C Explanatory memorandum
by Mr Andries Gryffroy, rapporteur
1 Introduction
1. The motion for a resolution
Note which has initiated the present report
recalls that: “Since its establishment, the Council of Europe has
been aware of the importance of cultural heritage for achieving
a greater unity among Europeans. Through its activities, it illustrates
the importance of heritage as a tool to facilitate intercultural
dialogue, a peaceful co-existence and conflict prevention. At a
time when our societies face new and profound challenges, cultural
heritage has become a crucial element for the construction of a
peaceful and democratic society, and a key element in the processes
of sustainable development and promotion of cultural diversity.”
2. The aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine and
conflicts in the countries of former Yugoslavia in the 1990s sadly
demonstrate that alongside humanitarian and economic devastation,
cultural identity and cultural heritage remain a clear target of
destruction; with museums, libraries, theatres, and churches destroyed
and looted. In follow-up to the Assembly
Resolution 2057 (2015) “Cultural heritage in crisis and post-crisis situations”
which was prepared in our committee by Ms Ismeta Dervoz (Bosnia
and Herzegovina, EPP) in 2014, I would propose to explore the relevance
of the Cultural Routes of the Council of Europe to the promotion
of peace and intercultural dialogue, as a practical and in my opinion
effective means towards conflict prevention.
3. In my report I present some significant experiences at local,
regional, national and international levels in which the Cultural
Routes promote open exchanges based on mutual understanding between
individuals and groups of different origins, cultures, religions
and languages and how these initiatives contribute to the prevention
of religious, linguistic, political and cultural tensions.
4. I wish to warmly thank the many enthusiastic men and women
who stand behind the six Cultural Routes that we have interviewed
online – ATRIUM Route, Liberation Route Europe, European Route of
Jewish Heritage, Saint Martin of Tours Route, Phoenicians’ Route
and Routes of El Legado Andalusí – for sharing their knowledge,
experience, and thoughts around questions that we have raised with
them
Note. I also wish to
thank Dr John Bold, a heritage expert from the United Kingdom, who
has assisted me in preparing this report.
2 The Cultural Routes Programme and the
main related conventions
5. The Cultural Routes Programme
is a very practical means of implementing Council of Europe policies on
the value of cultural heritage for promoting cohesive societies,
intercultural dialogue and the right of access to culture, extensively
among people and across regions in Europe. The Cultural Routes link
local heritage to a broader historic exchange of ideas and skills
across Europe and encourage collaborative grassroots initiatives
which give people a sense of ownership and pride in their heritage
as an element of “common European heritage”.
6. In 1984, the Assembly adopted
Recommendation 987 (1984) “European pilgrim routes”, calling on the Committee
of Ministers to revive these ways, beginning with the routes converging
towards Santiago de Compostela. This recommendation was followed
up by the establishment of the first Council of Europe Cultural Route
with the Santiago de Compostela Declaration in October 1987.
Note Today, pilgrimage remains a dominant theme
for Cultural Routes, since it carries the potential for shared experiences
and intercultural dialogue and attracts mixed social groups and
cultures.
7. Since the creation of the Cultural Routes Programme in 1987,
the number of routes has expanded to 48 routes,
Note covering a range of different themes,
from architecture and landscape to religious influences, from gastronomy
and intangible heritage to major figures of European art, music
and literature. The routes bring people and places together in networks
of shared history and heritage.
8. The significant rise in the number of certified routes is
a clear sign of the success of the Programme. However, the accomplishment
lies also in the capacity of each route to sustain its activity
and relevance in the long term. I therefore wish to outline the
main policy instruments of the Council of Europe that lay the foundation for
the activities and management of the Cultural Routes.
Note
2.1 European
Cultural Convention: a political platform for co-operation
9. The European Cultural Convention
(ETS No. 18),
Note which was adopted in 1954 in the
aftermath of the Second World War, is the foundation for European
co-operation in the fields of culture, education and particularly
history education, youth, and sport. Its aim is to encourage cultural
co-operation in all its forms, to foster understanding and knowledge
among European countries, and to preserve their cultural heritage
and treat it as an integral part of a broader “European” common,
shared heritage. The Convention recognises the intangible heritage
of language, literature and civilisation. Given its historic context,
an early educational task was to undo the nationalist appropriation
and distortion of history. Guidelines on history education
Note and teacher training became crucial
parts of assistance to post-communist countries, especially in the
conflict regions of the Balkans and the Caucasus. It is important
to mention that the European Cultural Convention offers a political
platform for co-operation also to non-member States of the Council
of Europe, including today Belarus and the Russian Federation (since
its exclusion from the organisation in March 2022).
