Reabilitação de edifícios habitacionais com valor patrimonial : o caso do centro histórico de Guimarães

A presente dissertação centra-se no tema “reabilitação de edifícios habitacionais com valor patrimonial – o caso do centro histórico de Guimarães“ Com o passar dos anos tem-se feito, cada vez mais, um esforço para tentar combater as áreas degradadas das cidades e colmatar lacunas referentes às ações tomadas nesse sentido. É necessária a intervenção dos Arquitetos que, através dos seus conhecimentos e poderes, têm a obrigação de manter a história da Arquitetura intacta no tempo. Esta dissertação centra-se em analisar algumas questões inerentes ligadas á reabilitação de edifícios habitacionais, declarando possíveis respostas. As questões vão desde perceber como é que um espaço reabilitado pode ser tão adequado como um espaço pensado de raiz até à questão da utilização de materiais, passando pelo tipo de relacionamento entre o arquiteto e o proprietário, e como os dois protagonistas podem fazer valer as suas ideias em simultâneo. Este trabalho pretende, então, transmitir a importância da reabilitação e preservação dos centros históricos, mostrando que com a reabilitação é possível a sua conservação. Para uma melhor compreensão do tema selecionado, Guimarães apresenta-se como uma cidade que vai ao encontro de todos os pontos referidos até este momento, sendo o seu centro histórico um exemplo de requalificação e conseguindo, com uma metodologia bem determinada, manter todas as origens da cidade, no qual são utilizadas técnicas e materiais tradicionais de construção. A dissertação termina com a análise de cada projeto escolhido para estudo.

Guidelines for strategic national planning of training and education for museums, cultural heritage and related fields in Sweden and in international co-operation

The guidelines presented in this document are a preliminary strategy for establishing a comprehensive policy for the needs of training and education wiyhin the sector and adjoining areas, across fields of knowledge and professions concerned, on relevant levels and for the varies institutions and operators. The objective of these guidelines is to analysis the problems, objectives and goals for development of a far reaching system of educational and training programs and courses for museums, cultural heritage and related fields of activities. This objective comprises a close collaboration between museum, cultural heritage organizations and educating organizations, notably within universities and colleges, but also other kinds of educating bodies.

CARTA DE VENEZA 1964 - CARTA INTERNACIONAL SOBRE A CONSERVAÇÃO E O RESTAURO DE MONUMENTOS E SÍTIOS

Os monumentos de um povo, portadores de uma mensagem do passado, são um testemunho vivo das suas tradições seculares. A humanidade tem vindo progressivamente a tomar maior consciência da unidade dos valores humanos e a considerar os monumentos antigos como uma herança comum, assumindo colectivamente a responsabilidade da sua salvaguarda para as gerações futuras e aspirando a transmiti-los com toda a sua riqueza e autenticidade. É essencial que os princípios orientadores da conservação e do restauro de edifícios antigos sejam elaborados e acordados a nível internacional, ficando cada país responsável pela sua aplicação no âmbito específico do seu contexto cultural e das suas tradições.

Museology as a pedagogy for heritage

This essay presents some parameters for the study of Museology and its respective contribution for the constitution of preservationist processes, biased towards heritage education. From the decoding of some parameters that delimit this applied discipline’s action and reflection field, the text presents some paradigms, which have stimulated its epistemological construction and have guided its social functions. These paradigms are considered responsible for a new methodological order within the scope of the museum and, further, for the new commitments that these institutions have taken up.

Disabled access and heritage attractions

In a UK context, the importance of heritage tourism, the potential of the disabled market, and government policies concerning tourism, social inclusion, and the historic environment provide the setting within which access improvements at heritage attractions for disabled visitors are studied. At issue is how disabled access and conservation can be reconciled. The stakeholders range from the central actors, the disabled tourists and the heritage tourism service providers, through to the gatekeeper and lobby players in the conservation, disability, and tourism contexts. The critical power structures are identified. Changes to the historic environment are managed through the conservation planning system in which disability interests are not formally represented. Recent disability discrimination legislation has not altered this balance of power, and is a source of uncertainty over the access standards that should apply to heritage attractions. An evaluation of progress in implementing access improvements at heritage attractions reveals the limited extent of improvements undertaken to date. Consideration is given not only to physical access but also to alternative methods (intellectual access) of providing the heritage tourism service. In conclusion, the situation is examined from three perspectives. From the disabled tourists' perspective, choice of heritage attractions to visit remains restricted compared to that of nondisabled tourists. The lack of consultation with disabled stakeholders in the access improvements decision-making process is discussed, including the acceptability of alternative methods of service delivery to disabled tourists. The uncertainties facing heritage tourism service providers arising from the disability discrimination legislation are considered but, to ensure a more balanced recognition of disability interests, both conservation planning and disability discrimination legislation need to be amended, adjusting the roles of the legislative gatekeepers.

Heritage property, tourism and the UK Disability Discrimination Act

Heritage tourism depends on a physical resource based primarily on listed buildings and scheduled monuments. Visiting or staying in a historic building provides a rich tourism experience, but historic environments date from eras when access for disabled people was not a consideration. Current UK Government policy now promotes social inclusion via an array of equal opportunities, widening participation and anti-discrimination policies. Historic environments enjoy considerable legislative protection from adverse change, but now need to balance conservation with public access for all. This paper discusses the basis of research being undertaken by The College of Estate Management funded by the Mercers Company of London and the Harold Samuel Trust. It assesses how the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act has changed the legal obligations of owners/operators in managing access to listed buildings in tourism use. It also examines the key stakeholders and power structures in the management of historic buildings and distinguishes other important players in the management process.

Copyright issues on the protection of architectural works and designs

Architects and engineers depend on copyright law to protect their original works. Copyright protection is automatic once a tangible medium of expression in any form of an innovative material, conforming the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, is created. In terms of architectural works, they are protected as literary works (design drawings and plans) and as artistic works (the building or model of the building). The case law on the concept of “originality” however discloses that it may be difficult for certain artistic works of architecture to achieve copyright protection. Although copyright law provides automatic protection to all original architectural plans, the limitation is that it only protects the expression of ideas but not the ideas themselves. The purpose of this research is to explore how effective the UK’s copyright law regime is for protecting the rights and interests of architects in their works. In addition, the United States system of copyright law will be analysed to determine whether it provides more effective protection for architects and engineers with regard to architectural works. The key objective in carrying out this comparison is to compare and contrast the extent to which the two systems protect the rights and interests of architects against copyright infringement. This comparative analysis concludes by considering the possibility of copyright law reform in the UK.

Who owns the copyright of architectural works and designs?

Copyright protects the rights and interests of authors on their original works of authorship such as literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, and certain other intellectual works including architectural works and designs. It is automatic once a tangible medium of expression in any form of an innovative material, which conforms the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988), is created. This includes the building, the architectural plans and drawings. There is no official copyright registry, no requirements on any fees need to be paid and they can be published or unpublished materials. Copyrights owners have the rights to control the reproduction, display, publication, and even derivation of the design. However, there are limitations on the rights of the copyright owners concerning copyrights infringements. Infringement of copyright is an unauthorised violation of the exclusive rights of the copyright author. Architects and engineers depend on copyright law to protect their works and design. Copyrights are protected on the arrangements of spaces and elements as well as the overall form of the architectural design. However, it does not cover the design of functional elements and standard features. Although copyright law provides automatic protection to all original architectural plans, the limitation is that copyright only protects the expression of ideas but not the ideas themselves. It can be argued that architectural drawings and design, including models are recognised categories of artistic works which are protected under the copyright law. This research investigates to what extent copyrights protect the rights and interests of the designers on architectural works and design.

Intellectual property law on architectural design in collaborative design communication as digital assets

Digital Economy is one of the crucial elements promoted by the Digital Britain Report June 2009 and its Implementation Plan August 2009 in order to maintain and further the UK’s position as one of the world’s leading digital knowledge economies. Therefore, the application of Digital Technologies is high in the agenda. As pervasive digital technologies become more widely available, it becomes increasingly important to understand the legal implications of digital assets produced via digital technologies in collaborative design communication. Architects and engineers depend on intellectual property law to protect their original works. Copyright protection is automatic once a tangible medium of expression in any form of an innovative material, conforming the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, is created. Although copyright law provides automatic protection to all original architectural plans, the limitation is that it only protects the expression of ideas but not the ideas themselves. The purpose of this research is to explore how effective the UK’s copyright law regime is for protecting the rights and interests of architects and engineers in their works as digital assets. The UK’s copyright law is ripe for modernisation not only to protect the rights of designers but also to further UK’s position in digital economy.

Architectural effect on the surface tension of an ABA triblock copolymer melt

The excess surface energy of lamellae formed by an ABA triblock copolymer melt oriented parallel to a neutral surface is evaluated using self-consistent field theory (SCFT). Consistent with experiments and previous SCFT calculations, we find a preference for the A-rich domains at the surface, which can only be attributed to the architectural asymmetry between the A and B blocks. The behavior was previously attributed to a loss of bridging configurations that occurs when the B-domain resides at the surface. Here we demonstrate that it is actually the presence of chain ends that reduces the excess surface energy of an A-rich domain relative that of a B-rich domain.

The importance of sward architectural complexity in structuring predatory and phytophagous invertebrate assemblages

1. Although the importance of plant community assemblages in structuring invertebrate assemblages is well known, the role that architectural complexity plays is less well understood. In particular, direct empirical data for a range of invertebrate taxa showing how functional groups respond to plant architecture is largely absent from the literature. 2. The significance of sward architectural complexity in determining the species richness of predatory and phytophagous functional groups of spiders, beetles, and true bugs, sampled from 135 field margin plots over 2 years was tested. The present study compares the relative importance of sward architectural complexity to that of plant community assemblage. 3. Sward architectural complexity was found to be a determinant of species richness for all phytophagous and predatory functional groups. When individual species responses were investigated, 62.5% of the spider and beetle species, and 50.0% of the true bugs responded to sward architectural complexity. 4. Interactions between sward architectural complexity and plant community assemblage indicate that the number of invertebrate species supported by the plant community alone could be increased by modification of sward architecture. Management practices could therefore play a key role in diversifying the architectural structure of existing floral assemblages for the benefit of invertebrate assemblages. 5. The contrasting effects of sward architecture on invertebrate functional groups characterised by either direct (phytophagous species) or indirect (predatory species) dependence on plant communities is discussed. It is suggested that for phytophagous taxa, plant community assemblage alone is likely to be insufficient to ensure successful species colonisation or persistence without appropriate development of sward architecture.