Culture In, for and As Sustainable Development. Conclusions from the COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability

Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development

CONCLUSIONS FROM THE COST ACTION IS1007 INVESTIGATING CULTURAL SUSTAINABILITY

Katriina Soini - [email protected] | Joost Dessein - [email protected] EDITED BY Joost Dessein, Katriina Soini, Graham Fairclough and Lummina Horlings 2 Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development Conclusions from the COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability

Edited by Joost Dessein, Katriina Soini, Graham Fairclough and Lummina Horlings

3 COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural First published 2015 by University of Jyväskylä Sustainability Editors: Joost Dessein, Katriina Soini, Graham Fairclough and Lummina Horlings

Main authors: Katriina Soini, Elena Battaglini, Inger Birkeland, Nancy Duxbury, Graham Fairclough, Lummina Horlings and Joost Dessein

Authors of the stories: Story 1: Christiaan De Beukelaer, Julija Matejić, Lummina Horlings and Nancy Duxbury; Story 2: Theopisti Stylianou-Lambert, Marina Mihailova, Paola Spinozzi, Annalisa Cicerchia, Jenny Johannisson, Anita Kangas, Miloslav Lapka, Milena Sesic -Dragicevic, Katriina Siivonen and Astrid Skjerven; Story 3: Inger Birkeland, Katarzyna Plebanczyck, Goran Tomka, Oliver Bender, Maria Leus and Hannes Palang; Story 4: Constanza Parra, Robert Burton, Claudia Brites, Jenny Atmanagara, Elena Battaglini, Mari Kivitalo, Nina Svane-Mikkelsen and Katriina Soini; Story 5: Nathalie Blanc, Raquel Freitas, Maria Cadarso, Svetlana Hristova, Marion Lang, Roberta Chiarini, Eva Cudlinov and Mario Reimer.

Authors of text boxes are specified in each box

Graphic Design and Artworks: Minja Revonkorpi | Taidea

This publication should be cited as: Dessein, J., Soini, K., Fairclough, G. and Horlings, L. (eds) 2015. Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development. Conclusions from the COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability. University of Jyväskylä, Finland.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

ISBN: 978-951-39-6177-0 4 COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability

5 COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability

Investigating Cultural Sustainability is a Eu- Action Investigating Cultural Sustainability in ropean research network focused in a mul- its four years organised eight workshops or tidisciplinary perspective on the relationship symposiums hosted by its members across between culture and sustainable develop- Europe, and a cross-cutting meeting was or- ment. During its four year period (2011-2015) ganised in Brussels for stakeholders in or- its main objective was to highlight European der to collate and produce new knowledge research across its members’ countries in with the help of external experts, scholars, order to provide policy makers with instru- policy-makers and practitioners. Over 30 ments for integrating culture as a key ele- research missions between the research in- ment of the sustainable development. Ac- stitutes were carried out by members of the tion’s network was composed of around 100 Action, and two training schools were organ- researchers from 25 countries within the EU, ised to strengthen the topic among the young with participants as well from Israel, New researchers working in this field. A key out- Zealand and Australia. It held a wide variety come of the Action was the establishment of of disciplines and fields of research, rang- a new series of books that establish culture ing from cultural, humanistic and social sci- and sustainability as an important emerging ences, through political and natural sciences and active field of research. Published as to planning. These were organised in three ‘Routledge Studies in Culture and Sustain- thematic clusters – Concepts, Policies and able Development’, the series has been in- Assessments – which are broadly reflected augurated by three volumes of papers drawn in the structure of this document. from and representative of the work of the Action itself. The work of the network was supported by the European COST Association (COpera- The results of the work – including the pub- tion in Science and Technology) and funded lication of the present document, ‘Culture in, within the European Commission’s research for and as Sustainable Development’ - were programme Horizon 2020. COST Actions are shared and discussed in a final public confer- designed to build new knowledge by bringing ence in Helsinki on 6-8 May 2015, ‘Culture(s) together researchers to cooperate and coor- in Sustainable Futures: theories, policies, dinate nationally-funded research activities, practices’. and to build up new transnational and international research co-operation. The funding provides an opportunity for researchers to www.culturalsustainability.eu develop their competences, share experi- www.cost.eu ence and expertise with colleagues in other countries, and improve their research career through workshops, training and exchange programs. 6 Pictures by Joost Dessein 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

It should be obvious that culture matters to sus- into a framing, contextualising and mediating tainable development. Yet almost 30 years af- mode, one that can balance all three of the ter the Brundtland report ‘Our Common Future’ existing pillars and guide sustainable develop- the incorporation of culture into sustainability ment between economic, social, and ecologi- debates seems to remain a great challenge, cal pressures and needs. Third, we argue that both scientifically and politically. There have there can be an even a more fundamental role been some recent attempts to bring culture into for culture (‘culture as sustainable develop- sustainability, by trans- and inter-national or- ment’) which sees it as the essential foundation ganisations and by cross/trans-disciplinary sci- and structure for achieving the aims of sustain- entific endeavours, but they continue to swim able development. In this role it integrates, co- against the prevailing current of conventional ordinates and guides all aspects of sustainable sustainability discourses rooted in environmen- action. In all three roles, recognising culture as tal and economic perspectives. at the root of all human decisions and actions, and as an overarching concern (even a new Culture, sustainability and sustainable develop- paradigm) in sustainable development thinking, ment are complicated concepts that are not al- enables culture and sustainability to become ways easy for scientists, policy makers or prac- mutually intertwined so that the distinctions be- titioners to grasp or apply. In the course of our tween the economic, social and environmental four-year (2011-15) COST Action, IS1007 In- dimensions of sustainability begin to fade. vestigating Cultural Sustainability, we explored all three concepts and learnt to embrace their Our second chapter, ‘Culture at the crossroads multiple meanings and connotations. In this fi- of policy’, identifies a number of different top- nal report from the Action we present their di- ics, fields or themes that are commonly – or versity and plurality as a meaningful resource should be – addressed by policies, and the for building a comprehensive analytical frame- streams or flows of thought and action that work for the structured study and application of they follow; we liken them to ‘scripts’ that guide ‘culture and sustainable development’. Our con- the performance of sustainability. These scripts clusions are presented in three chapters, after reveal the broad contours of a new type of pol- a Prologue to set the scene and followed by a icy landscape. We explore eight overlapping reflective and forward looking Epilogue. themes: the negotiation of memories, identi- Our first chapter offers our view of key con- ties and heritage; the relevance of place, land- cepts, and presents the three important ways scape and territory; the complexities of social we identify for culture to play important roles life, commons and participation; the centrality in sustainable development. First, culture can of creative practices and activities; culturally have a supportive and self-promoting role sensitive policies for economic development; (which we characterise as ‘culture in sustain- nature conservation; the importance of increas- able development’). This already-established ing awareness and knowledge of sustainability; approach expands conventional sustainable and finally, policies aiming at transformations. development discourse by adding culture as a Our analysis reveals that culture is not just the self-standing 4th pillar alongside separate eco- subject or object of cultural policy; it should logical, social, and economic considerations also inform and be integrated with all other and imperatives. We see a second role (‘culture policies, for the economic, the social and the for sustainable development’), however, which environmental, and for the global and the local. offers culture as a more influential force that All the best and most successful policies are 8 can operate beyond itself. This moves culture (although not necessarily consciously) culturally informed. Policies dealing with education, tour- low cultural statistics to be consistently con- ism, research, cultural diplomacy, social poli- structed and made useful, although we also cies, and city and regional planning, as well as recognise the historical and local specificity other areas, can integrate culture in the core of of indicators – they must be fit-for-context. We their policy-making to various degrees. offer suggestions for the way forward, including the importance of joint learning processes All these ‘scripts’ are interlinked and over- and participatory development of indicators, the lap, of course, but they can be viewed in the need for the collection of good examples and framework of the three roles that we have just practices (notably of qualitative indicators, with summarised. In the first role, policy strengthens illustrations of how they can be used and com- the key intrinsic values of culture, and tends bined with quantitative indicators) and above all to focus on creativity and diversity of cultural the acknowledgment in indicator construction expressions and the contributions of artistic/ of the three different roles of culture in, for and cultural activity and expressions to human-cen- as sustainable development. tred sustainable development trajectories. In the second case, when culture is understood In our Epilogue, we reflect on the intellectual as having a mediating role, the policy extends and cultural journey and exchanges that the to influence, share and shape the aims of other Action has afforded its many participants. We public policies, like livelihood, industries, social have explored new territory between disciplines, and environmental well-being. In the third case, between cultures and between the convention- policy will promote broader transformations to- al three pillars of sustainable development. wards more holistically sustainable societies, A major lesson is how little is actually known for example through increased awareness and about the current and the potential inter-oper- behaviour changes that can provide catalysts ability of culture and the sustainability ‘tripod’, and enablers for grassroots collective actions, and we therefore conclude by looking forward. and through the development of the capacity We suggest lines for future research in four cat- and capability of individuals and communities egories - concepts, methodologies and prac- to adapt and carry on more sustainable ways tices, evidence bases, and selected topics that of life. seem us to be currently key. With new European and global funding streams becoming available Assessing the impact and effects of both pol- to address sustainability issues (for example icies and politics is a crucial aspect of sus- within the ERA and through Horizon 2020), and tainability. There are several methodologies for supported by our extensive webs of cross- and carrying out assessments and communicating inter-disciplinary collaborations, we can see the their results, but indicators are perhaps the necessity and the advantages for everyone of most commonly used, and we turn to these in culture gaining a more central and transforma- our third chapter. From the complexity of every- tive role in sustainable development discourse, day life, indicators select a few representative and in action. We envisage that the insights of threads, headlines or leverage points that can this COST Action will help to ensure a strong be distilled into more easily comprehensible ‘cultural stream’ in future research and policy. evidence for the impacts of events and trajectories, the effects of different courses of action, and the quality and direction of change. Existing culturally-sensitive indicator sets are limited, and in this publication we therefore focus on specific challenges. These include the availability, standardisation, aggregation and ranking of data, all of which are required to al- 9 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 CONTENTS 10 LIST OF TEXT BOXES 12

PROLOGUE 14

Story 1 – Cultural Industries for Sustainable Development? 18

THREE ROLES FOR CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 20

Thriving on complexity 20 Culture 20 Development 21 Sustainability or sustainable development? 22 Social and cultural sustainability: same or different? 24 Policy 25

Story 2 - The Stories Museums Tell 26

Multiple contributions of culture to sustainable development 29 Supporting Sustainability – A self-standing role for culture in sustainable development 29 Connecting sustainability – The mediating role of culture for sustainable development 30 Creating sustainability – The transformative role of culture as sustainable development 31 Three roles, but many applications 33

Story 3 - Surviving Post-Industrialisation 34

CULTURE AT THE CROSSROADS OF POLICY 38

Defining policy 38 Policy ‘scripts’ for culture and sustainable development 39 Policies negotiating memories, identities and heritage 39 Policies on place, landscape and territory 40 Policies dealing with social life, commons and participation 41 Policies encouraging creative practices and activities 42 Culturally sensitive policies for economic development 42 10 Policies of nature conservation 43 Policies to increase sustainability awareness 44 Transformations 44 Conclusions and reflections on policy 45

Book series and book introductions 48

ASSESSING CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 50

Informing and shaping policy 50 Existing indicators 51 The challenges of assessing culture in sustainability 52 The way forward 53

Story 4 - Reconstituting Culture 56

EPILOGUE 58

Dwelling in No Man’s Land 58 Returning with new ideas: future research lines 61 The end of an Action, the beginning of action 64

Story 5 - Greening the City, Cultivating Community 66

ACTION PEOPLE 68 REFERENCES 70

11 List of Text Boxes

Culture as a topic in international policy framework: selected landmarks 15

On bio-cultural diversity 16

The mantra of ’Our Common future’ and its cultural vision 23

Seven storylines of cultural sustainability 28

Interaction between cultural activities and sustainable regional landscape development 32

Bridges as Places of Divisions in local communities 40

Mapping Sense of Place 41 Sustainability and legitimacy of the Tanyaszinhaz theatre community in Serbia 43 PROLOGUE Developing indicators in a participatory way 52

Cultural mapping as a way to involve communities to make assessments 53

On inter- and transdisciplinarity in culture and sustainability 61

International pilot online course on ‘Cultural Sustainability’ launched 64

12 PROLOGUE

13 PROLOGUE

Culture matters in sustainable development. the conventional discourse and action of the Many if not all of the planet’s environmental three pillars: the economic, the environmen- problems and certainly all of its social and tal and the social. To pursue sustainability economic problems have cultural activity and through the framework of culture therefore ur- decisions – people and human actions – at gently requires new approaches, which cross their roots. Solutions are therefore likely to the sectoral and disciplinary boundaries. be also culturally-based, and the existing models of sustainable development forged Few can have fully foreseen the success of from economic or environmental concern the idea of ‘Sustainable Development’ when are unlikely to be successful without cultural it was introduced to a broad global audience considerations. If culture is not made explic- in 1987 by the Brundtland publication ‘Our it, discussed and argued over explicitly within Common Future’. Almost 30 years later, the the sustainability debates, it does not have idea is still increasingly being presented as power in the decision making. a pathway to all that is good and desirable in society, widely adopted and frequently Yet incorporating culture in the sustainability called-in-aid. This was clearly illustrated at debates seems to be a great scientific and the United Nations Conference on Sustain- political challenge. The scientific challenge is able Development (Rio+20), held in Rio de that both culture and sustainability are com- Janeiro in June 2012. One of the confer- plex, contested, multidisciplinary and norma- ence’s main outcomes was the agreement tive concepts. The policy challenge is that by member states to set up sustainable de- a broad understanding of culture requires velopment goals, which could be useful tools cross-sectoral or even transdisciplinary pol- in achieving sustainable development and to icies, and innovative, at times even radical be linked with United Nation’s Post-Millenni- modes of implementation that involve re- um Development goals. The concept is also examination of broad spectrum issues such frequently used by local governments, prac- as governance, democratic participation and titioners, educational sector, and it has also social equity. Crossing into both sets of chal- been taken as a tool for marketing. The pop- lenges is the manner in which bringing cul- ularity of the concept among scholars is il- 14 ture into the sustainability debates questions lustrated in the number of journals or articles that deal entitled ‘sustainable development’ publications introduce a number of ways cul- or ‘sustainability’. More than 108.000 peer ture ‘drives’ and ‘enables’ development, the reviewed papers that deal with ‘sustainabil- conditions of sustainable development in re- ity’ or ‘sustainable development’ have been spect to various aspects of culture, have not published. been thoroughly analysed.