2.2 European
Landscape Convention: a wider context for heritage protection
10. In its preamble, the European
Landscape Convention mentions three other fundamental conventions
of the Council of Europe on which it is based and for which it constitutes
a fundamental implementation: the Convention on the Conservation
of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (ETS No. 104, Bern, 1979);
the Convention for the protection of the Architectural Heritage
of Europe (ETS No. 121, Granada, 1985); and the European Convention
on the protection of Archaeological Heritage (revised) (ETS No.
143, Valetta, 1992). Together they underline the necessity to preserve
cultural and natural heritage as an essential part of local and regional
identity and they form a new and broader definition of common European
heritage which encompasses not only a particular item or place to
be protected by also its wider context.
2.3 Faro
Convention and Faro Action Plan: links between heritage, human rights
and democracy
11. The Framework Convention on
the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (CETS No. 199, Faro Convention,
2005)
Note broadens the understanding of cultural
heritage even further by establishing close links between heritage,
human rights and democracy. It considers heritage both as a resource
for human development, and for enhancement of cultural diversity
and promotion of intercultural dialogue. Heritage becomes a key
part of a local economic development model based on sustainability.
The Faro Action Plan
Note promotes the innovating principles
of the Convention through diverse activities in the member States.
There is an opportunity to reinforce the links between the Cultural
Routes Programme and the implementation activities promoting the
key principles of the Faro Convention (heritage seen from a human
rights perspective; participation of local communities in developing
a common vision for local development; and principles of sustainable
development which bring together economic, social, cultural and
environmental concerns into a coherent strategy).
2.4 UNESCO
Convention on intangible heritage: cultural heritage and identity
12. The UNESCO Convention for the
Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003) provides
a definition of intangible cultural heritage in Article 2 referring
to “practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills as
well as instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated
therewith – that communities, groups and in some cases, individuals
recognise as part of their cultural heritage. This intangible cultural
heritage, transmitted from generation to generation, is constantly
recreated by communities and groups in response to their environment,
their interaction with nature and their history, and provides them
with a sense of identity and continuity, thus promoting respect
for cultural diversity and human creativity.” The importance of
intangible cultural heritage is not the cultural manifestation itself,
but rather the wealth of knowledge and skills that is transmitted
through it from one generation to the next. The social and economic
value of this transmission is relevant for both minority groups
and for mainstream society. The Cultural Routes promote through
each specific theme traditions, knowledge, rituals and tastes which
are an essential part of European and local culture and identity,
and which are often linked with each other across different regions
of Europe.
2.5 Convention
on Offences relating to Cultural Property: relevance for conflict
zones
13. In the framework of the Council
of Europe’s action to fight terrorism and organised crime, the Committee of
Ministers adopted the Convention on offences relating to cultural
property (CETS No. 221, Nicosia Convention) in May 2017.
Note This Convention is complementary
to the existing international legal framework and seeks to stop
the looting of antiquities and their trafficking through art markets.
It makes their unlawful excavation, importation and exportation,
acquisition and placing on the market, including the falsification
of documents in this context, a criminal offence. By bringing national
legislations up to the same standards, the treaty will close the
existing loopholes and enable much more effective cross-border co-operation
in investigating, prosecuting and sentencing persons suspected of
the offences listed in the Convention. Crucially, the Convention
protects the cultural property of any State, be it party or not
to the treaty. Following the required number of ratifications by
the member States, the Convention entered into force on 1 April
2022.
Note The Nicosia Convention will be relevant
to countering trafficking and looting of cultural heritage in conflict
zones and it provides a more stringent basis for restitution.
