Cultural heritage research · effects of climate change, pollution, natural and man-made disasters, neglect, vandalism and even mass tourism become all the more evident. Changing

Research &Innovation

Cultural heritage research

Survey and outcomes of projects within

the Environment ThemeFrom 5th to 7th Framework Programme 2012 Edition

KI-NA-25503-EN

-C

Cultural heritage 121012.indd 3 12/10/12 11:58

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Directorate-General for Research and InnovationDirectorate I — EnvironmentUnit I.2 — Environmental Technologies

Contact: Luisa Prista

European CommissionOffice CDMA 03/10B-1049 Brussels

Tel. +32 229 61598Fax +32 229 52097E-mail: [email protected]


EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Directorate-General for Research and Innovation2012 Environmental Technologies EUR 25503 EN

Cultural heritage research

Survey and outcomes of projects within

the Environment ThemeFrom 5th to 7th Framework Programme 2012 Edition


2

LEGAL NOTICE

NeithertheEuropeanCommissionnoranypersonactingonbehalfoftheCommissionisresponsiblefortheusewhichmightbemadeofthefollowinginformation.

Theviewsexpressedinthispublicationarethesoleresponsibilityoftheauthoranddonotnecessarily reflect the views of the European Commission.

MoreinformationontheEuropeanUnionisavailableontheInternet(http://europa.eu).

Cataloguingdatacanbefoundattheendofthispublication.

Luxembourg:PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion,2012

ISBN 978-92-79-25492-5ISSN 1018-5593doi:10.2777/71172

Coverimage:©Shutterstock

©EuropeanUnion,2012Reproductionisauthorisedprovidedthesourceisacknowledged.

Printed in BelgiumPrintedonelementalchlorine-freebleachedpaper( )ECF

EUROPE DIRECT is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union.

Freephonenumber(*):

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11(*)Certainmobiletelephoneoperatorsdonotallowaccessto00800numbers

orthesecallsmaybebilled.


Table of contents

1 Introduction 4

Background and context 4

Scope of the survey 5

2 Results and outcomes of cultural heritage research 6

Introduction 6

Support instruments 8

Analysis of cultural heritage research projects 10

Impact 15

3 Overview of FP7 cultural heritage projects 17

Introduction 17

Challenge N° 1 | Damage assessment and preventive conservation 18

Challenge N° 2 | Predicting and responding to climate change and extreme events 19

Challenge N° 3 | Mapping and monitoring cultural heritage – scaling up and zooming in 20

Challenge N° 4 | Traditional and advanced materials and technologies for improved conservation 21

Challenge N° 5 | Enhanced energy efficiency in historic buildings and urban districts 22

Challenge N° 6 | Coordination of national research programmes and priorities 23

4 Conclusion and future trends 24

5 Annexes 25

C U L T U R A L H E R I T A G E R E S E A R C H 3


IntroductionBackground and contextEurope’s cultural heritage is invaluable for its citizens and is irreplaceable. It provides a link to and a better understanding of the past, and promotes a sense of social and common identity. Over time, however, the fragility of European cultural heritage has increased, and its vulnerability to the harmful effects of climate change, pollution, natural and man-made disasters, neglect, vandalism and even mass tourism become all the more evident. Changing landscapes, deforestation and coastal erosion due to increasing urbanisation also take their toll. To avoid irreversible damage and loss, appropriate action is needed at every level.

In economic terms, the cultural heritage of Europe draws millions of visitors each year to monuments, historic city centres, archaeological sites, museums and galleries, generates employment and con-tributes significantly to tourism and business activity. In social terms, it contributes to the cohesion of the European Union (EU) and plays a fundamental role in European integration.

The EU recognises the dangers of inaction, and supports new research programmes that promote the long-term future protection and conservation of cultural assets. The EU regards the study and pres-ervation of tangible and intangible cultural heritage as equally important to the preservation of European identity, cultural diversity, wellbeing and wealth. This is not only for present but also future generations.

Cultural heritage research has been a constant theme in all EU Framework Programmes (FPs) since they began in 1986. FP7 (1) covers the period 2007-13 and has a broader than ever range of topics. These topics have emphasised the need for environmental impact assessment, the design and test-ing of new tools and models for risk evaluation and non-destructive techniques for diagnosis and conservation. They also feature strategies for mitigation and adaptation for the sustainable man-agement of both movable and immovable cultural assets. An additional key element of FP7 is the ever-increasing support for networks of collaboration and cooperation between international part-ners with the aim of improving coordination and reducing fragmentation and duplication. These include not only researchers and industry partners such as large companies or small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), but also government departments, cultural institutions, associations, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and others, to promote further synergies.

Indeed the Lisbon Treaty underscores the importance of cultural heritage and encourages the EU to take actions on a global scale to preserve its cultural heritage and promote cultural tourism. In line with this, several different Directorates-General (DGs) of the European Commission (EC) have programmes relating to these issues, among them: DG Research and Innovation, DG Connect, DG Education and Culture, DG Enterprise, and DG Regional Policy.

1

4


Scope of the surveyThe scope of this survey is to analyse the results and impacts of cultural heritage research projects funded through FP5, FP6 and FP7 up to 2012, as part of the DG Research and Innovation ‘Environment (including climate change) Theme’, with the sub-activity ‘Protection, Conservation and Enhancement of Cultural Heritage, including Human Habitat’ under the activity ‘Environmental Technologies’. To do so the EU publication Preserving our heritage, improving our environment (Vol I and II (2)), as well as the European Commission databases (Cordis and Corda) were examined.

Section 2 of this survey presents key aspects of these projects such as their themes, types of organi-sations and geographical spread, the level of cooperation and coordination among partners, out-comes and benefits (social, economic and political). Section 3 provides a short overview of the 25 projects funded through the FP7 ‘Environment (including climate change) Theme’ up to 2012.

To complete this analysis, relevant information was taken into account from the FP6 CHRAF project ‘Priorities and strategies to support cultural heritage research activities within the European Construction Technology Platform (ECTP) and future FP7 activities’ (3) regarding technologies and impact of FP5 and FP6 projects on cultural heritage.

The survey is intended as a valuable resource for all potentially interested end-users, but especially for two specific initiatives: the Joint Programming Initiative (JPI) on ‘Cultural Heritage and Global Change: a new challenge for Europe’ (4), and the Public Private Partnership (PPP) on ‘Energy-efficient Buildings’ (EeB) (5). Both initiatives have put a strong emphasis on coordination and cooperation between Member States at transnational level on one side, and public authorities and industry on the other side.

Annex 1 lists project countries, while Annex 2 shows the acronyms, abbreviations and titles of all projects.

1 FP7, the seventh framework supporting scientific research in the EU.

2 Preserving our heritage, improving our environment, Vol I 20 years of EU research into cultural heritage (ISBN 978-92-79-09027-1) and Vol II Cultural heritage research: FP5, FP6 and related projects (ISBN 978-92-79-09029-5).

3 See the following link for further details: http://www.ectp.org/chraf/default.htm

4 See the following link for further details: http://www.jpi-culturalheritage.eu

5 See the following link for further details: http://www.e2b-ei.eu/default.php



* EESD: ‘Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development’ including the key action ‘City of Tomorrow and Cultural Heritage’.

** SSP: ‘Scientific Support to Policies’.

Results and outcomes of cultural heritage researchIntroductionFrameworkProgrammes(FPs)aretheEU’smainmechanismforfundingresearchanddevelopmentinEurope.Fundingtakestheformofa‘granttothebudget’.Itconsistsofareimbursementofthecostsclaimedbytheparticipantsonthebasisoftheircostdeclaration.

