十字路口的保护:衡平法保护的必要性

IF 0.6 4区 艺术学 0 ARCHITECTURE
C. Cheong
{"title":"十字路口的保护:衡平法保护的必要性","authors":"C. Cheong","doi":"10.1353/cot.2021.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Historic preservation has an image problem. The field has evolved from a conversation among an elite few regarding select monumental buildings judged solely for their appearance or national significance, to a dialogue among many about collections of buildings appreciated for their pluralistic contexts and meanings. Despite these advancements, the discipline is still often accused of being elitist, exclusionary, and opposed to equity. Couched within the field's interdisciplinary expansion, preservation's supporters and critics increasingly demand greater and more comprehensive inclusion of minority and marginalized communities in the preservation process to ensure fairer distribution of its costs and benefits. Given the current climate of cause-driven social movements and vibrant social dialogue, ignoring such a clarion call threatens to stagnate the preservation field and its contributions to contemporary issues, as well as substantiate accusations that the field is incompatible with equity. There is extremely limited literature on preservation and equity. This research begins to fill that gap. It starts by tracing the discipline's conceptual evolution toward equity and diversity and emphasizes the anachronistic mismatch between the field's conceptual development and practical implementation. It then examines the scant literature directly connecting preservation and equity, contending that an equity preservation approach addresses three of the most common criticisms levied at the field—which are also among society's significant social challenges—gentrification, diversity, and social justice. The paper concludes by presenting examples of two tools, public-private partnerships and community land trusts, that are particularly well suited to an equity preservation agenda.","PeriodicalId":51982,"journal":{"name":"Change Over Time-An International Journal of Conservation and the Built Environment","volume":"108 1","pages":"66 - 83"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preservation at a Crossroads: The Need for Equity Preservation\",\"authors\":\"C. Cheong\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/cot.2021.0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Historic preservation has an image problem. The field has evolved from a conversation among an elite few regarding select monumental buildings judged solely for their appearance or national significance, to a dialogue among many about collections of buildings appreciated for their pluralistic contexts and meanings. Despite these advancements, the discipline is still often accused of being elitist, exclusionary, and opposed to equity. Couched within the field's interdisciplinary expansion, preservation's supporters and critics increasingly demand greater and more comprehensive inclusion of minority and marginalized communities in the preservation process to ensure fairer distribution of its costs and benefits. Given the current climate of cause-driven social movements and vibrant social dialogue, ignoring such a clarion call threatens to stagnate the preservation field and its contributions to contemporary issues, as well as substantiate accusations that the field is incompatible with equity. There is extremely limited literature on preservation and equity. This research begins to fill that gap. It starts by tracing the discipline's conceptual evolution toward equity and diversity and emphasizes the anachronistic mismatch between the field's conceptual development and practical implementation. It then examines the scant literature directly connecting preservation and equity, contending that an equity preservation approach addresses three of the most common criticisms levied at the field—which are also among society's significant social challenges—gentrification, diversity, and social justice. The paper concludes by presenting examples of two tools, public-private partnerships and community land trusts, that are particularly well suited to an equity preservation agenda.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51982,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Change Over Time-An International Journal of Conservation and the Built Environment\",\"volume\":\"108 1\",\"pages\":\"66 - 83\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Change Over Time-An International Journal of Conservation and the Built Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/cot.2021.0002\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHITECTURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Change Over Time-An International Journal of Conservation and the Built Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/cot.2021.0002","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:历史文物保护存在形象问题。这个领域已经从少数精英之间的对话发展到仅仅根据其外观或国家意义来评判精选的纪念性建筑,到许多人之间关于建筑收藏的对话,这些建筑因其多元化的背景和意义而受到赞赏。尽管取得了这些进步,这门学科仍然经常被指责为精英主义、排他性和反对公平。在该领域的跨学科扩张中,保护的支持者和批评者越来越多地要求在保护过程中更大、更全面地纳入少数民族和边缘化社区,以确保更公平地分配其成本和收益。鉴于目前的社会运动和活跃的社会对话的氛围,忽视这样一个响亮的呼吁可能会使保护领域及其对当代问题的贡献停滞不前,并证实该领域与公平不相容的指控。关于保护和公平的文献极其有限。这项研究开始填补这一空白。它首先追溯了该学科向公平和多样性的概念演变,并强调了该领域概念发展与实际实施之间的不合时宜的不匹配。然后,它检查了直接将保护与公平联系起来的文献,认为公平保护方法解决了该领域最常见的三个批评,这也是社会重大的社会挑战之一,即士绅化,多样性和社会正义。本文最后介绍了两种工具的例子,公私合作伙伴关系和社区土地信托,这两种工具特别适合于股权保护议程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Preservation at a Crossroads: The Need for Equity Preservation
Abstract:Historic preservation has an image problem. The field has evolved from a conversation among an elite few regarding select monumental buildings judged solely for their appearance or national significance, to a dialogue among many about collections of buildings appreciated for their pluralistic contexts and meanings. Despite these advancements, the discipline is still often accused of being elitist, exclusionary, and opposed to equity. Couched within the field's interdisciplinary expansion, preservation's supporters and critics increasingly demand greater and more comprehensive inclusion of minority and marginalized communities in the preservation process to ensure fairer distribution of its costs and benefits. Given the current climate of cause-driven social movements and vibrant social dialogue, ignoring such a clarion call threatens to stagnate the preservation field and its contributions to contemporary issues, as well as substantiate accusations that the field is incompatible with equity. There is extremely limited literature on preservation and equity. This research begins to fill that gap. It starts by tracing the discipline's conceptual evolution toward equity and diversity and emphasizes the anachronistic mismatch between the field's conceptual development and practical implementation. It then examines the scant literature directly connecting preservation and equity, contending that an equity preservation approach addresses three of the most common criticisms levied at the field—which are also among society's significant social challenges—gentrification, diversity, and social justice. The paper concludes by presenting examples of two tools, public-private partnerships and community land trusts, that are particularly well suited to an equity preservation agenda.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Change Over Time is a semiannual journal publishing original, peer-reviewed research papers and review articles on the history, theory, and praxis of conservation and the built environment. Each issue is dedicated to a particular theme as a method to promote critical discourse on contemporary conservation issues from multiple perspectives both within the field and across disciplines. Themes will be examined at all scales, from the global and regional to the microscopic and material. Past issues have addressed topics such as repair, adaptation, nostalgia, and interpretation and display.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信