of goods and services
and deep symbolic value within Aboriginal culture.
produced by the city’s economy. A significant proportion
If the economic and cultural value of cultural
of these direct use values is generated by tourism, which
capital can be separated, what is the relationship, if any,
provides the tangible revenue base upon which the local
between them? Consider first the asset value of an item of
economy is sustained. In addition, Venice gives rise to all
tangible heritage such as a building of historical signifi-
three of the nonmarket benefits noted above: people all
cance. The asset may have economic value that derives
over the world care deeply about the continued existence
simply from its physical existence as a building without
of Venice, even if they have never been there; many
regard to its cultural worth. But the economic value of the
would be willing to pay something simply to preserve the
asset is likely to be augmented, perhaps significantly so,
option of visiting it at some time; and the city is surely
because of its cultural value. Thus we can see a causal
regarded as part of Italy’s and the world’s cultural patri-
connection: cultural value may be a significant determi-
mony, which must be passed on intact to future genera-
nant of economic value. So, for example, individuals may
tions. All of these use and nonuse values can be identified
reveal their willingness to pay for the embodied cultural
for Venice as a whole and, at a more specific level, for
content of this asset by offering a price higher than that
individual components of Venice, such as particular
which they would offer for the physical entity alone.
build-ings or (collections of ) artworks contained within
its boundaries. In other words, a heritage building may embody “pure”
cultural value, according to the assumed scale proposed
So much for the economic value of cultural
earlier, and also have an economic value as an asset
capi-tal. By definition, an item of cultural capital also
derived from both its physical and its cultural content.
embodies cultural value, and any valuation of the item
Other forms of tangible cultural capital may be construed
as a stock of capital would, in principle, account for
similarly, although the significance of the elements may
this value sepa-rately from its economic worth.
differ. Artworks such as paintings, for example, may
Similarly, the cultural value of the flow of services it
derive much of their economic value from their cultural
produces could, again in principle, be identified. What
content, since their purely physical worth is likely to be
are the dimensions of the cultural value that might be
negligible (a piece of canvas, some bits of wood).
embodied in or produced by an item of cultural
Likewise, the economic and cultural value of the
heritage? Whether the approach to assessing cultural
flow of services produced by the cultural asset would
value is absolutist (Etlin ) or rela-tivist (Connor ),
likely be closely related. In the case of the historic build-
certain elements might be identified as contributing to
ing, for example, its use value, measured as the entrance
the aggregate cultural value of the item, including
fees paid by visitors, would be expected to be greater the
• aesthetic value: beauty, harmony
higher the cultural value people place on the experience
• spiritual value: understanding, enlightenment,
of visiting it (other things being equal). Its nonuse values
insight
would be similarly related to the building’s perceived cul-
• social value: connection with others, a sense of
tural worth. Thus the overall economic value of the flow
identity
of services provided by the asset would be expected in
general to be closely correlated with its cultural valuation,
even though those economic and cultural values can be
separately defined.8
Nevertheless, despite the likelihood of correla-tion the correlation will be perfect. Indeed, instances can be
between economic and cultural value when assessed for readily imagined where high cultural worth is asso-ciated
some particular heritage item, there is no reason to suppose with a low economic valuation, and vice versa.9
ence between present and future value. The first measures
Asset Management the preference of an individual or of society for consump-
Bearing in mind that “value” when applied to cultural tion now rather than in the future. This is called the indi-
cap-ital embraces both economic and cultural vidual or social time preference rate; the higher the rate
connotations, we can ask how far we can go in applying of discount, the greater the preference of the individual or
conventional asset management techniques and society for consuming now rather than later, other things
investment theory to the assessment of cultural heritage. being equal. The second concept is the opportunity cost
To do so requires some further terminology and concepts. rate, defined as the best alternative risk-free rate of return
Consider first the notion of investment. A capital available to the investor at time zero. This rate reflects the
asset is created by investment; the capital cost of the asset fact that the initial capital investment or value of the asset
includes the costs of all the resources used up in its manu- at time zero could have been invested elsewhere and
facture. An asset already in existence has a value that would have yielded a rate of return; thus an opportunity
depends on a variety of factors, including its age, its cost is incurred by having these funds tied up in the asset
condi-tion, its original cost, and so on. Accountants have under consideration. There has been a long and some-
various ways of assessing the value of already existing what inconclusive debate among economists as to which
assets that need not concern us here.10 of these is the “correct” discount rate to use in evaluating
Next consider an asset’s earnings. An asset yields investment projects, how large or small it should be in
a time stream of benefits and costs into the future: the particular contexts, and, indeed, whether some entirely
benefits are represented by the value of the services the different basis for comparing present and future values
asset provides, the costs by the value of resources used up should be found. Nevertheless, whatever method of
in producing those services, including the costs of main- discounting is used, when the future time stream of net
taining the asset itself. The flow of net benefits into the benefits yielded by an asset is brought back to a single
future can be represented as a rate of return to the initial sum measured at time zero, the resulting amount is called
capital cost or to the current asset value of the capital item the net present value ( ) of the asset’s earnings.
