Transparency and access: contemporary preventive conservation practice by Robyn Ho

Transparency and access: contemporary preventive conservation practice and its potential in the digital future.

Abstract The fundamental principles and history of preventive conservation practice are outlined and its current holistic, evidence-based, sustainable and risk management methodologies are discussed. Recent examples of preventive conservation approaches are presented in relationship to ‘The New Museology’ developed in the 1990s that recontextualised the museum as instruments of social inclusion (Stam 1993), emphasising a strongly educative role (Keene 2002, pp. 12-13). ‘The New Museology’ has coloured the manifestation of preventive conservation efforts that facilitate transparency and access to the community to ensure social, economic and environmental accountability. Contemporary digitisation projects are discussed as potential methods to increase accessibility and transparency to collections and to share the preservation mission with an engaged public, as well as serving as effective practical tools for condition monitoring and examination. Ultimately, the emphasis on transparency and access ensures ongoing relevance and sustainability of preventive conservation practice in order to ensure the continued long-term preservation of cultural materials.

RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

Introduction Preventive conservation involves the evaluation of deterioration risks to collections and the implementation of strategies to mitigate those threats to maintain the current condition of objects. Generally speaking, preventive conservation protects cultural material through indirect action upon the object, as opposed to conservation treatment, and often entails activities that control the collection environment: physical, social and/or political aspects (Caple 2000, p. 152; Szczepanowska 2013, p. 14; Muñoz-Vinas 2005, pp. 21-3). Causes of deterioration were broadly understood by the mid-twentieth century, however framed by primacy of the object that characterised conservation practice at the time. It was not until the 1970s that conservation research shifted to the museum environment and the term ‘preventive conservation’ came into widespread use as the concepts of minimal intervention were advocated in conservation ethics (Muñoz-Vinas 2009, pp. 48-9). With the publication of the Garry Thomson’s The Museum Environment (1978), preventive conservation was recognised as fundamental to collections care and Thomson’s prescriptive specifications were readily adopted by museums. Bachmann describes the subsequent development of conservation practice: ‘At present, minimal treatment is preferred: this leaves an object closer to its original appearance, presents a lesser risk, and affords the opportunity to await a better treatment technology. The thinking that underlies this approach has evolved over the past twenty years and is the basis for the change in orientation from treatment for a single object to preservation of whole collections or classes of objects. The emphasis in conservation today is on prevention of deterioration through control of the environment, in climate, storage, and on exhibition’ (Bachmann (ed.) 1992, p. 3). In the 1990s, critical analysis of accepted collections care conventions were more widely discussed and Thomson’s stringent guidelines questioned (Bradley 2002, pp. 3-4; Erhardt & Mecklenberg 1994).

Current preventive conservation practice has now developed into a nuanced discipline and understood ‘…as an essential aspect of the functioning of museums’ (de Guichen 1999, p. 5). The museum has undergone a shift in the late twentieth-century from the traditional role as inert repositories of cultural connoisseurship to an acceptance of the museum’s active relationship and responsibility to the social, economical and political milieu. Termed in the 1990s as ‘The New Museology’, the new objective of museums is to more closely integrate these institutions with the cultural groups they were tasked to serve, emphasising empowerment to whom the collections ‘belong’ to (Stam 1993). The development of an outward focus of museology was in response to dissatisfaction with the traditional emphasis on non-inclusive practice and instead emphasised critical thought on the social purpose of museums to inform collections activities (Stam 1993, p. 269). Influenced by this new

RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

museum purpose, the preventive conservation activities have emphasised accessibility and transparency of the discipline to the public.

Overview of preventive conservation Defined by Michalski (Michalski 1994; Costain 1994) and further added to by Waller (1994), the ten agents of deterioration that preventative conservation attempts to manage are listed below. Table 1: The ten agents of deterioration with specific examples for illustrative purposes (adapted from Waller 1994). Deterioration agent Physical forces

Fire Water

Criminals 2

Pests Contaminants

Light and UV radiation Incorrect temperature

Incorrect relative humidity

Category of risk 1 Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 — Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 — Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 2

Type 3 Custodial neglect

Type 1 Type 2 Type 3

Examples Earthquake, building structure collapse, etc. Dropping specimens, damage while placing specimens, etc. Distortion from poor support, constant vibration, etc. Fire Flood Roof leaks, plumbing leaks, etc. Rising damp Major theft Isolated instances of theft or vandalism Embezzlement by staff or frequent users of the collection Pest infestation Fallout from nearby industrial or transport accident, etc. Use of a corrosive cleaner, dust during construction, etc. Gases and vapours from storage hardware, acidity in fluids, etc. Fading of colours, structural damage, etc. Thawing of a frozen tissue collection Thermal shock to susceptible specimens, etc. Higher than ideal. High enough to cause an outbreak of mould or mildew, rapid change in concentration of fluids causing damage from osmotic pressure, etc. Splitting shells or teeth, transitions in minerals, deterioration of fluid preserves, etc. Collection abandonment Loss of specimens, specimen data, etc. Ongoing failure to ensure ownership, easy access, etc.

Risk categories identified by Waller (1994) according to frequency and severity are: Type 1 defined as rare and catastrophic; Type 2 are sporadic and intermediate in severity; and, Type 3 are considered constant and gradual. 2 Michalski (1994) termed this agent of deterioration as ‘thieves, vandals and displacers’.

It is understood that the ten risks and their effect on objects, the museum building or the objects’ environment can pose potential deterioration of the collection as a whole. Activities that define preventive conservation endeavour to prevent or mitigate the impact of these threats. As summarised by Capel (2000, p. 152), preventive conservation includes:

RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

—

Managing object risk: assessing and limiting the risks posed to objects by display, movement, storage, and loans. Assessments of the building, object condition and museum operations inform the development of disaster response, loans, exhibition and handling policies.

—

Environmental control: to ensure a secure and benign environment by providing stable storage conditions and materials; minimising interaction with the surrounding environment; and, controlling temperature, radiation (light) and pollutants in the museum environment within acceptable levels.

—

Legal protection: criminalisation of theft and vandalism of cultural material, whether buried or in collections.

Considered a fundamental component of a balanced program involving all individuals involved in collections care, preventive conservation is combined with ‘preventive care, the management of change and preventive treatment – treatment intended to prevent future change’ (Bradley, in Szczepanowska 2013, p.15). Regard of its importance has progressively increased and preventive conservation has developed integrated holistic, evidence-based, sustainable and risk management approaches that characterise preventive conservation practice today.

Holistic practice Holism is the concept that systems comprise of intimately interconnected processes that can only be explicable by reference to the whole entity – ‘the whole is more than the sum of its parts’. The reconceptualization of the museum’s mission as espoused by ‘The New Museology’ has ultimately infiltrated conservation practice and facilitated the growth of preventive approaches that emphasised a complementary holistic outlook. Keene (2002) suggests the development of holistic thinking in museum management is rooted in the development of systems theory in the later part of the twentieth-century and the resulting conceptualisation of the museum as a system (Keene 2002, pp. 79-96). Preventive conservation activities emphasise analysis of the components of the collection system (object/s, building and environment) and an understanding of their inherent interdependency: ‘Preventive conservation is focussed upon minimising the impact of various processes of degradation and as such it is concerned with the interactions between different combinations of materials and environments…. The holistic approach to conservation requires that the conservator always considers the object or group of objects within the broadest possible context, and for preventive conservation this means the total physical environment. However, the holistic approach to restoration requires that the restorer considers the individual object within the totality of its intellectual context, and this cannot be achieved without a deep understanding of the cultural milieu in which it was created’ (Cooper 1994, p. 338).

RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

Current preventive conservation practice further expands the frame of analysis to not only the physical environment, but also to social, political and economic spheres, in line with ‘The New Museology’. The broadening of holistic thinking has compelled conservators to not only think of the preservation issues in the museum environment, but also to advocate for the contribution of preventive conservation in wider conversations of sustainability (Henry 2007; Cassar 2009), public accessibility (Narkiss & Tomlin 2008) and the societal value and significance of collections (Clavir 1994).

