Towards an Integrated Assessment of the Cultural Ecosystem Services in the Policy-Making for Urban Ecosystems: Lessons from the Spatial and Economic Planning for Landscape and Cultural Heritage in Tuscany and Apulia (IT)

ABSTRACT

Scientific literature points out the need for the heritage conservation disciplines to influence the research on the Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES) in urban ecosystems. However, there are still some unclear points in this linkage that our study investigates through a comparative analysis of the integrated planning tools for the landscape and cultural heritage produced by Tuscany and Apulia, the most advanced Italian regions in this field. The paper encourages a debate on the techniques and indicators related to the cultural capital that the policy makers and researchers should consider when implementing the CES assessment for the urban ecosystem planning.

KEYWORDS:

• Cultural ecosystem services (CES)
• landscape planning
• cultural heritage
• policy-making
• Italian regions
• Apulia
• Tuscany

Acknowledgement

The authors thank the reviewers for their useful comments and suggestions.The authors acknowledge the Fondazione Banco di Sardegna for its financial support to the research project “Cultural Districts in Sardinia Region. A toolkit for the Cultural Heritage and Landscape Governance” (Scientist in charge of the Project: Prof. AM Colavitti).Alessia Usai acknowledges the Sardinia Regional Government for supporting her PhD thesis “The creative city. Cultural policies and urban regeneration between conservation and development ” through a PhD scholarship (POR Sardegna ESF Operational Programme of the Autonomous Region of Sardinia, European Social Fund 2007-2013 - Axis IV Human Resources, Objective l.3, Line of Activity L.3.1). In the paper, methodological framework and case studies’ analysis have been defined according to her PhD thesis’ findings on analytical techniques and indicator in cultural districts’ design.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. Italian: Ministero per i Beni, le Attività Culturali e il Turismo.

2. In this regards, an exception is represented by the autonomous regions of Sicily, Trentino Alto-Adige and Valle d’Aosta because, according to the Italian Constitution, the MIBACT has no jurisdiction upon them in landscape planning.

3. LD. 42/2004 Art.135 paragraph 1.

4. Resolution of the Apulia Regional Board no. 176 of 16 February 2015, published in the BURP no. 39 of 03.23.2015.

5. See Report no. 3.2.5 ‘La Carta dei Beni Culturali’.

6. In accordance with Article 136 of the Code or Section 13 of the Code.

7. However it must be acknowledged that, once adopted the PPTR, the Apulia Region has set-up a very minute action intercepting social design and in activating forms of social constructions and management of the plan.

8. District vision has been defined according to definitions adopted by the National Research Programme 2011–2013 of MIUR while research areas have been defined according to the Tuscany Regional Development Programme 2011–2015 (PRS) which supports and finances district’s activities (www.polis-toscana.it).

9. This reform includes: a new legislation for the show business (LR 6/2004); the creation of the Regional Technology and Innovation Agency (ARTI); creation of a regional Register of show business operators; creation of technology clusters with funds POR 2000–2006 and MIUR’s calls.

10. This question reflects in full the findings of the European Program Creative Cities where the Slovenian city of Ljubljana has analysed the factors of context based on an analysis of the spatial distribution of cultural and creative enterprises (mapping) while, in Italy, the city of Genoa has proceeded without it (http://www.creativecitiesproject.eu/).

11. RLPs’ strategic component, or ‘strategy’, is constituted by quality objectives, rules and directives drawn for each landscape unit. These latter are translated into practices through projects for conservation, recovery, rehabilitation, valorisation and management of well-defined areas. In Tuscany, for example, PIT’s strategic part is implemented through a general strategic vision and few priority pilot-projects on slow fruition of regional landscapes. Also in Apulia, the strategic part of PPTR is implemented through a strategic vision from which five strategic projects and 12 Integrated Projects of Experimental Landscapes are derived.