Development of the territory within the framework of the preservation of cultural heritage. Preservation of cultural and historical heritage is a condition for the sustainable development of Russian cities Shimanskaya I.Yu
Kruglikova Galina Alexandrovna,The problem of preserving historical cultural heritage V modern conditions acquired special relevance. History is the history of people, and each person is an accomplice in the existence of the past, present and future; the roots of a person are in the history and traditions of the family, their people. Feeling our involvement in history, we care about preserving everything that is dear to the memory of the people.
It should be emphasized that at present, interest in monuments, anxiety for their fate is no longer the property of individual specialists and disparate public groups. The sharp decline in the Russian economy, the loss of spiritual ideals aggravated the already disastrous situation of science and culture, which affected the state of the historical and cultural heritage. Now the head of state, local authorities are constantly addressing the problem of preserving cultural heritage, emphasizing the need to take measures to prevent the loss of monuments. The policy of spiritual revival proclaimed by the government, in case of loss of the continuity of the best traditions of culture, cannot be fully implemented without the preservation and revival of the historical and cultural heritage.
IN historical science there is a process of rethinking assessments, experience, lessons, overcoming one-sidedness; Much attention is paid to unexplored and little-studied problems. This fully applies to the state policy on cultural heritage. Culture was and still is historical heritage. It includes those aspects of the past that continue to live in the present in an altered form. Culture acts as a phenomenon of active social impact on social practice, expressing the essential interests of mankind, and is one of the most important areas for understanding human existence.
Cultural heritage is a broad and multifaceted concept: it includes both spiritual and material culture. The concept of " cultural heritage» is associated with a number of other categories of cultural theory (cultural values, traditions, innovation, etc.), but has its own scope, content and meaning.
In the methodological sense, the category "cultural heritage" applicable to the processes taking place in the field of culture. The concept of inheritance presupposes a theoretical understanding of the patterns of succession and a conscious action in the form of an assessment of the cultural values created by previous generations and their creative use. But the process of spiritual production is characterized by a variety of relations inherent in it, and for this reason the culture of each new formation finds itself in the necessary succession connection with the totality of the relations of spiritual exchange and consumption that have arisen earlier.
Cultural heritage is always considered in terms of its possibilities practical application corresponding social groups (classes, nations, etc.), entire generations of people, therefore, in the process of cultural inheritance, something is preserved and used, and something is changed, critically reviewed or completely discarded.
It is also necessary to turn to the analysis of the concept, without which the category cannot be defined. "cultural heritage", namely, to the concept of "tradition". Tradition acts as "a system of actions that are passed down from generation to generation and form the thoughts and feelings of people, caused in them by certain social relations."
Since development proceeds from the past to the present and from the present to the future, on the one hand, traditions always live in society, in which the experience of previous generations is concentrated, and on the other hand, new traditions are born, which are the quintessence of experience from which they will draw knowledge for future generations.
In each historical epoch, humanity critically weighs the cultural values it has inherited and supplements, develops, enriches them in the light of new opportunities and new tasks facing society, in accordance with the needs of certain social forces that solve these problems in terms of both scientific and technical, as well as social progress.
Thus, the cultural heritage is not something immutable: the culture of any historical epoch always not only includes the cultural heritage, but also creates it. The cultural ties that are emerging today and the cultural values being created, growing on the basis of a certain cultural heritage, tomorrow will themselves become an integral part of the cultural heritage inherited by the new generation. The widespread rise of interest in historical and cultural monuments requires an understanding of the essence of cultural heritage in all its connections and mediations, and an attentive attitude towards it.
E.A. Baller defines it as “a set of connections, relations and results of material and spiritual production of past historical eras, and in a narrower sense of the word, as a set of cultural values inherited by mankind from past eras, critically mastered, developed and used in accordance with objective criteria social progress» .
International documents note that “the cultural heritage of the people includes the works of its artists, architects, musicians, writers, scientists, as well as the works of unknown masters of folk art and the whole set of values that give meaning to human existence. It covers both material and non-material, expressing the creativity of the people, their language, customs, beliefs; it includes historical sites and monuments, literature, works of art, archives and libraries.”
According to the Fundamentals of Legislation Russian Federation about culture, the cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation - material and spiritual values created in the past, as well as monuments and historical and cultural territories and objects significant for the preservation and development of the identity of the Russian Federation and all its peoples, their contribution to world civilization.
Thus, the introduction of the concept cultural heritage” has played a positive role in establishing a new paradigm applicable to all categories of immovable objects of historical and cultural significance.
The question of the relationship between culture and society may seem trivial. It is clear that one does not exist without the other. Culture cannot be outside society, and society cannot be outside culture. What is the problem? Both culture and society have a single source - labor activity. It contains both the mechanism of culture (social memory, social inheritance of people's experience), and the prerequisites joint activities people who give birth various areas social life. The status of culture in society, ideas about its state, ways of preserving and developing are always in the process of formation. And a society can be understood not only from an analysis of its political and socio-economic "biography", but certainly from an understanding of its cultural heritage.
One of the most important determinants of the development of culture is ideology, which expresses the social and class characteristics of certain elements of culture. It acts as the social mechanism through which any social community subordinates culture to itself and through it expresses its interests. The ideological influence leads to an appropriate state policy in the field of culture, expressed in its institutionalization (the creation of an education system, libraries, universities, museums, etc. in society).
The most complete definition is cultural policy as "activities related to the formation and coordination social mechanisms and conditions of cultural activity of both the population as a whole and all its groups, focused on the development of creative cultural and leisure needs. As mechanisms for the formation and coordination of the conditions of cultural activity, administrative, economic and democratic conditions are distinguished.
One of the paradoxes of today's cultural situation is the concentration of enterprising, bright, talented ascetics of culture on one side of the cultural life of society, and funds, buildings, legal rights in the form of cultural institutions and bodies - on the other.
The result of this confrontation is a social order, which is an important regulator not only of the constitution of monuments, but also of their preservation. This is the order of society, adjusted to historical and cultural traditions, state priorities.
Particularly effective is the manifestation of public interest in the protection of historical and cultural heritage as an integral part of the ecology of culture, on the basis of which not only is formed public opinion but security measures are being taken. Thus, the preservation of cultural heritage becomes a civic action in which the people take an active part.
Public interest and social order influence the creation of an idea of what is a monument of history and culture on the scale of a locality, region, country as a whole. Thus, the preferences that have developed among different peoples and national groups are taken into account.
After the October Revolution, the problems of protecting cultural property began to occupy a large place in the activities of the Soviet government and the party. The adoption of fundamental legislative acts - the Decrees of the Council of People's Commissars "On the Nationalization of Foreign Trade" (April 22, 1918), which prohibited trade by private individuals; "On the Prohibition of the Export and Sale of Items of Special Artistic and Historical Importance Abroad" (October 19, 1918); "On registration, registration and protection of monuments of art, antiquity, administered by individuals, societies and institutions" (October 5, 1918), as well as the decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee "On the registration and protection of monuments of art, antiquity and nature" (7 January 1924) clearly expressed the essence of the policy of the Soviet government in relation to the cultural and historical heritage. An important step was the formation of a network of state bodies in charge of the preservation and use of historical and cultural heritage.
The state has always tried to put the protection of monuments under its control and direct it in the right direction. In this regard, the Soviet government could not but pay attention to the fact that most of the monuments taken into account in the first years of Soviet power were religious buildings. Thus, in 1923, of the three thousand immovable monuments registered in the RSFSR, more than 1,100 were examples of civil architecture, and more than 1,700 were religious. This disparity grew rapidly. Two years later, out of the six thousand recorded immovable monuments, more than 4,600 were cult and only a little more than 1,200 were civil buildings.
On the one hand, the Soviet government took measures to save objects that had historical and cultural significance. On the other hand, the famine relief campaign of 1921–1922 had a pronounced political and anti-church character. It was decided to hold in each province a week of agitation for the collection of church valuables, and the task was to give this agitation a form alien to any struggle against religion, but entirely aimed at helping the starving.
The meeting of the Politburo was reflected in an article in the Izvestia newspaper dated March 24, 1922. The article proclaimed the determination to confiscate church property everywhere, and announced a serious warning to anyone who planned any disobedience to the authorities. This was how public opinion was prepared regarding the seizure of church property and the authority of the authorities to take any action. Now any discontent could be interpreted as resistance, as a manifestation of counter-revolution. Consequently, the authorities received the right to protect their own interests, and by all available means and justify any of their actions in the interests of the people and the desire to maintain the rule of law.
The Ural region was among the first in terms of the number of seized valuables. In the secret order of the Ekaterinburg Provincial Committee of the RCP (b), the county committees of the Communist Party were ordered to take quick, energetic and decisive action. “Withdrawal,” it said, “is subject to absolutely everything that can be realized in the interests of the state (gold, silver, stones, embroidery), no matter what these values are. Any talk about leaving things "necessary for the performance of religious rites" should be avoided, because for this it is not necessary to have things made of valuable metals.
