M. Lin
info
Please Note
<p>This page displays the records of the person named above and is not linked to a unique person identifier. This record may need to be merged to a profile.</p>
5 records found
1
Journal article
(2026)
-
Matthias Sahli, Jan Bieser, Jonathan Chenoweth, Jeff Love, Mi Lin, Marco Martens, Maureen Pennock, Uta Pottgiesser
Digitalization has transformed the book market with significant environmental consequences. Various life cycle assessments (LCAs) compare the per-unit greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts of reading paper books and e-books. However, they do not capture the net GHG effects of digitalization, which also depend on changes in production and consumption volumes in both formats. This article assesses whether digitalization has increased or decreased the GHG footprint of the book market by combining evidence from LCAs with economic insights on how digitalization affects book supply and demand. Our results show that e-books can lower emissions for heavy readers, while paper books may be more climate-friendly when they are widely shared. While e-books offer advantages such as accessibility and portability that support substitution, many digitalization-driven supply and demand effects expand the overall book market by improving discoverability, lowering costs and prices, and accelerating publication and distribution. Our quantitative analysis indicates that e-books reduce emissions only if they substantially displace print, yet evidence suggests substitution rates are low and emissions may therefore increase. This shows that treating e-books as simple substitutes for paper books is overly simplistic, and that integrated environmental and economic perspectives are needed to assess their net sustainability impact.
...
Digitalization has transformed the book market with significant environmental consequences. Various life cycle assessments (LCAs) compare the per-unit greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts of reading paper books and e-books. However, they do not capture the net GHG effects of digitalization, which also depend on changes in production and consumption volumes in both formats. This article assesses whether digitalization has increased or decreased the GHG footprint of the book market by combining evidence from LCAs with economic insights on how digitalization affects book supply and demand. Our results show that e-books can lower emissions for heavy readers, while paper books may be more climate-friendly when they are widely shared. While e-books offer advantages such as accessibility and portability that support substitution, many digitalization-driven supply and demand effects expand the overall book market by improving discoverability, lowering costs and prices, and accelerating publication and distribution. Our quantitative analysis indicates that e-books reduce emissions only if they substantially displace print, yet evidence suggests substitution rates are low and emissions may therefore increase. This shows that treating e-books as simple substitutes for paper books is overly simplistic, and that integrated environmental and economic perspectives are needed to assess their net sustainability impact.
Reconceptualizing Interventions of Built Heritage
A Comparison between Doctrines and Practices
This research aims to reveal and explore the commonalities and differences in the definition of interventions on built heritage between theory and practice, using new aspects—cultural values and attributes of cultural significance—to support the definition process. A comparative approach is employed to discuss how different interventions are defined in international doctrines and applied in a local project, including stakeholders’ perspectives.
International organizations have adopted doctrinal documents that promote best practices in heritage management. However, these doctrines are difficult to compare and apply due to the lack of alignment in definitions between them and the limited research on how cultural values and attributes of cultural significance influence the definition of interventions.
In filling these gaps, the main research question was asked: What are the trends of interventions and their definitions under the influence of cultural significance, as scoped by international doctrines between theory and practice? The research utilized theoretical frameworks on cultural values and attributes and analyzed documents and interview transcripts from the National Gallery Singapore.
The main findings indicate the diversity in defining interventions at the international level. Values play a dynamic role in shaping intervention definitions, whereas attributes influence them in a hierarchical pattern. At the local level, stakeholders' perspectives on definitions are shaped by the local context and a mindset of "practicality." This research concludes that Singapore follows international trends while locally customizing and evolving its definitions. This research proposes a possible novel approach to defining interventions in built heritage that bridges theory and practice.
...
International organizations have adopted doctrinal documents that promote best practices in heritage management. However, these doctrines are difficult to compare and apply due to the lack of alignment in definitions between them and the limited research on how cultural values and attributes of cultural significance influence the definition of interventions.
In filling these gaps, the main research question was asked: What are the trends of interventions and their definitions under the influence of cultural significance, as scoped by international doctrines between theory and practice? The research utilized theoretical frameworks on cultural values and attributes and analyzed documents and interview transcripts from the National Gallery Singapore.
The main findings indicate the diversity in defining interventions at the international level. Values play a dynamic role in shaping intervention definitions, whereas attributes influence them in a hierarchical pattern. At the local level, stakeholders' perspectives on definitions are shaped by the local context and a mindset of "practicality." This research concludes that Singapore follows international trends while locally customizing and evolving its definitions. This research proposes a possible novel approach to defining interventions in built heritage that bridges theory and practice.