Consideration of the broader implications and motivations of preventive conservation activities is what characterises current practice, which pragmatically engages interdisciplinarity as a core activity. The broad scope of preventive conservation compels the involvement of all museum staff to engage with the protection of cultural material (Szczepanowska 2013, p. 14). The boundaries of traditional museum department designations have been made more fluid to facilitate increased information exchange (Stam 1993). Conservators are increasingly conducting tasks outside of their traditional professional boundaries to service the collective preservation goal (Keene 2002, pp. 28-9). Beyond the museum environment, preventive conservation obliges engagement outside of the discipline such as engineers, architects, scientists, archaeologists, anthropologists and stakeholders (e.g. First Peoples, visitors, custodians) to glean knowledge and methodologies that could inform preventive conservation processes and ethics (Cassar 2009). The holistic approach of preventive conservation compels the practitioner to adopt flexible collaborative methodologies that integrate interdisciplinarity.

Evidence-based practice The term ‘evidence-based’ was first coined in relation to medicine and the methodology has widely spread to other fields. Evidence-based practice advocates a balanced integration of legitimate external research, practitioner expertise and stakeholder preferences and values (Sackett et al. 1996). Contemporary preventive conservation practice similarly employs such a dynamic approach. Keene (2002) advocates a ‘soft’ system analytical methodology in museum management whereby systematic processes are derived and outcomes assessed by real world applications in a continual feedback loop. Similarly, adoption of a systems approach could be seen as a reaction to the inadequacies of the reductionist scientific enquiry, prevalent in traditional conservation practice, to elucidate the complex field of relations that preventive conservation contends with (Keene 2002, p. 80). Preventive conservation remains scientifically based yet it is tempered by empirical knowledge of the conservation professional and the values of the society the collection serves, which aligns with the increased agency encouraged by ‘The New Museology’: RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

‘Conservation today is a scientifically informed discipline guided by general principles as well as by a growing body of written information. This is not to suggest that conservation is a science. Scientific investigation and research have greatly contributed to a better understanding of the processes of deterioration and have provided safer methods of testing and treatment; however, only the sensitivity, knowledge, integrity, and skill of an individual[s] can make possible a synthesis of science and art within the framework of ethical structures that bound the practice of conservation’ (Bachmann (ed.) 1992, p. 2). The integration of scientific research and empirical experience assessed via practical application and critical reflection is what typifies preventive conservation as an evidence-based discipline.

The emergence of evidence-based methodologies in preventive conservation is most apparent in the increased integration of practical experience to inform and re-examine accepted scientifically derived practices. There has been an increased research into the effectiveness of local and historical conservation practices to explore their potential effectiveness (UNESCO 1981; Staniforth 2010, pp. 393-4; Koller 1994). Inspired by conservators’ observation of reasonable object stability in environments with less than ‘optimum’ conditions, dogmatic environmental parameters described by Thomson (1978) have been reassessed and new appropriate approaches, as opposed to ideal, have been discussed (Ashley-Smith, Umney & Ford 1994). Scientific research and experiential data showed that some types of organic materials were more physically resilient in a wider range of relative humidity than had been previously assumed, culminating in the subsequent broadening of standards in the 1990s with the adoption of the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASRAE) guidelines and the current debate on further relaxation of parameters (Atkinson 2014; Bickersteth 2014). Furthermore, the inadequacy in tropical climates of established guidelines, developed in temperate climates, have informed the promotion of passive control measures that are more applicable the local environment (Vinod et al. 2000). This research is part of a general trend in preventive conservation to examine traditional architecture to develop passive methods of environmental control through materials and planning of the built environment (Henry 2007). Evident in these recent developments, is the necessity of evidence-based practice to inform critical analysis and progression of preventive conservation practice. Evidence-based approaches require open-minded thinking incorporating practical application and experience to inform scientific analysis, and without it, preventive conservation would fail to be the responsive practice it is today.

