Abstract
Purpose
This article explores the role of preventive conservation in mitigating the risk of deterioration of archaeological sites. It clarifies the distinction between preventive and curative conservation. It demonstrates that using an integrated preventive conservation framework combined with a risk management cycle could enhance the protection of archaeological sites.
Design/methodology/approach
The study employs a comparative framework analysis that integrates five methodologies from ICCROM and the Canadian Conservation Institute (CCI), including the ABC Method, Ten Agents of Deterioration, Risk Treatment Framework, Risk Matrix and Prioritization and First Aid to Cultural Heritage protocols. These are examined across three themes and twelve operational dimensions. Two case studies from Jordan, Umm Qais and Petra, were examined to explore the framework and its potential uses. Additionally, documented patterns of deterioration and management interventions offer empirical evidence for real-world application.
Findings
Preventive measures are most effective when assessment protocols are systematically linked to treatment selection and emergency preparedness within an iterative cycle. Three critical gaps emerge: inadequate stakeholder engagement, limited capacity for climate change adaptation and underdeveloped integration between pre-event assessment and emergency response. The authors propose the Post Preventive Conservation Assessment (PPCA) as an original conceptual contribution that provides a formal decision point for evaluating preventive effectiveness and governing the transition to curative action.
Originality/value
This article presents the first systematic comparative analysis of five ICCROM-CCI frameworks for archaeological site management, introduces the PPCA as an original component of an evaluation framework and presents a new integrated preventive conservation framework.