Suchergebnisse

For many centuries, the landscape and cultural history of the Netherlands have been influenced by the rural estates of large landowners. Their country houses with gardens, parks and farmland formed an important combination of practical aspects of economic management and aesthetic landscaping. Many castles or country houses were linked to large landholdings of several hundred, sometimes even thousands of hectares, as in the case of the Veluwezoom in the Province of Gelderland. Since the late Middle Ages this area, now known as Gelders Arcadia, has been popular with the landed elite, whose ranks have included noble families, stadtholders, city regents and bankers. The undulating landscape, the rivers and brooks and the fertile land was ideally suited to the creation of the desired combination of productive and aesthetic landscapes. One of the special aspects of the Gelders Arcadia estate zone is that it represents nearly every stage in the development of the Dutch country estate, from the emergence of castles and lordships (c. 500-1600), to the foundation of small country retreats by town regents (c. 1600-1800), and the creation of villa-like country estates for a new elite of bankers, industrialists and lawyers (c. 1800-1940). The historic country houses and landed estates are manifestations of their time and therefore very diverse, ranging from transformed noble castles with large landholdings to the rural retreats of town regents to villa-like country houses for the newly wealthy. Not only the architecture of the house and park, but also the use, the anchoring in the cultural landscape and the social significance underwent development. A historical-geographical approach was used to analyse location and distribution patterns and to investigate the size, character and functions of country estates in each period from an economic, political, societal and social perspective. It appears that the majority of new country houses and estates were created by a new elite of the newly rich, whereas the old elite continued ...

This thesis deals on integration of ASEAN. The primary objective of this thesis is to find out the potential of ASEAN to be politically and economically integrated like EU, and the kind of difficulties it may face in a mid way. Since EU is a pioneer and benchmark for any integration and ASEAN takes EU as a reference, I choose EU as a base to compare the progress of ASEAN. As for the theoretical aspect, integration theory and its importance in global scenario is discussed. The research sought after the way ahead for ASEAN. This study is based on a comparative analysis of the development of both EU and ASEAN. The information and literature needed for the thesis will be collected from open source, which is easily accessible to all. After analyzing the historical background, present development and future prospect, I think ASEAN is turning out to be the successful regional cooperation. Even though ASEAN took reference from EU in its development, It don´t need to be like EU. Being the cooperation from different group of differently diversified nations, It can pave its own way forward and can lay good precedent for other upcoming regional co-operations. ; M-IR

The trend that saw care, welfare and educational institutions being expected to collaborate at a local level began in the 1980s. This is now standard practice, with, for example, the implementation of the WMO (Social Support Act) or the Brede School (a network of provisions for children, parents and district with the school at its core), but Zuidersma noticed that this was still very much in its infancy fifteen years ago. She conducted research into local collaboration between care and educational institutions with a focus on Nursing and Care programmes. 'What was already conceived in 1980 was only introduced from 1997 onwards. In my research I discovered that there was great call for collaboration but that very little was known about how this should take shape and which attitudes should be fostered to achieve a concrete result.' Success factors Questionnaires and observations of dozens of collaborating organizations helped Zuidersma come up with a number of critical success factors. First, the institutions involved need to be aware that their partnership is not an organization in itself but a network with a specific goal. This actually requires the different layers at the partner organizations to interact: for example, the manager of a care institution speaking directly with a teacher at a school. Together with this multilayered aspect, Zuidersma introduces the term of reciprocity, in which not the status of the organization is the main focus but, for example, the interest of students or patients. Over the course of time the organizations should sense where this joint interest lies and none of them should dictate the agenda. They must be able to grow together. This is crucial to the success of a project. 'I noticed that the parties involved generally collaborate well, but that if things are proceeding less smoothly the organizations stake out their positions, making effective consultation more difficult.' Two other factors that Zuidersma distinguishes are that the collaboration has a long-term perspective and that those working in such a partnership are accessible, both physically and digitally. Measuring instrument On the basis of her research Zuidersma can provide a method which organizations working in different social fields can use to structure their partnership. This includes a measuring instrument that makes it clear whether objectives are being achieved and an observation method that determines whether difficult discussions involving divergent interests are actually effective. It is also a good test for checking whether collaboration is worthwhile at all, says Zuidersma. 'I hope that my thesis will communicate the message that one can look at these conditions and say with certainty: we will not opt for collaboration at present. Organizations must look very critically at whether they have a joint objective; otherwise they should not even begin. You should never collaborate for the sake of collaborating.'

