Agnes Soh MLA RMIT 2011 by marieluise jonas

Heritage Conservation + Development > Tourism

DESIGNING Otherwise

SECTION 19-19

SECTION 18-18

SECTION 17-17

SECTION 16-16

SECTION 15-15

SECTION 14-14

SECTION 13-13

SECTION 12-12

SECTION 11-11

SECTION 10-10

SECTION 09-09

SECTION 08-08

SECTION 07-07

SECTION 06-06

SECTION 05-05

SECTION 04-04

Heritage Conservation + Development > Tourism

DESIGNING Otherwise

SECTION 39-39

SECTION 38-38

SECTION 37-37

SECTION 36-36

SECTION 35-35

SECTION 34-34

SECTION 33-33

SECTION 32-32

SECTION 31-31

SECTION 30-30

SECTION 29-29

SECTION 28-28

SECTION 27-27

SECTION 26-26

SECTION 25-25

SECTION 24-24

SECTION 23-23

SECTION 22-22

SECTION 21-21

SECTION 20-20

Appropriate Durable Record for Masters of Landscape Architecture Rmit University by AGNES SOH . S3268259 14 Nov 2011

CONTENTS

RESEARCH SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION What is Designing Otherwise?

DESIGN METHODOLOGY Adapting Corner Themes

08 11

MEASURING DESIGN What is good design? \\ Precedent\ The System of Measures for Excellence in Destinations (SMED) unfolding themes TOURISM Tourism is Development! > Study 01| Generic City HERITAGE UNESCO + Friends \\ Case-study\ Global Heritage Fund \\ Case-study\ The Nature Conservancy Conservation versus Preservation Heritage Redefined > Study 02| Tea Off! COMMUNITY Can design reduce poverty? > Study 03| Istana Kampong Glam Community Centre ENVIRONMENT Beyond Sustainability > Study 04| Raft Away

14 16 19 22 24 28 29 30 32 33 34 38 39

recording petra, jordan SETTING THE CONTEXT Heritage Community Environment Tourism

46 47 48 50 52

\ Folly 01\ Contestation \ Folly 02\ Processes

56 57

\\ Precedent\ Garden Of Forgiveness, Beirut

\ Folly 03\ Re-jigging \ Folly 04\ Gestures

60 61

JUGGLING THE THEMES > Study 05| An Authorityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Vision > Study 06| A Productive Museum \\ Precedent\ National Tourist Routes in Norway > Study 07| Reshuffling the Parkland > Study 08| Re-living Petra > Study 09| Everything and everyone counts!

64 66 70 72 74 76 80

AFTERWORD

APPENDIX 01\ World Heritage Convention: Definition and Selection Criteria

REFERENCES BIBLIOGRAPHY 42 43

94 97

THE RESEARCH IN BRIEF

> TITLE DESIGNING Otherwise > SUB-TITLE Heritage Conservation + Development > Tourism

> RESEARCH QUESTION How can strategic landscape planning for tourist destinations drive heritage conservation and socio-economic improvements in the developing regions?

> ABSTRACT Rapid urban expansion in the developing regions is creating new homogenous cities lacking in character, while driving the destruction of unique environments and cultural heritage. The economic benefits of tourism makes an attractive incentive for conservation, but often at the expense of local inhabitants living on or close to these sites. Designing Otherwise is about investigating the potential for landscape architecture practice to negotiate manifold and conflicting concerns in these fragile environments to benefit both wider regional areas as well as local communities. Heritage conservation, community development and sustainable tourism are not new concepts, but current design methods tend to favour one or the other over the sum of all parts. Through a selection of design studies varying in scale and resolution, this research aims to redefine current heritage conservation approach and suggest a framework for designing with complex issues in landscape architecture practice. The framework distills large-scale problems into key themes; their spatial operations developed using strategies adapted from James Cornerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s outline for landscape urbanism practice â&#x20AC;&#x201C; experiences of the community, processes over time, the staging of surfaces, and the imaginary. Using Petra, Jordan, as the main site for investigation, design studies are developed, and refined against an assessment tool to measure their qualitative benefits. 1

There is no single solution for dealing with the complexities associated with urbanisation, but existing methods of compartmentalising multi-faceted problems have proved inadequate. This project demonstrates the need for cross-disciplinary collaborations in bridging diverse concerns as well as an on-going process of production and evaluation, in order to benefit local communities and processes most vulnerable in contested spaces.

> KEYWORDS: Heritage conservation, community development, sustainable tourism

INTRODUCTION

â&#x20AC;&#x153;This architecture presents solutions to questions that are both much larger than architecture and impossible to tackle without architecture.â&#x20AC;? Ole Bouman1

INTRODUCTION

What is Designing Otherwise?

and intangible, becomes crucial in defining the character of a place and the cultural identity of a district. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) actively encourage heritage conservation, and the “World Heritage Convention” was adopted in 1972 to protect significant cultural and scenic sites under threat from urban development. The explosion of tourism witnessed at world heritage sites and

The developing regions, especially Asia and the Middle East, have been experiencing unprecedented urban and economic growth driven by globalisation of worldwide economies. Traditional ways of life – from housing typologies, livelihoods, activities to languages – are viewed as obstructions to progress; instead, paved highways, modern skyscrapers and new lives in factories and cities are readily embraced. This hunger for modernisation is driving the frenzied transformation of farmlands and ecological habitats into new urban centres, large-scale industries or mining towns. The cultural influences of globalisation on localities are undisputed when Western household symbols like McDonald’s and Coca-Cola become widely embraced as the preferred meal and drink. It is no coincidence then, that the built environment is not spared from its impacts, with urban environments looking increasingly homogeneous as brand-name architects are asked to transplant their signature buildings elsewhere (figure 1). Given such settings, heritage, both the physical

its potential to propel economic growth quickly became attractive incentives for governments in the developing regions to encourage heritage conservation, such as the case of Petra, Jordan. Tourism, one of the fastest growing global economic sectors, is now a “key driver for socioeconomic progress” according to the United Nations World Travel Organisation (UNWTO)2. Through careful planning and consideration of community requirements, tourist destinations can also provide basic infrastructure, utilities, services and employment opportunities for local populations. Heritage conservation, community development and sustainable tourism are not new concepts, and there is no lack of research and documentation, of individual subjects as well as the symbiotic relationship between all three. However, the intricacies of each field become amplified when considered in tandem, thus current planning and management strategies for heritage sites tend to compartmentalise them, favouring one concept or the other, or in many projects none at all. This is especially apparent in developing regions where the lack of clear guidelines and regulations mean design outcomes need only to privilege a few influential stakeholders.

Using Petra as the main study site, Designing Otherwise is about investigating the potential to engage tourism and urban development beyond economic considerations, and bring about sustained benefits for communities and processes in complex environments such as heritage conservation sites. Research on urban sprawl in Asia have shown that drawing up “two-dimensional urban patterns” as master plan for development is an unrealistic approach to planning in the developing regions, particularly when they disregard “economic, cultural and social concerns” (Stokmann, Rabe and Ruff 2008)3. Urban environments are an integral part of the modern landscape, the products of interactions between contemporary culture and its geographical sites. Thus there is potential for landscape architecture practice to “critically intervene in cultural habit and convention” and become instruments for “producing and enriching culture” (Corner, 1999)4. Working through various design studies at a range of scales and resolution levels, this research attempts to redefine heritage conservation perception and practice, and to suggest a framework for responding to multidimensional concerns in design, such as those on fragile environments like heritage sites.

Figure 1/2/3. Apart from obvious differences in climate and social settings, what differentiates Melbourne from Singapore or Shanghai from Dubai?

DESIGN METHODOLOGY

â&#x20AC;&#x153;No matter how ambitious and far-reaching the above-outlined practices may be, at the end of the day there will still always be doors, windows, gardens, stream corridors, apples, and lattes.â&#x20AC;? James Corner5

DESIGN METHODOLOGY Adapting Corner

Design, as defined by the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design (ISCID), is “a creative activity whose aim is to establish the multi-faceted qualities of objects, processes, services and their systems in whole life-cycles” (Manzini, 2005)6. It is this flexibility and openness, in the design activities of landscape architecture practice, which offers multiple possibilities in juggling manifold intricacies within the concerns of heritage conservation, community development and sustainable tourism. Yet current design approaches, driven by business margins for the client or developer, tend to over-simplify composite activities and processes; any physical, cultural or social qualities of the site are exploited and marketed for profits, rather than considered towards reaping longer-term non-financial gains. In his seminal essay, “Terra Fluxus”, James Corner presented four provisional themes in his “schematic outline for landscape urbanism practice: processes over time, the

staging of surfaces, the operational or working method, and the imaginary” (2006)7. While ground-breaking in its shift from objects to systems in design thinking, like his predecessor McHarg, this structure continues to operate mostly at the top-down pedals of master planning, missing the potential for ground-up considerations of man’s activities that shape our landscapes. This is not to say that we should throw away the strategic and planning functions of landscape architecture practice. If we envision places to be seen not only as contained sites but “articulated moments in networks of social relations” (Massey, 1991)8, then a combination of both top-down and bottom-up approaches will result in better designed spaces that serve both capitalist pragmatics and enrich the social and cultural aesthetics of our built environment. Through a continual and reflective process of applying Corner’s original themes in various design studies, this project begins to suggest another design methodology for dealing with complexities in our environment (figure 4). The framework distills complex mega-themes (such as those in discussed in this research) into single key themes, from which specific spatial operations can be developed using the following key design strategies:

experiences of the community, processes over time, the staging of surfaces, and the imaginary.

MEANS

THEMES

OUTCOMES

OPERATIONS

Experiences of the community

Processes over time

The Operational Method

STRATEGY

The staging of surfaces

Evaluation

The imaginary

Figure 4. Design Methodology

It is essential, at this point, to pause and highlight the importance and necessity for cross-disciplinary collaborations in this approach. Because of the depth and breadth of the issues we are trying to “solve”, landscape architects do not always hold all the expertise and knowledge critical towards dealing with the issues we face. Other professionals – architects, engineers, geologists, archaeologists, geographers, economists, etc. – are experts in their disciplines, and play equally important roles in shaping our physical environment and the social operations in between. This cross-disciplinary approach becomes especially significant when practicing in the developing regions, as cross-cultural practice demands our reliance on partners and peers with deeper understanding and awareness of local sites and context. While it is impossible that we become experts in all matters of the world, the practice as a “blend of science and art, proposition and thought” can provide a suitable mode for

bridging the demands in our contemporary environments (Prior, 2011)9. The suggested framework then becomes the operational method for practice, creating spatial design outcomes through permutations of different spatial operations to better respond to specific conditions on site. These design outcomes are evaluated against a qualitative assessment tool adapted from existing evaluation toolkits used in the tourism sectors, to measure their benefits and impacts on sites. This on-going process of evaluation and production becomes a way of informing and refining design outcomes, as well as the methods for investigating and negotiating complex issues in practice.

STRATEGY

MEANS

OPERATIONS

Experiences of the community

Residents

Demographics Livelihoods Culture and traditions Activities

Community types, settlement, origins

Tourists/ Visitors

From where? Purpose of visit Activities

Local, regional, international Leisure, business, education Sightseeing Picnics or grill picnics Fieldtrips Hiking

Industry

Tourism Construction Education Archaeology

Who? Organisations

Authorities Developers Preservation groups Tourism operators

study 01

Processes over time

Climate

Seasons Rainfall, sunlight, wind Hazards

Spring, summer, autumn, winter

seasonal? broad-scale phasing? environmental? annual? people?

Population

Settlement patterns

Semi-nomadic Nomadic Permanent Range

Growth Migration patterns Environmental process

Time-scale

Water systems Air Plants Wildlife Temporal “Permanent” Tourism

The staging of surfaces

Infrastructure

singular? multiple? landuse? activities? scale?

Transport Water Drainage Sewage

Tourist infrastructure

Residential/ Community

Housing typology Facilities

Agriculture

Production Processing

Ecology/ Reforestation

Plants Animals/ Wildlife

Local usage Water systems

Catchment

The imaginary

Soil cover Hazards

Suitable uses Landslides, erosion, earthquakes, etc

Heritage

Physical structures “Tangible”

"Natural" "Cultural" "Mixed" "Cultural Landscapes" Urban fabric, grain, texture Scale of built environment Culture eg. Language, lifestyles, livelihoods Traditions eg. Cuisine, crafts, stories Symbolism Museum/ exhbition space Adaptive re-use

Intangible

Function Aesthetics

Scenic value

Figure 5. Expanding design methodology

Form Materials Spatial experience Local knowledge Landscape features

study 07 Shuffling around the Parkland PETRA, JORDAN

Native/exotic Water consumption levels Habitat Range

Geology

recontextualisation innovation scale

study 05 An Authority’s Vision PETRA, JORDAN

Crops eg. cereals, fruit trees, vegetables Meat eg. fishing, dairy, herding, farming On-site Off-site

Hazards

Usage

study 04 Raft Away THREE PARALLEL RIVERS OF YUNNAN, CHINA

“Modern” Vernacular Schools Health centre Recreational spaces

Natural: Rivers, wadis, seas, lakes Artificial: Reservoirs Size Freshwater Saltwater Recycled water Potable water Industries Irrigation Flooding, drought, pollution, etc.

Type

Tea Off! MUNNAR, INDIA

Local, regional, national Roads, train stations, bus stations, airports Pedestrian/bike networks Other local modes of transport eg. Rickshaws Catchment type: built/natural Other facilities Drains, channels, surfaces Collection and processing

Pedestrians, bike paths, carriageways Other local modes unique to site Visitors' Centre/ exhibition space Signage, bins, toilets, lighting Pathways/routes Food and beverage outlets Souvenir shops Protection Excavation Reuse Site limitations

Special events Management/ Maintenance

study 02

Seasonal, short-term Annual Long-term/ broad-scale phasing Peak, off-peak Growth

Circulation

Archaeology

study 03 Istana Kampong Glam Community Centre KAMPONG GLAM, SINGAPORE

Sowing, harvest, blooming seasons Life cycles, growth, range

Accommodation/Hotels Retail/Dining Commercial services

Visitor facilities

Generic City KAMPONG BUGIS, SINGAPORE

Flooding, drought, typhoon, etc.

