Urban Conservation of Nagadesh, Madhyapur Thimi Municipality, Bhaktapur, Nepal

BACKGROUND

Nepal has many traditional towns and rich culture. The diversity in culture, castes and creeds make Nepal rich in culture and cultural heritages. With the modernization and change in people’s life style, there is a threat to the culture and cultural heritage. So, the culture and cultural heritages needs to be conserved.

Introduction of Ancient Monuments Preservation Act in 2013 B.S. (1956 AD) marked the provision of modern concept of heritage conservation in Nepal. UNESCO’s mission to restore the Hanuman Dhoka Durbar in the 1970s was the first major international assistance for heritage conservation in Nepal. The enlisting of seven different sites from Kathmandu valley including 3 Durbar Squares, Pashupatinath, Bouddha, Changu Narayan and Swoyambhu in the UNESCO’s World Heritage Sites brought Nepal to international attention in heritage conservation arena.

Along with nature conservation and biodiversity conservation, cultural heritage conservation has been of interest to many national and international agencies. It is also linked with tourism and development besides the primary intention of preserving cultural and historic heritage. However, much needs to be done with regards to promulgation of effective policies and institutional frameworks to address various challenges.

The surviving examples of cultural heritage in Nepal date back to various periods in history and they have lived significantly long period of time primarily because of the maintenance and repairs practices that were put in place by their respective sponsors. Many historic inscriptions record such maintenance practices and specific repair works carried out to these monuments (Banerjee, 1970). Often, the ruling royal family or influential ministers would occasionally grant such commissions of restoration and maintenance. Institutionally, there were guthis associated with important communal buildings to sustain their regular functions, maintenance and renovations. Generally, the buildings of important cultural and communal values would be sponsored by a powerful (King or a social leader) and rich donor for either personal dignity or attaining ‘dharma’, and therefore those donors would ensure some provisions for the upkeep and repairs to ensure the longevity of such monuments.

Other institutions also existed that were meant to take care of important monuments, i.e.an institution called Chhen-Bhadel seemed to be in existence from Malla period and it “had been carrying out repairs to ancient and public edifices in Nepal as its specific duty. Since pre 1950s Nepal was relatively isolated and the urban and rural areas were developing on their own paces, the need of ‘conservation’ was not critical.

As Nepal opened herself to the World in the 1950s, interaction and exchange of people, goods and ideas made the pace of change faster than ever. Initially there were some Nirman samitis (Construction Committees) and the Public Works Department, which used to be in charge of repairs to ancient structures. Various public agencies and government departments had undertaken some beautification and repair works of various monuments on the occasions of coronations of King Mahendra and King Birendra. At times, the repair and maintenance of important cultural heritage had been carried out in part and parcel by various community groups.

Even after the establishment of the Department of Archaeology (DoA) in 1952-53, these various agencies were still undertaking such works. In fact, the first major repair work undertaken by DoA was that on Kasthamandapa. The work on Kasthamandapa was a joint undertaking between the DoA and the Guthi Sansthan, in which actually the Guthi Sansthan provided entire financial support for the repair works. Following the establishment of DoA, the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act was promulgated in 1956 to maintain peace and order by preserving the ancient monument and by controlling the trade in archaeological objects as well as the excavation of the place of ancient monuments and by acquiring and preserving ancient monument and archaeological, historical or artistic objects.

In the 1960’s various missions of experts in town planning and the restoration of cultural
property were fielded by Unesco and the’ United Nations under the United Nations Technical Assistance Programme, to advise on the planning of conservation measures” (UNESCO/UNDP, 1981). Further in 1970s, the financial and other support from other countries and international agencies continued resulting in expansion of the conservation programs and frameworks.

First promulgated in 1956 and revised several times afterwards, The Ancient Monuments
Preservation Act is the main legal document on heritage conservation in Nepal. It is no surprise that this law puts heavy emphasis on “ancient” and “archaeological”. As the old saying refers the Kathmandu valley as the “Nepal”, this act truly limits itself to the heritage in Kathmandu valley. Therefore, the first and foremost challenge of heritage policy in Nepal is to expand the legal provision to other regions. For expanding the conservation legislations to other regions, the policy needs a framework on administrative coordination and law enforcement in sites all over the country.

First trend of conservation from ancient history to early modern history was that the conservation effort was almost entirely sponsored by King (or for that matter the government). The second trend that is seen in recent decades (typically after 1970s) is a major involvement of national and international agencies including UNESCO and other donor agencies. In between these two main trends, there is also a third trend which exists everywhere but rarely noted in discussions; the initiatives of local private and public agencies; for example – repairs and restoration works sponsored by locally affluent and rich persons or families and the same done by collaborative efforts within communities. Associated with this third trend are various cultural entities and events that support such conservation efforts, i.e. youth groups in a community organize or take advantage of cultural events to raise funds to support any repair works in local temples or other communal buildings, the guthis and local administration support community efforts to maintain any structures of practices of heritage importance. However, the national policy for conservation lacks a clear stand on such local initiatives. Not specifically falling under these three trends, yet a major constitution of a heritage and heritage practice are the people who create, care for and carry forward the legacies of these heritages.

As indicated by various policy intentions, the visible stakeholders in heritage conservation include DoA, NTB, Municipal governments/departments, Conservation Area Management Authority, Businesses groups, Academic Institutions, Donor Agencies, International intergovernmental agencies, National NGOs, International NGOs and occasionally other agencies.

For detail report, Please click to download in PDF format:

Urban Conservation of Nagadish, Madhyapur Thimi Municipality, Bhaktapur

The entire credit goes for this study goes to hereby mentioned students and everyone are thanked who were involved directly or indirectly involved in the preparation of this study. The Study was prepared by the 2072 batch Students of Urban Planning in Pulchowk Campus, Institute of Engineering (IOE), TU, Nepal for the Academic Purpose;

namely by: Barsha Shrestha, Damodar Acharya, Mita Prajapati, Namrata Bhattarai, Priyanka Pradhan, Pusp Raj Bhatt, Raman Kapali, Sunibha Kayastha, Yogina Ranjikar and Rojeena Dangol.