Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Environmental and social impact assessment of cultural heritage restoration and its application to the Uncastillo Fortress

  • NEW PARADIGM IN URBAN DEVELOPMENT: LIFE CYCLE THINKING AND SUSTAINABILITY
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The restoration of cultural heritage, like in other production sectors, requires an innovative approach to integrate the principles of sustainability into processes. The main purpose of this article is to demonstrate that an integrated environmental and social impact assessment of restoration works can be conducted through the use of an operational model, which for the first time is applied to a real case of public private partnership (PPP) in the cultural heritage sector.

Methods

The evaluation of the proposed strategy is carried out through an approach based on life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, which takes into account environmental and social aspects. An environmental LCA analysis was conducted on a case study, assessing the effects of an intervention of a historical site that was restored to become a museum. The social effects arising from the intervention were then examined and evaluated with an approach based on the key points of the UNEP/SETAC S-LCA guidelines involving stakeholders, social topics, and performance indicators, thus defining a reference framework that can be adapted to the case study.

Results and discussion

The environmental LCA analysis identified the phases of the restoration with the most impact as those related to the reconstruction of materials and elements that was necessary when the originals were too damaged to be recovered. The use and periodic replacement of electronic equipment in the museum also had a significant impact in the use phase of the buildings. The evaluation method for the social aspects scored each social theme, outlining the benefits produced by the restoration. The results show that the restoration had several positive effects, particularly in terms of social issues related to the local community.

Conclusions

The environmental LCA assessed the advantages and the hotspots in the recovery and reuse of heritage buildings. The framework developed from the guidelines for the S-LCA of products is a suitable tool for the evaluation of social aspects related to cultural heritage interventions, after adapting the methodology of S-LCA to the context and to the reference case study. In some cases, evaluations are based on subjective judgments, but the results provide a reliable overview of the social impact generated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akande OK, Odeleye D, Coday A, Jimenez Bescos C (2016) Performance evaluation of operational energy use in refurbishment, reuse, and conservation of heritage buildings for optimum sustainability. Front Arch Res 5(3):371–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atakul N, Thaheem MJ, De Marco A (2014) Risk management for sustainable restoration of immovable cultural heritage, part 1: PRM framework. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 4(2):149–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arodudu O, Helming K, Wiggering H, Voinov A (2017) Towards a more holistic sustainability assessment framework for agro-bioenergy systems - A review. Env Imp Assessment Review 62:61–75

  • Axelsson R, Angelstam P, Degerman E, Teitelbaum S, Andersson K, Elbakidze M, Drotz MK (2013) Social and cultural sustainability: criteria, indicators, verifier variables for measurement and maps for visualization to support planning. Ambio 42(2):215–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baitz M (2017) Attributional life cycle assessment. In: Goal and scope definition in life cycle assessment. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 123–143

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Becker HA (2001) Social impact assessment. Eur J Oper Res 128(2):311–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benoît C, Norris GA, Valdivia S, Ciroth A, Moberg A, Bos U, Beck T (2010) The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(2):156–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouleau G, Pont D (2015) Did you say reference conditions? Ecological and socio-economic perspectives on the European Water Framework Directive. Environ Sci Pol 47:32–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bragança L, Mateus R, Koukkari H (2010) Building sustainability assessment. Sustain 2(7):2010–2023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brundtland GH, Khalid M (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmosino C (2013) La Convenzione quadro del Consiglio d'Europa sul valore del patrimonio culturale per la società. In Aedon, Rivista di arti e diritto on line, n.1: 1127–345. http://www.aedon.mulino.it/archivio/2013/1/carmosino.htm

  • Ciegis R, Ramanauskiene J, Martinkus B (2015a) The concept of sustainable development and its use for sustainability scenarios. Eng Econ 62(2):28–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciegis R, Ramanauskiene J, Startiene G (2015b) Theoretical reasoning of the use of indicators and indices for sustainable development assessment. Eng Econ 63(4):33–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Cinieri V, Zamperini E (2013) Lifecycle oriented approach for sustainable preservation of historical built heritage. In: Boriani M, Gabaglio R, Gulotta D (eds) Online proceedings of conference built heritage, pp 465–474

  • Ciroth A, Hildenbrand J, Steen B (2016) Life cycle costing. In: Sustainability assessment of renewables-based products: methods and case studies, Wiley, pp 215–228

