*2.2. Process of Involvement, Relations, and Organization of Di*ff*erent Actors*

The public authorities around the world have led, in most cases, the revitalization projects of historic urban quarters in the last two decades of the 20th century—especially the physical component of regeneration—through which the quality of the built environment has been upgraded [19]. However, the preservation and conservation of historic city centers could not occur merely at the public expense [18], thus opening opportunities for the involvement and participation of the private and civil sector. Furthermore, the participation of new social and economic actors is demanded in the governance and urban management of historic quarters, which requires the coordination of multiple actors guided primarily by public institutions and the private sector [20].

The issue in urban regeneration became how urban governments actually stimulate the private sector to invest in public policies and programs [21], beyond the traditional role of the public sector through regulations and the provision of infrastructure. Local governments have, in general, two possible options, according to Vedung [22]:


There are several viable options for urban governments to provide economic incentives for private sector participation, such as different property tax exemptions; or the transfer of development rights from protected areas to new developments, which represent the transfer of floor space indexes that promote the efficient reuse of historic buildings; or as in-kind subsidies of the public sector as a reduction in building land development fees for land uses enabling tourism, cultural tourism, or adaptive reuse of protected buildings [23].

Another possible option in urban regeneration programs for historic areas is creating public–private partnerships. Public–private partnerships are a contractual agreement between a public agency and a private sector, in which the skills and assets, as well as risks and rewards, of each sector are shared in delivering a service or facility with the future benefit of public use [24]. In most cases of heritage protected areas projects, the private sector is not interested in participating in the beginning since there is a gap between the costs of renovation and the value of the property itself. Thus, public sector incentives should be attractive in order to attract private capital and to improve the overall investment environment that will reduce the risk and cost of investing and result in an increase of revenues. According to Rypkema [24], the physical improvement of the surrounding areas and the protected area itself, and the level of public services, can be a critical activity for private sector involvement in the regeneration projects. Public sector commitments to renew infrastructure, streets, and parking systems are often not sufficient to attract the private sector, although they might be a public partner's obligation in joint agreements. In order to increase the probability of the success of such projects, local authorities often adapt the local regulation of land use, zoning, and parking requirements according to the requirements of private partners.

Regarding citizen participation, they are increasingly involved in public life, policymaking, and project implementation at the local level. According to Radosavljevi´c [16], participation can ensure the legitimacy of policies and projects, secure the public interest and introduce new creative ideas, while providing acceptance of and support for decisions made. The degree of involvement in and instruments to mobilize citizens and civic associations varies depending on the specificity of the cultural and social context, political will, and the importance and size of the projects and policies. In this regard, the various degrees of citizen participation refer to variations between:


Therefore, the whole process of creating strategic urban projects should be transparent and communicate with the public, in order to obtain broad social support from citizens. Broader social support is possible through forums and public debates, live project presentations and the web, etc. [25].

Nevertheless, citizen participation can be controversial, particularly when the cultural heritage protection agencies inadequately perform their functions, usually due to private sector economic pressure, which generally opposes the sustainability and conservation criteria. Azpeitia Santander, Azkarate Garai-Olaun and De la Fuente Arana [20] criticize the involvement of social participation processes in the field of cultural heritage, and thus underline two different types that can be observed:


However, in the case of the citizen participation processes, we have to distinguish that, in the field of cultural heritage, differentiation has to be made concerning any other type of participation in planning and urban design. For instance, in the mid-ring of the city, in which new business or housing schemes make planning efforts easy for city governments and few developers, without strict conservation policies [18]. The same goes for peripheral city locations in which the revitalization and upgrading of depressed areas and public spaces pose elementary and less complicated tasks for city governments. The participation in central historic areas is influenced by contexts with various historic layers and often conflicting interests of different, mainly real-estate property market actors, local business and residents. Thus, participation has limited effectiveness regarding cultural assets in the case of the complex needs of the protection heritage values [20].
