Historic urban landscape: an approach for sustainable management in Cuenca (Ecuador)

Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Histori c urban landscape, an approach for sustainable management in Cuenca (Ecuador) Journal: Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Manuscript ID JCHMSD-12-2016-0064.R1 Manuscript Type: Research Paper Keywords: interdisciplinary, Urban Planning, social participation, cultural values Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Introduction The 2011 Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) is the latest concept defined by UNESCO which has proven to be an innovative method for the preservation and heritage management of historic cities (UNESCO, 2011, p.9). However, it should be understood more as a management tool set than a protective measure. With this new approach, backed by the Vienna Memorandum, both cultural and natural values, contemporary architecture, historic buildings and open spaces merge (UNESCO, 2005). This approach considers the city as a whole “characterised by the intensity of the interaction between the community within the city and the physical environment in which it is located” (Casares et al., 2011, p. 58). The HUL approach overcomes the idea of studying isolated individual buildings, taking as essential parts, the building setting and the social participation coordinated both by the citizens and by diverse public authorities. This approach considers the place itself, the city’s profile, the visual axis, types of buildings, open spaces, topography, vegetation, infrastructures, archaeology, anthropology, contemporary architecture, etc., thus proposing a broader vision (Bandarin and Oers, 2015). In fact, it does so to such an extent, that new tools and resources are considered to be imperative, tools which differ greatly from those which are currently being used for the conservation and management of the values of cultural heritage (Bandarin and Oers, 2012; Fredheim and Khalaf, 2016, p. 467). To tackle the process of rapid urbanisation worldwide over the course of the next thirty years (ONU-HABITAT, 2012), the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in which culture and heritage were acknowledged as axes for sustainable urban development, were approved in September 2015. This Agenda is a roadmap in the fight against poverty and inequality, with a people-centred approach, hence SDG number 11 “Make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable” must be addressed (UNESCO, 2015). At the end of 2015, the International Conference “Culture for Sustainable Cities” took place in Hangzhou (China). This conference was held with the aim of implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with regards to the role of culture in sustainable development, and in order to draw up an effective “New urban agenda” which was subsequently adopted at the UN Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III 2016, Quito). Following the Hangzhou Conference, UNESCO declared that it considered the HUL approach to be an adequate instrument for the achievement of the SDGs and for the management of the UNESCO World Heritage Sites (UNESCO, 2015; Taylor, 2016). UNESCO has also claimed that culture and heritage constitute the backbone of the much-needed sustainable urban development (UNESCO, 2016). This fact has been evidenced in the conference program Habitat III and in latest publications on this subject (UNESCO, 2016). The HUL approach is based on all of the aspects that are currently considered to be at the centre of sustainable development –regardless of the heritage viewon an international level. It addresses issues such as inclusiveness, social cohesion, inequality and segregation, economic and social improvements, housing and environmental needs and urban regeneration (Cervelló-Royo et al., 2012, p.45). One of the aspects in which the HUL approach differs from other studies that address the issue of sustainable development, is that the HUL considers cultural heritage as an essential resource for this development, although this concept has also been considered by other authors, not only by the HUL (Cervelló-Royo et al., 2012, P.46; Pereira Roders and Van Oers, 2011). The definition of HUL itself in the Recommendation expands the object of study to cover the entire city and its surroundings. In addition, multiple so-called layers of Page 1 of 24 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development information make up the urban-territorial set (UNESCO, 2011b, articles 8 and 9). Veldpaus and Pereira argue that the main purpose of the HUL notion is to provide guidance on sustainable urban management, considering an integrated approach, management of the significance of urban landscapes within an overall sustainable development framework (Veldpaus and Pereira Roders, 2013b, p.3). Undoubtedly, the management of heritage assets goes through, phases of “managing thoughtful change", to identify the "acceptable limits of change"(Veldpaus and Pereira Roders, 2013). At the same time Lalana and Zancheti & Jokilehto agree with the before mentioned authors (Lalana, 2011, p.18; Zancheti and Jokilehto, 1997, p.38), meanwhile, Paskaleva-Shapira and Bensson refer to