For example, in Yekaterinburg and the county, from the beginning of the seizure until June 2, 1922, the Gubernia Financial Department received: silver and stones - 168 pounds 24 pounds, copper - 27 pounds, gold with and without stones - 4 pounds. In the districts of the Ekaterinburg province, the churches lost 79 pounds of silver and stones and 8 pounds of gold.
According to official statistics (note that the source refers to 1932), as a result of the seizure of valuables throughout the country, the Soviet state received about 34 poods of gold, about 24,000 poods of silver, 14,777 diamonds and diamonds, more than 1.2 poods of pearls, more than a pood of precious stones and other values. It is safe to say that the number of items seized was much higher.
During the events, gross violations legislation and normative documents temples have lost what was created by Russian masters of several generations. Having proclaimed the goal of building a democratic classless society, the ideological confrontation was brought to a disastrous absurdity, which led to the denial of universal spiritual values. The protection of monuments in the country was put under strict control by creating a single state centralized all-encompassing system for managing scientific, museum, and local history institutions.
Since the 1920s the state began to systematically destroy and sell cultural property. This was determined by the policy of the party and government in connection with the need for imports and the limited export funds and foreign exchange reserves. A course was taken to give the sphere of spiritual life a secondary role in comparison with material production. As an example of the attitude towards the historical and cultural heritage of representatives of the state authorities of that time, one can cite the words of the chairman of the Moscow City Executive Committee, N.A. Broken - better. They broke the Kitaygorod wall, the Sukharev tower - it became better ... ".
Ideology had a powerful impact on the worldview and worldview of people, on their social health. Characteristically, even many specialists in the museum business agreed with the sale of valuables abroad, not considering that it caused irreparable damage to the culture of the country. This is confirmed by the minutes of the meeting at the Office of the Commissioner of the People's Commissariat of Education on the issue of allocating valuables for export, which took place on January 27, 1927. and educational work of museums. Philosophers (Hermitage): In connection with the changed policy on the allocation of export goods, the entire museum fund should be revised. With the exception of a small number of items needed for central museums, the entire museum fund can be transferred to the export fund.
It is not possible to give even an approximate number of art and antiquity items taken out of the USSR in the late 1920s. The following example is indicative: “A list of jewels and art products exported to Germany” in 1927 occupies 191 sheets. It lists the contents of 72 boxes (2348 items in total). According to Robert Williams, only in the first three quarters of 1929 Soviet Union sold at auction 1192 tons of cultural property, and for the same period in 1930 - 1681 tons.
Mass sale of cultural property since the late 1920s was natural, as it was a reflection of the mentality Soviet society of that period and its relation to the pre-revolutionary historical past.
In the course of atheistic propaganda and an anti-religious campaign, thousands of churches, chapels, monasteries were closed, demolished, converted for economic needs, and the church utensils that were in them were also destroyed. As an example, we can cite the minutes of the meeting of the commission for closing churches in Sverdlovsk dated April 5, 1930: out of 15 objects considered, 3 were sentenced to demolition, while the rest had to be adapted for a library, a club of pioneers, a sanitary and educational exhibition, and children's a nursery, a dining room, etc. Another example: the church of Verkhotursky, closed in 1921 monastery after a short-term use as a club for military infantry courses, it was used in 1922 as a sacking point, and then completely abandoned.
Bell ringing was banned in many cities; bells were everywhere removed and melted down in foundries "in favor" of industrialization. So, in 1930, the workers of Perm, Motovilikha, Lysva, Chusovoy, Zlatoust, Tagil, Sverdlovsk and other cities proclaimed: “The bells are to be melted down, it’s enough to mumble in them and lull us with a ringing. We demand that the bells do not honk and do not interfere with us building a new and happy life.
As a result, the system of protection of monuments was destroyed as superfluous, it was replaced by monumental propaganda, which soon took on ugly forms both in terms of its scale and artistry. In the late 1920s - 1930s. the nihilistic approach to the creations of the past triumphed. They were no longer recognized as having any spiritual value for the builders of a socialist society. Thus, the monuments of the centuries-old history and culture of the people turned into sources of funds and non-ferrous metal, were used for household purposes without regard to their historical and cultural value.
The phenomenon called Soviet culture”, arose as a result of the implementation of the Bolshevik cultural policy. It embodied the relationship and interaction of the three subjects of cultural life - the authorities, the artist and society. The authorities purposefully and intensely - in accordance with the postulates of the Bolshevik cultural policy - tried to put culture at their service. So the “new” art (“faithful assistant to the party”) carried out a social order under the supervision of the same party - it formed a “new man”, new picture world, pleasing to the communist ideology.
The protection of monuments is a struggle for a correct understanding of history, for the public consciousness of the broad masses of the people inhabiting the historical and cultural space.
It is curious that this position is theoretically not questioned even today. The shortcomings that still exist in conservation work are widely discussed in the central and local press. architectural monuments history and culture. In particular, there are criticized (and very sharply) the facts of a dismissive attitude towards the unique structures of the past. The damage inflicted on the monuments of antiquity and their protection, in whatever form it manifests itself - whether as a result of neglect, in the form of direct destruction of buildings of the past, or through aesthetic humiliation - this is damage to the national culture of the people.
In a society divided into social strata, where there is no unity of views on history and social processes, there are always different approaches to the preservation of historical and cultural heritage, since it has cognitive and educational functions.
Monuments of history and culture are endowed with cognitive functions, as they are the materialized facts of the past. historical events or bear traces of the impact of historical events. As a result, the monuments contain certain historical information (or aesthetic, if they are works of art). Thus, monuments of history and culture are sources of historical and aesthetic knowledge.
Monuments are endowed with educational functions because, having visibility and high attractiveness, they are a source of strong emotional impact. Emotional sensations, together with historical and aesthetic information, actively influence the formation of knowledge and social consciousness of the individual. The combination of these two qualities makes monuments a powerful means of pedagogical influence, the formation of beliefs, worldview, motivation of actions and, ultimately, one of the factors that determine public consciousness and behavior.
Public interest in monuments of history and culture is one of the forms of man's eternal desire to search for a higher principle, a universal measure. It follows from this that interest in traditions is a manifestation of the spiritual beginning of the individual, his desire to enrich his own culture and the culture of society as a whole. This interest is projected mainly in the plane of preservation and consumption of cultural heritage.
The multilayer nature of such public interest is obvious. It grows out of the many goals pursued by people who come into contact with cultural heritage.
Let us point out some of these goals: to know the past (to join history); sensually perceive the experience and life of previous generations; get aesthetic and emotional satisfaction from acquaintance with historical and cultural objects; satisfy natural curiosity and inquisitiveness. More serious goals: to preserve the memory, master and pass on the traditions of the past, protect the historical and cultural heritage as an integral part of the ecology of culture.
Today they talk and write a lot about the revival of Russia, but everyone understands it in their own way. It is necessary to decide in relation to one's historical and cultural heritage, to understand what can be in demand in the current situation, to understand the relationship between traditions and innovations on Russian soil, and to determine their optimum. Historical and cultural heritage is closely interconnected with historical memory as a special mechanism, a system of preservation and transmission in the public consciousness of the most important events, phenomena, processes of history, the activities of outstanding historical figures. However historical memory is not only an intellectual and moral phenomenon. It, among other things, is embodied in the material results of human activity, which, alas, tend to perish.
Thus, in Lately a reasonable and realistic cultural policy, a well-thought-out strategy for the development of culture, is of particular importance. The goal of cultural policy is to make people's lives spiritually rich and multifaceted, to open wide scope for revealing their abilities, to provide opportunities for familiarization with culture and various forms of creative activity. The human being is at the center of politics.
In the recommendations on the participation and role of the masses in cultural life, adopted by UNESCO, it is said that the main task of modern cultural policy is to provide at the disposal of the largest possible number of people a set of tools that contribute to the spiritual and cultural development. Cultural policy is faced with the task of ensuring intellectual progress, so that its results become the property of every person and harmonize the cultural relations of people.
As a prerequisite for the implementation of a meaningful state cultural policy, one can consider the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation "On especially valuable objects of cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation", in accordance with which the State Expert Council under the President of Russia was created.
It is impossible not to recognize the need to revive national dignity, respect for one's own traditions as the most important task of state cultural policy. As a first step in this direction, we can recommend expanding access to genuine culture and education for large groups of the population. In the meantime, the movement is going in the opposite direction - the sector of free education is shrinking, the contacts of the population with culture are declining, a large-scale westernization of the spiritual life of Russia is taking place - through television, radio, the movie screen, education, language, clothing, etc.
There is neglect legal problems in the field of culture: “despite the abundance of existing legal acts, today we are forced to state that there is no unified regulatory framework for ensuring activities in the field of culture that adequately reflects its needs, the specifics and diversity of features, nuances inherent in managed objects, neither for creative workers, nor for institutions and organizations.
What can we say about the “consumption” of valuables, if people see only 5% of the entire wealth of the museum fund in Russia? Everything else lies under a bushel, and, apparently, much of what is there, no one will ever see.
One of the main reasons for the confusion is, in our opinion, the fact that the Bolshevik and then the communist ideology abolished all previous culture. The current timelessness is precisely due to the loss of value, cultural landmarks.
There are probably enough reasons to understand that the values of culture have yet to acquire the status of true in the public mind.
The culture of each nation exists and manifests itself as a cultural heritage and cultural creativity. Subtract one of the terms - and the people will lose the possibility of further development. The cultural heritage of a people is the criterion of its national identity, and the attitude of the people to their own cultural heritage is the most sensitive barometer of their spiritual health and well-being.
The priorities of the legal support of the state cultural policy are the creation of new opportunities for initiation into the culture of subcultural groups of the population and the elimination of the gap between elite and mass culture on the basis of legal guarantees of social protection for all creators of cultural values, regardless of cultural and educational level and socio-demographic characteristics.
Yes, the greatest artistic values have been left to us. And these monuments are our glory and pride, regardless of their original cult purpose. Like ancient temples and gothic cathedrals, they are a universal property.
Age-old vaults do not collapse by themselves. They are destroyed by indifference and ignorance. Someone's hands sign the order, someone's hands plant dynamite, someone calmly, intrepidly contemplates all this and passes by. I would like to note: in the matter of protecting monuments, our national pride and glory, there are no and cannot be outsiders. Caring for the past is our duty, human and civic.
Cultural policy actually forms the living space in which a person lives, acts and creates. Such is the process of interaction: politics is interested in culture as a means of humanizing its pragmatic decisions, and culture is interested in politics as a link with the life of man and society.
Culture is always acquired at a high cost. Yes, much has not been preserved that today, of course, would be recognized as cultural heritage. But is it right to speak in this case of a catastrophic loss of cultural heritage?
A new approach to understanding the value of historical and cultural monuments should, to a certain extent, relieve the stress that arises when thinking about the lost heritage. The movement in support of the ecology of culture is growing every day, which makes it possible for the public to effectively control the preservation of cultural heritage. And, finally, the human factor, which is now given paramount importance, is becoming a true guarantor of the intensification of public interest in historical and cultural monuments in all their diversity and originality.
The historical continuity of the development of culture, embodied in monuments, and the awareness of their living connection with modernity, are the main motives for the social movement in defense of cultural heritage. Monuments of history and culture are carriers of a certain historical meaning, witnesses of the people's fate, and therefore serve to educate generations, preventing national forgetfulness and depersonalization.
Bibliographic list
1. Baller E.A. Social progress and cultural heritage. M., 1987.
2. Volegov Yu.B. The state of legal support in the sphere of culture and in the system of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation // Landmarks of the cult. politicians. 1993. No. 1.
3. Mexico City Declaration on Cultural Policy // Cultures: Dialogue of the Peoples of the World. UNESCO, 1984. No. 3.
4. Diagnostics of socio-cultural processes and the concept of cultural policy: Sat. scientific tr. Sverdlovsk, 1991.
5. Law of the Russian Federation of December 9, 1992: Fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on culture. Sec. I. Art. 3.
6. Kandidov B. Famine of 1921 and the Church. M., 1932.
7. Kumanov E. Thoughts of the artist. Sketches in disturbing tones // Architecture and construction of Moscow. 1988. No. 3.
8. Mosyakin A. Sale // Ogonyok. 1989. No. 7.
9. Enlightenment in the Urals. 1930. Nos. 3–4.
10. Center for Documentation of Public Organizations Sverdlovsk region, f. 76, op. 1, d. 653.
Cultural and historical heritage ensures continuity in the transmission of emotionally significant information, encoding this information in artifacts and texts (that is, monuments) . The concept of "cultural heritage" includes, along with the material basis, the spiritual sphere, in which the stereotypes of the mass consciousness of society, its aspirations, ideology, and behavioral motivation are refracted. Along with the sign of universality, the cultural heritage is also characterized by the fact that usually the realization of its true meaning occurs only over time. The most objective assessment of the historical, scientific and artistic merits of cultural objects is given by social practice. Moreover, the more time separates the acts of creating cultural objects and their evaluation, the more highly valued these objects are, as a rule.
Thus, cultural values play a social role, are specially protected by law, serve as a link between different generations of people, are of a specific historical nature and act as a factor in the formation of the qualities necessary for society in a person. Therefore, their preservation cannot be only a museum problem. It must be solved by the combined efforts of state power, society and science.
The current legal acts classify as monuments those valuable historical and cultural objects that are registered or identified by state bodies for the protection of cultural heritage objects, in accordance with the relevant procedure, which underlies the entire system of protection of historical and cultural monuments. For objects included in the state Lists of historical and cultural monuments of federal or regional (local) significance, as well as in the Lists of newly discovered monuments, it is planned to draw up a passport with fixation of the property composition of the monument, its main technical data, subject value and maintenance regime, as well as the development a project of protection zones (as part of a buffer zone, a zone of development regulation and a zone of protected natural landscape), security obligations of users of monuments. These actions should ensure the conservation regime of the monument and the regulation of economic activities in areas adjacent to it.
The modern system of cultural heritage protection is dominated by the monumental approach, oriented towards static and managerially monostructural formations. However, the legal norms applied to individual objects are not sufficient to solve the legal problems of complex historical and cultural formations. Any immovable monument was created in a certain historical and natural environment and in its specific place, which means that its value and safety are determined not only by its physical condition, but also by the safety of the surrounding natural and historical background. The contradictions of modern legislation are especially clearly reflected in the practice of such specific entities as national parks, on the territory of which monuments of cultural and historical heritage are located, museum reserves, museum estates, palace and park ensembles, which include elements of the natural environment in the form of gardens, parks. , natural landscapes, etc. The management system for such objects is hampered by the contradictions that arise in the legal support of these measures and the inconsistency of the actions of economic entities and the established protection regimes. Thus, from the point of view of management, the natural and cultural components of these monuments are separated by departmental barriers. The organization of protection and management of such objects as parks and gardens is regulated by environmental legislation. If they are considered as objects of cultural heritage, then at best they are considered examples of landscape architecture. Meanwhile, their spiritual, mental components and socio-cultural significance are much more significant, which was brilliantly revealed by D.S. Likhachev in his works. Today, more than ever, the issue of developing an integrated approach to the management of historical, cultural and natural heritage resources is acute.
Until recently, there have been a number of complex, difficult to solve problems in the field of cultural heritage. Here are some of them:
The ongoing destruction of historical and cultural monuments, which has become catastrophic;
Violation of natural systems and increased economic exploitation of many historical and cultural territories;
Destruction of traditional forms of culture, entire layers of national culture;
Loss of unique and widespread folk crafts and crafts, arts and crafts;
Gap of cultural interaction between generations, as well as between different Russian territories.
The state policy for ensuring the safety of cultural heritage sites should be based on the recognition of the priority of preserving the historical and cultural potential as one of the main socio-economic resources for the existence and development of the peoples of the Russian Federation and implement an integrated approach to solving issues of state protection, direct preservation, disposal and use of cultural objects. heritage of all kinds and categories.
The preservation or rescue of endangered cultural property must be ensured by the following means and specific measures:
1) legislation; 2) financing; 3) administrative measures; 4) measures for the preservation or rescue of cultural property (conservation, restoration);
5) penalties; 6) restoration (reconstruction, readaptation); 7) incentive measures; 8) consultations; 9) educational programs.
It should be noted that the post-industrial society in our electronic age has realized the high potential of cultural heritage, the need for its conservation and efficient use as one of the most important resources of the economy. The state policy in the field of cultural heritage preservation is no longer based on the traditional “protection from”, which provides for restrictive measures, but on the concept of “protection for”, which, along with protective restrictions, provides for the creation of optimally favorable conditions for investors who are ready to invest in the preservation of monuments. The main necessary condition safeguarding objects of cultural heritage is currently the improvement of state policy based on a comprehensive account of the composition and condition of cultural heritage objects, modern socio-economic conditions for the development of society, the real possibilities of authorities, local governments, public and religious organizations, other persons, features of national and cultural traditions peoples of the Russian Federation and many other factors. In addition, projects for the preservation of cultural heritage are being created. These projects have a different scale, and among them the following areas can be distinguished:
Preservation projects, mainly aimed at the restoration and conservation of objects subject to destruction.
Microfilming projects, i.e. transferring to film and distributing degradable books, newspapers and periodicals.
Cataloging projects, i.e. describing thousands of books and manuscripts and making them available.
Digitization projects, i.e. creation of virtual facsimile editions of books and newspapers, in some cases optical character recognition is used.
Research projects that represent in the digital environment both documentary sources and historical and cultural context.
Of particular importance is the involvement of the local population in projects for the preservation and use of the heritage of the region. This gives an additional impetus to the development of a renewed image of the region and the growth of the area's attractiveness in the eyes of potential residents and investors.
The Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation established an autonomous non-profit organization "Russian Network of Cultural Heritage". In 2002, the first Russian project supported by the EU was launched. Cultivate-Russia is a network infrastructure project aimed at promoting cooperation between cultural organizations in Russia and Europe. Within the framework of this project, a series of 37 seminars and round tables was held, information was disseminated throughout Russia, an information website was launched, an international conference was held, 2 editions of CDs were released, and regional and international contacts were established.
