European Commission logo
English English
CORDIS - EU research results
Content archived on 2024-06-18

European Cultural Heritage Identity Card

Final Report Summary - EU CHIC (European Cultural Heritage Identity Card)

Executive Summary:
The primary objective of the “European Cultural Heritage Identity Card” (EU-CHIC) project is to propose a strategy, and systems, for the most efficient methods and tools of harmonising criteria and indicators to track changes and interventions on the tangible cultural heritage across Europe and its neighbouring countries. The project results demonstrate a significant cost-benefit advantage for owners, managers, authorities and conservators in charge of protecting Europe's immovable cultural assets. It also creates the capability to monitor, and systematically report on, various human and natural impacts on the physical state of that heritage, and assist in the provision of the most relevant and economic choices for effective preventive conservation. The aim of EU-CHIC was to develop and test guidelines, required for the efficient compilation and storage of data, pertinent to each asset and structure under observation. The EU-CHIC system has a potential to support sustainable maintenance, preventive conservation and the rehabilitation of historic sites and monuments. It enables screening, and monitoring over time, of progressive changes to the physical heritage as a result of recurring human interventions and environmental impacts. One of the basic requirements in the development of the EU-CHIC project was therefore to define data management protocol and thus to contribute to a unified approach to the collection and organization of data on cultural heritage assets in order to use this in a process of effective decision-making relative to the assets preservation. EU-CHIC data management protocol developed in several phases. First, the pyramidal approach to organize cultural heritage data evolved through discussions amongst project partners. However, in Athens project meeting in February 2012 the general opinion was that the pyramid format should be developed into the concept of an iceberg. Thus, as a final result, the EU-CHIC consortium devised and elaborated the concept of the ‘EU-CHIC iceberg’ – the "CHICEBERG" protocol for integrated documentation of tangible cultural heritage, together with detailed CHICEBERG guidelines. The basic concept behind the CHICEBERG is to divide heritage asset data into the three levels. This presented an outline of the content and philosophy behind the European Cultural Heritage Identity Card. Protocol proposal also gives some information on the proposed methodology for the collection, presentation and application of data required for the identification, knowledge accumulation and scientific decision-making of cultural heritage assets. CHICBERG is sub-divided into three levels of data: General data – level 1; Pool of knowledge – level 2; and Decision support data – level 3. Each level is structured according to purpose and need. The consortium formulated templates for levels 1, 2, and 3 in order to test the guidelines and the protocol concept. Each of the EU-CHIC partners have prepared case studies on the basis of the pre-defined CHICEBERG templates, and provided language translations of the CHICEBERG guidelines. All those documents are publically available at the projects’ public web page ( where also public consultation was launched in September 2012 in order to invite experts to contribute to the further methodology implementation also beyond the project duration. The consortium consists of 12 partners from 11 countries: Slovenia, Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Poland, and Spain. They are committed to coordinating activities at both national and international level. Members of the EU-CHIC Advisory Committee come from six countries - Egypt, France, Norway, Italy, United Kingdom (Scotland) and The Netherlands.
Project Context and Objectives:
Documentation on cultural heritage assets is an indispensable part of an overall strategy for the protection of that heritage. It is not possible to achieve sustainable conservation and management in the absence of a detailed record that helps identify the monuments’ history, architectural attributes, state of preservation, and possible alterations during its lifetime. This requires an integrated documentation protocol for the collection and organizing of data. This needs to be built upon certain documentation procedures to encompass all parameters regarding the monument or building; upgrading the current documentation methodologies, and corresponding to criteria and indicators for risk assessment, in addition to advanced diagnostics and data management. The developed integrated documentation protocols can create a solid basis for knowledge-based decision-making through assisting in determining priorities for Cultural Heritage protection, preparing conservation plans, and effecting integrated management.

In the past, decisions regarding conservation interventions and the protection of monuments were largely based on prior experience, limited and non-systematic documentation, and available technology. Frequently, they were not even supported by standardised diagnostic studies. The application of such incompatible conservation interventions, and/or use of incompatible materials, has often caused significant defects and encouraged decay processes. This approach has repeatedly been shown to have limited the effectiveness of any implemented interventions on the historic structures and, in many cases, even threatened their state of preservation.
No established universal documentation protocol/system exists for cultural heritage assets. Instead, there are many variations in the systems of establishing and evaluating data from buildings in the different European countries. The responsibility for collecting the data depends on the administrative structure in each country.

Preferably, the planning of conservation interventions should be based on a mutually developed methodology where the basic rules and approach can be elaborated from existing European standards and codes. However, the intention is not develop an existing model but rather evaluate successful and promising models and tools, to provide assistance in the development of pan-European standards.

The EU-CHIC proposal focuses on the immovable heritage of monuments, churches, museums, palaces, castles, industrial heritage, and historic and archaeological sites. All these items were considered in the Strategic Planning for the implementation of the EU-CHIC Guideline. But, due to the complexity and quantity of fields relating to cultural heritage, limits to the project have had to be established: movable, intangible, and underwater heritage case studies have not been considered in developing the EU-CHIC Guideline. Of course, the procedures developed during the project could be useful as a basis for further specific research to address these issues.

Therefore, main objectives of the EU-CHIC project were:

- Review and document current methodologies and tools for data collection and assessment: achieved as WP2, WP3 and WP4 results;
- Develop criteria and indicators for risk assessment: achieved as WP3 results;
- Develop guidelines for the future improvement of methods and tools for the collection and storage of data required for the evaluation of changes to heritage assets over time: achieved as WP4 and WP5 results;
- Consolidate recommendations and strategies, adjusted to the particular needs and heritage preservation strategies of the various European, and neighbouring, countries: achieved as WP5 and WP6 results.

The final output of the EU-CHIC project is the creation of a Guideline to establish the application of the Identity Card concept to European Cultural Heritage. A part of the Guideline is a model for data collection and presentation. This was demonstrated by selected case studies of heritage assets.

The concept of the Identity Card is the development of a registration, description and classification system for data collection that includes a follow-up of changes over time to allow for the evolution of proper management, conservation and maintenance strategies.

The Identity Card shall provide data regarding a:
- Review of the history of the historic asset, from its origins to the present day
- Description of its current state, including the record and analysis of any pathology
- Characterisation of materials and typologies, in their historical context
- Risk analysis in terms of safety and security
- Investigation of the structure, including structural problems
- Intervention history and documentation to easily identify previous works and any additions
- Record of photographs, plans, maps, etching, appropriate to the state-of-the-art, to provide a baseline against which future change can be measured.
The Identity Card concept, assessed by this project, is oriented towards heritage buildings and assets. It should not be considered as a single document for a particular asset or group of buildings, rather it should be seen as a set of documented activities and developed documents applicable in the EU and neighbouring countries, including those around the Mediterranean.
The main intentions of the approach is to facilitate an increase of knowledge on the heritage building stock across Europe and to support the development of sustainable maintenance, preservation and revitalization of historic sites and monuments through greater knowledge management.
More specifically, the Guideline includes:
- The assessment of data collection that should be undertaken, including risk indicators. This element comprises the harmonisation of criteria and indicators of existing European standards for development in the Identity Card concept.
- The evaluation of the most usable tools and methods to collect and store data, and the criteria to select the most appropriate in each case
- The criteria to be considered regarding future and previous alterations of assets. This section takes fully into consideration the different typologies, building materials, environmental conditions, specific risks etc. (e.g. Fire risk and termite damage in wooden architecture is not explicitly included in the Italian risk map).

It was also recognized that other major international and EU models, such as the Council of Europe (Dublin Core Data Index), Herein, Standard CEN/TC 346, FACH material, COST Action C5, E!2694 – Eurocare 2000, Getty Conservation Institute model, ICOMOS Burra charter, CIPA, UNESCO World Heritage list, the Monumentenwacht model, RILEM, and the European Standards regarding the diagnostic methods and techniques protocols, must be taken into serious consideration on preparing the EU-CHIC final conclusions.