ThemaximumfinancialcontributionfromtheEuropeanCommission(EC),fundingschemeandexpectedimpactareindicatedintheannualWorkProgrammeforeacharea(Activity/Sub-activity).Forculturalherit-ageresearch,theareasandthemesweredefinedasfollows:

Table 1 | Areas and themes for FP5 EESD*, FP6 SSP** and FP7 (incl. 2013 call) cultural heritage projects

FP Areas ThemesFP5 Protection,conservationand

enhancement of European cultural heritage

Improved damage assessment on cultural heritageDevelopment of innovative conservation strategiesFosterintegrationofculturalheritageintheurbansetting

FP6 Protection of cultural heritage and associated conservation strategies

Assessment of air pollution effects on cultural heritageSustainableimpactassessmentofprotectionandconservationtreatmentsandtheirreversibilityEffectsofglobalchangeonculturalheritageIdentificationofdurableancientortraditionalmaterialsand craft technologies for application in modern conservation treatments of cultural heritageCultural heritage and tourism

FP7 Protection,conservationandenhancement of cultural heritage,includinghumanhabitat

Consolidation and dissemination of results related to cultural heritageDamageassessment,diagnosisandmonitoringforthepreventive conservation and maintenance of cultural heritageDevelopmentandapplicationofmethodologies,technologies,modelsandtoolsfordamageassessment,monitoring and adaptation to climate change impacts (excludingextremeevents)EUculturalheritageidentitycardERA-NETforthepreservationoftangibleculturalheritageFrameworkconditionstoenhancemostpromisingprototypesTechnologies for protecting cultural heritage assets fromrisksanddamagesresultingfromextremeevents(earthquakes,fires,storms)

2

6


FP Areas ThemesFP7 Protection,conservationand

enhancement of cultural heritage,includinghumanhabitat

Compatiblesolutionsforimprovingtheenergyefficiencyofhistoricbuildingsinurbanareas(singlebuilding)Non-destructive diagnostic technologies for the safe conservationofmovableculturalassetsDevelopmentofadvancedcompatiblematerialsandtechniquesandtheirapplicationfortheprotection,conservation and restoration of cultural heritage assetsCoordination action in support of implementation byparticipatingstatesofaJPIonCulturalHeritageConceptsandsolutionsforimprovingenergyefficiencyofhistoricbuildings,inparticularaturbandistrictscaleDevelopment of advanced technologies and tools for mapping,diagnosing,excavatingandsecuringunderwaterand coastal archaeological sitesDevelopment of advanced technologies and tools for mapping,diagnosing,protectingandmanagingculturallandscapesinruralareas(2013call)ERA-NETPlusaction:Developmentofnewmethodologies,technologiesandproductsfortheassessment,protectionandmanagementofhistoricalandmodernartefacts,buildingsandsites(2013call)

FromFP5onwardscameanewfocusonthecreationofaEuropeanResearchArea(ERA).ERAaimsat scientificexcellence,improvedcompetitivenessandinnovationthroughthepromotionofincreased cooperation,greatercomplementarityandimprovedcoordinationbetweenrelevantactors,atalllevels.

ThepromotionofpartneringandcollaborationisacentralcommitmentoftheEuropeanCommission.TheoverarchingaimofthefundingschemesorsupportinstrumentsistoclustertheEUresearchefforts,tobetterstructuretheEuropeanResearchAreaandmaximiseoutputsandimpactsoftheFPs.

InthefollowingsectionsFP5,FP6andFP7projectsareanalysedaccordingtothefollowingcriteria:

• Support instruments used• Typeoforganisationsinvolved• Countries involved• Typeofinstrument(contract)andfunding• Typeofmainoutcomes/impacts• Averagenumberofpartnersperproject• Averageprojectduration• Averageprojectbudget• PercentageofwomeninvolvedascoordinatorandprojectWorkPackage(WP)

leader within the consortium.



Support instrumentsInculturalheritageresearch,thefollowingsupportinstrumentshavebeenused• SharedCostActions(FP5)andSpecificTargetedResearchProjects(FP6)• ConcertedActions/ThematicNetworks(FP5)andCoordinationActions(FP6)• AccompanyingMeasures(FP5)andSpecificSupportActions(FP6)• R&DCollaborativeProjects(FP7)• CoordinationandSupportActions(FP7).

Shared Cost Actions (FP5) and STREPs (FP6)

SharedCostActions(SCA)andSpecificTargetedResearchProjects(STREPs)areprojectsdealingwithobjective-drivenresearch.Theyarelimitedinscope.Theymayconsistofaresearchandtechnologicaldevelopmentactivity,ademonstrationactivity,oracombinationofboth.

AnylegalentitycanparticipateinaSCAoraSTREP,butinpracticeprimarilyorganisationsactiveintheresearchfieldsuchasresearchinstitutes,universitiesandenterprises(includingSMEs)areconcerned.

SCAsandSTREPsarebasedona‘projectapproach’orientedtowardstheresolutionofonespecificissueorproblem.Theyhaveonesinglecomponent,being‘research/innovation’or‘demonstration’.Inprinciple,theydonotincludeanytrainingactivity.

Researchactivitiesaretargetedandhavepreciselyfocusedresearchobjectivesandmeasurableoutcomes.Innovationactivitiesincludeactivitiesrelatingtotheprotection/disseminationofknowledge,socio-economicstudies,activitiestopromotetheexploitationoftheresultsandpossibly‘take-upactions’.Demonstrationactivitiesaredesignedtoprovetheviabilityofnewtechnologiesthatofferapotentialeconomicadvantage,butwhichcannotbecommercialiseddirectly(e.g.testingofprototypes).

Topromoteappliedresearchandencouragethedevelopmentofmarket-orientedsolutions,participantsareaskedtoincludeindustrialpartnersandnamelySMEsintheirresearchconsortia.SpecificSMEori-entedprojectswereavailableunderFP5andFP6asSMESpecificMeasures.Theirmainpurposewastopromote the participation of SMEs. Two ad-hoc instruments were envisaged:

• FP5–CooperativeResearchProjects(CRAFT):thesewerecarriedoutbyResearch,TechnologyandDevelopment(RTD)performersforthebenefitofanumberofSMEsfromdifferentcountriesoncom-monspecificproblemsorneeds;

• FP6–Collectiveresearchprojects:thesewerecarriedoutbyRTDperformersonbehalfofindustrialassociationsorindustrygroupingsinsectorswhereSMEsareprominent,toexpandtheknowledgebaseoflargecommunitiesofSMEs.

Concerted Actions/Thematic Networks (FP5) and Coordination Actions (FP6)

ConcertedActions/ThematicNetworksandCoordinationActionsaimatpromotingandsupportingthecoordination,cooperationornetworkingofarangeofresearchandinnovationprojectsoroperators.

8


TheyshareaspecificobjectivetoachieveimprovedintegrationandcoordinationofEuropeanresearchforafixedperiodoftime.Theydonotprovidesupportforresearchanddevelopment.

Anylegalentitymayparticipate,butinpracticetheparticipantsareprimarilyorganisationsinvolvedinresearchandinnovationsuchasresearchinstitutes,universities,enterprises(includingSMEs)andpublicadministrations,aswellaspotentialend-usersandstakeholders.

CoordinationactivitiesintendtocomplementotherFPinstrumentsandinclude,interalia,studies,analy-ses,benchmarkingexercises;establishmentofroadmapsforresearchinspecifictopics;exchangeofper-sonnel;etc.Trainingactivitiescancoverthefollowingissues:exchangeanddisseminationofgoodpractice;useofcommoninformationsystems;andmanagementofcommonactivities,providingtheyareindirectrelationwiththeabovecoordinationactivities.

Accompanying Measures (FP5) and Specific Support Actions (FP6)

AccompanyingMeasuresandSpecificSupportActionsaimedatcontributingactivelytotheimplementationoftheFrameworkProgramme,theanalysisanddisseminationofresults,orthepreparationoffutureactivi-tieswiththeviewtoenablingtheEuropeanUniontoachieveordefineitsstrategicRTDobjectives.

