Calculo Del Riesgo Del Castillo de Venosa

XII Congresso Internacional sobre Patologia e Reabilitação de Estruturas
XII International Conference on Structural Repair and Rehabilitation

XII Congreso Internacional sobre Patología y Rehabilitación de Estructuras
26-29 October, 2016, Porto, Portugal
ELARCH Project: Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development

of a hazard map. The case study of Aragon’s Castle, Venosa (Italy).
Michelangelo LATERZA1, Michele D’AMATO2, Edgar LAGUNA3

(1,2,3)
DICEM, Dept. of European and Mediterranean Cultures (Architecture, Environment and Cultural Heritage),
University of Basilicata, Matera, Italy)
1
Associate Professor, michelangelo.laterza@unibas.it
2
Research fellowship, michele.damato@unibas.it
3
PhD student, edgar.laguna@unibas.it
Abstract: In recent years it has highlighted global interest in disaster prevention and risk mitigation, and the
importance of cultural heritage and conservation. According to the literature, the risk is directly linked to two
variables: vulnerability and threat, the first related to intrinsic causes of the element and the second to
external phenomena causes it. On this basis, it has developed this document, which has been evaluated the
threat variable of a representative Castle of the municipality of Venosa, located in the region of South
Basilicata (Italy). By studying the dangers of the area, based on historical records of the territory, was
developed a classification of threats categorizing them according to their level of impact, which could be
catastrophic, mild or no harm to the historical heritage. The next step was the development of a map of the
cultural threats, using geographic information systems (GIS), which synthesized information and allowed
referencing the dangers to a territorial scale. In the end, it was concluded that hazard maps are a key tool in
risk management of cultural heritage and allowing summarize information in a danger to the architectural
heritage and helps develop plans and project strategies for all phases of the disasters, the case Venosa castle
was possible to determine that the threats that could affect most impact are seismic, chemical, fire and
physical stress.
Keywords: Threat, cultural heritage, risk, map.
1. Introduction.
In recent decades it has been increased the interest in the study of natural and anthropic risks of cultural
heritages and their mitigation, changing the concept of action reactive to a preventive stance towards it. A
risk is "the combination of the probability that an event occurs and its negative consequences" (UNISDR,
2009), commonly knowing in scientific literature as presented in equation 1.
Risk = Threat x Vulnerability (1)
where the threat is "a phenomenon, substance, human activity or dangerous condition that can result in
death, injury or other health impacts, as well as damage to property, loss of livelihoods and services, social
disorders and economic, or environmental damage", and vulnerability are "the characteristics and
circumstances of a community, system or asset that make it susceptible to the damaging effects a threat"
(UNISDR, 2009). For cases of uncontrollable natural phenomena such as an earthquake, it proceeds to reduce
vulnerability or increase the impact strengths in the cultural properties (Díaz Fuentes, 2015).
1
The study and analysis of the threat variable for a cultural object requires many efforts and knowledge of all
boundary conditions. For example a methodology may be found in (Agapiou, et al., 2015) or recently an
alternative approach has been developed in (Díaz Fuentes, 2015) (Laterza et al., 2016) methodology in it,
having considered various aspects provided by sources as the “risk map”, the CENAPRED, the "guide analysis
of natural risks for land use planning" among others.
By using Geographic Information Systems GIS, hazard maps locating the threats that could affect the cultural
heritage may be developed, where historical data describing the severity of each threat is indicated. Then it
proceeds to the analysis of prioritization based on historical facts and their severity on the historical buildings,
placing it into one of the three possibilities: No damage, mild or catastrophic.
In this study an application of this approach is described and applied to the case study of the municipality of
Venosa, located in the region of Basilicata in Italy.
2. Literature review
2.1. Threat
A hazard or threat is the change in a situation or a series of situations that has the potential to cause harm
or property loss. A disaster is the collapse of a series of social functions that cause loss of life, materials,
economy, or the environment. In addition to the possibility of life and property loss, the meaning of disaster
also includes damage or loss of the general value of a country’s cultural heritage and the ecological system
and its environment (UNESCO, 2010). UNESCO notes that the disaster risk to cultural heritage comes from
both external and internal causes. The external cause is the disturbance or damage to cultural heritage sites
caused by typhoon, tsunami, destructive sabotage, or war. The internal cause is the fragility of the structure
or materials of cultural heritage and their sensitivity to the environment.
Ghose divided the disaster risks to cultural heritage into unpredictable disasters and predictable
deterioration (Ghose, 1999). Unpredictable disasters include disasters caused by natural phenomena and
human behaviors. The five categories of natural disasters are geophysics, meteorology, hydrology,
climatology, and biology. Man-made disasters include fire, accidents and military conflicts. Predictable
deterioration includes vandalism, illicit traffic in cultural property, and environmental deterioration (Fig. 1
(Jung, 2010)).
Moreover, in the area of risk management, it has created the concept of multi-hazard, which are those that
relate to the analysis of the various hazards and trigger cascading effects that threaten the same elements
exposed with or without a temporal coincidence (Komendantova, et al., 2014). Interactions between threats
can be considered a probabilistic analysis of historical databases that already take into account events
cascade, for example, databases that determine the possibility of an earthquake causing a tsunami
(Marzocchi et al. (2012).
Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development of a hazard map 2