Facilities

Retail/Dining Commercial services Heritage site

The Operational Method

Workforce

OUTCOMES

considerations for what? to happen

Construction methods Crafts and craftmanship Water systems Ecological system

study 06 A productive museum PETRA, JORDAN

study 08 Re-living Petra PETRA, JORDAN

Evaluation

live work play

what?

Themes

For the purpose of this research, the mega-themes of heritage conservation, community development and sustainable tourism have been broken into four key themes: TOURISM, HERITAGE, COMMUNITY, AND ENVIRONMENT.

i a m b

The next chapters will discuss these themes in detail, and how they are used in designing for tourism development in Petra. Four secondary sites will be employed in the discussion to demonstrate: - Kampong Bugis, Singapore; - Kampong Glam, Singapore; - Munnar, India; and - Three Parallel Rivers of Yunnan, China.

MEASURING DESIGN

â&#x20AC;&#x153;The design of public spaces influences both general well-being and also how we behave. The design of workplaces affects productivity and creativity. The design of public services has a substantial impact on user experience and public satisfaction. Well-designed products and services delight and are usable by all.â&#x20AC;? Design Council10

MEASURING DESIGN What is good design?

Design evaluation, according to Deming and Swaffield, â&#x20AC;&#x153;refers to the work of considering, measuring, and judging the merit and value of a range of competing design optionsâ&#x20AC;? (2011)11. Design, either as artistic activity or as creative outcome, is subjective in nature. Its strength lies in its integrative nature between the arts and sciences, between technology and experiences; but it is also this overlap that makes the question of good design a difficult one to answer. This overlay makes it problematic to employ traditional assessment tools in design evaluations. Yet, it is precisely this ambiguity and its wider influence on the world that calls for defining a set of evaluation criteria to measure its real impacts, qualities and values. While it is challenging to determine the success of design as an activity, the effects of its outcomes are less vague. For example, the decision by local planning authorities to expand a key local attraction into a tourist destination requires the building of more visitor facilities, hotels and

other forms of tourist infrastructure to accommodate the influx of visitors and an increased work force. Most planning decisions have resultant spatial operations, which can then be assessed both qualitatively and quantitatively. For the purpose of this research, a qualitative evaluation tool is the preferred method for quick assessments of design ideas throughout their development, and this can be further developed to incorporate quantitative measurements. There are currently several tourism management tools available for evaluating tourist destinations and heritage sites, such as the System of Measures of Excellence in Destinations (SMED) by Centre of Excellence for Destinations (CED). While these toolkits have been tailored to policy-making processes, they serve as valuable precedents in formulating an evaluation tool for assessing the success of different design outcomes proposed in the process of this research. For this research, six key

evaluation criteria, borrowed from National Geographic Traveller’s Global Stewardship Survey, are used in design assessments (Tourtellot 2011)12: Aesthetics Heritage Cultural Integrity Environment Socio-Economics Tourism Management A brief outline of each of the evaluation criteria is further detailed below: 1. AESTHETICS • Innovation in design, planning and management strategies • Landscape form, including scale, proximity, materiality, textures, etc. • Visual impacts on sites 2. HERITAGE • Impacts on the material conditions and systems of heritage sites, with reference to conservation criteria set out by UNESCO’s world heritage convention (including the condition of archaeological monuments, biodiversity of natural sites, etc.) • Intangible built heritage, including urban grain, texture and scale, etc. • Cultivation and promotion of conservation skills • Marketing and awareness towards conservation 3. CULTURAL INTEGRITY • Sustainability of existing (and traditional) livelihoods, such as grazing, herding, agriculture etc. • Survival of intangible cultures, such as stories, settlement patterns, languages, crafts, construction methods, cuisine, etc. • Transfer or spread of local indigenous knowledge of the “land”

4. Environment • Sustainability of local ecological (or natural) processes, such as river systems, sea levels, geology, etc. • Impacts on local environmental conditions, such as climate • Impacts on local habitats, including diversity of native flora and fauna 5. Socio-economics • Community access to basic needs, such as homes or shelters, food, education, work, etc. • Economic growth (local, regional, national) • Diversity of local economy • Balancing the benefits of all in the community (live, work, play) 6. Tourism Management • Development of local infrastructure: roads, civic facilities, water services, utilities etc. • Development of tourism-related infrastructure, such as hotels, restaurants, etc. • Development of visitor facilities within the tourist attractions • Negative impacts, such as single economy base, erosion of local cultural values, etc. The design outcomes from each study, regardless of scale and level of resolution, are assessed against the above criteria and rated on a scale of 0-5. Individual ratings from each criterion are then combined to provide an overall score from 0-5, with brief notes outlining the pros and cons from each evaluation. Although preliminary and rudimentary as an evaluation tool, the above criteria provides a basic structure for multiple quick design assessments throughout the design process, allowing lessons learnt from earlier studies to inform and enrich subsequent designs, thereby setting up the continual process of production and evaluation to refine design outcomes.

\\ Precedent\ The System of Measures for Excellence in Destinations (SMED) by Centre of Excellence for Destinations (CED) 13

According to information on CED’s website, the SMED toolkit is a “diagnostic, progress and management tool” aimed at assisting tourist destinations to benefit from the “short-term and long-term goals of sustainable tourism”. Typically, experts from CED spend two months on site for each assessment, conducting workshops, interviews and meetings with government officials, key stakeholders and partners, who benefit by “receiving concrete and feasible recommendations for strategic interventions and continuous improvement” on their sites. Although a fairly new evaluation tool, this “hand-on” approach seems to be gaining acceptance among officials at heritage sites, with SMED recommendations already implemented in destinations such as Mexico City and Portugal’s Douro Valley (Tourtellot, 2011)14. Details of the SMED evaluation method: STEP 1: DESTINATION PROFILE QUESTIONNAIRE (DPQ) The Destination Profile Questionnaire, or DPQ, gathers general information and documentation on the destination participating in a SMED evaluation. The information collected provides SMED experts with preliminary knowledge of the destination for the preparation of relevant and carefully targeted questions in the steps that follow.

STEP 2: CUSTOMIZED SMED QUESTIONNAIRE (C-SMEDQ) The SMED is composed of 4 fields and 11 categories that serve as indicators for measuring excellence within a destination. SMED experts carefully select the most appropriate indicators for the destination profile, and then use the initial DPQ to develop a web-based Customized SMED Questionnaire, or C-SMEDQ, for the destination. They will meet with as many stakeholders and local experts as needed to assist in completing the C-SMEDQ. The analysis of the data collected enables the SMED experts to better prepare their on-site visit.

STEP 3: THE ON-SITE VISIT The on-site visit is performed to validate the information collected in the DPQ and the indicators from the C-SMEDQ and to gather any missing data through consultation workshops and interviews with local experts. The visit is also used to target the main areas for improvement within the destination, in close collaboration with all participating stakeholders. STEP 4: THE REPORT The confidential report includes the destination’s current opportunities and challenges, a qualitative analysis per field and category, comparative studies of other similar destinations as well as general recommendations proposed by the SMED experts who performed the onsite visit. Recommendations address both short-term goals (one to two years) as well as long-term goals (three to five years). For quality control, each SMED report is submitted for peer review before being remitted to the destination authority. STEP 5: FOLLOW-UP FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT Each destination evaluated by the SMED becomes part of a worldwide destination database which protects the confidentiality of each destination’s responses. These destinations and their stakeholders will benefit from on-going follow-up and receive additional information obtained by the CED over time. After three to four years of a SMED evaluation, it is expected that a destination will invite SMED experts to return to track how recommendations were implemented, explore new solutions and provide new information pertinent to the destination’s continuous improvement.

T EN SM ES SS A LL RA O VE

TO U

To RI Vi uri SM sit st or in fa fra cil st iti ru es ct ur e

E G

ity

nt eg r

ER an IT d A i

Im pa ct s

he rit V ag N IR e sit cli atu ON es m ra at l p M e, ro EN riv ce er ss T sy es st on em s IN s, ite ge , s TA ol u c og h Im N y, as pa G et IB ct c. s L an E d in CU te gr LT ity U to RE SO lo ca C lc I O A ul tu Ec cce -E re C on ss O om to N ic bas O gr ic ow n MI C th ee ds S

s rm fo an d eg ie s

IL T

no E va TI tio C S n in st ra t

A study 01

Generic City Kampong Bugis, Singapore

+ Scale of ground structures to mirror building scale at conservation area + Fusing finer texture of conservation area with large development plot sizes + Translating modern imagery to evoke site's port history

+ Variety of floor areas in development to allow flexibility in change of use

study 02

Tea Off! Munnar, India

+ Maintenance of working landscapes + Multiple-programming to meet the demands of urban development and desires + Heritage sites as working landscapes and not â&#x20AC;&#x153;museumsâ&#x20AC;? + Plantations both for production and tourism + Supports variety of tourism options

study 04

Raft away... Three Parallel Rivers of Yunnan, China

study 03

Istana Kampong Glam Community Centre Kampong Glam, Singapore

study 05

An authorityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Vision Petra, Jordan

Limited tourism development can + fund conservation activities + increase awareness both locally and internationally

+ Provision of local firewood supply and employment

+ Reforestation of native plant species + Zoning to manage logging

+ Expanding site's usage beyond a little-visited musuem

+ Expanding site's usage beyond a little-visited musuem + Rekindling site's original symbolic meaning to the community

+ Creation of clear conservation and buffer zones + Defining extents of urban development (in Wadi Musa and satellite settlements) + Archaeological/ Conservation college - Tourist numbers exceed carrying capacity + Reorganisation of facilities within site to protect views and site aesthetics - Impact of tourist facilities on site's aesthetics?

+ Increased routes to increase carrying capacity of heritage site + Increase in tourist facilities + Increase in tourism infrastructure + Connections between three key tourist sites

+ Infrastructure to encourage cultural continuation (eg. story-telling, food) for tourism - Loss of traditional livelihoods, settlement patterns and culture as a result of tourism

+ Reforestation in the buffer zones - Availability of irrigation to sustain reforestation - Few to no considerations for site processes

+ Reorganisation of urban development and provision for growth + Plans reflect possible diversification of economy and social improvements + Increase in infrastructure and services + Provision of recreational areas for local communities

study 06

A productive museum Petra, Jordan

= Restoration of the parkland landscape that was once Petra - Extensive agriculture may cause damage to existing and unearthed monuments

+ Increase types of tourism activities - No increase in tourist routes

+ Extensive reforestation to restore soil cover - Availability of irrigation to sustain agriculture and reforestation - Extensive agriculture damaging to sandstone geology + Land allocation for activities such as cultivation and herding + Provisions for local community to return to living in Petra during winter = Restoration of the parkland landscape versus existing arid landscape?

+ Building self-sufficiency in local communities through agriculture - Lack of tourism income may limit budget for infrastructure and communnity development - Little to no land provision for growth of settlements - No consideration for any form of urban development

study 07

Shuffling around the Parkland Petra, Jordan

+ Defining extents of urban development (in Wadi Musa and its satellite settlements) - Extensive landuse all year may cause damage to existing and unearthed monuments + Allowances for land production, restoration and regeneration - Availability of irrigation to sustain agriculture and reforestation - Extensive agriculture and traffice damaging to sandstone geology - Landuse rotation does not take into account climatic and site conditions

+ Increase in tourist routes during peak season; current routes maintained during off-peak season + Allowance for alternative forms of tourism while maintaining current carrying capacity of site

+ Land allocation for activities such as cultivation and herding + Provisions for local communities to return to living in Petra most parts of the year + Allowing local traditions and culture to re-establish + Building self-sufficiency in local communities through agriculture + Building diversity into local economy + Tourists are source of extra hands

+ Redefining landuse and programmatic possibilities within a conservation site

study 08

Re-living Petra Petra, Jordan

+ Development of site boundaries, including core conservation and buffer zones + Integration of neighbouring urban areas with conservation site + Spreading out tourist infrastructure and facilities to reduce strain on site + Development of viewing route outside core area to limit tourist numbers

+ Increase in tourism infrastructure and tourist facilities + Viewing route (both for pedestrians and vehicles)along heritage site

+ Minimising flood risks through reforestation in upper catchment areas + Reuse of wastewater from urban areas for irrigation - Traditional activities may impact diversity of local flora + Reorganisation of facilities within site to protect views and site aesthetics + Consideration of details to deal with materials and maintenance

+ Landuse provision for traditional activities (eg. agriculture, herding, picnics, etc.) + Reorganisation of settlement areas to meet community needs + Initial ideas for return to living in non-critical areas of heritage site + Plans reflect possible diversification of economy and social improvements - Limited provisions for growth of urban areas

study 09

Everyone and everything counts! Petra, Jordan

Figure 6. Measuring Design

unfolding themes

4. PETRA, JORDAN

3. THREE PARALLEL RIVERS OF YUNNAN, CHINA

world heritage sites (inscription types) cultural natural mixed sites in danger

developed regions developing regions

2. munnar, INDIA

LEGEND

1. SINGAPORE

TOURISM

“What if we simply declare that there is no crisis – redefine our relationship with the city not as its makers but as its mere subjects, as its supporters? More than ever, the city is all we have.” Rem Koolhaas15

DEVELOPMENT

Tourism is development!

Development is progress, something all humanity aspires, albeit taking different forms and motivations (figure 3). Authorities in developing regions view modernisation as the key to economic growth and consolidation of power; while its citizens, especially those living in the rural areas, perceive gleaming cities as their key out of hardship and poverty. It is this obsession with cities that is responsible for rapid urbanisation in the developing regions.

In recent years, tourism has been closely linked to development, and it represents a main income source for many developing countries. World heritage sites are huge tourist attractions and tourism destinations. Whilst previous attitudes towards conservation have been less favourable, authorities and site managers are now eager to attain and take advantage of world heritage status. This is evident in the persistent “stream of local world heritage requests” from the Mediterranean region, “even though these already much-represented countries have been

asked to reduce the number of new nominations” (van der Aa 2005)16. The development of a tourist destination thus presents opportunities for heritage conservation and sustained community development to take place along with urbanisation, and vice versa. Nevertheless, the failures for these grand ideas to achieve their larger ambitions are equally familiar. The transformation of destinations into tacky theme parks, exploitation of local populations, mass-tourism killing the archaeological cash cow – these are just some of the many evils that have come to be associated with the making and management of a tourism destination. Tourism can provide essential capital for development of critical infrastructure, but capital is not responsible for the quality or spatial experiences in the final built environment. The creation of the Dubai “Disneyland” is a perfect case in point, where incessant investment and frenzied production have brought “ambiguous and sometimes disappointing results” (OMA-AMO, 2007) 17.