Theymayalsobeusedtostimulateinternationalcooperation,encourageandfacilitatetheparticipationofSMEs,smallresearchteams,newlydevelopedandremoteresearchcentres,aswellasorganisationsfromthenewestEUMemberStatesandAssociatedCandidateCountriesintheprioritythematicareas,inparticularinIntegratedProjectsandNetworksofExcellence.SpecificSupportActionsdonotprovidefundingforresearchanddevelopment.Theyaremorelimitedinscalethancoordinationactionsandmaybecarriedoutbyonesingleparticipant,oragroupofseveralpartners.

SpecificSupportActionsmaycoveroneormoreactivities,including:organisationofconferencesandseminars;developmentofresearchorinnovationstrategies;organisationofhighlevelscientificawardsandcompetitions;settingupofworkinggroupsandexpertgroups,etc.

R&D Collaborative Projects (FP7)

R&DCollaborativeProjectsareresearchprojectscarriedoutbyconsortiawithparticipantsfromdifferentcountries,aimedatdevelopingnewknowledge,newtechnology,products,demonstrationactivitiesorcommonresourcesforresearch.Thesize,scopeandinternalorganisationofprojectscanvaryfromfieldtofieldandfromtopictotopic.Projectscanrangefromsmallormedium-scalefocusedresearchactionstolargescaleintegratingprojectsforachievingadefinedobjective.Projectsmayalsotargetspecialgroups such as SMEs.

Coordination and Support Actions (FP7)

TheaimofCoordinationandSupportActionsiscoordinatingorsupportingresearchactivities(network-ing,exchanges,trans-nationalaccesstoresearchinfrastructures,studies,conferences,etc.)andpolicies.EuropeanResearchAreaNetworks(ERA-NETs)areconsideredasCoordinationandSupportActions.



6 Foreachcall,EuropeanCommission(EC)introducesfundingthresholdswhichwillbeappliedaseligibilitycriteria.

7 Foreachprogramme,thereisanindicativebudgetgiveninadvance.

8 TheWorkProgramme2013forthe‘Environment(includingclimatechange)Theme’foreseesatotalbudgetofEUR7million for cultural heritage research.

Analysis of cultural heritage research projects

Cultural heritage funding

Table2summarisesinformationon41culturalheritageresearchprojectsoftheFP5EESDProgramme,23projectsoftheFP6SSPProgrammeand25ongoingprojectsoftheFP7‘Environment’Programme(until2012).

Table 2 | Information on FP5, FP6 and FP7 (until 2012 included) cultural heritage research projects managed by Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, Directorate I – Environment

Analysed data FP5 EESD FP6 SSP FP7

Numberofprojects 41 23 25

Totalnumberofpartners (includingcoordinator)

322 183 292

Averagenumberofpartners 8 8 13

Averageprojectduration(months) 35 31 37

AverageECfunding/project(EUR)(6) 955 512 773 163 2 294 017

Total EC funding (EUR) (7) 39 175 997 17 782 581 57 350 415 (8)

AsshowninFig.1,2and3below,themainproportionofEuropeanCommission(EC)fundingforculturalheritageresearchwasdedicatedto‘CostSharedResearch’(CSR)representedby‘SharedCostActions’inFP5EESD,‘SpecificTargetResearchProjects’(STREP)and‘SpecificTargetedInnovationProjects’(STIP)inFP6and‘CollaborativeProjects’(CP)inFP7.

InFP5,therelativelyimportantpercentageofCRAFTprojects(10%)representsasignificantinvolvementofSMEs.ThiscanbecomparedwiththeSTIPprojectsinFP6(9%)morefocusedondemonstrationactivi-tiestoprovetheviabilityofnewtechnologiesthatofferapotentialeconomicadvantage(e.g.testingofprototypes).

10


CRAFT |cooperativeresearchprojects|10 %

STREP |specifictargetedresearchproject|65 %

CA | concerted action | 2 %

STIP |specifictargetedinnovationproject|9 %

AM |accompanyingmeasure|15 %

SSA | specific support action | 22 %

CSA | coordination and support action | 20 %

TN |thematicnetwork|5 %

CSR | cost shared research | 68 %

CA | concerted action | 4 %

CP |collaborativeproject|80 %

Fig. 1 | Type of instrument ( %) for 41 FP5 EESD projects

Fig. 2 | Type of instrument ( %) for 23 FP6 SSP projects

Fig. 3 | Type of instrument ( %) for 25 FP7 projects

Types of networks and organisations involved

Figure4givesanoverviewofthetypesoforganisationsinvolved.Itshowsthatresearchorganisations(pub-licandprivate)andhighereducationinstitutionsarefairlyequallyplacedregardingprojectcoordination(CO)(RES46%andHE41%inFP5;RES48%andHE39%inFP6;RESandHE:botharound40%inFP7).

Theinvolvementofindustrialorganisations,includingSMEsandconsultants,asprojectcoordinatorsislimited:7%inFP5,13%inFP6and8%inFP7(until2012).Organisationsclassifiedas‘others’mainlyrepresent‘users’and‘stakeholders’.Onlyafewparticipateascoordinators:5%inFP5,0%inFP6and12%inFP7.

Figure4showsthatinFP5andFP7theparticipationofresearchorganisations,highereducationinstitu-tions,industry,usersandstakeholders(‘others’)wasfairlyevenlydistributed,whichdemonstratedagoodbalanceofcompetenceoverall.InFP7itseemsthatindustrialparticipationisgrowing(37%)whichcouldberelatedtotheevaluationcriteriainFP7calls.InFP6industrialparticipationwasnotparticularlystrongduetothemorepolicyorientationofthe‘SSP’Programme.



Thenumberofprojectsinwhichorganisationsareinvolveddemonstratestheirdynamismandworkforce.TheItalian‘ConsiglioNazionaledelleRicerche’(CNR)andtheUK’s‘UniversityCollegeofLondon’(UCL)havebeenparticularlyactivesinceFP5eitherascoordinatorofprojectsoraspartner(PA).

Regardinginvolvementasprojectpartners,theFrench‘CercledesPartenairesduPatrimoine–LaboratoiredeRecherchedesMonumentsHistoriques’(CPP-LRMH),theSlovenianUniversityofLjubljanaandtheCzech‘InstituteofTheoreticalandAppliedMechanics’(ITAM)canalsobeconsideredasveryactive,fol-lowedbytheGerman‘FraunhoferGesellschaftzurFörderungderangewandtenForschung’(FhG),theFrench ‘CentreNationalde laRechercheScientifique’ (CNRS), theSpanish ‘ConsejoSuperiordeInvestigacionesCientificas’(CSIS)andNorway’s‘NorwegianInstituteofAirResearch’(NILU).

Itisclearthattheseresearchorganisationsanduniversitieshave,throughtheirinvolvementintheFPs,con-tributedtobuildingaEuropeanResearchArea(ERA)inthefieldofculturalheritage.TheEuropeanCommission(EC)conferencesorganisedatregulartwoyearlyintervalsalsocontributedsignificantlytorein-forcingresearchnetworksinthisarea.

Geographic distribution of networks by analysing the EU Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries involved

InFP5thecountrieswiththehighestpercentageofcoordinators(CO)weretheUnitedKingdom(20%),followedbyItaly(15%),Germany(12%)andtheNetherlands(10%).Thecountrieswiththehighestper-centageofpartners(PA)wereItaly(16%),theUnitedKingdom(11%),Germany(11%)andFrance(9%).

UnderFP6,Italybecametheleadingcountrywithrespecttothehighestpercentageofcoordinators(22%),followedbyBelgium(17%)andGermany(13%).Regardingthehighestinvolvementaspartners,ItalywasequallyplacedwiththeUnitedKingdom(13%)whereasFrance(11%),Germany(10%)andtheNetherlands(9%)followedslightlybehind.

