Page 53 - Sjæklen2008
Basic HTML Version
53
13.
Henrik Harnow, René S. Christensen og Gitte Haastrup:
Industrisamfundets havne 1840-1970. Bygninger, miljøer
og bevaringsværdier på danske havne.
Foto: Flemming
Wedell. Kulturarvsstyrelsen og Odense Bys Museer
2008. Registrering af helheder skete efter
KIP-metoden
(Kulturhistorien i planlægningen), beskrevet i
Udpegning
af værdifulde kulturmiljøer i regionplanlægningen
. Miljø-
og Energiministeriet, Skov- og Naturstyrelsen 1999.
Registrering af bygninger skete efter
SAVE-metoden
(Survey
of Architectural Values in the Environment), beskrevet i
Vejledning. SAVE – kortlægning og registrering af byers og
bygningers bevaringsværdi og udarbejdelse af kommuneat-
las.
Skov og Naturstyrelsen, 3. reviderede udgave 1997.
14.
René Schrøder Christensen, Gitte Haastrup,
Henrik Harnow, Ellen Warring og Susanne Mikkelsen:
Industrisamfundets erhvervshavne 840-1970 – Forunder-
søgelse
. Odense bys museer og Kulturarvsstyrelsen, juni
2007. Ligger på Kulturarvsstyrelsens hjemmeside www.
kulturarv.dk.
15.
„7 havne udvalgt til eftertiden” Pressemeddelelse fra
Kulturarvsstyrelsen 28/08-2007.
.
16.
Henrik Harnow, René S. Christensen og Gitte Haastrup:
Industrisamfundets havne 1840-1970. Bygninger, miljøer
og bevaringsværdier på danske havne.
Foto: Flemming
Wedell. Kulturarvsstyrelsen og Odense Bys Museer 2008.
17.
Kulturarv – en værdifuld ressource for kommunernes
udvikling
. Kulturarvsstyrelsen og Fonden Realdania. 2005.
18.
Ibid. p. 4, 5 og 7. For en kritisk anmeldelse af undersø-
gelsen, se Torben Witt: Kulturarv – en værdifuld ressource
for kommunernes udvikling.
Danske Museer
nr. 5. 2005, p.
8-9.
19.
Det mener danskerne om udvikling og bevaring af hav-
neområderne. Omnibus-undersøgelse 30. januar 2007. Byg-
ningskultur Danmark. Ligger på
.
20.
27% ønsker videnerhverv som banker, IT-virskomhed,
reklame, arkitekter etc. og 34 % ønsker produktionserhvervv
som fødevarer, energi etc. Ibid. p. 7.
21.
F.eks. indlæg af Nis-Edwin List-Petersen, næstformand
i Træskib Sammenslutningen: „Den maritime kulturarv kan
gå tabt i havnebyer”. JydskeVestkysten 7/11 2008.
Summary
The changes in Danish harbours in recent years have resul-
ted in discussions on preservation of the physical cultural
heritage at the harbours and a number of surveys of the har-
bours.
At Nordic level, the matter is within the province of the
Nordic Council of Ministers, which focused in the 1990s on
Nordic coastal culture, and published a book on harbours’
development, function and buildings. In Denmark, the ma-
ritime museums’ network has contributed to the discussions
with the publication Danske Havne – en kulturhistorisk over-
sigt (Danish Harbours – a cultural historical overview).
I 2003, the Heritage Agency of Denmark launched the
area of initiative Industrisamfundets kulturarv (the industri-
al society’s cultural heritage) and initiated a major survey of
the industrial society’s harbours which was performed by
the museums of the City of Odense. The survey was based
on 75 harbours from the period, 40 of which were selected
and fully registered. Seven of these were then selected for
registration of every single building. The survey has provi-
ded an overview and a level of information which can be
used at all Danish harbours whether or not they were inclu-
ded in the survey.
Several additional surveys were made of Danes’ attitu-
des to preservation of the country’s cultural heritage. The
surveys show that Danes are very positive towards their cul-
tural heritage, but also that they would prefer to preserve
those parts of the harbours which belong to the pre-indu-
strial period, while silos and cranes do not enjoy the same
popularity.
Harbours are generally a part of the infrastructure and
are operated on a commercial basis. But there is also inte-
rest in using them as recreational and residential areas. The
interest in preserving the historic features at the harbours is
a third point which should be considered with the others. As
the surveys have not resulted in any formal provisions for
preservation of the harbours’ cultural heritage, it is up to the
individual harbour owners and the other interested parties
who are associated with the harbours to integrate the cultu-
ral heritage into the harbours’ current functions.