...
This research aims to reveal and explore the commonalities and differences in the definition of interventions on built heritage between theory and practice, using new aspects—cultural values and attributes of cultural significance—to support the definition process. A comparative approach is employed to discuss how different interventions are defined in international doctrines and applied in a local project, including stakeholders’ perspectives.
International organizations have adopted doctrinal documents that promote best practices in heritage management. However, these doctrines are difficult to compare and apply due to the lack of alignment in definitions between them and the limited research on how cultural values and attributes of cultural significance influence the definition of interventions.
In filling these gaps, the main research question was asked: What are the trends of interventions and their definitions under the influence of cultural significance, as scoped by international doctrines between theory and practice? The research utilized theoretical frameworks on cultural values and attributes and analyzed documents and interview transcripts from the National Gallery Singapore.
The main findings indicate the diversity in defining interventions at the international level. Values play a dynamic role in shaping intervention definitions, whereas attributes influence them in a hierarchical pattern. At the local level, stakeholders' perspectives on definitions are shaped by the local context and a mindset of "practicality." This research concludes that Singapore follows international trends while locally customizing and evolving its definitions. This research proposes a possible novel approach to defining interventions in built heritage that bridges theory and practice.
International organizations have adopted doctrinal documents that promote best practices in heritage management. However, these doctrines are difficult to compare and apply due to the lack of alignment in definitions between them and the limited research on how cultural values and attributes of cultural significance influence the definition of interventions.
In filling these gaps, the main research question was asked: What are the trends of interventions and their definitions under the influence of cultural significance, as scoped by international doctrines between theory and practice? The research utilized theoretical frameworks on cultural values and attributes and analyzed documents and interview transcripts from the National Gallery Singapore.
The main findings indicate the diversity in defining interventions at the international level. Values play a dynamic role in shaping intervention definitions, whereas attributes influence them in a hierarchical pattern. At the local level, stakeholders' perspectives on definitions are shaped by the local context and a mindset of "practicality." This research concludes that Singapore follows international trends while locally customizing and evolving its definitions. This research proposes a possible novel approach to defining interventions in built heritage that bridges theory and practice.
Mind the diversity
Defining intervention concepts of built heritage in international doctrinal documents
Purpose
Interventions are essential for the management of built heritage because they extend the lifespan of buildings and enable them to be enjoyed by multiple generations. International organisations and institutions, such as UNESCO and ICOMOS, have adopted doctrinal documents over time, stimulating best practices in built heritage management worldwide. Although these documents are often referenced in academic work, they are seldom systematically researched. Which interventions are referenced or omitted? Are they defined? What trends are noted in the understanding of best practices as interventions?
Design/methodology/approach
This research consists of a systematic content analysis of nine international doctrinal documents, which were selected from nearly seventy international doctrinal documents—mainly adopted by UNESCO and ICOMOS. The main aim is to reveal and compare the concepts used for reference interventions and further use the definitions to reveal and discuss the relationships between them. The trends of these interventions being used were determined based on the frequency of mentions per intervention term in the selected documents.
Findings
Regarding the definition of the intervention concepts, there are three main findings. First, instead of being treated as a single concept, ‘conservation’ has been presented as an umbrella concept for other interventions and thus has been the most popular concept since the first version (1992) of the New Zealand Charter was implemented. In contrast, ‘preservation’ remains a single concept, among the highest scales, to maintain the integrity of built heritage, including use. Second, ‘repair’ was found to play a paradoxical role between ‘restoration’ and ‘reconstruction’, which created divergent opinions in the documents. Third, since the notions of ‘use’ have expanded from the functions of monuments (International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites: The Venice Charter, 1964) to the ‘associations of places’ (The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, with associated Guidelines and Code on the Ethics of Co-existence, 1999; The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, 2013), which include activities, traditional habits, accessibility, etc., the complexity of mentioning different forms of ‘use’ has led to some (re)interventions, such as ‘adaptation’, ‘adaptive reuse’, and ‘rehabilitation’, being put into grey areas and used interchangeably.
Originality
This research advances the current understanding of intervention concepts and their relationships, as well as differences and similarities in definitions. ...
Interventions are essential for the management of built heritage because they extend the lifespan of buildings and enable them to be enjoyed by multiple generations. International organisations and institutions, such as UNESCO and ICOMOS, have adopted doctrinal documents over time, stimulating best practices in built heritage management worldwide. Although these documents are often referenced in academic work, they are seldom systematically researched. Which interventions are referenced or omitted? Are they defined? What trends are noted in the understanding of best practices as interventions?