The comparative assessment of the surveyed documentation and data recording systems revealed the significant attributes to be taken into consideration in addition to important deficiencies. Most systems apply unilateral documentation that focus on certain building types, whilst data registration and organization follows the specific needs of the deploying organization.
In order for any new methodology for monument documentation to be effective and widely applicable, not only does it need to be harmonized with existing standards but, most importantly, it should also be able to cover the variety and particularity of cultural heritage through applying the best possible organization and management of knowledge. This can be achieved by selecting, and integrating, common criteria on the asset to formulates a dynamic archive that incorporates and supplies information during its lifetime. The key aspect is the inclusion of all existing data concerning building documentation, materials and structure, environmental factors, degradation mechanisms, diagnostic techniques and methods, and work interventions. Moreover, well-defined documentation specifications have to be followed in order to ensure a uniformity of data is obtained, to minimize the gaps in knowledge, and to conform to established techniques and standards for data collection and registration. This complex process reveals the urgent need for the development of protocols for integrated documentation of the cultural heritage.
The development and implementation of documentation protocols is also generated by a general necessity for quality control applications in order to ensure the attributes of materials, to minimize structural faults and failures from design to construction, and to enhance the effectiveness of conservation and protection interventions in buildings and structures, and/or the use of conservation techniques.
Organizations and bodies responsible for the preservation and protection of immovable cultural heritage, and who supervise or employ necessary interventions, have identified the need to accomplish this in a more organized and scientific manner. Being able to do so has the added advantage of utilizing available resources more effectively (technical and financial). But, most importantly, such an approach ensures that any interventions are compatible with, and address, the specific needs of each asset.
Quality control includes all the necessary techniques and actions required to meet exacting requirements through recording all performed actions, and through procedures based on standards and regulations that minimize the causes of unsatisfactory performance.

The developed integrated documentation protocols provide new documentation procedures, to upgrade the data level of current documentation methodologies corresponding to criteria and risk assessment indicators, and to advance diagnostics and data management.

Project Results:
The EU-CHIC data management proposals have been developed in several phases. Initially, the pyramidical approach to the organization of cultural heritage data evolved through discussion amongst project partners. However, during the Athens project meeting in February 2012, the general opinion was that the pyramid format should be developed into the deeper concept of the ‘EU-CHIC iceberg’ – the ‘CHICEBERG’. The final EU-CHIC iceberg proposal is therefore based on the integrated results of WPs 2, 3, 4 and 5; on the outcomes of the three project Workshops (in Vienna, Ravenna and Olimia); on the results of the mid-term preparatory meeting and assessment report; on the Athens meeting conclusions; and on the final project meeting and conference in Split. The concept behind the EU-CHIC iceberg was to divide heritage asset data into three levels. This presented an outline of the content and philosophy behind the European Cultural Heritage Identity Card. The related Protocol also gives information on the proposed methodology for the collection, presentation and application of data required for the identification, knowledge accumulation and scientific decision-making of cultural heritage assets.
As a final result, the EU-CHIC consortium devised and elaborated the concept of the CHICEBERG protocol for integrated documentation of tangible CH, together with detailed CHICEBERG guidelines. CHICBERG is sub-divided into three levels of data: General data – level 1; Pool of knowledge – level 2; and Decision support data – level 3. Each level is structured according to purpose and need.

The consortium formulated templates for levels 1, 2, and 3 in order to test the guidelines and the protocol concept. Each of the EU-CHIC partners have prepared case studies on the basis of the pre-defined CHICEBERG templates, and provided language translations of the CHICEBERG guidelines.

The guidelines, originally written in English, are being translated into the following languages: Croatian, Czech, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Italian, Polish, Russian, Slovenian and Spanish.

All the submitted case studies and language translations are published on the projects’ public web page (

The development of the project is being achieved through the activities of four core WPs that are supported by integrated coordination and dissemination WPs.

WP2: Current documentation methodologies

Objectives of the WP2:

• To collect information about existing models, procedures and concepts for the tracking and global knowledge of cultural issues
• To identify the key players in CH management in the different EU countries, and the classification methods of targeted buildings used in Europe
• To assess the most usable and interesting strategies, concepts and tools of Identity Card models for future assessment of the EU-CHIC directive
• To identify future needs on RTD development for the establishment of methodological concept all over the EU

Most significant results of the WP2:

• Collection (questionnaire) and analysis of 27 information systems from across Europe and neighbouring countries
• Identification of key-players in CH management in Europe and neighbouring countries
• Identification of future research priorities in the European area
• Workshop on the assessment of current information systems: Vienna, Austria, April 2010.

Task 2.1. Collection, study and analysis of the state of the art relevant for EU-CHIC

In Task 2.1 the identification of previous and current experiences addressing the preservation of CH using protocols for data collection and analysis have been studied. The general aim was to identify and analyse developed methodologies of EU CH information systems, protocols and procedures that were useful and relevant for the EU-CHIC concept of preventive conservation and maintenance. More specifically, on the basis of the extensive survey, Task 2.1 identified and analysed selected data collection protocols. Some 27 information systems, collected by questionnaire responses, were analysed according to a strict methodology and common vocabulary. The conceptual survey framework was ‘preservation in the context of sustainable development’, where the principle issues were location, monitoring, management, and diagnosis of damage, materials and intervention techniques. Systems were analysed from: Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Italy, Israel, Hungary, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.
The Deliverable 2.1 results are summarised as follows:
- The vast majority of information systems are implemented at national level (70%).
- The longer an information system has been in existence the more data it contains on a greater number of CH assets; however this data is not necessarily more detailed.
- Accessibility to data remains a big question. Several of the systems are ´mixed´, meaning some data is private, and some public. Internet accessibility is only available in 40% of the systems. In addition, 80% are not fully computerized yet undergo regular updates (again at 80%).
- Location is a key factor with over 50% utilizing a geographic information system or some other type of national code. This is an important issue to bear in mind when designing a new system, or in combining systems.
- The state of conservation and legal descriptions, including ownership and other important issues, are addressed in many of the systems.
- For the ranking of data the most pronounced aspect is a well-described location (74%). However, risk prevention is considered in just over half (57%), and restoration activities are addressed in nine cases (30%). Surveys, structure and materials are, for the most part, only superficially described.
- Several important conclusions from the Concentrated Consulting Workshop of 22 experts were the importance of identifying end-users; the purpose of a universal information system; the findings in this report; an appropriate information hierarchy; timeframe details; universal coding, and accessibility policy.

Several recommendations regarding the future structure of the EU-CHIC system can be summarised as follows:
In the unified system additional information on structural analysis, material identification, risk exposure, technical characteristics, and the documentation of previous restoration-conservation interventions should be integrated - existing systems generally only describe these elements superficially. In addition, information on repairs, additions and alterations together with an analysis of historic pathologies should be added for the same reason - no coverage of these elements occur in existing systems. At least, the combined package should contain information on any works carried out before protection regulation; documents related to previous or basic protective conservation works; pathology analysis, and the present condition of the asset.
As the survey of existing systems revealed only general dimensions in 75% of the analysed cases, and no laboratory data, information on chemical and physical components should also be added. Given that the CH has a great socio-economic impact, the proposed EU-CHIC system should also provide links to spatial planning (urban and landscape sustainable developments), regional level stakeholders participation, and environmental aspects. The EU-CHIC proposal should provide IS application elements and, as stressed in the report, include mapping tools, rich multimedia content, and social network capabilities. Taking into consideration recent IT development, the proposed system should not necessarily be centralised. It could take appropriate advantage of the open web 3.0 based systems.
The Vienna workshop in April 2010, was organised by the WP2 leader, and addressed several highly important questions regarding the proposed EU-CHIC model structure.
Invited experts and EU-CHIC consortium members established that one of the most important aspects was the identification of end-users. Knowing the target group(s), the elaboration and uptake of the EU-CHIC proposal would be much more efficient. To do that, participants identified a variety of possible end-users and carried out an exercise, which granted a score from 1 to 10 points to each of them. Points were given according to the estimated need of the IC data. The resulting highest awards were given to municipalities and relevant ministries, underlining that these authorities should be identified as the key end-users that were most likely to be interested in an IC system. As an example of use, the tool could enable them to define the urgency of a conservation/restoration intervention.

