Francis, T J; Geens, A J and Littlewood, J (2010) Is facilities management fundamental to the conservation of heritage buildings and their contents? In: Egbu, C (ed.) Proceedings of 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2010, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
Many irredeemable cultural objects and artefacts are housed and exhibited within historic buildings and estates of outstanding cultural significance. Frequently, these properties were conceived to serve a very different use than act as permanent depositories for the objects, functions and collections, they now house. Sustained performance of fabric, fixtures/fittings and services is essential, given the perceived demands of: climate-change, perils, increasing user expectations e.g. accessibility, environmental quality and legislative demand. As a consequence the cultural significance of both building and collection are tested. The aim is to establish whether a Facilities Management approach offers a solution to mitigating such risks. This research studied 50 'heritage' buildings and utilized a Condition Survey pro-forma approach, to record and evaluate the management and maintenance of the building and contents. Conflicts of: conservation philosophy, accessibility, environmental monitoring, visual display, curator-ship and guardianship; are tested against established methods of building care. Whilst most heritage sites have been modified, updated and repaired, this has been undertaken in a widely, conflicting manner, displaying varying standards of care and exposing the contents to risk. It is concluded that a pro-active 'Facilities Management' approach has scope for effectively sustaining cultural objects, artefacts and iconic buildings, for the benefit of future generations.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building care; climate change; cultural significance; facilities management; sustainability |
| Index terms: | accessibility, cultural significance, survey, philosophy, historic building, environmental quality, artefact, environmental monitoring, heritage building, conservation, climate change, facilities management |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, construction type, climate science, environmental impact, environmental policy, inclusive design, management, sustainability assessment, cross-cultural studies, sociology, philosophical studies |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Sustainability, Research Practice, Business Strategy, International Construction, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here