Consultation on Grey Indicators Proposed by IAEG-SDGs

Submission by ICOMOS
December 15, 2015

The International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) is a Paris-based

international Non-Governmental Organization. We are pleased to provide this comment on the
proposed indicator for Target 11.4. These comments expand upon the comment we submitted in
the spring of 2015 during the earlier UN Non-Governmental Liaison Services online Indicator
consultation.
ICOMOS believes there are four key tests against which any proposed indicator for Target
11.4 should be measured:
(1)

(2)
(3)
(4)

Is the Indicator based on sound methodology and is the methodology behind the
indicator (data sources, method of computation, treatment of missing values,
regional estimates, etc.) well documented and readily available? Is the indicator
recommended by a well-established and recognized peer review mechanism or
through international mechanisms?
Does the indicator expressly correlate to the broader aims of SDG Goal 11, to make
cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable?
Does it recognize the inter-linkages of natural and cultural heritage, implicit in the
text of Target 11.4 and explicit in contemporary heritage policy and philosophy?
Does it operate at a landscape or regional scale, recognizing the pervasive and
multifaceted nature of heritage, including tangible and intangible, movable and
immovable, natural and cultural.

The current proposal is Share of national (or municipal) budget which is dedicated to
preservation, protection and conservation of national cultural natural heritage including World
Heritage sites. As we wrote in the UN-NGLS consultation in March, we believe a different
approach would better address the four key tests we have outlined. Also, ICOMOS notes the

current draft seems to have a typographical error. Presumably, it was intended to read protection
and conservation of national cultural and natural heritage.
ICOMOS writes in support of the following Indicator for Target 11.4:
the percentage of urban areas supported by development and financing governance
frameworks that include the safeguarding of natural and cultural heritage.
Such an Indicator would use existing methodologies to establish a baseline definition for
inclusion of the safeguarding of natural and cultural heritage into metropolitan or urban regulatory
and legal development and financing governance frameworks. These reflect an assessment of the
effectiveness of governance tools, as community engagement, knowledge and planning regulatory
systems and financial tools on the safeguarding of heritage. Progress towards Target 11.4 would
then be measured in terms of increases in the number (measured by means of population covered,
square miles covered or another suitable metric) of urban areas supported by an effective
development governance framework, that is to say, ones that meant the baseline definition of being
inclusive of the safeguarding of heritage.
The ICOMOS proposal focuses on spatial and process variables, versus economic/financial
ones. ICOMOS believes this is justified in view of the multi-dimensional manner in which heritage
safeguarding supports Goal 11. This approach also creates more synergy with the other Targets of
Goal 11 and the New Urban Agenda expected to be adopted as part of the UN Habitat III process.
Financial expenditure is a reducing tool of heterogeneity/complexity/multidimensionality, because
it transforms all aspects into one dimension. While ICOMOS prefers an approach that is more
multi-dimensional, ICOMOS does agree that financial mechanisms are extremely important. The
ICOMOS proposal recognizes this by including as a baseline requirement the incorporation of
incentives for heritage safeguarding within broader development governance tools. Thus, key to
our proposal is the reference to development and financing governance frameworks.
What follows is an explanation of the ICOMOS proposal with reference to each of the four
key tests outlined above.
(1)

Methodology

The ICOMOS proposal is based on research collected by UN Habitat and others and on
national and sub-national assessment tools already in use and being developed by the World Bank
and the Asian Development Bank. For example, the approach draws on the concept of country
environmental analysis (CEA) found in the Asian Development Bank's 2003 Environmental
Assessment Guidelines. (Available online at http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutionaldocument/32635/files/environmental-assessment-guidelines.pdf). The CEA assesses, at a policy
level, a country's Regulatory and Institutional Framework that includes a review of its
environmental standards, regulations, enforcement, mechanism and instruments. It makes this
assessment against identified environmental issues that are most important to a country's
development strategy. The ICOMOS proposal utilizes this approach to assess existing governance
frameworks against the issue of the safeguarding of natural and cultural heritage.
One finds similarities in the World Bank's draft Environmental and Social Procedure,
which requires the Bank, as part of its due diligence, to evaluate countries' Environmental and

