Environmental values are becoming increasingly important in restoration of historical buildings, while energy interventions can seriously damage historical qualities. Cultural-historical values and environmental values are often considered difficult to commensurate, with energy engineers and heritage experts adhering to widely differing values and relating to different discourses. Valuation instruments are devised to deal with such value conflicts in restoration projects. In this article we study what such instruments perform in the case of assessing historical buildings. We ask how these instruments work, and how they afford, support and guide valuation processes? Furthermore, we enquire what is achieved and what is lost in the reconciliation of values. Theoretically, we start from the notion of commensuration, which allows comparison of values through a shared metric. Empirically, this research note examines the history and use of DuMo, an instrument that aims to reconcile cultural – historical and environmental values and provides a range of sustainable restoration strategies. We find that DuMo indeed performs commensuration of these conflicting values, but also keeps intact the epistemic authority of the two professions. Our claim thus is that valuation instruments can successfully perform commensuration while at the same being contested by involved professionals.
In case of induced seismicity, expectations from a structural monitoring system are different than in the case of natural seismicity. In this paper, monitoring results of a historical building in Groningen (Netherlands) in case of induced seismicity has been presented. Results of the monitoring, particularities of the monitoring in case of induced earthquakes, as well as the usefulness and need of various monitoring systems for similar cases are discussed. Weak soil properties dominate the structural response in the region; thus, the ground water monitoring as well as the interaction of soil movements with the structural response has also been scrutinized. The proposed study could be effectively used to monitor historical structures subjected to induced seismicity and provide useful information to asset owners to classify the structural health condition of structures in their care.It was shown that the in-plane cracks at the building would normally not be expected in this structure during small induced earthquakes happening in Groningen. One explanation provided here is that the soil parameters, such as shrinking of water-sensitive soil layers, in combination with small earthquakes, may cause settlements. The soil effects may superimpose with the earthquake effects eventually causing small cracks and damage.
The article engages with the recent studies on multilevel regulation. The starting point for the argument is that contemporary multilevel regulation—as most other studies of (postnational) rulemaking—is limited in its analysis. The limitation concerns its monocentric approach that, in turn, deepens the social illegitimacy of contemporary multilevel regulation. The monocentric approach means that the study of multilevel regulation originates in the discussions on the foundation of modern States instead of returning to the origins of rules before the nation State was even created, which is where the actual social capital underlying (contemporary) rules can be found, or so I wish to argue. My aim in this article is to reframe the debate. I argue that we have an enormous reservoir of history, practices, and ideas ready to help us think through contemporary (social) legitimacy problems in multilevel regulation: namely all those practices which preceded the capture of law by the modern State system, such as historical alternative dispute resolution (ADR) practices.
SIA-RAAK gefinancierd MKB onderzoeksproject gericht op het onderzoeken van de vraag: hoe historische gebouwen energiezuiniger en comfortabeler kunnen worden gemaakt zonder monumentale waarden onevenredig aan te tasten.
In summer 2020, part of a quay wall in Amsterdam collapsed, and in 2010, construction for a parking lot in Amsterdam was hindered by old sewage lines. New sustainable electric systems are being built on top of the foundations of old windmills, in places where industry thrived in the 19th century. All these examples have one point in common: They involve largely unknown and invisible historic underground structures in a densely built historic city. We argue that truly circular building practices in old cities require smart interfaces that allow the circular use of data from the past when planning the future. The continuous use and reuse of the same plots of land stands in stark contrast with the discontinuity and dispersed nature of project-oriented information. Construction and data technology improves, but information about the past is incomplete. We have to break through the lack of historic continuity of data to make building practices truly circular. Future-oriented construction in Amsterdam requires historic knowledge and continuous documentation of interventions and findings over time. A web portal will bring together a range of diverse public and private, professional and citizen stakeholders, each with their own interests and needs. Two creative industry stakeholders, Yume interactive (Yume) and publisher NAI010, come together to work with a major engineering office (Witteveen+Bos), the AMS Institute, the office of Engineering of the Municipality of Amsterdam, UNESCO NL and two faculties of Delft University of Technology (Architecture and Computer Science) to inventorize historic datasets on the Amsterdam underground. The team will connect all the relevant stakeholders to develop a pilot methodology and a web portal connecting historic data sets for use in contemporary and future design. A book publication will document the process and outcomes, highlighting the need for circular practices that tie past, present and future.