An Internet portal "Culture of Russia" has been created, which is designed for the mass user (at present, only in Russian). The portal provides users with various sections of information on the culture of Russia throughout the history of its existence. In addition, there is already an Internet portal "Library of Russia", an information service of Russian museums.
For Russia, the “legal framework” for the protection of monuments is formed by:
Federal Law "On objects of cultural heritage (monuments of history and culture) of the peoples of the Russian Federation". - M., 2002;
Regulations on the protection and use of historical and cultural monuments. - M., 1982;
Instructions on the procedure for accounting, ensuring the safety, maintenance, use and restoration of immovable monuments of history and culture. - M., 1986;
Order of the Ministry of Culture of the USSR dated 01.24.1986 No. 33 "On the organization of zones for the protection of immovable monuments of history and culture of the USSR."
Separate norms aimed at regulating legal relations for the protection of cultural heritage are contained in the Town Planning Code of the Russian Federation, the Land Code of the Russian Federation, the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the Federal Laws "On architectural activity in the Russian Federation", "On the privatization of state and municipal property", "On licensing certain types of activities”, legislation regulating budgetary relations.
The Decree of the Government of St. Petersburg dated November 1, 2005 No. 1681 “On the St. Petersburg Strategy for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage” proposes the following measures to achieve the main goals of restoration - “preservation and identification of the aesthetic and historical values of the monument”:
constant monitoring of all processes of destruction of the monument, the study of methods of suspension and causes of destruction processes;
creation of a database of information support for measures to identify objects of protection, providing monitoring of the use and technical condition of cultural heritage objects, the history of their restoration with photographic recording of the process;
promoting the quality of restoration work through exhibitions, competitions, etc.;
creation of a research center (restoration institute) for the development and implementation of modern restoration principles, norms and methods, new technologies that meet the specifics of the St. Petersburg heritage, assessment of the quality of materials and work, certification and training of specialists;
training of specialists in restoration and heritage protection in the system of secondary specialized and higher education on the basis of a city order;
encouragement of education (provision of grants, subsidies, subsidies, gratuitous loans), the creation of master classes that stimulate both highly qualified specialists and talented youth who want to master the secrets of craftsmanship;
strengthening educational and educational work aimed at educating worthy citizens of modern society and developing effective forms of counteracting manifestations of vandalism;
careful differentiation, establishment of norms and prices for all types of restoration work;
broad public awareness through the media, which should increase the dignity of the profession, the value and socio-economic significance of restoration and crafts, and, consequently, open up new prospects for employment and personal fulfillment;
careful differentiation of norms and prices for all types of restoration work. 4
With noticeable positive shifts in the analysis of the current situation in the field of conservation and management of cultural heritage objects that are in federal ownership, the property of the constituent entities of the federation and municipal property, there are still serious problems in this area:
The absence in the Russian legislation of a clear and systematic approach to the protection of cultural heritage sites;
Lack of a system in organizing the work of state bodies for the protection of cultural heritage sites.
Emergency state of most cultural heritage sites. (According to the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, out of 90 thousand cultural heritage objects protected by the state and more than 140 thousand identified cultural heritage objects, about half are in poor and emergency condition).
Lack of object-by-object certification of monuments and reliable information about the state (physical safety) of these objects.
Lack of funds for the reconstruction, restoration and maintenance of cultural heritage sites. (The funds allocated for the maintenance of these objects do not allow not only to maintain their current state, but are often insufficient even for the conservation of these objects, which in turn leads to their loss.)
The lack of elaboration of regulatory legal by-laws provided for by the Federal Law "On objects of cultural heritage (monuments of history and culture) of the peoples of the Russian Federation" of 2002, the lack of methodological documents.
It must be remembered that any loss of heritage will inevitably affect all areas of the life of present and future generations, lead to spiritual impoverishment, breaks in historical memory, and impoverishment of society as a whole. They cannot be compensated by development modern culture nor the creation of significant new works. The accumulation and preservation of cultural values is the basis for the development of civilization. Cultural heritage is a spiritual, economic and social potential of irreplaceable value. It nourishes modern science, culture, education, and is one of the most important resources of the economy. Our heritage is the main basis for national self-respect and recognition by the world community.
The process of protection and protection of cultural, historical and natural values should be based both on the study of the history of the formation of the security activities of the state, and on the legal framework developed and constantly changing in accordance with the requirements of the time.
Legal acts are based on the laws of a particular society, international acts that must be observed and promoted in society.
At the RISS, experts discussed the study, preservation and development of historical and cultural territories in the context of the strategic tasks of Russia's spatial development
In the strategic planning documents of the Russian Federation, the issues of the progressive development of the country, as well as strengthening its competitiveness in the world, are increasingly linked to the tasks of spatial development and the preservation of the national cultural, historical and natural heritage of Russia.In March 2018, in his annual Address to the Federal Assembly, the President put forward the idea of launching a large-scale spatial development program in Russia, including the development of cities and other settlements, doubling spending for this purpose over the next six years.
On September 20 and 26, RISS hosted round tables on such topical issues as"Study, preservation and development of historical and cultural territories of the European part of Russia" And"Russia in the Preservation of Cultural Heritage Abroad".
A representative pool of Russian experts from a number of specialized organizations took part in the discussion of this topic:Moscow Architectural Institute;public movement "Arhnadzor"; Directorate of the International Cultural Forum; Institute of Linguistics RAS; Institute social policy National Research University Higher School of Economics; NPO Energy, Urban Planning and Strategic Development NIIPI General Plan; Analytical agency "Center"; Institute of the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences; architectural company RTDA LLC. Among the participants in the discussion were representativesRussian Research Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage. D.S. Likhachev and the House of Russian Abroad named after Alexander Solzhenitsyn, as well as expertsInternational Research Center (ICCROM) and the International Council for the Conservation of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS).
Head of the Center for the Study, Preservation and Development of Historical and Cultural Territories (TSISIRKT)O.V. Ryzhkov, Speaking about the goals and objectives of the Center of the RISS structural subdivision, established in April 2018, he emphasized the difficulty of implementing a dual task: on the one hand, to preserve, on the other, to develop. In order to develop approaches to solving this problem, namely the preservation and reproduction of historical and cultural identity as a factor in the socio-economic development of territories and the enhancement of human capital, competent specialists gathered at RISS.
It is clear that this complex issue cannot be exhausted by one or two discussions. A long and thoughtful conversation, an exchange of opinions, and discussions are ahead. Acquaintance with the directions and results of research is required, as well as with the accumulated experience of organizations and institutions working in the field of studying and preserving the historical and cultural heritage of small towns and settlements.The task of the Center and these "round tables" is to create a new expert platform within which it would be possible to systematically discuss these problems by leading Russian experts and state representatives.
During the events, a number of topical issues were raised, including:
– development of regional programs for the preservation and use of cultural heritage using foreign experience in organizing recreational and event tourism in historical cities (N.V. Maksakovskiy, National Research University Higher School of Economics);
– formation of a comfortable environment in historical settlements based on the results All-Russian competition among small historical towns (M.V. Sedletskaya , Agency "Center");
– development of a conceptual apparatus (“historical city”, “historical settlement”, “historical territory”, etc.) as a tool for more accurately attributing objects to historical territories and determining their boundaries (N.F. Soloviev, Deputy Director of IIMK RAS).
The experts were also provided with important information about the activities of ICCROM in Russia (N.N. Shangina, member of the Council of ICCROM, Chairman of the Council of the Union of Restorers of St. Petersburg), as well as about actual problems facing the Russian ICOMOS committee and the Russian heritage protection system as a whole (N.M. Almazova, VVice-President of the National Committee of ICOMOS of Russia, Vice-President of the Union of Restorers of Russia). Speech by the head of the Center for World Heritage and International Cooperation Research Institute. D.S. LikhachevN.V. Filatova was devoted to international cooperation in the field of heritage protection, in particular, the efforts of the Russian Federation to preserve Orthodox monasteries in Kosovo; activities of employees of the Research Institute. D.S. Likhachev in Syria.
WHead of the Department of International and Interregional Cooperation of the Alexander Solzhenitsyn House of Russian AbroadE.V. Krivova reported on the areas of work of the House of Russian Diaspora. And the deputy director of the Research Institute. D.S. LikhachevE.V. Bahrevsky presented a guide to the history and culture of Russia in Japan prepared by the Heritage Institute and drew the attention of the participants round table on the need to study in foreign countries the influence of not only Russian culture, but also the culture of other peoples of Russia.
In general, the participants of the expert meetings came to the conclusion that it is necessary to exchange experience and coordinate the work of organizations and institutions dealing with the problems of historical and cultural heritage on a regular basis in order to increase the efficiency of this work and reduce the risk of duplication. The importance of strengthening control over construction and restoration work in historical settlements was emphasized in order to preserve local cultural identity. In this regard, it is advisable to assess the prospects for creating a working group of the expert community on the revival, conservation and development of historical and cultural territories.