12

Fig. 4 | Type of organisations involved in FP5, FP6 and FP7 projects

CO | coordinatorsPA | partners

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

CO%

41%29%

39%29%

40%24%

20%

37%

19%

40%

8%

12%

26%

8%

38%

48%

13%

21%

22%

28%

46%

7%

5%

PA% CO% PA% CO% PA%

FP7FP6FP5

other

industry

research

higher education


ThistrendisconfirmedforItalyinFP7projects(44%ofcoordinators),whereaseachofthefollowingcountries,Germany,France,SpainandSloveniacountsfor8%.ThestrongestparticipationfrompartnersotherthancoordinatorscomesfromItaly(15%)andGermany(13%).TheFigures5and6summarisethesefindingsforFP5,FP6andFP7culturalheritageresearchprojectsregardingtheparticipatingcoun-tries of coordinators and partners.

Amongthe10countriesfromCentralandEasternEuropethatjoinedtheEUin2004,themostactiveareSloveniaandPoland,followedbytheCzechRepublic.Forexample,Sloveniacoordinated5%ofthepro-jectsinFP5,9%inFP6and15%sofarinFP7.

TheparticipationofpartnersfromAssociatedCountriesandThirdCountriescombinedwas5%inFP5,9%inFP6and8%inFP7.ThereisatrendintheincreaseofThirdCountryparticipation(12%inFP7),namelyforcountriesfromtheMediterraneanarea.ThisproportionincreaseswhenincludingprogrammesotherthantheFP5EESDandtheFP6SSP,namelytheMPCandINCO-MEDprogrammes.

0

10

20

30

40

50

AT BA BE BG BR CH CZ DE

DK

DZ

EE EG ES FI FR GB

GR

HU

HR

IE IL INO

IS IT JO LU LV MA

MT

NL

NO

PL PS PT RO RS RU SE SI SK TJ TN TR US

0

5

10

15

20

AT BA BE BG BR CH CZ DE

DK

DZ

EE EG ES FI FR GB

GR

HU

HR

IE IL INO

IS IT JO LU LV MA

MT

NL

NO

PL PS PT RO RS RU SE SI SK TJ TN TR US

FP5 (%)FP6 (%)FP7 (%)


Fig. 5 | Countries of the project coordinators (CO) in FP5, FP6 and FP7 ( %)

Fig. 6 | Countries of the project partners (PA) in FP5, FP6 and FP7 ( %)


Type of activities undertaken

ByanalysingthetopicsandissuesaddressedbyresearchprojectsunderFP5,FP6andFP7,itcanbeobservedthat:

• atmospheric pollution and climate change impacts for cultural assets show a growing significance. Thisismostprobablylinkedtotheincreasingvulnerabilityoftangibleculturalheritage,especiallyimmovableheritage;

• damageassessmentmostlyrelatedtoimmovableheritagehasbecomeacontinuouschallenge;• novelmicrobiologicaltoolsforconservationhavenotbeenidentifiedasaprioritytopicunderFP6andFP7,butnanomaterialsandnanotechnologieshavebeenintroducedinFP7calls;

• thenumberofprojectsrelatedtodisseminationinvolvingeithertheorganisationofconferences,work-shopsortrainingcourseshasdecreased,particularlyinFP7,buttheseactivitiesarenowmoredeeplyembeddedineachresearchproject;

• thetopicof‘riskanalysisandprotectionfromextremeevents’hasbeenaddedinFP7toreinforcethechallengeoftacklingclimatechangeimpactsonculturalheritage;

• twonewtopicshavebeenaddedinthefieldsofresearchonthepreservationofunderwaterarchaeo-logicalsites(2011call)andofculturallandscapes(2013call);and

• inFP7theculturalheritageresearchcommunityhastakentheopportunitytobuildonthenetworkingnurturedundervariousinitiativesoftheformerFP5andFP6programmesenablingthedevelopmentofacooperationframeworkandstrategieswithinanERA-NETproject,whichpavedthewayfortheJPIon‘CulturalHeritageandGlobalChange:anewchallengeforEurope’implementedthroughaCoordinationandSupportaction.AfirstERA-NETPlusactionwillbelaunched(2013call).

Type of outcomes

AsshowninTable3,thedistributionbytypeofoutcomeisquitesimilarfromFP5toFP7projects,withthe exception of training seminars and conferences in FP7.

Table 3 | Main outcomes of FP5, FP6 and FP7 (until 2012 included) cultural heritage research projects

Main outcomes FP5 FP6 FP7No. of projects

% No. of projects

% No. of projects

%

New instruments/software 11 27 6 26 7 28New products/materials 8 20 4 17 7 28New methodologies/strategies/ databases/guidelines

16 39 9 39 10 40

Training seminars and conferences 6 14 4 18 1 4

Themajorityofprojectshasledtothedevelopmentofnewmethodologies/strategies/databasesandguidelines,followedbynewinstrumentsandsoftwaredevelopment.

Inacknowledgementofthisandofthedifficultiesoftenfacedbydevelopersofproductsandtoolsinmakingtheleapfromprototypetomarket,whichisclearlythecaseforsomeoftheoutputsofFP5and

14


9 ForFP5,theanalysishasbeenperformedonlyonthebasisofthefirstnameofthecoordinator.

10 ForFP6andFP7projects,thisanalysishasbeenperformedonthebasisoftheGrantAgreementwheremaleorfemaleparticipationareclearlyindicated.

11 DeliverableD14‘MappingFP5-FP6projectsinCulturalHeritageandassessmentofresultsregardingtechnologiesandimpact’ oftheCHRAFproject.

FP6culturalheritageresearchprojects,theEUlaunchedacall(FP7-ENV-2008.1)especiallydedicatedto‘Frameworkconditionstoenhancemostpromisingprototypes’.Theaimwastoprovideaneededboostto researchers and developers in overcoming some of the remaining hurdles to exploiting and commer-cialisingfurthertheoutputsoftheirsuccessfulresearchimplementedunderFP5andFP6projects.

Gender issues

Table4showsthattheparticipationofwomeninFP5,FP6andFP7projectsonculturalheritageresearchisrelativelyhighcomparedtootherfieldsofresearch.InFP5projects32%ofcoordinatorswerewomen (9).InFP6projects39%ofthecoordinatorswerewomenand23%ofWorkPackageleaderswerealsowomen.InFP7projectssofar,womenrepresent44%ofprojectcoordinatorsand29%ofWorkPackageleaders(10).

Table 4 | Participation of women in FP5, FP6 and FP7 (until 2012 included) cultural heritage research projects

Participation of Women FP5 FP6 FP7No. of

Women % No. of

Women % No. of

Women %

Coordinators 13 32 9 39 11 44WorkPackageleaders (Partnerswithinconsortium)

- - 37 23 84 29

ImpactAsfortheoverallimpactofFP5EESDandFP6SSPprojectsinthefieldofculturalheritage,itishereworthmentioningtheconclusionsoftheFP6CHRAFprojectstudy‘Prioritiesandstrategiestosupportculturalher-itageresearchactivitieswithinECTPandfutureFP7activities’(11).Forthetimebeing,thisstudyrepresentsthemostcompleteworkinthisregard.

ThestudyhighlightedthatmostFP5andFP6projectedhaveaquitehighsocialimpactintermsofdis-semination,communicationandeducationactivitiestowardsbothsocietyingeneralandthescientificcommunitymorespecifically.

Withregardstothepolicyimplicationsoftheseprojects,thepolicyfocusoftheFP6callsforculturalher-itageundertheFP6‘ScientificSupporttoPolicies’SSPProgramme,mayexplainwhyFP6projectstendto have a higher impact.



DuetothegrowingimportanceofenvironmentalissueswithinEUpolicies,FP6projectstendtohaveaslightlyhigherimpactinthisarea.