the definition of the carrying capacity of heritage to face different impact (Paskaleva-Shapira and Besson, 2006, p.62). It seems that, from the existing tools proposed at international level, the Recommendation on HUL is, the contemporary and innovative approach for managing urban change with a significant ongoing speed (UNESCO, 2011). This, because within this notion, heritage and socioeconomic gather towards planning management into the territory (Pereira Roders and Van Oers, 2011). Most scholars, who approach this tool, as well as UNESCO itself, argue that local public administration and agencies are responsible for the Recommendation implementation. Although, it is also necessary to consider the existing gap between local government in charge of cultural values identification of urban areas (in all their dimensions) and the best-integrated way to define the most appropriate action procedures. (Pereira Roders and Van Oers, 2011, p. 277-278). Studies including that of Zancheti and Ferreira (2012, p.16), show the importance of involving all possible stakeholders in heritage assessment, in order to ensure the lasting effects of sustainable urban conservation, and, in the same way, the HUL approach tools are also advocated. During the Recommendation discussion and elaboration (between 2005 and 2011), the community of international experts who participated in the draft proposal identified six critical steps for the application of the notion on HUL [Table 1 near here] (UNESCO, 2013). According to the Recommendation, the development of a six-step Action Plan is required within a comprehensive and interrelated Plan. In parallel, UNESCO proposes four main types of tools that would be necessary to regulate and facilitate heritage management in dynamic and contemporary urban contexts. These tools are community engagement, planning and knowledge, regulatory systems, and financial tools (UNESCO, 2011). In short, assuming such a recommendation implies training the city's management, including the formulation of new policies, the conservation of key resources, and the planning of the new city. This research purpose is to present the methodology created according to the HUL approach, which through the identification of cultural values - among all the actors involved in the city -, draws up a series of sustainable urban development strategies. The construction of this methodology is based on the analysis of the city from multiple disciplines such as geomorphology, environment, urban planning, historic cartography, land uses, archaeology, intangible and tangible heritage, and economy and heritage value. The challenge of this methodology is not only its implementation in the world heritage city of Cuenca in Ecuador, but also the integration of the management of the historic centre within the overall city development plan. In this respect, the reality is that the management of the historic centre of Cuenca is regulated by the Department of Historic Areas of the Municipality of Cuenca, a department made up of mostly of architects with a vision of heritage still limited to building conservation. Therefore, the purpose of this methodology is to integrate all the Page 2 of 24Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development studies relevant and necessary in the management of a complex entity such as the city, that so far, are done by different organisms without any crosschecking of information nor any reflection to heritage matters. Besides studies, needs from all stakeholders such as public, private academic and citizens are addressed in implementing the HUL approach in Cuenca. Considering the six-step Action Plan defined above, the proposed method allows academics to develop the first five steps and to use Community engagement and Knowledge and Planning tools. Government support is fundamental to complete the process in the rest of the steps which will essentially lead to a successful application of the HUL notion (UNESCO, 2011a, p. 3). Despite previous discussions and attempts to implement the HUL Recommendation in Brazil and Argentina (GobBsAs and Ministerio de Cultura, 2006; UNESCO, 2013), the interest in the research process in Cuenca has led to its incorporation as a Latin-American pilot city for a program developed by the World Heritage Institute of Training and Research for the Asia and the Pacific Region [2]. Background Cuenca is the third city in importance in Ecuador in terms of population, size and administration. The city’s historic centre was recognised as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1999 based on criteria ii, iv and v, emphasising aspects such as the merging of cultures and the Spanish urban inland colonial town planning (entroterra) (UNESCO, 1999). However, the lack of an updated Management Plan for the historic areas places the exceptional universal values, which met the criteria for inscription on the World Heritage List, at risk 15 years after this recognition (Heras et al., 2011). A preliminary study of the historic centre, which was carried out since 2012 by the vlirCPM research project [1] justified the reasons for implementation of the HUL approach in Cuenca. This relates to evidence of the city’s rapid and uncontrolled urban growth over the course of the last century. They include: socioeconomic changes caused by immigration and emigration, degraded areas, the disappearance of historic buildings, backyards and gardens, the impact of modern architecture, façadism caused by the proliferation of plots which have been converted into parking lots, the prominence of cars, lack of accessibility, gentrification, an increase in property investment and even the mounting insecurity that is typical of Latin-American cities (ONU-HABITAT, 2012). Since the 1970s, multiple efforts have been made both by governmental bodies and institutions responsible for heritage matters to deal with these problems (CONSULPLAN, 1982). Recent work carried out by the Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning in the form of the vlirCPM Project, built on prior efforts that had been made and included a “Plan for Preventative Conservation and Monitoring” based on an Inventory System, with the aim of resolving the matters regarding property issues (Jaramillo and Astudillo, 2008; Heras et al., 2011). However, it is clear that this study must be extended to develop a management plan that encompasses, not only the historic centre, but also the city as a whole and at the same time that ensures the preservation of its World Heritage values. In view of this, the Project “Reassessment of the cultural and natural heritage of the city of Cuenca, based on the sustainable development strategies backed by the Historic Urban Landscape approach” (PUH_C for its acronym in Spanish) has been drawn up. Due to the project’s broad conceptual nature, as well as the complexity of the heritage question in the urban setting, it has been decided that an interdisciplinary group of researchers is needed, a group that should include members from environmental, Page 3 of 24 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development economic, anthropological, archaeological, geological, architectural and sociological fields. A key element of this project is the participation of citizens as the main protagonists. Therefore, the three main objectives delineating this research are, the broadened view of heritage, the interdisciplinary nature of the research and the important role of citizens. This experience searches to accomplish the following objectives: 1) assessing the state of conservation of the city of Cuenca; 2) defining the city’s cultural values, not limited to those identified in the 1999 Declaration; 3) identifying different impacts that affect the city of Cuenca’s heritage values and; 4) drawing up a series of Recommendations or a Manual of Good Practices, which, based on the city’s heritage values, will help to define the policies determined by the historic city’s intervention guidelines, as well as setting out the city’s urban growth strategies. Research methodology and Project status and results Since the HUL approach is a recent idea, there are very few case studies in which a scientific methodology has been developed in order to apply said Recommendations to urban ensembles. In fact, the reviewed publications regarding the Edinburgh, El Cairo, Italy and Seville case studies have been carried out by public administration bodies, and are backed by conventional approaches to urban protection (Anderson, 2010; Direction de L’Architecture et du Patrimoine, 2002; IAPH 2016; Miglioli and Pini, 2012; Van Eetvelde and Antrop, 2009; IAPH, 2009, IAPH, 2010). A common element throughout the case studies is the analytical phase in which the data about the cities are collected and mapped. The multiple data cover different layers of the city under the HUL conception, related to the tangible and intangible aspects. They include natural systems; archaeology, historic and contemporary architecture as well as socio-cultural practices, economic processes, workshops and citizens’ participation respectively. Another common phase in the case studies is the identification of heritage values for which future recommendations are established to delineate intervention guidelines, both in the historic city and in the new growth areas. In the analysed cases, the work is carried out directly in the urban sub-zones of the city that have been previously defined by the government, without having presented the criteria adopted for this identification and which influences the research process. In the PUH_C project, the definition of landscape units (or zones) are considered as tools to enable data management, as well to tackle urban issues, due to the increased difficulty involved in analysing the city as a whole. The case studies have been used as a point of reference in the development of the research methodology adopted for Cuenca, which consists of: (1) Phase I. Analysis of interdisciplinary contributions: The analysis carried out by multiple disciplines defines the key physical or territorial, urban and heritage elements that make up the structure of the city. Experts provided 12 reports based on data collection georeferenced and later gathered into a common GIS (Geographic Information System). (2) Phase II. Identification of Units: The identification of such units is backed up by previous research results obtained through a mapping