Advertisement

Archaeological Heritage Enhancement in the City and in the Landscape

  • Marko RukavinaEmail author
  • Roberto Busonera
Chapter
Part of the The Urban Book Series book series (UBS)

Abstract

The chapter examines the possibilities of enhancement and planning of immovable archaeological heritage in situ from the perspective of urban and spatial planning. The aim of the research is to develop scientific starting points for the enhancement, preservation and sustainable use of archaeological heritage. The research is based on the deductive method whose results are confirmed by qualitative measurement obtained from field research conducted in Croatia and Italy. The survey included selected sites (case studies) in urban areas and in the landscape. The results of the research are defined spatial models of archaeological heritage planning: archaeological heritage in suburban recreational and leisure areas, archaeological heritage in protected natural areas, urban integration of archaeological heritage, archaeological heritage in tourism areas, archaeological heritage in the vicinity of important road infrastructure or traffic nodes, and the combined model. In addition to the basic planning models, the research includes specific archaeological heritage planning models (Council of Europe Cultural Routes, the European Heritage Label and World Heritage) and the cultural landscape model as a contemporary archaeological heritage planning model.

Keywords

Archaeological heritage Heritage enhancement Spatial planning Planning models Planning criteria 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research is part of the scientific project “Heritage Urbanism—Urban and Spatial Planning Models for Revival and Enhancement of Cultural Heritage”. It is financed by the Croatian Science Foundation [HRZZ-2032] and is carried out at the University of Zagreb, Faculty of Architecture.