Het proefschrift heeft als onderwerp de toekomst van de Vlaamse parochiekerken. Het definieert het kerkenprobleem als een vierledige uitdaging. (1) Er is een gebrek aan voorgangers voor de katholieke eredienst; (2) het kerkbezoek neemt gestaag af, maar voor bijzondere vieringen zoals doopsels en begrafenissen blijft de parochiekerk dienst doen voor een groot deel van de bevolking; (3) de kosten (zowel qua exploitatie als qua investeringen) met betrekking tot de parochiekerken stijgen; en (4) het risico op verval van de kerken neemt toe, hoewel dat via de doorgaans goede zorgen door de kerkfabrieken (een systeem dat quasi uniek in de wereld is) te overzien blijft. De volledige uitdaging echter is niet alleen via cijfers te begrijpen: politici en erfgoedexperts dreigen het kerkenprobleem te generaliseren en oplossingen, tot herbestemming toe, te projecteren die in feite geen antwoord zijn op de concrete situaties in de Vlaamse parochies. Vandaag is het daarom nodig om het kerkenprobleem te zien als een breed-maatschappelijk en steeds gesitueerd probleem. Het kerkenprobleem is te complex, te specifiek en telkens te lokaal om een generalistische aanpak voor te stellen die gebaseerd is op a priori categorieën. Dat leidt tot de volgende dubbele onderzoeksvraag: welke strategische aanpak van het bestaande kerkprobleem leidt tot zowel een architecturale herdefiniëring als een conviviale herwaardering van het kerkgebouw? Dit onderzoek tast een mogelijk spoor af; het vindt daarvoor inspiratie in de Actor-Network Theory en de spatial-agencypraktijk en - theorie (of: de expliciet maatschappelijk geëngageerde architectuur), twee kennisdomeinen die complexiteit, specificiteit en het lokale aspect steeds incalculeren en daarenboven theorie en praktijk niet zien als gescheiden werelden. Ook veldonderzoek speelt een belangrijke rol in dit onderzoek; er is gekozen voor de Schulense Sint-Jan de Doperkerk (Schulen is een deelgemeente van het Limburgse Herk-de-Stad) als casestudy. Het onderzoek werkt een strategie voor de Vlaamse parochiekerken uit die meer pragmatisch is en meer op de praktijk gericht dan wat verschillende experts ter zake voorstellen; het brengt aanknopingspunten, ' propositions' (naar de Franse filosoof en socioloog Bruno Latour), in kaart die het kerkgebouw zelf aanbiedt. Om dat te verwezenlijken bouwt het onderzoek eerst een brede definitie - een dikke beschrijving - op van wat het kerkgebouw is door na te gaan wat het kerkgebouw werkelijk doet of teweegbrengt (herdefiniëring). Aan de hand van de aanknopingspunten articuleert de tekst mogelijke invullingen voor het kerkgebouw (herwaardering). In hoofdzaak bestaat het proefschrift uit drie delen: (1) een status quaestionis met betrekking tot het debat over de toekomst van de parochiekerken, met de nadruk op Vlaanderen, (2) een nieuw (theoretisch) onderzoekskader dat voortkomt uit een kritiek op hoe experts denken over de parochiekerken en dat steunt op het spatial-agencydiscours en op hedendaagse sociale theorie, en (3) de uitwerking van een methodiek of een protocol om het kerkenprobleem praktisch te behandelen, gebaseerd op het nieuwe onderzoekskader en uitgewerkt als een constante wisselwerking van theorie en praktijk. Dat is de wijze waarop de dubbele onderzoeksvraag onderzocht werd. Doorheen het onderzoek verschijnt nevenbestemming, als een aanpak die (pragmatisch) voortbouwt op wat al voorhanden is, méér als oplossing dan harde herbestemming. Dat betekent niet dat het zinvol is om herbestemming op voorhand uit te sluiten. Via dorpsvergaderingen, enquêtes, publieke acties in het kerkgebouw en ontwerpend onderzoek en participatiesessies aan de hand van grote maquettes werd de maatschappelijke performance van de Schulense parochiekerk onderzocht en werden mogelijke toekomstige invullingen getest. De praktijk voedde in die zin de strategie evenveel als de theorie. Meer nog: de praktijk weerlegde belangrijke delen van de bestaande theorie rond de toekomst van de parochiekerken.

