Everyday Heritage: Identifying attributes of 1965-1985 residential neighbourhoods by involved stakeholders

Improving the energy performance and the climate resilience of buildings and landscapes, while making them affordable and inhabitable for everybody, are key challenges of our time. In facing these challenges, European countries and instutions emphasise the need to protect and advance the cultural values of the built environment. However, the largest part of the stock that needs sustainable renova*on is not listed, nor is its heritage significance assessed, detailing what is valuable (aIributes) and why (values). Herein lies the risk that present significant aIributes are not iden*fied and maintained in future renova*ons, causing the loss of a variety of resources and their cultural significance. Moreover, the risk to destroy existing values and atributes can also reduce ci*zen’s support for future developments. This problem is faced by the housing stock built in Dutch ci*es between 1965 and 1985, which is more than 30% of the housing stock in the Netherlands. Although in recent years there is a growing aIen*on for Dutch architecture built after 1965, there is a need for more knowledge about its heritage significance. In assessing everyday

residential architecture, the need to involve citizens alongside experts is recommended. The societalrelevance of this PhD research is underlined both at national and international levels, with respecively the Dutch ‘Post 65’ program, the upcoming Dutch Environmental Law (Omgevingswet), the European Faro Convention and its Dutch ratification, the Renovation Wave and European Green Deal, and the global housing crisis. The objectives of this PhD research are two-fold. First, it aims to reveal new knowledge about the atributes of 1965-1985 residential neighbourhoods. Second, it aims to contribute to development and test of methodologies that assess the heritage significance of residential architecture. The main research question is: What atributes of residential neighbourhoods, built in The Netherlands between 1965-1985, can be identified as significant by the stakeholders involved? This question is further deconstructed in

three main components: how (methods), what (aIributes) and who (stakeholders). The research adopts a broad concep*on of heritage, assuming that all buildings and neighbourhoods have heritage significance, including aIributes that are valuable, to someone, in some form. These aIributes can be the tangible embodiment/expression of a value, but they can also be an intangible aIribute, such as an event, use or

meaning. The first part of the thesis explains the development of the research framework. An ‘integral view' research approach allowed multiple value categories and stakeholder perspecttives to be included.

Exploration of a range of 1965-1985 residential neighbourhoods led to identification of main types, lowrise and mid-rise, that hold representa*ve urban and architectural aIributes and could serve as examples

for the empirical research. The ‘Heritage Cube’ developed by Peter Howard was adopted, adapted, and tested as a conceptual model for the operational framework. It integrates aIributes, stakeholders, and

scales, fifng the purpose of iden*fying aIributes by different stakeholders and finding the potentially differentiated opinions of individuals and groups.

The second part of the thesis explains the empirical qualitative research. The operational framework was used to examine three case studies, mixing methods, stakeholders and data collection. Methods included

interviews, inductive and deductive coding methods for content analysis, followed by theory-building on stakeholder differences and aIribute classification.

Results show that by an ‘integral view’ research approach aIributes can be identified in both tangible and intangible categories, and, on successive scale levels. The stakeholders involved in the iden*fica*on have an influence on the aIributes, as different stakeholder groups and different individuals show similarities but also focus on different aIribute categories and scale levels and convey significance to different

aIributes. AIributes that were intended in the original planning and design of the neighbourhoods are currently assessed as significant but also later added or changed aIributes. The research results also

suggest that aIributes specific for 1965-1985 neighbourhoods are perceived as valuable, but also more generic aIributes. The iden*fica*on of this wide range of aIributes, according to the ‘integral view’ and a

broad defini*on of heritage, results from an open-ended questioning by multiple participatory methods. A process of inductive analysis, classifying and relating aIributes resulted in a network of aIributes and

sub-aIributes that illustrates a shared narra*ve of a neighbourhood.

The study provides insights and recommenda*ons for practioners in heritage participation regarding e.g. the participatory methods that can contribute to the democratic renewal as proposed by the European

Faro Convention and the 'integral vision' as a way of thinking for heritage professionals and agencies to assess residential neighbourhoods. The atributes and aIribute categories identified in the empirical study can provide a basis for further explora*on in the Post 65 inventories expected in Dutch municipalities and at the national level in the coming years. For academics, this research provides insights in the heritage assessment of significance by various stakeholders and individuals and the related

influence on types and categories of aIributes. By assessing the heritage significance of atributes in notlisted everyday neighbourhoods, this research has expanded the boundaries of what can constitute

heritage. Deep knowledge about aIributes of the existing built environment informs optimal use of the existing ones and can help to ‘refuse’ or ‘rethink’ the use of new materials and thereby helping the

circular economy. Further developing, tes*ng and applying this broader heritage defini*on and related research methods can contribute to a more informed and sustainable renova*on and development of the entire built environment, informed by its heritage significance, regardless of the heritage status.