Home Architecture Valuation of Medieval Churches; Taking Account of Laypersons’ Views
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Valuation of Medieval Churches; Taking Account of Laypersons’ Views

  • Tineke van der Schoor ORCID logo EMAIL logo , Ezequiel Colmenero-Acevedo ORCID logo and Maarten Vieveen ORCID logo
Published/Copyright: May 25, 2019

Abstract

Local voluntary groups often play an important role in the day-to-day care for historic churches, therefore the perspective of laypersons is very relevant for their conservation. In this paper, we investigate laypersons’ valuation of historic buildings, their experiences of thermal comfort in those buildings and contrast this with their views on the appropriateness of energy efficiency measures. This paper presents four case studies of medieval churches in Groningen, Netherlands. We applied interviews and photo-elicitation to investigate the values held by local committees that take daily care of the churches in our sample. Our theoretical contribution lies in the combination of valuation studies and heritage approaches. Valuation studies is used to investigate the values that are attached to historic buildings by various stakeholders. We apply the ‘heritage-as–a-spatial-vector’ approach which focuses on using heritage as a resource and to position heritage in relation to developments in society. We conclude that for a more balanced assessment of historic buildings, laypersons’ valuations should be further integrated in heritage studies. In particular, community values and comfort needs should be more fully addressed in value assessments.

References

1. Bond S, Worthing D. Managing built heritage: the role of cultural values and significance. 2d ed. Chicester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2016.10.1002/9781118298718Search in Google Scholar

2. Australia ICOMOS. Understanding and assessing cultural significance. 2013.Search in Google Scholar

3. Ashworth G. Preservation, conservation and heritage: approaches to the past in the present through the built environment. Asian Anthropol. 2011;10:1–18. DOI:10.1080/1683478X.2011.10552601.Search in Google Scholar

4. Walter N. From values to narrative: A new foundation for the conservation of historic buildings. Int J Herit Stud. 2014;20:634–50. DOI:10.1080/13527258.2013.828649.Search in Google Scholar

5. de la Torre M, Mason R. Assessing the values of cultural heritage: research report. 2002.Search in Google Scholar

6. Fredheim LH, Khalaf M. The significance of values: heritage value typologies re-examined. Int J Herit Stud. 2016;22:466–81. DOI:10.1080/13527258.2016.1171247.Search in Google Scholar

7. Helgesson C-F, Muniesa F. For what it’s worth: an introduction to valuation studies. Valuat Stud. 2013;1:51–81. DOI:10.3384/v.Search in Google Scholar

8. Heuts F, Mol A. What is a good tomato? A case of valuing in practice. Valuat Stud. 2013;1:125–46. DOI:10.3384/vs.2001-5992.1312125.Search in Google Scholar

9. Vatin F. Valuation as evaluating and valorizing. Valuat Stud. 2013;1:31–50.10.3384/vs.2001-5992.131131Search in Google Scholar

10. English heritage. Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance. 2008.Search in Google Scholar

11. Mydland L, Grahn W. Identifying heritage values in local communities. Int J Herit Stud. 2012;18:564–87. DOI:10.1080/13527258.2011.619554.Search in Google Scholar

12. Waterton E, Smith L. The recognition and misrecognition of community heritage. Int J Herit Stud. 2010;16:4–15. DOI:10.1080/13527250903441671.Search in Google Scholar

13. Nijkamp P. Economic Valuation of cultural heritage. In: Licciardi G, Amirtahmasebi R editors. Econ. Uniqueness. Washington, DC, USA: World Bank Group, 2012.Search in Google Scholar

14. Ruijgrok ECM. The three economic values of cultural heritage: a case study in the Netherlands. J Cult Herit. 2006;7:206–13. DOI:10.1016/J.CULHER.2006.07.002.Search in Google Scholar

15. Janssen J, Luiten E, Renes H, Rouwendal J. Heritage planning and spatial development in the Netherlands: changing policies and perspectives. Int J Herit Stud. 2014;20:1–21. DOI:10.1080/13527258.2012.710852.Search in Google Scholar

16. Janssen J, Luiten E, Renes H, Stegmeijer E. Heritage as sector, factor and vector: conceptualizing the shifting relationship between heritage management and spatial planning. Eur Plan Stud. 2017;25:1654–72. DOI:10.1080/09654313.2017.1329410.Search in Google Scholar

17. Witsen PP character sketches, national heritage and spatial development research agenda; part 1 research agenda. 2014.Search in Google Scholar

18. Fouseki K, Cassar M. Energy efficiency in heritage buildings — future challenges and research needs. Hist Environ Policy Pract. 2014;5:95–100. DOI:10.1179/1756750514Z.00000000058.Search in Google Scholar

19. Drury P. Conservation: an evolving concept. build conserv dir 2012. 2012. http://www.buildingconservation.com/articles/conservation/conservation.htm. Accessed: 19 May 2017.Search in Google Scholar

20. Bernard HR. Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches - harvey russell bernard - Google Boeken, 5th ed. Lanham: AltaMira Press, 2011.Search in Google Scholar

21. Yin RK. Case study research: design and methods. 5th ed. Beverly Hills: SAGE Publications, 2014.Search in Google Scholar

22. Harper D. Talking about pictures: A case for photo elicitation. Vis Stud. 2002;17:13–26. DOI:10.1080/14725860220137345.Search in Google Scholar

23. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, 2011.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2019-05-25
Published in Print: 2019-05-27

© 2017 Birkhäuser Verlag GmbH, Basel. Part of Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 5.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/rbm-2017-0005/pdf
Scroll to top button