Social Frameworks, that is those aspects of the countrys policy, legal and institutional framework,
including its national, subnational, or sectoral implementing institutions and applicable laws,
regulations, rules and procedures, and implementation capacity, which are relevant to the
environmental and social risks and impacts of development. (Available online at
http://consultations.worldbank.org/Data/hub/files/consultation-template/review-and-updateworld-bank-safeguardpolicies/en/materials/clean_draft_es_procedure_final_draft_for_consultation_july_1_2015.pdf),
The review requires an assessment of the Country's overall legal framework in service of
determining the extent to which that framework addresses the risks and impacts of development
and enables the project to achieve objectives materially consistent with World Bank's
Environmental and Social Safeguards (ESSs), including the World Bank policy on the
safeguarding of cultural heritage.
The starting point for application of the proposed Indicator would be a determination by
national authorities of the urban development and finance framework (national, regional, subregional) relevant to its urban areas. Five elements could be used as part of a baseline for
establishing whether heritage safeguarding had been included in the relevant framework:
Inclusion of natural and cultural heritage safeguarding elements in development standards,
regulations, enforcement, mechanism and instruments.
Existence of financing tools for heritage safeguarding as part of broader schemes of
development finance.
Existence of heritage capacity and capability within development and development
finance agencies.
Existence of mechanisms for cross-sectoral coordination of heritage policies and actions
with other development and finance functions.
Opportuinty for public consultation in heritage-related decision-making.
The following references support these elements:
REPORT

YEAR

2002

20042005
UN
HABITAT
REPORTS

REFERENCE TO HERITAGE
Good governance should preserve
the urban environment and the
cultural and historical heritage of
cities
with the growth of Cultural
Heritage Tourism, more cities in
developing countries were
investing in the conservation of old
historic buildings and thus tapping
into their cultural capital

20062007

Law on Spatial Planning that

followed is based on the
overarching principle of protecting
the public over individual interest

20082009

cultural heritage, sense of place

and memory and the complex set
of social and symbolic relationships
that give cities meaning

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

RELATED SUSTAINABLE
DIMENSIONS

Identify and protect the

commons
Conservation offices
Conservation policies
Culturally driven models of
redevelopment

SOCIAL: related to democracy, human

rights and civic participation in decisionmaking processes

Integration of heritage
conservation on urban
planning

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC: a more

rational use of land, greater equity in the
provision of basic infrastructure and
services, the protection of the
environment and the preservation of
cultural heritage.
SOCIAL: these intangible assets
represent the soul of the city and are as
important for harmonious urban
development as tangible assets

Adopt policies to protect

intangible assets, and
create social spaces that
contribute to humanizing
cities

ECONOMIC: Cultural heritage sites are

playing notable roles in the symbolic
economy

20102011

20122013

STATE
OF
ASIAN
CITIES
2011

STATE
OF
EUROP
EAN
CITIES,
2013

Local UN
HABITAT
REPORTS

STATE
OF LAC
CITIES
2012

STATE
OF
ARAB
CITIES
2012
STATE
OF
AFRICA
N
CITIES
2013
UIMC
2001

URBAN
MANAGE
MENT /
PERFOR
MANCE

A number of cities today are using

culture as a transformational tool
to integrate ethnic minorities,
preserve regional values, safeguard
linguistic and religious diversity,
resolve conflicts, protect the
heritage in the built environment,
and in the process promote
economic development.:

Shared urban prosperity puts

people first, values the tangible
and intangible aspects of
development

Asian cities are also waking up to

another dimension of
globalization, i.e., tourism, with an
attractive mix of historical heritage
and dramatic modern buildings
and skylines.
Protected territories (natural and
cultural heritage) are an element
of master and detailed plans.
Spatial planning is also seeking to
bring development in
settlementswith crucial
ecological value and to achieve the
protection of territories endowed
with historic and cultural heritage
Latin American and Caribbean
cities implementing conservationled programs focus on the
preservation and regeneration of
public space as a tool to improve
the quality of urban life.
Arab Cities are also taking efforts
to preserve their urban heritage
through the renovation of old
forts, palaces, suqs and mosques.
African Governments have
deployed programs to restore and
preserve the historic centers as a
valued cultural heritage and an
architectural and urban legacy that
can be attractive to domestic and
tourism

An inclusive city promotes

of creative artistic
expression and heritage
activities

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC: Beyond the

sole cultural sphere, these policies
together can go a long way towards
bridging the urban divide in its other
social, political and economic
dimensions.

To ensures civic
participation by all in the
social, political and cultural
spheres

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND

ENVIRONMENTAL: inclusive economic
growth, protects human rights, ensures
enabling equitable development, cares for
the natural environment, reduces disaster
risks and vulnerabilities for the poor and
builds resilience to adverse forces of
nature
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND
ENVIRONMENTAL: urban biospheres
offer the potential for Asian cities to
devise policies and development practices
that recognize and manage
environmental and cultural heritage and
values in a more sustainable way.
ECONOMIC: Some non-capital cities have
a specialized economic or functional role,
such assmaller cities with rich a cultural
heritage
or natural resourcesCities with a
significant urban region, on the other
hand, were often able to recover from
economic decline over quite
short periods if they had architectural
heritage
SOCIAL: improvement of quality of life
through the recovery and renovation of
historic public spaces.

Conservation policies
Integration of conservation
in planning strategies.

Better cooperation with

European and global
institutions for criteria
setting, evaluation and
management of the
natural, cultural and
landscape heritage.
Inclusion of cultural and
natural heritage protection
in a territory
development initiatives
aimed at the recovery and
renewal of historic centers

Development programs
including the conservation
of cultural (tangible)
heritage

ECONOMIC: Mostly mentioned through

tourism revenues

Launching plans to
rehabilitate and promote
urban heritage

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC: Challenges due

to fragmented ownership patterns and
the reluctance to participate in
improvement initiatives that do not
generate revenue. Nevertheless,
significant improvements to public
spaces,
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC: contribution
related to high tourism potential and its
social and economic implications.

cultural heritage as part of a cities

management departments

Establishment of heritage
conservation and
management offices

An important component of a
sustainable society is the general
well-being of its citizens

Empower local
communities
Foster citizen participation
in local planning and
decision-making processes

ECI,
2000

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND

ENVIRONMENTAL: This means being
able to live in conditions that include safe
and affordable housing, the availability of
basic services (such as school, health,
culture, etc.)... a good quality
environment (both natural and built)...

PWC,
2011

URBAN
COMPETI
TIVENESS

Preservation is taking off

worldwide: Twelve percent of the
worlds surface now is preserved,
and a vast amount of new area
awaits heritage certification,
according to a study done by
AMO

Measuring and comparing

urban preservation efforts
would make city
comparisons unwieldy,
inaccurate or impossible
due to differences among
cultures and economic
conditions.

ECONOMIC: ironically, heritage status

attracts waves of tourists who, in turn,
jeopardize the integrity of what was just
preserved.

Table 2 BEST PRACTICES BASED ON THE CONSERVATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE (Blue cases are WHS)
REPORT

YEAR
2002

BEST PRACTICE
1. Crosstown 116, redesign of the 116th
Street corridor from
Hudson to the East River
2. Ciutat Vella Project:
Revitalization Of The
Historic Centre Of
Barcelona, Spain

3. Atelier 231: Street Art In

Sotteville, France

UNHABITAT
REPORTS

Partnerships addressing inner-city issues

through educational programs at high
school level working with architects.
the city council, in partnership with
citizens and the private sector,
formulated an integrated plan to
rehabilitate housing, improve public
infrastructure, promote local economic
development and implement social
welfare programs.
located in a former French railways
building, rehabilitated to accommodate
artists, a cultural policy in favor of
promoting street arts, it was essential to
establish an appropriate system of
rehabilitation

4. Zanzibar, Tanzania:
preserving the historic
Stone Town

The Stone Town Conservation Plan was

approved in 1994, lays out a general
planning framework, and establishes the
broad conservation and development
policies for the Stone Town.

5. Kathmandu, Nepal:
restoring a centuries-old
water supply system

One of the projects undertaken by

KMC, in collaboration with UNESCO, is
the restoration of the centuries-old
water supply system of sculptural stone
spouts and wells.

