Studi e proposte per una regolazione europea della valorizzazione dei beni culturali

This work starts from the widely shared observation that culture constitutes the instrument through which to achieve, despite the diversity of the histories and traditions of the peoples, an effective unity of Europe, strengthened by the common citizenship. Culture, and for it cultural heritage and goods, lends itself to this important task to the extent that it is known and recognized, in a reciprocal way, by individuals and individual states. Therefore, the preparation of a discipline in the European context is desirable, which has as its specific object the valorisation of the cultural heritage belonging to, and present in, the twenty-seven countries, also for the purpose of identifying a “cultural heritage of European importance” and of a “common cultural heritage”, in the motto: “united in diversity”. Objectives, those just mentioned, which, moreover, are sanctioned by the provisions of art. 3 of the Tu and art. 167 of the Tfeu. Since the start of the research, however, it has become clear that the european regulation of cultural assets is focused on their protection, mainly aimed at combating the illicit traffic perpetrated through the territories of the member States. An attempt has therefore been made to identify, in the reconstruction of secondary Eu legislation - especially directives and regulations - adopted starting from the Maastricht Treaty of 1992 up to the present day, the provisions that could lend themselves to forming the basis for a (new) european regulation of the enhancement of cultural heritage. With a good degree of reliability, it has been ascertained that the european Legislator, in more recent years, adding the cultural sector to that of “creativity” (see most recently, the “Creative Europe 2021-2027” programme), has almost inevitably, favoring the latter, to the detriment of culture, progressively omitted from Eu programs, as “creativity” has an almost instinctive inclination for the market and is better suited to achieving the economic results typical of the european Union. The question which, therefore, almost spontaneously emerged from the survey had as its object the identification, given its centrality to the aforementioned purposes of european relevance, of an organic and unitary regulation by the Eu of the valorisation of cultural assets belonging to the member States and, more generally, of european cultural heritage. Therefore, the proposal for the adoption by the Eu of a general model of regulation of the valorisation of cultural heritage of european importance was brought into focus, which effectively allows the achievement of the objectives of mutual knowledge of the cultures of the individual States which, despite the evidence of their diversity, identify aspects of their “common cultural heritage”. European cultural programs - such as the “European Capitals of Culture”, the “European Heritage Label” and the “European Year of Cultural Heritage” - should not be implemented through sporadic Eu actions, even if on a regular basis (yearly). The change of pace, which has been proposed, in the choices of the european Union on the enhancement of its cultural heritage should instead be carried out in a choral regime of twenty-seven “voices”, through the adoption of directives or regulations which, as happened for the protection against illicit cross-border trafficking of cultural goods or through only some of the recent Eu programmes, introduce rules which all member States are simultaneously required to comply with in order to “discover” each other through the knowledge of their own cultural heritage, of the respective culture which, while not neglecting the diversity of each story, indeed deepening it, benefiting from the knowledge of the other testimonies of civilization contained within the borders of the member States, tends to identify that “common cultural heritage” which can only strengthen the pillars of values on which the european Union was founded (see art. 2 of the Eu Treaty) and must stand on for the future. Finally, seizing the by no means negligible prospects of widespread diffusion (and contextual use) today opened up by the digitization of cultural heritage (see “Europeana” platform).