Armed with all these concepts, economists and
by expressing the (annual) net benefits as a percentage of
accountants have developed techniques for assessing
the capital value. But it has to be remembered that a dollar
whether or not a decision to invest in a particular capital
in a year’s time is not the same thing as a dollar now. This
asset or project is warranted. There are several methods
is so for two reasons. First, people prefer present over
for evaluating capital investment decisions, including
future consumption and so would rather have a dollar now
• the payback method—that is, how long does it take
than to have to wait a year for it; in other words, peo-ple
for the asset’s earnings to repay its initial capital cost?
would need more than a dollar in one year’s time to make
it an amount equivalent to a dollar today. Second, if a • the benefit-cost ratio and NPV method—that is,
dollar now is invested at the going rate of interest, it will do aggregate net benefits, suitably discounted, exceed
have grown to more than a dollar one year from now; the capital cost?
hence again, future monetary amounts are equivalent to • the internal rate of return method—that is,
something less when expressed in terms of their present what dis-count rate just matches aggregate discounted
value. Therefore, in any investment appraisal, future net benefits with the initial capital cost?
benefits and costs have to be discounted to bring them to All of these methods fall into the general category of
equivalent terms at time zero (the present). The discount investment appraisal techniques called cost-benefit analysis,
rate is the rate at which this discounting occurs. Econo- widely used by economists in analyzing and informing
mists distinguish two different concepts of the discount investment decisions in the private and public sectors.
rate, which correspond to the two reasons for the differ- There seems no reason why these methods could
not, in principle, be applied to the appraisal of cultural
capital. Heritage items such as historic buildings have an
existing asset value, require real resources in their mainte-
nance, and yield flows of benefits into the future. Thus the
evaluation of a heritage project involving, say, restora-tion
of a site could aim to identify all the market and non-
market benefits and costs involved and then use one or investment in this project with other competing heritage
another of the techniques outlined above to compare projects or with other (nonheritage) alternative invest-
ment opportunities. It is important to repeat, however, have come from the beneficence of nature, cultural capi-
that since cultural capital is distinguished from ordinary tal has arisen from the creative activities of humankind.
physical capital by the cultural value it generates, Both impose on us a duty of care, the essence of the sus-
evaluation methods applied to heritage projects should tainability problem, which will be discussed below. Fur-
be focused on both the economic and the cultural value thermore, a similarity can be seen between the function of
of the projects under study. This requirement becomes natural ecosystems in supporting and maintaining the
an empirical and measurement issue to which we shall “natural balance” and the function of what might be
return below. referred to as “cultural ecosystems” in supporting and
maintaining the cultural life and vitality of human
Parallels with Natural Capital civiliza-tion.13 Finally, the notion of diversity, so
important in the natural world, has a perhaps even more
The definition of cultural capital has much in common
significant role to play within cultural systems. It is a
with the way in which natural capital was defined at a
characteristic of most cultural goods that they are unique,
sim-ilar stage in its development. Indeed, it is useful to
and this applies par-ticularly to tangible heritage; all
review the development of that definition in the ecological
original artworks, for example, are differentiable from all
eco-nomics literature. The origins of considering “the
others, all heritage buildings and sites are individually
envi-ronment” as capital go back, in fact, to the great
identifiable as distinct. Thus, cultural diversity is perhaps
nine-teenth-century political economists such as David
even more far-reaching than is diversity in nature. It has
Ricardo and Thomas Malthus, who were concerned with
often been noted that diversity is a fundamental
the con-tribution of agricultural land to the production of
characteristic governing the functioning of culture in
goods and services in the economy. But contemporary
society ( ); hence, much of the analysis of biodiversity
formula-tion of the concept of natural capital to describe
might be applicable to a consideration of cultural heritage.
