RESULTS

PARTICIPANTS

Subjects involved

 
SITES

Heritage sites proposed by the CHeLabS community

206   56


PARTICIPANTS IN EACH PROFILE


TOwnSup

Territorial Organizations, Owners, Superintendences
10

CoHs

Conservation Operators & Heritage Scientists
29

TechO

Technologies Operators
18

HeUniRi

Schools, High Education Institutions & Universities And Research Institutes
37

FundA

Funding Agencies
1

CTzens

Citizens
46


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 29
It helps the comprehension of the past 17
It deepens the human experience 16
It has a value because it is a common good 15
It opens us to the direct experience of beauty 14
Expected experience
Visual 26
Explorative 25
Guided visit 23
Multisensory 20
Immersive 13

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


Knowledge enhancement
Conservation and Restoration Sciences 60
Socio-economic sciences, and management 40
Technologies applied to heritage assets 39
Education and Training 36
Knowledge on heritage assets 27
Technological development
Fruition and museology 45
Digitalization 36
Materials and restoration technologies 33
Monitoring and Topographic survey 32
Systems and platforms 31

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: