IRPP/SAAH: Priority Intervention Lists (PIL)
The Ministries of Culture, or the competent authorities, adopt a PIL in each country by means of an extensive consultation process, involving all stakeholders at national and local levels. Such lists were developed and implemented in 2004 and 2008. The list for 2010 is currently being drawn up.
This reference document, prepared under the supervision of the Project Co-ordinators, is composed of a
Report" which briefly presents the legal and institutional framework in relation to the protection and enhancement of heritage, the existing management mechanisms and tools, the resources available (professional, documentary and budgetary). It also takes into consideration the political guidelines and the role given to heritage in society.
The second part of the reference document is the actual "List", which identifies the monuments and sites of significance that are in urgent need of conservation or restoration. This list includes examples of a whole range of buildings, as well as examples of the religious heritage of all denominations. It also takes into account ensembles and single monuments from all eras, thus acknowledging the fact that the architectural and archaeological heritage is a historic continuum which gives it local, regional and national value, as well as international significance.
In drawing up the "Priority Intervention List", experts in each country are engaged in a continual dialogue with all possible stakeholders from different fields of expertise or institutions, in order to ensure a degree of national consensus on the final lists. The Project Co-ordinators are careful to prepare lists with limited numbers of monuments and sites, in order to stimulate the general mobilisation of available resources and means in favour of these priorities. Thus, by considering the whole range of protected monuments and sites, rather than emphasizing the importance of one type over another, they encourage a range of projects with different kinds of intervention and increased funding possibilities.
The list provides a snapshot of priorities, compiled from a very
specific standpoint, and describes significance and condition; the
various threats faced, both internal (ownership, occupation and
management) and external (exposure to environmental damage of
natural or human origin). The lists are compiled with the
understanding that further detailed technical assessment work will
be required before funding options can be seriously explored. It is
also understood that such lists are part of a continuing process of
assessment, compilation, review and refinement. As buildings are
rehabilitated, others in need will be identified. So the continuum
of the heritage should be reflected in a virtuous cycle integrated
into a preservation, rehabilitation and funding strategy.
Map of the region