Abstract The preservation and evaluation of cultural heritage increasingly demand methodologies capable of navigating complexity, expert subjectivity, and participatory foresight. This study examines the Delphi method as a robust tool for cultural heritage research, particularly for contexts marked by plural values, limited empirical data, and evolving stakeholder constellations. Drawing from the method’s philosophical foundations and recent evolutions (including fuzzy, policy, and e-Delphi variants) we propose a narrative framework for Delphi-based heritage assessments. Based on a review of eleven Delphi studies across the arts and heritage fields, we identify common methodological patterns, design innovations, and challenges related to expert selection, consensus-building, and transparency. We also highlight the method’s potential to engage diverse knowledge systems and to map dissensus rather than enforce artificial agreement. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of Delphi for interdisciplinary research, inclusive governance, and the co-construction of knowledge in sustainable cultural development.
Codignola et al. (2026) studied this question.