  • Cocen ON, Baniotopoulos CC (2013) Heritage buildings’ sustainability assessment framework. Proceedings of CESB13 - Central Europe towards sustainable building. Prague

  • Council of Europe (2005) Council of Europe framework convention on the value of cultural heritage for society. Council of Europe Treaty Series - No 199

  • Dutta S (2016) Business and sustainable development—a study from climate changes perspectives. Siddhant - J Dec Making 16(4):221–230

  • EN 15978:2011 (2011) Sustainability of construction works—assessment of environmental performance of buildings—calculation method. BSI. ISBN 978-0-580-77403-4

  • Ferilli G, Sacco PL, Noda K (2015) Culture driven policies and revaluation of local cultural assets: a tale of two cities, Otaru and Yūbari. City Culture and Society 6(4):135–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari AM, Pini M, Neri P, Bondioli F (2015) Nano-TiO2 coatings for limestone: which sustainability for cultural heritage? Coatings 5(3):232–245

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fontes J (2014) Handbook for product social impact assessment. Pré Sustainability

  • Fundaciòn Uncastillo (2011) Fortaleza de Uncastillo, Actuaciones de la Fundaciòn Uncastillo en la Fortaleza de la villa

  • General Assembly of UN (1948) The universal declaration of human rights

  • Golinelli G (2016) Patrimonio Culturale e Creazione di Valore. La Componente Naturalistica. CEDAM, Padova

    Google Scholar 

  • Govindan K, Garg K, Gupta S, Jha PC (2016) Effect of product recovery and sustainability enhancing indicators on the location selection of manufacturing facility. Ecol Indic 67:517–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gražulevičiūtė I (2006) Cultural heritage in the context of sustainable development. Environ Res Eng Manag 3(37):74–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Guidelines IC (1995) Guidelines and principles for social impact assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 15(1):11–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzmán PC, Roders AP, Colenbrander BJF (2017) Measuring links between cultural heritage management and sustainable urban development: an overview of global monitoring tools. Cities 60:192–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humbert S, Schryver A, Bengoa X, Margni M, Jolliet O (2012) Impact 2002+: user guide. Draft for version Q2.21 (version adapted by Quantis). Quantis, Lausanne

  • International Council of Museums (2004) ICOM Code of ethics for museums

  • International Council of Museums (2007) Statutes

  • Jensen PA, Maslesa E (2015) Value based building renovation - A tool for decision-making and evaluation. Build. Environ 92:1–9

  • Jolliet O, Margni M, Charles R, Humbert S, Payet J, Rebitzer G, Rosenbaum R (2003) IMPACT 2002+: a new life cycle impact assessment methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(6):324–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellenberger D et al (2007) Life cycle inventories of building products, data V.2.0. Ecoinvent Report No 7. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf

  • Laefer DF, Manke JP (2008) Building reuse assessment for sustainable urban reconstruction. J Constr Eng Manag 134(3):217–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehtonen M (2004) The environmental–social interface of sustainable development: capabilities, social capital, institutions. Ecol Econ 49:199–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loulanski T (2006) Cultural heritage in socio-economic development: local and global perspectives. Environments 34(2):51

    Google Scholar 

  • Magis K, Shinn C (2009) Emergent principles of social sustainability. In: Dillard J, Dujon V, King M (eds) Understanding the social dimension of sustainability, pp 15–44

  • Maslow AH (1943) A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev 50(4):370–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MECD, Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport of Spain (2017) Anuario de Estadísticas Culturales. Internal publication of the Ministry, Madrid

    Google Scholar 

  • MiBAC, Italian Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism (2014) Minicifre of Culture. Cangemi Publisher, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Mora EP (2007) Life cycle, sustainability and the transcendent quality of building materials. Build Environ 42(3):1329–1334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno Ruiz E, Lévová T, Bourgault G, Wernet G (2013) Documentation of changes implemented in ecoinvent data 3.1. Ecoinvent Report, 5, 3

  • Ness B, Urbel-Piirsalu E, Anderberg S, Olsson L (2007) Categorising tools for sustainability assessment. Ecol Econ 60(3):498–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nypan T (2007) Cultural heritage monuments and historic buildings as value generators in a post-industrial economy. With emphasis on exploring the role of the sector as economic driver. In: Nordic networking event “economics and built heritage, pp 2–17

  • Obermayr C (2017) Informal housing and marginal settlements. In: Sustainable city management. Springer, Berlin, pp 27–52