Task 2.2 Assessment of Identity Card models

The results of Task 2.1 were upgraded in Task 2.2. This established priorities for future research in the field of CH documenting systems and assessed the proposed EU-CHIC model in terms of simplicity of data collection, multidisciplinary approach, sustainability criteria, and its universal applicability.
This was done during the “Concentrated Consulting Workshop” (CCW) activity that arranged to draw some conclusions to help develop the project tasks. The workshop was held on 29 April 2010 at Schönbrunn Palace in Vienna.

Task 2.3. Identification of needs for future research priorities

Main objective of Task 2.3 was to establish the research needs to promote new strategies, concepts, methodologies and techniques for knowledge improvement on CH information systems. The joint results of Tasks 2.2 and 3.2 provide an overview of the research topics that can be developed in the EU over the next few years.
Four main research priorities were established:
Priority 1: Inter-disciplinarily - Any research activity related to IC CH models requires a high degree of inter and multi-disciplinary collaboration to include researchers, practitioners and managers. It is appreciated that such collaborations are not easy to establish due to the considerable differences in tasks, goals and approaches, but they are necessary to reach a common vision and understanding of the preservation of CH. Real benefits of multidisciplinary CH research should be recognized and valued through the development of a higher degrees of interdisciplinary. Active dissemination of research that promotes useful results to the CH sector is needed, and related education and training courses and programmes, and the mobility of researchers, is also required.
Priority 2: Integrated approaches for heritage sites - During recent times many “city centred” conservation policies have been exercised, thus limiting the integration between CH and territorial development. Management policies have tried to solve the problem by adopting cultural tourism as their main theme of providing a unique opportunity for economic development. But, the result has been an excessive development of secondary residences and holiday facilities with the resulting collapse of main permanent residences, thus deepening the marginalization of small towns in social and economic terms. These kind of strategies need to be reappraised through an intelligent optimization of available resources that integrates tourism in a comprehensive approach. There is an urgent need to spread knowledge gained through the different European regions in order to support the recovery and regeneration of historical sites and assets. This can be achieved by improving the effectiveness of regional developments as an opportunity for CH conservation and the enhancement of economic and social attractiveness through historic site networks. The involvement of the local population and institutions in charge of CH protection is essential in order to find new planning strategies for the consolidation and development of economic activities in historic towns and sites. The possibility of connecting these by cultural routes, or communication modes, should be evaluated in order to create territorial networks, promote integrated economic developments, and stimulate territorial regeneration.
Priority 3: Towards a maintenance policy - One of the main goals of present policies is to flow towards a maintenance approach that is based on an understanding of the real conservation status of an asset. The periodic, systematic and comparative heritage asset monitoring, with the identification, recording and reporting of changes over time, is one of the main aspects considered necessary for long-term effective management needs. The collection of data and its comparison with information gathered over time, (such as, for example, definition, use, ownership, protection, authenticity etc.) can be objectively described if a standardised methodology based on measurable data is periodically repeated. The impact and changes from management decisions and interventions to the physical status of a heritage asset can be better evaluated, understood and predicted. A CH “census” can be the appropriate basis from which a management plan can be developed. Research should focus on maintenance techniques and methodologies that can guarantee a continuous use to CH buildings and sites, whilst accommodating all the collectives that want to enjoy the CH. The dissemination of research results based on the characterisation of old materials, the compatibility of new restoration techniques and materials with ancient ones, and best practices should enrich all organisations involved in CH protection. There is a also need to exploit researched results through the development of market-ready solutions, to better understand the CH market, and the companies which operate in it, in order to fulfil the gap between research outcomes and market requirements.
Priority 4: Unified language and codes - The role of inventories and IC models in the management of CH has been recognised as an indispensable tool for its identification, protection and interpretation. Many of the organisations in charge of the protection of the European heritage still need to establish effective networks, to exchange experiences and share information. Many activities related to the protection of CH, such as illicit traffic or transnational heritage sites, should count on documentation that is understandable by the public at large. The opportunities that are offered by information technologies should help with the integration of a common network system. Research should focus on common core data, and on developing standards based on a European dimension that could reach a wide audience of users, and promote strategies for the implementation of EU-CHIC model into EU Policies and standard setting bodies.

WP3: Criteria and Indicators for Risk Assessment

Objectives of the WP3:

• Criteria and indicators for risk assessment will be developed by:
- Risk identification: search and analyze existing directives for risk assessment related to monument conservation;
- Set up criteria to meet principle of CH protection: critical analysis of all risk affecting the state of conservation of CH and to set up assessment criteria which meet conservation ethics principles;
- Establishment of criteria and risk indicators to be incorporated into final strategy and model.

Most significant results of the WP3:

• Collection (questionnaire) and analysis of 21 existed risks assessment methodologies across Europe and neighbouring countries
• Extensive survey of literature, documents, standards and related projects
• Elaboration of the proposal of major risks to be considered by the project
• Elaboration of the proposal of methodology, risk indicators and hazard prioritization to be considered by the project
• Workshop on the risks assessment methodologies, Ravenna, Italy, October 2010

Task 3.1 Research and analysis of existing directives for risk assessment related to monument conservation

The purpose of the WP3 was the identification and analysis of risks to enable and identify the required level of protection of CH assets dependent upon the most frequent experienced local risks. Task 3.1 aimed at providing an overview of existing methodologies for risk assessment throughout Europe. To this aim, comprehensive research was carried out by literature survey and through a questionnaire amongst all project partners, including the advisory committee.
A questionnaire has been produced and forwarded to members of the projects’ consortium. Feedback were received by UL, BBRI, ITAM, NTUA, UNIFE-UNIBO, IPPT-PAN, Tecnalia, and the Advisory Committee - thus collecting information from: Slovenia, Belgium, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Greece, Italy, Malta, Vatican, San Marino, Poland, Spain, Norway, France, the Netherlands.
A detailed state-of-the-art was produced by literature and documentation survey, and carefully analysed. The main objective was to become aware of current methods, tools and directives currently employed in the field of risk assessment through hazard identification and evaluation of the state of conservation. Eight methods were reported on through the questionnaire, and this was presented and analysed in the WP3 report. On that basis, it can be concluded that the various national, regional and municipal respondents from 8 countries only superficially address risk assessment, hazards identification and vulnerability determination. Following this analysis, the WP3 report presents a study of the ESPON projects; two national initiatives: Italian Risk map approach and Monumentenwacht; several EU projects: Noah’s Ark, CULT-STRAT, MULTI-ASSESS; work on CEN/TC 346 standard; and, finally, COST Action C26 (mainly dealing with fires, earthquakes and explosions/blasting).
Three tasks were amalgamated into one report: Deliverable 3.1 - to identify and analyse existing directives for risk assessments related to CH protection; critically analyse all risks affecting the state of conservation of CH assets; and to establish criteria and risk indicators to be incorporated into the final strategy and EU-CHIC model. This work was carried out on the basis of a questionnaire sent to all partners; the extensive study of literature and documents; and on the basis of a contribution, prepared by Ingval Maxwell, EU-CHIC Advisory Committee President, who offered a summary analysis of the EU-CHIC WP3 workshop, held in Ravenna on October 2010.
Several potential sets of risks that should be considered by the EU-CHIC system were identified. As the results of the WP3 work a methodology, and risk indicators, to be included in the final IC proposal was also proposed.

Task.3.2 Critical analysis of risks and setting up of assessment criteria

The results of the survey were analysed and evaluated within Task 3.2. The work was conducted in collaboration with the task partners. The results evidence the presence of three approaches, which can, at a first stage, be related to the geographical location of countries.
Across Europe, several projects and tools are already available to identify natural hazards. It is worth mentioning the availability of maps addressing specific risks and hazards and their graphical distribution developed by the European Spatial Planning Observation Network (ESPON). Amongst the data so far obtained, three current projects have been considered as the most meaningful for EU-CHIC, and have, therefore, been discussed in details. In particular, the methodology employed by the Italian project “Risk Map”, which combined external sources and factors of hazard with the individual vulnerability of items, is very relevant at a local scale. On a European scale, the ESPON project has produced European-level maps of hazard that can be useful for an effective evaluation of sources of hazard and for their prioritization within each country at national level.
It has been proposed to further develop and implement these issues within the WP dealing with future recommendations and strategies (WP5).

