Search

The Alto Douro Wine Region (ADW) was listed by UNESCO in 2001 as a living and evolving cultural landscape. Besides the physical diversity of the landscape, there is amultiplicity of actors involved in ADW preservation defi ned at three levels: i) instruments and public entities (in terms of land management); ii) property rights defi nition and liability management (asset level); and iii) stakeholders (as regard the preservation effects). In this paper, we defi ne the relevant attributes to formulate a program to preserve and safeguard the ADW, based on the evidence suggested in a previous study, on the results of a pretest and using information from public discussions and meetings with experts. The research carried out shows that the attributes to consider are: (a) terraced vineyards supported by schist walls, (b) landscape mosaic with agricultural diversity, including plots planted with and bordered by traditional crops, (c) traditional agglomerations and built heritage and,(d) a price, expressed by an annual tax increase per household.

Cultural assets are increasingly being considered in the policies of social and economic development of territories due to spillover effects. However, since cultural assets are not transacted in the market, their use value should be calculated using indirect methods of evaluation or non market techniques. In this paper, the travel cost method was chosen to estimate the curve of demand in the Museum of Lamego which constitutes an important cultural item of the Alto Douro Wine Region, classified by UNESCO in 2001, as a world heritage site – a living and evolving cultural landscape. The results of the application of the Poisson model confirm the expected, that is, the probability of visiting the museum is positively influenced by the educational level, female gender and negatively by the travel cost.

In this paper we trace the emergence of a specific case of cultural policy: the example chosen is a UNESCO World Heritage site, namely the Alto Douro Wine Region (ADW) a portuguese living and evolving cultural landscape. In order to contextualize the particularities of the means that have been adopted for the management of the ADW, we use Throsbys (2001) typology of most commonly-used cultural heritage policy instruments. Additionally we draw on the arguments that are frequently used to support public intervention in this sphere. We conclude that ADWs management policy should: 1) use binding agreements to operationalize a range of measures that compensate farmers who become providers of cultural products; 2) strengthen education and information so as to promote greater physical access and personal appreciation of the ADWs cultural goods and services; and 3) formulate an integrated set of social policies able to mitigate the negative socio-demographic trends that characterize the region and its population.