Sustainable practice In general terms, sustainability is the endurance of systems and processes, and contemporary preventive conservation endeavours to ensure longevity of the complex collections system. Reflecting the holistic thinking RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

prevalent in preventive conservation practice, not only environmental sustainability a high concern, but also solutions are also assessed according to economic sustainability and continued societal relevance of collections. Cassar describes this comprehensive concept of sustainability: ‘[T]he Triple Bottom Line approach, which enables improved conservation and environmental performance to be evaluated from three points of view — conservation and social benefits and financial costs — so one activity generates several objectives with sustainable outcomes…. A sustainability approach helps achieve a deeper understanding of the material/cultural interface, recognizing not only that heritage originates from resources that, once removed from their natural environment, may be considered to be “dead” or nonrenewable but also that human skills and creativity imbue artifacts fashioned from nature with a cultural “life” embodied in attributions of significance, meaning, and value. These cultural/social attributions transform materials into artifacts that are reinterpreted and renewed by each passing generation, thus maintaining the all-important relevance of cultural heritage to contemporary society’ (Cassar 2009, p. 9). This broader remit ensures a balanced and integrated approach that recognises the complex multi-faceted relationship that society has with cultural collections to ensure the pragmatic survival and social significance of collections endures into the future.

Sustainable preventive practice has manifested in various ways to contend with the environmental, economic and social responsibilities it faces. Climate change poses a pressing threat on collections as unprecedented temperature, atmospheric moisture and weather can exacerbate deterioration risk factors and place stress on the building that must perform beyond its intended structural design (Henry 2007). Museums are reducing their carbon footprint to reduce their energy consumption, reduction of waste from conservation treatments and employ more passive building design initiatives (Staniforth 2010; Cassar 2009). International conservation bodies are publically debating the relaxation of environmental control parameters to reduce reliance on high energy consuming air conditioning systems. Wider temperature and relative humidity ranges are being established, allowing individual institutions to develop feasible environmental control set-points based on location specific seasonal drift (Bickersteth 2014; Velios 2014). Economically justifying preventive conservation can be difficult, particularly as preventive activities contend with potential risks and progressive improvement rather than a clear discernable enhancement: ‘Unfortunately, most managers without a specialist background, and politicians, prefer results from spending money which are highly visible and can be ‘sold’ to the ordinary citizen. A well-chosen pair of ‘before’ and ‘after’ photographs tells a story and can readily be used to justify expenditure, while a ‘non-event’ such as the avoidance of accelerated degradation has to date been much more difficult to sell’ (Cooper 1994, p. 335).

RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

To ensure viability of the discipline, preventive conservation attempts to maintain economic and practical feasibility to ensure the widespread and willing uptake of preventive methods, particularly for collections in developing nations. Collections are increasingly pressured to generate revenue through cultural tourism to ensure their economic survival (Keene 2002, pp. 15-6). In line with ‘The New Museology’ mandate, engagement and education of the public of preventive conservation through tourism is one way of generating financial benefits, but can also imbue in the community a collective responsibility for the protection of collections and the communicate the importance and professionalism of the discipline (Perier-D'Ieteren 1998). Further public involvement in conservation through training and volunteering can also increase visitor numbers and increase the societal value of collections in the public consciousness (Staniforth 2010, p. 394). Sustainable preventive practice implores all activities to be environmentally, economically and socially accountable which requires transparency and accessibility of the profession to all stakeholders: the community, management and within the conservation discipline itself.

Risk management practices Risk management entails the identification, assessment and priorisation of potential risk and was developed from financial management practices and has infiltrated a multitude of disciplines. The prediction of risk is analogous to preventive conservation that focuses on the avoidance of possible undesirable change and subsequently, risk management strategies have recently been advocated to assist collections management in prioritising tasks. The development of risk management strategies has undergone subtle changes in focus over the years. Risk management approach described by Keene (2002) was a ‘bottom-up’ methodology that relied on the qualitative data gathered from collection surveys to identify likely future risks to prioritise task. Ashley-Smith (1997, in Taylor 2005), Michalski (1994) and Waller (2002) provide theoretical models to identify and predict risk by examining the collections environment to determine conservation activities in a ‘top-down’ approach. Waller (1999, in Taylor 2005) devised a risk equation that could numerically rate the potential risk, quantifying the uncertainty allowing the consideration of preventive measures more receptive to museum administrators. Waller and Michalski (2005) describe this shift in preventive conservation from a process control model, possibly as earlier defined as ‘soft’ systems methodology by Keene (2002), but it to incorporate a predictive risk model. Criticism of the process control model included its reliance on feedback on the effectiveness of the activity and assessment reliant on observable effect. These methodologies become more difficult to apply when the relationship between environmental variable and deterioration effect are not linear and more complex, resulting in resorting to ritual and ‘best practice’ to guide decision making in a field of uncertainty (Waller & Michalski 2005). Recently, Taylor (2005) has advocated the integration of both ‘bottom-up’ and ‘top-down’ thinking that RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