Task 3.3 Establishment of risk indicators

As an important outcome of Task 3.3 a workshop on Risk Assessment Methodologies was held in Ravenna on 12 October 2010 where the existing assessment methods applicable to CH sites and buildings were presented and discussed.
As a recommendation, the WP3 report suggests that the EU-CHIC system adopt a combined method of computerised theme-based maps, overlapped by the integrating Italian Risk map approach. This results in a combination of external sources and factors of hazards with individual vulnerability of items, ESPON maps of hazard, and the COST C26 two levelled data-sheets system. Ingval Maxwell demonstrated an example of such approach in referring to the flood risk initiative from Italy, and more specifically Rome. WP3 further suggests developing a prioritisation of hazards in each country, and suggests integrating risk management and disaster management considerations so that pre and post-disaster planning could be enabled on the basis of the EU-CHIC system.
An Integrated risk management system, carried out on the basis of site survey work to enhance the knowledge base of each individual asset, and address key end-user needs (strategic and governmental policy makers, local politicians and tacticians, and owners and professionals, including specialist conservators), should be an integral part of the EU-CHIC system of recording the assets’ history, restoration works, structure, state of conservation and materials, whilst offering fully informed guidelines and knowledge management as a result.

WP4: Assessment of Methods and Tools

Objectives of the WP4:

• Methods, techniques and tools (MTTs) for data collection and presentation
• Assessment, evaluation and presentation of MTTs
• Establishing of criteria for selection of efficient MTTs to render proposed indicators

Most significant results of the WP4:

• Collection and analysis of 23 information systems’ data collection MTTs from Europe and neighbouring countries
• Analysis of established domains, projects and references
• Development and definition of criteria and indicators of the main MTTs used for collecting information on European CH
• Extensive survey and analysis of the data, collected by questionnaire
• Identification of the most efficient MTTs’ in terms of time, costs and knowledge
• Identification of the level of difficulty and efficiency of each MTT
• Identification of key-players
• Elaboration of the proposal of the most efficient MTTs for the EU-CHIC project
• Workshop on Assessment of methods and tools, Olimje, Slovenia, June 2011

Task 4.1 Identification of MTTs for data collection and presentation

A questionnaire survey, carried out during Task 4.1 aimed at the identification of MTTs for data collection and presentation. Twenty-three information systems from 11 European countries and Israel are presented in the Deliverable 4.1 report. The MTTs are sorted and discussed according to general categories.
The survey of MTTs was undertaken on the basis of two template tables prepared for the collection of information on national information systems and the adopted MTTs. The Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics (ITAM) designed the templates. They were based on comments by partners involved in Task 4.1 and discussions during the WP meeting organized by the WP4 leader Fraunhofer IBP held in Holzkirchen on 18 May 2010. Other work undertaken in Task 4.1 was the description and categorisation of MTTs used by the information systems on European CH. Specific focus fell on linking the MTTs with the application for data acquisition/management/presentation of the various systems. The WP 4 partners responded to the questionnaire by listing the MTTs used in the information systems they previously reported on in WP2 and WP3 activities.
Apart from national information systems, several internationally recognised domains (bodies, activities, recommendations) that relate to the MTTs used for information systems on CH were also evaluated. Some of the well recognised approaches are listed and reviewed in Deliverable 4.1 including:
• Core Data Index to historic buildings and monuments of the architectural heritage,
• UNESCO’s World Heritage list,
• European Heritage Network and Council of Europe work (Herein, Compendium),
• ICOMOS (CIPA) and,
• Getty Conservation Institute projects (RecorDIM).

The standardisation work of the CEN Technical Committee on the conservation of cultural property was also analysed, especially the CEN/TC 346 Standard. This demonstrated the potential advantage of connections between European standards and the trans-national systems. Amongst the relevant projects, Onsiteformasonry, CHEF, SMooHS, Stonecore, Mondis were considered, in addition to the Monument Damage Diagnostic System (MDDS) expert system.
Effective CH protection, and the safeguarding, standardisation and methodologies of improvements and technological advancements in MTTs and research are the main issues emerging from the international scene. On the other hand, the national information systems focus on practical issues, such as the effective use of MTTs, enforcing legal protection, making inventories, and serving State administrations.
Based on the extensive European MTTs survey, the general recommendations that should be followed in an elaboration of the EU-CHIC IC system are:
• Definition of the most efficient MTTs should be linked to the aims and objectives of the particular information system and its elements;
• There is no systematic, unified method or methodology for data acquisition in the analysed systems; therefore there is a need for:
o Well-established standardised protocol for data acquisition
o Standardised core data-sheet to be completed in-situ
o Relevant software
o Trained personnel
o Accurate accessibility policy.

Report on the assets’ condition (material condition, structural analysis, diagnostic survey) should follow standardised guidelines (e.g. CEN/TC 346).
In a concluding part of the WP4 report, the potential benefits of linking the EU-CHIC IC concept with the European initiative ECHL (European Cultural Heritage Label) is also presented. Several necessary preconditions of using the EU-CHIC as a supporting system to the Label should be considered, such as:
• Given criteria for the attribution of the ECHL,
• Pre-selection process by Member States,
• Regular monitoring against the harmonized criteria,
• Regular interval assessment against common indicators and,
• Specific website.

Another integration tool - CHOOGLE as promoted by ITAM during the project, could offer a range of advantages if applied as an information system in support of EU-CHIC such as:
• Integrated data – top level IC data,
• Data across borders, language and semantic integration,
• Permanently up-to-date,
• Open to public,
• Open to share, and
• Easy and open access through one provider.

Task 4.2 Assessment, evaluation and presentation of methods and techniques

Task 4.3 Establishing criteria for selection of efficient MTTs to render proposed indicators

The questionnaire was organised on the basis of previously defined main MTTs used in Europe that were identified in Task 4.1 and on the methodological approach developed for Tasks 4.2 and 4.3 with the basic recommendation that data should be shared on a single European platform.
The focus of the Task 4.3 was to develop and define criteria and indicators of the main MTTs used for collecting information on European CH, and partners were asked to define the most efficient MTTs regarding CH and key-players, i.e. the main categories of professionals who take part in CH data collection and management. They elaborated on an extensive questionnaire, and carried out an evaluation of the collected data. The seven collected questionnaires were assessed by the methodology of weighting the information, and by the elaboration of new tables, referring to MTTs instead of referring to data sub-categories.
The results identified the most common European MTTs; those that can be used to obtain more information on the CH asset; and MTTs that are easier to use and most efficient in terms of cost, time and knowledge. 60 MTTs were presented, with each containing information of the data that can be obtained, the key technical players that use them with numerical information on the level of difficulty of use and efficiency in terms of time, cost and knowledge (Scale 0 – 1).
The determination of key users was important result of the assessment and evaluation process for the EU-CHIC project, as this will help ensure that the final results find sufficient acceptance by a wide range of end-users. Therefore, knowledge of various key user groups can help ensure that their needs and interests can be adequately considered and incorporated.

In conclusion, Deliverable 4.2 points out that it is important to recognise that not all the CH information has the same level of importance in the various European countries. Furthermore, not all the identified MTTs were distributed in the same way. Against the background of developing a single IC for use in all European countries, this awareness provides an important insight into attempting to fulfil the ideal requirement that all the required data can be shared on a single platform. In summary, substantial uniformity is stressed in the:
• Use of the MTTs in Europe,
• Leadership of some countries in methodological analysis of certain aspects,
• Variety of professionals from different disciplinary areas involved in CH recording and,
• Some MTTs are extremely efficient to use either in cost, time or knowledge terms (archive research, digital camera, 3D scanner, on-site inspection, monitoring stations, risk assessment – general risk index).