20042005

6. Santiago de Chiles
strategic plan

7. Havanas 1998
2001 strategic plan

20062007

INNITIATIVE

Revitalizing the central core system,

including the downtown district and the
surrounding deteriorated areas, entailing
the preservation of the citys cultural
heritage and specialized commerce, as
well as restoring surrounding areas and
improving access to them.
Relevant projects given priority: Raise
habitat quality and improve preservation
of the built heritage. Strategic areas:
Historic inner city of World Heritage
status in Old Havana., Malecon
Rehabilitation Project

RELATED SUSTAINABLE DIMENSIONS

SOCIAL: Restore the former architectural
feel of the area. Participatory community,
inclusive processes to protect the
commons.
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC: Urban redevelopment
and social policies have improved the
quality of life in the district, including
educational levels, household income,
economic activity and security. this has, in
turn, reduced the economic and social gaps
that existed within Ciutat Vella

SOCIAL: This has helped to build and

strengthen the social fabric of the city.
SOCIAL: Life quality with measures to
develop and improve parcels of land and
other larger spaces in the central area,
including methods to improve parking and
circulation of vehicular traffic in and around
the Stone Town.
SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL: the restoration
of the water spouts not only helps to
preserve a unique living heritage, but also
contributes to the improvement of the
water supply and drainage system in a city
that suffers from chronic water shortages.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC

8. Enhancing
Partnership In
Planning: The Case
Of Mega-Project
Management In
TheNetherlands

The Rotterdam Central Station project

had been part of a strategy that was to
turn Rotterdam into a world city. But in
2002, the newly formed city council could
not be convinced of this logic. The
exuberant champagne glass design had
to be scrapped. The old railway station
was declared a heritage building, and a
home-grown architect would be enlisted
for the project

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC: In this dramatic

instance, globalization did not eliminate the
local; it strengthened it. The new council
majority represented the interests of small
businesspeople and petty bourgeois in the
city who were feeling disoriented, their
livelihood threatened by the forces of
globalization. It was this majority that the
formerly hegemonic social democrats, in
their eagerness to put Rotterdam on the
global map, had failed to perceive.

9. Improving urban
planning and
monitoring in the
city of Aleppo

The new planning scheme, which aims to

upgrade the historic core of the city and
preserving its architectural heritage,
conceived of this task within a broader
structure of urban management,
including land use regulation, housing,
technical infrastructure, traffic, and
others.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC: The municipality

has also been able to involve several
stakeholders and generate innovative
partnership with local and international
actors that allowed it to compensate for lack
of know-how as well as the scarcity of its
resources.

20082009

10. The strategic

urban plan of
Guangzhou

20102011

11. Bogots
Declaration of
Cultural Rights

STATE
OF
EURO
PEAN
CITIES
, 2013

STATE
OF
LAC
CITIES
2012

STATE
OF
ARAB
CITIES
2012

12. The county

territory master
plan, Lithuania,

13. National Urban

Policies, Belarus

provided the overall framework for

implementation and resulted in substantial
improvements in management, urban
greening, sanitation, pollution control, and
conservation of natural resources and
cultural heritage.
this came as part of a broader-ranging
effort to promote cultural diversity and
more equitable appropriation of the
citys cultural riches and heritage.
Protected territories (natural and cultural
heritage) are an element of master and
detailed plans. The county administration
and the Ministry of Environment
supervise lower-level preparation of
planning documents.
Spatial planning is also seeking to bring
development in settlements and on
territories with crucial ecological value
and to achieve the protection of
territories
endowed with historic and cultural
heritage, as well as those with natural and
recreational potential.

14. Regenerating the

Historic Centre of
Havana

declared a priority area for conservationled programs because of its dilapidated

state. Regeneration saw improvements to
social and cultural facilities and services
for tourism.

15. Regenerating the

Historic Centre of
Quito

a housing project for the historic centre,

the relocation of street vendors to malls,
and vehicle traffic regulation (1994-2004).
With local and international financing, and
private sector support, the project
focused on the regeneration of vacant
buildings to create social housing and
private housing free of public subsidies.

16. Syrias Municipal

Administration
Modernisation
(Mam) Programme

From 2005 to 2010 MAM has undertaken

activities which include reviewing and
revising legislation, increasing the
capacity of central and local governments
and working jointly with municipalities to
prepare sustainable urban development
plans, it addressed the issues involved
in the preservation of cultural heritage in
the Damascus historic centre and the
archaeological site of Palmyra

17. Oman launched its

National Spatial
Strategy in 2010

30-year development plan designed to

promote geographically balanced and
sustainable growth in line with its 2020
vision.

