Mr President, dear colleagues:

Louise Noelle and Christina Cameron, in our role of General Rapporteurs for this World Congress, we greet you again. When we met in Mexico City last Sunday, we described our vision of the general report. We indicated that we did not intend to make a summary of the reports of the City Rapporteurs, reports that you have just heard this morning. We said that we would attempt to analyze the discussions that would take place in the four cities and that we would draw out some conclusions.

These conclusions would try to capture some of the common elements that have surfaced in the keynote speeches and the work of the Scientific Committees.

Our final report has consequently been structured as follows. First there will be an introduction, followed by a review of the main scientific themes that have been covered during the week. After that, we will present three major conclusions pertaining to sustainable development, the role of ICOMOS and the purpose of conservation.

We should start with some initial comments on the subject of the academic organization of the Scientific Committees of ICOMOS as it was framed by the 12th Assembly, in which the members of the Executive Committee met to perform their administrative functions. This World Congress on the Conservation of Monumental Heritage, "Mexico 99", (the 20th ICOMOS-Mexico Symposium), had as its overall theme, "The Wise Use of Heritage". The conference took place from Monday, the 18th of October to Thursday the 21st, 1999, in the cities of Mexico, Morelia, Guanajuato and Guadalajara. These centres were grouped respectively under the specific themes of "Heritage and Conservation", "Heritage and Territory", "Heritage and Society", and "Heritage and Development", in which a keynote speaker on each theme was given by: Etienne Poncelet of France, Carlos Gonzalez Lobo of Mexico, Ramon Gutierrez of Argentina, and Jean-Louis Luxen of Belgium.

In the different cities, 17 Scientific Committees met, of the 20 official working groups of ICOMOS. They were: in Mexico: archaeology, undenvater archaeology, structures, and risk management; in Guanajuato: the economics of conservation, training, legislation, and cultural routes; in Morelia: Historic Cities, vernacular architecture, wood, earth, and stone; in Guadalajara: mural painting, cultural tourism, historic sites and gardens, and photogrammetry. Two other additional themes, the conservation of Industrial Heritage in Guanajuato and the architecture of the 20th century in Guadalajara also met, the latter \vith the intention of forming part of the scientific committees of ICOMOS. Two introductory speakers were planned for each of these themes, a Mexican and a foreigner, as weIl as five general papers, and this did indeed take place in most cases. Also, each of the aforementioned themes was complemented by the 19 working groups, in which a good number of presentations were made. In this way, we may say that on this occasion nearly 300 presentations were offered, corresponding to about 100 countries of the five continents.

In respect to the participant the delegates came from many countries, many different backgrounds, both geographically and professionally, and they enriched our conclusions with their active participation and their diverse points of view. It is fundamental to emphasize that, in a meeting of this type, the shared concern for the conservation of heritage with a multiplicity of points of view, variety of origins, and plurality of specialities has resulted in an event that is difficult to summarize. In this regard, we had a particularly interesting challenge in our role as General Rapporteurs, in view of the large number of presentations with a wide-ranging content in terms of new ideas and new positions; for this reason, we think it is particularly important to underline the diverse conclusions extracted from the debates in the various working groups, as they relate to the addresses of the keynote speakers.

It is fitting to note that this is the last world meeting of ICOMOS in this century , so that its undertakings must constitute the foundation of concepts that will drive conservation initiatives of the next millennium. Their utility remains to be seen, both for the numerous participants of this meeting as weIl as for the future of conservation in relation to governments and other institutions.

As for how this event unfolded, we must express the general sense of inconvenience due to the various organizational and logistical problems, which were probably the result of the choice of multiple city-sites, the need to travel across country, the complications of accommodation, and finally the lack of precision in the programs and schedules of the presentations, as weIl as the adverse working conditions in some cases. Without doubt this made more difficult the accomplishments of certain participants, but once these problems were overcome with the help of the administrative assistants and volunteers, in balance one can say that the results of the conference are positive, in regard to exploring new ideas for heritage conservation.

Additionally, the creation of this summary was complicated, as it was impossible to attend all events. In this regard we would like to acknowledge the assistance of the session chairs, especially the city rapporteurs, who have just given their presentations. In this sense, as we said in our opening comments at the inaugural ceremony, we will present not a summary of what you have just heard, but rather an evaluation of what has occurred, in light of the diverse themes and the conclusions that may be drawn.

In the first place we must emphasize that the opening ceremonies took place in the principal theatres of each city, the Palace of Fine Arts, the Ocampo Theatre, the Juarez Theatre, and the Degollado Theatre. Various government officiaIs participated, such as Rafael Tovar y de Teresa, President of the National Council of Culture and the Arts, Maria Teresa Franco and Gerardo Estrada, Directors of the National Institutes of Anthropology and Fine Arts, and Roberto Eibeinshult, Director of Urban Development of the Federal District. As weIl, Governors, the Secretaries of Culture, Secretaries of State and other legislative and judicial officiaIs were present at the inauguration in Guanajuato, as in Morelia and Guadalajara. We consider the presence of these officials as relevant, given that many of the heritage protection and conservation activities are originated by or are directed through government. It is appropriate that we capitalize upon their interest. Their comments are valuable as introductions to our theme and to the actions that ICOMOS must undertake.

Initially it is useful to review analytically the four keynote addresses, as they concerned the subthemes of the principal theme: the "Wise Use of Heritage". Etienne Poncelet's presentation, "From the Classification of Monuments to the Conservation of Heritage" offered first an overview of the historical process of the classification of monuments in France with the purpose of explaining the conservation actions required when confronted by two fundamental changes: the industrial revolution of the past century, and the present urban culture dominated by the realities of cyberspace. He considers that in a monument one must take into account not simply the fabric of the structure, but also its works of restoration, materials and surroundings, both physical and social. These considerations in turn must relate to the relevant qualities of nature, beauty, antiquity, integrity and significance. Existing research, records of interventions and physical and spiritual authenticity are fundamental for a substantive appreciation. To summarize, the good use of a monument consists in bringing out its essential characteristics, where the cultural complexity of humanism is clearly expressed.

Ramon Gutierrez in "Heritage for Everyone: Reflections at the End of the Millennium," emphasized the theme of identity, to him a critical issue, which is presently confronted by globalization and by the domination of the "factories of centralized thought." Another theme of his presentation was the characteristics of architectural production of today, ,vhich is influenced by superficiality and the search for instant fame. To confront this problem, he called for ways to put a halt to social exclusivity, the destruction of cultural values, the loss of urban heritage and environmental degradation. Heritage must play a fundamental role in the next millennium by searching for compatibility with urban development and social requirements.

For his part, Carlos Gonzalez Lobo defined heritage as belonging to two opposing concepts, that ,vhich relates to the ownership of a monument, whether public or private, and that which takes into consideration the value of the monument to the greater community. In this sense, and with a wide number of graphic examples taken from around the world, he illustrated how intangible values of culture and custom must take precedence over globalization as framed by technology and cybernetics.

"Heritage and Development" was the theme of Jean-Louis Luxen's lucid presentation. Drawing upon his wide experience working on conservation problems and supporting his theme with many examples, he emphasized the need to achieve a sustainable position in actions related to physical heritage. He explained that conservation must be an indicator of social well-being, if it is to transmit heritage legacy successfully. He explained three measures for supporting conservation work: direct, indirect and induced funding. Finally, it is essential to conserve the ideals of heritage conservation to promote peace and to conserve monuments while always placing humanity at the centre of the process.

The ideas as expressed in these keynote addresses were interwoven throughout most of the presentations. Upon these recurring points we will base our conclusions. It remains only to add that the Introductory Addresses and the presentations in thc working groups brought to our attention many examples that supported the theoretical concepts already mentioned. For that, and in spite of having attended only a few of the 19 working groups that took place simultaneously in four cities (while we have tried to collect the opinions of those who did attend these sessions), we are left with the impression that there was a cohesion of ideas in both individual cases and in themes. As weIl, it is worth mentioning the high quality of most of thc presentations, which contributed to the enrichment of the conference generally, and for each one of us individually; this without forgetting that the practical cases studies were well-recieved by the diverse specialists, which speaks favourably of the profession, and speaks of the need for more activity of this kind.

MAIN CONCLUSIONS

The threc conclusions that we wish to present today focus on the contribution of heritage to sustainable development, an evolving role for heritage professionals and ICOMOS itself, and thirdly a new role for conservation in social development.

