Why in the News?

• The government has introduced a major heritage policy shift by allowing private players, alongside ASI, to participate in monument conservation through the National Culture Fund.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Monument Conservation (Introduction, Key Features of the New Policy, Criticism, Implications, etc.)

Introduction

• India, with its vast cultural and historical legacy, is home to over 3,700 protected monuments.
• Until now, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), under the Ministry of Culture, had the exclusive mandate to conserve and restore these monuments.
• However, the government has recently announced a landmark shift in heritage policy by opening monument conservation to private players under a public-private partnership model.
• This decision seeks to enhance conservation capacity, bring in corporate participation, and accelerate preservation efforts across the country.

Monument Conservation in India

• Monument conservation in India has historically been the responsibility of the ASI, established in 1861 during British rule and restructured post-independence to safeguard India’s civilizational heritage.
• The ASI has undertaken conservation of forts, temples, stepwells, palaces, mosques, and other historical structures. Some of the ASI’s notable works include:

• Restoration of the Sun Temple at Konark (Odisha).
• Structural conservation of the Humayun’s Tomb complex (Delhi).
• Preservation of Ajanta and Ellora caves (Maharashtra).
• Development of heritage museums at Purana Qila and Red Fort (Delhi).

• While ASI’s contributions are invaluable, the agency has faced challenges of understaffing, resource constraints, and delays in completing projects.
• Critics have often pointed out that relying solely on ASI has slowed the pace of conservation at many sites.

The Policy Shift: Entry of Private Players

• The new heritage conservation model introduces private participation for the first time in core conservation work.
• Corporations, PSUs, and private organisations will now be able to directly hire external agencies for conservation work at selected monuments.
• Key features of the policy shift include:

• Public-Private Partnership Model: Corporations and donors can directly finance conservation projects through the National Culture Fund (NCF), with 100% tax exemption benefits.
• Empanelled Conservation Architects: The Ministry of Culture will empanel reputed conservation architects, from whom donors can select for project execution.
• Checks and Balances: While private players will be involved, ASI will retain supervisory authority. Detailed Project Reports (DPRs) must align with the National Policy for Conservation, 2014.
• Pilot List of Monuments: Initially, 250 monuments will be opened for private participation.

Role of the National Culture Fund

• The NCF, set up in 1996, will play a central role in this new framework. Since its inception, the NCF has received Rs. 140 crore in corporate and PSU donations, funding nearly 100 projects.
• Of these, 70 have been completed, including conservation of Bhuleshwar Temple (Pune), Hyderabad’s British Residency, and Mandu monuments (Madhya Pradesh).
• Previously, corporates contributed only financially, while ASI handled the work. Under the revised policy, donors will have greater control, being able to directly hire implementing agencies under ASI’s oversight.

Checks, Safeguards, and Criticism

• While the policy marks a major opening, the government has been cautious. Safeguards include:

• ASI’s Supervisory Role: The ASI must approve DPRs and ensure compliance with conservation standards.
• Eligibility Criteria: Executing agencies must have prior experience in heritage conservation of structures over 100 years old.
• Credit to Donors: Corporations and donors will be credited at the monument site, incentivising CSR contributions.

• Critics argue that opening up conservation to private players risks the commercialisation of heritage sites.
• Concerns remain about balancing historical integrity with corporate branding.
• However, proponents believe it will help overcome ASI’s limited capacity and bring much-needed efficiency.

Broader Implications

• This policy shift has several implications:

• Capacity Building: With more players, conservation efforts will speed up, especially for lesser-known sites.
• Sustainability: Private funding will reduce the financial burden on the government.
• Public Engagement: Corporate branding and involvement may lead to increased public awareness of heritage conservation.
• Global Standards: Involving reputed conservation architects can help India align with global practices in heritage management.

• The move also complements earlier initiatives such as the Adopt a Heritage scheme, which allowed corporates to provide visitor amenities but not conservation work.
• Now, with private participation in core conservation, India is expanding the scope of public-private engagement in cultural heritage.