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of common disasters and risks to cultural heritage.
Additionally, in the field of cultural heritage, it is necessary to evaluate other variables that are the result of
a cascade effect, such as the demographic decline, which could result in lack of maintenance and finally the
abandonment of cultural property.
2.2. Hazard Map.

A hazard potential map or a hazard map is presently an important, sensible tool and the basic foundation for
developing various strategies for disaster adjustment and relief, indicates the setting of hazard situations,
warning values, potential hazard areas, the main landmarks, and the possible scope of effect (Wang et al.,
2011). It is the substantiation of risk assessment on the map, which helps responders plan projects and
strategies for all phases of disasters. The predictable or unpredictable effects of disasters will thus be reduced
(Wang J.-J. , 2015).
With regard to risk maps, for example may be mentioned the ones proposed by CENAPRED in Mexico and
the “Risk Map” in Italy, based on GIS and where are mapped the main threats that cause impairment to
equity (Díaz Fuentes, 2015).
In 2011 in Chile were developed the Guide Analysis of Natural Hazards and Territorial Planning, where one
of the main emphasis of this document was the mapping of natural hazards, based on a methodology that
considered historical aspects and scope of developed natural disasters. For their case in particular, it focused
on threats that affect the country, which are natural hazards and occasional action caused by environmental
factors (Secretaría de Desarrollo Regional y Administrativo, 2011).
A highlight of the hazard maps contribution is one that Maria Jose Jimenez has proposed in the article called
The map Euro-Mediterranean seismic hazard, it is incorporated into hazard mapping the interaction between
soil type and frequency presents the structure depending on their structural characteristics. For this reason,
Jimenez proposes to map factors as the point of ground, acceleration and spectral acceleration
corresponding to portions of bandwidth energy radiated by an earthquake, for different return periods and
soil conditions (Jimenez, 2008).
In (Agapiou, et al., 2015), several natural and anthropogenic hazards have been mapped using different
remote sensing data and methodologies. The results from each hazard were imported into a GIS environment
in order to examine the overall risk assessment based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process methodology. In this
document was obtained a threat map of a cultural heritage with all threat studied by them. However, the
scale at which it developed was extensive and developed a general scale of the territory.
Moreover, the use of hazard maps has been used mostly for two types of threats, seismic threats and threats
by climatic effects, as they are phenomena that impact greatly architectural heritage and which generally
tools used GIS to finally be represented in maps, usually working in areas of large areas.
2.3 GIS as tool of heritage cultural