2.6 Certification
of Cultural Routes based on policy guidelines
14. The certification procedure
Note and criteria were established by
the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe in 2013 (revised
criteria),
Note to guarantee that any proposal to
establish a new Cultural Route is clearly embedded in the Council
of Europe and UNESCO policy guidelines and principles, as outlined
above. The proposals must define a theme representative of European
values common to several Council of Europe countries; identify heritage
elements, whether tangible and/or intangible; create a network with
legal status, involving at least three member States; co-ordinate
common activities in the main field of actions according to certification
criteria; ensure a common visibility strategy and coherence of the
project across involved countries.
15. For the Cultural Routes to evolve from a concept to an initiative
which brings together a range of different stakeholders (local authorities,
enterprises, cultural organisations, research institutes and universities,
NGOs, etc.), it was necessary to provide solid support in terms
of expertise, counselling, training, and capacity building. The
European Institute of Cultural Routes (EICR, technical agency of
the Cultural Routes programme) based in Luxemburg, houses an extensive
documentation resource and specialised library on the routes and provides
advice and expertise on the organisational, technical, and logistical
aspects of the conception, development, and promotion of Cultural
Routes. Annual fora and training seminars are organised to exchange practices
and experiences both among certified cultural routes and with other
programme stakeholders.
3 Intercultural
dialogue
16. The notion of intercultural
dialogue is fundamental in the policies and conduct of the Council
of Europe; it should be understood as “a process that comprises
an open and respectful exchange of views between individuals and
groups with different ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic
backgrounds and heritage, on the basis of mutual understanding and
respect” (White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue, Strasbourg, 2008)
Note. It is nested within the overriding
objective of the Council of Europe to promote full respect for universal
and indivisible human rights, democracy and the rule of law as essential
features of inclusive societies. It is a necessary enabling process
for us to live together peacefully and constructively in a multicultural
world, and a tool for the prevention and resolution of conflicts.
17. Encouraging intercultural dialogue and facilitating conflict
prevention and reconciliation are key objectives of the Cultural
Routes programme of the Council of Europe. Each route may be interpreted
as a network, going beyond the notion of individual monuments seen
as isolated artefacts. It is based on a theme representative of
European values and concerns and common to at least three countries.
It is designed to enable co-operation and research, cultural tourism
and sustainable social, economic, and cultural development, educational
opportunities and exchanges of expertise, enhancing the understanding
of history and heritage for all, thereby making European citizens
aware of a European cultural identity and enhancing with tangible
benefits their living environment.
18. Intercultural dialogue does not just happen; it needs to be
encouraged since it is always easier to take the line of least resistance
and speak only to those with whom agreement is anticipated. The
Cultural Routes broaden the scope of discussions by bringing together
disparate voices; they involve schools, universities and cultural
institutions in research and the dissemination of a wide range of
ideas, some of which may be conflicting; they involve people of
different backgrounds, beliefs, and expectations with the ambition
of creating a climate of respectful understanding and they deal
constructively with the negative feelings of those who regard the
heritage of the “other” as alien and dissonant.
19. The potential risks of one-sidedness in post-war educational
practice have been highlighted in recent years by the Assembly in
Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Cyprus. In this respect, the Liberation
Route Europe
Note (certified since 2019) deals with
sensitive political issues, starting from the vexed question of
the use of the contested word “Liberation” on the Eastern front;
the problem with some World War II museums in their reluctance to
acknowledge different points of view; the risk of distorting the
past through failing to reflect nuances and varying interpretations:
histories are not clear-cut. The Route presents different aspects
of war, not just “liberation” and seeks to address diametrically
opposed views non-judgmentally and with respect, though this might
be difficult when such emotive subjects are discussed, in an age
when the risk of manipulation is always present. The Route endeavours
to create a platform for discussion, underlining the point that
the history of war is to be found everywhere. It is a complex subject,
subject to different interpretations which must be acknowledged.
Visiting sites, seeing cemeteries and the dates of death of those
who were killed, brings home to people the reality of war and its
legacy.
20. It is particularly important to engage students since it is
otherwise hard for young people to grasp the significance and extent
of what has occurred in the not-so-distant past, and the potentially
divergent legacies, particularly as the older generations are diminishing.