Perception of development (or progress) in developing regions

Development (or lifestyle progression) as perceived in the developing regions

farming...

working in regional factories...

moving to the cities...

Perception of development (or progress) in developing regions

Lifestyle progression (or development) as perceived in the developed cities

living in the cities or urban centres...

farming (and green spaces) in the urban areas...

moving out of urban centres...

Figure 7. Diagram comparing differing perceptions of development in the developed and developing regions

We all want permanent shelters, jobs, televisions, mobility, Internet and other accessories of modernity. Development as an ‘action’ needs to happen to provide for the growing needs of a bursting population, and tourism as a ‘means’ becomes a useful partner. But it is ultimately the designer’s decision to place that seat under a tree, or a mall next to a sewage treatment works, that will determine the atmosphere of the spatial environment we live, work and play in. 23

Intangible Culture

Figure 8. Port history depicted through imagery

themes

i a

Socio-economics

Tourism Management

A LL VE RA O

V Na IRO

Environment

To RI Vi uri SM sit st or in fa fra cil st iti ru es ct ur e

G E

in te gr it

ER an IT d A

ct s

IL T

Heritage

SS ES SM EN

ag e sit cli tu es m ra NM at l p e, ro EN c riv e er ss T sy es st on em s IN s, ite ge , s TA ol uc og h Im N y, as pa G et IB ct c. s L an E d in CU te gr LT it y U to RE SO lo c C al cu A IO lt u Ec cce -E re C on ss O t om o ic bas NO gr ic ow n MI C th ee ds S

he r it

fo rm s an d

Aesthetics

Im pa

ES T

H In no E va TI t io C S n in st ra te gi es BU

> STUDY 01 Project: Generic City Site: Kampong Bugis, Singapore

Overall

+ Variety of floor areas in development to allow flexibility in change of use

The study site is a rectangular plot sandwiched between the newer Bugis Junction and Kampong Glam Conservation District in downtown Singapore. It is a characteristic representation of a development site in much of the developing regions, a tabula rasa forcefully stripped of its past and present. The proposed project – a residential-commercial-retail multiplex – is also typical of new contemporary development in any metropolitan area, hence the name “Generic City”. The site’s blankness however betrays its importance; the land is co-owned by the Singaporean and Malaysian governments in a landexchange deal, and earmarked for high-density, highreturn development. Its strategic location between a busy retail hub and a much-forgotten conversation site also presents urban design opportunities for re-vitalising the district as a whole.

Figure 9. Sketch plan

Figure 10. Sketch section

The collage is a quick design study at investigating the opportunities for conserving intangible urban elements such as grain, scale and symbolic identity, in a conventional development project. At massing and plan scales, the finer textural qualities of built forms within the conservation areas can be fused with larger plot sizes through a series of progression and layering; modern port imagery was adapted to evoke the site’s history as the key port during pre-modern Singapore. grain

circulation

layout

uses Figure 11. Intangible urban elements conserved

HERITAGE

“For UNESCO, cultural heritage is about the identity of a particular people and place over time, and it is about the belonging that binds us all together as members of a common humanity. Culture is dynamic. It is the work of centuries and generations, and, yet, it is made anew every day, through exchange and dialogue. In times of change and uncertainty, UNESCO’s core message is that cultural heritage can be a building block for sustainable development, a vector for reconciliation and harmony and a catalyst for regional cooperation. Culture can play a key role in reinforcing social cohesion – especially through education around heritage values.” Irina Bokova18

HERITAGE

UNESCO + Friends

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATION NATURAL SCIENCES SOCIAL & HUMAN SCIENCES CULTURAL NATURAL

CULTURE

CULTURAL DIVERSITY

COMMUNICATIONS & INFORMATION

WORLD HERITAGE

CULTURAL LANDSCAPES

INTANGIBLE HERITAGE

>200 practices + expressions ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

MIXED

UNDERWATER CULTURAL HERITAGE MOVEABLE HERITAGE & MUSEUMS CREATIVITY DIALOGUE

Physical Environment

Forest Mountains Waterways Deserts Monuments Buildings Complexes Whole Cities

NOMATIVE ACTION EMERGENCY SITUATIONS

Figure 12. Heritage and Culture themes in relation to overall United Nations structure.

Working with technical advice from International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), UNESCO’s “World Heritage Committee” administers the convention and maintains a list categorised under four inscription types – “cultural”, “natural”, “mixed” and “cultural landscapes”. As of June 2011, this list includes 704 “cultural”, 180 “natural” and 27 “mixed” properties spread across 151 countries, represented by a diverse selection that includes forests, mountains, waterways, deserts, monuments, buildings, complexes, and whole cities19. A substantial percentage of heritage sites are located in the developing regions, a figure that has not yet accounted for nominated sites not currently inscribed on the list. The world heritage convention and clinching a spot on the compared to winning the Novel der Aa, 2005)20. A brief study

is a recognised brand, coveted list has been Prize (Pressouyre in van of existing policies and

programmes by UNESCO and its partner organisations, however, reveals significant gaps in current approaches to heritage conservation. For the purpose of this research, two conservation agencies and their methodologies were studied – the Global Heritage Fund (GHF) and The Nature Conservancy (TNC). Heritage sites were clearly split between two inscription types – “cultural” and “natural”, until the introduction of “mixed” and “cultural landscapes” in the 1990s. Site management and preservation is centred largely on its inscription criteria (refer to Appendix 1), and there are distinct management differences within different inscription types. “Cultural” sites, including archaeological monuments and significant architecture, tend to rely on the convention for preservation guidelines, with substantial emphasis on tourism activities for site development, preservation and management. “Natural” sites, on the other end, rely less on the convention, but

Figure 13. Analysis of Global Heritage Fund’s “Preservation by Design” methodology

Integrated conservation and development strategy for developing regions

Preserving heritage globally. Changing lives locally.

proposed programmes

existing programmes

PRESERVATION BY DESIGN

GLobaL hEritaGE fuND

pLaNNiNG & iNcrEaSED SitE protEctioN

regional and national governments

Sustainability of local development

Site sustainability

Local authorities Partnering local, regional and international organisations to ensure long-term sustainability of sites and commitment towards projects.

Local communities

provision of basic needs

provision of jobs

community engagement

Skills training for locals

high-priority monument preservation Sustainable preservation Preventing looting and neglect

preservation of intangible cultural heritage?

Sustainable tourism planning

Master conservation planning Significance & universal values Economic opportunities Threats/ Conditions Assessment Long-range vision and Conservation Goals

partNErShipS

Engaging and empowering local community to be responsible for conservation and protection to ensure sustainable preservation.

coMMuNitY DEVELopMENt

Drawing on the latest technology, methodology and data in conservation of sites, which will form the local capacity for community development.

coNSErVatioN SciENcE

A master plan or road-map to outline all priorities, key objectives and outcomes outlined for the project.

Site and regional Master plan Site analysis Scientific/ Historic/ Architectural Survey

change in livelihoods

Loss of intangible cultural heritage

healthcare

Water food Shelter Sanitation Education

tourism conservation

Funds community development

Funds conservation

tourism as key economy Cultural tourism Mass tourism

infrastructure planning

The mission of GHF is to “protect, preserve, and sustain the most significant and endangered cultural heritage sites in the developing world”21. The agency actively engages government stakeholders and local communities in the process of preservation, but the generation of a tourismbased economy base means altering traditional livelihoods and lifestyles among local populations permanently. While physical evidences of cultural heritage (i.e. architecture and monument) are protected and restored, embalming entire towns and its indigenous communities like in the case of Lijiang in Yunnan, China, erodes and destroys the original character of the site. This transformation creates little more than a refurbished museum, with its inhabitants becoming part of the exhibits and artefacts. The overreliance on a tourism-based economy also prioritises development to that of tourism infrastructure, which may not always bring lasting rewards to local communities. Local agriculture? Education? Traditional livelihoods?

other economy types?

Loss of land

Landuse planning roads and transportation Sanitation tourism infrastructure Environmental planning policies

\\ Case-study\ Global Heritage Fund (GHF)

proposed programmes

existing programmes

Protecting nature. Preserving lives.

thE NaturE coNSErVaNcY

DEVELOPMENT BY DESIGN

CONSERVATION BY DESIGN

Integrated conservation and development strategy for developing regions

offsets: directing funding to conservation

increasing costeffectiveness of mitigation

reducing conflicts and steering development away from conservation Evaluation and adaptation

Application of the science-based approach in multiple scales.

kEY aNaLYticaL MEthoDS

A systematic approach to conservation that determines where to work, what to conserve, what strategies to use, and the effectiveness of the schemes.

SciENcE-baSED approach

Multiple Scales

MEaSuriNG rESuLtS “How is the biodiversity doing?” “Are our actions having the intended impact?”

taking action Place-based actions locally, regionally and globally

Developing Strategies Working with partners to develop suitable strategies to combat conservation, taking into account socio-political and economical factors

Setting Goals and priorities Long-term survival of all biodiversity on Earth

Global habitat assessments

Integrated mitigation planning to balance the needs of planned development and nature conservation

Ecoregional assessments

Key initiatives

urgent issues

regions Worldwide

Natural habitats

people and conservation Are we using sound science to protect ecologically important lands and waters? And are we improving the lives of people?

preservation of cultural heritage and livelihoods?

provision of basic needs?

Empowering indigenous communities

investing in nature

responsible development

Loss of land?

For initiatives to also fund conservation?

conservation Lands Balancing growing development needs with those of conservation

Migratory birds

coral reefs

rainforests

climate change

conservation action

Deserts and aridlands

Grasslands and prairies

forests

oceans and coasts

rivers and lakes

According to information on its website, TNC’s mission is to “preserve the plants, animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive” 22. In line with the operations of most other nature conservation agencies, TNC is focused on the preservation of “nature” and its ecological processes, and not all initiatives integrate community involvement in the larger strategy. By limiting human intervention and activities in the sites they operate in, external donations become the main source of funding for its initiatives.

coNSErVatioN actioN pLaNNiNG

healthcare

Water food Shelter Sanitation Education

\\ Case-study\ The Nature Conservancy (TNC)

Figure 14. Analysis of The Nature Conservancy’s “Conservation by Design” methodology

for conflicting reasons. For some sites such as national parks in the United States, existing guidelines are already sufficient for their management and protection; for others, such as Oman’s Arabian Oryx Sanctuary (delisted in 2007), recommendations set out in the convention conflict with their own development plans. There is an under-representation of “natural” sites on the list, as site managers and conservation groups prefer to limit visitor numbers and human intervention on these sites. Although changes to the convention were made to recognise the impact of human activities on shaping these heritage sites, there is still a tendency for sites to “forcefully frozen” at particular moments in time, divorcing the conservation of physical monuments and environments from any considerations of context, processes and change. Intangible culture, such as oral traditions, craftsmanship and customs, and the socioeconomic conditions of local communities, are often sacrificed during the “protection” of a site for heritage listing as well as during the physical transformation of the site into a tourist destination. UNESCO asserts that its key mission is “to contribute to the building of peace, the eradication of poverty, sustainable development and intercultural dialogue” (2011) 23. It is an irony then that, more than twenty years after the Bedu groups were forcefully resettled as part of the conditions for Petra to attain world heritage status, the “cultural space of the Bedu in Petra and Wadi Rum” is now inscribed on the same UNESCO’s “Intangible Heritage List”.

Conservation versus Preservation

There are many overlaps in our current understanding and definition of the terms “conservation” and “preservation”. In general terms, they both refer to the protection of something, from material objects such as buildings, to less quantifiable ones like ecosystems. In more specific heritage terminology, the term “conservation” would refer to the protection of natural resources or “nature”, while “preservation” would refer to the protection of cultural artefacts, monuments and architecture. Despite the many similarities in definition and understanding, the terminology used reflects a certain attitude towards heritage and its protection. “Preservation” suggests an insistence at maintaining status quo, focusing largely on the subject to be preserved and protected. This tendency to apply exclusionary definitions onto complex realities reflects a general failure at integrating the different processes and change which “conservation” seeks to acknowledge. As such, the ambition of this project (and of the design studies) will be focused exclusively on the concept of “conservation” when referring to heritage protection.

“For us preservation is a tool for transformation. If you look at the problem critically, but with creative thinking, you can always invent very powerful strategies for reuse in collaboration with local political systems, without necessarily heavy physical transformation.” OMA24

Heritage Redefined

Although this research is focused on heritage conservation in the context of world heritage sites, the concept of heritage conservation has a larger implication on our practice today. With globalisation and the export of modern architecture across the globe, heritage becomes a tool for understanding and designing with site specificity. Heritage conservation is ultimately not about preserving a space in time, but setting the stage for its actors to inhabit it, and allowing the continue shaping and refinement of the place.

What is heritage and why is it important to us as landscape architects? According to Dictionary.com, “heritage is something that comes or belongs to one by reason of birth, as is an inherited lot or portion” 25. Due to the sphere and scope of the word “heritage”, UNESCO has compartmentalised its meaning into two key classifications – the physical and the intangible. Under the world heritage convention, its definition is limited to refer only to physical environments; while the intangible heritage convention acknowledges that “traditions or living expressions inherited from our ancestors and passed on to our descendants” should also be included in its definition. Because our world is not merely composed of unrelated objects in space, our understanding of heritage needs to move beyond recognising physical objects or monuments in a landscape, but to also recognise the intangible patterns in our environment and include the social relations in between.