combines the qualitative data of the collection survey with the predictive risk analysis, inspiring the modification of Waller’s risk score equation by English Heritage to include qualitative data such as collection significance (Xavier-Rowe & Fry 2011). Though relatively new to conservation, risk management strategies have emerged as important tools to prioritise conservation workflow in the face of uncertainty.

Risk management systems have been widely adopted in institutions, with early uptake by museums in North America and Europe where the key early advocates of risk analysis were based. Locally, Museum Victoria (MV) has adopted in 2011 the Cultural Property Risk Analysis Model (CPRAM) developed by Robert Waller (McCubbin et al. 2014). The CPRAM model applied to MV was modified to suit the specific complexities of their collection, however, it is evident that collections management is readily embracing risk analysis. Risk management has become so ubiquitous in conservation that the International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works (IIC) and International Council of Museums (ICOM) have enshrined in their latest environmental guidelines that ‘Risk management should be embedded in museum management processes’ (Velios 2014). Regardless of which risk assessment model is implemented, it is apparent that risk assessments allow preventive conservation practitioners to systematically evaluate complex and interdependent deterioration risks and the collections environment. ‘Risk assessment and prioritising protective actions is one of the tasks of collections evaluation…. A product of collection assessment is a detailed and comprehensive report which serves as a springboard for further action’ (Szczepanowska 2013, p. 55). Risk management approaches provide methods for effective strategic proactive planning in a complex unstructured system, raising the professionalism in the eyes of decision makers and further legitimising the practice.

Transparency and access Museums have developed a new relationship with the public as the concepts of ‘The New Museology’ emphasised the viewer experience and thus assumed an educative role that highlighted transparency and access (Stam 1993), and has ultimately informed the methodologies of preventive conservation. Contemporary preventive conservation is characterised by holistic, evidence-based, sustainable and risk management approaches which have developed from the attempt to make conservation practice more accessible. Holistic methods require interdisciplinarity, opening up the preservation dialogue with other disciplines. Evidence-based thinking necessitates a reflective and responsive practice, requiring candid critique of the discipline and to be open to empirically proven or traditional solutions. Sustainable practice requires honest accountability of the environmental, social and economic responsibilities conservation faces. Whilst risk analysis facilitates systematic planning in an seeminly unstructured collections system, raising the impression of professionalism and RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

legitimacy within management and the public and empowering the discipline to proactively advocate to the community the importance of caring for collections. Making the discipline more transparent and accessible has made all these gains possible. No longer is conservation inaccessible, attainable only by experts on a ‘…’truthenforcement’ operation… to maintain or reveal an object’s true nature or integrity’ (Muñoz-Vinas 2005, p. 65), but instead preventive conservation has facilitated more fluid authority in all engaged individuals to enact the collective preservation mission.

Digital and virtual potentials As ‘The New Museology’ continues into the twenty-first century, the integration of digital technologies in preventive conservation practice can allow for increased transparency and access of collections to professionals and the public. On an object level, three dimensional (3D) visualisation techniques such as photogrammetry and laser scanning can produce 3D virtual models that can assist conservators in studying objects as virtual replicas can permit scaling of the original object without physical handling that could contribute to further deterioration (Szczepanowska 2013, p. 62). On a wider scale, these 3D techniques also permit commercial bodies and the public to actively contribute to the preservation of cultural material. For example, Project Mosul involves the partnership between researchers, software companies and the public, and supported by the European Union, to use crowd-sourced imagery to digitally reconstruct cultural objects through photogrammetry techniques in response to the destruction of cultural heritage by the Islamic States (IS) at the Mosul Museum, Iraq in 2015 (Vincent 2015). The images are processed for suitable photogrammetry by volunteers through a web-based platform (projectmosul.org) with the aim to produce an online museum accessible to the public. In response to recent IS destruction of cultural sites in Syria, imagery obtained from drone photography is being utilised to produce 3D models, again using the joint efforts of researchers, industry and government, to facilitate remote monitoring in the hostile region and aid future reconstruction efforts (Kidd 2015; Drones Imaging 2015; McCue 2015).

