Abstract

India has a long and illustrious history of preserving and caring for historic structures. We, the Indians, believe in conservation, not only for structures but also for the sake of a healthy ecosystem. It not only safeguards native plants, birds, and animals, but it also safeguards us. Heritage protection is an important element in city development since it helps to establish landmarks within heritage areas while also generating revenue and supporting the tourism industry. This is because heritage sites are being developed to meet the need for recreational possibilities, and the heritage sector has begun to be considered as part of the leisure industry’s supply. For preserving the inheritance and the need to provide understanding to visitors, a tool developed for the heritage building which has some factors and its sub-factors affecting on the heritage building based on architectural expert’s survey in this paper. Based on of expert’s evaluation of factors, an empirical equation has been created which gives the value of Heritage building. By this tool or equation, we can get not only values of factors of affecting on the building and overall value of the building for heritage building but also get value for any abandoned building.

1. Introduction

“The history, traditions, and qualities that a country or society has had for many years and that are considered an important part of its character” ¹. The heritage structures, in the context of architecture, essentially represent a nation’s history and culture. Heritage structures deteriorate through time, leading to a scenario in which they are no longer able to serve the function for which they were constructed. In India, historical books such as Mansara chronicle the theory and technical aspects of old rituals. With the consolidation of colonial rule during the nineteenth century, European ideology and conservation systems supplanted indigenous practices after independence, i.e. the mid-twentieth century, there has been a significant global increase in the attention given to heritage conservation and management. This has been accompanied by a shift in the way people think about heritage and approaches to dealing with changes in the historic environment.

The colonial legislation was replaced by the AMASR act, which expanded protection to monuments and cultural heritage of national significance. Safeguarding cultural heritage is essential to preserve the identity of communities and cultural diversity worldwide. Successful conservation techniques necessitate not just a knowledge of chemical and biological degradation processes, but also a knowledge of the mechanical failure mechanisms that cause harm to cultural assets. The erosion of structures and decorative surfaces, flooding of buildings, and salt weathering of important historic and archaeological items are only a few of the effects of climate change. Climate change impacts on cultural heritage assets may have far-reaching repercussions on development programs since these assets are crucial to the preservation of cultural value and identity and often play a significant role in supporting the regional economy.

By incorporating Article 49 in the Directive Principles of State Policy, the framers of the Constitution made it obligatory for the State to protect every monument of national importance. “Article 49 says that “It shall be the obligation of the State to protect every monument or place or object of artistic or historical interest, declared by or under law made by Parliament to be of national importance, from spoliation, disfigurement, destruction, removal, disposal or export, as the case may be” ². In 1951, AMASR was enacted in India, earlier it was The Monument Preservation Act 1904. And the selection criteria for selecting a building into a World Heritage monument and site by first nominated by the respective government of the country. The site should be satisfied in any one listed criteria of OUV of UNESCO, then the site was evaluated by the International Council of Monument and Sites. Then they gave it to the World Heritage Committee and then the committee presents the selected monument as per the evaluation.

2. Research Methodology

To begin with, the stage to offer rationale and background for this dissertation, a historic and contextual literature review was conducted. The systematic literature review has been explored through the internet and secondary data from relevant published academic literature from journal articles and research papers. To assess the determinants on a worldwide scale, further literature was consulted. Scholarly journals, conference proceedings, and other published conservation material, as well as contemporary sources such as newspapers and online magazines addressing conservation, were consulted. In addition to this stage is the Consideration for the value of heritage building would be taken by the factors affecting it. Furthermore in this stage involved the collection of data using the questionnaires for checking the value of the heritage building: Google form questionnaire survey by the experienced practitioners in architecture and then by using expert choice software, the data were analyzed from nationwide data collection.

3. Literature Study

The Literature demonstrates that efforts taken by international organizations including UNESCO, ICOMOS, ICCROM, and other agencies have given space for heritage to expand. The rapid changes in the world will present the biggest challenges to conservation activities.