Yet at the same time the concepts contin- Cultural aspects have also been embedded ue to be critiqued by scholars and policy- in a number of other recent closely-aligned makers for their anthropocentrism, vague- research lines, theories and frameworks, ness and ambiguity. The mainstream way is which in one way or another aim at a to discuss and implement sus- CULTURE AS A TOPIC IN INTERNATIONAL POLICY tainable development in terms FRAMEWORK: SELECTED LANDMARKS of ecological, social and eco- Year Agency Event or Publication nomic ‘pillars’ as confirmed 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage - at the Johannesburg Summit ratified by +150 countries of 2002, but often labelled in 2004 United Cities and Local Adoption of ‘Agenda 21 for Culture’ 2005 UNESCOGovernments (UCLG) Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of more or less symbolic ways, Cultural Expressions - ratified by +130 countries such as people-profit-planet. 2007 UN UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007 Fribourg Group Fribourg Declaration on Cultural Rights However, attempts to keep 2009 UN Human Rights Council Established a post of Independent Expert in the field of cultural rights for a 3-year period (extended) these three dimensions in bal- 2010 UN General Assembly Resolution re: connection between culture and development - ance and to make sustainabili- adopted United Cities and Local Policy statement on ’Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable 2010 ty a ‘win-win-win’ solution for all Governments (UCLG) Development’ - adopted three, seems to remain unsat- 2011 UN General Assembly Resolution 2 re: connection between culture and development - adopted isfactory or in many people’s 2011 UNESCO Adoption of new UNESCO Recommendation on the Historic Urban eyes a grail to be sought but Landscape UN Conference on Sustainable Outcome Document of the UN Conference on Sustainable 2012 never found. Development, endorsed by UN Development General Assembly/High-level UNESCO International Congress Final declaration – ‘Placing Culture at the Heart of Sustainable 2013 ‘Culture: Key to Sustainable Development Policies’, the Hangzhou Declaration We argue that the three pil- Development’ UN Conference on Trade and lar model is proving to be Creative Economy Report 3: Special Edition – Widening Local 2013 Development (UNCTAD), UN Development Pathways fundamentally flawed by the Development Programme (UNDP) and UNESCO absence of culture. Sever- International Federations of Arts Councils and Culture Agencies Culture as a Goal in the Post-2015 Development Agenda – al transnational and inter- 2013 (IFACCA), Coalitions for Cultural published. The ’#culture2015goal’ campaign launched national organisations like Diversity (IFCCD), Agenda 21 for Culture and Culture Action Europe UNESCO, United Cities and Lo- 2013 UN General Assembly Resolution on Culture and Sustainable Development A/RES/68/223 - adopted cal Government and the Coun- Thematic Debate on ‘Culture and Sustainable Development in the 2014 UN General Assembly Post-2015 Development Agenda’ (NYC); Panel Discussion ‘The cil of Europe have recently ad- power of culture for poverty eradication and sustainable development’ vocated culture as an explicit 3rd UNESCO World Forum on Forum concluded with the adoption of the ‘Florence Declaration’ - aspect of sustainability, but it 2014 Culture and the Cultural Industries: recommendations on maximising the role of culture to achieve ‘Culture, Creativity and Sustainable sustainable development and effective ways of integrating culture in has also been introduced im- Development’ the Post-2015 Development Agenda. United Cities and Local ‘Culture 21 Actions: Commitments on the role of culture in 2015 plicitly in many other policy Governments (UCLG) sustainable cities’ (approved in Bilbao, first UCLG Culture Summit) publications from global to lo- (Nancy Duxbury, Jordi Pascual, Jyoti Hosagraha) cal. However, although these

15 holistic, cross-disciplinary and transdisci- This publication presents conclusions emerg- THREE ROLES plinary integration of human systems with ing from a four-year (2011-15) COST Action ecological ones. Examples include land- IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability, scape research, bio-cultural diversity, the attempting to strengthen and more solidly FOR CULTURE actor-network theory or capability frame- ground sustainability by integrating culture works. These concepts and approaches – and cultural perspectives into it. The Action all with significant cultural dimensions in their aimed to strengthen sustainable develop- own right - can perhaps help to integrate cul- ment’s conceptual framework, suggest ways IN SUSTAINABLE ture explicitly into sustainable development of operationalising the new perspectives frameworks. But this has not been done and insights, and to locate culture in sustain- comprehensively, and the essence of culture ability policies and assessments. This publi- in sustainable development research and cation offers ways forward to harness culture DEVELOPMENT policies therefore tends to remain ignored. to the sustainable development goals. The first chapter after this Prologue (‘Three roles ON BIO-CULTURAL DIVERSITY for culture in sustainable development’) touch-

The intricate relations between biodiversity and culture can be cap- es on concepts, frameworks and the various tured by the concept of ‘bio-cultural diversity’, defined as the diver- roles played by culture in sustainable devel- sity of life in all its manifestations (biological and cultural forms) opment. The second chapter ‘Culture at the which are all inter-related within a complex socio-ecological adap- crossroads of policy’ turns to the type of poli- tive system [33]. Bio-cultural diversity emphasises the adaptive connections between nature and people and thus the significance cy (or politics) that might be able to put those of hybrid landscapes. Moreover it is a way to analyse these land- concepts to practical use. ‘Assessing culture scapes as an integrated value-practice system. in sustainability’ considers the issues of assessments and indicators: how to know what The biological and cultural value of the environment grows from practice, action and behaviours. This definition of ‘environment’ actions to take, how to measure and if need- thus exceeds the spatial understanding that the term is most often ed modify their effects. Thereafter, an Epi- given, for example when it comes to assessing biodiversity, garden- logue formulates some future research lines ing or quality of habitat. It establishes instead a complex approach in this field and sums up the lessons learned. which takes into account both scientific knowledge as a medium towards an understanding of social ties or cultural practices associ- Finally, people who actively contributed to the ated with a given space [34]. Biodiversity was first seen in cities as scientific work of the network are listed. the manifestation of the diversity of species mainly in a genetic or ecosystemic sense. Bio-cultural diversity however is a way to read The publication is illuminated by five real life the diversity of urban landscapes, as well as narratives and atmo- spheres, in relationships to socio-cultural groups and the quality of ‘stories’ that are presented as a running thread places. Bio-culturally significant places are mainly green places such in parallel to the main text; they are support- as community gardens and multifunctional parks that accommodate ed by many smaller examples, symbolised in needs of different socio-cultural groups. the text as . These stories and examples illustrate the possibilities that exist, and are (Nathalie Blanc) already being exploited, within the rich, diverse and challenging practices offered by culture. They give some idea of the kind of knowledge that is and will be needed to be able to understand the interrelation of culture and sustainable development, and to be able to apply these insights in science, policy and other sustainable development-practices. They will 16 provide inspiration for moving forward in the proposed new framework. THREE ROLES FOR CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

17 STORY 1

CULTURAL INDUSTRIES FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT Culture as expression and mediation in Burkina Faso

Policy documents that highlight the impor- events, festivals and heritage sites that attract tance of cultural industries are becoming in- tourists) is one of four sectors (alongside agri- creasingly common throughout the world, culture, mining and small / medium businesses) even though culture is almost invisible in the identified as key to driving the economy through Millennium Development Goals. This is also entrepreneurship, tourism, the production of cul- the case in countries that are in the ‘low hu- tural goods and services and cultural and artistic man development’ category, such as Burkina creation. Second, BBEAC (2012) – Study on the Faso, positioned by the UNDP at 183 out of Impact of Culture on Social and Economic Devel- 187 countries. Its population of approaching opment of Burkina Faso (published by the Bu- 20M contains more than 60 ethnic groups, and reau Burkinabe` d’Etudes et d’Appui-Conseils for studying policy here offers a compelling view the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, funded by of the creative economy debate in a cultural- UNESCO’s International Fund for Cultural Diver- ly diverse context, and highlights local-global sity) - deals more widely with culture and (sus- policy interaction. tainable) development, and focuses not only on the cultural sector but also on culture perceived Two key policy documents from Burkina Faso il- more broadly as a way of life, a key aspect of the lustrate how culture is linked to sustainable de- social fabric, and as a traditional mechanism of velopment. First, SCADD (2010) - Stratégie de mediation. Croissance Accélérée et Développement Durable (Strategy for Accelerated Growth and Sustainable The two documents use different views of cul- Development) - has a general objective of achiev- ture, however, which sometimes conflict with ing accelerated and sustained economic growth each other. ‘Cultural industries’ are prominent and improved quality of life. Culture (specifically in both (although in the BBEAC study culture is crafts, cultural industries and tourism, in practice also taken to mean the broader social fabric), and

18 Boromo Giants at the opening ceremony of FESPACO 2013 | Picture by Christiaan De Beukelaer provide greater economic justification for cultural industries. They additionally valorise culture (both quantitatively and qualitatively) for its instrumental capacity towards social and economic development: as a way of life ‘culture’ is recognised to have transformative power, whether towards or against change.

Policy formulation in Burkina Faso is inspired by debates at a local level but is also coloured by ideas from global fora such as the UN and UNESCO; like anywhere now, the country is part of wider networks, influenced by multi-scale discourses and debates. Critical questions remain, not least to ask how culture can play a role in balancing economic growth and sustainability, especially, crucially, in so-called ‘developing’ countries. How to bridge the gap between cultural patterns, practices and traditions ‘on the ground’, and more abstract concepts and policies which often come from elsewhere? How to de- culture features explicitly. Yet the term remains velop sustainable enabling policies to support ill-defined, and actions and aims can be conflated cultural products and practices? if, as in SCADD, ‘culture’ and ‘cultural industries’ are used interchangeably. The actions are also A key lesson is that, in whatever form, whether disjointed because in BBEAC the relation between expressed in routines, unspoken rules, humour, artistic creation in the cultural industries is not relations or practices, connected to culture as social fabric. So far, the culture can indeed act as most common use of culture as a separate fourth an integrating factor in pillar of sustainable development mainly treats it society. It makes a cen- as a product (the cultural sector, arts, events and tral contribution to the cultural industries), whereas using culture as a social fabric, contributing mediating force, to regulate and shape develop- both to unity and to an ment more broadly, recognises culture as a sig- appreciation of cultur- nificant contributor to social cohesion. Examples al diversity, which is a include the process through which agricultural valuable insight for any activity is driven by cultural context and inher- country currently facing ited practices, or the function of ‘kinship jokes’ in ethnic difference or con- inter-ethnic communication to mediate conflict flict. At a time when the and tension. Taking culture beyond mediation to culture-light Millennium become a generally-transforming element, how- Development Goals are ever, would embed it more deeply in grassroots about to expire (in 2015), aspirations and activities, such as community there is a growing con- farming and anti-desertification initiatives, which sensus that culture needs are not central to the current policy documents. to be more prominent in These policy documents create higher visibility the next set of Goals to for culture, potentially encourage greater public emerge from the global support and funding for cultural activities and development agenda. 19 THREE ROLES FOR CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

difficult ideas that underpin culturally- Thriving on focused and culturally-informed sustain- complexity ability. This involves reconsidering apparent- ly familiar ideas such as culture, and even Few things in human life are more ‘development’. It is also necessary to explore powerful than ideas and concepts, what lies behind the two terms sustainability and sustainable development: are they inter- and culture is one of the most changeable, complementary or in conflict? influential in all walks of life. And where do social and cultural sustain- (Graham Fairclough) ability intersect, interact or overlap?

Both culture and sustainable development are broad concepts, covering different Culture spheres of life from past to future. Trying to define the roles of culture in sustainable As Raymond Williams now-famously said, development opens up questions about what ‘culture’ is one of the two or three most com- we mean by culture, how it is related to var- plicated words in English usage [1]. There ious types of development and how it lives have been, and will continue to be, many at- with diverse interpretations of sustainabili- tempts to list all the things the word embrac- 20 ty. In this chapter we examine some of the es. Whilst used in different ways in several distinct intellectual disciplines and distinct style-based concept referring to all domains systems of thought, culture is additionally also of human life’, which is akin to Williams’ ‘way an everyday concept, it has ‘public’ meanings of life’, an anthropological-archaeological and understandings, and is used in many dif- interpretation, and on the other side, a ‘nar- ferent ways and contexts. Its meaning has row, art-based culture referring to both the changed through time as well, from early general process of intellectual and spiritual ideas of culture as action in real life-worlds or aesthetic development and its results’ [2]. and its interaction with nature, which are es- Many policy conventions and declarations sential aspects for anthropological use of define culture in a broad way, but in politics the concept even today, to culture as the cul- and in public discourse culture is often treat- tivation of the human mind and behaviour. ed in a narrower sense. In addition to these two formulations, we can bring in the symbol- We define culture as a loosely ic dimension of culture: culture as semiotic, integrated totality of practices, drawing on symbols as vehicles, arguably as institutions and mechanisms that the broadest view of all, including as it does deal with the production, distribu- both intentional and unconscious behaviour. tion, consumption and preservation In this publication we settle on a usage of the term culture that encompasses all these of collectively shared meanings, as perspectives, whilst recognising the possibil- well as the explicit and implicit rules ity, indeed necessity, of both subdivision and that govern the relevant processes. overlap. The cultural system is only relatively organised and embraces the tensions and internal contradictions Development of the social and spatial world, in which it appears, perpetuating and Development - perhaps more precisely qualified as ‘human development’ – usually subverting its norms of behaviour entails intentional as well as unintentional and power relations, as well as processes of change and evolution towards providing loopholes for escape from a new situation that is better in social, cul- its everyday routines to imaginary tural, and environmental terms. This can for spaces. example be expressed through high level (Hannes Palang) values such as democracy, health, food and water security, equality of opportunity and access to resources, social equity, justice Williams came up with three main meanings or economic prosperity. The latter is some- of culture that have become popular both in times foregrounded to the partial exclusion research and policy: culture as the general of the others, but such a focus on economic process of intellectual, spiritual or aesthet- growth, especially if accompanied by social ic development, culture as a particular way and cultural inequalities, or without regard of life, whether of people, period or group, to environmental balance, cannot move to- and culture as works and intellectual artis- wards sustainability. tic activity [1]. Often, however, two distinct higher level distinctions are drawn, broad- Development has been described, in the UN based and narrowly-defined: a ‘broad, life- Development Programme (UNDP) first Hu- 21 man Development Report in 1990 as a pro- ditions, tastes or ways of thinking discourage cess (‘the enlargement of relevant human change or adaptation to new technologies or choices’) as well as an achievement (‘the ways of life? It is possible in some circum- compared extent to which, in given societies, stances to question how far every aspect of those relevant choices are actually attained’) a particular culture can be valued. As already [3: 17]. It will generally also involve specific mentioned, development can be defined in goals of the type emphasised in sustainabil- terms of achievement as well as of process, ity, notably equity, justice and responsibilities taking various directions, and potentially for- within and between the generations. This can ward and backwards. It is also common for entail a spontaneous evolution towards such development to be seen as a continuous goals, without self-conscious or intentional evolutionary path; but the trajectory can be actions, or it can refer to (social) processes changed, or even broken, for example by po- that are deliberately designed to transform a litical, social or technical ruptures. social environment and which may be insti- gated by institutions or actors not necessarily belonging, or deriving from, the place or Sustainability or sustainable community in question. development?

As well as recognising this broad spectrum In our work we have taken the Brundtlands of development, we are also in this document report on sustainable development and the strongly aware that the concept of develop- pillar-approach to sustainable development ment cannot be objectively defined but is value as one of our principal starting point. The -laden in ways that are specific to culture, Brundtland definition of ‘sustainable devel- context and history or time. It is therefore a opment’ is world-famous: “development that continuously (re-)negotiated concept. Wheth- meets the needs of the present without com- er a situation, context or place is regarded promising the ability of future generations to as being more developed than another, or meet their own needs”. Although the defini- not, or a particular development proposal is tion talks about sustainable development, regarded as being ‘good’ or ‘bad’, depends sustainability has also become popular. The on the viewpoints and agenda of those as- two terms are often used interchangeably; sessing the changes. The introduction of a are they therefore synonyms? Presumably new crop variety in a farming system, for ex- not - a number of governments and global ample, might be an improvement for some business corporations are prepared to dis- people because of its better production and/ cuss policies for sustainable development, or better social and economic conditions, but pull back from sustainability. It may be but others might consider this as a decline that for such governments sustainable de- through, for example, its impact on biodiver- velopment is ‘safe’ in its implication that any sity or landscape character, or through loss type of development can go ahead as long of economic independence; both viewpoints as it is mitigated usually in practice envi- may be culturally-informed assessments. ronmentally, occasionally in theory at least socially. ‘Sustainability’, in contrast, with its Culture is often considered as a positive implication that an association with further cause or result of development. But might development is not essential, can seem it sometimes be a hindrance or obstacle to threatening to those sectoral interests for 22 development, for example if entrenched tra- whom ‘growth’ (usually defined as economic growth) is the only way ahead. This would culture and leading to sectoral rather than suggest that ‘sustainability’ is a term with cross-sectoral/disciplinary thinking), we also a more reaching set of objectives and val- recognise their value as metaphors in sus- ues, one that can support de-growth and no tainability debates, as relatively well-accept- growth agendas as well as growth, one that ed and understood tools, and therefore as might have social equity and justice not eco- means to explore the role of culture in that nomic prosperity as its goal. framework and bring it to the policy debate.

Sustainable development or sustainability is usually seen as a win-win-win solution between ecological (protection), social (justice) and economic (viability), hence the widely-used model of the three pillars, or axes [4]. Other pillars like institutional, cultural and other dimensions of sustainability have been proposed [5]. Our position is that, whilst acknowledging some shortcomings related to the pillar model (reduction of reality and

THE MANTRA OF OUR COMMON FUTURE AND ITS CULTURAL VISION

Almost three decades since its publication, the report Our Common Future, popularly known as the Brundtland Report (1987) has become a cornerstone of the conceptualisation of sustainable development and is today still one of the most cited documents in sustainability discourses. Its introductory statement has acquired the status of an indisputable definition turned into a mantra: ‘Sustainable development ... meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.’ However, taken out of its context, this statement sounds ambiguous. It may be interpreted at least in two ways: as a need to save resources for the next generations, and as recognition of the present’s limited possibilities to solve the sustainability problems that will be left to our successors.