The valuable data evaluation and methodological analysis of Task 4.3 gives the project important information on the identification of most efficient MTTs to be integrated in the EU-CHIC IC concept. Another important aspect of the assessment and evaluation work was the identification of the existing methods and techniques used to collect and store data regarding asset documentation and risk assessment. This issue was addressed by reviewing examples of best practice in data modelling (Fraunhofer IOSB) and storage (MonArch project).

WP5: Recommendations and Strategies

Objectives of WP5:

• Development of integrated documentation protocols
• Knowledge base decision making procedures
• Strategic planning for implementation and validation of the EU-CHIC

Most significant results of WP5:

• Elaboration of the EU-CHIC data management scheme and concept (Iceberg)
• Elaboration of the EU-CHIC Guidelines: Proposal of protocol for integrated documentation of tangible CH
• Testing of the EU-CHIC Guidelines through case studies, prepared on a pre-defined template
• Development of the proposal for integrated methodology for knowledge based decision making procedures related to CH preservation
• Development of the necessity index methodology proposal for the prioritization of CH preservation works
• Application of the quality control principles to the CH documentation field
• Development of strategic research proposal for further EU-CHIC methodology elaboration
• Development of strategic proposal for EU-CHIC Implementation and further development through relevant EU Policies
• Development of strategic proposal for EU-CHIC network articulation and expansion
• Exploration of potential funding options for further EU-CHIC development
• Preparation, conduction and analysis of the end-users survey
• Formation of the extensive bibliography on the CH data compilation, presentation and storage
• Creation of all partners’ professional profiles

Task 5.1: Integrated documentation protocols

In Task 5.1 an extensive analysis of the background material was carried out, revealing the gradual conceptual development of the EU-CHIC protocol proposal. EU-CHIC recommendations were elaborated in a process, evolving from an initial star scheme, through a pyramid approach to the final iceberg concept. The IC iceberg concept, conceived and elaborated in Task 5.1 is directly oriented towards heritage buildings and assets. It should not be considered as a single document. Rather, it should be realised as a set of documented activities and resulting documents, applicable for use on assets in the EU and neighbouring countries, including those bordering the Mediterranean. Information will be collected by addressing, establishing and harmonizing criteria and indicators for tracking environmental changes to the immovable CH assets, buildings and monuments, whilst also taking into account the view that the "natural" deterioration processes, and human interventions, are an essential part of the issues to be addressed.
The Task 5.1 results offer recommendations on criteria for harmonising documentation protocols as a base for new documentation methodology that will upgrade current documentation methodologies, and respond to criteria and indicators for risk assessments, advanced diagnostics and data management, that is conceptually grouped and graphically presented in the EU-CHIC ice-berg model.

Task 5.2: Knowledge based decision making procedures and EU-CHIC Identity Card Guideline

Task 5.2 consolidated, built upon and upgraded the results of all the previous project work. As a result, an integrated protocol for the documentation of CH data was prepared, which together with a brief summary of the project work, and a conceptual framework, represents the projects’ main result: the EU-CHIC Guidelines. In order to enable the widespread dissemination and implementation of the EU-CHIC methodology, partners have translated the guidelines, originally written in English, into 11 languages.
However, before the context of the final guidelines could be elaborated, EU-CHIC partners decided that the range of actual end-users needs should be explored in-depth, so that the final result would actually offer answers to their needs. Therefore, at the Athens meeting in February 2012 a decision was taken to determine the range of end-users of the EU-CHIC project results. Consequently, an on-line survey was targeted at the professional users and promoted through the EU-CHIC and ICOMOS Linkedin networks, CIPA, ISPRS, and other connections. Almost 600 professionals responded to the survey and the results were collected, analysed, discussed and presented to the Split meeting in May 2012. Following the Split meeting, the survey continued and an additional 98 professionals responded and reinforced the preliminary results presented in Split. The survey was closed on 1 October 2012 and the results were downloaded onto various spreadsheet types and reports.
Following a presentation given at Split, during the Athens meeting a short bibliography was also presented with the proposal that this could be amended and organized before the next partner meeting, as this information is an important product of the EU-CHIC project. Further efforts are required given the complexity of the EU-CHIC initiative, and this research should be passed on to future projects and researchers in an organized manner. It is recommended that the evolving bibliography be placed on the EU-CHIC website

Task 5.3: Strategic planning for implementation and validation of EU-CHIC

WP 5 was a key part of the EU-CHIC project, where all the previously collected information produced by WPs 2, 3 and 4 was assessed, compared, combined and linked. The main purpose was to reach a common European methodology regarding documentation procedures, risk assessment and knowledge based decision-making to encourage the exchange of relevant documentation across European countries.
Task 5.3 had the objective of elaborating strategies for further research on recommendations for the integrated documentation protocols and knowledge-based decision-making procedures, in addition to offering strategies for the implementation and validation of developed recommendations. More specifically, the evolution of the project’s strategy was researched and the main strategies for EU-CHIC research and implementation were investigated for the further elaboration and implementation of the EU-CHIC Card, and development through relevant EU Policies. To make all these strategies feasible, the funding possibilities regarding future developmental work of the EU-CHIC outcomes were explored. Moreover, the articulation of the EU-CHIC Network and its expansion was considered a necessary step in the strategic planning process for the dissemination and support of the emerging results. The final step of the strategic plan included several case studies exploring the implementation of the EU-CHIC results. For this purpose, a template was designed and circulated. The final output of WP5 is the EU-CHIC Guidelines methodology to establish the application of the IC concept to the CH of Europe. A part of the Guidelines will be a model for data collection and presentation, and this is also demonstrated by selected heritage asset cases. Each partner prepared at least two case studies according to the pre-defined template, and these are published on the projects’ public web page: The case studies demonstrated the future potential of the EU-CHIC methodology and its implementation, and as this is a process that will go beyond the life of the EU-CHIC, the Project Coordinator launched an online public consultation on the relevance and use of the methodology. Here, experts on the preservation of CH are invited to contribute case studies or comments and thus help refine the methodology and disseminate the approach.
The EU-CHIC consortium also strived to establish links with the on-going and anticipated EU policies. To this purpose they regularly communicated with respective EU bodies, as was originally stressed as an important part of the strategic proposal for EU-CHIC’s future implementation. Endeavours for an on-going commitment to CH research were also placed in the context of the future EU research policy. A letter to the Commissioner for Research, Innovation and Science, dated May 2010, and the “Athens Call”, dated February 2011, addressing all National Governments; the European Commission; National and European Parliaments; National and European Political Parties; Political and Social Institutions are especially highlighted and noteworthy communications.

WP6: Communication and Dissemination

Objectives of the WP6:

• Development and implementation of Awareness and Dissemination plan
• Establishment of communication tools
• Organization of dissemination activities (workshop, publications, panels)

Most significant results of the WP6:

• Launching, maintaining and editing of public web portal and of members’ area web page
• Development of mid-term and final dissemination and awareness plan
• Publication of promotional material: leaflet, folder, poster
• Preparation of the international conference in Split, Croatia, May/June 2012, together with conference material: leaflets
• Publication of the conference proceedings
• Preparation of three projects’ workshops: Vienna, Ravenna, Olimje
• Translation of the EU-CHIC Guidelines into respective partners’ languages
• Preparation of the promotional DVD
• Coordination of dissemination activities

Task 6.1 Development and implementation of Awareness and Dissemination Plan

An awareness and Dissemination Plan containing different kinds of current and future activities was prepared and deployed. There are four objectives of the dissemination plan: to ensure maximum impact of EU-CHIC within and outside the project consortium; to inform the research community about the results; to disseminate the project results and the IC concept within key European stakeholders in conservation; to contribute to the awareness of the importance of CH conservation within the Society.
A detailed identification of stakeholders beyond the consortium, and the general and particular message for each of the collectives at National, European and Third Countries level was performed. Main end-users are considered to be: owners and managers of CH buildings and assets; architects and other professionals, prescriptive and legislative bodies; restoration enterprises (specially SME’s); related NGO’s; the scientific community; conservation laboratories and technical assistants; European and International Associations and networks related to CH; FACH of the European Construction Technology Platform; ERANET; Standardisation Committees, mostly CEN/TC 346.
Another intention of the plan will be to disseminate the emerging methods and activities at a broader National, European and Third countries level, to a wide range of potential beneficiaries.
All partners also performed a range of dissemination activities during the project (See the dissemination activities table).

