Basic HTML Version
8
t h e b u i l d i n g c o n s e r v a t i o n d i r e c t o r y 2 0 1 2
Heritage asset
is the portmanteau term
used in PPS5 for ‘a building, monument,
site, place, area or landscape positively
identified as having a degree of significance
meriting consideration in planning
decisions. Heritage assets are the valued
components of the historic environment.
They include designated heritage assets (as
defined in this PPS) and assets identified
by the local planning authority during the
process of decision-making or through
the plan-making process (including local
listing)’. The English Heritage Conservation
Principles prefers ‘significant place’, defined
as ‘a place which has heritage value(s)’, while
the Welsh Principles use ‘historic asset’,
defined as ‘an identifiable component of the
historic environment. It may consist of or
be a combination of an archaeological site,
an historic building, or a parcel of historic
landscape. Nationally important historic
assets will normally be designated’. Scotland
uses ‘historic asset’ and, less commonly,
‘heritage asset’ ⁶ as generic terms.
Conservation
can be defined in many
ways. The difference between prescriptive
and operative definitions is evident from
comparing the current BS 7913 (1998) with
Conservation Principles. The BS definition
is generic: ‘action to secure the survival or
preservation of buildings, cultural artefacts,
natural resources, energy or any other thing
of acknowledged value for the future’. But
paragraph 7.1.2 goes on to state ‘a conservative
approach of minimal intervention and
disturbance to the fabric of an historic
building in which there is a presumption
against restoration is fundamental to good
conservation’. There are many buildings for
which this is entirely true, but, arguably,
others where a values-based approach would
lead to a different conclusion.
The operative definition in the
Conservation Principles is ‘the process of
managing change to a significant place in
its setting in ways that will best sustain
its heritage values, while recognising
opportunities to reveal or reinforce those
values for present and future generations’. It
implicitly accepts that heritage values change
over time, indeed that they can be changed
by the process of conservation. The definition
of conservation in PPS5, ‘the process of
maintaining and managing change to a
heritage asset in a way that sustains and where
appropriate enhances its significance’, differs
primarily in its assertion that significance can
be enhanced through conservation. ‘Enhance’
presumably arises from the general application
of a legislative provision relating to a specific
type of heritage asset, namely conservation
areas, whose character or appearance ‘it is
desirable to preserve or enhance’.
Other concepts tend to be confined
to statements of principles or professional
guidance, suggesting a boundary between
public policy and conservation ethics.
Authenticity
is defined in the
Conservation Principles as ‘those
characteristics that most truthfully reflect
and embody the cultural heritage values of
a place, following the Nara Document on
Authenticity (ICOMOS Japan, 1994)’. The
process of conservation cannot sustain
heritage values unless it has due regard for
the authenticity of the place or building. This
definition recognises that authenticity can be
related to, for example, design (especially for
recent buildings) and function (for example, a
place of worship, or an engineering structure),
as well as the evidential and historical values
of inherited fabric, but nonetheless suggests
that change should be detectable, at however
subtle a level.
Integrity
(literally ‘wholeness, honesty’)
can apply, for example, to a structural
system, a design concept, the way materials
are used, the character of a place, artistic
creation, or functionality. Decisions about
recovering any aspect of integrity that has
been compromised must, like authenticity,
depend upon a comprehensive understanding
of the values of the place, particularly the
values of what might be lost in the process
(Conservation Principles, para 94). Similarly,
ascribing relative significance to parts of a
building cannot justify interventions which
cumulatively fragment the whole.
Reflection
The concept of building conservation to
sustain cultural heritage values, normally
alongside utility value, has been evolving
in the UK for more than three centuries.
The past half-century has seen the most
rapid developments, in scope, in thought
about purpose and aims, and in technical
skills, not least the rediscovery of traditional
skills. There has been progress towards the
integration of conservation philosophy and
practice that has been developed by different
professional groups under different legislative
or policy frameworks, both within and outside
official bodies.
Ultimately, however, each of us has
a conservation philosophy shaped by
professional experience, personal value scales
and sensibility. The importance of official
and ethical guidance perhaps ultimately
lies in providing common frameworks for
consideration, assessment and debate about
particular proposals.
Paul Drury
FSA MRICS IHBC is co-principal
of the Drury McPherson Partnership (see
page 39), which specialises in historic
environment policy and practice. He is a
former director of English Heritage’s London
Region and was the chair of the Council of
Europe’s Steering Committee for Cultural
Heritage, 2003–4.
This article draws on text written by the
author for Chapter 1 of Conservation
Basics, the first volume of the new
edition of the English Heritage Practical
Building Conservation series, due
for publication early in 2012.
Notes
¹ Except in Northern Ireland, where listing
was introduced in 1974
² Scottish Planning Policy (2010); Scottish
Historic Environment Policy (2008),
esp 1.15
³ Historic Environment (Amendment)
Scotland Act 2011
⁴ Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning,
Archaeology and the Built Heritage (1999,
as amended)
⁵ The term ‘artistic’ comes from the
Protection of Wrecks Act 1973
⁶ Scottish Planning Policy (2010),
para 110–111
Evidential value:
The atmospheric power-press room in a workshop in Vyse Street, in the heart of Birmingham’s Jewellery
Quarter, captures the emotive power of past human activity. It is above all a primary source of information about how
jewellery and small metalwork were made. (Photo: English Heritage)