Vivek Menezes
Today is the 43rd World Heritage Day, with a theme of great relevance to Goa and the world at this moment: Emergency Response for Living Heritage. International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) —which has steered the annual commemoration for over four decades —says it wants to bring “visibility to the work undertaken to conserve and protect the world’s culturally significant ‘Living Heritage’ increasingly at risk from accelerating disasters and conflicts unfolding in complex, multi-hazard contexts.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
UNESCO defines ‘Living Heritage’ as the ‘oral traditions, performing arts, social practices, rituals and festive events, knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe, and the knowledge and skills related to craftsmanship’. In its work, ICOMOS understands ‘Living Heritage’ to encompass all dimensions of cultural heritage – tangible, intangible and natural [including] a region’s biodiversity, geodiversity, and natural features—such as landscapes, seascapes, waterways, woodlands, bogs, uplands, habitats, and native wildlife, including plants, insects, birds, and animals.” Understandably, this focus is due to the devastating warfare in several different parts of the world. Nonetheless, even if India has managed to avoid getting trapped in those wars, the theme of Emergency Response for Living Heritage is highly pertinent in places like Goa, where the conflict and disaster is coming from within.
Exactly what the organization recommends is already happening here: “Heritage enthusiasts and heritage professionals” must “consider the potential impacts on heritage resources; examine what resilience looks like in the face of those impacts; and what they can do to RESPOND, within their mandates, capacities and ethical frameworks, from their national and scientific perspectives.” In this regard, India’s smallest state has churned up several inspirational movements and leaders over the past few years alone. To get some perspective on how Goa compares to other parts of the world, I reached out to one of them, the passionate visionary young architect Tahir Noronha, whose remarkable advocacy for Goa’s living heritage has remained undimmed even after he left for graduate school in the USA, where he is currently a PhD researcher at the University of California, Berkeley (and his dissertation looks at the impact of law changes on how land is used and protected in Western India). Noronha told me “there are two things I take away from how built heritage is protected in other places.
First is the proactive role the government takes. Across the world having a heritage property means you are restricted from making changes. But how much can be changed pans out two ways based on the state/national Act: (1) is rather strict criteria-based guidelines that stipulate exactly what materials, architectural elements, finishes etc can be used, and to what extent, while (2) is a design review presentation made before a committee of experts in a public forum. The committees are – like our conservation committee in Goa, appointed by politicians – but the difference is that any member of the public can attend these presentations and speak their opinions. Only after hearing everyone, does the committee decide (in the same forum). Their ‘verdict’ and reasoning are given at the same instance or in a subsequent open forum.
Therefore, even though the decision is discretionary, it is transparent. Citizens can seek alternative remedies much before the construction licenses are issued by planning / local government.” Another common heritage policy that is not applied in Goa is direct benefits. Noronha says “in many countries, if you’re the occupant of a heritage property, the government compensates you, as you have something that is bringing social benefits. Here we impose heavy restrictions, decide claims in a non-transparent way, and the owner gets nothing but hardship, as the residents of Sao Tome and other heritage neighbourhoods know too well.
Therefore, across Goa, owners of heritage properties are selling them corporations or powerful connected people, who do not have the cultural competency that someone who lives in Goa brings. This is resulting in a proliferation of kitschy renovations that at times don’t meet ICOMOS norms to even be considered a renovation.” In addition, there is the hands-off attitude on protecting heritage. There are constant violations, most blatant in recent memory being the case in June 2025 where a resident of Rajasthan took a JCB and made an illegal road through the Monte property in Old Goa, to get access to orchard land they purchased for construction of a ‘farm house’. Luckily it was stopped before more than the compound wall could be demolished thanks to prompt intervention from Glen Cabral, but the Archaeology Department was completely unaware. I don’t exactly fault them, they are badly understaffed. Per information obtained by MLA Cruz Silva via LAQ060 on 21 July 2025, the Goa Archaeology Department has only 17 staff to look after around 70 monuments across the state.
What’s more, there’s only one “Conservation Archaeologist”, and an acting director whose expertise is in Information Technology (was a former lecturer at GEC).” Noronha says “one thing that Goa has working in its favour is a community that sees value in heritage “worth saving”. Across the world, built heritage protection has been the interest of the wealthy. But in Goa, time and time again, everyday people have come out to protect heritage.” Two examples would be the Kala Academy demolition issue where nearly 30,000 Goans signed petitions to save the structure; and the Save Old Goa movement against an obnoxious construction within the Largo of St. Cajetan on top of the ruins of the old market, where around 3-4000 Goans came out in a Maha Andolan to protest the actions of the builder and the government. There are good officers in both the ASI and the Goa Archaeology Department, but they are perpetually under threat of transfer, as was seen by the honest Superintendent who was transferred out after taking action against the illegal bungalow in the Largo.”