process, and by the identification of key features which characterise each area of the city (Siguencia and Rey, 2016). Internal zoning allows for the establishment of the protection levels, and at the same time regulates activities and land use (Hosagrahar, 2015). (3) Phase III. Units’ value assessment: In this phase, all the compiled information is recorded on a file sheet in which the data collected from phase I is displayed. Page 4 of 24Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Recommendations and upcoming needs for each landscape unit are also outlined (Fernández Cacho et al., 2008) (4) Phase IV. Specific analysis per unit: In this part of the project, a more exhaustive study of each defined unit is carried out, focusing on the identification of aspects that effectively complete the characterization of said unit. To this end, studies of accessibility, traffic and visual perception have been proposed and they will serve to incorporate recommendations for intervention in the guidelines which are currently not being taken into account (Rey, 2014). The information obtained from the diverse studies carried out in the first phase is unique. It includes data which has previously never been studied in the city of Cuenca, and in particular, this information has been produced, taking into consideration the heritage and urban landscape. The consolidated GIS database is the result of this effort and is an important tool as for spatial analysis. The database was organized in 11 schemas systematically organized from the different disciplines incorporated in the project. This database was created in PostgreSQ, an open source software that allows easy connection to web servers. Once the database was created, the Apache Tomcat server was used for visualization. This server allows, by means of Geonetwork and Geoserver tools, the storage of metadata and spatial data respectively. Below the first three phases will be described according to the results obtained while the last phase has not been included in this article since it is still a work in progress. Phase I. Analysis of interdisciplinary contributions. Reports coming from interdisciplinary studies regarding the influence of each discipline on the historic centre and the outstanding universal values, which make of Cuenca a World Heritage Site. Territorial studies. Influence and conditioning of the territory in the urban configuration of Cuenca. The city of Cuenca is located in the depths of a valley, surrounded by mountains. The importance of the Tarqui, Yanuncay, Tomebamba and Machángara rivers to the city’s geomorphology is indisputable, and these rivers, together with their flood plains, are fundamental agents in the shaping of the city. The connection between these rivers and the human settlement in Cuenca has been present since the city was first established, and in fact, it was one of the defining factors when determining its location. The fluvial escarpments of the Tomebamba and Yanuncay rivers, define significant slopes that produce a sequence of visuals between the historic city and the natural surrounding setting. Likewise, a series of high plateaus, the remains of former alluvial terraces, and a series of hillocks have been identified. Some of these hillocks and high plateaus form part of the sacred landscape and viewpoints system which were used by ancient inhabitants of the territory (Acosta, 2015) The maps provided have geotechnical, hydrological and topographic data displaying soil quality, river flows and slope ranges respectively [Figure 1 near here]. The Natural landscape, an environmental point of view. A lack of green areas within the city has been identified, although this is slightly less critical given the magnitude of the protected margins of the Tomebamba and Yanuncay rivers, which have been set up as linear green parks. The historic centre lacks vegetation, in contrast to the ‘El Ejido’, an area that was developed during the first urban plan in the 1950s based on the principles of “Modern Urbanism” and the “garden city”. The replacement Page 5 of 24 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development of the ancient villas with high-rise multifamily buildings and the removal of the private green areas to allow for the introduction of paved surfaces has meant that this feature of the city has effectively been lost. The protected riverbanks as well as heritage trees are mapped(Cordero, 2015). Historic Cartographic study, Cuenca’s urban evolution and its territorial planning. The objective of this study has been to understand and reconstruct Cuenca’s urban evolution and its internal and exterior planning, and this objective is backed by historic maps presented by Albornoz (Albornoz, 2008). The overlapping of historical maps has highlighted the periods in which urban evolution experienced the most significant changes: Period 1 (1557-1830), Period 2 (1830-1960), Period 3 (1960-1982) and Period 4 (1982-2015). These episodes were considered for the catalogue record made in 2013 by the vlirCPM Project. From the information on the year of construction per building, the data was clustered by period and displayed for the entire urban area. Land use and population density studies. Using