Finland's Faro Convention Process

TOWARDS THE RATIFICATION: THE PREPATORY REVIEW PROJECT 2014 Tell, ask, listen – open preparation The goal of the preparatory review project for ratifying the Faro Convention was to implement the

citizen-oriented, interactive idea of the Convention.

Goals of the project The project aimed to spark discussion about the significance of cultural heritage, publicise the Faro Convention and investigate and highlight the most essential entities that should be addressed after ratifying the Convention. What are the key needs for change and development involving cultural heritage work that could be used to promote the realisation of the goals of the Faro Convention in Finland? How could they be met? The purpose of the preparatory review that was drawn up is to support the Ministry of Education and Culture in preparing the ratification of the convention. The parties involved, such as non-governmental organisations, were encouraged to think about how they could do more active cultural heritage work.

The extensive contents of the Faro Convention were already analysed in the planning phase of the preparatory review project. Reference points included an analysis of the Swedish preparatory report that was at the draft stage at the time, as well as the material on the agreement produced by the Council of Europe. Three themes that were as comprehensive as possible were chosen for closer inspection; the aim was to consider the effects of ratifying the Faro Convention on the cultural heritage work through these themes. The selected themes are 1) cultural heritage in the everyday lives of individuals and communities, 2) cultural heritage as a resource for sustainable development and 3) open and fair cultural heritage administration. It was found during the background review phase that these themes could be used to discuss cultural heritage as a resource from the points of view of individuals, communities and society, as well as rights, obligations and opportunities on all of these three levels.

The main project phases The overarching principles of the preparatory review project were open communication and extensive participation in as diverse ways as possible. In the project, an online survey open to everyone was conducted and three discussion events were arranged with the purpose of deepening the points of view that arose from the survey. The project website and social media were actively used in the communications. In addition to this, the project and the Faro Convention were presented at different kinds of events and seminars and in magazine articles.

Online survey – Everyone’s common cultural heritage The preparatory review project started with an online survey. The open online service otakantaa.fi for citizens, administration and decision-makers was selected as the implementation platform. The survey ‘Kaikkien yhteinen kulttuuriperintö’ (Everyone’s common cultural heritage) was open from 15 April to 15 August 2014. It received a total of 130 responses. The survey consisted of 12 questions according to three main themes.

Various online communication channels were used actively throughout the review project: in addition to the website www.faronsopimus.org also Facebook, YouTube and Twitter were used.

The tweets are referred to with the following hashtag: #FARO2014.

In keeping with the theme ‘Cultural heritage in the everyday lives of individuals and communities’, the respondents were asked what issues and objects in their immediate surroundings they considered important and what they wanted to pass on to the future generations. In addition to this, the respondents were asked about their views on how cultural heritage affects their quality of life. The goal was to gain an impression of how citizens see the importance of cultural heritage in their everyday life and their right and obligation to participate in work on cultural heritage. The questions also sought information that would provide background for the concept of cultural heritage community.

In connection with the theme ‘Cultural heritage as a resource for sustainable development’, the respondents were asked about their views on utilising cultural heritage both in their immediate surroundings as well as society as a whole. In the questions, sustainability was also linked to education: concrete suggestions were sought on how cultural heritage could be utilised at schools, for example. The use of cultural heritage was approached through the questions from the points of view of economically, socially, ecologically and culturally sustainable development.

In connection with the third theme ‘Open and fair cultural heritage administration, a survey was conducted on how the cultural heritage administration should be developed both now and in the future: what kind of support do citizens need, and what kind of new forms and channels of cooperation may be needed.

Discussion events In the preparatory review project, there were three discussion events intended for citizens and experts, at which the main themes of the project were processed in more depth. The survey responses and the contents of the Faro Convention in accordance with the theme provided background material for the discussions. Different participation methods were also tested at the events. Each event had a guardian and an organisation that held the main responsibility.

The guardian for the theme Cultural heritage in the everyday lives of individuals and communities

was Professor Janne Vilkuna from the University of Jyväskylä. The event was organised in Jyväskylä in October 2014. The participants in the panel discussion represented different kinds of communities, associations and local actors working with the cultural heritage as well as cultural heritage research and the field of museums. Questions and comments could be presented to the panellists either directly or via an electronic message wall service. Social media was also actively utilised during the event.

The guardian for the theme Cultural heritage as a resource for sustainable development was

Professor Katriina Siivonen from the University of Helsinki. The event was organised in Oulu in October 2014. The panellists represented communities and projects, associations, education, research and museums utilising local cultural heritage.