18. Bahrains national

planning
framework
19. Jeddah, historic
department, Saudi
Arabia

access to global markets, preserve its

environmental resources, develop an
integrated transport network, build new
communities, accentuate the waterfront,
protect its heritage, green the country
and build a sustainable future
The Saudi government has recently
invested a significant amount of money to
restore and preserve the historic buildings

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC: In 1997, the

municipality of Guangzhou in southern
China initiated a five-year Actio0n Program
for improving the living environment to
maintain and enhance Guangzhous
attractiveness both as a place to live and do
business.
SOCIAL: in a bid to enhance equal
opportunities for cultural expression by all
segments of the population;

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL.

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL:

focuses on sustainable development of its
urban and rural settlements, transport
system, engineering and technical
infrastructure, social amenities, recreation
and health care systems, and on
preservation and efficient use of its historic
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC: The project, which
recovered the centers historical heritage
without losing its residential character,
favored the development of new economic
activities and inspired similar initiatives in
other cities in Cuba
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC: to achieve mixed
occupation by different social groups. The
architectural heritage was restored while
basic infrastructure like water and sanitation
have been improved, and so too the lives of
inhabitants. The initiative, replicated in
Cuenca, Ecuador, faces the challenge of
maintaining socio-economic diversity and
the financial viability of the zone

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC:
developing approaches to the regularization
of informal settlements, streamlining
procedures for the delivery of urban services
and improving financial management.

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL: It

focuses on developing both urban and rural
areas through land planning, economic
development, infrastructure, social services,
heritage conservation and environmental
protection.
ECONOMIC: tourism contributes 10 per cent
to GDP and the government is investing in
hotels and tourist facilities in Durrat Al
Bahrain and Al Areen. It has proposed
Muharraq for UNESCOs world heritage
list.
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC: The government is
also investing in initiatives to train local
workers in the tourism sector and

and sections of Jeddah, develop a tourism

corridor linking to Al Balad and obtain
world heritage status, among other
initiatives.

URBAN
MANA
GEME
NT /
PERFO
RMAN
CE

STATE
OF
AFRIC
AN
CITIES
2013

20. Medinas 2020

Initiative

a programme for the rehabilitation and

conservation of Northern Africas historic
urban centres.

UIMC
2001

21. 16 Asian cities

profiled trough
different
governance
qualities and
management
challenges, in
which Heritage is
included

Heritage is often included within the

cultural and/ or governance sector,
related activities include:

Adaptive reuse

Restoration

Inventory of cultural heritage

assets

Community participation on
heritage activities

collaborating with educational institutions to

offer vocational training

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC: Tourism attraction,

Development (facilitating basic need for
local communities)

The foregoing tables adapted from Guzman Molina, P.C. (Paloma), WORLD HERITAGE
CITIES AND SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT, Bridging global and local levels in
monitoring the sustainable urban development of World Heritage cities (2015).
Additional References [Online]:
Asian Development Bank (ADB) (2001). Urban Indicators for Managing Cities (UIMC).
Available at: http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/30020/urban-indicatorsmanaging-cities.pdf
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC), (2011). Cities of Opportunities Report. Available at:
https://www.pwc.com/mx/es/publicaciones/archivo/2014-05-cities-of-opportunity.pdf.
The World Bank (WB) & Environmental Resource Management, (2008). Global Cities
Indicators Facility (GCIF). Available at:
http://www.cityindicators.org/Deliverables/Final%20Indicators%20Report%203_21_08_4-232008-924597.pdf.
2.