Design/methodology/approach
This research consists of a systematic content analysis of nine international doctrinal documents, which were selected from nearly seventy international doctrinal documents—mainly adopted by UNESCO and ICOMOS. The main aim is to reveal and compare the concepts used for reference interventions and further use the definitions to reveal and discuss the relationships between them. The trends of these interventions being used were determined based on the frequency of mentions per intervention term in the selected documents.
Findings
Regarding the definition of the intervention concepts, there are three main findings. First, instead of being treated as a single concept, ‘conservation’ has been presented as an umbrella concept for other interventions and thus has been the most popular concept since the first version (1992) of the New Zealand Charter was implemented. In contrast, ‘preservation’ remains a single concept, among the highest scales, to maintain the integrity of built heritage, including use. Second, ‘repair’ was found to play a paradoxical role between ‘restoration’ and ‘reconstruction’, which created divergent opinions in the documents. Third, since the notions of ‘use’ have expanded from the functions of monuments (International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites: The Venice Charter, 1964) to the ‘associations of places’ (The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, with associated Guidelines and Code on the Ethics of Co-existence, 1999; The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, 2013), which include activities, traditional habits, accessibility, etc., the complexity of mentioning different forms of ‘use’ has led to some (re)interventions, such as ‘adaptation’, ‘adaptive reuse’, and ‘rehabilitation’, being put into grey areas and used interchangeably.
Originality
This research advances the current understanding of intervention concepts and their relationships, as well as differences and similarities in definitions. ...
Purpose
Interventions are essential for the management of built heritage because they extend the lifespan of buildings and enable them to be enjoyed by multiple generations. International organisations and institutions, such as UNESCO and ICOMOS, have adopted doctrinal documents over time, stimulating best practices in built heritage management worldwide. Although these documents are often referenced in academic work, they are seldom systematically researched. Which interventions are referenced or omitted? Are they defined? What trends are noted in the understanding of best practices as interventions?
Design/methodology/approach
This research consists of a systematic content analysis of nine international doctrinal documents, which were selected from nearly seventy international doctrinal documents—mainly adopted by UNESCO and ICOMOS. The main aim is to reveal and compare the concepts used for reference interventions and further use the definitions to reveal and discuss the relationships between them. The trends of these interventions being used were determined based on the frequency of mentions per intervention term in the selected documents.
Findings
Regarding the definition of the intervention concepts, there are three main findings. First, instead of being treated as a single concept, ‘conservation’ has been presented as an umbrella concept for other interventions and thus has been the most popular concept since the first version (1992) of the New Zealand Charter was implemented. In contrast, ‘preservation’ remains a single concept, among the highest scales, to maintain the integrity of built heritage, including use. Second, ‘repair’ was found to play a paradoxical role between ‘restoration’ and ‘reconstruction’, which created divergent opinions in the documents. Third, since the notions of ‘use’ have expanded from the functions of monuments (International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites: The Venice Charter, 1964) to the ‘associations of places’ (The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, with associated Guidelines and Code on the Ethics of Co-existence, 1999; The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, 2013), which include activities, traditional habits, accessibility, etc., the complexity of mentioning different forms of ‘use’ has led to some (re)interventions, such as ‘adaptation’, ‘adaptive reuse’, and ‘rehabilitation’, being put into grey areas and used interchangeably.
Originality
This research advances the current understanding of intervention concepts and their relationships, as well as differences and similarities in definitions.
Interventions are essential for the management of built heritage because they extend the lifespan of buildings and enable them to be enjoyed by multiple generations. International organisations and institutions, such as UNESCO and ICOMOS, have adopted doctrinal documents over time, stimulating best practices in built heritage management worldwide. Although these documents are often referenced in academic work, they are seldom systematically researched. Which interventions are referenced or omitted? Are they defined? What trends are noted in the understanding of best practices as interventions?
Design/methodology/approach
This research consists of a systematic content analysis of nine international doctrinal documents, which were selected from nearly seventy international doctrinal documents—mainly adopted by UNESCO and ICOMOS. The main aim is to reveal and compare the concepts used for reference interventions and further use the definitions to reveal and discuss the relationships between them. The trends of these interventions being used were determined based on the frequency of mentions per intervention term in the selected documents.