“the free gifts of nature” dates from the late s and the
Apart from the matter of sustainability, there are
emer-gence of the subdiscipline of ecological economics
two important issues raised by the debate over natural
during the s. In a series of contributions,11 the elements of
capital which are of relevance in the heritage context. The
natural capital have been identified and are now generally
first relates to valuation of capital stocks. In natural
agreed to be the following components: ( ) renewable nat-
capital theory, the valuation question has been a matter of
ural resources such as fish and forest stocks, ( ) nonrenew-
considerable controversy. A recent attempt at quantifying
able resources such as oil and mineral deposits, ( ) the
global natural capital by Costanza and colleagues
ecosystems that support and maintain the quality of land,
(Costanza et al. ) attracted much criticism from com-
air, and water; and ( ) the maintenance of a vast genetic
mentators (El Serafy ; Toman ), who objected to alleged
library, referred to as biodiversity. Within these concepts
double counting and to the apparently infinite price being
we can distinguish between the stock of natural capital
placed on several items. Nevertheless, the exercise was
(the fish and forest populations, the mineral deposits, etc.)
fruitful if for no other reason than that it focused attention
and the flow of environmental services they provide (the
on the difficulty of, as El Serafy put it, pricing the
harvesting of fish and timber, the recycling of waste mate-
invaluable (El Serafy , ). Similarly, efforts to value the
rials, erosion control, aesthetic services of landscape,
stock of cultural capital are likely to be fraught with
etc.). In some formulations, the flow of services is referred
danger—a danger that will be compounded by the fact
to as natural income, reflecting the capital/income
that not only an economic measure but also some form of
distinction discussed above.12
cultural valuation must be sought.
The parallels between natural and cultural capital
The second issue relates to the relationship
now start to take shape. Tangible cultural capital that has
among different forms of capital and to the extent to
been inherited from the past can be seen to have some-
which one is substitutable for another.14 In the natural
thing in common with natural resources, which have also
capital debate, a great deal of attention has been devoted
been provided to us as an endowment; natural resources
to the possibilities or otherwise for substituting physical
for natural capital. Essentially the argument is that if
human-made capital can produce the same goods and
services as natural capital, then we need not be so con-
cerned about maintaining levels of natural capital in the
future (e.g., preserving stocks of exhaustible resources), taken in this debate range from zero substitutability at one
since physical capital can be substituted for it. Positions end all the way through to perfect substitutability at the
other. The likely consensus is that while some aspects of Most thinking and writing about sustainable
the services provided by natural capital may be replace- development over the last decade acknowledges its
able by manufactured capital, there are other aspects that debt, explicitly or implicitly, to the definition of the
cannot be.15 Thus, for example, while new human-made term put forward by the World Commission on
technologies may go some way toward replacing natural Environment and Development (the Brundtland
energy sources, it is difficult to see how species loss could Commission), which specified sustainable development
be made up through additions to physical capital, espe- as “development that meets the needs of the present
cially under conditions of uncertainty as to the future without compromising the ability of future generations
benefits that different species might provide. to meet their own needs” ( , ). A subsequent United
In the case of cultural capital, provision of the Nations commis-sion, the World Commission on
economic functions of cultural assets is readily imaginable Culture and Develop-ment, which reported in , carried
through substitution by physical capital; the services of these developmen-tal ideas through to the arena of
shelter, amenity, and so on provided by a historic building cultural development, where, again, the long-term
could as well be provided by another structure without needs of future generations for access to cultural
cultural content. However, since, by definition, cultural resources can be seen as important ( ). 17
capital is distinguished from physical capital by its embod- It is apparent from the accepted definition of sus-
iment and production of cultural value, there would be tainable development that a key element of this concept is
expected to be zero substitutability between cultural and equity in the treatment of different generations over time.
physical capital with respect to its cultural output.16 The term intergenerational equity, or intertemporal distribu-
tive justice, is used to refer to fairness in the distribution of
Sustainability welfare, utility, or resources between generations. Although
the principles of intergenerational equity can be applied to
relations between any series of generations at any time,
Definitional Issues
practical interest in it has focused, not surpris-ingly, on the
The concept of sustainability is most often invoked in the concern among those of us alive today for the well-being of
context of the environment, where the term sustainable is future generations. Intergenerational equity can be
generally linked with the word development. Sustainable considered in relation to cultural capital because the stock of
development marries the ideas of sustainable economic cultural capital is what we have inherited from our forebears
development, meaning development that will not slow and what we will hand on to future generations.
