TERRITORIAL IDENTITY AND DEVELOPMENT Volume 2 / No. 2, Autumn 2017 ISSN 2537 - 4850 ISSN–L 2537 - 4850 KNOWLEDGE DISSEMINATION ABOUT CULTURAL HERITAGE IN POST-1989 ROMANIA. SEVERAL EXAMPLES Ana-Maria STAN Baďeş-Bolyai University, University History Museum, Cluj-Napoca, ROMANIA ana.stan@ubbcluj.ro DOI: http://doi.org/10.23740/TID220175 ABSTRACT The article investigates several examples of instruments used in Romania, since the fall of Communism, for heritage education and/or studies, in an attempt to highlight how local and national cultural heritage has been made known to the general public and what achievements and challenges occurred during this process. With the help of four different case-studies, we look at how the methods of presenting cultural heritage have evolved over the years. Today there is a variety of available printed or digital resources for heritage education and their number, as well as their quality, is constantly increasing. The importance of heritage preservation equally gains weight in the RoŵaŶiaŶs’ ŵiŶd. Hoǁeǀeƌ, a lot of ǁoƌk still ƌeŵaiŶs to ďe doŶe, oŶe of the ďiggest ĐhalleŶges being to put together the expertise of different specialists (architects, historians, geographers, ethnographers, etc.) for a proper valorisation of the local, regional, and national heritage. Keywords: cultural heritage, heritage education, post-Communist Romania, printed and digital resources PRELIMINARIES Last May, the ruling bodies of the European Union decided that 2018 will be dedicated to and officially labelled as the European Year of Cultural Heritage, attempting to encourage people, especially young people, to explore Europe’s rich cultural diversity and to reflect on the place that cultural heritage occupies in all our lives. [Cultural heritage] allows us to understand the past and to build our futuƌe (Navracsics, 2017). While analysing and taking action in order to further promote, preserve and use the European heritage, in all its forms, this year can also present a good opportunity of looking back to the long and sometimes complicated journey to consecration of this domain, mainly in post-Communist countries. Consequently, in the present article, we look at several examples of instruments used in Romania, for heritage education and/or studies, since the fall of Communism. We focused on how local and national cultural heritage has been made known to the general public, underlining what achievements and challenges occurred during this process. As a general observation, we have to mention that a significant revival of interest for heritage studies and heritage education can be observed in Romania after 1989 and in particular since the ĐouŶtƌLJ’s EU aĐĐessioŶ iŶ ϮϬϬ7. AŶotheƌ aspeĐt that staŶds out is the laƌge ǀaƌietLJ of actors that have gradually become involved in the protection, exploitation, and even the creation of new Romanian heritage (puďliĐ ĐeŶtƌal aŶd loĐal authoƌities, NGO’s, uŶiǀeƌsities, other public/private entities – restoration companies, museums, craftsmen, travel agencies, etc.). Over the last three decades, a rich legislation in the field of heritage has equally been adopted (however, the rules are not always applied, followed and even known by those in