Findings
Regarding the definition of the intervention concepts, there are three main findings. First, instead of being treated as a single concept, ‘conservation’ has been presented as an umbrella concept for other interventions and thus has been the most popular concept since the first version (1992) of the New Zealand Charter was implemented. In contrast, ‘preservation’ remains a single concept, among the highest scales, to maintain the integrity of built heritage, including use. Second, ‘repair’ was found to play a paradoxical role between ‘restoration’ and ‘reconstruction’, which created divergent opinions in the documents. Third, since the notions of ‘use’ have expanded from the functions of monuments (International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites: The Venice Charter, 1964) to the ‘associations of places’ (The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, with associated Guidelines and Code on the Ethics of Co-existence, 1999; The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, 2013), which include activities, traditional habits, accessibility, etc., the complexity of mentioning different forms of ‘use’ has led to some (re)interventions, such as ‘adaptation’, ‘adaptive reuse’, and ‘rehabilitation’, being put into grey areas and used interchangeably.
Originality
This research advances the current understanding of intervention concepts and their relationships, as well as differences and similarities in definitions.
Purpose: Attributes conveying cultural significance play a key role in heritage management, as well as in differentiating interventions in built heritage. However, seldom the relation between interventions and attributes, either tangible or intangible, has been researched systematically. How do both tangible and intangible attributes and interventions relate? What attributes make interventions on built heritage differ? Design/methodology/approach: This paper conducts a systematic content analysis of forty-one international doctrinal documents—mainly adopted by the Council of Europe, UNESCO and ICOMOS, between 1877 and 2021. The main aim is to reveal and compare the selected eight intervention concepts, namely—restoration (C1), preservation (C2), conservation (C3), adaptation (C4), rehabilitation (C5), relocation (C6), reconstruction (C7) and renewal (C8)—and their definitions, in relation to attributes, both tangible and intangible. The intensity of the relationship between intervention concepts and attributes is determined based on the frequency of the mentioned attributes per intervention. Findings: There were three key findings. First, although the attention to intangible attributes has increased in the last decades, the relationship between interventions and tangible attributes remains stronger. The highest frequency of referencing the tangible attributes was identified in “relocation” and “preservation,” while the lowest was in “rehabilitation.” Second, certain attributes play contradictory roles, e.g. “material,” “use” and “process,” which creates inconsistent definitions between documents. Third, as attributes often include one another in building layers, they trigger the intervention concepts in hierarchical patterns. Originality/value: This paper explores and discusses the results of a novel comparative analysis between different intervention concepts and definitions, with a particular focus on the attributes. The results can support further research and practice, clarifying the identified differences and similarities.
...
Purpose: Attributes conveying cultural significance play a key role in heritage management, as well as in differentiating interventions in built heritage. However, seldom the relation between interventions and attributes, either tangible or intangible, has been researched systematically. How do both tangible and intangible attributes and interventions relate? What attributes make interventions on built heritage differ? Design/methodology/approach: This paper conducts a systematic content analysis of forty-one international doctrinal documents—mainly adopted by the Council of Europe, UNESCO and ICOMOS, between 1877 and 2021. The main aim is to reveal and compare the selected eight intervention concepts, namely—restoration (C1), preservation (C2), conservation (C3), adaptation (C4), rehabilitation (C5), relocation (C6), reconstruction (C7) and renewal (C8)—and their definitions, in relation to attributes, both tangible and intangible. The intensity of the relationship between intervention concepts and attributes is determined based on the frequency of the mentioned attributes per intervention. Findings: There were three key findings. First, although the attention to intangible attributes has increased in the last decades, the relationship between interventions and tangible attributes remains stronger. The highest frequency of referencing the tangible attributes was identified in “relocation” and “preservation,” while the lowest was in “rehabilitation.” Second, certain attributes play contradictory roles, e.g. “material,” “use” and “process,” which creates inconsistent definitions between documents. Third, as attributes often include one another in building layers, they trigger the intervention concepts in hierarchical patterns. Originality/value: This paper explores and discusses the results of a novel comparative analysis between different intervention concepts and definitions, with a particular focus on the attributes. The results can support further research and practice, clarifying the identified differences and similarities.
Values and interventions
Dynamic relationships in international doctrines
Purpose
Even if there is a wealth of research highlighting the key role of values and cultural significance for heritage management and, defining specific interventions on built heritage, seldom the relation to their leading values and values hierarchy have been researched. How do values and interventions relate? What values trigger most and least interventions on heritage? How do these values relate and characterize interventions? And what are the values hierarchy that make the interventions on built heritage differ?