Correlation with the Broader Aims of SDG Goal 11

Target 11.4 calls for making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and
sustainable by strengthening efforts to protect and safeguard the worlds cultural and natural
heritage.
The development of an Indicator for Target 11.4 must start from an understanding of the
ways in which the safeguarding of heritage link to urban inclusiveness, safety, resilience and
sustainability. This in turn requires an understanding of the term cultural heritage. The term
should not be exclusively associated with extraordinary sites such as Historic Monuments or
World Heritage sites even though such sites retain their exceptional iconic status but rather
should be understood as including cultural landscapes, historic cities, and sites of
memory. Moreover, contemporary practice extends the concept of heritage beyond tangible

heritage, to the intangible dimensions of heritage as well. This means the capital of knowledge
derived from the development and experience of human practices, and from the spatial, social and
cultural constructions linked to it.
Cultural heritage, as thusly understood, comprehends not only a collection of monuments
but humanitys historical, cultural and social memory, preserved through authenticity, integrity
and sense of place, thus forming a crucial aspect of the development process. In both its tangible
and intangible forms, heritage fosters socio-economic regeneration and is a crucible of creativity,
a driver of 21st century economies. It is also a key element of resilience, from bio-cultural
knowledge and its role in climate change adaptation, to the sustainable model for urbanization
offered by traditional, dense development patterns. Perhaps most critically (in the face of climate
change, potential future resource scarcity, rapid urbanization and other trends), cultural heritage
with its value for identity strengthens social cohesion and social well-being and enhances the
livability of cities. In short, heritage is both an enabler and a driver of sustainable development
and it was for these values that it was included in Goal 11.
One of the most comprehensive efforts to address the role of cultural heritage in urban
development is the ICOMOS Symposium entitled Heritage, a driver of development held in
Paris in 2011. This meeting was held in anticipation of the UN Conference on Sustainable
Development (the Rio+20 Conference) and attended by nearly 1,200 heritage experts from over
100 countries. The meeting resulted in a doctrinal text in heritage known as the Declaration of
Paris on Heritage as a Driver of Development (the Paris Declaration). The International
Congress "Culture: Key to Sustainable Development" convened by UNESCO in Hangzhou
(China) in 2013 was a foundational event in these discussions. The Habitat III Issue Paper on
Urban Culture and Heritage provides another valuable contribution to these questions and to other
issues around culture, heritage, and urban sustainability. This work has yielded an enormous
diversity of practical approaches and solutions designed to leverage heritage in service of urban
resilience, safety, inclusiveness and sustainability.
From these, the following conclusions can be drawn:

Heritage has the power to strengthen communities where citizens associate the historic
environment with a shared identity, attachment to place and everyday life, including people
who are minorities, disadvantaged or socially excluded.

Traditional settlements, with their lasting cultural identity and socio-economic traditions,
raise the awareness and pride of citizens in local history and culture no matter where they
originate or how they may be adapted.

The mix of public and private spaces found in traditional settlements engenders social
cohesiveness and interaction by providing common spaces for diverse groups to interact.

Historic cities are by nature functionally and socially mixed, supporting a wide range of
complementary activities, and embody multiple cultural values. Historic cities were
vibrant, convivial, inspiring and have proved to be supremely adaptable to incremental and
harmonious change.

People are at the heart of heritage conservation policies and projects. Good governance and
transparency are key to a sense of ownership of heritage, which allows heritage to
strengthen the social fabric and enhances social well-being.

Public spaces like historic parks or plazas are often key to historic parts of towns, or
adjacent to historic monuments.

Historic towns, districts, and the historic parts of the cities are valuable for their uniqueness
and sense of place. They help to attract tourism, employment and local investment,
fostering the sustainable development of the city. They also engender curiosity and in so
doing, build an understanding and acceptance of others values, history and traditions.

In designing the Indicator for Target 11.4, it is also important to consider the key ways in
which heritage can make cities and human settlements more inclusive. Some examples include:

Occupations related to cultural heritage, cultural practices, and creativity provide a

valuable source of income, dignity, and livelihood.

Culture based livelihoods have the potential for small and micro enterprises empowering
local communities and contributing to poverty alleviation.

Enables people to draw on and build on local and knowledge for their livelihoods and
problem solving rather than privileging external education and knowledge alone. They
offer a diversity of solutions to a wide range of problems.

Heritage, both tangible and intangible, thus contributes to the goal of making cities and
human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable in a myriad of ways, including by
strengthening sense of belonging and of identity of local communities; by promoting social
cohesion, inclusion and equity; and as a model of sustainable, traditional settlement patterns.
These processes are heterogeneous, complex and multi-dimensional. The challenge for the
Indicator for Target 11.4 is to design a metric that expresses a meaningful correlation between
these urban goals and heritage safeguarding. ICOMOS believes that measuring increases in the
number of cities and settlements that are taking steps to incorporate heritage safeguarding into
broader development and development finance governance frameworks offers an effective model
for doing so.
3.