The hereafter following is abstract of the discourse held by Prof. dr. ir. C. L. Temminck Groll in honour of the jubilee 1899-1989 of the KNOB on September 23th 1989. The KNOB (Royal Antiquarian Society of the Netherlands) exists 90 years. A respectable age after human standards. Although a society depends on human devotion it does not know age limitations. This is an excellent moment to reflect upon our centenary. Then, in 1999, we will have to present an extremely good manifest for the coming millennium! We have been spoiled very much during the past 90 years. Which of the founders would have expected so many people professionally involved at the protection of monuments? Which of them could have estimated the money available to realize restoration activities? Still, despite of all we obtained, we are rightly concerned about our country and especially that part of the world beyond our borders. These concerns are formulated by the National Geographic Society which hereby stated: 'Can we save this fragile earth?' This society aims at the earth herself as well as at human achievements. Co-operation between the protection of nature and the protection of monuments certainly is sensible and could be one of our future actions. How much nature, how much culture is not already 'dead'! Wren's St. Benet in London f.e. seems saved, but surrounded by flowing thoroughfares the church misses every relation with the original urban structure. Thus in fact the monument has not been saved. At Liège, Belgium, 20th century traffic and concrete buildings overran the medieval Place St. Lambert. And what about the European countryside? How much harmonious farmer's land has not been industrialized yet? Old structures disappear everywhere. Instead of the newly made our Society had to study more and more the continuous changes of the already extant. As to our foreign activities, we can distinguish three angles of incidence. First of all: what can we learn from other countries? Our founder mr. dr. J.C. Overvoorde already realized the importance of study of the way monuments are protected in different European countries. ICOMOS at present is the platform to discuss organizational and substantial aspects. Second: stock-taking of Dutch cultural influences to other regions in Europe, which subject used to attract more attention than it does now. At last: Dutch influences beyond European borders. Like our founder in 1910-11 studied Hindu-Buddhistic antiquaries and the monuments of the Dutch East-Indian Company our Foundation Social History of the Dutch Oversea studies these treasures now. One of her working-groups tries to solve Indonesian problems with respect to the protection of monuments and started stocktaking of especially younger architecture and town-planning. Still, a lot remains to be done on this field in the 'West'! Borders fade. But with the introduction of new fields of work we may not forget the old. Not the older monuments, since we are occupied with the young, not the Dutch, being directed at the whole world. After the question of what we study, the question rises how. Our purpose always was protection. Unlike nature culture cannot renew herself: we have to 'maintain'. And then mankind also is a piece of nature with continuous new desires to which the extant has been adapted. 'Maintain' as well as 'adapt to' means: to change. We can let nature change the made - how beautifully weathered the ruins are! - but we can also preserve the weathering - until now. Replacement of weathered material by new in the shape of colour it used to have is another possibility. Also opinions about this sort of alterations are constantly changing. Thus a platform like the KNOB at national level or ICOMOS at international level will always be needed. That's why: an extremely good manifesto in 10 years. One that states that we are occupied with changing instead of static affairs. Alterations must be directed professionally in a careful and modest way. For the real is infinitely more valuable than the copy.