“For UNESCO, value is defined in the Operational Guidelines under section 49: Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), having 14 factors these are: Utilities or service infrastructure, Pollution, Physical sources, local conditions, social, other human activities, climate change, and other weather effects, sudden ecological geological changes, management, and institutional factors” ³.

From these factors, Malaysia creates ten factors affecting the Heritage building. Confirmation of the theoretical assessment of factor influence must be completed by a group of Malaysians with extensive knowledge and experience in a heritage building, referred to as specialists. They did some quantitative surveys in terms of demography, like the chi-square test, etc. From these surveys, findings are: based on perception, factors ranking can decide. By this ranking, two Malaysian cities- George Town, Melaka came into UNESCO World Heritage Site.

For getting qualitative results, “Strategies for Qualitative Study Approaches are:

• Ethnography: Ethnographic research emphasizes in‐depth engagement with site‐specific settings, most especially through active and thorough observation.

• Phenomenology: is that researchers aim to clarify the essential or underlying meaning of experience, “where experiences contain both the outward appearance and inward consciousness based on memory, image, and meaning.”

• Grounded theory: can be further described in the following ways. First, it depends on an intensive, open‐ended, and iterative process that simultaneously involves data collection, data analysis, and theory building.

• Tactics: an overview of data collection, analysis, and interpretation.” ⁵.

4. Factors Influencing Heritage Buildings through Theoretical Assessments

Based on the findings of the literature research, several potential factors have a significant direct and indirect impact on heritage buildings, including social, spatial, environmental, physical, and cultural factors.

For checking the above factors created based on literature, a questionnaire was created here for the architectural experts, where they can rate the importance level of weight-age of the factors. The Findings of this survey are given as followings:

The architectural experts evaluate the value of main factors and sub-main factors. So that it can prioritize the importance level of factors. This is the general formula, weighted average=

Where, = Average Mean and = frequency. From the above formula, here, are the calculated values of sub-factors and main factors which is evaluated by the architectural expert, these are:

Cs = Composite value of social factor

E = Empirical values of subfactors

Q = Qualitative values of sub factors

Qhs = Human scale

Qh = History

Qn = Neighborhood

Ql = Landscape

The means shows the importance level of Sub Factors of Social Factors: Landscape > History > Human Scale > Neighborhood

Here: Csp = Composite value of Spatial factor

E= Empirical values of sub factors

Q = Qualitative values of sub factors

Qlo = Location

Qto = Topography

Qtr = Transparent

The means shows the importance level of Sub Factors of Spatial Factors: Location > Transport > Topography

Here: Ce = Composite value of environmental factor

E= Empirical values of subfactors

Q = Qualitative values of sub factors

Q(aqi) = Air-Quality Index

Q(temp) = Temperature(inside and outside the building)

Qp = Pollution (by nature and human)

The means shows the importance level of Sub Factors of Environmental Factors: Temperature (inside and outside the building) > Pollution (by nature and human) > Air-Quality Index

Here: Cp = Composite value of physical factor

E = Empirical values of sub factors

Q = Qualitative values of sub factors

Qsi = Structural Integrity

Qtc = Treatment and Conversion

Qa = Architectural elements and Aesthetics

Qo = Originality

The means shows the importance level of Sub Factors of Physical Factors: Architectural elements and Aesthetics > Structural Integrity > Treatment and Conversion> Originality.

Here: Cs = Composite value of social factor

E = Empirical values of sub factors

Q = Qualitative values of sub factors

Qtr = Traditional- Religious / Cultural

Qit = Importance of tourism

Qr = Recreational

Qsg = Social gathering and Events

The means shows the importance level of Sub Factors of Cultural Factors: Religious / Cultural>Importance of tourism > Structural Integrity > Recreational >Social gathering and Events

Here: O = Overall factor

F = Empirical values of main factors

C = Composite values of sub factors

Cs = Social

Cp = Physical

Csp = Spatial

Ce = Environmental

Cc = Cultural

The means shows the importance level of Sub Factors of Main Factors: Cultural > Environmental > Physical > Social > Spatial

5. Establishing and Evaluating the Criteria for the Value of Heritage Building through Case Studies

For establishing the criteria for the value of Heritage building, two famous Heritage Buildings have chosen to check the developed tool and factors affecting the building. The buildings are:

Rajasthan is famous for its magnificent forts and palaces. These depict the era of governing royal kingdoms' might and splendor. UNESCO has designated many of these forts as world-historic monuments. The Amer Fort, located in the town of Amer, which is only 11 kilometers from Jaipur, is one such fort. This beautiful fort, which overlooks Maota Lake and is stretched across stunning terrain, is a must-see.

