Suchergebnisse

After the restoration of independence of Lithuania the legal basis and administrative structures of heritage preservation were changed many times, though the maintenance, use and state of heritage were not improved, and its decay did not decrease. Undemocratic and inhumane legal basis and management of heritage preservation based on restrictions, prohibitions and penalties without any compensatory incentives for imposed restrictions and economic disadvantages increasingly raises discontent not only from society but also from heritage owners and users. The owners and users of land where heritage objects are situated realize that their property can be used more efficiently and profitably and that social and economic restrictions imposed by heritage protection regulations contravene their rights. Instead of investing into preservation of heritage objects, owners usually attempt to get rid of them. Conflicts between heritage preservation institutions, owners of heritage objects and society are especially inherent in historic city centers where commercial interests are expanding and master plans and development projects propose intensive modernization and development of high rise buildings. Countries with long-lasting democracy traditions are looking for solutions how, without contradicting heritage preservation ethics and social justice, to encourage owners and users of heritage objects to protect and use rationally the legacy inherited from the past simultaneously retaining and stimulating vitality of historic centers and improving quality of life of their inhabitants. The problem is multipartite and ambivalent. Only changes and improvements in heritage preservation systems enacted in latter years in the countries of stable democracy, emphasizing the problem of development and protection ethics, the questions of respect of heritage values and implementation of social justice in juridical and practical heritage preservation activities are discussed in the paper. Demokratiniai proveržiai paveldosaugoje Santrauka Atkūrus nepriklausomybę ne kartą buvo keičiama Lietuvos paveldosaugos teisinė bazė ir administravimo struktūros, tačiau paveldo priežiūra, panauda, būklė nepagerėjo, o netektys nesumažėjo. Teisinė paveldosaugos bazė ir vadyba, paremta apribojimais, draudimais ir baudomis be kompensacinių paskatų taikymo už patirtus suvaržymus bei ekonominius nuostolius, susilaukia vis didėjančio paveldo naudotojų bei savininkų nepasitenkinimo. Žemių naudotojai ir savininkai, kurių valdose yra paveldo objektų, yra įsitikinę, kad žemės nuosavybę galima naudoti pelningiau ir kad socialiniai bei ekonominiai suvaržymai paveldosaugos reglamentais pažeidžia jų teises. Užuot dėję pastangas ir skyrę lėšų paveldo vertybėms išsaugoti, jie įvairiais būdais stengiasi jų atsikratyti. Konfliktai tarp paveldosaugos institucijų, paveldo savininkų bei visuomenės ypač dideli miestų istoriniuose centruose, kuriuose vis daugiau atsiranda komercinių interesų, o plėtros planais yra numatyta intensyvi modernizacija bei daugiaaukštė statyba. Senos demokratijos šalyse ieškoma būdų, kaip, nepažeidžiant paveldosaugos etikos ir socialinio teisingumo normų, paskatinti pačius paveldo savininkus ir naudotojus saugoti bei racionaliai naudoti praeities turtą, plečiant miestų istorinių centrų gyvybines funkcijas ir rūpinantis gyventojų gerove. Tačiau mūsų šalyje teisinio mechanizmo, padedančio vietos gyventojams saugoti kultūros paveldo vertybes, racionaliai naudojant jas kaip socialinės ir ekonominės gerovės išteklius, dar nėra, nors 2005 m. Europos Tarybos paskelbtoje "Bendrojoje konvencijoje dėl kultūros paveldo vertės visuomenei" (Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society) nurodoma, kad kultūros paveldo apsauga organizuojama ne tik siekiant išsaugoti paveldą kaip istorijos produktą, bet ir panaudoti jį kaip vizualinę prekę vietos gyventojų socialinės gerovės labui ir siekiant ekonominės naudos. Problema daugiabriaunė ir ambivalentiška. Straipsnyje aptariami tik kai kurie pastarojo meto nauji paveldosaugos poslinkiai stabilios demokratijos šalyse. Jame daugiau dėmesio skiriama apsaugos ir plėtros etikos problemai, paveldo vertybių respektavimo klausimams bei socialinio teisingumo užtikrinimui paveldosaugos teisėje ir praktinėje paveldotvarkos veikloje. Reišminiai žodžiai: miestų istoriniai centrai, apsauga ir plėtra, atgaivinimas ir modernizacija, aukštybinė statyba, paveldosaugos etika, vertybių respektavimas, socialinis teisingumas, demokratija, lengvatos, kompensavimo programos. First Published Online: 22 May 2013

After the restoration of independence of Lithuania the legal basis and administrative structures of heritage preservation were changed many times, though the maintenance, use and state of heritage were not improved, and its decay did not decrease. Undemocratic and inhumane legal basis and management of heritage preservation based on restrictions, prohibitions and penalties without any compensatory incentives for imposed restrictions and economic disadvantages increasingly raises discontent not only from society but also from heritage owners and users.The owners and users of land where heritage objects are situated realize that their property can be used more efficiently and profitably and that social and economic restrictions imposed by heritage protection regulations contravene their rights. Instead of investing into preservation of heritage objects, owners usually attempt to get rid of them.Conflicts between heritage preservation institutions, owners of heritage objects and society are especially inherent in historic city centers where commercial interests are expanding and master plans and development projects propose intensive modernization and development of high rise buildings.Countries with long-lasting democracy traditions are looking for solutions how, without contradicting heritage preservation ethics and social justice, to encourage owners and users of heritage objects to protect and use rationally the legacy inherited from the past simultaneously retaining and stimulating vitality of historic centers and improving quality of life of their inhabitants.The problem is multipartite and ambivalent. Only changes and improvements in heritage preservation systems enacted in latter years in the countries of stable democracy, emphasizing the problem of development and protection ethics, the questions of respect of heritage values and implementation of social justice in juridical and practical heritage preservation activities are discussed in the paper.

After the restoration of independence of Lithuania the legal basis and administrative structures of heritage preservation were changed many times, though the maintenance, use and state of heritage were not improved, and its decay did not decrease. Undemocratic and inhumane legal basis and management of heritage preservation based on restrictions, prohibitions and penalties without any compensatory incentives for imposed restrictions and economic disadvantages increasingly raises discontent not only from society but also from heritage owners and users.The owners and users of land where heritage objects are situated realize that their property can be used more efficiently and profitably and that social and economic restrictions imposed by heritage protection regulations contravene their rights. Instead of investing into preservation of heritage objects, owners usually attempt to get rid of them.Conflicts between heritage preservation institutions, owners of heritage objects and society are especially inherent in historic city centers where commercial interests are expanding and master plans and development projects propose intensive modernization and development of high rise buildings.Countries with long-lasting democracy traditions are looking for solutions how, without contradicting heritage preservation ethics and social justice, to encourage owners and users of heritage objects to protect and use rationally the legacy inherited from the past simultaneously retaining and stimulating vitality of historic centers and improving quality of life of their inhabitants.The problem is multipartite and ambivalent. Only changes and improvements in heritage preservation systems enacted in latter years in the countries of stable democracy, emphasizing the problem of development and protection ethics, the questions of respect of heritage values and implementation of social justice in juridical and practical heritage preservation activities are discussed in the paper.

After the restoration of independence of Lithuania the legal basis and administrative structures of heritage preservation were changed many times, though the maintenance, use and state of heritage were not improved, and its decay did not decrease. Undemocratic and inhumane legal basis and management of heritage preservation based on restrictions, prohibitions and penalties without any compensatory incentives for imposed restrictions and economic disadvantages increasingly raises discontent not only from society but also from heritage owners and users.The owners and users of land where heritage objects are situated realize that their property can be used more efficiently and profitably and that social and economic restrictions imposed by heritage protection regulations contravene their rights. Instead of investing into preservation of heritage objects, owners usually attempt to get rid of them.Conflicts between heritage preservation institutions, owners of heritage objects and society are especially inherent in historic city centers where commercial interests are expanding and master plans and development projects propose intensive modernization and development of high rise buildings.Countries with long-lasting democracy traditions are looking for solutions how, without contradicting heritage preservation ethics and social justice, to encourage owners and users of heritage objects to protect and use rationally the legacy inherited from the past simultaneously retaining and stimulating vitality of historic centers and improving quality of life of their inhabitants.The problem is multipartite and ambivalent. Only changes and improvements in heritage preservation systems enacted in latter years in the countries of stable democracy, emphasizing the problem of development and protection ethics, the questions of respect of heritage values and implementation of social justice in juridical and practical heritage preservation activities are discussed in the paper.

After the restoration of independence of Lithuania the legal basis and administrative structures of heritage preservation were changed many times, though the maintenance, use and state of heritage were not improved, and its decay did not decrease. Undemocratic and inhumane legal basis and management of heritage preservation based on restrictions, prohibitions and penalties without any compensatory incentives for imposed restrictions and economic disadvantages increasingly raises discontent not only from society but also from heritage owners and users.The owners and users of land where heritage objects are situated realize that their property can be used more efficiently and profitably and that social and economic restrictions imposed by heritage protection regulations contravene their rights. Instead of investing into preservation of heritage objects, owners usually attempt to get rid of them.Conflicts between heritage preservation institutions, owners of heritage objects and society are especially inherent in historic city centers where commercial interests are expanding and master plans and development projects propose intensive modernization and development of high rise buildings.Countries with long-lasting democracy traditions are looking for solutions how, without contradicting heritage preservation ethics and social justice, to encourage owners and users of heritage objects to protect and use rationally the legacy inherited from the past simultaneously retaining and stimulating vitality of historic centers and improving quality of life of their inhabitants.The problem is multipartite and ambivalent. Only changes and improvements in heritage preservation systems enacted in latter years in the countries of stable democracy, emphasizing the problem of development and protection ethics, the questions of respect of heritage values and implementation of social justice in juridical and practical heritage preservation activities are discussed in the paper.