Preamble This report was validated by the plenary Assembly of 5 February 2009 of the Departmental Council for consultation of Bouches-du-Rhône. Download the report. Introduction: This report is part of the collective thinking movement launched by the CDC in 2007 to understand and understand the principles of sustainable development and their applications to the territories of the Department. This report brings heritage lighting, it results from numerous round-trips between the already existing citizen practices in the Department and the framework of law newly opened by the Faro Convention of 2005:» Framework Convention of the Council of Europe on the value of cultural and natural Heritage for society. You can see in Appendix 1. This report proposes to consider the natural and cultural heritages of the territories of the Bouches-du-Rhône department as a living and founding citizen of any sustainable development process. This report does not go beyond the theoretical, sometimes complex, and yet at the heart of the commitments of heritage communities in the face of economic, social and tourist issues: the discourse of cultural tourism consistently affirms that Tourists are increasingly interested in heritage, "authentic" destinations and multiple cultural activities. This statement, issued in the commercial language, accompanies and justifies the implementation of many tourism projects presented as the future "local development engines". The problem is that the reading of attendance figures and the observation of non-' prestigious ' cultural places and territories, the vast majority of tourist offerings, is totally opposed to this institutional and political optimism. The discourse of cultural tourism does not seem rational in relation to the market criteria and the financial purposes it claims. "What is sought by tourism policies – and undoubtedly by tourists, is then not an alteration, a difference, but what makes it possible to represent oneself, by identification or differentiation." The consequences are that cultural tourism is not a modality of exchange and discovery of the other as postulated by its proponents, but rather a deficit of thought of otherness and an unthink of exchange. ("Identity in the Mirror of tourism" PhD thesis sociology, Saskia Cousin, 2003). 1 – The natural and cultural heritage of the territories of the Bouches-du-Rhône department will be as many resources for sustainable development as there will be heritage communities to establish and sustain them. * Evolution of the concept of heritage: the word heritage is used in this report in the French sense. We inherit a set of public visual and written forms that base power and crystallize the social body. It should not be forgotten that Aix was the home and cradle. Many private collectors, all from the sphere of the Parliament of Provence, whose Peiresc, from the end of the 16th century, helped to found and the first public collections and the royalty of divine right that was invented. One of them, P.A. Rahmanadia de Bagarris, collector Aix, of noble Robe, was chosen by Henri IV to be the founder and intendant of his collections of antiques and his Cabinet of medals, circa 1598. He insisted on the advantage of establishing public treasures and recalled that a prince was obliged to preserve the monuments of the glory of his predecessors. He has written a book that is still topical: "The need for the use of medals in currencies". What image do you hold in your hand every day when you make your deal? He's the first public curator. Still today, this built public continuity relies on us in the unseen. After the religious and divine right, the Republican state continued to occupy this place in our collective imaginary, thus constituting an unspoken heritage community. P. LEGENDRE who created dogmatic anthropology dismantles This process and shows "what the West does not see from the West". Title at Mille and One Nights 2004. * The public service has the responsibility of the public treasury in this French tradition, but the new reality of the state obliges us to rebase the principles of local and European policies. That is the current issue. Heritage is an active principle that we still collectively have responsibility for. Be careful so the heritages are not resources like the others. We propose in this report the basics of alternative management which could give rise to opinions for the Assembly of elected representatives. * The challenge of sustainable development as an alternative and citizen management of Territories and heritages: In a previous report of the Departmental Council of consultation, in 2006, we advocated the integrated approach to heritage to make Department a pilot in the application of the principles developed by the Council of Europe and updated in the Faro convention which we recall in the annex. We have an active tool to found specific local territories integrated into the European dimension and the process of its construction. Still need to know how to use it!! These principles are too far from French traditions and continuity is broken. So we have to translate them into sustainability. We have several local strengths to do that. A – Local strengths rapid state of play in 2008: At the general level:-The growing awareness of public opinion on sustainable development is timidly translated into action, whether we are challenged as a citizen, professional or simple Consumer. -This change in behaviour, so often highlighted as fundamental, represents for each one (r) cultural evolution. It is not just a matter of having the right tools, a certain number of recipes already exist, but