References

  1. Alpan A (2005) Integration of urban archaeological resources to everyday life in the historic city centres Tarragona, Verona, Tarsus. Master of Science thesis, Middle East Technical University, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  2. Antona A (2005) Il complesso nuragico di Lu Brandali e i monumenti archeologici di Santa Teresa Gallura. Delfino editore, SassariGoogle Scholar
  3. Azzena G (n.d.) Piano del Parco Naturale Regionale di Porto Conte: Relazione preliminare - Assetto storico-culturale. Available via Parco di Porto Conte. http://www.parcodiportoconte.com/public/docs/gli_aspetti_storici_e_culturali_del_territorio_del_parco_di_porto_conte.pdf. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
  4. Azzena A (2011) History for places. In: Maciocco G, Sanna G, Serreli S (eds) The urban potential of external territories. Franco Angeli, Milan, pp 194–227Google Scholar
  5. Azzena G, Busonera R, Perini C (2017) The future (?) of effective protection. Archeologia e calcolatori 28(2):549–560Google Scholar
  6. Arheološki muzej Narona n.n. Izvješće o radu za 2016. godinuGoogle Scholar
  7. Bafico S (1993) Il nuraghe S.Imbenia di Alghero. In: Sardegna: civiltà di un’isola mediterranea. Bologna, p 59Google Scholar
  8. Bafico S, D’Oriano R, Lo Schiavo F (1995) Il villaggio nuragico di Sant’Imbenia ad Alghero (SS). Nota preliminare. Actes du IIIe Congrès international des Études Phéniciennes et Puniques, Tunis 11–16 Nov 1991, pp 87–98Google Scholar
  9. Bafico S, Oggiano I, Ridgway D, Garbini G (1997) Fenici e indigeni a Sant’Imbenia (Alghero). In: Bernardini P, D’Oriano R, Spanu PG (eds), Phoinikes b Shrdn/I Fenici in Sardegna: nuove acquisizioni. Oristano, pp 45–53Google Scholar
  10. Baud-Bovy M, Lawson F (1998) Tourism and recreation handbook of planning and design. Architectural Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. Bundesrepublik Deutschland (1975) Xanten. Detschen Nationalkomitee für das Europäische Denkmalschutzjahr 1975, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  12. Busonera R (2014) Leggere il territorio dell’archeologia: l’area archeologica di Neapolis (OR) tra politiche di tutela e processi di valorizzazione e fruizione, Dissertation, University of SassariGoogle Scholar
  13. Busonera R (2016) Landscape and archaeology in Sardinia. Between juridical inertia and land management. In: Lai L, Mastinu M, Saiu V, Schirru M (eds), Ricerca in vetrina. PhD in Sardinia: higher education, scientific research and social capital. Franco Angeli, Milano, pp 288–296Google Scholar
  14. Caravaggi (2002) Paesaggi di paesaggi. Meltemi, RomaGoogle Scholar
  15. COE (2016) Council of Europe cultural routes. Council of Europe/European Institute of Cultural Routes, Strasbourg/LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  16. COE (2017) Declaration by the Committee of Ministers on the 30th anniversary of the cultural routes of the Council of Europe (1987–2017)Google Scholar
  17. COE (2018) Cultural routes. https://www.coe.int/en/web/cultural-routes/by-theme. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
  18. D’Oriano R (2001) L’Emporion di Sant’Imbenia. In: Argyróphleps nesos. L’isola dalle vene d’argento, Esploratori, mercanti e coloni in Sardegna tra il XIV e il VI sec. a.C. Bondeno, pp 35–36Google Scholar
  19. Dumbović Bilušić B (2014) Prepoznavanje i razvrstavanje krajolika kao kulturnog naslijeđa. Godišnjak zaštite spomenika kulture Hrvatske 36:47–66Google Scholar
  20. EU (2011) Decision no 1194/2011/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 establishing a European Union action for the European Heritage LabelGoogle Scholar
  21. Eurostat (2016) Culture statistics. Publications Office of the European Union, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  22. Fazzio F (2004) Archaeology and urban planning. Urbanistica 124:2–5Google Scholar
  23. Fazzio F (2005) Gli spazi dell’archeologia. Temi per il progetto urbanistico. Officina, RomaGoogle Scholar
  24. Gücer E (2004) Archaeology and urban planning—a consensus between conservation and development: Aphrodisias and Geyre. Master of Arts thesis, Izmir institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  25. Hina (2015) Hrvatska na Ruti rimskih careva i dunavskoj vinskoj ruti. Available via Culturenet. http://www.culturenet.hr/default.aspx?id=65526. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
  26. Klemenčić M (2006) Temeljna geografska obilježja Žumberka. Žumberak & Latobici. Arheološki muzej u Zagrebu, Zagreb, pp 11–17Google Scholar
  27. Land Nordhein-Westfalen (1976) Landesentwicklungsplan III. DüsseldorfGoogle Scholar
  28. Lilliu G (2002) Uomo e ambiente in Sardegna nel suo percorso storico. In: Mattone A (ed) G. Lilliu, La costante resistenziale sarda. Ilisso, Nuoro, pp 424–438Google Scholar
  29. Lippeverband (2018) Unterwegs auf der Römer-Lippe-Route 2018. Available via Römer Lippe Route. http://www.roemerlipperoute.de/informieren/kostenfreie-downloads.html. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
  30. Maetzke G (1959–61) Scavi e scoperte nelle province di Sassari e Nuoro. Porto Conte. Resti di necropoli in località S. Imbenia. StSardi, XVII, pp 656–657Google Scholar
  31. Manconi (1999) Römische Villa von Sant’Imbenia. BetaGamma, SassariGoogle Scholar