Geographic Information System (GIS) is the new emerging field and grows at very rapid pace. Remote sensing,
aerial photography, cartography, surveying and other field instruments for attribute data collection
contributes to the data acquisition. Cartography, surveying, geography, and geodesy contributes for mapping
process disciplines such as computer science and statistics, making the GIS maps a smart tool compared with
paper map in this digital age (Elangovan, 2006).
The use of GIS for cultural heritage management purposes has grown considerably in the last decades,
becoming a very widespread toolkit among preservation specialists. Due to the very spatial nature of the
discipline, this technology rapidly opened up new possibilities such as the cultural heritage management,
appearing the most effective environment where to perform both technical and historical-critical assessment
and where to analyses and control the entire conservation processing a more diagnostic sense (Campanaro,
2016).
For the specific case of hazard maps, GIS allows the inclusion of mapping data of the study area and
overlapping layers, it allows to study the terrain where the object of study is by obtaining contours, slopes,
drains natural and georeferencing.
Regard to the properties mentioned GIS, this becomes the ideal for managing mitigation of cultural heritage,
especially in interactive maps that can be updated at any time and fulfill the mission to synthesize a series of
data and have easy interpretation.
3. Methodology
The mapping of threats to the conservation of cultural heritage proposed in this methodology is considered
a simple tool, with the aim of collecting information that generally exists in every country and that do not
have agencies responsible for coordinating this information for the conservation of the cultural heritage.
Through this methodology factors, to analyze each of the threats that could affect cultural property is
necessary determine the type of hazard on basis of their frequency of occurrence and nature, whence were
divided into 3 groups: Natural Hazards occasional action, threats of physical nature and anthropic threats
and chemical and electrochemical nature.
3.1 Cartography Base

For the mapping of threat of a cultural object must have a cartographic basis for the phenomena plot to
capture in the study area, these should contain: Regional, provincial and communal limits, hydrography and
contours, territorial area under study identifying streets, buildings and green areas, primary and secondary
roadways, and timely geographical location of cultural property.

3.2 Identifying threats
3.2.1 Natural hazards occasional action

They are the result of natural phenomena that occur sporadically, but with catastrophic consequences in
general for the cultural heritage, among these are earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides, hydrometeorological
threats and eruption of volcanoes.
3.2.1.1 Seismic hazard and tsunami

The seismic hazard refers to the probability that a given seismic action occurs on a point of land with a certain
intensity, extent and duration, but for purposes of this methodology, only the worst earthquake stage based
on historical information is considered. Should be assessed for the hazard map the following information:
Seismic regionalization, seismic intensities and susceptibility to tsunamis.
3.2.1.2 Threat of Landslides

Slippage occurs when broken or loses balance a portion of the materials that make up a hillside slope and
slide down by gravity. Should be assessed for the hazard map the following information: Instability of natural
slopes, mudflows and debris and regional and local subsidence and identification of cracks.
3.2.1.3 Volcanic threat

A volcanic threat is the probability of occurrence of a potentially damaging volcanic event at a time and
particular area, however, for purposes of this methodology is considered only the worst volcanic scenario,
based on historical information. Should be assessed for the hazard map the following information: Dormant
and active volcanoes, dangerous historical eruptions.
3.2.1.4 hydrometeorological threats

Should be assessed for the hazard map the following information: Flood, incidence of cyclones and Frosts.
The hydrometeorological threats must be analyzed at the regional level, the only threat is possible to plot
scale microzoning is the flood, so that threats by tropical cyclones, or frost would be reflected as a datum on
the map threats, and only graphing the maximum range of a flood, given the presence of watercourses, the
topography and the events historically.
3.2.2 Threats of physical nature

Threats of physical nature are called environmental hazards by the “risk map”, and this danger with regard
to the involvement of immovable cultural heritage are defined two indicators: the rate of erosion and
physical stress index.
3.2.2.1 Threat by erosion

Should be assessed for the hazard map the following information: maximum wind speed and direction,
relative humidity, marine aerosol effect and maximum rainfall.
3.2.2.2 Threat by physical stress

The information associated with the threat by physical stress should be recorded in a report on the map of
threats, and should considering the sun orientation, topography, maximum rainfall, maximum and minimum
temperatures and identifying the existence of frost in periods of rain.