Intermsofeconomicimpact,thelowlevelofdirecteconomicbenefitsfortheresearchconsortiacanbeconsideredaweaknessfortheseinitiatives.ThemainoutputsoftheFP5andFP6projectsinparticulartendnottohaveanycommercialfollow-upandtheirpotentialeconomicbenefits(intermsofimprove-mentofthelocaleconomy,newjobopportunities,etc.)arenotalwaysadequatelyordirectlyaddressed.Asthestudyhighlights,theconsortiacharacteristicsmaypartiallyexplainsuchaweakness:consortiamostlyinvolvescientists,withsignificantexperienceindisseminationofscientificresults,butwithnotrainingorexpertiseinexploitingprojectoutputs.Itistooearlytodrawconclusionsregardingtheeco-nomicimpactofFP7culturalheritageprojects.

Lessons learnt

ThemostpositivebenefitofFP5andFP6istheconstitutionofarealEuropeanResearchArea(ERA)inthefieldofculturalheritageresearch,generatingnewknowledgeandsharinggoodpractice.

TheMemberStatesthatjoinedtheEUin2004,andin2007,arenowfullyintegratedinresearchprojectsandhaveevengainedacertainleadership.Inaddition,AssociatedCountries,likeNorway,areveryactiveparticipantsinFPs.LikewiseThirdCountries,especiallyfromtheMediterraneanarea,arealsobecomingincreasinglyinvolvedasFP7progresses.

AsthepromotionofpartneringandcollaborationisacentralobjectiveoftheEuropeanCommission(EC),thiscanbeseenasasuccess.Neverthelessthefragmentationofthisresearchareastillneedstobeaddressedandshouldbeovercomethroughbettercoordination.

AlthoughmanypromisingproductsandtoolshavebeendevelopedinvariousFP5andFP6projects,themainweaknessofculturalheritageresearchprojectsisthepoorexploitationofotherwisepromisingresults.Mostoftheprojectshavebeenlaunchedbyresearchorganisationsorhigherresearchinstitutionsandthefinalprojectachievementsoroutputsdonotsufficientlyaddresstheneedsofstakeholdersandend-users.

InFP5andFP6,theinstrumentsforresearchanddevelopmentprojectswereorientedtowardsthereso-lutionofaspecificissueorproblemandtheprotection/disseminationofknowledgeandpromotionofexploitation,butnottowardstacklingbarrierstothecommercialisationofnewproductsandtools.

3

16


Overview of FP7cultural heritage projectsIntroductionThe 25 FP7-funded cultural heritage research projects analysed in this survey represent a broad range of concepts and challenges in Europe’s efforts to protect and preserve cultural heritage against potential environmental impacts. They aim for a better understanding, management and coordination of approach to conservation.

There are numerous and serious threats to the preservation of European cultural heritage. These include pollution from vehicle and industrial emissions, heating and air-conditioning, natural and human hazards. The cultural heritage assets at risk are both moveable (such as paintings, sculpture, manuscripts) and immoveable (buildings and their artistic and architectural features such as frescoes, balconies, staircases). Their surfaces can react to changes in temperature and humidity, and with chemicals and gases to change colour, crack, corrode or crumble. Their structures can be attacked by pests, or destroyed by the powerful forces of earthquakes or floods.

The peculiar locations, construction or composition of cultural heritage assets compared to modern counterparts can mean greater vulnerability to natural and human-induced damage. Failure of diag-nosis, of advance warning, coordination or appropriate solutions can hinder efforts to address these vulnerabilities. The economic and social costs of acting too little and too late are enormous: more extensive repairs and restoration works are required, and in some cases invaluable cultural heritage assets are lost altogether.

It is critical, therefore, to develop new and better tools and methodologies to sensitively map, moni-tor and predict the risks from environmental impacts. These and a rapid sharing of data are essen-tial for an integrated and rapid response by heritage management and conservation teams.

Key features shared by all projects described in this study are the existence of international partner-ships between scientists and other professional engaged in cultural heritage conservation, including curators, conservators, managers, architects, and small to medium-sized businesses. This diversity of expertise encourages the development and wide dissemination of adequate strategies and appropri-ately tailored novel products and technologies to heritage professionals.

For the purpose of this study, the 25 projects are grouped into six topic areas, according to a com-mon goal or application: damage assessment and preventive conservation; predicting and respond-ing to climate change and extreme events; mapping and monitoring – scaling up and zooming in; traditional and advanced materials and technologies for improved conservation; enhanced energy efficiency in historic buildings and urban districts; coordination of national research programmes and priorities.

3



CHALLENGE N° 1

Damage assessment and preventive conservation Damagefrompollutioncanseverelyaffecttheexteriorfacadesofhis-toricbuildings,butthisisnotthewholepicture:collectionspreservedinsidehistoricorrecentbuildingsarealsoatrisk.Thefocusofthisclus-terofprojectsisondevelopingforecastingmodels,advancedsensortechnologiesandearly-warningdevicesforassessingandmonitoringtheimpactofbothoutdoorandindoorpollutiontodevelopanade-quatepreventiveconservationstrategy.

SMooHSDevelopingmarketablemodularprototypesofwirelesssensorsandnetworkstomonitorenvironmentalimpactsonhistoricbuildings,totacklebetterandpreventtheprocessesof deterioration. More info | www.smoohs.eu

SYDDARTADevelopingaprototypeportableinstrumentformonitoringculturalheritageassets,byusing‘3DHyperspectralimaging’,whichisalsoapplicableforauthenticationpurposes.More info | www.syddarta.eu

TEACHDevelopingacost-effectivekitfromexistingand new devices for monitoring the weathering of cultural heritage assets and correlating damagetomaterialsdisplayedindoorscausedbyoutdoorpollution,todevelopanadequatepreventiveconservationstrategy.More info | www.teach-project.eu

MEMORIProvidingtheconservationmarketwithinnova-tive,non-destructiveandearly-warningdevicesto assess indoor environmental conditions forprotectingorganicmaterialsdisplayedinmuseums collections. More info | www.memori-project.eu

MUSECORRProvidingtheconservationmarketwithhighlysensitivesensorstomonitor,inreal-time,the corrosive potential of indoor pollutants onmetal,toprotectheritageobjectsinmuseums collections. More info | www.musecorr.eu

POPARTDevelopingaEuropean-wideacceptablestrategyforassessingthedeteriorationof plastics to preserve and maintain the 20thcenturyplasticartinmuseums.More info | www.popart.mnhn.fr

THE PRO

JECTS

THE PRO

JECTS

TotalEUcontribution|EUR 10 069 989

Numberofcountrieswithprojectpartners|22

18

© LE IM

AGE – FO

TOLIA.CO

M


CHALLENGE N° 2

Predicting and responding to climate change and extreme events Climatechangeandextremeeventssuchasearthquakes,fires,floodsandstorms,poseseriousthreatstoculturalheritage,bothmovableandimmovable.

Thefocusofthisclusterofprojectsisondevelopingpredictivemodels,early-warningdevicesandnovelmaterialsandtechnologiesforadap-tationandmitigationstrategies.Thiswillalsocontributetotheissuingofnewguidelines,standardsandpolicieswhosescopegoesevenbeyondthefieldofculturalheritage.

CLIMATE FOR CULTUREPredictingtherisksforculturalheritageassoci-atedwithclimatechangebyusinghighresolu-tion climate models and developing tools for mitigation and adaptation strategies testedatregionalscaleonalargenumberof case studies. More info | www.climateforculture.eu

FIRESENSEDevelopinganintegratedearly-warningsystembasedonwirelesssensors,formonitor-ingremotely,archaeologicalsitesandhistoricbuildingsinruralareasfortheriskofwildfireand storms.More info | www.firesense.eu

NIKERDeveloping advanced materials and technolo-giesandassessingtheriskstoculturalheritageinspecificregions,toimprovetheresistanceofhistoricbuildingstotheforcesofearthquakes.More info | www.niker.eu

PERPETUATE Assessingandmodellingthevulnerabilityofstructuresandthewaytheybehaveduringearthquakesinrelationtotheirground,founda-tionsandbuildingmaterials,anddesigninginnovative,lowimpactandreliablestrengthen-ing interventions to prevent damage.More info | www.perpetuate.eu

THE PRO

JECTS




©DIMITRISU

RKOV–FO

TOLIA.CO

M


CHALLENGE N° 3

Mapping and monitoring cultural heritage – scaling up and zooming in For the preservation of cultural heritage it is crucial to develop and val-idate innovative cost-effective methods and non-destructive diagnos-tictechnologiestomapandmonitorthestateofpreservationof,andtheimpactofenvironmentalchangeson,movableandimmovablecul-tural heritage.

