Introduction: SAS 600, ‘Protection of National Heritage, Art, and Culture,’ aims to promote the preservation and development of traditional arts and crafts, restoration of historical buildings, and conservation of artworks. This article provides an overview of the SAS, emphasizing its significance in honoring cultural heritage and supporting the growth of young artists. The process of social audit, data collection, and key questions asked during the assessment are also discussed.
Process of Social Audit
The SAS provides perspicuous insight on whom the SA should approach in the process of data collection for its impact assessment assignment which shall include but not limited to:
Data Collection
- Direct beneficiaries e.g., Archaeological department, Tourist, art Students, Trainees,
- Participants, Attendees, international visitors
- Parents/Guardians of the direct beneficiaries
- Faculty/Teachers / Trainers imparting education / training on art and heritage
- Management personnel of art Education/Training Partners
- Monitoring Agency
- Recruitment Agencies
- Employers
- Key Program officials of the reporting entity
When conducting surveys and collecting sample data, the following factors should be considered to assess relevance and reliability:
- designed by an in-house team or external specialized agency
- conducted by an in-house team or external specialized agency
- coverage: number of villages/districts/ total distance (km) covered
After data collection, the SA should thoroughly review the data, which can include conducting physical inspections and one-on-one interviews to better understand the situation.
The social audit process under this SAS involves the SA asking key questions of themselves and the people involved. These questions form the foundation of the Social Impact Assessment Report. These questions could include:
- Is the Heritage site attracting tourists and footfall?
- Is the heritage site bringing employment to the marginalized communities?
- What is the Socio-cultural sustainability of cultural heritage?
- Is there education related to heritage, art and culture in various educational institutions?
- What is the level of historic and cultural awareness in the target group?
- What social issues does the heritage target?
Key Metrics: Framing and Assessment
Depending on the engagement, the SA is required to develop key metrics or performance indicators, which can be compared with the actual performances of the Social Enterprise under audit. These key indices should include both qualitative and quantitative evaluation criteria.
The assessment will prompt the SA to ask pertinent questions, and with the collected data, they will be able to answer these questions. Examples include:
- What would have happened without the intervention?
- How much has the project contributed to the changes that are evidenced in relation to the outputs/outcomes/social objectives that were sought to be achieved?
- Has there been any unintended negative impact due to the intervention?
This assessment will guide the SA towards the final outcome of their report. With all the collected data and key metrics analysis, they will be able to grade the performance of the Social Enterprise based on its Social Impact.
Assessment of evaluation criteria
Some key aspects that can be considered as evaluation criteria are listed below:
- Quantitative Criteria
- Number of heritage attractions under cultural heritage management
- Number of programs organized at/ for heritage sites, arts and culture. Its Participants/Visitors.
- Number of old and new creative and knowledge-based jobs in the sector for promotion of heritage, arts and culture.
- Number of international visitors to heritage site and participants in cultural programmes.
- Cultural heritage presence in artworks, stories, films, music compositions, design, etc.
- Number of artists and workers using infrastructure for protection of heritage, arts and cultural creation.
- Number of related traditions / customs / knowledges preserved.
- Change in the number of visitors due to intervention into heritage.
- Number of products promoting a heritage brand
- Number of funding sources (e.g., crowdfunding, products retail, co-branding, interpretation)
- Number of digitally preserved heritage assets, art and culture.
- Number of companies with new heritage-related products
- Number of innovative interpretation media (e.g., QR codes, 3D technologies,
- multimedia and interactive tools, multisensory media, enhanced interpretive design, interpretive films, etc.)
- Use of human resources management tools (e.g., software)
- Number of new job openings
- Volunteers
- Measures taken for audience development.
- Existence of an innovative entrance counting system
- Increase in the number of educators, artists and students compared to earlier years.
- Increase in the number of artisans working on revival of craft like traditional embroidery or a saree weave.
- Increase in year-on-year revenue of the Social Enterprise through ticket sales, advertising, merchandising, and provision of other services.