Physical Heritage If we borrow Kevin Lynch’s definition of an image of a city, then our understanding of “heritage” needs to be composed of three parts: identity, structure and meaning (1960) 26. The elements in our built environment, such as buildings, streets, parks, provide a structure for our spatial experiences, from which meaning can be built upon. In the same way, the definition of built heritage should, in addition to components such as architecture and monuments, include also the invisible elements such as patterns, grain, texture and scale. The clear distinction in categories is a suggestion of current definitions and attitudes towards “nature” and “culture”. Although nature is composed of multiple interconnected ecological processes of which humans are a part of, there is a tendency to define “nature” as a form of pure wilderness that exclude all considerations of human interference, otherwise known as “culture”. This creates problems of authenticity in preservation and conservation efforts because nature and culture are constantly evolving processes that cannot be defined by specific starts nor end dates. Therefore, categorisation of heritage sites needs to move beyond current set definitions, and require sites to consider all the physical conditions in the conservation process.

Environment

Intangible Culture

Socio-economics

T SS ES SM EN A LL A VE R O

To RI Vi uri SM sit st or in fa fra cil st iti ru es ct ur e

V EN

an d

ct s

IL T

Heritage

ag N IR e sit cli atu ON es m ra at l p M e, ro EN c riv e er ss T sy es st on em s IN s, ite ge , s TA ol uc og h Im N y, as pa G et IB ct c. s L an E d in CU te gr LT it y U to RE SO lo c C al cu A IO lt u Ec cce -E re C on ss O t om o ic bas NO gr ic ow n MI C th ee ds S

in AG te gr E it y to he r it

fo rm s an d

Aesthetics

Im pa

ES T

H In no E va TI t io C S n in st ra te gi es BU

> STUDY 02 Project: TEA OFF! Site: MUNNAR, INDIA

Tourism Management

+ Multiple-programming to meet the demands of urban development and desires + Maintenance of working landscapes + Heritage sites as working landscapes and not â&#x20AC;&#x153;museumsâ&#x20AC;? + Plantations both for production and tourism + Supports variety of tourism options

Figures 15/ 16. Golf courses in tea plantations.

Overall

Golf is big business in Asia and the Middle East, as â&#x20AC;&#x153;few other western exports carry the symbolic power of golfâ&#x20AC;? (Gould 2010) 27. Golf courses are sprouting up in the most obscure regions of China, and parched Dubai boasts seven golf courses designed by leading golf personalities. The development of golf courses, as with other sort of urban development in the developing region, often brings a list of issues, such as displacement of existing villages, loss of valuable agricultural land, disruption to local livelihoods and loss of precious ecological habitats.

themes

i a m

Golf courses are often constructed in some of the most valuable land available, as dictated by its irrigation and cultivation demands. By integrating existing tea plantations into the design of new golf courses, valuable cultural landscapes such as these could be conserved and remain productive, while allowing continual exploitation of its scenic value. By retaining its productivity, the livelihoods of local communities can be retained, growing job opportunities without taking away existing ones.

COMMUNITY

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Poverty is hunger. Poverty is lack of shelter. Poverty is being sick and not being able to see a doctor. Poverty is not having access to school and not knowing how to read. Poverty is not having a job, is fear of the future living one day at a time. Poverty is losing a child to illnesses brought about by unclean water. Poverty is powerlessness, lack of representation and freedom.â&#x20AC;? The World Bank Poverty Net28

COMMUNITY

waterways

water treatment facilities

water infrastructure

universities

theatres

sports + fitness facilities

shopping malls

sewage treatment facilities

schools

roads

recreational parks

railway stations

ports

nature reserves

museums

markets

libraries

irrigation

housing

hotels + other accomodation

hospitals

health centres

government + administration

golf courses

farms

factories + industries

exhibition + convention centres

cultural centres

community centres

car parks

bus stations

bus shelters

banks + financial instituitions

airports

built + planned programmes

Can design reduce poverty?

SOCIAL GOALS ACHEIVED THROUGH DESIGN CLIMATE CHANGE PREPAREDNESS EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION FLORA + FAUNA CONSERVATION FOOD HEALTHCARE HERITAGE CONSERVATION JOBS LAND RIGHTS SANITATION PERSONAL SECURITY SHELTER CLEAN WATER

The needs of the developing regions are real. Access to clean water, shelter, food, education, and jobs. These are just some of the many concerns that both authorities and the average person will have to grapple with. Every day.

Landscape architects are part of a wider community of “construction professionals” – including engineers, architects, planners – that are responsible for bringing some of these basic needs to people. Yet, it is not everyday that a design professional is commended for the successful construction of a “bridge school” in a remote Chinese province (Aga Khan Development Network, 2011) 29. The profession, for a long time, has selected the best of its bests based on extravagance and display than the ability to address pressing development issues. Some groups have begun questioning and actively addressing the role of design in tackling these larger concerns of the world, as evidenced by the Netherlands Architecture Institute’s publication “Architecture of

Figure 17. Matrix showing how land development can be used to achieve social goals

Consequence”. There are opportunities for the landscape architecture practice to contribute towards this initiative, which currently takes place largely in the form of probono volunteerism outside of commercial practice or through United Nations initiatives. Given that any form of community development is dependent on capital and funding, it is the ambition of this research to go beyond the speculative and the pro-bono, and integrate the concept of community advancement into every design project in practice.

Aesthetics

Environment

Intangible Culture

+ Expanding site's usage beyond a little-visited musuem

The site of the current Malay Heritage Museum is the former Istana Kampong Glam, home to the former Sultan’s descendants. The museum sits within the Kampong Glam Conservation Area, and the family was relocated from the compound when it was converted into a museum as part of conservation efforts. Some of the original furniture used by the Sultan’s family now forms part of the museum’s exhibits and heritage collection. (Although neither museum nor site has world heritage status, some of the convention’s conservation guidelines are applied here, in line with current conservation practices.)

Socio-economics

SS ES SM EN

Tourism Management

VE R

To RI Vi uri SM sit st or in fa fra cil st iti ru es ct ur e

VI RO

an d

ct s

IL T

Im pa

Heritage

ag e sit cli tu N es m ra at l p M e, ro EN riv ce er ss T sy es st on em s IN s, ite ge , s TA ol uc og h Im N y, as pa G et I ct B c. s L an E d C in te UL gr ity TU to RE SO lo ca C l I cu O A lt u Ec cce -E re C on ss om to ON b ic as gr ic OM ow n th ee IC ds S

in AG te gr E it y to he r it

fo rm s an d

te gi es

st ra

t io n

In no va

ES TH

IC S

> STUDY 03 Project: istana kampong glam community centre Site: Kampong Glam, SINGAPORE

Overall

+ Expanding site's usage beyond a little-visited musuem + Rekindling site's original symbolic meaning to the community

Figure 18. Existing museum

Conventional conservation guidelines dictate that only physical evidences of heritage such as building’s architecture form be preserved, thus they do not question the transformation the original Istana into a museum for exhibiting “culture”. However, the building today has lost its original significance as the social and cultural centre of the local Malay, Arab and Muslim communities, and remains nothing more than a government showpiece for foreign dignitaries. This series of collages is a test at injecting contemporary programmes, such as a football field, to reclaim the Istana’s symbolic identity and function, while allowing the existing museum to remain.

themes

i a m Figures 19/20. Day and night collage of proposed soccer field in the forecourt

ENVIRONMENT

ENVIRONMENT Beyond sustainability

For years, Ian McHarg preached the ecological method for planning urban regions, arguing that cities need to work with nature’s intrinsic cycles to achieve maximum benefits in land development (1969) 30. While there is a need for ecological considerations in planning and development, its strong emphasis on ecological process over the city’s needs makes it an unpopular approach, especially in the developing regions. In the last few years, with the massive surge in food prices and concerns over depleting energy sources, the term “sustainability” has overnight become the latest trend and buzzword among construction professionals. The concept of “sustainability” is tied to the idea of a longterm beneficial relationship between all parties. Because the built environment consumes more resources than it can produce, to achieve any sort of “sustainability” in an urban environment would require the concept of the “unbuilt” (Bhabha, 2010).

Aesthetics

Intangible Culture

Limited tourism development can + fund conservation activities + increase awareness both locally and internationally

Socio-economics

Tourism Management

A LL VE RA O

To RI Vi uri SM sit st or in fa fra cil st iti ru es ct ur e

V Na IRO

Environment

G E

in te gr it

ER IT A an d

ct s

IL T

Im pa

Heritage

SS ES SM EN

he r it

fo rm s an d

te gi es

st ra

t io n

In no va

ES TH

IC S

> STUDY 04 Project: RAFT AWAY! Site: THREE PARALLEL RIVERS OF YUNNAN, CHINA

Overall

+ Provision of local firewood supply and employment

+ Reforestation of native plant species + Zoning to manage logging

Development on natural heritage sites is limited. This often has detrimental effects on the local populations living on or close to these sites, such as those living along the riverbanks in this reserve. Most communities live in remote villages without access to basic needs such as water, food an education, forcing younger generations to leave to work in larger towns and cities. RAFT AWAY is a set of speculative ideas that challenge current approaches towards conservation of natural sites, by suggesting limited tourism activities to keep local employment and initiate development of basic infrastructure.

themes

i a m b

Figures 21/ 22/ 23. Introduction of minimally invasive activities within heritage sites to allow for tourism and development

SECTION 25-25

SECTION 24-24

SECTION 23-23

SECTION 22-22

SECTION 21-21

SECTION 20-20

SECTION 19-19

SECTION 18-18

SECTION 17-17

SECTION 16-16

SECTION 15-15

SECTION 14-14

SECTION 13-13

SECTION 12-12

SECTION 11-11

SECTION 10-10

SECTION 09-09

SECTION 08-08

SECTION 07-07

recording petra, jordan

SECTION 41-41

SECTION 40-40

SECTION 39-39

SECTION 38-38

SECTION 37-37

SECTION 36-36

SECTION 35-35

SECTION 34-34

SECTION 33-33

SECTION 32-32

SECTION 31-31

SECTION 30-30

SECTION 29-29

SECTION 28-28

SECTION 27-27

SECTION 26-26

AMMAN

PETRA

JORDAN

CO-ODINATES CAPITAL TIME ZONE

31.57 N 36.56 E Amman UTC+2

LAND AREA LAND USE

89,342 sq km Arable land| 3.32% Permanent crops| 1.18% Other| 95.5% Irrigated land| 820 sq km

POPULATION

6,508,271 Urban| 79% of total population USD 5,400 per capita (PPP) 1.6% annual rate of change

GDP URBANISATION

PETRA co-ordinates location AREA unesco

30.32 N 35.44 E Maâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;an Governorate 264 sq km* Cultural

*Note: Site covered in this project measures approximately 65sq km.

SETTING THE CONTEXT Heritage

Petra, the famed rose-red city carved out of sandstone cliffs, is located in the mountainous basin that forms the eastern flank of Wadi Araba in Jordan. The site achieved world heritage status in 1985, filed under the “cultural” inscription. “The Outstanding Universal Value of Petra resides in the vast extent of elaborate tomb and temple architecture; religious high places; the remnant channels, tunnels and diversion dams that combined with a vast network of cisterns and reservoirs which controlled and conserved seasonal rains, and the extensive archaeological remains including of copper mining, temples, churches and other public buildings. The fusion of Hellenistic architectural facades with traditional Nabataean rock-cut temple/ tombs including the Khasneh, the Urn Tomb, the Palace Tomb, the Corinthian Tomb and the Deir (“monastery”) represents a unique artistic achievement and an outstanding architectural ensemble of the first centuries BC to AD. The varied archaeological remains and architectural monuments from prehistoric times to the medieval periods bear exceptional testimony to the now lost civilisations which succeeded each other at the site.” (UNESCO, 2011) 31. The city was founded by the Nabataeans in the 6th century, and is known for its stone-cut architecture as well as water management strategies. The site of Petra Archaeological Park (PAP) spreads across approximately 264 square kilometres, and includes the main Petra Museum, Little Petra and Sidd Al-Ahmar (where Wadi Musa Waste Water Treatment Works and a new Ecological Demonstration Area is located), as well as two recent Bedu settlements, Um Sayhoun and Al Beidha. The nearest town is Wadi Musa, which has seen rapid urbanisation resulting from the rise of tourism.

Figures 24/25/26/27/28/ 29. Site photos of Petra. SOURCE: Author’s own.

Community

Prior to its listing as a cultural heritage site, Petra was home to as many as five different indigenous Bedu tribes. The groups include nomadic tribes like the Ammarin who spend summers here because of cooler mountainous climate and winters more than 100 kilometres north; the semi-nomadic and sedentary Bdul who live in tents during summers and put up in the warmer caves during winters; the sedentary Liyathna who have inhabited neighbouring Wadi Musa. Animal husbandry, particularly the grazing and herding of sheep, goats and camels, is the main source of livelihood among these tribes, and determines the type of nomadism practiced by these communities. Since settling in the region more than 150 years ago, some communities have started cultivation of cereals (namely barley and wheat) and fruit trees (such as olives and grapes), and used them to trade for other items with the settled communities at El-Gi (or the present Wadi Musa).

When Petra attained world heritage listing, the indigenous populations living in the area were forcefully re-settled into the towns of Um Sayhoun and Al Beidha. There were two main reasons for their relocation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; to reduce the impacts their grazing activities brought onto the fragile sandstone site, and to minimise local contact with the expected influx of tourists. Grazing within the site has been banned; but local communities have been previously assured allocation of agricultural land as part of the conservation and development proposals, to ensure continuation of their livelihoods and traditions. More than twenty years since the re-settlement, most of the original development proposals have yet been materialised, apart from the establishment of a small health centre and primary school at Um Sayhoun. A large part of the local population is solely dependent on the tourism economy for their livelihoods, commuting to the museum daily to run visitor facilities such as drinks stalls, souvenir shops, transport services (horses, camels and donkeys); as well as budget accommodation and outdoor grill picnics outside the museum.

Figures 30/31/32/33/34. Local Bedu community. SOURCE: Authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own.

Nomadic range >100KM

SUMMERS IN PE TRA WINTERS ELSEWHERE

BEDOUIN COMMUNITIES + REGIONAL RANGE

O I-N

DIC R

A N G E: 8k m

4 km

2 km 1k m

INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES + GRAZING/ HERDING RANGe

LEGEND permanent settlement/ town summer residence (tents) winter residence (caves)

SETTLEMENT LAYOUT IN PETRA

Environment

Jordan’s climate is arid, but Petra’s average elevation at 910m above sea level results in a milder microclimate. Summer temperatures can reach a maximum of 45°C and winter temperature may fall below 0°C. Annual rainfall measures approximately 200mm, much of it occurring only during the winter months of December and January. The site is split into three main agricultural zones, marginal arid zone, semi-arid zone and semihumid zones, supporting a range of native vegetation and agricultural crops.

