At every seismic or hydrogeological disaster (earthquakes, floods, landslides, landslides), at any damage to the infrastructure system (bridges, roads, railways) or to the cultural heritage other cries and mea culpa on non-maintenance, but everything goes by after a few days, everything is forgotten until the next time.
The last clamorous event that involved the cultural heritage was the death of the Spanish tourist struck from above by a fragment detached from the inside, in Santa Croce in Florence, in October 2017.
It is yet another case that has highlighted how our extraordinary cultural heritage is in difficulty because of its enormous extent and lack of resources.
Decades of lack of maintenance and of interventions aimed at favouring punctual and more expensive restorations, and then sometimes forgetting the recently restored buildings, have resulted in considerable expenditure but with limited results in terms of real protection of the entire heritage.
It is necessary to change the strategy – also in view of the current shortage of resources – in order to encourage "cure" interventions and constant maintenance, aiming everything on prevention.
It can be done with inspection activities and monitoring, also sent out, but effective for the definition of urgency and priorities for intervention. It is also possible to control the system built with digital control, (smart preservation) thus having certain data available in real time.
The reasons for suggesting that processes aimed at preventing degradation should be encouraged scheduled activities inspection and maintenance – rather than more invasive restoration interventions – they have long been known and widely shared, but have not so far found the availability of effective cultural contributions and financial support, with defiscalizations (e.g. in energy saving) and premia (think only of VAT, which is 4% on the new construction, 10% on restoration interventions, 22% on ordinary maintenance).
Addressing such problems presupposes, therefore, the activation of more incisive and courageous protection policies and management the built heritage and the entire built environment.
Strategies and procedures related to the scheduled maintenanceThey also save considerable resources by preventing degradation with simple and repeated activities over time.
Experience on the ground has shown that these activities can have a very low annual cost compared to the cost of the entire restoration. Ensuring higher levels of conservation and usability.
Control and care activities also have a strong impact on the construction of intellectual capital and constitute an elective way to make investment in cultural heritage more effective: the values at stake are such that a significant increase in cultural heritage can be achieved.Youth employment, economic activities at the level of tourism industry and local development consistent with models of knowledge economy.
In Italy we have about 250,000 buildings subject to protection (of which about 85,000 public and 165,000 private; among these some 110,000 would be ecclesiastical property – source MiBACT, 2009).
The presumed volume would be between 5,000 and 7,000 million cubic meters.
There would be some 250 000 historic buildings. which would be subject to protection on the statistical basis of the existence of "declarations of interest".
There are also archaeological areas (only Pompei covers an area of 60 hectares) and UNESCO sites, which are often serial sites, include, that is, entire historical centers of large or smaller cities (Venice, Florence, Rome, Naples, Siena, San Gimignano or Crespi d’Adda, etc.).
On this vast and manyform heritage are urgent interventions reduction of seismic risk and interventions prevention and scheduled maintenance.
Whereas benefits in terms of better conservation of data identity identity and authenticity are recognized as obvious, it is worth dwelling on economic benefits.
Experienced data shows that the costs of inspection and small maintenance can be included between 2 and 4% per year of the cost of restoration.
Therefore, over a period of ten years, economic savings could be from 80 to 60% less than the costs of a new restoration, while maintaining the state of conservation.
With regard to the damage caused to seismic events (other than human costs for victims), data updated in 2014 say that in the last 50 years the State has allocated approximately 120 billion euros for reconstruction, when it would be enough from 1/3 to 1/4 for the prior security of the heritage. Economic costs non-maintenance are therefore very, very high.
The data processed on the size of the cultural heritage built in relation to unit costs for the sun inspection activities and monitoring, there could be an increase in qualified youth employment corresponding to at least 50,000 employees per year.
If the activity was extended to actions of seismic risk prevention and scheduled maintenance, you could get more or less 1,000,000 employees per year.
It is also essential to consider induced costs and economic impact that they would, for example, on tourism tourism thanks to enhancement and promotion of knowledge, in the local production sector, through creation of new enterprises, recovery of craft skills of the past, formation of human capital.
There is, in fact, a strong link between economics, culture and heritage care: culture is taking a strategic role in defining a new competitive model in the context of post-industrial society, so it could fly to the production and dissemination of different models of Local development: a process based on an improvement in the quality of care, aattention to training and scientific research, a growth of intellectual capital and an involvement of local populations starting from the awareness connected to the sense of belonging to the territory, to the sharing of values and the potential of the territory itself.
Studies conducted over the last decade make preventive and planned maintenance processes a solid and well structured system from the conceptual, methodological, technical and organizational point of view: that we know well how to do it.
Although the theme of planned maintenance interests limited to "restaurants" (treating from non-blasoned interventions) and construction companies (mainly dealing with real estate market), there is an evolving sector that is increasingly concerned with maintenance according to the logics exposed.
In the context of the Cultural Heritage already several Regions, moreover, have defined the profiles of skills that must possess these new professional figures, also enabled work on rope to reduce costs and operate safely.
If not now, when?
Abbiamo tutte le conoscenze, competenze e abilità necessarie, e un Patrimonio straordinario da tutelare – la vera ricchezza del Paese – che, per dimensione ed estensione, non avremo mai le possibilità economiche per “restaurarlo” tutto: la prevention, con attività continue e costanti nel tempo, è davvero l’unica strategia possibile.
Prof. Paolo Gasparoli, Politecnico di Milano
+39.335.8321288 – paolo.gasparoli@polimi.it