GlobalInformationSystems,newdatahandlingsystemsandrobotisedapplications have the potential to meet these needs for a more sus-tainableapproachtopreservingarchaeologicalandhistoricsitesandbuildings.

SASMAPDevelopingnewtools,techniquesandbestpracticeguidelinesforlocating,assessing,monitoring and safeguarding underwater archaeological sites.More info | http://sasmap.eu/

WRECKPROTECTDeveloping tools for predicting the spread ofwood-degradingshipworm,toprotectshipwrecksandsubmergedarchaeologicalsites in the Baltic Sea.More info | www.wreckprotect.eu

ARROWSAdaptingtechnologiesfrommilitaryandspaceresearch and developing small low cost underwa-terroboticvehiclestoreducethecostofarchaeo-logicalmapping,diagnosisandexcavation.Website under construction

EU-CHICDeveloping guidelines for harmonised and efficient methods and tools and indicators to monitorandperiodicallyinspecthistoricbuildings.More info | www.eu-chic.eu

THE PRO

JECTS

THE PRO

JECTS



20

© M

ARCUS – FO

TOLIA.CO

M


CHALLENGE N° 4

Traditional and advanced materials and technologies for improved conservation Ingeneraltraditionalmaterialsandtechniquesareusedforconservationwork.Newmaterialsandtechniques(includingbio-andnanotechnology)mayofferadditionalandlonger-lastingsolutions,especiallyforconsoli-dating,coatingorcleaningtopreserveculturalassetsorimprovetheirphysicalstate.However,theseadvancedmaterialsandtechnologiesshouldbeenvironmentallyfriendlyandharmlessfortheuser.

HEROMAT*Developinginnovativeenvironmentallyfriendlymaterials for improved protection of historic buildingsandmonumentsthroughconsolida-tion,self-cleaningandanti-microbialaction.More info | www.heromat.com

IMATDesigningandtestingaccurate,mobileandversatileheatingmats,basedoncarbonnanotubes,fortheconservationofculturalheritageobjects.More info | www.imatproject.eu

NANOFORART*Developing and testing new nano-materials andresponsivesystemsfortheconservationandrestorationofmoveableandimmovableartworksaswellassettinguprelatedprotocols.More info | www.nanoforart.eu

NANOMATCHIntegratingresultsfromnanotechnologyresearchwithexistingproducts,toensuremoreeffectivepreservationofwood,stoneandglass.More info | www.nanomatch-project.eu

PANNADevelopingnewcoatingswhicharecompatiblewithhistoricmaterials(stone,metalandpaint),and a new atmospheric plasma torch for clean-ing,depositionandremoval.More info | www.panna-project.eu

ROCAREEnsuringtheproductionofhighqualityRomancementatindustrialscale,tosupplythemarketfortheconservationofhistoricbuildings.More info | www.rocare.eu

THE PRO

JECTS



*ProjectsmanagedbyDGResearchandInnovation,‘IndustrialTechnologies’Directorate.


©CYB

RAIN–FO

TOLIA.CO

M


CHALLENGE N° 5

Enhanced energy efficiency in historic buildings and urban districts Historicquartersgiveuniquenesstoourcities.TheyarealivingsymbolofEurope’srichculturalheritageandreflectsociety’sidentity.However,historicbuildingsarenotenergyefficientandaresubstantialcontribu-torstogreenhousegasemissionsandrisingenergybills.Atatimewhenclimatechangeposesarealandurgentthreattohumanityanditsinfra-structure,itisvitaltoimproveourapproachtotherefurbishmentofhis-toricbuildingsandpreventtheirdestruction.However,theseinterventionsshouldrespectthehistoricandculturalvalueofthebuilding.Therefore,researchteamsaredevelopingnewsolutionstoimproveandmonitortheenergyefficiencyofhistoricbuildings,fromthelevelofindividualstructurestoentireurbandistricts.

EFFESUSDevelopingamethodology,technologiesandtoolsforenergy-efficientinterventionsonhistoricbuildingsinurbanareas,whichtakeinto account their cultural value. Results will includeaDecisionSupportSystemandmulti-scalemodeltoaidenergymanagementona district-wide scale. Website under construction

3ENCULTDeveloping solutions for improving the energyefficiencyatahistoricbuildingscale bydesigningandtestingnewproductsandtoolsandbycontributingtotheDirectivesonEnergyPerformanceofBuildingsandrelatedEuropean standards.More info | www.3encult.eu

THE PRO

JECTS

THE PRO

JECTS



22

© CIEN

PIESNF – FO

TOLIA.CO

M


CHALLENGE N° 6

Coordination of national research programmes and prioritiesInadditiontocollaborativeresearchprojects,thereareothertypesofprojectsaimingatpromotingbettercoordinationwithintheveryfragmented field of cultural heritage research.

The European Commission encourages and supports efforts from MemberStatesandAssociatedCountriestojointlyprogrammetheirresearchactivities.Publicauthorities, fundingagencies, researchorganisationsandprivatecompaniesarejoiningforcesandworkingtogether in the related aspects of research and education.

CHRESPThe 8th European Commission Conference on SustainingEurope’sCulturalHeritagethroughfosteringdissemination,exploitationandsetting-upofresearchspinoffforthebenefitofend-users,conservatorsandrestorers,managersandownersofculturalpatrimony.More info | http://ec.europa.eu/research/environment/pdf/publications/fp7/cultural_heritage/chresp_preprint.pdf

JHEP Providing administrative and logistical support tothesettingup,andinitialimplementation,oftheJointProgrammingInitiative(JPI)forresearchon‘CulturalHeritageandGlobalChange:anewchallengeforEurope’,whichaimsatthepreservationoftangible,intangibleand digital cultural heritage. More info | www.jpi-culturalheritage.eu/jhep

NET-HERITAGEThe first significant initiative coordinating national programmes and supporting European programmes for research and training applied totheprotectionoftangibleculturalheritage.More info | www.netheritage.eu

THE PRO

JECTS




©VEG

E–FOTO

LIA.COM


Conclusion and future trendsThissurveyrevealsthatEuropeanculturalheritageresearchhasgainedasignificantpresencethroughsuccessiveroundsofEUfunding.Thisisevidentthroughanincreasingnumberofprojectsinvolvingnet-worksofEuropeanpartners,withawidegeographicalspread.PartnersfromAssociatedCountriesandThirdCountriesfromaroundtheMediterraneanarealsobecomingactiveplayers.

ByanalysingtheoutcomesofFP5,FP6andFP7supportedprojectsseveralimportanttrendscanbeiden-tified.Inparticular,andinkeepingwithamoremarkedpushforpracticaloutcomes,FP7projectshavecontributedtoasignificantnumberofnewmethodologies,strategies,databasesandguidelinesfordiag-nosing,monitoringandpredictingenvironmentalimpactsonculturalheritageassets.Manyprojectshavealsoproducednewinstruments,software,productsormaterials.TherangeofpossibletopicswidenedduringFP7tocover,forexample,theevaluationofrisksfromextremeeventsandthepreservationofculturallandscapesandunderwaterarchaeologicalsites.Furthermore,womenhavetakenincreasinglyprominentroles,asprojectcoordinatorsorWorkPackageleaders.