This history needs to be made relevant and accessible and close
consideration must be given to how such relatively recent history
is interpreted, taught, and communicated in a balanced manner. The
participants in the Council of Europe’s Baku Cultural Routes Declaration
(2014)
Note stressed the importance of intercultural
dialogue between young generations in order to anticipate and negotiate
conflict, recommending formal and informal education and the promotion
of new channels for exchanges between young people from different
countries, inviting their active participation in the understanding
and sharing of European memories. It is significant in this context
that the Saint Martin of Tours Route
Note (certified since 2005) organised
a meeting of children and young people from France, Germany and Belgium
on 11 November 2018, the centenary of the armistice, at the church
of Saint Martin at Dom-le-Mesnil in the Ardennes. This meeting illuminated
a profound paradox since the feast of Saint Martin on 11 November in
Germany is an occasion for celebration whereas in France it is the
occasion for the sad commemoration of the deceased of all wars.
Note
21. The Liberation Route Europe is also seeking to provide additional
resources such as providing training in the historical context of
the Route to travel trade operators as well as to volunteers and
local people. The organisers of the Route are working on the design
of its educational strategy which includes specific projects and
activities, for example a touring “History through their Eyes” project
which is also available online,
Note telling the history of World War
II. Other activities include long distance hiking trails, linking
existing trails, World War II locations and tourism sites which
may be accompanied by online presentations and packages as well
as more traditional publications. The Rough Guides in 2019 published
a substantial guidebook:
Travel the Liberation
Route Europe: Sites and Experiences along the Path of the World
War II Allied Advance.Note
22. The ATRIUM and the European Route of Jewish Heritage share
with the Liberation Route Europe the political difficulties inherent
in its contested subject.
23. The ATRIUM Route
Note (certified since 2014) acknowledges
these difficulties through the use of an acronym to designate its
subject:
Architecture of
Totalitarian
Regimes of the XX Century
in Europe’s
Urban
Memory and announces its rejection
of any revisionist standpoint in Article 2 of its Statute. The routes
extend from formerly fascist Italy to formerly communist Eastern
Europe. The towns and cities of this route display an architectural
and urban material heritage of considerable richness and value,
often conspicuously aesthetically stylish and photogenic, yet essentially
dissonant therefore hampered by the disinclination of public authorities to
support it. The principal challenge of the route is to promote a
critical historical involvement with a difficult past, to establish
a common democratic vision which includes the promotion of cultural
tourism, and to foster an articulate and critical appreciation of
the complexities of architectural heritage. Through involving citizens
in the creation of local heritage communities and explaining history,
the intention is to strengthen the resilience of civil society,
enabling it to resist any potential renewal of political repression
and the violation of human rights. This is particularly important
with sites such as Mussolini’s birthplace Predappio in the province
of Forli which is a site of neo-Fascist nostalgic tourism.
24. The ATRIUM Route encourages the participation of universities
and secondary schools to allow students both physically and digitally
to explore the complexities of dissonant heritage and enable them
critically to analyse fascism and the communist and socialist regimes
of Eastern Europe and to understand how architecture became an instrument
of education and propaganda as well as state-fostered local development. The
various programmes of student exchanges, events, activities and
photographic exhibitions are aimed to re-evaluate the architectural
heritage, in order to enhance remembrance and understanding. However,
it is not easy to depoliticise a fundamentally politicised heritage.
Although ATRIUM enjoys very good relations with cultural associations,
maintaining links with the responsible local authorities remains
a challenging task which requires constant attention. When there
has been on occasions insufficient institutional buy-in to something which
is perceived as difficult and dissonant, too much depends on individuals;
consequently, changes in personnel disrupt project continuity and
oblige to restart the dialogue with newly elected mayors and members of
municipal or regional councils. Further problems arise in attempting
to preserve and promote the architecture of a challenging past,
finding new uses and funding for buildings without forgetting their
original functions, and dealing with problematic issues of the conservation
of property involving both private and public subjects.
25. The European Route of Jewish Heritage
Note (certified
since 2004) has the primary objective of promoting a better knowledge
and understanding of European history and changing the mentality
of society about the importance of Jewish heritage. This is a challenging
heritage which is surprisingly little understood by the general
public. The route seeks to combat the all too prevalent antisemitism,
which continues as a blight on many societies: national report cards
have been prepared with specific questions for States to test the effectiveness
of the approach.