of wanting to seize it. Our relationship with our environment, whether human, natural or technical, goes through culture. Just like the link between generations, the foundation of sustainable development. -Cultural heritages, which are not taken into account today in sustainable development policies, are on the move to be the active principle. We then consider them not only as a common good to be preserved for future generations, but also as one of the only ones able today to accompany a cultural change of this nature. -Heritage has a dual cultural and economic quality that would make it a catalyst for collective process, which is indispensable for sustainable development. It can be this "lowest common denominator" between sectors, disciplines and logics that are difficult to rub shoulders with. A common good shared by different uses or valuations: economic, symbolic, ecological, historical, social, etc. -This new ambition for both the elect and the heritage curators is perceived as a risk-taking first. And it is a real risk taking to move from an outlet so well identified public heritage policies to this new outlet where everything seems "to be built". But what are the risks of not taking that risk? Heritage is not a commodity. Today, conditions seem to come together to accompany a risk-taking. At the departmental level: A detailed study on the state of the department's assets has just been delivered by the Regional heritage Agency; Its text is available in Appendix 2. B-The most symbolic value based on shared management in another CDC report, presented in November 2006: "Departmental heritage: Common good and economic exchange", the CDC was already advocating immediate applications in this direction. It was published and disseminated in the field of heritage professionals by their association: the AGCCPF. The book is available in library libraries and at the CDC under the title "Shared valuation of heritage". Rapid state of play in 2008: At the general level: cultural and natural heritages are already at work in the new processes of value creation. They become the most important competitive values to stand out in an increasingly global and virtual economy. Heritage has also become an economic lever for state debt. The new Intangible Heritage Agency of the state the FIPA and the recent exceptional valorisation of the "Louvre" brand are there to testify. This increased recovery, certainly risky, is also the opportunity for the world of culture to take language with the economic world, often perceived as antagonist. The local authorities, the TPE, the SMEs, the associations, in short what makes the local economy, has as much need of the heritage to be anchored locally and to find a room for economic manoeuvre conducive to sustainable development. (role of smaller common denominator). Public policy frameworks are also structured at national level: the state, as part of the modernization of public services, has built a battery of more than a thousand performance indicators. They concern all public policies culture, health, economics, etc. and are apprehended from the point of view of the citizen, the user and the taxpayer. Communities are increasingly inspired at the local level. So many benchmarks to follow the risk taking, compare its performance, draw on the balance sheets and know whether it remains compatible with national policies, or even European. This possibility is offered by the Organic law relating to the financial laws of 2001, the LOLF. (See our annexes). Legislation that is increasingly binding on the cultural heritage and its environment, translating in fact the shift from an essentially cultural approach of heritage sites to an approach taking into account the environment of the site and its management Decentralised. At the departmental level: civil society supports the ratification process of the Council of Europe's Faro convention, both at the Professional level by the association AGCCPF PACA and more general by CDC 13 (report 2006). Public policy framework indicators are structured at the local level through the work of the regional heritage agency: Mr Parodi, president of the H.C. will make its contribution at the end of June in the No. 5 of the agency's notebooks. 179 942 ha are under patrimonial jurisdiction at the departmental level: 40 Registered sites (104 680 ha), 68 sites classified (26,200 ha), their approaches (48 120 ha) and 12 ZPPAUP (942 ha) – Source SDAP. 5 agreements for the transfer of monuments belonging to the State to communes pursuant to Article 97 of the Law of 13 August 2004 were signed, i.e. 10% of the national (41) – Source Senate October 2008. 10 years of experimentation in field application of the Council of Europe's recommendations within the framework of the European Integrated Heritage mission have enabled the emergence of 5 active heritage communities and the structuring of a methodology that Already schooled at European level (even annex 40xVenezia). C-The right to heritage an update of dogmatic invisible springs. Rapid state of play in 2008: At the general level: the absence or weakness of the existing repositories concerning the cooperation of the Conservatives with the private sector weakens the construction of conventions to regulate the relations of forces or even possible Conflicts of interest between public and private. The right to cultural heritage emerges at European level. It makes it possible to envisage more serenely a regulatory framework adapted to the cooperation of the Conservatives with the private: associations, companies, individuals, etc. By proposing to pass each of the status of "beneficiary" of heritage to that of "entitled", it proposes a new regulatory framework. Private partners are recognized as partners, not just potential customers, suppliers or benefactors. The heritage is public and remains public. Co-operative status is increasingly becoming a framework for private public cooperation. In a previous report of the departmental Consultation Council in 2006, we called on the Department to continue its support to the cooperative movement and in particular to the development of public-private cooperation, particularly within CICS. Since then, our region has been the first place for the number of cooperative corporations of collective interest (CICS). CICS associate multiple actors around a single project that focuses on its outcome rather than short-term profit-seeking. CICS ' business lines are human services, the environment, culture, local development (source our region N ° 199). At the departmental level: heritage institutions and their elected officials are beginning to be sensitized to the principles of sustainability integrating heritage communities. The necessary methodological revolution is underway to share the former public monopoly and to make it a public service of scientific accompaniment. The Association of curators of the public collections of France offers on its website under the heading "Topical question" concrete examples in progress: www.ateliermuseal.net. The practice of free software already widely used in the citizen networks of the Department promotes this new shared value. See appendix 3 for J.C. Spoiler's text on the principles of free. 2 – First conclusions for a proposal for an opinion the difficulty is to move forward on all three fronts in a collaborative way: public/private shared management, monitoring framework (indicators), (re) updating of the common law. One cannot do without the other. Cooperation without clear objectives is often limited to a display strategy. And the pursuit of common objectives without a regulatory framework lasts only the time of the founders, or less. If the relationship to the client or beneficiary is sufficiently marked, that of public/private cooperation requires more. The recognition of the participatory approach as one of the fundamentals of sustainable development strategies, including that of the state, and the new Faro convention are two points of support for tackling the task. A-collaborative work proposals within the CDC, the emergence of social value since the presentation of the framework, we have sought some heritage practices of sustainable Cooperation in the Department and in each case the angle Analysis focused on the relationship between public professionals and private contractors (SES) such as a SA (limited company), an association or an individual company. The realization of portraits of heritage cooperation is being published by the network of curators of the region (AGCCPF). This consisted initially of going to see on the sites, to meet these people, to collect their testimony and the data available. Then, from this material, a diagnosis was made from three angles:-The first on economic valuation or otherwise said the interest for the entrepreneur,-the second on the efficiency and effectiveness of this cooperation for the heritage,-and The last one on the modalities of contracting which it was possible to pose between the company and the public heritage institution. In what measures does a cooperative approach between a conservative and a company perform well? Is it compatible with the performance targets set by the state through the LOLF? Does it strengthen the company? Does it help to strengthen a sustainable development approach for the company? The three examples chosen by the AGCCPF PACA attest to the effective existence of cooperation between conservatives and enterprises favourable to sustainable development. They voluntarily illustrate the three traditional axes of sustainable development: the environment, the social and the economy. As they illustrate the diversity of possible entrances: a national museum, a departmental museum and a communal mission – an association, an independent and a public limited company – a work of art, a heritage object and a historical monument. The conclusions of the diagnostics are encouraging: cooperation is interesting for both parties. Each of these cooperation is efficient – or thrifty – for the museum and the company. They are an effective way to accompany the realization of the museum's missions – improving the accessibility of heritage, intervention in rural areas or in sensitive urban areas. They are even effective in terms of the targets set by the LOLF to museums for 2010. Finally, they strengthen the economic actors in their choice to be enrolled in sustainable development. Cooperation is done with a large part of civil society – associations, companies, collectives, residents. The fragility of these cooperations is structural: these are sustainable development initiatives that are not sustainable. Cooperation is based more on trust than on contractual regulation of reports. In this context, it can be difficult to pass a course of development, to go beyond the founders or simply to transfer these experiences except to find an identical context. A first conclusion to these portraits is perhaps the identification of this site which seems to be a priority for these innovations, these experiments and these investigations to emerge a framework of common law. B – Experience elsewhere in EUROPE: to make the concept of heritage community understood we have shifted to a port city and Delta: Venice. We have retained a