Home About IUP Magazines Journals Books Archives
     
A Guided Tour | Recommend | Links | Subscriber Services | Feedback | Subscribe Online
 
The IUP Journal of Architecture
A Buddhist-Systems Paradigm for Conserving Cultural Built Heritage Development of a Conceptual Framework for Conserving Non-Secular Monuments in South and Southeast Asia
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
 
 
 
 
 
 

This paper presents the development of an alternative paradigm for the conservation of non-secular monuments in South and Southeast Asia. The proposed paradigm and supporting conceptual framework are based on the synergies between Buddhism and the systems theory. The purpose of the adoption of Buddhism is based on the need to find a culturally sensitive holistic and organic approach as opposed to the rationalist materialist approach of the current Euro-centric approaches. The differences in approaches to the conservation of monuments between the East and the West have been discussed widely amongst conservationists, with the development of a number of guidelines to deal with the issue. The use of systems theory, while being based on established synergies with Buddhism, provides a structured foundation to build the conceptual framework. The proposed alternative paradigm and conceptual framework are based on three Buddhist principles of interconnectedness, interdependence and mutual conditioning.

 
 

This is the first of two papers presenting the doctoral research that looks at the development of an alternative paradigm for the conservation of non-secular built heritage in South and Southeast Asia. This paper describes the development of the paradigm and supporting conceptual framework based on identified synergies between Buddhism and systems theory (Ellis and Ludwig, 1962; Churchman, 1968; Macy, 1976, 1991a and 1991b; Capra, 1996; Schmithausen, 1997; Checkland, 1999; Khisty, 2006a and 2006b; Chao and Midgley, 2007a and 2007b; and Midgley and Chao, 2007).

Culture and people across the world have often been labelled in a binomial manner: East and West, occidental and oriental, and Western/European and Asian. One manifestation of this divide is in the appreciation of the built heritage that has been produced from these cultures. While there have been recent trends towards inclusiveness of other cultures and views (Wijesuriya, 1993 and 2003; ICOMOS, 1994; Larsen and Marstein, 1995; Australia-ICOMOS, 1999; UNESCO, 2005; and Jokilehto, 2006), the current pervasive view of conservation and restoration has been overwhelmingly driven by Euro-centric policies (Seung-Jin, 1998 and 2005). The basis of global heritage protection has been enshrined in the clauses of international charters and guidelines determined by western imperatives (Seung-Jin, 1998 and 2005; and Jokilehto, 2006). However, representation and interpretation of art and architecture irrevocably differ between the Asian and European mode. For example, arguably, the cultural systems of the sub-continent is based on spiritual values, norms and beliefs, while the western culture has evolved, particularly since the enlightenment (Capra, 1982) through values founded on the reality of the material world or materialism (du Plessis, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2005; and Macy, 1976, 1991a and 1991b). The implications of these differences are significant within conservation practices.

 
 

Architecture Journal, Buddhism, Systems Theory, Buddhist-Systems Paradigm, Heritage Conservation, Non-Secular Heritage, Conceptual Framework, Cultural Built Heritage, CBH, Theoretical Framework, Environmental System.