LEGEND WATER SHED WADIS (or dry streams)

WATER CATCHMENT

WATER CATCHMENT + SOIL GEOLOGY Information source: Flood Analysis And Mitigation For Petra Area In Jordan’ (Al-Weshah and El-Khoury, 1999) 32

LEGEND limestone with soil cover sandstone

GEOLOGY

NATIVE VEGETATION + AGRICULTURE Information source: Documenting Deforestation at Sidd Al-Ahmar, Petra Region (Addison, 2006) 33

Figures 35-39. Site photos along the Siq to the Treasury.

Figures 40-44. Site photos of Petra geological formations.

Development + Tourism

As part of the Jordanian government’s greater economic development plans, Petra has been designated the country’s primary tourism centre after capital Amman (USAID, 2004) 34. There are on-going plans to develop the tourism infrastructure required to attract and support the growing number of visitors and investment. Since 2007, Petra’s additional status as one of the “new seven wonders of the world” in a worldwide poll conducted by “The New7Wonders Foundation” has brought more attention and consequently higher visitor numbers to the site (Sheikh-Miller, 2007) 35. While significant efforts have been made to consolidate tourism planning and development in recent years, the same enthusiasm has not been applied to community development efforts, especially among the resettled Bedu groups. The fast-growing local populations have led to increasing discontent with the lack of facilities and progression at the new settlements, pushing younger member of the tribes to return to living in the museum. Figures 45/46. View of Wadi Musa.

STAKEHOLDERS Ministry of Tourism & Antiquities Department of Antiquities The Petra Archaeological Park (PAP) Petra Development and Tourism Region Authority (PDTRA) Petra Region Tourism Authority (PRTA) Petra National Trust (PNT)

LEGEND

highways main roads secondary roads desert tracks

TRANSPORT NETWORK

sidd al-ahmar al-beidha um sayhoun wadi musa

LEGEND visitor centre monuments/ sites tourist routes settlement/ village

TOURIST FACILITIES

VISITOR STATISTICS Information source: Petra National Trust {The maximum daily capacity set by UNESCO’s site management plan is set at 4,000. The actual number of visitors allowed is halved, as there is only a single access into the site via the Siq.) Average daily visitor number > 3,000 (year-round) > 4,000 (peak tourist season)

key visitor facilities

VISITOR FACILITIES Information source: Preliminary Risk Assessment for the Petra Arcaheological Park: Recording Strategy (Cesaro et. Al. 2010) 36 With additional information from news article published in The Jordan Times. ‘Students map natural, man-made risks to Petra’s integrity’ (Luck, 2010) 37 There are currently four key visitor routes within Petra Museum: 1. [Main Spine] Siq and Outer Siq (Street of Facades) to Qasr Al Bint 2. Outer Siq (Street of Facades) to High Place of Sacrifice & High Place of Sacrifice to Wadi Farasa (Qasr Al Bint) 3. (Opposite Theatre) to Royal Tombs, to Petra Church until Qasr Al Bint 4. Restaurants to the Monastery Key assessment findings: • heritage site lacked defined boundaries, nor core and buffer zones • lack of signage (information and directional), toilets, bins and seating • high concentration of stalls at the Treasury and Theatre • simultaneous entry and exit of visitors through the Siq resulting in overcrowding at peak arrival times, often exceeding carrying capacities set out by the site management plans • visitor experience highlights (in descending order): monuments, scenic landscapes, hiking, interactions with local residents

EXISTING ROUTES + FACILITIES

:0600 hrs :0900 hrs

:1200 hrs

53 :1500 hrs

:1600 hrs (summer) :1800 hrs (winter) :2130 hrs (night)

LEGEND CONCENTRATION OF VISITOR FACILITIES (FOOD/ BEVERAGE, TOILETS, SOUVENIR STALLS ETC.) WALKING TRAIL HIKING TRAIL

VISITOR TRAFFIC

Figure 47. SWOT Analysis

OTHER THREATS Information source: Petra National Trust • urban encroachment and indiscriminate development within the heritage site • site’s geological stability, especially in highly trafficked areas such as the Siq • flood risks in winter • management of view corridors • vehicular usage within heritage site • use of exotic vegetation within heritage site • staging of mass events within site

\\FOLLIE\

\\FOLLIE 01\ Contestation

The site of this follie - the dune - is a site of contestation. Dunes serve a larger ecological purpose and should not be breached, but its proximity to the beach means it is a highly soughtafter site for residential development. Economics and development often win in the contest for land, but not without deliberating effects.

\\FOLLIE\

Object 1

Object 2

\\Follie 02\ Processes When two physical objects are put together to achieve new spatial forms, the shadows cast enriches the overall experience of physical forms. 57

\\ Precedent\ Garden Of Forgiveness (Hadiqat As-Samah)

Location Beirut, Lebanon Landscape architect Gustafson Porter Project typology Urban Park Project area 1 ha Client Solidere Project collaborators Imad Gemayel Architects/ Arup/ Dar Al-Handasah/ Davis Langdon Status Under construction

The scheme is the winning entry of an international competition held in March 2000. The garden is located at the centre of Beirut’s Central Business District, nestled among key cultural and religious sites. Given the strategic location of its site, it is the project ambition for the garden to become a symbol of unity, following years of divisions and unrest from civil war.

The highlight of this project lies in its clever integration of the archaeological remains within the design and functions of the garden, rejecting any tendency to “encase” the ruins as so often seen in other similar projects. The remains belong to five successive civilisations, constantly revealed and re-contextualised throughout the garden, creating a sense of collective identity and timelessness that encapsulates the ambition of the project.

Figure 48. PLAN/ SECTION/ PERSPECTIVE. Source: Gustafson Porter. http://www.gustafson-porter.com/ projects/project19-shorelinewalk/holder.html

\\FOLLIE\

\\Follie 03\Re-jigging By making small organisational moves with onsite materials (the rocks in this case), I attempted to draw attention to features that would otherwise go unnoticed.

\\FOLLIE\

\\Follie 04\ Gestures Expanding on the ideas in “Re-gigging”, this set of follies work with the idea of using an alien object to mark features in “natural” landscapes. While the original features are eventually hidden by successive waves, the alien markers on both ends continue to mark their existence.

JUGGLING THE THEMES

â&#x20AC;&#x153;The regional composition of culture is the sum of all of its components. The Mount of Olives is singular, it is a metaphor for any other place. To prepare a plan for such a place is a tremendous challenge for an architect. The notion of a client and a user gains a different meaning than in any other project. The program has many dimensions and the scope of the plan encompasses different expanses of time. In its extremities and complexities the mountain points towards a deeper meaning in architecture and environmental design. Reality and abstraction interact in graphic documents that construct the image of a place.â&#x20AC;&#x153; Rahamimoff and Dyer38

JUGGLING THE THEMES

Tourism planning is a very broad term, which is best defined as the application of planning concepts and processes at the three geographical scales of region, destination and site (Gunn & Var, 2002) 39. For the purpose of this project, the following operational scales have been defined:

- LAND USE STUDY at regional scale: a 65 square kilometre site within PAP; - MASTER PLAN at destination scale: Petra Museum and the adjacent towns (Wadi Musa and Um Sayhoun); and - SITE PLAN at site scale: Petra Museum. The particular ambition of this research is to juggle three broad but mutually valuable concepts of heritage conservation, community development and sustainable tourism on a single site, and these will be discussed through the design moves made in each of the next five sets of studies.

Environment

Intangible Culture

Socio-economics

EN T SS ES SM A LL VE RA O

ct s

V EN

H ER I

T IL BU

Heritage

To RI Vi uri SM sit st or in fa fra cil st iti ru es ct ur e

ge N IR sit cli atu ON es m ra at l p M e, ro EN riv ce er ss T s y es st on em s IN s, ite ge , s TA ol u c og h Im N y, as G pa et IB ct c. s L an E d C in te UL gr ity TU to RE SO lo ca C l I cu O A ltu Ec cce -E re C on ss om to ON b ic as gr ic OM ow n th ee IC ds S

i n AG te gr E ity to he rit a

fo rm s d an

Aesthetics

Im pa

In n

tio

ES TH ov ET a I

st ra te gi e

> STUDY 05 Project: AN AUTHORITY’S VISION

Tourism Management

Overall

+ Increased routes to increase carrying capacity of heritage site + Increase in tourist facilities + Increase in tourism infrastructure + Connections between three key tourist sites

+ Infrastructure to encourage cultural continuation (eg. story-telling, food) for tourism - Loss of traditional livelihoods, settlement patterns and culture as a result of tourism + Reforestation in the buffer zones - Availability of irrigation to sustain reforestation - Few to no considerations for site processes + Reorganisation of facilities within site to protect views and site aesthetics - Impact of tourist facilities on site's aesthetics?

DENSE URBAN GROWTH ACROSS WADI MUSA

LEGEND roads core heritage zone buffer heritage zone visitor centre monuments/ sites tourist routes settlement/ village

INITIAL LAND USE STUDY scale nts 66

The local authority or private consortium is usually the main client in a destination development project of this scale, and thus the main author of the site development brief. AN AUTHORITY’S VISION is developed using the brief published by the PDTRA’s Request for Fee Proposal for A Strategic Master Plan for Petra Region (2011) 40, supplemented by UNESCO’s guidelines for development of world heritage sites. The brief reflects a conventional approach towards destination planning, that is, one focused on the priority of maximising visitor numbers to the site. This study is however not a viable nor realistic option, as the site has already exceeded maximum visitor capacity, and any substantial increase visitor numbers will cause irreversible damage to the site.

pit stop between little petra and petra heritage parks visitor centre + entry key visitor hubs inside park

SITE PLAN OF HERITAGE

MASTER PLAN scale 1/25.000

LEGEND core heritage zone primary “museum” site secondary “museum” site visitor centre buffer heritage zone

themes

reforestation & reserve

i a

recreation areas agriculture key township development

little petra

satellite towns

roads

MASTER PLAN 1

creation of core heritage and buffer zones to include neighbouring towns and urban areas

potential development of wadi musa as heritage city/ limiting expansion of urban areas

expansion of um sayhoun into satellite town

expansion of al-beidha into satellite towN

little petra visitor centre

petra visitor centre

recreation park (for locals)/ tourist summer accommodation

recreation park for locals (for activities such as grill barbeques)

petra

1 6

wadi musa 2

SIDD AL-AHMAR AGRICULTURE DEMONSTRATION AREA wadi musa waste water treatment plant al-beidha settlement um sayhoun settlement

LAND USE STUDY scale 1/75.000

limited high-end low density hotels within buffer zones to protect views from heritage park

re-orientation of main visitor centre to protect views of surrdounding landscapes

67 1 limit high density urban growth to key corridor away from heirtage park

WADI MUSA 2

PARK

LEGEND key development areas tourist route (paving type 1) tourist route (paving type 2) tourist route (tracks) signages rest pavilions monuments/ features feature tree cluster

SITE PLAN scale 1/10.000

tourist routes (paving type 1) + pavilions + directional tree markers

CIRCULATION NETWORKS LEGEND main visitor centre park visitor facilities vehicular entry/ exit

EXTERNAL ROADS PEDESTRIAN ROUTES CYCLING TRACKS DONKEYS CAMELS + CARRIAGEWAY

camels + carriages

summer

donkeys

bike paths

CONNECTION TO LITTLE PETRA

secondary entrance/ exit

main entrance/ exit

VISITOR ROUTES

> STUDY 06 Project: A PRODUCTIVE MUSEUM

Taking the side of the local Bedu communities in this iteration, A PRODUCTIVE MUSEUM is a preliminary land use study, looking at staging the surface for the Beduâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s various land activities, such as grazing, agriculture and recreational grill picnics. The local economy base is diversified while tourism retains its importance, but there are no provisions for expansion of existing tourist infrastructure and visitor facilities. Despite the good intentions, this design is a failure as only the siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s topography is considered in the design, ignoring other critical environmental factors required for the success of a productive landscape, such as irrigation volumes and sources, and soil condition.

2 SECTION 12-12

3 SECTION 21-21 1

SECTION 26-26

INITIAL LAND USE STUDY scale nts g in az a) ) a) gr ci ) ic ina / ni ) t n p ra nt oe ua ife ltla les io e e h t a c q a p li oc p a h a c s o ia st s ru a s s ac chi re nd pe ni cu st ta fo t a ni ato uer (Pi (Pis ) e u r oa ia ( J r Q io r er k ( ch chio ron g a `a (C a ta

LEGEND ROADS KEY HERITAGE SITE

VISITOR CENTRE KEY TOURIST ROUTES MONUMENTS

r b O is sta s `A aro es s P Pi egu C erm tla ian ata K t. A stin (Cr M le ur Pa ro Za

LOCAL SETTLEMENT CEREALS + SUMMER VEGETABLES FRUIT TREES TREE CROPS REFORESTATION + GRAZING LANDS

themes

Heritage

Environment

Intangible Culture

Socio-economics

= Restoration of the parkland landscape that was once Petra - Extensive agriculture may cause damage to existing and unearthed monuments

EN T

SS A LL VE RA O

To RI Vi uri SM sit st or in fa fra cil st iti ru es ct ur e

LAND USE ACTIVITIES

tomatoes sqaush grapes potatoes onions beans wheat barley

an d fo Im T rm pa H s ER ct s an IT d in AG te gr E ity to EN he rit VI ag R N e sit cli atu ON es m ra at l p M e, ro EN c riv e er ss T sy es st on em s IN s, ite ge , s TA ol uc og h Im N y, as pa G et IB ct c. s L an E d in CU te gr LT ity U to RE SO lo c C al cu A IO ltu Ec cce -E re C on ss O t om o ic bas NO gr ic ow n MI C th ee ds S

ie s

te g

st ra

in n

TH ET

no va t

Aesthetics

s crop tree io ch s pista s olive figs ots apric ds almon

25%

a m

Tourism Management

Overall

+ Increase types of tourism activities - No increase in tourist routes

SECTION 26-26

SECTION 21-21

SECTION 12-12

RE-FORESTATION

CEREAL CROPS

RE-FORESTATION

HERITAGE SITE

limited agricultural activities within main heritage sites

LITTLE PETRA VISITOR CENTRE

AGRICULTURAL LAND AROUND settlement

HERITAGE SITE

UM SAYHOUN SETTLEMENT

TREE CROPS + FRUIT TREES

AL BEIDHA SETTLEMENT

RE-FORESTATION

WADI MUSA

TREE CROPS + FRUIT TREES

RE-FORESTATION

\\ Precedent\ National Tourist Routes Location nORWAY Designers 50 architects, landscape architects and artists Project typology Roadways (landscape + infrastructure) Project area 18 roads nationwide Client Norwegian Public Roads Administration Status Under Construction (expected completion 2020)

The Norwegian National Tourist Route is a nationwide scenic roadway spanning the coastline of Norway. It is composed of 18 smaller sections of roadways, comprising infrastructure, rest stops and associated development at selected points along each section. The project was conceived as a nationwide tourist attraction to feature unique Norwegian landscapes otherwise inaccessible to public access. Despite the lack of world heritage status, the project is a commendable example of how “natural” heritage sites could be developed to accommodate tourism activities without damaging the ecological integrity of the site. In a similar fashion, the concept of the tourist route can be utilised on “cultural” heritage sites in danger of exceeding visitor capacities, to minimise damages on archaeological integrity of the site.