To cope with this ambiguity, it is worthwhile to re-contextualise the vision of sustainable development that the report offered: (1) It is based on a new holistic developmental model, denying the narrow preoccupations and compart- mentalisation of national economies, characterised by three important aspects: the imperative of limits, a changed developmental aim, and differentiated approaches to achieve these ends. (2) In this vein, the report suggested – in the name of our common future – a global redistribution of the causes, consequences, benefits, and responsibilities of development. (3) Our sustainable future can be guaranteed only by a drive for new type or form of development, one beyond the motivation of purely economic profit: the necessity to satisfy human needs and aspirations, declared to be the major objective of development. (4) The report suggests resetting the direction of urbanisation, by ‘taking the pressure off the largest urban centres and building up smaller towns and cities, more closely integrating them with their rural hinterlands’. (5) Although culture is not especially accentuated in the report, its role is crucial as a new value promot- er and pattern maker: it begins in chapter 1 by stating that ‘To successfully advance in solving global problems, we need to develop new methods of thinking, to elaborate new moral and value criteria, and, no doubt, new patterns of behaviour’. Thus the report marked the cultural turn to a new developmental path. (Svetlana Hristova)

23 Some scholars think it less a problem to The undefined ‘needs’ mentioned by define sustainability than to find ways to the Brundtland’s definition are not achieve it, and this has been explored in a on the whole consistent across the number of ways. Perhaps some of the most globe, through all levels of society, familiar is the spectrum from ‘(very) weak’ to or at different stages of life, or even ‘(very) strong’ sustainability [6], or the distinc- when filtered through ideology or tion between ‘broad’ and ‘narrow’ sustainability [7]. Such concepts are important, in par- faith. One person’s need is another ticular when the substitution of various forms person’s excess or dearth; when one of capital (social, human, natural, economic) set of ‘needs’ is fulfilled, another are being negotiated in the face of devel- (often someone else’s) is denied. opmental change. Another relevant discus- (Constanza Parra) sion concerns the intrinsic and instrumental values of both culture and nature, and how they should be understood, balanced and treated in a sustainable manner. This is an Social and cultural important issue when culture is used purpo- sustainability: same or different? sively as an instrument in development (e.g. to boost creative industries). Questions such Until now the cultural aspects of sustainable as which and whose culture is used, and for development have mainly been discussed or what purposes, are deeply founded on issues elaborated as a part of the social pillar of of power. sustainable development, or else combined with social sustainability (socio-cultural sus- Sustainable development does not mean the tainability). In the former case cultural issues same in all parts of the world, and current are solely considered as part of the social di- meanings are subject to change over time. mension; in the latter there is recognition that Nor can it be understood independently of culture is different from social but the diffi- cultural context(s). There is no single defi- culty of separating them in practice or ex- nition of sustainable development or sustain- isting policy means that they are kept linked. ability that works for all circumstances, and Only a very few researchers (e.g. [11][12]) it is necessary to acknowledge the diversity or policy documents have tried to separate of these meanings. Meanings are shaped by them, yet not necessarily with a proper way diversity in human life-modes and by adap- to make a difference between them. Are they tations to living conditions that vary around the same or different? Are cultural issues, as the world; even more so by aspirations and many actors consider, a part of the realm needs or wants. Consequently the key ideas of social issues, or (as implied above) does and values of sustainable development, in- culture act through societal frameworks and ter- and intra-generational equity, justice, mechanisms? How to separate the cultural participation and gender equality, and eco- and the social in sustainability? logical quality vary from culture to culture, and within them [8][9]. These questions lead us to discuss the relationship between society and culture. In its broadest sense culture covers all 24 spheres of life, and therefore also of society. Defining culture in this way, however, makes it Policy is in fact highly plural and highly di- so full of meaning (‘conceptually obese’) that verse. It can be created at any scale from it may cease to be a concept with practical the smallest community or municipality, use. Yet, much research in the social scienc- through business or industrial corporations es (particularly since the so called ‘cultural and all levels of municipality up to and includ- turn’) recognises not only the separateness ing a ‘World City’ like London, to regions and but also importantly the interlinkedness of upwards to nation states, federal states, and culture with society and/or social structures. supra national communities such as the EU, In Habermassian thought, for example, the NATO or global multinationals such as Shell, constituents of the life-world are seen as in- Rio Tinto or Google. Policies can be bottom dividuals, culture and society; many commen- up or top down; in both cases they may be tators have also added concepts of power, democratic or participatory, or not. They may and emphasised the symbolic as well as ma- be mandatory rules or optional guidance, terial importance of all these things. bedded in law or in custom, or ideologically -based. Whilst increasing attention is being In this document, we assume that culture given to integrated policy and planning pro- and society have to some degree an iter- cesses, and to holistic thinking about devel- ative and reciprocal relationship, in which opment, policies still usually arise from par- culture constructs society but society also ticular sectoral groupings, or specific areas shapes culture. To make an analogy, people of governance, or particular government de- have for thousands of years designed their partments. These different origins, and their architecture to contain their specific, cultur- relationship (or lack of) to each other, may ally constructed lifestyles and economic ac- prevent successful functioning or lead to un- tivities; yet once built, the architecture in its intended consequences. turn shapes and changes how people live, so that their future ‘ways of living’, their culture, In this document, in the next chapter we fit into the (by then) pre-existing structure. focus mainly on the various fields in which Whilst society and culture are in many ways policies operate and the ‘scripts’ they most interlinked and constitutive of each other, commonly follow. Then we consider ways however, their different constituencies never- to monitor the effect of policy, as of other theless allow for distinctive social and cultur- planned or prospective changes, for exam- al dimensions in sustainability. ple by monitoring through indicators. Before moving into those areas, however, it is necessary to describe the ways in which we see Policy culture operating and functioning through sustainability. Policy can be almost as challenging a word as culture. It has so many actual or potential meanings that it can be overloaded, impos- sible to use without qualification. It is often taken to refer to ‘public policy’ defined by governments at various levels, but individuals and social groups have policies as well, explicitly or not. 25 STORY 2

THE STORIES MUSEUMS TELL Politics and uses of the past: Varied narratives in the museums of Cyprus

Any museum usually integrates two parallel narratives, such as global and local, or nation and community. It is however not clear whether museums can succeed in sharing multiple narratives and acknowledging its relations with a variety of stakeholders. In Cyprus, museums in the southern part of the island (Greek-Cypriot) tend to celebrate the island’s classi- cal Greek past. On the other hand, in the northern part (Turkish-Cypriot) the more recent, medieval and Otto- Cultural heritage is well known to be dynamic, man past takes its place, yet paradoxically with controversial and able to generate heated de- space given, for example, to the culture of Greek bates. There are many arenas in which this can orthodox icon painting. How are heritage and cul- happen, but one of the most common is the ture used in museums? Whose culture is it? For museum, an institution created and maintained what aims, and why? And how does this relate to to preserve and look after objects, stories and xenophobic or nationalist movements? memories from the past, a task which can never be politically or ideologically neutral. Museums, This is relevant as culture is the object of social as places where heritage is not only preserved conflict. It also represents the interplay of poli- (with issues of what to select) but also present- cies and politics of memory and forgetting. As a ed and interpreted (with issues of which stories result, power relationships may shape a muse- to tell, which narratives to create) are often used um’s content and practices. Museums may exhibit as tools for shaping national, local or community politically desired narratives and exclude or mis- identities in the context of particular policy dis- represent the heritage of ‘others’. Museums run courses. In some cases, they are even involved in the risk of merely reflecting officially accepted political battles. This story deals with Cyprus, a identities or the dominant ideologies of those in country divided in two, amidst unresolved politi- power. A crucial question for the future is how cal conflict, with a long history of cultural change to ensure that those museums which keep local (Greek, Roman, Venetian, Ottoman, British etc.) heritage and cultural diversity alive become more and a currently rapidly-changing economic and self-sustainable and not dependent on political social environment. It serves here as a good case priorities. study to discuss the potential of museums to engage in social dialogue in the face of xenophobic and nationalistic movements throughout the 26 world. The Faro Convention strongly suggests that com- imperatives that promote exclusion and to be munities engage in active communication with ethically responsible, not only about museologi- museums to define the content and multiple cal issues but also in relationship to all its stake- uses of cultural heritage. Democratically-rooted holders, users and visitors, the communities, local in such a way, museums would serve society as or otherwise, which they serve, their audiences, places of inspiration, knowledge and expertise, and society in general. and as safe places to (re)negotiate heritage. They can be key actors in the negotiation of its complex multicultural values and traditions within Cultural policies should encourage the inclusion society. By collecting individual and family mem- of multiple voices and perspectives and the en- ories they can function as gateways of communi- gagement of diverse communities and experts cation, offer interpretations, and transmit them to in defining and interpreting heritage and culture. a growing collective social memory, thus contrib- This is not just a responsibility for sector based uting to a new culture of shared memories. Mu- cultural policies but requires a wider culture- seums might even help cultural heritage to play inclusive policy approach. Policies dealing with the decisive role that the Faro Convention identi- education, tourism, research, cultural diplomacy, fies of conflict reconciliation and the bridging of social policies, and city and regional planning, as deeply politically divisions. To do this however, well as other relevant public policies, can inte- requires museums to be independent of political grate museums in the core of their policy-making.

The Cyprus Museum, southern part of Cyprus, inaugurated in 1909 (left page) and the Canbulat Tomb and Museum, northern part of Cyprus, inaugurated in 1968 (rightpage); Pictures: Theopisti Stylianou-Lambert

27 Multiple contributions of culture to sustainable development

The overall issue is a need to make In this publication, we recognise that culture culture more explicit in the academic is capable of being integrated within sustain- and policy debate on sustainable able development in three more-or-less sep- development: I refer here to a view arate but never fully distinctive and indeed of culture in and for sustainable often interlocking ways, or ‘roles’. These are development which is understood derived from a literature review of scientific articles using the concept of ‘cultural sus- in dynamic interaction with nature. tainability’ [13] . Each role is discussed in Culture, as an ensemble of tangible more detail below, but to summarise: vectors of social life, comprises a natural dimension. It is this dimen- • First, a supportive and self-promoting role sion that should be resurrected in (characterised as ‘culture in sustainable order to strengthen and make more development’), which simply, and fairly un- tangible the role of culture in sustain- controversially, expands conventional sustainable development discourse by adding able development. culture as a more or less self-standing (Constanza Parra) or freestanding 4th pillar. Culture stands, linked but autonomous, alongside sep- SEVEN STORYLINES OF CULTURAL arate ecological, social, and economic SUSTAINABILITY considerations and imperatives of sus- In their paper in GeoForum [14], ‘Exploring the scientific tainability. discourse of cultural sustainability’, Soini and Birkeland reported on their analysis of the diverse meanings that • Second, a role (‘culture for sustainable were being applied in scientific publications, at that stage development’) which offers culture as a in the development of this field of study, and as the COST more influential force that can operate Action began its work, to the concept of ‘cultural sustain- beyond itself; this role moves culture into ability’. The study showed that the scientific discourse on cultural sustainability could be organised around seven a framing, contextualising and mediating principal ‘story lines’ or narratives: heritage, vitality, eco- mode, that can balance all three of the nomic viability, diversity, locality, eco-cultural resilience pillars and guide sustainable development Culture in sustainable development Culture for sustainable development Culture as sustainable development and eco-cultural civilisation. between economic, social, and ecologi-

Some of the storylines referred to culture as the fourth cal pressures and needs (which of course pillar of sustainability, while others saw culture as con- grow out of human cultural aspirations tributing to achieve social, economic or ecological goals and actions). of sustainability, or culture as a necessary foundation for a transition to a truly sustainable society. Moreover, although also interlinked and overlapping, the storylines were relatable to four different contexts, ideologies, attitudes or ways of thinking that can be labelled conser- vative, neoliberal, communitarian and environmentalist. These contexts provide further perspectives on the diverse political ideologies and policy arenas in which cultural sustainability must operate. 28 The overall issue is a need to make (Katriina Soini, Inger Birkeland) • Third, a role (‘culture as sustainable de- SUPPORTING SUSTAINABILITY - A SELF-STANDING ROLE FOR CULTURE velopment’) which sees culture as the IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT necessary overall foundation and structure for achieving the aims of sustainable First role – supporting. Culture as a sepa- development. By recognising that culture rate aspect, a free-standing or self-standing is at the root of all human decisions and additional pillar, the ‘4th pillar’, a role as an actions and an overarching concern (even independent and autonomous dimension a new paradigm) in sustainable develop- alongside the others. ment thinking, culture and sustainability become mutually intertwined, and the dis- Seeing culture as a fourth pillar of sustain- tinctions between the economic, social able development, alongside the ecolog- and environmental dimensions of sustain- ical, social and economic pillars is already ability begin to fade. a well-established view [14]. It is a relatively straightforward and thus practical approach. The diagram below shows the relationship It risks being a limited approach however, fo- of these three defined roles to sustainabili- cused on protecting assets deemed cultural ty and to each other. They are not mutually that are valued (‘giving culture a voice of its exclusive, but rather represent different ways own and an equal value’); it is sometimes too of thinking and organising values, meanings easily limited to a narrow definition of cul- and norms strategically and eclectically in ture as the arts and creative-cultural sector. relation to discussions on sustainable devel- It is also open to allowing culture to be un- opment. derstood only qualitatively as that which is considered excellent or only through its socio-economic contribution to a nation or other imagined community.

Furthermore, because of the way culture is often popularly understood today as art and creative activities, and as a separate sphere of public policy, the 4th pillar role can obscure

Culture in sustainable development Culture for sustainable development Culture as sustainable development

The three roles of culture (represented in orange) in sustainable development (the three circles represent the three pillars). Culture added as a fourth pillar (left diagram), culture mediating between the three pillars (central diagram) and culture as the foundation for sustainable development. The arrows indicate the 29 ever-changing dynamics of culture and sustainable development (right diagram). culture’s relationship to nature, and can un- ability would imply, for example, with regard derstate its connections to broader societal to aesthetic valuation of public art, cultural issues. This encourages the view that culture heritage, natural and built environments. The is a marginal concern in sustainable develop- qualitative concept of culture is thus very ment, not the equal of the other three pillars. important whenever we want to evaluate Through the historical construction of culture, and judge quality and develop indicators for art and aesthetic processes have become assessing the effects of a particular practice ranked above other more earthly activities or program. This is also why culture can use- like agriculture, and other primordial areas fully be understood and used as a 4th pillar of of life like nursing and caring. Modernity’s sustainability. expansion of scientific thinking and reflexiv- ity helped to establish art and culture as a CONNECTING SUSTAINABILITY – THE separate sphere, and deserving its own do- MEDIATING ROLE OF CULTURE FOR main in public policy. Now, at a time when all SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT divisions of knowledge (disciplinary boundaries) are being re-examined, and when holis- Second role – connecting and mediating. tic solutions – of which sustainability is of Culture as driver of sustainability processes; course one - are being seen as necessary, it this transcends the drawbacks and benefits th is clear that a 4 pillar approach for culture of ecological, economic and social develop- cannot be the only way forward, useful and ment. Economic, social and ecological sus- powerful though it is proving to be. tainability afforded by culture.

The 4th pillar role nevertheless offers many Since all human beings both have culture possibilities for relating culture to sustainable and are cultural human beings, we need a development. The key issue here is the un- broader conceptualisation of culture that in- derstanding of art and creative activities in cludes the diversity of human values, subjec- terms of particular qualities, which makes it tive meanings, expressions and life-modes, very possible to define the qualities of sus- and that allows us to distinguish between tainable development within the arts and differences in culture and between cultures culture sector. Values can be set in policy- in a fruitful way, without making judgments making, operationalised in strategies and about qualities of art and culture. Culture is carried out in practical action at different po- the meaningful content of human societies litical levels, within arts and cultural organisa- and communities. It is made by individuals tions and within business and economic en- within societies whilst simultaneously also terprises. Artistic and creative qualities can shaping their lives and existence. In terms be introduced for example through the setting of sustainability’s three pillars, culture can be of criteria for judgments about how sustain- the way to balance competing or conflicting able a particular policy, organisation or com- demands and work through communication pany is. Criteria can be defined for valuing or to give human and social meaning to sus- assessing the contribution to sustainable de- tainable development. Culture can be a go- velopment of a particular process, product between or intermediary to connect the vari- or image. ous dimensions of sustainability, as shown in the second part of the diagram. Furthermore, artistic and cultural qualities 30 are relevant when asking what sustain- …(s)ustainability is cultural by being contextual, his- torically and geographically concrete; everything human beings do is woven into culture in terms of webs of meaning created by human beings. Culture appears and is understandable through narrative organisation, and cultural sustainability can emerge as a social process created through narratives that connect the past with the future, and the local with the global. [15: 165]

Culture processes and translates into a com- CREATING SUSTAINABILITY – THE TRANSFORMATIVE ROLE OF CULTURE mon language the ecologically-, environmen- AS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT tally- and socially-founded reactions to proposed development or imminent avoidable Third role – creating sustainability. Here cul- change. Generally speaking however some ture takes on its evolutionary, holistic and sort of lens or filter is required to understand transformative role, providing a new para- how culture mediates the relation between digm to the question of sustainable devel- society and environment. One might be the opment. concept of landscape , for example, another might be the context of territorialisation, Culture can be viewed at a more profound a third could be ecosystems services, and level of society as a core issue for a tran- creativity might be fourth example. All require sition towards sustainable development. We a cultural context and an understanding and can for example insist on a co-thinking of en- welcoming of diversity of cultural expres- vironmental, social and cultural sustainability, sions, and most importantly some level of and an insistence on how social life is em- co-production rooted in human intentionality bedded in particular places and situations. A expressed in practices, i.e. culture. The fact truly evolutionary culture, or an eco-cultural that the potential of culture’s mediating role civilisation, involves practicing a new under- has rarely been exploited perhaps explains standing of the human place in the world, and why sustainable development has proved to recognising that humans are an inseparable be so elusive. part of the more-than-human world. Crucially, this means that every human action is always relative to and influenced by the situation at hand. It allows new values, new ways of life, and (perhaps) utopian visions of a sustainable society.

31 Culture represents and creates wider relations between human and nature, past, present and future, the materialised and the imagined world. [16]

INTERACTION BETWEEN CULTURAL ACTIVITIES AND Culture thus becomes the matrix for particu- SUSTAINABLE REGIONAL LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT lar ways of life. In this sense, culture is more than a descriptive or analytical tool, and of- Many rural areas in Europe have undergone a sustained depopulation fers an ideal of doing things well, of culture of urban centres over a long period, whereas others have experienced positive renewal through in-migration and population growth. Can cul- as cultivation and sustaining life, but without ture positively influence such developments? making things well at the cost of something or somebody else. Culture in this approach The University of Bern undertook case studies in six protected areas refers to a worldview, a cultural system guid- of four European countries within the framework of a project entitled ‘The cultural dimension of sustainable regional and landscape de- ed by intentions, motivations, ethical and velopment (SRLD)’. These studies revealed that culture is generally moral choices, rooted in values that drive our a significant driver of SRLD, in that it promotes social cohesion and individual and collective actions [17], and to a can delay or even reverse depopulation of rural areas. One example is process and communication of transforma- the French National Regional Park (PNR) of Monts d’Ardèche, a region boasting a high diversity of cultural activity, a high density of people tion and cultural change. This makes it pos- engaged in the cultural sector, and numerous cultural associations sible to think of sustainability and sustainable and activities. Furthermore, there are many efforts to promote the ar- development as processes, ongoing and in- ea’s rich cultural heritage, particularly its dry-stone terraces. This high the-making, not as fixed states. level of cultural activity is self-energising and works to attract further inward migration of those interested in spaces for creative living. In the case of the Ardèche, the diversity of cultural activities enhances Sustainabilities imply making connections quality of life and adds value to the economy; culture can be seen to between people and the worlds they inhab- play a significant role as a driver of SRLD. it and use. In this approach, ecoculture is

Even a single flagship project can contribute to regional cultural re- deeply related to social learning by working vival and consequent positive economic and social benefits, including with place-conscious and place-responsive counteracting depopulation. The internationally-renowned ‘théâtre du teaching, sharing and learning, and engaging peuple’, for example, has endowed the village Bussang in the Vosges humans in discussions of what kind of world with a prominence above and beyond commercial success: its vibrancy and long tradition has become central to regional identity. The newer, we want to live in now and in the future. This is but already widely acclaimed Theater Origen in Switzerland’s Parc Ela applicable in policymaking and even in wider may engender a similar effect over time. politics: engaging citizens in discussions of what kind of world should be a basic prem- These examples demonstrate that culture can contribute significantly to sustainable regional and landscape development and can also posi- ise of public policies. Culture refers here not tively influence the demographic development in rural areas. to particular types of knowledge, but to fundamental new processes of social learning (Bettina Scharrer, Marion Leng, Thomas Hammer) that are nourishing, healing, and restorative. www.cde.unibe.ch/Pages/Project/6/66/The-cultural-dimension-of- Sustainability exists thus as a process of sustainable-regional-and-landscape-development-SRLD.aspx community-based thinking that is pluralistic where culture represents both problem and possibility, form and process, and concerns those issues, values and means whereby a society or community may continue to exist. 32 Three roles, many applications

Depending on circumstances and objectives, Acknowledging all the challenges related to all three ways of using culture in sustainable the concepts of culture, sustainability and development will be relevant in particular con- sustainable development, we suggest that texts, whether theoretical, political or practi- this framework can work as a first system- cal. The three roles should not necessarily atic attempt to analyse the role of culture be seen in the sequence presented here, and in sustainable development. We also argue they do not necessarily form an evolution- that given the broadness, vagueness and ary path. Nonetheless, within the three-role complexity of culture and sustainability, there framework one can observe trends, trajec- will still be space for interpretations and flexi- tories, dynamics and gradients. In comparing bility. Thus - although a number of issues re- th the third to the first (4 pillar) role, the eco- main to be resolved - this framework may be logical emphasis, but also (thanks to the in- used both in research and policy concerning tegrating power of culture) the integration of culture and sustainability as a tool to find cultural, social and ecological aspects, and one’s position in the field. the overall dynamics, diversity and openness, hence the overall complexity, increases. Similarly, policies become more diverse, nu- anced and multilayered, and more dialogue and interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary communication is required. These trends are obviously related to the broader definition of culture, which allows, perhaps sometimes demands, a systemic approach including aspects from both natural and human worlds. We should also realise that there can be complex dynamics even within the ‘simple’ 4th pillar model. Although most clearly based on disciplinary and sectoral approaches, this use of culture is also encouraging new modes of governance to emerge.

33 STORY 3

SURVIVING POST-INDUSTRIALISATION Resilience and transformation: Post-industrial landscapes, place and living futures in Norway

The protection and uses of industrial heritage nomination consists of four components associ- raise many problems. Some (whose heritage, ated with technical-industrial heritage: the tangi- what to protect and how, who is in control?) are ble and man-made remains for power production, common to all heritage, although often exac- the factories and industrial buildings, the trans- erbated by scale and recentness. Some on the port systems and urban communities of the com- other hand are more distinctive to industrial her- pany town type. itage. So-called ‘industrial’ heritage is normally actually post-industrial: it is the material remains The nomination emphasises the human creation that have been left behind that we grapple with, of society as an expression of modernisation and often in the context of communities affected through industrialisation. But what should be by the withdrawal of employment and prosperity, sustained and protected and why? Is it the build- who have the need to not only preserve the re- ings with machines, and the trains and ships? Is mains but to ensure they take on new economic, it the town and the workers’ housing areas? Or is cultural and social life. The uses of these remains it the whole landscape? Industrial development are therefore an aspect of heritage that is par- at Rjukan and Notodden was highly dependent ticularly relevant to discussions of culturally-in- on the physical landscape. Why not sustain the formed sustainability. whole production system, the physical and the man-made landscape? Or is it the intangible her- The towns of Rjukan and Notodden in Telemark itage, the “ways of living” of population with all became in the early 20th century the birthplace their customs, skills and backgrounds, that also of Norway as a modern, industrial nation, thanks should be sustained? The human features will initially to the use of hydro-electricity drawn change and vanish if they are not protected. This from local waterfalls in large-scale industrialisa- is also a question of how to protect. It concerns tion, notably the production of chemical saltpe- the way in which factory buildings are turned into tre. From 1900 to 1920 their populations grew nice, sanitised and safe surrounding for families, from almost nothing to several thousands. After children and visitors of any kind. Are factories fun a short period of rapid growth, the area has ex- places to play? Are hard working conditions, long perienced a prolonged period of de-industrialisa- hours, dangers, etc. from the beginning of twenti- tion, and since 1945 in particular technological eth century being forgotten in the process? Sus- development and the changing global economy taining industrial heritage is also a question of created social and economic challenges as facto- the image of the landscape, not only the physical ries closed and large scale industrial employment landscape. fell away. The two towns have met the need for economic restructuring in different way. In 2014 The protection of cultural heritage has to be the Norwegian government submitted a proposal evaluated in the context of current discours- to nominate the industrial heritage at Rjukan and es in media, policy, education and the arts, in 34 Notodden for UNESCO’s world heritage list. The order to understand the varied meanings of The Saaheim power station in Rukjan (picture: Inger Birkeland) sustainability and culture, and to be clear whose culture an object of discourse can be relevant cultural sustainability is being described. These as the relation between culture and sustainable meanings are multiple, but include (as adapted development is emotional, cognitive and ethical; from [14]): values (as in the content of landscape people have a sense of place or belonging to and/or heritage), processes (identifiable through their place. Policy-makers can include this sense practices and participation) and affordances (in of place in policy-making via collaboration and terms of those living there and visitors, such as networking. This can even change the political sense of place, identity, locally -defining events culture itself. like the sun festival). The key lesson is perhaps that cultural sustain- The stewardship of a post-industrial landscape ability can be achieved by maintaining links with involves, like any aspect of heritage, a process the past through an understanding of heritage of selection of what is to be sustained, re-used as a social and cultural process, especially in the or adapted, protected or memorised. When de- case of recent, still deeply ‘felt’ heritage such industrialisation remains, as in Rjukan, more or as industrialisation. Recently de-industrialised less within living memory, local interests, tastes, complexes and landscapes, amongst all types of identities and powers come to the fore. They are heritage, offer great opportunities via protection, also usually foregrounded by the sheer scale of use and re-use to absorb elements from diverse the industrial remains and the imperative to find cultures, so that post-industrially-challenged lo- new economic uses. A more reflexive policy ap- cations once again become ‘enlivened’ places. 35 proach to culture would be helpful here. To make CULTURE AT THE CROSSROADS OF POLICY

36 CULTURE AT THE CROSSROADS OF POLICY

37 CULTURE AT THE CROSSROADS OF POLICY Defining policy

We discussed the complexity and plurality interaction involving multiple stakeholders in of policy in the previous chapter. Here, we decision-making processes, based on val- use the word ‘policy’ to refer to formal plans, ues and principles such as local democracy, actions and strategies, and how they are transparency, citizens’ participation, cooper- implemented in regulations and institutions. ation and exchange [19]. Policies include principles, documents, rules and guidelines that are formulated or adopt- Due to all this complexity, ‘policy’ is a thread ed by collectives or organisations to reach running through all the discussions and de- their long-term goals, and more specifically, bates on culture and sustainable develop- strategies, decisions, actions and other ‘sys- ment. These discourses emphasise how tems of arrangements’ undertaken to solve it is necessary always to root policies and a collective problem with the help of human, their implementation into the specific cir- financial and material resources. The word cumstances of their existence, and how pol- also applies to coordinated actions under- icies should be specific and appropriate in taken to modify a structural or a temporary particular social, geographic or cultural situation in order to attain predetermined ob- terms, not be generic. This is valid at any jectives [18]. Policy also incorporates in its level, from international to local, and helps scope formal and informal practices linked to explain why some worldwide policies en- to operationalisation and implementation. counter difficulties of implementation in Governance is an important issue as well; some areas, or why some countries choose 38 we consider it here as processes of social not to ratify international conventions. Successful policies will normally be those We discuss here eight such contexts in which that take into account the specificities of the policies are commonly devised, although we cultures relevant in their context. appreciate that these can overlap and be mutually supportive. They form a nexus of memory, heritage and identity, place, landscape and territory, social life, commons and Policy ‘scripts’ for participation, creativity, economic development, nature, awareness, and transforma- culture and sustain- tions. able development

In reviewing existing policy areas, we have Policies negotiating memories, found it useful to identify a number of differ- identities and heritage ent ‘scripts’ that policy formulation and implementation can be seen to follow, the con- Cultural sustainability in this context is about texts in which policies are commonly devised maintaining links with the past, whilst recog- and used. These ‘scripts’ can be character- nising that heritage is about much more than ised as the theme that policies address, or preserving materiality or even ‘keeping the the steams or flows of thought and action past alive’. It is dynamic, controversial and that they follow. They each frame specific can elicit heated debates. Policies relating to goals, often even using specific languages, heritage and memories seek to protect and disciplinary assumptions or ideologies. For preserve but also, and as importantly, to use our purposes they provide a means to ex- and develop non-material as well as material press the particular ways in which policies heritage, such as folklore, cultural practic- are informed by and shaped with culture. es and attitudes, events and traditions and They differ at many levels, such as the geo- buildings or artifacts. Such policies should be graphic scale at which they are applied, the capable of absorbing ideas and supporting type of actors who are involved and the sec- the aspirations from a variety of groups in- tors concerned, the institutional, legal and volved in the heritage and contemporary life financial tools that are used, and the ethics, of a place. In this context it is helpful to rec- assumptions and values by which they are ognise distinctions between the diverse man- inspired. The scripts can be observed at the ifestations of heritage, the values people as- local level within diverse settings, embedded sign to things, and the processes and means within dynamics of local living, collective so- (practices and participation) that they apply cial dialogues, and planning and policy pro- to them. Heritage policies involve both the cesses of cities and communities. These ‘on inclusion of the perceptions of people who the ground’ discussions and often innovative shaped the place, as well as wider imagining practices are developed for particular con- and discussions on how development possi- ditions and circumstances, but they are of- bilities can be created in the future. In this ten informed by multi-level policy frameworks way, heritage does not result in a derelict site and overarching sets of guiding principles or a museum but, like landscape, becomes a and commitments negotiated at supra na- living environment. tional levels. 39 Culture is complicit in signifying that partic- BRIDGES AS PLACES OF DIVISIONS IN LOCAL ular places of memories or identity bench- COMMUNITIES marks serve as touchstones. These places may be sites of solemn remembrance or, Bridges are functional public spaces, and spaces used for fes- tivities, and everyday social and cultural practices. They also in contrast, significant places of celebra- have great significance as evidence of human achievements. tion. Some may be marks of deep antiqui- In the collective memory of the Balkans, bridges are also ty and have an ancient history, while others symbol-bearers of attempts to make connections between are more recent; some still live in collective communities on both sides of a divide. memories of local or national communities, Throughout history, bridges have been a symbol of territorial- such as locations constructed in the context isation and state power. Remarkable examples are the Otto- of European Capital of Culture designations man bridges in Bosnia and Hercegovina, such as the famous or important historical events. Some memori- Old Bridge in the city of Mostar, or the Latin Bridge over the River Miljacka in Sarajevo. al sites remember and deal with a shameful

or sad pasts, others commemorate or cele- All of these bridges have multiple narratives and function as brate the foundations of society and identity. symbol- bearers of their cities. People attach different mean- Either can be subversive or ‘dissonant’ in the ings to this heritage. Many of these bridges are ‘heritage which divides’. The bridge on the Drina for the Bosniak (Mus- sense of both uniting and dividing, carrying lim) community, as do other bridges of the Ottoman period, different meanings for different communities. contributes to a much wider sense of cultural identification, Heritage functions as a key means to facili- as symbols of the greatness of the culture they wanted to tate social communication, and can also be participate in, and the importance of the Ottoman Empire. The destruction in 1993 of the Old Bridge in Mostar by Croatian a platform for unheard voices and to allow forces had no strategic or military purpose, but led to a de- tensions (sometimes suppressed) to be ne- crease of self-confidence and respect and created a feeling of gotiated publicly, for example where there is hopelessness among the Bosnian community. a lack of dialogue between ethnic groups, ( social groups, races and nations . Milena Dragićević, Šešić M. Ljiljana, Rogač Mijatović)

Policies on place, landscape and territory

People are involved with places via loca- action as a response to unwanted spatial tion, ecological participation, socio-territorial and sometimes unsustainable developments belonging and cultural conformity or com- even beyond the local scale [21][22]. Terri- monality. Memory, heritage and identity are torialisation is a closely-connected concept, also relevant. They attach subjective cul- too, that refers to a framework within which tural meanings to place, often described as to facilitate the role of culture to mediate a sense of place, but the concept of land- intentions and practices in spatial develop- scape is a close synonym. Sense of place ment at multiple scales [23]. has frequently been linked to sustainability, suggesting that the construction of socially The construction of identities is often linked -sustainable (and in the case of ‘landscape’ to particular places. To enhance the sym- approaches, also environmentally-sustain- bolic identity of a place, and contribute to able) communities can be facilitated through residents’ connecting with a place, atten- a shared (re)connection with a place they tion is increasingly paid to the importance of 40 call home [20], inspiring people to collective ‘everyday’ markers such as architecture, public art, street benches and light standards, MAPPING SENSE OF PLACE paving designs, plantings, and other aspects of urban design as well as improvised uses Although a perceptual, literally ‘sensed’ thing, there are ways to describe or map sense of place [35]. Without pretending to be of public space that help mark the identi- comprehensive, these ways include: ty of a place and collectively contribute to the sense of place experienced by its res- - Sense of place has been spatially mapped. The growing empha- idents and visitors [24]. Capturing, indeed sis on place-based and value-centred meanings urges social scientists involved in natural resource management to think defining, such resources and values though in spatial terms, and to facilitate the integration of personal place-specific cultural mapping is becoming place-based values data into resource-based decision models, more popular. These mapping exercises are as has been done in the context of forest management and often focused on the arts and creative sec- planning. - Perceptions of residents towards their place have been mapped tor, but there is also growing interest in cap- as part of community assets mapping in the context of partic- turing more intangible elements and broader ipative action-oriented community development. Assets refer aspects of sense of place and place identity. to what inhabitants value, perceive and experience as being qualities of their communities. - The mapping of values has also been implemented in the con- Just as there is a need to be sensitive to text of the complex and contingent sphere of the multiple, co- and acknowledge the multiple histories and existing space-time trajectories that make up landscape. Deep memory-based perspectives on a place, mapping, as applied in place-based research, or processes such or the distinctive ways in which a place as landscape biography occupying generally larger scales, refer to processes of engaging with and evoking place in temporal connects people to the natural world, so depth by bringing together a multiplicity of voices, information, there are multiple and overlapping lines of impressions, and perspectives in a multimedia representation experiences and meaning-making in a place. of a particular environment. Culture-sensitive policies can help ensure Alongside their range of scholarly research techniques and ap- that all citizens can ‘see themselves’ reflect- proaches, all methods but particularly the latter method, should ed in ‘their’ city and can contribute active- draw upon a wide set of participatory tools to retrieve data, build- ly to its development, its continuity, and its ing on conversational exchange, fieldwork, performative actions, changes. ans sound and image work.

(Lummina Horlings)

Policies dealing with social life, old concept of commons which is current- commons and participation ly being revived in a wide range of spheres: that of natural resources, access to and use This script is about how to live together in of which is shared by a community within a ways that supports the co-existence of dif- set of socially-agreed rules that ensure fu- ferent ways of life and values and makes ture sustainability, and governance for the space for equal participation. It highlights cul- benefit of the whole community. Commons tural diversity within society and the inclusion presents an alternative to the notions of of varied groups in decision making, as key enclosure and privatisation that have been issues in the move towards cultural sustain- growing since the early modern period. The ability. It embodies the principle of respect- concept of landscape, for example, already ing the rights of all citizen groups, including mentioned, or even of heritage, can be seen cultural rights. Participation and social cohe- as a universal commons [25]. sion in communities are conditions for development and transformational change. There The inclusion of different groups in society are powerful connections here to the age- into participative decision-taking and action 41 has its own challenges, of course, especially and dynamic character of local cultures, as in the context of large scale demographic resources for sustainable development. change, problems with social equality, and widespread mobility and migration. Moreover, The second main dimension concerns the with policies directed towards these issues, art and cultural sector and related creative unexpected side-effects and complexities practices in a more narrow sense. Culture can occur. Culture can function here as a here focuses mainly on art as an activity and way of communication between different on the products of art, that is, for example, groups but also may express officially or po- theatre performances, music, literary works, litically desired narratives, excluding the nar- visual arts, museum and heritage sector, vi- rative of others. sual and digital sector, and any cultural idea or product that can be placed within artistic Cultural diversity calls for culture-specific un- and creative sectors. It also involves sustain- derstandings of development at all scales, able design: not only environmentally, cultur- and taking a variety of values and worldviews ally and socially sustainable products, but of different cultural groups into account. This products in everyday settings and designed is a reason why ethnographic and anthropo- environments that can promote more sus- logical methods are useful in research on tainable ways of life and shifts in thinking and cultural diversity. From a planning and poli- behaviour. cy development perspective, the diversifying populations of cities and regions are leading Arguments for the multiple ways in which ar- local authorities to emphasise culturally-sen- tistic and creative activity as well as design sitive and culture-inclusive planning process- contribute to societal well-being and holistic es, involving extensive consultations and real sustainability are grounded in a long stream participation in decision-making processes. of evidence-based research concerning the These principles are also reflected in the role of arts and culture in society . The many initiatives to encourage and support in- focus on artistic and creative activities in the tercultural dialogue that are being developed context of sustainability relates both to their throughout Europe [26]. central role in developing meaning and narratives that structure the way we think about and act in the world, as well as the various Policies encouraging creative dimensions of sustainable actions embed- practices and activities ded within their artistic, organisational and creative industry practices. One of the main dimensions of a creativity -focussed script for policy is the recognition of ‘everyday creativity’. It acknowledges Culturally sensitive policies for the diversity of practices, values and under- economic development standings of a world shaped by interactive processes between human beings and their Creative economy and bio-economy are surroundings. It highlights ‘ordinary’ residents key dimensions in sustainable economies as active contributors of grassroots agency discourse. This sphere of policy-making is to gradually and iteratively contribute to a interested in the role of culture in policies place and its development. The challenge for aiming for sustainable economic develop- 42 policy is to take into account the diversity of ment. Cultural and creative industries are SUSTAINABILITY AND LEGITIMACY OF THE bedded in and supported by routines, unspo- TANYASZINHAZ THEATRE COMMUNITY IN ken rules, humour, interpersonal relations, SERBIA and other practices that are integrating and dynamic factors in the society, and these Tanyaszinhaz (loosely translatable from Hungarian as ‘vil- important elements of culture in a broader lage theatre’) is a theatrical community base in a tiny vil- sense may be left in the shadows. The ex- lage in the province of Vojvodina (north of Serbia) that has been performing in dozens of villages across the province plicit recognition of culture beyond economic for almost 40 years. Most of their members are ethnic Hun- terms both requires and deserves more at- garians living in Serbia, performing almost exclusively in tention within the creative industry debate. Hungarian for local audiences. While changing directors and actors - in total some 260 actors have collaborated in their productions - their mission remained the same: bringing Within the bio-economy discourse the prob- theatrical experience to small and remote villages in Serbia. lem is not the over- or mis-use of culture, but As such, Tanyaszinhaz is a rare form of travelling theatre in rather the ignorance of the significance of South-East Europe which has survived many social and po- culture. Bio-economy encompasses the sus- litical systems, including the turmoil of the war-saturated years. Without any doubt, these trailer-based performers tainable production of renewable resources not only sustained, but also built from scratch rural cultural from land, fisheries and aquaculture environ- life in places they are visiting. ments and their conversion into food, feed, fibre, and bio-energy as well as related pub- The theatre’s organisational model as well as its programme orientation is valuable because it runs against the grain of lic goods such as well-being services de- the current national cultural field in Serbia, in which govern- rived from nature. Within this debate, there ment funding of institutional theatres, and an orientation is a strong belief in the exploitation of knowl- towards urban cultural-elites, are regarded as the standard edge-based technology and innovation. But in professional art circles. The existence of the Tanyaszin- haz troupe has been neglected, however, by all ‘relevant’ bio-economy is also based on the conserva- theatrical circles, media reports and cultural policy debates. tion and preservation of biological diversity It is usually discounted as folkloric or amateurish even at all scales, which, in turn is based on the though it is not vernacular culture, and its artists are profes- cultural diversity of local ways of lives and sional academy-educated artists. Yet it is a shining example of how self-governed communities, despite a lack of wider locally developed livelihoods. It is also de- public attention to the topics they deal with (rural cultural pendent on citizens’ values and knowledge, life for example), can successfully sustain forms of cultural for example their invention and adaptation expression. It shows that sustainability can be non-institu- of new technologies, products and ser- tional, and that marginalised and de-legitimised actors can also build sustainable and vital cultural networks. vices. It can be argued that policy to foster a bio-economy is culturally-informed and em- (Goran Tomka) bedded, but until now an explicit understanding of culture in bio-economy debate is very based on individual and collective creativity, limited, if not absent. skills and talents that have a potential for wealth and job creation through, for example, the development of products, services, tour- Policies of nature conservation ism and place branding. A focus on the economic dimensions of cultural and creative It is commonly known, although not always activities tends to provide economic data to practiced, that to be successful nature con- lift ‘culture’ higher up the policy agenda, cre- servation activity should take into account the ating a wider understanding of the roles of cultural values of people and their livelihoods. culture in society. But the rich social fabric If not, there will be conflicts between actors of a society and its functioning is also em- or a decrease in well-being, and the aims 43 of nature conservation will not be reached. Three key tools of transformation are high- Traditionally, nature conservation policies lighted in this script: sustainability education, were largely based on public policies, using communication media, and artistic practices. legislation as the main instrument, which has Sustainability education engenders greater not left much space for voluntary activities awareness and informed practices. Environ- or participation. As far as livelihoods such as mental education, both formal and informal, agriculture or forestry are concerned, finan- aims to raise children’s awareness of envi- cial subsidy systems have been introduced to ronment and sensibility towards nature. Yet make practices more environmentally sound. education is not only formal school-based, Yet these financial support systems are not but also informal life-long learning among all sustainable in a sense that they are not nec- age groups. Moreover, it should include all di- essarily able to change the attitude and be- mensions of sustainable development from haviour in the long term [27]. environmental to social and cultural ones. There are examples of better recognition of Cultural sustainability within nature conser- culture as heritage, multiculturalism and way vation policies will instead seek to change of life in the curriculums of schools. Com- human and social behaviours and practices munication media such as newspapers, mag- or find alternative ways to treat or use nature. azines, television, radio, and social media Culture is a key factor in the adaptation and can be engaged to extend this dialogue into learning new practices. Another, more often the wider society, to play important roles in mentioned point is the use of traditional eco- public education about sustainability issues, logical knowledge and know-how in nature and to serve as key platforms for information conservation and restoration which should be exchange and social dialogue in communi- acknowledged alongside the expert or sci- ties. Artistic works aimed at bringing envi- entific knowledge; neither is sufficient alone. ronmental issues to the public’s attention or using the arts to improve the environment are growing. They can serve as insightful cata- Policies to increase lysts for rethinking our daily habits and mod- sustainability awareness and elling new ways of working and living. There knowledgeability are growing calls to invent strategies to more deeply involve artistic and cultural actors in Awareness has been considered to be an fostering more sustainable cities and ways important accelerator for change towards of living and grassroots examples of civic sustainability, referred to as ‘change from the imagination and ‘artivism’ (art-led activism) in inside out’ [28], which is linked to people’s many cities [37] . values, world-views and motivations. Culture and cultural values matter in the context of environmental concern and people’s motiva- Transformations tion for action. Most of the various attempts to uncover intrinsic value in nature have in Transformation to a more sustainable soci- common a search for ways to use such an ety calls for new ways of thinking and act- ascription of value as a basis for a system ing. Many modes of innovations are need- of non-anthropocentric duties toward nature. ed: technological, social, cultural, systemic and informal. The role of policy is not only 44 to provide institutional (or market) structures and education for supporting innovations, seems evident. Yet culturally sensitive policy but also to enable citizens’ awareness and structures to guide our societies – and, col- engagement in culture and social life, which lectively, the world – into the future are still can contribute to an emergence of innova- the exception. tions in a remarkable way. Engaging in dynamic grassroots movements – animated, Until recently, cultural sustainability has been for example, by artistic communities – can advocated most strongly by actors associat- lead to a joint spirit, collaboration, and result ed with the artistic and creative sectors, but in multi-actor dialogues, new networks and the realisation of the importance of culture institutional arrangements. for human-centred sustainable development is steadily gaining traction among nations Bottom-up and participatory approaches can (e.g., the Group of Friends of Culture and help to create ideas and actions leading Development, launched in September 2013 toward sustainable local communities, but by 15 UN Member States), cities (brought without systemic support from the local gov- together through the United Cities and Lo- ernment such initiatives cannot be sustain- cal Governments organisation and guided able in the long run [37]. It is therefore crucial by Culture 21: Actions, approved in March to recognise the complexity of multi-stake- 2015), and international agencies led by holder processes in policy-making, and con- UNESCO. However, we realise that the sciously cope with this complexity. Enabling struggle to develop and implement policies policies and planning processes are needed that more fully and more strongly relate to to support these grassroots initiatives, in- the integration of culture with sustainabili- cluding recognition and power to grassroots ty and development continues. The field is innovation actors and processes and involv- challenged by multiple definitions and per- ing them within an inclusive, multi-scale inno- spectives about these relationships, which vation politics. characterises its complexity and multidimen- sional character.

In closing this chapter, we emphasise again that culture is not just a topic of cultural pol- Conclusions and icy. It should also inform and be integrated within all other policies. Increasingly it is ar- reflections on policy gued that all the best and most successful policies are culturally informed, although not In the context of international negotiations necessarily consciously. Yet many policies to develop the post-2015 global Sustainable and programs have been traditionally im- Development Goals, and amid internation- plemented only in a top-down ‘one size fits al efforts to incorporate explicit mentions all‘ manner, with too little regard for the cul- of culture within this agreement, the policy tural specificities of the people and places ‘scripts’ described here reveal the broad involved. Experience has shown that such a contours of a new type of policy landscape. practice is problematic and generally not ef- A wide range of research and policy efforts fective. And while the idea of a cultural lens is striving for greater articulation and clarity, on all public policies and plans to ensure lo- and the need to generate a greater ‘action- cal development proceeds in harmony with ability’ of culture in sustainable development local cultural contexts has been discussed 45 for well over a decade, it is only rarely a systematic practice. However, we contend that policies dealing with education, tourism, re- ASSESSING search, cultural diplomacy, social policies, and city and regional planning, as well as other areas, can integrate culture in the core CULTURE IN of their policy-making to various degrees.

Although the ‘scripts’ policy is (or in some cases should in future be) following, as pre- SUSTAINABLE sented in this chapter, are interlinked and overlapping, and are definitely not mutually exclusive, they can be viewed according to the three roles of culture introduced in the DEVELOPMENT previous chapter, that is, culture having supportive, connecting and transforming roles in sustainability. In the first case, the policies strengthen the key intrinsic values of culture, and tend to focus on creativity and diversity of cultural expressions and the contributions of artistic/cultural activity and expressions to human-centred sustainable development trajectories. In the second case, when culture is understood as having a mediating role, the policies extend to cover/share and shape the aims of other public policies, like livelihoods, industries, social and environmental policies. In the third case, policies are promoting broader transformations towards more holistically sustainable societies, for example through increased awareness, behaviour changes providing catalysts and enablers for grassroots collective actions, and developing individuals’ and communities’ capabilities to adapt and carry on more sustainable ways of life. All three models of cultural interven- tion in sustainable development are valid and resonate in different circumstances.

46 ASSESSING CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

47 ‘Routledge Studies in Culture and Sustainable Development’ A major outcome of this COST Action is a new Theory and Practice in Heritage and book series ‘Routledge Studies in Culture and Sustainability. Between past and future Sustainable Development’ aiming to analyse Edited by Elizabeth Auclair and the broad and multiple roles that culture plays in Graham Fairclough sustainable development. It takes as one of its starting points the idea that culture in sustainability serves as a ‘meta-narrative’ for bringing together ideas and standpoints from a diverse body of academic research currently scattered among different domains, disciplines and thematic fields. Moreover, the series responds to the call for inter- and transdisciplinary approaches which is being strongly felt, as in most other fields of research, in the field of sustainability and sustainable development. By combining and confronting the various approaches, in both the sciences and the humanities and in dealing with social, cultural, environmental, political, and aesthetic disciplines, the series offers a comprehensive contribution to the present day sustainability sciences as well as related policies.

The books in the series take a broad approach to This book views heritage as a process that con- culture, giving space to all the possible under- tributes through cultural sustainability to human standings of culture from art-based definitions well-being and socially- and culturally-sensitive

Book series to way-of-life based approaches, and beyond. policy. By examining the interactions between The essence of culture in, for, and as sustainable people and communities in the places where development will be explored in various thematic they live it exemplifies from a broad interdisci- contexts, representing a wide range of practices plinary perspective the diverse ways in which and processes (e.g., everyday life, livelihoods and a people-centred heritage builds identities and lifestyles, landscape, artistic practices, aesthetic supports individual and collective memories. experiences, heritage, tourism). These contexts may concern urban, peri-urban, or rural contexts, With theoretically-informed case studies from and regions with different trajectories of so- leading researchers, the book addresses both cio-economic development. The perspectives of concepts and practice, in a range of places and the books stretches from local to global and cov- contexts including landscape, townscape, mu- ers different temporal scales from past to present seums, industrial sites, everyday heritage, ‘or- and future. These issues are valorised by theo- dinary’ places and the local scene, and even retical or empirical analysis; their relationship to UNESCO-designated sites. The contributors the ecological, social, and economic dimensions of demonstrate in a cohesive way how the cultural sustainability will be explored, when appropriate. values that people attach to place are enmeshed So far three books in the series have been pub- with issues of memory, identity and aspiration lished. These have been edited by members of and how they therefore stand at the centre of the COST Action and with most of their the au- sustainability discourse and practice. The cases, thors being participants in the Action. More books drawn from many parts of Europe, illustrate the and book proposals are on their way. If you are in- contribution that dealing with the inheritance of terested in publishing a book in this series, either the past can make to a full cultural engagement an edited volume or monograph, contact Katriina with sustainable development. Soini and Joost Dessein, the editors of the series. An introductory framework opens the book, and www.routledgetextbooks.com/textbooks/ a concluding section draws on the case studies sustainability/culture.php to emphasise their transferability and specificity, and outlines their potential contribution to future www.routledge.com/books/series/RSCSD/ research, practice and policy in cultural sustain- 48 ability. ‘Routledge Studies in Culture and Sustainable Development’ Cultural Sustainability in European Cities. Cultural Sustainability and Regional Imagining Europolis Development. Theories and practices of Edited by Svetlana Hristova, territorialisation Milena Dragićević Šešić, and Nancy Duxbury Edited by Joost Dessein, Elena Battaglini and Lummina Horlings

European cities are contributing to the develop- Meeting the aims of sustainability is becoming ment of a more sustainable urban system that is increasingly difficult; at the same time, the call capable of coping with economic crises, ecologi- for culture is becoming more powerful. This book cal challenges, and social disparities in different explores the relationships between culture, sus- nation-states and regions throughout Europe. tainability and regional change through the con- This book reveals in a pluralistic way how Euro- cept of ‘territorialisation’. This describes the dy- pean cities are generating new approaches to namics and processes in the context of regional their sustainable development, and the special development, driven by collective human agency contribution of culture to these processes. It ad- that stretches beyond localities and marked-off dresses both a deficit of attention to small and regional boundaries. medium-sized cities in the framework of Europe- an sustainable development and an underestima- This book launches the concept of ‘territorialisation of the role of culture, artistic expression, and tion’ by exploring how the natural environment creativity for integrated development of the city and culture are constitutive of each other. This as a prerequisite to urban sustainability. concept allows us to study the characterisation of the natural assets of a place, the means by On the basis of a broad collection of case stud- which the natural environment and culture in- ies throughout Europe, representing a variety of teract, and how communities assign meaning regionally specific cultural models of sustainable to local assets, add functions and ascribe rules development, the book investigates how partici- of how to use space. By highlighting the time- pative culture, community arts and, more gener- space dimension in the use and consumption of ally, creativity of civic imagination are conducive resources, territorialisation helps to frame the to the goal of a sustainable future of small and concept and grasp the meaning of sustainable re- medium-sized cities. gional development. Drawing on a range of case studies from all continents, the book addresses both conceptual issues and practical applications of ‘territorialisation’ in a range of contexts, forms, and scales.