26. However, the work of the route is not solely devoted to Jewish
heritage: it encourages both Jewish and non-Jewish collaboration,
giving visibility to the positive elements, rather than concentrating
on the profound negativity of antisemitism. For example, the Parallel Traces project – which
is collaborative, inter-disciplinary and pan-European – encourages
artistic projects that connect cultural heritage and contemporary
culture, promote intercultural dialogue and multi-disciplinary exchanges
and collaborations. The project emphasises the positive contribution
of culture and education to human rights and democracy, a link which
is not always well understood in all countries.
27. The European Route of Jewish Heritage also promotes cultural
and educational exchanges for young Europeans, involving schools
and universities in the exploration of Jewish heritage as European
heritage, to support the social integration of young people, both
Jewish and non-Jewish, from different social backgrounds and regions.
In line with the Faro Convention, the route looks at heritage as
plural and diverse; the question that follows is how the route might
work in an open and inclusive manner, creating bridges between worlds. These
are complex concepts with many difficulties in their realisation,
not least the fact that funding for the routes must be found on
a project-by-project basis and funding bodies tend to require proof
of previous success, which in the heritage world is notoriously
difficult to measure. The way forward appears to be to think in
terms of bottom-up projects – small “incubator projects” which may
be more readily fundable, and which have the potential to feed into
the routes and so enrich them.
4 Cultural
heritage: a means to re-connect communities and open a broader perspective
28. As a consequence of the Covid-19
pandemic, individuals tend to be more introvert and disconnected. Also,
nationalism and populism are rising in Europe, with more focus on
national borders. Cultural Routes are predicated on principles of
collaboration and co-operation and therefore offer opportunities
to counter these negative trends. Within the routes, cultural heritage
may potentially provide the glue which binds together communities
and societies in a common cause, enabling connections to be made
across cultural, ethnic, religious, and generational divides. Arguing
for the preservation and enhancement of a traditional, recognisable environment
or the maintenance or reconstruction of an historic building brings
stakeholders together, reviving former connections and forging new
ones.
29. The Routes are collaborative transnational networks which
are managed by institutions and municipalities rather than by governments
so projects may be developed through a bottom-up approach which proceeds
from the local to the national to the global, rather than being
imposed from above. The networks enable participants to come together
in collaboration, empowering communities in pursuit of a common
cause or interest which will then attract further participation,
ideally encouraging greater diversity among participants as the
networks grow.
30. However, networks may also be used as politicised vehicles
for propaganda and misinformation, joining people together in a
common cause which is directed towards undermining other individuals
and institutions. Recent political experience in both Europe and
the USA has shown how difficult it is to counter deliberate misinformation.
It is particularly difficult to introduce alternative interpretations
and nuanced positions in situations where there are clear and strongly
supported diametrically opposed positions, equally firmly maintained
and often heavily funded by those pursuing a political agenda.
31. Cultural heritage is clearly not always passive; it may be
weaponised and politicised, used to identify and stigmatise the
“other”, fomenting discord and encouraging division in the undermining
and even destruction of social cohesion. Targeting the built heritage
of those who are perceived as different or alien to an indigenous (majority)
population has long been a feature of warfare; the rebuilding of
iconic monuments and sites by the victors after destruction might
also be interpreted by others as an act of overly assertive aggression.
32. It is vital therefore to present cultural heritage as a positive
element in the formation of cohesive, yet diverse societies, respecting
the idea of a shared European heritage for which we all have a responsibility,
an idea which is embedded in the Faro Convention. It is particularly
important to educate young people in the notion of a shared heritage,
bringing positive outcomes through countering the notion of the
alien “other”. Through cultural and educational exchanges, site
visits, in-person and on-line participatory projects, cultural heritage
and its associated histories might be made comprehensible and relevant
to the concerns of young people today.
33. Much may now be learned remotely on-line, but it remains vital
to our understanding and appreciation to visit sites. In the context
of cultural routes, these sites need not be restricted simply to
the items on the route; rather, there may be potential to use the
route as a starting point. This is the approach which has been adopted in
the EU Horizon 2020-funded “rurAllure” four-year research project
which seeks to promote rural museums and heritage sites in the vicinity
of pilgrimage routes, showing that the impact of the route may be
seen in the surroundings as well as in specific places on the route.