Design/methodology/approach
This paper conducts a systematic content analysis of 69 international doctrinal documents – mainly adopted by Council of Europe, UNESCO, and ICOMOS, during 1877 and 2021. The main aim is to reveal and compare the intervention concepts and their definitions, in relation to values. The intensity of the relationship between intervention concepts and values is determined based on the frequency of mentioned values per intervention.
Findings
There were three key findings. First, historic, social, and aesthetical values were the most referenced values in international doctrinal documents. Second, while intervention concepts revealed similar definitions and shared common leading values, their secondary values and values hierarchy, e.g. aesthetical or social values, are the ones influencing the variation on their definitions. Third, certain values show contradictory roles in the same intervention concepts from different documents, e.g. political and age values.
Originality/value
This paper explores a novel comparison between different interventions concepts and definitions, and the role of values. The results can contribute to support further research and practice on clarifying the identified differences. ...
Even if there is a wealth of research highlighting the key role of values and cultural significance for heritage management and, defining specific interventions on built heritage, seldom the relation to their leading values and values hierarchy have been researched. How do values and interventions relate? What values trigger most and least interventions on heritage? How do these values relate and characterize interventions? And what are the values hierarchy that make the interventions on built heritage differ?
Design/methodology/approach
This paper conducts a systematic content analysis of 69 international doctrinal documents – mainly adopted by Council of Europe, UNESCO, and ICOMOS, during 1877 and 2021. The main aim is to reveal and compare the intervention concepts and their definitions, in relation to values. The intensity of the relationship between intervention concepts and values is determined based on the frequency of mentioned values per intervention.
Findings
There were three key findings. First, historic, social, and aesthetical values were the most referenced values in international doctrinal documents. Second, while intervention concepts revealed similar definitions and shared common leading values, their secondary values and values hierarchy, e.g. aesthetical or social values, are the ones influencing the variation on their definitions. Third, certain values show contradictory roles in the same intervention concepts from different documents, e.g. political and age values.
Originality/value
This paper explores a novel comparison between different interventions concepts and definitions, and the role of values. The results can contribute to support further research and practice on clarifying the identified differences. ...
Purpose
Even if there is a wealth of research highlighting the key role of values and cultural significance for heritage management and, defining specific interventions on built heritage, seldom the relation to their leading values and values hierarchy have been researched. How do values and interventions relate? What values trigger most and least interventions on heritage? How do these values relate and characterize interventions? And what are the values hierarchy that make the interventions on built heritage differ?
Design/methodology/approach
This paper conducts a systematic content analysis of 69 international doctrinal documents – mainly adopted by Council of Europe, UNESCO, and ICOMOS, during 1877 and 2021. The main aim is to reveal and compare the intervention concepts and their definitions, in relation to values. The intensity of the relationship between intervention concepts and values is determined based on the frequency of mentioned values per intervention.
Findings
There were three key findings. First, historic, social, and aesthetical values were the most referenced values in international doctrinal documents. Second, while intervention concepts revealed similar definitions and shared common leading values, their secondary values and values hierarchy, e.g. aesthetical or social values, are the ones influencing the variation on their definitions. Third, certain values show contradictory roles in the same intervention concepts from different documents, e.g. political and age values.
Originality/value
This paper explores a novel comparison between different interventions concepts and definitions, and the role of values. The results can contribute to support further research and practice on clarifying the identified differences.
Even if there is a wealth of research highlighting the key role of values and cultural significance for heritage management and, defining specific interventions on built heritage, seldom the relation to their leading values and values hierarchy have been researched. How do values and interventions relate? What values trigger most and least interventions on heritage? How do these values relate and characterize interventions? And what are the values hierarchy that make the interventions on built heritage differ?
Design/methodology/approach
This paper conducts a systematic content analysis of 69 international doctrinal documents – mainly adopted by Council of Europe, UNESCO, and ICOMOS, during 1877 and 2021. The main aim is to reveal and compare the intervention concepts and their definitions, in relation to values. The intensity of the relationship between intervention concepts and values is determined based on the frequency of mentioned values per intervention.
Findings
There were three key findings. First, historic, social, and aesthetical values were the most referenced values in international doctrinal documents. Second, while intervention concepts revealed similar definitions and shared common leading values, their secondary values and values hierarchy, e.g. aesthetical or social values, are the ones influencing the variation on their definitions. Third, certain values show contradictory roles in the same intervention concepts from different documents, e.g. political and age values.
Originality/value
This paper explores a novel comparison between different interventions concepts and definitions, and the role of values. The results can contribute to support further research and practice on clarifying the identified differences.