RESULTS

PARTICIPANTS

Subjects involved
SITES

Heritage sites proposed by the CHeLabS community
195 68

PARTICIPANTS IN EACH PROFILE


TOwnSup

Territorial Organizations, Owners, Superintendences
10

CoHs

Conservation Operators & Heritage Scientists
32

TechO

Technologies Operators
18

HeUniRi

Schools, High Education Institutions & Universities And Research Institutes
39

FundA

Funding Agencies
1

CTzens

Citizens
50

MOST SIGNIFICANT SUGGESTIONS FROM THE QUESTIONNAIRES – TOP TEN

Perceived value attributed to the Heritage Asset and expected experience suggested by the Citizens


Perceived value
It forms the collective identity 30
It helps the comprehension of the past 20
It deepens the human experience 18
It has a value because it is a common good 16
It opens us to the direct experience of beauty 15
Expected experience
Visual 29
Explorative 26
Guided visit 24
Multisensory 20
Immersive 14

Needs for knowledge enhancement and for technological development suggested by the Experts community


Knowledge enhancement
Conservation and Restoration Sciences 64
Technologies applied to heritage assets 43
Socio-economic sciences, and management 42
Education and Training 37
Knowledge on heritage assets 30
Technological development
Fruition and museology 48
Digitalization 39
Materials and restoration technologies 35
Monitoring and Topographic survey 34
Systems and platforms 33

NUMBER OF SUGGESTIONS PUBLICATED IN THE DISCUSSION FORUM
ON THE TOTALITY OF SITES

PROBLEMS / CRITICAL ISSUES
SOLUTIONS / OPPORTUNITIES

33
31

TOTAL NUMBER OF CONTACT REQUESTS

0

More details about the complete analysis of the results, derived from the participated survey, can be found in the extended report at the following link:

DOWNLOAD