Evidence building & demonstration
This report is the analysis of the data gathered from the Role Models (RMs) regarding their successful heritage-led rural regeneration models. This analysis has been done from a holistic and multidisciplinary perspective, studying their objectives, motivation, needs and barriers using the Community Capitals Framework.
First the RM have been studied in their context and characterised for their inclusion in the “Best practices Repository”, second the six Systemic innovation Areas (SIAs) has been conceptualised and finally the best practices from each RM have been analysed. These analyses have allowed the identification of common features, mechanism for mobilisation of capitals and required resources that will facilitate the replication in other rural areas. This analysis will allow refining and validating the characterisation of the SIAs.
This report is a continuation of the analysis realised in the D1.1 RURITAGE Practices Repository of the data gathered from Role Models (RMs) regarding their successful heritage-led rural regeneration models. In this second stage the best practices from each RM have been analysed from a transversal perspective using 11 cross-cutting issues. These analyses have allowed the identification of 70 common lesson learnt. This abstraction and conceptualisation of the best practices have been included in the lesson learnt repository as replicable specific strategies for replicators.
The baseline of the Replicators (Rs) establishes the starting point for monitoring and allows the diagnosis of their current situation. It is the first measurement of all the key performance indicators (KPIs) taken into account in the RURITAGE project, both letting to know these indicators value before the execution of the actions to be performed and also easing the comparison between the same indicators after the execution of the actions. A state of the art of Replicators at different dimensions and a deep analysis and validation of Rs’ needs have been done.
This Deliverable is providing an ad-hoc stakeholder identification and engagement strategy that will support the Replicators and Role Models in identifying the stakeholders to be involved in the Rural Heritage Hubs set within the RURITAGE project. WP3 aims at the co-development and co-implementation of heritage-led regeneration strategies in the RURITAGE Replicators and it supports an enhanced sense of ownership and responsibility among the inhabitants of the rural areas through local engagement in the participated and inclusive Rural Heritage Hubs (RHHs) within both Role Models (RMs) and Replicators (Rs).
This report describes Model Business Canvases presenting the tailored solutions for all Replicators. The framework was designed to suit the needs of Cultural and Natural Heritage (CNH). This report includes the CNH Canvas/solution for each R, along with the description of the methodology and process and guide used to develop them.
This deliverable summarizes the results of the co-development of innovative heritage-led regeneration plans in Replicators and builds on findings and activities coming from WP1-4 and WP7. RURITAGE’s 6 Replicators represent six very diverse rural areas in Europe and beyond (Austria, Norway, Germany, Slovenia, Italy and Turkey) and are acting as the main laboratories to test the RURITAGE approach. By working on the 6 identified Systemic Innovation Areas (SIAs) – Pilgrimage, Local Food, Migration, Art&Festival, Resilience, Landscape-, the Replicators are demonstrating local Cultural and Natural Heritage (CNH) as a driver for regeneration and sustainable growth. The heritage-led regeneration plans presented in this deliverable will be implemented in Task 3.5.
The goal of the Monitoring Programme is to provide evidence of the role of cultural and natural heritage in rural areas as a driver for sustainable growth. This document shows the elaboration of RURITAGE monitoring programme implemented within the Replicators during project development. Several data collection options are described, including regular, non-regular and co-monitoring. In order to combine the pre-selected and multiscale KPI, weights have been assigned to indicators, according to the knowledge provided by the experts of the consortium.