Date: 02/03/2023
Relevance: GS-1/GS-2: Government Policies and Interventions for Development in various sectors and Issues arising out of their Design and Implementation.
Key Phrases: Monument Mitras, Adopt a Heritage scheme, Occupying prime public land, Undermining historical character, Development, and Research Organisation for Nature, Arts, and Heritage (DRONAH) Foundation.
Why in News?
- Private firms, companies, and public sector units can enter into agreements with the Union Ministry of Culture to adopt and maintain State-owned archaeological sites or monuments. Businesses that enter such agreements are going to be known as Monument Mitras.
- The central government is eager that this scheme, which began in February, leads to the adoption of 500 protected sites by August 15, and the adoption of another 500 sites shortly thereafter.
- This number represents a tenfold increase in the number of sites being brought under the ambit of the controversial ‘Adopt a Heritage’ scheme of 2017.
- Unless the ‘revamped’ scheme is suspended, the nation’s precious pluralistic heritage stands at the threshold of obliteration.
Progressive measures:
- Under the purportedly overhauled ‘Adopt a Heritage’ scheme, businesses may use their Corporate Social Responsibility funds at select sites to construct and maintain ticket offices, restaurants, museums, interpretation centres, toilets, and walkways.
- They may dramatically illuminate monuments, set up guided tours, hold cultural programs, and fix equipment for light and sound shows.
- Some of these activities appear to be progressive measures aimed at improving visitor services and amenities. However, scrutiny establishes perils.
Issues with the scheme:
- Assigning tasks without expertise:
- Permitting businesses to build museums and interpretation centres without trained professionals could threaten India’s understanding of its own past. E.g., the heart-wrenching tragedy at the colonial-era bridge in Morbi, Gujarat.
- Side-lining the guidelines:
- The current plan also side-lines the mandate of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and abandons The Sarnath Initiative, guidelines devised by the ASI, the Getty Trust, the U.S., the British Museum, and National Culture Fund to safe keep excavated objects and present them to visitors in an engaging manner.
- Unnecessary Infrastructure:
- Many monuments selected for the scheme — including the stupas at Sanchi, the Brihadeshwar temple in Thanjavur, and Akbar’s palace city at Fatehpur Sikri — already have tourist infrastructure. There is no need for new ticket offices and gift shops
- Occupying prime public land:
- Allowing businesses to build on public land around iconic monuments may further diminish the grounds around them, which can be valuable spaces for archaeologists to excavate.
- Disrupting local communities and livelihoods:
- Guided tours led by employees of large businesses who have received permission to adopt a monument may endanger the livelihoods of those who have lived near the site and made a living by regaling visitors with stories of its colourful past.
- Day-night operation of the sites:
- Keeping these spots open from dawn to dusk has limited footfall and thus preserved them from excessive wear and tear.
- Night tourism will also pull electricity away from rural homesteads and hospitals.
- Undermining historical character:
- There are some monuments selected for the scheme that is not protected by the ASI and are in States without Archaeology Directorates.
- One fears that businesses that sign agreements with the Union Ministry of Culture to adopt these monuments will be able to alter their historical character without much opposition.
- Risk of monuments being converted into hotels:
- Monuments not adopted by Monument Mitras may be turned over to tourism departments and converted into hotels, prioritizing tourism and corporate interests over historical preservation.
The path to choose:
- Creating Awareness and Encouraging Education:
- Corporate India can allocate CSR funds towards grants for researching, writing, and publishing high-quality textbooks.
- Developing imaginative and effective ways of teaching history can help citizens understand the importance of monuments.
- Traders and shopkeepers can contribute funds to school libraries for collecting archival materials relevant to monuments.
- Supporting Conservation of Heritage Buildings:
- Industrial houses can utilize CSR funds to purchase new equipment that releases fewer noxious gases and discharges fewer effluents into rivers, thus making these water bodies less likely to serve as breeding grounds for microbes that gather on the walls of ancient buildings.
- Corporates can contribute funds to organizations that train individuals in much-needed restoration skills and create jobs for them.
- Interdisciplinary teams at the Development and Research Organisation for Nature, Arts, and Heritage (DRONAH) Foundation and the Centre for Advancement of Traditional Building Technology and Skills can be supported to protect monuments from emergent threats such as climate change.
- Securing Monuments from Threats:
- Corporate India can help the ASI and State Archaeology Directorates to secure monuments from dams, mining projects, defacement, and looting.
- Rising sea levels, salination, higher rainfall, and greater fluctuations in temperature are some of the threats that monuments face today, which can be addressed through corporate support.
Conclusion:
- Currently, India’s progress in diverse fields is being projected at G-20 events across the nation. By embracing forward-thinking principles of historical preservation, businesses, government agencies, and civil society groups can showcase India’s genuine progress in this arena.
- Maybe their efforts will inspire more citizens to participate in the pressing task of safeguarding India’s pluralistic heritage.
Source: The Hindu
Mains Question:
Q. What are the potential dangers associated with the ‘Adopt a Heritage’ scheme in India, and what alternative measures could businesses take to preserve the nation’s-built heritage?
