7. Analysis and evaluation of the management system

The analysis of the management of the property has been done as a result of the monitoring, in co-operation with the central and local management bodies, also as a result of contacts with representatives of the business, public organisations, etc. As a result of the analysis could be pointed the following positive aspects of the present management system:

  • For the first time was held entire monitoring of the state of the property and the activities carried for its conservation, use and management (2010-2011); monitoring maps were developed for the scientific observation of 115 heritage sites.

  • After 2010 was strengthened the administrative control aiming at preventing new unregulated building interventions – an architect was appointed by the Municipality directly responsible for the Ancient City of Nessebar and initiatives were undertaken for updating of the local rules and regulations as well as for the financial provisions for designs for conservation of the cultural heritage.

  • Partial reform in the present strongly concentrated management system was carried out, appointing two regional inspectors from the Ministry of Culture in the South-east region.

  • Municipal initiatives were undertaken for incorporation of the population in the conservation of the heritage sites.

Along, the MP identifies the following problems in the management, manifested by the juxtaposition between the results of the analysis in this field and the characteristics of the modern management systems:

  • The institutional network is to a great extent disintegrated. In spite of the pointed measures, the management system is still too centralised and concentrated. There is insufficient relation between the central and local management bodies. There are contradictions, even conflicts among the main interested participants: public authorities, population, business that obviously have not common interests and for sustainable use of the property.

  • The participation of the central public authorities is insufficiently active, in contradiction to the great image and economic resource of the property. To some extent the state underestimates its responsibilities for the conservation of the property; the cultural heritage – public ownership is in bad physical condition; there is no consecutive policy and national strategy for the conservation, use and management of the property with adequate legislation, financing, permanent monitoring, effective protection regimes and open information system. The economic efficiency in the management of the property is unsatisfactory. New construction has been allowed, not considering the outstanding universal value and inadequate development of functions that threaten it.

  • The local authorities are unable with cope with the above problems which decidedly exceed their recourses by the existing centralisation of the management. There is lack of local system for conservation with specialised local bodies for management and control; there is insufficiency of resources for conservation – financial, expert, administrative and executive. As a result of that there is a considerable amount of infringements and illegal construction. (SCHEME №8: Violations of the Monuments of Culture and Museums Act/Cultural Heritage Act ascertained by commissions of NIICH within the World Heritage Site boundary – typology of the violations).

Scheme 8: Violations of the Monuments of Culture and Museums Act/Cultural Heritage Act ascertained by commissions of NIICH within the World Heritage Site boundary - typology of the violations

  • The indicated state is gravely affecting the local population. “The Ancient City of Nessebar” is a World Heritage site but in the same time – a living city, with living people, who naturally strive for well-being and quality of life. But in the current conditions the residents find themselves in a difficult situation: they have to satisfy old and vague conservations prescriptions without the possibility of reaching modern standard of living; doomed to suffer only restrictions and bans, without any stimuli and public support; demotivated by the low economic effectiveness of the practiced form of tourism; deprived of enough information and of permanent dialogue with the public authorities, of possibilities for creation of new jobs in the sphere of tourism, etc. As a result of all this the people become passive and disinterested, deprived of self-confidence of a real owner of the property and participant in its management. In this case some of the residents of the Ancient City look for a way to evade the set restrictions. Sometimes even they come to the conviction that the “World Heritage” statute is rather more an obstacle than a chance.

  • Sustainable participation of the business in the system for management is not achieved; there is lack of effective mechanisms for public-private partnership based on the joint marketing and common understanding for the aims of conservation and sustainable use of the property.

In these circumstances the present management of the property apparently does not correspond to the modern concept for management of the cultural heritage. The integrity in the institutional network for management is broken; it disintegrates into participants with conflicting interests.