Task 6.2 Establishment and application of communication tools

The EU-CHIC Portal ( was launched on March 2010 (see Figure 3). In May 2010 a moderated discussion forum was added, with both being administered by UL and ZZ. A Restricted Members Area was launched in January 2011 ( and is regularly maintained and edited by UL and ZZ (see Figure 4). In addition, registered members of the portal can upload and download documents, news and comments and thus co-create and develop the portal. The EU-CHIC portal enables internal communication amongst all CHIC partners (through the restricted part) and the visibility of the project progress and its communication amongst stakeholders. No confidential deliverables are loaded into the public part of the website, which displays other relevant documents and details of events. In addition, a forum open to the Advisory Network is a way to exchange information and criteria regarding the EU CHIC Identity Card concept. Both domains will remain active till 2017.
In addition to the web portals that operate as a major communication tools between project partners and the public, in April 2010 the EU-CHIC consortium prepared a promotional Leaflet and Folder giving general information on the project, its objectives and work plan.
In April 2010, a Leaflet with general overview information on the projects’ objectives and work plan was published. The leaflet has been issued to partners, potential Advisory Network members, and other stakeholders to aid a further dissemination of knowledge about the project. Information on the project was also disseminated by folders that were very well accepted, with copies often being ordered and requested by Cultural Heritage Institutions from all over the European Union, Israel and Egypt. Poster of the project has been designed (135cm x 75 cm) and 200 copies were printed. This has been disseminated and displayed at several conferences (ECTP, ERA-NET) and fairs (Valladolid fair of cultural heritage and Ferrara fair of cultural heritage). All promotional printed material was disseminated to the partners, potential Advisory Network members and a wide range of other stakeholders at various events, conferences, etc.

Task 6.3 Organization of Workshops and Conference

The EU-CHIC consortium held six well-attended and progressive meetings:
- Ljubljana, Slovenia (22 – 23 September 2009): Kick-off meeting
- Vienna, Austria (28 – 29 April 2010): EU-CHIC Steering Committee and Advisory Committee meeting; Internal review meeting; CH projects’ cluster meeting
- Ravenna, Italy (12 October 2012): EU-CHIC Steering Committee and Advisory Committee meeting; Internal review meeting
- Olimia, Slovenia (30 – 31- May 2011): EU-CHIC Steering Committee and Advisory Committee meeting; MTA meeting; CH projects’ cluster meeting
- Athens, Greece (12 – 13 February 2012): EU-CHIC Steering Committee and Advisory Committee meeting; Internal review meeting; Press conference
- Split, Croatia (29 – 31 May 2012): EU-CHIC Steering and Advisory Committee Meeting; CH projects’ cluster meeting

The EU-CHIC consortium planned and carried out three Workshops:
- Vienna, Austria (29 April 2010): WP2 Workshop on assessment of existing information systems
- Ravenna, Italy (12 October 2010): WP3 Workshop on the current risk assessment methodologies
- Olimia, Slovenia (1 June 2011): WP4 Workshop on assessment of MTTs

The EU-CHIC consortium planned and hosted an international conference on CH preservation:
- Split, Croatia (31 May 2012): International Conference on CH Preservation

The various Minutes of the meetings and workshops, the presentations and related materials were published and are available at the web page:

Potential Impact:
The EU-CHIC project has developed a broad societal impact on key players in the field of cultural heritage preservation across the EU and neighbouring countries, especially through the:
• Online consultation process, launched in September 2012 at;
• Translation of the CHICEBERG guidelines into 11 languages;
• Implementation of the methodology as demonstrated by case studies;
• Various dissemination activities, including the:
- Launching, maintaining and editing of public web portal and of members’ area web page
- Development of mid-term and final dissemination and awareness plan
- Publication of promotional material: folder, poster, promotional textile bags
- Preparation of the international conference in Split, Croatia, May/June 2012, together with conference material
- Publication of the conference proceedings
- Preparation of three projects’ public workshops: Vienna, Ravenna, Olimje
- Preparation of the promotional DVD
- Publication of two leaflets; first with the anticipated results and the work flow and the second (final) leaflet with the CHICEBERG guidelines level 1 publication
- Development of the strategic plan for the CHICEBERG guidelines implementation (Deliverable 5.3)
All EU-CHIC partners and Advisory Committee members will continue to promote the use of the EU-CHIC methodology by contributing to the adaptation and development of the final project results, and achievements, to meet real end-users requirements. In a manner similar to that implemented by the “Monumentenwacht” organisation in the Netherlands, and Flanders Region of Belgium, a significant aim of the EU-CHIC project is to stimulate and assist in the creation of new initiatives for the regular monitoring and inspection of historic buildings and monuments. With guidance and support of an Advisory Committee, such initiatives will be established in the project's beneficiary countries and regions. All Project partners will maintain and develop cooperative links with relevant governmental and other authorities responsible for safeguarding the cultural heritage, its protection and preservation, and a range of other stakeholders. They will continue to promote and assist in the introduction of the EU-CHIC system in their respective countries, and will further facilitate its use in neighbouring States. Project partners and Advisory Committee members will be encouraged to direct other beneficiaries and partners to adopt the EU-CHIC methodologies in local conservation schemes. Significant successes in this arena will greatly assist in achieving the widespread adoption of a universal methodology, and the harmonisation of criteria and indicators, as identified in the project's overall objectives.
According to the enormous volume of research aims as defined in the project description above EU-CHIC the final product of the project could not end up with a single ‘identity card’ where all relevant data are to be stored . The following Iceberg-model represents the growing volume of data available and useful for CH preservation. It integrates the spectrum of necessary knowledge to general data on macro- and microeconomic level as well as local geographic or historic information. The model distinguishes on different levels relevant to owners purpose only and of public interest. This leads to immediate support of decision making – in case the information available (data bank system) can be integrated in the users individual work flow.
Every application of EU-CHIC presented in the final report or being developed in any follow up program will have to react on this Iceberg scheme considering all aspects at the same time.
As the Iceberg-model can provide a clear perspective managing the enormous amount of information needed to maintain and preserve European CH we have to look at these information in detail. All experience so far indicates that an elaborate approach to risk assessment is needed. According to the economic relevance of the sector and to the vulnerability of CH objects there is the need to identify and monitor all related risks and to unify these efforts on a pan-European level.There are considerable research efforts already running all over Europe – the coordination need of these efforts is evident. An adequate platform for this task is COST. As a conclusion the project coordinator of EU-CHIC launched a preliminary proposal on “Cultural Heritage Resilience and Risk Indicators (CHERRI)”.
This urgently needed document management system should be a task easy to achieve. But this only will work, when the management system is integrated into the individual workflow of the organisation using it. So the task rather would be to develop a general framework for the databank managing the documents but focus in detail on the workflow of the end users.
For this reasons, strategic orientation in exploring EU-CHIC results is:
1. Carrying out further research in order to finalize the recommendations for the creation of integrated documentation protocols and the development of knowledge-based decision-making procedures in the cultural heritage protection sector
2. Devising strategies for implementing the EU-CHIC model into EU Policies and Standard setting bodies
3. Implementing the EU-CHIC results through demonstration projects, comparative studies, and benchmarking the Guideline
4. Extending the proposal to other assets not covered within the project topics: such as the movable, archaeological, intangible and underwater heritage.