  32. Matijašić R, Ujčić Ž (2005) Pula antički grad. Arheološki muzej Istre/Buvina/Difo/Laurana, ZagrebGoogle Scholar
  33. Mittelbach, HA (1972) Die Planung von Erholungs- und Freizeitanlagen für das Gebiet des Siedlungsverbandes Ruhrkohlenbezirk. In: Olschowy G (ed) Landespflege im Ruhrgebiet. Deutschen Rates für Landespflege, Bonn, pp 38–40Google Scholar
  34. Moravetti A (1992) Il complesso nuragico di Palmavera. SassariGoogle Scholar
  35. Moravetti A (1996) Il territorio dal Neolitico all’età romana. Alghero e il suo volto, SassariGoogle Scholar
  36. Parco di Porto Conte (n.d.) Il piano del Parco. http://www.parcodiportoconte.it/piano-del-parco.aspx?ver=it. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
  37. Parkovi dinarida (n.d.) Park prirode Žumberak – Samoborsko gorje. https://parksdinarides.org/me/park/park_prirode_zumberak_samoborsko_gorje/. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
  38. Park prirode Žumberak - Samoborsko gorje (n.d.) http://www.pp-zumberak-samoborsko-gorje.hr/aktivnosti/pjesacenje.html. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
  39. Regionalverband Ruhr (n.d.) Metropole Ruhr - das neue Ruhrgebiet Differenzierte Bevölkerungsstruktur. http://www.metropoleruhr.de/land-leute/daten-fakten/bevoelkerung.html. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
  40. Regione Autonoma della Sardegna (1999) Regional Law n. 4, February 26, 1999—establishment of the “Porto Conte” Regional Natural ParkGoogle Scholar
  41. Repubblica Italiana (1985) Law n. 8, August 1985—provisions for the protection of areas with particular environmental interestGoogle Scholar
  42. Repubblica Italiana (2004) D.Lgs. 42/04—code of cultural heritage and landscapeGoogle Scholar
  43. Repubblica Italiana (2015) Visitatori e introiti di Musei, Monumenti e Aree Archeologiche Statali. Available via: Ministero dei Beni e delle Attività Culturali e del Turismo - Ufficio Statistica. http://www.statistica.beniculturali.it/Visitatori_e_introiti_musei_15.htm. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
  44. Republika Hrvatska (2013a) Zakon o zaštiti prirodeGoogle Scholar
  45. Republika Hrvatska (2013b) Zakon o prostornom uređenjuGoogle Scholar
  46. Republika Hrvatska (2017) Turizam u brojkama 2016Google Scholar
  47. Republika Hrvatska Ministarstvo Kulture (2018) Registar kulturnih dobara. http://www.min-kulture.hr/default.aspx?id=6212. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
  48. Republik Österreich (2013) “European cultural routes”: a practical guide. Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs/Federal Ministry of Economy, Family and Youth, Department for Tourism and Historic Objects, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  49. Rico, JMF (2010) Formas de inserción de los yacimientos arqueólogicos en áreas fuertemente antropizadas de la Costa del sol: Una aproximación metodológica previa al aprovecamiento territorial da la ruina. Dissertation, Universidad Politécnica de MadridGoogle Scholar
  50. Rukavina M, Obad Šćitaroci M (2013) Arheološki parkovi kao pejsažni prostori grada - Andautonija u kontekstu Zagreba i okolice. In: Božičević J, Nikšić M, Mlinarić TJ, Missoni E (eds) Zelenilo grada Zagreba Zbornik radova s međunarodnoga znanstvenog skupa održanog 5. i 6. lipnja 2013. u Zagrebu. HAZU, Zagreb, pp 108–116Google Scholar
  51. Rukavina M, Obad Šćitaroci M, Petrić K (2013) Prostorno-urbanistički aspekti zaštite nepokretnog arheološkog naslijeđa - Međunarodni i nacionalni dokumenti o zaštiti. Prostor 21(46):312–325Google Scholar
  52. Rukavina M (2015) Metoda integracije arheološkog naslijeđa u urbanističkom planiranju (Archaeological heritage integration method in urban planning). Dissertation, University of ZagrebGoogle Scholar
  53. Rukavina M, Petrić K, Obad Šćitaroci M (2015) Studija zaštite i prezentacijskog potencijala arheološkog nalazišta Kuzelin i bliskih arheoloških nalazišta (Izabrani djelovi teksta i grafičkih priloga). Muzej Prigorja, ZagrebGoogle Scholar
  54. Saruhan Mosler, A (2005) Landscape architecture on archaeological sites—establishing landscape design principles for archaeological sites by means of examples from West Anatolia, Turkey. Dissertation, Technische Universität MünchenGoogle Scholar
  55. Stadtverwaltung Xanten (2015) Luftkurort Xanten Erleben. XantenGoogle Scholar
  56. Tosco C (2014) I beni culturali. Storia, tutela e valorizzazione. Il Mulino, BolognaGoogle Scholar
  57. Teatini A (1993–94) Il clomplesso edilizio di Porto Conte. Almanaco GallureseGoogle Scholar
  58. UNESCO (1972) Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage. ParisGoogle Scholar
  59. UNESCO (1997) World Heritage Committee Twenty—first session, committee report no. 833. NaplesGoogle Scholar
  60. UNESCO (2014) Periodic report—second cycle, section II Stari Grad PlainGoogle Scholar
  61. UNESCO (2017) Operational guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage ConventionGoogle Scholar
  62. UNWTO (2015) Global report on cultural routes and itinerariesGoogle Scholar
  63. Želle M (2006) Arheološki park u parku prirode. Hrvatska revija 6(3) Available via Matica hrvatska. http://www.matica.hr/hr/343/arheoloski-park-u-parku-prirode-20987/. Accessed 26 Feb 2018

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of ArchitectureUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia
  2. 2.University of SassarySassaryItaly

Personalised recommendations