Recognition of the inter-linkages of natural and cultural heritage

The recognition of the inter-linkages of natural and cultural heritage provided by Target
11.4 are critical to harnessing the power of heritage, culture and nature-based solutions for
sustainability. The Indicator selected should be agile enough to measure not only increases in the
safeguarding of natural or cultural heritage but also in the effectiveness of governance tools at
increasing the integration of natural and cultural heritage safeguarding. In the co-joining of
cultural and natural heritage, Target 11.4 of course finds a ready antecedent in the World Heritage
Convention, among international laws, that natural and cultural heritage. This co-joining is
consonant with emerging best practice in the heritage field. A growing body of experience has
demonstrated that in many landscapes, natural and cultural heritage are inextricably bound together
and that the conservation of these resources would benefit from more integration. Protected natural

landscapes and cultural landscapes, for example, share much common ground: both are focused
on landscapes where human relationships with the natural environment over time define their
essential character. In the World Heritage context, there has been much work done to stimulate the
development of new methods and strategies to better integrate nature and culture.
4.

Landscape-Scale

A concern with the current, proposed Indicator (share of budget dedicated to the
preservation, protection and conservation of heritage including World Heritage sites) is the risk of
reducing the consideration of heritage to expenditure on conservation of monuments and protected
areas only. We believe the focus should be on the incorporation of cultural and natural heritage
into development, planning and development finance governance frameworks at a landscape
(regional) scale.
As discussed above, in order to explore how heritage operates at a landscape scale and how
heritage informs spatial development strategies and policies that effectively create equitable,
compact, connected, and socially inclusive cities, the idea of heritage must be understood in its
broader, modern sense.
Nowadays, as more and more people abandon small towns and the countryside, migrating
to large conurbations, urban development has been alternating between authoritarian policies and
anarchic planning that have already had serious, even catastrophic results. A key function of
heritage is to inform a focus on more balanced form of spatial development. This will be achieved
at regional development level. This is where lessons from our heritage, associated with best
participatory practice, will again be valued as a framework for new spatial development:
continuation of time-honored boundaries and settlement patterns.
There is an enormous diversity of practical approaches and solution designed to leverage
traditional settlement patterns and planning methods in service of making cities more inclusive
and equitable based on the references cited above. Such patterns are not only a key element for the
revitalization of historical core areas of cities and towns but are also of great importance to the
urbanization of the world, for their capacity to inform and guide new spatial development. In
order to leverage this accumulated wisdom, the following elements should be included in overarching spatial development strategies:

Promote and revive the value of historical settlement patterns, landscape forms and
traditional building techniques, while protecting the integrity of the historical urban fabric
in new spatial development and redevelopment.

Expand the use and availability of fiscal tools, such as tax incentives, to attract investment
both in core historic areas and the surrounding areas. These economic development
strategies and financial tools will provide a framework for revitalization and development
of the city.

Promote the integration of new development within the traditional street, public space,
architectural elements and cultural heritage patterns.

Use rules, regulations and financial incentives to discourage urban sprawl in the rural
countryside and encourage the revitalization and reuse of existing infrastructure.

Consider the historical urban-regional linkages when adapting historic and traditional
settlements to other areas.

In conclusion, we believe our proposed Indicator, properly informed by needed pilot

projects, as the best potential to meaningfully measure the aspects of heritage most relevant to
Goal 11.
About ICOMOS
ICOMOS is a non-governmental organization that works for the conservation and
protection of cultural heritage around the world. It also serves as the Advisory Body on cultural
heritage to the World Heritage Committee for the Implementation of the World Heritage
Convention of UNESCO. At an international level, ICOMOS has been at the forefront globally in
considering the role of heritage in sustainable development, both in the lead up to and during the
Rio+20 process. Target 11.4 is perhaps the fullest realization in the SDGs of the #culture2015goal
campaign, a coalition of more than 700 organizations from around the world that mobilized in
support of explicit targets and indicators for culture in the SDGs. This work was undertaken as
part of the Rio+20/The Future We Want process. ICOMOS was pleased to play leadership roles
in these efforts.