- Qualitative Criteria
- Economic Indicator
Core Indicator
- Contribution of Cultural Activities
- Cultural Employment
Description
- Percentage of the contribution of private and formal cultural activities
- Percentage of persons engaged in cultural occupations within the total employed population
- Education
Core Indicator
- Arts Education
- Professional Training in the Culture sector
Description
- Percentage of instructional hours dedicated to arts education in relation to the total number of instructional hours in secondary school
- Coverage of technical and vocational education and training and tertiary education in the field of culture
- Governance
Core Indicator
1. Policy and Institutional Framework for Culture
2. Civil Society Participation in Cultural governance
Description
1. Assessment of protection and promotion of culture, cultural rights and cultural diversity.
2. Assessment of the participation of cultural professionals and minorities in the formulation and implementation of cultural policies, measures and programmes that concern them.
- Social Participation
Core Indicator
1. Participation in going-out Cultural activities
2. Cinema
3. Heritage
4. Museums
5. Festivals
Description
1. Percentage of the population who have participated at least once in a going-out cultural activity in the last 12 months
2. Percentage of the population who have participated at least once in an identity -building cultural activity in the last 12 months
3. Degree of tolerance within a society towards people from different cultural backgrounds
4. Self-determination implies the individual’s right to live the life they choose, according to their own values and beliefs. In this sense, self-determination is strongly linked to cultural values, aptitudes and convictions.
In order to comprehensively address each aspect, it is important to consider multiple scenarios that may arise. This approach ensures well-rounded understanding and facilitates effective decision-making.
Areas for improvement
- Lack of National Archaeological Database.
- National Geographic Information System (GIS) Database for monuments and sites to be authenticated and validated with Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).
- The National Mission on Monuments and Antiquities (NMMA) to be reactivated with budget and staffing to complete its previous listing of built heritage and antiquities.
- Extend ongoing initiative for Archives Data to be accessible digitally and Archives to be stored as per conservation norms.
- New technology like Photogrammetry & 3D Laser scanning should be used for documentation, surveys, excavation and conservation works.
- LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) and Drone Surveys to document monuments and sites.
- National Policy on Conservation needs to be implemented and put into practice vigorously by Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and State Archaeology Departments.
- Conservation Plan be prepared for the site before undertaking any conservation works.
- Region-wise empanelment of crafts persons to be taken up.
Limitations:
Just like any other financial or statutory audit even Social Audit has its inherent limitations. The SA should recognize these limitations is respect to SAS. Evaluation process in this engagement has its own limitations and impediments are common.
There may be cases where evaluation sheets are not answered completely or correctly or not replied to completely if not given personally. Unable to contact direct beneficiaries of the Social Impact Projects are frequent. This SAS deals with a section of society which may not want to come forward on its own and hence it becomes difficult for the SA to complete his or her assessment.
Such limitations should be highlighted and reported in the SA report.
My Remarks
In today’s discussions, there is a significant focus on reviving the lost heritage of our society. The government has undertaken various measures to educate the younger generation about India’s rich culture. While some may perceive this SAS as less important than previous ones, it is crucial to recognize that culture plays a defining role in shaping an individual.
When addressing this SAS, the social auditor should consider both broad and specific topics. It is important to understand the overall process and challenges involved in such endeavors. Additionally, the social auditor will need to exercise judgment, as each engagement will be unique, particularly in the intricate yet immensely significant realm of Social Audit.
To conclude, SAS 600 assumes a pivotal role in the preservation and promotion of India’s national heritage, art, and culture. The social audit process outlined in this SAS facilitates a comprehensive assessment of the impact of cultural heritage initiatives. By collecting data, establishing key metrics, and evaluating qualitative and quantitative criteria, social auditors can determine the effectiveness of these initiatives in preserving cultural heritage, generating employment opportunities, and fostering socio-cultural sustainability. However, it is vital to address areas that require improvement and acknowledge the limitations of social audits to ensure a thorough and accurate assessment.
Author Bio
