Argument

Argument on topic: Heritage in debate. Some findings on the protection of built heritage in Romania

Heritage on debate

France achieved a high level of performance in the protection of built heritage after the 1960s, thanks to the will of a personality such as André Malraux and with the support of the President of the Republic, Charles de Gaulle. The problem of protecting historic monuments and protected areas in Romania is mainly a matter of political will and the culture of the majority of the population, but above all of decision-makers. Effective protection of the built heritage cannot be achieved without state involvement. The budgets and resources allocated at central and local level are almost symbolic. Local authorities in Romania do not have structures specialized in the protection of built heritage. Romania has acceptable legislation in the field of heritage protection, but with many gaps in the area of operational implementation. The implementation of a legislation, however perfect it may be, requires instruments, structures, policies, programs and projects. At the level of the actors involved in the process, who very rarely cooperate, we have remained at the level of: analysis, observation, protest and contestation. The expropriation of abandoned historical monuments for reasons of public utility, as provided for by law, is practically ineffective, given that the procedure ultimately leads to the enactment of a special law for each individual case. The access of private owners to subsidies, although established by law, is almost impossible, as there are no structures capable of implementing the procedure, which is complicated, unclear and practically unfunded. The legal issue of compensation for the introduction of an easement to classify an immovable as a historical monument in relation to the right of ownership and the right of use is still unclear in Romania. The right of pre-emption of the state (central or local authority) to purchase historical monuments is applied in an extremely small number of cases, due to lack of funding. An insignificant number of monuments have their protection area defined by scientific procedure. Very many local urban planning regulations for protected areas (Bucharest being a significant case) are deficient in the degree of generalization, ranging from absurd restrictions to unacceptable permissiveness. Examples of good practice, the achievements of "anonymous" entrepreneurs and professionals, are very little popularized.

A number of observations on conservation of the built heritage in Romania. Thanks to the will of leading figures such as André Malraux and with the support of the President of the Republic, Charles de Gaulle, France achieved high levels of conservation of the country's built heritage in the 1960s. In Romania, the problem of conserving historic monuments and protected areas is mainly a question of political will and of educating the majority of the population and, above all, decision-makers. Effective protection of the built heritage is impossible without the involvement of the state. But the budgets and resources allocated to this at the central and local levels are all but symbolic. The local authorities in Romania do not have bodies specialized in conserving the built heritage. Romania has acceptable legislation in the domain of heritage conservation, but there are very many lacunae in the area of its practical application. In order to apply legislation, however good that legislation might be, there is a need for tools, bodies, policies, programmes, and projects. When it comes to the agents involved in the process, who very rarely work together, we are still at the level of analysis, ascertainment, protest, and contestation. Although stipulated by law, expropriation of abandoned historic monuments in the cause of public utility is inoperative in practice given that the procedure ultimately leads to the promulgation of a special law for each particular case. Although laid down down by law, access to subsidies is all but impossible for private owners as there are no structures whereby to apply the procedure, which is cumbersome, vague and, in effect, starved of funds. The juridical problem of compensating for easement following the listing of a historic monument is still unclear in Romania. The state's (central or local authority) right of preemption on the purchase of historic monuments is applied only in an extremely small number of case due to lack of funds. A significant number of monuments have a protected area defined by scientific procedure. A large number of local urbanism regulations for protected areas (Bucharest being a significant case) are deficient given their over-generalization, going from absurd restrictions to unacceptable permissiveness. Examples of good practice and achievements on the part of entrepreneurs and professionals of the "anonymous" category are given very little coverage.