3.2.3 Anthropic threats and chemical and electrochemical nature.

According to the “risk map” to the anthropic danger it is required deductive reasoning that aims to verify
whether the anthropic pressure attributed to a given territory is indeed dangerous for cultural property, or
has adverse effects on the conservation of cultural heritage. Considering the above and based on the manuals
and risk management programs for the conservation of cultural heritage property, it concluded that the
anthropic and chemical and electrochemical nature that could affect cultural property are:
3.2.3.1 Chemical threat

For the assessment of this threat must know where chemicals are produced, which are the routes used for
transport and which sites are used and the waste generated and dangerous. Of these dangers, the main
affecting cultural heritage property is the fire.
3.2.3.2 Atmospheric pollution

Air pollution directly affects materials properties by causing blackening cultural property, so should assess
the proximity of the property to the sources of contamination. The “risk map” considered a blackening index
based on the influence of particulate pollutant emissions, therefore should record the location of pollutants,
sectors with traffic congestion and location of immovable cultural heritage.
3.2.3.3 Threat socio - organizational

This type of threat is the risk of vandalism, wars or damage that can cause crowds of people due of tourism
in cultural property, and it is also possible to consider in this category forest fires, especially in times of
drought. The information associated with the socio-organizational threat that should be recorded in a report
and the hazard map is as follows: Agglomerations, tourist pressure, threat of forest fires and fire threat in
urban areas.
3.2.3.4 Serious demographic decline

This threat is related to the condition of abandonment of cultural property, which ultimately is reflected in a
lack of maintenance and progressive deterioration, a situation that mostly generated in rural towns that are
affected by migration processes of its inhabitants, and transform into sites occasional visit. This situation
occurs when the historical centers lose their residential character in favor of commercial or administrative
activity, which means that the properties are borne by the tenants, who generally do not take care of its
maintenance. The information associated with severe demographic decline that should be recorded in a
report and the hazard map is as follows: Uses of soil, demographic flows and Condition of real estate.
3.3 Prioritization of threats
The hazard map is a representation of extreme events to know against what needs to be protected and the
measures to be taken. These scenarios depend on the specific conditions of each site, both by the
characteristics of phenomena such as the vulnerability of buildings and their location.
For hazard maps it is considered the worst case scenario as a backdrop, and identify areas where for a given
intensity phenomenon, the consequences of damage to the cultural heritage property are mild, gradual or
catastrophic. This classification and description of hazard scenarios, coupled with threats defined in this
chapter, is a tool to rank threats of disturbing phenomena, later to make a thematic map of threats and
prioritize mitigation or preventive conservation.

In this way, the description table scenarios and prioritization of threats is made up of the parameters shown
in Table 1. In the blanks should describe in detail the possible risk scenarios of a property, more particularly:
what's the harm that would occur; estimate what area will be affected; and estimate how soon or how often
happen (see Table 1) (Díaz Fuentes, 2015).
Table 1- Description of scenarios and prioritization of threats depending on the severity of damage
Threats (The worst case) according to Maximum historical Severity

