Land of cultural heritage sites in the city of Kazan: geoinformation accounting and safety problems

DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2024-2-30-516-527

View or download the article (Rus)

About the Authors

Guzel R. Safina

Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University,
18, Kremlin str., Kazan, 420008, Russia,
E-mail: safina27@mail.ru

Victoriya A. Fedorova

Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University,
18, Kremlin str., Kazan, 420008, Russia,
E-mail: fva_14@mail.ru

Abstract

Objects of cultural and historical heritage represent an important component of the educational, social and economic development of cities. In modern conditions, it is necessary to take care of existing cultural heritage sites in order to preserve the identity of the urban environment and the possibility of its cultural and economic development. The purpose of the work is to study existing problems in the field of geoinformation recording and preservation of cultural heritage sites in the city of Kazan, as well as to propose ways to solve them for the preservation of historical heritage. The authors created 2 registers: cultural heritage objects registered in the cadastral register and lost objects; maps of the location of lost cultural heritage sites, as well as the modern use of vacated land plots, were made. In the city of Kazan (European Russia), according to open data from the Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, there are 601 cultural heritage sites (CHSs). To date, 23 CHSs are considered lost as a result of anthropogenic and natural causes. A spatial analysis of lost CHSs in the city of Kazan showed that most of them were located in the historical part of the city, which is attractive to developers. Analysis of geographic information systems (public cadastral map) showed that land plots cleared of CHSs are actively involved in the urban planning activities (in 70 % of cases, the territory is allocated for the construction of various real estate objects). The authors revealed that not all cultural heritage sites are subject to total cadastral registration and, accordingly, they are not represented in the existing geographic information system. The public cadastral map reflects only 26 % of the cultural heritage sites of Kazan, which in modern economic realities creates a certain threat to the existence of the overwhelming number of objects. Improving and expanding the content of the geographic information system, consisting in a total accounting of cultural heritage sites and adjacent territories (protection zones of cultural heritage sites) will ensure their safety and prevent destruction.

Keywords

objects of cultural heritage, cadastral registration, geoinformation system, safety and loss, land use

References

  1. Audrerie D. World heritage. Paris: Presses University of France, 1999. 127 p. (in French).
  2. Dolganov A.V., Berdiugina Y.M. To the question of territories associated with the cultural heritage sites. Akademicheskiy vestnik UralNIIproekt RAASN, 2013. No. 3. P. 16–20 (in Russian).
  3. Fedorova V.A., Safina G.R., Zaripova S.N. Spot development of residential purpose objects as a method for solving territorial problems (on the example of the city of Kazan). InterCarto. InterGIS. Proceedings of International Conference, 2021. V. 27. Part 4. P. 244–259 (in Russian). DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2021-4-27-244-259.
  4. Klebanov L.R. Monuments of history and culture: legal status and protection. Moscow: Norma, 2023. 168 p. (in Russian).
  5. Muzychuk V.Y. Economics of cultural heritage in Russia: features and contradictions. Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk (The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences), 2022. No. 6. P. 7–33 (in Russian). DOI: 10.52180/2073-6487_2022_6_7_33.
  6. Nagornaya O.S., Erokhina E.V. Preservation of cultural heritage: from national to global change. Bulletin of the Council of Young Scientists and Specialists of the Chelyabinsk Region, 2016. No. 1 (12). V. 1. P. 91–96 (in Russian).
  7. Scherbina E.V., Salmo A. Urban planning risks of losing cultural heritage. Construction: Science and Education, 2022. V. 12. Iss. 4. P. 46–53 (in Russian). DOI: 10.22227/2305-5502.2022.4.4.
  8. Sivolap T.E. On the issue of preserving cultural heritage in Russia: some aspects of solving the problem. Russian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2012. No. 1 (9). P. 80–89 (in Russian).
  9. Wright W., Eppink F. Drivers of heritage value: A meta-analysis of monetary valuation studies of cultural heritage. Ecological Economics, 2016. V. 130. P. 277–284. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.08.001.

For citation: Safina G.R., Fedorova V.A. Land of cultural heritage sites in the city of Kazan: geoinformation accounting and safety problems. InterCarto. InterGIS. GI support of sustainable development of territories: Proceedings of the International conference. Moscow: MSU, Faculty of Geography, 2024. V. 30. Part 2. P. 516–527. DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2024-2-30-516-527 (in Russian)