The Art Newspaper

“We are not an international police force”

Unesco’s new culture chief Francesco Bandarin sets out his priorities

By Martin Bailey. Conservation, Issue 214, June 2010
Published online: 23 June 2010

Francesco Bandarin on a Unesco mission to the Galapagos in April 2005

PARIS. From organising the restoration and re-erection of the 1,700-year-old Obelisk of Axum in Ethiopia more than 70 years after it was looted by Mussolini, to working to protect the ancient capital city of Samarra in war-torn Iraq, Italian-born Francesco Bandarin has been involved in many well-known projects during the decade he has served as the director of the World Heritage Centre—the most high-profile side of Unesco’s conservation work and the body responsible for the World Heritage Site programme. Next month he takes over Unesco’s entire cultural programme in his new role as assistant director-general for culture.

Bandarin will report to the new director general, Irina Bokova, from Bulgaria, who narrowly defeated Egypt’s culture minister, Farouk Hosni, for the top job in November, after Hosni had made what many regarded as anti-semitic comments. Bokova, who succeeded former Japanese diplomat Koïchiro Matsuura, has just appointed her key officials. Bandarin is one of the few officials to have been promoted internally.

Born in Venice, Bandarin has previously served as a professor of urban planning at the city’s school of architecture and as a cultural heritage conservation consultant for organisations such as the World Bank.

The Art Newspaper: You grew up in Venice. How has the city changed?

Francesco Bandarin: I saw Venice falling prey to a monster: international mass tourism, which swallowed the city. Venice has lost its soul. It is a small and weak society. Yet it has also become a huge theatre for global events—the biennale, Pinault’s gallery, etc. It is like a world capital of art. Compared with my youth, Venice has gained a lot in terms of vitality—in the 1970s you couldn’t eat at a restaurant after 8pm. Now Venice attracts about 20 million visits a year, which equates to nearly 60,000 a day in the city; this is equivalent to its population of 60,000. Tourism is the basis of the economy, but it is an industry which kills off all others. No other industry can produce such short-term profits.

TAN: How damaging is tourism to the major world heritage sites?

FB: It is an issue of scale, and context. Machu Picchu now has one million tourists a year, which may not seem so many, but it is an isolated mountain site. This led to the development of the city of Aguas Calientes at the foot of Machu Picchu. All the rules of conservation have been overrun by the sheer volume of tourists. At Angkor Wat, in Cambodia, the temples are being conserved, but we did not realise that nearby, at Siem Reap, 150 luxury hotels have sprung up like mushrooms.

TAN: Should Unesco have been tougher in monitoring Angkor Wat?

FB: We were distracted because we were focusing on conservation of the temples, not on the environment. Now it is a problem. We are not an international police force, but we do run a substantial monitoring system. This year we will be reporting on 180 World Heritage Sites, out of 890. Sometimes monitoring works in terms of results and sometimes it ­doesn’t. It’s a bit frustrating.

TAN: How much difference does a new Unesco director general make—is it a bit like a change of national government in a state?

FB: Yes, each director general has their own style and agenda. Ten years ago, when Matsuura took over, Unesco had severe problems, both political and organisational. His mandate was: let’s get it straight. The US rejoined in 2003. Matsuura reformed the organisation, re-establishing ethical codes and control systems, which were much needed. He also emphasised the importance of international Conventions: when he took over Unesco had four, and now we have seven—with new ones on intangible heritage, underwater archaeology and cultural diversity. Bokova, the new director general, wants to put Unesco back onto the international agenda and give it more visibility. She has the challenge of expanding our capacity to communicate. Unesco does much more than what it is known for, so there is a gap—and this gap is at the centre of her preoccupations. She also wants to bring back Unesco’s role as a mediator between cultures.

TAN: What are her plans?

FB: Bokova is making a big effort to bring Unesco back into the field of intercultural dialogue. She has established a high-level panel on “Peace and Dialogue among Cultures”, which at the end of the year will draw up conclusions on what we should do. Bokova also wants to bring culture into the development agenda. Culture is not a luxury, it is a constituent of development, both economic and social. Culture is not entertainment, it is actually production or capital for development. This will be my main activity in the coming year.

TAN: You will soon be head of culture. What exactly is “culture” in Unesco’s terms?

FB: Unesco deals with four aspects of culture. First, conservation of heritage sites, both cultural and natural. Secondly, preservation of intangible culture. That comprises traditional knowledge, such as rituals, dance or skills. For instance, the Tango was born in Argentina and Uruguay, but it is now found all around the world. Thirdly, museums. And finally, intercultural dialogue.

TAN: You haven’t used the word “art”.

FB: The arts deal with creativity, where it is much more difficult for an intergovernmental body to play a role. However, I think it is an area that we should deal with more. We could play a role in connecting the different worlds—the developed and emerging countries. We could help with networking, and platforms for exchanges. We could do training.

TAN: And what are some of your specific plans?

FB: I want to deal more with the human habitat. I am an architect, so I may be biased, but Unesco has not really dealt with this field. So I have started to work with some of the major architects, such as Rem Koolhaas and Renzo Piano, addressing issues such as the quality of the urban environment and sustainability.

I also think we need to have more art at Unesco. If you look around, the Unesco building is beautiful, but the art is mainly from the 1950s when the headquarters was constructed. There should perhaps be a Unesco gallery for contemporary art. My goal is that we get into Pariscope [the weekly “what’s on” publication for Paris].

I will be organising a major international conference on the future of the book. The book is the most important cultural object, but Unesco has been absent from the debate. The argument between Google and the French government is not healthy, and I think we should provide a forum for the actors [French publishers are resisting Google’s attempts to scan their books]. There is the issue between the Anglo-Saxons and the rest of the world, with English dominating language and technology. Amazon did not exist a few years ago. Books won’t disappear, but they will mutate.

TAN: There is a certain cynicism about international organisations. Does Unesco have a future?

FB: I am optimistic because the ideals that are behind our mission are still alive. But the world is changing fast, and we are not. This gap has to be addressed. We are not a company that needs to be continually marketing, but we need to keep up our pace.