Correlation of Vulnerability and Damage between Artistic Assets and Structural Elements: The DataBAES Archive for the Conservation Planning of CH Masonry Buildings in Seismic Areas

Valluzzi, María Rosa; Calò, Sergio; Giacometti, Gianluca

doi:10.3390/su12020653

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A set of 15 churches were selected among the case studies included in the DataBAES web archive [18,19] to validate the proposed AHP model and consequently implement it in the wider context of preservation of historical structures and their integral unmovable artworks (e.g., frescoes and mural paintings, stuccoes, and mosaics). Most of Italian CH assets, specifically churches, were struck by earthquakes along their history and their main characteristics, and in terms of both construction details and possible occurred damage, are taken into consideration in the modeling.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the artistic assets, i.e., frescoes/mural paintings, stuccoes, and mosaics, the main aspects affecting damage were identified according to the Italian CNR-ICR recommendations [22]. As for vulnerability, no references are available as the study was carried out based on the comprehensive evaluation process provided by the reference survey forms of DataBAES [18]. They refer to both construction (composition, realization technique, etc.)…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Then the model was validated on a set of 15 churches, which were damaged by earthquakes, occurring in Italy in the last decades. These buildings present damage and vulnerability aspects related to structural components and their supported artistic assets, whose data (surveyed on site visual inspections have been collected in a new web archive called DataBAES [18]. Such a tool provides two levels of inspections: the former is limited to damage survey of the artistic asset, such as structural element pairs detected in a building, whereas the latter includes also vulnerability issues of the pairs in questions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Protection of Cultural Heritage Buildings and Artistic Assets from Seismic Hazard: A Hierarchical Approach

D’Alpaos

Valluzzi

2020

Sustainability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The occurrence of natural disasters such as earthquakes represent a worldwide challenge in the conservation of cultural heritage (CH), which suffer from damage due to high vulnerability conditions. Therefore, the protection of CH from seismic hazard is of paramount importance. Damage and vulnerability assessment of CH and artistic assets play a key role in the identification of conservation strategies. Effective strategies require the stabilization of severely damaged buildings and the preventive improvement of constructions structural response to seismic actions. Although the operation of emergency inspections is meant to classify buildings on the basis of buildings residual seismic capacity, investment decisions in restoration and conservation strategies of such vulnerable structures must take into consideration tangible and intangible values of both building structures and artistic goods as well as must combine objectives of verifying structural safety standards and preserving cultural heritage significance. Damage and vulnerability assessment depend on different criteria, which, on the one hand, are related to buildings structural characteristics, materials, and geometrical properties. On the other hand, to the peculiarities and uniqueness of artworks and artistic goods present on structural elements. In this paper, an AHP (absolute) model is proposed to rank multi-criteria prioritization of protection and restoration interventions on a set of 15 churches, which were damaged by earthquakes, occurring in Italy in the last decades. In detail, in order to structure the decision problem, identify key factors, and define the hierarchy, we conducted an extensive literature review and interviewed a pool of experts. Focus groups were organized to develop the set of criteria and sub-criteria and validate the hierarchy by dynamic discussion.Sustainability 2020, 12, 1608 2 of 14 considered composed of independent portions whose limits are identified among either crack patterns or construction/vulnerability defects (e.g., large voids, lack in connections, etc.) [3,4]. Such an approach is particularly effective for churches as macro-elements can also coincide with the architectural portions of the building (apse, façade, dome, etc.), whose brittle behavior has been observed even under earthquakes of moderate magnitude [5,6].Hence, to face the seismic post-emergency phase [7] a comprehensive methodology able to contribute in managing the protection of both artistic assets and structural issues is needed. Damage and vulnerability assessment of CH and artistic assets plays a key role in the identification of effective conservation strategies, which require the stabilization of severely damaged buildings and the preventive improvement of constructions structural response to seismic actions. Investment decisions in restoration and conservation strategies of such vulnerable structures must take into consideration the tangible and intangible values of both building structures and artistic goods. It must also combine objectives o...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Protection of Cultural Heritage Buildings and Artistic Assets from Seismic Hazard: A Hierarchical Approach