The rurAllure project
Note is related to the EU-funded Ruritage
project
Note which uses natural and cultural heritage
as an engine for the regeneration of rural areas and the sustainable
enhancement of local heritage for regional and community development.
This strategy of highlighting rural heritage and sites off the beaten
track has been employed also on the Saint Martin of Tours Route
since the Saint Martin’s ways, frequently experienced as slow tourism
through walking, highlight a local heritage far from major centres
and tourist currents, in the Massif Central and in Flanders, in
the Dauphiné and in Friuli, in Puglia or in Croatia, and so on.
34. It is seeing things in their wider context, not only physically
but also conceptually, making tangible links, which helps make the
heritage relevant and accessible, especially for younger generations
who are coming to an appreciation of it for the first time. Greater
contextualisation and a more relativist approach to historical questions
makes it possible to bring different perspectives on situations
and artefacts forward, to advance different interpretations and
to counter totalitarian, absolutist tendencies. On the St Martin
of Tours Route for example it has been recognised that the Friuli
border between Italy and Slovenia was in the twentieth century a
place of major confrontation in both world wars and a site of frequently
difficult contact between Latins, Germans, and Slavs, as well as
between the western and communist worlds: divergences of interpretation
fuel conflicting ideological positions which it is the task of the
Route to reconcile and overcome.
35. There is no single standard or authorised version of history
so it is crucial to accommodate a diversity of views in its teaching,
and in the present context, utilise a wide range of sites as examples,
not just the well-known museums and battlefields but also the under-exploited
and humble sites which might tell us more about the past and raise
awareness of how people lived. In considering the Jewish built heritage
for example, for a better understanding of the circumstances of
people’s lives we need to look beyond the obviously major sites such
as synagogues and cemeteries towards philanthropic housing for the
poor, free schools, public baths, and soup kitchens. Consideration
of this specifically Jewish heritage enriches our knowledge and understanding
of European history, which is a fundamental aim of the European
Route of Jewish Heritage, underlining the notion of a common European
heritage, not delimited by race, religion, or ethnicity.
36. A difficulty inherent in approaches to the humble heritage,
which can tell us so much about how people lived, is that unlike
the monumental heritage, it may not survive. Hence there is the
need to maintain documentation and to make it accessible to all
through multi-media as well as in repositories and museums. And
it must also be noted that documents do not speak for themselves
but require well-informed interpretation and presentation if they
are to be properly understood and communicated.
5 Innovation,
digitalisation, education, and sustainable development
37. We must encourage the use of
new technologies and innovative techniques to increase knowledge
and understanding of heritage, enabling more collaboration and better
communication, reaching wider audiences and crossing generations.
Heritage may often be perceived incorrectly as something which has
simply to do with the past and is concerned solely with the care
and presentation of historic buildings and sites. But it is more than
that: built heritage covers all types and all ages of buildings,
right up to the present day; it is all around us and helps to define
the ways in which we navigate our societies, geographically, economically
and socially.
38. Heritage and its interpretations and management differs from
the study of history in relating to our present concerns and future
expectations: history is what has happened, and we make attempts
to describe and understand it and learn from it; heritage is a product
shaped by history and used for current purposes, which may not all
be sympathetic. This goes beyond the obviously attractive and non-contentious
heritage to include dissonant heritage which may be controversial,
unsettling or even undesirable but is nevertheless vital in educating,
commemorating, prompting memory and encouraging reflection. As such
it can be a means of bringing people together. This might be a slow
process since dissonance arouses strong, often oppositional feelings
with people holding diametrically opposed views which may only be
overcome gradually over time.
39. Dissonant heritage is a fundamental part of European history
and heritage, often displaying striking architecture but also often
neglected and threatened, a victim of negative associations so under-funded
and under-used. But with well-informed management, dissonant heritage
may play an important role in sustainable tourism, even in circumstances
in which local populations might need to be persuaded of the benefits
before becoming involved. Certain of the cultural routes, particularly
the Liberation Route Europe (the tangible and intangible cultural
heritage of World War II) and the ATRIUM Route (the architecture
of totalitarian regimes), are developing new approaches to tourism
and education, particularly involving school children, and encouraging
online discussions and sharing of experiences with which we have
become familiar during the period of the Covid-19 pandemic, as well
as site visits. For the European Route of Jewish Heritage, online
tours have been created, applying heritage data to such pan-European
(and topical) topics as multiculturalism, persecution, and migration.
