“En todo sitio se cuecen habas:”The Difficulties of Gathering Stakeholders to Sit at the Table -

By Sofia Marin

Broken conversation

For my master’s thesis, I wanted to research how Public-Private Partnerships PPPs (C. Cheong and Macdonald 2014) can help develop heritage projects, particularly in areas such as my hometown of Bogota, where the government is much too occupied investing its resources in more pressing issues such as food security and education. As Cheong (2021) mentions in her article “No Time to Rearrange the Furniture,” even though heritage can be an engine for sustainable development (Europa Nostra 2015), Global South governments ought to prioritize their resources, and heritage interventions end up coming last on the list.

In my research, I found that in Colombia, PPPs have not been successful for heritage intervention even though they have worked for infrastructure projects, and my thesis’s objective changed. I decided to focus on why this otherwise successful business model (Fox, Brakarz, and Cruz Fano 2005) has not been implemented for heritage projects in my home country. While searching for an appropriate case study, I stumbled upon the difficulties the TIC has had in getting its proposals approved by the government. The reasoning for said refusals is presented in a letter from the Ministry of Culture from February 2021 to CREMIL, stating that the proposed interventions by the private investor disrespect the heritage legacy the TIC embodies (Escobar 2021). To understand each side of the story, I delved into the history of the TIC, what happened with the multiple efforts of having the site developed and intervened, and what possibilities lay ahead of this gigantic structure that once was the crown jewel of the modern city that Le Corbusier had imagined for Bogota in the 1950s. The main conclusion of my research was that the conversation between sectors is extremely fragmented, and these fractures are the key reason behind the unsuccessful proposals for the TIC.

Figure 4. “Stakeholder relationship diagram for the TIC.” (Marin 2024, 156). The three sectors (notes 2) are involved in the TIC’s management and conservation efforts. The closer the ring is to the center, the more involved the stakeholder is to the TIC, additionally, the arrows indicate relationship influence and impact. The diagram shows that even though the TIC has been subject of multiple academic endeavors, there is no tangible relationship between Academia or organizations such as ICOMOS to the factual managers of the Complex. Sadly, this means the knowledge being produced is unknown and sometimes even intentionally ignored by the respective authorities in charge of the buildings.

Figure 5, 6, and 7 “Stakeholder mapping”, Sofia Marin 2024. This is an “invaluable tool that helps situate and characterize the different actors involved in a project. The map clearly shows the power and influence that each stakeholder holds over the TIC, guiding the level of management required for each. It is worth noting that although some representatives from the third sector may have a potentially high level of influence over the TIC, they lack the necessary power to affect its management significantly” (Marin 2024, 158).

International issue

To my surprise, the difficulty of building consensus to activate heritage conservation projects was something I encountered as well during our visit to the city planning office in Gothenburg. Our host, Ms. Madelene Seberbrink, stated that having all stakeholders actively participate in the heritage intervention discussion is a titanic task. She mentioned how the local government has implemented various strategies, and even so, despite their efforts, public participation is scarce. Prof. Jennie Sjöholm shared a similar story during her presentation “Goal conflicts and windows of opportunities” (2024), stressing how hard it is for heritage interventions to guarantee an active community engagement from the start of a project. At the same time, she made clear how vital it is for the long-term success of projects to ensure all parts are invited from the beginning. Considering all points of view from all actors can guarantee that the increased shared knowledge gives way to better collaborations where more alternatives benefit everybody, and that, ultimately, the decision-making process assures everyone counts.

To help bridge the gap, Ms. Seberbrink has come up with an idea for informal gatherings taking place every few months. In these meetings, to which all stakeholders involved in heritage planning are invited by an open email, interested people can join for a beer after work, in a restaurant or a pub. The goal of this invitation is for stakeholders to get to know each other outside a working environment, with the hopes that this familiarity will translate to the workplace and help actors understand each other’s points of view, where, as Prof. Sjöholm mentioned, there are no correct versions, and every opinion and story must be heard.

