Tools for Analyzing and Mapping the Architectural Heritage: Toward Integrated Monitoring

The cultural heritage spread across the entire Italian national territory, which is rich and heterogeneous in terms of history, construction, morphology, materials, and conservation, is continually exposed to the risk of loss and wear caused by exposure to a plurality of actions—of a natural or anthropic nature—attributable to the peculiarities of use and enjoyment of the assets themselves and to their location in highly dangerous territorial areas. In this regard, it must be remembered that Italy is a geologically recent country, characterized by a tectonic dynamism that induces territorial changes with consequent seismic and volcanic events but also with hydrogeological and hydraulic instability, coastal erosion, etc. The characteristics connected with the conservation and enhancement of historic buildings do not, however, make it possible to implement safety management strategies based on deterministic-prescriptive solutions valid for ordinary buildings, due to certain peculiarities attributable to the irreproducible historical-cultural value and risk of loss, to the particular conservation conditions of building materials and to the factors of vulnerability and intrinsic weakness induced by the centuries-long transformations that have taken place over time. The evolutionary framework of technical regulations that has emerged since the calamitous events that struck the country in the middle of the last century reflects a true cultural renewal that leads to bring about the non “sacrificability” of “conservation” in the name of “safety” (Lagomarsino, S., Responsabilità della conservazione del costruito storico, atti del convegno per il ventennale dell’Arco (Roma, Villa Medici, 29–30 novembre 2010). Gangemi, Roma, 2011; Lagomarsino, Quale sicurezza per il patrimonio architettonico? Atti del VI Convegno Nazionale Arco (Mantova, 30 novembre – 2 dicembre 2006), pp. 70–89. Nuova Argos, Roma, 2007, Modena et al., Conservazione del patrimonio architettonico e sicurezza strutturale in zona sismica: insegnamenti dalle recenti esperienze italiane. In: Materiali e Strutture, I, 1–2, pp. 17–28. Edizioni Quasar, 2012). The serious damage caused, for example, by the seismic events that hit Friuli in 1976 and Irpinia in 1980 inaugurated intense technical-scientific research that confirmed the ineffectiveness of a “reparatory” post-damage intervention policy and the need to pursue a different approach to the theme of “safety,” based on the adoption and implementation of policies and strategies of risk mitigation and, more generally, of prevention (Circolare M. BB. CC. A. 18 luglio 1986, n. 1032, Comitato nazionale per la prevenzione del patrimonio culturale dal rischio sismico, Interventi sul patrimonio monumentale a tipologia specialistica in zone sismiche: raccomandazioni, 1986; Delibera del Consiglio Superiore LL.PP. – Comitato nazionale per la prevenzione del patrimonio culturale dal rischio sismico, 28 novembre 1997, n. 564; le Istruzioni generali per la redazione dei progetti di restauro dei beni architettonici di valore storico artistico in zona sismica, 1997; Circolare M. BB. CC. A. 12 marzo 1991, n. 1841, Comitato nazionale per la prevenzione del patrimonio culturale dal rischio sismico, Direttive per la redazione ed esecuzione di progetti di restauro comprendenti interventi di miglioramento e manutenzione nei complessi architettonici di valore storico-artistico in zona sismica, 1991). Thus, a different and more effective attention toward pre-existing structures is outlined, which aims at the adoption of management models centered on the knowledge of the heritage as a primary element for a coherent management but also of its constant updating in relation to changing boundary conditions. The monitoring of degradation processes and the control of material and conservation characteristics over time, therefore, become fundamental elements for guiding in-depth studies and investigations but also for planning maintenance or preventive interventions (Cecchi and Gasparoli, Prevenzione e Manutenzione per i Beni Culturali edificati, Procedimenti scientifici per lo sviluppo delle Attività Ispettive. Il caso studio delle Aree archeologiche di Roma e Ostia Antica. Alinea, Firenze 2010; Cecchi and Gasparoli, La Manutenzione Programmata dei Beni Culturali edificati, Procedimenti scientifici per lo sviluppo di Piani e Programmi di Manutenzione. Casi studio su aree di interesse archeologico a Roma e Pompei. Alinea, Firenze, 2011). The definition of a prevention policy in relation to the damage suffered by the cultural heritage– is an increasingly recurring theme in the guidelines of the Ministry of Culture (MiC). In particular, the General Directorate for Cultural Heritage Safety has at its disposal territorial information systems that allow the monitoring of the state of conservation of pre-existences, procedures before and after calamitous events, as well as technical and management information on the MiC’s real estate assets: The Cultural Heritage Risk Map and SecurArt system.