D’Alpaos

Valluzzi

2020

Sustainability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, building performance in the built heritage context is tackled as: (1) Structural behaviour (representing 44% of the publications about built heritage) which includes seismic vulnerability assessment of existing buildings (e.g., [47][48][49][50]), structural health monitoring (e.g., [51][52][53][54]), or mechanical properties of construction materials (e.g., [55][56][57][58][59]). (2) Hygrothermal and energy performance of buildings (representing a quarter of the publications on built heritage); integrates publications about bioclimatic strategies (e.g., [60,61]), strategies for energy renovation (e.g., [62][63][64][65]), or hygrothermal performance of traditional building systems (e.g., [66][67][68][69]).…”

Section: General Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Going beyond Good Intentions for the Sustainable Conservation of Built Heritage: A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research addresses the performance gap between intentions towards a sustainable conservation of built heritage and its actual implementation. Socio-psychological models of human behaviour, such as the theory of planned behaviour (TPB), have been studying this dissonance between intention and behaviour, and allow to recognise latent critical factors. This paper provides a systematic literature review of research publications on the intersection of the topics of human behaviour, heritage, and sustainability. It aims to analyse how the TPB has been used in the field of sustainable conservation of built heritage. The studies are categorised according to the type of heritage, main actors targeted, aims, and methodology. A total of 140 publications were analysed. The results show a recent field of research. In the domain of built heritage conservation, behaviour is commonly addressed as a synonym of performance, targeting the building itself. Most publications relating socio-psychological constructs of behaviour and heritage sustainability can be found in the tourism and hospitality field, focusing on tourists’ and residents’ behaviours. The review shows that practitioners are still absent from the literature. However, research addressing other stakeholders shows that the theoretical framework can play an important role in the implementation of sustainable conservation practices in the built heritage.

show abstract

“…The Italian territory is characterized by a high seismic hazard [2][3][4][5][6][7]. Seismic hazard maps are defined according to intervals of peak ground acceleration (PGA) and territorial seismicity is classified based on local earthquake intensity into four categories from 1 to 4, where zone 1 is the most dangerous area, whereas zone 4 is the least dangerous area [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Market Price Premium for Buildings Seismic Retrofitting

D’Alpaos

Bragolusi

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Italian territory is largely prone to seismic risk and 6 million buildings require seismic retrofitting. In the last three main seismic events (Abruzzo 2009, Emilia Romagna in 2012 and in Lazio in 2016) 633 people died and considerable financial losses such as the structural collapse of buildings and interruption of production activities were incurred. During the period 1944–2017, economic losses caused by seismic events amounted to EUR 212 billion. More than 80% of the entire building stock does not respect seismic design standards provided by Italian regulations (NTC 2018). Seismic retrofitting of buildings may avoid many deaths and financial losses, as well as increase people’s safety. In addition, seismic retrofitting of buildings may also generate an increase in real estate asset value (namely a market price premium), which may accelerate investments. Despite the relevance of this issue, there is a lack of literature, which investigates the key factors in boosting investments and the market price premium for retrofitted buildings in detail. The aim of this paper is to fill this gap with respect to the Italian Real Estate market. To estimate the capitalization effect of benefits produced by seismic retrofitting on property market values, it is fundamental to know how much people are willing to pay for it. As, to our knowledge, there are no available datasets which provide house characteristics, including seismic performances and market prices of Italian real estate assets, we implemented a contingent valuation approach to determine the market price premium for retrofitted assets. In detail, information about the willingness to pay (WTP) an additional price for a seismically retrofitted home (by considering different risk exposure), ceteris paribus was elicited using open-ended questions in a self-administered web interview. In particular, we applied the methodology to a case study, i.e., a contingent scenario related to masonry-detached houses located in a seismic hazard zone. Our results revealed that individuals are willing to pay an additional price for retrofitted assets and the average market price premium ranges from 10% to 52% of the property market price.

show abstract

Correlation of Vulnerability and Damage between Artistic Assets and Structural Elements: The DataBAES Archive for the Conservation Planning of CH Masonry Buildings in Seismic Areas

Cited by 9 publications

References 24 publications

Protection of Cultural Heritage Buildings and Artistic Assets from Seismic Hazard: A Hierarchical Approach

Protection of Cultural Heritage Buildings and Artistic Assets from Seismic Hazard: A Hierarchical Approach

Going beyond Good Intentions for the Sustainable Conservation of Built Heritage: A Systematic Literature Review

The Market Price Premium for Buildings Seismic Retrofitting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About