This paper describes the concept, models and methods for analyzing compensation in the cultural environment. The aim is to present a theoretical basis for the discussion of compensatory activities. The discussion begins with the concept and principles for ideas about compensation in town planning. There are two different ways of seeing the need for compensating activities that have a negative impact on the landscape: On the one hand, the cultural heritage can be seen as a matter of public interest. The demand for compensation is applicable in this case for the landscape as an entity, without spatial delimitations. On the other hand, compensation measures can be directed at cultural heritage that is considered valuable by the town administration and government authorities. In this case, the demand for compensation becomes limited to objects considered to be of national interest, cultural reserves, building heritage, town planning with protection regulations or demolition bans, and local objects which are part of the national environment quality goal “Good building environment”. Both principles involve, as compared with praxis, an extensive broadening of thought about compensation when exploiting cultural environments.
Four types of compensation activities are discussed. The value of the cultural environment may be compensated when:
1. The same value, which is lost, is recreated at the same place.
2. The same value, which is lost, is recreated at another place.
3. A different value than that which is lost, is recreated at the same place.
4. A different value than that which is lost, is recreated at another place.
Compensation activities can be regulated either by agreements between the contractor/developer and the town or by decisions made by government authorities. The agreements represent a market solution. Compensation can also be the result of government decisions based on legal regulations. In town planning and urban design the actors take on different roles for compensation demands in the planning processes. An actor may take the initiative and develop suggestions for compensatory actions or may deter the recreation of the lost value. These are two active roles. The planning process also has two passive roles. An actor may revoke demands or may neglect to make a decision about a suggestion for compensation actions and hide the need for background material.
The paper ends with a discussion about the conditions for creating a systematic transfer of experience with compensation activities. A prerequisite is that the assignment to analyze the quality of the cultural heritage is complemented by following up compensation activities.
Stockholm, Fjällbacka: KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2014. 83-100 p.