The subject of the invitational expert workshop held at the National Board of Antiquities in September 2014 was the development of the cultural heritage administration. The sponsor for the theme Open and fair cultural heritage administration was Financial Counsellor Katju Holkeri from the Ministry of Finance.

The workshop was divided into three table talks. The theme at the first table was open cultural heritage administration as an opportunity and an enabler, and the main question was: ‘How could the cultural heritage administration meet the challenges of open government better?’ The second theme was division of responsibility and sector responsibilities in the administration, with the main question: ‘Is the current division of responsibility right?’ The third theme involved discussing the Faro Convention as a part of legislation. The main questions involved the concept of cultural heritage in the convention, what kind of legislative needs for change or needs affecting the interpretation of existing legislation the convention imposes, and how the existing legislation enables participation, influencing issues and cooperation, as well as the new ‘heritage partnerships’ offered by the Faro Convention.

Recommendations: towards sustainable cultural heritage work The preparatory review describes effects of ratifying the Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (the Faro Convention) and the related expert views and wishes from citizens that arose during the preparatory review project. The review does not cover all aspects of the convention, and it is therefore not exhaustive. It must also be noted that the actual assessment of the effects will be carried out in connection with the ratification preparation process. However, the preparatory review anticipates that ratifying the convention will not require any immediate large changes; rather it involves recommended changes in modes of operation and attitudes, and the direction of cultural heritage policy. The countries that have ratified the convention have a lot of latitude in implementing the convention.

The preparatory review recommends the ratification of the Faro Convention in Finland. Benefits of ratifying the convention include, for example:   



Ratification of the convention and acting in accordance with it will strengthen the active participation of individuals and communities in issues related to cultural heritage.

The agreement offers starting points for discussion in the society on the importance of cultural heritage and its sustainable use.

So far, countries with conflicts in their recent history in particular have ratified the convention. By ratifying the convention Finland can support the peaceful development in Europe, and participate in cooperation between the countries that have ratified the convention.

The convention offers a direction and a European framework for Finnish cultural heritage policy. It also supports the implementation of the national cultural environment strategy approved by the Finnish Government.

In the following, the conclusions of the preparatory review project on the consequences of ratifying the convention and the desirable direction it offers are specified in more detail, and operating methods are recommended.

Vision 2020: towards sustainable cultural heritage work 

Sustainable cultural heritage work involves more conscious, democratic and participatory activity for cultural heritage and in order to utilise it.



Individuals and communities act for the good of the cultural heritage that they see as their own and pass it on, while still respecting the cultural heritage of others.



Knowledge of cultural heritage and its sustainable use enrich everyday life and strengthen identity.



There is active public discussion on cultural heritage and its meanings and advantages to individuals, communities and the society.



Participation is realised more strongly and equally than before; people are listened to and their opinions and suggestions have an impact in making decisions on cultural heritage.



Open cultural heritage administration enables and supports spontaneous bottom-up activities and cooperates with communities and individuals.



The administration disseminates open and easily understandable information on cultural heritage. This is realised in various administrative sectors and with various types of communication.



The cultural heritage communities and individuals participate in producing the information as far as they are able. Cultural heritage reaches more and more people via digital media.



The concept of cultural heritage is known and the importance of cultural heritage as a social and international resource is widely understood.

Towards sustainable cultural heritage work The preparatory review project identified sustainable cultural heritage work as a goal in keeping with the spirit of the Faro Convention. Vision 2020 describing its content is presented in image Out of the dimensions of sustainable cultural heritage work in particular social, economic and cultural sustainability were highlighted. In the project, these dimensions appeared as follows: the rights and awareness of individuals and communities, shared responsibility for cultural heritage, sustainable use and utilisation of cultural heritage, the opportunities for individuals and communities both to participate and not to participate, administration as an enabler and supporter, an open dialogue between the administration and the individuals and communities.

Recommendations In the following, points of view emphasised in the Faro Convention and the resulting recommendations in support of better and more sustainable cultural heritage work are presented.

The recommendations have been divided into three key thematic entities in the preparatory review project. The first section ‘Cultural heritage in the everyday life of individuals and communities’ considers the opportunities for individuals and communities to become more aware of the different forms and meanings of cultural heritage. Training and education are key in increasing awareness. Sustainable development is everyone’s issue, not only the actors in the field of environment. For this reason, the second section ‘Cultural heritage as a resource for sustainable development’ emphasises the right of determination and also brings ethical questions related to the utilisation of cultural heritage to the attention of companies and the business sector. The third section on ‘Developing the cultural heritage administration’ focuses on the challenges in cultural heritage administration.