Reconstructions of cultural sites using augmented reality (AR) can allow a virtual experience of cultural sites vulnerable to environmental stresses of visitation, assisting preventive measures to eliminate the deterioration risks. For instance, high-resolution digitisation of Cave 220 of the Mogao Grottoes at Dunhuang, China has been used to a produce a panoramic immersive environment, entitled Pure Land. The wall murals and statues in Dunhuang are in a high risk of deterioration due to visitation and are prized as prime examples of Chinese Buddhist art along the Silk Road particularly during the Tang Dynasty (618-906 CE) (Kenderdine 2013; Maekawa 1994). The digitisation data was subsequently used to produce the Pure Land: Augmented Reality Edition (Pure RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

Land AR) exhibit, whereby visitors were able to physically explore a virtual rendition of the cave using tablet screens in ‘…a kinaesthetic revealing of the painted architectonic space’ (Kenderdine 2013, p. 200). The Pure Land AR immersive environment facilitated public engagement with cultural material in real time, ‘…demonstrating how the immersion environment can be used to let visitors actively explore and understand complicated cultural objects’ (Kennicott, in Kenderdine 2013, p. 214) and providing new interpretive tools for interacting with collections. It has also been proposed that AR can also assist condition monitoring and surveying as real-time comparison of the physical environment and virtual model could facilitate more accurate assessments, which have previously been prone to interpretive subjectivity (Szczepanowska 2013, p. 61).

From these brief examples, it is clear the immediacy and responsiveness of digital and virtual technologies can protect cultural objects by providing detailed and accurate condition monitoring and examination to strategise and assess preventive conservation measures. In addition, providing improved access to other disciplines and increased connection to the public shares the responsibility of preserving cultural material, fulfilling the broader societal obligation of preventive conservation.

Conclusion Preventive conservation can aid the long-term preservation of cultural material on both the micro and macro scale. At the object level, preventive conservation aims to reduce the deteriorating effects of the environment on the collection and the building. On the broader scale, preventive conservation’s wider economically, environmentally and socially sustainable responsibilities allow practitioners to advocate for the continued significance of collections to the public. Preservation of cultural material requires an engaged populace to believe in the importance of preserving collections and their value for future generations. This new educative and socially responsive focus as advocated by proponents of ‘The New Museology’ in the 1990s has inspired a contemporary preventive conservation practice that emphasises transparency and access, which has influenced the manifestation of the discipline’s holistic, evidence-based, sustainable and risk management methodologies. Increased accessibility and public engagement has been expanded in contemporary practice with the development of immersive 3D digital and virtual technologies that facilitates improved responsiveness and accuracy that aids conservators in accessing preventive measures, but also communicate to the public the importance of their cultural artefacts. By enabling transparency and accessibility of the profession, preventive conservation has promoted the ongoing sustainability of the practice and thus ensured the continued preservation of cultural material into the future.

RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

References Ashley-Smith, J, Umney, N & Ford, D 1994, 'Let's be honest-realistic environmental parameters for loaned objects', Preventive conservation: practice, theory and research. Preprints of the contributins to the Ottawa Congress, 12-16 September 1994, IIC, London. Atkinson, JK 2014, 'Environmental conditions for the safegaurding of collections: A background to the current debate on the control of relative humidity and temperature', Studies in Conservation, vol 59, no. 4, pp. 205212. Bachmann, K (ed.) 1992, Conservation Concerns: A Guide for Collectors and Curators, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington. Bickersteth, J 2014, 'AICCM Environmental Guidelines.finally an interim position', AICCM National Newsletter, March 2014. Bickersteth, J 2014, 'Environmental conditions for safeguarding collections: What should our set points be?', Studies in Conservation, vol 59, no. 4, pp. 218-224. Bradley, S 2002, 'Preventive Conservation: The research legacy', in JH Townsend, K Eremin, A Adriaens (eds.), Conservation Science 2002, Archetype, London. Caple, C 2000, Conservation Skills: Judgement, method and decision making, Routledge, London / New York. Cassar, M 2009, 'Sustainable Heritage: Challenges and Strategies for the Twenty-First Century', APT Bulletin: Journal of Preservation Technology, vol 40, no. 1, pp. 3-11. Clavir, M 1994, 'Preserving conceptual integrity: Ethics and theory in preventive conservation', Preventive conservation: practice, theory and research. Preprints of the contributions to the Ottawa Congress, 12-16 September 1994, IIC, London. Clavir, M 2002, Preserving What is Valued, UBC Press, Vancouver. Cooper, JW 1994, 'Editorial: Preventive conservation and the holistic approach to restoration', Museum Management and Curatorship, vol 13, no. 4, pp. 335-9. Costain, C 1994, Framework for Preservation of Museum Collections, viewed 16 September 2015, <www.cciicc.gc.ca/discovercc-decouriricc/preventive/15-eng.aspx>. de Guichen, G 1999, 'Preventive Conservation: A Mere Fad or Far-Reaching Change?', Museum International, vol 51, no. 1, pp. 4-6. Drones Imaging 2015, Cultural heritage preservation of Palmyra & 3D modeling - Syria, viewed 21 September 2015, <http://diydrones.com/forum/topics/cultural-heritage-preservation-of-palmyra-3d-modeling-syria>. Erhardt, D & Mecklenberg, M 1994, 'Relative humidity re-examined', Studies in Conservation, vol 39, no. Supplement 2, pp. 32-8. RESEARCH PAPER â&#x20AC;&#x201C; TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

Fangi, G, Piermattei, L & Wahbeh, W 2013, 'Spherical Photogrammetry as Rescue Documentation for The Reconstruction of some UNESCO Sites in Syria', International Journal of Heritage in the Digital Era, vol 2, no. 3, pp. 336-341. Henry, CM 2007, 'From the Outside In: Preventive Conservation, Sustainability, And Environmental Management', Conservation Perspectives: the GCI Newsletter, Spring 2007. Ioannides, M, Fritsch, D, Leissner, J, Davies, R, Remondino, F, Caffo, R (eds.) 2012, Progress in Cultural Heritage Preservation 4th International Conference, EuroMed 2012 Limassol, Cyprus, October 29 –November 3, 2012 Proceedings, Springer, Heidelberg. Keene, S 1991, 'Audits of Care: a framework for collections condition surveys', Storage. Preprints for UKIC conference, Restoration 1991, United Kingdom Institute for conservation of Historic and Artistic Works of Art, London. Keene, S 2002, Managing Conservation in Museums, 2nd edn, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford. Kenderdine, S 2013, '"Pure Land": Inhabiting the Mogao Caves at Dunhuang', Curator: The Museum Journal, vol 56, no. 2, pp. 199–218. Kidd, J 2015, Museums are using virtual reality to preserve the past – before it’s too late, viewed 24 September 2015, <http://theconversation.com/museums-are-using-virtual-reality-to-preserve-the-past-before-its-too-late44600>. Koller, M 1994, 'Learning from the history of preventive conservation', Preventive conservation: practice, theory and research. Preprints of the contributions to the Ottawa Congress, 12-16 September 1994, International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works, London. Maekawa, S 1994, 'Preventive strategies for reducing the impact of visitors on the microenvironment of caves at the Mogao Grottoes', Preventive conservation: practice, theory and research. Preprints of the contributions to the Ottawa Congress, 12-16 September 1994, IIC, London. McCubbin, M, Cannon, A, Carter, C, Henry, D, Privett, H, Ladas, N, Leggett, D, Leveson, R, Raberts, M, Stedman, L & Waller, R 2014, 'Improving risk assessment methods in a complex setting: Museum Victoria's collection risk assessment', ICOM-CC 17th Triennial Conference Preprints, Melbourne, 15-19 September 2014, International Council of Museums, Paris. McCue, TJ 2015, Saving Syria: 3D Cultural And Natural Preservation Around The World, viewed 2015 September 2015, <http://www.forbes.com/sites/tjmccue/2015/03/06/saving-syria-3d-cultural-and-natural-preservationaround-the-world/>. Michalski, S 1994, 'A Systematic Approach to Preservation: Description and integration with other museum activities', Preventive conservation: practice, theory and research. Preprints of the contributions to the Ottawa

RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

Congress, 12-16 September 1994, International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works, London. Muñoz-Vinas, S 2005, Contemporary Theory of Conservation, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. Muñoz-Vinas, S 2009, 'Minimal intervention revisited', in A Richmond, A Bracker (eds.), Conservation: principles, dilemmas and uncomfortable truths, V & A, London. Narkiss, I & Tomlin, H 2008, 'Close Encounters: Enabling Access to Museum Collections', Conservation and Access: Contributions to the London Congress 15-19 September 2008, International Institute for Conservation of Historical and Artistic Works, London. Perier-D'Ieteren, C 1998, 'Tourism and conservation: striking a balance', Museum International, vol 50, no. 4, pp. 5-14. Sackett, DL, Rosenberg, WMC, Gray, JAM, Haynes, RB & Richardson, WS 1996, 'Evidence Based Medicine: What it is and What is isn't: It's about integrating individual clinical expertise and the best external evidence', British Medical Journal, vol 312, no. 7023, pp. 71-2. Stam, DC 1993, 'The informed muse: The implications of ‘the new museology', Museum Management and Curatoriship, vol 12, no. 3, pp. 267-283. Staniforth, S 2010, 'Slow Conservation', Studies in Conservation, vol 55, no. 2. Staniforth, S (ed.) 2013, Historical Perspectives on Preventive Conservation, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles. Szczepanowska, HM 2013, Conservation of Cultural Heritage: Key Principles and Approaches, Routledge, London, viewed 16 August 2015, ebook. Taylor, J 2005, 'An Integrated Approach to Risk Assessment and Condition Surveys', Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, vol 44, no. 2, pp. 127-141. Thomson, G 1986, The Museum Environment, 2nd edn, Butterworths, London. UNESCO 1981, 'Appropriate Technologies' in the Conservation of Cultural Property, The Unesco Press, Paris. Velios , A 2014, IIC announces declaration on Environmental Guidelines, viewed 20 September 2015, <https://www.iiconservation.org/node/5168>. Vincent, M 2015, Home - Project Mosul, viewed 20 September 2015, <www.projectmosul.org>. Vinod, D, Pearson, C, Cole, I, Ganther, W & King, S 2000, 'Behaviour of museum buildings in tropical climates', Studies in Conservation, vol 45, no. Suppliement 1, pp. 45-50. Waller, R 1994, 'Conservation risk assessment: a strategy for managing resources for preventive conservation', Studies in Conservation, vol 39, no. Supplement 2, pp. 12-16. Waller, R 2002, 'A risk model for collection preservation', 13th Triennial Meeting Rio de Janeiro Preprints , ICOMCC, Paris. RESEARCH PAPER – TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015

Waller, R & Michalski, S 2005, 'A paradigm shift for preventive conservation, and a software tool to faciltiiate the transition', ICOM-CC 14th Triennial Meeting: Preprints The Hague, 12-16 September 2005, International Council Of Museums, Paris. Xavier-Rowe, A & Fry, C 2011, 'Heritage collections at risk - English Heritage collections risk and condition audit', ICOM 16th Triennial Conference Preprints, Lisbon, Portugal, 19-23 September 2011, International Council of Museums, Paris.

RESEARCH PAPER â&#x20AC;&#x201C; TECHNICAL REPORT CUMC 90029 PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION

Student Details | Robyn Ho (672025) Date | 02.10.2015