Until the 18^th century, Amer was the capital of Rajasthan. The Amer Fort, also known as Amber Fort, was built in the 16^th century by Raja Man Singh I, one of the Mughal Emperor Akbar's Navratnas (nine diamonds). Raja Singh I and several succeeding monarchs expanded and rebuilt it further. Until Jaipur was named the capital of Rajasthan, Rajput monarchs used Amer Fort as their imperial palace.

Jaisalmer Fort, built-in 1156 A.D. by King Rawal Jaisal, dominates the terrain in Rajasthan's far northwestern region, near the Indian-Pakistan border. The spectacular complex developed on the east-west caravan route connecting India and Central Asia to the Middle East and North Africa and was also known as Sonar Kila ("Golden Fort") because of its shining golden sandstone walls and buildings. Among the numerous palaces, temples, bazaars, and apartments within the complex's walls, merchants constructed lavishly crafted Havelis.

Built-in 1156, the fort is a proud possession of the Bhati dynasty. The city of Jaisalmer was founded by Rawal Jaiswal, and the fort of Jaisalmer was built during his reign. It's a 250-foot-tall fort with 30-foot-long walls to protect it. The fort has 99 bastions, 92 of which were constructed between 1633 and 1647. The combination of Islamic and Rajput architecture can be seen.

For checking the developed tool on the above selected two buildings, case studies have been done in the context of main factors and sub factors and get the qualitative values.

• This qualitative survey response is for a Heritage building to analyze the factors for the value of a Heritage Building.

• The people (architectural students/ experts/ field experts/ non-architects) evaluate the value of main factors and sub-main factors based on their visiting experience on these heritage buildings. So that It can prioritize the importance level of factors and their values.

6. Results and Findings

A data which can rate Judge the building physical factors like beauty and function etc. and vary as per the data information.

Where, C- Composite Value, E- Empirical Value, Q- Qualitative Value

The general formula, Weighted Average= where w=frequency, ^Px=Average mean

For getting the qualitative values, composite values are calculated of all factors by the above equation.

Social factor: Landscape = History = Human Scale > Neighborhood

Spatial factor: Topography = Location = Transport

Environmental factor: Pollution (By Nature & by Human) = Temperature (Inside & Outside the building) >Air Quality Index

Physical factor: Structural Integrity = Treatment & Conservation = Originality = Architectural elements & Aesthetics

Cultural factor: Recreational = Importance of Tourism = Social gathering & Events = Traditional- Religious / Cultural

Social factor: Landscape = History = Human Scale > Neighborhood

Spatial factor: Topography = Transport > Location

Environmental factor: Temperature (Inside & Outside the building) > Pollution (By Nature & by Human) >Air Quality Index

Physical factor: Structural Integrity = Treatment & Conservation = Originality = Architectural elements & Aesthetics

Cultural factor: Recreational = Traditional- Religious / Cultural > Social gathering & Events > Importance of tourism

7. Discussion

From Table 9, the composite values of Social, Spatial, Environmental, Physical, Cultural factors of Amer fort are:

Cs (Composite value of Social factor) = 9.16

Csp (Composite value of Spatial factor) = 10

Ce (Composite value of Environmental factor) = 8.82

Cp (Composite value of Physical factor) = 10

Cc (Composite value of Cultural factor) = 10

Overall Value of Amer Fort

Importance level of Main factors: Spatial = Physical = Cultural > Social > Environmental

Now, From Table 10, the composite values of Social, Spatial, Environmental, Physical, Cultural factors of Jaisalmer fort are:

Cs (Composite value of Social factor) = 9.16

Csp (Composite value of Spatial factor) = 8.82

Ce (Composite value of Environmental factor) = 7.55

Cp (Composite value of Physical factor) = 10

Cc (Composite value of Cultural factor) = 8.87

Overall Value of Jaisalmer Fort

Importance level of Main factors: Physical > Social > Cultural > Spatial > Environmental

8. Conclusions

The purpose of this research is to assess the value of Heritage buildings in Northern India. As we all know, India has a long and rich tradition of caring for and maintaining historic buildings. According to Indian tradition, we believe in conservation not only for buildings but also for a healthy environment. It protects native plants, birds, and animals, and vice-versa. No one wants to live in an unhealthy environment. So, it is necessary to conserve the Heritages. It also provides a sense of identity and continuity in this fast-changing world for future generations. If we choose any heritage building, like the selection of the world Heritage sites, so there is a selection criterion for any building to make the heritage building as per its importance level, for example, UNESCO has outstanding Universal factors. Based on the importance level from these factors, Malaysia has also created its own 10 factors affecting the heritage building. From these factors, Malaysia got two cities in the world Heritage sites. Now if we talk about Indian sites, the selection criteria depend upon the UNESCO’s Outstanding Universal factors.

Heritage destinations and attractions play a significant role in the tourist industry because they attract people who are looking to enjoy their free time. This is because the heritage sector has now begun to be seen as a part of a revenue-generating industry and heritage sites are being built to meet the need for recreational opportunities. In This modern world, people like to spend their free time in the tourism of Heritage sites which has resulted in growth in the utilization of heritage sites and the number of individuals has also increased. Subsequently, as a result of this increase, tension has arisen between the desire to preserve the inheritance and the need to provide access and understanding to visitors.

So, therefore preserving the inheritance and the need of understanding of the visitors has to be fulfilled, after going through the complete literature study of selection criteria of UNESCO and Malaysia. Taking both these considerations, I created my factors affecting the heritage building as per its importance level. And a tool has also been developed for the heritage building which has some factors and its sub-factors. By this tool, an empirical equation has been created which gives the value of Heritage building. This study contains two parts:

1- Architectural Expert’s Survey: who evaluate the factors affecting the building based on its importance level. By the importance level of factors, a formula has been created i.e. An empirical equation that helps to evaluate the values of factors affecting any heritage building.

Findings of experts survey: From this survey, first and foremost thing which we got the value of factors and second thing the importance level of factors (Table 8) which both show: Cultural >Environmental > Physical > Social > Spatial, which means the cultural factor is the most important factor from all for any heritage building.

2- Common people’s Survey: who evaluate the factors affecting those buildings which have taken as a case study for analyzing the tool developed. So, for analyzing the tool, Amer fort and Jaisalmer fort have been taken. A questionnaire has also been created based on the visiting survey of common people for evaluating the factors affecting the above four buildings. By evaluating the factors affecting the building and the importance level of factors, the qualitative values of factors and Actual Values of the above two heritage buildings have been found.

Findings from the Common people survey: From this survey, the first and foremost thing, the value of factors affecting the above two buildings, the second thing is the importance level of factors and the third thing is the importance level of the above two buildings from these values.

i. Amer Fort, Amer, Rajasthan, India: Spatial = Physical = Cultural > Social > Environmental

ii. Jaisalmer Fort, Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, India: Physical > Social > Cultural > Spatial > Environmental

As we all know, these two buildings are the world Heritage sites, and there is no doubt that all building has its importance and identity. We can’t even compare among the buildings. But according to the importance level of the factors affecting and visitor’s experience of the building, the overall value says that Amer Fort is the more valuable Heritage building.

From this Empirical equation, we can get the values of factors as well as the overall value of the heritage building. From this equation, we can find out not only the values for heritage buildings but also for any abandoned building. These values which we calculated are so valuable to make any abandoned building converted into a valuable place. The value of any place is increased by the users, its functions, its identity, its scale, its physical integrity. So, evaluating the value of the values of common people, who is the visitors or users of the building, can make any building remarkable and valuable.

References