Contents
Introduction
As per UNESCO (2023), India hosts over 40 World Heritage Sites, yet the ASI’s annual budget allocation is barely 0.08% of total expenditure, revealing a chronic underfunding crisis in heritage conservation.
Heritage as a National Asset
- India’s cultural heritage, comprising monuments, museums, crafts, and living traditions—constitutes a crucial component of soft power and cultural economy.
- The World Bank (2022) estimates that cultural tourism contributes nearly $250 billion globally, yet India underutilises its vast heritage potential due to inadequate funding and fragmented governance.
Challenges Faced by Public Funding in Heritage Conservation
- Budgetary Constraints and Low Prioritisation: Despite being a civilisational repository, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) receives a meagre share of public funds. Between 2010–2023, allocations stagnated around ₹1,200–₹1,500 crore, insufficient to maintain over 3,600 protected monuments.
- Bureaucratic Inefficiency and Lack of Flexibility: Rigid procurement norms and delays in fund release hinder restoration work. The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) Report (2013) noted that 70% of heritage structures under ASI were in a “neglected state” due to bureaucratic delays.
- Fragmented Institutional Framework: Multiplicity of agencies—ASI, State Archaeology Departments, Municipal bodies—leads to duplication, weak accountability, and lack of integrated Heritage Management Plans.
- Deficit of Expertise and Skilled Manpower: Public departments lack multidisciplinary expertise in heritage engineering, conservation science, museology, and community engagement. UNESCO (2021) observed that India faces a 40% shortfall in trained conservation professionals.
- Community Disconnection and Economic Unsustainability: Absence of participatory management results in vandalism, encroachment, and local apathy. Sites like Elephanta Caves and Hampi exemplify how neglect leads to cultural and economic loss.
Necessity of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs)
- Mobilisation of Financial Resources and Expertise: PPP models such as the “Adopt a Heritage” scheme (2018) encourage corporate sponsorship for conservation and tourist infrastructure. Corporate entities can invest CSR funds (2% of profits) for heritage development under Schedule VII of the Companies Act, 2013.
- Holistic Conservation Models: Case studies like the Elephanta Caves and Dr Bhau Daji Lad Museum demonstrate that PPPs ensure end-to-end site management—including restoration, documentation, tourism planning, and community benefit—beyond mere monument repair.
- Enhancing Visitor Experience through Technology: Private sector innovation—AR/VR-based tours, smart signage, ticketing platforms—enhances accessibility and engagement. The Qutub Minar e-guide project (ASI-TCS collaboration) illustrates how technology can merge preservation with education.
- Job Creation and Local Empowerment: Heritage PPPs can integrate skill development, craft revival, and eco-tourism, benefiting local communities. The City of Jaipur Heritage Project (UNESCO–INTACH) exemplifies community-inclusive urban heritage regeneration.
- Global Benchmarking: Countries like Italy (Fondo Ambiente Italiano) and UK’s National Trust have shown that non-state participation ensures sustainability, transparency, and tourism-led economic growth.
The Way Forward
- Develop National Heritage PPP Policy Framework ensuring accountability and transparency.
- Build capacity and training programs for heritage professionals.
- Encourage community-led micro-enterprises around heritage zones.
- Integrate heritage conservation into urban and regional planning, aligning with UN SDG 11.4 (Protect the world’s cultural and natural heritage).
Conclusion
Echoing Amartya Sen’s Development as Freedom, sustainable heritage conservation demands shared responsibility, where public trust, private innovation, and community participation coalesce to preserve India’s living legacy for future generations.