the probability of occurrence historical maximum No Mild Catastrophic
magnitude intensity damage
Richter Mercalli Description of the damage that would
Seismic hazard and occur with seismic or tsunami threat; the
tsunami area to be affected; and how often it will
happen, in the corresponding severity
Sporadic level.
events It has Known Description of the damage that would
Landslides occurred? effects. occur with the threat of sliding slopes; the
(yes/no) area to be affected; and how often it will
level.
It has Known Description of the damage that would
Volcanic threat occurred? effects. occur with the volcanic threat; the area to
(yes/no) be affected; and how often it will happen,
in the corresponding severity level.
maximum Known Description of the damage that would
Hydrometeorological precipitation effects. occur with the hydrometeorological
threat (mm) threat; the area to be affected; and how
often it will happen, in the corresponding
severity level.
Chemically occurred? effects. occur with the Chemically technological
technological threat (yes/no) threat; the area to be affected; and how
severity level.
Forestry or urban occurred? effects. occur with the threat forestry or urban
fires (yes/no) fire; the area to be affected; and how
severity level.
Maximum Known
Continuous daily effects. Description of the damage that would
processes precipitation occur with the threat by erosion; the area
Threat by erosion (mm)/ to be affected; and how often it will
Maximum happen, in the corresponding severity
wind level.
velocity
(km/h)
Thermal Known Description of the damage that would
Threat by physical oscillation effects. occur with the threat by physical stress;
stress and frost the area to be affected; and how often it
will happen, in the corresponding severity
level.
Atmospheric Pollution Known Description of the damage that would
pollution index effects. occur with the atmospheric pollution; the
area to be affected; and how often it will
level.
Socio-organizational occurred? effects. occur with the socio-organizational threat;
threat (yes/no) the area to be affected; and how often it

will happen, in the corresponding severity

level.
Demographic decline It has Known Description of the damage that would
and lack of occurred? effects. occur with the demographic decline and
maintenance (yes/no) lack of maintenance; the area to be
affected; and how often it will happen, in
the corresponding severity level.
4. Case study
The Aragon’s Castle of Venosa (See Figure 2) is located at the southern end of the town of Venosa, province
of Potenza, region of Basilicata in Italy (See Figure 3). Its construction began in 1470 ordered by the “Duke
Pirro del Balzo” order to develop a broader fortification project. The structure consists of a square with
four cylindrical towers located at the ends, access to the castle is through skybridge, since around the
structure is a moat. The structure was built with blocks of tufa and mortar. Currently it works as
archaeological museum of the city (Direzione regionale per i beni culturali e paesaggistici della Basilicata,
2013).
Figure 2- Aragon’s Castle of Venosa.
Figure 3- Location of Venosa in Italy

The territory of Venosa, is on the fringes of the seismogenic zones of the Southern Apennines and not far
from the seismogenic zones Gargano. According to the order of the president of the council of ministers
number 3274/2003 and updated to 2015, the municipality of Venosa is classified as seismic zone 2 with a
meda seismic hazard which can happen major earthquakes (Presidenza del Consigio dei Ministri,
Dipartamento della protezione civile, 2015).
The threat analysis methodology was applied in Venosa and its affectations on the Aragon’s castle, the results
were summarized in Table 2 and then represented on a map (see Figure 4).
Table 2- Prioritation of the hazard of the Castle of Venosa
Threats (The worst case) Maximum historical Severity
according to the probability of historical maximum
occurrence magnitude intensity
No damage Mild Catastrophic
Venosa
5.95 on Richter scale, belongs to the
in 1851. Fuente seismic zone
especificada no 2, which
Seismic hazard válida. & Fuente means that
and tsunami especificada no IX-X Mercalli the seismic
válida. scale
hazard is the
second
highest, with a
maximum
acceleration
Sporadic of ag <0.25g.
events Landslides on Sliding areas
the outskirts of are defined
the village, and identified
It has occurred? have not by the
Landslides Yes caused major municipal
damage to the administration
civilian
, however,
population.
there are
(Comune di
Venosa, 2012) areas very
close to the
castle that
could
destabilize the
ground on
which this
monument.
x
Volcanic threat No
It can be a
Efforts thermal factor of
Hydrometeorol Temperatures nature of the cracks and
ogical threat below 0 ° C. structure. degraded
material of
the structure.
A possible fire To present a
There is not caused by an possible fire
Chemically historical record oil company and spread
technological (Comune di that works with quickly, it
threat Venosa, 2012) 300 meters could destroy
from the castle. the
monument
To present a
Forestry or There is not It could destroy possible fire
urban fires historical record the monument and spread
quickly, it
could destroy
the

