CULTURAL POLICY OF CITIES AND CREATIVE ECONOMY OF HERITAGE

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Edin Jašarović

Abstract

In the need to impose on decision-makers a road map that will contain convincing arguments for investing in the field of cultural heritage, researchers in cultural heritage policy use various values of analytical research and socioeconomic indicators to facilitate the understanding of future directions. In this framework, this paper analyzes the European perspective of development and related spheres of influence, which arise in the socioeconomic chain of contemporary production and heritage branding. As inspiring case studies for adopting good practices, the paper also observes three examples of successful interpretations of heritage from neighboring Albania, which may give rise to a situational analysis of the current trends in the Montenegrin context. Since there is a certain inertia in the acceptance of new models of heritage management, this paper considers the issues of the unused potential of Montenegrin cities as well. Fundamentally, the paper emphasizes the solutions that have already been theoretically and practically implemented and connected in the cycle of complementary activities of the creative economy of heritage, but also critically relates to the Montenegrin reality, which requires a new approach in its management.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

How to Cite
CULTURAL POLICY OF CITIES AND CREATIVE ECONOMY OF HERITAGE. (2022). Limes-plus, 19(3), 11-35. https://doi.org/10.69899/limes-plus22203011j

How to Cite

CULTURAL POLICY OF CITIES AND CREATIVE ECONOMY OF HERITAGE. (2022). Limes-plus, 19(3), 11-35. https://doi.org/10.69899/limes-plus22203011j

References

  1. Ahlfeldt, G. M., Maenning, W. 2010. „Substitutability and complementarity of urban amenities: external effects of built heritage in Berlin“. Real Estate Economics 38(2): 285–323.
  2. Backović, V. 2018. Džentrifikacija kao socioprostorni fenomen savremenog grada. Beograd: Čigoja štampa.
  3. Dragićević Šešić, M., Dragojević, S. 2005. Manadžment umetnosti u turbulentnim okolnostima. Beograd: Clio.
  4. Đukić Dojčinović, V. 2005. Kulturni turizam. Beograd: Clio.
  5. Haspel, J., 2011. „Built heritage as a positive location factor – economic potentials of listed properties“. In: Heritage, a driver of development: rising to the challenge. Paris: ICOMOS.
  6. Jašarović, E. 2016. „Made in Montenegro: Identitet crnogorskih gradova na globalnom tržištu kreativne ekonomije – strategije razvoja“, str. 152–207. U: Vojvodić, R., Ljumović., J. (ur.) Crnogorske studije kulture i identiteta. Podgorica: DPC.
  7. Marlet, G., Van Woerkens, C. 2005. „Tolerance, aesthetics, amenities or jobs? Dutch city attraction to the creative class“, 12. Discussion Paper Series nr: 05-33., (Tjalling C. Koopmans Research Institute). Utreht: Utrecht School of Economics.
  8. Mikić, H. 2022. „Kreativne industrije i kulturno nasleđe – kreativnost inspirisana tradicijom staklarstva“. Limes plus: Časopis za društvene nauke i humanistiku 1/2022: 89–108.
  9. Murzyn-Kupisz, M., Działek, J. 2013. „Cultural heritage in building and enhancing social capital“. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 3(1): 35–54.
  10. Nypan, T. 2005. Cultural heritage monuments and historic buildings as value generators in a post-industrial economy. Oslo: Directorate for Cultural Heritage.
  11. Plemić, B., Rabotić, B. 2018. „Uloga interpretacije u promociji arheološkog nasleđa Srbije“, 123–130. U: Stanišić, M. (ur.) Kultura, nasleđe i razvoj kulturnog turizma, Sitcon. Beograd: Univerzitet Singidunum.
  12. Tate Modern, 2001. The economic impact of Tate Modern. London: Press release.
  13. Zipsane, H. 2007. Local and regional development through heritage learning. Glasgov: PASCAL International Observatory.
  14. Council of the European Union 2014. Council conclusions on participatory governance of cultural heritage. Council of the European Union.
  15. Cultural Heritage Counts for Europe 2015. CHCfE Full Consortium Report by the International Cultural Centre, print: Know-How, Krakow.
  16. English Heritage 2010. The impact of historic visitors attractions – final report. English Heritage. London.
  17. Europa Nostra 2015. EU Prize for Cultural Heritage / Europa Nostra Awards.
  18. European Commission 2014. Towards an integrated approach to cultural heritage for Europe. European Commission, Brussels.
  19. World Bank 2001. Cultural heritage and development. A framework for action in the Middle East and North Africa. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
  20. https://culture.ec.europa.eu/cultural-heritage/initiatives-and-success-stories/mapping-eu-support-for-cultural-heritage-in-europe (pristup: 11. 12. 2022).
  21. https://www.europeanheritageawards.eu/ (pristup: 9. 12. 2022).
  22. http://muzeugjethi.gov.al/?lang=en (pristup: 11. 12. 2022).
  23. https://www.marubi.gov.al/ (pristup: 11. 12. 2022).
  24. https://www.bunkart.al (pristup: 11. 12. 2022).

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.