English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In an era of modern science-based conservation, heritage professionals pride themselves on their objective and interdisciplinary approach in conservation decision-making. However, supposedly well-supported conservation treatment decisions continue be the topic of heated discussions in the cultural heritage field. The question is why this is still the case. It is argued that many conservation decisions are by nature subjective, and that taste or professional preference play an important role. Combined with the fear of failure based on strict interpretations of conservation codes of ethics, this often leads to convoluted and heated arguments for or against a particular treatment. The meaning of the key concepts of authenticity and originality are no longer clear to practitioners, whose working definitions are often far removed from their original dictionary definitions. It is proposed that heritage professionals begin to accept that decision-making in conservation is, for the most part, subjective. Coupled with the concept of a ‘bespoke code of ethics’, this will allow for more open discussion and more flexibility in decision-making.

Authenticity and Originality, Objectivity and Subjectivity in Conservation Decision-making – or is it Just a Matter of Taste?