Such a transversal approach could possibly be applied to other potentially challenging
and divisive routes, providing a more accessible starting point
for those who consider the notions of “liberation” and “totalitarian”
to be so politically and culturally contested that they become difficult
to sell to the wider audience in which one person’s reason for condemnation
might be another person’s reason for celebration.
40. In line with the Council of Europe Faro Convention, the enabling
of successful sustainable tourism (meeting the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs) demands local involvement and local management. It also
requires the active participation of residents in defining what
may be considered and promoted as heritage, so determining the nature
of the tourist offer and avoiding the top-down approach in which
residents are told by “experts” what is important. This approach is
very different in its procedures and effects from traditional mass
tourism. It is particularly valuable in bringing a wider, potentially
appreciative audience to the road less travelled and the destination
hitherto unknown, so extending sustainable development to previously
less frequented locations.
41. Mass-market tourism tends to be orchestrated from above with
large travel companies working in concert with airlines, hotels,
and shops with the aim of maximising footfall at well-known destinations.
At the opposite end of the tourist scale, a bottom-up approach in
determining the visitor offer and providing a welcoming and informing
environment, centred on particular sites, displays or activities
is intended to encourage a more thoughtful tourism. Such has been
the experience in the Liberation and ATRIUM routes, with the encouragement
of such green activities as hiking and biking, often following trails
through customarily less well visited areas, so bringing many of
the social and financial benefits of tourism to places which hitherto had
been off the tourist map.
42. On the European Route of Jewish Heritage, remarkably, in Girona
(Spain) the physical reconstruction of a Jewish quarter has brought
back a lost Jewish community, and fostered tourism. This recalls
one of the intentions of post-war reconstruction in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
notably in Stolac: rebuild the destroyed town in order to encourage
the return of those who were forcibly removed during the conflict
in the 1990s, making the place once more look familiarly like home.
43. Among the most strikingly innovative approaches to sustainable
tourism, the Phoenicians’ Route,
Note certified since 2003 – covering essential
routes, by land and water, for trade and cultural communication throughout
the Mediterranean civilisations – has introduced Smart Ways
Note (pathways bringing together heritages,
communities and services to provide a territorial sustainable tourist
offer) and Interpretation Centres, in which service providers meet
visitors in hubs along the route where the tourist offer can be
explained and understood.
44. The Smart Ways approach is designed to enhance territorial
co-operation and cohesion, enabling some less developed destinations
to build their economy. The approach is predicated on the understanding
that tourism has a very fast multiplier effect with a high return
on investment and great resilience in recovering rapidly from crisis,
particularly important in post-Covid economic recovery programmes.
Note
45. The emphasis in Smart Ways is laid upon collaboration between
experts and local partners: cultural and tourism operators, representatives
of associations and institutions, private companies and municipalities:
it is the view of the organisers of the Phoenicians’ Route that
cultural routes offer the best future for tourism in being sustainable,
responsible and collaborative, with the full engagement of local
communities. This collaborative, capacity building approach, bringing
public and private actors together in workshops to develop new approaches
to heritage, while not always explicitly acknowledged, has been
fundamental to the most successful Council of Europe heritage initiatives
in recent years, notably in the Regional Programme in South-East
Europe.
46. For the routes of El Legado Andalusí
Note (certified since 1997), which celebrate
the centuries of Spanish-Muslim civilisation (linking the Arab world
with the Mediterranean basin) through its heritage, arts, sciences, and
historical and social relationships, cultural tourism enables the
establishment of bonds of solidarity between civilisations. These
bonds are not only made manifest through traversing a physical route
but also through the elements of the route which are representative
of an idea and a process of cultural co-operation, enabled in part
in this case by digital innovation: their QR codes of heritage sites
are shared with others as an innovative model. The methodologies
of this route might provide a way forward in confronting the difficulties inherent
in dissonant heritage since El Legado Andalusí represents an historic
model of tolerance, respect and mutual understanding between Muslims,
Christians, and Jews.