Message of the President to the Federal Assembly on March 1, 2018:Kremlin. en/ events/ president/ news/56957
Text Search
current
| Document's name: | |
| Document Number: | 20-RP |
| Document type: | |
| Host body: | The government of Moscow |
| Status: | current |
| Published: | |
| Acceptance date: | January 14, 2008 |
| Effective start date: | January 14, 2008 |
On approval of the Concept of the Medium-term Target Program for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage Sites and Development of the Territory of the Moscow State United Museum-Reserve for 2008-2010
THE GOVERNMENT OF MOSCOW
ORDER
In accordance with the Decrees of the Government of Moscow dated January 17, 2006 N 33-PP "On the Procedure for the Development, Approval, Financing and Control over the Implementation of City Target Programs in the City of Moscow", dated January 11, 2005 N 3-PP "On Improving the Practice of Development and the implementation of urban targeted programs in the city of Moscow ", dated December 13, 2005 N 1005-PP" On the transfer to the State Institution of the City of Moscow "Moscow State United Art Historical, Architectural and Natural Landscape Museum-Reserve" of the historical estate "Lublino" (South- Vostochny administrative district)", Decree of the Government of Moscow dated August 15, 2005 N 1544-RP "On the Moscow State United Art Historical, Architectural and Natural Landscape Museum-Reserve", Law of the City of Moscow dated March 12, 2003 N 18 "On the Long-term Target the program for the preservation of objects of historical and cultural heritage and the development of the territory of the State Art Historical, Architectural and Natural Landscape Museum-Reserve "Kolomenskoye" for 2003-2007":
1. Approve the Concept of the Medium-Term Target Program for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage Sites and Development of the Territory of the Moscow State United Museum-Reserve for 2008-2010 (Appendix).
2. The state institution of the city of Moscow "Moscow State United Art Historical, Architectural and Natural Landscape Museum-Reserve" to develop a Medium-term target program for the preservation of cultural heritage and development of the territory of the Moscow State United Museum-Reserve for 2008-2010 and submit it to the Department of Economic policy and development of the city of Moscow.
3. Submit the Medium-Term Target Program for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage Sites and Development of the Moscow State United Museum-Reserve for 2008-2010 to the Department of Economic Policy and Development of the City of Moscow for approval by the Government of Moscow in the 1st quarter of 2008.
4. Control over the implementation of this order shall be entrusted to Yu.V. Roslyak, First Deputy Mayor of Moscow in the Government of Moscow.
Acting
Mayor of Moscow
V.I. Resin
Application. The Concept of the Medium-Term Target Program for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage Sites and Development of the Territory of the Moscow State United Museum-Reserve for 2008-2010
1. Introduction (substantiation of the compliance of the problem being solved and the goals of the program with the priority tasks of the socio-economic development of the city of Moscow)
One of the priority areas of socio-economic development of the city of Moscow is the preservation of the historical and cultural heritage of the capital, the restoration of the lost elements of architectural and natural complexes, including such significant ensembles as the royal country residence in Kolomenskoye, the imperial palace and park ensemble in Lefortovo and the noble estate in Lublin.
The basis for the development of the Concept of the Medium-Term Target Program for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage Sites and the Development of the Territory of the Moscow State United Museum-Reserve for 2008-2010 are the following legal acts of the city of Moscow:
- Law of the city of Moscow of July 11, 2001 N 34 "On state targeted programs in the city of Moscow";
- Law of the city of Moscow dated March 12, 2003 N 18 "On the Long-term Target Program for the Preservation of Historical and Cultural Heritage and Development of the Territory of the State Artistic Historical-Architectural and Natural Landscape Museum-Reserve "Kolomenskoye" for 2003-2007";
- Decree of the Government of Moscow of January 17, 2006 N 33-PP "On the Procedure for the Development, Approval, Financing and Control over the Implementation of City Target Programs in the City of Moscow";
Decree of the Government of Moscow dated December 13, 2005 N 1005-PP "On the transfer to the State Institution of the City of Moscow" Moscow State United Art Historical, Architectural and Natural Landscape Museum-Reserve "of the historical estate "Lublino" (South-Eastern Administrative District)";
- Decree of the Government of Moscow dated November 13, 2007 N 996-PP "On the General scheme of planting greenery in the city of Moscow for the period up to 2020";
- Decree of the Government of Moscow dated August 15, 2005 N 1544-RP "On the Moscow State United Art Historical, Architectural and Natural Landscape Museum-Reserve".
Reconstruction and development of these historical and cultural territories included in the Moscow State United Art Historical, Architectural and Natural Landscape Museum-Reserve (hereinafter referred to as the Museum-Reserve) will make it possible to turn the recreational areas of the capital into unique display objects used in educational, upbringing and tourism purposes.
2. Substantiation of the expediency of solving the problem by the program-target method
Historical and cultural ensembles are complex objects, which include lands of historical and cultural purpose, monuments of history, architecture, archeology, geology, nature. The modern use of these territories involves the solution of a complex of tasks related to the issues of gardening and park art, the organization of infrastructure for servicing visitors, food facilities, energy and transport supply, communications between territories, the creation of an integrated security system for territories and objects, etc.
The solution of the tasks set is impossible without the use of program-target method, allowing to develop and implement a set of program activities aimed at recreating, developing and using historical and cultural ensembles.
The main objectives of the developed program are:
Preservation, restoration and reconstruction of historical and cultural monuments;
Preservation and maintenance of natural monuments, unique natural objects and monuments of garden and park art;
Integrated landscaping of territories based on the reconstruction of the historical landscape;
Creation of thematic museum expositions and exhibitions;
Creation of a modern restoration, scientific, informational and educational center;
Creation of infrastructure for recreation of Muscovites and guests of the capital.
The implementation of the program will effectively develop inbound and domestic tourism, taking into account the urban areas adjacent to the museum-reserve that have preserved monuments of historical and cultural heritage, and will provide assistance in the implementation of urban cultural, sports and educational programs.
An integrated approach to the preservation and restoration of the historical, cultural and natural heritage of the museum-reserve, envisaged by the program, will systematically solve urgent problems and preserve the heritage of the country.
At the same time, within the framework of limited funding, priority tasks are set within the program.
For example, the priority direction in the reconstruction of the Lefortovo palace and park ensemble is the restoration of the ensemble's water system.
In the historical estate "Lyublino" - the reconstruction of the historical park, as well as the conduct of research, design and restoration work throughout the architectural ensemble of the estate.
In the royal estate "Kolomenskoye" the priority is the reconstruction of the Palace of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and the development of the historical protected area of Dyakovo.
The program-target method used in the development of the Long-term target program for the preservation of historical and cultural heritage sites and the development of the territory of the State Museum-Reserve "Kolomenskoye" for 2003-2007 gave a positive result.
The territory is developing according to the approved general plans, taking into account the preserved monuments of history, architecture, geology, archeology, and nature. The created public service infrastructure takes into account all the features of this territory and is organized on the basis of urban planning regulation regimes, subordinating all aspects of the museum-reserve's diverse activities.
3. Characteristics and forecast of the development of the current problem situation without using the program-target method. Risk assessment when solving a problem by other methods
The development of territories without the use of an integrated program-target method will lead to the loss of the integrity of historical ensembles, to the work on separate objects that are not related to each other. In addition, such an approach will complicate the creation of the infrastructure of objects and may lead to a violation of the legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of the use of territories where objects of cultural heritage are located.
The main risk of not using the program-target method in solving this problem is the loss of a holistic perception, and, consequently, the historical appearance of the ensembles. If the reconstruction of a separate building or structure is possible in the context of the current modern urban environment, then the reconstruction of historical and cultural complexes must be carried out without interruption from its history, development and modern use. The lack of an integrated approach will lead to the risk of losing the preserved elements of the historical environment, historical and cultural monuments, archeology, nature, etc., as well as to the possible loss of historical and cultural heritage.
At the same time, the positive experience of implementing the Long-term Target Program for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage Objects and the Development of the Territory of the State Museum-Reserve "Kolomenskoye" for 2003-2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Program) confirmed the expediency of using the program-target method when conducting work on historical and cultural complexes.
In the period from 2003 to 2007, program activities were carried out within the framework of the allocated funding, approved by the laws of the city of Moscow on the budget of the city of Moscow for the corresponding years.
Of the 10 sections of the Program envisaged, activities were carried out in 8. Sections No. 5, 8 (organization of car parking and an integrated security system) did not receive financial resources under the Program.
