ABSTRACT

The UK Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport have just published a new framework for developing ideas about culture and heritage capital. The aim is to provide research, data, guidance and tools to help organisations make a stronger case for investment in culture and heritage assets. The model will adapt an approach used for natural capital. This review article guardedly welcomes the initiative but notes that, as with natural capital, there are major conceptual challenges to be addressed. Leaving aside core theoretical issues, these include policy challenges such as defining cultural and heritage ‘assets’ and mapping their condition, the need to explore the whole idea of a ‘services’ model for cultural and heritage assets (which already exists for natural capital), questions around the validity of monetary values as proxies for heritage values, and major questions around the application of such models to different areas of heritage and cultural policy and practice. Cultural capital is not a new idea, but what is new is the attempt to take the monetisation of values a step further. This is an important debate, but it will require proper resources, and considerable engagement from the sectors, practitioners and communities in order to close the gap between economists and non-economists, and to genuinely help us all to better make the case for investing in culture and heritage.

摘要

英国数字、文化、媒体和体育部刚刚发布了一个关于发展文化和遗产资本理念的新框架。目的是提供研究、数据、指导和工具，帮助组织为文化和遗产资产的投资提供更有力的理由。该模型将采用一种用于自然资本的方法。这篇评论文章谨慎地欢迎该倡议，但指出，与自然资本一样，有一些重大的概念挑战需要解决。撇开核心理论问题不谈，这些包括政策挑战，例如定义文化和遗产“资产”并绘制其状况，需要探索文化和遗产资产“服务”模式的整体理念（自然资本已经存在） , 围绕货币价值作为遗产价值代理的有效性的问题，以及关于将此类模型应用于遗产和文化政策与实践的不同领域的主要问题。文化资本并不是一个新的想法，但新的是将价值货币化更进一步的尝试。这是一场重要的辩论，但它需要适当的资源以及部门、从业者和社区的大量参与，以缩小经济学家和非经济学家之间的差距，并真正帮助我们所有人更好地为投资提供理由文化和遗产。但新的尝试是将价值货币化更进一步。这是一场重要的辩论，但它需要适当的资源以及部门、从业者和社区的大量参与，以缩小经济学家和非经济学家之间的差距，并真正帮助我们所有人更好地为投资提供理由文化和遗产。但新的尝试是将价值货币化更进一步。这是一场重要的辩论，但它需要适当的资源以及部门、从业者和社区的大量参与，以缩小经济学家和非经济学家之间的差距，并真正帮助我们所有人更好地为投资提供理由文化和遗产。