General Evaluation of the Potential of the Cultural-Historical Heritage Built in the Republic of Moldova

This article analyzes the efficiency of the administration, as well as the way of financing the cultural heritage of the Republic of Moldova through the prism of the legal, institutional and cultural policy framework. Following the research, it was found that in the last 30 years the efficient and transparent management of the material cultural heritage of the Republic of Moldova has not been ensured, which endangers the national cultural heritage. If the current management and financing model does not change significantly in the near future, there is a risk that the cultural heritage of the Republic of Moldova will reach an unrecoverable condition.


Introduction
The architectural heritage is one of the most representative pages in the cultural heritage of mankind, the study and protection of which has become a mandatory  [1].
In most countries of the European Union, the values that the Republic of Moldova tends to assimilate, the cultural and historical heritage is protected primarily by proper maintenance, through conservation and restoration interventions.
The immovable cultural heritage is considered one of the pillars that ensures the sustainable development of cities, its protection being placed among the essential objectives of urbanism and spatial planning. The current situation in this field is a catastrophic one, given the fact that a large part of the monuments with state protected status is further ruined and destroyed. In this sense, we want to emphasize that if we continue to be irresponsible and indifferent to cultural heritage, we risk losing them irretrievably quite quickly and many of these objectives can be seen only in documents and archive images. Thus, in the 1970s, the notion of "historical monument" was replaced by the term "cultural heritage", the first being since then reserved for the values protected by law. Both the scope of the concept of heritage and the concept of historical monuments have expanded considerably. New approaches have emerged, new types of heritage have been highlighted internationally, new ways of valuing historical monuments have been successfully implemented [2]. From the data presented publicly, it is found that there are deficiencies in the efficient and transparent management of cultural heritage.
Among them, the following could be listed ( 2) 17 historic buildings are in an advanced state of ruin; 3) 160 cases of illegal interventions that damaged the authenticity of the monuments.
In Chişinău, 254 national and local real estate monuments from a total of 977 monuments suffered due to the non-compliance with the legislation in force.
The historic center of Chişinăucontinues to be seen as a space for urban experiments, the historic buildings here being treated as an embarrassing obstacle to progress, which is confused with the destruction of the historic fund of buildings and its replacement with new buildings, considered to be the only ones "con- -Creating the market of services for the conservation/restoration of the built cultural heritage-by forming the national system for training staff in the field; by ensuring a competition for access to the provision of design and operation services for conservation/restoration works based on professionalism/knowledge and specialization in the field.
-The creation of the cultural heritage protection system within the territorial-administrative units.
The strategy did not establish separate actions against the protected built-up Open Journal of Applied Sciences areas and historic cities. To solve the existing problems, it is important to promote the perception of the built cultural heritage, including the urban heritage of historic cities, as an important resource for sustainable development of localities, and not as an "embarrassing obstacle to progress" ("progress" is usually, associated with wide streets, large urban constructions, made of glass and concrete, which "inevitably" must replace the constructions of historic centers).
That perception has been educated over the past few decades against the background of the demolition of the Soviet system of protection of built heritage and not building anything new.
Overcoming the situation is possible by building a new system for the protec-

Analysis of the Current Situation Regarding the Cataloging of the Cultural Heritage
The legislation in force on the cultural heritage of the Republic of Moldova does not provide a unique system for cataloging real estate cultural heritage. The classification system is based on the registration of assets in the Register of Historical Monuments, based on the proposal of the Ministry of Culture. Although in recent years the legislation has been repeatedly completed and updated, the procedure for the registration of cultural property remains unclear [6].
The classification mechanism is confusing, the procedures for identifying, describing and cataloging the assets are quite complex and are not applied or they are applied only to a minimum. In this context, any digitization project is vir-Open Journal of Applied Sciences tually impossible due to the lack of homogeneous databases, infrastructures and technological systems.
In addition, the fragmented nature of competencies and regulations between the different protection systems weakens the whole system. Thus, it is currently difficult to develop a common digital documentation system that could make the necessary data available to the various stakeholders.
One of the worst problems is the lack of an efficient link between the registers and the cadastral system. This link would strengthen the practice of protecting private property.
The lack of a unified cataloging system makes it virtually impossible to implement the information systems connected to other national databases, preventing the creation of effective urban and spatial planning tools or the development of risk maps. In Chişinău, there is an obvious lack of concordance be- Moreover, the data included in these inventories were not designed for IT applications, so they are not suitable for homogeneous transposition into a digital information system. In order to overcome this problem, professional data analysis is mandatory. It is also necessary to address the spatial analysis of data, which is not yet regulated.
In order to create an efficient information system of the built cultural heritage, it is essential to adopt a progressive and a modular unitary cataloging system that applies to all types of immovable cultural heritage.
Modularity would allow to respond to the diversity of goods, offering a series of specific modules adapted to different types (archaeological, monumental, his-torical…) within a unified data structure. The adoption of databases for asset identification (administrative data, geo-referencing, location, cadastral data, properties, metadata) would be of particular importance. Such an approach to the cataloging process would also facilitate the access to the various levels of detail required for the procedural steps, from the first identification of the asset to the proposal for listing, protection and monitoring.
Cultural heritage management is a complex set of legal and institutional frameworks, capacities, resources that, together, ensure the physical protection of property, adequacy in related management activities and public satisfaction.
The catalog aims to identify and describe the cultural heritage for which the artistic, historical, archaeological or ethno-anthropological importance has been recognized. The general catalog of cultural heritage collects and centralizes the descriptive and administrative data of protected monuments. It also collects the data on monuments that are not yet registered and those that are protected for research purposes. Open Journal of Applied Sciences The general catalog of cultural heritage would be a suitable tool for the protection and consolidation of cultural heritage, planning interventions for conservation and is the fundamental level of knowledge for spatial planning and for effective prevention of natural and man-made threats.
In Moldova, the heritage protection policy and decision-making processes include various degrees of vertical autonomy and low levels of horizontal relations [6]. On the one hand, this is due to the lack of adequate technical equipment, and on the other hand-the lack of easily accessible and common basic information on heritage. This constraint could be exaggerated if the basic heritage information were more easily accessible in a common, coherent way through up-to-date information technologies.
The implementation of an autonomous IT cataloging system for the built heritage of Moldova is of strategic importance in the perspective of a general policy for the development of Moldovan institutional and administrative assets.
The IT cataloging system for the built heritage of Moldova will be a relational integrated spatial database, which will allow users to explore, overlay and process the information about cultural assets and the potential risk factors. It will provide heritage managers with a technological tool to support scientific and administrative activities. This system will collect data on any type of real estate, both monumental and archaeological, regardless of classification and degree of protection, and will be an operational tool to support the decision-making process in the protection of cultural heritage, spatial planning and control. The IT cataloging system for the real estate heritage of Moldova will be based on a database of registered and unregistered monuments and archaeological assets.
The database will consist of: 1) Archaeological sites; 2) Monuments. Both registered and unregistered.
All monuments and archaeological assets will be analyzed on the basis of a Unified Inventory Form and files on Monuments and Archaeological Assets.
They are based on the data set stipulated in the following:

Conclusions
The Republic of Moldova has a considerable cultural heritage that needs urgent capitalization and consolidation. The Government of the Republic of Moldova has assumed as a priority the alignment and functioning of institutions in the field of cultural heritage to European standards through its long-term programs and objectives [3]. At the same time, after the examination of the current situation in the localities of Moldova, regarding the technical condition of the cultural heritage, it can be concluded that in these 30 years of independence, efficient and transparent management of the cultural heritage has not been ensured. A major problem is the conservation and protection of the immovable (architectural) cultural heritage, which has been affected to a greater extent in recent years.
The legal framework in the field of cultural heritage has not been accompanied by practical reforms, and the "preservation of heritage" has taken place only on paper, without having a real impact in terms of its protection and enhancement. The lack of coherent state policies, the lack of a strategic plan for heritage development, the lack of an efficient management system of cultural heritage, the lack of specialists in the field of restoration, precarious financing and the lack of political will contributed to the irretrievable destruction of hundreds of monuments and vestiges of the national cultural heritage.
About 10% of the monuments of the Historic Center of Chişinău have already been illegally demolished, and 30% of the immovable cultural heritage is considered endangered, with a new case of demolition being registered every month.
The poor financing of programs for the protection and enhancement of cultural heritage, but also the inefficient management of heritage is largely due to the inefficient mechanism of financing the cultural sector, which remained the same as in the Soviet period. Although the allocations for cultural heritage have increased from year to year, the state's financial policy regarding the safeguarding of cultural heritage focuses on strategies and objectives for survival and not on its development.
The recommendations for improving the situation in the field of capitalization of cultural heritage would be the following: 1) Adapting the legislative framework to the real and current needs, including the International norms in the field, in order to stop the degradation and de-Open Journal of Applied Sciences struction of the inherited cultural heritage. It is necessary to draft a new law on the protection of historical monuments in the context of international experience in the field and compliance with the obligations of the Republic of Moldova to European partners and UNESCO, which will replace the current Law on the Protection of Monuments from 1993;