Figures 49-52. Norway Tourist route. Source: Detour.

e ag rit

e sit

Environment

Intangible Culture

Socio-economics

HERDING AGRICULTURE

BEDUL WINTER RESIDENCE BEDUL SUMMER RESIDENCE

Activities in Petra PEAK TOURIST SEASON TOURIST TRANSPORT COFFEE SHOPS + SOUVENIRS

JANUARY

FEBRUARY

MARCH

Overall

MAY

JUNE

+ Building self-sufficiency in local communities through agriculture + Building diversity into local economy + Tourists are source of extra hands

APRIL

JULY

+ Increase in tourist routes during peak season; current routes maintained during off-peak season + Allowance for alternative forms of tourism while maintaining current carrying capacity of site

Tourism Management

+ Allowances for land production, restoration and regeneration - Availability of irrigation to sustain agriculture and reforestation - Extensive agriculture and traffice damaging to sandstone geology - Landuse rotation does not take into account climatic and site conditions

+ Defining extents of urban development (in Wadi Musa and its satellite settlements) - Extensive landuse all year may cause damage to existing and unearthed monuments

Heritage

+ Redefining landuse and programmatic possibilities within a conservation site

Aesthetics

> STUDY 07 Project: SHUFFLING AROUND THE PARKLAND!

re as c. E ultu h t R c l uc , e S d , s gy TU loca an IC he te olo L E i s o o s M e U t G ty t T on , ge gi e O ds C ity ur S trate N nee TA tegri EN ses ems E tegr I ct C L O s M I ic th R s st ru n n t i i B s e C n E I N oc sy ET i SM fras ies -E ba ow G nd H nd r r H ation N ts a O s to ic gr RO al p rive RI st in cilit T cts a I I T A v r L c s U ri r fa C ce m V tu te, I pa T pa u ES no A In EN Na lima SO Ac cono TO To isito BU Im IN Im V E c

rm fo

74 AUGUST

SEPTEMBER

OCTOBER

NOVEMBER

DECEMBER

According to historical records, before the Ottomans cleared out the surrounding forests to supply timber for building the empire’s rail network, Petra and its surrounding landscapes resembled “European parklands” and not the arid desert it is today (Addison, 2006) 41. The forests were grazed by sheep and goats, leaving only canopies of the `Ar`ar (Juniperus phoenicia), Kermes Oaks (Quercus coccifera), Palestinian Pistachios (Pistachio palestina) and Wild Almonds (Amygdalus korschinskyii).

PEAK SUMMER

reforestation/ grazing

agriculture

LEGEND

OVERALL SITE PLAN scale 1/20.000

reforestation/ grazing

agriculture

settlement/ village

monuments/ sites

tourist routes

visitor facilities

heritage site

roads

LEGEND

PEAK WINTER

reforestation/ grazing

agriculture

LEGEND

PEAK TOURIST SEASON

reforestation/ grazing

agriculture

LEGEND

i a m b

themes

SHUFFLING AROUND THE PARKLAND is an attempt at establishing a land use timetable for meeting the demands of various tourism activities and those of the local communities. Ten visitor routes are proposed in this study, but only the current four remain open throughout the year. The scheduling of visitor routes are timed with the communities habitation of the site, and The rest of the routes are accessible only during peak tourist seasons during Spring and Autumn, allowing local communities to pitch up in summer and access to the winter caves.

Aesthetics

Intangible Culture

Socio-economics

A SS ES SM

EN T

Tourism Management

A LL

TO U To RI

Environment

O VE R

an d

ER I

ct s

BU IL Im T

Heritage

Vi uri SM sit st or in fa fra cil st iti ru es ct ur e

ag N IR e sit cli atu ON r e m a M at l p e, ro E riv ce N er ss T sy es st on em s IN s, ite ge , s TA ol uc og h Im N y, as pa G et IB ct c. s an LE d in CU te gr LT ity U to RE SO lo c C al cu A IO ltu Ec cce -E re C on ss om to ON ic bas gr ic OM ow n th ee IC ds S

in AG te gr E ity to he rit

fo rm s an d te gi es ra

tio n

In no va

A ES TH

ET I

> STUDY 08 Project: RE-LIVING PETRA

Overall

+ Increase in tourism infrastructure and tourist facilities + Viewing route (both for pedestrians and vehicles)along heritage site

Taking cue from the issues and aims outlined on the intangible heritage listing, the key objective of RE-LIVING PETRA was to allow the five Bedu tribes access into their traditional â&#x20AC;&#x153;culturalâ&#x20AC;? lands. The move allows the re-establishment of their settlement patterns and cultural traditions by establishing land use programmes to accommodate these needs. The key tourist facilities, such as tourist routes, and other activities are limited and adjusted according to these needs. A tourist route running along the perimeter of the heritage park allows visual access while limiting overall visitor numbers into the fragile site.

<9% slope 9-25% slope

Reforestation/ grazing reserve within heritage buffer zone

wadi musa heritage city: - dense urban development limited to area surrounding existing town centre - development of transport hub away from current town centre

themes

i a m b

development of um sayhoun into satellite town

local settlement/ residential facilities integrated with surrounding agricultural land

LEGEND petra heritage park visitor centre petra tourist route buffer heritage zone with sandstone cover reforestation & reserve

petra visitor centre + coach parks

secondary visitor centre + car parks

petra tourist route to minimise tourist numbers in the heritage park

viewing stop/ exit from petra heritage park

reserve/ grazing grounds

higher education centre

recreation agriculture key township development roads

LEGEND

creation of core heritage and buffer zones to include neighbouring towns and urban areas

core heritage zone primary “museum” site

potential development of wadi musa as heritage city/ limiting expansion of urban areas

expansion of existing settlements into satellite towns

provision of agricultural land adjacent to settlements

secondary “museum” site visitor centre buffer heritage zone

reforestation & reserve

recreation

little petra

agriculture

10 key township development

little petra visitor centre

petra visitor centre

university

secondary entrance to petra/ viewing stop

roads

reserve/ heritage buffer

reserve/ grazing grounds

satellite towns

9 8

7 petra

wadi musa

local recreation park

10 (including activities such as

grill barbeques)

MASTER PLAN

SIDD AL-AHMAR AGRICULTURE DEMONSTRATION AREA wadi musa waste water treatment plant al-beidha settlement um sayhoun settlement

LAND USE STUDY scale 1/75.000

SITE PLAN

MASTER PLAN scale 1/25.000

CONNECTION TO LITTLE PETRA

LEGEND secondary entrance/ exit

main visitor centre park visitor facilities vehicular entry/ exit EXTERNAL ROADS petra tourist route PEDESTRIAN ROUTES

main entrance/ exit

handicapped access CYCLING TRACKS DONKEYS CAMELS + CARRIAGEWAY

VISITOR Routes

overall

main entrance/ exit

summer routes + bedul tents

main entrance/ exit

winter routes + bedul caves

Vernacular Bedul architecture (Angel, 2006) 42 The layout of Um Sayhoun is re-organised to reflect the Bedu vernacular architecture and traditional community interactions. 78

LEGEND key development areas tourist route (paving type 1) tourist route (paving type 2) tourist route (tracks) signages rest pavilions monuments/ features feature tree cluster

SITE PLAN scale 1/10.000 Layout of Um Sayhoun.

layout and setting of new residential clusters to resemble vernacular bedul architectural style and layout

> STUDY 09 Project: EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE COUNTS!

LEGEND core heritage park visitor centre reforestation & reserve agriculture - tree crops

agriculture - cereal crops township and satellite development

little petra

roads petra tourist route

5 4 10

definition of core heritage and buffer zones to include neighbouring towns and urban areas and integrated development

MASTER PLAN 7 1

3 2

potential development of wadi musa as heritage city/ limiting expansion of urban areas

um sayhoun town centre (existing)

expansion of al-beidha into satellite towN

little petra visitor centre

petra visitor centre

main petra visitor centre + productive recreational park

residential + grazing land

future connection to neighbouring archaeological sites

petra 6 9

wadi musa 2

connection between

10 neighbouring

archaeological sites expansion of sidd al-ahmarr

11 waste water treatment

plant and surrounding argricultural facilities

LAND USE STUDY scale 1/75.000

themes

i a m b

Starting with Study 05: AN AUTHORITYâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S VISION, each of the subsequent design studies dealt with a combination of different themes and with increasing complexity. Each of them privileged particular groups and concerns, and the outcomes were evaluated for their measure of success against the criteria set out in MEASURING DESIGN. STUDY 09 is an attempt at pulling all those previous ideas together to find a solution that will benefit everyone living, working and visiting Petra.

9 6

SITE PLAN

MASTER PLAN scale 1/25.000 1

potential development of wadi musa as heritage city/ limiting expansion of urban areas

re-forested reserve to restore soil cover and reduce flash floods in petra heritage park

existing um sayhoun settlement to develop into local town centre

relocation of the main visitor centre to ease traffic congestion and relive visual obstruction at current site

definition of core visitor zone to limit development within heritage park

development of alternative tourist attractions outside of core heritage zone

extension of um sayhoun with agricultural land and expansion zones

future connection to neighbouring archaeological sites

connection between neighbouring archaeological sites

Rainfall

SEASONS TOURISTS TOURIST TRANSPORT COFFEE SHOPS + SOUVENIRS BEDUL WINTER RESIDENCE BEDUL SUMMER RESIDENCE

Average Max. Temperature Average Min. Temperature

off-peak

peak season

off-peak

AGRICULTURE sowing harvest barley wheat grapes olives

lower peak

threshing/ storage

HERDING

range increases in summer

DAIRY FARMING REFORESTATION HOUSING

main planting season caves/ built settlements

JANUARY

outdoor tents

FEBRUARY

MARCH

APRIL

caves/ built settlements

MAY

JUNE

JULY

AUGUST

SEPTEMBER

OCTOBER

NOVEMBER

DECEMBER

Expanding on the earlier time-table suggested in STUDY 07, the detail activities of varies players can be organised to minimise conflict and maximise site potential.

21-21

SECTION 21-21

SECTION 12-12

RE-FORESTATION

CEREAL CROPS

FUTURE CONNECTIONS

HERITAGE SITE

LITTLE PETRA VISITOR CENTRE

HERITAGE SITE

SECTION 21-21

LEGEND

key development areas

tourist route (paving type 1) tourist route (paving type 2) tourist route (tracks)

signages

rest pavilions

monuments/ features

feature tree cluster

SITE PLAN scale 1/10.000

petra heritage park main visitor centre

petra tourist route

RE-FORESTATION

UM SAYHOUN SETTLEMENT TOWN CENTRE

RE-FORESTATION

AL BEIDHA NEW TOWN

It is proposed that the Main Visitor Centre be relocated from its current site at Wadi Musa to a site north of the Museum, closer to Um Sayhoun. The open site allows for future expansion, and visitor infrastructure for the museum can also be shared by local residents using the site for outdoor grill picnics. The site topography and soil cover also makes it relatively suitable for cereal cultivation, providing suitable agricultural land for local communities within the suitable range of their residence.

Viewing point along the propose PETRA TOURIST ROUTE, over-looking Petra towards Um Sayhoun Town. Access to the Petra Amphitheatre is controlled via Um Sayhoun Town. By proposing alternative tourist attractions outside the main Petra Museum, mass-market tourism can continue to grow without damaging the archaeological integrity of the site. The development of Um Sayhoun into a township takes the strain off Wadi Musa, and allows better control of access to the Petra Museum.

time-based distance markers to “move” crowds traditional henna paintings “burnt” onto paving surfaces

the siq/ paving type 1: RAISED CATWALK

PAVED ROUTES FROM VISITOR CENTRES/ paving type 2: precast concrete footpath HILLY ROUTES/ paving type 3: COMPACTED LOCAL SANDSTONE WITH ETCHING

PAVING DETAILS

trees to mark key features/ monuments

scale nts

The designation of visitor routes is one of the key aspects in the development of a heritage site for tourism. Some of the key considerations involve site or soil stability, topography, proximity to critical monuments, as well as potential visitor numbers.

AFTERWORD

â&#x20AC;&#x153;The city, for all its importance, can no longer be thought of only as a physical artefact; instead, we must be aware of the dynamic relationships, both visible and invisible, that exist among the various domains of a larger terrain of urban as well as rural ecologies.â&#x20AC;? (Mohsen Mostafavi43

AFTERWORD

As financial concerns outweigh everything else today, “urban transformation and expansion are more often immediate response to the urgent demands of functional necessity, globality and profit maximisation” (Lim, 2005)44. This attitude has prompted the commodification of many good initiatives including heritage conservation, community development and sustainable tourism, short-circuiting the detailed and considered approaches required to reap long-term rewards. Landscape architects are trained to have an understanding of the wider environment at large, and cannot claim responsibility only towards those who pay our professional fees. There is no shortage of research by designers and geographers on the negative impacts of urbanisation, but their approaches and solutions have been largely separate, with few attempting to address the social and livelihood issues of marginalised communities through inter-disciplinary collaboration and everyday practice.