heritage and sustainable citizen experience that of the 40XVenezia. The 40xVenezia (Quarantine for Venice) is a proposal movement that seeks to make available to Venice its own plural experiences of citizens 40xVenezia has found a formidable tool of expression through its social network (or NING) , an online discussion instrument to which it is sufficient to register by giving its name, a photograph and a profile course to be immediately projected in an immense telematic agora (more than 1500 users to date) in which it is possible to Know the movement and participate in its activities (www.40xVenezia.it). Currently the 40xVenezia movement is committed to promoting knowledge of the Council of Europe's cultural Convention initialled in Faro in October 2005 (in the process of ratification). He made a translation in Italian language to promote a citizen awareness of the significance of the cultural heritage. . A working group has been set up to support this right on the ground. For this reason the 40xVenezia retain that the Faro Convention, which stresses the importance of the "right to cultural heritage", can offer a fundamental support to better interpret, use, preserve and revive the meaning of the cultural dimension of Venice, concerning just as much the relationship with its own citizens-the "heritage community"-that more broadly the one with the world that comes into contact with this community. On the example of the methodology of the heritage ballads created in Marseille, one of the first cities in Europe to have committed itself to make known to its own citizens the Convention, two Venetian heritage ballads were carried out in 2008. See: www.40xvenezia.it C-we propose on the basis of these concrete examples five co-operative opinions arising from these field APPLICATIONS, to be discussed in committee A-The first opinion aims to make more explicit the interest of the entrepreneur who cooperates in Valuing its heritage resource and the one designated as a common good. We see in the examples that he is neither a customer, nor a supplier, nor a patron of the patrimony but the partner of a joint project. How does he find his account? How does this cooperation strengthen its position? We could advocate an extension of the frameworks of indicators by taking into account the existence of private interests (associations, companies, individuals) in the management of the heritage that they remain to name and evaluate. The Regional heritage Agency, the Ministry of Finance via the FIPA or the promotion of PPPs (private public partnerships) could be asked to do so. It would be a measure of civil society's interest in contributing to shared management of heritage. (B) The second opinion is intended to measure cooperation from the point of view of public heritage policies. That is, the ability to achieve the objectives corresponding to the missions of general interest inherent in the cooperation project. In order to be able to compare the efficiency of the cooperative process with other experiences and the target set by the state for the years to come, the indicators are first recovered within the LOLF and integrated into departmental departments. (C) The third opinion concerns the effectiveness of cooperation. It is a question of looking at the means deployed and the results set. Or said more simply to evaluate the value for money. Always with the prospect of being able to compare the effectiveness of the cooperative process at European and national level, LOLF is reused as well as existing territorial measures such as ZPPAUP. How do these cooperation contribute to maintaining a high level of public service in a framework of control of public expenditure? (D) This fourth opinion concerns the involvement of members of civil society (companies, associations, individuals, etc.), on issues relating to heritage and their levels of contracted. This opinion of democratic governance requires a radical change in the categories of knowledge. Heritage leaves the context of education for sustainable development. This implies a large reform of the administrative machinery that falls well since the public debate on the modernisation of the public service was officially launched on 1 October 2007. The CDC could thus participate in the elaboration of their white paper (see annexed article). It requires a patrimonial right (framework for action and regulation) and therefore the application of the text of the Council of Europe's Faro convention on Bouches-du-Rhône by a symbolic signature until the state does so. In this same movement, the department can announce the start of an experimental Agenda 21 on the heritage of the department. This would be the beginning of the process and the recognition of potential partners so motivated. E-Propose the experimental implementation of article 11 of the Faro Convention at the departmental level; "Article 11: Organisation of public responsibilities in the field of cultural heritage". In the management of cultural heritage, the Parties undertake: to promote an integrated and well-informed approach to government action in all sectors and at all levels; To develop legal, financial and professional frameworks that allow for combined action by public authorities, experts, owners, investors, businesses, non-governmental organizations and society Civil To develop innovative practices for the cooperation of public authorities with other stakeholders; D. To respect and encourage voluntary initiatives complementary to the Government's mission; E. To encourage non-governmental organizations concerned with heritage conservation to intervene in the public interest.