I CONTRIBUTION OF HERITAGE TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Many speakers have spoken eloquently about the challenge of using heritage wisely in the context of development. How do we reconcile heritage and development? This is not really a new consideration, since a passing reference to sustainable development appears in the Venice Charter.

Speakers emphasized the need to modify our conceptual framework for heritage conservation. They spoke of the traditional approach as being relatively isolated, using technical and aesthetic concerns as a basis for action. In the context of human development, speakers mentioned frequently the need to develop a conceptual frame work that better integrates heritage and development. In the words of ICCROM Director Marc Laenen, cultural heritage needs to be repositioned as a key element of sustainable development.

Several speakers explored ideas about how heritage sites and monuments might benefit from development, particularly in terms of channelling dollars earmarked for development into heritage conservation. This will require a better understanding of market forces, in the case of private sector investment, and of the many tools that governments and institutions have created. It also requires more sophisticated evaluation methodolgies (especially related to social and cultural values) to properly assess the short and long term contribution of heritage conservation to development. An interesting example was presented by Juliet Ramsay, who gave a good demonstration of being opportunistic. She spoke of obtaining significant funding for cultural resource work by piggy-backing onto a sustainable development initiative in Australia, specifically a forestry renewal project.

In the context of sustainable development, two interrelated issues that require urgent attention are cultural tourism and historic towns and cities. These two issues underscore the fact that historic resources are non-renewable, belonging to all of humanity .Without proper management to ensure the long-term survival of historic resources, there is a risk that during our lifetime we may witness the consumption and permanent loss of this legacy.

Heritage tourism has often been seen as a threat to historic resources. Manuel de Santiago from Mexico described the challenge of managing cultural tourism. On the one hand, if poorly managed tourism can overwhelm and destroy heritage. On the other band, if,vell-managed, cultural tourism can contribute to local economies and reinforce awareness and education about the importance of historic places. Cultural tourism needs authenticity , if it is going to provide the basis for understanding human development and giving access to the spirit of different countries. ln this sense, speakers recognized that cultural tourism offers incredible opportunities to develop cross-cultural awareness.

We have heard about the growth of cultural and eco-tourism and its role in dispersing heritage to everyone. The representative from the World Tourism Organization indicated that natural and cultural heritage resources are and w ill remain motivating factors for travel in the foreseeable future. According to the experts, people choose travel destinations where they can learn about traditional and distinct cultures in their historic context. The balance that must be maintained is between visitor access and conservation needs.

Several speakers indicated that the tourism sector now more clearly understands that tourism must be sustainable, although several papers presented case studies to the contrary. It should be noted that the tourism industry bas recently adopted a code of ethics to reflect the need to protect ecological and cultural heritage.

Bill Sugaya of the USA made the point that there is a major change in the relationship between tourism and conservation, in large measure because the tourism industry has matured a great deal in the last decade. The old paradigm supported the view that tourists were a threat to be managed. The new paradigm leads to the view that conservation is driven by the need to make heritage resources available to tourists. The new approach encourages partnerships and long-term sustainability.

The situation of historic towns is particularly alarming. The historic town is both the content and container, as it were, of heritage. Several speakers addressed the need to reduce the negative impacts of heritage tourism through a variety of actions, aimed at diversifying the product base, improving the quality of life for inhabitants, and ensuring participation of the community in planning and decision-making.

In addition, historic towns are vulnerable to redevelopment projects that fail to understand and take in account the historic fabric, texture, morphology and traditional patterns of use. Taken collectively ,such features are essential to defining a distinct sense of place. The case studies on 20th century architecture are particularly pertinent in this regard, because modern architecture is underappreciated and viewed as disposable. The presentations on threats to the rich Bauhaus-inspired urban fabric of Tel Aviv or the Art Deco buildings at Miami Beach illustrate the point.

Our first conclusion from the meeting is that, to use heritage wisely, it will be necessary to position heritage as an essential element of sustainable development, giving particular attention to cultural tourism and historic cities.