As a result of the implementation of the Program, the following tasks were completed:
As part of the formation of the territory of the museum-reserve in accordance with the main directions of its activity as one of the Centers of Russian culture, the main set of works was completed on the restoration of historical and architectural monuments (to be completed in 2008);
An ethnographic zone was singled out in the restored structure of the former village of Kolomenskoye, with the Museum of Wooden Architecture of Fortification Monuments of the Russian North of the 17th century located within its boundaries;
The lost historical three-dimensional structure of the northern part of the territory of the museum-reserve has been partially restored (continuation of work is required);
Work was carried out on the reconstruction of existing and arrangement of new exposition premises and areas;
The storage facility was expanded;
To ensure excursion inspection of the territory, work was carried out to create a road and footpath network in the newly developed territories of the museum-reserve;
As part of the implementation of a set of environmental measures, the following was carried out:
- identification, preservation, restoration and maintenance of unique, valuable and characteristic elements of the natural environment;
- capturing of springs and drainage;
- cleaning of anthropogenic waste;
- decontamination of areas with increased radioactivity;
- strict zoning of the territory, taking into account anthropogenic loads;
Partially completed reconstruction of the embankment of the Moscow River (southern part of the territory of the museum-reserve, continuation of work is required);
In order to create a tourist service complex, a tourist service center was created on the territory of the former village of Kolomenskoye.
Also, during the implementation of the Program, pre-project and design studies of the following tasks were carried out, requiring further work, including: restoration of the lost historical volume-spatial structure of the partially northern and completely southern parts of the territory of the museum-reserve; creation of a repair and restoration center in the southern part of the territory; organization of an economic zone in the southern part of the territory; organization of the system of protection and security of the territory and objects of the museum-reserve; organization of parking lots for temporary parking of cars; accommodation public toilets; organization of public catering; creation of a hotel complex; development of economic structures.
In accordance with the Program in the period from 2003 to June 2007, the customer, the museum-reserve, carried out work on 98 objects of budget financing.
In accordance with the Program, in the period from 2003 to May 2007, the customer JSC "Moskapstroy" carried out work on 12 objects of budget financing.
The customer - the Committee for Cultural Heritage of the city of Moscow in accordance with the Program in the period from 2003 to 2007 carried out work on 1 object of budget financing.
Implementation of program activities by sections of the Program
Section I. Emergency work (customer - museum-reserve)
The section provided for work on 5 objects. In fact, design and survey and construction and installation work was carried out on 9 objects.
In addition to the approved list of facilities, emergency response measures were taken at the following facilities: Church of the Ascension of the Lord, Fence of the Sovereign's Courtyard (Fodder Yard Wall), Fryazhsky Cellar, Sytny Yard (an increase in the number of objects in the section is due to the discovery of the emergency state of the monuments).
The work was carried out in accordance with the procedure approved for the city of Moscow.
The section is complete.
Section II. Restoration (customer - museum-reserve)
The section provided for work on 12 objects.
In fact, during the reporting period, design and survey and construction and installation work was carried out on 19 objects, including 3 objects not provided for by Section II: the refectory of the 19th century, the Pavilion of 1825, the filling of icon cases of monuments of the Museum-Reserve.
Section III. Engineering communications (customer - JSC "Moskapstroy")
The section provided for work on 11 objects.
In fact, during the reporting period, design and survey and construction and installation work was carried out at 7 facilities.
Section IV. Ethnography (customers - museum-reserve, JSC "Moskapstroy")
The section provided for work on 88 objects.
In fact, during the reporting period, design and survey and construction and installation works (major repairs, capital investments) were carried out by the museum-reserve for 44 objects, JSC "Moskapstroy" - for 3 objects.
Section V. Organization of parking of vehicles at the approaches to the territory of the Museum-Reserve (customer - Department of Urban Planning Policy, Development and Reconstruction of the City of Moscow)
The section included work on 8 objects.
Design and survey work was carried out on one object.
Section VI. Landscaping and museumification (customer - museum-reserve)
The section included work on 13 objects.
In fact, for the reporting period:
Works were carried out on the museumification of two objects (archaeology of Dyakovo settlement, Kormovoi yard);
Landscaping work was carried out on 17 objects (improvement of the territory of the Museum-Reserve (stages 1 and 2 of the project), improvement of the territory of the village of Dyakovo, reconstruction of the Moskva River embankment (stages 1 and 2 of the project), clearing the bed of the Zhuzha River, clearing the floodplain part of the river Moscow, sanitary felling, reconstruction of the pond in the Dyakovskiy garden, capturing of springs, improvement of natural monuments in the Golosovoy ravine, strengthening of the landslide slopes of the banks of the Moscow River, reconstruction of the bridge and stairways).
Section VII. Museum construction objects (customers - the museum-reserve and JSC "Moskapstroy")
The section included work on 15 objects.
In fact, during the reporting period, design and survey and construction and installation works (major repairs, capital investments) were carried out by the museum-reserve for 6 objects, JSC "Moskapstroy" - for two objects.
Section VIII. Integrated security system (customer - JSC "Moskapstroy")
The section included work on 6 objects.
In fact, during the reporting period, work was carried out to coordinate and approve in the prescribed manner the Concept of the project for organizing an integrated security system for the Museum-Reserve and the Project for organizing an integrated security system for the facilities of the Sovereign's Court (the central part of the Museum-Reserve).
Section IX. Integrated visitor service system (customers - the museum-reserve and JSC "Moskapstroy")
The section included work on 55 objects.
In fact, during the reporting period, work was carried out on the design of one object - a tavern for 150 seats (museum-reserve).
Section X. Planning and development project for the left bank of the Moscow River on the territory of the museum-reserve (customer - museum-reserve)
The section provided for work on one object.
The section was completed in full within the approved funding volumes.
4. Goals and tasks of the work (proposals on the goals and objectives of the Program, target indicators and indicators that allow evaluating the progress of the Program implementation by years)
The goal of the Program is the creation of a modern multidisciplinary museum-reserve based on the authentic palace and park and manor ensembles of the city of Moscow of the 17th-19th centuries "Kolomenskoye", "Lublino", "Lefortovo".
In accordance with the main directions of the statutory activities of the museum-reserve for sociocultural, scientific, educational, recreational purposes and for the development of inbound and domestic tourism in the city of Moscow, a single complex of management and use of these historical and cultural territories is being formed, taking into account historical features each of them, including:
Creation on the territory of the museum-reserve "Kolomenskoye" of the largest historical, cultural and ethnographic complex in the city of Moscow, as a suburban royal residence;
Formation of the territory of the historical estate "Lublino", as a model of Russian estate life 19th century, with the creation of a multifunctional museum center within its boundaries;
Formation of the territory of the Lefortovo palace and park ensemble as a Russian imperial residence.
Program Objectives:
Preservation, reconstruction and restoration of historical and cultural monuments, including religious sites;
Restoration within the historical boundaries of the lost historical volume-spatial structure of historical and cultural territories;
Comprehensive landscaping, focused on the reconstruction of the historical landscape, conservation, restoration and reconstruction of green spaces;
A significant increase in the volume of museum expositions on the basis of the reconstruction of existing and arrangement of additional exhibition areas, the expansion of opportunities for sightseeing tours of the territories of the museum-reserve;
Ensuring the safety and security of funds, objects (including architectural monuments) and territories of the museum-reserve;
Creation of infrastructure for tourist services of the territories of the museum-reserve, multifunctional museum and cultural centers.
The program should provide for the need to complete the implementation of activities provided for by the Long-term Target Program for the Preservation of Historical and Cultural Heritage Sites and the Development of the Territory of the State Artistic Historical-Architectural and Natural-Landscape Museum-Reserve "Kolomenskoye" for 2003-2007.
Targets
Name of the event | 2010 | |||||||
Acquisition of museum funds (number of items) | ||||||||
Display objects | ||||||||
New expositions | ||||||||
Introduced new service facilities included in the infrastructure of tourist services | ||||||||
Exposition attendance (persons per year) | ||||||||
Permanent entertainment events | ||||||||
5. Sources of funding for the target Program
Funding for the implementation of program activities is provided at the expense of the budget of the city of Moscow and extrabudgetary sources of funding.
Allocation of city budget funds for the implementation of the tasks set by the Concept, including the preservation, restoration and reconstruction of historical and cultural monuments; preservation and maintenance of natural monuments and unique natural objects; complex improvement of the territory, focused on the reconstruction of the historical landscape; creation of infrastructure for the recreation of Muscovites and guests of the capital, etc. provided for the following sectors:
- "Culture, cinematography and mass media" (funding items "overhaul", "capital investments");
- "Communal construction" (financing item "capital investments").
6. Program Management Mechanism
The functions of the state customer - the coordinator of the Program are supposed to be assigned to the Department of Economic Policy and Development of the City of Moscow. To appoint as the personal head of the Program, respectively, the head of the Department of Economic Policy and Development of the City of Moscow Ogloblina Marina Evgenievna.
The State Customer of the Program for Capital Construction and Reconstruction of the Museum-Reserve Objects is supposed to be the Department of the City Order for Capital Construction of the City of Moscow.
In connection with the specifics of work on the reconstruction of historical and cultural complexes and territories, as well as taking into account the positive experience of implementing the Long-term Target Program for the Preservation of Historical and Cultural Heritage Sites and the Development of the Museum-Reserve for 2003-2007, the functions of the customer for the main activities of the program (scientific and research and repair and restoration work, work on the improvement of the territory and the reconstruction of historical buildings) to be assigned to the museum-reserve.