down or wither away but will be, in some sense, self-per- Intertemporal equity issues arise in regard to access to that
petuating, and ecological sustainability, meaning the capital; in fact, it may be suggested that equity of access to
preser-vation and enhancement of a range of cultural capital should be regarded as just as important as
environmental val-ues through the maintenance of equity in the intergenerational dis-tribution of benefits from
ecosystems in the natural world. Furthermore, the term any other sort of capital.
sustainable development embraces an interpretation of We take up a more detailed consideration of
“economic development” that supersedes former notions intergenerational equity as it relates to cultural capital
of economic growth measured only in terms of increases in the next section.
in per capita ; sustainability in this context embraces the
wider concept of “human development,” focused on the Intergenerational Equity and
individual as both the instrument and the object of Dynamic Efficiency
development and measured by a variety of indicators of
Economists have defined intergenerational equity with
quality of life and standards of living that go well beyond
reference to the maintenance of an equal level of welfare
measuring simply material progress.
or utility between generations, expressed as per capita
consumption or as endowment of resources or capital
stock (Young ). Prima facie, therefore, the intergener-
ational equity dilemma is a classic intertemporal alloca-
tion problem—that is, a choice between present and
future consumption. Casting this problem as one involv-
ing fairness or justice makes some economists uneasy, judgments on behalf of others; such hesitancy derives
because of their unwillingness to make or assume value from a view of economics (especially neoclassical
economics) as an objective, or value-free, science. So choice of a social welfare function is viewed (Rawls ;
some economists have framed the intertemporal Page , – ; Becker ). Nevertheless, despite the theoretical
resource allocation question as one of efficiency rather appeal of these sorts of paradigms, they hardly provide
than of equity,18 requiring maximization of the net operational decision rules to guide social choice when
present value of benefits that the resources generate intergenerational equity problems arise.
(Tietenberg , ). In a series of papers, Solow and The foregoing discussion has been framed in
Hartwick have shown that if the net income, or “rent,” terms of intergenerational issues in the treatment of
from natural resources can be invested in a certain way, natu-ral resources. How do those issues fall out when
efficient growth paths for an economy can be achieved applied to cultural capital? To begin with, we can note
(Solow , ; Hartwick , a, b). Pearce and Atkinson carry that both the Hartwick-Solow and Pearce-Atkinson
this proposition further by developing a sustainability models assume perfect substitutability between natural
test for an economy that requires the total capital stock and physical capi-tal. However, when it comes to
(physi-cal plus natural) to remain constant over time cultural capital, this assumption will often not hold, as
(Pearce and Atkinson ).19 we have noted already. Indeed, Solow himself
However, framing the problem of intergenera- concedes that “it makes perfectly good sense to insist
tional resource allocation in this way raises difficulties, in that certain unique and irreplaceable assets should be
particular the proper choice of discount rate to apply to preserved for their own sake; nearly everyone would
future net benefit streams.20 Even if the conceptual prob- feel that way about Yosemite or, for that matter, about
lems of whether the rate is a time preference or an oppor- the Lincoln Memorial, I imagine” (Solow , ).
tunity cost indicator are solved, the determination of a Moreover, the critical difference between
single number to encapsulate the complex processes cultural and other forms of capital lies in its generation of
involved is something of a tall order. But, more impor- cultural as well as economic value. Thus, the applica-tion
tant, it can be argued that seeing intertemporal resource of efficiency criteria to intertemporal investment
allocation solely as an efficiency question does not decisions in cultural capital raises the prospect of a dual
dispose of the equity issue entirely. For example, any evaluation of the time stream of benefits, with both
positive dis-count rate, however low, will mean that some economic and cultural benefits having to be considered
future benefits will be effectively reduced to zero, and with possibly different discount rates for each. For
inevitably giv-ing what many would regard in ethical economists, the identification of use and nonuse values
terms as undue weight to the preferences of the present and their conversion to present-value terms, once the
generation. Thus, there is an inescapable question relating discount rate issue is resolved, is a straightforward
to the fairness of alternative outcomes that cannot be dealt matter. For conservationists, in contrast, the identification
with by an analysis that looks only at efficiency. and measurement of cultural value and its aggregation
There are several ways in which the ethical basis into the equivalent of a net present value of cultural
of intergenerational judgments can be approached. A util- worth present formidable conceptual and operational
itarian view might look to the maximization of total social difficul-ties. For both economists and conservationists,
utility, where individuals’ ethical positions were reflected there may ultimately be a further choice: if economic and
in the measure of their own welfare; in such a case, admit- cultural valuations produce different rankings of projects,
ting altruism, disinterested demand, bequest values, and some means of trading off the different benefits will have
other such variables into individual utility functions to be considered if resources are sufficient to allow only a
would allow the self-interest of people alive today to sub-set of the projects to be pursued.
