Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article explores collaborative management and monitoring of archaeological heritage using digital tools, suggesting implications for conservation efforts.
In the field of collaborative maintenance of archaeological heritage supported by digital tools, this article proposes an innovative approach to its management and monitoring. Starting with the development of a scientific framework that addresses the constraints, gaps and scenarios, the authors conducted a bibliometric analysis and systematic review of the scientific literature and regulations, and a compilation of best practices. To develop the most effective approaches in the collaborative management of archaeological sites, the paper outcomes the requirements under which maintenance communities to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of preventive and predictive maintenance. These conditions open up strategic scenarios for the stewardship of Italian archaeological sites by operating from a dual perspective. On one hand, it enhances high-visited sites, where participation improves the quality of monitoring data on maintenance status. On the other, it boots low-visited sites, where user involvement raises awareness among visitors regarding shared care initiatives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pinto et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: