Mansuri, L; Udeaja, C; Trillo, C; Kwasi, G; Patel, D; Jha, K; Makore, C B and Gupta, S (2019) Scientometric analysis and mapping of digital technologies used in cultural heritage field. In: Gorse, C and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 35th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2019, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
The benefits of digital technologies especially the use of Building Information Modelling (BIM) for the architectural, engineering, construction and operation (AECO) industry are well known, but how well it can be applied in the heritage sector is still open to question, partly because of the diversity of projects that involve historic buildings and sites, such as conservation and refurbishment, adaptive reuse, preventative maintenance, heritage management, interpretation, documentation and research. In the AECO field, BIM and digital technologies have been applied widely for a number of years at an international level, with scores of relevant publications and online content, BIM and digital technologies for heritage assets are relative new fields of academic research and appears less popular in terms of adoption by heritage professionals. This research will systematically analysis the recent development of BIM in the area of cultural heritage by using both quantitative and qualitative review processes. The scientometric analysis and mapping technique in this research will be used to visualize global trends and patterns of research and its findings showing the top influential authors, journals, articles, countries, institutions and keywords in the field of BIM heritage. The analysis from an initial pilot study shows that the major BIM and digital technologies heritage research contributions are mainly from Italy, China, Spain, Canada and United Kingdom, etc. For this research, analysis of literature will mainly focus on subject categories of remote sensing, image science, photographic technology, physical geography, as-built modelling, 3D reconstruction, maintenance and restoration, conservation, preservation and management, documentation, survey work, simulation and virtual technology. It is anticipated that the analysis will generated six clusters of key words and categories. In summary, this review will provide an overview and understanding of research domains, trends and pattern of worldwide research in BIM and digital technologies for cultural heritage.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | digital technologies, building information modelling, cultural heritage field, as-built, scientometric analysis and mapping. |
| Index terms: | remote sensing, Spain, historic building, restoration, reconstruction, United Kingdom, modelling, Canada, documentation, building information modelling, publication, science, journal, China, conservation, digital technology, heritage management, Italy, survey, mapping |
| Subjects: | information systems, professional development, data collection methods, spatial and geospatial analysis, Geography, environmental policy, heritage and conservation, building construction, specialized education, analytical methods, construction type, computing systems, renovation and retrofit, research dissemination and communication, research products and data |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Geographical Context, Information Management, Education, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Construction Technology, Research Practice, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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