ItmayalsobeobservedthatFP7projectsinculturalheritageresearchhavesignificantnumbersofindus-trypartners,includingSMEs,withanemphasisonmarketabletoolsandproducts,andcooperationforthepurposeoftechnologytransferandindustrialmanufacture.ThisprovesthepotentialofculturalheritageresearchtoboosttheEuropeaneconomyandcreatenewjobopportunities.

Moreandmoreeffortshavebeenputintostrengtheningcollaborationandcooperationamongallrelevantstakeholderssuchasresearchers,policy-makers,SMEs,conservationprofessionals,andMemberStatesthroughtherepresentativesoftheirnationalorganisations.However,thereisstillscopeforreducingfrag-mentationfurtherthroughimprovementsonexistinglevelsofcoordination.ThisisalsowhytheJointProgrammingInitiative(JPI)on‘CulturalHeritageandGlobalChange:anewchallengeforEurope’,aMemberStatedriveninitiative,hasbeenlaunchedwiththesupportofaCoordinationActionfundedbytheEuropeanCommission.TheoverallinitiativeaimsatbringingtogetheradiversesetofpartnersinordertodevelopaStrategicResearchAgendaonculturalheritageresearch,andisexpectedtoprepareandimplementjointactivities and calls for proposals.

WithFP7drawingtoacloseattheendof2013,theEuropeanUnionislookingtothenextprogrammeforResearchandInnovation,‘Horizon2020’,whichaimsfor‘smart,sustainableandinclusivegrowth’.Thisinvolvesthreemutuallyreinforcingpriorities:‘ExcellentScience’,‘IndustrialLeadership’and‘SocietalChallenges’.Thelatterincludesclimatechange,resourceefficiencyandrawmaterials,whichalsointe-gratessustainablelanddevelopment.

The conservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage involves issues interconnected with all these priori-ties.BoththeFrameworkProgrammesandtheinitiativesencouragedbytheEuropeanCommission,suchasthe‘PublicPrivatePartnership(PPP)’on‘Energy-efficientbuildings’ortheJPIon‘CulturalHeritageandGlobalChange:anewchallengeforEurope’,aimatreinforcinglinksacrossthesepriorities.

Itisexpectedthat‘Horizon2020’willcontinuepromotingmultidisciplinaryandcross-cuttingaspectsofcul-turalheritageresearch.IndeedresearchonculturalheritagesignificantlycontributestotheEuropeanResearchAreaandispioneeringthefutureofEUresearchbyitsstrongeffortstocoordinateresearchwithinandacrossMemberStatesanditssubstantialmobilisationofpublicandprivatestakeholdersandfunding.

4 5

24


Countrynames ISO3166-1- alpha-2 codeALGERIA DZAUSTRIA ATBELGIUM BEBOSNIAANDHERZEGOVINA BABRAZIL BRBULGARIA BGCROATIA HRCYPRUS CYCZECHREPUBLIC CZDENMARK DKEGYPT EGESTONIA EEFINLAND FIFRANCE FRGERMANY DEGREECE GRHUNGARY HU

Countrynames ISO3166-1- alpha-2 codeICELAND ISINTERNATIONAL INO NON-GOVERNMENTALORGANISATIONS IRELAND IEISRAEL ILITALY ITJORDAN JOLATVIA LVLITHUANIA LTLUXEMBOURG LUMALTA MTMEXICO MXMOROCCO MANETHERLANDS NLNORWAY NO

FP5 EESD projects

APPEARAccessibilityprojects–sustainablepreservationandenhancementofurbansubsoilarchaeological remains.

ASSETAssessmentofsuitableproductsfortheconservationtreatmentsofsea-saltdecay.

BACPOLESPreservingculturalheritagebypreventingbacterialdecayofwoodinfoundationpiles and archaeological sites.

BIOBRUSH Novel approaches to conserve our Europeanheritage:BioremediationforbuildingrestorationoftheurbanstoneheritageinEuropean states.

BIODAMInhibitorsofbiofilmdamageon mineral materials.

BIOREINFORCE Biomediated calcite precipitation for monumental stones reinforcement.

CARAMELCarboncontentandoriginofdamagelayersinEuropeanmonuments.

CATS Control and preventive strategies to avoid damagecausedbycyanobacteriaandassociatedmicro-organismsinRomanhypogeanmonuments.

CHEPRISS Cultural heritage protection inasustainablesociety.

COALITION Concerted action on molecular micro-biologyasaninnovativeconservationstrategy for indoor and outdoor cultural assets.

COLLAPSECorrosionofleadandlead-tinalloysof organ pipes in Europe.

COMPASSCompatibilityofplastersandrenderswithsaltloadedsubstratesinhistoricalbuildings.

CURE (*)Centreforurbanconstructionandrehabilitation:technologytransfer,researchand education.

Countrynames ISO3166-1- alpha-2 code PALESTINIANTERRITORY PS OCCUPIED POLAND PLPORTUGAL PTROMANIA RORUSSIAN FEDERATION RUSERBIA RSSLOVAKIA SKSLOVENIA SISPAIN ESSWEDEN SESWITZERLAND CHTAJIKISTAN TJTUNISIA TNTURKEY TRUNITEDKINGDOM GBUNITED STATES US

Annex 1Annexes

Annex 2List of EUculturalheritageprojectsinFP5,FP6 and FP7(until2012included)fundedwithintheenvironmentprogrammes(seealsowebsiteoftheEnvironmentDirectorateofDGResearchandInnovation: http://ec.europa.eu/research/environment/index_en.cfm?pg=cultural).

5



DEMOTECDevelopmentofamonitoringsystemfor cultural heritage through European cooperation –accompanyingmeasure.

DIAS Integrated tool for in-situ characterization ofeffectivenessanddurabilityofconservationtechniquesinhistoricalstructures.

FIRE-TECHFireriskevaluationtoEuropeancultural heritage.

FRIENDLY HEATINGBothcomfortableforpeopleandcompatiblewithconservationofartworkspreserved in churches.

HISTO-CLEAN Intelligent measurement technologyforlasercleaningofhistorical buildingsandmonuments.

IDAP Improved damage assessment of parchment.

IMPACT Innovative modelling of pollution and conservation thresholds.

INKCORStabilisationofirongallink-containingpaper.

ISHTAR (*)Integratedsoftwareforhealth,transportefficiencyandartisticheritagerecovery.

ITECOMAdvancedstudycourse:innovativetechnologies and materials for the conservation of monuments.

ITERIsotopictechnologiesappliedtotheanalysisof ancient Roman mortars.

LASERACTLasermultitasknon-destructivetechnologyinconservationdiagnosticprocedures.

LICONSLowintrusionconservationsystemsfortimberstructures.

LIDO A light dosimeter for monitoring cultural heritage:development,testingandtransfertomarket.

MASTER Preventive conservation strategies forprotectionoforganicobjectsinmuseums,historicalbuildingsandarchives.

MIMIC Microclimate indoor monitoring in cultural heritage preservation.

MIP Transition metals in paper.

MODHT Monitoring of damage to historical tapestries.

MULTI-ASSESS Model for multi-pollutant impact and assessment of threshold levels for cultural heritage.

ONSITEFORMASONRY On-site investigation techniquesforthestructuralevaluationofhistoricalmasonrybuildings.

PANEURO5thECconference‘CulturalHeritageResearch:apan-EuropeanChallenge’.

PAPYLUM Chemiluminescence: a novel tool in paper conservation studies.

PARELAPaperrestorationusinglasertechnology.

ROCEMRomancementtorestorethebuiltheritageeffectively.

RUFUS (*)Re-useoffoundationsforurbansites.

SUITSustainabledevelopmentofurbanhistoricalareas through an active integration within towns.

SUSTAINABLE HERITAGEAdvancedstudycourseonscienceandtechnologyoftheenvironmentforthesustainableprotectionofculturalheritage.

VIDRIO Determination of conditions to prevent weatheringduetocondensation,particledepositionand micro-organism growth on ancient stained glass windows with protective glazing.

*TheprojectsCURE,ISCHTARandRUFUSwereimplementedthroughtheKeyAction‘Cityoftomorrowandculturalheritage’ oftheFP5EESDprogrammebutdevelopedintheframeworkoftheurbanpartofthisKeyActionandcoveronlypartiallycul-tural heritage issues.

26


FP6 SSP projectsARCHAIATrainingseminarsonresearchplanning,characterisation,conservationandmanagementin archaeological sites.

ARCHAEOMAP Archaeological management policies.

AUTHENTICO Authentication methodologies for metalartefactsbasedonmaterialcomposition andmanufacturingtechniques.

CHEF Cultural heritage protection against flooding.

CHRAF Priorities and strategies to support cultural heritage research activities within ECTP and future FP7 activities.

COINSCombatonlineillegalnumismaticsales.

CONSIST Comparison of conservation materials and strategiesforsustainableexploitationofimmovableindustrial cultural heritage made of iron and steel.

CONSTGLASS Conservation materials for stained glasswindows–assessmentoftreatments,studiesonreversibilityandperformanceofinnovativerestoration strategies and products.

CULT-STRAT Assessment of air pollution effects on cultural heritage – management strategies.

DESALINATION Assessment of desalination mortars andpoulticesforhistoricmasonry.

FING-ART-PRINT Fingerprinting art and cultural Heritage-insitu3Dnon-contactmicroscaledocumentation and identification of paintings andpolychromeobjects.

GRAFFITAGE Development of a new anti-graffiti system,basedontraditionalconcepts,preventingdamage to architectural heritage materials.

MULTI-ENCODEMultifunctionalencodingsystemforassessmentofmovableculturalheritage.

NOAH’S ARKGlobalclimatechangeimpact onbuiltheritageandculturallandscapes.

PAPERTREAT Evaluation of mass deacidification processes.

PICTURE Pro-active management of the impact of cultural tourism upon urbanresourcesandeconomies.

PROPAINT Improved protection of paintings duringexhibition,storageandtransit.

SALTCONTROL Prevention of salt damage tothebuiltculturalheritagebytheuseofcrystallisationinhibitors.

SAUVEUR Safeguarded cultural heritage – understandingandviabilityfortheenlargedEurope.

SENSORGAN Sensorsystemfordetection of harmful environments for pipe organs.

SPRECOMAH Seminars on preventive conservation,monitoringandmaintenanceof the architectural heritage.

SurveNIRNear-infraredspectroscopytoolforcollectionsurveying.

SUSTAINING HERITAGE 6th European Commission conference‘SustainingEurope’sculturalheritage:fromresearchtopolicy’.



ARROWSArchaeologicalrobotsystemsfortheworld’sseas.

CHRESP 8th European Commission conference ‘Culturalheritageresearchmeetspractice’.

CLIMATE FOR CULTUREDamageriskassessment,economic impact and mitigation strategies for sustainablepreservationofculturalheritagein the times of climate change.

EFFESUSEnergyefficiencyforEUhistoricdistrictssustainability.

EU-CHICEuropeanculturalheritageidentitycard.

FIRESENSE Fire detection and management throughamulti-sensornetworkfortheprotectionofculturalheritageareasfromriskoffireandextreme weather conditions.

HEROMAT (**)Protectionofculturalheritageobjectswith multifunctional advanced materials.

IMATIntelligentmobilemultipurposeaccuratethermoelectrical mild heating device for art conservation.

JHEP Coordination action in support of the implementationofaJPIonculturalheritageandglobalchange:anewchallengeforEuropean Commission.

MEMORIMeasurement,effectassessmentandmitigationofpollutantimpactonmoveableculturalassets–Innovativeresearchformarkettransfer.

MUSECORRProtectionofculturalheritagebyreal-time corrosion monitoring.

NANOFORART (**) Nanomaterials for the conservationandpreservationofmovableandimmovableartworks.

NANOMATCHNanosystemsfortheconservationofimmovableandmoveablepolymaterialculturalheritage in a changing environment instrument.

NET-HeritageEuropeannetworkonresearchprogrammeappliedtotheprotectionoftangiblecultural heritage.

NIKERNewintegratedknowledgebased approaches to the protection of cultural heritage fromearthquake-inducedrisk.

PANNA Plasma and nano for new age ‘soft’conservation.

PERPETUATE Technologies for protecting cultural heritageassetsfromrisksanddamagesresultingfromextremeevents,especiallyinthecaseofearthquakes.

POPARTStrategyforthepreservationofplasticartefacts in museum collections.

ROCARE Roman cements for architectural restoration to new high standards.

SASMAPDevelopmentoftoolsandtechniquestosurvey,assess,stabiliseandpreserveunderwaterarchaeological sites.

SMooHS Smart monitoring of historic structures.

SYDDARTASystemfordigitizationanddiagnosisin art applications.

TEACH Technologies and tools to prioritise assessment and diagnosis of air pollution impact onimmovableandmovableculturalheritage.

WRECK PROTECT Strategies for the protection ofshipwrecksintheBalticSeaagainstforthcomingattackbywooddegradingmarineborers.

3ENCULTEfficientenergyforEUCulturalHeritage.

FP7 projects (until 2012 included)

**ProjectsmanagedbyDG‘ResearchandInnovation’/Directorate‘IndustrialTechnologies’.

28


How to obtain EU publications

Free publications:• viaEUBookshop(http://bookshop.europa.eu);• attheEuropeanUnion’srepresentationsordelegations.Youcanobtaintheircontactdetails ontheInternet(http://ec.europa.eu)orbysendingafaxto+3522929-42758.

Priced publications:• viaEUBookshop(http://bookshop.europa.eu);

Priced subscriptions (e.g. annual series of the Official Journal of the European Union and reports of cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union):• viaoneofthesalesagentsofthePublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion (http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm).

European Commission

EUR 25503 EN – Cultural heritage research: survey and outcomes of projects within the Environment Theme – From 5th to 7th Framework Programme – 2012 Edition

Luxembourg:PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion

2012 — 28 pp. — 17.6 x 25 cm

ISBN 978-92-79-25492-5ISSN 1018-5593doi:10.2777/71172


KI-NA-25503-EN

-C

Europe’s cultural heritage is invaluable and irreplaceable, and yet faces numerous environmental threats. Since 1986, the European Union (EU) has supported research and innovation projects aim-ing to improve the preservation of cultural heritage. This study represents a synthesis of all cultural heritage research projects funded within the Environment Theme, up to 2012, through the EU’s Framework Programmes (FPs) FP5, FP6 and FP7.

The projects were analysed according to criteria including the types of organisations involved, their geographical distribution, types of outcomes and their impacts (social, economic and political), as well as the level of cooperation and coordination among partners. A separate section gives an overview of 25 projects funded through FP7, grouped into thematic clusters according to six different challenges.

It emerges from this analysis that throughout the various Framework Programmes (FPs) the net-working within and between project consortia has contributed to improving the knowledge needed for preserving cultural heritage and has created a European research community in the field of cul-tural heritage preservation.

Although the dissemination of project results is embedded in each project, there is room for improve-ment in terms of knowledge transfer and commercial exploitation of results. The commercialisation process would certainly benefit from the help of specialists in this field. Fragmentation is still a major issue in cultural heritage research. In line with the general approach of the European Research Area (ERA), further efforts are required to improve communication and coordination of research, including the strengthening of links with policy and user needs. It is important that research leads to practical solutions for conservation experts and that it results in viable tools for the widest possible circle of end-users.

Studies and Reports


Documents

Cultural heritage research · effects of climate change, pollution, natural and man-made disasters, neglect, vandalism and even mass tourism become all the more evident. Changing