The Value Chain of Urban Conservation and the Role of Economics

Binkai Chen^*
*Correspondence: Binkai Chen, Department of Economics, Central University of Finance and Economics, Changping, Beijing, China, Email:

Introduction

This essay seeks to present a thorough understanding of heritage economics and that discipline's contribution to urban conservation. Heritage economics, in particular, is frequently envisioned as a supplementary field that conservationists might use to measure advantages and outcomes beyond the projected cultural values from heritage preservation. This essay is based on the conservation paradigm, which views economics as the primary goal of conservation and is consistent with the urban agenda in a sustainable context. It holds that sustainable conservation projects are more legitimate when they align with economic, social, and environmental goals. This essay addresses both tangible (legacy of the built environment) and immaterial heritage. The strategy is the value chain of all actions directly and indirectly related to cultural heritage preservation [1].

The fact that economics has a significant impact on our daily lives and is becoming increasingly important in the area of culture and the arts is not a recent discovery. The impact of the field of heritage protection faces a major challenge as a result of economic and business thinking. We face a bewildering assortment of financial challenges and barriers, as well as brand-new worlds of possibility. Economic factors are increasingly being prioritised over cultural, social, political, and aesthetic aspects when deciding what history should be preserved. Because of this global tendency which affects all forms of material heritage, and because economic factors heavily impact our conservation decisions, the Getty Conservation Institute [2].

The Getty Conservation Institute convened a group of academics and professionals for a conference on economic challenges linked to the conservation of cultural objects, collections, buildings, and places from December 8–11, 1998. The attendees discussed and argued the contributions that economic discourse and analysis may make to the work of conservation. The participants were chosen from a variety of academic fields, including anthropology, economics, and conservation. In particular, they looked for concepts and methods for assessing both the economic and cultural aspects of heritage, as well as the economic implications on conservation decisions. This workshop, which was a part of a larger investigation into the economics of conservation, was created to address a particular gap in the body of existing research on economics. This strategy contrasts with the central thesis of much recent research on the economics of conservation, which asks how to quantify legacy in terms of price without taking into account why. The majority of this type of research focuses on improving economic techniques for assessing cultural value without taking into account the underlying assumptions that frequently diminish the worth of heritage conservation to society. The conversation across the numerous disciplines represented at the table produced a number of tangible breakthroughs, some specific paths for future research, and a fantastic exchange of ideas [3].

When we discuss the significance of heritage in society, what is at stake? Southeast Europe is currently experiencing a terrible, devastating situation as this article is being printed. This civil, military, and political confrontation is driven by powerful emotions and social ties that have their origins in land and cultural conflicts. For those of us worried about the future of heritage, these occurrences should serve as yet another warning. If we don't comprehend the roles that heritage plays in society-for better and for worse-as a lightning rod for cohesiveness and conflict, we conserve, interpret, manage, and invest in heritage at our peril [4].

Description

Our grasp of how conservation fits into society is greatly aided by economic ideas and thinking. As a social science, economics throws insight on both human behaviour and the nature of society, and as such, shares a lot with other social sciences. With anthropology, art history, and other academic fields whose research has historically had a direct connection to the conservation sector?.

Heritage measured in terms of price

Traditional economic models, which are built to explain all values in terms of prices that are determined in markets, fall short in crucial ways when analysing heritage and conservation. All heritage values, however, cannot be classified into a single, conventional economic framework or quantified in monetary terms [5].

The process of consecrating as a practise

To balance and decide on the many different values of heritage, it is necessary to better understand the social processes that underlie conservation decisions. The meeting participants came to the conclusion that it is best to model many aspects of conservation as an ongoing and contingent process. This realisation is the result of an enormous amount of research in the humanities and social sciences, while it was noted that a process-centered paradigm contrasts with the conservation field's conventional emphasis on outcomes and products.

Imaginative common grass

Participants at the meeting came to consensus on a number of ideas, models, and other issues that could help to bridge economic and cultural perspectives on heritage valuation, inform conservation practise, and influence. Looking ahead, each of these would make an excellent topic for multidisciplinary, collaborative research: sustainability and other ideas rooted in environmental concerns. This topic was the focus of fruitful conceptual discussion throughout the meeting, and it was felt that this fundamental theme should remain on the table as the GCI's research on economics is continued. There is much to gain by continuing to debate these two different ways of appreciating heritage and discussing how they conflict and how they might overlap. Additionally, the discipline of conservation offers a wealth of knowledge that the study of cultural economics can benefit from as it works to conserve cultural assets. A specific source of worry is the diversity, complexity, and multivalent nature of the values that support cultural heritage and the practise of conservation. To take into consideration these types of value-whether they aesthetic, symbolic, or historic-and to go beyond different pricing structures or recognition of the publicbenefit nature of historical sites and items, economic discourse needs to be revised and reimagined.

Conclusion

The impact of social influences (economic, cultural, and political) on conservation practise is investigated by the GCI's conservation research programme. The GCI and its partners conduct conceptual and empirical integrated research activities to examine problems pertaining to the role of the conservation field in civil society. In addition to conferences and symposia, commissioned research articles, original research, and distribution of research findings to the conservation field and its related disciplines are all included in this programme. A research into the values and advantages of heritage conservationspecifically, the part played by social values and valuing processes in conservation-led to the development of the Economics of Heritage Conservation inquiry. When determining the numerous values that are utilised.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1. Amiram, Dan. "Financial reporting fraud and other forms of misconduct: A multidisciplinary review of the literature." Rev Acc Stud 23 (2018): 732-783.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Li, Jianping. "Risk spillovers between fintech and traditional financial institutions: Evidence from the US." Inter Rev Fin Analysis 71 (2020): 101544.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

3. Ngai, Eric WT. "The application of data mining techniques in financial fraud detection: A classification framework and an academic review of literature." Dec Supp Sys 50 (2011): 559-569.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Zhu, Xiaoqian. "Balancing accuracy, complexity and interpretability in consumer credit decision making: A C-TOPSIS classification approach." Knowledge-Based Sys 52 (2013): 258-267.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Ahadiat, Nasrollah. "Association between audit opinion and provision of non‐audit services." Inter J Acc Infor Manag (2011).

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at