Since the definition of cultural patrimony in the Brazilian Constitution, the revision of concepts and criteria for identifying and giving cultural goods their proper value has been the focus of scientific research in multiple disciplines - architecture and urbanism, history, geography, anthropology, archaeology, tourism and law, to name a few. Despite their disciplinary origins, studies on cultural heritage, as well as correlated technical organs’ practical problem-solving strategies need to incorporate contributions from several areas of knowledge to contemplate the complex issues involved in their recognition, valuing and management. Such reflection and experiences constitute the current parameters for public and cultural policies in cities, master plans, urban projects, operations for recovery and rehabilitation of city centers and urban sectors.

Valuing the city as a social and cultural product that integrates multiple forms of material and immaterial cultural manifestations increasingly leads to the investigation of its preservation in urbanistic research, where broad knowledge has been built in the form of inventories, sectorial studies, experiences in preservation of projects and governmental management at all levels. Mainly from the end of the 90s, several experiences of urban integration in Latin America and Iberic countries focused on neighborhoods and cities. With local governments as protagonists, they demanded the interaction of several governmental instances to act over territories. Programs for conservation and preservation of public spaces, delimitation of zones of historical conservation, patrimonial rehabilitation for public housing, fiscal exemption/waiver and other forms of constitutional rights-based compensation begin. On the other hand, the general view of cultural legacy as an economic resource was explored in recovery, requalification and rehabilitation programs for buildings in preserved areas, with great appeal to private touristic and economic exploration.

One can recognize progress in relation to the isolated treatment of cultural goods preservation, formerly classified as historical or artistic and selected in technical offices for preservation. However, as results fall short in improving the quality of life of the directly affected population, as pointed by studies on economic valuing and displacement of settlements in regenerated areas, a discussion on failures, efficient but largely unused instruments and multiple contradictory effects provoked by urban interventions for patrimonial valuing and recovery, which are mostly observed only in its visible material effects, is urgently needed.

There are many gaps in the diffusion of post-intervention analyses and studies on the nature of patrimony that overcome the strict view of its material or immaterial character and take the perspective of the population involved as a parameter for preservation policies. Also included in this gap are the broader discussions on cultural heritage management and on more effective ways to approximate the knowledge produced - both academic and technical - to its forms of social diffusion.

In countries like Spain and Portugal, cultural heritage recovery and intervention projects for city centers and historic areas began to integrate urban policies only in the end of the 70s, after the conclusion of re-democratization processes. A decade later, Latin American perspectives in resuming discussions on urban problems, also coincident with the consolidation of democracies or with special periods for planning and management, turns to interventions in consolidated areas, both central and peripherical, that demand new instruments, other than the ones previously used to regulate and order new areas of urban extension. Even as settled in different contexts, these are correlated experiences that might contribute to understanding the current state of preservation policies in cities, including urban plans, intervention methodologies for buildings and patrimonial projects, as well as strategies for participation of entities involved in its use and management.

With those premises, Oculum Ensaios number 14(2), May/August 2017, gathers articles of recognized ibero-american researchers in the preservation and management of cultural heritage. It is the first number of a series that we will publish annually in the form of a dossier, without affecting our regular publications.

Results could not be more stimulating to the discussion at stake. Opening with the editorial by researchers Milene Soto Suárez and Maria Teresa Muñoz Castillo from the Universidade de Oriente de Cuba, who have gently accepted our invitation, and associate editors Aníbal Costa (Universidade de Aveiro), Eduardo Mosquera Adell (Universidade de Sevilha) and Maria Teresa Pérez Cano (Universidade de Sevilha), who are also responsible for this edition’s success.

We happily invite all to read the IBERO-AMERICAN CULTURAL HERITAGE DOSSIER.