During the final EU-CHIC Conference in Split, Croatia, it was stressed that progressive long-term efforts should be made (via, for example, the legal forum and other platforms) to develop the EU-CHIC concept into a Directive and the EU-CHIC system, into a European Standard. To achieve this, the basic idea was to create and develop a market plan, entitled “From idea to product”. Consequently, conclusions from the meeting round-table offered some key directions for future research strategies:
• Identification of the needs and advantages of EU-CHIC
Offering a dynamic interaction with end users, the EU-CHIC outcomes delivers guidelines for a user-friendly Cultural Heritage management system that can satisfy the needs for interdisciplinary input, whilst also supplying a tool to assist in developing an EU Cultural Heritage strategy.
• The marketing plan that needs to be developed.
A main concern of the strategic EU-CHIC implementation plan lies in the creation of a marketing plan so that the results can impact on the future practical requirements of actual end-users. This can be partly achieved through matching EU-CHIC outcomes to existing policy needs in the strategy for built heritage, tourism, and regional development. To do so requires the development a set of mandatory data (EU-CHIC Guidelines) that is of interest for the management and reporting processes of the EU Cultural Heritage Label, and this aim could be one of the plan targets.
• The considerable range of end-users, next steps, and future EU-CHIC research
Towards identifying and defining the next steps, major challenges, and future prioritized research topics, these could involve:
• Using the pillars in Horizon 2020 to argue for CH research to:
- Invest in future jobs and growth
- Address the concern of people about their livelihoods, safety and environment.
- Strengthening the EU’s global position in research, innovation and technology.
• Carrying out economic research into job creation, tourism, and the importance of maintenance.
• Using and promoting the term/theme “Cultural heritage to save Europe”
• Petition stakeholders and previous research projects for support.
• Research of risk indicators and parameters for integrated documentation and diagnosis

The delivered EU-CHIC Guideline offers new documentation procedures to:
• Advance the data level in comparison to the current documentation methodologies,
• Provide criteria for risk assessment responding to advanced diagnostics and data management,
• Create standard documentation procedures to apply similar methods and tools,
• Standardize outputs and clearly define database entries without further need for definition and,
• Apply unified documentation terminology.
This is achieved through selecting and integrating common criteria to formulate a dynamic archive that incorporates and supplies information on the historic asset during its lifetime.
Moreover, the proposed integrated documentation protocols serve the need to feed decision-making support systems to become a useful tool for the conservation, management, strategic planning, and promotion of the cultural heritage. This is accomplished through the development of specific necessity indices that draw upon the collected data organized in the proposed protocols. All this developed work reveals the urgent need for further research on the identification and elaboration of specific risk indicators regarding buildings, monuments and other assets, relative to the specific needs of each country, and the particularities of the European cultural Heritage.
Equally compelling is the need to proceed into the detailed parameterization of all protocols, and the creation of new standards and guidelines regarding methods, techniques and tools encouraged by the integrated protocols. Such a project expansion would allow a further advancement of the specific necessity indices to enable a more efficient and accurate means of decision-making support systems that could be based on the EU-CHIC Guideline.
• Customizing the EU-CHIC Identity Card regarding the various end-user groups’ special needs.
According to the integrated protocols analysis, numerous categories, subcategories and parameters that require documentation are identified in the macro, meso and micro scale. In recognizing the importance and ideal scientific intensity of these sub-divisions, the Advisory Committee promoted the view that not all end-users would require access to all such detailed parameters. To create a more diverse and user-friendly approach, and to increase the potential of a greater degree of user uptake, the need to re-consider their specific relevance and applicability to the range of end-users identified in the EU-CHIC Outline Dissemination Plan framework was suggested. To achieve this requires customizing the EU-CHIC Card according to the specific needs of specific end-users.
A major challenge for the future of EU-CHIC is to ensure that it has sufficient acceptance by a range of end-users. This requires each stage of its final proposals to be ‘fit for purpose’. Different requirements will have to be determined for different levels of need, and the consistency of approach needs to confirm that the ICEBERG approach to structuring, collecting and disseminating the data is a relevant one to follow.
• Pilot application, validation and transfer of EU-CHIC outcomes by developing a computer intelligent tool for decision support in Cultural Heritage protection
In order for the EU-CHIC Guideline to be tested and validated regarding its efficiency for conservation, management, strategic planning and promotion of the cultural heritage, it has to be applied, in scientific support, using computer aided tools to decision-making processes.
The intelligent decision-making mechanism should be based on multiple criteria evaluation provided by EU-CHIC, in order to result in the need for conservation activities. The key elements of such a system for exploiting valuable information deriving from the integrated documentation protocols involve a database, on which all cultural heritage content is stored and supplied with data from the protocols. Such an archival database could either be a centralized database system, or is enhanced to include distributed databases, enabling storage and remote access of the content in different geographic locations.
Within the remaining Calls of framework FP7-2013, a new effort is required to develop bid initiatives regarding the application and validation of the EU-CHIC Guideline. Therefore, proposals have to be launched in the ICT Calls with the purpose of developing computer intelligent tools that can be used in decision-making support for CH protection.

Strategies for EU-CHIC Implementation and further development through relevant EU Policies

- Linking EU-CHIC guidelines to the European Committee for Standardization (CEN)

Responsibility for developing European standardisation procedures regarding cultural heritage (Conservation of Cultural Property) is in Technical Committee CEN/TC 346.
The general process of implementing a CEN standard enables the European Commission, academia, research organizations, government departments, public authorities and NGO representatives across Europe to propose a topic for standardisation that must be supported by at least five CEN member organisations . Thereafter:
- The appropriate CEN Technical Committee (TC) makes a decision on the adoption of the proposal
- An adopted standardization project is allocated to one of the working groups for the drafting of the standard. This requires delegated experts from member states to sit on and participate in TC workgroup relevant to the topic (Establishing a new working group is possible).
- After preparing the draft at working-group level it needs to be confirmed by the CEN plenary.
- The draft is released for public comment, during which all who have an interest (e.g. manufacturers, public authorities, consumers, etc.) may comment on it.
- A review of received comments is undertaken by the national mirror-committee.
- Any revision of the draft is carried out by the TC working group.
- Agreement to the final draft is by the national mirror-committee (without further public consultation).
- Approval of the norm from CEN is by a qualified majority.
- After ratification, adoption the European Standard as an identical national standard follows by each of the National Standards Bodies.
Active participation is linked to the establishment of national ‘mirror-committees’, which are responsible for developing the national position on a particular standard, and presenting this position to the relevant CEN Technical Committee. The national ‘mirror-committees’ also provide experts for the relating TC working groups who ensure the process of the topic. A stakeholder wishing to participate in CEN can become a member of the national delegation to the CEN Technical Committee, or be nominated as an expert in one of the working groups.
Within the CEN framework, the strategy for implementing the EU-CHIC Guideline as a standard requires the following initial steps:
1. National ‘mirror-committees’ need to be established if not already in existence
2. National experts with specialist knowledge on the proposed topic need to be defined and appointed within the EU-CHIC project
3. The topic needs to be assign to the responsible TC working group – in this case, CEN/TC 346/WG 1 General methodologies and terminology

- European Cultural Heritage Label

The possibility to combine and use the results of the EU-CHIC ID Card with the EC European Cultural Heritage Label was investigated during the Ljubljana (Slovenia) preparatory EU-CHIC meeting in January 2011. The idea was that key EU-CHIC final outcomes need to be directed towards their uptake by the European Cultural Heritage Label (ECHL) initiative, a proposal that was launched on 9 March 2010 and adopted by the European Commission in order to establish a European Heritage Label. The Commission's proposal has been sent to the Parliament and the Council for adoption under the co-decision procedure.
The general objectives of the European Cultural Heritage Label are to strengthen European citizens’ sense of belonging to the European Union, based on shared elements of history and heritage, as well as an appreciation of diversity, and to strengthen intercultural dialogue. The Commission's proposal responds to the conclusions adopted by the Council of Ministers of the European Union on 20 November 2008 inviting the European Commission to submit to it ‘an appropriate proposal for the creation of a European Heritage Label by the European Union and specifying the practical procedures for the implementation of the project.’