It has been bittersweet to see heritage projects everywhere struggle to get stakeholders to sit at the table and genuinely participate in the debate concerning the possible outcomes of their future development. Actors from different sectors are not used to actively engage with city planning decisions, and in many cases their opinions are often just part of a bureaucratic checklist required by the government agenda. The result is that, while the public sector blames the private sector for the lack of cultural interest and for being driven only by economic gain, the private sector accuses the public sector of setting impossible goals for maintaining the heritage object. Additionally, the third sector tends not to be invited to the discussion, and their expertise and know-how are often forgotten or misused. Furthermore, these issues are not unique to a specific region but rather a universal concern. This understanding underscores the crucial role of cooperation in finding solutions that can bridge the gap and foster collaboration across sectors.

Notes

The headline sentence is Spanish traditional saying which points out that “there are problems or troubles everywhere and, in all circumstances” (Centro Virtual Cervantes 2024).
The public, private and the third sector, which “… Includes residents and consumers in the targeted areas, as well as social institutions and nongovernmental organizations that provide social services.”(Fox, Brakarz, and Cruz Fano 2005, 9)

Bibliography

Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá. 2001. Decreto 606 de 2001. Bogota: Alcaldía.

Centro Virtual Cervantes. 2024. “EN TODAS PARTES CUECEN HABAS.” 2024. https://cvc.cervantes.es/lengua/refranero/ficha.aspx?Par=58737&Lng=0#:~:text=Significado%3A%20Hay%20problemas%20o%20disgustos%20en%20todas%20partes%20y%20circunstancias.&text=Comentario%20al%20marcador%20de%20uso,(El%20Quijote%20II%2013).

Cheong, Caroline, and Susan Macdonald. 2014. “The Role of Public-Private Partnerships and the Third Sector in Conserving Heritage Buildings, Sites, and Historic Urban Areas.” Los Angeles. 978-958-53758-5-7.

Cheong, Caroline S. 2021. “‘No Time to Rearrange the Furniture in the Living Room’: Current Debates in Urban Conservation in the Global South.” Heritage and Society 14 (1): 87–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159032X.2021.2021777.

Escobar, Alberto. 2021. “PQRSD: MC24264E2020 – Radicado CREMIL 0087821 Respuesta Definitiva.” Bogota.

Europa Nostra. 2015. “Cultural Heritage Counts for Europe.” https://www.europanostra.org/our-work/policy/cultural-heritage-counts-europe/.

Fox, Catherine, José Brakarz, and Alejandro Cruz Fano. 2005. Alianzas Tripartitas: Reconocimiento Del Tercer Sector “Cinco Estudios de Casos En La Revitalización Urbana de América Latina.” Edited by Steven Kennedy and SBK&A. Washington DC: Inter-American Development Bank.

la Torre, J de, and Cuéllar Serrano Gómez y CIA LTDA Arquitectos Ingenieros. 1956. “Edificio Para La Caja de Sueldos de Retiro Del Ejercito / Fachada Sur. Corte Esc 1:100 / Drawing Number Number A-105. Project Number 810.” Bogota.

Marin, Laura Sofía. 2024. “The Tequendama International Center: Unfinished Conversations. The Dialogue between the Public, Private and Third Sectors for a Heritage Project in Bogota.” Master Thesis, Leuven: KU Leuven.

Ministerio de Cultura. 2002. Resolución 1582 de 2002 Ministerio de Cultura. Bogotá: Ministerio de Cultura. https://www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=5642.

Ordúz, Saúl. 1959. “Tenth Avenue, Liberator’s Pavilion, and San Diego’s Hermitage.” Bogota. https://twitter.com/colombia_hist/status/1145407906780 573696.

Sjöholm, Jennie. 2024. “Goal Conflicts and Windows of Opportunities.” In The Role of Heritage Planners in Future Landscapes Public Seminar. Gothenburg. https://www.heriland.eu/2024/09/30/the-role-of-heritage-planners-in-future-landscapes-public-seminar/.

About the author

Sofía Marín is an architect specializing in heritage conservation, and urban planning for Historic City Landscapes. She graduated from the Master’s program in Conservation of Monuments and Sites at KU Leuven’s Raymond Lemaire International Center for Conservation in 2024. Her professional experience encompasses design, construction management, development, and financial oversight of conservation projects, as well as collaboration with government officials at the District Institute of Cultural Heritage in Bogotá on licensing heritage initiatives. This blog post was inspired by her participation in the Heriland Blended Intensive Program on “Heritage and Landscapes Futures”, in Gothenburg, Sweden, in October 2024.

Contact the author: sofia.marin55@gmail.com / https://www.sofiamarin.com/