Perception and ownership as indicators of the concept of Heritage. Case Bogota Foundational Centers

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: López, Martha Cecilia Torres
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: Alfonso, Marcela Riveros, Olaya, Yeimi Paola Rodriguez
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: spa
Título da fonte: Labor & Engenho (Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/8635367
Resumo: In 1954, through Departmental Order (Administrative Council of Cundinamarca) Bogota joined with nearby municipalities (Usaquén, Suba, Engativá, Fontibón, Bosa and Usme) configured as District. Despite remain as foundational centers declared Cultural Heritage Material, these annexes have not been valued patrimonially by the community that lives there, and over time have lost their historical and cultural significance, showing a total lack of cohesion between them and the Capital District since its connotation as cultural assets. Social, territorial and economic relations between them basically do not exist today. This article presents the values obtained from the Declaration and the perception that the community has of them for their appropriation, exercise achieved from an academic process with the participation of students of Architecture of the University's Great Colombia.
id UNICAMP-15_fbdbac99f7150c008ab8cf93ab1753bd
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8635367
network_acronym_str UNICAMP-15
network_name_str Labor & Engenho (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Perception and ownership as indicators of the concept of Heritage. Case Bogota Foundational CentersLa percepción y las formas de apropiación como indicador del concepto de Patrimonio. Caso Núcleos Fundacionales del Distrito CapitalBogota. Heritage. Cultural assets.BogotáPatrimonioBienes de interés culturalIn 1954, through Departmental Order (Administrative Council of Cundinamarca) Bogota joined with nearby municipalities (Usaquén, Suba, Engativá, Fontibón, Bosa and Usme) configured as District. Despite remain as foundational centers declared Cultural Heritage Material, these annexes have not been valued patrimonially by the community that lives there, and over time have lost their historical and cultural significance, showing a total lack of cohesion between them and the Capital District since its connotation as cultural assets. Social, territorial and economic relations between them basically do not exist today. This article presents the values obtained from the Declaration and the perception that the community has of them for their appropriation, exercise achieved from an academic process with the participation of students of Architecture of the University's Great Colombia.En el año de 1954, a través de ordenanza departamental (Consejo Administrativo de Cundinamarca)  la ciudad de Bogotá integra los municipios cercanos (Usaquén, Suba, Engativá, Fontibón, Bosa y Usme) configurándose como Distrito. A pesar de permanecer como Núcleos Fundacionales declarados como Patrimonio Material Cultural Territorial, estos municipios anexos no han sido valorados patrimonialmente por la comunidad que los habita y con el tiempo han perdido su significado histórico y cultural, evidenciando una total falta de cohesión entre ellos y con el Distrito Capital desde su connotación como Bienes de Interés Cultural. Las relaciones sociales, territoriales y patrimoniales entre ellos básicamente no existen en la actualidad. Este artículo expone los valores que lograron la Declaratoria, así como la percepción que la comunidad tiene de los mismos para su apropiación como patrimonio, ejercicio logrado a partir de un proceso académico en el que participaron estudiantes de la Facultad de Arquitectura de la Universidad la Gran Colombia. Universidade Estadual de Campinas2015-09-16info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionTextoapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/863536710.20396/lobore.v9i3.8635367Labor e Engenho; Vol. 9 No. 3 (2015): jul./set.; 33-45Labor e Engenho; Vol. 9 Núm. 3 (2015): jul./set.; 33-45Labor e Engenho; v. 9 n. 3 (2015): jul./set.; 33-452176-8846reponame:Labor & Engenho (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)instacron:UNICAMPspahttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/8635367/pdfBrasilCopyright (c) 2015 Labor & Engenhoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLópez, Martha Cecilia TorresAlfonso, Marcela RiverosOlaya, Yeimi Paola Rodriguez2019-08-05T04:41:15Zoai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8635367Revistahttp://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/laborePUBhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/oai||argollo@fec.unicamp.br2176-88461981-1152opendoar:2019-08-05T04:41:15Labor & Engenho (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Perception and ownership as indicators of the concept of Heritage. Case Bogota Foundational Centers
La percepción y las formas de apropiación como indicador del concepto de Patrimonio. Caso Núcleos Fundacionales del Distrito Capital
title Perception and ownership as indicators of the concept of Heritage. Case Bogota Foundational Centers
spellingShingle Perception and ownership as indicators of the concept of Heritage. Case Bogota Foundational Centers
López, Martha Cecilia Torres
Bogota. Heritage. Cultural assets.
Bogotá
Patrimonio
Bienes de interés cultural
title_short Perception and ownership as indicators of the concept of Heritage. Case Bogota Foundational Centers
title_full Perception and ownership as indicators of the concept of Heritage. Case Bogota Foundational Centers
title_fullStr Perception and ownership as indicators of the concept of Heritage. Case Bogota Foundational Centers
title_full_unstemmed Perception and ownership as indicators of the concept of Heritage. Case Bogota Foundational Centers
title_sort Perception and ownership as indicators of the concept of Heritage. Case Bogota Foundational Centers
author López, Martha Cecilia Torres
author_facet López, Martha Cecilia Torres
Alfonso, Marcela Riveros
Olaya, Yeimi Paola Rodriguez
author_role author
author2 Alfonso, Marcela Riveros
Olaya, Yeimi Paola Rodriguez
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv López, Martha Cecilia Torres
Alfonso, Marcela Riveros
Olaya, Yeimi Paola Rodriguez
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Bogota. Heritage. Cultural assets.
Bogotá
Patrimonio
Bienes de interés cultural
topic Bogota. Heritage. Cultural assets.
Bogotá
Patrimonio
Bienes de interés cultural
description In 1954, through Departmental Order (Administrative Council of Cundinamarca) Bogota joined with nearby municipalities (Usaquén, Suba, Engativá, Fontibón, Bosa and Usme) configured as District. Despite remain as foundational centers declared Cultural Heritage Material, these annexes have not been valued patrimonially by the community that lives there, and over time have lost their historical and cultural significance, showing a total lack of cohesion between them and the Capital District since its connotation as cultural assets. Social, territorial and economic relations between them basically do not exist today. This article presents the values obtained from the Declaration and the perception that the community has of them for their appropriation, exercise achieved from an academic process with the participation of students of Architecture of the University's Great Colombia.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-09-16
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Texto
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/8635367
10.20396/lobore.v9i3.8635367
url https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/8635367
identifier_str_mv 10.20396/lobore.v9i3.8635367
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/8635367/pdf
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2015 Labor & Engenho
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2015 Labor & Engenho
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv Brasil
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Labor e Engenho; Vol. 9 No. 3 (2015): jul./set.; 33-45
Labor e Engenho; Vol. 9 Núm. 3 (2015): jul./set.; 33-45
Labor e Engenho; v. 9 n. 3 (2015): jul./set.; 33-45
2176-8846
reponame:Labor & Engenho (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron:UNICAMP
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron_str UNICAMP
institution UNICAMP
reponame_str Labor & Engenho (Online)
collection Labor & Engenho (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Labor & Engenho (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||argollo@fec.unicamp.br
_version_ 1800217037808599040

Registros relacionados