49 ASSESSING CULTURE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT Informing and shaping policy

Assessments are an important part of both cult task – to devise and use qualitative in- policies and politics. There are several meth- dicators by means, for example, of general odologies for carrying out assessments and descriptions, anecdotes and observations, communicating their results, but indicators narratives, images and perhaps even perfor- are perhaps the most commonly used. Indi- mance. cators select threads, headlines or leverage points from complex and non-linear phenom- While indicators reflect policy ena, and reduce them to more easily com- options, they can also shape them, prehensible evidence in order to provide in- since very often policies, or at least formation about the impacts of events and activities are defined by what trajectories, the effects of different courses outputs can be measured. This often of action, and the quality and direction of change. Usually indicators are quantitative, leaves behind the less quantifiable statistical and numerical, which for some areas of cultural sustainability and topics can be a simplification too far, and which are a great many. 50 it becomes necessary – a far more diffi- (Raquel Freitas) Efforts to develop sustainability indicators into the field of culture and humanities. We have strongly increased since the beginning find however that indicators, whether quanti- of the 1990s, often led by intergovernmen- tative or qualitative, provide important tools tal processes of organisations (such as the for making culture more tangible in the policy OECD, EU or UNESCO) and supported by arena. The essential question for us is not large research projects as well as by region- whether or not to have indicators, but rather al and local initiatives. Indicators (such as to find or create indicators that are capable GDP) also serve as a tool of communication of accurately and fully pinpointing the partic- and can raise awareness (for example ‘eco- ular and characteristics attributes of culture logical footprints’). Thus, although indicators within sustainable development, not ‘whether’ are used to indicate and measure change, but ‘what sort’ and ‘how’ to construct or to they may also generate it, and in that sense use them. they are powerful policy tools. Indicators relate not only to the production of scientific knowledge, but also to a political norm creation [29]. The design of sustainability indi- Existing indicators cators constitutes a challenge to scientists, however, given the multidimensionality and There are presently a number of social and value-laden nature of sustainability, and this cultural statistics from international to local difficulty is only exacerbated in the context of level that offer data about cultural phenom- culture which can less easily than, say eco- ena and human well-being. There also exist nomics or ecology, be quantified statistically. sets of sustainability indicators that include socio-cultural aspects alongside their en- Social, cultural and environmental vironmental and ecological ones. But what contexts are time and space specific. kind of indicators are there that explicitly To attend the purposes of reducing target the interconnections between culture complexity, correlate one another and sustainable development? What is char- acteristic of these indicators? phenomena that seem untidy and chaotic and facilitate handy The existing indicators are often sector communication for policy arenas, based serving a certain type of policies. the assessments often may They usually concern practices and process- flatten and trivialise the es such as the consumption or the supply of phenomena’s complexity or crush services or the availability of resources, but a concept on the indicator and they are rarely able to measure and interpret quality change in society. They also often masking or even hiding paradigms, suffer from confusion between cultural activ- ideologies and assumptions. ities and impacts [30]. Overall, it seems to be (Elena Battaglini) difficult to take into account the full diversity and complexity of our cultural reality, and as Indicators, and more broadly evidence-based a result existing indicators tend to follow a ra- policies, are often criticised as representing tionalist and econometric logic. Moreover, al- a techno-rational/economic view of society though these indicators are labelled as being and of decision-making, and there are some ‘cultural’, they seem to measure phenomena arguments for not expanding this approach that could rather be considered as social (for 51 example, participation, equity or education) or economic. They also seem to assume that The challenges of the impact of culture on development is always sustainable. assessing culture in sustainability Indicators may also suffer from scalar problems. The scale of the measurement does There are several challenges to finding or not necessarily meet the scale of the actual creating indicators that measure the rela- activity or practice or their impact (e.g. use tionship between culture and sustainability . of national level indicators in the assessment First of all a clear understanding of the link- of tourism at the destination level), or they ages between culture and sustainability is are simply designed to target certain type required at the conceptual level. Here, our of societies (such as, developing countries). identification of three different but comple- There are also challenges related to their mentary and overlapping roles for culture operationalisation arising from a discrep- in sustainable development might facilitate ancy between objectives (the vast aims of the collection of data and evidence that is the sustainable development ‘project’) and more suitable for the evaluation of the role resources (including the normal funding mod- and meaning of culture in sustainable devel- els, which make truly long term assessment opment. Second, however, come questions difficult) [31]. related to the availability, standardisation, DEVELOPING INDICATORS IN A aggregation and ranking of data, all of which PARTICIPATORY WAY are required to allow cultural statistics to be consistently constructed, and therefore use- “While working in the Institute for Sustainable Development ful. in Belgrade, I directly cooperated with non-governmental organisations that were implementing various communi- Assessment should be more than ty-related projects starting from education, culture, human rights or corruption, for example. NGOs lacked quality and a collection of indicators. It should cultural indicators that would enable the measurement of include methodological desired change. Together with the NGOs, I developed a tailor made capacity building program for every NGO partner. We considerations that go as far as jointly revised existing quantitative indicators, added ade- proposing the inversion of top-down quate cultural indicators and developed relevant quality indicators. Newly defined log frames contained indicators that structures that compartmentalise were measuring processes, performance, immediate output and pre-define policy areas, into of the implemented projects but as well mid-term quality alternative frames for guiding impact. Logical frameworks also contained different indicators that focused on measuring social, cultural, educational decision-makers through bottom-up, and if applicable environmental indicators. By incorporating contextualised decisional processes. quality and cultural indicators into their reports NGOs were familiarising donors with other aspects/dimensions of their (Raquel Freitas) work that they were not aware of. This led to improvement of donor’s standards i.e. requirements related to assessment Those developing cultural sustainability indi- of quality change that they might in future impose to their other partners and programs”. cators may also encounter other problems. Professionals and practitioners working in ( Jasmina Kuka) the sector of culture are not necessarily familiar with quantitative (or any other) assess- 52 ment methods, an issue also with variation between countries, and without interdisciplin- CULTURAL MAPPING AS A WAY TO INVOLVE ary co-operation they cannot essentially con- COMMUNITIES TO MAKE ASSESSMENTS tribute to the process of designing indicators. Decisions makers, on the other hand, might Cultural mapping [36] is a systematic tool to involve communities in the identification and recording of local rely on measurable, tangible quantitative indi- cultural assets, with the implication that this knowledge cators whilst seeing qualitative indicators as will then be used to inform collective strategies, planning being flawed by their perceived subjectivity. processes or other initiatives. It promises new ways of To achieve cultural sustainability, both types describing, accounting for, and coming to terms with the cultural resources (both tangible or quantitative and in- are needed, and must be combined into inte- tangible or qualitative) of communities and places. grated ways of monitoring and understanding Key issues in the highly interdisciplinary field of change, which will require new approaches cultural mapping include the questions of what to map, and long-term planning. There is an urgent how to map, and to what purpose the ‘findings’ should be directed. Issues of power, resistance, alternative per- need for good examples that show the op- spectives and knowledge, and the question of what con- portunities of new participatory approaches stitutes important cultural elements and meanings are such as cultural mapping or ‘counter-map- situated at the centre of the field. The process of making ping’, and co-production of various sorts . implicit knowledge explicit, and mobilising the symbolic forms through which local residents understand and com- municate their sense of place, also have ethical and political dimensions. Cultural mapping encompasses an array of traditions and trajectories. For example, since the turn of the The way forward millennium the rising prominence of so-called ‘creative industries’ internationally has meant that cultural policy- In the light of shortcomings in existing indica- related mapping research has tended to focus on defin- tors and acknowledging the challenges facing, measuring and mapping the presence and spread of ing the development of better indicators, we the economic dimensions of the cultural and creative sec- suggest the following steps to proceed. tors. At the local level, as culture became more integrated within strategic development and planning initiatives, there has been a growing number of initiatives to identify, The development of indicators that more quantify, and geographically locate cultural assets such as usefully reflect culture should be considered facilities, organisations, public art and heritage. as a joint learning process. This implies that This comprises only a part of the field, however. Cultural mapping also encompasses artistic and the importance of incorporating cultural as- counter-mapping traditions that prioritise the qualitative sessments in sustainability programmes and the intangible, valorise alternative perspectives, needs to be revealed to a wider range of and broaden the ways in which we understand cultural stakeholders, participants and research- resources within community systems, relationships, and fields of meaningful interaction. In these ways, cultural ers. Relevant stakeholders from policy and mapping aims to recognise and make visible the ways lo- decision makers to researchers and practical stories, practices, relationships, memories, and rituals tioners, with their different worldviews and constitute places as meaningful locations. paradigms, should be involved in the design- An important trajectory of cultural mapping involves the tradition of community empowerment and ing process of new indicators, and where fea- counter-mapping. Counter-mapping refers to a map-mak- sible to modify (broaden) existing ones, and ing process in which communities challenge the formal their capacities and knowledge of indicators maps, appropriate official techniques of representation, in the design and use of indicators should be and make their own maps. Both the alternative mapping process itself and the visualised map that results are increased. Collaboration between the actors viewed as acts of resistance, and in contexts of uneven at different levels and sectors is also needed power relations can serve to articulate and promote mar- to critically reflect on the existing statistics, ginalized voices and perspectives in society. taking responsibility for the costs of their 53 (Nancy Duxbury) development and operationalisation. Collab- indicators that can be used to measure (for oration may also contribute positively to the example) changes in the environmental- bias that may arise from political objectives ly-sound behaviour or human and societal related to the indicator work. wellbeing that is culturally embedded. The challenge is rather to consider these as in- The second imperative is that good exam- dicators of culturally sustainable transforma- ples and practices are urgently found and tion, and to develop new indicators to mea- shared. What is needed for example is quali- sure this change. tative indicators, examples of different types and formats, illustrations of how they can Finally there is the question of time and rel- be used, and ways for them to be combined ative perspectives. As far as the overall pro- with quantitative indicators. There already cess of indicators from design to use is con- exist approaches, frameworks and proce- cerned, it should be noted that assessments dures which might be exploited as a starting related to the interrelationship between cul- point or work of reference when developing ture and sustainability concern underlying indicators for culture. This includes cultural processes that are not necessarily percepti- EPILOGUE ecosystem services [32] and the principles ble in the short-term. Moreover the process- and practice of sustainable design. But there es may be perceived differently depending seems to be need for many different and on the subject and on the object of analysis. parallel assessment methods and types of Therefore, the long term and issues of in- indicators, instead of one. ter-subjectivity and different perceptions and interests concerning cultural sustainability The acknowledgment in indicator construc- are necessary points of departure for analy- tion of the three different roles of culture in, sis. They must be included in the picture that for and as sustainable development, as elab- is taken through assessment. This is useful orated in this document, is a third require- not only for the policy design, but also for the ment of future research. As far as the first policy implementation and policy evaluation role, the 4th pillar approach, is concerned the phase. Assessment tools and indicators, just indicators may mostly concern the cultural as the concepts that underlie them, should policy sector, and there are both good sta- also not be seen as static entities but as tistics, as well as already ongoing work, in contextualised and evolving realities, which this field. Lessons from this field, however, in- the policy-maker has to constantly take into clude the need for a more critical elaboration consideration in order to maintain the rele- of sustainability and a more critical stance to vance of policy and resultant action. economic development. In culture’s ‘second role’, where culture is considered as a connecting or mediating force between the other dimensions of sustainability, the assessment becomes more complex, due to the role of culture in different processes. Moreover, the assessments are extremely context specific. However, (participatory) methodologies in landscape research and place attachment have been shown to be helpful. Finally, in 54 the third role of culture, there are already EPILOGUE

55 STORY 4

GREENING THE CITY, CULTIVATING COMMUNITY: Social and cultural sustainability: Re-connecting urban humans with the land in Paris

Since the publication of the Brundtland Report pre-occupation with important matters such as and Agenda 21, interest in urban nature has the health of the soil and the air, rights of access grown, and for social, cultural as well as environ- to land and soil as a public good, the preservation mental reasons. For many decades, nature within of old species, the right to reproduce and distrib- cities has been ‘civilised’, relegated to a decora- ute seeds, access to healthy local food and the tive role, and appreciated at best for relaxation implementation of alternative economic models, and recreation. This position has been challenged guerrilla gardening touches through culture on by recent enthusiasm for community gardening all three of the traditional pillars of sustainable and the more radical ‘guerrilla gardening’. These development, the environmental, the social and activities reflect on the place and role of inhabi- the economic. The gardeners occupy public and tants’ engagement with nature in the context of private space as public goods, for example via urbanisation. shared use and open access to city public ame- nities, self-sustained food production, and green Although guerrilla gardening varies around the art. They question the conventional urban way of world, there are fundamental aspects in com- life, remind citizens that natural resources such mon, notably social and political dimensions, and as land are not endlessly renewable, and offer above all the desire to begin to transform the alternative, more sustainable, pathways through relationship of humans to nature. Guerrilla gar- the urban world and lifestyle. dening is interconnected with local cultures and based upon ordinary everyday creativity closely Culture is a dynamic concept; through initiatives linked to nature. The initiatives function as com- such as guerrilla gardening it creates openness mon ground for people to express basic universal to innovation and change in terms of personal concerns on issues such as participation, democ- behaviour. Guerrilla gardening also touches and racy, responsibility, trust, personal health and modifies perspectives such as identity, the shape aesthetic concerns. and importance of (perhaps dormant) local cultures with historical roots; it provokes new cul- Guerrilla gardening in Paris and its suburbs illumi- tural experiences. It leads to experiments with nates the new understandings and roles begin- self-sufficiency and sharing, so that guerrilla gar- ning to be given to nature by city dwellers, sug- dening in Paris is also a social movement which gesting fundamentally new cultural patterns are symbolises its transformative power and the cul- being created. By means of direct action and the tural shift it is bringing about, in which participa- changes it brings to the quality of the everyday tion and civic empowerment are crucial aspects. environment, it challenges both the perception of It has socially innovative outcomes, too, because what urban nature could be and the governance participants have an opportunity for social learn- mechanisms that contain both nature and use of ing; actions such as this, not requiring a code of 56 the land; taken together this underlines a desire rules, can, as Evans Prichard says, create ‘a good by citizens for a more enlivened milieu. In its ordered anarchy’. There are obstacles. The occupation of public space can create tensions between con- trasting perspectives and varied societal claims on how best to use the public space. Furthermore, because it brings into question models of society and economy based on private property and profit-led economic development, the possibility of integrating its perspectives into public policies is limited. Finally, whilst most guerrilla gardening initiatives have started as self-governance, with participatory approaches (radical civic engagement) and a marked tendency towards horizontal decision processes, in some cases gardens or growing yards have been institutionalised and are now promot- ed by governments and local municipalities, leading to a change in the existing policy models.

Some key lessons can be learned. Guerrilla gardening has already developed a rich cultural pattern that alters meanings of common space, self-identity, or even language, encouraging a new political perspective and approach. It proposes not only an alternative economic model, but alternative models of sustainable development more generally which question private property and promote the common use of public space. In a cultural perspective, guerrilla gardening leads to the de-institutionalisation and the re-institutionalisation of existing routines and ways of doing things. This is a precon- dition for change, as without impetus from inside, change would not happen.

