Suggestion to the President

On the evening of July 10, 2000, I had the pleasure of attending your opening of the International Symposium on Conserving Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Social, Economic and Tourism Development.

I was grateful that you permitted questions from the audience but regret that I did not have the opportunity to reach the microphone to ask my question. Rather than leave the question unasked and inspired by your spirit of openness, I ask it via this open letter.

You posed the problem of finding the proper balance between the past and the future; of choosing conservation or development. Stated this way, the answer is easy for us to agree on; the past is done, finished, yesterday's news, or basically ... the past; while the future holds our hopes, our dreams, the promise of a better world and endless possibilities. The past cannot be changed. We have a responsibility to live for the future. The answer is easy because this is the wrong question.

Conservation is development. It is development that builds on the past. Cultural conservation is a project to create a better future. Instead of being deceived by the false question of the past versus the future, let us acknowledge that we are all working together to create a better future. Permit me to suggest a more relevant question of balance. What is the proper balance between the short-term and the long-term future; between the short-term profits of a few people or the long-term quality of life for all; between muddling through in the short-term or seizing the opportunity to pursue a vision of long-term sustainability?

You spoke admiringly of Singapore's solution to the problems of the automobile, something which is a good example of the importance of this question. Singapore has not chosen between the past and the future. It has rejected muddling through and instead committed to a vision of long-term social, economic and environmental sustainability. It has built a mass transportation system that is the envy of the world and is paying for its improvement and expansion by taxing private automobile usage. It has protected its living cultures and built heritage as an integral part of an aggressive development effort and will hopefully soon realize that tourism is only a small part of the benefits of cultural conservation.

It has studied the past experience of cities and nations around the globe and learned from both successes and failures. Singapore is not perfect but it has avoided many of the mistakes made elsewhere by creatively adapting the best practices of others to its own circumstances.

I hope the governor and councillors of Bali follow your suggestion and study the Singapore example as a basis for developing solutions to the challenges facing Bali -- including a healthy development based on cultural heritage conservation.

ROBERT COWHERD

Denpasar, Bali