- Integrating EU-CHIC guidelines to the European Heritage Network (HEREIN)

The European Heritage Network (HEREIN) is a professional theme-based forum that brings together government departments responsible for cultural heritage under the umbrella of the Council of Europe. The network has become a reference point for policy-makers, government bodies, professionals, research workers and non-governmental organisations active in this field of culture, heritage and the environment. It serves as a tool for co-operation and dissemination and is intended to foster the adaptation of public authorities’ policies. It therefore functions as an instrument that enables observation of the development of cultural heritage policies.
HEREIN provides a database on the various heritage policies pursued in European countries covering topics such as funding, protection, conservation, and integrated conservation strategies designed to promote sustainable development, dissemination, awareness-raising, new technologies, and the digitisation of cultural assets. Its database allows data extraction in order to consistently collect information.
By promoting the exchange of information on the role of heritage in a knowledge-based society to encourage added value, HEREIN is an essential tool for establishing and implementing EU-CHIC guidelines on a EU level. The strategy for implementing the EU-CHIC guidelines into HEREIN consists of the following steps:
1. EU-CHIC guidelines need to be promoted to the HEREIN network in order to present the EU-CHIC results and promote the necessity of standardised heritage information management systems.
2. EU-CHIC members need to join the European Heritage Network
3. EU-CHIC guidelines need to be integrated as single entry in the HEREIN database in order to make information open to policy stakeholders, professionals, researchers, organisations, and the wider public.

- Integrating EU-CHIC into DG Education and Culture directives

A European cultural heritage strategy is currently being created by the European Commission’s Directorate General for Education and Culture. EU-CHIC should be included in the strategy, and long-term efforts should be made, for example, through legal forum and other platforms to upgrade the EU-CHIC concept into a directive.
The strategy for implementing EU-CHIC results to the European cultural heritage strategy includes:
1. EU-CHIC results need to be presented and introduced to the Directorate General for Education and Culture in order to ensure a comprehensive and uniform implementation of heritage information standards.
2. Implementation through the development of an artificial intelligence environment for education on protocols applications in local and pubic end-users.
3. Alternatively implementation through lifelong learning for architects, conservators, engineers etc. on protocols application and risk indicators validation

Moreover the integration of EU-CHIC results into the projected education strategy in various educational levels could be a vital step for its implementation. This process would require:
1. Call for programs regarding EU-CHIC advanced study courses
2. Integration into European master courses through FP7-FP8 calls and proposals
3. Integration into undergraduate courses
4. Integration into lifelong education programs for professional applications
5. Integration into UNESCO chairs educational programs

Exploring Funding options in further developments of EU-CHIC

The evolution of EU-CHIC concept will contribute to further promotion of the European development in:
• Valorisation and revealing of European cultural heritage
• Tourism
• Local levels
• Construction
• Upgrading the quality of life in historic centre / cities in cooperation with the World Heritage Cities Organisation
European policies should be able to foresee and provide with regional level funding in order to achieve pilot EU-CHIC applications for cultural heritage assets valorisation and incorporation within local development planning. Such policies implementation requires strategic planning and cooperation with international bodies like UNESCO, World Economic Forum and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
Further research and development of the EU-CHIC concept requires the investigation of financial resources able to support such an expansion. Additional funding bids might be focused in the following directions:
• European Funding through new FP7-FP8 projects
• International investments for the customization of EU-CHIC to the regional needs (Middle East, Far East, Eurasia, etc.)
• Private funding for cultural heritage
• Funding through calls for Euromed programs regarding European-Mediterranean applications based on the EU-CHIC results
• Funding through calls for ICT programs with interdisciplinary partnership
• CHERRI COST Action Proposal support for the continuation of EU-CHIC partners interaction and post project experiences exchange
• Investigation of local and national end-users’ funding options for EU-CHIC pilot application in CH protection
• Private and public funding for research cooperation with construction companies and industries for specific EU-CHIC applications
• Tourism operators funding options for cultural heritage assets exploitation through touristic applications (hotels, historic buildings, monasteries etc)

EU-CHIC Network articulation and expansion

Contact and communication channels with the EU-CHIC Advisory Network have been open since the start of the project. The Network consists of a broad group of interested stakeholders, and administrative and public organizations responsible for, and involved in, Cultural Heritage preservation. This included owners and managers of CH assets, architects, conservators, prescriptive bodies, restoration enterprises and, in particular :
• SMEs,
• Related NGOs,
• The scientific community,
• Laboratories and technical assistant bodies to conservation,
• European and international associations,
• Networks related to CH, including:
- National technology platforms,
- Net-Heritage project,
- Standardisation committees, mostly CEN/TC 346,
- Educational bodies for training professionals
- Lifelong training schemes and others

During the project, additional potential end-users were defined to include:
• Conservation and restoration professionals,
• Decision makers,
• National and local authorities and,
• Local stakeholders.
A number of these end-users have been contacted and informed about the project progress in order to seek valuable feedback and help in its implementation. The EU-CHIC project’s primary aim was to network all of these areas through an Advisory Network.
The final EU-CHIC conference organized in Split presented the outcomes of the project to a wider community of experts and stakeholders engaged in safeguarding the heritage. Discussion also took place regarding transfer of the EU-CHIC philosophy and methods to the practice of heritage protection through the channels that were created by the Advisory Network. A round of new contacts in conjunction with the Advisory Network is to be planned in order to reinforce and establish new communication links to implement the EU-CHIC final results.

EU-CHIC “marketing” through pre-market demonstration applications

- Case studies for the implementation of EU-CHIC results

The strategic plan is also be based on an analysis of the case studies delivered by the project partners. This means that the case studies partly dictate the specific direction for the EU-CHIC implementation to follow, through further research and the application of policy. Case studies applications should be promoted as a pre-market approach of the EU-CHIC “product” and can be found at the web page:

- Discussion upon the EU-CHIC post project “marketing” plan

EU-CHIC dissemination plan agreed among partners during the projects progress, suggested involving the European Commission and linking the project to the European Cultural Heritage Label (ECHL) project process, along with the emerging EU Tourism Strategy and with sustainability initiatives in emerging European politics. It noted that generally addressing individual national authorities in an unfocussed manner was most likely a waste of time, and that EU-CHIC should approach the authorities from "above" (adopting a pull, not push, strategy); meaning that EU-CHIC should identify relevant ongoing political EU/EC initiatives and make use of them.
Further on it was suggested that EU-CHIC should ddress European Cultural Heritage Heads Forum – ECHHF. The aim would be to contextualise the EU-CHIC project under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty; the DG Research Joint Programme Initiative (JPI); and the potential benefits that could feed into the standardization CEN/TC 346 work, to promote the uptake and benefits of EU-CHIC at national levels. Other feasibly potential strategic targets identified were EC Eurostat as well as EC Tourism Strategy.
Final EU-CHIC meeting in Split and round table discussion, entitled “From idea to product” demonstrated that exploitation potential and strategy of EU-CHIC results is one of the major project’s topics to be addressed as a priority in the last period of the project. It became clear that the exploitation plan needed to take into account in particular “The EU-CHIC marketing plan”, i.e. how to sell the “product”.
Arguments to offer EU-CHIC product could be :
• It bridges gap between industry and CH management
• It offers scientific support to policies
• It is a management system that reduces costs for maintenance and repair and makes the statistical reporting to parliament more efficient
• It collects and structures huge amounts of knowledge and delivers it to the user
• It is practitioner based
• It can develop new tools and experience
• It delivers comparable information across Europe for statistical reporting and management by objectives
• It provides a format (guideline)

All the above reveal how post-project dissemination could use demonstrative case studies as a voluntary EU-CHIC pilot implementation during a pre-market approach. It will show how EU-CHIC Identity Card can serve as a tool for European cultural heritage applications recording the heritage assets identity, through integrated documentation protocols, so that it applies in comparative assessment, valorisation of the heritage asset, protection and exploitation and offer prospects of a unified European strategy based on EU-CHIC tool.

Generally, next steps in offering and selling the EU-CHIC product should be embedded in the context of the pillars of Horizon 2020 research, in the context of arguments about need to invest in future jobs and growth, about peoples’ concerns about their livelihoods, safety and environment and about strengthening the EU’s global position in research, innovation and technology. Selling points should be: economic research, job creation, tourism and economic importance of maintenance. “Use cultural heritage to save Europe” was the final motto proposed to be adopted by EU-CHIC marketing plan.

List of Websites:
Public website address:

University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering
Jamova 2, 1000 Ljubljana
prof. Roko Žarni?, PhD- coordinator of the EU-CHIC project

Telephone: +386 1 4768 500