Repository of colleges and higher education institutions

Show document
A+ | A- | Help | SLO | ENG

Title:Dejavniki izbrisov enot etnološke dediščine v registru kulturne dediščine : magistrska naloga študijskega programa druge stopnje
Authors:ID Sfiligoj, Mojca (Author)
ID Tomšič, Matevž (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
ID Ramšak, Mojca (Comentor)
Files:.pdf RAZ_Sfiligoj_Mojca_i2016.pdf (1,24 MB)
MD5: 7BCF08E6F8E2636AFFBDCD60D4AD3AE5
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Master's thesis/paper
Typology:2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:FUDS - School of advanced social studies
Abstract:V sodobni postindustrijski družbi je nepremična kulturna dediščina ranljiva kot še nikoli. Etnološka stavbna dediščina sodi med najbolj ogrožene skupine dediščine, ki nezadržno propada in izginja. Razlogi so različni. V magistrski nalogi bomo poiskali razloge za pričetek izbrisa, ki so navedeni v registru kulturne dediščine. Register predstavlja zbirko osnovnih podatkov o nepremični kulturni dediščini v Sloveniji, v katero je vpisanih skoraj 30.000 enot raznolike kulturne dediščine. Podatki, ki so v njem dostopni, prikažejo le razlog za pričetek postopka izbrisa, in ne razloga za propad etnološke stavbne dediščine. Uvodno bomo predstavili področje varstva kulturne dediščine, register kulturne dediščine in etnološko stavbno dediščino. V empiričnem delu bomo s kvantitativno analizo preučevali izbrise etnološke stavbne dediščine v registru. V drugem delu bomo primerjali Območno enoto Celje in Območno enoto Ljubljana Zavoda za varstvo kulturne dediščine. Primerjava območnih enot, ki imata največ izbrisane etnološke stavbne dediščine, bo omejena na podatke, dostopne v registru nepremične kulturne dediščine. S kvalitativno analizo pogovora fokusne skupine odgovornih konservatork bomo preverjali verodostojnost podatkov registra in poiskali razloge za izbrise enote etnološke dediščine, ki niso zajeti v podatkih registra kulturne dediščine. Predlagamo nadaljevanje raziskav na področju ranljivosti kulturne dediščine in iskanje razlogov za ohranjanje, saj je vsak objekt kulturne dediščine, ki je poškodovan ali uničen, izgubljen. S preučevanjem in identificiranjem dejavnikov izbrisov iz registra nepremične kulturne dediščine lahko z ustreznimi ukrepi kulturne politike na področju varstva kulturne dediščine zajezimo propad etnološke stavbne dediščine v prihodnosti.
Keywords:varstvo kulturne dediščine, register nepremične kulturne dediščine, etnološka stavbna dediščina, registri, izbrisi, raziskave, analize, primerjave, magistrske naloge
Place of publishing:Ljubljana
Place of performance:Ljubljana
Publisher:[M. Sfiligoj]
Year of publishing:2016
Year of performance:2016
Number of pages:[86] str.
PID:20.500.12556/ReVIS-7896 New window
COBISS.SI-ID:4608763 New window
UDC:719
Publication date in ReVIS:26.07.2021
Views:1321
Downloads:127
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
:
Copy citation
  
Share:Bookmark and Share


Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:English
Abstract:Immovable cultural heritage has never been as vulnerable as it has become in the contemporary post-industrial society. One of the most endangered heritage groups is represented by the ethnological architectural heritage which is visibly decaying and disappearing. The reasons for this vary. In my Master's thesis I will search for the reasons for starting the deletion process as found in the register of immovable cultural heritage. The register represents a collection of basic data on immovable cultural heritage in Slovenia that includes almost 30.000 miscellaneous cultural heritage units. The data found in the register merely shows the reason for starting the deletion process, but fails to reveal the reasons behind the decay of the ethnological architectural heritage. In the introduction I will present the various cultural heritage protection fields, the register of immovable cultural heritage and ethnological architectural heritage. In the empirical part of the thesis I will use quantitative analysis to study the deletions of ethnological architectural heritage from the register. In the second part I will compare the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of Slovenia Regional Offices in Celje and Ljubljana. The comparison of the two regional offices with the highest share of deleted ethnological architectural heritage will be limited to data revealed by the register of immovable cultural heritage. I will verify the credibility of the register data and seek for the reasons behind the deletion of ethnological heritage units that are not included in the data found in the register of immovable cultural heritage with a qualitative analysis in which I will hold talks with a focus group of accountable conservationists. I propose a continuation of the research in the field of cultural heritage protection as well as a continuous search for reasons for preservation, for every cultural heritage object that is damaged or destroyed is lost. By studying and identifying the factors for deletions from the register of immovable cultural heritage we can - with appropriate cultural policy measures in the field of cultural heritage - stop the decay of ethnological architectural heritage in the future


Back