Also entrust the museum-reserve with the current management and monitoring of the implementation of program activities.
The implementation of the Program is ensured by a set of measures for legal, organizational, financial, informational and methodological support. To ensure a unified approach to the implementation of the system of program activities, as well as the targeted and efficient use of the allocated financial resources, coordination of the actions of federal state authorities in the field of culture, structural divisions of the Moscow Government, state and non-state scientific, design, production enterprises and institutions participating in activities for the implementation of the Program.
Due to the intersectoral nature of the Program, it is proposed to create a Coordinating Council under the head of the Program with the participation of all interested parties, including a representative of the Department of Culture of the City of Moscow.
The implementation of the Program is carried out on the basis of state contracts (contracts) concluded in the prescribed manner with the executors of program activities.
Mechanisms for adjusting the activities of the Program and their resource support
The Program is adjusted on the basis of proposals prepared by the state customer and customers and submitted to the Department of Economic Policy and Development of the City of Moscow.
The mechanism for adjusting the Program requiring the issuance of the relevant legal act Government of Moscow, is determined in the manner established for the implementation of targeted programs.
Adjustment of the activities of the Program, which does not require the issuance of relevant legal acts of the Government of Moscow, is carried out through the proposals of the museum-reserve to change the plan of activities and their submission to the Department of Economic Policy and Development of the City of Moscow.
Proposed changes must contain an explanatory note explaining the reasons for the adjustment of program activities and be submitted by April 1 of the relevant financial year.
To ensure monitoring and analysis of the implementation of the Program, the museum-reserve annually coordinates with the Department of Economic Policy and Development of the City of Moscow the updated performance indicators of the Program for the corresponding year.
To ensure monitoring and analysis of the progress of the Program implementation, the state customer of the Program and the museum-reserve submit reports on the supervised areas to the state customer - the coordinator of the Program within the following terms:
Until October 31 - on the actual implementation of the Program for 9 months and on the expected implementation for the current year.
The state customer - coordinator submits summary reports to the Department of Economic Policy and Development of the City of Moscow:
Until November 15 - on the actual implementation of the Program for 9 months and on the expected implementation for the current year.
Electronic text of the document
prepared by CJSC "Kodeks" and checked against:
Moscow City Hall mailing list
On approval of the Concept of the Medium-term Target Program for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage Sites and Development of the Territory of the Moscow State United Museum-Reserve for 2008-2010
| Document's name: | On approval of the Concept of the Medium-term Target Program for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage Sites and Development of the Territory of the Moscow State United Museum-Reserve for 2008-2010 |
| Document Number: | 20-RP |
| Document type: | Order of the Government of Moscow |
| Host body: | The government of Moscow |
| Status: | current |
| Published: | Bulletin of the Mayor and Government of Moscow, N 10, 15.02.2008 |
| Acceptance date: | January 14, 2008 |
| Effective start date: | January 14, 2008 |
This idea is discussed in the Government of the Russian Federation. The decision should be made before the end of 2016.
"Guardians of the Legacy"
The preservation of cultural heritage can become a priority national project of Russia. Currently, the Government of the Russian Federation is considering proposals from the federal Ministry of Culture to include the "Culture" direction in the list of the main directions of the country's strategic development. The concept provides for implementation in 2017-2030. priority projects "Preservation of cultural heritage" and "Culture of the small Motherland".
According to our information, the concepts of these projects are expected to be presented in December 2016 at the International St. Petersburg Cultural Forum. If the project receives government support (it is expected that a decision should be made before the end of 2016), the issue will be submitted for discussion by the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for Strategic Development and Priority Projects.
Tasks and meanings
The project developers relied on the Fundamentals of State Cultural Policy approved by the presidential decree, as well as on the current National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation, according to which culture is one of the strategic national priorities.
Basic principle priority project "Preservation of cultural heritage" declared "Preservation through development": "Improving the accessibility of cultural heritage, cultural and economic development of territories, education and spiritual development of citizens based on cultural heritage."
The project is intended, according to the idea of the initiators, to solve the following tasks:
Identification, inclusion in the state register and cataloging of objects of cultural heritage;
Improving the state protection of cultural heritage sites;
Holding scientific research in the field of heritage conservation and development of scientific and project documentation;
Restoration, conservation and adaptation of cultural heritage objects based on integrated programs using foreign experience and best practice;
Creation of a modern domestic restoration industry;
Organization of service and profitable use of cultural heritage, increasing its accessibility for the population;
Popularization of cultural heritage, including with the use of modern information technologies;
Development of cultural tourism based on the use of restored and put into cultural circulation objects of cultural heritage;
Assistance in the development of a mass volunteer and volunteer movement for the preservation of cultural heritage;
Legal, financial and personnel support for the processes of preserving cultural heritage.
The project is planned to be implemented in 3 stages: 2017 - Q1 2018; Q2 2018 - 2024; 2025 - 2030
According to the concept, at the first stage, additional state budget expenditures will not be required, and at the 2nd and 3rd stages in the field of cultural heritage preservation, additional funding in the amount of 30 billion rubles is planned (including from income from restored and put into cultural and economic circulation of monuments - " with a total area of 400,000 sq. m annually”).
Global context
Judging by the concept of the project, its initiators are well aware that the importance of preserving the national cultural heritage goes far beyond the specialized industry. The project developers have carefully studied the latest European experience, in particular, the announcement by the European Union of 2018 as the Year of European Cultural Heritage and the presentation in June 2016 in the European Union of the Strategy for the Development of the Cultural Dimension foreign policy meeting the most important priority of the European Commission - strengthening the position of the European Union as a global player. The documents of the European Commission stressed the importance of preserving the cultural heritage of Europe, not only to encourage cultural diversity, tourism development, attracting additional investments, introducing new management models and increasing the economic potential of the territories, but also for the formation and “promotion” of a “common European identity”.
In this context, the initiators of the project conclude, “it is obvious that Russia, being a country with a large number of cultural heritage sites and its own national code, is also interested in preserving cultural heritage sites, since they constitute a visible memory and the basis for subsequent development.”
Regional aspect
The project is planned to be implemented primarily in the regions of Russia with a "high density of cultural heritage sites": Novgorod, Pskov, Smolensk, Arkhangelsk, Vologda, Bryansk, Yaroslavl, Kostroma, Kaluga regions, as well as in certain regions of the Caucasus and South Siberia. According to our information, the role of "pilot regions" is prepared by experts for the Tver and Kostroma regions.
Particular attention should be paid - in order to preserve not only heritage sites, but also the cities and settlements themselves, which, according to the fair assessment of the authors of the project, is in itself a national strategic task. The territorial planning of the project implementation will be coordinated with the system plans of the Ministry of Economic Development for the development of social infrastructure in the regions. When implementing the project, the Ministry of Culture plans to coordinate efforts with the Ministry of Economic Development, the Federal Property Management Agency, the Ministry of Construction, the Ministry of Labor and other federal departments.
Plans and indicators
According to the calculated indicators of the priority project "Preservation of cultural heritage", the share of monuments, information about which , by the end of 2016 should reach 70%, in 2017 - 80%, and from 2019 should be 100%.
From 2019 it is expected restore and introduce"for profitable use" of cultural heritage - 400 thousand square meters. m annually.
Volume extrabudgetary funding“Measures for the preservation of cultural heritage sites” are planned to be increased by 60 times over 15 years. In 2016, it should amount to 1 billion rubles, in 2017 - 5, in 2018 - 8, in 2019 - 10, in 2020 - 15, in 2021 - 20, in 2022 - m - 25, in 2023 - 30, in 2024 - 35, and in 2030 - 60 billion rubles.
At the same time, the volume of attracted extra-budgetary funds from 2018 should significantly exceed the volume of similar state budget investments. For comparison, the project concept assumes them as follows: 2016 - 6.9 billion rubles; 2017 - 8.5; 2018 - 8.1; 2019 - 7.6; 2020 - 9.3; 2021 - 8.9; 2022 - 8.3; 2023 - 10.2; 2024 - 9.8; 2030 - 9.1 billion
Indeed, the project also additional, starting from 2019, financing preservation of monuments from the federal budget - 30 billion rubles each. annually.
In general, towards the end of 2030, it will be extremely interesting to discuss the state of affairs and urgent prospects with the initiators of the project.
For the "Heritage Keepers" the idea of the priority project "Preservation of cultural heritage" is commented
Alexander Zhuravsky, Deputy Minister of Culture of Russia:
Preservation of heritage must be recognized as a priority for socio-economic development
It seems extremely important that culture should appear among the priority areas that are considered at the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for Strategic Development and Priority Projects. After all, culture - along with the military-industrial complex, nuclear energy and space - is the area in which Russia globally competitive.
The sphere of culture in Russia needs not just investment, it needs strategic development and competent project management. If this is not done, it will gradually lose its competitiveness.