incorporate their interest in the well-being of later gener- Turning to equity issues in the process of resolv-
ations. Alternatively, a contractarian approach following ing intergenerational problems, we can see a closer paral-
Rawls might be proposed, in which members of future lel between natural and cultural capital. We have men-
generations are given equal weight in Rawls’s “original tioned this already in the context of fairness in access to
position”—that is, the vantage point from which the cultural resources, which can be seen in the same terms as
access to the benefits provided by natural resources. In a
wider context, just as the maintenance of natural capital is
regarded as essential to the achievement of economic and
social objectives in a resource-using world, so also might
the maintenance and accumulation of cultural capital be If the alternative to investment in the project is
seen as critical to the same objectives. Again, ensuring investment in another project, the two projects should
that future generations are not denied the cultural be evaluated as far as possible on the same basis. If the
underpin-nings of their economic, social, and cultural alter-native is not to undertake the investment project,
life as a result of our short-sighted or selfish actions then the assessment should be based on a comparison
now is a matter of fairness for which the present of the with-and without-project situations.
generation must accept a moral responsibility.
INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY

The Application of Sustainability This principle requires that the interests of future genera-
tions be acknowledged. This acknowledgment might be
Principles to Cultural Capital
pursued in several different ways. In quantitative terms,
While intergenerational equity is a key element of respect for intergenerational concerns might suggest
sustainability, the long-running debate about ecologically adoption of a lower discount rate than might otherwise be
sustainable development has indicated that other criteria accepted on time-preference or opportunity-cost grounds
need to be taken into account in making the concept in the process of reducing both economic and cultural
relevant and operational. Therefore, let us now broaden benefit streams to present-value terms. In qualita-tive
the scope of sustainability to incorporate other aspects of terms, the issue of fairness itself should be explicitly
this concept and consider their application to cultural considered in terms of the ethical or moral dimensions of
heritage. An appropriate way for us to proceed will be to taking account of the likely effect of the project on future
define a set of principles covering the significant criteria generations.
to be taken into account and to consider how the manage-
INTRAGENERATIONAL EQUITY
ment of cultural heritage might be evaluated in the
Heritage decisions have significant effects on the welfare
context of those principles. In this section, such a set of
of the present generation. Consideration should be given
criteria is proposed which, it is hoped, can form the basis
to the distributional impacts of the costs of the invest-
for judging sustainable cultural asset management and
ment project under study, in case a regressive incidence
investment decisions in subsequent real-world applica-
can be identified. Furthermore, intragenerational equity
tion. The suggested criteria may be interpreted as specify-
also refers to equity in access to the benefits of cultural
ing the requirements to which heritage decisions should
cap-ital across social classes, income groups, locational
conform if they are to lead to sustainable outcomes.
cate-gories, and so on. If serious inequities are identified,
Without loss of generality, these decisions may be charac-
the possibility of corrective or compensatory action might
terized as involving investment in projects relating to the
be raised, if indeed such action is feasible. Overall, in
creation, preservation, restoration, renovation, classifica-
regard to this criterion, a sustainable project will be one
tion, maintenance, reuse, interpretation, or whatever else,
leading to no adverse distributional consequences, in
of cultural capital. It is intended that these criteria should
either eco-nomic or cultural terms, with respect to the
apply equally within economic and cultural discourses
incidence of either its costs or its benefits.