6 Conclusions
47. The significant rise in the
number of certified routes is a clear sign of the success of the
Cultural Routes of the Council of Europe Programme. However, the
accomplishment lies also in the capacity of each route to sustain
its activity and relevance in the long term. I therefore wish to
outline some ideas that we have discussed with representatives of
six cultural routes
Note that
seem relevant to pursue with a view to promote further intercultural
dialogue and cultural diplomacy; to reconnect communities and broaden
perspectives; to innovate and to make local economic and tourist
initiatives more sustainable.
48. One of the aims of cultural routes is the celebration of diversity
which should be respected by all, as expressed in the Faro Convention:
“everyone alone or collectively, has the responsibility to respect
the cultural heritage of others as much as their own heritage, and
consequently the common heritage of Europe” (Article 4). This shared
responsibility towards the places where people live is vital in
the reinforcement of social cohesion (Article 8), a particularly
significant ambition in a period which frequently has been characterised
by divisiveness and discord, and especially important in routes
with a high proportion of dissonant, contestable heritage on which
opinions may be too-strongly expressed. Notably it is among the
recommendations of the European Commission’s “Strategy on Combating
Antisemitism and Fostering Jewish Life” (2021)
Note that there should be co-operation
with the Council of Europe to support and enhance cultural routes,
and that guidance and financial incentives should be developed for
the protection and preservation of Jewish heritage sites, supporting
the implementation of the Faro Convention.
49. It has been noted with respect to the ATRIUM Route that heritage
in the Faro Convention is not delimited to material heritage but
also lays emphasis upon the immaterial – this has notably been acknowledged
in El Legado Andalusí which has contributed to the EU’s iHeritage
First Register of Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Mediterranean.
Note In Article 3 of the Faro Convention,
heritage is concerned with the meaning systems which objects represent,
not simply the objects themselves: “all forms of cultural heritage
in Europe which together constitute a shared source of remembrance,
understanding, identity, cohesion, and creativity; and the ideals,
principles, and values … which foster the development of a peaceful
and stable society, founded on respect for human rights, democracy,
and the rule of law”. This focus on a shared understanding is particularly important
with respect to dissonant heritage which requires critical and historical
evaluation rather than unthinking celebration.
Note
50. Critical and historical evaluation is often elusive in our
current age of instantaneous communication and asserted opinions,
in which truths and falsehoods often indistinguishably traverse
the globe faster than reflective thought: it may often be difficult
to determine where priorities and sympathies lie and whom we can trust
when so many seek to mislead. However, viewed positively, the ever-increasing
availability of information, coupled with the growth of information
and communication technologies, when used with goodwill have created opportunities
for strengthening the role of cultural heritage in fostering dialogue
within and beyond particular regions.
Note We can experience cultural heritage
remotely, through digital technologies. This may not fully replace
the experience of physical travel but can substitute for it when
necessary or enhance it through providing supplementary information
and possibilities for exchange, thus offering new opportunities
to recognise the significance of cultural heritage as a vehicle
for developing knowledge and understanding, and for enabling dialogue.
51. The cultural routes initiatives emphasise the local and the
sustainable, but they cannot guarantee continuity without significant
engagement at all levels of involvement from local through regional
to national, bringing participation in funding, enabling, publicising,
and managing. This has been recognised specifically by the organisers
of the Phoenicians’ Route which has achieved wider national publicity
through being represented on the institutional websites of ministries
of tourism in Spain, France, Italy, and Croatia. Initiatives lose
momentum when the initiators move on to new projects or new places
unless they have reassigned responsibilities to others and embedded
strategies and procedures in continuing networks and institutions.
In those routes which focus on dissonant heritage, maintaining continuity
of personnel and endeavour is particularly challenging because these
are not mass-market subjects with many friends and potential collaborators
who would wish to benefit from involvement. They are by definition
“niche subjects”, with specialist audiences.
52. In conclusion I would emphasise that each Route is an idea
and a process that offers inspiration and guidance to be shared
widely across Europe and to be used more systematically as an innovative
and collaborative process locally. In my opinion member States are
not sufficiently aware of these local processes and their value
in building knowledge and understanding between cultures with a
view to sustaining cohesive, tolerant, culturally diverse, and vibrant
democratic societies.