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Orbasli A, Barch D (2009) Re-using existing buildings towards sustainable regeneration. School of Architecture: Place Culture & Identity Group working paper. Oxford Brookers University, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz O, Castells F, Sonnemann G (2009) Sustainability in the construction industry: a review of recent developments based on LCA. Constr Build Mater 23(1):28–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parent J, Cucuzzella C, Revéret JP (2013) Revisiting the role of LCA and SLCA in the transition towards sustainable production and consumption. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(9):1642–1652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parr A (2016) Capital, environmental degradation, and economic externalization. The Oxford handbook of environmental political theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 445

    Google Scholar 

  • Pereira AF, Soares SR (2016) Environmental parameters for ecodesign: a tool based on ecolabel programs and life cycle thinking. Int J Sustain Des 3(1):1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Pini M (2015) Life cycle assessment of nano-TiO2 functionalized building materials extended to historical buildings. PhD Thesis, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia

  • Pré Sustainability (2014a) Handbook for product social impact assessment. Version 2.0

  • Pré Sustainability (2014b) SimaPro 8.0.4.30 Multi user

  • Pré Sustainability (2016) Handbook for product social impact assessment.

  • Rypkema D (2009) Economics and the built cultural heritage Council of Europe. Heritage and Beyond, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbour

    Google Scholar 

  • Sala S, Ciuffo B, Nijkamp P (2015) A systemic framework for sustainability assessment. Ecol Econ 119:314–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sala S, Vasta A, Mancini L, Dewulf J, Rosenbaum E (2016) Social life cycle assessment. This file is available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Serenella_Sala/publication/292116640_Social_Life_Cycle_Assessment_State_of_the_art_and_challenges_for_supporting_product_policies/links/56a8ed9c08aea8dbc7048ee2.pdf (Accessed on 29th)

  • Sargent RG (2015) An introductory tutorial on verification and validation of simulation models. IEEE Press

  • Settembre Blundo D, Ferrari AM, Pini M, Riccardi MP, García JF, Fernández del Hoyo AP (2014) The life cycle approach as an innovative methodology for the recovery and restoration of cultural heritage. of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 4(2):133–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh A, Berghorn G, Joshi S, Syal M (2011) Review of life-cycle assessment applications in building construction. J Archit Eng 17(1):15–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone D, Auffhammer M, Carey M, Hansen G, Huggel C, Cramer W, Yohe G (2013) The challenge to detect and attribute effects of climate change on human and natural systems. Clim Chang 121(2):381–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNEP/SETAC (2009) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. United Nations Environment Programme

  • UNEP/SETAC (2011) Towards a life cycle sustainability assessment: making informed choices on products. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative

  • UNEP/SETAC (2013) The methodological sheets for subcategories in social life cycle assessment (S-LCA). United Nations Environment Programme and SETAC

  • Valdivia S, Ciroth A, Sonnemann G, Ugaya CML, Lu B, Alvarado C (2011) Toolbox for life cycle sustainability assessment of products. Life cycle management conference, Berlin

  • van Haaster B, Ciroth A, Fontes J, Wood R, Ramirez A (2017) Development of a methodological framework for social life-cycle assessment of novel technologies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:423–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waas T, Hugé J, Block T, Wright T, Benitez-Capistros F, Verbruggen A (2014) Sustainability assessment and indicators: tools in a decision-making strategy for sustainable development. Sustainability 6(9):5512–5534

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Uncastillo Foundation for supplying information, architectural drawings, and quantitative data about the restoration of the fortress.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sciences and Methods for Engineering, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Via Amendola, 2, 42122, Reggio Emilia, Italy

    Sara Mohaddes Khorassani, Anna Maria Ferrari & Martina Pini

  2. Rey Juan Carlos University, Campus de Vicálvaro, P°. Artilleros s/n, 28032, Madrid, Spain

    Davide Settembre Blundo & Fernando Enrique García Muiña

  3. Uncastillo Foundation, Uncastillo, Spain

    José Francisco García

Authors
  1. Sara Mohaddes Khorassani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anna Maria Ferrari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martina Pini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Davide Settembre Blundo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fernando Enrique García Muiña
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. José Francisco García
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Maria Ferrari.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Marzia Traverso

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 679 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohaddes Khorassani, S., Ferrari, A.M., Pini, M. et al. Environmental and social impact assessment of cultural heritage restoration and its application to the Uncastillo Fortress. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24, 1297–1318 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1493-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1493-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation