The objective of this work was to gain insight into 1) how a coating layer with barrier properties is built up, 2) how different polymer dispersions and pigments function as a barrier against gases and fluids, and 3) how the thickness and evenness of the coating layer affect barrier properties. In addition to tests for permeability of water vapor, barrier properties required for functional applications (i.e., against solvents and acids) were studied. Permeability of an organic solvent (ortho-dichlorobenzene) and hydrochloric acid was studied as a function of barrier layer structure. Providing a barrier to these materials is important in the processing of printing functionality on paper. Pigment particle orientation and tortuosity were examined by infrared spectroscopy and by high-resolution, focused ion beam milling and imaging. The barrier properties were influenced by the thickness and evenness of the coating layer and the mass ratio between the pigment and latex. A barrier against water vapor did not always ensure a barrier against the organic solvent or the acid. In addition to barrier properties, the choice of coating materials affects coatability and may provide possibilities for cost savings.

This paper provides insights into the handling of climate change issues related to cultural heritage at different government decision levels dealing with physical planning, and in particular roads. Data are derived from a qualitative analysis of official reports and interviews with local and regional planners in three Swedish regions with contrasting climates. The theoretical lens of Institutional Interplay is applied to an analysis grouped into six themes: Climate threats to cultural heritage, Adaptation measures, Preparedness, Institutional preconditions, Institutional interplay, and Challenges. The results suggest that despite a strong environmental reputation internationally, Sweden is not particularly well prepared for dealing with future climate change impacts on cultural heritage and landscape. The lack of national standards and standardised methods risks regional and sectoral variation in the treatment of similar tasks, a problem which deficiencies in knowledge and continuing education are perpetuating. The degree to which discussions and cooperation occur between divisions within the same authority, between authorities, and in national networks varies considerably. Routines and criteria for prioritisation of cultural heritage mitigation, essential under conditions of limited resources, have yet to have been implemented. We conclude with five recommendations for improving the planning process with respect to climate change risks to cultural heritage.

In this article the author discuss how many regions can be identified in the province of Bohuslän. Region is a construction that covers everything from landscape, people and economic structure, to nature, political structure and structures for subsistence. We have to keep this fact in mind, because these aspects, will be the reasons for how and why our material remains have the shape and distribution that they do. Different materials within the region can also be the result of the agricultural history, as well as the influences of the interested group of collectors could create for the artefacts. Therefore it seems most correct to use the term region only in the geographic sense.

This paper provides insights into the handling of climate change issues related to cultural heritage at different government decision levels dealing with physical planning, and in particular roads. Data are derived from a qualitative analysis of official reports and interviews with local and regional planners in three Swedish regions with contrasting climates. The theoretical lens of Institutional Interplay is applied to an analysis grouped into six themes: Climate threats to cultural heritage; Adaptation measures; Preparedness; Institutional preconditions; Institutional interplay, and Challenges. The results suggest that despite a strong environmental reputation internationally, Sweden is not particularly well prepared for dealing with future climate change impacts on cultural heritage and landscape. The lack of national standards and standardized methods risks regional and sectoral variation in the treatment of similar tasks; a problem which deficiencies in knowledge and continuing education are perpetuating. The degree to which discussions and cooperation occurs between divisions within the same authority, between authorities, and in national networks, varies considerably. Routines and criteria for prioritization of cultural heritage mitigation, essential under conditions of limited resources, have yet to have been implemented. We conclude with five recommendations for improving the planning process with respect to climate change risks to cultural heritage.