61
While the UNESCO 1972 Convention (UNESCO 1972) considered cultural heritage to be strictly physical (monuments, groups of buildings and sites), the
UNESCO 2003 Convention (UNESCO 2003) widened the scope, to include intangible aspects of cultural heritage: “…the practices, representations, expressions,
knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces
associated therewith…”. This tangible-intangible dimension of cultural heritage
could be promoted by the Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage
for Society (Council of Europe 2005), which recognised the need for a holistic
approach to cultural heritage, “a resource for sustainable development and quality
of life in a constantly evolving society”. The Faro Convention obligates the Parties
to “promote cultural heritage protection as a central factor in the mutually supporting objectives of sustainable development, cultural diversity and contemporary creativity” (Council of Europe 2005; article 5). Environmental Citizenship should be in
accordance with the Faro Convention, demanding solid knowledge on cultural heritage diversity, appreciation, and protection.
Tangible cultural heritage usually refers to all cultural artefacts from the past that
are perceived as valuable. Environmental Citizenship mostly focuses on historical
buildings or constructed units, which are protected not only because of their physical characteristics but also as documents of knowledge, which had been collected,
shaped, and transferred through many generations. It is particularly visible in the
vernacular architecture or ‘architecture without architects’ (Rudofsky 1987), which
expresses “the cultural diversity anchored in the specificities of territories” (Guillard
2014). The VerSus project (VERSUS, Heritage for Tomorrow: Vernacular
Knowledge for Sustainable Architecture, 2008–2013) showed that vernacular architecture all over the world has embodied principles of sustainability in various creative ways (Correia et al. 2014).
Based on the analysis of numerous examples, VerSus has identified socioeconomic and sociocultural key principles to protect the cultural landscape, transfer
construction cultures, enhance innovative and creative solutions, recognise intangible values, and encourage social cohesion. In addition, it promotes principles of
environmental sustainability by respecting environmental context and landscape to
the benefit of natural and climatic resources, to reduce pollution and waste materials, contribute to human health and welfare, and reduce the natural hazard effects of
vernacular architecture. The VerSus project did not dismiss any of the vernacular
building practices as old-fashioned, overcome, or primitive, but it considers them as
a collection of knowledge, produced by anonymous builders who adopted the building practice to the diversity of environments, overcame constraints, and made the
best use of available resources (Guillard 2014).
Tradition and innovation are not necessarily opposed. Due to the close relation of
man and nature in the past, the knowledge gained through centuries could nowadays
be employed in order to achieve sustainability. Although the relationship between
vernacular architecture and sustainable buildings has been realised and explored
throughout the last two decades, we should not only consider the preservation of the
material aspects of cultural heritage (architecture) or the knowledge of how to produce it (building crafts, intangible aspect) but also regain the positive image of our
4 Societal Issues and Environmental Citizenship
While the UNESCO 1972 Convention (UNESCO 1972) considered cultural heritage to be strictly physical (monuments, groups of buildings and sites), the
UNESCO 2003 Convention (UNESCO 2003) widened the scope, to include intangible aspects of cultural heritage: “…the practices, representations, expressions,
knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces
associated therewith…”. This tangible-intangible dimension of cultural heritage
could be promoted by the Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage
for Society (Council of Europe 2005), which recognised the need for a holistic
approach to cultural heritage, “a resource for sustainable development and quality
of life in a constantly evolving society”. The Faro Convention obligates the Parties
to “promote cultural heritage protection as a central factor in the mutually supporting objectives of sustainable development, cultural diversity and contemporary creativity” (Council of Europe 2005; article 5). Environmental Citizenship should be in
accordance with the Faro Convention, demanding solid knowledge on cultural heritage diversity, appreciation, and protection.
Tangible cultural heritage usually refers to all cultural artefacts from the past that
are perceived as valuable. Environmental Citizenship mostly focuses on historical
buildings or constructed units, which are protected not only because of their physical characteristics but also as documents of knowledge, which had been collected,
shaped, and transferred through many generations. It is particularly visible in the
vernacular architecture or ‘architecture without architects’ (Rudofsky 1987), which
expresses “the cultural diversity anchored in the specificities of territories” (Guillard
2014). The VerSus project (VERSUS, Heritage for Tomorrow: Vernacular
Knowledge for Sustainable Architecture, 2008–2013) showed that vernacular architecture all over the world has embodied principles of sustainability in various creative ways (Correia et al. 2014).
Based on the analysis of numerous examples, VerSus has identified socioeconomic and sociocultural key principles to protect the cultural landscape, transfer
construction cultures, enhance innovative and creative solutions, recognise intangible values, and encourage social cohesion. In addition, it promotes principles of
environmental sustainability by respecting environmental context and landscape to
the benefit of natural and climatic resources, to reduce pollution and waste materials, contribute to human health and welfare, and reduce the natural hazard effects of
vernacular architecture. The VerSus project did not dismiss any of the vernacular
building practices as old-fashioned, overcome, or primitive, but it considers them as
a collection of knowledge, produced by anonymous builders who adopted the building practice to the diversity of environments, overcame constraints, and made the
best use of available resources (Guillard 2014).
Tradition and innovation are not necessarily opposed. Due to the close relation of
man and nature in the past, the knowledge gained through centuries could nowadays
be employed in order to achieve sustainability. Although the relationship between
vernacular architecture and sustainable buildings has been realised and explored
throughout the last two decades, we should not only consider the preservation of the
material aspects of cultural heritage (architecture) or the knowledge of how to produce it (building crafts, intangible aspect) but also regain the positive image of our
4 Societal Issues and Environmental Citizenship