Designing Otherwise is about exercising the potential for landscape architecture practice to negotiate the manifold and conflicting concerns for benefiting both the larger regional areas and those at everyday scale. As demonstrated through the design studies on Petra, in particular STUDY 09, no single approach or strategy can provide a solution to the increasingly intricate problems we face as design professionals, especially when presented on fragile contested sites like heritage sites. Compartmentalising or ignoring the complications may reduce the complexity and difficulty in our approach, but will also result in one-dimensional “solutions” that untangles only part of the puzzle. The same notion applies to our attitudes and understanding of heritage and conservation and its practices. Our definition of heritage has to expand to include the physical (environments) and the intangible (culture), as well as the invisible patterns within our surroundings; while allowing these inheritances the flexibility of change with time.

As the world becomes more inter-connected, so are its problems. It is only by considering and addressing all fundamental conditions of a site – environment, stakeholders, processes, and change – during the design process, that the outcomes be meaningful and practical to those who inhabit our designs. The operational method outlined in this research is a start at understanding how this can be done in the fast-paced setting of our practice today. This research is both a critique and challenge that those “unheard” stakeholders and the “unseen” processes continue to be seen and heard.

APPENDIX

01: WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION DEFINITION AND SELECTION CRITERIA Information source: World Heritage Centre

DEFINITION OF THE CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE

The Criteria for Selection

Article 1 For the purposes of this Convention, the following shall be considered as “cultural heritage”: Monuments: architectural works, works of monumental sculpture and painting, elements or structures of an archaeological nature, inscriptions, cave dwellings and combinations of features, which are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art or science; Groups of buildings: groups of separate or connected buildings which, because of their architecture, their homogeneity or their place in the landscape, are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art or science; Sites: works of man or the combined works of nature and man, and areas including archaeological sites which are of outstanding universal value from the historical, aesthetic, ethnological or anthropological point of view.

To be included on the World Heritage List, sites must be of outstanding universal value and meet at least one out of ten selection criteria. These criteria are explained in the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention which, besides the text of the Convention, is the main working tool on World Heritage. The criteria are regularly revised by the Committee to reflect the evolution of the World Heritage concept itself.

Article 2 For the purposes of this Convention, the following shall be considered as “natural heritage”: Natural features consisting of physical and biological formations or groups of such formations, which are of outstanding universal value from the aesthetic or scientific point of view; Geological and physiographical formations and precisely delineated areas which constitute the habitat of threatened species of animals and plants of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation; Natural sites or precisely delineated natural areas of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science, conservation or natural beauty. Article 3 It is for each State Party to this Convention to identify and delineate the different properties situated on its territory mentioned in Articles 1 and 2 above.

Until the end of 2004, World Heritage sites were selected on the basis of six cultural and four natural criteria. With the adoption of the revised Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, only one set of ten criteria exists. Selection criteria: I. to represent a masterpiece of human creative genius; II. to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning or landscape design; III. to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared; IV. to be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history; V. to be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change; VI. to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance.

(The Committee considers that this criterion should preferably be used in conjunction with other criteria); VII. to contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance; VIII. to be outstanding examples representing major stages of earthâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features; IX. to be outstanding examples representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems and communities of plants and animals; X. to contain the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation.

REFERENCES

1. Bouman, O. (Ed.) 2009. ‘Introduction’. Architecture of Consequence: Dutch Designs on the Future. NAi Publishers, Rotterdam. pp. 04-09. 2. UNWTO. 2011. ‘Why Tourism?’ UN World Travel Organisation, [Online]. Available at http://unwto.org/en/ content/why-tourism [Accessed on 21 March 2011]. 3. Stokman, A., Rabe, S. and Ruff, S. 2008. ‘Beijing’s New Urban Countryside - Designing with Complexity and Strategic Landscape Planning’. Journal of Landscape Architecture. Issue Autumn 2008, pp. 30-45. 4. Corner, J. 1999. ‘Recovering Landscape as a Critical Cultural Practice’. Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture. Ed. Corner, J. Princeton University Press, New York. pp.1-26.

12. Tourtellot, J,B. 2011. ‘Part threat, part hope – the challenge of tourism’. World Heritage No. 58, [Online]. pp.8-19. Available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/ review/58/ [Assessed 6 August 2011]. 13. ‘SMED Info Kit’. World Centre of Excellence for Destinations, [Online]. Available at http://www.ced. travel/smed-en.pdf [Accessed on 20 August 2011] 14. Tourtellot, J,B. 2011. ‘Part threat, part hope – the challenge of tourism’. World Heritage No. 58, [Online]. pp.8-19. Available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/ review/58/ [Assessed 6 August 2011].

5. Corner, J. 2006. ‘Terra Fluxus’. The Landscape Urbanism Reader. Ed. Waldheim, C. Princeton Architectural Press, New Jersey. pp. 21-33.

15. Koolhaas, R. 1995. ‘Whatever Happened to Urbanism?’ Design Quarterly, [Online]. No. 164, pp. 2831. Available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/4091351 [Accessed on 3 September 2011].

6. Manzini, E. 2006. ‘Design, ethics and sustainability. Guidelines for a transition phase’. Cumulus Working Paper Series ‘Nantes’, [Online]. Vol. 16, pp.9-15. University of Art and Design Helsinki. Available at http://www.designmattersatartcenter.org/wp-content/ content/pdf/NantesWorkingPaper.pdf [Accessed on 20 September 2011]

16. van der Aa, B.J.M. 2005. ‘Preserving the heritage of humanity? Obtaining world heritage status and the impacts of listing’. Faculty of Spatial Sciences, PhD thesis, University of Groningen. Available at http:// dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/rw/2005/ b.j.m.van.der.aa/titlecon.pdf [Accessed on 12 September 2011].

7. Corner, J. 2006. ‘Terra Fluxus’. The Landscape Urbanism Reader. Ed. Waldheim, C. Princeton Architectural Press, New Jersey. pp. 21-33.

17. OMA-AMO. 2007. The Gulf. Lars Müller Publishers, Switzerland.

8. Massey, D. 1991. ‘A Global Sense of Place’. Marxism Today, [Online]. Issue: June 1991, pp.24-29. Available at http://www.amielandmelburn.org.uk/collections/mt/ pdf/91_06_24.pdf [Accessed on 10 March 2011]. 94

Inquiry, Strategy, Design. John Wiley and Sons, United Kingdom. pp.174-191.

9. Prior, J. 2011. ‘I want to be a landscape architect’. Interview. Landscape Institute, London. Available at http://www.iwanttobealandscapearchitect.com/being/ people_2/jason_prior.html [Accessed 07 October 2011].

18. Bokova, I. 2011. ‘Message by Director-General of UNESCO’. World Heritage No. 60, [Online]. Available at http://www.pfdheritage.com/wh60en/files/wh%20 60%20en%20ebook.pdf [Accessed on 6 August 2011]. 19. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. 2011. UNESCO World Heritage Centre, [Online]. Available at http://whc. unesco.org/ [Accessed on 21 March 2011].

10. Design Council. 2009. ‘Measuring Design: Design Council Briefing’. August 2009. Available at http:// www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-work/Insight/Research/ Research-Briefings/Measuring-design/ [Accessed on 07 November 2011].

20. van der Aa, B.J.M. 2005. ‘Preserving the heritage of humanity? Obtaining world heritage status and the impacts of listing’. Faculty of Spatial Sciences, PhD thesis, University of Groningen. Available at http:// dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/rw/2005/ b.j.m.van.der.aa/titlecon.pdf [Accessed on 12 September 2011].

11. Deming, E.M. and Swaffield, S. 2011. ‘Evaluation and Diagnosis’. Landscape Architectural Research:

21. . GHF. 2009. ‘Guidelines for Master Conservation Planning of Archaeological and Cultural Heritage

Sites and UNESCO World Heritage’. Global Heritage Fund, [Online]. Available at http:// globalheritagefund.org/images/uploads/docs/ GHFMasterConservationPlanningGuidelines2009.pdf [Accessed on 21 March 2011]. 22. TNC. 2011. The Nature Conservancy. Available at http://nature.org/ [Accessed 21 May 2011]. 23. UNESCO, 2011. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, [Online]. Available at http://www.unesco.org/ [Accessed on 28 August 2011]. 24. OMA. 2011. ‘Extreme Demolition and Extreme Preservation’. MONU magazine on urbanism #14 – Editing Urbanism. Board Publishers, Rotterdam. pp.1732. 25. heritage. Dictionary.com. Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. HarperCollins Publishers. Available at http://dictionary.reference.com/ browse/heritage [Accessed: 06 May 2011]. 26. Lynch, K. 1960. The Image of a City. The MIT Press, Cambridge. 27. Gould, D. 2010. ‘The Rise of Golf in China’. Executive Travel Magazine, [Online]. Available at http:// www.executivetravelmagazine.com/ [Accessed 21 March 2011]. 28. GHF. 2011. Global Heritage Fund, [Online]. Available at http://www.globalheritagefund.org/ [Accessed on 21 March 2011] 29. Aga Khan Development Network. 2011. ‘Bridge School by Li Xiaodong’. Aga Khan Award for Architecture, [Online]. Available at http://www.akdn.org/architecture/ project.asp?id=3796 [Accessed 10 September 2011]. 30. McHarg, I. 1969. ‘The Metropolitan Region’. Design With Nature. Natural History Press, New York. 31. UNESCO. 2011. ‘Petra’. UNESCO World Heritage List, [Online]. Available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/326 [Accessed 20 April 2011]. 32. Al-Weshah, R.A. & El-Khoury, F. 1999. ‘Flood Analysis And Mitigation For Petra Area In Jordan’. Journal 33. of Water Resources Planning and Management. Vol. 125, no. 3. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/ (ASCE)0733-9496(1999)125:3(170) [Accessed on 06

May 2011]. 34. Addison, E.H. 2006. ‘Documenting Deforestation at Sidd Al-Ahmar, Petra Region, Jordan’. School of Landscape Architecture, Masters thesis, The University of Arizona. Available at http://proquest. umi.com/pqdlink?did=1240699561&Fmt=7&clientI d=79356&RQT=309&VName=PQD [Accessed on 19 May 2011]. 35. USAID Jordan. 2004. Jordan National Tourism Strategy 2004-2010, [Online]. Available at http://pdf. usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADD205.pdf [Accessed on 06 May 2011]. 36. Sheikh-Miller, J. 2007. ‘Award winning Petra boosts Jordan’s growing tourism industry’. AMEinfo. com, [Online]. http://www.ameinfo.com/130945.html [Accessed 10 October 2011]. 37. Cesaro, G., Santana Quintero, M., Paolini, A., De Vos, P.J., Glekas, E. and Visconti, L. 2010. ‘Preliminary Risk Assessment for the Petra Arcaheological Park: recording strategy’. International Conference on Science and Technology and The CIPA Workshop on Documentation and Conservation of Stone Deterioration in Heritage Places. ICOMOS/UNESCO, Jordan. Available at https:// lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/289502/1/ Paper_Petra2010_Cesaro.pdf [Accessed on 20 May 2011]. 38. Luck, T. 2010. ‘Students map natural, manmade risks to Petra’s integrity’. The Jordan Times, [Online]. Available at http://jordantimes.com/index. php?news=28145&searchFor=unesco [Accessed on 03 April 2011]. 39. Rahaminoff, A. and Dyer, D. 1991. ‘Culture, Place and Region: The Mount Of Olives In Jerusalem’. MASS Magazine. University of New Mexico, New Mexico. Available at http://www.rahamimoff.com/CPR.pdf [Accessed on 23 August 2011]. 40. Gunn, C.A. & Var, T. 2002. ‘Destination Planning Concepts’. Tourism Planning: Basics, Concepts, Cases. 4th ed. Routledge, New York. 41. PDTRA. 2010. ‘Request for Fee Proposal for A Strategic Master Plan for Petra Region’, [Online]. Available at http://petrapark.com/files/documents/ Strategic%20Master%20Plan-%20Final%20RFP-April%20 2010.pdf [Accessed on 05 May 2011].

42. Addison, E.H. 2006. ‘Documenting Deforestation at Sidd Al-Ahmar, Petra Region, Jordan’. School of Landscape Architecture, Masters thesis, The University of Arizona. Available at http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?di d=1240699561&Fmt=7&clientI d=79356&RQT=309&V Name=PQD[Accessed on 19 May 2011]. 43. Angel, C. 2008. ‘Umm Sayhoun: A Unique Permanent Bedouin Settlement in Southern Jordan’. Department of Geography, Masters thesis, University of Arkansas. Available at http://search.proquest.com/doc view/304687202?accountid=13552. [Accessed on 19 May 2011]. 44. Mostafavi, M. & Doherty, G. 2010. ‘Introduction’. Ecological Urbanism. Lars Müller Publishers, Germany 45. Lim, W.S.L. 2005. ‘Asian Ethical Urbanism: A Radical Postmodern Perspective’. Asian Ethical Urbanism: A Radical Postmodern Perspective. World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore. pp.3-42.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abu-Jaber, N. & Al Saad, Z (eds). 2007. Landscape and provenance and conservation of stone sources from selected archaeological sites in Jordan. Project QuarryScapes, [Online]. Available at http://www. quarryscapes.no/text/publications/del1_report.pdf [Accessed on 06 May 2011].

Blondel, J. 2006. ‘The ‘Design’ of Mediterranean Landscapes: A Millennial Story of Humans and Ecological Systems during the Historic Period’. Human Ecology, [Online]. Vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 713-729. Available at http:// www.jstor.org/stable/27654149 [Accessed on 20 May 2011]

Addison, E.H. 2006. ‘Documenting Deforestation at Sidd Al-Ahmar, Petra Region, Jordan’. School of Landscape Architecture, Masters thesis, The University of Arizona. Available at http://proquest. umi.com/pqdlink?did=1240699561&Fmt=7&clientI d=79356&RQT=309&VName=PQD [Accessed on 19 May 2011].