Growing food along a disused railway; Pictures: Emeline Eudes EPILOGUE Dwelling in No Man’s Land On 8th May 2011 in the COST Association “No Man’s Lands are places that do not belong exclusively offices in Brussels a group of 30 researchers to one person but are shared and used by many people as a met together for the first time to start work common good. They were once firmly rooted in shared and on the newly-initiated COST Action ‘Investi- collective community activity, indeed in sustainability and the long term husbanding of common resources governed gating Cultural Sustainability’ [COST IS1007; by mutually-agreed social and cultural rules of behaviour ad www.culturalsustainability.eu]. Our four-year- practice. Their most familiar meaning today may well be that dwelling in the No Man’s Land of culture and of the land between the trenches in 1914-18. This reflects sustainable development had started. a much deeper meaning of lying between neighbouring communities, because such common lands for a thousand years have been located at the edges of village, township and In stepping into the gap between ‘culture’ and parish lands. What makes No Man’s Lands most interesting ‘sustainable development’, participants in the for us, however, is a contradiction within their meaning. As COST Action (their numbers rapidly growing a place of complex resources shared in common, they reflect from that initial 30 to about 100) were aware community and collectivity, but at the same time they lay of entering a metaphysical No Man’s Land. outside and challenged many norms of ‘society’. By virtue of their liminality, their location at the edge of communities, We called it ‘cultural sustainability’, a ‘place’ at the edge indeed of everyday activity and of the cultivat- with challenges but also resources and les- ed (‘cultured’) area, sometimes extending beyond even the sons to offer to its surrounding neighbours. It ‘outfield’, places only occasionally visited and used, No Man’s lay between large reasonably defined disci- Lands came to be seen as being beyond as well as between; plinary territories of environmental and social strange, eerie and queer, indeed potentially dangerous places, a place of outlaws and of otherness, a place from which sciences, arts and humanities, but its own radical ideas could come”. boundaries were badly drawn and its heart- lands hardly explored. It was most frequently (Graham Fairclough) visited and crossed by cultural policy and by artists of many kinds, bringing new ideas from other places, but also sometimes crossed standpoints. The actions and thoughts that by people interested in political ecology or took place in our notional No Man’s Land democracy or human identity and wellbeing. were as diverse (and superficially unconnect- Some concepts were already explored, but ed) as in real world No Man’s Lands. But we 58 usually from relatively narrow or focussed suspected we had simply not yet found the right set of mutually-agreed rules and shared As the group expanded, it accumulated, ex- or mutually-respected attitudes that all suc- perienced and shared a huge diversity in cessful commons needs. Approaches to ways of dwelling as well as of understanding cultural sustainability had been very diverse, of the key concepts, culture and sustainabil- reflecting the different aims, aspirations and ity. The group embodied social and cultural disciplinary backgrounds of the many dif- as well as disciplinary diversity. Its members ferent types of actors, artists, researchers, travelled from 25 different countries across practitioners, policy-makers and politicians Europe, and three in Australasia, bringing who haunted these outfields of what was be- experience of having worked in and with a coming ‘mainstream’, conventional sustain- wide range of social and cultural problems able development. Not enough voices called and contexts, and often too at internation- for new research lines; not enough critical al level which even further broadened our mass yet existed to establish different policy world view. This diversity, similar to multi- contexts or frames of discourse. As in the disciplinarity, enriched the content of the real historical world, the shared commonali- work. Even the challenges that it brought of ty of No Man’s Lands had been fractured by finding a common language, conceptually as sectoral difference. COST’s endorsement of the cultural sustainability action provided an opportunity to (re)discover this unexplored land, now abandoned at the edges but potentially central to everything.

Our key task was to embed in various ways cultural sensibilities and culture in all its forms into existing sustainability frameworks. We therefore packed the Brundtland Report

on Sustainable Development as a guide- Maurizio Sajeva Photo: book, albeit possible outdated, and carried the three ‘pillars’ of environment, society and well as linguistically, helped us to sharpen our economy in our toolbox, for want of anything questions and strengthen our conclusions. In more modern. Acknowledging the challenges and around our vaguely-defined No Man’s and some shortcomings of this set of ideas Land, we began to perceive smaller, better and implements, we also noted their applica- defined territories that started to emerge as bility in research and power in policy making. our comprehension grew. Our ‘maps’ became They gave us signposts, directions and oc- more detailed and in the untracked ‘waste’ casionally maps. we began to find pathways. Our No Man’s Land began to resolve or dissolve into a set The network itself witnessed and of places each with their own character and represented a diversity of European identity, problems and needs, resources and cultures and different perceptions wealth. Some of these were populated by of sustainabilities. This was a great experts interested in arts and cities, cultur- resource for our work, but also a al participation; others were covered by ge- ographers who were interested in planning challenge for the co-ordination. and the maintenance of sustainable places; (Katriina Soini) others were interested in how heritage and 59 memories make the future; some aimed book, as stories or as smaller texts; many for cultural, attitudinal and indeed political others went towards the making of three change. edited volumes in a new book series, ‘Rout- ledge Studies in Culture and Sustainable Development’, which will continue to offer a place to publish the best of ongoing cultural sustainability research and practice.

In the final year we returned from our No Man’s Land back into the centres of our communities, and started to build a common house, an interdisciplinary framework, the ground- work of which was based on three different Photo: Joost Dessein Joost Photo: roles of culture in sustainable development. The walls started to grow. Time was too short We began to understand and appreciate for such a network to complete the interiors others’ viewpoints and ideas, whilst neverthe- or even to cover the house with a roof, but less still keeping our own. No Man’s Lands in nevertheless No Man’s Land had been ex- the real world belonged to no single person, plored, and has been found to be a fruitful, but they were used by many. Such shared ar- rewarding and revealing place. This publica- eas and resources – commons – afforded tion serves as a first map for way-finding in many different things to many people, even No Man’s Land and for returning to it in order conflicting things as long as their exploita- to harness its intellectual and practical as- tion was well and sustainably managed. In sets for broader common and cultural good. our metaphorical No Man’s Land, therefore, We may also see that, although we covered we saw that, agreeing on single, exclusive most of the No Man’s Land with different key concepts, definitions or methodologies knowledge and expertise, there were areas - ways of dwelling - was not an option. We that remained unexplored (cultural minorities, wished to benefit from the diversity of per- cultural economics ... but the list is long). The spectives and methods that existed in our No Man’s Land, although explored now, is still research community, and to profit from the open for new travellers, visitors or residents; ‘otherness’ that lies within any No Man’s so is the field of culture and sustainable de- Land. A decrease in intellectual and practi- velopment open for further development. We cal diversity would, we felt, limit our under- end this book with our suggestions for next standing of our No Man’s Land, and reduce steps and new journeys, expressed through its value to others, as when mosaic farmland future research lines. is converted to agri-monoculture.

So instead (or as well as) framing definitions and identifying policies and tools, we started to tell stories about our different experiences, our contexts whether urban or rural, about agriculture, territorialisation, arts, both on conceptual as well as practical levels. Some 60 of these stories have been offered in this ON INTER- AND TRANSDISCIPLINARITY IN Returning with new CULTURE AND SUSTAINABILITY ideas: future The integrative search process of sustainability, with its 4+1 dimensions (ecological, economic, social, cultural, + research lines personal) requires a learning culture. Engaging with culture enables contributions to be made to shaping systems Despite growing interest in culture as an ex- of meaning in society, and connections to be made to plicit aspect of sustainable development, the worldviews, values and things that speak back to humans. number of research programmes covering the The symbolic universe that we build and inhabit is both part of the ecosystem of sensory realities, and a product of issue remains small, and in most cases re- inter-subjective agency. Learning-able and response-able search is concealed in a variety of other the- cultures of sustainability, infused with understanding matic projects. Raising the profile of cultural and respect for life in all its complexity, empower humans sustainability as an independent but integra- to change and re-invent their lives. The search for social justice requires not only the development of certain eth- tive research field is therefore a priority if it is ical values but also the enrichment and diversification of to be more deeply recognised in current and skills, competences and ways of knowing reality, embed- forthcoming research programs. ding these into shared practices.

The insights gained during our Action, which Transversal learning is possible through an expanded ra- tionality, striving for unity in complexity of knowledge, have been only briefly summarised in this doc- integrating different ways of knowing without simplify- ument, allow us to identify major gaps in un- ing them into one meta-discipline. It both rejects a unitary derstanding the role and meaning of culture ‘theory of everything’ and welcomes a complex unity of in sustainable development, and to discern knowledge, grounded in inter- and transdisciplinarity, de- obstacles to future progress. We can begin fined as: > Interdisciplinarity, practices which, thanks to inspir- to identify ways to take forward this relatively ing exchanges, enable researchers from one disci- newly-emerging field of interdisciplinary re- pline to borrow and adapt methods and metaphors search, and in this final section we offer a few from other disciplines, within a wider shared system suggestions. (e.g. science or art); > Transdisciplinarity, an extra dimension of research There is always a risk in setting out such lists and action, involving different modes of knowing, of research questions or topics. They might from outside of science (or of art); a wholly different kind of research practice, which complements for example be mistaken as being compre- disciplinary and interdisciplinary research, offering a hensive. More damagingly, they might be con- wider integrative framework. sidered in isolation, and it seems important to The transdisciplinary attitude is not opposed to disci- emphasise that whilst we argue for the inde- plinarity (which advances specialised, limited areas of pendence of “culture in, for and as sustain- knowledge), but is opposed to a ‘cisdisciplinary attitude’, able development” as a field of research, we i.e. a self-mutilating research philosophy whose self-iden- do not argue for its isolation; indeed, it’s very tification conforms with the boundaries of professional disciplines. Transdisciplinarity invites artful inquiry, an raison d’être is to be integrative and medita- openness to dynamic complexity and an acceptance of tive. One of the major lessons of our four year ambivalences, contradictions and ambiguities. COST Action, and of the intensive collaborative networking and co-researching that it en- (Sacha Kagan) abled, has been the inherent interconnectedness of culture and sustainable development, in action as well as in research. There are interconnections at disciplinary level, in terms of policy contexts (scales, public-private), in the 61 interface of the material and the cognitive or • Refining and operationalisa- perceptual worlds, in the transition from past tion of conceptual approaches to future, in the symbiosis of global with local > Further clarification and specification of and of people and place, the interdependence the interface, interrelationship and over- of production and consumption (and the im- lap between culture and sustainable de- pacts of both), to mention but a few examples. velopment > Investigation into how the three roles of We propose a loose-knit yet interwoven set of culture work in practice: what are the po- future research principles. They constitute a litical, philosophical and practical prereq- strategic framework for the next stages, perhaps over the next decade or so, of research uisites? into understanding and acting on the central > Exploration of ‘cultural sustainability’ in place that culture holds in sustainability dis- relation to other unifying and mainstream- course. In summary, research should: ing frameworks and new evolving frameworks • achieve true interdisciplinarity, beyond and between the domains (social sciences and • Developing methodologies humanities, natural sciences, technological and practices, such as sciences, etc) > Definition and selection of indicators or • reach out towards transdisciplinary guidelines to analyse and manage region- research involving other stakeholders al development through unifying cultural- • envision the co-creation and co-production ly-related filters such as landscape, eco- of knowledge, for example by integrating system services or territory local knowledge in research, and by es- > Further development of the practice of pousing participative and transdisciplinary place-based assessments that use cul- practices ture to create new opportunities, wealth, • stretch beyond Europe and develop inter- quality of life and progressive develop- continental collaborative practices, also ment between global South(s) and North(s) > Revival and modernised use of the con- • integrate and valorise quantitative and cept of commons, including consideration qualitative data and methodologies equally of public/private conflicts, the formation/ • expand ecological research from climate transformation of common (social) mem- change and biodiversity to wider variety of issues, including socio-cultural points of ory and cultural and counter mapping view > Development of methods for mobilising • contribute towards practical applications and motivating individuals and communi- and the re-formulation of policy at all lev- ties in activism and in sustainable thinking els, in other words seek to be transforma- and for studying processes of catalysa- tive in the ways that citizens, actors and tion (who leads, whose agendas) governments see and shape the future > Devising and testing new methods for in- fluencing and shaping eco-environmental Following these general research principles, action and injecting it with greater cul- we suggest a number of more-or-less specif- turally-sensitive and culturally-informed ic individual research lines. We have grouped awareness them in four clusters, broadly speaking, re- > Designing ways to use and benefit from 62 lating to concepts, methods, evidence and cultural activity and creativity in spatial themes, but nonetheless we of course insist planning on their overarching interconnectedness. • Expanding the evidence base > Explore the role of design and creativity in for the role of culture in sus- engendering both physical and emotional tainable development resilience in the face of unavoidable environmental change > Collect and comparatively analyse more > ‘Growing’ democratic participation: ways evidence through the study of exemplars, of operationalising the Faro Convention, such as the value and social impact of shifting practice and policy to become culture in diverse sustainability contexts more people-centred, practical infra- > Engage in comparative research (into dis- structures for participation course and practice) with due regard for > Absence/weakness of modes and mech- contingency and path dependence, in dif- anisms of local governance, which should ferent global contexts be capable (through openness, trans- > Harmonise statistical data spatially and parency, subsidiarity while safeguarding over time, successive aggregation of in- autonomy, context and information) of dicators and indices achieving more culturally-sustainable development • Selected thematic topics > The effects and benefits of migration and mobility: studying modes and methods of the reciprocal integration of incoming cultures and adaptation of ‘host’ cultures, a two-way process > The impact of the loss of ‘minority’ languages (which in academic and policy spheres increasingly means) – not only for their own sake, or impact on identity, but impact on how people think, share discourse, and connect to alternative discourses > Modernisation agendas and neo-liberal growth paradigms - negative influences on (obstacles to) achieving culturally-informed sustainable development > Exploring how research and policy deals with the ‘wickedness’ of sustainability challenges > Attitudes – culture as mediator of change management: questions of participation, adaptive strategies for resilience (e.g. to climate change, post-industrialisation), growth/de-growth and transition (towns), ‘nudging’ behaviours

63 The end of an Action, the beginning of action

We are confident that new research along We are also aware that many European and such lines will advance this emerging field global funding streams, for example within of study, and enable culture to play a more the ERA and notably Horizon 2020, are be- substantial and future-proofed role in achiev- coming available for research that address- ing sustainability. The Action has been able es sustainability issues. It would be a lost to establish a new book series – ‘Routledge opportunity if major research programmes Studies in Culture and Sustainable Develop- continue to focus as exclusively as they have ment’ – as a specific outcome of its work. in the past on narrowly-defined views of envi- This will provide a vehicle for dissemination ronment or ecology, or on views of the econ- of the results of future research and will help omy that separates it from its societal roots. to build cohesion within the whole field. The From our vantage point as returnees from No first three books in the series (see pages Man’s Land, and supported by our extensive 48–49) have been drawn primarily from the webs of cross- and inter-disciplinary collab- work of the Action and its participants. We orations, we can see the necessity and the have also already established a pilot on-line advantages of culture gaining a more central MA in this subject, which we hope will inspire and transformative role in sustainable devel- others to follow us. opment discourse and action. We envisage that the insights of this COST Action will be able to ensure a strong ‘cultural stream’ in future research and policy.

INTERNATIONAL PILOT ONLINE COURSE ON ‘CULTURAL SUSTAINABILITY’ LAUNCHED

In April 2014, a pilot for an international online course on ‘Cultural Sustainability’ was carried out. The course examined the interrelated dimensions of sustainability and the concept of development. It brought together lecturers and students from various backgrounds in interdisciplinary discussions about how culture, power and ecology interact in human-environment relations. The course critically investigat- ed the challenges of achieving sustainability at local, regional and global scales, and the role of cultural policy. It highlighted both philosophical and conceptual issues surrounding the relationship of cultural sustainability and cultural policy, and engaged students in practical case studies, such as those involved in with urban planning and rural development.

The course – MCPS125 ‘Cultural Sustainability’ – is now established at the University of Jyväskylä (Finland) as part of the MA in Cultural Policy. It is unique internationally and addresses a need to consolidate current ideas on this rising topic within academic training programmes. Moreover it equips young scholars to question and address policy development issues in this area. More info can be found here : www.culturalsustainability.eu/outputs

(Nancy Duxbury, Anita Kangas, Katarzyna Plebanczyk)

64 65 STORY 5

RECONSTITUTING CULTURE Tradition and Modernisation: Nature- culture interactions in the Atacama Desert in Chile

Landscapes can be seen as the materialisation of in search of employment, notably to the mining communities, culture and social relations in dy- sector in other parts of the north of the Chile. namic interaction with the natural world. Nature and culture co-evolve; each shapes and in turn Chile has a turbulent political past, and the elec- is shaped by the other. The ongoing social and tion of a democratic government in 1989 brought ecological transformation of the Atacama Desert both stability and further change. New democrat- in the Andes is a clear illustration of the complex- ic ideals led to the drawing-up of the 1993 Indig- ity of this interaction. It shows that policies not enous Peoples Act which recognised indigenous taking a sensitive approach to culture and social populations and began a progressive restitution change can cause unsustainable outcomes, even of land and water rights. Although seemingly a when seeking to do good (here, acknowledging positive step forward for the indigenous popula- the rights of indigenous people towards their re- tion, the way in which rights were distributed has sources). proved problematic. ‘Indigenous’ was defined on ethnic grounds alone; anyone genetically related Recognised as the driest inhabited place on to an indigenous population was granted rights earth, the Atacama spans the borders between to traditional resources and new social benefits. Chile, Peru, Bolivia and Argentina. Rather than This included people who had left the region; a barren strip of land, many parts of the region they were given the opportunity to register for a support a diversity of biological and geological share of indigenous rights and to take advantage forms, as well as a network of saltpans, lakes, hot of from their ethnic background. springs and underground water resources. The combination of these qualities, together with the This situation attracted indigenous people back presence of archaeological vestiges of past cul- to the towns of the Atacama Desert. These tures and the living legacies of the Atacameño people, however, brought back new values that culture, led to the establishment of the Flamen- were not necessarily compatible with those of cos Nature Reserve in the early 1990s. The entire the traditional cultures that the newly acquired north of Chile also contains an abundance of min- rights were supposed to protect. Instead of re- eral resources such as copper and lithium. storing the ‘traditional’ culture-nature nexus, the empowering of indigenous people thus entailed People have been living in Atacama since pre-Co- problematic effects as well. Indigenous popula- lumbian times, and more recently, occupation by tions who had remained in the area, with their traditional communities has led to the develop- particular dynamic of understanding and prac- ment of small settlements such as Toconao and tice, suddenly found themselves sharing their San Pedro de Atacama in oases that are scattered ‘culture’ and environment with neo-indigenous across the landscape. The natural resources his- immigrants who had different cultural values torically provided indigenous peoples with a sub- or understandings. As a result, instead of being 66 sistence livelihood, nevertheless many migrated strengthened, the relatively small existing communities were disrupted by an influx of newly community, the assumption that all hold to the ‘indigenised’ people with a different cultural same cultural values cannot be made. The na- connection to the land. Consequently, divergent ture-culture nexus is a result of complex and con- cultural meanings generated conflicts within the tinuously changing cultural, social and political Atacama Desert community, notably when man- connections built up over long periods of time. aging and deciding collectively over the newly Policies which seek to protect culture and nature returned land and water rights, including the Fla- (in this example, those which grant democratic mencos Nature Reserve. Furthermore, growing property rights to indigenous people) will also water scarcity caused by the expansionist needs impact on and change cultural identity itself [38]. of mining companies operating in a neoliberal setting add to the contemporary climate of tension and race for natural resources and water in the Atacama Desert.

The key lesson to be learned is that culture is constantly changing, that it evolves rapidly, and that it cannot be regarded as an inherent genetic trait. Many countries around the world have indigenous populations and, while their culture often provides a framework for maintaining the

67 Information panel on the Atacameña culture, Pukara de Quitor (on top) and Pre-Columbian archaeological site Pukara de Quitor (below). Pictures: Constanza Parra ACTION PEOPLE People who actively contributed to COST Action IS1007

Many people actively contributed to the COST Action 1007 ‘Investigating Cultural Sustainabil- ity’. They are listed below. More information about their expertise can be found in the online publication ‘Investigating Cultural Sustainability. Experts and multidisciplinary approaches’ (www.culturalsustainability.eu/about-is-1007). In addition to all those members listed below, we also of course benefitted greatly from the participation of all other Action members, as well as the assistance of many other people, notably those who helped organise our workshops and conferences, our invited keynote speakers and other colleagues who offered us presentation from a very wide range of expertise and experience, and advise of members of COST Domain Committee and our rapporteur.

Chair Katriina Soini (FI) University of Jyväskylä and Natural Resources Institute

Vice chair Joost Dessein (BE) ILVO (Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research) and Ghent University

Working Group 1: Concepts Chair: Inger Birkeland (NO) Telemark University College Vice Chair: Theopisti Stylianou-Lambert (CY) Cyprus University of Technology

Working Group 2: Policies Chair: Nancy Duxbury (PT) University of Coimbra, Centre for Social Sciences Vice Chair: Christiaan De Beukelaer (UK) University of Leeds and Jenny Atmanagara (DE) Baden-Württemberg International (before at University of Stuttgart)

Working Group 3: Assessments Chair: Jasmina Kuka (RS) Institute for Sustainable Communities Vice Chair: Elena Battaglini (IT) IRES (Economic and Social Research Institute)

Participants: • Chrystalla Antoniou (CY) Cyprus University of • Nikolaos Boukas (CY) European University Technology Cyprus • Elizabeth Auclair (FR) Cergy-Pontoise • Claudia Brites (PT) Coimbra College of University Agriculture • Oliver Bender (AT) Institute for • Aleksandar Brkic (RS) University of Arts Interdisciplinary Mountain Research • Robert Burton (NO) Centre for Rural Re- • Nathalie Blanc (FR) CNRS search 68 • Lluís Bonet (ES) University of Barcelona • Maria Cadarso (PT) University of Lisbon • Claudia Carvalho (PT) University of Coimbra • Anka Misetic (HR) Institute of Social Sciences • Roberta Chiarini (IT) ENEA Italian National Ivo Pilar Agency in Bologna • Gunnthora Olafsdottir (IS) University of Lux- • Arza Churchman (IL) Interdisciplinary Center embourg (IDC) • Hannes Palang (EE) Tallinn University • Annalisa Cicerchia (IT) Italian National • Anna Palazzo (IT) Roma Tre University Institute of Statistics • Constanza Parra (BE) Catholic University • Eva Cudlinova (CZ) University of South Leuven Bohemia • Mishel Pavlovski (MK) Sts. Cyril & • Mariusz Czepczynski (PL) University of Gdansk Methodius University; Center for Culture & • Cecilia De Ita (UK) University of Leeds Cultural Studies • Stephen Dobson (UK) Sheffield Hallam • Katarzyna Plebańczyk (PL) University of University Jagellonica • Milena Dragicevic-Sesic (RS) University of • Alexandre Polvora (PT) University Institute of Arts Lisbon • Emeline Eudes (FR) CNRS • Anu Printsmann (EE) Tallinn University • Graham Fairclough (UK) Newcastle University • Mario Reimer (DE) University of Stuttgart and (McCord Centre Historic & Cultural Landscape) ILS (Research Institute for Regional & Urban • Raquel Freitas (PT) University Institute of Development) Lisbon • Ljiljana Rogač Mijatović (RS) University of • Loreta Georgievska–Jakovleva (MK) Sts. Arts Cyril & Methodius University; Centre of • Bettina Scharrer (CH) Center for Develop- Cultural Studies ment and Environment (CDE) • Antti Honkanen (FI) University of Eastern • Mordechai Shechter (IL) Interdisciplinary Finland Center (IDC) • Lummina Horlings (NL) Wageningen • Katriina Siivonen (FI) University of Helsinki University • Astrid Skjerven (NO) Oslo and Akershus • Vidar Hreinsson (IS) Reykjavik Academy University College • Svetlana Hristova (BG) South-West • Helen Sooväli - Sepping (EE) Tallinn University of Bulgaria Univeristy • Rolf Hugoson (SE) Centre for Regional • Tatjana Stojceska (MK) Ss.Cyril and Science at Umeå University (CERUM) Methodius University • Jenny Johannisson (SE) University of Borås • Nina Svane - Mikkelsen (NO) University of • Henry Johnson (NZ) University of Otaga Bergen • Sacha Kagan (DE) Leuphana University of • Elisabete Tomaz (PT) University Institute of Lueneburg Lisbon • Anita Kangas (FI) University of Jyväskylä • Goran Tomka (RS) University of Arts • Mari Kivitalo (FI) University of Jyväskylä • Sara Ursic (HR) Institute of Social Sciences • Marion Leng (CH) University of Bern, Ivo Pilar Interdisciplinary Centre for General Ecology • Miroslav Valeriu Tascu-Stavre (RO) Centre for • Miloslav Lapka (CZ) University of South Studies in Contemporary Architecture Bohemia • Nevila Xhindi (AL) European University of • Maria Leus (BE) University of Hasselt and Tirana University of Antwerp • Myrsini Zorba (GR) Hellenic Open University • Karni Lotan (IL) Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) • Julija Matejić (RS) University of Arts • Marina Mihaila (RO) Center for Studies in Contemporary Architecture 69 13. Soini, K. and Birkeland, I. 2014. Explor- REFERENCES ing the scientific discourse of cultural sustainability. Geoforum 51, 213–23. 1. Williams 1976 (reprinted in 2011). Key- 14. Hawkes, J. 2001. The fourth pillar of words. A Vocabulary of Culture and sustainability: Culture’s essential role in Society. Routledge Revivals. Fontana/ public planning, Cultural development Groom Helm. Network (Vic.), Common Ground. 2. Pirnes, E. 2009. Cultural policy in the 15. Birkeland, I. 2015. The potential space sectoral trap - but how to escape it. for cultural sustainability: place narra- Nordisk Kulturpolitisk Tidskrift 2/2009, tives and place-heritage in Rjukan. In 155-174. Theory and practice in heritage and 3. Esteva, G. 1992. Development. In The sustainability: Between past and future, development dictionary: A guide to eds. E. Auclair and G. Fairclough, knowledge as power, eds. W. Sachs, Routledge, 161-75. Zed Books, 6-25. 16. Kivitalo, M., Kumpulainen, K. and Soini, 4. Connelly, S. 2007. Mapping sustainable K. 2015 (in press). Exploring culture development as a contested concept. and sustainability in rural Finland. In Local Environment 12 (3), 259-78. Cultural sustainability and regional development: Theories and practices 5. Seghezzo, L. 2009. The five dimen- of territorialisation, eds. J. Dessein, E. sions of sustainability. Environmental Battaglini and L. Horlings, Routledge. Politics: 4, 539-556. 17. Horlings, L.G. 2015 (in press). The 6. Turner, R. K., ed.1993. Sustainable worldview and symbolic dimension in Environmental Economics and Man- territorialisation: How human values agement. Principles and Practice, play a role in a Dutch neighbourhood. Belhaven Press. In Cultural sustainability and regional 7. Plumwood, V. 2002. Environmental development: Theories and practices culture: The ecological crisis of reason, of territorialisation, eds. J. Dessein, E. Routledge. Battaglini and L. Horlings, Routledge. 8. Barker, S. 2006. Sustainable Develop- 18. Muller, P. 2011. Les politiques pub- ment. Routledge, London. liques, Presses Universitaires de France. 9. Throsby, D. 2001. Economics and Cul- ture. Cambridge University Press. 19. Blondiaux, L. 2008. Le nouvel es- prit de la démocratie, Actualité de la 10. Auclair, E. and Fairclough, G. eds. démocratie participative, Coédition 2015. Theory and practice in heritage Seuil-La République des idées. and sustainability: Between past and future, Routledge. 20. Hay, R. 1998. Sense of place in developmental context. Journal of Environ- 11. Chiu, R. 2004. Socio-cultural sustain- mental Psychology 18 (1), 5-29. ability of housing: A conceptual exploration. Housing, Theory and Society 21 21. Horlings L.G. and Hinssen, J. P. P. (2), 65-76. 2014. Sustainable innovation in intensive animal husbandry: Policy and 12. Axelsson, R., Angelstam, P., Degerman, public protests towards a mega-farm in E., Teitelbaum, S., Andersson, K., the Netherlands. Elbakidze, M. and Drotz, M.K. 2013. So- cial and cultural sustainability: Criteria, 22. Relph, E. 1976. Place and Placeless- indicators, verifier variables for mea- ness. Pion Limited, London. 70 surement and maps for visualization to 23. Dessein, J., Battaglini, E. and Horlings, support planning. Ambio 42 (2), 215-28. L. eds. 2015. Cultural sustainability and regional development: Theories and practices of territorialisation, Routledge. 24. Chiesi, L. and Costa, P. 2015. 31. Freitas, R. and De Beukelaer, C. 2015 Making Territory through Cultural (in press). UNESCO’s Culture-Develop- Mapping and Co-Design. How Com- ment Indicator Suite (CDIS). In Glo- munity Practices Promote Territorial- balization, culture and development. isation. In Cultural sustainability and The UNESCO convention on cultural regional development: Theories and diversity, eds. C. De Beukelaer, M. practices of territorialisation, eds. J. Pyykkönen and J.P. Singh, Palgrave Dessein, E. Battaglini and L. Hor- Macmillan. lings, Routledge. 32. Blanc, N. and Soini, K. 2015 (in press). 25. ESF/COST 2010: Landscape in a Cultural and biological diversity: Changing World - Bridging Divides, Interconnections in ordinary places. Integrating Disciplines, Serving In Globalization, culture and develop- Society, SPB41, http://www.esf.org/ ment. The UNESCO convention on publications/science-policy-briefings. cultural diversity, eds. C. De Beukelaer, html; http://www.cost.esf.org/library/ M. Pyykkönen and J.P. Singh, Palgrave newsroom/spb Macmillan. 26. Council of Europe’s Intercultural 33. Harmon, D., Woodley, E. and Loh, J. Cities website, http://www.coe.int/t/ 2010. Measuring status and trends dg4/cultureheritage/culture/Cities/ in biological and cultural diversity. In Default_en.asp). Nature and culture. Rebuilding a lost connection, eds. S. Pilgirm and J.N. 27. Burton, R. and Paragahawewa, U. Pretty, Earthscan, 41-64. H. 2011. Creating culturally sustainable agri-environmental schemes, 34. Blanc, N. and Eudes, E. 2014. Art et Journal of Rural Studies 27 - 1, 95- environnement : prolonger la question 104. de l’habiter. Plastik 4, Art et biodiversi- té: un art durable ? http://art-science. 28. O’Brien, K. 2013. The courage to univ-paris1.fr/document.php?id=732 change, adaptation from the inside out. In Successful adaptation to 35. Horlings, L.G. 2015 (in press). Values climate change: Linking science and in place: A value-oriented approach policy in a rapidly changing world, toward sustainable place-shaping. eds. S. C. Moser and M. T. Boykoff, Regional Studies, Regional Science. Routledge. 36. Duxbury, N., Garrett-Petts, W.F. and 29. Rametsteiner, E. , Pülzl, H. , Al- McLennan, D. 2015. Cultural mapping kan-Olsson, A. and Frederiksen, as cultural inquiry: Introduction to an P. 2011. Sustainability indicator emerging field of practice. In Cultural development - Science or political mapping as cultural inquiry, eds. N. negotiation? Ecological Indicators 11 Duxbury, W.F. Garrett-Petts and D. (1), 61-70. McLennan, Routledge, 1-42. 30. Grincheva, N. 2014. Cultural dimen- 37. Hristova, S., Dragićević Šešić,M. and sion of sustainable development: Duxbury, N. eds. 2015. Cultural sus- Insights into the current practices tainability in European cities. Imagining of ‘measuring’ results of cultural Europolis, Routledge projects. International federation of 38. Parra, C. and Moulaert, F. forthcoming. coalitions for cultural diversity, http:// The governance of the nature-culture cdc-ccd.org/IMG/pdf/FICDC_Devel- nexus: literature, case-studies and opmentIndicators_ArticleGrinche- lessons to learn from the San Pedro de va_EN.pdf . Atacama case”. Nature+Culture 71

This publication is supported by the COST.

COST - European Cooperation in Science and Technology - is an intergovernmental framework aimed at facilitating the collaboration and networking of scientists and researchers at European level. It was established in 1971 by 19 member countries and currently includes 35 member countries across Europe, and Israel as a cooperating state.

COST funds pan-European, bottom-up networks of scientists and researchers across all science and technology fields. These networks, called ‘COST Actions’, promote international coordination of nationally-funded research. By fostering the networking of researchers at an international level, COST enables breakthrough scientific developments leading to new concepts and products, thereby contributing to strengthening Europe’s research and innovation capacities.

COST’s mission focuses in particular on: • Building capacity by connecting high quality scientific communities throughout Europe and worldwide; • Providing networking opportunities for early career investigators; • Increasing the impact of research on policy makers, regulatory bodies and national decision makers as well as the private sector.

Through its inclusiveness policy, COST supports the integration of research communities in less research-intensive countries across Europe, leverages national research investments and addresses societal issues.

Over 45 000 European scientists benefit from their involvement in COST Actions on a yearly basis. This allows the pooling of national research funding and helps countries research communities achieve common goals.

As a precursor of advanced multidisciplinary research, COST anticipates and complements the activities of EU Framework Programmes, constituting a ‘bridge’ towards the scientific communities of emerging countries.

Traditionally, COST draws its budget for networking activities from successive EU RTD Frame- work Programmes.

COST is supported by the EU Framework Programme Horizon 2020

72 Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development

CONCLUSIONS FROM THE COST ACTION IS1007 INVESTIGATING CULTURAL SUSTAINABILITY

Katriina Soini - [email protected] | Joost Dessein - [email protected] EDITED BY Joost Dessein, Katriina Soini, Graham Fairclough and Lummina Horlings