monument
Annual
Continuo precipitation of
us 701 mm Degradation
processes Threat by (Consiglio Deterioration of the
erosion Nazionale delle of especially material and
Ricerche Istituto porous potential
per i Sistemi materials. losses in the
Agricoli e exposed
Forestali del areas.
Mediterraneo –
ISAFOM, Agenzia
Lucana di
Sviluppo e di
Innovazione in
Agricoltura ,
2009)
Annual Thermal Thermal
Threat by temperature stresses in the stresses in the
physical stress range -5°C - 32°C material of the material of the
structure structure
Atmospheric No x
pollution
Socio- No x
organizational
threat
Demographic No x
decline and
lack of
maintenance
Figure 4- Hazard Map of Castle of Venosa.

Such as noted in Table 2 and Figure 4, the threats posed a bigger threat to the castle of Venosa are seismic
nature, fire, landslides and physical stress because of continuous processes.
The classification methodology threats of cultural heritage was based on historical events and on qualitative
criteria, so that aspects developed by be taken into account (Laterza et al., 2016) and (Agapiou, et al., 2015)
in their methodologies, in order to implement a system of quantitative assessment of threats during the
following stages of the investigation.
5. Conclusions
The hazard maps are a key tool in risk management of cultural heritage because they allow summarizing
information on a hazard architectural heritage and helps develop project plans and strategies for all phases
of disasters. On other hand, the use of GIS in the field of cultural heritage allows the development of smart
maps that can be updated at any time, in addition to obtain and work highly accurate geographic data that
help define more certainty the information on the map.
Diaz methodology allows analyzing qualitatively all threats that could jeopardize the architectural heritage
also the process of prioritization of threats and their respective tabulation summarizes the infromación and
represents a set of determining variables for analysis vulnerability and subsequent calculation and risk
management of the property studied. In the case of the castle of Venosa, it was possible to determine that
the threats that could affect are seismic, chemical, fire and through physical stress and degradation in the
material. Having identified the main threats of this cultural property, to make so, it should conduct a
vulnerability analysis of the structure against every threat to take the necessary measures in order to
preserve the cultural property.
The research developed is a first phase for the study of risk management of cultural heritage and mapping of
threats to territorial scale. As a point of improvement, we will work on optimizing the tool hierarchy of
threats, analyzing quantitative techniques to develop a more precise way to study a ranking thereof and the
subsequent mapping of threats.
Acknowledgements
This research herein presented is granted by the ELARCH scholarship and mobility, a project funded under
the Erasmus Mundus Action 2 Partnership (EMA2) by the European Commission, and coordinated by the
University of Basilicata (www.elarch.org). ELARCH project: Reference number 552129-EM-1-2014-1-IT-ERA
MUNDUS-EMA21 funded with support of the European Commission. This document reflects the view only of
the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the
information contained therein.
Bibliography
Agapiou, A., Lysandrou, V., Alexakis, D., Themistocleous, K., Cuca, B., Argyriou, A., . . . Hadjimitsis, D. (2015).
Cultural heritage management and monitoring using remote sensing data and GIS: The case study of
Paphos area, Cyprus. Computers, Environmment and Urban Systems 54, 230-239.

Campanaro, D. M., Landeschi, G., & Dell'Unto, N. (2016). 3D GIS for Cultural heritage restoration: A 'white
box' workflow. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 321-332.
Comune di Venosa. (2012). Piano comunale di protezione civile. Venosa.
Díaz Fuentes, D. A. (2015). Diseño de Herramientas de evaluación del riesgo para la conservación del
patrimonio cultural inmueble Aplicación en dos casos de estudio del norte andino chileno. Mexico D.F.:
Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia INAH.
Direzione regionale per i beni culturali e paesaggistici della Basilicata. (2013). Polo Museale di Melfi-Venosa,
Progetto delle opere di riqualificaziones e valorizzazione funzionale del castello di Venosa e dell'area
archeologica. Potenza: Ministerio per i beni e le attività culturali.
Elangovan. (2006). GIS Fundamentals Applications and implementations. Pitam Pura- New Delhi: NIPA.
Ghose, S. (1999). Protection against natural and man-made disasters, in: Risk Preparedness for cultural
properties: Development of Guidelines for Emergency Response. Tokyo: Chuo-Koron Bijustu Shuppan Co.,
Ltda.
Jimenez, M. (2008). El mapa Euro- Mediterraneo de peligro sísmico. Barcelona: Rehabimed.
Jung, F. (2010). From "blue shield" to disaster management: the awareness and anctions of risk preparedness
from world's cultural property. Journal Cultural Property Conservation 12, 43-56.
Komendantova, N., Mrzyglocki, R., Mignan, A., Wenzel, F., Patt, A., & Fleming, K. (2014). Multi-hazard and
multi-risk decision support tools as a part of participatory risk governance: feedback from civil protection
stakeholders,. Disaster Risk Reduct 8, 50-67.
Laterza, M., D'Amato, M., & Diaz, D. (2016). A simplified procedure for risk assessment of cultural heritage:
definition and application to case studies. International Conference on Urban Risk.
Laterza, M., D'Amato, M., & Diaz, D. (2016). A simplified procedure for risk assessment of cultural heritage:
definition and application to religius architecture. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on
Safety and Durability of structures ICOSADOS.
Marzocchi, W., Garcia-Aristizabal, A., Gasparini, P., Mastellone, M., & Di Ruocco, A. (2012). Basic principles
of multi-risk assessment: a case study in Italy. Nat. Hazards 62, 551-573.
Presidenza del Consigio dei Ministri, Dipartamento della protezione civile. (2015). Classificazione sismica al
2015.
Secretaría de Desarrollo Regional y Administrativo. (2011). Guía de Análisis de Riesgos Naturales para el
Ordenamiento Territorial. Santiago: SUBDERE.
UNESCO. (2010). Managing Disaster Risks for World Heritage. Pais: UNESCO.
UNISDR. (2009). Terminología sobre reducción del riesgo de desastres. Ginebra: UNISDR.
Wang, J., Shan, H., Maa, S., Chen, L., & Lin, L. (2011). Classification, making and application of the hazard map
in Taiwan. Fire Mon (10), 52-62.
Wang, J.-J. (2015). Flood risk maps to cultural heritage: Measures and process. Journal of Cultural Heritage
16, 210-220.

Calculo Del Riesgo Del Castillo de Venosa

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Calculo Del Riesgo Del Castillo de Venosa

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

XII Congresso Internacional sobre Patologia e Reabilitação de Estruturas

XII International Conference on Structural Repair and Rehabilitation

ELARCH Project: Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development

Michelangelo LATERZA1, Michele D’AMATO2, Edgar LAGUNA3

Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development of a hazard map 2

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of common disasters and risks to cultural heritage.

2.2. Hazard Map.

2.3 GIS as tool of heritage cultural

3.1 Cartography Base

Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development of a hazard map 4

3.2 Identifying threats

3.2.1 Natural hazards occasional action

3.2.1.1 Seismic hazard and tsunami

3.2.1.2 Threat of Landslides

3.2.1.3 Volcanic threat

3.2.1.4 hydrometeorological threats

3.2.2 Threats of physical nature

3.2.2.1 Threat by erosion

3.2.2.2 Threat by physical stress

Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development of a hazard map 5

3.2.3 Anthropic threats and chemical and electrochemical nature.

3.2.3.1 Chemical threat

3.2.3.2 Atmospheric pollution

3.2.3.3 Threat socio - organizational

3.2.3.4 Serious demographic decline

3.3 Prioritization of threats

Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development of a hazard map 6

Threats (The worst case) according to Maximum historical Severity

Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development of a hazard map 7

will happen, in the corresponding severity

Figure 2- Aragon’s Castle of Venosa.

Figure 3- Location of Venosa in Italy

Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development of a hazard map 9

Figure 4- Hazard Map of Castle of Venosa.

Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development of a hazard map 10

Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development of a hazard map 11

Prioritization of threats of cultural heritage for the development of a hazard map 12

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen