relationships generated by heritage resources. This can only be an exploratory study and has no
pretence to cover the whole European territory or any category of cultural heritage. For a selected
number of countries, and for selected heritage categories, an in-depth analysis (blue arrow in Fig. 3)
and a number of case studies (in red in Fig. 3) will be carried out.
Figure 3 Structure of analysis in ESPON 1.3.3
ORGWARE
SHAREWARE
XXXXX
XXXXX
SOFTWARE
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
( ountrv
XXX∖XX
XXXX
Indicators of “territorial cohesion” of European cultural heritage
HARDWARE
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
|
XXXXX-- |
[j XXXXX.....:] XXXX,∖ ;j XXX’ |
XXXXX
|
XXXXXK |
XXXXX X i |
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXX
CASE STUDIES
4 FIRST RESULTS OF THE ESPON 1.3.3 PROJECT
4.1 State of the ESPON project 1.3.3 and selection of indicators
In countries where data are available and have been collected with a sufficient degree of reliability
(only a small part of EU27+2 at the present stage of the project), it has been possible to produce a
first few maps which illustrate the diversity of European regions.
The assets mapped are at this stage of three types, encapsulating three different “moments” of
cultural heritage effects:
- tangible, immovable heritage resources. Monuments and buildings of artistic and/or historical
significance, historical sites and places of memory, architectural conjuncts, archaeological areas,
17