Bouman, O. (Ed.) 2009. Architecture of Consequence: Dutch Designs on the Future. NAi Publishers, Rotterdam.

Al-Weshah, R.A. & El-Khoury, F. 1999. ‘Flood Analysis And Mitigation For Petra Area In Jordan’. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management. Vol. 125, no. 3. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)07339496(1999)125:3(170) [Accessed on 06 May 2011]. Alhasanat, S. 2008. ‘Sociocultural Impacts of Tourism on the Local Community at Petra, Jordan’. European Journal of Scientific Research, [Online]. Vol. 44, no. 3, pp.374-386. Available at http://www.eurojournals.com/ ejsr_44_3_01.pdf [Accessed on 20 May 2011]. Angel, C. 2008. ‘Umm Sayhoun: A Unique Permanent Bedouin Settlement in Southern Jordan’. Department of Geography, Masters thesis, University of Arkansas. Available at http://search.proquest.com/docview/30468 7202?accountid=13552. [Accessed on 19 May 2011]. Berkes, F. 2004. ‘Rethinking Community-Based Conservation’. Conservation Biology, [Online]. Vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 621-630. DOI: 10.1111/j.15231739.2004.00077.x [Accessed on 01 June 2011]. Berre, N. & Lysholm, H. 2010. Detour: Architecture and Design along 18 National Tourist Routes in Norway, [Online}. 4th ed. Available at http://www. nasjonaleturistveger.no/eKatalog/Nasjonale_ turistveger2010.html [Accessed on 10 September 2011]. Bienkowski, P. 1985. ‘New Caves for Old: Beduin Architecture in Petra’. World Archaeology, [Online]. Vol. 17, no. 2, pp.149-160. Available at http://www.jstor.org/ stable/124507 [Accessed on 04 April 2011].

Cesaro, G., Santana Quintero, M., Paolini, A., De Vos, P.J., Glekas, E. & Visconti, L. 2010. ‘Preliminary Risk Assessment for the Petra Arcaheological Park: Recording Strategy’. International Conference on Science and Technology and The CIPA Workshop on Documentation and Conservation of Stone Deterioration in Heritage Places. ICOMOS/UNESCO, Jordan. Available at https:// lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/289502/1/ Paper_Petra2010_Cesaro.pdf [Accessed on 20 May 2011]. Cole, D.P. 2003. ‘Where Have the Bedouin Gone?’. Anthropological Quarterly, [Online]. Vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 235-267. Available at http://www.jstor.org/ stable/3318400 [Accessed on 20 May 2011]. Corner, J (Ed.) 1999. Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Theory. Princeton Architectural Press, New Jersey. Coughenour, M.B. 2008. ‘Causes and Consequences of Herbivore Movement in Landscape Ecosystems’. Fragmentation in Semi-Arid and Arid Landscapes: Consequences for Human and Natural Systems. Eds. Galvin, K.A., Reid, R.S., Behnke R.H and Hobbs, N.T. Springer Netherlands, pp. 45-91. DOI: 10.1007/978-14020-4906-4_3 [Accessed on 21 May 2011]. Deming, E.M. & Swaffield, S. 2011. Landscape Architectural Research: Inquiry, Strategy, Design. John Wiley and Sons, United Kingdom. Design Council. 2009. Design Council, [Online]. Available at http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/ [Accessed on 07 November 2011]. Euromed Heritage. 2010. ‘Suggestions to the Jordanian Authorities to Improve Heritage Management and Conservation of the Site of Petra’. Workshop on “Management of heritage sites and artefacts” (17-19

May 2010, Petra, Jordan). Available at http://www. euromedheritage.net/euroshared/doc/THE_02%20 Suggestions%20to%20Jordanian%20Authorities_EN.pdf [Accessed on 29 May 2011]. Fadiman, A. 1998. The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York. GHF. 2009. ‘Guidelines for Master Conservation Planning of Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Sites and UNESCO World Heritage’. Global Heritage Fund, [Online]. Available at http:// globalheritagefund.org/images/uploads/docs/ GHFMasterConservationPlanningGuidelines2009.pdf [Accessed on 21 March 2011]. GHF. 2011. ‘Global Heritage Network (GHN) Enables Worldwide Expert and Stakeholder Collaboration Using Satellite Imaging Technologies to Save Earth’s Most Significant and Endangered Cultural Heritage Sites’. Global Heritage Fund, [Online]. Available at http:// globalheritagefund.org/in_the_news/press_releases/ ghn_launch [Accessed on 21 March 2011]. GHF. 2011. Global Heritage Fund, [Online]. Available at http://globalheritagefund.org/ [Accessed on 21 March 2011]. globalisation. Dictionary.com. Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. HarperCollins Publishers. Available at http://dictionary.reference.com/ browse/globalisation [Accessed: 06 November 2011].

Green, R.J. 2010. ‘Empowering Communities to Preserve Character of Place’. Podcast. Up Close. Episode 110. University of Melbourne, Melbourne. Available at http://upclose.unimelb.edu.au/episode/episode-110empowering-communities-preserve-character-place [Accessed on 14 September 2011] Gunn, C.A. & Var, T. 2002. Tourism Planning: Basics, Concepts, Cases. 4th ed. Routledge, New York. Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities and the United States National Park Service. 2000. The Petra Archaeological Park Operating Plan, [Online]. Available at http://petranationaltrust.org/ui/ ShowContent.aspx?ContentId=216 [Accessed on 20 May 2011].

Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities and the United States National Park Service. 2010. The Petra Archaeological Park Operating Plan, [Online]. Available at http://www.petrapark.com/files/ documents/National_Parks_Service.pdf [Accessed on 20 May 2011]. Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities. 2011. Jordan National Tourism Strategy 2011-2015, [Online]. Available at http://www.siyaha.org/ sites/default/files/Documents/NTS%202011-2015_ English.pdf [Accessed on 04 October 2011]. ICOMOS. 2011. International Council of Monuments and Sites, [Online]. Available at http://www.international. icomos.org/home.htm [Accessed on 02 June 2011]. IUCN. 2011. International Union for Conservation of Nature, [Online]. Available at http://www.iucn.org/ [Accessed on 02 June 2011]. Kanellopoulos, C. 2002. ‘A New Plan for Petra’s City Center’. Near Eastern Archaeology, [Online]. Vol. 65, no. 4, pp.251-254. Available at http://www.jstor.org/ stable/3210854 [Accessed on 04 April 2011]. Koolhaas, R. 1979. ‘The Future’s Past’. The Wilson Quarterly, [Online]. Vol. 3, no. 1, pp.135-140. Available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/40255570 [Accessed on 03 September 2011]. Koolhaas, R. 1995. ‘Whatever Happened to Urbanism?’ Design Quarterly, [Online]. No. 164, pp. 28-31. Available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/4091351 [Accessed on 3 September 2011]. Koolhaas, R. 2009. ‘Dubai: from Judgment to Analysis’. Sharjah Biennial: Lecture on OMA’s engagement in the Gulf and the effect of the economic crisis on the region, 17 March 2009. Available at http://www.oma.eu/index. php?option=com_content&task=view&id=149&Item id=25 [Accessed on 04 September 2011]. Landscape Institute. 2011. ‘I want to be a landscape architect’, [Online]. http://www. iwanttobealandscapearchitect.com/ [Accessed 07 October 2011].

Lim, W.S.L. 2005. Asian Ethical Urbanism: A Radical Postmodern Perspective. World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore. Lowenthal, D. 1985. The Past is a Foreign Country. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Luck, T. 2010. ‘Students map natural, manmade risks to Petra’s integrity’. The Jordan Times, [Online]. Available at http://jordantimes.com/index. php?news=28145&searchFor=unesco [Accessed on 03 April 2011]. Lynch, K. 1960. The Image of a City. The MIT Press, Cambridge. Massey, D. 1991. ‘A Global Sense of Place’. Marxism Today, [Online]. Issue: June 1991, pp.24-29. Available at http://www.amielandmelburn.org.uk/collections/mt/ pdf/91_06_24.pdf [Accessed on 10 March 2011]. McHarg, I. 1969. Design With Nature. Natural History Press, New York. Mostafavi, M. & Doherty, G. 2010. Ecological Urbanism. Lars Müller Publishers, Germany. National Geographic Traveller. 2011. Center for Sustainable Tourism, [Online]. Available at http://travel. nationalgeographic.com/travel/sustainable/index.html [Assessed 02 September 2011]. OMA-AMO. 2007. The Gulf. Lars Müller Publishers, Switzerland. OMA. 2011. ‘Extreme Demolition and Extreme Preservation’. MONU magazine on urbanism #14 – Editing Urbanism. Board Publishers, Rotterdam. pp.1732. PDTRA. 2010. ‘Request for Fee Proposal for A Strategic Master Plan for Petra Region’ [Online]. Available at http://petrapark.com/files/documents/Strategic%20 Master%20Plan %20Final%20RFP-April%202010.pdf [Accessed on 05 May 2011]. PNT. 2011. Petra National Trust, [Online]. Available at http://petranationaltrust.org/UI/ShowContent. aspx?ContentId=141 [Accessed 01 April 2011].

Rahaminoff, A. and Dyer, D. 1991. ‘Culture, Place and Region: The Mount Of Olives In Jerusalem’. MASS Magazine. University of New Mexico, New Mexico. Available at http://www.rahamimoff.com/CPR.pdf [Accessed on 23 August 2011]. Ritzenthaler, R.E. 1972. ‘Cultural Involution’. Journal of American Indian Education, [Online]. Vol. 11, no. 3. Available at http://jaie.asu.edu/v11/V11S3cul.html [Accessed on 02 September 2011]. Rolston, H. 1998. ‘Technology Versus Nature: What is Natural?’. Ends and Means, [Online]. Vol. 2, no. 2. Available at http://www.abdn.ac.uk/philosophy/ endsandmeans/vol2no2/rolston.shtml [Accessed on 13 April 2011]. Sheikh-Miller, J. 2007. ‘Award winning Petra boosts Jordan’s growing tourism industry’. AMEinfo.com, [Online]. http://www.ameinfo.com/130945.html [Accessed 10 October 2011]. Shoup, J. 1985. ‘The Impact of Tourism on the Bedouin of Petra’. Middle East Journal, [Online]. Vol. 39, no. 2, pp.277-291. Available at http://www.jstor.org/ stable/4327067 [Accessed 04 April 2011]. Sotamaa, Y. 2006. Cumulus Working Paper Series ‘Nantes’, [Online]. Vol. 16. University of Art and Design Helsinki. Available at http://www. designmattersatartcenter.org/wp-content/content/pdf/ NantesWorkingPaper.pdf [Accessed on 20 September 2011] Stokman, A., Rabe, S. & Ruff, S. 2008. ‘Beijing’s New Urban Countryside - Designing with Complexity and Strategic Landscape Planning’. Journal of Landscape Architecture. Issue Autumn 2008, pp. 30-45. Swaffield, S.R. (Ed.) 2002. Theory in Landscape Architecture: A Reader. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Syouf, M.Q. & Duwayri, M.A. 1995. ‘Jordan: Country Report to the FAO International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources’. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. Available at http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/agphome/ documents/PGR/SoW1/east/JORDAN.pdf [Accessed on 21 May 2011].

The Nature Conservancy. 2011. The Nature Conservancy, [Online]. Available at http://nature.org/ [Accessed 21 May 2011]. The New7Wonders Foundation. 2011. World of New7Wonders, [Online]. Available at http://world.n7w. com/ [Accessed on 10 November 11]. Ullah, I.I.T. 2010. ‘A GIS method for assessing the zone of human-environmental impact around archaeological sites: a test case from the Late Neolithic of Wadi Ziqlâb, Jordan’. Journal of Archaeological Science, [Online]. Vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 623-632. DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2010.10.015 [Accessed on 21 May 2011].

Waldheim, C. (Ed.) 2006. The Landscape Urbanism Reader. Princeton Architectural Press, New Jersey.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, 2011. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, [Online]. Available at http://www.unesco.org/ [Accessed on 28 August 2011].

Yunnila, H. 2006. ‘To Petra via Jabal Haroun: NabataeanRoman road remains in the Finnish Jabal Haroun Project survey area’. Department of Archaeology, Masters thesis, University of Helsinki. Available at https://helda. helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/19544/topetrav. pdf?sequence=3 [Accessed on 19 May 2011].

UNESCO World Heritage Centre. 2011. UNESCO World Heritage Centre, [Online]. Available at http://whc.unesco. org/ [Accessed on 21 March 2011]. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. 2011. World Heritage Magazine, [Online]. Issue no. 58. Available at http://whc. unesco.org/en/review/58/ [Assessed 6 August 2011]. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. 2011. World Heritage Magazine, [Online]. Issue no. 60. Available at http://whc. unesco.org/en/review/60/ [Assessed 6 August 2011]. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs occupied Palestinian Territories. 2008. ‘Drought: The Latest Blow to herding Livelihoods’. Available at http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ Hebron%20Drought.pdf [Accessed on 21 May 2011]. 100

van der Aa, B.J.M. 2005. ‘Preserving the heritage of humanity? Obtaining world heritage status and the impacts of listing’. Faculty of Spatial Sciences, PhD thesis, University of Groningen. Available at http:// dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/rw/2005/ b.j.m.van.der.aa/titlecon.pdf [Accessed on 12 September 2011].

UNWTO. 2011. United Nations World Travel Organisation, [Online]. Available at http://unwto.org/en/ [Accessed on 21 March 2011]. USAID Jordan. 2004. Jordan National Tourism Strategy 2004-2010, [Online]. Available at http://pdf.usaid.gov/ pdf_docs/PNADD205.pdf [Accessed on 06 May 2011]. USAID Jordan. 2008. Interpretive Plan for Petra Archaeological Park, [Online]. Available at http://petranationaltrust.org/ui/ShowContent. aspx?ContentId=216 [Accessed on 21 August 2011].

CED. 2011. World Centre of Excellence for Destinations, [Online]. Available at http://www.ced.travel/ [Accessed on 20 August 2011]

101

102