After the Second World War, Rome became a site of crossing populations, migrations, returns, transitions, and cultural convergence and divergence. Within this fluid landscape, the city’s reconstruction was shaped by transnational flows and the complexities of multilevel governance, with actors operating across international, national and local levels. How did multilevel governance shape decision-making in the reconstruction of war-damaged monuments? How did destruction generate opportunities to redefine heritage beyond the paradigm of loss? This study examines how these interactions influenced both the reconstruction methodologies and the evolving meaning of heritage, highlighting heritage as a form of governance. Drawing on archival sources, visual documentation and focused case studies, this paper demonstrates that tangible reconstruction efforts were closely entwined with the process of national identity formation in the aftermath of trauma and conflict. A consciousness of heritage emerged as a shared international patrimony, understood as belonging to all civilisations and mobilised for fundraising and cultural diplomacy across national borders. This heritage diplomacy illuminates the complex networks of institutions, funding mechanisms and competing notions of sovereignty that have shaped modern conservation and reconstruction. By tracing how cultural entanglements shaped heritage practices, critical insights arise for contemporary debates on post-conflict reconstruction, identity and urban resilience. PRACTICE RELEVANCE Post-war heritage reconstruction was not merely a technical exercise but a driver of political renewal, social cohesion and international collaboration. Lessons from Rome’s experience can guide today’s responses to conflict- and disaster-related heritage loss. Policymakers should establish multilevel governance frameworks that enable coordination between international organisations, national governments and local authorities. Transparent communication and active participation of local communities should be prioritised to ensure legitimacy and shared ownership. Reconstruction efforts should be used as opportunities to advance archaeological research, foster cultural diplomacy and strengthen social ties. Practitioners are encouraged to integrate heritage protection into urban planning and disaster preparedness, ensuring that interventions both safeguard authenticity and accommodate modern urban needs. These actions can help transform crises into opportunities for cultural dialogue and urban resilience in the face of conflict, climate change and other global challenges.
Jiayao Jiang (Thu,) studied this question.