II EVOLVING ROLE OF ICOMOS: A CALL TO ACTION

Based upon the various presentations and commentaries, we have collected together here a good number of recommendations for ICOMOS and the conservation specialists who make up the membership. These recommendations go beyond particular cases or issues. They refer to actions of a general nature tha t should be undertaken by the leaders of this organization, at both the local and international levels.

First ICOMOS needs to develop meaningful leadership for conservation and a real presence in each country. It is fundamental that the international executive members work together to define the steps to take so that the local members can assume greater visibility and awareness. Perhaps this issue can be best understood in cases such as architecture of the 20th century, which does not yet have an official Scientific Committee, and where spokespersons such as Michael Levin, are asking for better measures for protection of this fast-disappearing resource.

There is also the need to establish clear standards of professionalism. Given the current challenges of conservation, it is not enough just to know the materials and techniques of restoration. It is well understood that it is now necessary to take into account conservation theories as well as historical and cultural knowledge in order to achieve an integrated conservation approach. ICOMOS must establish guidelines for professional activity in order to guarantee the quality of results. Various speakers touched this theme and the need for ICOMOS to establish clear and holistic standards.

Here it is appropriate to mention the general preoccupation with the question of intangible heritage, which strictly speaking does not concern ICOMOS, as its name indicates. Nevertheless, the recurrence of these indications, from the presentation of Carlos Gonzalez Lobo, to the considerations of the working groups of vernacular architecture and cultural tourism, underlines that it is important that this organization study the theme of the intangible and come to some conclusions on the terms of its inclusion.

Finally, taking into account the need to establish constructive relations with governments, we must emphasize, with Jean Louis Luxen, the necessity of active and constant participation with governments and international institutions. In this regard, it is urgent that those in charge of the decision-making process understand the conservation principles promoted by ICOMOS and that ICOMOS establish closer relations with the decision-making levels.

Our second conclusion, then, is that ICOMOS should assume an expanded leadership role, both for its membership and for outreach to governments, institutions and partners.

III EVOLVING ROLE OF CONSERVATION IN SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT

The third conclusion is that heritage conservation can and must play an essential role in social development. Several speakers have addressed the issue of purpose. Why do we conserve historic sites, monuments and landscapes? For whom do we conserve them? Todor Krestev from Bulgaria summed it up well when he stated that conservation is more than a profession; rather, it is a way of thinking and behaving, of building consensus with local communities to ensure the transmission of authentic messages from the past to future generations.

Speakers here in Mexico have consistently pointed out that in the face of globalization, conservation takes on an essential role in ensuring the survival of identity. As globalization sweeps around the world, hastened by the exponential growth in communications, the need to preserve our sense of individuality bas become an essential counterpoint. Heritage conservation, defined by ICOMOS President Roland Silva as the best science to preserve the memory of humankind, supports authenticity and allows the unique qualities of individual human experience to be transmitted to future generations. Individual histories reside in monuments and sites, as well as in other cultural expressions. Collective histories reside in ensembles where people live, be they towns, villages or cultural landscapes.

In his comprehensive presentation on heritage and development, Jean-Louis Luxen described the new human development indicators used by UNDP and emphasized the fact that they focus on living conditions, social cohesion, identity and human dignity. He along with other speakers like Ramón Gutierrez stated that heritage conservation must support improved conditions for all human beings, to achieve a level of existence satisfactory to all. Investing in living spaces is not just about bricks and mortar. It must take into consideration the values that local communities attach to these places.

An essential ingredient to support this new vision for heritage conservation is the opening up of the decision-making processes and the provision of opportunities for local participation. As the State Governor of Jalisco put it so eloquently at the opening ceremony here in Guadalajara, something magical happens to local communities when historic centres are conserved. He said it is like putting on new clothes or washing your face. Lots of new activities result from this renewal and citizens become motivated to take on new civic challenges.

Our third conclusion then is that the conservation of heritage plays a key role in social development, contributing to greater participation of local communities and supporting a sense of identity and of belonging.

CONCLUSION

As we stated in our opening remarks last Sunday, we encourage ICOMOS International to present this report to national governments and international organizations as well as the ICOMOS national and scientific committees for consideration. In this way, the work of ICOMOS Mexico 99 could pave the way to better manage our heritage, to achieve social development goals and to transmit authentic messages of the past to present and future generations.

Guadalajara, October 22nd 1999

---