Any country, its citizens are distinguished by a special cultural, civilizational type. If the preservation and development of culture, its competitiveness does not become a strategic priority for the state, then sooner or later the country, civilization loses its identity, eroded by more competitive civilizations. Today we are seeing how European civilization experiences difficulties with the socio-cultural adaptation of the arriving migratory communities. Including because for the "new Europeans" European culture does not seem native, attractive and strong. The crisis of pan-European political integration coincided with an almost official recognition of the failure of the European project of multiculturalism.
Therefore, today Europe, in search of a reliable foundation for its civilizational identity, turns to culture, and, first of all, to its cultural heritage. It is in it, and not in supranational political institutions, that European civilization regains (or attempts to acquire) its own identity. That is why 2018 has been declared the Year of European Cultural Heritage in Europe.
We have a lot in common not only with the East. We and Europe have a lot in common, and, above all, in a cultural sense, in terms of cultural heritage. Let us recall at least Aristotle Fioravanti, let us recall the Italian architects of Russian classicism. Even commonplace historical comparisons- "Russian Venice", "Russian Switzerland", etc. – talk about how much of our culture is rooted in the common European heritage. At the same time, there were periods when European culture influenced us to a greater extent, and there were periods when Russia influenced other European cultures. Literature, theatre, ballet, performing arts. And even in architecture, especially if we talk about the contribution of the Russian avant-garde. Therefore, we also need to realize culture, the preservation of cultural heritage as a priority for the socio-economic development of our country.
Moreover, we have something to rely on: the Fundamentals of State Cultural Policy were approved by presidential decree, and this year the Strategy of State Cultural Policy was adopted. We propose, as part of the implementation of these strategic documents, to introduce the preservation of cultural heritage among the priority projects, to move in this area to real project management, which will allow us to solve many problems that have formed over two decades in the foreseeable future. This also applies to the reform of the restoration industry, and changes in legislation, and changes in the field of historical and cultural expertise, and the introduction of effective foreign experience, and changes in mental approaches to cultural heritage. A new class of managers of complex restoration projects is needed, who understand not only restoration, but also the economics of culture, urbanism, and modern adaptive technologies.
Everywhere in the world we observe the processes of valorization, capitalization of cultural heritage, active use of this resource in economic processes, in the development of territories and regions. 40% of the construction market in Europe is the work with historical buildings. And in our country, monuments are still perceived as a "unprofitable asset." The status of an object of cultural heritage reduces the investment attractiveness of the object of restoration. Until now, conditions have not been created, including tax ones, for large-scale attraction of investors and patrons to the restoration sphere, as is done in a number of foreign countries with a comparable cultural heritage.
According to experts, the total investment required to bring tens of thousands of Russian cultural heritage sites to a satisfactory condition is about 10 trillion rubles. It is clear that there are no such funds. And even if they magically suddenly appeared, then there are no restoration capacities and such a number of restorers to effectively use these funds. Thousands of monuments simply can't wait until their turn comes or when the appropriate funds and capacities appear.
Hence, it is necessary to change the system of heritage management. We need systemic actions that can radically change the situation. It is not normal when 160,000 monuments “hang” on the state budget, it is not normal when expensive real estate, which once adorned our cities, is in a deplorable or even ruined state. The primary task is not even to increase budget investments, but to create civilized market of cultural heritage objects, with various forms of public-private partnership, which can be attended by a philanthropist, investor, entrepreneur. We often like to compare ourselves to the USA. So, in the USA, for example, the key philanthropist in the field of culture is not the state (it accounts for only about 7% of total spending on culture), and not the money of large corporations and billionaires (about 8.4%), but individual donations ( about 20 percent), charitable foundations (about 9%) and income from endowment funds (about 14%), which are also formed from private or corporate income. I am not calling for a reduction in state support for culture, on the contrary. But I believe, following the experts in this field, that it is necessary to form a multi-channel system for financing culture in general and the preservation of cultural heritage, in particular, at a more systematic level.
At the same time, it is necessary not to mechanically increase funding for the sphere of heritage conservation, but to properly manage resources and regroup them. There is a need for public consolidation in the matter of conservation national heritage, combining the efforts of the state with public organizations, with volunteer movements through which young people can be involved in the preservation of heritage, explaining to them its significance. And, of course, fundamental work is needed to popularize the cultural heritage, which puts before us all the task of expanding educational activities in this area.
To solve all these problems, we consider it necessary formation of the Project Office on the basis of AUIPIC, which will both generate projects in the field of cultural heritage preservation and organize their implementation. It is necessary to demonstrate the effectiveness of this approach, to carry out pilot projects related to heritage in a number of regions, to create a model effective management in this domain. These should be start-up projects that stimulate investment activity, the development of small and medium-sized businesses, and the creation of new jobs. Another project office - "Roskultproekt" - is being created to implement other priority projects in the field of culture, to carry out analytical and design activities, as well as to monitor the state cultural policy.
And, of course, I repeat, it is necessary to popularize our heritage, to clarify its deep, ontological meaning as an integral part of the national cultural code.
The Ministry of Culture sent relevant materials to the Government justifying the need to consider culture as another (twelfth) priority area, and “Preservation of Cultural Heritage” as a priority project. The project will be presented in December at the International St. Petersburg Cultural Forum. We hope that this initiative will be supported in one form or another. We expect a decision to be made by the end of 2016.
Oleg Ryzhkov, Head of the Agency for the Management and Use of Historical and Cultural Monuments (AUIPIK):
Why do we have the Academy of the FSB, but not the Academy of Heritage Keepers?
The national project "Preservation of cultural heritage" from the very beginning should rely on specific projects implemented in the regions. The idea to make the preservation of cultural heritage the driving force behind the economic and social development of several regions of Russia was suggested to us by experts consulted by the Ministry of Culture. There are regions with an extremely high concentration of cultural heritage sites, and this resource must be exploited. The involvement of monuments in the economic and tourist circulation should give a positive impetus to the regional economy: in addition to creating additional jobs, replenishing the tax revenue base and developing tourism, heritage preservation will increase the investment attractiveness of the region. Experts recommend the Tver and Kostroma regions as pilot regions, but, of course, the project is designed for implementation in all heritage-rich regions of the North-West and Central Russia.
The purpose of the project is to preservation of cultural heritage has taken a worthy place in economic system countries. Now everyone “uses” the heritage resource, but does not adequately invest in it in return. For example, the tourism industry actively exploits heritage resources - but does it invest in it? The regions already receive income from the development of small and medium-sized businesses related to heritage - but does heritage receive worthy investments from regional budgets?
The national project will give investment priorities, create a situation where regions and local communities will not passively wait for someone to come and start saving their monuments, creating points of economic growth - and they themselves will start doing it. It is necessary to invest in the basic resource, in heritage and not to the businesses that operate it.
Of course, the project has an ideological component: it is necessary to change the attitude of people towards the heritage of their region, their small homeland, his country - as his property. This, from my point of view, is the education of patriotism, not abstract appeals, but real projects in which local communities should be involved.
Certainly popularization. architectural heritage, work on its preservation - as a scientific, innovative, creative activity - should be a significant part of the information policy of the federal media, primarily television.
From our point of view, a certain restructuring of the heritage administration system will also be required. Emphasis should be shifted from the "protection" of the heritage to its "preservation". Naturally, not by weakening security and state control as such, but by embedding these tools in a systemic state policy.
It is necessary, of course, to create professional personnel training system for the field of heritage conservation, a system of scientific and educational institutions. Why do we have, for example, the Higher School of Economics, the Academy of the Federal Security Service, but no Higher School or the Academy of Heritage Keepers? Abroad to train such professionals - in France, for example, out of 600 applicants for places in state heritage protection agencies, only 20 people are selected. And then after that they have to undergo special training for another 18 months, and only then they are “allowed” to the monuments. In European countries, there is a whole specialized branch of science - Heritage Science, dedicated to cultural heritage and its preservation, including with the help of the latest physics, chemistry, and microbiology.
AUIPIK we consider as a kind of polygon of the national project. Already today, projects are being implemented and developed at our facilities, in which approaches to the preservation of heritage are being worked out as part of the strategy for the development of territories and regions.
We have begun, for example, to work with Ingushetia on the extremely promising project "Cultural Landscape of Dzheirakh-Ass", which will make this reserve a point of growth for the republican economy.
We have a very interesting project in Uglich, where on the basis of the historical Zimin mansion and the adjacent territory, we expect to create a Handicrafts Center with Fair Square, which will combine museum and educational functions with shopping and entertainment in its activities. And at the same time increase the tourist attractiveness of the city - different ways, up to the reconstruction of the technology for the production of Russian glass beads of the XIII century, known from excavations.
We continue to work on the project in Peterhof, which involves not only the restoration of a complex of architectural monuments, but also the reconstruction of the national Russian riding school as an intangible cultural heritage. We are working on this together with the specialists of the French Equestrian Heritage Council - they are very enthusiastic about this undertaking.
An interesting project is taking shape in the industrial
in the Tambov region, where we plan not only to restore the preserved buildings, but to revive this estate as a functioning economic complex, which will give impetus to the development of the entire territory.
Top photo: Volunteer work day to rescue the flooded church of the Krokhinsky churchyard (XVIII century) in the Vologda region.