the information provided by the Municipality of Cuenca, a set of thematic plans were drawn up, the results of which relate to the conditions of use and the activities of the city’s population. The core of the historical areas are identified as those which have the lowest population density, and the land use in these zones is connected to marketing, exchange, administration and management (INEC, 2012). The gentrification process has become an evident issue in the historic centre, given that a high percentage of buildings are used for tourism as well. In recent times, the arrival of a significant number of foreign retirees to Cuenca has served to spur on the transformation of the ancient mansion-houses into apartments and suites for this social group, whose purchasing power has contributed to the displacement of less favoured sectors of the economy (INEC, 2010). Review on the Regulatory System. An analysis of the legislation in force, has shown that there are a considerable number of regulatory bodies in Cuenca. A comparison has been made between three of the most important regulatory bodies, the one regulating the Historic Centre, the area of El Ejido and the Spatial Management Plan for the urban area in Cuenca (Ilustre Consejo Cantonal de Cuenca, 2011; Ilustre Municipalidad de Cuenca, 2011c; Ilustre Municipalidad de Cuenca, 2011a; Ilustre Municipalidad de Cuenca, 2011b; Ilustre Municipalidad de Cuenca, 2011). Based on this comparative study, several conflicts have been identified due to the non-integration of those important heritage elements identified by the experts involved in the project. In addition, a database for the breaching on regulations coming from the local government has been provided. This last one shows the most common defilements that generally relate to the bad use of materials, publicity and informal construction. Heritage Studies. The archaeological component in the city of Cuenca. The archaeological data verifies the pre-Hispanic occupation of the city in the areas of Pumapungo and Todos los Santos, which although somewhat limited, contribute considerably to the configuration of the city’s landscape. The surrounding areas of the city, including Turi and Pachamama amongst others, form a circuit of archaeological landmarks that are related to ceremonial areas. These landmarks are located far from the centrally protected areas and are in a state of progressive deterioration Page 6 of 24Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development caused by abandonment, as well as by the agricultural, shepherding activities and the construction of properties and roads in this area (Novillo, 2015). Intangible cultural heritage (ICH) in Cuenca . This study aims to cover the five fields defined by UNESCO (2003) for intangible aspects. From all the fields that have been mapped, the most prominent one is the “knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe”. Likewise and despite the ephemeral nature, mapping of routes including religious events has been carried out (UNESCO, 2003). Furthermore, a significant number of manifestations of the ICH have been identified, which, whilst having been included in the collective memory, are not carried out at present. However, the maps that have been developed, demonstrate that nearly all the manifestations of the ICH are concentrated in the historic centre except for rare cases located in the surrounding areas, indicating the need to map also contemporary manifestations (Ordoñez, 2015). Economic activities in Cuenca. Street vending and new trades associated with tourism are considered in this study. The idea of working on the informal trade is associated with the lowest social classes nowadays excluded but of significance for the city’s identity. On the side, the tourism is linked to media and high social status and its fast increase during the last years, generates an impact on local inhabitants (Castillo, 2014). Both subjects have a high influence on the study of Cuenca under the HUL notion. The mapping carried out at the Historic Centre and El Ejido, shows the informal trade in concurred locations, a fact that reinforces the driving role in the public space. Although it is generally associated with disorder and chaos, said trade provides variety to the public space and contributes to the shaping of the character and identity of some areas. Changes in population and the significant number of foreigners living in the area have brought about important changes to the historic centre, namely the transformation of the housing into commercial and touristic services (Prada, 2015). The value assessment categories of built heritage. Using the architectural value categories obtained from the heritage inventory created in 2009 by the National Institute of Cultural Heritage of Ecuador (INPC, for its acronym in Spanish) and the University of Cuenca (VlirCPM Project and INPC, 2009), various maps have been drawn up. They show built heritage that stands out, due to the characteristics of the ensemble, rather than to the individual value of its elements. The categories established different protection levels (Emerging Value, VAR A (architectural value A), VAR B (architectural value B), Environmental Value, Without