and, indeed, that they should provide a bridge between
the two. It might also be suggested that an intra-
generational equity issue arises in the processes involved
The suggested criteria are as follows:
in actually making the investment decision. It may be
GENERATION OF TANGIBLE appropriate for stakeholders affected by the decision to
AND INTANGIBLE BENEFITS have some input into these processes. This concern raises
As we have noted, cultural capital generates a time stream the matter of empowerment of those whose interests are
of benefits that provide the rationale for the investment affected by heritage decisions; general considerations
project under consideration. A generalized cost-benefit of sustainability would suggest attention to the fairness
approach may be taken in order to estimate the overall of decision-making procedures in this context.
impact of the project. In this assessment, sustainability
MAINTENANCE OF DIVERSITY
would require the analysis of net benefits to take account
Just as biodiversity is seen as significant in the natural
of both use and nonuse values, and of both economic and
cultural value generated by the project. world, so also is cultural diversity important in maintain-
ing cultural systems. The diversity of ideas, beliefs, tradi-
tions, and values yields a flow of cultural services that is components. Indeed, diversity could be seen as one of the
quite distinct from the services provided by the individual most important attributes of cultural capital in the large,
because it has the capacity to yield new capital formation.
Application
For example, to the extent that creative works are inspired
by the existing stock of cultural resources, a greater diver-
The Task Ahead
sity of resources will lead to the creation of more varied
and more culturally valuable artistic works in the future. The concept of cultural capital as a means of representing
Thus, assessment of specific investment projects should heritage and the principles of sustainability that we have
pay attention, in terms of this principle, to the contribu- enumerated above provide a solid theoretical foundation
tion to cultural diversity that the project is likely to make. that links the economist’s and the conservationist’s
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE approaches to heritage decisions. The next step is to give
As a general proposition, the precautionary principle these theoretical ideas some practical reality. How can
states that decisions that may lead to irreversible change they be made operational in a way that continues to
should be approached with extreme caution and from a recognize the importance of both an economic and a
strongly risk-averse position, because of the imponder- cultural interpretation of heritage in the real world of
ability of the consequences of such decisions. In the natu- conservation?
ral world, this principle is invoked in regard to decisions In order to focus the analysis, let us suppose that
that might result, for example, in the extinction of species. the task ahead of us—that is, the decision to be made—
Similarly, the destruction of an item of cultural heritage is concerns a project. For example, a project might involve:
a case of irreversible loss, and the precautionary principle • the restoration of an artwork; the work might
should again be applied. The principle does not assert that be a freestanding single work, such as an old master
such decisions are never to be taken but, rather, that it is painting, it might be a collection of artworks, or it
appropriate to exercise a higher level of care in cases might be an immovable work or works integral to a
where irreversibility is involved, while bearing in mind building or site, such as the frescoes in the St. Francis
the other principles of sustainability that assist in Basilica in Assisi or rock paintings in Arnhem Land
determining the decision. • the restoration or redevelopment of a historic
building, perhaps also involving a decision as to its
RECOGNITION OF INTERDEPENDENCE possi-ble listing
Finally, an overarching principle of sustainability is the • the redevelopment (and possible reuse) of a
proposition that no part of any system exists indepen- historic or cultural site, precinct, location, urban space,
dently of other parts and that the interconnectedness and so on
between specific items of cultural capital and the benefits Other examples of projects might be imagined.
they bestow should be examined in any project appraisal. In each case, the focus of the project is an item or collec-
In other words, the role of heritage items as components tion of items of cultural capital, and the project itself can
of what might be termed the cultural infrastructure of a be conceived of as a process of investment of economic
city, a region, or a country should, according to this prin- resources and conservation expertise—that is, an invest-
ciple, be explicitly recognized and its importance be ment involving both economic and cultural inputs.
identified as a distinct element of the analysis. The investment might be interpreted as maintenance
In summary, the above set of principles provides investment (as in the case of restoration or
a checklist of criteria against which to evaluate decisions preservation) or as new investment (as in a reuse or
relating to cultural capital investment projects, so as to redevelopment project) or as both. The questions to
assess the degree to which they are sustainable. The crite- be asked can be framed as follows:
ria could be used to rank heritage projects or to compare • What are the economic and cultural returns to
them with projects in other (nonheritage) areas. In the that investment?
final section of this paper, we consider prospects and pro- • Does the project meet the sustainability criteria?
posals for empirical application of these criteria to actual • Do the economic and cultural returns justify pro-
case studies. ceeding with the project, in comparison with alternative
ways of using the same economic and cultural inputs?
To address these questions, we need to d