The contents of the Faro Convention are extensive, and choices must be made in implementing it.

Scoping was also carried out in the preparatory review project, which is why it is important that the themes that have not been discussed in detail or that have been left completely outside the project are discussed more strongly in the future. The recommendations also include these themes.

In the implementation phase that follows the ratification of the Faro Convention, the responsible parties should be defined in more detail. The most important development measures in cultural heritage work must be planned in cooperation with individuals and cultural heritage communities.

In the next phase, it is also important to find out how the implementation has been carried out in other countries.

Cultural heritage in the everyday life of individuals and communities 

A strong basis for participation. Education strengthens individuals’ ability to participate in the discussion on cultural heritage and their opportunities to influence issues. Education is also a way to support individuals having a responsible relationship with their immediate surroundings. The training and education related to cultural heritage are strengthened on different levels.



Accessible information. The accessibility and usability of information about cultural heritage is ensured. Electronic resources are opened up to everyone. Cooperation with users is carried out in producing and distributing information.



Decisions on immediate surroundings and cultural heritage. The inhabitants are heard and listened to in local decision-making on cultural heritage. Operating models are developed together with the inhabitants.



Listen and experiment. The participation of different age groups, such as young people, in decision-making and discussion on cultural heritage is also strengthened by trying out new operating models and listening to suggestions from young people.



Cultural heritage communities. Cultural heritage communities are a key part of the new cooperation model included in the Faro Convention, which encourages the third sector and the administration to develop more interactive cultural heritage work. In connection with implementing the agreement, it is a good idea to study the concept of cultural heritage communities more closely as well as its use as a part of sustainable cultural heritage work, in which individuals and communities gain better opportunities for presenting and passing on their cultural heritage.



Enabling spontaneity and pluralism of values. A cultural, social and economic atmosphere that enables the spontaneous and free formation and activity of cultural heritage communities is nurtured and actions that enable it are promoted. This protects the pluralism of communities and cultural heritage.

Cultural heritage as a resource for sustainable development 

Sustainable regional and industrial policy. The prerequisites for utilising cultural heritage in a sustainable way as a tool of regional and industrial policy are improved. Investments from all levels of the society are needed for this work.



Taking control of sustainable development. The parties representing cultural heritage actively participate in discussions on sustainable development and the related actions.

Examples include work on the social contract for sustainable development and work on indicators of cultural sustainability.



Strengthen local participation. The opportunities for individuals and communities to participate in the decision-making and activities that concern their cultural heritage are a part of culturally sustainable cultural heritage work. These opportunities are strengthened on a local level.



Strengthen the knowledge base. The economically sustainable use of cultural heritage requires more research information to support it. Opportunities for multidisciplinary research on cultural heritage are promoted. Attention is focused on issues such as conflicts between productisation and cultural heritage.



Include companies. Dialogue and cooperation with different parties, such as representatives of the business sector, are increased. Companies are encouraged to utilise cultural heritage responsibly.



Cooperation between different sectors. Regional cooperation between tourism and cultural actors, which implements sustainable use of cultural heritage is encouraged.

Developing the cultural heritage administration 

A better division of responsibility. How tasks should be divided among the state, the municipalities and the third sector is assessed, in order to keep expertise and services close to people.



Cultural heritage throughout the administration. The different administrative sectors commit to taking the importance of cultural heritage into account in their own field. Modes of cooperation that increase discussion on cultural heritage over sector borders and between citizens and the administration are promoted.



Enabling participation. Cultural heritage organisations favour modes of operation that promote the opportunities of individuals and communities to participate in discussion on cultural heritage, its identification, research, interpretation, protection, preservation and presentation. These modes of operation take different kinds of individuals and communities into account.



Opening the administration. Cultural heritage organisations commit to promoting the modes of operation of open administration in their work. Examples include commitments by organisations to promote openness, action plans and their implementation. Promoting the points of view of open government (open activity, open information, plain language and administration as an enabler) supports sustainable cultural heritage work.



Opening information and crowdsourcing. Cultural heritage organisations make access to their information and cultural resources even easier by using the new methods offered by the digital age. Digital cultural heritage is opened for wider use in society. Networks, cooperation and crowdsourcing should be utilised in the work.



Strengthening interaction competence. Cultural heritage organisations increase their interaction competence and try out new ways to communicate and interact. In addition to asking questions, they listen and enable new activities and share the results openly. Good practices are actively shared with others, too.