Value and Negative Value) and they are only applicable in the Historic centre and in El Ejido. Architectural typologies of the city of Cuenca . The objective of this study is to identify the percentage of the different architectural typologies that are found in the historic centre and in El Ejido (colonial, republican, modern and contemporary architecture, taking into consideration their state of intervention). The data obtained shows that 52% of the mapped architecture corresponds to modern architecture, 15% to contemporary architecture, 0.37% to historical buildings with a high degree of deterioration and 6.25% to plots (where parking lots, abandoned plots and mechanic garages are located). This data clearly demonstrates the scarce existence of historic architecture in the historic centre, with 14.42% being colonial and republican Page 7 of 24 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development architecture and 12.62% being colonial and republican reformed architecture. The rest of the city’s architecture is from the 1970s, as seen in the cartographic evolution study. Perception studies. Critical historical review of images. A compilation of historical photographs of the city, obtained from the Central Bank of Ecuador’s photo collection, as well as from private collections was used for this section. A comparative analysis has been carried out using current photos to reproduce the same shot point as the historic ones. The comparison between the photographs demonstrates significant changes in the city and its landscape: buildings that have disappeared or that have been transformed, the inclusion of high-rise buildings, alterations in vegetation, changes in land-use and the activities that are evident in the public spaces, the disappearance of the prominence of pedestrians and the shift with the arrival of the vehicle. In contrast, various elements that have been repeatedly photographed in the city have been identified, allowing them to be considered as significant in the collective memory. Perception of the historic urban landscape in Cuenca from the citizenship participation workshops. The recent paradigm for heritage interpretation is based on the notion that the ideal discourse leading to social consensus and collective action, should be focused on process, not product; on collaboration but not only by means of expert presentations (Zancheti and Ferreira Hidaka, 2012, p. 21); a collective memory and not a passive audience (Silberman, 2013; Mydland and Grahn 2012, 566). This understanding that addresses the Recommendation on HUL, suggests using tools for civic participation adapted to the local context in order to establish safeguarding measures for sustainable development of the cities (UNESCO, 2011b; Zancheti and Ferreira Hidaka, 2012). A key component in the methodological process applied in Cuenca is the fact that input has not only been received from experts but the opinions of citizens have also been heard. The social praxis adopted was oriented to support the interdisciplinary involvement. This was framed in an integral, synergistic and continuous process that included the principles of active listening, feedback, reflection and joint action. These processes included workshops which took place in social affinity spaces or neighbourhoods. In addition, a photography contest open to the public and a drawing competition for children were part of the activities organised to encourage citizens’ participation. The workshops held from February to March 2015, were designed using work dynamics to contrast quantitative information. Within 16 focus groups and 148 participants in total, a sociogram was used to analyse their inner interactions. Visual techniques as well as brainstorming support the five activities raised to search for: 1) identity-sharing elements, 2) anomalies, 3) heritage values, 4) areas or unit’s delimitation, and 5) reflections to better conserve the city’s heritage. The results indicate a shared interest on elements embedded in the collective memory such as the main Cathedral, the river’s flow sound, traditional gastronomy flavours and scents, amongst the most frequents. Anomalies ranged from the deterioration of building to transportation and insalubrity issues. Many public squares and parks were ascribed with heritage values with bound importance for their daily interactions. When defining the area limits, the lexes used included “the area we control”, “we have lived since ever”. Finally, the reflections mostly raised a desire for pedestrian areas and the incentive of housing in the city centre as well as the safeguarding of riverbanks (Tenze, 2015). Page 8 of 24Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 481. http://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2016.1171247 GobBsAs, G. de la C. A. de B. A., & Ministerio de Cultura, S. de P. C. (2006). Buenos Aires Ciudad. Buenos Aires: Paisaje Cultural de la Humanidad. Buenos Aires. Retrieved from http://www.buenosaires.gob.ar/areas/cultura/paisaje/?menu_id=20277 Heras, V., Zuñiga, M., Astudillo, S., Aguirre, A., & Cardoso, F. (2011). Plan de Conservación Preventiva para el patrimonio cultural edificado del centro histórico de la ciudad de Cuenca. Cuenca. Hosagrahar, J. (2015). Knowledge and Planning tools. In F. Bandarín & R. van Oers (Eds.), Reconnecting the City. The Historic Urban Landscape Approach and the Future of Urban Heritage (pp. 249–260). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. IAPH, I. A. del P. H. (2009). El paisaje histórico urbano en las Ciudades Patrimonio Mundial. Indicadores para su conservación y gestión I (Junta de A). Sevilla. IAPH, I. A. del P. H. (2010). Paisajes y patrimonio cultural en Andalucía. Tiempo, usos e imágenes. Sevilla: Junta de Andalucía. Consejería de Cultura. IAPH, I. A. del P. H. (2016). Guía del Paisaje Histórico Urbano de Sevilla. Sevilla. Retrieved from http://www.iaph.es/web/canales/patrimoniocultural/guia_paisaje_historico_urbano_sevilla/contenidos_guia_paisaje_historico_ urbano_sevilla.html Ilustre Consejo Cantonal de Cuenca. Ordenanza de aprobación del plan de desarrollo y ordenamiento territorial del cantón Cuenca (2011). Ecuador. IMC, I. M. de C. Ordenanza para la gestión y conservación de las áreas históricas y patrimoniales del cantón Cuenca (26/02/2010) (2010). Ecuador. IMC, I. M. de C. Formulación del Plan de Desarrollo y Ordenamiento Territorial del Cantón Cuenca. Tomo 1 Diagnóstico Sectorial e Integrado (2011). Ecuador. IMC, I. M. de C. PECH Plan Especial del centro histórico de Cuenca. Propuesta (2011). Ecuador. IMC, I. M. de C. Plan de Desarrollo y Ordenamiento Territorial del Cantón Cuenca Tomo 2 Diagnóstico Integrado y Modelo de Desarrollo Estratégico y Ordenamiento Territorial (2011). Ecuador. INEC. (2010). VII Censo de Población y Vivienda, 2010. , Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censo del Ecuador. Quito. Retrieved from http://www.ecuadorencifras.gob.ec/ INEC. (2012). Índice de proyecciones poblacionales. Cuenca. Retrieved from http://www.inec.gob.ec/proyecciones_poblacionales/ Jaramillo, D., & Astudillo, S. (2008). Análisis de los inventarios del patrimonio cultural edificado en la ciudad de Cuenca. In Universidad de Cuenca (Ed.), Facultad de Arquitectura 50 años de la Universidad de Cuenca (pp. 222–225). Cuenca. McNaughton, D., Morrison, M., & Schill, C. (2016). “My Country is like my Mother…”: respect, care, interaction and closeness as principles for undertaking cultural heritage assessments. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 22(6). http://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2016.1165277 Miglioni, F., & Pini, D. (2012). Urban regeneration Project for Historic Cairo. First report of activities. (F. Miglioli & D. Pini, Eds.). Unesco. Retrieved from http://www.urhcproject.org/content/pdf/book_english.pdf Mydland, L., & Grahn, W. (2012). Identifying heritage values in local communities. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 18(6), 564–587. http://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2011.619554 Novillo, M. (2015). El componente arqueológico en el PUH de la ciudad de Cuenca. Informe técnico. Universidad de Cuenca. Page 15 of 24 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development ONU-HABITAT. (2012). ONU-Habitat presenta el Estado de las Ciudades de América Latina y el Caribe. Retrieved from http://www.onuhabitat.org/index.php?option=com_ Ordoñez, S. (2015). El patrimonio inmaterial y su caracterización del Paisaje Urbano Histórico en Cuenca. Informe técnico. Universidad de Cuenca. Pereira Roders, A., & Van Oers, R. (2011). World Heritage cities management. Facilities, 29(7/8), 276–285. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/02632771111130898 Prada, J. (2015). Actividades económicas en la ciudad de Cuenca. Contribución del comercio a la formación del Paisaje Urbano Histórico. Informe técnico. Universidad de Cuenca. Rey, J. (2014). La figura del Paisaje Histórico Urbano como herramienta de intervención en la Ciudad Histórica de Santa Ana de los Ríos de Cuenca (The figure of Historic Urban Landscape as a tool of intervention in the historic city of Santa Ana de los Ríos de Cuenca). In Tourism and Development Eighth International Congress. Málaga: Eumed-Net, Universidad de Málaga. Rey, J., & Astudillo, S. (2015). Visioning Conference Outputs. Cuenca. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/en/events/1232 Siguencia Ávila, M. E., & Rey Pérez, J. (2016). Heritage Values Protection, from the monument to the urban dimension. Case study: The Historic Centre of Santa Ana de los Ríos de Cuenca. The Historic Environment: Policy and Practice, 7(2). http://doi.org/10.1080/17567505.2016.1172785 Silberman, N. A. (2013). Heritage Interpretation as Public Discourse – Towards a New Paradigm. In A. Marie-Theres, R. Bernecker, & B. Rudolff (Eds.), Understanding Heritage – Perspectives in Heritage Studies (pp. 21–33). Berlín: Walter De Gruyter Inc. Taylor, K. (2016). The Historic Urban Landscape paradigm and cities as cultural landscapes. Challenging orthodoxy in urban conservation. Landscape Research, 41(4), 471–480. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01426397.2016.1156066 Tenze, A. (2015). Perception of the historic urban landscape in Cuenca from the citizenship participation workshops. Universidad de Cuenca. UNESCO. (1999). Advisory Body Evaluation. Historic Centre of Santa Ana de los Ríos de Cuenca (Ecuador) n o 863. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/863 UNESCO. (2003). Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.phpURL_ID=17716&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO. (2005). VIENNA MEMORANDUM on “World Heritage and Contemporary Architecture – Managing the Historic Urban Landscape.” Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/document/6814 UNESCO. (2011a). Proposals concerning the desirability of a standard-setting instrument on Historic Urban Landscapes (36C/23). París. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002110/211094s.pdf UNESCO. (2011b). Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape, including a glossary of definitions. Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.phpURL_ID=48857&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO. (2015). international Conference on “Culture for Sustainable Cities.” Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/culture-anddevelopment/culture-for-sustainable-cities/ UNESCO, W. H. C. (2013). Report on the International World Heritage Expert Page 16 of 24Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Meeting on the Mainstreaming of the methodological approach related to the Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape in the Operational Guidelines. Río de Janeiro. Retrieved from whc.unesco.org/document/135630 Van Eetvelde, V., & Antrop, M. (2009). Indicators for assessing changing landscape character of cultural landscape in Flanders (Belgium). Land Use Policy, 26(4), 901–910. Retrieved from http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/elsevier/indicators-forassessing-changing-landscape-character-of-cultural-PM9nWVXKGg/. Villasante, T. R. (2010). Stories and approaches of a participatory methodological articulation. CIMAS Notebooks-International. Retrieved from http://www.redcimas.org VlirCPM Project, & INPC. (2009). Registration Form. Cuenca. VlirCPM Project, & INPC. (2011). Análisis y Jerarquización del Inventario de Bienes Inmuebles de El Ejido. Cuenca. Whitehand, J. W. R. (2010). Urban morphology and historic urban landscapes. In World Heritage Papers – Managing Historic Cities, 27 (pp. 35–43). París: Unesco. Zancheti, S. M., & Ferreira Hidaka, L. (2012). Measuring urban heritage conservation: indicator, weights and instruments (part 2). Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 2(1), 15–26. http://doi.org/10.1108/20441261211223243 About the authors Julia Rey holds a PhD in Architecture and works as a professor at the University of Sevilla. She coordinated the HUL research line at the vlirCPM project at the University of Cuenca (Ecuador). Her areas of research and publications are topics related to conservation, intervention and management in cultural heritage at urban level as well as territorial and landscape level, for instance, applying the Recommendation on Historic Urban Landscape (HUL), in several places, like the city of Seville or Cuenca. She has written several publications on HUL and has lectured at various Latin American Universities in relation to this issue. Maria Eugenia Siguencia is a PhD candidate at the Faculty of Engineering in the KULeuven in Belgium. She has been granted to course her studies through the VLIRUOS Cooperation with the University of Cuenca in Ecuador where currently she is a Professor and researcher in the Faculty of Architecture. Page 17 of 24 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Figure 1. Historic Urban Landscapes elements identified on geomorphological and environmental studies. Source: PUH_C Team 406x288mm (300 x 300 DPI) Page 18 of 24Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Figure 2. Overlapping layers for identifying landscape units corresponding to Heritage Studies. Combination of information from the anthropological, economic, normative and density study. Source: PUH_C team. 397x282mm (300 x 300 DPI) Page 19 of 24 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Figure 3. Overlapping layers for identifying landscape units corresponding to Heritage Studies. Combination of information from the architectural typologies and state of conservation study. Specifically in this map, a bad state of conservation and a high degree of deterioration is included. Source: PUH_C team. 397x282mm (300 x 300 DPI) Page 20 of 24Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Figure 4. Overlapping layers as historic periods of the city, buildings without value, craftsmanship and population density, provide key information of the proposed units and their needs. Source: PUH_C team. 296x210mm (300 x 300 DPI) Page 21 of 24 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Figure 5. Citizen voting during the Visionary Conference.Source: PUH_C Team 329x219mm (300 x 300 DPI) Page 22 of 24Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Table 1. Six-step Action Plan for the implementation of HUL. Source: Veldpaus, L. and Pereira Roders, A. R. (2013). 612x362mm (300 x 300 DPI) Page 23 of 24 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Table 2. Summary on relevant strategies to be consider for further management in Cuenca. Source: PUH_C team. 161x187mm (300 x 300 DPI) Page 24 of 24Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60