The heritage of captains
on Wadden Sea islands
Research aims:
•
Identify and deal with value conflicts between
energy transition and heritage
•
Understand laypersons’ valuation
•
Develop a Valuation framework
Method
•
Multi-method project
•
Three layered approach:
•
Buildings
•
Townscapes
•
Landscapes
Tineke van der Schoor, c.van.der.schoor@pl.hanze.nl
Maarten Vieveen, m.c.vieveen@pl.hanze.nl
The concept of cultural heritage
Concept has changed over time:
•
From historic monuments and archeological sites to
landscapes, townscapes, natural environments and
traditional cultural expressions, including tangible
as well as intangible aspects.
•
Heritage now refers to ‘the capacity of an object to
arouse certain values that led the society in
question to consider it as heritage’
Examples:
•
historic and artistic value
•
cultural value
•
spiritual value
•
value of identity
•
memory value
M. Vecco, “A definition of cultural heritage: From the tangible to
the intangible,” J. Cult. Herit., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 321–324, 2010.
Questionnaire Heritage gives energy to Ameland!
•
Questionnaire developed on the
basis of policy documents regarding
heritage on Ameland
•
Feedback by local project partners
•
Distributed through project
partners
•
54 respondents
Heritage and energy: buildings
Values of Captains’ HousesResponses
Percent of Cases N Percent
Damage to historic materials 10 7.6% 35.7%
Historic features (interior or exterior) 25 18.9% 89.3% Investment costs 10 7.6% 35.7%
Energy efficiency 22 16.7% 78.6% 100% renewable energy 5 3.8% 17.9% CO2-footprint of sustainability measures 7 5.3% 25.0%
Improvement of comfort (draught, coldness) 20 15.2% 71.4% Noise insulation 8 6.1% 28.6% Daylight transmission 5 3.8% 17.9% Overlooked from the street 2 1.5% 7.1% Renovation carried out by local entrepreneurs 7 5.3% 25.0% Prevention of nuisance during renovation works 1 0.8% 3.6%
Improvement of usability of the building 9 6.8% 32.1% Otherwise,... 1 0.8% 3.6%
Total 132 100.0% 471.4%
• Respondents had to choose one out of three building types
• For this building type they indicated up to six values they felt
were important
• Please note that this is a multiple response question, which
explains the more than 100% of cases
Table 2: Acceptance sustainability measures in buildings x Importance energy efficiency Should this building type be made more
sustainable?
How important is energy efficiency for you?
Total Very
important Important Neutral unimportantVery Yes, it should: the more, the better 4 2 0 0 6
Yes, if visibility from the outside is limited 6 10 1 0 17 Yes, if invisible from the outside 9 9 1 1 20
Yes, if invisible from the outside and inside 1 6 0 0 7 No, the building may not be made more
sustainable 0 1 1 0 2 Total 20 28 3 1 52
•
Values
•
Historical features
•
Energy efficiency
•
Comfort
Norms/ requirements
•
Minimal or no impact on historical
features
•
Energy
Heritage and energy: townscapes
Values in Hollum Responses Percent of Cases N Percent Archeology 6 9.1% 46.2% Historical character 13 19.7% 100.0% Investment costs 5 7.6% 38.5% Energy efficiency 10 15.2% 76.9% 100% renewable energy 2 3.0% 15.4% CO2- footprint of sustainability measures 3 4.5% 23.1% Economic benefits for the town 5 7.6% 38.5% Spatial quality of public space 3 4.5% 23.1% Impact on tourism 2 3.0% 15.4% Prevent overcrowding at chargers 5 7.6% 38.5%Renovation carried out by local entrepreneurs 8 12.1% 61.5% Prevention of nuisance during renovation works 4 6.1% 30.8% Total 66 100.0% 507.7% Please note that this is a multiple response question, which
explains the more than 100% of cases
Values Hollum
•
Historic character
•
Energy efficiency
•
Localism (local economy)
Norms/ requirements
•
Minimal or no impact on historical character of
townscape
•
(In)visibility
Heritage and energy: landscapes
Table 6: Values Landscape Dune and BeachValues Dune and Beach
Responses Percent of Cases N Percent Nature 22 16.9% 88.0% Archeology 7 5.4% 28.0% Historic character 15 11.5% 60.0%
Materials and colours that fit the landscape 14 10.8% 56.0%
Silence and darkness at night 20 15.4% 80.0% Investment costs 1 0.8% 4.0% Energy efficiency 7 5.4% 28.0% 100% renewable energy 9 6.9% 36.0% CO2-footprint of sustainability measures 6 4.6% 24.0% Economic benefits for the landscape 4 3.1% 16.0% Impact on tourism 8 6.2% 32.0%
Impact on coastal protection 16 12.3% 64.0% Implementation carried out by local
entrepreneurs 1 0.8% 4.0% Total 130 100.0% 520.0%
Please note that this is a multiple response question, which explains the more than 100% of cases
Is production of renewable energy in this landscape acceptable?
Chosen Landscape
Total
Polder Dune/forest Dune/ beach
Yes, it should, the more energy production the better 2 0 0 2
Yes, this may be visible from a distance 12 2 7 21 Yes, if it is not visible from a distance 5 5 13 23 No, it is not acceptable to produce renewable energy here 1 2 5 8
Total 20 9 25 54
Values Dune & Beach
•
Nature
•
Historic character
•
Fitting the landscape
•
Silence and darkness
•
Coastal protection
Norms/ requirements
•
(In)Visibility
•
Respect historic places
•
Minimize impact on nature
•
No lighting of installations
Acceptance of solar energy
Solar panelsAcceptance
Not acceptable Neutral/Don’t know Acceptable Blue PV panels on historical buildings 42 10/2 0 PV panels matching roof color on historical buildings 25 12 17
PV in form of roofing tiles on historical buildings 18 10/1 25 PV visible in townscapes 24 19 11 PV for streetlights in towns 15 13/2 24 Large solar fields in landscape 38 10/1 5 Small solar fields in landscape 24 16 13 Solar fields screened off in landscape 20 17 17
