Axiology in the domain of heritage: The concept of „Values” and its potential impact

The present contribution will outline the concept of “values” related to heritage in a broad sense and the other different elements actively contributing to the overall appreciation and fruitful exploitation of our legacy. In a very short way we can consider the matter of values as the complex interaction among different aspects: • Heritage typology (natural, cultural, intangible, … ) • Wide set of “values” (economic value, return of investment, social, cultural, exceptionality/uniquely, etc.) • Geographic range (valuable for locals, national, regional, global, non local mainly, etc.) • Potential users (experts, specialists, collectors, businessman, citizens, researchers, community members, etc.) Major parts of these values are “potential”; some times there is no chance or need to monetize it. As many time happens the “effects” of the “values” are shared among different actors in the value-chain some times not including the public body looking after the cultural assets. Many times it happens that the one who cover the expenses it is not the one who earn much money from the “use” of the cultural asset, it is a kind of asymmetric market model. Moreover sometimes the full set of values it is not evident at least to the managers or it is not considered proper or “wise” to take advantage from them. Occasionally the value is significant only for a specific target group, may be foreigners or collectors, on the opposite, sometimes it is evident at global level that means that is a patrimony of humanity as we use to term them. Long-term traditions and rituals may strengthen cultural identity; historical palaces or classic cars apart from the usual historical relevance may be extremely valuable as movie locations and key elements of the scene. Such an approach will not only maximise the economic impact (economic value, self sustainability, return of investment, market-induced, etc.) but even cultural and social aspects (cultural identity, appreciation, customer loyalty, sense of belonging, minorities, etc., etc.). The exploitation of such values will not, necessarily, jeopardize our heritage, cultural assets are not rivalling and a wise exploitation will not “consume” them. On the contrary a clear identification of their “values” will help to identify and protect them creating the basic conditions to ensure a proper exploitation. Such a scenario looks like a win-win agreement, citizens may benefit from the fruitful exploitation of their own heritage, and stakeholders may benefit from enhanced visibility and incomes. The cultural heritage, in the broad sense and in all its forms, is the bearer of a multitude of values: historical, witness, nationality, civilization recognition, cultural identity, traditions, arts, science, conservation and technology. The plurality of values associated to a cultural “object”, however, is widening according to the variety of stakeholders who consider themselves part of the process of use, conservation and management of heritage. Establishing these values when making decisions concerning the assets and, therefore, satisfy the needs of different stakeholders, turns out to be of crucial importance, mainly because they are the values to decide the degree of attractiveness of a given territory. Therefore the Cultural Heritage refers to a heterogeneous demand to be recognized in its many components, in order to investigate the space of values in its global extension, space that, as we shall see later, is delimited by the different needs of its differentiated demand. Except that, in order to do so, there is a need to identify and define the tools and methods of measurement and assessment of cultural heritage in the different perspectives of the value attributable to it. In this perspective, the cultural heritage is: • a multivalued good / service , in the sense that it belongs to different dimensions of meaning (for example, economic and cultural) in which it receives different values by different stakeholders that are interfaced to it; • a multifunctional good / service, meaning they can be used for different purposes (e.g. educational, touristic and social) based on the values of which it includes; • a resource in an economic sense, as it can be used to create a set of services for the production or exploitation, producing continuous streams of income, resource, however, must be properly “maintained” to ensure that production remains useful; • "a resource for sustainable development and the quality of life in a society in constant evolution" ; • a public resource (or private involving public interest), which is declined at the same time with the quality of "local" - or in a territory, and closely linked to it - and with the quality of the "global" - as understood by UNESCO. This dual aspect leads, in fact, in the neologism "glocal"; • a good / meritorious service, which the community assigns particular functional and moral value plus social development of the community itself; • a valuable information, because its value is intrinsic in the message it sends to those who benefit; • "... all those things that deserve our interest and that, therefore, survive and maintain thanks to this interest and because of the advantages, both material and spiritual, which we derive