Abstract
The identity of a territory is expressed in terms of local knowledge in the formula “traditional rural skills,” which contain the condensed and concretely tangible local biography of a community. The law is called on to preserve such knowledge from the risk of disappearing and to promote it as an instrument of responsible cultural tourism and new employment opportunities. We need to identify the best instruments to protect this immaterial patrimony since the norms typical of the Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape that generally imply a res cannot be used. In order to promote these time-honored rural skills and intangible cultural goods in general, we need to involve all levels of government and organized actors in civil society.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Montanari (2014), p. 42.
- 2.
Luther (1999), p. 2.
- 3.
Giannini (1976), pp. 3 et seqq.
- 4.
- 5.
Dugato (2014), pp. 139–146.
- 6.
Art. 2 of the Convention to safeguard intangible cultural patrimony of 17 October 2003 came into force on 20 April 2006 and was ratified by Italy by virtue of Law 167/2007. It includes as cultural heritage “the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills that communities, groups and, in some cases individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage,” then specified in terms of oral traditions and expressions, including language performing arts; social practices, rituals and festive events; knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe; traditional craftsmanship. Law 19/2007, of ratification and execution of the Convention on the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expression signed in Paris on 20 October 2005, sets out to protect expressions cultural in danger of disappearing.
- 7.
- 8.
Severini (2014), pp. 119–128.
- 9.
Judgement 94/2003 (author’s translation). Carpentieri (2003), pp. 1017 et seqq.
- 10.
Not by chance is the Court referring to its earlier Judgement 94/2003.
- 11.
For example, the distances for planting trees set by local usage (see Arts. 892 and 893 of the Italian Civil Code) are inherited from a plantation culture that, among other things, helped shape the form of the landscape.
- 12.
UNESCO distinguishes between lists dealing with the cultural heritage of humanity, prepared by an Intergovernmental Committee, and national lists of intangible cultural heritage in urgent need of protection by the national States; see Bartolini (2013), pp. 110–111.
- 13.
The warning is made by Severini (2000), pp. 12 et seqq.
- 14.
Comporti (1997), pp. 540 et seqq.
- 15.
These are defined by some as “light” cultural goods or separate from cultural goods sensu stricto and according to law ex Art. 117, Para. 2, lett. s), of the Constitution. Vitale (2010), pp. 171 et seqq., exp. at p. 176.
- 16.
Ainis and Fiorillo (2003), p. 106.
- 17.
Baldin (2012), p. 13.
References
Ainis M, Fiorillo M (2003) L’ordinamento della cultura. Giuffrè, Milano
Baldin L (2012) Musei, volontariato e sussidiarietà orizzontale. Museo in-forma. Rivista Quadrimestrale della Provincia di Ravenna. Notiziario del sistema museale provinciale 16(44):13
Bartolini A (2013) Beni culturali. In: Enciclopedia del diritto. Annali, vol VI. Giuffrè, Milano, pp 110–111
Cantucci M (1953) La tutela giuridica delle cose di interesse artistico o storico. Cedam, Padova
Carpentieri P (2003) Tutela e valorizzazione dei beni culturali. Urbanistica e Appalti 7(9):1017 et seqq
Cassese S (1976) I beni culturali da Bottai a Spadolini. In: Cassese S (ed) L’Amministrazione dello Stato. Giuffrè, Milano, pp 160–188
Comporti M (1997) Sfruttamento abusivo dell’immagine altrui e dei segni distintivi delle persone giuridiche. AIDA 7(6):540 et seqq
Dugato M (2014) Strumenti giuridici per la valorizzazione dei beni culturali immateriali. In: Bartolini A, Brunelli D, Caforio G (eds) I beni immateriali tra regole privatistiche e pubblicistiche. Jovene, Napoli, pp 139–146
Giannini MS (1976) I beni culturali. Rivista trimestrale di diritto pubblico 26(1):3 et seqq
Luther J (1999) Principi per il diritto dei musei pubblici in Italia. Fondazione G. Agnelli, Torino
Montanari M (2014) Istruzioni per l’uso del futuro. Il patrimonio culturale e la democrazia che verrà. Minimum fax, Roma
Morbidelli G (2011) Commento all’art. 10. In: Sandulli MA (ed) Codice dei beni culturali e del paesaggio. Giuffrè, Milano, pp 125–133
Severini G (2000) La nozione di bene culturale e le tipologie di beni culturali. In: Caia G (ed) Il Testo unico sui beni culturali ambientali. Analisi sistematica e lezioni. Giuffrè, Milano, pp 12 et seqq
Severini G (2014) Immaterialità di beni culturali. In: Bartolini A, Brunelli D, Caforio G (eds) I beni immateriali tra regole privatistiche e pubblicistiche. Jovene, Napoli, pp 119–128
Vitale C (2010) La fruizione dei beni culturali tra ordinamento internazionale ed europeo. In: Casini L (ed) La globalizzazione dei beni culturali. Il Mulino, Bologna, pp 171 et seqq
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Denuzzo, A. (2015). The Constitutional Dimension of Traditional Rural Skills: Protection and Promotion. In: Monteduro, M., Buongiorno, P., Di Benedetto, S., Isoni, A. (eds) Law and Agroecology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46617-9_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46617-9_25
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-46616-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-46617-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)